Here is an excerpt from an article written by Mike Prokopeak for Talent Management magazine. To check out all the resources and sign up for a free subscription to the TM and/or Chief Learning Officer magazines published by MedfiaTec, please click here.

* * *

Argument done right, as our politics would lead you to believe is a lost art, airs ideas and differences and charts a path forward.

At long last, the finish line of a seemingly interminable U.S. election season is near.

Candidates for the nation’s top job have been jockeying for position since snow was falling nearly two years ago. So when voters across the country head to the polls early next month, we’ll finally be putting an end to what feels like one of the longest presidential campaigns ever.

While it truly has been a long campaign, this round has felt especially drawn out because many believe it has been one of the most contentious and partisan contests in history.

I can’t say with certainty if that’s the case or not, but I doubt it. U.S. political history is liberally peppered with rancor and spite. In 1804, a sitting vice president, Aaron Burr, shot dead his chief political rival, Alexander Hamilton, in a pistol duel. It’s hard to top that one in the annals of partisanship.

That’s not to say that contentions and arguments are always so grim or fruitless. As a good high school debate team captain will tell you, there’s an art to argument and a purpose to dissension. Those of us who are skittish about conflict and keen to avoid confrontation would do well to remember that.

* * *

My own take on all this is that there are significant differences between negative and positive confrontations that are determined by the given circumstances. That is to say, there are positive and negative forms of what Joseph Schumpeter characterizes as creative destruction. More about those differences another time.

Mike Prokopeak is editorial director at Talent Management magazine. He can be reached at mikep@talentmgt.com.