Think Fast Talk Smart: Communication Techniques

“I’m not saying necessarily fight more, I’m saying fight better.”
Conflict doesn’t have to mean avoidance or escalation. Priya Parker, expert facilitator, strategic advisor and author of The Art of Fighting: The Transformative Power of Conflict, argues there’s a third option: “healthy heat,” where disagreement is handled with enough care, curiosity, and even humor to become productive rather than destructive. In this episode of Think Fast, Talk Smart, Parker joins Matt Abrahams to rethink how we approach disagreement. She explains why practicing low-stakes conflict can prepare us for harder conversations, how teams can build better systems for working through tension, and why the goal isn’t to fight more, but to fight better.

Takeaways:
  • Conflict can be productive when you learn to hold the heat. Rather than avoiding disagreement or letting it escalate, adding care, humor, and curiosity can turn tension into something clarifying and constructive.
  • Don’t fight more, fight better. Preparing for difficult conversations, clarifying your purpose, and creating structures for disagreement can help teams address the issues that matter instead of avoiding them.

Activity:
  • Start a grapple. Identify one issue your team keeps avoiding or turning into a logistical discussion. Give it a dedicated meeting where the explicit purpose is to debate the issue, hear different viewpoints, make a decision, and commit to what happens next.

Episode Reference Links:
Connect:

 Chapters:

  • (00:00) - Introduction
  • (00:55) - Healthy Heat
  • (01:54) - Practicing Disagreement
  • (07:29) - Conflict in the Moment
  • (10:19) - Normalizing Conflict
  • (14:47) - Conflict as a Signal
  • (17:29) - Starting the Conversation
  • (20:25) - The Final Three Questions
  • (23:51) - Conclusion

Creators and Guests

Host
Matt Abrahams
Lecturer Stanford University Graduate School of Business | Think Fast Talk Smart podcast host
Guest
Priya Parker
Author, Facilitator, host of the NYT podcast Together Apart, and Speaker

What is Think Fast Talk Smart: Communication Techniques?

One of the most essential ingredients to success in business and life is effective communication.

Join Matt Abrahams, best-selling author and Strategic Communication lecturer at Stanford Graduate School of Business, as he interviews experts to provide actionable insights that help you communicate with clarity, confidence, and impact. From handling impromptu questions to crafting compelling messages, Matt explores practical strategies for real-world communication challenges.

Whether you’re navigating a high-stakes presentation, perfecting your email tone, or speaking off the cuff, Think Fast, Talk Smart equips you with the tools, techniques, and best practices to express yourself effectively in any situation. Enhance your communication skills to elevate your career and build stronger professional relationships.

Tune in every Tuesday for new episodes. Subscribe now to unlock your potential as a thoughtful, impactful communicator. Learn more and sign up for our eNewsletter at fastersmarter.io.

Matt Abrahams: Adding warmth to heat
can actually help your conflicts.

My name's Matt Abrahams, and I
teach Strategic Communication at

Stanford Graduate School of Business.

Welcome to Think Fast,
Talk Smart, the podcast.

Today I'm looking forward to once
again speaking with Priya Parker.

Priya is best known for her
work, The Art of Gathering:

How We Meet and Why It Matters.

She's an expert facilitator
and strategic advisor.

She's worked with many organizations
and individuals worldwide to

reimagine how we come together in both
personal and professional settings.

Her latest book is The Art of Fighting:
The Transformative Power of Conflict.

Priya, thank you so much
for joining me again.

Our audience really enjoyed our
previous conversation in episode 174.

Thanks for being back.

Priya Parker: Thank you
so much for having me.

Matt Abrahams: Excellent.

Uh, shall we get started?

Priya Parker: Let's do it.

Matt Abrahams: All right.

Uh, when you were last with us, you
introduced the concept of heat in

communication and relationships, and
I know you've talked about healthy

heat as a transformative tool.

Can you help share what
you mean by healthy heat?

Priya Parker: In so many workplaces and
groups and friendships, when conflict

arises, we tend to oscillate between
two places, what I call unhealthy

peace, which is conflict avoidance,
pretending everything's fine, nothing

to see here, folks, and unhealthy
conflict, domination, escalation, abuse.

And as a conflict resolution facilitator,
I know that there's actually a third

place, which is a very important place
to be, which is what I call healthy heat.

And healthy heat is the ability to hold
friction or tension well between people

with care long enough for something
to be generative or clarifying.

Matt Abrahams: So help me understand, what
are some of the ways of generating healthy

heat without burning down the house?

And you use a great example in
your book, The Art of Fighting,

that really hit home for me.

