# Toxic Positivity Antidote Participants log workplace irritations, time drains, contrarian views, and general complaints across four themed categories. The group then votes on opinions and clusters shared time drains to identify practical process changes. **Time:** 30 minutes. The source suggests 10 minutes for silent entry; UWT adds 20 minutes for structured voting, pattern review, and debrief. **People:** 4 to 24. Individual silent entry followed by whole-group voting and discussion. ## Choose this exercise **Purpose:** Surface suppressed workplace friction, hidden time sinks, and candid opinions without pressure to frame everything optimistically. **Use it when:** Use during a team retrospective or project wrap-up when forced optimism has hidden recurring operational snags or blocked honest feedback. **Skip it when:** Skip during acute personal conflict between specific team members, or when leadership penalizes critical feedback. ## Materials and tools - Four physical flip charts or a shared digital board with four columns: Pet Peeves, Waste of Time, Unpopular Opinion, and Other Grievances - Sticky notes (one pad per participant) - Felt-tip markers (one per participant) - Voting dots (optional for in-person voting: 3 up-vote and 3 down-vote stickers per person) ## Before participants arrive 1. Label four distinct wall areas or digital columns with the prompt titles: Pet Peeves, Waste of Time, Unpopular Opinion, Other Grievances. 2. Distribute sticky notes and markers at each seat. 3. Ensure submissions can remain unsigned if participants choose. ## Say this to open We often feel implicit pressure to stay upbeat, which can sweep legitimate work friction under the rug. Today we will give our real frustrations room to breathe. You have four categories: Pet Peeves, Waste of Time, Unpopular Opinion, and Other Grievances. Focus your notes on workflows, tools, and shared habits rather than calling out individual colleagues. Writing your name on notes is completely optional. ## How to run it ### 1. Introduce prompts and ground rules (4 minutes) Explain the four categories. Emphasize that grievances should focus on systemic blocks, team habits, or operational bottlenecks. State clearly that names are not required on notes and that participants may pass on any category. ### 2. Silent contribution (10 minutes) Participants write one thought per sticky note and place them under the corresponding column. Silence is maintained to let people write without interruption. A neutral example: under Waste of Time, someone might write 'Attending the Monday status call when updates are already written in Slack.' ### 3. Voting and clustering (6 minutes) Participants review the boards. On the Unpopular Opinion column, each person marks up to two thumbs-up (agree) or thumbs-down (disagree) marks. In parallel, the facilitator moves matching notes in the Waste of Time column into shared clusters. ### 4. Review patterns and select action items (6 minutes) Examine the Unpopular Opinion results to see if supposedly solitary concerns are actually widely held. Review the largest cluster in Waste of Time. Invite the room to propose one operational change to address the biggest time drain. ### 5. Debrief and close (4 minutes) Conclude with two focused questions about the team's norms. Capture any agreed workflow adjustments on the room's permanent tracker. ## Debrief questions - Which opinion labeled 'unpopular' turned out to be shared by most of the room? - What is one concrete habit or meeting we can drop next week based on the time waste clusters? - How can we raise operational frustrations in regular work before they accumulate? **Finished output:** A board of categorized team friction points with at least one prioritized operational change to reduce time waste. ## Remote Set up a four-column virtual board (such as Miro, Mural, or EasyRetro) with anonymous posting enabled. Give 10 minutes for silent typing. Use the platform's thumbs-up and thumbs-down reaction feature on the Unpopular Opinion column. Screen share the board during the clustering and pattern review. ## Hybrid In-person participants post physical sticky notes while remote participants enter items on a shared digital board. A co-facilitator duplicates in-person notes into the digital board, or points a dedicated camera at the physical wall so all participants see the full set during the voting and review phases. ## Access and participation choices - Anonymous contribution is explicitly supported both in-person and online. - Participants may pass on submitting notes or contributing during verbal discussion without giving a reason. - Digital boards should support keyboard navigation and screen-reader accessibility. ## If the session gets stuck **Submissions target individual personalities rather than work processes.** Intervene immediately. Reframe the note publicly to focus on the underlying workflow or communication channel, or remove the note if it breaches behavioral codes. **Participants hesitate to write candid notes out of concern about handwriting identification.** Offer digital submission via a shared anonymous document even in person, or have participants swap notes to post them to the wall. ## Terms used here - Toxic Positivity: The pressure to display an optimistic attitude regardless of actual challenges, which suppresses constructive criticism and problem identification. ## Sources and adaptation Observed as a retrospective board template published by user 'Kat' on EasyRetro. Retained the four distinct column prompts (Pet Peeves, Waste of Time, Unpopular Opinion, Other Grievances) and the core mechanics (anonymous submission, up/down voting on unpopular opinions, clustering time wastes) from the EasyRetro template. UWT expanded the source's 10-minute entry into a 30-minute complete session including explicit ground rules, clustering steps, action selection, and debrief prompts. [EasyRetro](https://easyretro.io/templates/toxic-positivity-antidote/) Current run sheet: https://unitedwetransform.com/exercises/toxic-positivity-antidote/