The Art Of The Fight

Last week, I was on the phone with my dad. Our conversation began with the usual pleasantries; “How was your weekend?” “What did you get up to?” “Are you eating well, sleeping well?” And then came the inevitable question: “So, how is the job hunt going?” I felt my stomach drop. Like many of my GSB classmates, I hadn’t yet figured out my next step. Interviews were moving along but I wasn’t terribly excited by most of the opportunities coming my way.

“It’s going okay; I’m still interviewing.”

What ensued was a long debate. He: was worried about me, didn’t want me to be stressed, thought I should invest in a backup. I: am 27 and capable of managing my life, am ambitious about my career and unwilling to settle. After twenty minutes of back-and-forth, I threw in the towel.

“Okay, I’m done! I have too many other things on my plate to be fighting about this.”

Confused, my dad responded, “Fighting? We were just discussing the issue. I’m not trying to add anything more to your plate, I just want to explore your options.”

I felt my heart rate slow and my muscles relax. Oh, we’re “discussing” again.

This type of conversation is almost ritualized in my relationship with my father; he frequently “discusses” ideas through conflict, and I respond by running away from his seemingly personal attacks. More often than not, I have to be cajoled into re-entering the arena, and I’m only ready to let my guard down once he’s made his intentions clear.

While women tend to explore ideas through rapport building — that is, through praise, by allowing the other party to save face, etc. — men tend to explore them through opposition.

In fact, the art of the fight is a common conversational ritual among men. Deborah Tannen, a Linguistics Professor at Georgetown University, has spent years studying the impact of linguistic style on influence and human interaction. Through her work, she has found that while women tend to explore ideas through rapport building — that is, through praise, by allowing the other party to save face, etc. — men tend to explore them through opposition. Both are ways to test an idea, but they are each ritualized in different groups.

How does this difference affect our work? Tannen explains in an HBR article titled “The Power of Talk: Who Gets Heard and Why”:

“[Those unaccustomed to ritual opposition] may give up an idea that is challenged, taking the objections as an indication that the idea was a poor one. Worse, they may take the opposition as a personal attack and may find it impossible to do their best in a contentious environment. People unaccustomed to this style may hedge when stating their ideas in order to fend off potential attacks. Ironically, this posture makes their arguments appear weak and is more likely to invite attack from pugnacious colleagues than to fend it off.”

In GSB speak, avoiding ritual opposition makes you more likely to end up at the back of the influence line. And nobody wants that.

So what can we non-fighters do about it? After years of practicing the art of combat with my father, I’ve developed five tricks:

1. Start with positive self-talk: If a challenge is bubbling up and I’m scared to share, I say to myself, “I’m making this idea better,” then proceed. The exact mantra changes by situation, but it is always uttered in my head. I hedge on the inside, so only opposition comes out.
2. Assume good intentions: More than likely my opposition is not out to get me. But even if they are, how does it help to focus on that? Constant challenging can feel like a personal attack, but assuming good intentions and fighting back maintains your footing.
3. Challenge ideas not people: “I disagree” can be more effective than “You’re wrong.” Challenging the idea, not the person, helps prevent disagreement from feeling like a personal attack, and creates space for productive opposition.
4. Say why: A popular 1970s study shows that using the word “because” significantly increases compliance, even if your reason doesn’t make a whole lot of sense. Human beings use “why” as a heuristic for logic, and adapt their behavior accordingly. Internally, it has the calming effect of a hedge. Externally, it remains dissent.
5. Practice with a friend: This has been most useful in the lead up to a presentation. I prime my friend to poke holes in my argument, and because I trust his good intentions, I am prepared to engage his challenges with an open mind. By the time the meeting rolls around, I’m ready to hook and jab.

We know from two years of giving action-impact feedback that practice makes perfect. As we re-enter the workforce, we can ritualize opposition bit by bit. When others oppose our idea, we can try to see it as a bid for exploration, rather than a hostile shut-down. When building our teams, we can practice the art of the challenge; making it normal for team members to confront one another without it being taken too seriously.

These few tricks can prepare us to engage productively in the inevitable opposition we’ll face in the workplace. Like my father, we can grow to see spirited, even heated debates as just discussing.