Policy Games for Strategic Management

Chapter 7 - Understanding the Policy Game Construct

by Richard D. Duke and Jac L.A. Geurts

7.4 Process

Webster defines process as “a series of actions or operations directed toward a particular result.” Process within the policy game can be thought of as the mechanisms through which the roles in the game interact with each other and with the game environment (e.g. artifacts, environmental processes). The facilitator is responsible for controlling both the roles and the environment during the game. Process includes the presentation of the exercise (facilitation, the three primary phases of a game); the game artifacts (visuals, paraphernalia); and the evaluation of results (documentation, etc.).

Game processes can be thought of as the mechanics of the game. There are a variety of facilitator-generated tasks (e.g. forms, voting, etc.) as well as player-generated tasks (e.g. negotiation, developing and implementing strategies, etc.). Game processes have a structure that is important in establishing communication within the game. They are subject to modification during a given game as the players create a jargon of their own and as procedures are abbreviated for the mutual convenience of the participants.

7.4.1 The Presentation of the Exercise

The purpose of a policy exercise is to assist participants in gaining insight into a complex issue. The presentation of the policy exercise (facilitation, visuals and paraphernalia) is critical for success.

Facilitation

It is always necessary to have one clearly defined central figure facilitating the game whose word is beyond dispute. This does not mean that the facilitator is not subject to challenge and interrogation by the players during the critiques. Rather, it means that, during the normal operation of a cycle, the players must submit to the instructions of the facilitator. In addition, role advisors are used in games that are so complex that the start-up time would be prohibitive without them. Subject matter specialists may be introduced at any time to aid the facilitator in transmitting factual information to establish the nature of the system; they can assist players in learning both the function and the mechanics of the role.

To ensure proper use, a well-designed policy exercise must include detailed instructions for the facilitator. A good game design team will give careful consideration to the utility of the game as an environment for self-instruction. If the game is so rigid that the player cannot alter characteristics which seem unrealistic, irrelevant, or restraining, or which prohibit the player from exploring some alternative future that is of interest, the game has failed. At the same time, a game provides an environment for the player to confront the total system. A game is a failure if a player leaves the exercise understanding some aspect well, but having failed to improve his perception of the linkage of this aspect to the totality.

Techniques can be employed to involve the players emotionally in the consequences of the decisions they have made (e.g. public disclosure of the results of decisions). Another technique that can be used to maintain player involvement is the use of a roving reporter to reveal players’ actions or strategies. It must be emphasized that the objective of the game is to increase dialogue and not to embarrass the players. Successes may be reported; if it seems necessary to reveal a failure, the facilitator should go to some pains to give the player some way to save face (the concept of a “safe environment” is central to the design and use of a policy exercise).

Primary Phases of a Game

A policy game has three primary phases: introduction prior to play, the play of the game itself, and the final debriefing. This sequence of activities is required to initiate, conduct, and conclude the exercise.

Pre-Game Activities

A variety of pre-game activities are required of the facilitator prior to arrival of participants. This includes logistical concerns (room arrangements, technology, etc.) as well as distribution of player materials. Chairs should be comfortable and arranged to be conducive for player interaction. When possible, distribute materials beforehand to properly prepare the participants for the game. The pre-game handout serves several purposes: it identifies the day’s objective; provides a brief scenario and role descriptions; and gets players focused on the game activity. The sequence and timing of the distribution of these materials is situation specific, but the materials might well include:

* A letter of invitation with the particulars of the logistics, an explanation of the purpose of the game,

a description of what is expected of the participant, a description of the activities that will be

associated with the game experience, and a phone number or other contact information;

* A brief document that presents in summary the basic materials with which the participant is

expected to be familiar;

* Selected readings that will establish the proper frame of reference for the activities pursued by the

game; and

* A workbook that requires the participant to make explicit decisions before arriving at the game

(including a brief questionnaire if appropriate).

Game Activities

Once the participants are present, game activities begin. It is necessary to familiarize participants briefly with the intent of the game, the structure, procedures, and the initial scenario. The game progresses through several cycles; each cycle consists of a sequence through the steps of play. These cycles fall into three phases: learning how to play the game, dealing with the substance of the game, and the “happy ending.”

The introduction takes many forms; it may be presented to players either before or upon their arrival and a variety of media may be used. In some contexts, it is quite desirable to have lectures or readings precede the game as preparatory material. It is a mistake to have an elaborate introduction as play begins; this can overwhelm the participant. Inertia is reduced if presentation to the players is accomplished quickly. The initial presentation requires a coherent and relatively simple characterization of steps of play, symbolic structure, game mechanics, time scale, information flows, game components, and the primary linkages among players. Players will inevitably enter a game with a minimum of information; however, they will move to a fuller level of comprehension through the device of increasingly sophisticated cycles of play.

