Facilitator Toolkit : Games for Emerging

The 5 Whys

Build the Checklist

Elevator Pitch

Force Field Analysis

Iceberg

LEGO

Lens and Window

Scenario Planning

SWOT Analysis

Games for emerging make and break patterns.  They help you navigate, combine, and interpret the ideas you developed in the diverge phase to enable new ideas to emerge in surprising ways.  

Additional ideas can be found in GATHER and in Gamestorming.

Objective: Similar to the Iceberg, The 5 Whys helps move beyond the surface of a problem and discover the root cause.  In addressing a problem at its source, a more sustainable solution can be developed.  

Numbmer of players: 5-10

How to play:

• Write the problem statement on a sheet of flip-chart paper and display in a clearly visible space
• Have each participant take 5 Post-its and label them 1 through 5
• Participants should review the problem statement, ask themselves why it’s a problem, and write their response on Post-it 1
• Next, each participant asks themselves why the answer on Post-it 1 is true and write their response on Post-it 2
• Continue this process through Post-it 5
• Below the problem statement, write the word “Why?” five times in a column and draw lines to create columns for each player’s set of responses, have participants post their Post-its
• Review the columns and note commonalities and differences.
• Rewrite the problem statement on a new sheet of flip-chart paper and have the group build consensus on which of the five “Whys” offer the most meaningful insight. Write these on new Post-its and display under the problem statement.
• Have a discussion on “what’s next”

Encourage players to be honest and to write the first things that come to mind each time they ask themselves “Why,” as opposed to jumping to their perceived root of the problem.  Don’t feel that you need to fix the number of “Whys” to 5, if more “Whys” are necessary, keep going.  

Objective: Building a checklist forces the group to discuss the order and importance of certain tasks in tackling a topic.  This activity can be used to develop an action plan for moving forward in a project.

Number of players: A small team with deep experience in the task at hand

Duration: 1 hour or more, depending on the task

How to play: It is most useful to create the checklist in order of operation, but at times, ranking or prioritizing a list of ideas is more appropriate.

• Introduce the topic -- “You will be creating a checklist for [reaching 80% renewables by 2050]”
• Have participants brainstorm, on Post-its, tasks that are concrete and measurable
• Once a pool of ideas has been generated, do one of the following:
• Have the group order the tasks into a procedure
• Have the group force-rank the tasks by order of importance (this can allow some of the unimportant items to be removed)

The real progress will be made during the discussion and reflection that stem from the initial brainstorming.  This is likely where new ideas will surface and be added to the checklist.

Objective: When developing and communicating a vision for something (not just a new product), a group will benefit from writing their elevator pitch.  The pitch must be short enough to deliver in an elevator ride but also contain a description of the problem, how you’re solving it, and a benefit that distinguishes it from other ideas.  

Number of players: Can be done individually, or with a small working group

Duration: At least 90 minutes for the entire process.  Consider a short break after the initial idea generation is complete.

How to play: This activity includes a generating and a formative phase.

Generating phase.  Write the following headers in sequence on flip charts:

• Who is the target customer?
• What is the customer need?
• What is the product name?
• What is the market category?
• What is its key benefit?
• Who or what is the competition?
• What is the product’s unique differentiator?

These will become the elements of the elevator pitch: For [target customer], who has [customer need], [product name] is a [market category] that [one key benefit]. Unlike [competition], the product [unique differentiator].

Have participants brainstorm ideas for each category on Post-its. Once all ideas are up, discuss any areas of difficulty and then prioritize ideas in each category.  

Formative phase.  Break the group into small groups, pairs, or individuals and give them 15 minutes to write the elevator pitch.  Each group presents and the activity is complete when there is a strong consensus on what the pitch should and should not contain.  

Objective: This game is designed to evaluate the forces that affect change in an organization and ultimately see surrounding system to steer the change in the direction you want to move.

Number of players: 5-30

Duration of play: 30 minutes to 1.5 hours

How to play:

• Before the meeting, decide on a potential change associated with the topic of the meeting.  Draw a representation of this change on a large sheet of paper or a whiteboard.  
• On the top left of the page, write the phrase “Forces FOR Change.”  On the top right, write “Forces AGAINST Change”
• Draw large arrows on both sides pointing toward the image in the middle, make the arrows large enough to contain writing
• Introduce the change topic and explain that the goal of the game is to evaluate the feasibility of that change
• Give participants 5-10 minutes to quietly generate ideas (one per Post-it) about what elements are driving the change
• Give participants 5-10 minutes to quietly generate ideas about what elements are restraining the change
• Have participants rank each of their ideas for and against change on a scale of 1-5 with 1 being a weak force and 5 being a strong force and add that number to the Post-it
• Gather all Post-its FOR change and post them to a surface visible by all players
• With the group’s input, cluster the ideas based on their affinity to other ideas and identify overarching categories for each cluster (don’t completely overlook outliers)
• Write each category in the arrows on the main poster and then get an average numeric score for each
• Repeat the steps for notes generated AGAINST change
• Summarize overall findings with the group, including numeric totals, and discuss the implications of whether change should occur

If you want to take the evaluation further, have participants identify meta-categories that are a level higher -- politics, economics, company culture, etc.  Meta-categories can help identify where the bulk of the evaluation needs to be focused.  

