It appears that ‘being convinced’ and ‘having conviction’ are sometimes used to mean the same thing. The two emerge from different Universes and the processes that shape them are perhaps quite different.

‘To convince’ / ‘To be convinced’ is a function of rationality and argument. It follows from a calculus of cost–benefit, loss–gain, for–against, risk–reward, and competing claims or arguments that are settled based on some criteria. In the EUM framework*, it is largely located in the Universe of Purpose and Achievement (UPA).

Amongst criteria that help one be convinced of a choice or decision are the consequences, real or imagined, and the willingness to live with some, and not others.

To be ‘convinced’ is to also pit a choice/decision against a desired outcome and lean towards a choice that appears to have a greater probability of realising the outcomes sought.

The question we ask is, ‘Are we clear about the outcomes we seek?’—have we weighed the options, and settled on them?

We often say, ‘If I cannot convince you through reason, let me appeal to your emotions’ or to your sense of fairness, justice, honour, etc., which involves assigning subjective valences to aspect seen as important. The more subjective the weight of the variables, the more we are left with a sense of scales tiling to one side—on balance. One might say that the heart has reasons that the head cannot contest and win over.

Convictions more likely stem from and is associated with the Universe of Duality and Simultaneity (UDS).

Convictions arise from recognising what one values, not instrumentally, but for its own sake, and the willingness to reflect this in the choices and actions one takes.

What distinguishes convictions from beliefs? Beliefs, as we understand them, are often associated with the Universe of Roles and Boundaries (URB), and typically flow from conventional, received wisdom and the norms of the social context. Perhaps one could think of convictions as internalised beliefs that have stood the test of validity and relevance to one’s context through direct personal–subjective experience. The individual finds them a meaningful ground to act from, and so imbues them with the force of a personal, moral imperative.

Convictions are therefore a product of emotional intelligence rather than impulse or expediency, a touchstone for oneself rather than dogmatic assertion upon others. However, convictions, because they are also about what one holds dear, sometimes involve their espousal. One can be staunch in their defence, and when someone makes light of these convictions, it may feel like an affront.

Convictions impel one to act—while aware of context and unfazed by consequence—not just win an argument. Convictions are not formulaic—one size does not fit all.

The individual acting from conviction is not caught with comfort and convenience, pragmatics based on desired outcomes, or constrained by a web of relationships. Convictions are not about what gets you ahead, what buys you peace, or avoid potentially unpleasant consequences; they are about what feels right in each context, what defines you as a person in this world, what helps you act with integrity.

When you act from conviction, you don’t look for guarantees. Courage and faith are worthy companions of conviction for good reason.

Action Choices

There are many options: we can choose to act by how things were done ‘back in the day’, be altogether desire-led, act within the bounds of socially sanctioned roles, take a pragmatic approach, or a principled one. Or maybe a combination of these, if it were possible. All come with consequences.

We are sometimes led by pain (of various kinds) avoidance, and choices may be in the form of silence, murmurs, conflict avoidance, compromise, etc. Some of the payoffs are: a sense of continuity, stability, social approval and intact relationships, The price that one pays can take many forms. Among them: unarticulated anger, feelings of letting down oneself, inner dissonance, a lack of fulfilment, stagnation, and stress directed towards oneself (and one’s body).

At other times, we may wish to make principled or conviction-led choices and decisions. This may take the form of stating the rules one is willing to play by, what one is willing to stake, and what the red lines or non-negotiables are. One can expect less vacillation, a greater sense of anchorage, inner alignment and integration, and the possibility of becoming a role model/inspiration to many. The price one pays may be many: exclusion, isolation and loneliness, being labelled arrogant and difficult, and having to deal with a mix of awe and fear, and in the process be placed on a pedestal and become inaccessible/untouchable.


*The EUM Framework is preferred by a growing number of consultants, coaches, counselors, OD practitioners, and change management professionals to map individuals and collectives in terms of their inner dynamics. Universes referred to are parts of us: a coherent set of values, proclivities, worldviews, role orientations, etc., that correspond to different imperatives of existence.

Image: PxFuel