You talk about, uh, pineapple and
ham pizza, which is a perpetual

debate my wife and I had.

How do you generate healthy
heat in those moments?

And, and you mentioned banter, which
is something that really fascinates me.

Priya Parker: I think of banter as
the elixir of pro-social conflict.

Part of our, our fear of approaching
conflict, and I have it as

well, is that we are afraid that
it's gonna burn the house down.

And part of what I began to see in teams,
in restaurants, in organizations and

clubs that were able to have relevant
conversations that scared the people

in them, but were helpful to their
performance and breakthrough, was that

they added warmth to heat, and they
began to see that there are so many

different ways to actually approach
conversations and, and have actually

energy and debate and controversy that
also injects fun, and humor, and energy.

One of the things I began to see in
multiple different workplaces was that

when people normalized or were invited
into banter, like literally bantering

with each other, whether it was part
of the culture or whether they actually

designed for it, low stakes arguing helped
them prepare for high stakes arguing.

And I was in a room in a tech company
that was bringing together their

leadership, uh, across a global
organization, across a lot of departments.

They knew that they were at
a crossroads as a company.

They needed to really have serious
conversations in which the conversations

themselves, the arguments, the debates,
would affect the outcome of the

direction they wanted to go as a company.

So, they needed, like so many teams, to be
able to actually have good conversation.

Any time they'd sort of approach a more
difficult or, or high-stakes conversation,

people would kind of lean out.

And so, uh, on the first day, 500
people in this ballroom, and the

vice president of the company came
out on stage and said, "You know,

I don't really want to start
in a heavy place today, but

we got a lot of work to do.

And so, we're gonna start with five
really important but controversial

conversations." And he said, "So, the
first one I want to really put to you

all as leaders of this firm are, is,"
and he put up a slide behind him, and

it said, "Pineapple on pizza, yes or
no?" People were like, "What the heck?"

And then he said, "Okay, turn to
three people around you and debate for

15 minutes." People started turning
to each other and started debating.

And in the group that I was in,
somebody was like, "Yum, it's amazing.

Salty and sweet." And someone else
was like, "This is disgusting."

And someone else was like, "Well,
I'm Italian, and this is offensive

to my tradition," you know?

But all of a sudden, people
started laughing and chatting,

and the room changed.

And then he came back and he said, "Okay,
let's hear it out." And then he began

to go from the small group to the large
group where people started yelling out

pros and cons for pineapple on pizza.

And this group of people, who let alone
didn't know each other, had the social

permission to argue about something
that didn't matter, but that they felt

strongly about, was actually injecting
warmth into the room to help them practice

actually disagreeing with one another.

And immediately, it basically gives
people humor, banter, and social

permission to actually be, I don't
want to use the word antagonistic, but

actually turn to each other and have
a different form of interaction that's

related to controversy, but infuses fun.

And those are two elements, two
ingredients in communication and in

an interpersonal, uh, interaction
that often doesn't go together.

But when it does, it begins to help
you approach the heat to realize, oh,

there's so many ways we can do this.

Matt Abrahams: I really like this idea
of adding warmth to heat, which plays on

lots of words, but really taps into some
foundational principles in communication

by bringing connection and levity, and
in service of practicing, how we're

going to interact with each other.

So it's a way of warming up and
practicing and showing respect in

something that doesn't really matter
that can be really close to people.

If you listen to Think Fast, Talk
Smart, you know I believe communication

is something we can all get better
at, and getting better takes more

than simply learning new ideas.

It takes practice.

That's why I love teaching Communication
Essentials for Work and Life

through Stanford Continuing Studies.

We explore the communication challenges
that show up in everyday life, how

to be more persuasive, tell better
stories, strengthen your presence,

navigate difficult conversations, and
connect with others more effectively.

Along the way, you'll hear from
expert guest speakers, learn

practical techniques, and most
importantly, have opportunities

to put those ideas into practice.

My goal is simple, to help you become
a more confident, clear, and effective

communicator at work and in your life.

If that sounds like something you'd like
to work on, I'd love to have you join me.

Learn more and sign up at
continuingstudies.stanford.edu/tfts.

That's
continuingstudies.stanford.edu/tfts.

I'd like to move to right in the
moment when conflict is generating.

Uh, there's a difference
between identifying a dispute

and actually addressing it.

Uh, when we're caught in a, in
a spontaneous moment where a

disagreement just flares up, what's
the best way to address that?

Is there a conversational framework for
naming it honestly without immediately

triggering the person and getting
into a, a full-on conflict right away?

