Actively supporting a decision you disagree with isn't just about team cohesion. If the project fails despite your best efforts, you have collected the most credible data to prove the initial decision was wrong, which is far more convincing than if you had undermined it from the start.
To resolve a strong disagreement with a senior engineer, 'disagree and commit.' Execute their plan diligently. This either proves you wrong or makes the plan's flaws so apparent that reversing the decision becomes the logical next step, earning you trust and credibility in the process.
If a decision has universal agreement, a leader isn't adding value because the group would have reached that conclusion anyway. True leadership is demonstrated when you make a difficult, unpopular choice that others would not, guiding the organization through necessary but painful steps.
Instead of directly opposing a decision, surface the inherent dilemma. Acknowledge the desired goal (e.g., speed), then clearly state the cost ('If we do X, we trade off Y'). Then ask, 'Is that a tradeoff we are comfortable making?' This shifts the conversation from confrontation to collaborative risk assessment.
Negative feedback that dismisses your idea as 'nuts' is incredibly valuable. This extreme reaction forces you to rigorously test your core assumptions, revealing whether you are fundamentally wrong and saving time, or 'deadly right' about a non-obvious market shift.
Instead of escalating disagreements, Atlassian's founders operated on a simple principle: if one couldn't be persuaded that an idea was good, it was likely not worth pursuing. This served as a critical decision-making filter and prevented major conflicts.
Taking a strong stance on a strategic question, even if it's not perfectly correct, is a powerful way to accelerate progress. It provides clear direction, allowing a team to skip endless deliberation and move decisively, avoiding the paralysis that comes from trying to keep all options open.
Bozoma Saint John applies the 'disagree and commit' principle to creative work. While diverse ideas are vital, once a leader chooses a direction, the entire team must rally behind it without reservation. Dwelling on what 'should have been' ensures the chosen path will fail.
Managers cannot just be soldiers executing orders. If you don't truly believe in a strategy, you cannot effectively inspire your team. You must engage leadership to find an angle you can genuinely support or decompose the idea into testable hypotheses you can commit to.
Citing a story where Martin Luther King Jr. reprimanded an advisor for not challenging him enough, the insight is that top leaders must actively cultivate dissent. They must create an environment where their team feels obligated to point out when an idea is "crazy" to prevent the organization from making catastrophic errors.
To get your team to adopt a new strategy, you as the leader must present it with absolute conviction. Any hesitation you express will be amplified by your team, leading them to reject the idea because they sense your lack of belief.