Lessons from Collaborative Games

What exactly is a “game”?  A quick search on Wikipedia delivers this definition:

game

/g?m/

Noun

“A form of play or sport, esp. a competitive one played according to rules and decided by skill, strength, or luck.”

Although I agree that games must necessarily have rules (and structure), what strikes me as Interesting about the definition above is the phrase “[especially] a competitive one”.   It seems that the internet, like most of society, has bought into the notion that games must be competitive in order to qualify as “games”.  But is this necessarily so?

Consider two of the most popular collaborative board games on the market:  “Forbidden Island” & “Pandemic”

1) Forbidden Island 

In this cooperative board game, you and the other players are fearless adventurers on a do-or-die mission to capture four sacred treasures from the ruins of a mysterious island. Your team must work together to earn the treasures, even as the island slowly sinks beneath you!   The challenge in Forbidden Island is not to win the game individually (by reaching a designated end point or accruing the most points).  Rather, you all play together, win together or lose together.  The competition, in a sense, is against the island itself, which seems (for vaguely supernatural reasons) to be bent on your destruction.  Each player receives a role card which gives them specific powers:  For example the Explorer has the ability to move diagonally around the board; the pilot can fly anywhere on the board for one action per turn, and so on.  In order to beat the island and “win” t, players must talk out each move and leverage their teammates’ special powers.

2) Pandemic

In this similar but more advanced “co-op” game, virulent diseases have broken out simultaneously all over the world.  You are all disease-fighting specialists whose mission is to treat disease hotspots while researching cures for each of four plagues before they get out of hand.  As in Forbidden Island, you each have specific roles and abilities that will aid the team’s efforts.  For example, the Operations Expert can build research stations which are needed to find cures for the diseases and which allow for greater mobility between cities; the Scientist needs only four cards of a particular disease to cure it instead of the normal five. And so on.  Once again, it’s all for one and one for all in Pandemic.   You win (or lose) together; either you discover the cures that save the world, or the diseases outbreak all over the world and mankind is doomed!

Do all future games need to be cooperative and collaborative?  Not at all.  There will always be a role in society for soccer and football, Monopoly and Chess, Survivor and the Amazing Race.   But co-op games are gaining on the competitive games in popularity, proving that people can have loads of fun working together, moving towards a common goal.  Perhaps most importantly, at the end of co-op games like the ones above, you tend to feel more unified with the other players rather than divided from them.  Who hasn’t, for example, lost a game involving head-on competition and left the board feeling animosity toward their “opponent” (or negativity towards themselves)?   In co-op games, the “vibe” is very different.   Whether you win, lose or draw, you’ve all gone through it together. Very rarely do you feel it’s one person’s “fault”.

What does this all mean for leaders and managers in the workplace?  Simply that we should think about our goals the next time we set up a game or a competition amongst our employees and team members.  How do we want people to feel towards each other once the game is over?   Is there any way we might, perhaps, add a little collaboration into the mix?

Scavenger Hunts vs. Treasure Hunts: Is there a difference?

One of the most common questions I hear from prospective clients is, “So what can you tell me about your scavenger hunts?”    For a native San Franciscan like me, this is akin to a tourist saying “I just love Frisco…especially your trolley cars.”   Sad to say folks, my lovely hometown by the bay is San Francisco (not Frisco), we have cable cars here (not trolleys), and Dr. Clue creates treasure hunts (not scavenger hunts).   Semantics do matter!

So what exactly is the difference between a scavenger hunt and a treasure hunt?  

Simply put, a scavenger hunt is based on a list.   On this list, you might be asked to bring back a specific object — a pine cone, a flag, a coaster from a particular bar, etc.   Or the hunt might be more photograph-based:  ie. “Take a picture of yourself in front of the Golden Gate Bridge, snap a shot of yourself at the top of the Eiffel Tower,” etc.   You get the idea.   Scavenger hunt lists tend to be quite direct and straightforward; here’s your task–now go out and execute it.   Each task in a scavenger hunt is worth a certain number of points and the team with the most  points accrued at the end of the game is named the winner.  Pretty fun stuff, huh?   Absolutely.   But not very cryptic!   From the beginning, you pretty much know what your tasks are; the biggest challenge, then, is prioritization.  How long will it take to reach this spot vs. that spot?   Is it worth going for the hard 10-pointers (which will take more time and effort) or the easier the 1-, 3- or 5- pointers, which take less time but are worth less points?

