Mark: A study of classrooms found teachers ask, on average, 84 questions per hour. The students? They ask two. Michelle: Two? That can't be right. Mark: It is. That's one question per student, per month. We're systematically trained to stop asking questions. Today, we learn how to reclaim that lost superpower. Michelle: Wow. Okay, that statistic is both depressing and incredibly intriguing. Where are we going with this? Mark: We're going straight to the heart of the problem with Hal Gregersen's book, Questions Are the Answer. Michelle: Ah, I like that title. It’s a promise. Mark: It is. And what's fascinating is that Gregersen isn't just an academic; he’s a senior lecturer at MIT Sloan, and this book is the result of over 200 interviews with innovators like the founders of Pixar, Tesla, and Amazon. He was on a quest to find out how they generate their world-changing ideas. Michelle: Okay, so he talked to all these geniuses. What’s the secret? Is it just that they’re smarter than the rest of us? Mark: That's the beautiful thing. He found it's not about having a higher IQ. It's about a skill they've mastered that the rest of us have let atrophy. And it all starts with changing the one thing we're obsessed with: the answer.

Michelle: What do you mean, "changing the one thing we're obsessed with"? We're supposed to be obsessed with answers. That's how problems get solved. Mark: That's what we think. But Gregersen argues that the biggest breakthroughs don't come from finding a new answer to an old question. They come from finding a new, better question. The answer is often the easy part. Michelle: Okay, but is 'reframing the question' just a fancy way of saying 'thinking about a problem differently'? What makes this a breakthrough concept? Mark: It's about the fundamental frame you put around the problem. Let me give you a powerful example from the book. It’s about a German social entrepreneur named Andreas Heinecke. In the late 80s, he was tasked with helping a colleague who had recently gone blind reintegrate into the workplace. Michelle: Right, a classic problem-solving situation. Mark: Exactly. And his initial question was the one most of us would ask: "What can my blind colleague still do, despite his disability?" It's a question rooted in limitations, in deficits. He was trying to find answers within that narrow frame, and he was getting nowhere. Michelle: That makes sense. You're focused on what's lost. Mark: Precisely. But then, he had this moment of insight. He completely flipped the question. He stopped asking about the weakness and started asking about the strength. His new question was: "How could a blind person's unique abilities create an experience that a sighted person could never have?" Michelle: Whoa. Okay, that is a different question entirely. It's not about accommodation anymore; it's about advantage. Mark: It's a total paradigm shift. And that single question led to the creation of a global phenomenon called "Dialogue in the Dark." It's an exhibition, or rather, an experience, where sighted visitors are guided through completely dark, simulated everyday environments—a park, a city street, a cafe—by blind guides. Michelle: So the blind person is the expert, and the sighted person is the one who's 'disabled' in that environment. Mark: You got it. The tables are completely turned. You, as a sighted person, are suddenly clumsy, disoriented, and vulnerable. You have to rely entirely on your other senses and, crucially, on the calm, confident guidance of your blind guide, for whom this is just normal life. The experience is profound. It builds empathy in a way no lecture or pamphlet ever could. Michelle: That's incredible. And it all came from just changing the question from 'what can't they do' to 'what can they do better?' Mark: Yes. That reframed question created a multi-million dollar social enterprise that has employed thousands of blind people and been experienced by millions of visitors worldwide. It didn't just solve a problem; it created a whole new category of value. Michelle: But isn't this a rare, lightning-in-a-bottle example? How often does a simple question change lead to something so huge? Mark: Gregersen argues it's a pattern behind many of the world's biggest innovations. Think about George Eastman, the founder of Kodak. In the late 1800s, photography was a complex, messy, and expensive hobby for professionals. The question everyone was asking was, "How can we make better, more professional cameras?" Michelle: Right, improve the existing thing. Mark: But Eastman, who found the equipment too bulky for his own vacation, asked a different question: "How can we make photography so simple and accessible that anyone can use it?" That led to the Kodak camera and the slogan, "You press the button, we do the rest." He didn't just improve the camera; he created the snapshot. He changed the entire market by changing the question from being about the technology to being about the user. Michelle: So the pattern is to stop focusing on the existing solution and start questioning the fundamental problem itself. Mark: Exactly. And that's why it's so hard. We are trained to be expert answer-finders, not expert question-askers.

