Most people suck at answering questions.

They fail to think about the question behind the question.

Here’s a framework for impactful responses:

You get asked dozens of questions per day.

Each one is an opportunity to show your credibility and build trust.

🚫 If you answer poorly?

They start doubting your competence.

✅ If you answer well?

They trust you and are grateful you’re on the team.
Answering questions is higher stakes than most people realize.

Doing it well is a competitive advantage.

The secret to increasing your effectiveness?

Always consider the "question behind the question” (QBQ).
What does this mean?

When a person asks you something, there's the surface question—but there's often a deeper layer.

A few signs you should address the QBQ:

• You have to repeat yourself
• Lots of follow-ups
• They’re still skeptical
• They ask oddly specific questions
These are all indicators that your original answer isn’t landing.

Folks don’t necessarily have ulterior motives--they're just looking for more depth.

There could be a deeper worry, concern, or simply curiosity.

And it’s usually subconscious.
The benefit of understanding the question behind the question:

✔️ you’ll give a better answer
✔️ you’ll be more confident in it
✔️ your audience will feel more satisfied with your response
Here's how to do it:

Your colleague asks, “How is the project going? Is everything under control? Anything I should be aware of?"

Most people would simply answer the question at face value.

But that's a miss.
🚫 “Everything’s good. I’ve got it under control."

This is too generic. It lacks context they want to see.

Your coworker might not believe you. They will keep asking until they can.
✅ "Great question. I reviewed our numbers this morning. We’re tracking to our Q2 forecast. We’re a bit behind on X, but beating expectations on Y. I’m monitoring weekly & will flag if anything is off."

This is tailored to your colleague’s concerns.

It answers the QBQ.
If you know the person, your answer depends on a few factors:

• What does my colleague focus on?
• What part do they care about most?
• What would make them feel reassured and safe?

Address these in your response.
For example, let’s assume your colleague is a numbers person.

They're analytical. They want to see the data--numbers, percentages, logic.

Your answers should include these details.

And you can save your breath on storytelling or other aspects they don’t care as much about.
If you don’t know someone well, it's harder to tailor your response.

You won’t always have the chance to ask for clarity.

Try to take your best guess as to what this person values.
Sometimes folks might not even know what they really want to ask.

They just have a vague feeling.

You’ll need to probe to find their underlying question.

You might have to explain in different ways until you see their eyes light up.

https://t.co/NqbFFwmcdQ
What should you do?

Don’t blindly engage in a never-ending back-and-forth.

That’s a huge drain of time and emotional labor.

Step back and think about what their true concern is.

Then focus on answering the QBQ.
You feel good knowing you got to the root of the problem.

The person asking the question will feel seen and heard.

That's ultimately what we want when we engage with anyone.
That’s it for today.

If you found this thread valuable:

1. Follow me for more threads on leadership, education, and marketing →
@wes_kao

2. I’ll write a deep dive about this in my newsletter. Subscribe to get it in your inbox.
https://t.co/L4ZWtdIOM0
3. @MavenHQ is hiring. We have open roles across engineering and business teams. Come join a fast-paced startup shaping the future of education.

https://t.co/vkujvtWZES

More from All

॥ॐ॥
अस्य श्री गायत्री ध्यान श्लोक:
(gAyatri dhyAna shlOka)
• This shloka to meditate personified form of वेदमाता गायत्री was given by Bhagwaan Brahma to Sage yAgnavalkya (याज्ञवल्क्य).

• 14th shloka of गायत्री कवचम् which is taken from वशिष्ठ संहिता, goes as follows..


• मुक्ता-विद्रुम-हेम-नील धवलच्छायैर्मुखस्त्रीक्षणै:।
muktA vidruma hEma nIla dhavalachhAyaiH mukhaistrlkShaNaiH.

• युक्तामिन्दुकला-निबद्धमुकुटां तत्वार्थवर्णात्मिकाम्॥
yuktAmindukalA nibaddha makutAm tatvArtha varNAtmikam.

• गायत्रीं वरदाभयाङ्कुश कशां शुभ्रं कपालं गदाम्।
gAyatrIm vardAbhayANkusha kashAm shubhram kapAlam gadAm.

• शंखं चक्रमथारविन्दयुगलं हस्तैर्वहन्ती भजै॥
shankham chakramathArvinda yugalam hastairvahantIm bhajE.

This shloka describes the form of वेदमाता गायत्री.

• It says, "She has five faces which shine with the colours of a Pearl 'मुक्ता', Coral 'विद्रुम', Gold 'हेम्', Sapphire 'नील्', & a Diamond 'धवलम्'.

• These five faces are symbolic of the five primordial elements called पञ्चमहाभूत:' which makes up the entire existence.

• These are the elements of SPACE, FIRE, WIND, EARTH & WATER.

• All these five faces shine with three eyes 'त्रिक्षणै:'.
APIs in general are so powerful.

Best 5 public APIs you can use to build your next project:

1. Number Verification API

A RESTful JSON API for national and international phone number validation.

🔗
https://t.co/fzBmCMFdIj


2. OpenAI API

ChatGPT is an outstanding tool. Build your own API applications with OpenAI API.

🔗 https://t.co/TVnTciMpML


3. Currency Data API

Currency Data API provides a simple REST API with real-time and historical exchange rates for 168 world currencies

🔗 https://t.co/TRj35IUUec


4. Weather API

Real-Time & historical world weather data API.

Retrieve instant, accurate weather information for
any location in the world in lightweight JSON format.

🔗 https://t.co/DCY8kXqVIK
1. Mini Thread on Conflicts of Interest involving the authors of the Nature Toilet Paper:
https://t.co/VUYbsKGncx
Kristian G. Andersen
Andrew Rambaut
Ian Lipkin
Edward C. Holmes
Robert F. Garry

2. Thanks to @newboxer007 for forwarding the link to the research by an Australian in Taiwan (not on

3. K.Andersen didn't mention "competing interests"
Only Garry listed Zalgen Labs, which we will look at later.
In acknowledgements, Michael Farzan, Wellcome Trust, NIH, ERC & ARC are mentioned.
Author affiliations listed as usual.
Note the 328 Citations!
https://t.co/nmOeohM89Q


4. Kristian Andersen (1)
Andersen worked with USAMRIID & Fort Detrick scientists on research, with Robert Garry, Jens Kuhn & Sina Bavari among


5. Kristian Andersen (2)
Works at Scripps Research Institute, which WAS in serious financial trouble, haemorrhaging 20 million $ a year.
But just when the first virus cases were emerging, they received great news.
They issued a press release dated November 27, 2019:

You May Also Like