By contrast, a treasure hunt is based on the solving of cryptic clues.   A clue might be a riddle, a rhyme, or some simple wordplay.  It could be in code.  It could look like a puzzle.   What matters is that the clue, when solved, directs you to a specific location.    For example, let’s say a clue in San Francisco starts with, “There’s an eye in your milk — remove it!”   After pondering this phrase for a minute, you would realize that when you take the “i” out of “milk”, you get MLK — short for Martin Luther King — a street in Golden Gate Park.   A harder clue might be encrypted in Morse Code, Braille, or Sign Language.  Or it might involve a crossword puzzle, sudoku, wordsearch, or anything else the hunt master can think of.   Clues can require pen & paper; they can involve music or video; they can incorporate physical items.   One of my favorite clues had participants searching for messages in a bottle, floating in a lake.  Another one had teams opening up specially-made Cracker Jack bags.  Inside each bag, the peanuts and Cracker Jacks had been divided into separate baggies to represent dashes & dots, a la Morse Code.

Moreover, treasure hunts break down further into two distinct sub-categories:   sequential and non sequential.   A sequential treasure hunt looks like this:   you go to the first clue location and find clue # two…you then proceed to clue location # two and there find clue # three, and so on.   The hunt proceeds down a linear path until you reach a final location, where a “treasure” is awaiting the team that reaches there first.    The final location may also be the site of the final party.    A non-sequential treasure hunt, on the other hand, is a little bit like a scavenger hunt in that the clues are NOT in order.  In fact, you get ALL the clues up front.  Not only can you solve the clues in any order that you like, you can also visit the revealed clue locations in the order of your choice.  If you get stuck on a clue, just skip it and come back to it.  If you see a team going one direction, perhaps your team will head off in the opposite direction.    Each clue is worth a specific number of points; like a scavenger hunt, the team with the most points is named the winner.    How you acquire points at each location is up to the hunt master.   Perhaps there is a question to answer at each location.   Perhaps you have to pick up a certain item or take a specific photo (a la scavenger hunts).   The possibilities are endless.

What are the pros and cons of these various hunt formats?      Scavengers hunts are perhaps the easiest hunts to mount.  All you need to do is come up with a list and the teams take care of the rest.   For people who are more action oriented, scavenger hunts can be a great option.  Without too much planning, teams get out on the course, rushing around, and crossing items off the list.  Conversely, treasure hunts take a bit more time to set up.  As the hunt master, you need to go out and scout a number of potential locations, choosing the very best ones for your hunt clues.  You must take detailed notes and digital photos.  And you must then write the clues, bearing in mind that any ambiguity will literally send teams on a wild goose chase.  That means that you really need to playtest all the clues in advance, which — again — takes more time and effort.   The advantage of treasure hunts, however, is in my opinion quite worthwhile. In particular, it’s simply a blast watching participants get that delicious “Eureka Moment”, when they’ve solved a clue, pulled meaning from chaos, and then followed the “trail of breadcrumbs” to a cool location that they wouldn’t have otherwise known about.   For people who are more “mind-oriented”, treasure hunts really do the trick.  And for teambuilding, treasure hunts are terrific because groups are required to assess their skills and knowledge and delegate the right person to the right clue.   If the hunt master has done their job sufficiently, one person — alone — could never solve all the clues.  It take a diverse group, with diverse skills and knowledge, to succeed at a puzzle-based, non-sequential treasure hunt (like we create here at Dr. Clue).

So what’s it going to be the next time you’re in Frisco riding a trolley car?    A scavenger hunt or a treasure hunt?   As they say in Pig Latin (a fun decoding language):  “ouyay ecideday.”

Should Games be More (or Less) Competitive

There’s a popular social movement in schools these days, compelling teachers and coaches to minimize competition on the playground while increasing collaboration.  It’s gone so far that one school I heard about even removed the scoreboard from their high school football field, insisting that keeping score put too much pressure on the students and inflated the competitive element, reducing self-esteem.

This type of thing begs the question:  Is competition all bad — or none of it — or just some of it?

