Noun & Outcome: Recent Episodes
Noun & Outcome
Chad Owen 0:10
I think I see the task at hand is maybe a slightly different, right? I see myself. I mean, it's, it's the snake is eating its own tail here, but you're coaching me to be a designer so that you can be a player of this game in which I'm the client of the intended stimulus is remaking itself to better provide cert a service to have an outcome.
Well, the first thing I could do is send you home with these tools, so that you can also follow along. And prototype so it's getting so it's kind of a base environment for working in a lab with stimulus, everyone has access to these prototyping tools.
The Yeah, I mean, at its simplest, so taking up kind of like using Rome as a, as a thought tool to generate content, it's just like, you know, it's a pretty simple input output process, like a factory, you know, thoughts, ideas and concepts go into Rome. I do thinking on them, I write on them in Rome, and then I organize them in a way that is, like, you know, more publicly consumable. So like, there's kind of this artificial barrier between Rome and the outside world. And, you know, Rome mirrors my thought processes more closely, whereas kind of the outputs are more traditional ways of consuming content in the form of like, an essay, or a conversation or an interview, or a, how to educational, you know, opinion, etc.
So in this game, there's, there's kind of all these potential inputs or resources that can be put into realm, there's actions or processes that can be taken on those resources that then convert them into
kind of enhanced or leveled up resources going from like the raw to processed ingredients.
Nathan Snyder 3:07
And and how, how is there a conversion between the economies of labs, studios and salons, that mirrors the manufacturing line that you just articulated?
Chad Owen 3:39
Well, in a way, they're like the processes or actions that can be taken. They have inputs and outputs. You know, some task is taken up in a lab. So something is done in the lab, and there's a result of that lab. And what I had done previous is just taken the output from one lab and used it as the input to another.
Well, or not, not directly, actually, just there was a processing of a lab into Rome, that I think better helped me understand how to use it as a thinking tool.
I think to simply answer your question, it's like
to kind of keep it a closed loop, like the outputs of the labs flow into Rome, and then Rome can be used as a, as a resource or source of knowledge for the next lab.
Nathan Snyder 5:19
I guess I'm trying to I'm trying to understand how you see lab studios and salons as generating the content by which Rome gets filled. So that Rome, a full room, a full room block, then becomes a new input to a lab. To begin the process over again, I guess I'm just not understanding is there? Is there one process that's going on? Or is there a bilateral process, one going on through the medium of Rome and the other going on through the medium of dialogue?
Are those the same?
Chad Owen 6:13
Well, I think ideally, Rome would would be like, my interactions with Rome would be dialectical. Like, my thinking would be reflected in there in such a way where I can ask it questions, or it's asking questions of me. I mean, it will take a while, I think, for there to be enough content and structure in that to provoke me in that way. But I mean, I think that's, that's the aim.
What became what became clear to me in the reinterpretation of the prior lab from October 8, was it allowed me to, there's a reinterpretation in in kind of some, some logical and contextual thinking and reflection on what occurred. And I think we didn't necessarily take it up here, but we could take it up here. But we could take some of that content and use that as an assertion or an assumption, or I have purposes to then bring into the next lab, we like did a little bit of that, in that I uncovered or discovered some metadata, some potential metadata for for labs, studios and salons. So that was some input that I took from Rome into this lab, but we kind of decided not to necessarily take that up as is what we were working on here necessarily. What was missing is because I didn't reflect on I hadn't had a chance to reflect on Tuesday's lab just yet. I was like come too far behind in the backlog I guess. But we could have taken up some of the processes through the game design process like in this lab. But it didn't come directly from from Rome in this instance in this instance.
Nathan Snyder 8:37
Yeah, I guess I want to see if the UN so I guess I want to move into like expert consultant and articulate free you in this recording how I see there to be a reciprocal process that the labs studios and salons enable as you go from transcription into your database. So that your database can then feed back into the creation of new dialogue through this the the means of production of labs separate from salon separate from studios. So what what before you go into expert consultant
Chad Owen 9:37
mode, like what has been absent in our dialogue that has not pushed or moved me to come to what it is that you wish to share with me.
Nathan Snyder 9:48
I think you're looking at your your you're looking you're looking at the picture historically. And not creation only. So you aren't realizing that this moment right now is an opportunity for you to narrate the blog post that you hope to have as an output from your own database that's being fed by a lab. And, and, and so the limit is that by only looking at the loop between really roam as an input or output to a lab, or vice versa, you're missing the, the secondary cycle of putting labs in relationship to studios. And then you're missing also the third relationship, which is putting labs and studios into relationship with a with a salon, which then initiate a new whole cycle of lab studio and salon. So in other words, like, if you're not, you're not, you're not looking, you're not looking like I am right now.
Chad Owen 11:08
Yeah, my loop is like this. And your loop is like we're here looping in labs for a little while, but then we go out into a studio. Yeah, back into a lab, then maybe back out to another studio and then allow it but and then we get to the salon. And that's kind of like the outermost loop.
Nathan Snyder 11:24
Yeah. So we don't know. We don't know what the system's architecture is that allows for those three, separate, separate but inner penetrating loops to get animated for the for remaking stimulus.
Unknown Speaker 11:44
Yeah.
Nathan Snyder 11:46
Right. So what I was going to, while I was stepping into expert consultant mode was to begin, like I'm doing now articulate that to you. And, you know, in a way, you provoked me even further, and allowed me to get out of expert consultant mode by asking me a question. So that was awesome. Thank you.
Chad Owen 12:17
Yeah, kind of picking up the entire, like, customer acquisition or audience engagement kind of portion of lab studios and salons. I might be forcing Rome is kind of this tool that helps me, like perpetuate or like the flywheel that keeps the process going. I think that's kind of what I'm looking for in this. And
Unknown Speaker 12:47
yeah, and
Chad Owen 12:49
it's not like I put something into Rome and some that comes out of it. It's just like, I go to Rome and discover or work with it in a way that that then generates.
Unknown Speaker 13:03
Like that end game, because,
Chad Owen 13:06
you know, we'll probably go through like 10, or maybe even 20 lab cycles, I think, potentially before we like even have our first studio when there's like an outside participant when I don't know, we just haven't gone through enough loops. But if you're like it's kind of the metastasize, or not metastasized the metabolizing of the labs through a tool for me, like Rome, that will generate the interest and or like potential value to someone to them participate into it in a studio. I'm trying to like, see them as self reinforcing systems, as you were describing.
Nathan Snyder 13:43
Yeah, and I think you would, you would further enhance your understanding of how to create the right tension strength inside of the mechanics that allow the crank to get turned more easily, then the flywheel through. Seeing this moment right now as a potential studio moment, at the same time as seeing it as a potential salon moment, that a future viewer is going to watch as if it's its own finished performance. So it's a finished performance to the degree to which the flywheel has been able to be created, but would but are the flywheel is also limited not only mechanistically by the rotation of, of Rome to labs and and transcripts into the database, but also from the content structure relationship, between the way that we're able to understand the The dynamics of sort of the lab system encompassed by getting outside feedback from people beyond that of who become insiders to our very, like jargon.
Unknown Speaker 15:18
Full
Nathan Snyder 15:20
dialogue now, you know, because we've created all of these meanings, like we mean things, because we've had, we mean things when we use a term like game designer that has it has something implied to it. Like that's not entirely because the history
Chad Owen 15:38
discussions. Yeah.
Nathan Snyder 15:40
So like, we're saying, Yeah, yeah, like, we know what we know what each other means. Because we've been a part of these experiences. That's not necessarily the case to an outsider, and what feels like an insider experience that has a lot of rich meaning to us, maybe non transferable to an outsider who's listening to this in the future. So we need to bring in that outside expert voice ideally, who, you know, can be a translator between a naive audience and an insider expert, because they've been a part of these type of laboratory like settings in the past. And, and I think we need to introduce that voice at some time, at some point into our lab process, which would make it a studio so that we can eventually get to this end state of whatever cycle that we're in right now, being documented in the form of a salon to draw in this outside naive audience.
Chad Owen 16:48
There's an interesting way in which Rome can act as that outside it's kind of like a dumb outsider in that it's, it's, it's not it's not an active participant, it's not like acting upon you are I but it can be, you know, it can be structured and it can hold the information from the labs in such a way. Like
Yeah, there's a way I'm kind of progressively summarizing a lab by putting it into Rome. And then what I need to or can do in Rome there's like a process that I go through inside of Rome to like D jargon a fi it D contextualize it, two worlds, Nate and Chad, and kind of have it be this like, naive participant or naive observer. So that there's there's kind of like a reformulation of it inside of Rome. In the way it's structured and kind of the way I'm answering questions or asking questions of myself in interacting with it. That can then be externalized either like back to us as participants in the labs or, or inviting actual outside participants in into it. It also kind of keeps to this container of like, you know, the means of productions is like labs and studios and salons and like in a way me in conversation with my room database is like a lab of sorts, and like I can do whatever like hour long or half an hour long like Sprint's
so that like even when I'm working alone or you're working alone, you're like working in law alone, kind of with these digital partners
that's how I that's how I see like that's kind of like my ideal idealized like the use of a tool like realm.
So yeah, to me talking about it in terms of this like factory process where there's inputs in there upgraded to some other kind of outputs is like just not doing it justice.
Nathan Snyder 19:31
Doing what justice
Chad Owen 19:32
not doing wrong justice.
Because like I you know, I find myself when I'm interacting with it's like, I'll write something out or I'll take notes on like what happened in a prior lab and now put in a question in into it.
Nathan Snyder 19:56
Can you can you demonstrate this to me? I don't know. Know what you mean? Can you can me like, look at the screen. And so I can understand this better.
Chad Owen 20:21
This is kind of like a gross and unprocessed version, but
Nathan Snyder 20:35
so walk me through this.
Like walk me walk me through this as if I'm, I'm an outside expert giving you like that you're looking for feedback on your artifact that you hope to turn into a studio for the public at some point in the near future. I'm Nate, I work I'm a partner and noun and outcome. I'm an expert in lab studios and salons. Teach me about how you are using lab studios and salons in relationship to Rome so that you can begin to attract clients and interested parties to stimulus.
Chad Owen 21:35
It's a very nascent process, but in this is really just like my first attempt. So there was
there's an hour long lab that you and I are participants of here's the transcripts. And what I did was listen to that transcript to and read it to progressively summarize that lab. And I think all I mean, by progressively summarizes, you know, taking an hour's worth of text and distilling it into what I felt like were the more meaningful you know, definitions questions. process is going on inside of that lab. And so you can see that here. As I'm delineating this, this play by play, reflecting on the the Texas changes that we had had while we were still on the road. And there was a moment that 80 minutes where you kind of paused to reorient us. And that's when I came up with this idea of of metadata.
where, you know, what kind of meeting is it? What roles what interventions were what house who, in what strata kind of are we taking up as a part of what's going on in those labs. So that was an interesting way of kind of tagging. And tracking what's happening across labs.
In this particular lab was kind of the first attempt at describing the nano and outcome scenario planning game. And
it's interesting, I mean, there's a lot of opportunities and jumping off points for for kind of writing and thinking about what it means to use labs, studios and song just means of production.
Nathan Snyder 24:17
I guess I'm not I'm not I'm not trying to provoke you to like narrate your blog post. Now. I'm asking you instead, in this moment, to use the little time that we have left to interact with this expert in lab studios and salons to further to further enhance what you're up to with stimulus. However you want to interpret that
Chad Owen 24:53
to use you as an expert, participant or coach in this lab
Nathan Snyder 25:01
Yeah, I mean, I'm an outsider to what you've done here. I'm not, I'm, I'm an expert, but in something, something different from your own process, while there's a relationship between what I have an expertise in and what you are becoming an expert in, which is your own process. You know, I'm, I'm an outsider to what you've done here, just as you're an outsider, to what I've done. And so I'm really here to serve you to use what you don't know about that I can offer you for my own expertise to enhance what you've created here, or to use my point of view to help you see what's missing.
