One Minute Pause no 23
A good argument at work, around a dinner table or at the pub seems to be a national past time.

But what strikes me is that winning an argument, and persuading the other party to come around to your way of thinking, are two completely different things.

During arguments people can get railroaded into a submissive nod, yet deep in their hearts they know they are right and stop arguing because they have been worn down, or can’t be bothered.

The dominant arguer registers this as a win - but have they really achieved what they want? Or will the person who has “lost” the argument continue to carry on as normal, albeit with a little less respect for the “winner”?

We all have to put forward regular arguments at work - whether we like it or not. Around 90% of the people I train have this task before them - whether it be to fundraise, to sell or to discipline others.

So how do we argue more effectively at work to ensure that we are getting what we want more often?

A good persuader always starts by finding the other person’s viewpoint. The best path to discovering a viewpoint is by asking intelligent questions.

Good questions will help you understand how passionately people believe in their view.

Dale Carnegie, author of How to Win Friends and Influence People had it right in the 1930s: “A man convinced against his will is of the same opinion still”.

By asking professional, credible questions you will understand whether the job in front of you is simply one of convincing, or the harder version - convincing against will.

1. Convincing
This is the easiest category to argue against. The best way to win an argument when someone needs some convincing is by talking in benefits. You have hopefully already uncovered the values of the other party by asking them questions. So you will know how to appeal to these values by putting your argument in terms that will benefit them. For example, if you know the other party values money more than career, there’s little point pushing the career button.

2. Convincing against will
Some people are stubborn, or very strong-willed. This means that they won’t budge on what they truly believe to be right. This is a much harder category to be arguing against. Some, like Carnegie, believe it to be impossible to convince against will.
So in light of this, the best advice is not to bother. But that’s not very helpful when we don’t have a choice.

Another common bit of advice to ‘convince against will’ is the old sales mantra of “make the other party think it is their idea”. That does work some of the time.

For example, Jamie Oliver was delighted for dinner ladies and some politicians to promote healthy school dinners as their idea.

However, I think this is at times a far too simplistic approach.

Imagine you’re in an argument and at some point the other party says “That is the best idea I’ve heard in a long time. You should use it and tell management”. At what point do you start being a little suspect of their intentions?

I think the best advice when you realise that you are arguing ‘against will’ is to take it one step at a time. With pen and paper, list all the contributing factors, then find out what the areas of common ground are. What are the bits that you can influence now versus later?

A measured approached with small wins over time may contribute to an eventual argument win in your favour.

The bottom line is this: before you start trying to win an argument, question as deeply as possible first.

By quickly ascertaining which category, or ground, you are dealing in, then it will help you to win more arguments and get what you want.

This entry was posted on Wednesday, November 9th, 2005 at 11:02 am and is filed under One Minute Pause. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.