Although the answer to this question is complex,  I think it’s worth noting that not all games are equal; in truth, some games are designed to be more competitive than others.  Consider the classic board games.  In chess, for example, you find a classic “zero sum” activity; in order for one person to win, he must compel the other person to lose.   The vast majority of two-person games are set up this way, as a personal battle of wits and wills.  Winning is a “successful” outcome; losing is an “unsuccessful” one.   In chess, where there’s no actual scoring, it can be difficult to measure your progress and mastery.   About all you can say to yourself in a losing effort is, “I stayed alive a little longer this time.”  In other two-person games, by contrast, scoring is built into the activity, increasing your ability to assess personal progress.  For instance, in cribbage you can see exactly how many points it will take you to win; you can measure by how many points you’ve won or lost.  As analyzing your success is more manageable, you can console yourself in a loss with, “Well, at least I’m getting closer; I only lost by 15 points that time.”

Multi-player games are no different.  Some games are zero sum (you either win or you lose), while others allow you to rate your progress by the toting up of points and keeping score.   Scrabble, for example, is zero sum in the sense that there is one winner and everyone else is a “not winner”.  Because there’s a final score, however, you can keep track of your own personal milestones and continually strive to get better, improving your metrics after each round.   You might say, “I lost, but at least I got a 300 that time, only 20 points below my all time high.”

One phenomenon you sometimes see in multi-player games is the “piling on” syndrome.   Consider the game of Risk.  The status of your assets (armies) is always transparent.  Nothing is hidden.  Since no one wants a particular player to get too far ahead (making a personal comeback impossible), what often happens is that everyone gangs up on the front runner.   “She’s getting too far ahead–let’s all work together to bring her back to the pack.”   Not very pleasant if you’re the one in the pole position!

Although far outweighed by the sheer number of competitive games on the market, a few collaborative board games do exist.  One of my favorites is Pandemic, a game which casts you in the role of a CDC (Center for Disease Control) researcher endeavoring to stop a world-wide disease epidemic.  Significantly in Pandemic, you work together with the other researchers (not against them), both to find cures as well as to stem the flow of the outbreak.  The common enemy is the pandemic.  If you discover the cures, you all win; if the world becomes consumed by the contagion, you all lose.  Other similar collaborative games operate with this “all for one” team ethic, games like “Forbidden Island” and “Break the Safe”.

But is a collaborative game as “fun” as a competitive one?   Do you receive as much “benefit”?  It all depends on what draws you to games in the first place.  For some of us, working together to stop a collective evil (like in Pandemic) is a real adrenaline rush.  For others, the fun derives from pitting yourself against the mind of an actual player.   And for still others, the enjoyment has little to do with the other players at all; like in solitaire, your goal is simply to improve your skills (as reflected by higher points and improving scores).

Myself, I don’t see competitive games as a bad thing.  As described above, there are just so many different types of games out there, all of which carry their own distinctive virtues (and pitfalls).   At their best, games force you to exercise your wits; they challenge your ability to design tactics and execute strategy. In many ways, games are the antithesis of passive activities like watching TV.  While playing a game, you need to be active!  You have to think.  And more often than not, you also have to interact and communicate with another person, in real time (we’re talking about board games today, not video games, which are different kettle of fish).

The major trap of competitive games is their ability to inflame your insecurities.   For a person with low self esteem, winning and losing can become something very personal.   How many times, for instance, have we all seen a losing player “cross the line”, bombarding the other players with inappropriate behavior, crass language and poor sportsmanship?  In short, he’s losing, he doesn’t like how that makes him feel, and so he tries to “kill the messenger” (his opponent), the person who has made him feel this way.

Most especially for today’s kids, I believe the key — no matter the game– is to emphasize the personal takeaways.  You might ask, “What did you learn about yourself today?  What did you learn about others?  What skills did you develop?   And what might you work on next time around.”   In the end, there are no winners or losers in games:  just areas for growth and learning.

