There is always a deeper place to go.
Coaching teacher teams, I often find myself in the middle of heated discussions about "Method A vs Method B". It's natural that caring and ambitious teachers have strong opinions about the methods they want to use, and it's natural that there shall be a difference of opinions, and that those opinions shall change over time.
When called upon to guide teachers in the discussion about "A vs B" I have found that asking a few overarching questions really helps a lot better than telling them my opinion.
What are we working together to create here?
What does the final result look like when it's working perfectly?
What is our current perceived reality?
What do we include in what we are able to influence?
What are the advantages of "A"?
Make a list
What are the advantages of "B"?
Make a list
Which seems to offer the most?
Compare the lists
Usually the first two questions reveal that there are greater differences in perceptions about what the teachers are aiming to create in their school and community; and their perceptions of what's possible to influence.
Most "Method A vs Method B" discussions are invitations to go to a deeper place, where mutual understanding may happen. Resolving the "A vs B" discussion without going to this deeper place may result in another heated "A vs B" discussion sooner rather than later.