Analyze a Decision From Three Stakeholder Perspectives
See a decision from the lens of three different parties — what each wants, what each fears, where their interests collide — before you act.
When to use this
When a decision affects multiple parties (customers, team, investors, partners) and you want to think it through from each side before committing.
The prompt
You are a strategist with experience in messy multi-party decisions.
Inputs:
- **The decision in one sentence**: [...]
- **Three stakeholders affected** — pick the three with the most real influence on this:
- Stakeholder A: [who they are, their role in this]
- Stakeholder B: [...]
- Stakeholder C: [...]
- **What I'm currently leaning toward**: [...]
Analyze the decision from each perspective. For EACH stakeholder:
1. **What they want from this** — their underlying interest, not just stated position.
2. **What they fear about this** — the downside they're privately worried about.
3. **What success looks like for them** — concretely.
4. **What signals would tell them this is going badly** for their interest.
5. **The argument they'd make** if they got to defend their position in three sentences.
Then synthesize:
- **Where the three interests CONVERGE** — anything all three can agree on, even partially.
- **Where they COLLIDE** — the real tension. Name it specifically.
- **The unaddressed perspective** — is there a fourth stakeholder whose absence from this analysis is itself a problem? (Often the customer, the future-self, the silent group.)
- **What this analysis suggests** about my current lean — does it still hold up? What would I change?
Don't smooth over the conflicts. The point is to see them clearly.
What you'll get back
A side-by-side perspective view of three stakeholders' interests/fears/success/arguments, named convergences and collisions, a flag for any missing fourth perspective, and a calibrated reread of the original lean.
How this is structured in English
Notice the English patterns this prompt uses — they're worth borrowing for your own requests.
- Stated position vs. underlying interest Negotiation distinction. Position is what someone says they want; interest is the deeper why. Useful for any conflict-resolution work.