The Wave

A few days ago, I watched a fascinating movie from 2008 — “The Wave” — available widely on DVD, Netflix, etc.  Although the film takes place in Germany (with an all-German cast), it’s actually a dramatization of the true story of an unusual teaching experiment conducted by Ron Jones at his Palo Alto, CA high school in 1969.    As the “The Wave” begins, young teacher Rainer Wenger finds himself compelled to teach a one-week course on the topic of “autocracy” — not his favorite subject.  After his first class — taught in the traditional, lecture manner — fails to inspire much interest from his students, Rainer decides to try an experiment.  During his next session, he suggests people see what living in an autocracy might actually feel like.  For the rest of the week, they will address him as Herr Wenger.  They will stand up when speaking (standing apparently helps blood circulation).  They will wear a uniform to class — a simple white shirt and blue jeans.   And they will come up with a logo, a salute, and a name for their “movement”.   What follows is equal parts fascinating and horrifying.   “The Wave”, as their class is called, takes on a life of its own.  A student begins to shadow “Herr Wenger”, acting as his body guard.   Events are scheduled — for Wave-members only.  Non-Wave members are even beat up.   I won’t spoil things by telling you how it ends up, but you get the idea.    Even in today’s modern Germany — so passionately committed to avoiding another Third Reich — fascism remains an ever-present, enticing, sociological possibility.   And this was just a movie!   The real thing actually happened, right here in the democratic USA — during the rebellious 1960s, no less!

As it turns out, I was lucky enough to attend a screening of The Wave” at a theater in Northern California with Ron Jones in attendance to answer questions.  Jones confirmed that the events in the film were essentially accurate (except for the very end).  His students did, indeed, become this powerful, unified, aggressively-superior clique, all within the course of 5 days.

For the students in the Wave, there were clearly some benefits derived:

• Their intelligence was piqued and their interest ignited.
• They felt neat, organized and disciplined.
• They felt a sense of community (something many were not experiencing in their home lives).
• They felt the power of numbers.
• They were given a purpose.
• They felt individually empowered.

Energizing stuff.   And of course, dangerous as well, in the wrong hands.  The cost of this experiment was the students surrendering their freedom of thought…their ability to challenge authority.  By reaping the benefits of the Wave, the students traded in their basic, human rights: as people, as individuals.  And as the violence escalated, no one was willing to “go against the flow” as things got further and further out of hand.

As a team building leader and coach, viewing “The Wave” got me thinking about the groups I work with.  So often, I observe managers urging their teams to become unified via hatred of another group, company or division.  To aid in this effort, they create a team name, a team logo, and a team purpose.  And this method is highly effective in the short term:  as long as they don’t cross the line into aggressive behavior (which I HAVE seen happen!)

So what can we do build our teams without creating mini-fascist states?

I believe the key is to employ participatory decision making, whether that takes the shape of majority vote, consensus, or something else you can come up with.    There are no sheep in a high-performance team.  All participants have to challenge authority: assertively but constructively, within respectful, agreed-upon channels and procedures.

And we can’t unify via hate.   Organizations, like societies, are made up of a variety of different groups and teams.  Although acting independently to achieve their own results, teams are also part of something bigger.   During times of crisis, they may even need to coordinate with other teams and groups, for the common good.  Where will they be if they detest their counterparts on other groups? Look at the current gridlock in the US Senate!

The team leaders’ challenge, then, is to bring his/her team together using a different inspiration, one that unifies via camaraderie and positivity vs. dislike of others.

I advise you all to give “The Wave” a viewing.  You may just reconsider your own, current “wave” of team leadership.

What is the value of team building?

When I’ve asked this question to clients, they’ve responded with a broad variety of answers, such as:

–Team building helps people bond
–It raises morale
–It lets us blow off steam
–It allows folks to get to know people with whom they may not work on a regular basis
–It breaks down boundaries that may be keeping people apart

What strikes me about all these answers is the common theme:  behavioral change.    We expect our team building off-sites to effect some kind of change in our staff’s behavior.  For example:

• If our people are low, we’d like to see their moods raised.
• If our people are stressed, we’d like to see them become more relaxed.
• If our people are in cliques, we’d like to see them socializing with people outside of their usual work/social groups.
• If our people are fighting, we’d like to see them making peace.

As leaders and managers, these are valid, organizational goals!   It’s our job to monitor and boost productivity, which is governed (to a large extent) by the behavior of our team.  So we cajole, we nudge, and we inspire; we change things up, we get people out of the office, and we boost productivity.

It’s no longer good enough to schedule our team building events haphazardly, hoping that an injection of fun will somehow make things better in our office.   In this challenging economy, we have to act with much more intentionality!

As you consider a team building event for your group, please ask yourself these 3 important questions:

1) What is my group’s current level of productivity?
2) What specific behaviors are holding us back?
3) How can an off-site event bring about the new, desired behaviors?

As a thought experiment, imagine that your event is complete and you’ve achieved everything you wanted from the activity.   How are people now feeling (as compared to before)?   What are they doing that they weren’t doing before?