Mark: You're right to be a little skeptical, because as we established in the intro, most of our environments are actively hostile to this kind of questioning. Which brings us to the next big idea: you can't just have a great question; you need the right conditions for it to even be asked. Michelle: That's so true about school! I remember feeling like asking a 'dumb' question was social suicide. It really does get beaten out of you. Mark: It does. The book quotes educator Neil Postman, who said, "Children enter school as question marks and leave as periods." We learn very quickly that the path to success is having the right answers for the test, not asking challenging questions that might derail the lesson plan. Michelle: And it doesn't stop after graduation. In the workplace, asking a fundamental question can be seen as naive, or worse, as a challenge to authority. Mark: The book has a great, punchy story about that. The old Hollywood mogul Samuel Goldwyn once summoned the writer Lillian Hellman to his office because she'd publicly called one of his movies "a piece of junk." He started grilling her, demanding she answer his questions. She refused. A power struggle ensued, with him shouting questions and her refusing to answer. The whole scene was a contest over who got to ask the questions. The person asking holds the power. Michelle: And the person answering is on the defensive. I get that. So if our schools and workplaces are designed to shut down questions, how do we ever create a space for them? Mark: Gregersen argues we have to do it intentionally. We have to design and protect spaces specifically for inquiry. And this is where the idea of "psychological safety" comes in. Michelle: That term gets thrown around a lot. In this context, what does it actually mean? Is it just about being nice to each other? Mark: It's more rigorous than that. A psychologically safe space, in this context, is an environment with clear rules of engagement where ideas can be challenged without the people who proposed them feeling attacked. The idea is on trial, not the person. And the book gives a beautiful, deeply personal example of this with the story of writer and activist Parker Palmer. Michelle: I'm listening. Mark: Palmer was offered a prestigious job as a college president. It was a huge opportunity, and he was pretty sure he was going to take it. But he was a Quaker, and they have a practice called a "Clearness Committee." Michelle: A Clearness Committee? What's that? Mark: It's a small group of trusted friends you assemble when you're facing a major life decision. But here's the key rule: they are forbidden from giving you advice. They can't tell you what you should do. They can only ask you honest, open-ended questions to help you find your own inner truth. Michelle: Wow. No advice, only questions. That's a radical concept. Mark: It is. So Palmer sits with his committee, and they start asking him questions. Not "Should you take the job?" but things like "What does this role ask of you?" and "What are you afraid of?" For a while, he gives all the polished, right-sounding answers. But then, one friend asks a very simple, very gentle question: "Parker, what would you like most about being a president?" Michelle: And what did he say? Mark: He said he blurted out, without thinking, "I guess I'd like to see my name on the college letterhead." Michelle: Oof. The ego speaks. Mark: The ego speaks. And in that safe, quiet space, where he was only being asked questions and not being judged, he heard himself say it. He realized his motivation wasn't about service or education; it was about status. The question didn't give him the answer, but it allowed him to find his own. He withdrew his candidacy the next day. That one question, asked in the right conditions, changed the course of his life. Michelle: That's a powerful story. So a 'safe space' is really about creating a structure that separates the ego from the idea, so you can see things clearly. Mark: Exactly. It's about creating the conditions for your own truth to emerge. And you don't need a formal committee to do it. You can create those conditions for yourself.

