Washington Hospital Services recently sat down with Julia Minson, associate professor at the Harvard Kennedy School, to ask about the psychology of disagreement and how to disagree better. Here are some key insights that emerged from the conversation. (The Art and Science of Constructive Disagreement, a five-week virtual course starts Sept. 30.)
WHS: Julia, your research focuses on the psychology of disagreement. What makes it so easy for disagreement to turn into conflict?
Julia Minson: Much of it comes down to our basic psychology. When we disagree with someone, we’re quick to assume they’re misinformed, irrational or even acting in bad faith — while giving ourselves the benefit of the doubt. These quick judgments lead us to see the other person’s perspective as flawed, which makes conversations get personal pretty fast. It’s often less about the topic and more about the assumptions we make about the other side’s motives and competence. This can quickly turn a productive discussion into a defensive standoff.
WHS: It sounds like being open or receptive during disagreement could be incredibly challenging in those moments. Adding to that, some people might feel that being open to opposing views is naïve or even risky in a high-stakes environment like health care. Is there a downside to being too receptive?
Julia Minson: That’s a common worry, but the evidence actually points in the opposite direction. When people show receptiveness to opposing views, they’re consistently seen as more trustworthy and more desirable collaborators — people actually want to work with them more. Far from appearing weak, receptive leaders and team members are respected for their openness and thoughtfulness. It turns out that making space for disagreement is one of the clearest signals of strong leadership, not a lack of conviction.
WHS: What can individuals or teams do to move toward more constructive disagreement?
Julia Minson: A big part of it is slowing down and getting curious. Research shows we’re much more critical of others’ views than our own, and we often spend more energy trying to persuade than to understand. Teams benefit when people make their intent to learn explicit — asking open-ended questions, listening for understanding and being clear that hearing another perspective doesn’t mean giving up your own. Using practical, research-backed techniques for receptive communication really helps shift the trajectory of conversation.
WHS: How can organizations foster a culture where disagreement actually leads to better outcomes?
Julia Minson: It starts with normalizing disagreement as a valuable part of problem-solving, not something to be feared or avoided. Organizations can equip teams with both the mindset and the visible behaviors of constructive dialogue—like demonstrating a willingness to learn, explicitly inviting a range of views, and expressing receptiveness at the same time as saying your piece. Creating opportunities for learning and accountability around these behaviors helps everyone become more skilled and confident in turning disagreement into productive collaboration.
Interested in learning more about the research and skills that support constructive disagreement? The Art and Science of Constructive Disagreement, a five-week virtual course starts Sept. 30.
Group discounts and custom in-person training options are also available. For more information, email Jenn Bui, jennb@wsha.org. (Jenn Bui)