Validate their right to hold their viewpoint without suggesting you share it: “I understand that’s your perspective on this issue” or “I can see you’ve thought about this a lot.” This acknowledgment reduces defensiveness by showing you’re not dismissing them, even as you maintain your own view.
Identify and emphasize any point of agreement, no matter how small. Statements like “We both seem to care about finding a long-term solution here” or “I agree that safety is the top priority” establish shared territory before addressing differences. This common ground creates a foundation for more productive exchange.
Move the conversation from specific positions to the underlying values or concerns: “It seems we both care about family well-being, even if we see different approaches” or “We both want what’s best for the company, though we have different ideas about how to get there.” This shift often reveals more agreement than initially apparent.
For issues that don’t require immediate resolution or united action, explicitly acknowledging the impasse can prevent unproductive cycles: “We see this differently, and that’s okay. Should we move on to something else?” This approach works best for matters of preference or opinion rather than decisions requiring consensus.
These techniques work because they address the underlying dynamics that often maintain Opinion Entrenchment. Many firmly held positions connect to identity, values, or perceived threats, making them resistant to direct challenge. By acknowledging perspective, finding common ground, and focusing on shared values, you create pathways for more flexible engagement without requiring immediate position change.
Remember Boundaries
While these techniques can improve interaction quality, recognize when continuing a particular discussion becomes counterproductive. Some topics may need to be revisited later or approached differently if they consistently generate tension.
See also: Understanding Opinion Entrenchment and Tip: Disagreeing Respectfully
