Exit Strategies for Impossible Arguments

Trained to resolve conflict and build bridges, Janett Cordoves, the senior program director at the Institute for Citizens and Scholars, walked into her first job believing every disagreement can be fixed.  She was faced with a supervisor who was immune to every tool she learned. What started as micromanagement turned into credit-taking, control, and a painful realization that good faith alone could not save a toxic relationship. Forced to choose between endless engagement and self-respect, Janet learned the hardest lesson in civil discourse: sometimes the most ethical move is to leave. From the workplace to churches and classrooms, this episode wrestles with a radical idea: wisdom isn’t persuading everyone, but knowing when to stop trying.

Tell us your argument stories!

• Email guest and topic suggestions to us at whenwedisagree@gmail.com
• Follow us on Instagram

Transcript

Michael Lee : [00:00:00] When we disagree is a show about arguments, how we have them, why we have them, and their impact on our relationships and ourselves. We tend to like things more simply because we encounter them repeatedly. This mere exposure effect discovered by Robert Zj explains why songs grow on us, why familiarity breeds affection rather than contempt.

In disagreements, this means position that once seem crazy at first, can become reasonable through repetition. And people we initially clash with can become allies through continued interaction. This mere exposure effect plays out in political discourse constantly. Ideas that seemed radical when they were first introduced become mainstream because of repetition.

This is how the Overton window moves. Marriage equality, universal healthcare, basic income, whatever it is, positions that once seem extreme to some of us become normalized through exposure. [00:01:00] Not because arguments improved, but because familiarity, reduced threat perception. The strange became familiar.

The familiar became acceptable and the acceptable becomes obvious and personal relationships, mere exposure can heal or harm. The annoying coworker becomes a friend through forced proximity. The neighbor you argued with becomes an ally through repeated interaction, but the same effect can normalize bad behavior.

The critical comment that shocked you initially becomes background noise through repetition. The boundary violation that upset you becomes just how they are through familiarity. Time doesn't heal wounds. Exposure creates affection despite them. Understanding mere exposure helps us to be patient with disagreements.

Hopefully, that position that seems absurd might make more sense after you've sat with it for a little while. The person who irritates you might become important to you through continued interaction, but it also warns us to be careful what we normalize through repetition. Not [00:02:00] everything should become comfortable.

Sometimes our initial aversion is worth preserving. I'm Michael Lee, professor of Communication and Director of the Civility Initiative at the College of Charleston. Our guest today on When We Disagree is Janet Cordova. Janet is the senior program director for the Institute for Citizens and Scholars, and she's widely involved in bridge building and depolarization efforts, including education and communal work for organizations like More Perfect Union Faith Lives and Better Together America.

Janet, tell us an argument story. 

Janett Cordoves : Oh, Michael, thanks so much for having me here. There's so many arguments in my life and as I think about all the different spaces that I'm in I, I wanted to lift up one that kind of shadows a little bit of the personal and professional realm. Perfect. And so I, this was.

Finishing up my master's program after all my training in conflict resolution [00:03:00] and peace building. Really excited, especially as a first generation college student who went about their life differently than my siblings. I was finally proud of landing a job that had a salary and a title so I can explain to my family what it was that I was actually doing with my life.

Because you, it was very different. It was either business or mathematics or engineering or law, and I went in a different direction. And but soon after I landed this incredible job, I started to realize that my direct supervisor was. I'm showing up to all of my meetings. And I thought that was different, odd than what I had studied around leadership.

Or I started to feel that she was micromanaging things or had to have one more thing to add anytime I spoke, but I thought I justified it. I was like, I'm new to the job, I'm new to the field. I'm very green. I am learning. I just this is part of the onboarding, right? They wanna ensure my success.

They wanna ensure I [00:04:00] understand the organization its culture. Et cetera, et cetera. As many of us have started new jobs, we're trying to figure out that relationship with our direct supervisors. And so I stayed put and I kept working at it, but, that type of behavior continued where, and it and it, and exacerbated where my direct supervisor was taking credit for things I had produced or led or relationships I had brought in.

And so now my openness right to this new opportunity and this idea of I'll just win my supervisor over with time, with trust, with building rapport. I started to. Think through it a little differently and, and I was like, okay, maybe I need to be more direct in my communication. Again, remember, this is my first job out of college, right?