Chad Owen 25:51
Yeah, I mean, I think what I'm already seeing is missing is structure to this. I mean, clearly, this is like, this is mapped to my own brain and the way in which I'm thinking, like, in a way, it's kind of indecipherable to you. But what's a little interesting is like looking at reflections on Wednesday. And you can see, I already began to have a discussion with myself where I'm asking myself questions. Mm hmm. And so it's kind of question and then answer more questions, me answering it. So in a way, it's, it's kind of explicitly capturing. Certainly some logical thinking on my part, but hopefully, eventually dialogical and contextual, maybe process thinking, but it's all kind of subconscious or subliminal. Just how I've been using it to date is, I mean, I just show up, and I ask questions, and then and then I answer them, and then I re ask more questions and answer them. That's kind of how I've been using Rome at the broadest level, in what I did, as a response to the lab was tried to I only got to the point of progressive summarization. And I guess what I didn't do was ask myself questions based upon what had happened in that lab as like a jumping off point. So yeah, I mean, IBM, what questions are more most interesting to you?
Nathan Snyder 27:31
Yeah, it's just not clear to me, how the process that you're undertaking right now is it's exemplified here is ever going to turn into something that is decipherable to an audience that you want to the audience that you want to create through stimulus.
Chad Owen 27:50
I agree. That's, that's the struggle.
Nathan Snyder 27:53
Yeah, so this isn't, you know, it's not, you know, while you could make this, well, why are you taking that away? Don't Don't be shy. Let me get my fingers around this savour. Um, you know, while while it's while this makes sense to you, because it's sort of the intuitive process that you're going through in relationship to yourself and the dialogues that you're a participant in, it's not clear how what you're doing here invites others to be in dialogue with you that are, you know, both non experts and naive.
Chad Owen 28:39
One One is not engaging you even as an expert, and as a per participant, well, just sharing economy just sharing this, this kind of reinterpretation. Because all I did was just share this page with you. I didn't like ask you to do anything with it. I didn't ask you to engage with it in any kind of way. In this in and of itself is not asking you to do anything, either. It's just it's just like meeting notes I sent you right.
Nathan Snyder 29:09
Yeah, it's there's there's a way that this is like impenetrable. I read this, you know, and I, I like don't know what to do. I'm like, I don't know what my task is here.
Chad Owen 29:25
Well, I don't know how you could know. It's not here.
Nathan Snyder 29:28
Well, because what because it's I don't think like what what do you want? It's not that's not evident. What do you want to create, like, what do you expect what what's your hypothesis? How are you testing? What are the success criteria? What are the constraints? How will you know if you were successful?
Chad Owen 30:07
I think that I want as a result of a lab, what I would like to have is a provocative assertion or question that I can then ask either the participants of that lab or outsiders
Unknown Speaker 30:40
to
Chad Owen 30:45
begin a new lab, in which we take up that assertion, or hypothesis or or, or test or experiment.
So maybe what I could have done, instead of sending this to you, in its current form,
well, in a way, you already did it, too, for me, because your response to me was, Hey, I actually thought and reflected on it. And I'm seeing it in the new way I see it totally differently, actually, I actually think the output is not important. So in for you, that's, that's, like relatively strong assertion that you're making. And that could be a fun and interesting generative input for a lab or this lab.
But you just like you just kind of beautifully and succinctly said it even without knowing it. Because we did kind of take up that assertion at the beginning of this lab, we were reflecting on the benefits or use of that, that of the lab on Tuesday.
mean, for example, I could I could just take this concept or idea of like, the dramatic question and, and throw it back to us as well. What's what is what's the role? What's the generative role that dramatic questions can play inside of these labs? You know, or how might we re re focus reinterpret it, something like this based on what happens or what takes place in the lab? Like, what what's the dramatic question that we're asking in labs instead of scenario planning games, that might be an interesting output from having reflected upon this? I'm kind of doing it in real time here, but I think this is imirt. And as you stick him in penetrable, it's not. It's not asking anything of anyone.
Because like, in a way, we already moved past all of this. We're kind of like, in a way This doesn't matter anymore.
Nathan Snyder 34:09
I mean, what's what's the salon moment that you are envisioning right now?
Chad Owen 34:21
Well, I mean, none of this is anything game like.
Nathan Snyder 34:28
Yeah.
Chad Owen 34:34
This one moment is like we sit down to play a game.
Nathan Snyder 34:47
I mean, is this not like, the raw puzzle pieces that are gonna get assembled to build the game That we're gonna then play.
Chad Owen 35:04
Yeah, I think well distinction it's unclear to me is between is moving beyond labs into studios and then salons. Or maybe the labs and studios are kind of learning together because we've already begun to like play test in a way, which maybe is like a should be reserved for studios. Or maybe that's just when we invite outside participants. You know, so like the game design, in initial play testing happens in the labs, more rigorous play testing. In polishing happens in studios and salons is kind of like these big reveal moments where there's interesting entertaining, both for the participant pins, but even like, maybe people watching afterwards, like these people playing this game. So I think that's the difference of the salon, like, you could rewatch the salon, and it theoretically, could or should be entertaining and educational. Whereas like the studio recordings, maybe don't necessarily provide that. They might be helpful from like a game design educational perspective. But I don't know, I don't think there's like any entertainment value. Whereas I think maybe in a salon there is just because of kind of the broader nature of the audience and trying to appeal to a broader audience. Mm hmm.
Nathan Snyder 36:37
So So studios have educational value where salons have entertainment value? Well, both have they're both watchable. Yeah.
Chad Owen 36:51
Yeah. Well, like to the outside world. The labs are observable and should be observed by Studio participants as well. But like, so like studio participants, watch labs and salon participants, could watch studios, but then anyone in the world could or should be able to watch salons.
Nathan Snyder 37:15
Mm hmm. Okay.
So those see those, those sound like the beginning set of a game dynamics.
Chad Owen 37:32
Just like we shouldn't have these kind of media assets.
Nathan Snyder 37:35
Yeah. I mean, it seems like, yeah, like media asset creation, the media asset creation game was what you just articulated. Mm hmm. The basic mechanics of it. The key there was algorithmic in the way that you just said it. Mm hmm. There's a bunch of If This Then That statements,
Chad Owen 37:57
yeah, then just an interesting analog. So they remember it like, there are actual play. tabletop role playing games, where like, voice actors play Dungeons and Dragons, and that has a huge audience, like hundreds of thousands, if not, like, a couple million viewers. That the gamemaster also from time to time hosts, like prep sessions, where he's preparing the scenario that he's running. And he also has an audience for those sessions. But he's just really like working on his adventure, maybe kind of, you know, interacting with chat or whatever. Like while he's doing that, but then there's also like, preparation he's doing behind the scenes with just himself, or maybe his like game design or game mastering or friends. It's like generating that content for those sessions about adventure design that is then that he's been taking the output of that, to run at the table with the other actors
is just kind of the content. stimulus is content is not a game, Eg Dungeons and Dragons. It's like the game design process.
that the content is not a concept that is so much as the content is a process. I think
luck Yeah. Because it's more interesting to figure out the game that they create not what the how they play the game, or how they play a game.
So what are we playing to find out we're playing to find out how cool is A game can be created not how does the How does the game resolve? How fun is the game or wins?
Nathan Snyder 40:06
Yeah.
Unknown Speaker 40:08
Boom. Fuck
Nathan Snyder 40:09
yeah, keep going.
Chad Owen 40:21
Yeah, I mean, I think what's missing for me is like, I'll just call it like business applicability. It's just like, I don't know how to sell any. I don't know how to sell this.
Nathan Snyder 40:34
I mean, if you have a massive audience, does it matter?
Chad Owen 40:50
Yeah, well, you're kind of like changing my concept of the reason for the reasons for its existence is just for it to exist not for it to be sold. Or that's, that's how you reframing it for me.
Nathan Snyder 41:08
I mean, think of all the possibilities of things that you could sell if you had 10,000 people watching your shit. I mean, like it. Your, your, your
Chad Owen 41:28
I haven't. I have an audience of one.
Nathan Snyder 41:31
You right now. Me? Yeah, yes. I love being the first customer. It's like my favorite role. I swear, economically. I love being like, customer one. Like,
Chad Owen 41:44
there's this service that I signed up for, like three years ago that I refuse to cancel because I was the first customer.
Unknown Speaker 41:50
Yes.
Chad Owen 41:54
I've even like tried to cancel and then the founder, like, reaches out and like, Hey, you know, just wanted to check in and like goddamnit Madeline like, I'm gonna stick with the service.
Nathan Snyder 42:02
Yeah, right. It's like, I want to be the customer who like signs the first dollar bill to like, give to the laundromat.
Chad Owen 42:11
Yeah, no, but I mean, I wanted to make it clear that like, or just point out that you're my first audience member, because your reaction to me stepping into the game designer and coach role was like, yeah, you just did it again, your eyes go away. You're like, Whoa, that was like, That was intense. That was cool. I had fun. You know, I'd never seen Chad kind of in that motor in that work in that way before. So yeah, I need, I need to kind of just lean into what I did, how I did it, to engender that and then do it in such a way that's like inviting of other people to participate. I think
Nathan Snyder 43:08
I can kind of the need, though, to write I had a need, I need to develop a game. So that I can get data to build a simulation. And I have like a very particular way that I want to work. And I've like, I've like educated you about that. So that you can be a consultant to me. Like I've taught you about lab studios and salons, like we've like taught each other about eye electrics and and Human Development research. We've read like a bunch of books together, like there's ways that I'm primed to be your first customer.
Like, you've taught me how to be a customer to you in ways. Mm hmm. And vice versa. So that's what I'm suggesting is like for for you to like ask, What's you know, how can I How can I monetize this is premature because you don't have an audience that you've taught in order to be able to buy the service that you're creating, there is no demand because you haven't educated people to to desire what you've created.
Unknown Speaker 44:32
Right?
Chad Owen 44:37
Well, they didn't you know, that, like the world doesn't know this could exist, let alone that it does.
Nathan Snyder 44:42
Yeah.
Chad Owen 44:45
I think because it I think it's very novel. I mean, even in just the game design world of like, of of tabletop, board games. Not that that's how I should limit My audience even the game creators themselves even Jamie stag Meyer doesn't talk about. He talks a little bit about how he designed some of his games, but it's not really his Kickstarter
Nathan Snyder 45:24
thing. But he doesn't go into how he goes into what it's like. Yeah, it's like, how did I get? How did I raise money? And what was my process for doing that? That's why it's a Kickstarter. You know, it's a Kickstarter book, not a game design book. Kick it's Kickstarter for game designers not game design for game designers. To become like Jamie stag Meyer.
Unknown Speaker 45:50
Right?
Nathan Snyder 45:59
stone mine. How do you say it's stone or stone? Mine?
Chad Owen 46:03
Stone? JAMIE stone Meyer? Yeah.
Yeah, I guess maybe I just really want clients that I have worked with before, or clients like them to be customers of this, whatever this is. But like you said, I just haven't educated them enough to know that they need it.
Nathan Snyder 46:38
What is it? I mean, who are those customers?
Chad Owen 46:41
Like Reebok or Chris at Adidas? Like I really, and maybe this is just like, I want to hold on to clients that I've worked with before just because that's comfortable for them, like oh, I would love to like have them as a client since in the in this new version of stimulus. But like, I don't even I'm still in the middle of this process of figuring out what stimulus is becoming not like it's just it's still performing.
Nathan Snyder 47:09
Well, but is there I mean,
I mean, what's Chris's? Like? DNI needs responses game.
Chad Owen 47:27
Yeah, are tom toms a agile game?
Nathan Snyder 47:32
Yeah.
Chad Owen 47:36
Are Tom's you think you need agile but you really don't game?
Nathan Snyder 47:45
You think you want to agile
Unknown Speaker 47:50
the game?
Chad Owen 47:56
Or like yeah, like what's the responsive game for August? Or? You know what, uh, you know, the brave new work game for Aaron or, or? Yeah,
Nathan Snyder 48:13
yeah, I mean, Aaron's a game designer, don't you think that he would love to like, have you interview him and then formulate a new game through labs, studios and salons, so that he like can externalize his thought process that you then turn into like media content and into a game? A packaged game?
Chad Owen 48:37
Just something that came to mind is Tucker Max has a whole service where they interview you and you get a book.
Nathan Snyder 48:48
Yeah.
Chad Owen 48:51
This is that but for games,
Nathan Snyder 48:54
yes.
Unknown Speaker 48:54
Nice.
