L 2 C Learning to Collaborate

1. L2C Learning to Collaborate D3.1 and 3.2 ACDT Framework, Simulation Scenarios and Design and Prototypes (WP 3) Albert Angehrn & Alicia Cheak, INSEAD and Paolo Petta, OFAI

2. L2C Simulation Games Prototypes Design (WP 3) Structure of the Presentation • ACDT Framework • L2C Simulation Types • Simulation Scenarios • L2C Simulation Prototypes • Edusynergy • WorldTeam • Pit Stop Simulation • Eagle Racing Simulation • Intermediary Agent Simulation

3. L2C Simulation Games Prototypes Design (WP 3) ACDT Framework

4. L2C Simulation Games Prototypes Design (WP 3) ACDT Framework: Objectives The Framework provides structure for designing, implementing and deploying effective technology-enhanced learning solutions based on advanced organisational simulation games. 2. Supports game designers and educators in the selection and integration of behavioural models for the design, development and deployment of simulations addressing collaboration dynamics.

5. L2C Simulation Games Prototypes Design (WP 3) ACDT Framework: Key Components The Knowledge Harvesting phase which brings together a number of collaboration-related models and dynamics in six research areas, The Modelling and Design phase which consists of selecting models and dynamics gathered in WP 1 toward the design of simulation games targeting specific collaboration challenges, and The Deployment phase, which consists of the implementation and diffusion of the simulations to target users.

6. L2C Simulation Games Prototypes Design (WP 3) ACDT Framework

7. L2C Simulation Games Prototypes Design (WP 3) ACDT Framework: Knowledge Harvesting Phase • Underlying Foundations/Models: • Motivational and Cultural Dynamics • Knowledge Integration Dynamics • Technology-enhanced Workgroup Dynamics • Collaboration Management Competencies: Best/Worst Practice Cases • Learning Solutions addressing Advanced Collaboration Dynamics • Advanced Simulation & Agents Technologies Analyzed at different levels:

8. L2C Simulation Games Prototypes Design (WP 3) ACDT Framework: Design Phase • Consists of a set of: • Design and modelling guidelines • Implementation guidelines • Pedagogical guidelines

9. L2C Simulation Games Prototypes Design (WP 3) ACDT Framework: Deployment Phase • Disseminateand make L2C Simulation games available among learners and players interested in competence development in the area of collaboration. • Observe and evaluate of these learning experiences and outcomes (related to Workpackage 6, Embedded, Continuous Evaluation). • Further extend the effectiveness of the simulation-based learning experiences as well as the usability and deployability of the L2C Simulation Games prototypes, fine-tuning also the technical and pedagogical guidelines (related to Workpackage 4, Pilots and Prototyping Cycles).

10. L2C Simulation Games Prototypes Design (WP 3) Simulation Types COLLABORATION Organisational perspective Group/Team perspective Individual/Interpersonal perspective

11. L2C Simulation Games Prototypes Design (WP 3) Three Simulation Types

12. L2C Simulation Games Prototypes Design (WP 3) Key Collaboration Issues Targeted

13. L2C Simulation Games Prototypes Design (WP 3) Key Collaboration Issues Targeted

14. L2C Simulation Games Prototypes Design (WP 3) Different Team Interaction Modes Targeted

15. L2C Simulation Games Prototypes Design (WP 3) Key Collaboration Issues Targeted

16. L2C Simulation Games Prototypes Design (WP 3) Simulation Scenarios

17. L2C Simulation Games Prototypes Design (WP 3) Organizational Dynamics (OD) Simulation Scenario Scenario 1 Imagine being put in charge of exploring the opportunities for increasing the level and quality of collaboration within an educational institution (a university) through implementing a set of collaboration systems and processes. You will face the resistanceof deans, faculty members, administrative staff and other stakeholders protecting a not-so-collaborative status quo dominating the reality of today’s educational institutions. The experience will help you realize why collaboration is so hard in certain organizational contexts and which factors might determine the success or failure of managerial initiatives aimed at identifying and leveraging collaborative synergies in organizations.

18. L2C Simulation Games Prototypes Design (WP 3) Group/Team Dynamics (GT) Simulation Scenario Scenario 2 Imagine you are a member of a distributed and very diverse team working on a complex business issue (involving a strategic decision to be developed, taken, and implemented collaboratively). Without even realizing it, you will experience how an initially collaborative context can gradually degenerate into one where the different team members gradually blame or accuse each other of incompetence, start ignoring each other, or feel the need to focus their resources on competing rather than looking for reachable win-win solutions. The experience will help you realize why collaboration in teams, particularly when distributed and diverse, is so difficult, and to identify factors which might improve the chances of such teams and groups to collaborate in a more efficient and effective way.

