45. I Wish You Failure

Lars Peter Nissen: 00:11

Welcome to Trumanitarian. I'm your host, Lars Peter Nissen simulations, Serious Games and Gamification is something I passionately believe in and think can have a significant impact on the way we work with humanitarian crisis. I've done quite a bit of simulations in my previous roles, and not to brag, but I am actually a founding member of the Shadow Cabinet of Zuboumba, a very powerful organisation that you may not have heard about. But that just shows you how powerful we are.

On a serious note crisis are different from everyday life. Different rules apply, and you have to think and walk and talk differently. When you're in a teaching or training situation and you sit comfortably in your chair behind your desk. It's very easy to agree on policies and procedures, the way we behave when we're in the middle of a stressful situation is very different. Games can help us bridge the gap between how we think we work, how we actually work, and it can bring us insights on how we get closer to working the way we should be. So I was extremely happy to bump into Tom Fisher and his company Imaginetic at the humanitarian networks and partnership week in Geneva. Tom runs a fascinating company developing serious games for anybody from the World Bank, HCR and the military. We had a great conversation about the ins and outs of gaming. To be honest, you may find this episode a bit too geeky. But I hope you'll forgive Tom and me for this and that you will continue listening. There are some real lessons to learn from his experience of being a humanitarian dungeon master. Trumanitarian is produced by volunteers. And if you are in a generous mood, there is a PayPal link on our website and we appreciate every donation we get. You can also help us out by following us make noise and social media. Recommend the show to your friends. You know the drill. However, as always, the most important thing is that you listen and think about what you here on the show. Enjoy the conversation. Tom Fisher, welcome to Trumanitarian.

Tom Fisher: 02:15

Thank you very much, Lars.

Lars Peter Nissen: 02:17

You know, I feel 13-14 again back with the Dungeons and Dragons. We didn't have a PlayStation. But you know, those dices with many sides. That's where my mind is right now.

Tom Fisher: 02:31

We are speaking the same language. Exactly.

Lars Peter Nissen: 02:35

And that's because I was walking around here in the Conference Centre in Geneva where the Humanitarian Networks and Partnership Week is taking place. And I stepped into this game shop where it wasn't quite Dungeons and Dragons. It was I guess, trucks and floods or something.

Tom Fisher: 02:53

Exactly. Realism and reality maybe

Lars Peter Nissen: 02:58

Exactly. A whole bunch of board games about humanitarian stuff. And you work with something called Imagenetic

Tom Fisher: 03:07

Yes, exactly.

Lars Peter Nissen: 03:08

What is that?

Tom Fisher: 03:09

That's my company that originally started in 1996 in a rather different direction, and then flowed into the serious game world in about 2005 When I started doing work with the World Bank, got involved in training for anti corruption, anti money laundering, dealing with all of this donor money that was coming into some African countries to help their their police forces manage that and through that snowballed into other games dealing with humanitarian aid and disaster relief, crisis management, War Gaming and involving NATO. So we've, we've got quite a wide library now.

Lars Peter Nissen: 04:00

Tell me about these games you've developed - they are board games. Give us a couple of examples of what what you actually have developed for humanitarian organisations?

Tom Fisher: 04:09

Absolutely. One in particular is something that we've developed for UNHCR to help them with their supply group. And we call the game supply and emergency and working very closely with them develop this whole scenario that runs over five days, well, six days because we have an introductory day that runs over five days each day representing a a full week of time in the in the DRC. Dealing with the surprises, complications, customs issues, transport horrible roads, getting goods out from outside the country, in and then distributing to them to the actual camps and in Now we model the camps themselves as well as each team that's playing, because will often play with multiple teams has a family assigned to them humanising it very much, because whatever the teams do, this will directly affect their families in terms of physical health, mental health and security.

Lars Peter Nissen: 05:22

And so this is a board game with little trucks being moved around.