Chad Owen 48:57
And that that sounds pretty damn cool. Like Aaron's The only person in business that I know personally, that that has created their own game. You know, there's lots of people that have written books there's even people that have you know, like thinking tools, you know, like the creative whack carbs or the
Nathan Snyder 49:17
Yeah, what about the fish clearly game? I mean, not the matea says any money but
Chad Owen 49:25
what do you mean to think clearly game?
Nathan Snyder 49:28
What's the thing clearly game?
Chad Owen 49:32
I don't have to ask them.
Nathan Snyder 49:33
think clearly the game.
Chad Owen 49:43
What? A funny aside, I'm playing a version of it with him. Because he has this whole new, like chat based consulting. Mm hmm. That I signed up for just because I was very curious, based on our prior conversations and how we thought we were playing the game. Through the text interactions, Mm hmm. Maybe he's still coming at it from a very, like expert consulting point of view. But I think there's underlying structures in what he's doing. And this is precisely why I paid the 30 bucks to try it out. The that could be turned into a game. I mean, he tried it because like he published these different cards for like thinking differently. Yeah. He had like strategic strategic questions deck and a, I forget what the other one was. It was like maybe a visual deck. Yeah. It's funny that you brought him up, actually.
Nathan Snyder 50:40
saw him in your own database. So? Oh, yeah. Yeah, I mean, what if you if What if you've like, took the various experts that you love, who choose products you are a customer of and then turn that around, and then sold them a consulting service? As customer number one of this company, then
Chad Owen 51:24
what do you mean as customer number one, US customer? Number one?
Nathan Snyder 51:27
No, you were talking about how there's the service that you're your customer? Oh, yeah, no. And it's like, it's like you take the disappointing things that are almost leading you to leave, as like the design impetus to invite them into a consulting service to create a new, a new product or service game. It's like a way that you help differentiate their revenue streams through a new product and service line.
Chad Owen 52:08
Because they created it as a game first.
Nathan Snyder 52:13
Or the game itself becomes the product and service line.
Unknown Speaker 52:17
Mm hmm.
Nathan Snyder 52:20
Like it's a revenue differentiator,
Chad Owen 52:22
right, or it's the product ties version of the service
Nathan Snyder 52:26
could be or it's, it's creating a service out of an existing product. And how do you do that? You do that through this, like, dialectical game design? Mm hmm.
Hey, I need to take a break. I'm, uh, yeah, I have another brand out. I have another lab coming up in an hour in 30 minutes. So I'm going
Nathan Snyder 0:00
Definition one, you know, you know, what I said was that you can think about all the clients that you've had in the past is becoming experts to you and recreating stimulus. And, you know, in the past you you, you had definition one of stimulus, and now you're using definition of too. And what that means is that, you know, you want to engage with your existing clients, even over new clients, turning them in ways into experts that you know them to be to help you build a new revenue and product line so that you can then further serve them for their new needs, as they've created their work since you guys have stopped working together temporarily. So you could think about inviting Chris and Aaron and Mateus into your, you know, studio, where you, you show them a prototype of the game that you've designed for, for their own expert methodologies. get feedback on that and publicize that to your, you know, to your twitch audience, so that you can then get new experts to come in, into your studio in the twitch into your studio that's publicized on Twitch, that then lead into then labs for you to actually do the work that you've you've created a demand for in there in these new experts, businesses.
Unknown Speaker 1:31
Yeah.
Chad Owen 1:37
That was beautifully said. I mean, the other thing, too, is like, I'll let you go, but I wanted here for the transcription was like, like unpacking that process, both unpacking like the games dialectically that already exist in the world that useful and interesting, valuable content. But in the same way that I'm doing that, like, alongside these clients, as well as they're externalizing, their assumed processes into game form. Yeah, I guess I'm seeing the value in that some of this content could provide to an external audience that it wasn't seen before.
Nathan Snyder 2:21
Yeah. And I really see this as a marriage of what makes you a really good storyteller to a great game player. Like because what you said to me in one of our walks through the Brooklyn Bridge Park was that what makes you a great storyteller is your ability to be naive, and to to really be inspired by other people's stories. So I think in the same way that that made you a good storyteller through filmmaking, it makes you a good game designer, because you can listen to the games that people are already playing in their expert consulting services, and and then help them package those in a more intricate way so that the, the aesthetics of the game are revealed in a new revenue line through the the mechanics and and the dynamics that go on in their minds, which allow them to do the consulting work, but now are captured in a game so other people can play it as if they're playing, you know, an Aaron dignan or Mateus, or,
Unknown Speaker 3:31
Chris.
Nathan Snyder 3:37
So, it just seems like a great marriage of the, you know, the, the differentiation between, you know, the roles that you played as a storyteller from game to game player to game designer, to developmental process consultant. You know, it seems like those in your, in your, you know, the relationship between your task house and yourself house are becoming more clearly delineated. And, and I think stimulus will benefit from how you continue to do that going forward.
Chad Owen 4:15
Yeah, and to kind of put a fine point on this series of labs like that, yeah, this is a beautiful, kind of summation, or like, return to clearly I was expressing through myself house, these needs that I hadn't reorganized my org house, to, to resolve that. And I think what we've been able to uncover and do is yet you just so beautifully stated, like, here's how we can actually integrate those three aspects in in a way that makes the organization clear and gives me a clear, you know, set of tasks and ways of working going forward. Mm hmm. Nice Like a good cycle, it feels like yeah, a good cycle.
Nathan Snyder 5:02
I think it was a great cycle, man. Um, yeah, really fun working with you this week. I'm so glad you're back in New York and I know you're just a neighborhood away.
Chad Owen 5:10
Yeah, I'll be I'll be here and we work all next week. Sorry. Cool. Let's get together. You want to take up down and I'll come let's do it.
Nathan Snyder 5:17
All right. Let's do it.
Unknown Speaker 5:19
Cheers. Do any Have a great day.
Nathan Snyder 0:04
All right, what's up? Here we go again, another lab.
Unknown Speaker 0:11
Yeah. So one way that I was kind of orienting towards reinterpreting previous labs was asking,
Unknown Speaker 0:25
like,
Chad Owen 0:27
kind of, in what organization? Are we running the lab? What are the roles in even kind of? What kind of moment of dialectic or even which house?
Are we in?
So I don't know if we want to, like,
Unknown Speaker 0:47
dictate that, or I just I'm pointing to that as something that might emerge as we also begin.
Nathan Snyder 0:54
And can I add was an added strata to that matter, that list?
Unknown Speaker 0:58
Oh, yeah. That was just an interesting metadata that I had. Totally.
Nathan Snyder 1:00
That's, that's great. That's a great indexing function. So, yeah, dude, let's,
Unknown Speaker 1:10
you know, and that came about as I was processing, that,
Chad Owen 1:15
that previous lab,
Unknown Speaker 1:16
and I was creating metadata inside of Rome. I was like, Huh, this is actually interesting. You know, they can cut across
Chad Owen 1:25
all of the labs. Right.
Now, there was also intervention. Hmm.
Nathan Snyder 1:36
What? intervention?
Unknown Speaker 1:39
Yeah, interpretation, attentional support in action. Right.
Chad Owen 1:45
And you're talking about work level strata.
Nathan Snyder 1:53
Are you typing in Rome right now? Yeah.
Chad Owen 2:10
I don't want to distract us there.
Nathan Snyder 2:15
Yeah, it's interesting to, like, try to orient through that indexing system that you just articulated. In that I'm not I don't, I think I'm starting in.
I'm starting in sort of like thought form nine. And in context and trying to, like, globally, consolidate the nature of the labs that we have been participating in, and then, you know, my attention moves to the parts. And
as I thought about the parts that we were testing in relationship to one another. From your point of view, is sort of in the game designer role. And my role is player of this game that I want to create. You know, you were hosting me as a game master in a way to explicate the game that's running in my mind. And by so doing, offer me these two different design game design frameworks, the DNS framework and
the game NDA and journalist and the Oh, did I say the DNS the DNS framework, which is the No no, I'm mixing the two up now.
Unknown Speaker 4:27
It's one or
Unknown Speaker 4:30
the
Unknown Speaker 4:32
the the game so narrativas simulationist. Are GNS and then the MDA framework, the mechanics dynamics and aesthetics. Exactly, exactly.
Nathan Snyder 4:41
Right. So um, in in you offering me the those frameworks to think about the game design. What ended up happening was us beginning to create turns For one another in this game that was like running in my mind. So, like, You helped me draw out of my own thought process that a game that was already there. And so I guess the what allowed us to do that was having this objective of creating a game. That is the scenario planning game. And however, then in reflection, I felt that the process of doing that with you was so much more valuable than the prototype that we were interacting with. And I don't know if that's because of how ephemeral The, the kind of white marker cards were, that it was so easy to sort of release up, erase something in my mind is like, it's like precious or something like that, like, these frames, the ways that I think about the dynamics of an organization are like, they're real, to me are like they're true or something. And, like, I hold on to them dearly, because they're sort of my they're sort of like, my ideological principles. And,
Unknown Speaker 6:30
yeah, so seeing them just kind of in this, like
Unknown Speaker 6:35
erasable state was
Unknown Speaker 6:37
destabilizing for you.
Nathan Snyder 6:38
Yeah, I was like, yeah, it was a little destabilizing, and just to even just even articulate things in such an architectural way to become possible to make a game design possible through through that, that kind of conceptual architecture was, was a was a bit it was a bit disorienting, but then what I noticed was, I was so, well, I felt like so clear, for the rest for this whole week, my my, the access that I had to my own thought process seemingly was a lot was greater than what I normally have access to. So,
yeah, so, there was something about the way in which you helped me make
Unknown Speaker 7:38
these
Nathan Snyder 7:41
these principles that are, to me, the way I see things, in this case, you help them become visible, in a way because of taking up this role in, in as a game designer, gave me let me not make them so sacred as objects of thinking apparatuses. By putting them out in this ephemeral way, then I was able to feel more able to kind of think creatively speak off the cuff in ways more poetic, I guess, in my dialogues, after in the in the remainder of the week, so I guess is that some more kind of elaborated check in, in my own reflection, now, having listened to myself, it's like, I guess I'm in sort of a self house, it's pretty psychological in nature, I am kind of looking at the relationship between how I observed my context thinking, I'm getting deepened by the game design process that opened up more process thinking if I had to categorize it. And yeah, I think the interpersonal roles that we were playing with one another in the task House of kind of game designer, player, facilitator, or coach and client helped, helped well enabled the the lab dynamics that we participated in to influence the rest of my week in a in a particular fashion
Unknown Speaker 9:53
that was not connected to the kind of physical aspects of the game that was created that
Unknown Speaker 10:00
That wasn't like,
Unknown Speaker 10:02
I gave you those cards, and then you pick them back up. And then that's what gave you access. It was nearly kind of the act of creation and testing that did that.
Nathan Snyder 10:13
So yeah.
Unknown Speaker 10:22
Yeah, I'm, I'm trying to maybe understand or label like, what is it that we did in
Unknown Speaker 10:27
that?
Unknown Speaker 10:28
lab? Yeah.
Unknown Speaker 10:30
And in some ways, I'm hearing you describe the process of that game creation.
Unknown Speaker 10:37
In a way,
Unknown Speaker 10:39
simulating and making object your thought processes
Unknown Speaker 10:45
through these
Unknown Speaker 10:48
through these game elements, like cards and actions and exchange, and, you know, numerical values and algorithms.
Unknown Speaker 11:06
So in a way, the process of game creation is a is in a sense, like a simulation of how we're thinking or one aspect of how we're thinking.
Unknown Speaker 11:17
So there's this weird.
Unknown Speaker 11:21
Like,
Unknown Speaker 11:23
where are we creating a game? Or like, were we running a simulation in like, I think we were doing both? In a sense.
Nathan Snyder 11:31
Yeah, I guess in, in, in other words, what I, what has flipped in my mind, is that I thought the value would be created as a result of the game. Because of how participants in the game would have to be forced to simulate their own and others. workplace. Now, inversely, I'm saying, I think the value that I actually found in, in my own inner workplace was the process of that we took in designing the game. And maybe the, the notion of the SPG is just a prompt to getting into a game design process, whose outcome hat is in an asymmetrical relationship with the value that they gain from the experience? Because of translating what that what having the context of a game design does, when they translate that experience back into their actual workplace. It's not, it's not the benefit isn't, you know, having this like physical game or these playbooks? They're not taking the box. Yeah, right. Right. It's, it's that they've unpacked, they've unpacked their boxes in this game, in the game design process, and which allow them more freedom or flexibility then back at work. So they're working by working in order to play in the game design experience, they get to have more freedom to play back at work.