19. L2C Simulation Games Prototypes Design (WP 3) Group/Team Dynamics (GT) Simulation Scenario Scenario 3 Imagine you are a member of a high performing team, tasked with executing a highly coordinated, interdependent group activity. Through the hands-on experience, you will be immersed in the dynamics of team collaboration and the challenges of group work in the presence of time and competitive pressures. The experience will help you realize the key ingredients for high team performance as well as typical team breakdown patternsthat can emerge if certain conditions are not in place.

20. L2C Simulation Games Prototypes Design (WP 3) Group/Team Dynamics (GT) Simulation Scenario Scenario 4 Imagine you are a high-level decision maker of a race car company, faced with the dilemma of making a number of decisions affecting the financial future of your company. You are confronted with different options, types of information, and conflicting opinions, which you will have to analyze and manage properly in order to make the best decision. In addressing such a situation you will be immersed in the dynamics of collaborative decision making and the challenges to sound decision making when emotions, alliances, perception, interpretation of information, peer pressure, etc come into play. The experience will also help you experience how collaboration in collocated teams can be significantly improved with Synchronous Collaboration Technologies, particularly when facing the challenges and pitfalls of collaborative decision-making in teams and larger groups.

21. L2C Simulation Games Prototypes Design (WP 3) Interpersonal Dynamics (IP) Simulation Scenario Scenario 5 Imagine you have been put in charge by your consulting firm of a difficult change management mission in an organization. You will have to move to this organization and stay there for 6 months, trying your best to achieve your mission. You are confident to be able to succeed, but something is going to make it even harder: The CEO of the organization has decided that in order to minimize disruptions, you are not going to intervene directly within organizational staff. Instead, you will always need to interact first with an “organizational contact”, an intermediary who has been put in charge of working with you to implement all the decisions you will take (meet managers at the organization, communicate and organize events, etc.). As you will soon realize, collaborating with this contact will make things complicated, and you will wonder what to do to increase both his motivation and capability to work with you towards the achievement of your mission. The experience will help you realize what makes collaboration difficult at the inter-personal level and how to diagnose and influence an individual’s attitude and behaviour towards collaboration.

22. L2C Simulation Games Prototypes Design (WP 3) L2C Simulation Games Prototypes

23. EduSynergyAddressing the Challenge of Adopting Collaboration Processes & Systems in Higher Education Contexts L2C Simulation Games Prototypes Design (WP 3) • Key Features • Intensive, time-concentrated learning experience (1/2 day workshop of simulation run + debriefing) • Learning from interaction with collocated (or distributed) co-players sharing the same "role" • Learning from interaction with virtual characters • The player role is external (Collaboration Agent) to the context with a mission to fulfil within the context (e.g. to drive the adoption of collaboration-related processes and technologies)

24. Collaboration Opportunity DomainsCollaboration in Higher Education Contexts is not as advanced as it could/should be L2C Simulation Games Prototypes Design (WP 3) COD 1. Student and student COD 2. Faculty members across different departments COD 3. Between administration groups COD 4. Faculty and students COD 5. School management and faculty COD 6. Administrative staff and students COD 7. Faculty and industry representatives

25. SmallWorld Simulations – generic components Generic Components: Key difference from traditional simulations Key difference from traditional games A realistic scenario A challenging mgmt mission A set of believable characters A range of managerial actions A realistic dynamic(reflecting differentresistance forms, the impact of formal and informalinfluence networks and cultural factors on the innovation diffusion dynamics)

26. Designing EduSynergy L2C Simulation Games Prototypes Design (WP 3) • Learning Objectives: • Experience the challenge of trying to successfullyintroduce and implement Collaboration Processes and Systems within organizations. • Experience first-hand and try to interactively address different forms of resistanceto collaboration in organizational contexts, and the factors determining such resistance. • Try to dynamically influence the attitudes of different virtual characters through different strategies and interventions .

27. Designing EduSynergy L2C Simulation Games Prototypes Design (WP 3) • Specific Learning Points • Experiencing the most typical “collaboration breakdowns” in organizations. • Understanding the different “collaboration drivers” that need to be considered and effectively managed to give collaborations an advantage. • Understanding which characteristics of an organization can favour or hinder the introduction of collaboration processes and systems into an organization. • Learn how to diagnose and address different forms of resistances to collaboration and their organizational roots. • Encounter how individuals at different levels in organizations articulate resistance to collaboration processes and systems. • Understand how to best diffuse collaboration processes and systems within organizations.

