PLAY FOR PERFORMANCE: December 2005

Guest Gamer

Interview with Kat Koppett

PFP: Kat, you are a trainer and a consultant who uses storytelling in corporate settings. What's the story behind it?

Kat: I have an eclectic background with an undergraduate degree in acting from NYU. For a long time, I was an actor and improviser in New York. Through a series of strange events, I ended up running creativity and communication workshops with an improvisational theatre company. At one point, I wanted to make sure that what I taught actually had some theoretical validity to it, so I went back to school and got a Masters degree in Organizational Psychology from Columbia. Luckily, I found research that supported the kind of work I was doing. Since then, I've continued to expand my work applying theatre and storytelling techniques to organizational settings.

PFP: How does storytelling fit into training adults?

Kat: In almost every way, actually. We use stories and storytelling exercises for conducting training needs assessment, for enhancing retention, for evaluating learners' understanding, for building teams, for envisioning the future, for generating ideas, for solving problems, for making memorable presentations….

PFP: That sounds great. Why do you think storytelling is such an effective tool in all these situations?

Kat: Well, I've narrowed it all down to four major reasons—at least for this week:

1. Stories are an incredibly robust way to convey meaning. They are not just facts; they contain feelings and sensory impressions and colors and metaphors and associations. So the learning from stories is especially rich. Plus, learners are more likely to retain the information. They remember the why and the how as well as the what.
2. Stories bridge the gap between the trainer and the learner in two major ways. First, storytelling is an interactive process. The listener plays as active a role in the communication as does the storyteller. Second, by having participants tell their own stories, a trainer can directly tap into their experience.
3. Storytelling is an effective assessment strategy. By listening to participants relate tales from their own experiences and by facilitating discussion around these tales, a trainer can get a strong sense of what the participants need, what they know, and what they have retained.
4. Stories are fun. And, as a colleague of mine once said, “People don't feel incompetent when they're having fun. So fun enhances interest and intrinsic motivation in learning.”

PFP: What happens during one of your storytelling exercises?

Kat: Our work could be as simple as sitting in a circle and sharing experiences related to a specific topic. Or as large as having a company create a collective mythology of the company: past, present and future. In addition to having the trainer and participants share stories, we use exercises designed to help people create stories in a more conscious way—individually and collaboratively. For example, we use a technique called the “Story Spine”, which is a template for building well-structured stories. And we have an exercise called “Color/Advance” which requires storytellers to alternate between action and description to form vibrant and compelling narratives.

PFP: How do participants react to your storytelling exercises? Don't they sometimes feel scared?

Kat: I suppose sometimes they could. When you ask people to share and make up stories, you are asking them to take two kinds of risks: revealing themselves and “being creative”. Most of us have spent our lives being punished for doing either of these things. That said, we are by nature storytellers. It's nearly impossible for us not to tell stories. So, given just a little encouragement, participants almost always engage willingly. There are a few things we do to help create a safe environment. One of the simplest ways to allow people to feel safe is to give them choices. The choices we give participants include choice of topics, choice of working individually or in teams, choice of working on a true story or a made-up one, and choice of sharing their story or not. Giving participants a flexible structure like the “Story Spine” can also help reduce anxiety. Finally, framing the exercise within the context of specific training objectives can help those who prefer a linear and analytic approach.

PFP: Do you have a favorite storytelling session experience?

Kat: I ran a story circle in which the participants shared their experiences with “connecting to others”. The stories took place in Syria, South Africa, Germany, New Orleans and about a dozen other places. The diversity and similarity of the stories was striking, and the feeling in the group afterwards—the intense bonding of a group of strangers—was so moving.

PFP: Have you trained other trainers to use storytelling?

Kat: Yes, and they love it. In fact, I have one client who had such success in using storytelling techniques that he's redesigning a new-hire orientation program around a full-day story activity. So far, he's received rave reviews from the participants, other trainers, and company executives. How's that for a happy ending?

PFP: Any advice to people who want to improve their storytelling skills?

Kat: There are many recent books on the use of story in organizations. Trainers might be especially interested in Tales for Trainers by Margaret Parkin. And I'd recommend a great book on narrative and lots of other things. It's a bible of the improvisational theatre world. Impro, by Keith Johnstone.

[Table of Contents]

Improv Game

Zooming Around
by Kat Koppett

The same series of events or information can be transformed into a myriad of stories. This exercise helps the storyteller work like a movie camera—zooming in for close focus, zooming out for a broader picture—in order to highlight elements of a process that is being relayed. The storyteller can zoom in or out on an action, a descriptive detail or an emotion.

The key element of this interactive story is that the storyteller tells the story and is periodically instructed by a “director” to “zoom in” or “zoom out”.

Purpose

To review and reinforce key steps and principles in a work process.

Participants

Any number, organized into pairs.

Time

10 to 20 minutes.

Flow

Divide the participants into pairs. Have the pair identify one person as “A” and the other as “B”. Ask B to act as the storyteller and A as the Director.