Unknown Speaker 13:38
Yeah, and I think that's helping me understand it, like the stimulus shouldn't be striving for creating these games for companies that they then take back and, and play or run. Although that may be helpful thing. But it's only because it's like a happy accident as a result of that
Unknown Speaker 14:05
process
Unknown Speaker 14:07
of going through the game design.
Nathan Snyder 14:11
Yeah, it's like, you don't you don't go to happy hour with friends to get drunk. I mean, you go to you use drinks to experience happiness with friends. If you do use happy hour to get drunk. I mean, you know, you're at risk of being an alcoholic. I mean, not that we don't get drunk and happy hour. It's just to say, Why do you go to happy hour? Do you go for the drinks? Do you go for spending time with your friends? Probably better to go spend time with your friends wholesomely than it is to go for the drinks.
Unknown Speaker 14:45
Yeah, yeah. And I think
Unknown Speaker 14:57
I think that the the question that I'm asking myself is Like,
Unknown Speaker 15:02
how was it that the game design process?
Unknown Speaker 15:12
influenced
Unknown Speaker 15:15
your thinking in that way? Was it because the game design process is more concerned with or pays more attention to process? Like the that the process moment of dialectic, like, by the nature of that it's a game or? Or is it because it's so focused on context that like, we had, we had like a scaffolding of the game, they built this kind of stable context, ground that we could then like, move into,
Unknown Speaker 15:53
into more process. Thinking.
Nathan Snyder 15:56
Yeah, I? Yes, I think it had to do like you were able to so quickly understand my context, when you took the role on as a game master and game designer. Like,
Unknown Speaker 16:13
I felt like I was thinking ahead of you.
Nathan Snyder 16:16
Yeah, there was something like, I don't think if you would have if I would have been in like teacher mode, and you would have been student that you would have been so adapt at you, you, you wouldn't have been so fluid in your in downloading that information from me, there was something about the game environment downloading this as if it was a game that made like that triggered you to be such a fast learner. And then, because you were ahead of me in understanding how my principles applied to games, then it allowed me a lot of space to be able to teach you. And in a way learn about what I know myself. So that I didn't have to be so subject to what I already know, or think I already know.
Unknown Speaker 17:41
I feel like we've done a good reflection on on the experience of that lab. I'm curious kind of what do we what's what's our task, you know, that we want to or are trying to accomplish here? And kind of what are the roles? In which or what roles do we want to take? up? I know, they that you had maybe a proposed just initially to run this lab? We do you kind of be in the consultant role, and potentially me in the client role. It doesn't matter to me, I just wanted to kind of know where we were at and kind of where we wanted to go.
Nathan Snyder 18:29
Is there anything more that you think needs to be said? from your own reflection process? That would help us answer the question of how do we proceed?
Unknown Speaker 18:49
Yeah, like,
Unknown Speaker 18:52
can you articulate how you were more poetic in your dialogues? Or can you can you point to how
Unknown Speaker 19:10
the experience in the game design
Unknown Speaker 19:13
process like, influenced
Nathan Snyder 19:17
your thinking and dialogues? Are you are you asking that so that you could better understand or you could better trace a discernible and repeatable process that you helped me arrive at the game?
Unknown Speaker 19:36
Yeah, I'm kind of I'm asking you about your aesthetic experience of the game that influenced us such that I can try and trace that back kind of like into its design our structure
Unknown Speaker 19:50
or process. Mm hmm.
Nathan Snyder 20:02
I guess one of the things that really worked well was there was sort of a clear delineation between us in that meeting, like, you have so much more experience. And it was so apparent in the game in interpreting me as a game designer, or interpreting what I was saying to you as a game, you could like you could like, or it was a way that you were organizing the information. To me, that then led me both share with you my own thought process in a new way, but then also release, like a cognitive burden that I was feeling with myself by having my like, ideological principles, sort of you thought form 13. I was like, you deep in 13. And that, that I think, maybe, you know, I'm just looking at the contrasting thought form to 13 is 28. And I'm wondering if you helped me move into transformational thinking in a way that, because I don't normally get the chance to be so objective about my ideologies, and the way that being in the game design, forced me to, it created more freedom, for me to then deepen into the contrast and thought form 28, which then, you know, sparked more transformative, you know, poetic thinking across the rest of my week.
Unknown Speaker 21:51
Yeah, me in the game designer role in the creation of this artifact, in a way is like providing form or structure that you can pour your thinking out into, which is both like cathartic.
Unknown Speaker 22:07
But then also allows you to remake it,
Unknown Speaker 22:10
as you're saying, kind of in this maybe more transformational way?
Nathan Snyder 22:14
Hmm, No, I wouldn't. I mean, I think that is, that's more of the kind of process interpretation of what I was saying. Rather, I was suggesting that like, by being forced to make object, what I'm subject to, through thought form 13, that produced the inverse subjectivity of more transformational thinking that was available to me. So it had more to do with like, what I was subject and object to, from a, from a sense of like, my total understanding of my own, like sociological, anthropological thinking, like, because we were thinking in a whole system, you know, the game, we're trying to think in a whole system, so relationally, like the economics, the algorithms that were produced by these opposite up oppositional pairs that were being that that were the relationship of 13. Were were the contents of 13. Like, normally, I wouldn't talk about
Unknown Speaker 23:34
it be a senior concept.
Nathan Snyder 23:36
Yeah, I wouldn't. I wouldn't talk about between, I wouldn't we wouldn't be talking about, oh, what happens when we the organization is in a contingent versus an institutional state related to like the social media campaign? You know, like, normally, I wouldn't? That would be implied, I wouldn't would just be the case, I wouldn't think be I wouldn't look at all of the causative mechanisms that the constituent have relationships of the system at that particular time, in my own thought process, which only happened because 13 happened, and I'm saying, Now, relationally, I was pushed, as well, to, you know, in some ways, as I moved from move from 13 to 28, what I'm suggesting is that like, yeah, to, you know, the contrasting thought forms to So, yes, I was moved into processes where you initially went, but also 16, you know, asserting the value of seeing relationships between things or forms otherwise seen as separate and unrelated. Right, I was also pushed into 16, which, you know, I didn't even look at the contrasting relationship until you want to to after what I was articulating, and then I naturally just articulated 16 and and what you know, I think
Unknown Speaker 24:57
I think
Nathan Snyder 24:59
what we can Look at is the start from six. And, you know, might we be simplifying the topic by asserting that we are dealing with fixed entities aspects, rather than something undergoing unceasing change? what emerges if we look at this at this as a historical process with us in the middle of it, which I think is that a lot of ways what we're doing right now. Yeah, by trying to understand, you know, what, what, what
Unknown Speaker 25:25
did we do
Nathan Snyder 25:26
what we did? Yeah, yeah, what, you know, and, and I and so then the next question is, are we falling prey to the attractions here that blind us to the process that's actually going on? And then how would you trace this result to the process that emerged from you know, which puts which, which pushes us back to 28? Or two, seven? So in the contrasting way?
Yeah, so I think if we just stay that, you know, kind of down at the bottom of the dialectic here,
let's play the game. Let's play the game, but not on, let's play the game between the roles. Like let's play the stimulus game today, let's redesign stimulus as if it's a game that we learned about through your experience in facilitate your experience in facilitating me as a designer and me as a player this week. So we have like the roles that are at hand are designer, player, coach, client.
So in other words, if those were the fundamental roles in the task house, that produced jet produced value generated value so that it can be delivered to a client externally. How would we remake the whole of stimulus through these the means of production of lab studios and salons? Can you just dwell on that question for a second and I want to but after end of the loop, okay. Right.
Unknown Speaker 29:26
So how might we remake stimulus understanding these the impact these four roles had kind of previously in how I'm
Unknown Speaker 29:46
we forming or kind of assuming that that in the task at hand here is kind of awkward. The means of production, as you say is
Unknown Speaker 29:57
in labs, studios and salons.
Nathan Snyder 30:07
So
Unknown Speaker 30:08
well, in some right in some ways, we've already done that. I mean, I, we already did that on Tuesday.
Unknown Speaker 30:14
Like, that was the first, how did we do that on Tuesday,
Unknown Speaker 30:19
I was designer and coach and your player and client. Those are roles that I had not ever taken up, nor had my counterparts taken up in doing work together with clients. Mm hmm.
Nathan Snyder 30:37
So how is stimulus likely to change further like, it's begun to change already?
Unknown Speaker 30:57
Yeah.
Unknown Speaker 30:58
I think just like the injection of this novelties, like a preview for injection of further novelty. Like, in a way, I'm so far from kind of this fixed notion of what stimulus was or is. Yeah, there's, there's this interesting concept that's kind of coming to mind in that,
Unknown Speaker 31:24
like,
Unknown Speaker 31:27
each time the lab like boots up, it's like a new,
Unknown Speaker 31:33
we're like spinning up a new server or something.
Unknown Speaker 31:37
And we're like walking into the, there's like, I don't know, like a dozen avatars, or roles that we can like, go and choose to then take through
Unknown Speaker 31:50
the lab.
Unknown Speaker 31:57
And like,
Unknown Speaker 32:01
because we're assuming that the means of production is only in these kind of three settings, lab studios and salons, it's like, in order for me to work in stimulus, like I have to be doing it inside of the context of one of those three environments or servers. And that's just like a wholly new concept for me, because, you know, I think previously I've fixed work as in like, it's more of kind of just like a discovery, and then like a work. It's like a divergent and convergent just thought processes. Okay, let me learn about the problem, then let me
Unknown Speaker 32:41
see,
Unknown Speaker 32:42
you know, condense it to kind of the singular thing that I'm solving for. Okay, now I'm solving it. So I'm like going out search of divergent solutions. And then I converge on like, this solution, but it's, it's, like, very absent of the client. Like, in real time, they're not present. Usually, there's, you know, kind of minimal exchange, usually at the beginning of the project or the engagement, but then it's like, we'd go to our separate camps and don't,
Unknown Speaker 33:12
don't interact. But like,
Unknown Speaker 33:17
I think what we're assuming here is that stimulus is only going to be working in a dialogical format from now on, like, indirect conversation with
Unknown Speaker 33:31
clients.
Unknown Speaker 33:32
This is related to some, like, I think an epiphany I had had prior were like, just understanding it's like, the dialogical process, like is the work in a way?
Unknown Speaker 33:44
Not the work.
Unknown Speaker 33:47
It's, it's the process, it's not the outcome.
Unknown Speaker 33:51
I feel like I'm very far away from your initial question.
Nathan Snyder 33:55
Well, I think you were, um, well, let's, let's Um, so you. So let's switch roles. I want you to step in, well, you step into the coach role, so that I can step into the the game designer role. How would you coach me to design a game for Chad? The client in what he just said.
Unknown Speaker 34:37
So I just I just, like moved the carbs that were in front of me. So. So this is what now so this is me, Coach player and this is your designer client. Well, yes. They just were. Right.
Unknown Speaker 34:55
They It was like this. Yeah.
Unknown Speaker 34:58
Yeah. So that's, that's Kind of just how I reorganized it. Mm hmm.
Nathan Snyder 35:05
So was that reorganization that you just did an interaction
Unknown Speaker 35:12
as a response to you as a response to your proposal?
Nathan Snyder 35:16
Well, I'm trying to learn from from you right now. So we have we have the DNS, we have that the design interaction, I have to pull up my room.
Unknown Speaker 35:37
Okay, next dynamics and aesthetics.
Nathan Snyder 35:43
Yeah, so was was that switching of the cards that you just did the byproduct of a dynamic?
Unknown Speaker 35:55
No, I felt that we were switching roles. And therefore, that caused me to move the cards, which is a dynamic, that's what's happening in real time in front of me. And then I think the mechanic is that, like, there's like the Chad board and the nape board, and the cards get shuffled based on what roles they're taking. And you took the action of making a proposal to switch roles, or you just like, we got to the milestone of Okay, let's check in and figure out who's, or we had the opportunity to switch or take on the roles here. We took that action, and therefore I switch the cards. Mm hmm. And then, and then I, so I went ascetics, dynamics, mechanics, and then back to dynamics aesthetic. So now I'm feeling like I'm in the, in the client. I'm sorry, the coach player role, and you're the designer.