Michelle: Okay, so we need to reframe our questions and create safe spaces to ask them. That still feels a bit abstract. Is there a practical, step-by-step way to do this? Mark: There is. And this is probably the most valuable takeaway from the book. Gregersen offers a simple, powerful tool he calls the "Question Burst." Michelle: A Question Burst. I like the sound of that. It sounds energetic. Mark: It is! And the origin story is fantastic. Gregersen was co-teaching an MBA class, and they were brainstorming solutions for a tough problem. The energy was dead. The ideas were stale. The students were just going through the motions. With only a few minutes left in the class, he improvised. Michelle: What did he do? Mark: He went to the board and said, "Okay, forget answers. For the next four minutes, we are only allowed to ask questions about this problem. No solutions, no explanations, just questions. Go." Michelle: A 'no-answers-allowed' zone for the brain. I love it. What happened? Mark: He said the energy in the room completely transformed. It went from a morgue to a fireworks show. Questions started flying. "Why are we assuming X?" "What if we looked at it from the customer's perspective?" "What are we afraid of?" In those four minutes, they generated more creative energy and more new pathways than they had in the entire previous hour. Michelle: Four minutes, that's it? What if you just get a bunch of dumb questions? Mark: That's the point! The book quotes him saying the goal is quantity, not quality. You're trying to break your own cognitive frames, the hidden assumptions that are keeping you stuck. You generate a long list, and then, after the four minutes are up, you look for the one or two questions that feel different, that challenge a core belief, that open up a new door. Michelle: So what are the official rules? Mark: It's beautifully simple. First, you set the stage: pick a challenge you care about, something you feel stuck on. Second, you invite a couple of people who see the world differently than you to help. Third, you set a timer for four minutes and generate as many questions as you can about the challenge. And the two crucial rules are: contribute only questions, and don't offer any answers, explanations, or preambles. Michelle: So you can't say, "Well, the reason we haven't tried that is because..." You just have to ask the next question. Mark: Exactly. You're deferring judgment completely. After the timer goes off, you study the questions you've generated and look for the ones that give you that little jolt, the ones that reframe the problem for you. Then you commit to taking action on one of them. Michelle: So anyone listening right now, if they're stuck on a problem at work or in life, could literally pause this podcast, set a timer for four minutes, and just... ask questions about it? Mark: That's exactly what Gregersen wants you to do. It's a tool for intellectual and emotional liberation. The data he's collected on this is amazing. People report feeling stuck, frustrated, and overwhelmed before the Question Burst. Afterward, they feel energized, hopeful, and more in control, even before they have a single new answer. The act of questioning itself is empowering.

Michelle: It's fascinating how it all connects. You start by realizing that the answer isn't the prize; the right question is. But you can't find the right question if you're afraid or in an environment that punishes curiosity. Mark: Right. So it's a three-step process, really. First, you give yourself permission to reframe the problem, to challenge the "givens." Second, you create a safe condition—even if it's just you and a notepad for five minutes—to explore it without judgment. And third, you use a tool like the Question Burst to force your brain onto a new track and see the problem with fresh eyes. Michelle: It makes you wonder what assumptions you're living with right now that are holding you back. The questions you're not even aware you're not asking. Mark: Exactly. The book is filled with stories of people who were one question away from a breakthrough, but they were stuck in a loop of answering the wrong one. From CEOs to parents to artists, the pattern is the same. Michelle: It feels like the ultimate form of mindfulness, in a way. Paying attention to the questions that are running your life, often unconsciously. Mark: That's a great way to put it. Tony Robbins has a quote in the book where he says something similar: the quality of your life is determined by the quality of the questions you ask yourself. Michelle: So the final question isn't from the book, it's for our listeners: What's one problem in your life that you've been trying to answer, when maybe you should be trying to question? Mark: I love that. It could be about your career, a relationship, a creative project. What's the question underneath the problem? Michelle: We'd love to hear your thoughts on that. Find us on our socials and share one new question you've come up with after listening to this. Let's build a community of questioners. Mark: This is Aibrary, signing off.