[playpause]

I think these two flaws actually go hand in hand, despite seeming opposed:

1. Avoiding acknowledging doubts or weaknesses in the position you're arguing for.

2. Allowing a decision to be finalised when you remain unconvinced.

These two behaviours have different outcomes if you take 'outcome' to mean 'who won the debate'. But they're both flawed and they both come from underconfidence.

Confident engineers care about finding the best consensus. They openly entertain doubts in their own position (and happily change their position in front of others), and they also persist with the discussion until they're genuinely satisfied with whatever consensus is reached.