Nathan Snyder 36:52
Yeah, next up, because I think you're, you're interpreting, you're interpreting me. And so I asked, I asked for help. Essentially, I was saying, Hey, is I'm just a learner of the the the game design system. And so Chad, teach. Teach me how you did that. When we switched roles just a second ago? Did did I see that accurately? And then you reinterpreted what I said in a deeper, more robust way?
Unknown Speaker 37:32
Yeah, and so like, I took it a little further.
Unknown Speaker 37:35
Hold on, I'm just doing cable
Unknown Speaker 37:37
here.
Unknown Speaker 37:43
Mm hmm. Right. So you're asking for help as a designer? Mm hmm. So that's why he pushed me into the coach Coach role, so I could kind of help you just develop in a designer role. And
Unknown Speaker 37:57
I don't know if this is directional or not.
Unknown Speaker 38:03
No, it's I think it's actually this way. Because Because then you can play the game.
Unknown Speaker 38:12
Actually, it's more like this.
Unknown Speaker 38:18
This is this is just kind of how I was thinking about it. Mm hmm.
Unknown Speaker 38:35
But
Unknown Speaker 38:37
I just did it I wasn't really helping or coaching you, I kind of just gave you the answers or interpreted on my own
Nathan Snyder 38:51
okay. I guess my mind's going in in two directions. Now, one is like, what what did you do from last lab to this lab? And then what what needs to get done from this lab to the next following the process that you use between last lab in this one, but amending it to get to a new outcome in the next lab that we have?
Unknown Speaker 39:29
I actually went like to the week prior Hmm.
Unknown Speaker 39:36
So kind of reinterpret, a reprocess that,
Unknown Speaker 39:39
that lab.
Unknown Speaker 39:44
So I kind of skipped back over what we had done on Tuesday. So I could do that where this then over the next few days, I revisit what we did on Tuesday, but in ways I think we've already moved past or the Beyond that, I mean, one thing I've started to do is I've started to just use these cards to begin to represent how I'm conceiving of different things. Kind of on the side, I was, I was interacting with the cards in this way just to help me better understand how I want to use Rome as a thinking tool. To better understand that, or to better give it some structure and then understand how its parts are interrelated, or how I see them as interrelated. And then how it can help support me accomplish some of the things that I would like to do like specifically around generating more content, whether that's an audio or written form, or textual content, I guess. And it's also spurred me to use these tools as props in this lab,
Unknown Speaker 41:02
as well.
Unknown Speaker 41:05
Yeah, so in a way,
Unknown Speaker 41:07
like using these tools and props, like is just now a natural part of the process and working in this way as like stimuluses hosting, or is in these labs. Like, I'll just always have my prototyping kit with me wherever I go as, as like a support tool.
Unknown Speaker 41:40
Because I also think that that can help
Unknown Speaker 41:43
make the interactions when I am in designer and consultant, role or designer and coach role towards a client player, like we were, in those roles on Tuesday, can can more seamlessly operate, because there's like an established, established lexicon established, like, you know, there's little cards and there's big cards, we use just one color, raise two colors. And then, you know, we exchange crypto exchange cards, we write cards for one another, and then you start to kind of understand that there's like, there was an interesting, because you were kind of talking about being able to hold like, both the positive and negatives in your mind, as you're bringing it into related ideas to one another. And that was just simply because there's two sides of a card. So it's like, you're able to hold this contingent or institutional state, because it was like, represented as a card, in that that led to access to more complex thinking. So I think what I'm uncovering is like some of the dialogical.
Unknown Speaker 43:02
Like, the embeddedness, of dialogical, thinking in some of the ways in which we're using those tools, so like, I think, in ways like better understanding or exploring that.
Nathan Snyder 43:12
Yeah, I think, I think you would want to change your cards, then if you're going to translate what you saw to be helping me in our previous lab, here. So in other words, player and coach are on one side of, of the spectrum and designer and client are on the other. So when I'm when one person's in, in player mode, that that creates the oppositional other. So it's like magnets. So I'm wondering if these roles need further delineated from one another to kind of find the way their common ground is being created in any one moment that we're playing?
Unknown Speaker 44:22
Yeah, well, I had had them as separate and then now have them. I put them on both sides. So you flip them like that.
Nathan Snyder 44:32
I see.
I guess the problem that doing it, I guess, just just doing it like that cause a problem for you in that it allows for to I mean, Is that too many variable states for the where the the mechanics of the game are? In other words? Are is are the mechanics of the game defined enough for the amount of dynamics that putting four cards with two, two sides out is ready for?
Unknown Speaker 45:27
No, I think we're ready for it. I you had
Unknown Speaker 45:32
you clarify the distinction? Well, I mean, you clarify the distinction. But then you also asked us to kind of find the common ground. So I was asking like, you know, is it possible for us? or How might someone both embody the player and the designer role? And someone in body, the client and the coach role? And I don't know that that makes much?
Unknown Speaker 45:57
I don't know that that makes sense.
Unknown Speaker 46:05
What I think putting them on the spectrum as you
Unknown Speaker 46:08
well, you as coach and client, and then me as player and designer?
Nathan Snyder 46:13
Yeah, I think that that's, that is actually because it flips it's a dynamic if you if you delineate them too far from one another, it doesn't show the oppositional unity between the difference that the difference creates, rather, so.
Unknown Speaker 46:28
Yeah, right. But it's almost like
Unknown Speaker 46:36
I think the point is that they're not fixed, they flip, they flip even within a lab. The point is,
Unknown Speaker 46:46
is to flip them,
Unknown Speaker 46:48
right? Like
Unknown Speaker 46:52
they're not fixed. And there's a move that you can take that would flip you from one to the other.
Nathan Snyder 47:00
So what happens? Okay, so how would you set up the board? If? How would you set up the board in order to deal with the topic of using Rome to more publicly demonstrate your thinking?
Unknown Speaker 48:02
Here we go.
Unknown Speaker 48:12
So we're in a lab right now in the task is to figure out how to leverage Rome to generate
Unknown Speaker 48:20
textual output.
Unknown Speaker 48:23
And currently, Chad is in the client player role, and Nate is in the designer coach role.
Unknown Speaker 48:33
Because you asked me how I might do this
Unknown Speaker 48:36
in your framing and kind of in you know, the, the ways in constructing the game, and certainly you actually asked me to design it.
Unknown Speaker 48:48
So you're coaching me as a designer.
Unknown Speaker 48:58
And then so that you can play. So in a way, I'm kind of supporting you as a coach to me as a designer to to recreate stimulus, which is kind of your first prompt. Mm hmm.
Unknown Speaker 49:20
So that's the board that I had created here.
Nathan Snyder 49:23
Cool. Okay. How do we use that board to arrive at an output?
Unknown Speaker 49:36
You need to coach me to be a designer so that you can play this game.
Nathan Snyder 49:45
So what's the story that you are what what would be a real time way that you would narrate the story of how you're teaching me to become a designer? So that I can become a player for stimulus so that you can become a consultant to noun and outcome.
Unknown Speaker 50:19
I.
Unknown Speaker 50:23
The way I'm conceiving of it is
Nathan Snyder 50:24
okay, I'll stop. Let's stop here. Let's because it's an hour and then start again.
Chad Owen 0:01
All right, Nate and I are playing v one up and down in our game yeah.
Nathan Snyder 0:14
I need to make it, I need to make some cards for myself, huh.
So you have
the change card. We have four boxes here.
Unknown Speaker 0:41
Okay.
Nathan Snyder 0:44
And then you have the.
Unknown Speaker 0:48
You have the isomorphisms.
Chad Owen 0:52
And I have a negative capital card and I'm Kevin capital capital card.
Yeah. And they just have a value that kind of stands in for, you know, your little chits.
Nathan Snyder 1:11
Okay, so. Okay, and who are what, who are you playing.
Chad Owen 1:19
I'm playing the box ticker.
Nathan Snyder 1:21
Okay, what's your
Chad Owen 1:22
board. And I'm bored,
Unknown Speaker 1:39
all colors.
Nathan Snyder 1:57
So I'm
Unknown Speaker 2:00
unburned right now.
Chad Owen 2:02
So, yeah, I'm bored with like a value, three so I'm just like kind of bored out. Okay, so
Nathan Snyder 2:07
I'm like, sort of, I'm pretty burnt out.
Unknown Speaker 2:14
Let's say maybe five is the most five is the most okay. Yeah.
Nathan Snyder 2:22
All right. And we're just going to put these to the side so then this is our, our team that we're on. And we're in an institutional state. Okay so box ticker yearly like you're who create the appearance that and so what stage of the game are we in stage one stage one
Chad Owen 2:51
first turn
Nathan Snyder 2:52
stage one first turn, okay,
Chad Owen 2:54
I'm the Social Media Manager for now and outcome.
Nathan Snyder 2:57
Okay, and I'm the taskmaster I manage and I create extra work for those who do not need it, middle management, leadership professional professional,
Chad Owen 3:08
this is kind of a perfectly codependent work relationship
Unknown Speaker 3:13
because
Chad Owen 3:15
you're creating work that's unnecessary and I'm doing unnecessary work
Nathan Snyder 3:18
right so like, I'm maybe I'm you're like, I'm your coach. I'm like your, or on your manager, let's say I'm a middle manager. I'm like, I'm you're the VP of Marketing. Yeah, or no no no no I'm not, I'm like, I'm like, okay, here's your actor of digital strategy Yeah sure, like that. I'm like hey Chad What do you want to create this week. Like, what amazing tweets, do you have in mind.
Chad Owen 3:51
Or it might even be something like this hashtag is trending we need to jump into the conversation. What tweets. Are you going to create. Right. It's kind of unnecessary. Okay, Now nakum is jumping into the meat to conversation.
Because it's trending on Twitter,
Nathan Snyder 4:18
or what right right okay see two conversations trending on Twitter, your board. So,
Chad Owen 4:24
where did this come from. So is that is the taskmaster giving this to the box ticker is this generated from the encounters.
Nathan Snyder 4:31
It's got to be the encounter. So, so like my cart says, What is it,
Unknown Speaker 4:42
what's trending on to hashtag Nico.
Nathan Snyder 4:54
Okay. Me too is trending. Okay. And so, sorry teams upwardly divided me to is trending. We're in an institutional state. I've got what so we're just working on my turn right now. Okay,
Chad Owen 5:26
so we're in where did that card come from, which which deck did it come from.
Nathan Snyder 5:33
Oh, the meter is trending.
Chad Owen 5:38
Because to me that's like outside of all of these it's almost like an environmental. You're like a random. Right.
And that might that might not be right because we were talking about how the taskmaster in the box taker might actually interact inside and out and outcome that seems a little too specific to the player to player interaction and, like, I don't know what the goon might would make of the metoo trending hashtag, I don't know. Yeah,
Nathan Snyder 6:11
but he might never get the me to trending he would get something else like we're getting we're getting his corresponding thing would be like someone found a really offensive tweet from years ago, years ago. Yeah, yeah from three years ago, and he and like we're getting sued and you have to block and tackle. Yeah,
Chad Owen 6:35
it sounds to me like, each player has their own encounter decks
Nathan Snyder 6:42
that are corresponding to one another.
Chad Owen 6:47
Interesting. So there's not a central encounter deck that is being drawn from each player's drawing from their own encounter deck.
You just said the goon will never draw that card because they're not drawing from that deck that that card read, he's had resides in the taskmaster deck.
Nathan Snyder 7:11
Yeah, right.
Chad Owen 7:22
So it's not like monopoly where you're all drawing from the same deck,
Nathan Snyder 7:26
you're actually you're asking a mechanical question right now. I think we need. I think we need more experience, I think we need more narrative. Okay. To experience and then determine the game just mechanics.
So, Okay so, but I'm so I'm burnout. What are the what do I have a.
Chad Owen 8:11
It's like one of the three
Unknown Speaker 8:13
right so responsive
Unknown Speaker 8:17
complex adaptive stratified and existential.
Nathan Snyder 8:21
So it's an existential, and the isomorphisms are normative coercive a medic. And I have.
Unknown Speaker 8:32
And I have. Okay, so let's just say
Nathan Snyder 8:35
normative. And I'm so I've got a bunch of capital capital. So this is where I'm, I have an idea. So this, we didn't we haven't we don't have on our hands right now like pitch or ask for help us political cloud or, or use social clout and, or political clout.