Objective: The iceberg will help participants start thinking on a whole systems level.  Only 10% of an iceberg is visible from the surface while the remaining 90% lies below the waterline.  Translate this idea to the topic of the meeting, the problem you’re addressing is the 10%, to get to the underlying causes, you must dig down to the 90% that isn’t tangible: the patterns, structures, and mental models that manifest themselves in the visible problem.  

How to play: Draw the iceberg on a flip chart and have your participants populate the chart with Post-its containing ideas and observations about the problem in question.  

• Events: one-time occurrences that tell us something about the problem you’re addressing (ie. newspaper headlines or stories)
• Patterns: repeating events.  With enough time, all significant events will show up in some sort of pattern
• Structures: something that underlies a pattern and is truly structural (ie. policies, laws, rules, geography, etc.)
• Mental Model: an idea, belief, or paradigm: why does the structure exist?

For maximum impact, look for leverage points at the levels of structures and mental models.  This is where action will cause a systemic impact.  

This a summary of the Reos tool, the complete version is attached.  

Objective: To create a three-dimensional model of a desired future state.

Number of players: 8-20

Duration of play: 45 minutes to 1.5 hours

How to play:

• Start with a topic that would benefit from the group advancing it to a desired future state (ie. a community microgrid)
• Break the group into groups of three or four and give them 10-15 minutes build the ideal world out of LEGO Blocks.  They can include people, scenes, buildings, products, features, basically anything necessary to create an idealized version of the topic
• Give each team five minutes to create a slogan to summarize what they’ve built
• Have each team present their world and give insight into what it offers.  Make note of any recurring themes or parallel features.

Objective: Constricting participants to view the problem from a limited frame of context, and often an unfamiliar frame of context, will ultimately lead to creative solutions.  

How to play:

• Before the meeting, break apart the problem you’re trying to solve into several different windows -- particular physical solutions or problem statements -- and lenses -- specific viewpoints through which to think about the problem (see the Autocomposites example)  
• Structure the sessions as a round robin to get a fresh mix of participants in each group
• Once each window has been viewed through each lens, come together to discuss the ideas as a group

Objective: Scenario planning has its roots in military intelligence and gained popularity in the 70’s as Royal Dutch Shell attributed it’s ability to bounce back from oil price hikes to scenario planning.  

Scenarios help organizations understand how the world might appear decades ahead.  This allows improved awareness around issues that could become increasingly important to society, thinking through best case and worst case scenarios.  Through scenario planning, organizations may find it easier to recognize impending disruptions in their operating environment, such as political changes or recessions, and increase resilience to sudden changes caused by unexpected events and crises.

How to play: This is a high-level overview of the steps. I suggest reading the article found here for more detail.  And you can read through a full history and explanation of steps on wikipedia.

• State the focal issue or decision facing the participants
• Have participants list the key factors that influence this decision
• List the driving forces that influence these key factors
• Rank the key factors and driving forces by importance and uncertainty
• Compose plots for alternate futures that could impact the decision. Develop a range of plausible scenarios whose differences all have a bearing on the decision at hand.  Commonly occurring plots include:
• Winners and losers - a zero sum plotline where the strong survive and the weak get weaker
• Challenge and response - adventure story of overcoming obstacles and being transformed in the process
• Evolution - slow change in growth or decline in response to environmental influences
• Evaluate the decision in each of the postulated scenarios
• Select indicators and signposts for each scenario: these will help provide advanced insight into which of the scenarios is actually unfolding and can provide a competitive advantage from knowing what the future holds

Objective: This is a long-standing technique of examining what participants have going for them, and what they could improve upon, in respect to a desired end state.  SWOT analysis provides an opportunity to gauge approaching opportunities and dangers, and assess the seriousness of the conditions that will affect the future.

Number of players: 5-20

Duration: 1-2 hours

How to play:

• Write the desired end state, with respect to your topic, on a piece of flip-chart paper
• Create a four-square quadrant using four sheets of flip-chart paper
• On the top left of the quadrant, write the word “STRENGTHS” and give participants 5-10 minutes to quietly brainstorm ideas on Post-its about the strengths the group has with respect to the desired end state
• On the bottom left, write the word “WEAKNESSES” and, again, have participants write ideas about weaknesses around the desired end state
• Repeat with “OPPORTUNITIES” on the top right and “THREATS” on the bottom right
• Note: if participants are reserved in suggesting weaknesses, frame the notion of a weakness as something that can be improved upon.  Similarly, a threat is something that can act as a catalyst for performance improvement.  The higher the quality of contributions, the better they will be able to evaluate what’s on the horizon.
• Gather the participants’ Post-it notes and post them on a flat surface near the quadrant, keeping the notes in their original groups
• Start with “STRENGTHS” and have the players collaborate to cluster and categorize ideas.  Repeat with each of the quadrant topics. Write the categories on the quadrants.
• Have participants dot vote to indicate the idea that is most relevant for each section
• Summarize the overall findings and have participants discuss the implications around the desired end state
• Engage the group in evaluating weaknesses and threats positively, for example, “How does this threat have the potential to make the solution stronger?”