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: 63d58a987998d1b4ccf19d74561a6e1d7018d94735c8c383bb1d665a2d541d22

# Strength Envelopes

Colleagues circulate personalized envelopes around a table, writing specific strengths and behavioral examples for each other. Participants then privately review the feedback to compare perceived strengths against their self-image.

**Time:** 55 minutes. Calculated for up to 9 participants per table: 4 minutes setup, up to 28 minutes for all envelope writing rounds (up to 8 peers at 3 minutes plus passing), 15 minutes individual reflection, and 8 minutes debrief.
**People:** 5 to 18. Tables of 5 to 9 participants working in parallel; individual private work for reflection.

## Choose this exercise

**Purpose:** Gather observed personal strengths with concrete behavioral evidence from colleagues to compare external perceptions against self-perception.
**Use it when:** Use with intact teams who have worked together long enough to observe daily performance and want structured peer feedback for development.
**Skip it when:** Skip with newly assembled groups who lack shared working history, or during acute interpersonal conflict where positive feedback feels forced.

## Materials and tools

- One standard mailing envelope per participant
- Five to eight sheets of blank paper per participant
- One pen or pencil per participant
- One printed copy of the Player Instructions and Strength Reference List per participant
- Countdown timer or chime

## Before participants arrive

1. Seat participants in intact work groups at tables of 5 to 9 people.
2. Place blank envelopes, paper sheets, pens, and handouts in the center of each table.
3. Ensure each participant knows everyone seated at their table.

## Say this to open

Today we will discover how our colleagues perceive our strengths. Write your name clearly on an envelope and pass it to the left. When you receive someone's envelope, you will have three minutes to write down at least three strengths you have seen them demonstrate, along with concrete examples. Do not read prior notes. When your envelope returns to you, you will privately compare those observations with your own view of your work.

## How to run it

### 1. Prepare and brief (4 minutes)

Distribute envelopes, paper, pens, and the reference handouts. Have each person print their full name in large letters on the front of their envelope. Review the strength list and the concrete example format on the handout. State clearly that notes remain private to the recipient and all whole-group sharing is voluntary.

### 2. First envelope exchange and writing (4 minutes)

Instruct everyone to pass their envelope to the person on their left. Start the 3-minute timer. Each person writes at least three strengths of the colleague named on the envelope, adding one or two concrete behavioral observations. When the timer chimes, participants fold their paper and slip it into the envelope without reading existing contents.

### 3. Circulate envelopes through remaining rounds (24 minutes)

Have participants pass envelopes to the left again. Run consecutive 3-minute writing rounds. In each round, participants write strengths for the named colleague, fold the sheet, and drop it inside without looking at other slips. Continue until each envelope returns to its owner. For a table of 9, this takes 7 remaining writing rounds.

### 4. Individual reflection and comparison (15 minutes)

Ask participants to take their envelopes to a quiet space. Before opening the envelope, each person lists three strengths they believe they possess. Participants then open their envelopes, read all peer notes, and compare the feedback against their list. Prompt them to record which strengths matched and which were unexpected.

### 5. Pair share and room debrief (8 minutes)

Reconvene the room. Invite participants to turn to a neighbor and share one strength they were glad to see recognized, or choose to pass. Gather two or three observations from volunteers about common themes or patterns across their feedback.


## Debrief questions

- Which strengths appeared consistently across multiple colleagues?
- What was an example of a strength that others saw in you that you took for granted or did not recognize?
- How can you adjust your daily tasks or work routine to apply one of these recognized strengths more deliberately?

**Finished output:** Each participant receives an envelope containing peer feedback sheets documenting specific strengths with concrete behavioral evidence, alongside a self-assessment comparison.

## Remote

Create a shared folder containing one private document per participant. Divide participants into breakout rooms of 5 to 9. In each 3-minute round, participants open one teammate's private document and write strengths and examples, or submit responses through an online form that routes text into individual recipient sheets. Run synchronized 3-minute timers. Participants then mute video for 15 minutes of individual review before returning for the debrief.

## Hybrid

Do not mix in-person and remote participants in the same circulation group. In-person tables use physical envelopes while remote attendees work in separate virtual breakouts using shared private documents. The facilitator broadcasts timing chimes simultaneously to both groups and brings everyone together on the central display for the closing reflection.

