close
    Subscribe to News

    Popular Stories

    Weave Toolkit: SAFe PI Planning with Weave
    7+1 Principles And Five Frameworks for Agile Portfolio Prioritization
    Backlogs, BLACKlogs and Dreamlogs - Entrepreneurial Agility
    How to Run HUGE Retrospectives Across Dozens of Teams in Multiple Time Zones!
    Conteneo's Innovation Ambitions
    Written by Luke Hohmann
    on December 11, 2015


    In my last post on the San José Budget Games I promised a brief overview of why Surveys SUCK and why collaborative games are better. This expands on my Agile 2015 keynote and will help the Participatory Budgeting community in creating even more participation for our sessions.

    Let's start with a story. I was in Paris this week, teaching a master class on serious game design and attending Playcamp Paris. Produced with our partner, Raphael Goumot, a Black Belt CCA and owner of creagile.fr, we spent the entire evening discussing Participatory Budgeting, our Budget Games and our Budget Investor.

    Through an amazing coincidence, Tarang Patel (an Agile specialist from Adobe and another Black Belt CCA) was in Paris. Tarang has personally facilitated San José Budget Games sessions in 2013 and 2014 and told this story:

     

    "What is amazing about collaborative prioritization, in which citizens have to work together to purchase projects, is how collaboration can change the minds of the other participants. In 2014 our table was not interested in funding any items. And yet, near the end of the session, a girl from the youth commission who strongly believed in addressing what she felt was an increasing problem homelessness, invested a substantial sum of her money on a project designed to address homelessness. The other participants at her table really took notice and started to explore the issue. By the time they were finished, the table had changed their minds and joined together to fund this project."

     

    This story is not unique. As near as we can tell, every single collaborative forum changes the opinions of the participants. Here is another story, this time from Laura Richardson:

     

    "At our table one woman from an affluent neighborhood started the negotiations by purchasing code enforcement. She wanted to make sure the City was looking as good as possible. She changed her mind, however, when a mother from a less affluent part of the city described the dangers her children faced from gang violence -- just walking to school wearing the wrong color jacket could leave her child harassed, beaten, or even worse. The emotional impact was visible because both woman were crying by the time the 'negotiations' were finished. The table quickly aligned on purchasing projects to designed to address gang violence."

     

    We see similar outcomes in our platforms when used for prioritizing features in product roadmaps and project portfolios inside corporations: collaboration provides a forum for understanding complex issues and making better choices. Here is a story from my own experience in helping VeriSign prioritize a set of potential customer projects:

     

    "One of the projects under consideration was a self-service support website, in which customers could form a community to post questions, share best practices and help each other configure and use VeriSign products. In every forum junior customer service agents would purchase this project because it promised to make their lives easier. And in every forum a more senior and experienced agent would gently explain that this project would actually increase the amount of work because every comment by a forum member would have to be reviewed and verified by a VeriSign employee. The reasoning was simple: VeriSign provides complex, sophisticated security solutions. Hackers and other nefarious types could provide incorrect advice to make it easier to exploit a website."

     

    But Why Broccoli?

    Let's compare these stories about shared prioritization of a budget with broccoli. I happen to like broccoli. A lot of people don't. And no matter how much time I spend trying to convince you that you should like broccoli, I'm not going to change your mind. And no matter how much time you spend trying to convince me that I shouldn't like broccoli, you're not going to change my mind.

    Broccoli isn't a budget. At one level, it doesn't actually matter if you like broccoli, or you don't like bananas. Conversations on these topics aren't going to change your perspective and they certainly aren't going to affect your job or your city.

     

    This is why surveys suck when you're dealing with complex issues like corporate or city budgets. The results of the survey are subject to change once you start talking about the items with other people.

     

    This change is what draws people together instead of pushing them apart. In my next post, I'll outline how surveys evolve from being something that just plain sucks to being something that is downright harmful.

    Let us know what you think. 

    Add your comment below.

    You may also like:

    Budget Games Collaboration Events Every Voice Engaged News Participatory Budgeting San Jose

    Building the Budget from Zero: Online Participatory Budgeting in San José,CA

    Mayor Sam Liccardo and the San José City Council, in partnership with the Every Voice Engaged Foundation and Conteneo In...

    Agile Budget Games Buy a Feature Collaboration Collaboration Cloud Collaboration Frameworks customer Customer Story Decision Engine Innovation Games Multidimensional Collaboration Prioritization

    Case Study: How to Take the Pain out Portfolio Prioritization

    Ed. Note: This is the story of how Decision Engine and the Collaboration Framework known as “Buy a Feature/Budget Games”...

    Budget Games Collaboration Deliberative Decision Making Every Voice Engaged Participatory Budgeting Prioritization San Jose

    Budget Puzzles Considered Harmful

    In my last post about Participatory Budgeting I discussed why surveys suck when used as a tool to understand budget prio...