So I took the opportunity in performance appraisals and in one-on-ones to say, I perceived some censorship when I was explaining this. I would really [00:05:00] appreciate this type of communication practice. What are you open to doing differently? Like, all these things that I had learned right in my master's program of like, how do you connect, how do you bridge, how do you resolve conflict?

And nothing worked. So here I was in a real life, situation outside of college saying ah, this isn't working. 

Michael Lee : In this 

Janett Cordoves : moment you, yeah. 

Michael Lee : Go. You were trained to resolve conflicts, to build bridges to find some effective dispute resolution, and you have all these tricks of the trade, and then presumably you were hired because even though you were green, you had been taught these tricks of the trade, and then That's right.

Ironically enough, your first supervisor is immune. Highly resistant to all of the tricks of the trade. So after you go through the what, how would you like to be communicated with? And here's the way that I am perceiving the world, not the way that it is, but the story that I've created in my head and all of the [00:06:00] kind of excellent but also tried and true tactics for bridge building amidst controversial issues.

After those fell by the wayside, what happened? 

Janett Cordoves : I continued to try. I was like, I'm resilient. I'm gritty. It's, I'm first gen, it's my first job out of college. I was like, let me try some more open-ended questions. Let me try some visioning exercises with them. What would your role look like if I was fully successful in my role?

What would my role look like nine months from now? And again my, my goal of winning them over also shifted in this time where I was like, let me just create a collaborative work environment. But it became clear to me that, they didn't have my best interest in mind. This was not going to be the work environment for me.

They weren't going to pour into the team dynamic. And really didn't wanna relinquish control. And so will you say 

Michael Lee : they look 

Janett Cordoves : back. 

Michael Lee : Okay. Before you go on, will you say more about what they were saying specifically? Can you be vivid and use paraphrases or quotations that you remember [00:07:00] from this person where they were being resistant?

Janett Cordoves : Absolutely. Janet, this is the job. These are the top. Oh, Janet wasn't completely clear when she expressed X, Y, or Z. Let me add on she did design the curriculum, but I finalized it. And and so it's something that I, I led and so the, it was just a different, like a work dynamic.

That I had an experience in the inner group dynamic courses that I had taken, or even as an RA or a ta. It was just a very interesting experience, which looking back, feel like they were more about like self-preservation and perhaps I was seen as a threat. I'll tell you a little bit more because the way I exited, which ended up being the solution is that my next move after trying this for a year, all these different approaches, working through things, this couldn't be my experience for my first full-time job.

I must be missing something. I must have some diocese [00:08:00] and maybe I came in with too high expectations. So that self-awareness, right? But then say, no. You know what I, I think the goal here is the exit strategy, which, in disagreements it's always a possible solution, but it's never seen, or at least from colleagues it's seen kind of controversial because it's not it's not winning and it's losing, right?

And and it feels incomplete. And I had to learn that really early on, that, we, I embrace non closure and sometimes the strategy isn't more questions. Diving in further, sometimes the strategy is a separation in an amicable, thoughtful manner. 

Michael Lee : Let's talk about the specifics of how you quote unquote, set this boundary in this moment with your supervisor and with this job.

And then maybe get to how to find comfort in non closure as you put it more broadly in a second. So [00:09:00] how did you move on from this? 

Janett Cordoves : Yeah, so I started to be more clear in my conversations with my supervisor and with their supervisor. So when we had like team huddle meetings, I said I'm going to work on, the three or four things that I came here that you brought me on to do.

But as we reach the second year of our si of our fiscal process. I'm looking to move my role either in a different area of the organization or just completely right, think about offboarding. So I started to make it clear in the sense that I was going to complete and due to the best of my ability, what I was hired to do.

And that I was also thinking about a different role within the organization and or a role outside the organization. And that helped others at that senior leadership team commit and say Janet, what's unfolding for [00:10:00] you? You've only been here nine months, you're doing such great work.

What has unfolded behind the scenes that you would want to create this exit? Strategy. So that was really, I think, brave, but also others in the department were listening and said, let me pull this, young person who came in with such, vibrant, robust ideas. Who's looking to leave us in a year had such a quick turnaround, right?

