Do You Have an Opinion or a Persuasive Argument?

What makes the difference between an opinion and a persuasive argument? People love their opinions, but are based on thoughts, feelings, and wishes of the individual and don’t always have validity. It doesn’t matter if one is in college, a seasoned manager or running for political office, creating a persuasive argument leads to credibility. Their emotions may drive people, but it is their logic that makes them worthy of your ear.

Persuasive arguments are reinforced by substantial information that is reasonable and logical in its construction of the conclusion. The average person can see the argument as reasonable based on shared knowledge. They can follow the information and make the same conclusion as the speaker.

Opinions based on emotions and quick judgments often lack enough supportive information to be worthy of attention. They can use emotions to draw a crowd into a frenzy but lose their appeal once people start to question the logic. Over time, the emotional appeal fades the speaker's credibility suffers.

A problem with not evaluating what others are saying is that most people simply regurgitate the opinions of others within their social networks or people with authority without critical thought. This leads  to the spreading of false information among a broad group of persons.  They didn't look into the details of the information or whether or not it is true before spreading it.

The inability to truly think about issues and come to an independent conclusion is based in mental laziness and lack of self-confidence. We can see that destructive nature at work on the path to war, bullying behavior, or any other situation where emotions are stirred, but critical thinking is missing. Those who are least likely to think about issues or stand up for their beliefs are open to manipulation.

Leaders who want to create credibility and develop a justifiable argument should state their main proposition and then support that proposition with reliable information. Their argument should have enough supporting facts to justify that position and lead to a reasonable conclusion. Well thought-out arguments gain more support than flimsy opinions.

The justification for arguments should be from credible sources that have facts to support their claims. For example, a generic search for a term on the Internet will return lots of opinions but it is up to the reader to seek out credible information to formulate their  opinions. Perusing government websites, research, studies, polls, and industry knowledge is better than relying on the abundance of unsubstantiated fluff on the web.

The ability to see logical holes in other’s arguments allows for a more critical view of presented information. People are always seeking adherents to their cause and regularly manipulate information to justify their main points. Being able to question that information and where that information comes from makes a big difference in creating persuasive arguments.

It has been said that no one truly owns themselves until they can create an independent opinion. That opinion should be based in fact, information, experience, logic, and knowledge versus social considerations. Stating the main points and supporting those points with factual information is likely to raise credibility and differentiate a substantiated argument from unsubstantiated opinion. When people speak with  knowledge, they can gain long term followers to their cause.

Guarding the Mind for Better Business Strategy

Strategic decision making is not easy and comes with a number of fallacies that blind us to the actuality of the world around us. Executives should be aware of their bias and how this impacts their strategic decision-making. Using a few critical thinking tools helps to guard the mind from bias and ensure that decisions are more likely to be successful and have the largest impact.

Executives are faced with all types of different types of pressures that range from investors to employees. Each person comes with their own influence and opinion. At times a presiding opinion forms and this puts pressure on everyone else to accept the premises of those opinions without providing critical thought. When you are at the top and your decisions impact a large group of people you don't have the luxury of making momentous mistakes. 

The mind is seen as a manufacturing unit that results in the product of thoughts. These thoughts help us to reach conclusions about varying topics, beliefs, debates, and strategies. Like a factory your mind has inputs that come through the senses, previous understandings, and others opinions that make their way into the production process. 

Strategic decisions are well thought out and often tested conclusions about how a business should proceed. The best business decisions are something more than opinion and based upon a level of fact that reflects the environment in which the business succeeds. Executives are required to provide the rationale and then the supporting evidence to their decisions. 

From a philosophical vantage point few people can step outside themselves to formulate a true opinion based upon actual observation and fact. The same process applies in many ways to forming a strategic opinion without the bias of ones past. Nietzsche once said, 

"The individual has always had to struggle to keep from being overwhelmed by the tribe. If you try it, you will be lonely often, and sometimes frightened. But no price is too high to pay for the privilege of owning yourself."
  
The mind is full of fallacies that we pick up from the world around us and social networks in which we exist. Our thoughts are constructed from previous thoughts and ideas based in our childhood experiences, parents beliefs, friends, family and social networks. We are embedded in our social world around us. 

