Responding to Resistance: Why Are We Playing Games?
Facilitators run a structured peer-reflection protocol to practice responding constructively when participants question or resist experiential activities. Pairs test four practical response strategies: empathizing, asking peers, citing evidence, and honoring voluntary participation.
Choose this exercise
Purpose: Equip facilitators or team leaders with four specific verbal strategies to address participant skepticism about game-based learning without escalating tension.
Use it when: Use in facilitator training, staff professional development, or workshop prep when leaders anticipate reluctance toward group activities.
Skip it when: Skip during standard team-building sessions where participants are already engaged in core project work and not learning facilitation technique.
Group arrangement: Pairs within a whole group circle
Timing: UWT suggested duration based on the 5 to 15 minute time band in source metadata
Materials and tools
- One printed reference card per pair (or projected slide) listing the four response strategies
- Timer or stopwatch
Before participants arrive
- Print or project the four response strategy prompts (Empathize, Ask the Room, State the Evidence, Honor Choice).
- Arrange seating so participants can turn to a partner immediately.
Say this to open
At some point as facilitators, someone will ask, 'Why are we playing games?' or 'Why are we wasting time?' Today we practice four concrete ways to answer that question constructively. You will work in pairs to roleplay the pushback and try out the responses.
How to run it
Introduce the four strategies 3 minutes
Explain the four responses from the reference sheet: 1. Empathize (validate their feeling), 2. What do others think? (invite peer perspectives), 3. Evidence (cite the functional purpose of play in trust and collaboration), and 4. Honor choice (make participation clearly voluntary). Read opening script.
Practice round one 4 minutes
Form pairs. Partner A acts as the skeptic and says: 'I am an adult, why are we doing childish games?' Partner B uses one of the four strategies to reply. After 90 seconds, prompt Partner B to try a second strategy with the same scenario. Call time at 4 minutes.
Practice round two 4 minutes
Swap roles. Partner B acts as a busy participant saying: 'We have real deadlines, this is a waste of time.' Partner A responds using either Strategy 3 (Evidence) or Strategy 4 (Honor Choice). After 90 seconds, prompt them to test the other strategy. Call time at 4 minutes.
Whole-room debrief 4 minutes
Reconvene the full group. Ask two participants to share which response felt most natural and which felt hardest to execute. Wrap up on time.
Debrief questions
- Which of the four strategies felt most natural to deliver under pressure?
- How did the skeptic feel when their concern was met with choice rather than defense?
Finished output: Each participant completes at least two practice responses to participant pushback.
Remote
Run in main room or pairs using 2-person breakout rooms for steps 2 and 3. Paste the four prompt scripts into the chat. Broadcast 90-second prompts to change strategies, then close breakout rooms for the debrief.
Hybrid
Pair in-person participants together and remote participants in virtual breakout rooms. If uneven, assign one hybrid pair with an individual laptop in a quiet corner.
Access and participation choices
- Participants may read the printed script verbatim rather than improvising words.
- Anyone may choose to observe a pair's practice without taking an active speaking role.
If the session gets stuck
- Participants get defensive or argue during the roleplay.
- Remind speakers that the goal is de-escalation; instruct them to start their sentence with empathy before making any other point.
- An odd number of participants leaves one person without a partner.
- Form one triad where two people play facilitators testing two different strategies against one skeptic.
Terms used here
- Challenge by Choice: A principle where each person decides their own degree of participation without pressure or penalty.
Four Response Strategies Cheat Sheet
Run this exercise live
The facilitator console stays in this browser. Its QR handoff is a short-lived participant snapshot containing only public exercise instructions, phase, prompt, and timer state.
What participants need now
Materials:
This is a participant-safe snapshot, not a response form. It sends nothing back to the facilitator.
