Dealing with a disagreement


One of the core ideas that I discussed about awhile back was on the topic of agreement. Agreement can be perceived as a sort of compromise that gets you to better understand (or empathise with) others. Yet for some, they may find this concept a little difficult to understand. I discussed this topic with several people who seemed to have fervent objections on what this entailed. To these individuals, agreement is a sort of betrayal to their own ideas and principles, something that cannot enact the goal that they want. As the famous Prime Minister of Great Britain, Magarat Thatcher once said, you do not need to agree with a person to find a common language. Hence, for these individuals, I propose an alternative.


There are strong reasons for one to avoid a conversation or a fruitful discussion. Of the many, the predominant one would be because of a difference in authority. For instance, it would be difficult for you to debate or discuss a certain issue with the President because their position holds a lot more authority than any other role. This could be despite the fact that you are certainly more knowledgeable than they are. But what if the scenario was altered that the person you are having the discussion with is someone of the same stature as you? You would be more willing to have that conversation that you would likely forgo with someone that holds a lot more considerable weight. The main factor that triggered a difference in outcome is naturally their status. A higher status would intimidate those that are lower, and the flight or fight (leaning a lot more towards flight) response would be triggered.


In any discussion scenario, or even getting someone to do things your way, it would help tremendously by repositioning yourself to their level and finding a level ground to continue that discussion. In the workplace, we see this with the abolishment of certain red tapes and a promotion of an open-door office culture. Agreement in this case is a sort of empowerment and an incentive to discuss, which would definitely help bolster discussions and come to a feasible outcome.


Competent leaders can tactfully decide when to employ this skill to enhance the productivity of those around them. It makes sense that people are less loyal or less willing to cooperate when they are forced into doing so. There is only so much you can do through forceful means or throwing of rank before someone decides to defect. In the extreme situation, your work and social circle may even dwindle exponentially, and rapidly.



Still unsure of what to do? We just might have an answer for you. Like and contact us at our social media page www.facebook.com/brydangroup to gain exciting new insights.

9 views

Recent Posts

See All

What Comes After Covid?

Being fearful of Covid-19 is no longer. For many companies, the transition into the Work-From-Home scheme has been fully achieved - after all, we had two years to prepare for that. Arrangements in th

The Skill That Makes A Difference

People that hire purely based on skill-set and nothing else exist, but the numbers are so few. Perhaps the industry is too niche that these employers can do without the need for soft-skills in their e

What This Billion Dollar Company Did Right

Apple, a company with an enormous market share in the smartphone sector has an awfully odd way of doing things, but has somehow managed to make it work. Perhaps one of the most commonly seen brands in