In my executive coaching practice, I have the opportunity to work with talented leaders with a wide range of skill sets and backgrounds. Although they have a wide range of experiences, one common denominator among all the successful executives I work with is their strong ability to communicate their vision to their organization. Formulating that vision is an exciting process that is often anything but linear. We have deep philosophical conversations and debates about the best direction for the future of their companies. A great part of my job is to ensure that we have worked together to highlight the strengths of their vision for a path forward. We also work to identify and eliminate any potential pitfalls in the delivery.

One thing that always stands out about all these conversations for me is how skilled most of these leaders are in this area of communication. I will often take the opposite side of any proposed future vision and help refine and test the strength of that vision by attempting to reframe it in the form of potential objections that may come from the field.

As children, every one of us had heard about some invisible threat that might be hiding in our closet or perhaps under our bed… just waiting to attack us if we let our guard down. Most of us knew this shadowy entity as the Bogeyman. Even though we were afraid of the Bogeyman, most of us realized it was just a myth that couldn’t really do us harm. But in the corporate culture, another type of Bogeyman can cause you real detriment. I’m talking about “The Straw Man.”

Time and time again, I see corporate executives working diligently to share their vision, only to have someone who wants to undermine the vision interject the “straw man” into the argument in a way that makes getting the point across far more difficult.

If you’re unfamiliar with the strawman argument, here is how it works. Let’s take something simple. For example, I might say, “I prefer a dog over a Cat for a pet.” The person using the strawman technique then says, “in my experience, anyone who hates animals has a hard time relating to people as well.” Using the strawman technique, the person unfairly reframed what I said in a way that diminishes my overall credibility. This is insidious and can do real harm if left unaddressed. In the audience’s minds, you’re no longer a person with a pet preference; you don’t like any animals and probably aren’t good with people either.

There are various ways to distort an opposing argument, with some common ones being exaggerating the original argument, focusing on specific details in the original argument, and quoting parts of the original argument out of context.

The main way to counter a straw man is to point out its use and then ask your opponent to prove that your original position and the distorted stance are identical. In some situations, you might also choose to either ignore your opponent’s strawman or simply accept it and continue the discussion.

When responding to a strawman, it’s important to consider the audience watching the discussion and choose the approach that will most appeal to them.

Unfortunately, nowadays, we see the strawman routinely used in journalism and social media. This probably means the strawman isn’t going away anytime soon, so pick your battles carefully, but knowing that the tactic exists, puts you halfway to solving the problem. Being able to accurately and fairly articulate your vision for your organization is far too important to let this tactic stand in the way.