I was looking for a workshop to do as part of my mission to raise awareness of visualization practices, which are increasingly popular in the Agile world at the moment with graphic facilitation.
I came across this workshop by Tom Wujec, the creator of the Marshmallow Challenge, which outlines a visualization approach to problem solving. I decided to test it!
Step 1: Prepare the material
We therefore need:
- markers
- a packet of A4 sheets
- Post-its of different colors
- several rolls of painter's tape
but also :
- some tables and chairs
- free walls on which you can work
Note: It is important to have enough space for all participants to see everyone's creations.
Step 2: Introduce the workshop
Like any workshop of this type, it seems important to me to always carry it out informally. After all, participants are there to learn, why constrain themselves with extra rigidity? :-p
So I started by saying:
Hello everyone, thank you for coming!
Today we are going to learn how to make toast! By the way, how do you usually do?
Step 3: Individual / A4 sheet
I then distributed markers and A4 sheets then I invited each participant, in silence, to draw the way in which he/she made his/her toast and then to go and post it on the wall.
Here is the result:
The participants were surprised by the diversity of the performances and this gave rise to good bursts of laughter! Indeed, we realize that we are indeed talking about the same thing but that everyone has a different representation of it, which is the key to the exercise.
Now is the time to analyze the results in more detail. I then invite the participants to reflect on the common points and the major differences between all these representations.
Apart from the personal artistic touch of each, we notice that there appears in each drawing a system of nodes and arrows allowing to structure the stages of the process of preparation of the toast - being in the presence of a majority of engineers, it seemed rather obvious! This common formalism allowed everyone to be able to understand everyone's representation.
Thus, it is by looking at this system of nodes and arrows that one can observe a notable difference: the number. Indeed, the number of groups (node, arrow) is different according to the level of detail expressed by the author – we went from 2 steps to almost 10 in our case.
After a few minutes of discussion, I asked the following question:
And what about the person wishing to toast their bread – in other words, the main actor in the system?
We then notice that most of the time, it is the tools and the bread that appear, the user having often been omitted from the representation. This seems to be a common case for engineer profiles!
In addition to the fun side of this awareness, it leads to thinking about a more serious subject.
For whom is the system useful?
Indeed, if we place ourselves from the point of view of the user, would this not influence our perception of the process to be described? Wouldn't our solution, in this case linked to a real need, be more relevant?
Step 4: Individual / Post-it
We then continue with the next step. I invite this time the participants to change their support by replacing the A4 sheet with Post-its. Same instruction therefore: “Draw me, in silence, the way you make toast. »
Ah yes, I often add this sentence now in workshops where Post-its are used (almost all the time! :-p):
Remember that Post-its are like golf balls, they are meant to be used! 😉
This allows participants to act with a clear conscience and gives a clear framework that the use of Post-its is not restricted. Clarity is thus favored over the concentration of information.
When the participants have finished, I encourage them to come and post their result on the wall, of which here is an example:
Note: we will notice the presence of the user this time! 😉
I invite participants to share their feelings about the differences compared to the previous step on A4 sheet.
The general tendency is the representation of a stage by Post-it.
Indeed, the notable difference is that the participants have more easily the possibility of modifying their creation by moving, adding, deleting Post-its, which was not the case with the A4 sheet which, moreover, presented almost no deletion. Now, maybe the participants had made preliminary drafts before putting things back together, but the limited time tends to reduce this assumption.
The more flexible support provided by the Post-it thus makes it possible to accompany the construction of the result with the continuous reflection of the author.
Tom Wujec, in his TED, explains that most of the time at this stage, the number of nodes increases. Indeed, by isolating each step on a Post-it, it is easier to see if there are holes or to complete with detail elements without overloading the existing one.
However, in our case, the difference was not so noticeable. Maybe it depends on the profile of the participants?
Step 5: Group / Post-it
For this last part of the workshop, I invite the participants to work in groups (4 to 6 people).
The problem is the same: they have to build the process describing how the team decides to toast their bread, and all this… in silence! Indeed, the animation of a collaborative workshop of this type generates a lot of noise, so a little calm will not hurt! :-p
Jokes aside, the use of words to communicate can generate multiple pointless debates, which is why this experience could be enriching both for the participants and for the facilitator. It could also be interesting to vary the pleasures in the teams: half the time in silence then the rest with authorized oral communication, one team in silence and the other in oral communication...
I also specified that they could use their creations from the previous stage and build new elements if they felt the need.
Here is a video of the experience of one of the teams:
Timeline of highlights
(00:00 – 00:47): Synchronization of the team on the first element. A comparison is made, facilitated by the handiness of the Post-it.
(01:14): The team searches for the second item and continues to observe the options available to them before selecting it.
(01:24): The third element arrives in the system and a rearrangement is proposed. Creativity is on!
(01:34): The arrow system appears to facilitate understanding.
(02:47): The team clarifies their workspace while remaining focused on the objective.
(03:13): A moment of doubt in the team.
(03:33): Clarification of the doubt by adding a detail element.
(03:42): Structuring by branches.
(05:13): Instant correction.
(05:46): End of the experiment.
By way of debriefing, here are the topics on which I invited the teams to reflect:
Is there a person (say Type A) who has a majority of their initial proposals in the final process?
Is there a person (say Type B) who has few or none of their initial proposals in the final process?
I asked the people (Type A and B) concerned how they felt about the result.
- Type A: They are generally satisfied knowing that it is ultimately a large part of their ideas that have been accepted by the group.
- Type B: The interesting point is that these people were also overall happy with the outcome despite the fact that few or none of their initial ideas made it to the team. The difference is that even if their initial proposal was not selected, it was their opinion that was taken into account for the decision-making as a team. Thus the final result belongs to them just as much as to Type A people, which would promote their commitment to the application of this process just as much.
Conclusion
This workshop effectively raises awareness of the resolution of complex problems in groups through visualization, starting from a banal subject such as toasting bread. It simply demonstrates, through its different stages, that it is easy to have a different view on the same problem and therefore that it is important to have a shared understanding: the display on a wall in plain sight of all is then a very effective way! 😉
By involving the whole group in the reflection, we promote creativity, commitment and then potentially the adoption of the solution or the experimentation to be carried out with regard to the problem: after all it is the fruit of a reflection of the group for the group!
In my case, I have only reproduced the workshop presented by Tom Wujec in his video to sensitize the participants to this participative approach, however it can be interesting to combine it with a practical application on a real problem of the group during a next session. Allow approximately 1h30 per session.
Many thanks to the participants for their involvement and their good mood! 🙂
You can find Tom Wujec's TED here.