Chad Owen 9:07
Those sound like they might or could reside in the team and then institutional. So the political and sexual cloud actions can live kind of on the institutional health as daech are in the organizational state and then the pitch and ask for help. And they'll change based on whether it's upward or downward. Yeah. So what do we say so this is like pitch. And the hope here. And this is, social, and political.
Nathan Snyder 9:43
Yeah, same for the other side too. Right.
Chad Owen 9:48
Yeah. But but this is the given state so upper team institutional org. So it's almost as if you need to like get rid of or deal with that card. So like you could do something and unmute and, like, get rid of that card, or else like face consequences of holding that at the end of your turn or whatever. So it's like, get rid of this by taking some actions or you like get a negative consequence.
Nathan Snyder 10:15
Yeah, right. So, I'm looking at my capital capital and my negative capital. I'm like, my capital capitals pretty low. And my negative capital is pretty low. I'm like, I think I should gain some negative capital here. So, instead of doing nothing and taking the consequence. And I know that I'm in an upwardly divided team, and so by asking for help. I'm going to get negative capital. You know, even though that's gonna that's going to cost me that's going to cost. That's gonna cost me politically. Because my social is high right now. Does that make it No.
Chad Owen 11:02
How do you know how do I know.
Nathan Snyder 11:06
Well, let's see, I'm in an institutional state so like and we're in an upwardly divided team. So, like, I'm trying to bring. I have like a lot of external legitimacy or something so
Chad Owen 11:19
well this is another resource we need right, social
Nathan Snyder 11:22
social and political club is another resource. Are we relating to these like resources.
Chad Owen 11:34
No, well I'm seeing it as a process. Mm hmm.
Nathan Snyder 11:42
So because, okay,
Chad Owen 11:45
well it's almost like.
Unknown Speaker 11:48
Yeah, sorry, go ahead. No, it's okay. Go ahead.
Chad Owen 11:51
I was saying you're saying well okay we're divided I'm asking for help because that'll increase my negative capital so I I just did a. If you take the help if you ask for help and an overly divided team you can gain one negative capital, or whatever, I'm just I'm trying to figure out like a consequence of that.
Nathan Snyder 12:07
Yeah. And by gaining negative capital by gaining by using help here. I have to spend something. Hmm, I have to spend something here, which then, which then makes me lose capital capital.
Chad Owen 12:25
So what are you spending here to gain access to these like what, what, what do you have to input here.
Nathan Snyder 12:34
Well I'm in a normative isomorphism. So, in the meet to trending thing. So, like I'm gonna double down on our my like DNI initiatives. Okay.
Chad Owen 12:56
So you're spending capital capital for social capital.
Nathan Snyder 13:03
So that social clout political, social clout and political influence. But like because I'm in the normative isomorphism. Like, I'm gaining, I'm gaining political influence. Because the organization is in an institutional state. And I'm using the existential I'm in the existential change bucket,
which I can't, I can't remember what x is. What I defined
existential risk. That's my theory of change. So it's existential risk. It's not existential. Okay.
All right, so I'm thinking because I have, so I'm in the normative isomorphism thing so basically like DNI is already an accepted institutional meme. And like the opposite of that might be a like nationalist, like, like a, like a, I'm thinking like Jordan Peterson would be like right
Chad Owen 14:57
opposite Blue Blue Lives Matter
Nathan Snyder 14:59
blue Lives Matter.
Unknown Speaker 15:00
Yeah, blue Lives Matter.
Nathan Snyder 15:02
Yeah, all lives matter. Yeah, so, um, so like so because I'm in the normative isomorphism organizations in an institutional state, but I'm trying to. I'm trying to deal. I have my perspective right now is this like
Chad Owen 15:22
existential we don't deal with this, it could mean the end of, yeah.
Nathan Snyder 15:26
Yeah, it could mean like I'm trying to mitigate the end of the world, like that's what I'm all about. So, I'm like, some because I'm trying to mitigate the end of the world. Like, I'm gonna lose social clout. I'm gonna gain political influence, and I'm gonna lose social clout. And why because people on my team are blue lives matter.
But I'm okay with losing social club because my, my, I'm still an upwardly divided team. And I've protected because I've asked for help, even though, you know, teams divided. And just not down really divided.
So, so basically I think I've reduced my burnout.
Chad Owen 16:35
Yeah, just a quick aside. What's not represented here is whether the player is in the minority or the majority. Does that matter.
Nathan Snyder 16:55
If we're going to do, if we're going to do the majority majority minority and majority thing.
Chad Owen 17:06
I'm fine ignoring it is just something that came up
Nathan Snyder 17:08
yeah yeah that's a good idea. I mean, yeah, I think we have to have it,
Chad Owen 17:16
because you will because you were talking, you were saying that that you're taking the high ground or the teams outwardly divided but the majority is
Nathan Snyder 17:30
blue eyes. No, they're mean, they're the majority is what depends on the. That would depend on the developmental seem to the team.
Do you understand my hand, like do you understand my narrative.
Unknown Speaker 17:57
I think so.
Nathan Snyder 17:58
Okay. So, but now I have to, I have to tell you some, I have to tell you to do something. Why, I don't know,
Chad Owen 18:07
aren't Well, don't you have to deal with the need to trend to end make a decision of what to do, which was asking for help from the team, and then that had a crisis once in right what political influence or social clout you gain or lost. Okay.
Nathan Snyder 18:23
So play it now what's now it's your turn.
Chad Owen 18:28
I want to follow through. So you said you lost social clout but gained political influence. Yeah. So it sounds like these are resources or, or, if not resources their tracks
Nathan Snyder 18:39
are these resources pitching help.
Chad Owen 18:44
I don't think so I think their processes are that. Well, I wrote it down as a process you ask for help an upper divided team you can get to negative capital mean doesn't have it doesn't have to be that way, that's okay, because that's what you're seeking to do you want it to have capital, like, Well how do you do it. You ask for help.
Nathan Snyder 19:07
So I gained. I gained because I gained political. What's to say political influence. I my capital capital goes up.
Chad Owen 19:20
Right. And, and you, and you launched the, the social media campaign. Yeah, that, you know, got rid of this card, or whatever.
Unknown Speaker 19:34
Okay, like then dealt with that card.
Chad Owen 19:35
All right. Like you successfully resolved. So I
Nathan Snyder 19:38
went up in capital capital I went up in negative capital. But I also got myself closer to burnout.
Why did I get myself closer to burnout. Because I have to. I like, I don't know, that's just what happened.
Chad Owen 20:08
Yeah, or it could move in the other direction.
Nathan Snyder 20:12
I mean you asked for help. All right, that's okay. Sure. Okay, so I went to for right now it's your turn. You play it, you play it for me.
Chad Owen 20:22
Okay, so I have in the box ticker.
Nathan Snyder 20:25
So the box ticker.
Chad Owen 20:33
Oh I have, I have a short phone call in one hour.
Nathan Snyder 20:37
Okay, I need to get some
Chad Owen 20:38
food too right Oh wait, do I 430.
I think the food closes places close to victory.
Nathan Snyder 21:04
Oh we missed it.
Chad Owen 21:07
We might be able to go back to the building 77, there's like, I know that that Venezuela place or Colombia place is closed but there's like a soul food kitchen that has good bowls.
Unknown Speaker 21:17
Okay, but I don't know that there
Chad Owen 21:20
was no guarantee.
Nathan Snyder 21:23
I mean I can hold out for an hour, but then you'd have.
Chad Owen 21:29
I'm fine waiting until
Nathan Snyder 21:32
after your call. Yeah. Did you eat this morning after six mile run. I don't know. Okay,
Unknown Speaker 21:40
that's good.
Chad Owen 21:48
Yeah, so what's an interesting encounter card for the box sticker.
Nathan Snyder 21:54
What is an interesting encounter card for the Bucks ticker.
Chad Owen 22:01
I'm trying to do as little work as actual work as possible. So like I've been given a new.
Well, maybe. I've been given a new assignment where I have to work as a part of a team working before alone before.
Nathan Snyder 22:26
Okay,
so now like people see how much you're actually getting done. Exactly. I could
Chad Owen 22:37
kind of hide in anonymity beforehand but now I actually have to show up and work with the team.
I have low capital capital and low negative capital.
I think maybe, maybe my theory of change is stratified and I want to stick to level one, I don't put myself there and I just want to stay there I have no interest in working above that, and I don't know I have some courses, you're
Nathan Snyder 23:28
not very bored.
Chad Owen 23:31
I'm kind of I'm just a little bored, but I'm definitely not burnt out, right.
Nathan Snyder 23:37
So yeah, stratified that makes sense and then what, what,
Chad Owen 23:42
buy some more so, isomorphism,
Nathan Snyder 23:44
so are you. And then so we're unaware,
Chad Owen 23:47
I'm trying to convince the team that we actually don't need to work as a team, right, and we can, we can go off and we can do our thing. Like hidden away.
Nathan Snyder 24:00
Yeah. Yeah.
Chad Owen 24:03
So we're gonna try to convince them for right coercively, but like why like something on the box ticker thing like has to has to like, tell me, like, make it up, I don't know, like yeah I think there's something that.
Yeah, I guess I'm looking for motivation it's like how am I going to win this game or how am I going to accrue the resources that I mean I'm assuming that I need negative capital and capital capital.
Nathan Snyder 24:40
So with like so you are bored right so yeah i think that's right like how are you going to get motivation.
Chad Owen 24:50
Like the box ticker might actually be fine, or incentivized to have low capital capital and low negative capital. Hmm, like they just they just may be incentivized to just coast, like totally. Mm hmm. So I so like the box ticker actually wants Low, low capital capital and low. Negative capital, like,
Nathan Snyder 25:21
yeah, don't go above
Chad Owen 25:24
three. Yeah. Like, keep it less than three or whatever. Otherwise, I don't know, something happens, so I pitch.
Nathan Snyder 25:38
What are you going to spend to pitch.
Chad Owen 25:40
My current my course of isomorphism and
Nathan Snyder 25:44
we don't have. You're just used to using a chorus advice form so more isomorphism. You have to either spend capital capital or negative spin
Chad Owen 25:55
my negative capital. coercively, but if you pitch
Nathan Snyder 26:01
that's pitches like
Chad Owen 26:08
okay so Help Help is in helping and properly divided team we had said was increasing
Nathan Snyder 26:14
negative capital, right. So pitching in an upward team would be decreasing capital capital. you're going to spend capital capital to pitch. Sure,
Chad Owen 26:28
which is, which is good because I want low capital capital,
Nathan Snyder 26:30
right.
Chad Owen 26:33
So, then that that decreases capital capital this increases, negative capital, and maybe that flips on the other side.
Nathan Snyder 26:45
And then how does that play out institutionally.
Chad Owen 26:49
I think I lose political influence but gain social clout with the team. And, and then we go back to working alone. And I, I now have zero capital capital I've dealt with this card. Like, if I didn't deal with this card maybe it would increase both capital capital and then on
Nathan Snyder 27:17
the other side.
Chad Owen 27:18
Yeah, capital by like three, which was like whatever bust my right so like maybe it's the consequence like he says on the other side, it's like, like if you fail this, then increase negative capital by three and increase capital capital by three.
And then, actually, so my boon for this might be that I actually decrease my negative capital. At the same time.
Okay, I can like zone out even more. Cool. All right, so let's play stage, and I go from bored to maybe a little more bored. I'm still. Okay.
Nathan Snyder 28:21
All right. So, now,
Chad Owen 28:25
but it didn't change, it didn't change the board state, really.
Nathan Snyder 28:30
Yeah, well let's, let's just, let's play another hand. And, and at that sort of stage, you know, at the sophomore stage, stage two. Okay, stage two. Let's write the card for each other. So let's write the ticket payment counter in counterpart for each other. Okay. So what might happen to the box ticker or the taskmaster in stage two, what might happen to the box ticker in stage in the stage in situ and what are what's the positive consequence, and negative consequence. Okay. That's stage two. All right so
Chad Owen 30:14
stage two. All right,
Unknown Speaker 32:34
here we go. there's your card for your suite
Chad Owen 32:37
stage two
gloom haven jaws of the lion that's what it's called.