Tom Fisher: 05:27

Exactly, it is exactly that. So there's a representation so that you're delivering crates of goods in a very literal sense. And they have to handle the warehousing. And even when we're playing live, we've been playing online because of because of Covid. But when you're playing live, we actually have a warehouse that is set up where they're piling blocks one on top of the other to manage their warehouse. And it's, well good luck to you, if you've placed your fundamental goods at the bottom of that pile, because you didn't manage your warehouse properly. It's funny, but it really brings out that kind of that kind of thinking. And all the way through to putting things on a truck all the way through to landing a plane and figuring out how much stuff you can fit into a plane. And also, interestingly enough, as we have taught people both in play test and actual playing, what kind of plane could land at different airports, which is not always immediately obvious to people, especially who are new to the new to the endeavour. And so we will turn it into a joke with them when they try to bring a 747 into Bunia airport, and then we'll say, Are you sure? Yeah. Okay, so how are you going to take off again? Landing is that a problem? Taking off is a big problem. But that's it, and that and we have fun with it. And it becomes very engaging. And it's, you know, the the learning process is real, it's stressful. But terrific, but terrific. At the end, at the end, it's all smiles and people sort of walk away with that. Okay, okay, I've got a handle on this. What do you know, which is really fulfilling as a as a designer? From from our point of view?

Lars Peter Nissen: 07:17

And what's your own background? Did you sort of graduate from a level whatever we said in today's show, have you actually worked operationally as well,

Tom Fisher: 07:26

in the humanitarian field? No, not directly. My background comes from Electrical Engineering way back when switched out of that I was, as I was looking for something more human following something of a family tragedy. And that's how I got into special education to really be into that in touch with with people. And there started using a lot of role play, and a lot of games that I've been a hobby gamer since I was 10 years old, in nineteen seventy-nine. And using that with the kids and the young adults to really, you know, teach them about life more than anything. And through roleplay, they were able to very safely explore what they could do with a cashier taking the bus. And in this way, they were able to develop very quickly the skills that they need, outside of the safe classroom. And any failures that happened inside the classroom were beautiful, perfect lessons in a safe space. And then we projected that to developing games for the World Bank were very similarly have training games or even analytic games in a very safe space. So you get to very much feel and play the role that you might in real world scenarios. And my mantra to students is, I wish you failure. I hope they fail in the game. So they do not fail in the real world. So they're prepared for for that because failure in a game means that a peon a bonhomme, a card is lost in the real world, far different circumstances. So better a piece of paper

Lars Peter Nissen: 09:31

that really resonates with me and my experience. I remember once doing a training course in Hong Kong for Hong Kong Red Cross where we were talking about the different parts of the Red Cross movement, and the class was very silent half the class basically didn't speak. Then we simulated an earthquake and handed out a few uniforms. And these guys went bonkers. We had so much fun and you could certainly see who people were and how much they could bring to the field. It was such an emancipating experience, actually, and I've seen that on a number of occasions in different training setting, so I'm fully with you that, that serious gaming is something that probably we don't utilise enough in the humanitarian sector. And it required to sort of unpack what it can do for us what it can't do for us. But maybe, let's begin with what's the difference between developing a game for some kids who have to learn to go about the world, and then engaging with a humanitarian agency with 15,000 employees,

Tom Fisher: 10:31

Right. You know, as far as approach, there, actually, and it's going to sound strange, fairly similar. And it is because at the very core, what you're doing is engaging with the individual. And what happens during a game is when you get that engagement, and it's that magic moment when a game is done well, that you are connecting someone not only logically, but intuitively and hopefully, emotionally, that the real learning and the real person comes out. So in that way, very similar. Now, the stakes are obviously quite different. And fundamentally, the research that goes in is very different. Because if one, well, I will say this, the best way to learn about something is to create a game about it, I will tell you that certainly in terms of developing the, the algorithms in the background, making sure to get it right, because it's, it's too easy to get it wrong. So to properly serve your sponsor, you'd better get it right, which is a lot of research interview, taking in as much information as you as you can. But at the end of the day, it's all about getting, getting them so excited in the moment, that they're no different from that 13 year old who's swinging their fictional sword, or that person who's playing a humanitarian aid worker in a disaster scenario, and really fundamentally empathises With that representation on the board have this as a person. And that representation of, if you take this away off the board, you take the figure off the board, it hits hard, like people really get that involved and that and that's when you know, you've you've done the job, right? Because it's that emotional connection that they start to make.

Lars Peter Nissen: 12:50

So how do you get people into that bubble? What are what are the techniques for getting them in there? Because sometimes you have really, really important people who wear ties and suits and they don't like rolling with datasets, at least not to begin with, right? So how do you break that? How do you get them into the bubble?

