This game can be played by one group, or between two or more teams competitively.
The activity is more dynamic if played in competitive teams, minimum three players per team, ideally 5-10 per team.
This game can be played by very large groups, in teams, for example at conferences.
The exercise involves devising and using a simple coded non-verbal (unspoken) communications system.
The game may be played just once as a quick activity or ice-breaker, or in several rounds, optionally enabling the group/teams to review and refine their coding systems, at the discretion of the facilitator.
This is a very flexible game concept, and can be adapted in many ways to suit your situation and purposes.
These instructions are for competitive teams playing the game. Adapt it accordingly for a single group.
Equipment:
A pen/pencil and paper for each team member.
Instruction to teams:
• Devise a secret coded (non-spoken, non-written) communication system for your team which enables a very simple piece of information - a single digit number between 0-9 - to be passed throughout the whole group/team - person to person ideally - so that everyone knows the number.
• The winning team is the first to successfully convey the number to all team members. (If playing as a single group then the task is simply to successfully communicate the number throughout the group.)
• The number must be conveyed using non-verbal and secret signals - it cannot be spoken, mouthed, written, signalled by holding up a
number of fingers, or 'tapped' using fingers or feet, etc.
• Facial expressions and eye contact are likely to be significant in non-verbal code systems developed, although teams will devise other methods, which is part of the fun.
• Whether to allow or mention touching - for example secret hand-squeezing, which teams might think to try - is at the discretion of the facilitator.
• The secret code aspect is important if the game is played competitively and teams are given the same number to convey, or awarded bonus points for identifying an opposing an team's number.
• When receiving the number each player must privately record the number on a piece of paper, as proof of successful communication.
Alternatively to avoid risk of cheating or accidentally revealing
numbers, instruct people to write down the number after all teams have completed the round.
• The team leader must raise his/her hand to signal to the facilitator when group/team members have received the number correctly. This potentially requires another team coded signal - to confirm successful understanding - which is a matter for the teams to decide.
• No speaking is allowed while the game is in progress.
• Teams can be given between 5-10 minutes to devise and test their codes. Large teams may require longer.
• The facilitator begins each round of the game by showing the number (a single digit between 0-9) to the team leaders.
• The team leaders then take their seats or starting positions and await the facilitator's signal to start the game, at which the number must be communicated to all team members - using the non-verbal secret code - and ideally person to person (which introduces greater risk of errors and is a sterner test of the code system devised, and also of teamworking).
• (At facilitator's discretion) teams may stand, sit around the same table, or on separate tables, although separate tables makes cheating less easy to detect.
• Standing and mingling makes the activity more dynamic and energising, and increases the need for competing teams to devise a clever code to avoid it being 'cracked' or interpreted by members of competing teams.
Variations to the game:
• A way to enforce the conveying of the instruction person-to-person is to have the teams stand in a line, so that each person sees the conveyed signal individually, then turns about-face to convey it down the line to the next person. Such an arrangement increases the need for teams to consider having a signal for confirming to the leader that all members have correctly received the number.
134
• (At facilitator's discretion) teams may or may not make written notes of their coding system (so that each person has a code key). The facilitator can decide whether using a code key, or working purely from memory, will be most enjoyable/beneficial. Allowing written code keys enables more complex codes to be developed, which is appropriate for bigger exercises, whereas not allowing written code keys encourages quicker simpler codes and is more appropriate for a quick game or ice-breaker. Alternatively the facilitator may choose not to mention the possibility of teams making written code keys, and leave it open for teams to use the option or not.
• Where the game is played between competing teams, the facilitator can choose to give a different number to each team (rather than require teams to communicate the same number). This offers the option to award bonus points for a team which manages to identify the number of an opposing team.
Review points:
• Isn't it amazing how many signals can be conveyed without spoken or written words?..
• The section on body language provides useful background theory about non-verbal communications.
• It's one thing to devise a communications system or set of
communications rules - it's quite another challenge to ensure everyone understands it and uses it properly.
• Vital parts of communications systems/rules work best when people can remember them, without having to refer to complicated
instructions.
• Complex communications systems/rules are often very good in theory, but difficult to apply in practice because they entail an additional dimension - represented in this game by the code key - equating to a reference or instruction manual, which in real work situations people often fail to use, understand, keep updated, etc.
• Written instructions and reference guides are obviously important for quality management and training, etc., and for the operation of all complex/vital functions, but the fundamental rules of communications (and other critical organisational activities) are best kept as simple, intuitive and memorable as possible, so that core performance is not hindered or made unnecessarily complicated.
• In terms of this exercise, conveying the communication is only half the communications process - the other half is checking the
communication has been received and correctly understood.
• In terms of wider organisational communications other subsequent steps are required, notably ensuring that the communication is agreed and acted upon, which involves management areas such as: motivation (within which models such as Adams' Equity Theory, and Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs are helpful); delegation, especially follow up; and project management, within which reporting and monitoring are vital.