I'm married. I've learned the hard way that winning arguments is pointless. It's a very hollow victory you can only enjoy yourself why someone else sulks.
All you get is a brief sense of victory followed by a very empty feeling. I don't want to feel like that. I want my wife to feel like that. Which is why one of the core skills of not being a terrible husband is learning how to be wrong.
It's also a core skill for the planner, especially the grown up one who has realised the purist quest for the truth is very lonely journey, for the kind of planner who doesn't care who 'has the thought' as long as the thought is good .
Put another way, no one likes a smart arse, and let's face it, if there's one thing that prejudices folks against planners, it's that. And if you can makes someone feel bad about winning on something you don't care about enough, you've more chance of winning something that matters.
Here are some ways to not only be wrong and use it to your advantage...
Write a bad proposition and know there's a much better one. Dig your heels in a little with the creatives and help them think of the better one for themselves. Worship them for their genuis.
You know that bit of the data you left out to make your argument better? When you realise this is a battle you would better losing, casually bring it into the conversation and let yourself be taken apart and be pleased the argument was solved with evidence because next time you'll use evidence to win.
When you know you are losing the argument, admit you forgot what your actual point was. Let your antagonist put your argument back to together in way that is far kinder than you probably deserve. When they put it back together for you, they might even buy into it.
Never give a ultimatum, just in case someone calls your bluff. For a example, if a planner leaves a meeting, everyone will probably decide stuff quite happily without you complicating stuff.
Pretend you missed what the antagonists have actually said, and you only now fully understand their point. It's likely you were not listening anyway and you can now reframe their point to actually be your point.
You know that think about oversimplifying someone else's argument than destroying it? Like when someone is in favour of national service, "So you're in favour of young men having guns". Over simplify your own and let someone else destroy it. Then overcomplicate theirs, so they don't know what they were talking about, then help them see they were actually all for your original point.
Don't get into debates at all, that what suits or for, let them do it for you. If the problem is the suit, agitate the creatives folks, they hate suits. If it's the creative agency you're working with, never argue over the Polish Cinema reference, just gush how stupid you were to not have thought of that them damn it with faint praise. "Blimey, that's ace, just like Shindler's list but not as depressing, marvellous". Or, "Really great idea, I loved it when you presented it last year too!" Or the media agency, "So great to see that partership with Empire Magazine in the plan again, so consistent".
So, yes, revel in your wrongness. And remember, if you have to win, no one likes a self-righteous prick. Make sure there's a concession in their somewhere. Put another way, smile in someone's face while you stab them in the back.