How to Argue Like an Intel Bigwig

With "Architects of Tomorrow, Volume 1" up and running, it's time to get "Volume 2" under way. One of the first interviewees on the roster is Intel's David "Dadi" Perlmutter, the man behind everything from the 387 co-processor to Centrino and the architectural shift away from brute gigahertz. One of the things I enjoy doing in these interviews is getting to know the personalities behind the technology. Knowing Dadi's reputation as an epic arguer during product development, we shared this:

CPU: “Forbes” described you as “a relentless arguer.” Is this accurate?

Perlmutter: My assistant nods her head [laughs]. I hope I’m not argumentative in a disruptive manner. Call it more of a debate than argument, because “argument,” at least in my understanding of the nuances of English, is more of a negative. Debate is trying to get things sorted out and understood from multiple angles. It’s the Jewish scholar way of learning, very much about debate. You have this opinion? OK, I’ll use the other opinion. When you have been convinced by me, I’ll argue the other way. That’s a very good way to make sure you don’t agree on things too soon. Sometimes in team dynamics, you get to where everybody’s happy and loves the idea, and they just move on with it—but it isn’t necessarily the right one. So you want to ask the next question to make sure that all of the angles have been understood and you bring in people that have different opinions. It can’t just be me. There has to be discussion. The culture must be a thoughtful one. The trick is to know when to get out of the room, because you can stay in that phase forever. The art is to understand where the debate becomes an argument and you’re stuck and everybody is saying the same thing again and again instead of bringing in new ideas. I regret to say that sometimes we direct the debate for too long. I will not say that I know the exact point to get out.