Tom Fisher: 13:06

A big piece is know your audience. Fundamentally, whenever I start a serious game design project, it always starts with a very lengthy design brief process that I will do that both involves research, and finding out what the sponsor really wants. And from there, determining who the audience is, because I will tailor the game to make sure that I am really hitting the audience that we want. And then most people, not all, but most people, so long as you give them an engaging narrative that matches with their expectation of reality. Even if you change it and shape it with different injects and surprises for them, that they will become very, very, very engaged. So we'll have in a very literal, literal way, five star generals who are really getting into this, and playing, you know, far lower levels, you know, both from an appreciation point of view of what the corporal has to go through. And because you shape the narrative, so it resonates. And it's the when you get that aha moment for the for the player, and they're nodding and they say, oh, yeah, I've lived through this and they start making those connections. They are yours, they are yours and you once again, you know, that you have delivered that experience because at the end, a game and or serious play is all about that experiential engagement. factor, we're creating an experience that is similar to a movie, similar to a great novel. But that occurs in in the mind. So you know, you also want to have the the abilities of a good, compelling storyteller in creating this.

Lars Peter Nissen: 15:21

So I've worked with sort of two different kinds of scenarios. Sometimes we do Fluxonia, or Zuboumba, or some kind of fictitious places, right. And sometimes we do Albania, or Mozambique, or a concrete, actual country, and we built the baseline up on that country's baseline. And so when you say it has to be relatable, it has to be a credible scenario. What are the advantages of going sort of Harry Potter versus more of the real world.

Tom Fisher: 15:51

We will often use fictional worlds or fictional places to remain politically neutral. So for example, in our aftershock game, that is something that we will use the the country of Karana, and this is something that the World Bank has used, and some of the UN is used as their fictional country, and the capital city city of Galassy. So this way, we're not necessarily either triggering people or pointing specific things out, because we do get into some, you know, hard and dirty facts about inefficiencies, what works well, what might not work? Well, if we're talking about things like corruption, then, you know, it does not necessarily serve well to point the finger now, doing work for the State Department, or doing work for global affairs, Canada, the Ministry of Defence, when it is internal, then it's full on reality, then it's then we're dealing with the the X's and O's that are on the the world map. In terms of effect, certainly, when it's real world, you are able to harness people's previous knowledge. But here's the asterisk. Here's the big asterisk in these terms, is part of the great power of games is to be able to challenge assumptions. And if you present someone with a real scenario, for example, we developed something called ISIS Crisis dealing with with Iraq and the various the various factions within and without. Now, when we have professionals who are playing this and know about the politics of the region, that's one thing, but the assumptions that come in as to how various countries on the outside of Iraq would react. You know, for example, you know, Paul there what, what Arabian policy would be what Jordanian policy would be, how Turkey would react to certain things, unless one is well, really well versed? It is too easy to allow for assumptions to come in that will be completely off base.

Lars Peter Nissen: 18:27

Yeah, my experience has been that. It is from from from a training perspective, I have a preference also for the Zuboumbas of the world, because on one side, would you say it's borderline impossible to actually develop a scenario that's deep enough to really, really accommodate for all the stuff happening, and it's, it's harder to make stuff up when you're dealing with the real world. But I will say me even more importantly, what what I've seen happen when we use a real country is that half the audience has been there. They were there. And that's not how it was. And it totally kills the play aspect of it and people start fighting about, yeah, but you didn't take me on that trip, or that we should have done this instead of that. And it's just like, the game is gone.

Tom Fisher: 19:18

You know, and you really hit the nail on the head right there. And the key word is engagement, and suspension of disbelief. And this is why Dungeons and Dragons works well for that 13 year old boy or girl who gets so into it, that they, they start drawing their characters all the time. Same thing in serious games. And again, this is why they're not that different. They really arent because it's that emotional engagement. And it's the too easy to make certain assumptions, too easy to do. I get snapped out of that suspension of disbelief, if something does not match with an experience that people had, if something does not match, you know, in certain cases with the way that they, a player might expect or desire things to go because it fits with their worldview and what they want. When we quite well, we know from experience that nothing ever goes to plan. It is fundamental to plan but there has yet to be a plan in the world that has ever gone off perfectly as far as I know. And once you have lost a player with that engagement, and then being truly in the game, it takes a very strong facilitator to guide them back in so it's certainly doable. But that's when you need a a facilitator with some chops and some and some experience behind them.

