Agree to Disagree? 5 Tips to Cool Down a Heated Argument.

These are the types of workplace conversations that can ignite heated arguments among employees, says Steven L. Franconeri, a professor of management and organizations (courtesy) at the Kellogg School who studies how people can have smarter and calmer disagreements. He has a theory about why emotionally charged disagreements seem to be on the rise.

“We’ve gotten into a habit of assuming that disagreements should be infused with anger and hatred, and that the person that we’re disagreeing with is either irrational, or being purposely misleading,” he says. “We need to learn how to have better disagreements.”

Enter Point Taken, a game developed by Franconeri that models conversational interventions with the goal of helping people overcome destructive disagreements. Based on the critical thinking technique of “argument mapping,” the game uses octagonal tiles, play money, and collaborative fact-checking missions to teach people how to have disagreements that are healthy and productive, rather than polarizing and ineffective.

Franconeri has tested Point Taken with employees in a variety of settings, including at a venture capital firm, at a nonprofit for underserved youth, and with a group of U.S. Army officers. In every case, he’s observed categorical improvements in how people work through or resolve disagreements.

But you don’t have to play the game to play by its rules. Here are the five principles of productive disagreements to consider during your next conversation at work.

Reframe the goal

Though we all enter conversations with our own information, histories, viewpoints, biases, and blind spots, Franconeri notes that the goal of talking with someone is not to “win” or convince them that you are right. Entering any disagreement with the intention of converting them to your viewpoint can signal to the other person that you don’t intend to listen to them.

“That’s a recipe for a fight that’s not going to change anyone’s mind,” says Franconeri. “In fact, it may drive two people even further apart.”

Instead, make it your goal to gather information, broaden your perspective, reduce any biases you have, and, quite simply, learn. Think of it as an interesting exercise to challenge your logic, by understanding someone else’s.

Law students and intelligence analysts are trained to practice this habit, Franconeri adds. In fact, it’s so essential to critical thinking that he asks anyone playing Point Taken to sign an unofficial contract stating they will not try to persuade another person of their views.

“If that’s your intent, then you’re in the wrong mindset for learning and finding common ground with other people,” he says. “That’s explicitly against the game rules.”

Model emotional regulation

When you feel strongly about an issue, it’s only natural to get emotional when you talk about it. But Franconeri advises people to fight that urge. Becoming increasingly emphatic won’t move an argument forward, and it can allow irrationality to creep into a conversation.

Rather, make a conscious effort to stay calm and force yourself to ‘play both sides’ by focusing on where you agree, before exploring where you both disagree. “This will quiet your inner emotional brain,” says Franconeri, and invite your “outer, cognitive, intellectual brain to think through arguments more clearly.”

Modeling this behavior for others also encourages them to emulate it. And if they don’t, it reflects poorly on them, not you.

“By the way, this is not easy,” adds Franconeri. “It takes a lot of inhibition to keep your emotions down when you hear things that you don’t agree with. It takes inhibition to suppress that rebuttal that you’re dying to say.”

Setting emotions aside can also allow solutions to emerge. Case in point: employees at a nonprofit for at-risk teens couldn’t resolve an intense argument about their tutoring programming until they started talking about it in a calm way.

“They realized, in the end, that their real disagreement was only about a single course,” says Franconeri. “But it took time and lowering their emotions to figure that out.”

Focus on the issue, not the person

As conflict professionals recommend, treat the word “you” as taboo in the context of a disagreement. In other words, don’t say, “you only think that because ...” or “you believe this because ....” It will undermine the strength of your argument and make you look like you’re attacking the other person.

Along similar lines, avoid using the words “always” or “never,” which suggest you’re thinking in a biased or absolutist way. Many senior leaders are trained to see this as a sign of sloppy thinking, Franconeri says.

Keep your focus on the issue, which will encourage you and the other person to analyze it as a team. “It takes you out of that angry-dinner-table-argument context and into a collaborative mindset,” Franconeri explains.

What if, during the disagreement, a fact cited by someone is questioned by the other? In Point Taken, each player is issued “fact check” cards they can play to request verification of a point’s veracity by conducting online research. It’s important to share the belief that facts matter, Franconeri says.

“It’s about showing respect for one another and showing that the other person matters and that the way they think matters,” he says. “That’s the priority, rather than changing their opinion on a topic.”

Slow down

Conversations, particularly when they involve charged subjects, can be challenging simply because we have to do a lot of things at the same time. It’s hard to formulate an argument, listen to someone else’s, and offer a rebuttal on the fly, especially as you are receiving new and unexpected information. Plus, verbal memory is limited.

“You may remember the last two things you said, and you forgot the other three,” says Franconeri. “And then you remember the last thing they said and forgot the other five.”

In an ideal world, we would have time to gather our thoughts before having a particularly contentious conversation. In Point Taken, this is done by having each player write down the reasons they hold a viewpoint before sharing with the other player. This helps people slow down and reason more deliberately. It also makes it easier to recognize when we agree or disagree with the finer points of another person’s argument.

However, if there isn’t a practical way to write down your ideas, Franconeri offers two tips for slowing down a conversation. First, deploying phrases like, “so, if I heard you right ...” before repeating back what you’ve heard someone say allows the other person to feel heard while giving you time to absorb new information. Second, playing devil’s advocate by arguing from the opposing side makes it easier for you to remember and understand someone else’s viewpoint. It also allows the other person the opportunity to add context or clarify their position.

“Workforce culture and teamwork can improve as employees learn how to reason more slowly and carefully,” Franconeri says. “Given time to reflect, people are more likely to realize their colleagues are, in fact, mostly rational people with reasonable views.”

Stay open and humble

Try to enter a conversation with a sense of openness, curiosity, and intellectual humility. Otherwise, if someone says something you don’t understand, you might instantly jump to the wrong conclusion. “We often just assume that their lack of clarity is just a lack of thinking or bad intentions on their part,” Franconeri says.

He recommends asking for clarification when needed and making sure you fully understand someone’s opinion before offering your own. On the flip side, when you’re asked to clarify your points, avoid doing it in a way that could feel insulting to the other person. Bottom line: be open to others’ opinions and the possibility your opinion could be wrong.

Taking a humble approach gives people a chance to realize when they have made false assumptions about another person’s view. Some discover the source of their disagreement is something simple or minor, such as differences in how an issue is defined. Rounds of Point Taken frequently end with players agreeing to disagree, while identifying the points where both players agree. It’s common for players to discover they agree on far more than they originally thought.

This openness can help us identify unconscious biases—in ourselves and others—and start to question or shift our own views based on what we have learned.

“It’s good to be able to see things not in binaries, but in complexities, and to be able to soak up other potential positions that are different from your own.”