Strategic decisions should free itself from these biases as much as possible. This is where the concept of guardians of the mind come into play. By using a few tips it is possible to help avoid disastrous mistakes that cost companies millions of dollars in poor decision making and strategy implementation. Before making an important decision try and consider the following guardians:

-Scientific Management: Use literature, science, and the scientific method to help make your decisions. Look at what has been discovered and what other studies have concluded before finalizing your decision. Basing your decision on sound scientific findings helps to ensure a higher likelihood of success. 

-Listen to Your Stakeholders: To be successful a strategy will need a wide group of supporters. This means understanding stakeholders opinions will be important to ensuring that the strategy is designed in a way that is most likely to lead to a successful outcome. The more you listen the more you can create win-win situations. 

-Review Your Bias: It is important for the executive to understand the bias he/she has and ensure that those bias are not making their way into the decision-making process. Every person has some level bias based on their background and it is important to ensure the strategy isn't damaged by limited thinking. 

-Avoid Group Think: The worst decisions are often made from group think where people in the same social group reaffirm each others beliefs even though these beliefs are no longer rational. Step outside your social group and look for alternative opinions to make sure you are not simply just pleasing your friends and colleagues. 

-Rearrange the Data: Sound decisions are based upon data. However, people often take data and jam it together in a way that confirms their pr-existing beliefs. Rearrange the data to find alternative explanations and explore those explanations to ensure they are not more logical and sound.

-Create Feedback Loops: Once a strategy has been implemented it is important to have feedback loops to ensure it is fulfilling its objectives. Feedback loops will help adjust and change the strategy before major damage is sustained. Most strategies will need to be changed at some point.

How Groups Can Foster or Thwart New Product Idea Formation

Groups working together can be an enhancement to problem solving. This problem solving can be put to good use in developing products and services. Perpetually developing and advancing products and services help to develop market penetration, revenue generation, and greater opportunities. A paper by Nijstad & Stroebe (2006) delves into the idea generation process and how associated memory highlights categories  that lead to problem resolution. 

The idea generation process is the first step in finding solutions. According to Raaijmaker and Shiffrin’s people search their associative memory (SAM) to find new ideas (1981). They search through their memory creating a flow of thought whereby ideas and concepts spring forth by connecting various concepts, breaking them apart and generating concepts. 

Maintaining the free flowing stream of consciousness is important. Ideas should a.) be focused on quantity versus quality, b) seek unusual ideas, c) combination and improvement of ideas, d) not incorporate criticism of any idea (Osborn, 1953). It is important to simply gather and collect these ideas without judging them or creating social pressure to accept particular ideas. 

Our memories work a lot like categories and nodes. When nodes are activated in working memory this activation spreads to other connecting nodes creating multiple areas of connection (Collins & Loftus, 1975).  These nodes work within semantic networks. When a semantic network is activated a string of nodes with various concepts are brought forth (Brown et. al. 1998). Crossing categories of networks creates profound new knowledge. 

When problems arise we generally use an activation loop (long-term memory loop) and idea generation loop (working memory) to find a solution.  The working memory adjusts, moves, connects, disconnects and generally manipulates the information that was once stored in long-term memory (Baddeley, 1996) to produce new ideas. The larger a person’s working memory and general intelligence the more information they can manipulate at once. 

So how does idea generation work or falter in groups? An idea can cue new semantic networks that help to create new associations among members. The more people who dig through their long-term memory and spurt forward new connections in their working memory the more collective knowledge gained. When cues from the environment block new ideas from coming forward through criticism the type of new ideas are limited. It becomes more likely that only those ideas that confirm existing knowledge are shared. The result is that novel problem solving never makes its way into the conclusion. Market potential is lost when only pre-existing knowledge is rehashed for use. 

Baddeley, A. D. (1986). Working memory. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.

Brown, V., et. al.  (1998). Modeling cognitive interactions during group brainstorming. Small Group Research, 29, 495–526.

Collins, A. M., & Loftus, E. F. (1975). A spreading-activation theory of semantic processing. Psychological Review, 82, 407–428.

Osborn, A. F. (1953). Applied imagination. New York: Scribner’s.

Nijstad, B. & Stroebe, W.(2006).  How the Group Affects the Mind: A Cognitive Model of Idea Generation in Groups. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 10 (3). 

Raaijmakers, J. G. W., & Shiffrin, R. M. (1981). Search of associative memory. Psychological Review, 88, 93–134.