Constructive Conversations
Constructive Conversations is a practice format in which participants learn to hold a real dialogue on a contested local issue: listening actively to someone who disagrees while still arguing their own position. It was developed by Madelinde Winnubst for the Transition Makers Toolbox of the University of Amsterdam. Participants first rehearse with a peer who deliberately takes the opposing side, then repeat the conversation with someone outside the group and ask that person whether they felt heard.
Facilitation script
- 1
Introduce the aim and the listening and advocacy tips. In groups of three or four, brainstorm contested local issues; each person chooses one and writes down their opinion.
20 min - 2
Pairs across groups: A asks B for their view, B argues the opposing side, A listens actively and then advocates. Swap roles after about 15 minutes.
30 min - 3
Written reflection on one's own and the partner's behaviour, followed by one minute of feedback each: what I appreciated, what I would like to see more of.
20 min - 4
Outside conversation: each person finds a partner outside the group, opens by asking for their view, and afterwards explains the purpose and asks whether they felt heard.
30 min - 5
Original groups share their outside experiences and prepare a short presentation of tips on listening and advocating.
30 min - 6
Groups present; collect the key tips on a flip chart and close with one thing each person will practise.
30 min
Tips
Check the issues before pairing: a topic works when the person cares about it and reasonable people disagree, and it fails when it is either trivial or tied to someone's identity in the room.
Insist that the conversation opens with a question to the other person, because that order is the core of the format.
Brief the outside conversation carefully, including how to approach someone politely, how to accept a refusal, and that the purpose must be disclosed before asking for feedback.
Common pitfalls
The partner playing the opposing side argues weakly or as a caricature, so the advocate never practises against a credible counter-position
Participants open with their own statement instead of a question, which turns the exercise into a debate and skips the listening it is meant to train
Listening is treated as waiting for a turn; without paraphrasing or follow-up questions the outside partner will report not feeling heard
The outside partner is never told the purpose, which leaves them feeling used and makes their feedback impossible to collect honestly
Issues are chosen that touch a participant's personal identity or safety, and the devil's-advocate round becomes hurtful instead of instructive
Variations
The outside conversation can also be set as homework, which gives people time to choose a partner: the first meeting then ends after the feedback step, at about 70 minutes, and the closing block of about 60 minutes moves to a second meeting. In an organisation, replace 'local issues' with contested internal topics and send people to colleagues in other departments. Remote groups rehearse in breakout pairs and hold the outside conversation by phone or video between two sessions. With an odd number, form one trio and add an observer who gives the feedback.
Where it fits
When to use it
A team is about to enter stakeholder, resident or customer conversations where it will meet real disagreement
Participants can listen well or argue well but struggle to do both in the same conversation
A course or programme deals with contested public issues and needs practice, not theory, in talking across differences
You have two to three hours and the freedom to send people out of the room
A group has become used to talking only with people who share its views
When not to use it
The group itself is in an active conflict that needs resolving; use a mediated or restorative dialogue format instead of a skills exercise
You only have an hour or cannot let people leave the room; run an Active Listening exercise in pairs
The aim is to explore a topic together without advocating positions; Bohm Dialogue or a Fishbowl fits better
Approaching outsiders is unsafe or inappropriate in the setting, for example on highly charged topics in a tense neighbourhood; keep the practice inside the group
Participants are obliged to represent an official line and cannot speak for themselves
Related methods
Frequently asked questions
What is Constructive Conversations?▾
Constructive Conversations is a practice format by Madelinde Winnubst from the Transition Makers Toolbox. Participants pick a contested local issue, rehearse a conversation with a peer who takes the opposite view on purpose, and then hold the same kind of conversation with someone outside the group. The goal is to combine active listening with clear advocacy of one's own position.
How long does it take?▾
The source timings add up to 2 hours 40 minutes, plus about 30 minutes of preparation for the facilitator. If the outside conversation is given as homework, the in-room part is shorter and the closing presentations move to a later meeting.
Why does the partner argue against their own opinion?▾
It guarantees that every participant meets real opposition, even in a group that largely agrees. It also gives the opposing partner practice in voicing a position they do not hold, which tends to make them more careful when they later argue against it.
What if nobody outside wants to talk?▾
Prepare participants for refusals and suggest easy first choices such as colleagues, housemates or neighbours. A short, polite opening that asks for someone's view on a concrete local topic usually works. People who find no partner in time can do the conversation after the session and report back.
How many participants does it need?▾
The source sets no fixed number. It needs at least two small groups so that pairs can form across groups, which means six people or more in practice. Larger groups work as long as the closing presentations are kept short.
Plan your next workshop with AI
Workshop Weaver helps you combine methods like Constructive Conversations into a complete, timed agenda in minutes.
Try it freeMethod descriptions on Workshop Weaver are original content written by our team, based on established facilitation practices. This method was inspired by work from Madelinde Winnubst, Transition Makers Toolbox (University of Amsterdam).