The scenario should be addressed briefly at the outset so that the players share some common sense of the problem that they are about to address. In most cases, this should be brief (a five-minute introduction or a brief two-page statement). More detail on the scenario may be presented during the later cycles of play.

As the session begins, a series of formalities are conducted. These might well include introductions, a restatement of the purpose of the meeting, etc. The first cycle is typically a bit more involved than the following ones because the participants must be oriented to their environment. The best way to familiarize the participants with the structure of the game is to walk them through the first cycle introducing the particulars as they go through the steps of play. They are required to make decisions and follow all procedures; these activities are kept as simple as possible. These steps are repeated each cycle; after the first cycle, the participants are familiar with the process and the pace will increase.

The first phase acknowledges the initial inertia that inevitably results when players encounter a game for the first time. During this time, the players may feel distressed and attempt to escape participation in the game. Only essential materials should be presented. The participants should be directed through the forms in careful sequence as rapidly as possible so they can gain a general sense of what is going to happen and can gather some perspective for their own roles, other roles, the various components of the game, and the general gestalt. Each role should address the simplest possible set of materials and decision forms. In later cycles, complexity can be introduced as required.

Each cycle is followed by a short critique; this is the last activity in each cycle. The critique is a facilitator-controlled discussion at the end of each cycle designed to assist participants to gain insight into the game. It signals to the participants that a cycle has ended and that they will soon get another chance to explore a new set of ideas. This must include a review of the results from the cycle just ending. It is important to permit players to challenge any aspect of the game that they may find to be troublesome.

The second phase of playing the game, usually from three to five cycles, requires the players to develop and test their strategies. Events are introduced to generate exogenous problems that create cross pressures. Players are then forced to find solutions. The operator should be as inconspicuous as possible, administrative procedures should be as smooth as possible, and the processing of decisions should be as rapid as possible. Participants should be permitted to explore the limits of the system. The only exception to this rule would occur if a breakdown of gaming activities were about to take place because the decisions went beyond the limits of the technical capability of the game.

The “happy ending” cycle is the final phase of the exercise which is run primarily for the purpose of permitting players to establish a logical conclusion to their strategies. The facilitator must be alert to the possibility that the participant may attempt to use “end-of-game” strategies (defined as making unrealistic decisions in an attempt to “beat the game”).

Post-Game Activities

The debriefing is the primary post-game activity; it is to be conducted while players are still present (don’t postpone this to a subsequent meeting, because memory fades!). The debriefing is a systematic end-of-game discussion to evaluate the exercise; it provides the participants with an opportunity to escape from the game. If the game has been carefully designed, the players will be deeply involved. Players need an opportunity to complain about errors or flaws that they have encountered and, conversely, to glow about their successes. It is important that they be given a brief opportunity to go through this phase. The debriefing serves two purposes:

* It gives the participants an opportunity to vent, to clarify, and to explain or defend their behavior; and

* It gives the facilitator an opportunity to interact with the participants to ensure that they are comfortable with the evolution of the exercise. Players need the opportunity to confirm their understanding of the significance of the content as it relates to the real world.

Debriefing is defined as a systematic facilitator-controlled discussion at the conclusion of the exercise to evaluate initial objectives. The primary function of the debriefing is to refocus the participants on the client’s environment. This should be a serious review session that:

* Permits the participants to vent their emotions;

* Provides feedback on the game;

* Interprets results of the game in a real-world context;

* Enriches the game experience;

* Validates the experience;

* Reviews the advantages of simulation and gaming; and

* Acknowledges the limits of the technique.

If a game is successful, the extensive final debriefing will be a rough-and-tumble session during which players, committed to their beliefs, challenge the underlying model(s) and evaluate how this links to the reality they are addressing. They should be encouraged to pursue with diligence any ambiguities, errors, or undocumented postures which seem invalid to them. Since there is not just one perspective represented by one player but multiple roles addressing the same problem from different perspectives, a debriefing can develop exceedingly sharp discussions about the character of the client’s environment.

The debriefing should be entered through a deliberate announcement that the players are leaving the game and entering into a period of analysis. There should be a summary statement about the systems, models, roles, linkages, scenario and other components of the game, and discussion by the players about the construction of the game, its message, its successes, and its failures. This should generally be brief and somewhat perfunctory since those players who really wish to pursue these questions can be sent the concept report. The availability of the concept report in a well-designed game permits this stage of the critique to go very quickly (see Step 13, Section 8.2.3).

