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: 5f42f8ec03d81e55e669534e7b1415153dd448cafdd698f0ac7eabfd16e8f728

# Single

Participants compare pairs of advice cards in head to head discussions, advancing the stronger card while eliminated cardholders act as neutral facilitators. Repeated pairing rounds winnow the pool until one consensus piece of advice remains.

**Time:** 20 minutes. Source specifies 15 to 30 minutes; 20 minutes fits groups up to 24 with a structured debrief
**People:** 6 to 24. Initial pairs transitioning to larger review clusters as eliminated players become facilitators

## Choose this exercise

**Purpose:** Compare and evaluate practical advice items through systematic paired elimination to identify the most actionable recommendation.
**Use it when:** Use when a group needs to evaluate a broad set of recommendations, guidelines, or ideas and prioritize the most viable one.
**Skip it when:** Skip when the goal is to generate open-ended ideas rather than evaluate existing ones, or when the team needs nuanced consensus across multiple varied categories rather than a single winner.

## Materials and tools

- One index card per participant, each containing one practical advice statement on the session topic
- A countdown timer
- A collection tray or envelope for retired cards

## Before participants arrive

1. Prepare or print one distinct advice card per participant before the session. A sample set of 24 workplace advice statements is provided in participant materials.
2. Set up an open room where participants can walk around and pair up easily.

## Say this to open

We have a deck of advice cards, one for each person in the room. You will pair up, compare the advice on your two cards, and decide together which one is more actionable and practical. The person holding the chosen card moves forward to find another partner. The person whose card was not chosen drops their card into our tray and joins the conversation as a neutral facilitator, helping other pairs discuss and decide. We will repeat this until only one card remains.

## How to run it

### 1. Model the paired comparison (3 minutes)

Read two sample advice cards aloud to the whole room. Prompt participants to weigh trade-offs: cost, ease of implementation, and observable impact. Neutral example: compare 'Acknowledge mistakes immediately in writing' versus 'Ask clarifying questions before offering an opinion.' Have the room pick the stronger one. Hand out one card face down to each participant. Allow 30 seconds for everyone to read their card silently.

### 2. Run first elimination round (4 minutes)

Ask everyone to stand and pair up with someone nearby. If participant count is odd, one person joins a pair to make a trio. Partners read their cards to each other, debate the relative merits for two minutes, and select the stronger card. The owner of the eliminated card places it in the collection tray and becomes a facilitator. The owner of the winning card remains a cardholder.

### 3. Run progressive elimination rounds (8 minutes)

Remaining cardholders find a new cardholder partner. Facilitators who have lost their cards fan out across the room, join existing cardholder pairs, and help mediate their discussions without casting their own card. When a pair agrees on the better card, the eliminated card is deposited in the tray and that holder joins the growing pool of facilitators. Repeat pairing until exactly one cardholder remains.

### 4. Read the winning card and debrief (5 minutes)

Ask the final cardholder to read the winning advice statement aloud to the full room. Lead a short whole-room debrief using the provided questions, taking three to four spoken reflections from the floor.


## Debrief questions

- What criteria did your pairs use most often to decide that one piece of advice was stronger than another?
- Which eliminated piece of advice was the hardest to let go?
- How can the winning advice be applied in your work this week?

**Finished output:** One mutually agreed top advice statement selected from the initial card pool.

## Remote

Distribute private messages with one advice statement to each participant. Place pairs in two-minute breakout rooms to compare text. The holder of the dropped card returns to the main room, where the host assigns them as co-hosts to visit subsequent breakout rooms and help mediate debates. Re-pair remaining cardholders in new breakouts each round until one cardholder remains.

## Hybrid

Pair in-person participants with in-person partners and remote participants with remote partners in early rounds. Display all card texts on a shared digital board so eliminated participants, whether in the room or online, can view the remaining contenders and help evaluate them during final cross-mode rounds.

## Access and participation choices

- Participants may choose to serve as neutral facilitators from the beginning without holding an initial card.
- Cards can be read aloud by partners, and large-print cards should be made available.
- Anyone may pass on speaking during the whole-room debrief without explanation.

## If the session gets stuck

**A pair reaches a deadlock and cannot decide which card is better.**

Prompt an available facilitator to step in, hear thirty seconds from each cardholder, and cast the deciding vote.

**One cardholder cannot find an open partner because an odd number remains.**

Form one trio of cardholders where two cards are retired and one moves forward, or invite the solo cardholder to pair with the winner of the next finished match.


## Terms used here

- Cardholder: A participant who is still carrying an active card in the elimination process.
- Facilitator (in-game role): A participant whose card was retired, who now helps other active pairs listen, debate, and choose.

## Participant material: Sample Advice Card Set (Print and Cut 24 Cards)

Card 1: Clarify expectations before assigning a deadline.
Card 2: Acknowledge mistakes openly and describe next steps.
Card 3: Summarize decisions in writing within two hours of a meeting.
Card 4: Ask for feedback on one specific task rather than general performance.
Card 5: Check in on project progress before problems turn critical.
Card 6: State the purpose of an email in the opening sentence.
Card 7: Give credit publicly to people who did the work.
Card 8: Allow two seconds of silence before answering a hard question.
Card 9: Define what 'done' looks like before starting a joint task.
Card 10: Say 'no' to non-essential requests with an alternate offer.
Card 11: Ask 'What do you need from me?' at the end of handoffs.
Card 12: Test assumptions with a small trial before launching full work.
Card 13: Focus critique on the work product, not the individual.
Card 14: Schedule focus blocks on your calendar to protect core tasks.
Card 15: Restate the speaker's main point before offering your counterpoint.
Card 16: Break complex multi-month milestones into weekly check-ins.
Card 17: Replace status meetings with brief asynchronous written updates.
Card 18: Ask quiet contributors for their input before closing an agenda item.
Card 19: Write meeting agendas with question headings instead of topic nouns.
Card 20: Offer two acceptable options when presenting a recommendation.
Card 21: Document recurring processes so work does not depend on memory.
Card 22: Thank team members privately for specific discretionary effort.
Card 23: Revisit agreed team norms at the start of every quarter.
Card 24: Frame disagreements around shared goals rather than preferences.

## Sources and adaptation

Observed in Thiagi GameLetter, April 2014, published by The Thiagi Group. The newsletter attributes the issue's editorial work to Sivasailam Thiagarajan and Raja Thiagarajan.

The original April 2014 Thiagi GameLetter describes the card game 'Single', where players compare cards head to head until one remains. UWT retained the core bracketed elimination mechanic and facilitator-conversion rule. UWT added explicit time budgeting (20 minutes total), a full set of 24 actionable advice cards to make the game playable out of the box, digital and hybrid adaptations, and standard debrief questions.

[The Thiagi Group](https://thiagi.net/archive/www/pfp/IE4H/april2014.html)

[The Thiagi Group](http://thiagi.net/archive/www/pfp/IE4H/april2014.html)

Current run sheet: https://unitedwetransform.com/exercises/tgl-april-2014/