Adversarial Collaboration: An EDGE Lecture by Daniel Kahneman

Instead, Professor Kahneman favored an alternative that he termed “adversarial collaboration.” When people who disagree work together to test a hypothesis, they are involved in a common endeavor. They are trying not to win, but to figure out what’s true. They might even become friends.

This question eventually led O’Brien to Chris Argyris, whose writings resonated with Hanover’s managers’ experience. Argyris’s “action science,” offered theory and method for examining “the reasoning that underlies our actions.”9 Teams and organizations trap themselves, he says, in “defensive routines” that insulate our mental models from examinati

... See more

When disagreement is encouraged, new ideas can be tested as they’re being formed, in real-time, combining the knowledge-building efforts of each person into a single, dynamic process. The result is a multi-mind thinking system that’s superior to any of its individual members at learning new things and separating truth from fiction. Let’s call this

... See more

This is not generally how we run collaborative systems because we run them by consensus, which is the exact opposite. That's about pruning out stepping stones. People start generating things and then we start saying, "No, no, no. Committee doesn't like this. Committee doesn't like that." We then converge to the thing, which is basically the consens... See more