Inside Out

Heard at a conference this weekend:

“…and of course you can make the task harder by giving a vaguer brief.”

No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! No! and No!

Giving a vague brief doesn’t make tasks harder, it makes them more frustrating. Participants spend more time looking to their facilitators to get clarification about what they need to do than looking at themselves or each other. It puts you in the position of power and takes away their ability to operate without your intervention.

By all means make your tasks harder, but at least have enough respect for your participants to make the briefs clear.

Photo from Martin Kingsley’s flickrstream under CC BY 2.0.

We’ve had a number of odd situations on Totem courses.

We’ve had Mission Specialists from the Welsh Space Agency chasing members of the Ukrainian Warfare Department across the hills of Snowdonia.

We’ve had loyal Comrades of the People’s Liberated Taldovian State recovering gold from the bottom of the Cripsian Sea.

We’ve helped apprentices recover the parts of a top secret battery from across Dartmoor.

(However, unlike one of the organsations we work with, we haven’t, to date, had anyone arrested for  impersonating a member of the local CID.)

Yesterday, Lorna, (whose producing some great material at the moment) has come up with a team exercise that makes our situations look humdrum and everyday.

Read More »

As companies start to feel the effects of this economic downturn, their thoughts turn to their bottom line. Items considered non-essential to core business activities go by the wayside in the quest to reduce outgoings. Many managers see training as falling within that category, nice to have but can do without.

They’re wrong.

Read More »

Review is a key tool for almost all forms of learning. Whether you call it an “after action report” or a “personal reflection”, we must review our actions if we are to learn from them.

Choosing the right form of review is a skilled task, more art than science. Here are 10 questions to ask yourself before you dive into your next review

1. Do we want to review what just happened?

Sometimes it’s important to review as a group, sometimes it’s best to let the action speak for itself. The individual’s reflection over time may be enough.

2. Are we ready to review yet?

Even if we want to review the action, are the participants in a state where it will be useful? Could they do with more time to process what just happened or are they bursting to share their thoughts?

3. Is this the right time to review?

Even if we feel ready to review what just happened, is it worth leaving until we have eaten or are less tired, or do we need to capture the learning now?

4. Are we in the right location to review?

Sometimes it helps to be at the scene of the action, sometimes some distance is useful. Is this setting inspirational, will it help anchor the learning. Are there distractions and are they useful?

5. Are the right people here to ensure a successful review?

Do we need the whole group here? Should we split into smaller groups? Do some people need to reflect on their own? With or without leaders/trainers?

6. What role will I have in the review?

Should I contribute? Facilitate? Sit quietly? Be absent? Observe?

7. What format and structure will the review take?

Options include: Group discussion, written reports, structured notes, questionnaires, presentations, personal conversations, pictures, slideshows.

8. What tools do I have available to me during the review?

Do I have access to exercises, models, pictures and theories that might help explain my points, or help others to make theirs?

9. Are we going to capture the review for further review?

Is the review of interest to anyone other than the participants? Will they want a chance to revisit the review again later? Will they be building on this review?

10. If we are, how?

Sometimes taking notes is useful, what about video? Is there a formal system in place for reflection that needs to be completed?

Takes 20-30 minutes

Resources

A set of poker chips. 200 in four colours works fine, the less you have in more limited colours, the harder the task will be.

Instructions For Tutor

Give the group a box of poker chips. Tell them

“You have 20 minutes to create a means of transferring a message from one half of the group to the other using only the chips placed on the table.

No paper or pencils are permitted.

After 20 minutes I will split the group in two and half of you will be asked to leave the room. I will give the remaining participants a 20-30 letter message that may involve letters or numbers but no punctuation, which you must pass to the other group using only the poker chips”

Facilitate the creation of the code. This is where the bulk of the team dynamics and personal development takes place as the participants try to refine their aim, then develop the code and finally to ensure that everyoe understands the code.

Use whatever means you like to capture this discussion, we have successfully used video, notes, phrases used jotted on a blackboard and having observers taken from within the group.

When they have a code, split the group into two and send half out of the room. Give the other half a short (20-30 letter) message on a piece of paper and help them encode it.

The messages are best if they have several words, and aren’t too easy to guess once you have 2-3 of the words. We’ve used short Shakespeare quotes and the names of the building we are in.

Invite the other half back in to decode it and ensure that there is no  cheating.

Swap the two halves of the group over and try with a different message.

Using it elsewhere

We have used variants of this task in a number of places.

• On a beach with different coloured stones.
• In a forest using sticks.
• On a draughts (checkers) board using the pieces.
• In a park using “whatever you can find”.
• In a mountain campsite using “the contents of your rucksack”.

Doing it outside makes it a much more physical, tactile task and adds whole new areas of discussion such as role allocation “You go and collect black stones” or even “What shall we use?”.

We’ve just arrived home from the Sonata Nationals, a yacht racing event that this year was held in Poole. The Sonata is 6.9m boat that is very seaworthy and fast for its size.

We were blessed with sunshine and a good amount of wind which meant the racing amongst this very competitive fleet was close, intense and exciting. In this type of event there aren’t many tactics, the short courses and identical boats mean that most races are won by making your boat go faster through the water. A 1% drop in performance will cost you 60m over the race and probably about 5-6 places.

What struck me out on the water that a small yacht like the Sonata, normally crewed by 3 or 4 people, was a perfect medium for team building.

Read More »

If you watch any group discussion where more than 3-4 people are trying to achieve something, an interesting effect occurs. The group often start out with everyone contributing but after an initial period of politeness (Tuckman’s forming stage) the group begin to resemble a fried egg. Both physically and conceptually, people place themselves either in the yolk, the white, or outside the egg entirely.

Read More »