Addressing Dissent

Conversations are so much easier when we are talking with people who agree with us. No awkward moments. No disagreements. No skirting around sticky points. No holding back. Is there anything more relaxing than to wax philosophic with others with whom we are on the same page? I think not. However, having these kind of non-challenging exchanges day after day, encounter after encounter, conversation after conversation is like eating way too much ice cream: it is unhealthy, makes one lazy, rarely, if ever, contributes to anything meaningful, and places one inside a bubble that is counter to any acts of intellectual or even physical growth or betterment.

Disagreements, while not always fun, are essential to our advancement as a society and as individuals. Whether one is president of the United States, a parent in suburbia, or a teacher dealing with rowdy students, we all need to have our thoughts, perspectives, biases and ideas challenged. Being asked what it is we are talking about or being told we are wrong forces us to regroup, review our notions, and devise better ways to communicate them. All of that, of course, is challenging, frustrating and, at times, most humbling. But like the air we breath, I view them to be essential to our survival.

In terms of communication, the challenge is how best to disagree so that it leads to a fruitful exchange, enhanced relationships, and better ideas. One of the earmarks of effective communication is being able to create an environment where healthy exchanges are deemed to be safe and acceptable. Strategic communication based on establishing trust, mutual respect, and credibility can help make this happen. It comes from communicating with the intention of inclusion and building ties. These can be achieved by organizations with other organizations and individuals with other individuals. If done well and sincerely, then, disagreement evolves into discussion into food for thought and, finally, into sparks for more ideas and better actions.