Answering these questions in advance will give you much more bang for your buck the next time you go shopping for a teambuilding provider (like Dr. Clue).

Foot-Loose in Thailand

It’s a long climb from central Thong Pha Phum, Thailand, to the hill-top temple towering high above town.  First you cross a rickety rope bridge, then you pass through a monastery, and finally there are these steps…countless steps…straight up for close to forever. The journey is worth it though:  a glass-encased seated Buddha, a small golden stupa, and a 360-degree view for miles and miles.

That my girlfriend and I completed this trek at all during our December vacation was sheer serendipity.   Travelers to Thailand don’t often end up in Thong Pha Phum, a one-street town in the northwest corner of the country (3 hours north of Kanchanaburi and the River Kwai).  Why would they?  The city boasts no big attractions, no ruins, no museums, no beaches.  What it offers, however, is something far more rare:  pure Thai living, unsullied by the ubiquitous tourist industry octopus.  Thong Pha Phum has a street market, a police station, a number of shoe shops (more on this later), no signs or menus in English, and that fantastic temple, high on a hill.

So up we climbed on a warm, sultry Thai afternoon. At the top of the stairs, we stopped to catch our breaths and to take in the scenery, making sure to remove our shoes, as per usual, when treading softly around a Buddhist temple.  The views were simply splendid:  green rolling hills as far as the eye could see, seemingly all the way to nearby Myanmar.  Our only company at the temple was a French tour group that briefly snapped some quick photos and departed quickly, and a small local boy asking for a few-baht donation to a crocodile god statue.   Lingering there for almost an hour, enjoying the peace and quiet, we decided at last to begin our voyage back to town.   And that’s when realized:  my girlfriend’s shoes were missing!  Was the thief the local boy?  The French family?  Or someone else?  We never did find out.  Irregardless, we had a long walk before us, and my girlfriend was barefoot!  Talk about footloose!

Without much choice in the matter, she completed the trek back to town sans footwear, with nary a complaint. (That’s my girl!).   Only afterwards did she admit that she really liked those shoes and was having some trouble letting go of the anger and the frustration.  At the same time, she accepted that perhaps the culprit needed those shoes more than she did.   Nevertheless, we spent the rest of our time in Thong Pha Phum scouring the many USED shoe stores in town, hoping to discover some size 42 Asics running shoes from Santa Rosa, California.

How do you deal with theft, with unexpected loss?  Do you hold onto it (losing sight of the present moment), or can you quickly let go, make peace with it and move on?   We humans are all connected.  Our own loss is someone else’s gain — often someone else much needier than ourselves.  Think about it the next time a stapler goes missing at work, or a ream of paper.  Or even your shoes.

Six Lessons

The following is a great little advice article by Ari Emanuel, co-CEO of William Morris Endeavor (WME), a leading entertainment and media agency.  Ari’s blog can be found here. Enjoy.  See my comments below.  Db.

The Six Lessons I Live By

 

1. Surround yourself with people who are smarter than you and move out of their way.

If you feel like you know everything, you’re wrong. I know what I don’t know and then I find partners who can teach me. A perfect example is my partnership with Patrick Whitesell, my co-CEO at WME. While we take on different roles at the company and focus on different things, we share the same goals and at the end of the day, we’re working toward the same end. That’s been the key to our success.

 

2. The only constant in business is change. Get comfortable with it.

When I started in the business, there were four broadcast networks and 19 cable networks. Now there are five broadcast networks, 117 cable networks, Netflix, Hulu, YouTube, HBOGo, iTunes, Amazon Prime, VOD – the list goes on and on. Next year there will be more distribution platforms, and in ten years the landscape will have shifted another 180 degrees. The business is changing quickly, and the only way to succeed is to change with it. I always tell my colleagues, there is no such thing as a traditional talent agent anymore. It’s about pushing beyond that 10% commission and finding opportunity where it didn’t exist before.

 

3. Fail often, fail quickly.

Nobody f***s up like I do, but you’ll never succeed unless you take risks. Big ones. In 2009, we took Endeavor, a company that was doing incredibly well, and merged it with the oldest talent agency in the world. From a cultural and organizational standpoint, it was a big risk. People had their doubts. But we had a vision and a lot of help from very smart people (see #1.) Three years later, our business is stronger, our bench is deeper and smarter, and our deal-making is more innovative. It’s a better company – period. You have to lead by example if you want to promote a culture where risk-taking is rewarded.

