Works with Claude, ChatGPT, Gemini, or your own local model: paste this prompt and your AI will co-facilitate this exercise with you.

Help me prepare and run the exercise below. First ask for my participant count, time, setting, access needs and intended result. Check these against the stated limits. Use the supplied rules and materials. Explain any proposed changes before using them, and label them as adaptations. Do not invent source claims or require personal disclosure. Give me one step at a time when I say start. I manage the people, physical activity and clock; do not claim to observe the room. Ask me what happened before choosing a next step.

Reference revision: 008d14afb76ba0cffc0472a027ad42bc9b42bfc54e2cb599eb8b9ec2c79206ce

# Atomize

Groups break down a complex system or concept layer by layer into its foundational components. The resulting tree diagram exposes base elements, hidden assumptions, or distinct operational units.

**Time:** 60 minutes. Gamestorming source suggests 1 hour or more. 60 minutes allows 3 to 4 decomposition cycles plus review.
**People:** 3 to 24. Whole group for small cohorts (3 to 6) or parallel breakout teams of 3 to 5 participants for larger rooms.

## Choose this exercise

**Purpose:** Deconstruct a complex system into tangible, base-level components using recursive questioning.
**Use it when:** Use when a team needs to unpack an abstract concept, complex service, or messy workflow before redesigning or prioritizing it.
**Skip it when:** Skip when the focus is on synthesizing disparate ideas or when the system is already well-defined and simply needs linear execution.

## Materials and tools

- 1 large whiteboard, rolling wall, or wide butcher paper per subgroup
- 3 pads of sticky notes (different colors helpful) per subgroup
- 1 fine-point dry-erase or permanent marker per person
- 1 roll of painter tape per room

## Before participants arrive

1. Clear wall or whiteboard space for each small group.
2. Write the central system or topic on a large sticky note and post it at the top center of each board.
3. Place sticky pads and markers at each station.

## Say this to open

Today we are analyzing our core system by breaking it down into its smallest working parts, or atoms. We start with the whole system at the top. We will split it into three to five major parts, and then repeatedly ask what combines to make each part until we reach base components.

## How to run it

### 1. Frame the primary system (5 minutes)

State the system named at the top of the board. Give an explicit neutral example: if the system is a bicycle, the first split might be frame, drive train, wheels, and steering. If running parallel teams, ensure all groups work on either the same target or assigned distinct subsystems.

### 2. Split into top-tier components (10 minutes)

Ask participants to identify 3 to 5 large structural blocks that make up the system. Have participants write one component per sticky note and post them in a horizontal line directly beneath the main topic.

### 3. Deconstruct recursively (25 minutes)

For each component, prompt the group: 'What combines to create this?' Teams generate sub-components and post them beneath each parent note, branching downward. Continue this cycle for 3 to 4 vertical layers until reaching fundamental units that cannot be split further without losing practical meaning.

### 4. Review the atomic layer (10 minutes)

Have teams step back and scan the bottom row. Direct them to circle or mark recurring base elements, surprising dependencies, or operational bottlenecks using their markers.

### 5. Harvest findings (10 minutes)

If running parallel groups, have two representatives share one key base insight from their board with the room. Close by photographing the maps for system documentation or backlog creation.


## Debrief questions

- Which base components appeared under multiple different branches?
- Where did the breakdown reveal hidden work, unwritten rules, or unexpected complexity?
- Which fundamental component, if changed or removed, would have the largest effect on the overall system?

**Finished output:** A hierarchical tree diagram mapping a system down to its base structural components.

## Remote

Set up a shared digital whiteboard with a top-level sticky note and pre-arranged tiered lanes. Small groups use breakout rooms of 3 to 5 people to add sticky notes downward. Keep cameras optional and invite contributions via text or spoken turn.

## Hybrid

Pair an in-person scribe with an online participant in each breakout team. Use a digital board mirrored on the in-room display so remote and co-located participants can place and move notes simultaneously.

## Access and participation choices

- Provide a digital board option for participants who prefer typing over handwriting.
- Allow participants to observe, take personal notes, or focus on a single sub-branch rather than the whole board.

## If the session gets stuck

**Participants list sequential process steps instead of structural components.**

Clarify that this exercise maps ingredients or structural parts rather than a timeline. Ask: 'What must exist for this part to function?'

**A branch expands infinitely into trivial trivia.**

Stop the breakdown when a sub-item reaches an off-the-shelf tool, standard raw material, or singular indivisible human behavior.


## Terms used here

- Atomic level: The most fundamental, indivisible unit or behavior in a system that cannot be split further without losing context.

## Sources and adaptation

Observed in Gamestorming; the source attributes the Atomize game to James Macanufo.

Preserved the core mechanics of recursive splitting and hierarchical mapping described by James Macanufo in Gamestorming. UWT added explicit timeboxing (60 minutes), structured subgroup mechanics, a concrete bicycle framing example, and hybrid participation roles.

[Gamestorming](https://gamestorming.com/atomize)

[Gamestorming](https://gamestorming.com/atomize/)

Current run sheet: https://unitedwetransform.com/exercises/atomize/