At a time when many of our most important conversations feel increasingly polarized, it’s easy to fall into patterns that keep us stuck.
Too often, we retreat to our corners, avoid the hard dialogue, or settle for surface-level civility instead of real understanding. But the challenges we face today demand more from us.
When a conversation begins to feel too complex or emotionally charged, we often reach for a common refrain: “agree to disagree.” I’ve said this phrase myself. It is a polite way to avoid conflict and keep the peace.
But what I’ve come to understand is that while it feels courteous, “agree to disagree” closes the door. It ends the conversation, and with it, the possibility for progress. What if, instead, we start from where we already agree? What if we say, “agree to agree”?
Suddenly, we’ve started a conversation rather than ended one. Building on the common ground that already exists is the key to bridging what divides us and addressing our most complex social issues.
Start with where we agree
Few issues show the necessity of this approach more clearly than gun violence.
For the past four years, firearm injuries have been the leading cause of death for children and teens in the U.S. And yet, coming together on how to face the devastating impact of this crisis remains one of our nation’s greatest challenges. Many believe this issue is too polarizing to even talk about.
I believe otherwise. There is evidence to suggest that Americans agree on more than we think. For instance, an Ad Council survey found that 80% of firearm-owning households agree that safe storage reduces injuries. And a 2024 Ad Council-led studyfound eight in 10 Americans believe having more productive conversations can help reduce gun injuries and deaths among children and teens.
In other words, we all want to keep children and teens safe.
Starting from a place of common ground makes room for conversations that once felt out of reach. And when we start from that foundation, we turn difficult conversations that might have been considered polarizing into pathways to progress.
And it takes a lot of conversations.
The Ad Council put this model into action with our “Agree to Agree” campaign. And the message is resonating. In less than a year, 67% of parents who are aware of the campaign say they’ve engaged in conversations about preventing gun injuries and deaths with their kids, compared to 48% of those who aren’t aware.
A model for progress
The “Agree to Agree” framework is a strategy for moving society forward, not by eliminating differences, but by refusing to let them dictate what’s possible.
Disagreement is inevitable—not just on issues as complex as gun violence, but in every relationship and partnership we navigate. There isn’t a single person in the world we agree with on everything: not a spouse, a friend, a colleague, or a partner. Expecting total alignment before taking action only guarantees one outcome—that progress stalls before it ever begins.
What matters more than perfect agreement is what we do with disagreement once we’ve chosen to move forward together. In a real partnership, differences can surface blind spots, invite new perspectives, and pressure-test ideas that help move us forward.
When we treat disagreement as the stepping stones to common ground, that becomes the starting point, not the finish line. And those ensuing conversations become the engine that keeps the solutions themselves sharper, clearer, and more impactful.
Leading the Ad Council for more than 10 years has taught me that no matter what industry we’re in or the size of our network, we all have the capacity to create real change.
It happens when we choose to listen, connect, and act—together. When we agree (to agree) to build on the common ground we have, that’s when we clear the path for more collaboration and more impactful solutions.
The post Why We Should Agree to Agree appeared first on TIME.
