The "art" of being "right"

And, while we're at it:

RIGHT != CORRECT

For the purposes of this post at least!

1. Right - acknowledged as the correct viewpoint; accepted as correct by other parties; articulation of popular opinion.
2. Correct - a strongly founded standpoint derived from evidence, logical deduction and process; undeniably applicable and unchallengeable by any.

Better definitions of the above are welcomed.

The two are different for a few reasons. For those familiar with the history of our artform and industry, the "correct" option has not always won. The Amiga was superior to the Macintosh when both were in the marketplace, MCI was superior to EISA, NetWare was superior to Windows NT and IPX/SPX (and AppleTalk for that matter) was superior to TCP/IP.  All these statements are true on a purely technical level, but the outcomes would have the casual observer conclude otherwise.

In all cases, the surviving technologies above were right, if not at all correct. The Macintosh won due to software support and marketing, EISA won due to backward compatibility and ubiquity, Windows NT won due to marketing and identifiability and TCP/IP won due to existing vendor support (and AppleTalk for similar reasons). The surviving solutions were all right though.

In our industry, being right will serve you better than being correct (if it is a choice between the two). The correct solution tends to involve more time, effort and dedication than less technically-inclined and passionate stakeholders are willing to accept and tolerate. Our dedication to skill set and furtherment are tempered by others - it is the reality.

Which brings me to the "art" of being "right". In the words of my benevolent dictator who is almost always right "it isn't that hard":

1. Be undeniably clear - Leave no fact or detail up to interpretation. Expound, explain and clarify. Leave no room for debate or deviation.
2. Be correct in your use of language - Do not misuse terms. The moment you do, the nerd in the corner can unravel your otherwise well-weaved fabric of assertion and logic. Be prepared to define and explain.
3. Concede as quickly as possible - Harder than it seems. The moment you need to concede, you may need to rethink a large amount of what you have left to say or have already said. It is much better to show that you're in command of the subject matter in the face of challenge instead of holding steadfast to belligerent malfeasance.
4. Tell people they are wrong - You're doing them a favour if they're dedicated to learning, correctness, doing their job properly or being remotely professional. They're not lying, they're presenting facts as they know them. Just be prepared to support your point in a fashion that focuses on facts as opposed to personal failing.
5. Stay focused - Make a point, not a stand. You're not there to witness the pontification of others, as that doesn't serve anyone (see point 3).
6. Listen and respond - don't hear and disregard - If you have surrounded yourself with people who are one of Yes Men, people you consider your lessors or those with nothing to contribute no amount of reading or thought can possibly help you. Thus you are either beyond help or surrounded by people who are there to help you and are more than capable of doing so. Leverage expertise and have your expertise leveraged.
7. Challenge - don't quash - Being prepared to challenge and demeaning a person are two different and incompatible actions. The challenge improves all involved - being quashed improves no one.
8. Be deliberate and thorough in accepting concession - Someone accepting your viewpoint as correct and vacating their own is no different to the reverse occurring. Confirm why they see your assertions are now correct in their view. 

The strange thing with this points is that being correct will not require these rules to be followed when in the company of the faithful - they will convince themselves.