"Yeah, well, that's just, like, your opinion, man". I figure you are not arguing about a physical law, but about a course of action in the future. First: even

"Yeah, well, that's just, like, your opinion, man". I figure you are not arguing about a physical law, but about a course of action in the future. First: even if there are only "right" and "wrong" course of action for your issue, you cannot really know ex ante. None of you is right, but maybe one of you will be. In the future. Second: your situation most likely involves tradeoffs and you may not have all the information, often for valid reasons. You could make a case for any position in the room during debates. You argue for A, I argue for B. Chances are, A and B are very valid in the absolute and isolation. Education or Healthcare? With infinite resources? Both by all means. With a budget and an external threat? It gets harder because there's a system. "Right" or "wrong" isn't even obvious for a game of chess with clear/finite rules and moves, let alone life. Our job is to make the case and give options and a course of action for the decision makers to choose from and/or combine and/or weave together, then execute and act on the decision that is made. Doing this allows the team to execute and actually have a course to correct and learn from that. What's not to do in my opinion is to work half-heartedly and pout because management did not pick "your" option. And if/when the team figures that the course of action chosen isn't working and decides to correct course, the thing not to do is to go "I told you so!". Your system had some input signals and a desired state or the avoidance of an undesired state, took an action, produced an output, compared it with a desired state, figured there was an error, and now is merely correcting and optimizing given constraints, requirements, and perturbations.