Julia Minson’s recent book, How to Disagree Better, explores how we can become more receptive to opposing views, engage constructively with disagreement, and improve our conversations without necessarily changing anyone’s mind.
I think this is important work.
But I believe there’s another skill workplace teams need to develop alongside disagreeing well.
How to object well.
After all, disagreement is not necessarily conflict. Two people can hold opposing views, explain their reasoning, challenge assumptions and still have a productive conversation.
As Edward de Bono described in I Am Right; You Are Wrong, we can engage in parallel talking rather than continually trying to convert one another.
Converge, not convert.
But what happens when disagreement is accompanied by objectionable behaviour?
The volume and tone rises as someone starts berating a colleague, rolling their eyes, talking down to them, or becoming overly dogmatic.
The disagreement itself isn’t necessarily the problem. The behaviour accompanying it is.
And how better for a team to address objectionable behaviour than by objecting to it?
That’s the thinking behind SpatzAI.
We propose giving every team member, regardless of rank, an explicitly agreed, reciprocal process for addressing minor objectionable behaviour directly and in real time.
It begins with a simple verbal caution:
ie dividing an objection into three levels or phases: Caution – Objection – Stop
The recipient can acknowledge the caution, challenge it, or ignore it. If unresolved, the issuer can choose to resolve or escalate through the proportionate three levels, using the Spatz chat app.
And importantly, if necessary, both parties have access to the Spatz Team + AI Review platform on their Slack channel, where the original behaviour and the fairness of the objection itself can be examined.
Nobody is automatically right merely because they objected first.
Accountability before authority.
Minson’s work helps us understand how people might become better at engaging with opposing ideas.
SpatzAI aims to help teams become better at addressing objectionable behaviour when those ideas are exchanged.
I believe these are complementary skills.
Because teams need the freedom to disagree, but they also need an agreed way to challenge behaviour that crosses their behaviour boundaries.
Disagree with the content. Object to the behaviour.
And perhaps most importantly, learn to do both well.
Leave a Reply