It’s a scene we have all seen countless times in movies and TV shows. The underdog pitches a big deal, gets rejected, and then stands up tall. They unleash a passionate moral lecture on the arrogance or shortsightedness of the person across the table. Finally, they storm out in righteous defiance, leaving the room in stunned silence.

One example is Cameron Howe (Mackenzie Davis) and Donna Clark (Kerry Bishé) pitching Mutiny’s products and strategy to a venture capitalist in season two of AMC’s series Halt and Catch Fire. When the VC declines to write a check, Cameron erupts and storms out.

Viewers love it. That moment releases all the built-up tension, and we cheer for the hero who refused to deviate an inch from their original proposal. In the next act, of course, the underdog lands an even better deal elsewhere and comes back to rub it in the face of the original rejector. Psychological relief and satisfying to viewers, but completely fictional and a terrible strategy.

In real life, that kind of exit is a clear sign of immaturity and a serious lack of professionalism. Because if someone is still talking to you, listening to your pitch, and pushing back on terms, it means there is interest. Real disinterest looks very different. It is polite, quick, and final. They thank you for your time, explain briefly that it is not the right fit, and end the conversation with an amicable smile. They are not saying no to make enemies or to insult you. They simply decided it wasn’t a good opportunity for them. Well, at least not as it was presented.

A better prepared person recognizes this and treats the objection as leverage rather than an attack. Instead of taking it personally, they keep the dialogue open. They ask questions. What exactly is missing? What would need to change for this to become interesting? Is there another way we could structure this, perhaps a smaller pilot, a different market, or a phased approach? The goal is to find the overlap where both sides win.

Missing the forest for the trees

Sacrificing your larger objective for a moment of emotional relief might feel good, but the consequences are disastrous. You lose the opportunity, damage your reputation as someone difficult to work with, and give the other side every reason to avoid you in future deals. Even worse, you rarely change anyone’s mind with a dramatic exit. People who have already decided will tell themselves whatever stories they need to justify their position. They will convince themselves you were unreasonable, emotional, or simply not ready for their level. Your grand stand becomes their confirmation bias.

Those who are prepared to be in a position of leadership understand that their objective is not to be right in the moment. It is about being effective over time. They stay cool as a cucumber, listen carefully, and keep the conversation flowing. When they hear no, they translate it silently into “not yet” or “not like this.” Then they work to discover the version that could become yes. Sometimes that means walking away, but only after exhausting every reasonable path to mutual value, and always with the door left open for future talks.

Next time you face rejection across the table, resist the Hollywood urge. Take a breath and own the gap between your internal reaction and your external response. Choose your next move carefully. The professionals who build lasting careers and big outcomes are rarely the ones who storm out. They are the ones who stay seated, keep talking, and find the path forward that others miss.

Because in real life, the opportunity rarely ends when someone says no. It ends when someone stops trying to make it work.

Here’s a bitter pill to swallow: Most people who claim they burned a bridge on ‘principle’ were actually just protecting their ego, only to regret it later.And yes, there are rare moments when burning the bridge is the right call. How do you know when the situation calls for a match?