Lars Peter Nissen: 21:04

Yeah, it's, it's all well and good. As long as we get people into the bubble, somehow we suspend disbelief, as you say, and they move on. But, but I've, I've seen it happen. And especially because it is such an emotional thing that people really get into it. That as you say, people fall out, either because the go, this is not realistic. Or the way you played that local emergency management guide that was offensive, I can I can this is not okay. I once played the role as a rather peculiar Bishop, there was a couple of people who had issues with that and making fun of their religion, which which wasn't the same, so you can actually really upset people. And so how do you deal with the, with the power in a sense that you have when you play a game? How? How do you pick the people that fall?

Tom Fisher: 21:58

You really have to know the audience doing one's research, and then a lot in game when the game is running. And again, very much depending on the size of the game, this could be a two hour game or two, week eight. You know, facilitate game facilitation in and of itself is a skill set, that strangely enough 13 year olds who dungeon master will understand and it's almost one needs a course on dungeon mastering and I know how strange that sounds. But it's a very particular and specific skill set, because you have to keep that engagement going. And it's a matter of drawing them, drawing them back. With experience, you get to read people and understand what makes them tick. Sometimes you have to discuss with them with if it gets truly bad. Discuss with them. And, you know, remind them that this is a simulation, and that this is not necessarily going to be true to what it was. But remind them that you need them and to have faith in the process. But that's when it's truly far gone. Usually by engaging them in different ways or creating injects on the fly that engage them in their expectations in a little bit more of a direct way. Sometimes we're dealing with egos that may be bruised. And sometimes people would like a spotlight on them for a little bit for a cup for a couple of minutes, or they want the spotlight off, quite frankly, to give them a bit of a break. So it really is a read of the room and having, you know, facilitation and workshopping techniques in your back pocket that you can pull out. Having a team of facilitators also helps to that effect, again, depending on the size of the of the game itself, so that you have support in order to do that. Because you know, just as much as we might be dealing with large egos, we could be dealing with people who are very shy and you want them to participate and get their ideas out. And so easing them through the process and guiding them where you're very much a coach and your your, you know, as a facilitator of a serious game. I see my job is twofold, creating a great compelling narrative and pulling the best out of the people that are there. And so you're balancing those those two pieces to really get that that engagement.

Lars Peter Nissen: 24:58

So so far we've been talking about the experience that the individual player in the game helps and and I think it's clear from what we talked about that this can be an incredibly powerful way of experiencing things. That actually you don't really want to experience, but that you may write it, it's a way of simulating some of the dangerous situations, some of the ambiguous situations that we end up in without anybody dying or getting hurt. Exactly. I think it can enhance people's tolerance for ambiguity and really build that muscle memory of what it's like when you lose control. And it can be a fantastic way of training, for example, teams we deploy sort of first response to, to earthquakes.

Tom Fisher: 25:38

Absolutely, absolutely.

Lars Peter Nissen: 25:42

Now, there's a different aspect to games also. And that's the control side of it. So the out of the problem, right. And what I've seen in a couple of large exercises we have is how all of the worst sides of the system replicate themselves, if in exercise control how all of the axes that are to be grinded, you know that it happens in exercise control. And I've actually seen some relations where that managing exercise control was more complex than the training. What how, how to be looked to you, as the humanitarian sector when you come in and see how we conduct the gaming. So forget about the public record what's outside?

