Stop Trying to Win Arguments
A Harvard communication expert offers a 5-step plan for what to do instead.
Having a pleasant and productive conversation with someone you disagree with has never been easy. These days in America it can feel impossible.
One recent Pew poll found nearly half of us think people from the other political party are “evil.” With about even odds that a discussion is going to end with someone being called the spawn of satan, it’s unsurprising we’re reluctant to talk to each other.
That’s terrible for our politics. We can’t find solutions to our problems if we can’t get through a conversation without screaming. Our reluctance to talk to people we disagree with is also lousy for business. Healthy debate helps companies stress test their ideas, surface valuable information, and build consensus. Without it, information bubbles form and resentments brew.
Is it possible to turn the situation around? Can we relearn the lost art of healthy debate? Julia Minson’s answer is a resounding yes. A professor at Harvard Kennedy School of Government, Minson is the author of the new book, How to Disagree Better. As the title suggests, she’s on a quest to help us start having better conversations even with “the other side.”
Most of us are terrible at talking to people with disagree with
In a recent appearance on the consistently fascinating HBR IdeaCast podcast, Minson explains she started researching this topic for personal reasons. The child of blunt Russian immigrants, as a young person Minson wasn’t shy about sharing her point of view.
“My teenage self had a very loud opinion about everything,” she confesses. (I relate.) But as she grew older she realized bluntly telling people why they’re wrong didn’t produce very good outcomes.
“What I have found is that it leads other people to shut down. It doesn’t matter how right I am… when the other person can just walk away from the conversation or can just sort of sit there silently waiting for me to finish the rant, I know I’m not getting the best out of them,” she explains.
Teen know-it-alls might be especially prone to thinking they’re right and everyone else just needs to be informed of the facts that prove it. But this tendency to assume you’re reasonable and anyone who disagrees with you must be misinformed, self-interested, or not very bright is a common human tendency. Psychologists call it “naive realism,”
Decades worth of research shows that just reciting evidence rarely changes minds or even results in a useful discussion, however. The other person saying, ‘Oh, you’re right and I am wrong’ almost never happens. As Minson observed, people dig in their heels or literally or mentally walk away instead.
So what works better than just arguing your corner? On the podcast Minson offers five concrete pieces of advice for better conversations with people you disagree with.
Step one: give up on winning arguments
First and foremost, as the above suggests, you need to give up on the idea of “winning” arguments. That’s not happening. Instead, shift your goal from victory to continued dialogue.
“A constructive disagreement is a disagreement that leads the two parties to want to talk to each other again. It’s not reaching agreement, it’s not building consensus, it’s not finding a negotiated compromise, it’s, can we disagree, but in a way that makes you want to talk to me and makes me want to talk to you at some point in the future,” insists Minson.
If you keep the lines of communication open, greater understanding should help you find constructive solutions and mutually acceptable points of agreement over time.
Step two: forget body language
There’s lots of advice out there on what tone of voice or gestures will help you have more constructive conversations. But Minson’s research suggests most of these tips are a distraction from what really matters. Body language is incredibly varied from person to person and context to context and therefore quite hard to interpret. Signals are missed more often than they’re correctly interpreted.
That means you’re really going to need to lean on language.
“We are not trained actors, so our nonverbal signals are really, really messy. Language is also easy to misinterpret, but we are far more consistent at interpreting each other’s language than we are at interpreting nonverbal behavior. So if we want to clearly communicate engagement with opposing views, we need to use our words,” Minson underlines.
Step three: Start with exploration
What should you say then? Research out of Stanford suggests that the key to fruitful dialogue is convincing the other person of your genuine interest and respect for their perspective. Without this basis, it’s very hard for the conversation to go anywhere constructive. The team behind the study suggested specific language to signal this openness.
Minson agrees that it is best to start by exploring the other person’s viewpoint. Her preferred opener is something like, “I’m really glad we’re having this conversation. I’d like to understand more about your perspective. Help me understand why you think XYZ.”
Not only will you open their ears. It will also help you avoid wasting your time on useless arguments.
“People often jump into persuasion mode. If I explain to them how things really are, then they will recognize the correctness of my view. And maybe that’s true, but you have no idea where they’re coming from and you’re just as likely to frankly make a fool of yourself,” she warns. Getting a better handle on their perspective and values “protects you from making your own argument with kind of no awareness of the landmines.”
Step four: Don’t take the bait
This is all well and good in theory, but what happens when inevitably the other party says something you view as disrespectful or triggering? That’s when things can get tricky in practice. Minson advises setting a “north star” of “modeling receptiveness” before you start the conversation.
“This is a guiding principle that you don’t get distracted from,” she says. In difficult moments, remember why you value this conversation and what positive change you’re hoping it might bring about in the world.
Even with these mental reminders, you’re going to need to “exert some self-mastery to stick to the goal,” Minson warns. “Don’t take the bait.”
Step five: Practice status jujitsu
Jujitsu is a martial art based on the principle of using your opponent’s force against them. You win, in other words, by yielding in strategic moments. In Minson’s telling, verbal sparring can work much the same way. You often gain status in the end by yielding to your opponent in the short term.
“A lot of leaders are concerned, if I’m receptive to opposing perspectives, won’t people think that I’m uncertain? Won’t people think that I’m weak, that I don’t have the courage of my convictions?” she acknowledges. Her research shows the opposite is actually true.
“What we find very consistently is that receptive leaders are seen as better leaders because people want to feel heard. And even if I am giving air time to an opinion you disagree with, I am coming across as a more thoughtful person. I’m coming across as a better leader, even though I am talking to somebody you might not want me to talk to,” she explains.
Your instinct might be to show your status by shutting down discussion or bullying your opinions through. This tends to backfire. You don’t look strong. You look out of touch and afraid of challenges. Paradoxically, respecting others makes you more respected in the end.
For better conversations stop trying to fix people
Is it difficult to talk constructively with people you disagree with profoundly? Of course. Tips like the ones above can help but they can’t make it easy. But Minson is living proof better conversations are possible.
“It’s been a real journey from my teenage self that had a very loud opinion about everything to my probably much more correct and accurate and smarter self, who is now ironically much quieter. I know a lot more, but I say a lot less,” she concludes.
It’s a journey we can all take and one that starts with a simple first step. Stop trying to fix people and win arguments. Focus on connection and understanding instead.
A version of this post originally appeared on Inc.com. Books and authors mentioned have affiliate links, meaning I receive a small commission if you click and go on to buy them.