Rhetor-Oh! An Example Organizational Game

The Scenario

A researcher wants to explore contingency handling at an academic office.

Summary of the Game

Rhetor-oh! is a duelling card game modeled after games such as Pokemon and Yu-Gi-Oh! (or, to an extent, more traditional games such as War). It's designed to allow the designer to mix and match contingencies and see how the worker draws upon resources to address them. It's not designed to explicate an overall picture of the workflow, just particular pieces of it. In addition to the supplied cards, the deck will contain blank cards that workers can use to add resources and contingencies.

If the worker cannot address the event with the cards in his/her hand, s/he can discard up to five cards and draw new ones, or s/he can elect to fill out a blank card.

The game consists of two decks and four types of cards.

The Researcher's Deck

The researcher has a deck which s/he uses to create events to which the worker must react. This deck includes Challenge and Contingency cards. The designer always has five cards total in play or in her/his hand.

• Challenge cards represent basic challenges the worker might face related to sharing information, such as scheduling a meeting, circulating a course description, or applying for a fellowship. In addition to the defined cards, this deck includes six blank cards which the worker can define.
• Contingency cards represent contingencies that might close off certain possibilities for dealing with the challenges, such as email being down, the website being down, staff being out sick, or the worker getting sick. In addition to the defined cards, this deck includes four blank cards which the worker can define.

The worker's deck

The worker's deck represents resources s/he may draw on to address the events represented in the cards played by the researcher. Resources include Tools and People.

• Tools include physical and electronic artifacts used in the course of work. Tools include email, the website, the phone, paperwork, and new documents that the worker writes (such as letters, meeting minutes, or essays). In addition to the defined cards, this deck includes four blank cards which the worker can define.
• People include key personnel in the DRC, such as Madison Searle and Susan Peake (staff), John Ruszkiewicz (chair), and generic faculty and graduate students. In addition to the defined cards, this deck includes four blank cards which the worker can define.

Concluding the game

At the end of the game, the researcher and worker can do one or more of the following:

• Sort the different types of cards in terms of priority/severity (challenge and contingency cards) and usefulness/importance (tools and people cards).
• Go through the filled-out cards and discuss what other cards might be filled out.
• Go through challenge cards and discuss how an enhanced website might address each.

• Rhetoropoly: An Example Organizational Game
• The Scenario
• This game is developed to examine workflow in an academic office.
  • Summary of the Game
  • Rhetoropoly is a board game modeled after games such as Monopoly. It's designed to help investigate overall workflow in a chronological sequence, represented by the track running around the board, and random disruptive events, represented by the two stacks of cards in the middle of the board. Workers can reconfigure the game by adding and modifying cards and by changing the squares on the track.
  • Gameplay
  • The events on the board include standard parts of a faculty member's day, including office hours, classes, committee meetings, checking email, checking the inbox, and talking with other faculty members in the hallway.
  • Random disruptive events are delivered in two ways:
    • Email cards. If the worker lands on a Check Email square, s/he draws an Email card. Email events might include administrative requests, attempts to schedule committee meetings, and correspondence from students.
    • Inbox cards. If the worker lands on a Check Inbox square, s/he draws an Inbox card. Inbox events might include informative memos, paperwork, etc.
  • Whenever the worker draws a card or lands on a square, s/he should explain how s/he might handle the situation. S/he can also critique, modify, and add to the cards and squares.
  • Concluding the game
  • At the end of the game, designers and workers can engage in the following activities:
    • Go through the Inbox and Email cards, ranking them by priority.
    • Critique the squares and add/remove/change them.