Explain how the storyteller and the director interact with each other:

• The storyteller begins telling her story.
• The director periodically instructs the storyteller to zoom in. The storyteller focuses on a detail within the story and provides additional information.
• From time to time, the director instructs the storyteller to zoom out. The storyteller moves to a higher-level view.
• Sometimes the director may say “zoom in” or “zoom out” more than once in a row to get wide variations of levels in the story.
• The director continues in this way until the process is finished or time is up.

Announce a suitable time limit of 5 to 10 minutes. Ask storytellers to begin. Start a timer.

Circulate among participants, eavesdropping in on different stories. However, don't interfere with the flow of the activity.

When the allotted time is up, stop the activity.

Ask the directors and storytellers to exchange roles and repeat the process.

Variations

Have participants work alone, writing their stories on paper. From time to time, call out “zoom in” and “zoom out” to the whole group.

Use the technique as an interactive lecture. Encourage participants to direct you to zoom in and out during your lecture presentation.

Have members of one team tell a story while members of the other team direct the flow of the story.

A Sample Application: Telemarketing

Facilitator: Please begin.

Storyteller: Once upon a time there was an outbound sales rep named Peter. Every day, Peter called prospects from his database.

Director: Zoom in.

Storyteller: He clicked on the dial icon on his computer and waited for the dialer to ring a prospect. Once the prospect answered, Peter said, “Hello.”

Director: Zoom out.

Storyteller: Peter greeted the prospect and attempted to make a sale.

Director: Zoom in.

Storyteller: Peter probed to uncover the prospect's needs.

Director: Zoom in.

Storyteller: Peter asked open-ended questions about the prospect's current situation.

Director: Zoom out.

Storyteller: After identifying the needs, Peter asked the prospect how he might help him. Working with the prospect, Peter some services that his organization could provide.

[Table of Contents]

Structured Sharing

GameGame

GameGame is an application of a flexible small-group activity to enable players to express, explain, and exchange their opinions about training games.

GameGame has two important outcomes:

• Players express, explain, and exchange a wide range of opinions about training games.
• Players work cooperatively and creatively in teams.

Time Requirement

About 40 minutes. You can easily expand or contract the game to suit the available time.

Materials

• Twenty or more index cards with different opinions about training games. Here are some examples:
  • You lose control of trainees.
  • They motivate participants.
  • They ensure transfer of training.
  • Only lazy trainers use them.
• Four blank index cards for each player.

Flow Of The Game

In the following description, the phases of the game are printed in regular type, while sample segments from an imaginary play of the game are printed in italics.

Preparing The Initial Set of Cards. Before the workshop, prepare a set of opinion cards. Each card should contain one opinion about training games. Come up with a variety of positive and negative opinions. Prepare at least two opinion cards for each anticipated player. If you cannot make up that many opinions, use duplicates.

Getting Started. Start the game quickly. When the players are ready, say to them: “I'd like to begin right off with a group activity that will help us get to know each other. It will also allow us to discover what opinions people have about training games. This activity should set the stage for the rest of the workshop.”

Card Writing by Players. Hand out four blank index cards to each player. Ask them to write down an opinion about training games on each card. The opinions need not reflect the personal views of the writer. They should represent enthusiastic and skeptical points of view. Give some sample opinions to the group.

Distributing Cards. After about 3 minutes, collect opinion cards from players. Secretly add your prepared cards to this pile. Mix the cards well and deal three cards to each player. Ask the players to study the opinions and arrange them according to their personal preference—from the most to the least acceptable opinion.

Exchanging Cards. Arrange the remaining opinion cards on a large table at one side of the room. Tell the players that they may discard cards from their hands and pick up better replacements. Players must work silently; they should not talk to each other during this phase of the game. At the end of this exchange, each player should have three cards that may or may not include cards from the original set.

Swapping Cards. Instruct players to exchange cards with each other to make their hands better reflect their personal opinions. In this phase, any player may swap cards with any other player; every player must exchange at least one card.

Forming Teams. Ask players to compare their cards with each other and to form teams with people holding similar opinions. There is no limit to the number of players who may team up together, but a team may keep no more than three cards. It must discard all other cards, and the three cards it keeps must that meet with everyone's approval.

Preparing a Poster. Ask each team to prepare a graphic poster that reflects its three final cards. This poster should not include any text. After 5 minutes, ask each team to read its three cards, display its poster, and explain the symbolism.

Awards. Identify winning teams in each of these categories:

• Internal consistency among the three final cards.
• Clarity of the message in the poster.
• Appropriateness of the illustrations.

[Table of Contents]

Template

Design Your Own Group Grope Game

GameGame was designed on the Group Grope frame (described in last month's issue of PFP). I changed the content but keep the activity.

Use the template below to design your own Group Grope game. It is the same GameGame printed above, except all the words, phrases, and sentences that specifically refer to opinions about training games are clearly marked. To create your own game, all you have to do is to replace the highlighted content with your own content.

