·
Accepting the Person;
·
Acknowledging the Possibilities in what he says;
and
·
Advancing with Positive Purpose.
But it still seems as if we have a paradox here: What does it mean to say “Yes” to someone
while disagreeing with his position?
A classic example can help illustrate this point. Let’s
say that I’m scripting a scene involving two people (whom I’ll cleverly call Person
A and Person B) who are eagerly eyeing an orange sitting in a bowl on a table.
Imagine that I begin writing dialogue that goes something like this:
PERSON A: I want
the orange!
PERSON B: No, I
want the orange!
PERSON A: I want
the orange!
PERSON B: No, I
want the orange!
PERSON A: I want
the orange!
PERSON B: No, I
want the orange!
OK, this scene is going nowhere fast. I’ll wad up that
attempt and try again:
PERSON A: I want
the orange!
PERSON B: No, I
want the orange!
PERSON A: OK, you
say you want the orange – but why?
PERSON B: I want to
make juice.
PERSON A: Well, I
want to make marmalade.
PERSON B: In that
case, here’s an idea: Why don’t I take the inside of the orange …
PERSON A: … and I’ll
take the rind!
PERSON A & B
(together): Brilliant!
Ah, yes, that’s much better – and let’s see why.
In Version 1, the two characters had fallen victim to
what’s called Getting Stuck on a Position.
As long as each character presents his “want” in terms of acquiring the only
available orange, there’s no way to satisfy them both. The result is impasse
and stalemate – and a complete block to further progress.
However, in Version 2, Person A decided to get unstuck from his position. He chose to Advance
with Positive Purpose by exploring what interests lay behind Person B’s
position. By asking that key question – Why?
– he was able to find common ground with B and thereby discovered that the
availability of only one orange was not a barrier to both of their interests
being met.
This is how you can
disagree with someone else’s position while still saying “Yes”! You don’t
have to look for agreement only at the “position” level. By asking “Why?” you
open yourself (and the other) to the possibilities for saying “Yes” at the “interest”
level.
REFLECTIONS FOR THE YES! LEADER
Have you ever been in a business meeting where two or
more participants engaged in dialogue that sounded like Version 1? Where they
just repeatedly batted the same position back and forth, with maybe a few word
variations but basically the same message? Was it about as productive – and as
interesting – as Version 1? What would have happened if one of the participants
had asked “Why?” And – shades of picking up trash in the forest – what was
stopping you from asking “Why?”

Great way to incorporate Fisher and Ury's "position v. interest" in to improv's "yes . . . and." I have struggled a bit with how to disagree in a "yes . . . and" environment. This will help. Thanks.
ReplyDeleteYou're welcome, Marvin! The position-interest distinction is a powerful one for helping people realize they can disagree while still moving toward a positive outcome.
ReplyDelete