Home/Activities/Agree to Disagree

Debate · A great activity for everyone

Agree to Disagree

Two sides of a topic, argued out loud under a strict clock, with the explicit goal of understanding — not winning. It works because respectful disagreement is a skill, not a mood, and this is the drill that builds it.

30–60 min3–20 peopleAverageDiscussion prompts + timer
By Jon Zajac · Founder & Chief Icebreaker · Last updated February 19, 2024

What is Agree to Disagree?

Agree to Disagree puts two sides of a topic in the room and asks them to make their case, in turn, without talking over each other. A facilitator runs the clock, states the ground rules up front, and keeps score of nothing but airtime.

It works because disagreement usually breaks listening — most people spend the other side's turn drafting a rebuttal instead of actually hearing it. The structure here removes that option: no interruptions, confidentiality for anything personal that comes up, and a reflection round that asks what you understood about the other side, not who won. Run at 30–60 minutes, there's room for a few topics and the debrief both.

Skip it with a group that doesn't have some baseline trust yet — this activity assumes people already feel safe enough to disagree out loud; it doesn't build that safety from zero. It also needs a facilitator who can hold the neutral line for the whole session — without that, it reads as a debate stage, not an icebreaker.

The rules

  1. Respect every viewpoint in the room — opinions, beliefs, and experience all get equal standing.
  2. No interruptions. Let each person finish the thought before anyone responds.
  3. Listen actively, even, especially, when you disagree.
  4. Personal stories shared here stay confidential.
  5. The facilitator stays neutral — no taking sides, no picking a favorite argument.
  6. Balance the airtime. Everyone gets heard, and the clock keeps anyone from running long.
  7. Aim to understand the other side, not to win the exchange.

Before you start

  • Group size: 3–20 participants. The bigger end of that range needs the timer more than the smaller end — without it, a few voices will naturally take over.
  • Any space arranged in a circle or U-shape. Set chairs so everyone can see everyone's face. Eye contact does half the listening work in this activity.
  • Gather the core kit. Notecards, a timer, and a set of topic prompts. Voting tools (a show of hands works fine) help if you want to poll opinions before the discussion opens.
  • Pick direct or prompted engagement. Direct engagement asks people to expound on views they already hold; prompted engagement hands out your prepared topic prompts instead. Decide which before the room fills.
  • Write the ground rules and reflection questions down in advance. Have confidentiality, no-interruptions, and the reflection questions ready to read aloud — don't compose them in front of the group.

How to run it

  1. Introduce the activity 1–2 min

    Say the goal out loud before anything else: understand differing views, not change anyone's mind. That one sentence resets what "winning" means for the room.

  2. Set the ground rules 2–3 min

    State the rules for respect, confidentiality, and no interruptions before the first topic goes up. Declare your own neutrality here too — no taking sides once the exchange starts.

  3. Choose your method 1–2 min

    Direct engagement asks people to expound on views they already hold. Prompted engagement uses your prepared topic prompts and calls on volunteers or picks names at random.

  4. Run the exchange 10–20 min

    One side states its view, the other responds, under strict time control from the timer — that's what keeps a single voice from running the whole round.

  5. Build understanding 5–10 min

    Ask the open-ended questions out loud mid-discussion — what understanding did you gain about the opposite stance, how does this apply at work — before moving to the next topic.

  6. Reflect and close 5–10 min

    Give everyone a moment to jot down what shifted, then consolidate the reflections as a group and name what the room actually got out of it.

← the timer keeps the loudest opinion from winning.

Facilitator tips

Use plain, gender-neutral languageDrop idioms and colloquialisms that don't translate cleanly — a phrase that's obvious to you might leave someone else guessing at the point.
Pick topics that travelChoose subjects that are relevant and interesting across different backgrounds and experiences, not just the ones that resonate with you.
Check the room, not just the chairsConfirm the space is physically accessible — ramps, seating, clear signage — before anyone walks in.
Say the safety statement out loudState explicitly that all opinions are welcome and that discrimination or harassment won't be tolerated. Don't assume the room already knows.
Swap "both sides" for "all perspectives"Language that assumes exactly two positions boxes out anyone whose view doesn't fit either side.

Why it works

Disagreement becomes informationThe reflection prompts ask what you learned about the opposing view, not who won the exchange — so the group leaves with data about each other's reasoning instead of a scoreboard.
The timer protects quiet voicesStrict, timed turns for each side mean the loudest arguer in the room doesn't get to run the clock. Everyone gets the same window to make their case.
Confidentiality lowers the stakesPersonal stories shared during the activity stay in the room by rule, so people can voice a real opinion instead of a performed one.
HELLO, MY NAME ISJon

I like this one because it gives disagreement a container: a timer, a few ground rules, and a reflection round at the end. Take those away and it's just an argument. Keep them, and the group learns something about how it listens.

Jon Zajac · Founder & Chief Icebreaker

Reflection questions

6 questions for teams that want the debrief, not just the discussion.

  1. What did you learn about your own perspective during this activity?Surfaces assumptions you didn't know you were carrying into the room.
  2. How do you feel about the opposing viewpoints that were shared?Names the empathy this activity is actually training.
  3. What strategies did you use to listen actively and understand the opposing side?Turns listening from an instinct into a technique people can name and repeat.
  4. In what ways has this activity changed or challenged your perception of the topic?Checks whether anyone's thinking actually moved, even a little.
  5. How can you apply the lessons learned from this activity in your daily life or at work?Moves the skill from the exercise into the next real disagreement.
  6. What steps will you take to continue promoting respectful dialogue and understanding of diverse viewpoints?The commitment question — asks for a next step, not just a reflection.

If this fits, so will these

Activity

Agree to Disagree: Switch Sides Edition

Argue the position you don't hold — the discomfort is the point.

Activity

Agree to Disagree: Blindfold Debate Edition

Same debate, no eye contact — judge the argument, not the arguer.

Activity

Agree to Disagree: No Speaking Edition

Opinions expressed by where you stand in the room — not a word spoken.

Activity

Agree to Disagree: Word Swap Edition

Debatable phrases on cards, swapped mid-conversation as understanding shifts.

Jon Zajac

Founder & Chief Icebreaker

I started IcebreakerSpot because I believe strong connections are the foundation of successful teams. This site exists to make it easy to find and share the icebreakers and team-building activities that build trust, spark collaboration, and help groups do great things together.

XLinkedIn