 

4. Your schedule makes you dumber.

Force yourself outside of your daily schedule. Be curious and take time to learn about worlds outside of the one you live in. Watch the news, read the paper, educate yourself. Don’t be afraid to call people you don’t know, start a conversation, and ask for things you need. At the very least, you’ll be more interesting. At the most, you’ll take your business in new and bigger directions.

 

5. You only get one shot – make it count.

I learned this the painful way. After being hit by a car and lying face-down in the middle of Wilshire Boulevard, I was confronted with a whole lot more than my mortality. Take advantage of each day that’s given to you and do something to move the needle on your business, even if it’s just an inch. You’ve heard it before, but life is not a dress rehearsal. Don’t waste your time (or mine.)

 

6. Good ideas rule all.

In the end, it’s all about creative ideas and content – it’s the lifeblood of our business. I’m fortunate enough to work with the writers, directors, musicians and actors who are defining culture with their voices. It’s why I come to work in the morning. In 100 years, when the world looks different, and we communicate in new ways, and we have more devices and platforms and distribution methods, I believe great artistry will still matter most.

Editor’s Note:  Point #5 particular resonates for me.   In 2001, I was on a boat trip in Costa Rica when my tiny, 4-person ship — a glorified row-boat with outboard motor — was hit by a much larger craft.   The other ship, a big 15-seater, smashed right into us and, in fact, cruised up, over and, briefly, on top of us!   One second I was sitting on my bench, enjoying the lush scenery, the next — the prow of a speeding boat was plowing into the small of my back, sending me flying.  My first reaction, after slowly gathering myself off the floor of our craft, was “Can I move my legs and arms? Is anything paralyzed?”   Luckily, I was spared a more serious injury, escaping with a mere 5×5-inch bruise and swelling (that took weeks to heal!).  My life did flash before my eyes that day, and I recall vowing I would never take life for granted again.

Your life can go just that quickly.  You only get once chance at your relationships, at your business, at your dreams … you only get once chance at today!  Make it count!

The Drama Triangle, redux

From time time over the years, I’ve given periodic shout-outs to my friend up in British Columbia, Gary Harper, and his terrific little book:  The Joy of Conflict Resolution.  If you work in a team and wonder why ‘s always so much “drama” in your group, I highly recommend you give Gary’s book a look-see.

 

Quick review:  Harper identifies three archetypes people tend to play out when involved in a conflict (or the “drama triangle”), namely:

 

• The Villain
• The Hero
• The Victim

The villain is the nefarious bad guy; the hero is the action-oriented good guy, righting wrongs, saving the world; the victim is the innocent sufferer, acted upon negatively by the evil villain.

 

What’s significant is that each archetype believes that they have GOOD INTENTIONS.   The villain generally thinks she’s helping the world in some way, and that she’s just misunderstood.  The hero tends to feel that by stopping the villain, he is demonstrating his devotion to the common good. And the victim also feels she has the best of intentions, foiled once again by that self-serving villain.

 

So, all three characters believe they have positive intentions. What makes the “conflict triangle” so dramatic is that all three characters consistently fail to share their intentions with each other or seek mutual solutions.  In short, they ACT OUT rather than talk or discuss.  The victim tries to find someone to help her slay the villain.  The hero asserts himself forcefully for the  victim’s benefit. And the villain fights back against the hero, often becoming the victim herself when the hero (inevitably) crosses the line and behaves over-aggressively himself.

 

At home, at work (in the office or out on scavenger hunt), I believe it would behoove us all — when involved in a conflict — to stop and ask ourselves these six questions:

 

1) What role might I be playing?  Am I acting out the victim, seeking aid to my cause?  Am I playing the aggressive hero?  Or might I be perceived as the egotistical villain?

 

2) How am I labeling the other people involved in the drama?

 

3) What positive intentions might the other characters believe they have?

 

4) Even if I disagree with the others, can I at least recognize and affirm their positive intentions?

 

5) Can I then communicate to each person the impact of their actions (no matter how positive the intention)?

 

6) And finally, can we brainstorm mutually beneficial solutions, where everyone’s needs get met and we can escape the triangle completely?

 

When you take the time to acknowledge someone’s positive intentions, you keep them in the dialogue.  People always feel safer when they know you don’t see them as the villain. Okay, sure, their well-intended actions may have backfired.  But at least they started from a positive place.  And that acknowledgment often makes all the difference.

