Role Switch
Table of Contents
- Workflow
- Role Selection Patterns
- Synthesis Principles
- Common Patterns
- Guardrails
- Quick Reference
Workflow
Copy this checklist and track your progress:
Role Switch Progress:
- [ ] Step 1: Frame the decision or situation
- [ ] Step 2: Select relevant roles
- [ ] Step 3: Inhabit each role's perspective
- [ ] Step 4: Surface tensions and tradeoffs
- [ ] Step 5: Synthesize alignment and path forward
Step 1: Frame the decision or situation
Clarify what's being decided, key constraints (time, budget, scope), and why alignment matters. See Common Patterns for decision framing by type.
Step 2: Select relevant roles
Choose 3-6 roles with different goals, incentives, or constraints. See Role Selection Patterns for stakeholder mapping. For complex multi-stakeholder decisions → Study resources/methodology.md for RACI + power-interest analysis.
Step 3: Inhabit each role's perspective
For each role, articulate: what they optimize for, what they fear, how they measure success, what constraints they face. Use resources/template.md for structured analysis. For realistic roleplay → See resources/methodology.md for cognitive empathy techniques.
Step 4: Surface tensions and tradeoffs
Identify where perspectives conflict, map incompatible goals, articulate explicit tradeoffs. See Synthesis Principles for tension analysis.
Step 5: Synthesize alignment and path forward
Find common ground, propose resolutions that address core concerns, sequence decisions to build momentum. Self-check using resources/evaluators/rubric_role_switch.json. Minimum standard: Average score ≥ 3.5.
Role Selection Patterns
Classic product triad (most common):
- Engineering: Feasibility, technical debt, system complexity, maintainability
- Product: User value, roadmap prioritization, market timing, feature completeness
- Design: User experience, accessibility, consistency, delight
Business decision quads:
- Finance: Cost, ROI, cash flow, unit economics, margin
- Sales: Customer acquisition, deal closure, competitive positioning, quota attainment
- Marketing: Brand perception, customer lifetime value, positioning, conversion funnel
- Operations: Scalability, process efficiency, risk management, resource utilization
Regulatory/compliance contexts:
- Legal: Risk mitigation, liability, contract terms, IP protection
- Compliance: Regulatory adherence, audit trail, policy enforcement, certification
- Privacy/Security: Data protection, threat model, access control, incident response
- Ethics: Fairness, transparency, stakeholder impact, values alignment
External stakeholders:
- End Users: Usability, reliability, cost, privacy, delight
- Customers (B2B): Integration ease, support quality, vendor stability, total cost of ownership
- Partners: Revenue share, mutual value, integration burden, strategic alignment
- Regulators: Public interest, safety, competition, transparency
Synthesis Principles
Finding common ground:
- Shared goals: What do all roles ultimately want? (e.g., company success, customer satisfaction)
- Compatible sub-goals: Where do objectives align even if paths differ?
- Mutual fears: What do all roles want to avoid? (e.g., reputational damage, security breach)
Resolving conflicts:
- Sequential decisions: "Do X first (satisfies role A), then Y (satisfies role B)" (e.g., pilot then scale)
- Hybrid approaches: Combine elements from multiple perspectives (e.g., freemium = marketing + finance)
- Constraints as creativity: Use one role's limits to sharpen another's solution (e.g., budget constraint forces prioritization)
- Risk mitigation: Address fears with safeguards (e.g., eng fears tech debt → schedule refactoring sprint)
When perspectives are truly incompatible:
- Escalate decision: Flag for leadership with clear tradeoff framing
- Run experiment: Pilot to gather data, convert opinions to evidence
- Decouple decisions: Split into multiple decisions with different owners
- Accept tradeoff explicitly: Document the choice and reasoning for future reference
Common Patterns
Pattern 1: Build vs Buy Decisions
- Roles: Engineering (control, customization), Finance (TCO), Product (time-to-market), Legal (vendor risk), Operations (support burden)
- Typical tensions: Eng wants control, Finance sees build cost underestimation, PM sees opportunity cost of delay
- Synthesis paths: Pilot buy option with build fallback, build core/buy periphery, time-box build with buy backstop
Pattern 2: Feature Prioritization
- Roles: PM (roadmap vision), Engineering (technical feasibility), Design (UX quality), Sales (customer requests), Users (actual need)
- Typical tensions: Sales wants everything promised, Eng sees scope creep, Users want simplicity, PM balances all
- Synthesis paths: MoSCoW prioritization (must/should/could/won't), release in phases, v1 vs v2 scoping
Pattern 3: Pricing Strategy
- Roles: Finance (margin), Marketing (positioning), Sales (close rate), Customers (value perception), Product (feature gating)
- Typical tensions: Finance wants premium, Sales wants competitive, Marketing wants simple, Product wants value-based tiers
- Synthesis paths: Tiered pricing (serves multiple segments), usage-based (aligns value), anchoring (premium + standard)
Pattern 4: Organizational Change (e.g., return-to-office)
- Roles: Leadership (collaboration), Employees (flexibility), HR (retention), Finance (real estate cost), Managers (productivity)
- Typical tensions: Leadership sees serendipity loss, Employees see autonomy loss, Finance sees sunk cost, HR sees turnover
- Synthesis paths: Hybrid model (balance), role-based policy (nuance), trial periods (data-driven), opt-in incentives (voluntary)
Pattern 5: Technical Migration
- Roles: Engineering (technical improvement), PM (feature freeze), Users (potential downtime), DevOps (operational risk), Finance (ROI)
- Typical tensions: Eng sees long-term benefit, PM sees short-term cost, Users fear disruption, Finance wants ROI proof
- Synthesis paths: Incremental migration (reduce risk), feature parity first (minimize disruption), ROI projection (justify investment)
Guardrails
Avoid strawman perspectives:
- Don't caricature roles (e.g., "Finance only cares about cost cutting")
- Inhabit perspective charitably—what's the strongest version of this viewpoint?
- Seek conflicting evidence to your own bias
Distinguish position from interest:
- Position: What they say they want (surface demand)
- Interest: Why they want it (underlying need)
- Example: "I want this feature" (position) because "customers are churning" (interest = retention)
- Synthesis works at interest level, not position level
Acknowledge information asymmetry:
- Some roles have context others lack (e.g., Legal sees confidential liability exposure)
- Flag assumptions: "If Legal has info we don't, that could change this analysis"
- Invite real stakeholders to validate your perspective-taking
Don't replace actual stakeholder input:
- Role-switch is for preparing conversations, not replacing them
- Use to pressure-test before presenting, not as substitute for gathering input
- Best used when stakeholder access is limited or to refine proposals before socializing
Power dynamics matter:
- Not all perspectives carry equal weight in decision-making (hierarchy, expertise, accountability)
- Synthesis should acknowledge who has decision authority
- Don't assume consensus is always possible or desirable
Quick Reference
Resources:
5-Step Process: Frame Decision → Select Roles → Inhabit Perspectives → Surface Tensions → Synthesize Alignment
Role selection: Choose 3-6 roles with different goals, incentives, constraints
Synthesis principles: Find shared goals, resolve conflicts (sequential, hybrid, constraints as creativity), escalate when incompatible
Avoid: Strawman perspectives, position vs interest confusion, replacing actual stakeholder input