Margaret, I also wondered about that. I also wonder if the test subject would still try to fit in with the majority when the stakes of his answer are higher. What if he knows that the majority has authority to treat him differently for his answer?

David, that is a very helpful illustration. No doubt, this may have made all the difference. I had to admit later that I did expect some hostility to my efforts. Saluting the flag might have kept the peace.

On that topic for readers who are interested, I discovered another good resource on this particular topic which I believe would confirm and add to “Crucial Conversations.” It is the works by Arbinger Institute entitled “The Anatomy of Peace” and “Leadership and Self-deception.” I hope it is okay that I mention those resources here.

With this as the background, you decide to speak up–to the lecturer, to your boss, to your colleagues, to your spouse. Is this person going to see this as silence or as violence? Violence, right?

This means you have to have a way to communicate “This is not an attack!” early in the conversation. The adage I like comes from the military, “Always salute the flag before you disagree with your commanding officer.”

Saluting the flag means two things: First, show respect for the person, their role, and their intentions (mutual respect). Second, remind the person that you both serve under the same flag. You want what they want (mutual purpose). You are an ally, not an enemy.

Conclusion: Polite disagreement is a good place to start. However, you might go even further by reiterating mutual purpose and mutual respect. A brief intro written to the lecturer would have helped, though without knowing the situation I don’t know if it would have helped enough. A personal meeting might have worked even better.

David

As an undergraduate engineering student, I was very eager to “fix things.” In our final year, a lecturer at the university uploaded a document entitled, “How to write as an engineer.” I opened the document and immediately began to fix spelling and formatting errors and then sent the reviewed version back to this lecturer – note the lack of “polite doubt.” Before long, my action was publicly rediculed throughout the department. I was also called into the office of the school director who said that he appreciated my effort to correct something, but obviously my method was incorrect. I was asked to apologise to the lecturer. That said, it was not the first time I got into trouble for trying to “fix” something. After this event, I made minimal attempts to suggest any improvement, though I would say that I am fairly confident to attempt to fix things elsewhere.

The question then is, would a polite doubt be enough to restore the damage done by peer pressure? I would dearly like to hear what others’ opinions about this