Does Admitting You Do Not Know About AI Make Your Team Trust You More?|AI for executives| Neuroscience in AI

Send us Fan Mail

The oxytocin science behind why honest uncertainty builds more trust than performed AI confidence.

Sahar Andrade, MB.BCh, Neuroleadership Coach, breaks down the oxytocin science of why leaders who admit AI uncertainty build more trust than those who perform confidence. The body broadcasts the truth before the words do.

 Most leaders believe admitting they do not fully understand AI will cost them credibility. The neuroscience says the opposite.

 When a leader says 'I do not have all the answers on this,' oxytocin releases in the listener's brain. Threat perception drops. Trust increases. Cooperation rises.

 When a leader performs AI confidence they do not feel, mirror neurons detect the mismatch. The amygdala activates. Trust erodes at the nervous system level long before anyone can name why they feel uneasy.

In this Friday Forbes article-like edition, Sahar Andrade, MB.BCh, Neuroleadership Coach and Forbes Coaches Council member, breaks down the biology of honest leadership during AI uncertainty. She covers the oxytocin mechanism, why performed certainty makes teams more anxious during AI transitions, the difference between honest uncertainty and anxious uncertainty, and the three practices that make admitting you do not know a trust-building strategy rather than a credibility risk.

 #VulnerableLeadership #AILeadership #NeuroscienceLeadership #OxytocinTrust #NeuroleadershipCoach #ExecutiveLeadership #AuthenticLeadership #AIIntegration #TrustBuilding #Neuroleadership #humancenteredAI #humancenteredleadership #AIforexecutives  #AIStrategy  #AITransformation #RegulatedLeadership #PsychologicalSafety #neuroscienceinleadership #Futureofwork #AIpodcast #AICaféConversations #neuroscience #AItoolsforexecutives #NeuroscienceOfLeadership #LeadershipDevelopment  #aistrategyforexecutives #AIleadershiptransformation #nervoussystemregulation #Neurosciencebasedleadership #AICulturechange #peoplefirst #neuroscienceinAI #AIintegration #AIadoption 

Book a Leadership Clarity Call: calendly.com/saharandrade

1. Does admitting you do not know about AI make you look weak as a leader?

2. What happens in the brain when a leader admits uncertainty?

3. How does vulnerability build trust in AI leadership?

4. What is the neuroscience of trust and honest leadership?

5. Why do leaders fake AI confidence and what does it cost them?

6. How can a leader be honest about AI uncertainty without losing credibility?

Support the show

--- 

AI Cafe Conversations: Neuroscience-based AI leadership for executives. Hosted by Sahar (The AI Whisperer) | New episodes Wed & Fri 

🔗 Connect: https://www.linkedin.com/in/saharandradespeaker/

📧 Work with me: [e-mail]

🌐 Website: https://www.saharconsulting.com/

 📧 Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/saharthereinventcoach

Episode Transcript

SPEAKER_00 (00:13):
Here is something most leaders get completely
backless.
They believe that admitting theydo not fully understand AI will
make their team trust them less.
The neuroscience says exactlythe opposite, that the opposite
is true.
When a leader says, I do nothave all the answers on this,

(00:34):
something very specific happensin the listener's brain.
Oxytocin, which is a chemicalhormone that the body secretes
or a chemical or a chemical uhthat the body that the brain
releases increases trust.
We call it the team-buildinghormone.

(00:56):
We call it the bonding hormone.
So when the oxytocin isreleased, trust increases and
the threat perception drops.
The leader who performscertainty they do not feel is
not building credibility.
They are burning it.
I'm Sahar Andradi,neuroleadership coach and forbes

(01:16):
coach council member with amedical background.
This is AI Cafe Conversation,the for the Friday Forbes
article like edition.
Today we are going into theneuroscience of why honest
uncertainty is one of the mostpowerful leadership tools
available during AI transition.

(01:37):
And the industry that we aretalking about today is actually
a high education one.
And I'm gonna keep saying thisbecause I got questions and
emails about this.
Some listeners are asking me toactually share the organizations
that were that happened or namesof executives, and I cannot do

(01:59):
that due to privacy laws andNDAs or contracts that I signed
with my contracts, and also toprotect their privacy.
I will use the work, I have anapproval for that as a case
study, but I will never sharethe names of the organizations
or um or of the clients that Iwork with, just to make that
clear.