During the course of the debriefing, players must be permitted to challenge any aspect of the game. Games are typically not constructs of hard science but rather abstract presentations of such phenomena. Participants may have suggestions that could lead to the improvement of the exercise. The challenge provision ensures that any player who has serious doubts has an opportunity to express his or her challenge and offer alternatives.

Finally, the debriefing should focus the players’ attention on the substantive problem under discussion. This review should be permitted as much time as possible. The purpose of the review is to concentrate on the problem and capitalize on the understanding now shared by the entire group. This review should take from 15 to 20 percent of the total time available for the play of the game.

7.4.2 Game Artifacts

Inevitably, policy games require a variety of artifacts to aid the process. These can vary widely, but judiciously used, they can be quite valuable. Two primary types of artifacts are visuals and paraphernalia.

Visuals

Visuals assist participants in gaining insight; artwork is an important consideration when creating the desired feel and image for the exercise. Graphics, when properly employed, are vital as one element in the suspension of disbelief that must be achieved if the exercise is to have its full impact. Symbols and paraphernalia should look sharp, clean and businesslike; concepts that are central to the discussion should be visible in chart form. Some suggestions for materials that may be useful include a typical accounting system sequence, typical computer output, data file layouts, flow-charts, functional interaction diagrams, linkages among the roles, overview schematics, player activity charts, room layout, rules, the schematic, steps of play, tables, technical graphics, wall charts, etc.

Paraphernalia

The system of gaming elements and system components described in Section IV creates the basis for forming an interactive and composite structure, both in terms of their possible forms and how to design them. The choice of materials (paraphernalia) follows logically from the nature of the model and the game objectives. Paraphernalia are the various artifacts required by the facilitator to mount the game. They are inevitable, but a well-designed game will use a minimum, and each artifact will have an explicit purpose. It is important to select the correct stage props and keep them at an appropriate level of detail. Designing a stage setting for a Broadway play presents a comparable problem: Oklahoma required an elaborate stage setting, while Waiting for Godot required a bare minimum of props.

The initial design specifications (see Chapter 8) should determine the constraints to be imposed on materials used in the game (e.g. the need for portability, reproducibility, storage requirements, etc.); the number of “things” employed should be reasonable when measured against the game objectives. Abuse through overabundance or lack of clarity can destroy the effectiveness of a game. Parsimony is the watchword for good game design.

A mockup of all game materials prepared during the development of the prototype can be quite useful; it permits the client to evaluate the level of detail and the final character of the game. It is important to maintain an up-to-date list of paraphernalia required for the game. Some things to keep in mind: color coding of materials, computer requirements, cost, documentation required, other media required, portability, quantities of materials required, sources of game components, and standard vs. custom-made materials.

7.4.3 Evaluation of Results

When the exercise has been concluded, it is important to be able to establish whether the objectives have been met. The client will need evidence of the results; hence, mechanisms need to be thought through while the Concept Report (see Section 8.2.3) is under development; this evaluation must be focused on the initial objectives. This will permit specific mechanisms and procedures to be developed during the construction sequence.

There are two concepts associated with evaluation that must be distinguished: evaluation of the exercise, and evaluation of the results of its use (see Chapter 6). Ironically, there are situations that result in a good game producing bad results (as a consequence of poor facilitation, the wrong participants, inappropriate distractions during play, etc.). The reverse may also be true (a good facilitator can sometimes save the day, an audience that has an intense interest in the topic may forgive flaws in the game).

When considering the game itself, an evaluation of each of the specific game elements is the most appropriate way to proceed. If criteria were developed during the evolution of the Concept Report, the elements can be judged separately. Of course, the elements must also be evaluated in their totality. It is important to establish procedures to establish efficacy of the game in terms of validity, reliability, and utility. The evaluation should also look for unexpected outcomes, either positive or negative.

In some cases, a follow-up questionnaire may be sent to participants to serve one of two purposes: The objective may be to ascertain how much the participants learned from the game or the objective may be to have the participants critique the game. It is important to distinguish between these two objectives.

Documentation

Often, the client will require a final report documenting the exercise design, use, and results. It is also useful to provide the participants with materials that summarize the happenings of the game. This serves as a set of notes, but the document can also be circulated to confirm impressions derived during the game. It can serve as a further commitment of the participants to the process, by reinforcing the “message” from the experience.