Moving beyond point-by-point arguments
I recently read an excellent article by Sean Goedecke, “Arguing point-by-point considered harmful”, that clearly articulates a communication anti-pattern many of us in technology have experienced. He describes the unproductive cycle where a technical discussion devolves into endless mini-arguments, with no real progress made.
This is a pattern I recognise from my own experience, particularly from the perspective of a technical leader. It is a delicate balance. You want to guide the technical direction, but getting stuck in a point-by-point debate can easily damage working relationships. If you harm that trust, you risk people avoiding you, working around you, or simply not telling you about potential issues in the future.
I have been in those discussions that did not bring me, or the other party, anything of value. I learned that you have to step out of it and take a more holistic view, much like in systems engineering. Goedecke’s advice points to the same conclusion.
Instead of diving headfirst into every concern individually, he suggests a more constructive approach to shift the conversation from a series of small debates to a discussion about the core value. His method can be summarised in a few steps:
- Recognise the trap: Identify when a discussion is becoming an unproductive point-by-point argument.
- Focus on the affirmative case: Instead of defending against a list of concerns, make a clear case for the overall value of your proposal.
- Identify the real problem: Often, the stated reasons are not the core objection. Give the other person space to articulate their main concern.
- Collaborate on details: Once there is alignment on the bigger picture, you can work through the technical details together.
As Goedecke puts it, you should:
…make the case for why your feature is valuable enough to spend the developer time and CPU time on it.
This changes the dynamic entirely. It is about moving from defending individual points to building a shared understanding of the overall goal. When you achieve that alignment, the rest often falls into place.
If you get them on your side, you can work out the technical details together. If they don’t believe in your mission, you’ll never convince them by proving that they’re wrong about the technical points.
A good read for any engineer or leader looking to improve their communication and effectiveness.
