Again, if the idea of candor is it’s a collaborative search for the truth in order to make things better, to do more good in the world, then again, you’ve got to express the truth of what you think, and you have to explore the truth of what other people think. Three things you should think about when you’re expressing your truth of what you’re thinking and exploring the truth of what other people think. It’s number one, what is your and their point of view? So I think X. Number two, what is your data and reasoning? So what is the evidence you have that this actual problem or opportunity exists? That’s data. What’s your reasoning? What’s the logic that leads you to see this bit of data and come to this point of view? Number three, talking about what’s at stake. What are the downsides if we don’t address this issue? What are the upsides if we do? So it falls in the three categories. Again, you want to be clear and help somebody else be clear about their point of view. You want to be credible, so to make sure what you’re saying and what somebody else is saying is backed up with good reasoning and data.
And you want to be compelling. There’s got to be something at stake because it doesn’t matter if you fulfill one and two, that just means something’s true. It doesn’t mean we should do anything about it. And we only should take issues or opportunities the opportunity seriously if there’s something at stake, if there’s some negative consequences for failure to address it, and if there’s some real upside to address it. So what I’m saying to people is when you’re talking, make sure you express those three things, but also explore those three things. So let’s say, Ron, if you came back to me and says, I don’t think any of that’s true, or you said, I think that’s a bunch of nonsense. I don’t have to panic. Everything is fine. I just code that as Ron’s point of view. So what hasn’t Ron told me? Well, he hasn’t given me data and reasoning. He hasn’t told me anything about what’s at stake. So I could just chill out and just be calm like a Brazilian jiu-jitsu player on the mat when they’re on their back and they have somebody in the guard. Everybody’s flailing. You could just be calm.
And say, okay, Ron, why do you say that? Just insert that. And then Ron will explain it to you. And then you got to think. And Ron, if what I’m saying is nonsense, what does that concern you? And you’ll tell me what’s at stake. And then it gives me time to breathe, to think, to calm down. And then I might actually, there might be merit in what you’re saying. I say, well, Ron, actually on this piece of it, I think you’re right because of this, this, and this. But there’s other piece, let me tell you why I think there’s still something to what I’m saying. And so we could have a meeting of the minds. So just keeping in mind those three things, point of view, data and reasoning, and stakes. You got to give it and you got to get it in the conversation.
