How to listen to opinions you don't want to hear

Fast Company

15 hours ago

It has become popular to say that we want to have a diversity of opinion represented in workplaces. We want people to speak up when they disagree with an approach or have a unique viewpoint on how to address a complex problem.
While we say that in the abstract, there are many individual and group psychological factors that act against this ideal. We are often resistant to opinions that differ from our own and are more critical of evidence that contradicts our beliefs than we are of evidence consistent with it. We also have negative emotional responses to information that goes against what we believe. We are also more reluctant to say things that we think others in a group will not want to hear. Ultimately, people often have a powerful urge to believe what others in their social group also believe. To be successful at taking in diverging opinions, then, you have to fight against these factors.
Listen without reacting
One of the most difficult parts of hearing an opinion that differs from your own is to allow someone else to say everything they want to say before chiming in. There is a tendency to want to pick apart someone else's beliefs and arguments before they have even had a chance to say what they want to say.
Instead, give your conversation partner the chance to complete their train of thought. Even if you think you have heard an argument like theirs before, let them finish. You may be surprised to find out that they have a different approach than you expect. You'll never find that out if you interrupt quickly.
In addition, if you react in a visibly negative way when someone starts to disagree with you, they may find it difficult to complete their argument—particularly if you are in a position with more status or power than they have. Try to stay engaged and neutral in your interaction rather than being hostile.
Repeat back what you heard
A time-honored strategy when hearing a divergent opinion is to start by repeating back the argument you just heard before critiquing it. This works in discussions at work and in close relationships as well.
Repeating the argument back has two benefits. It allows the other person to feel heard, which makes it more likely that they will express themselves in the future when they disagree. In addition, it ensures that you understood the argument clearly. When someone disagrees with you by taking a novel approach, you may miss some of their key tenets. Repeating the argument back to them ensures that you have fully understood their position.
Find what is right in what you think is wrong
Even after listening to someone else's point of view carefully, you may have a desire to argue back strongly with them—and perhaps convince them that you are right after all. A good conversation is not a debate, and it doesn't have to have a victor. The real benefit of a conversation is an exchange of ideas.
Many people feel like the most intellectual thing they can do is to provide a convincing argument against someone else. I would argue that the hardest thing to do intellectually is to find something right inside of an idea you find wrong overall. When you do that, you can strengthen your overall base of knowledge, even if you don't change your mind in to agree with someone else completely.
It is a skill to see the truth in other people's arguments. It can take a lot of work to integrate seemingly incongruous viewpoints. Most importantly, it requires a lot of self-confidence. You have to recognize that adopting some of another person's viewpoint does not diminish your own standing or give them power over you. It simply makes you more likely to be able to deal with the complexity of the world in the future.