---
title: "Up And Down"
description: "Small groups evaluate real-world situations that help or hinder a specific project, debating the point value of each event to move tokens up or down a vertical track."
last_updated: "2026-09-07"
canonical: "https://unitedwetransform.com/exercises/tgl-april-2009/"
---

# Up And Down

Small groups evaluate real-world situations that help or hinder a specific project, debating the point value of each event to move tokens up or down a vertical track.

**Time:** 45 minutes. UWT suggested standard duration based on the full multi-phase card generation, board play, and debrief described in the source.
**People:** 4 to 24. Table groups of 3 to 6 participants

## Choose this exercise

**Purpose:** Assess the relative impact of positive and negative events on a project and evaluate mitigation or amplification strategies.
**Use it when:** Use during project post-mortems, onboarding, or risk-planning sessions to test assumptions about operational challenges and opportunities.
**Skip it when:** Skip when the group has not started the project or lacks basic context on the subject process.

## Materials and tools

- One prepared deck of 20 to 40 situation cards per table
- One Up and Down track board (a vertical scale from -20 to +20, with 0 in the middle) per table
- One distinct colored game token per participant
- 10 blank index cards per participant
- Pens or markers for all participants

## Before participants arrive

1. Print or copy the situation card decks and board tracks for each table.
2. Place one board, a card deck, blank index cards, and playing tokens at each table station.

## Say this to open

Every project faces unexpected breaks and sudden roadblocks. Today we are playing Up And Down to explore what really helps or hurts our work. First, you will write a few real-life scenarios based on your own experience. Then you will draw prepared situation cards, debate their true impact on a scale from 1 to 5, and move your markers up or down the board.

## How to run it

### 1. Brainstorm project situations (10 minutes)

Introduce the target project or topic. Distribute blank index cards. Ask each participant to write at least two positive situations that speed progress and two negative situations that derail it, using one card per situation. Collect these cards to expand future decks.

### 2. Set up boards and draw first cards (5 minutes)

Direct each player to place their colored token on space 0 in the center of the vertical track. Have tables shuffle their prepared situation card deck and place it face down. The player whose birthday is next takes the first turn.

### 3. Run board play rounds (20 minutes)

Active players draw the top situation card and read it aloud. The table discusses whether the event is positive or negative and assigns a score from 1 to 5 points. The active player argues to increase positive points or decrease negative points. If consensus fails within 60 seconds, take a majority vote. The player moves their token up for positive points or down for negative points. Play passes clockwise to the next person.

### 4. Debrief impact and strategy (10 minutes)

Stop play. Note which tokens climbed highest or dropped lowest. Lead a whole-room discussion on what made certain obstacles manageable and how teams can convert setbacks into progress. Take two to three volunteer comments per question.


## Debrief questions

- Which situation provoked the most disagreement about its true positive or negative impact, and why?
- Looking at the lowest drops on your board, what preparation could have softened the blow?
- How much of a project's success in this game came down to chance cards versus the group's handling of the situation?

**Finished output:** A shared ranking of project risks and opportunities, plus participant-authored situation cards for future team training.

## Remote

Use breakout rooms of 3 to 6 people. Provide a shared spreadsheet with a vertical number column from -20 to +20 and named tokens. Host a digital deck of situation cards on a shared slide deck or virtual whiteboard where players flip one card per turn.

## Hybrid

In-person tables run physical boards while fully remote participants join a dedicated virtual breakout table using the digital board. Avoid splitting a single game board across physical and remote members.

## Access and participation choices

- Participants may pass their turn or delegate reading aloud to a peer.
- Large-print card decks and high-contrast vertical boards accommodate low-vision needs.
- Participants may keep authored situation cards anonymous when handing them in.

## If the session gets stuck

**A group debates a single card's value for too long, stalling turn progress.**

Enforce the 60-second limit: if players cannot agree on the point value, call an immediate majority vote and move the piece.

**Participants write vague situations like 'bad communication' during step one.**

Provide a concrete neutral model: 'A vendor delivers custom parts two weeks late without tracking updates.'


## Terms used here

- Framegame: A training game structure designed so the subject-matter content can be replaced while preserving the core rules and mechanic.

## Participant material: Sample Startup Situation Deck

Positive Situations:
1. You bought software that formats your business plan cleanly (+1 to +5).
2. A personal contact introduces you to an active angel investor (+1 to +5).
3. A major industry blog features your product launch on page one (+1 to +5).
4. You successfully negotiate a 20 percent discount on shipping supplies (+1 to +5).
5. An experienced technical lead joins your founding team at lower equity (+1 to +5).

Negative Situations:
1. The bank that promised your startup loan shuts down credit lines (-1 to -5).
2. Your chosen business name is already registered by another company (-1 to -5).
3. Raw material costs increase 30 percent overnight (-1 to -5).
4. A key supplier shipments get held in customs for three weeks (-1 to -5).
5. A direct competitor launches an identical service two weeks ahead of you (-1 to -5).

## Sources and adaptation

Observed in Thiagi GameLetter (April 2009), published by The Thiagi Group, where Sivasailam Thiagarajan describes the Up And Down framegame based on an earlier design titled 90 Days.

The original newsletter publication contained multiple unrelated articles (including a Thought Experiment on Buying Happiness and an interview). This run sheet isolates the primary published framegame, Up And Down. We formalized the board track dimensions (-20 to +20), set explicit turn timings, added structured debrief prompts, and created ready-to-use startup situation cards directly derived from the text examples.

[The Thiagi Group](https://thiagi.net/archive/www/pfp/IE4H/april2009.html)

[The Thiagi Group](http://thiagi.net/archive/www/pfp/IE4H/april2009.html)

Current run sheet: https://unitedwetransform.com/exercises/tgl-april-2009/