Here's what you need in order to perform the required replacement:

• The name of your game.
• What you want participants to write on the cards (examples: opinions, ideas, suggestions, facts, questions).
• Name for these cards (examples: opinion cards, idea cards, suggestion cards, question cards).
• Sample items that participants write on the cards.
• Final product (examples: poster, list of suggestions, list of questions, summary, checklist, mission statement, wish list, priority list, agenda).
• Criteria for arranging the cards (examples: from best to worst, from useful to useless, from specific to general).
• Categories for evaluating the final products (examples: internal consistency, clarity).

GameGame

GameGame is an application of a flexible small-group activity to enable players to express, explain, and exchange their opinions about training games.

GameGame has two important outcomes:

• Players express, explain, and exchange a wide range of opinions about training games.
• Players work cooperatively and creatively in teams.

Time Requirement

About 40 minutes. You can easily expand or contract the game to suit the available time.

Materials

• Twenty or more index cards with different opinions about training games. Here are some examples:
  • You lose control of trainees.
  • They motivate participants.
  • They ensure transfer of training.
  • Only lazy trainers use them.
• Four blank index cards for each player.

Flow Of The Game

Preparing The Initial Set of Cards. Before the workshop, prepare a set of opinion cards. Each card should contain one opinion about training games. Come up with a variety of positive and negative opinions. Prepare at least two opinion cards for each anticipated player. If you cannot make up that many opinions, use duplicates.

Getting Started. Start the game quickly. When the players are ready, say to them: “I'd like to begin right off with a group activity that will help us get to know each other. It will also allow us to discover what opinions people have about training games. This activity should set the stage for the rest of the workshop.”

Card Writing by Players. Hand out four blank index cards to each player. Ask them to write down an opinion about training games on each card. The opinions need not reflect the personal views of the writer. They should represent enthusiastic and skeptical points of view. Give some sample opinions to the group.

Distributing Cards. After about 3 minutes, collect opinion cards from players. Secretly add your prepared cards to this pile. Mix the cards well and deal three cards to each player. Ask the players to study the opinions and arrange them according to their personal preference—from the most to the least acceptable opinion.

Exchanging Cards. Arrange the remaining opinion cards on a large table at one side of the room. Tell the players that they may discard cards from their hands and pick up better replacements. Players must work silently; they should not talk to each other during this phase of the game. At the end of this exchange, each player should have three cards that may or may not include cards from the original set.

Swapping Cards. Instruct players to exchange cards with each other to make their hands better reflect their personal opinions. In this phase, any player may swap cards with any other player; every player must exchange at least one card.

Forming Teams. Ask players to compare their cards with each other and to form teams with people holding similar opinions. There is no limit to the number of players who may team up together, but a team may keep no more than three cards. It must discard all other cards, and the three cards it keeps must that meet with everyone's approval.

Preparing a Poster. Ask each team to prepare a graphic poster that reflects its three final cards. This poster should not include any text. After 5 minutes, ask each team to read its three cards, display its poster, and explain the symbolism.

Awards. Identify winning teams in each of these categories:

• Internal consistency among the three final cards.
• Clarity of the message in the poster.
• Appropriateness of the illustrations.

[Table of Contents]

Pithy Saying

Thinking About Thinking

My Atlanta friend, David Strain, recently sent me this pithy saying. (Thanks, David!)

Harlan Ellison is a writer, but his statement applies to game designers and trainers as well.

Most training games incorporate questions. Players are happy if these questions make them think they are thinking. For example, if you ask, “What is an important festival that is celebrated in different regions of India?”, they have to recall the correct answer. If their answer matches the single answer given on the back of the card or on the computer screen, and if they score points, they are thrilled. They think that they are thinking, learning, and making progress. They believe that they know the cultural nuances of India.

If you ask a different type of question such as, “What do you think are the reasons that some people in the South of India oppose Diwali as a national festival?” and they cannot repeat a prepared answer, and there is no feedback on the back of the card or on the computer screen, they are unhappy. They feel they are not learning anything or making progress. They feel frustrated and confused because you did not teach them the answer.

The main difference between these two types of questions is that the first one makes people think that they are thinking. There is a single correct answer and recalling it makes people love the training activity and the trainer. The second type of question does not have a single correct answer. They represent the types of questions asked in the real world. They have to really think and recall relevant information, critically evaluate each piece of information, apply it to the situation, and come up with a unique hypothesis. One participant's response may differ from another participant's, and yet both could be appropriate and relevant. This type of deep thinking is often frustrating because nobody tells you if your answer is correct or not. Participants hate the training activity because it really makes them think. They also hate the trainer.

Here's another example pair:

• Pseudo thinking: What is the second step in the development of a team?
• Real thinking: What positive and negative things would happen if we forcibly skip the storming stage in the growth of a team?

Here's a question to make you really think—and to justify your answer:

“Would you prefer to use shallow questions to make participants think they are thinking (and love you) or use provocative questions to make participants really think (and hate you)?”

[Table of Contents]