Multi-Perspective Analysis Skill

Assemble and coordinate teams of virtual expert personas to analyze complex problems from multiple perspectives, generating insights unavailable from any single viewpoint.

When to Use This Skill

• Complex architectural decisions requiring diverse expertise
• Strategic planning needing multiple domain perspectives
• Problems spanning multiple technical or business domains
• Decisions with competing valid approaches
• Situations requiring productive disagreement to find best solutions

Team Assembly Framework

Complexity Scaling

Team Composition Template

## [Problem Domain] Expert Team

**Mission**: [Clear statement of team purpose]

### Team Composition

#### [Expert Title] (ID)
**Background**: [Relevant expertise]
**Domain Vocabulary**: [5-7 key terms]
**Characteristic Question**: "[What they always ask]"
**Analytical Lens**: [Unique perspective]

Orchestration Patterns

Sequential Pattern

Best for: Problems with clear dependency chains

Expert A → Expert B → Expert C → Synthesis
(Each builds on previous insights)

Parallel Pattern

Best for: Problems needing diverse simultaneous perspectives

Expert A ─┐
Expert B ─┼→ Synthesis
Expert C ─┘
(Independent analysis, combined insights)

Dialectical Pattern

Best for: Problems with competing valid approaches

Thesis (Expert A) ←→ Antithesis (Expert B) → Synthesis
(Structured opposition yields breakthrough)

Hierarchical Pattern

Best for: Complex multi-level decisions

Strategic Layer (Experts A, B)
        ↓
Tactical Layer (Experts C, D, E)
        ↓
Operational Layer (Experts F, G)
        ↓
    Synthesis

Voice Differentiation Guidelines

Each expert maintains distinct:

• Vocabulary: 10-15 domain-specific terms
• Questions: 2-3 signature questions they always ask
• Metaphors: Teaching analogies from their field
• Reasoning: Characteristic analytical patterns

Expert Contribution Template

### [Expert Title] Perspective

Looking at this through my lens as a [role], I notice...

**Key Insight**: [Primary contribution from this perspective]
**Trade-off Identified**: [What this view reveals about tensions]
**Recommendation**: [Actionable guidance from this expertise]
**Next Question**: [What this reveals we should explore]

Disagreement Protocol

Intensity Levels

1. Gentle (refinement-focused)

   • “This approach has merit, but what if…”
   • Edge case identification, optimization suggestions

2. Systematic (methodology-challenging)

   • “While the goal is sound, I question whether…”
   • Alternative framework proposals, evidence evaluation

3. Rigorous (premise-challenging)

   • “I fundamentally question whether we’re solving the right problem…”
   • Paradigm alternatives, success criteria redefinition

4. Paradigmatic (worldview-challenging)

   • “What if everything we think we know is wrong?”
   • Revolutionary approaches, constraint elimination

Synthesis Template

## Expert Team Synthesis

### Convergent Insights
[Where experts agree and why this matters]

### Creative Tensions
[Where perspectives productively differ]
- Tension 1: [Expert A] vs [Expert B] on [issue]
- Resolution approach: [How to honor both]

### Integrated Solution
[Unified approach that honors multiple viewpoints]

### Emergent Discoveries
[Insights that emerged only from combining perspectives]

### Implementation Path
1. [First action]
2. [Second action]
3. [Third action]

Success Indicators

• Generation of insights unavailable from single perspectives
• Successful assumption challenging leading to better solutions
• Effective voice differentiation across experts
• Productive disagreement resolved into robust outcomes
• Clear actionable recommendations with trade-off awareness