PROTOCOLS FOR IMPROVED ADVOCACY:
Make your thought process visible:
What to do
1 State your assumptions, and
describe the data that lead to
them.
2 Explain your assumptions.
3 Make your reasoning explicit.
4 Explain the context of your point
of view: who will be affected by
what you propose, how they will
be affected and why.
5 Give examples of what you
propose, even if theyre
hypothetical or metaphorical.
6 As you speak, try to picture the
other peoples perspectives on
what you are saying.
Ask others to make their thinking process visible.
What to do
1 Gently walk others down the
ladder of inference and find out
what data they are operating
from.
2 Use unaggressive language,
particularly with people who are not
familiar with these skills. Ask in a
way which does not provoke
defensiveness or lead the witness.
3 Draw out their reasoning. Find
out as much as you can about
why they are saying what theyre
saying.
4 Explain your reasons for
inquiring, and how your inquiry
relates to your own concerns,
hopes, and needs.
Publicly test your conclusions and assumptions.
What to say
Heres what I think, and heres
how I got there.
I assumed that
I came to this conclusion because 3 Reveal where you are least clear
Keep in mind the following
variables This will affect
in the following waysand for
the following reasons.
To get a clear picture of what
Im talking about, imagine that
youre and imagine
thathappens.
PROTOCOLS FOR IMPROVED INQUIRY:
Compare your assumptions to theirs.
What to say
What leads you to conclude
that? ; What data do you have
for that? ; What causes you to
say that?
Instead of What do you mean?
or Whats your proof? say,
Can you help me understand
your thinking here?"
What is the significance of
that? How does this relate to
your other concerns? Where
does your reasoning go next?
Im asking you about your
assumptions here because
What to do What to say
1 Encourage others to explore your What do you think about
model, your assumptions, and what I just said or Do you
your data see any flaws in my
reasoning? or What can
2 Refrain from defensiveness when You sound skeptical about
your ideas are questioned. If would you please clarify.
youre advocating something for me?
worthwhile, then it will only get
stronger by being tested. Pause
and breathe before saying
anything.
Heres one aspect which you
in your thinking. Rather than might help me think
making you vulnerable, it defuses through
the force of advocates who are
opposed to you, and invites
improvement.
4 Even when advocating, listen, Do you see it differently?
stay open and encourage others to
provide different views.
What to do What to say
1 Test what they say by asking for How would your proposal
broader context, or for examples. affect? Is this similar
to? Can you describe a
typical
2 Check your understanding of they Am I correct that youre
have said. saying?
3 Listen for new understanding that
may emerge. Dont concentrate
on preparing to destroy the other
persons argument or promote
your own agenda.
 PROTOCOLS FOR FACING A POINT OF VIEW WITH WHICH YOU DISAGREE:
What to do
1 Again, inquire about what has led
that person to that view.
2 Make sure you truly understand
the view.
3 Explore, listen, and offer your
own views in an open way.
What to do
1 Embrace the impasse and tease
apart the current thinking. (You
may discover that focusing on
data brings you all down the
ladder of inference.)
2 Look for information which will
help people move forward.
3 Ask if there is any way you
might together design an
experiment or inquiry which
could provide new information.
4 Listen to ideas as if for the first
time.
5 Consider each persons mental
model as a piece of a larger
puzzle.
What to say
How did you arrive at this
view? Are you taking into
account data that I have not
considered?
If I understand you correctly,
youre saying that
Have you considered
PROTOCOLS FOR WHEN YOURE AT AN IMPASSE:
What to say
What do we know for a fact?
What do we sense is true, but
have no data for yet? What
dont we know? What is
unknowable?
What do we agree upon?
What do we disagree upon?
How could we work together to
design a way to test this?
Are we starting from two very
different sets of assumptions
here? Where do they come
from?
What to do
4 Listen for the larger meaning that
may come out of honest, open
sharing of alternative mental
models.
5 Be open about concerns you have
in relation to the other persons
view.
6 Raise your concerns and state
what is leading you to have them.
6 Ask what data or logic might
change their views.
7 Ask for the groups help in re-
designing the situation.
8 Dont let conversation stop with
an agreement to disagree.
9 Avoid building your case when
someone else is speaking from a
What to say
When you say such-and-
such, I worry that it means
I have a hard time seeing
that, because of this
reasoning
What, then, would have to
happen before you would
consider the alternative?
It feels like were getting into
an impasse and Im afraid we
might walk away without any
better understanding. Have
you got any ideas that will
help us clarify our thinking?
I dont understand the
assumptions underlying our
disagreement.