Workplace debates turn into volume contests. PEP (Practical Empathy Practice) uses observation, feelings, and needs to find shared ground – so you can persuade without pushing.
The story
Problem: Workplace debates keep turning into two people trying to “prove” things at each other. Everyone gets louder, nobody gets clearer, and the meeting ends with less trust than it started.
Solved: In Chapter 17, “Master Debate,” from *A Practical EmPath: Rewire Your Mind* on Amazon, I teach a method I call Practical Empathy Practice [PEP]. It pulls debate out of domination culture and turns it into a simple structure for understanding, connecting, and still improving your odds of “winning.”
PEP has 3 parts:
– Observation without evaluation: start by tracking their *words*. Keep a light eye on cues like a frown or a smile, but don’t over-interpret.
– Feeling: name what you’re feeling, then take an educated guess at what they might be feeling.
– Values/needs: guess what they’re trying to protect or create.
These overlap. Feelings point to needs. Needs reveal shared ground. Shared ground makes persuasion possible without getting pushy.
A clean debate move sounds like: “When you heard that, did you feel frustrated or worried?” Then: “Are you wanting security, fairness, or autonomy here?” From there you can say, “Sounds like we both value human flourishing – we just disagree on strategy.”
PEP no-no’s: “You are wrong,” countering before empathizing, hiding behind stats, or pushing so hard you trigger defensiveness. And nobody “makes” anyone feel anything. I say, “I felt ___ because I value ___.”
I also recorded a 12.5-minute talk on Chapter 17 [made with help from AI tools]. The direct YouTube link is on the Chapter 17 page.
Recent Comments