Take a view you disagree with seriously

State a position that clashes with yours in terms its holder would accept, and find what it shows that yours does not.

Perché funziona

The second habit is taking multiple perspectives. The phrase “even when we disagree” is stated in the review, which lists it from the book. The disagreement is the material of the habit, not a reason to stop listening. The review’s summary does not spell out a mechanism for why this works. The reasoning given here is an inference: a view that clashes with yours is the one most likely to show a part of the situation your current frame leaves out.

Come farlo

1. Pick a disagreement that is live at work right now.
2. Write the other person’s position in terms they would accept as a fair account of it.
3. List one thing about the situation that their view shows and yours does not.
4. Say that back to them, and ask whether you have it right.

Prove scientifiche

The second habit, taking multiple perspectives, is named in the Integral Leadership Review summary (which gives the phrase “even when we disagree”) and in the Cultivating Leadership summary of Garvey Berger and Johnston (2015). The mechanism described in this practice is an inference from those summaries and was not stated by the authors in the sources read. (anecdotal)

Stating the other view fairly does not require agreeing with it, and it can be done in bad faith as a formality. The practice works only if you are genuinely looking for what the other view shows.

Fonti

• Integral Leadership Review (2015). Book review of Jennifer Garvey Berger and Keith Johnston, Simple Habits for Complex Times: Powerful Practices for Leaders.
• Cultivating Leadership, book page for Simple Habits for Complex Times (Garvey Berger & Johnston), accessed 2026-10-14.

Errore comune

Listening to the other view looking for the flaw you can answer, which keeps your own frame as the only one in the room.