I’ve Got Your Back

 

I watch a lot of action and sci-fi movies, and inevitably there’s a scene where the hero, preparing to rush into a gun fight, turns to his right-hand man (or woman, or Droid) and says, “You cover me”.

 

On the silver screen, this is a great “trust moment” for the protagonist — yes, they’re the one playing the hero and rushing selflessly into the line of fire, BUT they also realize that they can’t do it all alone; they acknowledge that, to succeed, they’ll needed a trusted teammate to “have their back”.

 

As true as this is for sci-fi/action movies, so, too, is it true in the workplace. Say, for example, you’re preparing a Powerpoint presentation and when you stand up to begin, you realize that your laptop is on the fritz. Then, as panic arises in your throat, your assistant steps up and assures you, “Don’t worry boss, I’ve got a spare laptop right here, and it’s already loaded with your presentation.”  Now that’s having your back!

 

This “having your back” phenomenon can include emotional as well as practical coverage.   A few years back, for example, I found myself standing in front of 80 people at the memorial for my father, Walter. Talk about a position of emotional risk!.  Although I had practiced my eulogy numerous times at home, I knew that keeping my composure was going to be a BIG challenge — especially towards the end when the speech had me saying goodbye to my Dad.  Without me asking her, my wife (at the time) spontaneously came up to the podium and stood there next to me throughout the entire speech, resting her hand supportively on the small of my back.  When I arrived — finally — at the end of the eulogy, my wife was right there, reminding me to relax and breathe.  I got through the speech without  a breakdown – thanks to the support of someone I trusted, anticipating my needs.   Although, in fact, my wife and are no longer together (just as teams often separate over time), I will always remember with gratitude that moment when she literally had my back.

 

Trust is about being trustworthy–about coming through in the clutch–about doing what you say you’re going to do. But it’s also about anticipating your teammates’ needs and backing them up, whether they ask for it or not.

 

Who in your life do you trust to have your back in times of risk?  And when is the last time you thanked those people for covering you when you were “under fire”?

Are you a Wizard or a Muggle

I was rereading the first book in the Harry Potter series the other day and got to pondering:  What makes J.K. Rowling’s wizarding world so compelling?   I think it’s the fact that the author has created this whole secret universe, furtively co-existing alongside our own mundane, non-magic “Muggle” reality.   By joining Harry, Hermione and Ron on their adventures at Hogwarts, we become privy to a wondrous, clandestine world, concealed to most and revealed to only a privileged few.

This is the same feeling I get when I’m out on a treasure hunt.   As I’m walking around town, sleuthing clues and visiting hidden locations (chosen for me by the mysterious hunt master), I think how cool it is be on this SECRET MISSION, with the whole “Muggle” world completely oblivious to my actions.  Geocaching and letterboxing work the same way.

It feels almost naughty, doesn’t it?   Are we really being allowed to do this?

Now consider the flushed, concentrated looks you see on the faces of high school girls on the bus, busily texting away to each other on their cell phones.  It’s the same phenomenon!  While the world goes by, doing its quotidian thing, here are these young people — communicating privately in plain sight –  sharing a secret, enhanced world full of intrigue, drama and emotion.

Now I ask you:  who would want to be a Muggle when you can be a Wizard, pursuing adventures and engaging in quests while the rest of humanity just trudges off to work?

So my question is, what can we all do to “power up” (as they say in the video game world)?  How can we create secret games and missions for ourselves that transform our ordinary reality?  In short, how can we tap into that wonderful feeling of being a man-or-woman of mystery, an international spy, a witch or a warlock amidst a “clueless,” hum-drum, oblivious society?

My recommendation:  start exercising some clandestine philanthropy!   Become a super hero of Samaritanism.   Your mission today:

• Do three good deeds for complete strangers
• Pay someone’s bridge tolls
• Leave a flower and a card for a waitress
• Drop off a bag of cookies for your hard-working flight attendant
• Sneak a small present into a co-worker’s desk

Keep track of all your deeds and compete with your chosen “Wizard” posse to out-Samaritan each other.  Give higher points for more extravagant challenges and charitable missions.    Be creative!   And give prizes to the winner(s) at the end of the day/week/month.    You’ll be amazed how much fun and dramatic every day can become as you surprise and delight the Muggles all around you while out-wizarding your friends.