Tom Fisher: 26:27

Yeah, it's certainly something that and again, because game facilitation is its real own particular set of skills. And, as you say, balancing egos that can sometimes be large. I dare I say even unruly sometimes in that, well, this is just the way things happen. Because guess what I'm in charge. So this is just the way things happen. And it can be very difficult to manage, especially if they inject themselves as control. But much like player management, control team management, knowing as best you can, who the control team are. And ideally, you get to hand pick them. In most scenarios, well, you can't. But sometimes it is the sort of thing where when we're dealing with a sponsor, we will very much handle running the game. And we will have the sponsor provide subject matter expertise. So let me handle the narrative and allow the others to give me the check and balance of whether or not institutionally this is something that would normally happen, and take that advice in that form. So that can be a bit of a mitigation. When you get into the scenario where the sponsor demands to be right in the in the middle of it, then how I'm trying to I'm trying to think how to best say this, let's let's put it this way, sometimes it is like herding kittens, where you grab one and another one goes squirting off somewhere. But that's, that's part of the skill set that you need to keep the manage. And also I think it's about managing their expectations. So making sure to meet with them have proper preparatory sessions. So they're not surprised because I find that situation happens more, when they're surprised by something and it's the will and the you know, the, the hands on the hips and they're, they're saying, Well, that would never happen. So if you can walk them through it beforehand, and get their input as to how do you see this happening in your organisation? And we would like to play it this way. Does that sound suitable to you? Then you can smooth over a lot of those a lot of those ripples ahead of time, but it's as any human endeavour. You're managing egos, you're managing hurt feelings, and because it's so engaging, you will end up with hurt feelings. You know, we've had we've had people in tears because they've been arrested by a fake police and you know, it gets that very now at that point. You also have to be very careful to not trigger certain emotional responses from people.

Lars Peter Nissen: 29:46

What some of the best experiences you've seen with game what? Talk about a time when you saw an organisation really use gaming effectively to learn and build a stronger team.

Tom Fisher: 29:58

Definitely the The travelling with the World Bank and going to various African and Asian countries and the seeing at a certain point, you see the light bulb go off. And then you know, or people will come up to you, and the massive thank you, where they they turn around said I never I never realised. And it's opening up that new those new pathways of thinking, you know, games are very good at teaching lateral thinking, you know, as you were alluding to before, and the Yes, I know what this to do in this scenario, I know what to do in this scenario, the next scenario is going to be different, but now I have a better capacity to be able to, to be able to do the shift. One in particular, was nursing training, and dealing with the dealing with the pandemic, and really giving an appreciation less to the nurses, but to the doctors of everything that the nurses go through. And that eye opener, and, you know, even as you were alluding with the were the control team themselves, seeing everything develop. And they they understand more the frontline worker, especially if they haven't come up through the through the ranks of being on the frontline. And getting that appreciation. We're delivering training at the Montreal genocide centre, and the eye opening of what was going on in the Middle East around around that as they were instructing university students and that's the Oh, with the with the with the big saucer eyes and the and the realisation and having been in the shoes of an internally displaced person and everything that they had to go through, that it's transmitting that and especially on an emotional level, where they just get it, you know that that's the most fulfilling.

Lars Peter Nissen: 32:27

Do you psychologically debrief, people afterwards?

Tom Fisher: 32:30

Debrief. There's no sense in running a game, as far as I'm concerned if there is not a debrief. debrief is a fundamental part of the learning. Because games being the powerful mechanism that they are, because they really target, you know, heart, soul and mind, they really, really do. That if you do not debrief, there's a horrible danger of teaching exactly the wrong lessons. Because you don't know exactly what people are walking away with. You have an impression, you have what you've built to point them in a direction. But until you discuss with them, you don't exactly know. So debrief is absolutely a fundamental piece of this. And the you know, both from a logical standpoint, and operational standpoint, in terms of Did you follow procedures, did you not? Or does this procedure make sense, but from a psychological basis of, you know, having the honest discussion, one of the games that we have for one of the UN agencies, it is their last training experience before deployment, we will find out right then and there, if they're actually ready to, if they're actually ready to go. Because, let's be honest, if you can't handle the stress, when it's on a map in front of you, and we're communicating over zoom, you're really not going to like the smell when you get to when you get to the caps and the open latrines and everything. So, you know, I cannot say fundamental enough that you must have debrief otherwise you're only getting 10% of what you have what you need.

Lars Peter Nissen: 34:29

And do you actually have like psychologists standby if somebody I've seen it when we do for example, simulation of hostage taking or some of the heat training that that we do right it you never know what people have experienced before. Right? Really trigger some some some heavy risk.

Tom Fisher: 34:46

That's it in in most of what we do. Not necessary. But as you say, if we're getting into the heavy duty stuff, then we'll have support now whether that is internal HR are to make sure and then to be able to point them in a in a direction. Because as you say, when when you get the correct level of engagement, you're feeling what you would normally be feeling in the in the field or as close as possible to it. So it can have triggering effects. It can be also somewhat sometimes cathartic and liberating. And I'm thinking of a particular a particular simulation. That that is run and one of the participants was a victim where the secret police had murdered their entire family. And but specifically wanted to play a role where they would be put up against the secret beliefs, because for them, this was their, their stand up and be strong moment. This was this was their ability to work through it. So as it may be triggering for some, it may be an absolute release for others. But again, that's why it's so important to know your audience because we're not here to cause trauma. We're here to make sure that trauma doesn't happen down the down the road. So you one must be sensitive.