Run this with your AI assistant +
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: 20803344aa376981b7894f8b4f3c5382890cdb13b2e3bb8f30077b043e1ce05f # Responding to Resistance: Why Are We Playing Games? Facilitators run a structured peer-reflection protocol to practice responding constructively when participants question or resist experiential activities. Pairs test four practical response strategies: empathizing, asking peers, citing evidence, and honoring voluntary participation. **Time:** 15 minutes. UWT suggested duration based on the 5 to 15 minute time band in source metadata **People:** 4 to 24. Pairs within a whole group circle ## Choose this exercise **Purpose:** Equip facilitators or team leaders with four specific verbal strategies to address participant skepticism about game-based learning without escalating tension. **Use it when:** Use in facilitator training, staff professional development, or workshop prep when leaders anticipate reluctance toward group activities. **Skip it when:** Skip during standard team-building sessions where participants are already engaged in core project work and not learning facilitation technique. ## Materials and tools - One printed reference card per pair (or projected slide) listing the four response strategies - Timer or stopwatch ## Before participants arrive 1. Print or project the four response strategy prompts (Empathize, Ask the Room, State the Evidence, Honor Choice). 2. Arrange seating so participants can turn to a partner immediately. ## Say this to open At some point as facilitators, someone will ask, 'Why are we playing games?' or 'Why are we wasting time?' Today we practice four concrete ways to answer that question constructively. You will work in pairs to roleplay the pushback and try out the responses. ## How to run it ### 1. Introduce the four strategies (3 minutes) Explain the four responses from the reference sheet: 1. Empathize (validate their feeling), 2. What do others think? (invite peer perspectives), 3. Evidence (cite the functional purpose of play in trust and collaboration), and 4. Honor choice (make participation clearly voluntary). Read opening script. ### 2. Practice round one (4 minutes) Form pairs. Partner A acts as the skeptic and says: 'I am an adult, why are we doing childish games?' Partner B uses one of the four strategies to reply. After 90 seconds, prompt Partner B to try a second strategy with the same scenario. Call time at 4 minutes. ### 3. Practice round two (4 minutes) Swap roles. Partner B acts as a busy participant saying: 'We have real deadlines, this is a waste of time.' Partner A responds using either Strategy 3 (Evidence) or Strategy 4 (Honor Choice). After 90 seconds, prompt them to test the other strategy. Call time at 4 minutes. ### 4. Whole-room debrief (4 minutes) Reconvene the full group. Ask two participants to share which response felt most natural and which felt hardest to execute. Wrap up on time. ## Debrief questions - Which of the four strategies felt most natural to deliver under pressure? - How did the skeptic feel when their concern was met with choice rather than defense? **Finished output:** Each participant completes at least two practice responses to participant pushback. ## Remote Run in main room or pairs using 2-person breakout rooms for steps 2 and 3. Paste the four prompt scripts into the chat. Broadcast 90-second prompts to change strategies, then close breakout rooms for the debrief. ## Hybrid Pair in-person participants together and remote participants in virtual breakout rooms. If uneven, assign one hybrid pair with an individual laptop in a quiet corner. ## Access and participation choices - Participants may read the printed script verbatim rather than improvising words. - Anyone may choose to observe a pair's practice without taking an active speaking role. ## If the session gets stuck **Participants get defensive or argue during the roleplay.** Remind speakers that the goal is de-escalation; instruct them to start their sentence with empathy before making any other point. **An odd number of participants leaves one person without a partner.** Form one triad where two people play facilitators testing two different strategies against one skeptic. ## Terms used here - Challenge by Choice: A principle where each person decides their own degree of participation without pressure or penalty. ## Participant material: Four Response Strategies Cheat Sheet 1. Empathize: 'I can completely understand why this looks like a distraction from our main agenda.' 2. What Do Others Think?: 'That is a fair question. Before I explain my reasoning, how do others in the room see this activity helping our goal?' 3. Evidence: 'Research shows that low-stakes collaborative exercises accelerate trust and shorten the time it takes teams to solve complex problems.' 4. Honor Choice: 'Participation is entirely voluntary. If you prefer to observe and take notes on team dynamics instead of playing, that is welcome.' ## Sources and adaptation Observed in Playmeo blog article 'Why Are We Playing Games?' by Mark Collard (published May 31, 2022). The original Playmeo article by Mark Collard is an advisory leadership essay offering facilitator tactics (Empathize, What Do Others Think, Evidence, Honor Choice). UWT converted these published tactics into a structured 15-minute peer roleplay activity with defined roles, timing, and debrief. [Playmeo](https://www.playmeo.com/why-are-we-playing-games/) [Playmeo](https://www.playmeo.com/why-are-we-playing-games) Current run sheet: https://unitedwetransform.com/exercises/how-to-respond-when-asked-why-are-we-playing-games/
Sources and adaptation
Observed in Playmeo blog article 'Why Are We Playing Games?' by Mark Collard (published May 31, 2022).
The original Playmeo article by Mark Collard is an advisory leadership essay offering facilitator tactics (Empathize, What Do Others Think, Evidence, Honor Choice). UWT converted these published tactics into a structured 15-minute peer roleplay activity with defined roles, timing, and debrief.
See our editorial policy for AI use, sourcing and corrections.