Interesting article here from today's NY Times. Apparently "The Sims" video game franchise has sold 100 million copies, making the $4B franchise one of the biggest pop cult phenomenons going.
This article attributes much of the success of the game to the Second Life aspect; the exploration of different expressions of oneself, or what is sometimes referred to as the "what-if" recesses of ones personality.
It seems funny that so many people are so interested in behaving in a way that is different or perhaps contrary to what they wish to portray regularly, or than what others have come to expect. How can a meeting setting appeal to this urge and satisfy this desire? Is there a benefit? I would think that offering some kind of networking tool composed of avatars or anonymous decision support function would harness the collective wisdom of individuals... and all of their personas. Perhaps offering a richer and more candid range of inputs.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
5 comments:
I can understand the allure of "The Sims". I think that some of the appeals of such a game must be that you only have to deal with the "life" of the game when you choose, as well as the idea that if you're not happy at all, you can simply restart with a new character. Nothing is permanent; nothing endures.
In applying this to meetings, I think that you're faced with the difficulty that the people that interact in a meeting setting are aware that it is more than just entertainment, and that the person you present as during the meeting isn't just a random choice. In the Sims, any action can be written off as 'gameplay'. No real accountability, which definitely doesn't apply to someone representing a business, or their years of study and research, in an important gathering of the minds.
I think that there are parallels between the mindset of someone in the midst of a roleplaying game, and someone intoxicated. There is the idea that any action can be written off later as being simply part of the actions of someone in their 'state' at the time. And I don't think this is the mindset of someone that I would like to be meeting with for practical purposes.
I'm big on the protection afforded by the Intoxication Act (sorry; MY intoxication act). You're right, shrugging accountability isn't in the best interests of developing trust and the other necessary components of an effective dynamic that will see real change take place.
I still think that disconnected avatars could be appropriate in at least some phases though. A generative ideation phase, for instance. Just getting ideas out there without any fear of judgement or offending authorities, etc. This could open the flood gates on undesirable inputs, but the nuggets that are currently overshadowed by the grim spectre of inhibition would shine through with the empowerment of the "what if" persona.
I think the most optimistic people out there - a category I definitely don't fall under - would also say that nothing is permanent, and that simply restarting is not without pain and effort, but a possibility.
The act of trying out new personality types or behaviors in the sims or second life platforms is most intersting and perhaps the parallel to meetings is in the alternate personality. How often do individuals take on different personas in meeting environments? Do people that are regularly opinionated take a back seat in some circumstances, do some that are normal followers get put in the leader/facilitator/moderator role for meetings on occasion. What about those that display different attitudes to the benefit/detriment of meetings?
If so, what are the outcomes? are meetings good environments to practice these switches in behavior, i would argue no for the same reasons above, that it is not a game situation and there are potential real life consequences. That being said, i certainly do believe that there are those out there that put on a different hat when they enter into certian meeting environments.
Great points. People are assuming roles in meetings all the time. See: http://www.debonogroup.com/6hats.htm
Also, the Kelly's at IDEO are promoting the assumption of roles as a means to innovate. Surowiecki in The Wisdom of Crowds promotes assigning a devil's advocate and other mindsets as a part of harnessing the collective intelligence of a group.
A little closer to your point is the leadership balance. A good leader is moderating her own contributions in a meeting so as not to dominate, and encouraging their people to develop themselves and the meeting outcomes by operating outside of their usual comfort zone.
The potential for new ideas increases with each additional point of view. This is most obviously achieved by increasing the number of participants, but also by challenging participants to think in new or different ways. Roleplaying is one of many access points to this.
Idea exchange and development is not limited to face-to-face discussions, as this forum proves. When one encounters a previously unthought thought for the first time, does the fact that it was spoken by a colleague, typed on a page, sung in a song or delivered by a film character lessen the idea’s value or potential for positive change? Sims/Second Life characters need not be permanent to have an impact. What endure are the ideas you discover and the insights you gain during the experience.
Post a Comment