APPLYING TRAINING GAMES AND EXERCISES

APPLYING TRAINING GAMES AND EXERCISES: AN INTERVIEW WITH GATEWAYS’ NIGEL BAILEY BY THE THIAGI GROUP AS REPORTED IN THE THIAGI GAMELETTER: OCTOBER 2009.

THIAGI GROUP: How did you get into designing and using games?

Nigel:

I learnt my original facilitation skills in the '80s and early '90s from university lecturers and corporate workshop trainers. Needless to say, I don't remember much from these lectures and workshops—they were truly boring. I had to find a different way of training that made sense to me! Since 1996 I have followed the Gateways' style of keeping things simple and maximizing interaction in the workshops through practical exercises. We recognized the need to raise our game (pun intended) by making our programs more impactful through using more games.

THIAGI GROUP: How long have you been designing and using games?

Nigel:

Although I have been designing and using training activities for many years I have only starting using games since working with the Thiagi Group in 2008.

THIAGI GROUP: Where do you use games?

Nigel:

My rough rule of thumb is to use at least one game or interactive exercise per 90 minutes of learning.

THIAGI GROUP: How do your clients respond?

Nigel:

For the most part, our clients respond positively to the games and activities because they get such positive feedback from the participants.

THIAGI GROUP: How do your participants respond?

Nigel:

Ninety percent of the participants respond very positively. Sometimes, even the 10 percent who enter the training room with anti-training baggage become positive when a particular game pushes their hot buttons. I had this happen recently when I facilitated our Company Called ME! workshop for an international financial services company. (The theme of the Company Called ME! program is that people who are or see themselves as self-employed tend to be more focused, proactive, and successful in what they want to achieve in the world of work.)

One of the participants was not engaging in the process and every so often dropped an obstructive comment in the discussions. But after we played COMPANY PICNIC, I heard him say, “That was fun!” Thereafter he was totally engaged in the program.
My greatest sense of facilitation satisfaction comes when I stand back and watch a group of more than 100 participants actively engaged in and enjoying a training game. What a pleasure!

THIAGI GROUP: What is the most horrible or embarrassing moment you had in conducting games?

Nigel:

Horrible—but with a happy ending: I was facilitating a 3-day senior leadership workshop in Saudi Arabia for a large company. The Training Director stood watching me throughout the program and every so often whispered in my ear that he thought the training exercises and games were not working. I saw differently as the participants were actively participating in the activities. But he carried on with his negative rapid-fire feedback. This was becoming a very stressful experience for me. To make matters worse, during the workshop the Training Director told me that in his years of working experience with top line multinationals in the USA he had never seen games and activities being used to such an extent in training.

The participants were required to give daily written feedback on the program. Lucky for me it was overwhelmingly positive! The Director remained unconvinced but did contract our training services a number of occasions thereafter.

THIAGI GROUP: What is your most favorite game?

Nigel:

BETTER CONNECTIONS (which is described below). The game was introduced to me by clinical psychologist and facilitator, Dr. Deon van Zyl. I have used it many times with complete success each time.

THIAGI GROUP: Who are your favorite game designers?

Nigel:

Thiagi and anyone else who comes up with a game that simply and creatively gets the message into the heads and hearts of the participants.

THIAGI GROUP: What is your prediction about the future of games?

Nigel:

The future of using games in learning is strong. However, as Bruno Hourst said in his August 2009 interview, there will still be strong resistance to training games and sometimes it will be necessary to avoid using the word games when pitching our services to potential clients.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Dialogue

BETTER CONNECTIONS

by Nigel Bailey

Key Idea

We build a stronger relationship with people when we see them as human beings with whom we share similarities in terms of family and life situations. It is very difficult to form strong relationships with people about whom we know very little.
We feel more connected to “full” people. For example, take John, the accountant. If I think of John as an accountant, I might put him into a box of what I think I know about accountants. I might not feel connected to accountants and will treat him accordingly. But when I think of John as a keen mountain climber and outdoor adventurer with two children, one of whom is graduating from university next month, then John becomes human to me, and I can feel connected to him.

Purpose

To create a short memorable experience in which the participants understand the value of sharing non-work related information in a conversation to build a stronger relationship.

Participants

Minimum: 2
Maximum: No limit

Best: 10 to 100

Time Requirement

20-30 minutes

Supplies

A copy of the Connection Rating Scale (shown below) for each participant.

Connection Rating Scale

Before: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
After: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

Flow

1. Instruct the participants to pair up with someone in the room whom they know the least well.
2. On the Connection Rating Scale, in the Before line, ask each participant to circle a number that reflects how connected they feel to the other person at the moment.

Give the following examples:

A “1” would be how connected they feel about a man from whom they bought a newspaper that morning for the first time. They know nothing about him except that he was selling newspapers that morning at that spot.
A “9” score could be for a spouse of 20 years. (Not a “10” because sometimes spouses do unexpected things!)
A “5” score could be a work colleague who I know to be married with children but I do not know the spouse's name or the children's names, ages, and genders.

3. Tell the participants that when you tell them to begin, they should do the following:

a. They will take turns to describe to the other person a close family member whom they love very much: someone who is very special to them, someone who they know intimately (such as a parent, a spouse, or a child). They should give as much detail as they can about this family member.
b. The other person should listen carefully, ask questions if they want to, while their partner shares a description of someone he or she loves very much.
c. After 3 minutes you will blow a whistle. The partners will swap their roles: The other person will take the opportunity to talk about his or her close family member.

4. Ask the partners to quickly decide who is going to go first.
5. Start the exercise.
6. After 3 minutes, blow a whistle and ask the participants to exchange their roles.
7. After 3 minutes, blow the whistle again to end the discussion.
8. Instruct the participants to circle a number in the After line of the Connection Rating Scale to reflect how connected they now feel to the other person. 9. Ask the participants to raise their hands if-

The number circled in the After line is lower than the number circled in the Before line. (They feel less connected with their partner after the discussion.)
The number circled in the After line is exactly the same as the number circled in the Before line. (The discussion made no difference to how connected they feel toward their partner.)
It is highly unlikely that any participant would raise their hand in response to either of these questions. This proves that the participants feel more connected to their partner just after a 6-minute conversation.

Debrief

Conduct a discussion around the following questions:

Why do most people rate a higher number in the After line compared with the Before line?
Would we have had the same results if the conversation was about a big problem at work?
What emotions, if any, did you feel while you were listening to your partner?
What emotions, if any, did you feel while you were talking to your partner?
What relevance does this exercise have to our workplaces?
How do you start a conversation with a stranger?
What are the safe topics for conversations with a stranger?
What are some unsafe topics for conversations with a stranger?

Nigel Bailey

Consultant

Mobile: 082 784 3981

This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it