With all the onboarding and interview processes that we go through to say what else is happening here? Why? Why is this the best decision for you? In those spaces, I'm like, oh, I had to be really diplomatic, right? Because it's my first job. I don't understand the bureaucracies of all these organizations just yet.

I want a glowing recommendation. I it's a small world, right? This bridge building civil discourse, it's a small arena, and I don't know what's next or where I'm going to next. And I know that I'm in a toxic 

Michael Lee : Yeah. 

Janett Cordoves : [00:11:00] Environment. And the best way isn't to blow up the experience or the opportunity, but actually utilize these bridge building techniques and strategies to say this is what I can do within this environment.

That this isn't the environment that I'm going to thrive in. 

Michael Lee : Yeah. I wanted to reflect on how you felt about this conflict at the time and now, and how you remember. It's one on the one hand it's, there's obvious professional consequences. This is your first job. You have to seek a kind of boundary with a boss in a toxic situation that seems intractable, unsolvable.

But then there's also your young ideological self who's forming an identity. In this space as somebody who can make impossible connections, who can resolve disputes, who can build bridges, and this is your first real big chance to do that, to solve this tough problem and utilize the skills that you've been in school for years for, [00:12:00] and it's just not gonna happen.

And then you have to, as you said, be comfortable with some non closure and not just continue asking questions 'cause it's. It's getting you and this person in the organization nowhere. So how did you feel from an ideological and or budding identity sense to have to walk away from this and not be able to solve it?

Janett Cordoves : Oh, so many things. I really felt like I was letting myself down. Wow, I, I wasn't equipped. Two, it I have had tough situations in my life and growing up, but it really colored. Be the space that I was, the sector that I was choosing to work in. And it jaded me a little bit. And then lastly, it felt like I failed.

I had tried everything with we talk about being of good faith. And not having an agenda and really trying to not have a relationship where, you know, when you go into a job, maybe you wanna be friends with the people. That's, that wasn't the intention was to have just a collaborative, [00:13:00] productive work environment.

And I fail. I felt like I failed and I, I did a lot to me, like psychologically, spiritually, mentally, and I, at. And I shared all of that in, in my interview and I, and by that time, eight, nine months later, I was able to say I failed forward. And I think that one of the things we have to realize in civil discourse and bridge building work is that it's not always gonna go our way.

And even if we plan for the long term the long term might just be to coexist. Even though we don't like that term or tolerate, which we also don't like that term, we aspire for something greater. That sometimes that's all you're gonna get. And it was a good lesson to learn early on in my career.

'cause I've had many now, with students, with faculty, with college presidents. With civic leaders in the city of Miami where I live, that sometimes you're [00:14:00] not gonna bridge or you're gonna bridge in a year, and sometimes you're just going to be, hearing from the sidelines or keeping an eye from the sidelines, but not being involved.

Michael Lee : B, if I'm wrong, but some of this, it feels like there's a community impulse that is motivated by almost what I would describe as an evangelical zeal. Amongst bridge builders and civil discourse types, which is to say that every heart has to be touched and every mind has to be persuaded. And if you miss an opportunity, that is, that's a kind of failure of faith.

A failure of practice, even a failure of pious devotion to making these kinds of impossible connections. And I'm wondering if there's a way to, to shift the metaphor a little bit and just value selectivity. Like a basketball player doesn't take every single shot. If you're three quarters of a quarter away.

That's a, it's a bad shot. Let's look for a better shot. And so [00:15:00] looking at it, instead of finding places that we can really capitalize and use our skillset as opposed to saying, every shot I don't take is a failure on my part as a basketball player. 

Janett Cordoves : Yeah. I think what helped with the blow of this failing forward that I experienced early on was my faith.

And I, as you said, evangelical. I am evangelical Christian. And I believe in evangelizing and sharing my faith. And so many times on a plane or in my work, people would say no, thank you. I'm not interested. Uhhuh. And so I think that prepared me a little bit more than maybe perhaps my colleagues where I have had that rejection or I've had not right now.

Sure. And so I think that prepared me. For the civ, the civil discourse in bridge building space. But that same thing happens, with our faculty institute at the Institute for Citizens and Scholars, this National Faculty Institute that focuses on productive conversations and holding tumultuous difficult topics and the [00:16:00] classroom so that students can process and wrestle with them.

