Designing a Thinking Tools Skill Game

Years ago in a lonely cabin high in the mountains my son and I passed the time with a self-made CoRT-card game. It was rather primitive: there were Thinking Situation Cards and Thinking Tools Cards. Both of us were given 10 Thinking Tools Cards, at random. Then you picked one Situation Card and applied an adequate Thinking Technique. The goal was to mention as many aspects you could, then it was the opponent's turn to explore additional aspects of the thinking situation. It was fun!

Now I would invitate you to bring the game further.

In my opinion an essential element of the game is the design of the set of rules. When do you "win" or "loose"? What is "winning" when you think? Should there be penalties for "wrong thinking or non-adequate behavior"? And what kind of penalties? Could it be designed to reflect life, where wrong decisions may lead to damage?

I think the set of rules of the game must induce adequate thinking behavior (Install constructive attitudes and routines).

What could be a concept of a Thinking Tools Skill Game?

Let's design at least three concepts. And let's use deliberate and structured thinking.....by applying tools.

Tags: game, skills, thinking, tools

0 members like this

Next Post >

Add a Comment

You need to be a member of The Edward de Bono Society to add comments!

Join The Edward de Bono Society

Comment by Gijs van Beeck Calkoen on July 7, 2009 at 12:27: - every card contains also a random word
-Make it a board game: the Situation Cards are the fields which you have to pass
-PO: make it a real life game

Comment by Gijs van Beeck Calkoen on May 13, 2009 at 12:01: 1. AGO on the rules of the game.

To install a sound thinking attitude and habits
Define winners and loosers
Lay-out of the procedure

2. CAF

The rules should be clear and simple
The rules should stimulate competition but at the same time stimulate the development of skill as a shared common activity

3. FIP

The rules should stimulate competition but at the same time stimulate the development of skill as a shared common activity

Alternative 1

Concept
The aim of the game is to install constructive attitudes and routines).
Participants encounter thinking situations and have to get rid of them in order to survive. Participants can get rid of thinking situations by applying thinking tools correctly. Applying the wrong thinking tool or applying a thinking tool uncorrectly will make life worse, in other words: a participant will have to resolve more thinking situations.
The value of the game is that it combines thinking, learning, playing and time-passing

Thinking Tool CardsThe basic set of 10 Thinking Tool Cards consist roughly of the CoRT1 lessons. It could be extended to 60

Thinking Situations
Every participant gets 10 Situation Cards, at random.
There are several types of Thinking Situation Cards for example Evaluation, Design, Prediction etc.
A Thinking Situation Card
1. describes a thinking situation (f.e. should only plastic backpacks be allowed in the public transport system)
2. mentions the type(s) of the described situation ( f.e. Evaluation)
3. Explains the type of the thinking situation (f.e. Evaluation is judging whether a alternative is good or bad)
There are four difficulty levels of Thinking Situation Cards: Fun items,
Remote items, Backyard items and Heavy items

Thinking Pause Cards
Thinking Pauze Cards are like Thinking Situation Cards, but blanco. Participants could formulate a Thinking Situation themselves. Doing so, they earn two Thinking Tool Cards

Winning and Loosing
Winning
He/she who gets rid of all Thinking Situation Cards first and has acquired the most Thinking Skills Cards, wins
Loosing
He/she who has at the end of the game the most Thinking Situation Cards and the least Thinking Skill Cards.Those who lose can still win if they maintain a sense of humour by making up a joke or writing a poem.

Rules
1. Each participant receives 10 Thinking Situation Cards and 2 Thinking Skill Cards
2. At each turn a participant chooses a Thinking Situation Card and applies a Thinking Tool Card he owns for 60 seconds. Then the next participant has an opportunity to complete the thinking by new aspects or ideas. The last one earns an extra Thinking Card. If nobody could complete, the first participant can claim to get rid of the situation. If not ( a second or third participant finished the thinking) then he/she holds the Thinking Situation Card.
3. If you asses the situation wrong (you apply a thinking tool to the wrong type of thinking situation, you get an extra Thinking Situation Card.
4. If you can redefine the situation on your Thinking Situation Card, and are able to apply one of your Thinking Tool Cards, you earn two extra Thinking Cards
5. If you are able to apply more than one Thinking Tool (a sequence) you will earn two more Thinking Tools
6. One participant will be assigned to reflect on the thinking process each turn. Also he/she will function as a judge when needed.

Who will join in the next steps:
4. APC on possible set of rules.
5. PMI on the alternatives.

Comment by Gijs van Beeck Calkoen on May 5, 2009 at 12:13: Dennis, I think you've proposed a brilliant new concept of "punishment" or "consequence" if you loose by "Those who lose can still win if they maintain a sense of humour by making up a joke or writing a poem" We should this keep in mind!

I did also some work.

1. AGO on concept of winning/losing.
The concept of winning should encourage explorative thinking; the concept of loosing should discourage restricted and standard thinking

2. CAF on concept of winning/losing.
Someone who wins is better equiped for the challenges of the rest of his game life
Someone who looses will having more handicaps in attaining his goals in game life
Winning reflects more depth and breadth in thinking
A winner is someone who can put more additional ideas or aspects of a situation forwards
A winner has shown the best ability to apply thinking tools upon thinking situations
PO there are no winners, only loosers
PO there are no loosers, only winners
A looser will make situations worse

3. FIP on the thinking output from step 1 and 2.
Winning should reflect ability, Loosing should be encouraging to take more exercise
4. APC on what winning/losing should consist of.
The winner would get an opportunity to help the looser, which is given a second trial
Winning is getting opportunities to help others in thinking
5. PMI on the outputs of the APC.
++ there is a sound competition, which is fun
++ there is a feeling of achievement for the winner
++ there is help for the looser
-- it is not very encouraging to get help offered by the winner
-- it could led to arrogance by the winner
ii if we could design rules where there is still competition but at the same time the development of skill is a shared common activity

Some situations:
*you can buy brainpills
*you can decide if you want to die at the age of 75, 100, or 150
*air pressure in car tubes
* Google concepts
* design new NO's

I propose to continue with == PLAN B ==

1. AGO on the rules of the game.
2. CAF
3. FIP
4. APC on possible set of rules.
5. PMI on the alternatives.

Comment by Gijs van Beeck Calkoen on April 30, 2009 at 12:08: Thank you Anders.

Let's invite everyone to give her/his imput following Plan A.
I suggest then to follow up with plan B

Comment by Andy on April 30, 2009 at 10:14: Red hat: Fantastic idea!

= APC on thinking plan =

== PLAN A ==

1. AGO on concept of winning/losing.
2. CAF on concept of winning/losing.
3. FIP on the thinking output from step 1 and 2.
4. APC on what winning/losing should consist of.
5. PMI on the outputs of the APC.

== PLAN B ==

1. AGO on the rules of the game.
2. CAF
3. FIP
4. APC on possible set of rules.
5. PMI on the alternatives.