Answering the opposition's loudest but weakest public voice, in the open and on the merits, lets a sponsor win the public argument while the stronger objections are handled in smaller rooms.
Borderline: whether this move is justified depends on the situation, and only the person in it can judge.
An example
When a hospital system proposed moving surgical scheduling to a central command center, the claim most staff had heard came from a general surgeon who wrote long emails saying the plan would kill patients. The chief operating officer answered the claim at the first town hall, with the safety data from the pilot site, and took questions. The three senior anesthesiologists who had the stronger objection, a rise in the pilot site's cancellation rate, did not want a public fight. She met them separately, accepted two of their changes to the cancellation rules, and said so in the next weekly update. By the third town hall the surgeon's claims had been answered twice and the room had moved on. The board approved the command center with the anesthesiologists' changes in it.
Why it works
Answering the weakest public critic lowers the cost of defending the plan in public, since the claims are easy to refute and the audience sees them refuted. Whatever else the opposition offers gets bundled in bystanders' minds with that voice, so the resistance as a whole looks weaker. Joining it becomes costlier, because new supporters inherit the weak critic's reputation and strong opponents must either disown their loudest ally or accept the discount. It works only where the weak voice really exists and is already prominent, and where you control which public questions get answered at length.
The thinking behind it
Carl I. Hovland Communication and Persuasion: Psychological Studies of Opinion Change (1953), from the Yale program Hovland led, found that the same message is judged differently depending on the perceived expertise and trustworthiness of the person delivering it. An objection carried by an erratic voice loses credibility, and the opposition as a whole can be judged by its most visible messenger. That is why critics who choose a credible spokesperson early take the move away.
Daniel Kahneman In Judgment under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases (1974), Tversky and Kahneman describe availability, judging by the instances that come most easily to mind. The loudest critic's claims are the instances bystanders recall when they think of the opposition. Answering those claims in public lowers the opposition's standing, and putting the strongest objection in writing to the decision-makers gives them a different instance to remember.
When it fits
Public forums are where it fits: the most widely heard objection to your plan is also the weakest, the audience you need is the broad middle, and you chair or speak at the meetings where the argument happens. You need a real answer to the weak objection and a separate, serious channel to the stronger opponents.
How to use it well
Answer the claim most people have actually heard, on its merits and with data, in the public forum, and leave the person out of it.
- Meet the strongest opponents separately, take their objection seriously, and say publicly what you changed because of it.
- Let anyone speak at your forums who asks to, and never claim the weak critic speaks for the rest.
- Keep the public answer short, and let the weakness of the claim do the work.
Report what you changed and who asked for it, so the stronger critics can see their case was heard.
What it costs and where it backfires
Strong objections survive the defeat of weak ones, and if they are right they surface later with interest. Bystanders who learn that stronger critics existed may conclude you chose your opponent. Once you keep the stronger critics from the microphone, misquote them, or present the weak critic as their spokesperson, the move has become misrepresentation, and you have also lost the information those critics had.
When it is used on you
Choose your own face before the sponsor does when the same weak critic is always called on first and quoted everywhere. Agree on a spokesperson early and announce who it is, put the strongest version of the objection in writing to the decision-makers, and ask the chair to call on your spokesperson or schedule a session on the objection.