Can we agree to disagree?

What does the abundance of “pre-meets” in the business world tell us??And whether these "alignment" meetings happen online or in-person, why are we at such pains to avoid disagreement in actual meetings?

I believe that the suppression of disagreement – whether that is in these set-piece meetings at work, the echo chambers of social media, or idle chats with neighbours – is profoundly unhealthy.

Isn’t this rather random stuff for a marketing leadership blog??

Maybe, but I think it matters for leaders or those aspiring to leadership roles.?After all, being able to disagree constructively comes from a place of confidence.?The alternative is disagreeing with aggression or “biting our tongue” both of which suggest an underlying anxiety or fear.

rocking the boat

I think many too people are operating under an implicit assumption that a good team player is someone that doesn’t rock the boat.?Alternatively, they’re killing time and choosing what appears to be the path of least resistance.

The reality is that disagreement and debate are critical to getting better outcomes – for teams, companies, even government.?Why would a team of any size overlook the in-built advantage that it has over the “one-man-band”? It can draw upon the rich diversity of approach and opinion that is (or should be) a characteristic of groups.

Ironically, disagreeing ‘well’ is something I’ve got better at over the past decade while consulting - which seems slightly paradoxical since this way of working often lacks the implied safety of employment.

set the right tone

As a leader in business, we have a particular responsibility to set the tone and encourage the right sort of disagreement and debate.?It’s actions, not words, that matter here.?

Here are a few things to think about yourself.?Some are drawn from my own somewhat delayed development in this area.

Be clear on problems, strategy & goals.?

Obvious perhaps, yet surprisingly rare.?Sensible discussions happen when the team has a shared point of reference – what problem are we trying to solve here??If scope is well-defined, you get better quality thinking.?Discussions about approach are much more objective because they’re about the extent to which an idea or proposal answers a question we've already agreed upon.?

How much time and effort do you put into defining “what problem we’re trying to solve”?

Reframe disagreement.?

I sense that the larger the organisation, the more likely we are to have been conditioned that disagreement is bad.?Leaders have to turn that on its head.?Again actions, not words, count here.?The leader that welcomes and responds to disagreement helps demonstrate they value it.?They also come across as confident people.?Confident people command more respect and typically get further in their careers.

Whilst challenge tends to be respected and rewarded in Western business cultures, in Asia disagreeing with superiors needs to be managed in a more nuanced way.

What does your behaviour tell your team about the extent to which disagreement is welcome??Do people agree with you for the right reasons?

More fact, less feeling.?

Fact-based discussions are more objective, which matters a lot whether it’s in business, charity or government.?They minimise the risk that a disagreement is taken personally – the facts are external to both of us, whereas your ‘feelings’ are more integral to you.?If I attack your feelings, I attack you.

It’s not about saying people and their feelings don’t matter.?Quite the reverse – if I genuinely value your opinion, you’ll offer your thinking to me more often, you’ll grow in confidence, you’ll feel more fulfilled and motivated.

To what extent is decision-making fact-based in your team or organisation??Are there some people you avoid disagreeing with because they seem to take things rather personally??How could you de-personalise difficult conversations?

Develop a language & culture that make disagreement OK.?

Use words like “I” more, and words like “you” less – this lessens the chances that comments will be taken personally.?"This is my perspective" works better than "you are wrong"!

Always recognise the good in what the other party is saying. Even if you think what they’re saying is *BS*, you can start by acknowledging their commitment to the issue and the personal values you each share.

Years ago, I received coaching from executive coach Arabella Ellis.?One of her many useful models that stuck with me is called parent-adult-child. Even in work, it's alarmingly easy for us to slip into parent/child relationships, whereas the?aim should always be to have adult to adult interactions: treating people respectfully as equals.?

If the other party behaves as a parent, our natural urge is to fulfil the role of child whereas we must remain “grown up”.?Many times, I’ve simply written “P-A-C” (parent-adult-child) in the margin of my notes to remind me to stay “adult” if the other party strays into either parent or child mode.

How “safe” is it to disagree in your team or organisation??What makes you say that??Many firms have wide-ranging programmes to encourage diversity & inclusion in the workplace – to what extent does yours extend to diversity of thinking??Thinking about people you find ‘difficult’ – do you notice that they or you tend towards playing the parent or child role?

Listen, really listen.?

Too many people use the period when they other person is talking to think about their next monologue!?Most marketers (and management) are extroverts.?I’m going to call you out here because this tendency for somewhat superficial?listening especially affects extroverts.?

However, introverts like me also have major blind spots – for example, we can fail to take people with us because we may not explain the implicit thinking that led to a particular conclusion.

As marketers we know what types of open-ended questions are necessary to understand consumers and interpret them without bias.?We need to apply that training to our interactions with colleagues.?

The most skilful influencers are able to understand the others perspective, and often they will help the other party come round (or at least recognise) their point of view using a series of questions, rather than assertions.

Are you an introvert of extrovert??How accomplished are you in asking open-ended questions, showing a genuine curiosity about other viewpoints, and demonstrating active listening?

Disagreement is good, not bad.?Perhaps we’ve been conditioned to see it as destructive because we’re not disagreeing well enough.?

As marketing leaders, we are responsible for generating the ideas & strategies that will help prepare our brands and teams for a better future.?Let's recognise that ideas and strategies are “anti-fragile“.?They get stronger when subjected to tension, scrutiny and discussion.?If they break, then they deserve to.

As a marketing leader, in order to get better outcomes, it is our responsibility to create an environment in which our team & organisation can disagree well.

A footnote about collective responsibility.?

In government, the term “cabinet responsibility” refers to the principle that a prime minister's top team should debate/disagree in private; but once a decision is made, they will present a united front outside the meeting room.?Government ministers sometimes 'forget' this principle, but it is nonetheless relevant to leadership roles in business.?Of course there is a time/place to disagree, but subsequently a responsibility to “toe the line” (or in extremis, get out) once key decisions have been made.

This article first appeared in Choices - our 15-minute monthly read for marketing & strategy leaders. To get more like this direct to your inbox, please signup.