Priya Parker: One of the things I did
with The Art of Fighting was I began to

look at places that actually fight well.

One of the types of teams I looked
at were restaurants, in part because

restaurants have inbuilt 110 micro
conflicts every night of service.

And I looked at this
restaurant called Canlis.

Part of what they do as a team
is they assume that there will be

disagreement between and conflict
between every employee at some point

or another, and they find ways to
ritualize it, to normalize it, and to

be able to have a place to diagnose
what's happening, and then also have a

second moment to go and deal with it.

If the team is sort of snapping at each
other while preparing the evening's

meals or cleaning up after close and,
and someone can hear something's, you

know, starting to really bubble between
two employees, you may actually hear

one of the owners or the chef or any
leader of the organization yell on

the floor, "Take it to the hooch!" And
the staff involved in the exchange, as

irritated as they might be, drop what
they're doing and file into a secret

room they built in the restaurant for
these purposes, specifically created to

relieve tension in the heat of battle.

And you sneak downstairs in this
funny little room in the basement of

the basement, and it's time to talk.

How do you decide what to do
in the heat of the moment?

Really, teams and organizations that
are, have group intelligence are starting

to find ways to normalize, ritualize,
and give both tools and places and

skills for, for people to be able to
actually have the argument and not rely

so deeply on the, you know, on putting
it on the weight of the individual.

In fact, one of the things
I actually have it with me.

Canlis has come out
with an employee manual.

It's the first time I've ever seen
an employee manual that doesn't

look at if conflict arises,
you have to go to HR, right?

Or if conflict arises, you have to
go to alternative dispute resolution.

They actually have conflict as one of
the core ways their team builds trust.

They have a three-page manual on what to
actually do in the moment, and the first

thing they say is, "Assume the best in
others and look for their true north."

Matt Abrahams: Wow.

That's so powerful to, to build
it into the way you do business.

I appreciate the idea of normalizing
it, that conflict is natural and normal,

and when you bring people together
who are good at what they do and

passionate, conflict is going to arise.

The ritualizing part
I'm, I'm curious about.

I can see a leader saying, "Hey, we,
we support conflict that's healthy,

that's respectful." What are some
other very specific actionable tools

to help ritualize it so it becomes
part of what we do in our daily lives?

Priya Parker: I mean, the first is,
uh, talking about conflict, shifting

our mental model of, of conflict
as something that's dysfunctional

to something that's functional,
meaning that it serves a purpose.

And that it's not, not
all conflict is good.

Some conflict can be toxic, some
conflict can be deeply unhealthy.

But first is normalizing and saying
there are certain conversations that we

actually have to have in which there's
going to be disagreement, there's

going to be passion, in part because
these questions affect us, right?

Conflict heat is relevance.

And so where and how do we begin to
hold these conversations with care?

I worked with a tech team, um, a few years
ago where they, they realized that every

time at their weekly leadership meeting,
every time a really kind of thorny issue

would come up that really was related
to kind of who they were as a company and

the core direction they were gonna go,
either they'd run out of time or it'd be

so scary, someone would inevitably sort
of turn it into a logistical conversation.

Like, it's a communication move, like,
"Oh, well, we don't have time to do that,"

or, "Well, actually we shouldn't even
talk about that 'cause we don't have the

bandwidth to actually implement that."

The leader of the organization, the CEO,
came to me and basically said, "We, these

are the conversations we deeply need
to have, but it feels actually scary

to have them in our regular leadership
meeting. Can you help us design a

meeting?" So we came up with a solution,
uh, to create a new type of meeting

specifically for these larger, thornier
questions, and we called it a grapple.

And the company's leader sent
out a document describing the

purpose of the new meeting.

The purpose was, our job as a
leadership team is to discuss, debate,

and quote, "grapple" with large
strategic issues that are critical

to us achieving our ambitious goals.

And then they listed three factors
that would trigger a grapple.

One, a high level of
uncertainty in the outcome.

Two, a broad range of opinions
among the leadership team on

how we should handle the issue.

And three, a significant level
of risk to our long-term success.

What this team was doing was they
were raising the group intelligence

level of all of the leaders to begin
to listen differently, to say, "What

are the conversations that rise to a
grapple?" And then they laid out four

principles that would guide them through
these hot-topic discussions and, and

outlined it in an internal document with
me, which I have permission to share.

So one, we create an inclusive way of
grappling so that diverse viewpoints

are heard, understood, and considered.

We create a space for synchronous
discussion and debate.

We make a call on the issue at hand and
commit as a team within a given timeframe.

