"Forecasting is ‘Strong convictions, loosely held.’” Paul Saffo
How do you argue with Steve Jobs?
Do you recall being in a meeting where otherwise reasonable people couldn’t agree? Worse yet, the conflict left everyone confused and demotivated? Most of us have.
This week, we look at how Edwin Catmull, former president of Disney and Pixar Animation uses a story aptly titled “How to Argue with Steve Jobs” to show us how he’d move from disagreement into alignment with his boss.
Ed’s narration style and the short length of this story makes it an easy listen. According to him, his clashes with Steve Jobs were multiple meeting affairs.
He’d make a point, Jobs would reject it.
He’d return days later, restating, reframing.
Sometimes Jobs shifted. Sometimes he allowed Catmull’s way.
This is a long-arc story that hews strongly to a story structure (Freytag’s Pyramid)
begins with a hook,
builds anticipation,
sets context for the listener,
then an inciting incident happens (“there’s no going back, Jobs is their new boss”),
rising tension to a climax and
then resolution (in this case a series of smaller conflicts & resolutions).
All packed into under 2-minutes and 300 words.
Takeaway
Catmull’s story isn’t just about surviving Steve Jobs. It’s about how narrative structure can turn conflict into alignment.
He doesn’t fight harder; he tells the story again, with a fresh frame.
He doesn’t demand instant agreement; he lets the arc breathe until resolution arrives.
And in the process, the relationship strengthens, not just the decision.
When disagreements drag on in your world, it might not be a sign of failure — it could be the long arc of a story playing out.
Want to Sharpen Your Storytelling Skills?
Next cohort of Success Through Persuasive Storytelling (rating 4.8/5) with Sri Srikrishna and Bikash Chowdhury starts on Ocotber 10, 2025. Registrations open.
Try This Week
Think of one disagreement you’re part of right now. Ask yourself:
Have I only told the story once, in one way?
How might I re-frame it and return to it later?
If I mapped this disagreement as a story arc, where are we — exposition, rising action, or resolution?
Instead of pushing for instant closure, practice retelling the story across time. Notice how the tension shifts.