Unknown Speaker 34:58
might be too simple.
Nathan Snyder 35:37
Okay. I don't know if you could remind NFC can be for cards to finish term and short term for you. Okay, here you go. I'll go first. Okay.
Chad Owen 36:00
So this isn't the right word. Yeah, I draw this card first.
Nathan Snyder 36:02
No, no, sorry, the top is first, and you know this is the first card. This is the first card. Okay.
Chad Owen 36:10
The data lake, the data lake team is responsible for putting a business process with data from all departments. Yeah. I've been asked if I want to manage the data lake team. No, I don't. Of course, because then I can create lots of work. So interest, manage the data lake team into storage.
Nathan Snyder 36:41
Yeah. You're so you're managing so you're being asked yeah you want to take on this isn't stage two. Yeah, you're being asked if you want to take on managing the data lake team, the data lake team is responsible for taking all the business processes across the whole business and taking their the data from those business processes and putting it into the lake, right for the, for the, for this data scientists for the future. Yeah, for some for some unknown reason. It's meaningless.
Chad Owen 37:15
So why. How do I know whether to choose yes or no.
Nathan Snyder 37:23
How do you know whether to choose yes or no, you can't see you should look at that first. Okay, so
Chad Owen 37:35
I'm the box ticker. This sounds like a lot of meaningless work that I can hide in.
Nathan Snyder 37:41
Yeah, but you have to then manage a team.
Chad Owen 37:44
But I have to manage a team, which I don't want. Why do I know that I don't want to do it. It's because I'm bored I want to stay bored. Because I'm a box ticker. I want these values to be low. my capital values to be low like learning something new, gaining negative capital is not interesting to me.
And that's moving me from a lower to a higher work strata.
Well I have some negative capital that I can. We'll see like now I want the team to be downwardly divided because then I wouldn't be able to spend negative capital,
Nathan Snyder 38:45
you still have another card there don't look at that.
Chad Owen 38:50
Yeah. So, what do I do, I'm gonna say no. Okay,
Nathan Snyder 38:54
flip to No.
Chad Owen 38:57
Change the isomorphism to
Nathan Snyder 39:02
are responsive,
Chad Owen 39:06
change, change the change model
Unknown Speaker 39:08
change model yeah charge
Chad Owen 39:10
does fine, change, change model to responsive and gain negative capital, so I went over my limit, I went up to four. So, oh, and I lose a capital capital which I don't have So does it go negative or No, I just
Nathan Snyder 39:26
think it's a zero.
Chad Owen 39:28
Okay. Well that's not good because my negative capital went up too much. So then, as a consequence, maybe, if, if it goes over. If this goes over four, then I begin I I subtract four from my from my BB track. So then, now I'm no longer bored I'm actually on it doesn't make sense because I turned down the work. But I don't know maybe, maybe I'm burnt out for some reason, because I'm stuck doing the same thing that I've always done.
Nathan Snyder 40:15
Sure. Okay,
Unknown Speaker 40:17
or, I don't know,
Chad Owen 40:18
I was trying to think of like a. I had said, I want to keep my capital values low just. For example, and they're needed there needed to be a consequence that triggered. Once I crossed that threshold Hmm,
Unknown Speaker 40:36
maybe that's not,
Chad Owen 40:45
Maybe it makes me even more bored.
Nathan Snyder 40:50
There we go. Just try that.
Chad Owen 41:01
My my interaction is simpler than yours so if I chose Yes, I would have gained capital capital and I would have lost negative capital.
Nathan Snyder 41:11
But that had nothing to do with my, I didn't make it have anything to do with this.
Chad Owen 41:22
It's not to say that it couldn't interact with that but in this instance it didn't.
Nathan Snyder 41:27
Interesting.
Chad Owen 41:31
Okay, now you have yours. So just ignore what's at the bottom
Nathan Snyder 41:37
program, and execute team. opposite off site team offsite post reorg Acquisition Program and execute team off site post reorg acquisition. This is so this is what's happened to me. My cc goes down to. All right, so my. Oh this is if I do it. Oh, yeah, yeah.
Unknown Speaker 42:06
It's like, yeah, so this was plus plus.
Chad Owen 42:12
So see it's interesting, could we formatted the cards differently. I'm making it known what happens, based on your choice. You're keeping it hidden, right, what happens. Yeah, based on my choice. Right,
Nathan Snyder 42:26
right. So, right, okay so it's just
Chad Owen 42:31
it's, it's an interesting difference.
Nathan Snyder 42:33
So if I say yes to this, then, is yes green and yellow is red. Okay, so yes they go up. They go up another two cc's. And they go up to negative capital. Sounds pretty good.
But my burnout is pretty high.
Chad Owen 43:03
So maybe, maybe, what's missing is is increased burnout by two, as well.
Nathan Snyder 43:07
Yeah, so, so burnout is pretty high. But that. Okay. But
I'm in the existential an existential change model. And I've got the normative isomorphisms. So I kind of want to go and my team's outwardly divided. So I want to go yeah I want to I want to end up in an institutional state. Fuck yeah I want to I want to, like, do I want to help support the reorg and the acquisition. And then, and therefore, run the off site, and so I'm gonna I'm gonna pitch, because I've just gained to two capital. And I'm going to I'm going to use my, my political influence. Even though that turned my burnout over five, which actually flips me the board.
Chad Owen 44:21
No, no, it like that there's some other negative consequence that you would need to go down to zero for it to flip. Oh,
Unknown Speaker 44:31
burnout. You're like, super burned out.
Nathan Snyder 44:35
Okay,
Chad Owen 44:36
so like if burnout goes above five there's some trigger where like, something happens, You like lose all of your negative capital.
Nathan Snyder 44:45
Right. Okay, so tell me
Chad Owen 44:48
what has happened, you've lost all your negative capital whoa fuck.
Nathan Snyder 44:53
Even the one that gained, even the negative capital I get into this hand. Yeah. Cuz cuz this is a six, but now it doesn't go down to zero. After the consequence,
Chad Owen 45:16
you you you you more than burned out. You lost all your negative capital. Okay. So you're in a new state with no negative capital.
Nathan Snyder 45:26
Fuck, what I'm going to be an asshole. Like, if I have no negative capital. I'm going to be a tyrant. Now, yes so burnout, of a tyrant, I mean I
Chad Owen 45:38
don't know that it changed I think it stays pinned at five at six Yeah, or it's at five but if, if you tipped over one more. What, then you keep losing all your negative capital. All right. Great, or maybe it's above five it's at six and you can't ever accrue negative capital unless it's five or lower.
Nathan Snyder 46:01
You told me.
Chad Owen 46:02
Yeah, well I think it's both. If you go over five you lose all your negative capital and is, if it's if it's greater than five you can't ever accrue new negative capital, because you're so burnt out. Okay. All right. Something like that.
Unknown Speaker 46:21
All right. Um, one thing
Chad Owen 46:23
that I didn't do is I didn't react to this environment that when I made the choice. I didn't choose to pitch or ask for help. And I didn't spend or.
Nathan Snyder 46:34
Yeah, I mean we didn't create, we didn't actually like you did the economy here and then we didn't do it like we did on the first turn here. Yeah.
Chad Owen 46:44
If I say no, then I need to spend capital capital to pitch.
Nathan Snyder 46:53
Or I could use shoes. You tell me.
Chad Owen 46:58
I'm just gonna use my political influence to say but like clearly I'm not a manager, this is, I'm not in that part of the org chart or whatever
Nathan Snyder 47:07
you're going to spend political capital or spend social I think zones.
Chad Owen 47:13
No, I think, in political info,
Nathan Snyder 47:15
you're gonna spend political influence
Chad Owen 47:17
to keep my role from being
Nathan Snyder 47:19
yeah and that define 10 that does that.
Chad Owen 47:21
How they will go or maybe social cloud I think even. Yeah. Right. Like I'm not a team player. I don't know,
two turns in. How did this feel.
Nathan Snyder 47:47
I had fun, I liked it. It's interesting, it doesn't, you know, it doesn't totally make sense.
But I liked. I liked what we did here. I keep thinking like, maybe this is a part of the, what makes it fun. Yeah.
Chad Owen 48:23
There's like a steep learning curve to this.
Nathan Snyder 48:27
Yeah, there's a lot of, there's a lot of moving pieces. I feel like we have to keep going. It has to keep getting more complex before it can get simple.
I still don't know what the end goal, like what's the what's the point in a game like. Is there a win. Is it a win. Can you win the game. I don't know.
Chad Owen 49:26
Yeah, I think that's a big missing piece for me is like, as the box ticker what am I trying to do, or even just as a player, what am I trying to do.
We can pick an arbitrary kind of goal or Wednesday, like, what, what I did on the other end was like, well, there's a, there's a negative consequence if if this happens. So, if, if these ever got above three. Then something bad happened. So in some ways, I'm not. It's not a win state but it's a not lose state, so I can keep myself from losing as long as I manage these values into this range, and that will determine the decision so you're just you're playing the game to not lose, as opposed to playing the game to win. Mm hmm.
Nathan Snyder 50:20
So you get kicked out of the game.
Chad Owen 50:23
Right. So you could win the game just through process of elimination and you survived longer than anyone else yeah
Nathan Snyder 50:30
you didn't have a heart attack, you didn't, which is
Chad Owen 50:32
kind of, which is, which is an interesting difference between like the race where it's like, well, I'm just trying to like, yeah, move to rev to stage five as quickly as possible to my ideal Alchemist state or in the box into my strategist state. But the question is like can you survive long enough so it's like a game of stamina and survival which kind of fits the whole sort of theme, like, are you gonna be like just like chewed up and spit out, right, or are you gonna be a daft player to be able to make it to the end to like achieve your
Nathan Snyder 51:13
full potential.
Chad Owen 51:14
Right. And so you can state that at the end it's like this game is actively trying to kick you out.
Nathan Snyder 51:20
Right. Stay alive,
Chad Owen 51:23
there will be rack semis your human potential stay alive. Yeah,
Unknown Speaker 51:28
to figure out how to maximize your human potential
Nathan Snyder 51:33
or maximize your fulfillment of life while staying alive. Despite your bullshit job
Chad Owen 51:40
because the other thing that might happen is if burnout goes above five, you might lose the game you might be eliminated. Or, or if if if more out goes above five, you just, you might totally check out and literally not show up to work or you might be so checked out that you get fired, like one on one of those two.
Nathan Snyder 51:59
Yeah. And you might need to like, how do you get back into the game. Do you get back in Do you get back into the game. Yeah,
Chad Owen 52:09
I think that's a matter of like duration of the game, if the game doesn't take that long, then it's okay if someone gets eliminated and you can design in such a way that like no one ever gets eliminated
Nathan Snyder 52:21
permanently
Chad Owen 52:23
or no one gets eliminated in in phase one or two. Mm hmm. It's just like the, you know, things don't change enough, but they're first turned in phase three maybe there's the potential where they're on the precipice and they could be eliminated or something, so someone can play through like half the game and, because that's a bad that's not fun. If you play three turns in you, you're out of the game. If the game that goes on for another 45 minutes or an hour. Yeah, like musical chairs lasts for like five minutes. Right. That's, that's fine if you're eliminated. For like dodgeball,
Unknown Speaker 53:03
right, because it's also fun to watch people. Chill.
Chad Owen 53:09
Well I mean I think this game has that going for it, it'd be interesting to understand, I mean you can be more complex in. In, then eliminated players can influence the. Like in dead of winter this zombie game. You can get voted out of your little enclave. But all that. So what happens is that you get this new exile card which is like a secret card that only you can see that gives you new powers and new motivations and how you win the game. And you can go to all of the like surrounding locations so you can like go to the school to forage or to the gas station or to the whatever the library, but you can't ever go back to the colony. So there's like different spots, there's like the colony and then like five surrounding locations as an exile player you can't ever go back, why would you get exiled because you have a secret card that you could be working against the other colonists like it could be hoarding resources, or you could be doing something for nefarious means, and your actions might give other players clues that you're doing that and then they just call a vote at any time and say, I want to vote Nate out I think he's working against the colony. You're not out of the game it's just like your enemies, so there's ways in which players can participate in. In other games there's like, you know, ghosts or whatever like the idea of ghosts or like there's observer players that can influence but like maybe they're not taking turns like all the players, right, um,
Unknown Speaker 54:41
that kind of has me thinking about some.