28. Designing EduSynergy L2C Simulation Games Prototypes Design (WP 3) Embedding OD specific collaboration dynamics • Created a list of statements of resistances to collaboration for the different virtual characters • Created a specific Simulation Mission to reflect the challenge of introducing collaboration processes and systems in a higher education context. • Understanding Collaboration Opportunities Domains

29. Factors Affecting Collaboration L2C Simulation Games Prototypes Design (WP 3) • Identity • Ethics • Trust • Openness • Connectedness • Values • Status Quo Satisfaction • Pace of change • Individual motivations • Financial considerations • Value added • Quality level and control • Effort • Technical barriers • Language barriers • Process

30. EduSynergy Statements of Resistance L2C Simulation Games Prototypes Design (WP 3)

31. EduSynergy Statements of Resistance L2C Simulation Games Prototypes Design (WP 3)

32. INTRO TEAMWORK DEBRIEFING 1/2 h to 1 h 1.5 h to 2.5 h 1.5 h to half day EduSynergy SIMULATION WORKSHOP 1/2 to 1 day session Deploying Edusynergy L2C Simulation Games Prototypes Design (WP 3) • 1/2 to 1 day workshop structure with intro, simulation run and debriefing • Intensive collocated or distributed experience • Simulation to be played in teams of 3-5 players.

33. EduSynergy Implementation L2C Simulation Games Prototypes Design (WP 3) • Two Step Process • Identification and selection of underlying models and dynamics from the material gathered in Workpackage 1 to provide a first set of collaboration, OD-specific dynamics to be modelled into our first EduSynergy prototype. • 2. Programming of the selected collaboration components. In this phase, Revolution code has been produced to provide flexible Plug-Ins for EduSynergy (in view of easy feedback integration in future prototyping cycles) supporting variations on the Mission, Resistance articulations, and other added or extended simulation components the players come in touch with during the EduSynergy simulation.

34. Next Steps L2C Simulation Games Prototypes Design (WP 3) • Validate and prioritize list of learning points. • Adding additional dynamics (further translating the models identified in WP 1 to dynamics). • Pilot test the prototype in continuous cycle of testing and revision.

35. Edusynergy Demo L2C Simulation Games Prototypes Design (WP 3)

36. L2C Simulation Games Prototypes Design (WP 3) World Team SimulationAddressing the Challenge of Team Collaboration in Diverse and Distributed Environments • Key Features • Intensive, time-concentrated learning experience (1/2 day workshop of simulation run + debriefing) • Learning from interaction with collocated (or distributed) co-players sharing the same "role" • No virtual characters with team dynamics emerging from players themselves • Member of a team, with a mission to fulfil within the context (e.g. achieve a common project objective)

37. L2C Simulation Games Prototypes Design (WP 3) Designing the World Team Simulation • Learning Objectives • Experiencing the challenge of trying to collaborate in a diverse and distributed setting. • Experiencing the emergence of group and team breakdowns that can occur during the collaborative process.

38. L2C Simulation Games Prototypes Design (WP 3) Designing the World Team Simulation • Specific Learning Points • Experience the challenge of different, conflicting or hidden aims and how to manage these aims. • Experience how “attributions” that we naturally do about the work and behaviour of others can lead to collaboration breakdowns (vs high-performance teams). • Understand what are the most frequent collaboration traps in diverse and cross-cultural settings. • Understand which attitudes, social and cognitive skills and competences are key to successful knowledge sharing and creation and to successful collaboration. Also, to diagnose and intervene in case such conditions are not present in a team. • Understand what are strategies that can be used to overcome or recover from breakdowns in team collaboration.

39. L2C Simulation Games Prototypes Design (WP 3) Designing the World Team Simulation MISSION: Six teams, each representing different regional bank headquarters of the international GloBank, to collaboratively come up with an acquisition plan of 15 local banks for international expansion. GROUP DYNAMICS: Through the experience, teams may begin to display non collaborative behaviours such as blame, accusation, frustration and because of the absence of face to face interactions, negative misattributions to the other teams’ choices, as well as refocusing resources on competing rather than on looking for reachable win-win solutions.

40. L2C Simulation Games Prototypes Design (WP 3) Key Activities • Nominate banks for acquisition: Each team (HQ) to take turns to nominate a bank from their list to the acquisition list. • Order the list of acquisition: Each team (HQ) to take turns to order the acquisition list in terms of banks to be acquired first, second …. etc. • Alignment of objectives: • Three teams will be given the following sequencing criteria: We should not engage in acquiring consecutively two banks in the same region (Americas, Eurasia, Far East). • Three other teams will be given the criteria: We should not engage in acquiring consecutively two banks of the same type (private, investment or retail). • Distributedness challenge: • Teams will have limited face to face interactions with one another (each team will be situated in a configuration that minimizes contact with the other teams) • Limited communication will be allowed through the use of a chat function. However, only a limited number of communication opportunities will be allowed.