(02:20):
Okay, so what is the problem?
What leaders are actually doingright now?
So let's start with what isactually happening.
On June 5th, I released anepisode called Why Are Leaders
Faking AI Fluency?

(02:41):
The data behind it was striking.
Leaders are performing AIconfidence that they do not
feel.
They're using the right words inmeetings, they are approving AI
initiatives they do not fullyunderstand.
They're nodding at AIrecommendations they have not

(03:01):
verified.
I'm gonna put the link for thatspecific episode into the notes,
a description of this episode.
So they are nodding at AIrecommendations they have not
verified, and guess what?
Their teams know.
Not because the teams havebetter AI knowledge, because the

(03:24):
nervous system reads microsignals that the conscious mind
misses.
The slight pause before theconfident answer, the
over-rehearsed talking points,the way the body stiffens when a
detailed AI question gets asked.

(03:46):
Mirror neurons detect thesesignals in milliseconds.
Milliseconds.
And the team makes a rapidunconscious calculation.
The leader does not actuallyknow.
This is not as solid as they aremaking it sound.
That calculation destroys trust,not loudly, but quietly over

(04:13):
time.
One performed answer at a time.
Sharm, SHRM, the great um humanresources organization, found
that trust in senior leaders onAI matters drops 14 points
between executives andindividual contributors.

(04:36):
That gap does not appear becauseleaders are communicated poorly,
it appears because people feelthe difference between genuine
confidence and performedconfidence.
The body does not lie.
The body always broadcasts thetruth before the words do.
As we know, I mean, this is acommunication 101, right?

(05:00):
Body language is around 85% ofour daily communication.
85%.
So no matter what words we say,the body language will always
tell the truth no matter what.
So let's talk about theneuroscience of that.
I always like to basically uh dothe foundation always in

(05:24):
science.
What actually happens when aleader admits that they don't
know?
Here is the biology.
Oxytocin is a neuropeptide.
Most people know it as thebonding hormone.
What fewer people know is itsdirect role in trust and threat
perception.

(05:45):
When oxytocin releases in thebrain, several things happen
simultaneously.
Threat perception drops,amygdala becomes less reactive.
Social anxiety decreases.
Cooperation and generosityincrease.

(06:06):
Research from Paul Zack atClaremont Graduate University,
referenced in the HarvardBusiness Review Neuroscience of
Trustworth, showed that oxytocinis triggered specifically by
signals of authentic humanvulnerability, not performed

(06:27):
vulnerability.
Genuine uncertainty, sharedhonestly.
When a leader says I do not havethis fully figured out yet, two
things happen in the listener.
First, the threat perceptiondrops.
The listener's nervous systemregisters this person is being

(06:52):
real with me.
That's a safety signal.
Second, oxytocin releases, trustincreases, the listener's brain
shifts from scanning fordeception to genuine engagement.
Now, here is what happens when aleader performs certainty they

(07:13):
do not feel.
The listener's nervous systemdetects the mismatch,
consciously or not, it registerssomething is off.
The amygdala, our threat center,activates a low-grade alert.
Oxytocin does not release.

(07:34):
The listener becomes watchfulinstead of open, waiting for the
other shoe to drop.
Trust erodes at the nervoussystem level long before anyone
can name why they feel uneasy.
This is not a soft finding.
This is measurable biology.

(07:54):
The leader who admits honestuncertainty is not weaker than
the one performing confidence.
They are triggering a completelydifferent neurochemical response
in the team.
One that builds trust.
One that does not.
There is a second piece ofneuroscience here that matters

(08:18):
even more for AI specifically.
The brain's threat detectionsystem is exquisitely sensitive
to two things deception andunpredictability.
Remember, our brain mainfunction while the brain exists
is to protect us from danger,either real or perceived.

(08:44):
Real or perceived.
So it keeps scanning fordeception and unpredictability
to protect us just in case.
So AI rollouts are alreadytriggering unpredictability
signals in teams.
The environment is uncertain.
The rules are changing and thefuture is unclear.

