[fsloth]

"I've worked with managers like this, and although it might work for some, it was hell for me. "

In that context argumentation is merely an unskilled testosterone filled show of force. I would hate that as well.

That's a bit limited view of argument. Argument is not necessary a fight, or a show of force, but merely two sides defending their view and trying to persuade others.

True teams use argument as a daily tool to reach - not consensus - but an agreed path forward that all respect. Everyone agrees to a "disagree and commit" policy where they whole heartedly proceed on the agreed course and see where it will take them.

The argumentation part is critical to reach this commitment level. Unless everyone has a chance to defend their view, commitment to disagreeable strategies is lower.

If this disassembly of group psychology is unfamiliar I can whole heartedly recommend Patrick Lencioni's "Five dysfunctions of a team".

That said, I have no idea of the quality and nature of late Mr. Jobs version of argumentation.