by John Brooker | Mar 5, 2012 | Innovate
YES! AND… Creative Gorilla # 65 If you quash valid discussion in the workplace, you run the risk of making sub-standard decisions… “A man convinced against his will is of the same opinion still.” Dale Carnegie, US Philanthropist Are you encouraging full discussion in your organisation? I love a good discussion. Recently, someone started talking to me about global warming and the impact people are having on the climate. I listened quietly to them and when they had finished I mentioned, quite light heartedly, that although I see great merit in recycling and reducing emissions, I am an agnostic on the topic of human affect on the climate, having read a lot of arguments both for and against. I waited for their response, instead their face set quite hard and not wishing to escalate discussion to argument, I quickly changed the subject. It struck me afterwards that in the “debate” about global warming there is a tendency for the opposing sides to try to stifle the debate. They ridicule commentators with opposing viewpoints or focus on their “hidden agendas” rather than the merits of their arguments; supporters of global warming theories are “scientists seeking more research funding” and detractors are “paid lackeys of the oil companies”. The only affect such criticism has is to stifle useful debate. So So what is your team or organisation’s equivalent of “global warming”? Are individual viewpoints stifled because they question the company’s strategy, policies or decisions or because the person has little political influence? Does argument descend into ridicule of the individual? I agree that at some point discussion must stop and action...
