WHAT IS CONSTRUCTIVE CONTROVERSY?

The best way ever devised for seeking the truth in any given situation is advocacy: presenting the pros and cons from different, informed points of view and digging down deep into the facts.

—Harold S. Geneen, Former CEO, ITT

Constructive controversy exists when one person’s ideas, information, con­clusions, theories, and opinions are incompatible with those of another, and

Figure 3.1 Processes of Controversy, Debate, Concurrence Seeking.

Reprinted with permission from Johnson and Johnson (1995).

the two seek to reach an agreement. Constructive controversies involve what Aristotle called deliberate discourse (that is, the discussion of the advantages and disadvantages of proposed actions) aimed at synthesizing novel solutions (that is, creative problem solving). Structured constructive controversies are most commonly contrasted with concurrence seeking, debate, and individu­alistic learning (see Figure 3.1 and Table 3.1). Concurrence seeking occurs when members of a group inhibit discussion to avoid any disagreement or arguments, emphasize agreement, and avoid realistic appraisal of alternative ideas and courses of action. Concurrence seeking is close to Janis’ (1982) concept of groupthink (in which members of a decision-making group set aside their doubts and misgivings about whatever policy is favored by the emerging consensus so as to be able to concur with the other members).

Table 3.1. Constructive Controversy, Debate, Concurrence-Seeking, and Individualistic Processes

Debate exists when two or more individuals argue positions that are incom­patible with one another and a judge declares a winner on the basis of who presented their position the best. An example of debate is when each member of a group is assigned a position as to whether more or less regulation is needed to control hazardous wastes, and an authority declares as the winner the person who makes the best presentation of his or her position to the group.