Tag: debate

The very best way to respond to someone who disagrees with you.

I was recently in a meeting where I had a difference of opinion with one of my clients. So after he was done sharing his view, I threw my challenge flag. Then I realized we were not in an NFL game. So I had to actually say the words, ‘I challenge that perspective.’ Afterwhich, I introduced my perspective.

Then, like an episode of Seinfeld, or Murder She Wrote, the plot thickened.

Someone else in the room announced that he challenged my challenge. Which left me in a challenging position.

I had 2 options.

  1. I could explain myself further to ensure that everyone clearly understood my perspective.
  2. I could seek understanding of my challenger’s perspective.

(Ironically, I drove a rented Dodge Challenger to the meeting, which may have kicked off all of the challenges.)

I chose door number 2.

When there is a difference of opinions, the win is not to make sure everyone else knows why you think what you think. The win is to learn, understand and gain greater insight from the perspective of others.

Rather than digging in and repeating your perspective try one of these magical comeback lines:

  1. Why do you think that?
  2. Please explain.
  3. How did you come to that conclusion?
  4. Tell me more.
  5. Who’s zooming who?

Key Takeaway

Seeking understanding doesn’t mean you have to change your mind. It doesn’t mean that one of you is right and the other is wrong. It simply means that you are keeping your mind open to learning about how others think. You get to understand the facts that others have collected and how they have processed those facts into conclusions. This will help you make better decisions in the future. And it will help you gain the respect of others. Because when you show someone else that you respect them and their thinking process they will often do the same for you.

*If you know someone who could benefit from this message, please share it with them.

+For more of the best life lessons I have learned check out my new book, What Does Your Fortune Cookie Say? from Ripples Media.

An idea to make debates useful again.

On Sunday night I watched the presidential debate. It was ridiculous. Don’t get me wrong, I was highly entertained. But the debate failed miserably at its sole purpose: helping Americans become better-informed voters. There was so much talk about non-issues, non-answering of questions and unverified fact-spewing that all of America was dumber for having watched it. Entertained, but dumber.

When it was finally over I switched channels and watched the Sunday night football game. Taking in the final 15:00 minutes of the Packers and Giants game was like mental sorbet, cleansing my palette before I prepared to think like a human again on Monday morning.

But a funny thing happened when I woke up the next morning. I had an idea to solve the debate problem.

Let’s make debates more like football games.

One of the great things about a football game is that it follows a clearly defined set of rules. There are pre-established ways to score points. There are also consequences for breaking the rules. The debates should have the same structure.

edhochuli

Instead of having a moderator like, say, Lester ‘Don’t-Mind-Me’ Holt, we would have referees, like Ed Hochuli. Ed is a trial lawyer when he’s not flexing his zebra stripes.  He’s the man we need controlling the candidates.

The Perfect Agency Project’s debates look something like this:

  • Moderators are replaced by referees (didn’t I just say that?): refs put the question in motion, blow whistles to stop the talk and penalize participants for breaking the rules of the debate.
  • Penalties: The ultimate penalty in a debate is air time. If you fail to answer the question, stray off topic or introduce false information, you have to sit out questions. Debaters have to serve there ‘Time Outs’ in a hockey-style penalty box. I would have Martha Stewart design it.
  • Run over your time limit: a whistle blows and your mic is cut off. If we can humiliate Hollywood stars by cutting their mics off during an acceptance speech, surely we can do the same to long-winded presidential candidates.
  • Talk when it’s not your turn: You lose time. This is just like being offsides in football. Or encroachment. Or interference.
  • Unpresidential-like conduct: Your mic is cut off. A third-party candidate walks on stage and replaces you for the next question.
  • Answer a question: score points on a 1 to 7 scale based on the quality of your answer.
  • Don’t answer the question: no points
  • Make false claims: the referees stops the debate, sites the facts, sends you to the Martha Stewart penalty box.
  • Nachos: Let’s all eat them. Just because.

But this is just a start. Now it’s time to add your ideas to the comment box. Don’t mention any candidates by name. It’s not that kind of show. Just the football-style rules we could incorporate to make the debates fair and informative. Points will be awarded for good rules. A flag will be thrown on anything that is offsides. Ready? Set. Omaha!