I just received feedback for the sessions I ran at the XP Day Benelux conference. One item in specific gave me some essential information on my performance. I'll paraphrase it below:
The Resistance as a Resource game is exactly what not to do when facing resistance. Dealing with resistance requires more coaching or change management skills, than just a brainstorm elaborating counter measures.
I fully agree with the notion that dealing with resistance by simply elaborating counter measures is not a good idea. I do think, however, that the Resistance as a Resource game is a great thinking tool for analysing the resistance you're experiencing.
The goal of the game is not to devise counter measures through brainstorming as much as it is about understanding the reasons behind the resistance better, thus leading to ability to deal with the resistance in an appropriate manner.
I'll have to make sure I'll explain the goal of the game better in tomorrow's session in London.
However good your session is, I guess there will always be people who are sufficiently engaged by the challenge of "resistance as a resource" to create "resistance" before/during/after your session just to see how you deal with it :)
Good luck in London, but I guess you should expect a greater level of complaining and pushing back than a session on a more acceptable, passive subject.
Thanks for the report!
One of my intentions in creating the game was to try to enter the other person's point of view, to elaborate my understanding of the other person.
But the game gives me only guesses about what the other person might be thinking, feeling, and wanting. I don't know, without the other person's validation, whether my guesses are anywhere near correct.
The feedback you received gives me an idea: Maybe, as part of the response step, encourage people to add responses that test their guesses about the other person's thinking. "Do you mean ..." "Here's what I hear you saying ... Is that what you meant?"
This kind of response is itself intended to build understanding, and not (necessarily) to change the other person's perspective.
I wonder what other changes in the game description would help people to focus on understanding.