## Access and participation choices

- Participants may decline to write and act as table timekeeper instead without explanation.
- Feedback can be written as short bullet points or entered via speech-to-text tools on mobile devices.
- Recipients own their envelope and may keep all contents confidential; sharing during debrief is entirely optional.

## If the session gets stuck

**A participant cannot think of three strengths for a teammate they rarely collaborate with.**

Encourage them to note one clear quality and a single positive observation, using the handout list for ideas such as calm demeanor, prompt attendance, or active listening.

**A participant runs out of time during a 3-minute writing round.**

Remind the room that brief bullet points with one concrete action are sufficient. Keep the timer moving so envelopes circulate smoothly for everyone.


## Terms used here

- Reflected Best Self (RBS): A positive psychology feedback exercise where an individual gathers stories from peers about times they demonstrated their highest capability.
- Johari Window: A model of interpersonal awareness dividing traits into four quadrants based on whether they are known or unknown to self and others.

## Participant material: Player Instructions and Strength Reference List

PLAYER INSTRUCTIONS:
1. Print your full name in large block letters on the face of your envelope.
2. Pass the envelope to the person on your left.
3. You have 3 minutes to write down at least three strengths for the person named on the envelope in front of you. Include 1 or 2 specific examples of how you have seen them demonstrate each strength in action.
4. Fold your slip and place it inside the envelope. Do not read slips already inside. Pass the envelope to your left.
5. Repeat until your own envelope returns to you.

SAMPLE FORMAT:
Strength: Reliability
Action: Delivered the regional report ahead of schedule despite tight turnaround; provided accurate answers in staff meetings.

INDIVIDUAL REFLECTION:
- Before opening: List 3 strengths you believe you have.
- Open and review: Compare your self-assessment against your colleagues' observations.
- Note: Which strengths are shared? Which surprised you?

STRENGTH VOCABULARY LIST:
Accountability, Adaptability, Assertiveness, Boldness, Bravery, Calmness, Caring nature, Caution, Cheerfulness, Cleverness, Commitment, Confidence, Continuous learning, Courage, Creativity, Critical thinking, Curiosity, Dependability, Detachment, Dignity, Diligence, Discretion, Efficiency, Emotional intelligence, Energy, Enthusiasm, Equity, Extroversion, Fairness, Flexibility, Friendliness, Future-mindedness, Generosity, Gratitude, Helpfulness, Honesty, Hope, Humility, Humor, Idealism, Impartiality, Improvisation, Inclusiveness, Independence, Industry, Ingenuity, Integrity, Intelligence, Interpersonal intelligence, Introversion, Intuition, Kindness, Knowledge, Leadership, Listening skills, Logical thinking, Long-term focus, Loyalty, Maturity, Modesty, Neutrality, Objectivity, Open mindedness, Optimism, Organization, Originality, Patience, Perseverance, Perspective, Playfulness, Proactivity, Prudence, Quantitative skills, Realism, Reflective nature, Relaxed nature, Resiliency, Respect, Responsiveness, Self-assertiveness, Self-awareness, Self-control, Self-esteem, Sense of humor, Sense of priorities, Sense of purpose, Sensible nature, Service mentality, Simplicity, Sincerity, Social intelligence, Spirit of adventure, Spirituality, Spontaneity, Street smarts, Sympathy, Teamwork, Technical expertise, Tolerance for ambiguity, Trust, Truthfulness, Versatility, Warmth, Wisdom, Wit.

## Sources and adaptation

Observed in the May 2009 issue of Thiagi GameLetter published by The Thiagi Group, where Sivasailam Thiagarajan describes creating Strength Envelopes by combining the Reflected Best Self exercise with his Envelopes framegame.

Retains the envelope circulation mechanic, the 3-minute timed drafting rounds, the vocabulary list, and the individual Johari reflection prompts described by Sivasailam Thiagarajan in the May 2009 Thiagi GameLetter. UWT structured the run sheet to support tables of up to 9 participants (totaling 8 writing rounds per table), added explicit timing allocations totaling 55 minutes, provided hybrid and accessibility protections, and removed speculative remote software.

[The Thiagi Group](https://thiagi.net/archive/www/pfp/IE4H/may2009.html)

[The Thiagi Group](http://thiagi.net/archive/www/pfp/IE4H/may2009.html)

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