Lars Peter Nissen: 36:27

What are some of the worst practices you've seen in terms of how institutions use gaming? What are some of the not-to's.

Tom Fisher: 36:33

Sponsors who are using nefarious gaming to push a particular agenda? That happens more often than one would think? sponsors who use a game at the very end of a training was no debrief, like the like the cherry on me the cherry on the cake to say, Oh, look, here's our fun adventure, well, you may as well have just had a pizza party, because your your your pet, you're paying for nothing if you're doing that, and you might be doing, doing some harm. You know, as much as I very much encourage new people into the business, my team is very diverse, and tends toward being very young. They need proper guidance. Because, again, because it's a medium that is so powerful, you can very easily teach the wrong lesson. And I've seen certain people, and I think they go in with good intent. But they develop these games, and I just shake my head and say, My Lord, you understand that you think you're teaching A but your teachings Z, when people walk out of this, so the nefarious sponsor, the cherry on top of the of the cake, and the the the misguided idealist, hopefully, because I don't think people are necessarily nefarious, that they're just dangerous. Really, and, you know, we see this often in large institutions that deal with leading large numbers of people where a lot of money is involved were purposefully or not, certain agendas are being driven, and they want these to be driven in the games and that's just, you know, problematic, let's, let's put it that way. And, you know, for us, we walk away, we walk away, because, you know, I wouldn't be able to live with myself or sleep at night if, if we were going along along that route. And there's a large number of, of academic studies on this one in particular is by Stephen Downes Martin, who was with the the Navy War College in the United States, and exactly about this in the prevalence and how to deal with and that's it being a private organisation, very easy for me, because then I just walk away, because it's not for me,

Lars Peter Nissen: 39:17

if we look at the humanitarian sector, what would you wish we did differently with gaming? How would you how would you hope that we could use this tool?

Tom Fisher: 39:25

I think, as you know, not just the idea of training, but the idea of using it to test what if scenarios, you know, and running short games, micro games as as, as I would put it, Matrix Games, which are a specific type of game that are very easy to put together in an afternoon to be able to sit down and say, let's, let's go through our What if and rather than a brainstorming session, or some kind of planning meeting let's actually move things around a map. And in plan this way, make it make it dynamic. So this the situation is coming at you from every which direction as it would in a in a humanitarian situation. I think that and then really emphasising gaming or serious gaming as a testbed following any kind of training or rent or any kind of lecture. I know there's a big push toward micro training in the industry, which I personally am against. Because I don't think it gives a holistic picture. However, if you combine micro training, with games that then provide a larger picture, then I could see how things could mesh because it can't be about one single scenario. And you're learning about one single small thing, because there is nothing more complicated than a humanitarian scenario, when you're dealing with when you have to deal with the militia to get through to the camps to deliver aid, you have to deal with the government in order to deliver aid and bring goods into the country. And balancing just those two pieces, before we've even gotten to condition of roads. And whether or not you may have to pay people off to cross areas or to get things into a country. That all of these complexities is something that you need to have the big picture vision of otherwise, you'll have that mental block when it when it comes to you. And unless you you are partnered with somebody who has experienced, you'll be stuck. I don't I don't see it any other way.

Lars Peter Nissen: 42:01

Tom, thank you for reducing us all to 13 year old. It's a great addition to the humanitarian toolbox to be able to play some games sometimes to get out of the box, so to speak, and really allow yourself to feel free enough to to experiment with extreme situations. It's the serious gaming is exactly the ways to put that I think, I think what you do is really fantastic. And we've already spoken about how you can help us in ecaps gamify, some of our processes and support some of our training, and I really look forward to that. So thank you for that. And thank you for coming on.

Tom Fisher: 42:38

Thank you so much. And again, you put it eloquently and just write this is a tool. It's not the be all end all, but it's a really great tool to have in your toolkit. So thank you, Lars and looking forward to working together.