Name from the Hat - Revision history

Richardatherton: Blanked the page

2016-05-17T20:29:14Z

Blanked the page

Richardatherton: /* Process: */

2016-05-17T20:25:07Z

Process:

Richardatherton: /* Process: */

2016-05-17T20:24:52Z

Process:

Richardatherton: /* Process: */

2016-05-17T20:23:20Z

Process:

Richardatherton: /* Process: */

2016-05-17T20:22:43Z

Process:

Richardatherton: /* Process: */

2016-05-17T20:21:41Z

Process:

Richardatherton: /* Process: */

2016-05-17T20:21:07Z

Process:

Richardatherton: /* Source: */

2016-05-17T20:05:09Z

Source:

Richardatherton: /* Source: */

2016-05-17T20:03:43Z

Source:

Richardatherton: /* Short Description: */

2016-05-17T20:02:35Z

Short Description:

← Older revision		Revision as of 20:29, 17 May 2016
Line 1:		Line 1:
−	~~===Use:===~~
−	~~An 'empathy hack' retro that forces team members to think of things from others' perspectives.~~
−	~~===Length of time:===~~
−	~~60 minutes.~~
−	~~===Short Description:===~~
−	By the simple process of selecting a colleague's name from a hat, team members are encouraged to put themselves in their colleagues' shoes and view the world from a different perspective. By evaluating the team's efforts through the eyes of another, they are better able to assess their own performance and that of the team.

−	~~===Materials:===~~
−	~~Hat, post-its, flipchart/whiteboard, pens~~
−	~~===Process:===~~
−
−	~~- 1. Each team member puts their name on a Post-It note and throws it into a hat. (1-2 minutes)~~
−
−	~~- 2. With the hat full, each person draws one Post-It out. (1 minute)~~
−
−	- 3. From the perspective of the person they drew from the hat, each participant writes two to three answers on separate Post-Its, to the following questions: (1) “What went well?” and (2) “What could have been better?” (5 mins)
−
−	- 4. In turn, each person places their 'stickies' on a board divided into two, each half dedicated to the above two questions, not mentioning the person from whom's perspective they were writing. (5-10 mins)
−
−	~~- 5. After the participant has placed all their stickies on the board, they ask the rest of the team "Guess Who?" (5-10 mins)~~
−
−	~~- 6. Once someone guesses correctly the person represented by the stickies, the person revealed gets to validate, disagree or add any comments to complete the picture. (5-10 mins)~~
−
−	~~- 7. When everybody has been represented on the board, cluster the Post-Its into common themes. (5 mins)~~
−
−	~~- 8. Translate these clusters into actionable tasks with owners. (5-10 mins)~~
−
−	~~===Source:===~~
−	~~[http://richardatherton.net/guess-who-a-retrospective-from-a-different-perspective/ richardatherton.net]~~

@@ Line 24: / Line 24: @@
 - 7. When everybody has been represented on the board, cluster the Post-Its into common themes. (5 mins)
-- 8. Translated these clusters into actionable tasks with owners. (5-10 mins)
+- 8. Translate these clusters into actionable tasks with owners. (5-10 mins)
 ===Source:===
 [http://richardatherton.net/guess-who-a-retrospective-from-a-different-perspective/  richardatherton.net]

@@ Line 16: / Line 16: @@
 - 3. From the perspective of the person they drew from the hat, each participant writes two to three answers on separate Post-Its, to the following questions: (1) “What went well?” and (2) “What could have been better?”  (5 mins)
-- 4. In turn, each person places their 'stickies' on a board divided into the above two categories, but not mentioning the person from whom's perspective they were writing. (5-10 mins)
+- 4. In turn, each person places their 'stickies' on a board divided into two, each half dedicated to the above two questions, not mentioning the person from whom's perspective they were writing. (5-10 mins)
 - 5. After the participant has placed all their stickies on the board, they ask the rest of the team "Guess Who?" (5-10 mins)

@@ Line 14: / Line 14: @@
 - 2. With the hat full, each person draws one Post-It out. (1 minute)
-- 3. From the perspective of the person they drew from the hat, each participant writes two to three answers on separate Post-Its, to the following questions: (1) “what went well” and (2) “what could have been better”  (5 mins)
+- 3. From the perspective of the person they drew from the hat, each participant writes two to three answers on separate Post-Its, to the following questions: (1) “What went well?” and (2) “What could have been better?”  (5 mins)
 - 4. In turn, each person places their 'stickies' on a board divided into the above two categories, but not mentioning the person from whom's perspective they were writing. (5-10 mins)

@@ Line 14: / Line 14: @@
 - 2. With the hat full, each person draws one Post-It out. (1 minute)
-- 3. From the perspective of the person they drew from the hat, each participant writes two to three answers on separate Post-Its, to the following questions:  (5 mins)
+- 3. From the perspective of the person they drew from the hat, each participant writes two to three answers on separate Post-Its, to the following questions: (1) “what went well” and (2) “what could have been better”  (5 mins)
 - 4. In turn, each person places their 'stickies' on a board divided into the above two categories, but not mentioning the person from whom's perspective they were writing. (5-10 mins)

@@ Line 15: / Line 15: @@
 - 3. From the perspective of the person they drew from the hat, each participant writes two to three answers on separate Post-Its, to the following questions:  (5 mins)
-      * “what went well” and
+       -  “what went well” and
-      * “what could have been better”.
+       -  “what could have been better”.
 - 4. In turn, each person places their 'stickies' on a board divided into the above two categories, but not mentioning the person from whom's perspective they were writing. (5-10 mins)

@@ Line 9: / Line 9: @@
 Hat, post-its, flipchart/whiteboard, pens
 ===Process:===
-Ask each member of the team to write their name on a piece of paper and to put it into a hat. They should then draw a piece each, making sure that each participant ends up with a name that is not their own.
-Now, ask everyone to imagine themselves as the person on their piece of paper. They must now write down 'what went well' and 'what could have been better' from the last sprint.
+- 1. Each team member puts their name on a Post-It note and throws it into a hat. (1-2 minutes)
-They should now spend 5-10 minutes thinking of three things each (positive and negative) that their imagined person would have felt, and write these down on two separate post-it notes.
-Divide the board into the two categories, and ask the participants to stick their post-its onto the appropriate one, without mentioning whose shoes they have been imagining themselves in.
+- 2. With the hat full, each person draws one Post-It out. (1 minute)
-Ask the group to guess who they think the post-its apply to best, and then reveal the true results. Individuals can then validate, argue and discuss the points on the post-its in front of the group.
-Finally, cluster the post-its into common themes, and decide on how best to action what you have learned from the task.
+- 3. From the perspective of the person they drew from the hat, each participant writes two to three answers on separate Post-Its, to the following questions:  (5 mins)
 ===Source:===
 [http://richardatherton.net/guess-who-a-retrospective-from-a-different-perspective/  richardatherton.net]

@@ Line 4: / Line 4: @@
 minutes.
 ===Short Description:===
-By the simple process of selecting a colleague's name from a hat, team members are encouraged to put themselves in their colleagues' shoes and view the world from a different perspective. By evaluating the team's efforts through the eyes of another, they should be able to better assess their own performance and that of the team.
+By the simple process of selecting a colleague's name from a hat, team members are encouraged to put themselves in their colleagues' shoes and view the world from a different perspective. By evaluating the team's efforts through the eyes of another, they are better able to assess their own performance and that of the team.
 ===Materials:===