content or the other

Interestingly, my coaching clients tell me about experiences in the office in two fundamentally different ways: some tell me the facts and the content first and report what in the experience with one or more third parties went right or wrong or was important – on the content level. The rest they are facing only vaguely, and my questions leading to other aspects generate surprising findings. Others tell me right away from the dynamics of power, ego-effects or other qualities that were relevant to the experience, such as the willingness to change, the pulling forces to create something new, or the ingenuity. Then sometimes I have to ask what the content of the meeting was about. So, it is interesting – here for your self-reflection -:
Which side do you pay more attention for?
What is the ratio of your attentions?
How would it affect your encounters, if you change that (more into the balance or getting the lesser side in the foreground)?
Would you like to try it?
What opportunity could be appropriate for this?