You're listening to Business English Pod, the Business English podcast for professionals on the move.
Hello, and welcome back to Business English Pod.
My name's Edwin, and I'll be your host for today's lesson on arguing in meetings.
Imagine you're in a meeting.
You're expressing your opinion about something when a colleague across the table interrupts you.
He disagrees with what you're saying and he's determined to make his point.
What do you do?
Do you sit back and smile or do you accept the challenge and defend what you're saying?
This situation plays out every day in every office.
Sometimes the discussion remains calm and the people remain diplomatic, but other times the conversation becomes more heated.
At a certain point, it doesn't seem like a conversation anymore, but an argument.
People interrupt each other.
They criticize and accuse.
They defend themselves and become emotional.
Arguments are a normal part of work life.
You can't avoid them, so you'd better be prepared for them.
In our last episode, we looked at several techniques for holding your own in an argument.
Today, we'll look at several more key skills, including how to defend yourself against an accusation, how to correct someone and how to dismiss trivial points.
We'll also learn about rephrasing another person's words and bringing an argument back to a reasonable place.
We are going to rejoin Paula, Gavin and Matt, who have been talking about a promotional event put on by their department store.
The event wasn't as successful as they had hoped for, and Matt Gavin and Paula's boss wants to figure out the reasons why the event failed.
However, Paula and Gavin seem more intent on arguing about who is responsible rather than why the event was a failure.
As you listen, try to answer the following questions.
Okay.
What we really need to do is focus on this event and try to break down all the reasons, external and internal, why it didn't happen the way we wanted.
I totally agree.
And I feel I need to explain a couple of things here.
Gavin, you know that we haven't dealt with that paper in about a year now because of that piece they ran about our hiring policies.
And correct me if I'm wrong, but weren't you involved in the creation of that plan?
Yeah, I was there, but I certainly didn't endorse the plan.
And, if I recall, I questioned the whole approach.
Well, you had your chance to put in your two cents, and now you're unhappy with the outcome.
Actually, I didn't have a chance.
I was completely out of the loop about those radio ads.
I really didn't have a chance to hear them before they aired.
You were out of the loop?
Are you saying people deliberately kept the ads from you?
Come on, Gavin.
You could have come to the meetings, but you didn't.
That's a load of bull.
Nobody ever told me about those meetings.
That's not true at all.
You came to the first one and we all agreed to a regular schedule of meetings.
You knew when and where they were, but you chose not to come.
Anyhow, I thought the ads were good and they tested well.
Well, the lead voice sounded like he was 12 years old or something.
OK, I really think we need to talk about the issues that matter here.
We can't split hairs about the voices at this point.
But the voices is just one example.
There were millions of things that were messed up.
OK, everyone take a deep breath.
We can't redo this thing.
It's done.
It's over.
But my hope is that we can figure out how to do it better next time.
Yes, for sure.
That's a good idea.
So, let's put the marketing aside for now.
I think we need to talk about the actual event and how effective the in-store promotion was.
We've got some of the numbers from that day, so let's go over them together.
Now let's go through the dialogue again and look at the language that Matt, Paula and Gavin use in their discussion.
Okay.
What we really need to do is focus on this event and try to break down all the reasons, external and internal, why it didn't happen the way we wanted.
Matt wants to focus the meeting on the reasons why the event wasn't a success.
In an argument, people can become emotional and it is the leader or facilitator's job to keep the discussion focused.
Let's listen to Paula's reaction.
I totally agree, and I feel I need to explain a couple of things here.
Gavin, you know that we haven't dealt with that paper in about a year now because of that piece they ran about our hiring policies.
And correct me if I'm wrong, but weren't you involved in the creation of that plan?
In the previous dialogue, Gavin criticized the planning of the event.
Now, Paula wants to defend herself against Gavin's criticism.
Paula begins by agreeing with Matt, which helps to set up her defense as reasonable.
She then explains that they haven't dealt with or done business with the paper in a year.
This is a direct response to Gavin's accusation in the last dialogue that there was nothing in the papers.
Paula reminds Gavin that he was also involved in the creation of the event plan.
She does this using a rhetorical question, so she doesn't really want an answer.
