--- title: "Role Simulation" description: "Small teams adopt distinct stakeholder roles, write dialogue around a key turning point, and map two alternative outcomes. Teams read or act out their scenes before the full room debriefs the trade-offs." last_updated: "2026-09-07" canonical: "https://unitedwetransform.com/exercises/role-simulation/" --- # Role Simulation Small teams adopt distinct stakeholder roles, write dialogue around a key turning point, and map two alternative outcomes. Teams read or act out their scenes before the full room debriefs the trade-offs. **Time:** 60 minutes. Source recommends 45 to 90 minutes; structured here as a concise 60-minute session. **People:** 6 to 24. Small teams of 3 to 5 participants (for 19 participants, use three teams of 5 and one team of 4) ## Choose this exercise **Purpose:** Examine how competing interests shape decisions and produce diverging outcomes in a realistic scenario. **Use it when:** Use when a team needs to examine a complex decision, anticipate conflicting stakeholder priorities, or test negotiation strategies before committing to a plan. **Skip it when:** Skip when the group needs to resolve an active personal interpersonal conflict or when there is insufficient time for both preparation and thoughtful reflection. ## Materials and tools - Printed scenario sheets with integrated roles (1 per team) - Blank chart paper or whiteboard (1 per in-person team) - Marker pens (2 per in-person team) - Timer or stopwatch (facilitator) - Digital collaborative workspace or shared document (remote/hybrid teams) ## Before participants arrive 1. Print or copy the scenario sheet with integrated role assignments for each team. 2. Arrange breakout spaces or tables so teams can discuss and rehearse without talking over one another. 3. Set up a central presentation area where the full room can see and hear each team. ## Say this to open Today we are running a role simulation to explore how different priorities drive decisions. In small teams, you will each take a distinct role in a shared scenario. Your team will map out a critical turning point and script two different paths the story could take. Acting skill does not matter; you can act it out or simply read your dialogues aloud. ## How to run it ### 1. Introduce scenario and assign roles (8 minutes) Explain the activity goals and ground rules. Divide participants into teams of 3 to 5. Distribute the scenario sheet. Give teams three minutes to review the roles and assign one per person. In teams of 3, use Roles 1 to 3. In teams of 4, include Role 4. In teams of 5, assign the fifth person as Narrator or observer. Anyone who prefers not to perform dialogue may take the Narrator role. ### 2. Develop narratives and branch points (22 minutes) Teams collaborate to construct their simulation. Each team writes key dialogue around a critical decision and outlines two distinct outcomes: Path A, where interests align or compromise is reached, and Path B, where negotiations stall or escalate. Teams document their two branches on chart paper or a shared doc, then briefly rehearse reading or acting out their scenes. ### 3. Present simulations (18 minutes) Reconvene the full room. Each team presents their simulation in strictly 2 minutes, showing the critical decision point and summarizing both outcomes. Non-presenting participants listen and note what drove the story branches. Keep strict time: signal at 90 seconds and stop each team firmly at 2 minutes to fit up to 6 teams. ### 4. Reflect and debrief (12 minutes) Facilitate a whole-room debrief using the prepared questions. Select two questions to focus on and take 4 to 5 concise one-minute contributions across different teams. Invite participants to compare how different teams resolved the core trade-off. ## Debrief questions - What was the most difficult constraint or motivation your character had to balance during the decision point? - Which specific dialogue choice or concession caused the narrative to shift between Path A and Path B? - How do the dynamics observed in these simulations mirror trade-offs we face in our actual work? **Finished output:** Completed simulation outlines displaying a critical decision point and two alternative narrative outcomes, documented on chart paper or in a shared digital document. ## Remote Run via video meeting software. Divide participants into breakout rooms of 3 to 5 with a link to a shared digital workspace containing the scenario and role prompts. When reconvening, teams read their dialogues or act them out on camera, pasting their two narrative branches into the main meeting chat or shared canvas. ## Hybrid Form fully in-person pods and fully remote pods so discussion pace remains natural. Remote pods use a shared digital document to record their branch points. Remote pods present using direct audio and video while in-person participants watch on the main room display. Debrief turns alternate evenly between in-person speakers and remote participants. ## Access and participation choices - Participants may choose an active narrator or scriptwriter role instead of performing dialogue aloud. - Presentations can be delivered as straight spoken readings rather than theatrical dramatizations. - Any participant may pass on speaking during the final whole-room debrief without explanation. ## If the session gets stuck **A team gets stuck trying to script an entire play instead of focusing on the decision.** Remind them to focus on just one turning point: define the exact choice, write three or four lines of dialogue leading to it, and summarize the two outcomes. **A team approaches the 2-minute presentation limit while still reading background setup.** Signal the 30-second warning and ask them to jump straight to the decision point and state the two alternative outcomes in one sentence each. ## Terms used here - Branch point: The specific moment in a narrative where a decision leads to one of two different consequences. ## Participant material: Sample Scenario: Community Project Launch Scenario: A city initiative has secured funding to renovate a vacant public lot into either a youth recreation center or a community garden. The project steering committee has 48 hours to submit the final plan. Role 1: Community Organizer Goal: Ensure green space, food security, and quiet accessibility for older neighborhood residents. Resistant to loud evening activities. Role 2: Youth Program Coordinator Goal: Build an indoor-outdoor recreation space to engage local teenagers and reduce after-school idle time. Needs dedicated, secure space. Role 3: Municipal Project Director Goal: Deliver the project strictly on time and under budget. Highly concerned with long-term maintenance costs and liability. Role 4 (Optional for 3-person teams; or Narrator): Local Small Business Owner Goal: Increase foot traffic to nearby storefronts during business hours while avoiding evening parking congestion. Role 5 (For 5-person teams): Community Narrator / Process Observer Goal: Track agreements, capture notes, and introduce the scene during the presentation. Team Task: 1. Formulate the core disagreement. 2. Script 3 to 5 lines of dialogue leading up to the decision. 3. Present Outcome A (collaborative resolution) and Outcome B (stalemate or escalation). Keep presentation to 2 minutes total. ## Sources and adaptation Observed in Participatory Methods library under Creative Commons attribution (2025). Original authorship is not specified. The core mechanic of small-team scenario planning with branching outcomes and dramatized presentation is preserved from the Participatory Methods source. UWT established a 60-minute facilitation structure, expanded group sizing from 3 to 5 participants per pod to handle arbitrary counts smoothly, added digital workspace materials for remote cohorts, aligned integrated scenario sheets with printable materials, and set strict 2-minute presentation caps. [Participatory Methods](https://participatorymethods.com/activities/role-simulation/) Current run sheet: https://unitedwetransform.com/exercises/role-simulation/