Ever been in a meeting or a conversation at work and you start to get that tightening sensation that things are going in a direction you disagree with?
You take a deep breath and your jaw clenches as the distinct feeling of conflict washes over you.
All of your counterarguments and points of disagreement start piling up in your brain, and you do your best to dam them.
When you finally speak, your first instinct is to say, “No! That’ll never work!”
In the instant that you do, the conversation shifts away from productivity and collaboration to one of defensiveness and a fight for control.
Saying “no” to an idea or decision you disagree with is like a reflex — an uncontrollable reaction.
You’ve done it. I’ve done it. We’ve all done it.
But there is a way to disagree and guide the conversation towards resolution without ever having to say the word “no.”
Let curiosity uncover the “no”
Being the detractor and stating a hard “no” in conversation makes you a gatekeeper to a decision, which can place you in a negative light with others.
Sometimes, this is necessary.
More often, though, it evokes friction, debate, and hard feelings.
Instead, when you invite curiosity and questions into the conversation, sometimes, the other stakeholders make the hard decisions themselves.
On a recent coaching call, a client of mine described a situation where he used this approach with astounding results.
One of the company’s top-five customers had requested a new feature to be built in their product, and the account manager went to my client, who led the development team, asking for this feature to be built.
Mind you, the customer was willing to pay to build this feature to the tune of millions of dollars.
My client considered the request, spoke with his team, and realized a few things:
It would take seven engineers (out of a team of 20) to build the feature.
It would take at least a year to build, even with that much talent dedicated to it.
Even after the feature was built, it would work, but it would cut product performance to half of what the customer was used to.
My client knew he had to say no to this customer ask — and the money that came with it — but rather than flat-out decline the request, he took a different approach.
My client shared:
“I went to the sales guy and said, ‘Let’s say that we build it. We are one year out in the future. This product is ready. It works great. It doesn't have any bugs. But the performance that you get out of it is 40, maybe 50 percent of what you get today.
“Would that be an acceptable outcome for the customer?’”
The account manager’s answer was emphatic: “The customer is never going to tolerate that. They want the same performance or better than what they have today.”
My client brought in several of his best engineers to share their perspective and confirm that the feature could be built, but not without the drastic performance drop.
While frustrated and disappointed, the account manager agreed with my client’s assessment, and then he said, “There’s no way you can build this; there’s no way the customer is going to be happy with it.”
My client never once had to say no.
3 steps to disagree without a “no”
So what did my client do that can serve as a repeatable framework for you moving forward?
First, he stated the facts with no emotional messaging or pushback attached to them. Along with stating the facts, he also validated and aligned with everyone’s goal in the situation, which was to please a high-profile customer.
Second, he exposed the trade-offs. He sought perspective from those that could give it, and he invited the stakeholders to explore and consider other possibilities and consequences that would come with a go-forward decision.
Third, he asked a strategic question rather than give a hard “no.” In doing so, he placed the processing burden on the requester — the account manager — while remaining a partner and collaborator.
Will this work every time you’re faced with an unreasonable request, deadline, or idea? Of course not.
Sometimes, you’ll get overruled, decided over, or forced into a decision you disagree with.
But often, by using this method, you’ll succeed in gaining the “no” you want without ever having to utter the word.