Faculty show up and they haven't opted in. They've signed up, they haven't opted in to really creating this type of environment or what's the benefit? Why do I have to lead, the students are gonna record me. This is gonna be my livelihood. There's so many things, there's so much skepticism.

And so the same is true in the academic space as it is in the community spaces that I lead where people might be even interested and they'll show up. But then when you talk about the charge and what it can look like and the time and effort that it takes to create that type of space where people actually want to, where they feel like they belong, where they feel like they can share their ideological differences or their different perspective or a different opinion.

That takes a lot of time and craft. And so that opting in and opting out or I'm not ready or just not now, [00:17:00] or this isn't for me. Continues in all the spaces that I'm in. 

Michael Lee : I'm interested in hearing more about the relationship, if you don't mind, between evangelical faith and e Evangelical Bridge building practices.

How do those two interact with each other? Are there places where they compliment each other? Are they places where they contradict each other? 

Janett Cordoves : Yeah, I think for me they're complimentary. That those aren't diverse values within me, they just manifest in different ways.

And I'll give you an example. This is this work about engaging across difference is very important to me. And so I, I reached. A church in my neighborhood, not where I attend, but I reached out to them. I went by, I talked to 'em about the work that I do at this national level about bringing people together.

And the pastor pastor Carter Brown was really receptive and he said, Janet, we really need this in the congregation. Will you help me build out a three, three-part series before this past November election? And I said [00:18:00] absolutely. And so we ended up calling it the trinity and the political environment had to be more like Jesus as you go to the polls, and I have to tell you, Michael, the most thoughtful, the most beautiful conversation, honest conversation amongst Christians.

So this like in, in intra group dialogue with diverse perspectives. On abortion on, on on bearing children, on immigration costs, on wraparound services was the most beautiful conversation and discussion that I've participated in. And specifically at a church, an evangelical church.

And so it, it can be done. And it just requires, a commitment from the pastor and from their leadership and from someone, in, in or outside the community to say let's figure this out amongst ourselves, because there's diverse perspectives within our belief systems as well.

And so they're very much aligned for me, but I'm sure in different [00:19:00] churches and in different spaces. They're not. 

Michael Lee : As we close and try to connect these two stories, the space that I wanted to ask you about in addition, was about non closure and finding comfort in non closure. So you had to, over the course of your professional life, really find comfort in non closure with the f first story you told about your first job, your first boss, and that toxic situation.

But now in the work that you're doing in the community and specifically in the churches that you just mentioned. How do you teach others amidst these heterodox ideas, even intra disputes between like-minded believers at a church or in a faith community, how do you teach them to find comfort in non closure over a really big issue like immigration, abortion, et cetera?

Janett Cordoves : Yeah. I start with stories and I add the, and I use myself to really ex explain the nuance. And the complexity of this. So [00:20:00] as an evangelical Christian, many evangelical Christians think that if you engage across lines of difference, you could be watering your faith. That is not true. The engagement can lead to deeper questionings of your own faith, deeper questionings of some other faith, but still holding true to your belief.

And so as someone who has this strong faith, who also believes in peace building and the studied conflict resolution and ethics, and does this work, as a scholar, how I've married those and many times that provides a space and an opening for people to also say how they are nuanced and complex.

I think in our society, we move so fast. We lack patience and we don't create the opportunity for a reflection that we feel that we need to always provide clear and concise answers and responses. And I think our world, ex pushes us to be that way. And so in these workshops, in these trainings, in these coffee connections, if it's just an hour.[00:21:00] 

I just start with demystifying that we're as simple as the media, as the senses, as all, all of these things ask us to be, because we're not. We're much more beautiful, we're much more diverse, we're more, much more complex, and from there we start to then see, oh, you know what? Maybe I do have something in common with someone that's vastly different than me.

Michael Lee : Dana Cordova, thank you so much for being on When we Disagree. 

Janett Cordoves : Thank you, Michael. It was a pleasure.

Michael Lee : When we Disagree is recorded at the College of Charleston with creator and host Michael Lee. Recording and sound engineering by Jesse k and Lance Laidlaw. Reach out to us at When We disagree@gmail.com.