# Collaborative Benchmarking Teams compare their current internal workflow or practice against an external standard or reference case. They map out shared strengths, find specific operational gaps, and draft realistic adaptations. **Time:** 45 minutes. UWT suggested duration. The 5 to 15 minute estimate in legacy metadata is insufficient for reading external documentation and analyzing gaps. **People:** 4 to 24. Small groups of 3 to 5 participants, working in parallel. ## Choose this exercise **Purpose:** Identify concrete gaps and practical improvements by comparing internal routines against documented external reference practices. **Use it when:** Use during retrospective, strategic planning, or operational redesign sessions when a team has hit a performance plateau and needs external examples to spark realistic improvements. **Skip it when:** Skip when the current internal process has not been documented yet or when participants lack reference data about outside practices. ## Materials and tools - 1 printed external reference sheet per participant - 1 Benchmarking Analysis Worksheet per small group of 3 to 5 - 1 pack of 3x3 sticky notes per small group - 1 fine-point marker per participant - 1 roll of painter's tape - 1 digital countdown timer ## Before participants arrive 1. Select a specific internal process to evaluate before the session. 2. Prepare and print the external reference case study or standard sheet. 3. Set up small-group tables with worksheets, sticky notes, and markers. 4. If in person, clear wall space to hang group worksheets at the end. ## Say this to open Today we are comparing our current way of working with a documented external reference case. Our goal is not to copy another team outright. We want to see what they do differently, recognize what we already do well, and choose practical adaptations for our own work. You will work in small groups to review the reference, complete a comparison worksheet, and propose one realistic change. ## How to run it ### 1. Introduce case and criteria (5 minutes) Hand out the external reference sheet. Read the target process statement aloud. Give participants 3 minutes to read the external case independently. Answer brief factual questions about the reference data before breaking into groups. ### 2. Small-group comparative analysis (20 minutes) Divide participants into groups of 3 to 5. Direct each group to review their Benchmarking Analysis Worksheet. Teams compare their internal practice against the reference on three prompts: Strengths (what we do better or equally well), Gaps (what they do that we do not), and Adaptations (what we can realistically adjust). Team members write individual thoughts on sticky notes first, discuss them, and agree on at least two items per box. ### 3. Cross-team exchange (10 minutes) Ask each group to post their worksheet on the wall or board. Conduct a brief gallery walk or table exchange: each team designates one speaker to summarize their top adaptation idea in 90 seconds while others listen. Stop each group promptly at the time limit. ### 4. Debrief and next steps (10 minutes) Bring the whole room together. Select 2 or 3 participants to answer debrief questions aloud. Record shared patterns on a central board and collect the worksheets for follow-up implementation. ## Debrief questions - Which strength from our own process stood out most when compared to the reference? - What external practice looked appealing at first glance but would fail in our day-to-day context? - Which single adaptation proposed today is practical enough to test in the next two weeks? **Finished output:** Completed Benchmarking Analysis Worksheets detailing verified strengths, identified operational gaps, and prioritized action proposals. ## Remote Upload external case studies and digital worksheets to breakout rooms on a digital whiteboard. Form breakout groups of 3 to 5 people for step 2. For step 3, keep everyone in the main room and have a designated speaker from each breakout share their screen or board section for 90 seconds. ## Hybrid In-person groups work with physical worksheets and post their top sticky notes into a shared digital document or whiteboard. Remote groups use dedicated breakout rooms on the same digital whiteboard. During the step 3 exchange, stream the digital board to the room screen and alternate presentations between in-person and remote speakers. ## Access and participation choices - Provide reference sheets in advance in plain-text and large-print formats for participants who need more reading time. - Allow participants to choose roles within small groups, such as reader, note-taker, timekeeper, or presenter. - Any participant may pass on presenting during the gallery walk or speaking in the whole-room debrief. ## If the session gets stuck **Participants dismiss the external case as irrelevant because the external organization is too different in size or budget.** Remind the room that the goal is not replication. Ask the group: What underlying routine or principle can we extract and downscale to fit our resources? **One participant dominates the small-group conversation, leaving the worksheet blank until the last minute.** Enforce silent sticky-note writing for the first 3 minutes of group work before verbal discussion begins. ## Terms used here - Benchmarking: Comparing your team's workflow, quality, or speed against recognized standards or peer teams to locate areas to adjust. - Adaptation: Altering an outside practice to work within your team's specific budget, culture, and technical constraints. ## Participant material: Benchmarking Analysis Worksheet BENCHMARKING ANALYSIS WORKSHEET Target Process Under Review: ____________________________________ External Reference Organization / Standard: _______________________ Team Members: __________________________________________________ 1. CURRENT STRENGTHS What are we doing well in comparison to the external reference? - - 2. IDENTIFIED GAPS What specific practices, tools, or steps does the external reference use that we currently lack? - - 3. PROPOSED ADAPTATIONS Which external practice can we adapt to fit our actual constraints, and what would our version look like? - - IMMEDIATE ACTION STEP: What is one concrete test we can run within the next 14 days? Describe the step and name the owner. ## Sources and adaptation Observed in Participatory Methods library under the entry 'Collaborative Benchmarking'. Retained the core structure from Participatory Methods: selecting an external standard, evaluating comparative strengths, identifying gaps, and developing context-specific adaptations. UWT adjusted the duration from an unrealistic 5-15 minute band to 45 minutes to allow genuine analysis, added the Benchmarking Analysis Worksheet, structured group turn-taking, and defined explicit hybrid and access steps. [Participatory Methods](https://participatorymethods.com/activities/collaborative) [Participatory Methods](https://participatorymethods.com/activities/collaborative-benchmarking/#) [Participatory Methods](https://participatorymethods.com/activities/collaborative-benchmarking/) Current run sheet: https://unitedwetransform.com/exercises/collaborative-benchmarking/