Party game: Minority Vote

Here's another interesting party game, suitable for a small to medium group.

Minority Vote consists of several voting rounds. In every round, players must vote for one of two (or more, depending on the number of participants) "options". The options are entirely arbitrary, e.g. male vs. female or red vs. green vs. blue; it is up to the host to decide.

At the end of every round, the votes are tallied. The option receiving the largest number of votes will be disqualified, and all players who voted for that particular option will be eliminated. After a certain interval to allow for interaction among players, the next round commences with the same number of options. The object of the game is to be among the last n remaining participants, of whom all will receive prizes.

The key point of the game is the formation (and betrayal) of alliances. In more advanced gameplay, it is not uncommon to see "bought votes" - players from an alliance choose to vote for a losing option so that their alliance can advance to the next round, and receive part of the prize from the alliance later. Betrayals are also common, with "mini-alliances" forming within alliances.

Party game: Company War

Here's an interesting party game, suitable for 6 teams and above.

Company War is a party game suited for dinners, team building events, etc. It works best when the participants can be divided into 6 groups or more. The gameplay is simple and comprises several voting rounds, ideally spaced out at intervals.

In each voting round, teams must vote to promote either Product A or Product B (replace these suitably, e.g. with your organization's product vs your competitor's product). Teams that vote for Product A will be awarded $10k (again, replace the currencies suitably), whereas those that vote for Product B will be awarded $40k. The points may be traded with other teams, or even donated to charity. However, there are two additional catches:

1. If more than a quarter (or two, whichever is more) of the teams vote for Product B, the competition in the market becomes tough, and instead of getting $40k they will all lose $20k. Those backing Product A remain unaffected and continue to earn $10k.
2. If all the teams vote for Product A, the market becomes saturated and all teams lose $20k. Additionally, a quarter of the teams with the lowest score at that point loses an additional $20k (making a total of $40k), as smaller companies suffer more loss from the financial storm.

The number of voting rounds is theoretically unlimited, but to stay within time constraints (and avoid participants losing interest) a total of 7 rounds is recommended. The total number of rounds must be announced beforehand. After round 3, if participants have not realized already, remind them that they could behave like real companies and actually trade their points, e.g. to form alliances and conglomerates.

At the end of the exercise, debrief the participants on the importance of forming alliances. In particular, remind them that nowhere in the game was stated that the objective is to be the company with the most number of points! They could have worked together to secure maximum gain on the whole. Reveal scores from other collection of companies (Company War conducted at other events), and let them realize that the world is truly much larger than just the companies they see around them today.

The millionaire's gold watch

Once upon a time there was a millionaire. He had a gold watch that he treasured with his life.

One day, he visited a farm in his village. He accidentally lost his watch in haystacks. Indeed, finding a needle (gold watch) in a haystack is no easy job! Desperate, he gathered the villagers and offered a reward for whoever could find it.

The villagers were naturally excited to hear of the reward. And off hordes of people went, looking for the gold watch. It was quite a sight.

However, as time went by and nightfall came, many started to give up. They had "other matters to attend to". The number of people decreased.

In the end, there was just a little boy left. He was about to give up as well. The thought of bringing back the reward for his family sustained him. He was determined not to leave without finding the watch.

He lied on a haystack, all alone now. The moonlight shone at him.

Suddenly he realised he could hear the familiar tick-tock of a watch. It couldn't be heard earlier due to the ruckus of people. Quickly, the boy moved towards the sound. He found the gold watch!

What is the moral of the story? Why is it that a little boy was able to find the watch, but not tens of adults?

Indeed, sometimes all it takes to achieve success is just a little more perseverance. Like Julie Andrews said: perseverance is failing 19 times amd succeeding the 20th!

Why withholding knowledge is not a viable strategy

Scientia potentia est - knowledge is power. It intuitively "makes sense" to retain as much of the information to oneself so that one always has the upper hand, particularly in the workplace where competition is rife. But is this a sustainable strategy in the long term?

How to compare things in a positive way

The essence of competition is comparison. Unfortunately, benchmarking can turn out to be a very daunting and demotivating experience, especially to those on the receiving end. Here are a few tips on ranking things, without having to "put down" the losing end.