And we live into the decision with
new behaviors that we practice and

hold each other accountable to.

And so they did two things here,
which having the intelligence to,

it's almost like an early warning
system, to know what are the triggers

for the type of conversation that
requires a different type of meeting.

And then the second, what are the
principles of the infrastructure of

that meeting to make it a success?

Matt Abrahams: So much
value in that response.

The first and foremost, the idea that
heat is all about relevance, and that

you can set up almost a early detection
system, train people to, to look for it.

I like the, the three criteria
you used, uh, uncertainty, uh,

broad base of different opinions,
and there's some kind of threat.

So as you're listening, as you're
engaged in the conversation, you're,

you're searching out signals of those.

And if they, if they exist, then in
essence you say it's time to, to grapple.

And a grapple, uh, has really
specific steps to it, uh, and people

commit to that, uh, to those steps.

So in essence, you're giving people a
framework through which to have that

discussion, and you're naming it.

One thing that I found really
interesting in your book as you're

talking about conflict is that you
say conflict can be a sign that

the group should evolve or disband.

So it's actually a signal for movement.

How can we use the friction of a fight
to diagnose whether a team or community

needs to evolve or it simply has run
its course and we should disband?

What are we looking for there?

Priya Parker: I structured The
Art of Fighting into the natural

cycle groups go through when
they have an existential fight.

And so the types of fights I'm really
interested in, in part 'cause I'm a

facilitator and these are the fights
that I'm brought in to, uh, to help

groups hold, aren't all types of fights.

They're not fights for dominance.

They're not fights for
extremely bad behavior.

They're not fights for what temperature
the AC should be on in the building.

They're a specific type of fight, which
is what I call an existential fight,

which is when a majority of a group has
to ask or grapple with the question,

"Well, who are we? And how do we do
this? How do we do things around here?"

Right?

What kind of church are we?

What kind of football team are we?

The other thing is groups can't actually
form or, or evolve without a fight.

So often a group starts because of
a need, or a company starts because

of a need in the marketplace,
or a need in the, in the public.

But for groups to actually
evolve, fights trigger the

conversations we've been avoiding.

And part of what happens when a group
has to face a certain conversation is

all of the questions that often lay below
the surface come to a head, and this

often happens at moments of gatherings.

Gatherings so often that are the
forcing mechanisms to have the

fights that make us decide aloud
who we are and who we're gonna be.

Matt Abrahams: And it is, at some
point, a decision that you have to

make if we wanna continue being or not.

The point that evolution in groups,
in teams, is predicated on tension,

on fighting, on, on challenge, is
one that's really, uh, insightful.

Because as a leader, as a manager, as
a participant in a group or a team,

rather than avoiding it, I should be
seeking it out, or at least trying

to figure out where those tension
points are to help the group grow.

Priya Parker: Or to, yeah,
or to be curious about it.

And so part of the invitation to have
how to become an artful fighter is to

start noticing when are the conversations
happening that are more likely gonna

trigger existential conflict, and how to
get both curious about it and good at it.

Matt Abrahams: And you mentioned earlier
that notion of we don't want just

logistics to, to bowl over potential
rich conversation around conflict.

If someone listening or watching
right now wants to initiate a conflict

that they've been avoiding, what
might be the best opening sentence

or way to get that conversation
going that will lead to hopefully

good heat and productive outcomes?

Priya Parker: I first would go through a
checklist in oneself, which is, uh, what

is my purpose in having this conversation?

What is my intention?

Do I think that by saying something
I'm able to alter a situation?

Could I meaningfully engage
without saying something, right?

So some of these are diagnostic tools
to get better at understanding when

to face something and when not to.

Chapter three of The Art of Fighting
is actually when not to face.

And so a huge part of what I'm saying
is not just, you know, dive into

all conflict everywhere, always.

Like, I'm not saying necessarily
fight more, I'm saying fight better.

And so the first is to diagnose what
is the conversation I want to have?

How do I increase the
likelihood that it goes well?

Part of what the skill is in one's
own self is figuring out what is the

need and then how do you find the
right languaging, because 90% of the

success of a fight or a gathering
happens before anyone has entered.

And so part of what you're trying to do
in that situation is making sure that

you're setting yourself up or setting
other people up to have the right fight.

Matt Abrahams: The correction you
gave me of, don't go into it thinking

I'm going to have a conflict.

Think it's a conversation.

And then understand what it is you're
hoping to get out of it and what you need.

And I really like the idea of how
you frame it and what you do in

advance sets you up for success.

