Identities and Issues Intersections

Choose this exercise

Purpose: Compare how different team criteria include or exclude community voices when addressing a complex public issue.

Use it when: Use when a coalition, committee, or student group needs to examine assumptions about who belongs on a working group or task force.

Skip it when: Skip when the group is looking for immediate operational staffing decisions or needs a simple 5-minute icebreaker.

Group arrangement: Subgroups of 3 to 4 participants (allow pairs or one group of 5 if counts do not divide evenly), plus whole-room comparison

Timing: 50 minutes based on source breakdown (five 10-minute steps); the old metadata tag of 5 to 15 minutes was incomplete OCR noise.

Materials and tools

• One copy of the Task Team Challenge handout or prompt display per subgroup
• One blank flipchart pad and marker per subgroup
• Scratch paper and pen per person
• Shared wall board or central flipchart for plenary capture

Before participants arrive

1. Write the Task Team Challenge on a central board or prepare digital slides.
2. If substituting the default topic (Affordable Housing), write out the replacement community challenge in advance.
3. Form clusters of seating for small groups of 3 to 4 people.

Say this to open

Today we will explore how community task forces are composed and how selection criteria affect representation. You have been asked to assemble an eight-person task team to communicate about Affordable Housing in your community. In small groups, you will generate ideal criteria, draft a call for volunteers, and compare who our criteria invite or exclude.

How to run it

1. Review Challenge and Brainstorm Characteristics 10 minutes

   Read the challenge prompt aloud. Place participants in subgroups of 3 to 4 (pairs or one group of 5 are fine if numbers require). Each group brainstorms member characteristics on scratch paper using the frame 'Someone who can...' without analyzing or debating ideas yet. Aim for a wide list of individual and collective traits.

2. Select and Rank Criteria 10 minutes

   Each person silently reviews their group list and chooses their top 10 characteristics. Subgroups then compare selections and discuss why certain traits matter. Groups distinguish between traits needed across every member versus distinct skills needed to round out the team.

3. Draft Call for Volunteers 10 minutes

   Each subgroup agrees on their final core criteria for an eight-person team and writes a short call for volunteers on their flipchart. The call must specify what the team needs from candidates.

4. Share Descriptions Plenary 10 minutes

   Reconvene the full room. A designated spokesperson from each small group reads their volunteer description aloud, keeping to 60 seconds each so all groups finish within time. Two volunteer scribes write recurring and unique criteria on the central board.

5. Debrief Criteria and Representation 10 minutes

   Facilitate a full-room discussion using the scribed criteria. Address common patterns, outliers, and systemic representation. Take 3 to 4 voluntary reflections across the debrief questions to conclude within time.

Debrief questions

• Where is there consistent overlap across the calls for volunteers, and why?
• Are there any outliers, and why were those specific criteria chosen?
• How important are diverse perspectives when dealing with complex issues, and when might diversity be a hindrance or a benefit?
• Looking at the criteria on the board, who would feel invited to apply, and who might be unintentionally excluded?

Finished output: Written volunteer recruitment blurbs and a consolidated plenary board list of selection criteria.

Remote

Run in video meeting breakout rooms of 3 to 4 participants. Share the prompt on a shared whiteboard or slide deck. Subgroups draft their volunteer calls on assigned digital board frames or shared document pages. In plenary, spokespersons present within 60 seconds each while the facilitator records criteria on the shared screen.

Hybrid

Keep in-person participants grouped together and remote participants in separate online breakout rooms. All groups paste or transcribe their finished volunteer calls into a single shared online document so both rooms can view and compare postings in real time.

Access and participation choices

• Participants may draft individually before subgroup discussion.
• Spokesperson and scribe roles are voluntary; participants may contribute ideas without speaking to the full room.
• Written prompt provided visually and read aloud to support different processing styles.

If the session gets stuck

Groups spend the initial brainstorm debating whether a characteristic is realistic.

Remind them that step one is strictly non-evaluative collection. Direct them to write down any idea framed as 'Someone who can...' and save prioritization for step two.

Groups write vague volunteer calls such as 'must be passionate and nice.'

Prompt them to name observable capabilities or lived connections, like 'Someone who has rented in the county for at least three years' or 'Someone who can facilitate bilingual public forums.'

Terms used here

• Task Team: A small working group convened to complete a specific assignment within a set timeline.