Resolving Perspective Differences by “Taking the Other’s Position”

Resolving Perspective Differences by “Taking the Other’s Position”

 

Sukjae Lee, Ph.D.
Creator of the Effectiveness Coaching Methodology
February 14, 2026

 

This is a case of coaching a senior executive at a large corporation to identify a critical behavior necessary to achieve desired results and to facilitate behavioral change so that the critical behavior would be successfully implemented. Readers will be able to observe the entire process through which behavioral change unfolded. A process-oriented approach was applied to ensure that the critical behavior was effectively promoted.

The coach first analyzed the coaching context surrounding the executive. Next, a structured coaching design was developed to guide the process from initiation to closure. The basic components of the coaching design included:

• Identifying the change demand
• Setting change goals
• Conducting behavior change coaching
• Evaluating coaching outcomes

The company operates an annual executive coaching program. The primary purpose of introducing coaching is to support organizational leaders in responding to environmental change through self-development, leadership development, and effective organizational management. In a highly competitive, performance-driven culture, top management recognized coaching as an effective support program to help leaders avoid burnout and maintain stable self-management.

 

Client Background

The client, Executive Park Jong-gil (pseudonym), is globally recognized for his expertise in a specific technical domain. However, he was experiencing significant interpersonal conflict with a small number of team members regarding talent management.

He had advanced to his current position by overcoming intense competition and by establishing a solid foundation in what had once been an undeveloped technical field. Within this environment, he developed a strong personal value system that guided his thinking and behavior as a leader. He took pride in his lifestyle and leadership approach, believing it contributed positively to performance outcomes and talent development.

Recently, however, he had been experiencing recurring conflicts—both major and minor—with several team members. Although he believed he bore no responsibility, 360-degree feedback revealed partially negative perceptions. He found it difficult to empathize with or accept these ongoing conflicts and negative evaluations. He sought coaching to find clarity. His superior also recommended that he participate in the coaching program.

 

Coaching Design for Leadership Behavior Change

The standard design for leadership behavior change includes conducting a pre-coaching diagnostic assessment and administering the same assessment at the conclusion (or toward the end) of coaching to examine differences. This is a pre–post single-group design.

The coaching consisted of eight sessions.
It was individual coaching, each session lasting 1.5 hours.
Meetings were held biweekly.

 

Step 1: Identifying the Change Demand

To identify the executive’s developmental needs, the Effective Leadership Assessment (ELA)—a 360-degree leadership diagnostic tool—was administered. In addition, face-to-face interviews were conducted with both the executive and his supervisor.

To clarify the scope of inquiry, the HR leader responsible for the coaching initiative was interviewed to understand the organization’s expectations. The interview scope included:

• Identifying change demands based on diagnostics and interviews
• Collecting input from HR executives and practitioners
• Integrating identified change demands
• Aligning and confirming the direction and content of change with the client

 

Findings from 360 Interviews and ELA

Strengths

• Strong technical leadership
• High drive and results orientation
• Excellent problem-solving ability in rapidly changing technical environments
• Sound judgment and quick decision-making

Development Areas

• Difficulty demonstrating flexibility when opinions and interests sharply conflict
• Tendency not to wait for others to resolve issues independently
• Immediate feedback delivery of his own viewpoints
• Providing answers rather than drawing out team members’ potential
• Perceived by some team members as overly assertive, controlling, and authoritarian

 

Deriving the Critical Behavior

Stakeholders described the executive as highly self-confident. However, they suggested that he needed to recognize how his emotional reactions and conflicts impacted others and respond more effectively.

Prior to the first session, I drafted a preliminary proposal of potential critical behaviors based on the diagnostic and interview results. Some clients struggle to articulate critical behaviors independently, so this preparation provides indirect support.

In the first session, I debriefed the diagnostic and interview findings. Following a standardized four-step process for deriving critical behavior, we engaged in structured coaching dialogue. Through this process, the executive identified and confirmed the following critical behavior:

“Taking the other’s position.”

Critical behavior is finalized no later than the second coaching session.

 

Step 2: Setting the Change Goal

Once the critical behavior is defined, a written change goal statement is developed. Typically, a draft is prepared before Session 2 and finalized during Session 2.

