Perspective-taking Dialogue (OBREAU)

Outwardly-facing – Helping a group imagine and explore other perspectives on an issue more clearly

Perspective-taking Dialogue is a guided process for exploring how different people and groups might understand and experience a particular issue.

Participants are invited to imagine how specific others might make sense of the issue being explored.

The aim is to expand and deepen understanding. It’s not about necessarily agreeing with others or trying to persuade them to your view.

Perspective-taking Dialogue:

• Focuses on strengthening the ability of groups to consider viewpoints other than their own
• Encourages participants to become more curious about perspectives they may initially find difficult to understand.

The process helps participants:

• Move beyond judging or dismissing others
• Recognise that others’ perspectives seem reasonable to them
• Explore assumptions, interests, concerns, experiences, and knowledge that may shape viewpoints
• Develop empathy and curiosity without letting go of critical thinking.

Perspective-taking Dialogue is best suited to controversial or contested issues, stakeholder engagement, conflict situations, leadership development, education settings, and situations where understanding differences is essential.

You are encouraged to use and adapt this process as per the terms of the Creative Commons licence, outlined on the Contact and Permissions page.

Why Perspective-taking Dialogue is Needed

Conversations on complex and difficult topics tend to stall as participants remain strongly attached to their own interpretations, often involving negative judgments of others and a sense of certainty about the correctness of their views.

Perspective Taking Dialogue invites participants to temporarily suspend such habits and step into a different form of inquiry. The central question becomes: “What might be real about this issue from the perspectives of other specific parties?” Participants don’t need to agree with these other perspectives, just be willing to explore them openly (without judgment) and thoughtfully.

Such a dialogue can help participants discover that an issue is more complex than they had assumed, help them gain a richer sense of what is likely going on for others, and open up previously unrecognised opportunities for action.

Perspective-taking dialogue also has a developmental function for those involved – in the sense of helping them grow their capabilities in appreciating and understanding issues from more than their own standpoint.

Clarifying a Focus Issue and Stakeholders

The issue needs to be significant to the group, with differing viewpoints among stakeholders and with potential value in better understanding the different views. It’s not an issue with a straightforward resolution, or where everyone agrees what the problem is. The issue should also be set up to support genuine inquiry. It could be framed as understanding stakeholder perspectives on (question or topic X).

In deciding which stakeholder perspectives to explore, consider: For which stakeholders is it most important that the group gains clarity about what might be true for them? For practicality, focus on no more than 3 or 4 stakeholders.

The Process

While the process can be adapted for different settings (e.g., organisational, community, healthcare, organisational), the points below represent a general version.

The process involves:

Step 1: Opening

Step 2: Considering Observations (light touch)

Step 3: Exploring Each Perspective

Step 4: Examining the Evidence

Step 5: Reviewing and Reflecting.

Timing

As with Intentional Observation Dialogue, and as a guide for a group of 10-12 participants, 100 minutes to 2 hours should allow a reasonably decent exploration.

Additional time might be needed for dialogues involving larger groups, where there are more than 3 or 4 stakeholders whose views need to be considered, or where the group is strongly focused on its own agenda.

In a 100-minute session, 20 minutes could provisionally be allocated to each of the above elements, with flexibility to reallocate time as needed on the day.

Step 1: Opening

The opening session should clarify the focus question and stakeholders to focus on, the purpose of the dialogue, the process, and provide an opportunity for participants’ responses and questions.

Emphasise that a key is to avoid negative judgment of others. We are trying to understand the issue from their side on the basis that their view makes sense, seems reasonable, to them. The group is in no way evaluating how reasonable others’ views are. The aim is instead to imagine the reality those others might experience.

Step 2: Observation (Light Touch)

Small groups, each focused on better understanding the perspective of one stakeholder, begin with a couple of questions:

• What do we observe in connection with this stakeholder (e.g., things that they have said and done) which might help us more fully understand what matters to them?
• What might they observe in relation to this issue that could be significant to them?

This is a lighter-touch consideration of observation than in an Intentional Observation Dialogue, but it still provides an observation focus to help anchor the exploration.

Step 3: Explore Each Perspective

Small groups then each consider what might be real for their nominated stakeholder.

• What story could the stakeholder be telling themselves about this issue?
• What’s their possible narrative?
• What assumptions might they be making?

Depending on time available, this might be as far as the exploration can go, allowing for some reporting back and group discussion.

If time permits, it can be useful to include a short pause after initial feedback from each group. Doing so enables the facilitator to test how effectively groups are imagining other perspectives – or if they are lapsing into judgment, problem-solving or solution-finding.

In a second iteration, participants can take their inquiry deeper. They might consider, for example:

• What are the likely interests that are important to this stakeholder – what could be really important to them?
• What concerns might they have?
• What information might they have that others do not?

The aim throughout is to produce testable propositions such that they could put to the stakeholder without getting a defensive response. Participants are encouraged to remain tentative and curious.

Step 4: Examine the Evidence

So far, the emphasis has been on generating possible accounts of the stories that others might be telling themselves about the issue at hand. But generating these possibilities does not make them true: there is a need also to consider the evidence – supportive or otherwise.

Questions such as the following can be helpful here (these are prompts only):

• What evidence supports our understanding of these perspectives?
• Is there any contrary evidence?
• What observations are we drawing upon to support our interpretations?
• Where are we making assumptions?
• What other information would aid our understanding?
• What can we usefully ask stakeholders, both to explore their perspectives and test our own interpretations?

This stage helps participants distinguish between informed understanding and unsupported speculation. It also reinforces intellectual humility and encourages further inquiry.

Step 5: Review and Reflect

After exploring a range of perspectives, participants step back and consider what they have learned.

Possible questions include:

• What surprised us?
• Which of our assumptions were challenged?
• Where did we find common ground?
• What important differences remain?
• What do we now understand more clearly?
• What questions remain?

At this stage, participants often recognise that the issue is more nuanced than they originally believed.

Perspective-taking Dialogue and​ OBREAU

Perspective-taking Dialogue is most strongly based in the OBREAU practice of Reasonableness.

Observation comes in particularly in Step 2, with the light-touch consideration of what might be observable, both in connection with the stakeholder and from the stakeholder’s perspective.

Authenticity is especially relevant in Step 5. A challenge here is for participants to reflect – and share if they feel comfortable – without falling back into well-rehearsed arguments and assumptions about the stakeholders. They are invited to be in the moment, working from both the observations and attributions of reasonableness that have come up, and then respond in a way that’s true for them now.

Applications

Perspective Taking Dialogue can be used in settings, including:

• Leadership development programs
• Professional education
• Healthcare quality and safety discussions
• Community engagement
• Organisational change initiatives
• Team development
• University and school classrooms
• Public policy and civic dialogue.

It is particularly useful when the goal is not simply to solve a problem quickly, but to strengthen the quality of collective thinking.

Concluding Comment

One reason for many work issues continuing to cause difficulty is that those involved are thinking from different places – especially different assumptions and interpretations.

Perspective-taking Dialogue creates an opportunity to explore the different lines of thinking on an issue more carefully.

By helping participants understand how things may appear to others, it supports more thoughtful reflection, more constructive engagement, and ultimately better collective thinking and decision-making.

A Perspective-taking Dialogue Facilitation Guide is under development. Please see the Contact and Permissions page for information on obtaining a copy.