She's just reminding Gavin that he is also responsible and shouldn't be trying to put the blame on others.
When someone criticizes or accuses you of something during an argument, it's important that you can defend yourself.
So let's practice some more examples.
That's not exactly true, Bob, for a couple of different reasons.
I most certainly did not talk to Jane, Susan or Charlie about this.
Let me just address what you're saying there.
That is completely unfair.
I didn't even know about the new policy in the first place.
So, how does Gavin respond to Paula's reminder of his involvement?
Yeah, I was there, but I certainly didn't endorse the plan.
And, if I recall, I questioned the whole approach.
Well, you had your chance to put in your two cents and now you're unhappy with the outcome.
Gavin confirms that he was at the planning meeting, but emphasizes that he didn't support the plan.
He says, if I recall, which means remember, and is a bit sarcastic.
He's responding to Paula's reminder with a reminder of his own, which is that he questioned the approach to the event planning right from the start.
Paula fights back, stating clearly that Gavin had the chance to provide input or put his two cents in, as she says.
But does Gavin agree?
Actually, I didn't have a chance.
I was completely out of the loop about those radio ads.
I really didn't have a chance to hear them before they aired.
You were out of the loop?
Are you saying people deliberately kept the ads from you?
Come on Gavin, you could have come to the meetings, but you didn't.
To show his disagreement, Gavin begins with the word actually.
This is a common way of contradicting information.
According to Gavin, he was out of the loop about the radio ads.
He explains this idea more clearly by saying that he didn't have a chance to hear them before they were aired or played on the radio.
Paula responds by restating Gavin's idea with a questioning intonation.
We do this to show we don't believe something.
She then asks him whether he is saying that people deliberately or intentionally kept the ads from him.
Paula is rephrasing Gavin's idea, or stating it in different words.
The way she phrases it makes Gavin sound unreasonable.
And to emphasize how unbelievable it is, she says When people argue sometimes they say things indirectly and it can be very effective to rephrase what they say to make it clear what they mean.
This puts them in a position where they have to defend their idea openly.
Let's listen to some more ways to rephrase someone's ideas.
So, in other words, you think that it was my mistake.
Are you trying to say that someone screwed up the entire schedule?
Remember, Paula finished by telling Gavin that he could have come to the planning meetings.
How does Gavin respond?
That's a load of bull.
Nobody ever told me about those meetings.
That's not true at all.
You came to the first one and we all agreed to a regular schedule of meetings.
You knew when and where they were, but you chose not to come.
Gavin thinks that Paula's statement is a load of bull.
This is a strong and informal way of saying that something is untrue.
According to Gavin, nobody told him about the meetings.
In an argument, people might say things simply to support their position, even if they're not true.
And in this situation, it's a good idea to correct the information, which is what Paula does.
That's not true at all, she says before explaining that Gavin knew about the schedule of meetings and just decided not to attend.
What are some other ways that we can correct someone?
In the following examples.
Notice how the first part of the statement clearly indicates that the idea is not true and the second part provides an explanation why.
Actually, it was Laurie who was in charge, not Brett.
That's not really true.
We decided as a group on that particular contractor.
No, that's not right.
The budget was 7,000, not 11,000.
I think you're mistaken.
Sales were highest in the Midwest, not the Pacific.
At this point, the argument is getting away from the real issue of publicity for the event.
Paula tries to bring the focus back.
Anyhow, I thought the ads were good, and they tested well.
Well, the lead voice sounded like he was 12 years old or something.
Okay, I really think we need to talk about the issues that matter here.
We can't split hairs about the voices at this point.
Paula uses the word anyhow to change the subject and expresses her opinion that the ads were actually good.
But Gavin isn't finished arguing.
He thinks that the lead voice in the ads sounded like a child.
Is this an important issue?
Paula doesn't think so.
In fact, she thinks it's trivial or very unimportant.
And for this reason she wants to dismiss it, which she does by saying they need to talk about the issues that matter.
Paula uses the word okay to signal a break and the word really for emphasis.
Paula doesn't want to split hairs about the voices.
If we split hairs about something, we are criticising small or trivial aspects of something.