41. L2C Simulation Games Prototypes Design (WP 3)

42. L2C Simulation Games Prototypes Design (WP 3) Additional Acquisition Criteria • When considering geographical proximity, in order to increase complexity, some additional criteria that we will consider adding are: •  Choose fast growing areas, even if far from the Head Quarters •  Within these fast growing areas, choose the country with lower labor and administrative costs •  Within lower cost fast growing areas, choose the country with lower language barrier •  Within countries with lower language barriers, choose that with minimal cross-cultural differences • When considering type of bank to be acquired, some additional criteria are: •  Choose a bank whose characteristics create income synergy with ones own bank, without cost duplication •  Avoid to create a bigger bank with massive labor redundancies in each area, with related conflicts with Trade Unions about the downsizing of human re-sources •  Choose fast growing banks within fast growing sectors (securities, investment banks, and so on) •  Choose important banks with a significant size, currently badly managed, in order to reorganize them by enhancing efficiency and extending good management practices

43. INTRO TEAMWORK DEBRIEFING 1/2 h 1/4 to 1 h 1.5 h to 2 h World Team SIMULATION WORKSHOP 1/2 day session Deploying the World Team Simulation L2C Simulation Games Prototypes Design (WP 3) • 1/2 day workshop structure with intro, simulation run and debriefing. • Intensive collocated or distributed experience. • Simulation to be played in teams of 3-5 players. • Controlled communication opportunities among teams during the simulation run.

44. World Team Implementation L2C Simulation Games Prototypes Design (WP 3) • The prototype is currently implemented on top of the code of the World Music Simulation, with a combination “Revolution” and php. • The inclusion of the collaboration-specific contents and dynamics (like chatting possibility and external interventions) identified and selected by the partners has started taking place in a way which allows players to: • log in • select their virtual team and access their game-specific mission, and then • operate collaboratively on their mission, with the possibility for the facilitator to intervene remotely

45. World Team Additional Features for the Next Prototyping Phase L2C Simulation Games Prototypes Design (WP 3) Controlled communication between teams. Option will be to allow a restricted number of online communication opportunities, which would require teams to choose carefully the communications which will be of the most value to them. Teams may have a number of “social points” to consume by selecting from a limited choice of communication activities. An intervention component. To be used by facilitators and instructors to enter into the simulation as a third party such as a representative from Top Management and introduce additional pressures by ways of time pressure, agenda changes, coveted aims, spying/sabotage, etc. These unexpected events ensure a certain level of challenge in the game experience by provoking additional breakdowns. World Team progress indicator. Unlike EduSynergy, the World Team simulation relies on inciting relevant reactions within the teams, rather than demonstrating collaboration breakdown phenomena within the simulation. What is needed is some sort of performance indicator, which shows the extent to which the acquisition plan is in alignment with corporate strategy, or perhaps some measure of progressing consensus.

46. Next Steps L2C Simulation Games Prototypes Design (WP 3) • Validate and prioritize list of learning points. • Adding additional dynamics and more complexity (further translating the models identified in WP 1 to dynamics). • Produce and integrate a list of interventions (unplanned events, pressures, changes to agenda, etc) + integration of intervention functionality. • Integration of a feature for controlled communication points. • Integration of a progress indicator. • Pilot test the prototype in continuous cycle of testing and revision.

47. World Team Demo L2C Simulation Games Prototypes Design (WP 3)

48. L2C Simulation Games Prototypes Design (WP 3) Eagle Racing SimulationAddressing Group Decision Making with Synchronous Collaboration Technologies • Key Features • The opportunity for the learner to experience directly the opportunities and limitations of deploying synchronous collaboration technologies to improve collaboration in teams (up to relatively large groups). • An series of cases supporting role playing in complex collaboration situations.

49. L2C Simulation Games Prototypes Design (WP 3) Designing the Eagle Racing Simulation • Learning Objectives • The advantages and pitfalls of synchronous collaboration technologies to support group decision making. • The challenges to collaborative decision making, including managing different points of view, emotional decision making, biases, allegiances, interpretation and use of data, etc. space same different time same different

50. L2C Simulation Games Prototypes Design (WP 3) Designing the Eagle Racing Simulation • Specific Learning Points • Dimensions and criteria to be taken into consideration when selecting Collaboration Partners in such contexts. • Insights from inter-organizational studies/experiences (e.g. about success and sustainability of collaboration depending on the partners’ characteristics), particularly in complex and cross-cultural situations. • Strength and weaknesses of collaborative team decision making. • Best practices and theoretical model related to the deployment of Synchronous Collaboration Technologies to enhance the performance of teams and in larger group contexts.