Desert survival training: reflection on the team
Survival in the desert, is the individual survival probability high or the team survival probability high? Most people's intuitive judgment should be the latter. Team decision-making can brainstorm and reduce the risk of individual decision-making. As the saying goes, "Many hands make light work." The game of desert survival training makes us rethink the advantages and possible greater risks of team decision-making.
This is a survival game about desert survivors. A plane forced to land in the hot desert, and all the crew members were killed. As survivors, "we" forced to land in the desert about 100 km from the scheduled landing point.
Before the plane forced to land, the pilot had handed over the flight plan to the air traffic control center and told us that there was a village 1 15 kilometers away from the forced landing site. We must rescue 15 items from the plane in the shortest time. 15 items include: flashlight and battery, fruit knife, map, first aid kit, red and white parachutes, water, sunglasses, coat, cosmetic mirror, pistol ... The task requires that these 15 items be sorted according to their importance to survival. First, the individuals are sorted separately, and then the groups are sorted. Group ranking requires all members to participate in opinions and reach an understanding. In the process of reaching group understanding, voting and coin toss are not allowed. Finally, the professor will give the standard answer of expert ranking. The closer to the result of expert ranking, the higher the chance of survival.
Take a closer look at item 15 in the rescue list. Parachutes, cosmetic mirrors, coats and other items are waiting for rescue, and maps, fruit knives and pistols are related to seeking rescue. Therefore, in grouping and sorting, the focus of fierce debate is "stay in place and wait for rescue" or "go out to find the nearest village". Such a decision is nicknamed "waiting to die" or "dying" by us. After a heated debate, each group handed over the ranking results of individuals and teams, and the professor also announced the standard of expert ranking: staying in place and waiting for rescue is the best choice.
Simple arithmetic calculation can tell the difference between individual ranking, group ranking and expert ranking. Most people's personal ranking results are not as good as group ranking results, which means that most people's survival benefits from the decision of the team. But there are also negative examples: in the personal ranking, the correct decision of "waiting for rescue" was chosen, but in the process of team decision-making, personal opinions succumbed to team decision-making and went out with everyone to find the nearest village. People who walk in the hot desert and choose to go out to "wait for death" can't last more than two hours.
In the process of group sorting, it is difficult to form team knowledge. * * * Knowing does not mean unanimous agreement, nor does it mean that most people agree, but on the basis of full communication and discussion, we can reach a level acceptable to everyone and form a plan that everyone can support. * * * Knowledge is not necessarily recognized by everyone, but accepted by * * *, which includes compromise. Compared with individual decision-making, brainstorming in team decision-making can reduce the risk to a certain extent, but if everyone chooses the wrong direction, team decision-making is more risky, and most people tend to agree on the pressure, which is likely to curb those different but possibly correct opinions.
In the face of problems, it is not optimal to choose team decision, individual decision or expert decision, but only applicable. There is no standard. . The following is an analysis.
Desert survival training: reflection on the team
Survival in the desert, is the individual survival probability high or the team survival probability high? Most people's intuitive judgment should be the latter. Team decision-making can brainstorm and reduce the risk of individual decision-making. As the saying goes, "Many hands make light work." The game of desert survival training makes us rethink the advantages and possible greater risks of team decision-making.
This is a survival game about desert survivors. A plane forced to land in the hot desert, and all the crew members were killed. As survivors, "we" forced to land in the desert about 100 km from the scheduled landing point.
Before the plane forced to land, the pilot had handed the flight plan to the air traffic control center and told us that there was a village 1 15 kilometers away from the forced landing site. We must rescue 15 items from the plane in the shortest time. 15 items include: flashlight and battery, fruit knife, map, first aid kit, red and white parachutes, water, sunglasses, coat, cosmetic mirror, pistol ... The task requires that these 15 items be sorted according to their importance to survival. First, the individuals are sorted separately, and then the groups are sorted. Group ranking requires all members to participate in opinions and reach an understanding. In the process of reaching group understanding, voting and coin toss are not allowed. Finally, the professor will give the standard answer of expert ranking. The closer to the result of expert ranking, the higher the chance of survival.
Take a closer look at item 15 in the rescue list. Parachutes, cosmetic mirrors, coats and other items are waiting for rescue, and maps, fruit knives and pistols are related to seeking rescue. Therefore, in grouping and sorting, the focus of fierce debate is "stay in place and wait for rescue" or "go out to find the nearest village". Such a decision is nicknamed "waiting to die" or "dying" by us. After a heated debate, each group handed over the ranking results of individuals and teams, and the professor also announced the standard of expert ranking: staying in place and waiting for rescue is the best choice.
Simple arithmetic calculation can tell the difference between individual ranking, group ranking and expert ranking. Most people's personal ranking results are not as good as group ranking results, which means that most people's survival benefits from the decision of the team. But there are also negative examples: in the personal ranking, the correct decision of "waiting for rescue" was chosen, but in the process of team decision-making, personal opinions succumbed to team decision-making and went out with everyone to find the nearest village. People who walk in the hot desert and choose to go out to "wait for death" can't last more than two hours.
In the process of group sorting, it is difficult to form team knowledge. * * * Knowing does not mean unanimous agreement, nor does it mean that most people agree, but on the basis of full communication and discussion, we can reach a level acceptable to everyone and form a plan that everyone can support. * * * Knowledge is not necessarily recognized by everyone, but accepted by * * *, which includes compromise. Compared with individual decision-making, brainstorming in team decision-making can reduce the risk to a certain extent, but if everyone chooses the wrong direction, team decision-making is more risky, and most people tend to agree on the pressure, which is likely to curb those different but possibly correct opinions.
In the face of problems, it is not optimal to choose team decision, individual decision or expert decision, but only applicable.
I personally think that such a game can only give players the greatest initiative by simplifying the rules and grading standards to the simplest.
The following scoring criteria are recommended:
1. Arrive at the scheduled place within the specified time, with no loss of personnel. full marks
2. Arrive at the scheduled place within the specified time, but people are injured, the whole team will be deducted 10 points/casualties, and the deduction fee can be borne by one or more people.
3. If a person arrives at the scheduled place within the specified time, but is "dead" or lost, the whole team will deduct 30 points/"death". The deduction can be borne by one or more people.
4. If it exceeds 1 hour, deduct 1 minute/person, and so on. Add 1 points/person every hour in advance.
5. Captain plus 10 points.
6. Each abstention will deduct 5 points from the captain, and each "death" or loss of the captain will deduct 5 points.
7. If the best player scores 5 points, the captain can get the best player, and the best player will be produced by the whole team within five minutes after arriving at the scheduled place, otherwise the award will be cancelled.
8. The selected items are not graded.