(09:07):
When a leader adds performcertainty on top of an already
uncertain environment, theteam's nervous system has to
hold two contradictory signalssimultaneously.
The environment says things areuncertain.

(09:27):
The leader says everything isfine.
We got this.

(10:05):
So let's talk about theframework.
What honest uncertainty actuallylooks like in practice?
This is not an invitation tounload your anxiety on your
team.
That's not what I'm saying.
That is not regulation.
That is actually this regulationwith an open door.
There is a critical differencebetween honest uncertainty and

(10:25):
anxious uncertainty.
Anxious uncertainty sounds likeI have no idea what we're doing
with AI.
I'm terrified.
And we're going to get thiswrong.
I do not know if any of this isgoing to work.
That is your amygdala talking.
It's not useful to share fromthat state.

(10:47):
Honest uncertainty from aregulated nervous system sounds
like this.
I do not have complete certaintyon where AI is taking this
industry.
What I do know is what we'redoing this quarter.
Why we're doing it, and what arewe watching for.
I will tell you when somethingchanges.

(11:10):
The difference is not the words,the difference is the nervous
system state generating thewords.
One comes from threat, one comesfrom regulation.
Your team feels which one youare in before you finish your
first sentence.
That is exactly what my brainB-R-A-I-N framework addresses.

(11:35):
Regulation is the R.
You cannot lead AI uncertaintywith honestly guidance or with
honesty unless your nervoussystem is regulated enough to
hold uncertainty withoutcollapsing into it.

(11:56):
Now I know what you're thinking.
Or some of you are thinking, ifI start admitting what I don't
know about AI in every meeting,do I just look unprepared?
Is there a point where honestystops building trust and starts
looking like I'm not in control?

(12:17):
Let me push back on that becausethis is a fair question and the
answer actually matters.
There is a real differencebetween honest and certainty and
abdication.
Saying I don't know and stoppingthere is not leadership.
That actually does erode trustbecause your team needed

(12:38):
direction and you gave themnothing.
The trust-building version isnever just the admission, it's
the admission paired with whatyou are doing about it.
Like I don't have full certaintyon this.
Here is what I'm watching, hereis when I will update you.

(13:00):
That is not a leader who looksunprepared.
That's a leader whose team canactually rely on what they say
because they know it, it willnot be performed.
Three things make honest AI andcertainty a trust builder rather

(13:20):
than a credibility threat.
First, name what you know andwhat you don't.
Not a confession, or not as aconfession, as a briefing.
Here is what we are confidentabout, here is what we are still
watching, here is what changesif X happens.

(13:40):
Second, stay curious rather thancertain.
In genuinely ambiguoussituations, perform certainty is
a threat.
It's a threat signal.
Genuine curiosity is a safetysignal.
I do not know yet, but here ishow we are going to find out

(14:02):
activates actually verydifferent neuroscience than we
have this handle.
Third, regulate before you read.
Do not walk into AIconversations till carrying the
anxiety from your lastinterview.
Your nervous system willbroadcast it before you open
your mouth.

(14:23):
The team will feel it and theywill trust you less for the
performed calm dead faults.
The leaders who are maintainingreal trust during AI transitions
are not the ones with theclearest AI roadmaps.
They are the ones whose teamsfeel when uncertainty arrives,

(14:47):
the leader will be honest aboutit.
That is the only kind of trustthat holds under pressure.
The question I want to leave youwith is simple.
What would it cost you to behonest with your team about what
you don't know about AI?
And what is it already costingyou not to be?

(15:12):
Because the performance is notfree.
Every meeting where you performAI confidence, you do not feel
is a withdrawal from your trustaccount.
The neuroscience is clear.
Honest uncertainty from aregulated nervous system builds
more trust than performcertainty from an anxious one.

(15:36):
Every time.
Share this with the leader whois working very hard to look
like they have AI figured out.

(15:59):
They don't have to.
See you next week.
And before I go, as I alwayssay, show me some love,
subscribe, comment, create ourpodcast so more people can see
it, share it with someone thatneeds to hear it.

(16:21):
If you want to be a guest on mypodcast that and you talk about
neuroscience, ai and leadership,you can email me at sahar at
saharconsulting.com.
Till I see you again, peace out.
I'll see you next Wednesday.