To Persuade, Present Options
Or how to convince someone
Leadership, at its core, is about persuading others, especially without slipping into manipulation.
But most of us didn’t grow up seeing that distinction clearly. In the stories we’re fed, the persuasive person is often relentless. It’s the one who argues the loudest, refuses to back down, and wins by sheer force of will. Or worse, it’s the manipulator: the one who bends the truth, exploiting uncertainty like a magician pulling strings behind the curtain.
Why does this happen? Mostly because real persuasion (the kind where you’re not just trying to win, but to genuinely bring others along because you believe it’s what’s best) is incredibly hard.
So when we try to convince someone we mostly default to what we know.
First, we lay out our case.
Then, we explain it again, a little more firmly this time.
And before we know it, our voice is rising and our tone tightening.
Still, they resist. Not because they don’t understand, but because they’re not ready to follow. And maybe our intensity is part of the reason why.
That moment can be deeply frustrating. Especially when you’re sure your idea is solid. And when you’re in a position of authority, the temptation grows to say: Just do it, because I say so. It’s faster and you can get the outcome you want (at least, on the short term).
But persuasion that relies on pressure wears thin. Sticky persuasion comes not from force, but from participation. And that’s where one of the most underused tools in leadership begins: presenting options.
When we push too hard (when we issue ultimatums or hide alternatives) we might win the moment, but we lose trust and buy-in.
Sure, positional power can get people to comply, but it rarely gets them to care in a long term.
Persuasion as an Invitation, Not a Mandate
Here’s a cool thought: what if we stop thinking about persuasion as winning?
Persuasion, at its best, invites someone to see the available paths with you. It’s not about dragging them over but making them understand how the different paths ahead are laid out. Plus, when you present thoughtful options, you can also improve your own arguments over a certain choice, making it more fruitful and impactful.
What does this actually look like? Here’s the basic structure I’m trying to use when trying to persuade someone by presenting options:
Be Transparent: Share the full picture, and stay clear of hidden agendas.
Encourage Reciprocity: Ask the other person what they see, what they care about, what they fear.
Lay Out the Options: Clearly outline two or three possible paths, each with real trade-offs. Don’t just stack the deck for your favorite.
Guide, Don’t Push: Share your perspective, but allow space for theirs. Help them reason through.
Incredibly, this framework often makes it easier for them to choose your option, especially when you master the skill of presenting options.
The Power of Transparency: Persuasion vs. Manipulation
“Hold on, but aren’t we manipulating the other part?”
The clear answer is no. There’s a major difference between persuasion and manipulation and they aren’t, inherently, the same thing.
Let’s start with the textbook definitions:
Persuasion is the process of influencing another person’s beliefs, attitudes, intentions, or behaviors through communication, typically by using reasoning, evidence, emotional appeals, and credibility, without coercion or force.
Manipulation is the process of influencing another person’s beliefs, attitudes, or behaviors through deceptive, covert, or unethical means, typically by withholding relevant information, distorting facts, or exploiting cognitive and emotional vulnerabilities, thereby undermining the individual’s capacity for informed and autonomous choice.
Notice that both definitions begin in exactly the same way, yet diverge sharply in the methods they rely on.
Manipulation hides information to control outcomes.
Persuasion reveals information to support shared understanding.
Presenting options is one of the most powerful tools for persuasion, and definitely not for manipulation. When you persuade through options, you’re saying: “Here’s the full picture as I see it. Let’s see it together.”
It Starts with Conflict
The difficult part is accepting that getting to “presenting options” almost always starts with conflict (a thought I’ll explore in another post).
Options don’t appear in calm moments. They emerge when there is some sort of clash and pressure rises in the room. Here’s a concrete example from an AI project I worked on a few years ago (anyone who’s worked on time-sensitive projects will recognize this situation):
A while ago, I was leading an ML project where we were already deep into execution. The pipeline was stable, the features were locked, and we were a few weeks away from delivery. Then a client came back with a request: they wanted to add a new dataset to the model.
On the surface, it sounded reasonable. More data often feels like more value. But after looking at it carefully, a few things were clear to us:
Integrating that dataset would delay the project by at least three weeks.
Based on similar cases, the likelihood of that dataset meaningfully improving performance was probably 20–30% at best.
The steering committee was already expecting results. A delay would almost certainly lead to frustration and loss of confidence in the project
I could have handled this in two familiar ways. The first would be authority:
“This isn’t a good idea. We’re not doing it.”
The second would be subtle manipulation:
downplaying the dataset, exaggerating the risks, steering the conversation until the option quietly died.
Instead, I chose the options path. I told them, very explicitly:
Option 1:
We keep the scope as is. We deliver on time, the committee sees results, and we evaluate this dataset in a second iteration once we have a baseline.
Option 2:
We integrate the new dataset now. The project is delayed by about three weeks. There’s a real chance it adds value, but also a real chance it doesn’t. The committee needs to be comfortable with that trade-off and understand the consequences.
Option 3:
We do a lightweight exploratory analysis on the dataset in parallel, no full integration. That gives us a signal on its potential without committing to the delay, but we change the timeline of delivery if we find at any point in time.
I also shared my perspective openly. I told them which option I leaned toward and why. I didn’t hide my concerns about the committee or oversell the upside.With my experience in AI and ML, I knew the best option was Option 1. Still, after laying out the options, I went quiet.
Then, something interesting happened. They weren’t debating me. Instead, they started debating the options between themselves, reaching the conclusion that option 1 was the obvious choice.
Most times, the most persuasive thing you can do is lay out the options, and step back.
Your Next Move: Embrace the Power of Choice
If you’re leading a team, managing up, or even just trying to convince a friend, try this:
Pause.
Lay out the options available.
Walk through the pros and cons together.
Ask: “What feels right to you?”
You might be surprised how often they’ll choose the very path you hoped they would. Not because you forced it, but because you invited them to own it.