Xem mẫu

•SUPPLIES • One sheet of flip chart paper, masking tape, and felt-tipped markers. • Seven or more problems, case studies, or questions on the topic, prepared in advance by the facilitator. • An overhead projector (if using transparencies) or a newsprint flip chart and felt-tipped markers. • Paper and pencils for each player. • Set of index cards, two for each team, per round. •GAME PLAY 1. Divide group into two to four teams. 2. Ask each team to select a team name. 3. Distribute a set of index cards and pens or pencils to each team. 4. Have teams write their team names on all of their cards. Round 1 1. Present the first question. 2. Have each team write its response to the question on the index card. 3. Have teams place their “response” index cards face down on their tables. 4. On a second index card have each team predict which opponent(s) got the correct response and which opponent(s) got an incorrect response. 5. Have teams place their “prediction” index cards down on the table. 6. Collect both cards from each team. 7. Go over the correct response. 8. Scoring: For each team’s . . . • Correct response, they receive 11 points. • Correct prediction, they receive 3 points. 286 Games That Boost Performance TEAM LinG - Live, Informative, Non-cost and Genuine! 9. This completes play for round one. 10. Play continues as in the first round. 11. Declare the team with the most points the winner. •POST-GAME DEBRIEFING The following questions will be helpful as you debrief the experience: • How did you go about assessing whether or not the other team had guessed correctly? On what did you base your estimate? • If their answers proved to be right, how did this change your assessment of their credibility? • Within your organization who (either people or groups) has a good reputation for credibility? On what is that credibility based? • Are there people in your organization who generally turn out to be right, but who lack credibility or voice? What is going on there? • How can individuals and teams boost their credibility in the workplace? How do you assess whether or not other teams really “know their stuff”? • How do we develop confidence that we “really know our stuff”? • If you were unsure of your answer, did you try to bluff anyway? • What are the consequences of bluffing in the workplace and in the team? •GENERAL COMMENTS • Some popular TV game shows, such as Hollywood Squares, are based on “secondary” responses—guessing the quality of a partner’s response. This passion for “people watching” is reflected in Second Mouse Gets the Cheese. • Robert Abrams, in Game Theory, proposed that players not only calculate their own play but also the likely play of their opponents. Thus, the most spirited play of the game may not be in your own response, but in predicting your opponent’s responses. Second Mouse Gets the Cheese 287 TEAM LinG - Live, Informative, Non-cost and Genuine! • Second Mouse Gets the Cheese brings home the importance of creating a reputation for credibility within an organization. In any organization it is sometimes a matter of how confident you are about what you know (or clarity about what it is that you don’t know) that counts for more than the knowledge itself. • This game points up the impact that credibility can have on teams. It can also be used to illustrate the elements that go into creating credibility for individuals, for units, for groups, and for departments. We establish our credibility not only by being proven right by events, but by being able to establish our rationale, by being able to put facts and events in context, and by speaking confidently as to how it is that we know something. Tone of voice, a matter-of-fact delivery, and eye contact all contribute to the impression of confidence. • In processing this exercise, elicit examples of people who—it later turned out—were dead right, but who were not believed because they lacked organizational credibility. Springboard into a discussion of how both teams and individuals can build their credibility. • In this game, you are never “out of the loop,” despite your own knowledge of the topic. Each team’s intuition or observations can earn points. This brings another dimension to play . . . “play acting.” • Determine whether teams meet and communicate differently knowing they may be under scrutiny by other teams. Discuss whether this affected their decision making and other aspects of “industrial spying.” •SAMPLE PLAY 1. Group is divided into three teams—Teams A, B, and C. 2. Each team receives its set of index cards (two for each round) and records the team name on the cards. Round 1 1. Facilitator presents first problem statement. 2. Each team meets to determine and then record its response on the first card. 3. On the second card, each team records how it believes the other teams fared on their own responses. 288 Games That Boost Performance TEAM LinG - Live, Informative, Non-cost and Genuine! 4. Each team places their index cards face down on the table. 5. The facilitator collects both cards from each team. 6. Team Aresponded correctly, so Team Areceives 11 points. 7. Team B responded incorrectly, so Team B receives 0 points. 8. Team C responded correctly so Team C receives 11 points. 9. Team A’s predictions about Team B and Team C were that Team B would responded correctly and Team C would respond incorrectly; predictions are wrong 0 points. 10. Team B predicted that Team Awould respond correctly and Team C incorrectly. First prediction is right 3 points; second is wrong 0 points. 11. Team C’s predictions were that Team Awould be correct and Team B would be correct. One correct prediction 3 points. 12. Total Scoring for Round 1: Team A 11 0 11 points; Team B 0 3 = 3 points; Team C 11 3 14 points. Team C is the winner. •CUSTOMIZING SECOND MOUSE GETS THE CHEESE Size of Group • For groups of six to ten, play as two teams. • For larger groups, divide into four teams and then have each team select its “response” player(s) and its “prediction” player(s). Time of Play • Shorten or lengthen the time allowed for question response and predictions, depending on the size of the group. Second Mouse Gets the Cheese 289 TEAM LinG - Live, Informative, Non-cost and Genuine! Method of Play • Use two different color index cards to help track the two scoring systems— one color for team responses and the second color for team predictions. • Instruct group that each team may or may not receive a different problem. Conduct the prediction round in the same manner. Discuss how the effect of not knowing the quality of other teams’ problems affected their predictions. • Have teams prepare their prediction cards AFTER you have announced the correct response to the problem. See how this affects how each team reacts to hearing the correct response. Scoring • Award 7 points for predictions. Determine whether additional rewards actually undermine the quality of the responses. 290 Games That Boost Performance TEAM LinG - Live, Informative, Non-cost and Genuine! ... - tailieumienphi.vn
nguon tai.lieu . vn