Real Time Strategy For the Team: subgroups?

This topic contains 3 replies, has 3 voices, and was last updated by  Stephen Dann 7 months ago.

  • Author
    Posts
  • #10372
     hoegaerts hans 
    Participant

    Hi everyone

    I’m not sure it is tackled in other topics yet, but I certainly can’t find the specifics. I can find info about working in small groups in LSP settings, but I’m finding it hard to see it for the RTS workshop. Sharing info and playing the past and emergence should really be done with everyone involved I think. Adding a facilitator does not always help the ability of the group to keep contact with what is happening when the group exceeds 12 – 14 people it seems.

    I have an assignment where my client added 3 more people, so I’m in with 16 people for what I want to be a RTS setting.

    Anyone has experience with this? Tnx for your sharing of experience!

    #10374
     Eli De Friend 
    Moderator

    Hi Hans,
    There’s not much point in repeating what I have already said in other posts. Certainly having 2 facilitators is better than one, and with 16 participants, you may end up working with 4 tables. With one client I had a project team of about the same number of people and we split them into two large tables of 8, until the end of the day, when they all came together, we physically put the tables together and the whole project team built a shared model and then we filmed the team’s story and played it to senior management at an executive dinner later that evening.
    One thing that, as facilitators, we may sometimes forget, is that the “teams” we meet in the workshop room do not necessarily all work with each other on daily basis. The project manager may sit regularly with the financial director, the chief architect and the project assistant, but not necessarily with the foreman in charge of factory floor workers. Meanwhile the engineer, may spend a lot of time with the architect and the factory floor workers, but doesn’t deal with the financial manager or the project assistant. My point is that splitting up the team is not a bad thing to do and may well be recommended if you can force people who don’t work together on a daily basis to sit, chat, ponder and build together at one table and split up the people who sit in front of each other all day in the office.

    What is great about sub-groups is that usually there are a lot of common themes coming about of the individual tables – this is a fantastic message to learn for all participants: “even when we work in our silos, we are still on the same page”.

    In any case, good luck with your workshop preparation.

    Eli

    #10375
     Eli De Friend 
    Moderator

    Hi Hans,
    There’s not much point in repeating what I have already said in other posts. Certainly having 2 facilitators is better than one, and with 16 participants, you may end up working with 4 tables. With one client I had a project team of about the same number of people and we split them into two large tables of 8, until the end of the day, when they all came together, we physically put the tables together and the whole project team built a shared model and then we filmed the team’s story and played it to senior management at an executive dinner later that evening.
    One thing that, as facilitators, we may sometimes forget, is that the “teams” we meet in the workshop room do not necessarily all work with each other on daily basis. The project manager may sit regularly with the financial director, the chief architect and the project assistant, but not necessarily with the foreman in charge of factory floor workers. Meanwhile the engineer, may spend a lot of time with the architect and the factory floor workers, but doesn’t deal with the financial manager or the project assistant. My point is that splitting up the team is not a bad thing to do and may well be recommended if you can force people who don’t work together on a daily basis to sit, chat, ponder and build together at one table and split up the people who sit in front of each other all day in the office.

    What is great about sub-groups is that usually there are a lot of common themes coming about of the individual tables – this is a fantastic message to learn for all participants: “even when we work in our silos, we are still on the same page”.

    In any case, good luck with your workshop preparation.

    Eli

    #10381
     Stephen Dann 
    Participant

    Backing up what Eli said about the split being beneficial – a team build in a 4×4, then 2 x 8, then 1 x 16 structure will have each group having a chance to generate multiple iterations of their models and explanations.

    It might be worth tasking each team with explaining their group model, and the listening teams with a note taking exercise so the explanation of A is recorded by B,C,D and then the perceptions of each round can be reviewed later.

Viewing 4 posts - 1 through 4 (of 4 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.

Send a question

We are a group of volunteers and may not respond right away. But soon! :-)

Sending

©2009-2018 SeriousPlayPro.com. SeriousPlayPro.com links professional facilitators using LEGO® SERIOUS PLAY® methodology. It is not affiliated with LEGO. Check LEGO SERIOUS PLAY open source for details or get in touch with us.

See also our Privacy Policy and Frequently Asked Questions about LEGO SERIOUS PLAY

Log in with your credentials

or    

Forgot your details?

Create Account