Many of us are so fixated on the
actual event, we don't think about

what we can do in advance to help
ourselves get ready, and your Art

of Gathering was a masterclass
for me in thinking that through.

Let's take a quick break for a word
from our sponsor, Strawberry.me.

The real value of coaching is
what it helps you see and what

it helps you do differently.

I have been coached and I have coached
others, and for me, the value is

clarity, seeing what you're doing
well, where you're getting in your own

way, and what you can do differently.

And if you're watching this,
I'm guessing you're someone

who wants to keep improving.

That might mean communicating
with more confidence, becoming a

stronger leader, or getting clearer
about your next career move.

Strawberry.me is like
therapy for your career.

They match you with a coach
who fits your goals and gives

you practical, personalized
guidance you can actually use.

It's all designed to make coaching
more financially accessible.

And because it's online, you can
use it from anywhere in the world.

Visit strawberry.me/smart to get
50% off of your session, and make

sure you tell them Matt sent you.

Well, Priya, I knew this was gonna
be great because we've had previous

conversations, and your work is so
meaningful and helpful to, to everyone.

I'd like to end, as we always
do, with three questions.

One I'm going to make up just
for you, and the other two you

had a chance to answer before.

I'm gonna see if they're, they're a
little different now that you've spent

some time thinking about conflict and,
and healthy heat in a different way.

Um, you up for that?

Priya Parker: I'm up for it.

Matt Abrahams: All right, first question.

In The Art of Gathering, you talked
about the container of a meeting

or event and how important the
physical and virtual space can be in

influencing how communication unfolds.

When it comes to fighting, talk to
me about the importance of virtual

communication and how we can leverage it.

Priya Parker: The physical
environment deeply affects the

room and the Zoom and the conflict.

And so a couple of, of tips on virtual
life is, first of all, sometimes Zoom

actually really helps conversations
because Zoom is an inherent equalizer

if you know how to use it well.

I work with a multigenerational family
that could never, one of the, one of the

blockages to their, to their fight was
that they couldn't agree on where to meet.

Who's hosting?

Who's paying?

How much is an airplane?

What does it actually mean
to gather in that spot?

And so our breakthrough actually
happened because all four siblings could

Zoom in from their own home, right?

And so don't assume all Zooms are bad.

Think about the tools that you
have and how do you create an

ecosystem that allows you to get the
conversations that you want given the,

given the infrastructure you have.

Matt Abrahams: So really thinking
through how the virtual can,

can be a benefit can help.

Question number two, who is a
communicator that you admire and why?

Priya Parker: I deeply
admire Mayor Zohran Mamdani.

I think he's an extraordinary
communicator, both from,

um, his embodiment, his
physicality as a communicator.

He, uh, he wants to be where he
is, which I think is actually

a really powerful force.

You know, when sometimes you see
people communicating and they may

be saying the perfect speech, but
actually you can tell, like, they're

not, their heart isn't really in it.

Um, I think he's a very embodied leader.

Um, and, and I think he's a brilliant
communicator in terms of being able

to actually talk about issues across
communities that are high-wire acts and

always come from what his values are and
inviting people into a world in which

everyone gets to experience those values.

Matt Abrahams: Excellent.

So I like this idea of being
an embodied communicator.

Be there and, and help others see
that you really want to be there.

Final question, what are the first
three ingredients that go into a

successful communication recipe?

Priya Parker: Clarity of
purpose, clarity of audience,

and specificity.

Matt Abrahams: Clarity of purpose
and audience makes a lot of sense.

You've talked a lot about that both in
your book, The Art of Gathering and The

Art of Fighting, and then making sure that
you, you have a, a clear outcome in mind.

Thank you, Priya.

I knew from our last meeting that this
was going to be a great conversation.

Thank you for helping us to hold heat and
really see the value that conversations

that involve conflict can have in
our organizations and in our lives.

Priya Parker: Thank you
so much for having me.

Matt Abrahams: Thank you for joining
us for another episode of Think

Fast, Talk Smart, the podcast.

To learn more from Priya
Parker, check out episode 174.

It was great again learning from Priya.

The one

thing I'm taking away that really stood
out to me was that you can add warmth,

connection, levity to your conversations
that will help you be better at

solving the more tangled and difficult
conversations and conflict that we have.

This episode was produced by Katherine
Reed, Ryan Campos, and me, Matt Abrahams.

Our music is from Floyd Wonder, with
special thanks to Podium Podcast Company.

Please find us on YouTube and
wherever you get your podcasts.

Be sure to check out fastersmarter.io
for deep-dive videos, English language

learning content, and our newsletter.