My job as a technical architect is to analyze, admit and register the city's construction plans  that request approval from the local government. In this particular case the plan that was  presented to me did not have the standards that were accepted in the original draft.   My challenge was explain to the architect beyond the technicality, why the plan was not going  to be admitted, for the malpractice and the obvious problem in the plan presented.    While we were talking, I decided to use the storytelling tool, because in my opinion it is a very  adaptable tool to its environment, especially because it is born from experience and  authenticity. In this government context, using it in its most basic forms and without  overidentifying, can be very relevant.    After talking for 45 minutes with the architect, on one hand he insisted that it was the same  as what was accepted in the original draft, but that this plan was simply difficult to understand  because it was poorly drawn and presented. We talked about the urban regulations that apply,  how they have changed and why he didn't update his plans in all these years knowing about  this. Then he insisted that the problem was that I didn’t understand the plans because I was  misreading it and so long, he tried to explain to me from the way he saw it. Never the less the  plans weren’t the same as the original draft. I was getting tired of the explanation without  substance and we had been talking for quite a bit.    I was tired and had already spent enough time, even passing by the solutions that he had to  make to correct the plans and be admitted. With the intention of concluding the meeting in  good manners, I applied the storytelling technique by saying: "A constructive plan is not  something that is open to interpretation, it is not literature. Somebody asked me not quite long  ago if I Had heard what `they´ say about being in loved and how is like being pregnant; If you  are, you are, if not, you are not.  No one can be half pregnant.” And then I added “Well, with  building plans it's the same thing, you cannot build with half plans that are open to  interpretation.”  He laughed and then understood that the plan will not be admitted as  presented and it was simple as that.    The insight I gained from using this argument as a storytelling tool is that it goes beyond one  sided point of view, it's something that one can understand from any context and makes you  understand that most things are as simple as a `yes or no’, analysis is an important study that  usually brings you to quite simple truths as results.    In this context of my work I would probably should had used a different example, but always  keeping in mind the mutual respect in the professional field.

