Introduction

What follows is an explanation of a particular set of methods developed since 2004 by The People Speak to help large groups of people with highly diverse ideas, opinions and points of view to make important decisions as a group, to come to creative compromises, and to have fun in the process.

This explanation may serve as a guide for others wishing to facilitate decision making in related situations. It is likely that the methods will require adaptation in each instance. If you or your group choose to use these strategies and techniques and have observations or improvements to suggest, please contribute them to the project wiki.


Spontaneity

Who Wants to Be? is a spontaneous, democratic gameshow, where the audience makes up the questions, has all the answers and sets the rules. The basic premise is that every member of the audience has a vote, and that they can propose ideas from the floor, discuss them with the rest of the audience, and then vote on any decisions that come from the discussion, moving towards a conclusion within a 1.5 hour time limit, unless they vote to extend that limit and keep the game going.

Gameshows are fun, and the key to a successful Who Wants to Be? is making sure that it is enjoyable for all participants. Because the timing, structure and really every part of the game is malleable and subject to audience adaptation, it can be difficult to plan and predict.

One of the crucial elements to The People Speak's approach in all of our projects is to be as open as possible as to what content or direction of the event can be. We want the people themselves to decide what the important questions are rather than making any assumptions about what topic or approach will be relevant.

The instability of what will occur when people come to one of our events becomes an entertaining factor, as does the free and spontaneous contribution of the participants. The techniques which The People Speak employ are designed to engage people creatively in the drama of an undecided outcome while maintaining a coherent structure.


Timing

Too short, and everyone will feel short-changed and rushed, too long and people will be frustrated and start to leave. We've found that a good starting point is 1.5 hours, approximately the length of a feature film - split into two 45 minute halves.

The two-part structure is useful because it allows a dramaturgy to develop. The first half can be about brain-storming and ideas generation. The second half can be about whittling down, reality-checking and making creative compromises.

It helps to have a clock clearly visible, counting down to the end of the half, to make sure that everyone understands the scope of the discussion and (if necessary) vote to extend it.


Voting

There are many different voting systems, and this is often an issue that audiences spend a while debating before they find something that feels comfortable.

The starting point is as simple as possible, without the simplicity being too restrictive. In our experience, this is an useful starting point, which can be modified to suit the audience's needs:

The three choices are important because they can be configured to be:

To page 2→