Team Building - Oh No, Not Another Pointless Activity!

I often get frustrated at the way some trainers use activities. Training should certainly be interactive and get people involved, and some activities can be excellent, but you really need to know why you're using them and what people are going to get from them. 

Let me give you an example.

There are lots of " team - building " activities ( a term I view with deep suspicion from the start ) based on problem solving. You've probably seen them, you're stranded on the moon or lost in the desert ( yes, everyday situations for most of us - you've lost your car in the supermarket car park might be more relevant ).

You get a list of items and you have to put them in order in terms of which ones would be most use to you. People get together in groups and discuss their thoughts to come up with a group answer.

Now, I don't mind these things, I use them myself. But I do mind people overstating what you can learn from them. 

For instance, as I mentioned, I've seen them referred to as " team - building " activities. They're nothing of the sort. They encourage discussion, they practice
communication skills and perhaps negotiation styles.

Because all that's going on is people are having a discussion. So you get to see how people might behave in situations where they're having a discussion with others and trying to put their point across.

Except, of course, you also have to factor in the point that nothing is riding on the outcome of this activity, so people won't necessarily show their true colours. Some people will be more aggressive than usual, others will sit back and not bother because they don't really care enough to get involved.

Anyway, the point is that this exercise can be useful but only in certain ways.

What it doesn't show is anything much about how teams really work together.

If you want an activity to explore team roles, it needs to be much more elaborate and lengthy, with opportunities for people to take on the roles, e.g. creating and making a film together.

This is an example of someone not really understanding what the activity they used was about and what it was meant to show. As a participant, I find it annoying when that happens because I feel the trainer hasn't thought things through enough.

It can work the other way as well, an activity can be TOO elaborate for the point it's making. I've seen long activities where groups have to build something or carry out an exercise while some of you are roped together blindfolded ( no, it's not a weird fantasy, I've seen it happen ). Then, after an hour or two of this, the conclusion is something like, " teams work better when they communicate with each other ". Yes, and they work better when half the team isn't blindfolded or tied together with rope.

So what am I saying, apart from having a good moan?

If you're going to use an activity on a course, you need to be clear about two things.

Firstly, what exactly are the key learning points that the activity can help to illustrate? Can the activity support the points you want to draw out? Conversely, is the activity
too complicated if you just want to make a fairly simple point? Be careful about how you choose it in terms of the length and complexity.

Secondly, how are you going to debrief the activity to draw out the learning? How much time have you allowed for the debrief, what form will it take, how open are you to the possibility that people may raise points other than the ones you were expecting?

If you're facilitating learning, you should select an activity that embodies the main points you want to discuss, but you need to accept that other things may come up. People  may draw their own conclusions or see things in it which you weren't expecting and you need to accept that., You can't prescribe exactly what people will
learn.

Having said that, if people do raise a lot of points which you weren't expecting, maybe you chose the wrong activity.

So make sure you really ask yourself, " Why? " before using any activity. Don't just assume that any activity must be a good thing, it must have a clear purpose and be
debriefed well in order for it to be justified.