与自上而下压制异见的独裁制度相比，在鼓励分歧存在的环境下实施创意择优要更难一些。但是，当分歧的可信各方愿意相互砥砺学习时，他们的进步会更快，决策也会更好。
关键是知道如何从处理分歧到实现决策。很重要的是，这个路径要很清晰，以便明确职责。（因此，我开发了一个工具，名为“分歧解决器”，它明确了从分歧到决策的路径，并使每个人都清楚，他们是否还固执己见，还是继续朝前去寻求解决方案。具体参见《原则》书中附录。）重要的是要知道最终的决策权归属何方，也就是说，知道从争议到裁决的路径有多远。尽管有争论（尤其是在决策做出后），但参与创意择优讨论的每个人都应该保持冷静，尊重整个程序。因为创意择优的最终决策结果不符合你个人希望而生气，这种态度是不可取的。It is harder to run an idea meritocracy in which disagreements are encouraged than a top-down autocracy in which they are suppressed. But when believable parties to disagreements are willing to learn from each other, their evolution is faster and their decision making is far better.The key is in knowing how to move from disagreement to decision making. It is important that the paths for doing this are clear so that who is responsible for doing what is known. (This is the reason I created a tool called the Dispute Resolver, which lays out the paths and makes clear to everyone if they are holding on to a different point of view rather than moving it along to resolution.)It is essential to know where the ultimate decision-making authority lies—i.e., how far the power of the argument will carry relative to the power of the assigned authority. While arguing and especially after a decision is rendered, everyone in the idea meritocracy must remain calm and respectful of the process. It is never acceptable to get upset if the idea meritocracy doesn’t produce the decision that you personally wanted.
