When facing a viewpoint you find incorrect, the instinct is to correct the facts. A better approach is to first validate the person's emotion ("It makes sense you feel X about Y"). This makes them feel heard and safe, preventing defensiveness before you present your own perspective.
Related Insights
In intimate relationships, arguing over objective facts is a recipe for disaster. According to therapist Terry Real, "objective reality has no place in intimate relationships." Trying to prove your point with logic ignores your partner's emotional experience and only escalates conflict. Focus on feelings, not facts.
To defuse conflict, frame your perspective as a personal narrative rather than objective fact. This linguistic tool signals vulnerability and invites dialogue by acknowledging your story could be wrong, preventing the other person's brain from defaulting to a defensive, "fight or flight" response.
The Nonviolent Communication framework (Observations, Feelings, Needs, Request) provides a script for difficult conversations. It structures your communication to focus on objective facts and your personal emotional experience, rather than blaming the other person. This approach minimizes defensiveness and fosters empathy.
Effective problem-solving ('Plan B') follows a sequence. First, genuinely understand the other's perspective (Empathy). Second, share your own concerns using 'and,' not 'but.' Only then, invite them to brainstorm a mutually satisfactory solution together.
In high-stakes discussions, instinctually attacking a point leads to a zero-sum game. Grammarly's co-founder starts his responses with a genuine "Yes" (not "Yes, but…"). This tactic is primarily for his own benefit, mentally priming him to find common ground first, which then shifts the conversation's dynamic toward a productive outcome.
In disagreements, the objective isn't to prove the other person wrong or "win" the argument. The true goal is to achieve mutual understanding. This fundamental shift in perspective transforms a confrontational dynamic into a collaborative one, making difficult conversations more productive.
The "looping" technique—repeating what you heard and asking "Did I get that right?"—is effective in conflicts even if your interpretation is incorrect. The act of trying to understand and giving them power to correct you demonstrates genuine intent, making the other person feel heard and reducing defensiveness.
The word "but" functions as a conversational eraser, negating whatever positive validation came before it and signaling an antagonistic stance. Replacing "but" with "and" allows you to add your perspective without dismissing theirs, maintaining a collaborative and receptive tone.
When a customer has an issue, the instinct can be to defend your process or prove they are mistaken. This is flawed. The focus should be on resolving the situation and making the customer feel heard, not on who was technically correct. The goal is to solve, not to win the argument.
To slow down a heated or fast-paced conversation, avoid telling the other person to calm down. Instead, validate their emotional state by acknowledging it directly, e.g., 'I hear you have a lot of passion here.' This meta-commentary creates space and can de-escalate the intensity without being confrontational.