If you want to dismiss someone's ideas as trivial, how else can you do it?
Here are a few more ways.
We've got way bigger things to talk about than the font size.
I think it's useless to go over each line item in such detail.
Let's just forget about the colors for the new office and focus on actually finding one.
Gavin just won't give up.
But the voices is just one example.
There were millions of things that were messed up.
Okay, everyone take a deep breath.
We can't redo this thing.
It's done.
It's over.
But my hope is that we can figure out how to do it better next time.
It doesn't seem like Gavin and Paula can agree on anything, so Matt steps in.
He tells everyone to take a deep breath.
This is a common way of asking people to calm down.
Matt emphasizes that the event is over, which means Paula and Gavin's argument is about things that can't be changed.
Matt wants the others to be reasonable in their argument, which is why he says he hopes to figure out how to improve things for next time.
Matt is using a useful pattern of speaking.
He starts by trying to calm people down and then asks for some focused discussion.
Now listen for this pattern in the following examples.
Please, everyone just calm down.
Let's just figure out what we want to do next.
Remember, folks, this isn't personal.
We need to decide what's right for the company.
Let's not fight, people.
There are two sides to this, and we need to just talk it out.
We're getting away from the issue here.
Now, let's just go over the pros and cons again.
Once again, Paula agrees with Matt.
In order to come across as reasonable.
Yes, for sure.
That's a good idea.
So, let's put the marketing aside for now.
I think we need to talk about the actual event and how effective the in-store promotion was.
We've got some of the numbers from that day, so let's go over them together.
At the end of this dialogue, we hear Matt suggesting that they put aside the marketing of the event.
When we put a topic aside, we leave it to move on to another topic.
In this case, Matt wants to talk about the in-store promotion, which is promotional activity that takes place within the store.
Now let's practice some of the language we've learned in today's lesson.
We're going to start with a role-play practice.
You'll play the part of a salesperson in a meeting about a presentation you have given.
A colleague doesn't think your presentation was very good.
You'll start by defending yourself.
Then you'll rephrase your colleague's words, correct some information and finally dismiss her trivial idea.
At each step, you'll hear a cue given by the colleague.
Then, I'll give you some suggestions for the language you can use to respond.
We'll guide you through each step in the practice and play an example answer for each response.
Ready?
Let's give it a go.
You really should have tested the projector before the presentation.
Start off by defending yourself by saying that you did test the projector, but it was replaced at the last minute.
Example answer.
That's not really fair.
I did test that projector beforehand, but it was replaced at the last minute and the presentation itself looked like it was done the night before.
Now, rephrase the speaker's words and ask whether he means you didn't spend enough time on it.
Example answer.
Are you trying to say I didn't spend enough time on the presentation?
Well, you totally forgot to include some things, like the sales figures for last month.
Now, correct the speaker by saying that you actually said that the sales figures weren't available.
Example answer.
That's not true.
I mentioned that the sales figures weren't available yet.
And why did you use that terrible blue background for the slides?
Now, dismiss the speaker's point as trivial and say the important thing are the ideas.
Example answer.
Well, colour is a minor issue.
It's really about the ideas.
Now let's practice useful vocabulary and idioms.
You'll hear a series of sentences with a word replaced with a beep.
Repeat the whole sentence including the missing word.
For example, if you hear, Every Easter we run a huge in-store.
You can say, Every Easter we run a huge in-store promotion.
After each response, we'll play the correct answer.
Let's begin.
I feel totally out of the... with the latest technology.
Answer.
I feel totally out of the loop with the latest technology.
Dan, just take a deep... and let's discuss the problem.
Answer.
Dan, just take a deep breath and let's discuss the problem.
We will have a public meeting where anybody can put in their two... Answer.
We will have a public meeting where anybody can put in their two cents.
I don't think we should split. about who works longer hours?
I don't think we should split hairs about who works longer hours.
We've reached the end of this episode, the second in our two-part series about arguing in meetings.
We've learned how to defend against accusations, rephrase someone's words and correct information.
We've also learned how to dismiss trivial points and bring people back to a reasonable argument.
Thanks for listening and see you again soon.
