This I believe made the difference with the decision made by Chief Justice John Roberts to uphold the ACA and side with the liberal justices and pass the law with a narrow 5 - 4 ruling.
Simply, by “why” I mean, the purpose for the act, and by “what” I mean the constitutionality of the act. (This is explained well by Simon Sinek.)
Roberts could have voted to overturn the act solely on the “what” of the argument, but he didn’t. He took his time and looked for a way to uphold the act if he could find a reason to justify it and still be consistent with the “what” of the act that made it constitutional. He did just that when he interpreted the mandate as a tax, which the federal government is authorized to do, thus upholding the law. In addition, he also realized that this was a law passed by the legislative and the executive branches of the government, and if it were to be overturned, it should be through election, not by the decision of the Supreme Court.
This ruling provides a valuable lesson in that “why” arguments do matter a lot since sometimes all you need is one person to change his mind. In sales where you are trying to persuade, it is better to lead with the “why,” because, if given time, it is likely to prove to be the difference between winning and losing since the “why” arguments tend to strengthen your “what” arguments and result in a win. I certainly believe this, at the end, made the difference in the ACA ruling by Chief Justice John Roberts. .
Jay Oza is a founder and principal innovation development consultant at 5ToolGroup, a company that specializes in helping startups and established firms bring their innovation to market within 90 days. 5ToolGroup has developed a unique methodology of integrating 5 tools necessary to enable Innovation-to-Market (ITM): Sales, Marketing, Partnerships, Customer Development and Agile/Lean Methodology. We are always interested in talking to companies who would like to succeed with their innovation-to-market initiative.