Most of us can remember instances where we won and should not have. Why?
Rule #1: Never argue with people who disagree with you or have a different world view.
When we come to the realization that we will never win an argument with strong “facts,” or any other reason, we will be 1,000 percent better off. Of course, this doesn’t apply to Lawyers in a court of law, etc. because this is by definition adversarial. We may actually win an argument but it will generally never be because of “Facts” even though most of us present facts (this is good) when dealing with others. Does that sound contradictory? We will give examples.
Many of us will give strong facts and head on argument when we realize that someone is not (never will be) on our side. We often do this to insult them–not to convince them. Often, it is after they have subtly insulted us or acted superior to us–people recognize this immediately because it has happened to everyone often. However, most of us don’t do this with people we really want to convince or someone we value or feel we have a chance to make our ally. We may have to be careful and make a conscious effort to avoid argument. Argument is 99.9% no win!
Rule #2: We win because they are winning or perceive themselves to be winning.
Rule #3: Being liked and in the majority takes priority over being right. Psychological studies support this concept.
There is no subjective issue where these rules do not apply (Politics, Religion, Marriage, Close Relatives and Friends, etc.). Note: It’s often difficult to argue that 1+1 does not equal two but this won’t be the case in many other subjective areas other than simple math.
For example, isn’t it fun to argue with an atheist when they may think they will change our opinion with “their facts!” That must really be frustrating to them.
Some examples of when we won and shouldn’t have. Our company ordered a computer system from a Distributor/Consulting Company without backend billable limits (free support). Even though this company went under trying to support this system (creating huge conflicts among their Partners) they continued down this losing road primarily for future business. They saw the relationship as an investment instead of a one time opportunity (win/win perception).
Example two:
Our company spent twice as much on a large capital project financed by a large investment bank. The Regional Bank Vice President saw our business as profitable to him and we could sway him on budget overruns “over a long period of time.” When the international executives at the bank finally figured out what was going on he was fired immediately. Note: This shows that you don’t always want to be dealing with the ultimate decision makers in charge–just the ones high enough to call some shots. Think of government and the military when getting your arms around this concept. Government is the prime example of overrun and understatement.
If you are a new executive there are several issues to keep in mind working for a large or small company. The other VP’s will never actually privately be onboard (may publicly agree) if you are competing with them for company resources or power. Never hit them head on with your proposals and, as much as possible, let them perceive that they are winning or it is their decision. Of course, if you don’t want to win argue the point.
People use this tactic or ploy all the time: “I’m sure you will be better off if we do this….” In reality they mean they will be better off!
Note: people that perceive they have the upper hand or power don’t care if you see through their ploy and understand the real meaning of their comment.
If possible, change the culture and eat the elephant (whatever the objective) one bite at a time. If you start at the far end of the body the elephant may not realize he has been eaten until it is too late. Many of us could give hundreds of examples.
If you don’t like to win argue your point and hit them head on. You are turning a large ship not driving a gocart.
God has often used the appearance of weakness or strength to gain advantage.
