Better Solution

Choose this exercise

Purpose: Test and refine problem-solving ideas by putting solutions through deliberate critique and counter-critique before finalizing an action plan.

Use it when: Use when a team faces authentic operational snags and needs fresh, stress-tested alternative solutions rather than immediate first-instinct fixes.

Skip it when: Skip when dealing with acute crises requiring standard protocols or when interpersonal conflict makes adversarial critique roles unproductive.

Group arrangement: Individual rotational ring of 6 or more participants, or subgroup rings of 6 each.

Timing: UWT suggested running time across six 5-to-7 minute rotational rounds and debrief.

Materials and tools

• One blank 6-section case packet or folder per participant
• One pen per participant
• Countdown timer visible to the room

Before participants arrive

1. Arrange seating in a circle or table clusters where participants can easily pass folders to the person on their left.
2. Distribute one empty folder with the multi-step worksheet clipped inside to each seat.

Say this to open

Today we will use a structured peer-review process called Better Solution. Each of you will write a real workplace problem. Then we will pass the folders in a circle six times. In each round, you will take on a specific thinking role: client, consultant, basher, booster, enhancer, or evaluator. By the time your case returns to you, it will contain an original proposal, a tough critique, a positive testimonial, an enhanced solution, and an independent comparison score.

How to run it

1. Write the problem case 6 minutes

   Each person acts as a Client. On Section 1 of your sheet, write a short, authentic workplace situation that needs a solution. Describe who is involved, the specific obstacle, and the desired outcome. When time is called, pass your folder to the person on your left.

2. Propose initial solution 6 minutes

   Read the case you just received. Act as a Consultant. In Section 2, write a concrete, practical solution to resolve the client's problem. Give clear action steps. When time is called, pass the folder to your left.

3. Write a critical review 6 minutes

   Read the case and the proposed solution. Act as a Basher. In Section 3, write a candid critique identifying vulnerabilities, unintended negative consequences, operational blind spots, and resource drains in that solution. Pass the folder to your left when time is called.

4. Write a positive testimonial 6 minutes

   Read the case, the solution, and the critique. Act as a Booster. In Section 4, write an endorsement pointing out the strengths, practical virtues, and upside of the original solution that the critique overlooked. Pass the folder to your left when time is called.

5. Draft enhanced solution 8 minutes

   Read all materials in the folder. Act as an Enhancer. In Section 5, write an improved, second-generation solution that retains the strengths of the original proposal while fixing the flaws exposed by the critique. When finished, fold back or conceal Sections 3 and 4 so only the case, Solution A, and Solution B are visible. Pass the folder to your left.

6. Evaluate and split points 5 minutes

   Read the case and both solutions. You do not see the critiques. As an Evaluator, compare Solution A and Solution B. Distribute exactly 13 points between them to reflect their relative practical value. For example, give 8 to the enhanced solution and 5 to the original, or 13 and 0 if one completely outclasses the other. Write your split in Section 6. Return the folder to its original author.

7. Debrief and review 8 minutes

   Authors spend two minutes reading their returned packets. The facilitator then calls for 3 or 4 volunteers from around the room to share what changed between the original and enhanced versions.

Debrief questions

• How did seeing both a harsh critique and a strong endorsement change the quality of the second solution?
• What made an enhanced solution score higher than the original proposal?
• Where in your regular workflow could you separate critical evaluation from idea defense?

Finished output: Completed problem portfolios containing peer-vetted solutions, explicit risk assessments, and scored enhancements for each submitted workplace scenario.

Remote

Run via a shared cloud spreadsheet or collaborative document with restricted page sections. Use timed rounds where participants rotate to their assigned participant tab or row (Participant 1 to Tab 2, Tab 2 to Tab 3, etc.). Reveal sections progressively or instruct participants to view only designated blocks.

Hybrid

Keep physical folders in-person and digital documents remote, or place all participants in a single shared digital workspace accessed via personal laptops so rotation sequence remains unified across both locations.

Access and participation choices

• Participants may use fictionalized or anonymized workplace scenarios instead of confidential details.
• Any participant may pass on reading their returned case aloud during the debrief.

If the session gets stuck

A participant writes a vague case that lacks detail for a consultant to work with.

Prompt the consultant to state one reasonable assumption about context before writing their recommendation.

The point split during evaluation does not total 13.

Remind evaluators that the math must add up to exactly 13 points total across the two options.

Terms used here

• RAME: Reusable Asynchronous Multiplayer Exercise, a structured activity format designed for staged, sequential participant contributions.