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: 09d63eb504e731fcfa6eb52ffb6d0781f22130b82f489858e908cb7676eb033a

# Argue It Out

Participants write their stance on an index card, deliver short uninterrupted mini-speeches, and enter a moderated discussion to test competing viewpoints. A volunteer scribe charts all arguments and trade-offs on a shared board.

**Time:** 35 minutes. Source suggests 30 to 60 minutes; this run sheet provides a 35-minute protocol that accommodates up to 12 one-minute speeches.
**People:** 4 to 12. Whole-room session with individual writing, timed individual mini-speeches, and an open moderated exchange.

## Choose this exercise

**Purpose:** Bring conflicting perspectives and counterarguments into view before making a decision.
**Use it when:** Use during a decision meeting when a group faces a contentious choice, risks groupthink, or needs to examine opposing sides thoroughly.
**Skip it when:** Skip when a decision has already been finalized, when interpersonal tension makes direct debate unsafe, or when the goal is simple informational broadcast.

## Materials and tools

- One 3x5 index card per participant
- One pen per participant
- One flipchart or whiteboard
- Two dry-erase or flipchart markers
- One visible digital countdown timer

## Before participants arrive

1. Write the central question or proposed course of action across the top of the board.
2. Draw two vertical columns on the board labeled Arguments For and Arguments Against.
3. Distribute one index card and one pen to each participant.
4. Ask for a volunteer to act as scribe for the session, noting that taking this role allows someone to participate through writing rather than speaking. If nobody volunteers, scribe from the facilitator role.

## Say this to open

Today we are examining all sides of our central question. Before we argue, everyone gets up to one minute to state their viewpoint without interruption. Our goal is not to win right now, but to occupy different positions and surface the strongest points on all sides. Take your index card and write down your core stance and your single strongest supporting reason.

## How to run it

### 1. Write initial positions (4 minutes)

Read the focal question aloud. Invite each participant to write their stance and main supporting point on their card. Those who plan to pass during the speaking rounds may note questions or tensions they want to track on the board. Stop writing when the four-minute timer sounds.

### 2. Deliver uninterrupted mini-speeches (13 minutes)

Go around the circle. Give each participant up to one minute to state their position. No interruptions, cross-talk, or rebuttals are allowed during this phase. Anyone may pass simply by saying pass. The scribe records key points in the matching column on the board as each person speaks.

### 3. Moderated argument exchange (13 minutes)

Open the floor for moderated debate. Invite participants to challenge points on the board, offer counterarguments, or advocate for an opposing view to test its strength. Call on speakers one at a time. The scribe adds new points, rebuttals, and trade-offs to the board. End when the timer reaches zero.

### 4. Review points and debrief (5 minutes)

Direct attention to the completed board. Pose the debrief questions to the full room. Take brief responses from volunteers across the remaining minutes to close out the session.


## Debrief questions

- Which argument on the opposing side was stronger than you expected?
- What blind spots or unexamined assumptions became clear once both sides were charted?
- What trade-off looks most critical as we move toward a decision?

**Finished output:** A two-column chart displaying arguments, counterarguments, and identified trade-offs for the focal question.

## Remote

Run on a video call with a shared digital whiteboard or document visible on screen. During silent writing, participants take notes privately. The facilitator calls on each participant in turn for their one-minute mini-speech. During open debate, participants raise their digital hand to be called on. A designated participant or co-host logs points directly into the board.

## Hybrid

Seat in-person participants facing both the room board and the remote camera. Remote participants write notes locally. Alternate between in-person and remote participants during mini-speeches. Use a shared digital whiteboard projected in the room so all participants see the exact same live notes. Test audio so remote voices carry clearly into the room.

## Access and participation choices

- Participants may pass during the mini-speech round without giving an explanation.
- Participants who prefer writing may hand their index card to the scribe or submit text in chat to be added to the board.
- Choosing the scribe role lets a participant focus entirely on capturing ideas rather than speaking.

## If the session gets stuck

**One or two participants dominate the moderated argument phase.**

Enforce hand-raising and cap individual speaking turns at ninety seconds, specifically inviting comments from those who have not yet spoken.

**Participants interrupt or debate each other during the mini-speech round.**

Intervene immediately. Remind the group that speeches are strictly uninterrupted, and ask responders to write counterpoints on their cards for the open debate.


## Terms used here

- Mini-speech: A brief, uninterrupted one-minute spoken statement summarizing a participant's perspective.

## Sources and adaptation

Observed in Relationship Makers Handbook (pages 276-277), where it is titled Obama Argue it Out and references meeting practices attributed to Barack Obama.

Retained the mechanic from Relationship Makers Handbook: participants write initial thoughts, give uninterrupted mini-speeches, and engage in a moderated argument recorded by a scribe. UWT structured the timing to 35 minutes to allow up to 12 full one-minute turns, resolved role selection for the scribe, added facilitator scripts, and detailed remote and hybrid procedures.

Current run sheet: https://unitedwetransform.com/exercises/obama-argue-it-out/