The coach develops a logic to help the client achieve the goal successfully. Rather than explicitly presenting theoretical models, I explain the logic conversationally:

“We first identify the change demands perceived by you and your stakeholders, including your supervisor. Then we define the desired outcome for this coaching engagement. To achieve that outcome, it is critical to successfully implement behaviors that connect the change demand to the desired result. The effectiveness of coaching depends on how well we link ‘Change Demand – Critical Behavior – Desired Result.’ Therefore, this logic must be clearly reflected in your change goal statement.”

 

Finalized Change Goal and Critical Behavior

Change Goal
Increase the proportion of my leadership role devoted to supporting team members in producing results, rather than focusing solely on being the direct producer of performance outcomes.

Critical Behavior
When perspectives conflict, temporarily set aside my own certainty and consciously take the other person’s position.
Understand the perspective of challenging middle managers and engage in empathic communication.

 

Step 3: Behavior Change Coaching

Out of eight sessions, six focused on behavior change.

Two primary coaching techniques were used:

1. Perspective-Taking (“Taking the Other’s Position”)
2. The Empty Chair Technique

At the end of each session, I asked the executive to reflect on the extent to which his implementation efforts were aligned with the coaching goal.

 

Coach Self-Check

The coach also reflected on the following:

• Did the behavior change coaching activate the success principles?
• Did I fulfill my responsibility to help the executive achieve his coaching goals?
• Were appropriate coaching tools applied effectively?
• Was outcome data collected through interviews?

Perspective-Taking

As a method for shifting rigid perspectives, we applied structured perspective-taking (Lee, 2020b). The executive practiced viewing situations from the standpoint of the opposing party.

 

The Empty Chair Technique

Originally developed by Gestalt theorist Fritz Perls (Corey, 2005), this role-play technique involves placing an empty chair in front of the client, imagining that a conflicted team member is seated there, and engaging in emotional dialogue.

The executive reenacted conflicts identified through diagnostics, interviews, and coaching conversations. He practiced monologues, dialogues, and role reversals.

 

Monitoring Progress

To systematically track progress, each session began by reviewing action steps from the previous session and identifying newly developed changes. The executive shared reflections, insights, and emotional experiences encountered during implementation.

At the end of each session, I asked:

“Did today’s conversation help you move toward your coaching goal? If so, in what way?”

 

Step 4: Evaluating Coaching Outcomes

The leadership diagnostic (ELA) administered at the beginning was re-administered. Coaching outcomes were assessed through:

• Client self-evaluation
• Coach feedback

The final session typically lasted 1.5 hours (extended to 2 hours with client consent if necessary).

 

Quantitative Evaluation

Using 360-degree diagnostics, coaching effectiveness was assessed by examining changes in:

• Pre–post mean scores
• Gap between self-ratings and others’ ratings

Improvement is indicated when self–other perception gaps narrow.

 

Results

When perspectives conflicted, the executive practiced perspective-taking and consciously lowering his certainty. Participation in empty-chair role-play was helpful. If effective, his “self-confidence” score would decrease post-coaching (reflecting reduced over-assertiveness), and the self–other gap would narrow.

Results showed:

• Lower self-confidence scores post-coaching
• Reduced self–other gap

This indicated positive coaching effects.

Additionally, emotional management and conflict management scores improved. The gap between self and others further decreased post-coaching.

Coaching was therefore deemed effective.

 

[Table 1] Pre–Post Mean Scores and Self–Other Gaps
(5-point scale: 1 = Not at all, 5 = Very much so)

 

Qualitative Evaluation

Stakeholder feedback and client self-feedback were also collected.

The executive’s self-reflection was as follows:

“Through one-on-one meetings with a few team members, I gained confidence in communicating more effectively. I also made deliberate efforts to communicate with a challenging middle manager whom I had previously avoided. This became an opportunity to value others’ perspectives more seriously. When I felt 100% certain, I practiced lowering my certainty by 20%. This helped reduce my impatience driven by results-oriented thinking. I am gradually shifting from an evaluative communication style to one that pays closer attention to the work process and genuine dialogue.”

 

This case illustrates how a structured process linking Change Demand – Critical Behavior – Desired Result can produce measurable behavioral transformation in leadership contexts. It demonstrates that perspective-taking, when systematically coached and reinforced, can meaningfully reduce conflict and enhance leadership effectiveness.