Echo chambers exist when we're only exposed to viewpoints we already agree with, and they've been a risk ever since humans learnt to speak. We all prefer to listen to some people more than others, which usually means people whose opinions don't annoy us. And inevitably, that limits the perspectives we get to hear. The arrival of newspapers in the 18th century stepped things up, bringing a regular feed of partisan opinion to subtly shift our thinking in one direction or another. The arrival of constantly accessible twenty-hour news channels in the late 1980s accelerated this further. But the real explosion was in the early 2000s, when the algorithms within newly emerging social platforms started feeding us content based on what we'd already seen. So, we all create our own echo chambers through the sources we use to get information.

Leaders' echo chambers, however, are worsened by the very nature of their roles. An inherent aspect of every leadership role is that it creates distance between you and the people you lead. It can create physical distance by removing us to a large, walnut-panelled office, or just keeping us busy and giving us less time to speak with others. It can create structural distance, by giving us status and authority over others and thereby making us different. And it can create psychological distance, by changing how we view and approach others and how they view and approach us.

This distance can useful, but – informationally – it's toxic. Studies show it has three main adverse effects. First, it prevents those in lower-level roles from being as open with us as they might otherwise be. And to make this worse, leaders typically underestimate the degree to which this is so. Second, it decreases the degree to which most people are willing to openly question or disagree with us. And again, leaders typically underestimate just how much this is so. And finally, there is strong evidence that the distance inherent in leadership roles renders leaders less sensitive to external, contextual information. In other words, they tend to rely more on their instincts, previous experience, and what they already know, and are less likely to take the advice of others. Add all these up, and ensuring your decisions are sufficiently informed is a huge challenge.

These are inherent aspects of leadership that every leader faces. But as job insecurity grows, they're getting worse as people willingness to speak up decreases. And you can't get rid of them entirely – you will always have an echo chamber of some sort. But there are things you can do to make it better and mitigate the effects on your decision-making.

The most critical thing is to assume you are in an information bubble of some sort and use the people around you to break it. Ask questions. Lots and lots of questions. Make a simple habit of asking, "What do you think?" Where possible, deliberately ask the views of those you know will disagree with you. When discussing issues with your team, ask them to play Devil's Advocate and push them to identify alternative ideas and options. Seek out different views and opinions as if they are essential nourishment. Because for you, as a leader making decisions, they are.

It's not rocket science, but it does take discipline and sometimes patience. For many years now, I have made a habit of watching a news channel that approaches things from the opposite end of the political spectrum to me. It really does take discipline because I find it exceptionally irritating. But I do have a better understanding of how others think as a result.

So, everyone lives in their own echo chamber, and that is truer today than at any other point in history. For leaders, the risks are worse, and the consequences are potentially far costlier. But you can minimise these risks. It just requires a systematic approach, a measure of curiosity, and a dash of patience.