Nathan Snyder 54:49
Another thing here, which is like what if we, what if we organize it by industry. And you have you have like
Chad Owen 55:02
there's like different modules.
Nathan Snyder 55:05
Well there's like different locations. So you have like finance. You have like shipping.
Chad Owen 55:25
Or why not make it like the industries that namun outcome is interested in. Like the blue collar manual offers that too on the nose,
Nathan Snyder 55:36
I think it's too on the nose. Let's just go. So shipping finance,
Chad Owen 55:45
manufacturing, Yeah.
service industry,
Nathan Snyder 56:01
high tech
Chad Owen 56:10
are biotech. Sure, or something actually that I think is good.
Nathan Snyder 56:21
So like, what if there are
these like destinations between the industries.
Chad Owen 56:55
So there's like pads between, yeah.
Unknown Speaker 57:39
I wouldn't want to do that.
Nathan Snyder 57:48
I'm just like I'm trying to find like.
So if you're stuck with this like you're stuck with your character. How do you make it. So, we're making an interesting by being stuck with your character by talking about stages of life. But what are you doing like you're trying to not get kicked out of the game. But like what are the crisis like what are they, what's the crisis state. Like how does the game. How did we come up with these cards in the first place like what's the engine that generates.
Chad Owen 58:28
There was assumptions about some fictitious organization. Yeah, they've got created based on these archetypes, right, and in what we felt to be interesting scenarios that that archetype may have to deal with, or not. I don't see it as industry specific or the we didn't write these, I don't think as industry specific well maybe your data, big data. One.
One thing that we haven't explored here that may address some of these issues and kind of court of operations, choosing different actions understanding what choices are available, like there's no worker placement elements to this where I'm committing limited risk, you know,
Nathan Snyder 59:23
right, a certain amount of,
Chad Owen 59:26
right, like, I'm a box sticker I might be like super productive so therefore I have five workers in a round instead of four, or something that only you know let me be one way that the box sticker is differentiated from others, like the taskmaster might be able to take a worker from someone else to be able to place as because they're getting people meaningless work or whatever, or. And, and again like the board state. There's like five places where we can put the worker and then do that thing go through that process right so it's like. So like, there's a pitch circle and there's a help circle in it and then there's like a flipping card, let you know whether it's upward or downward and it's like okay, I'm, I place it into pitch, but I commit that maybe before I'm able to take that action like maybe everyone would be able to go in the round and then we. And then we you know, do our workers, like in the interim someone flips, this to downward divided and now I've got I've already committed to to pitching but then the action that I thought I was gonna be able to take is like no longer available to me. I guess I'm speaking about those interactions as. Yeah, and maybe come coming more from the narratives perspective back to the gamers perspective, because we were just kind of like ad libbing different scenarios that might come up. That would be interesting to
to play out. Well, and at least now, it's not it's like non interactive. If what you're doing is not really affecting what I'm doing.
Nathan Snyder 1:01:19
Yeah, that's right.
Chad Owen 1:01:22
Which is fine. I think the player interaction is complexify as the game a lot. But I think it's important. I think that's part of what the game is trying to teach is the inter dependence between the players and how their choices affect others and how others affects theirs. And we just don't know how to mechanically make that happen at this point, we're still trying to figure out how to create meaningful decisions, and then like, decide how to decide. Or like how do we decide if the board is in this state and we have these resources like what I mean the front the funny. The funny stance, we can take in this is like we, we can make the game development process developmental and asking like we're asking the question like, what can I do, and for whom but like we're putting game mechanics onto it.
Nathan Snyder 1:02:25
We're also asking How are you doing, which is a behavioral thing. Yeah. We're not asking what should you do and for whom.
That would be the interdependence.
Chad Owen 1:02:45
Yeah, maybe I'm pointing to that absence,
Nathan Snyder 1:02:47
that like we.
Chad Owen 1:02:48
Yeah, we could make the game more developmental if that was baked into it. Mm hmm. And I think that could be like this subtle. Non explicit kind of hidden mechanics of the game.
Nathan Snyder 1:03:03
Okay. All right, I think. Yeah, this is, I mean you're you're like so versatile and thinking about the.
Unknown Speaker 0:00
Here's the really big jumping off point for me yesterday was the idea of like,
Unknown Speaker 0:07
visible and hidden.
Unknown Speaker 0:12
So like,
Unknown Speaker 0:15
I couldn't see up until that you made that.
Unknown Speaker 0:23
You you made that
Unknown Speaker 0:26
move yesterday
Unknown Speaker 0:29
how to coordinate. So many of the algorithms that are, like functioning need to function with one another. In order
Unknown Speaker 0:40
for the game until I described them as cars that have sides and faces in there flipping over, or
Unknown Speaker 0:46
no, I hadn't seen I had, like, understood that dynamic before. But I didn't know how to coordinate it.
Unknown Speaker 0:56
So
Unknown Speaker 0:58
without this notion of visible and hidden, it can't happen without visible and hidden.
Unknown Speaker 1:05
Are you referring to like hidden mechanics versus how I experienced it aesthetically as a player? For?
Unknown Speaker 1:11
No, I didn't even think about that distinction. I didn't know that was possible. And
Unknown Speaker 1:18
I was just thinking about, like,
Unknown Speaker 1:20
what each player sees can be different than what's visible, the board. And the choice that the player has in any given moment.
Unknown Speaker 1:31
Oh, the moment where there's hidden information. And there's, I called it, it's called like a simultaneous reveal. So I choose a card and you choose a card or I choose a move and you choose a move. Yeah, we don't know what the moves are. And we simultaneously reveal them and then resolve the interaction between them. Yes, this is,
Unknown Speaker 1:50
this was key yesterday for me.
Unknown Speaker 1:53
Because you were thinking more in a linear.
Unknown Speaker 1:56
If I do this, then you respond and do this, and then I respond and do that.
Unknown Speaker 2:02
But that was not going to allow the game.
Unknown Speaker 2:06
That that that's not a complicated enough
Unknown Speaker 2:11
movement.
Unknown Speaker 2:13
Because it's not simulating real the real world
Unknown Speaker 2:18
complexities or not that just just because you have, you know, you have the four turns. And then you have the relationship between negative capital and capital, capital and political,
Unknown Speaker 2:35
political influence, social cloud, and help it pitch.
Unknown Speaker 2:42
I can't see that.
Unknown Speaker 2:57
Can you see it?
Unknown Speaker 2:58
Only when I'm, like, right up here?
Unknown Speaker 3:25
Why don't you tell me about the game?
Unknown Speaker 3:30
I think I think you understand the game better than I do.
Unknown Speaker 3:33
Probably.
Unknown Speaker 3:40
Yeah. I was imagining players sitting down to a particular board state, in that the self, the organization, the change model, and the were in particular, in the in the organizational state were in particular states. Okay. All right.
Unknown Speaker 4:10
So you're gonna that's not your board like this?
Unknown Speaker 4:12
Yeah. The board the board has a particular set of state.
Unknown Speaker 4:16
Yes, you can play it
Unknown Speaker 4:18
from easy to hard state.
Unknown Speaker 4:21
Yes. So your
Unknown Speaker 4:23
state isn't the right word. Easy to hard setup. scenarios.
Unknown Speaker 4:27
Yeah. Okay.
Unknown Speaker 4:29
Adventure, whatever.
Unknown Speaker 4:38
Yes. How if this game were in front of us, how would I describe it and get someone to play it?
Unknown Speaker 4:51
Well, this is a question for the designer. Are the players meant to be representatives within the same organization within the same team, or are they representing different Organizations, different individuals in a particular industry? or How are you conceiving of it?
Unknown Speaker 5:08
I don't think I had gotten that far. What you how you drew my attention to that yesterday was that the choice that needs to be made from a perspective between playing as an organization or playing as a different? Like, like you in your game you had, like the market was a player?
Unknown Speaker 5:32
Yeah. You know,
Unknown Speaker 5:32
like,
Unknown Speaker 5:35
I can think about players as embodiments of the different principles like as their own unique composition of the principles and having independent mechanisms within their own ability to play like, you could kind of you could, you could compose of, you know, the, you can flute composed of the individual, as one player, the organization is another player. The the market dynamic is another player, the isomorphisms, is another player the
Unknown Speaker 6:17
still don't have you don't have a fixed notion of like how that shows up in the game? No, I don't.
Unknown Speaker 6:23
Yeah, I don't know how to make that decision either.
Unknown Speaker 6:26
Well, we need to play to find out, but
Unknown Speaker 6:30
it's pretty good.
Unknown Speaker 6:33
So that's great.
Unknown Speaker 6:41
We don't have to go too far into this. But like, are the gear intense as the game designer, the experience that you'd like to create for the player is
Unknown Speaker 6:55
one of blank.
Unknown Speaker 7:05
One definition or attribute of a game? is how I define it is making meaningful choices or decisions. What meaningful choices or decisions are you envisioning players making and that can help us understand better kind of what they're
Unknown Speaker 7:23
abstractly representing?
Unknown Speaker 7:25
Yeah, I mean, I want I want players to make decisions that lead them to have that lead them struck with awe and wonder.
Unknown Speaker 7:38
I mean,
Unknown Speaker 7:41
part of how I was envisioning or experiencing the game in my mind is it's like a fidget toy. Where I do something on this and like, another bit, pops out or makes a noise. And then I spin this thing and like something else
Unknown Speaker 7:56
happens, like Bop It.
Unknown Speaker 7:59
Sort of by far. Have you seen as fidget toys like paid raise millions of dollars on
Unknown Speaker 8:04
your starter? I mean, I've seen the fidget spinners.
Unknown Speaker 8:07
Yeah, listeners, but there's these fidget toys where they're like little tiny interactive cubes. And like, yeah, you press I haven't seen them. Yeah.
Unknown Speaker 8:17
Obviously more complex than that. But like,
Unknown Speaker 8:24
there's not an aim or a goal in that. But there's it there's interesting interactions. And and there's, you know, I don't know, like you said, like wonder are all like, you want somebody to be like, I didn't know that I could do that. And this would happen. Something like that. Or Oh, my God, I did this. And then this
Unknown Speaker 8:48
other thing happened all I want them to realize like two or three, or I want them to under, I want them to be like, Fuck, because I made that decision three turns ago. Now I am where I am. I'm stuck here because of that
Unknown Speaker 9:03
decision.
Unknown Speaker 9:04
Yeah, even though at that time, that was a good decision. Like I can see the alternative now.
Unknown Speaker 9:13
Well, either because the game showed me or another player showed me a different way.
Unknown Speaker 9:19
Or I had no idea how that would influence this other player. And I would never make the choice that they made in that circumstance. Holy shit. And because they did make that now, I'm in the position that I am. Wow. Like, this is like happening all the time.
Unknown Speaker 9:39
And that happens in games all the times. Like
Unknown Speaker 9:43
there's a game that I played
Unknown Speaker 9:46
with my sister in law.
Unknown Speaker 9:49
There's like a little marketplace with different resource costs and tiles underneath that, where you pay the cost and you can get that tile and you're going you're going around and turns it so You're planning out, okay, well, I want that I have these resources. And so you can either take resources or buy a tile. Like I'm hoarding these resources because I need to buy these tiles. Oh, fuck they bought the tile that I learned is that saturday or sunday I've been saving for now all my resources are useless. Because there's only blue tiles left and I need red tiles. And now I have to rethink my whole strategy or not, maybe you just stay the course. And eventually it gets refilled with the ones that you need or whatever. But you want more of those interactions on kind of like a grander scale? Or you want to like amp that up as much as possible in the in the game? I think so.
Unknown Speaker 10:38
Yeah. Like he definitely the economy is really important in my game.
Unknown Speaker 10:44
And is that something that's known from the outset or discovered through play?
Unknown Speaker 10:52
I mean, I think it's more interesting if it's discovered to play.
Unknown Speaker 10:56
Well, here's, um, now I'm just thinking about like, because you said, This happens all the time. Like, yeah, how has that happened all the time for me? Well, the game that I love is euphoria. Have you played that one? No. I mean, I need to play it. Yeah. Do you have it? I haven't, you can use it. Or you can play online. Anyway. It's great because you're, you're like, these are minimal. They're minimal, but they're important. Does the economy one of the economy's in the game is your knowledge versus your like?
Unknown Speaker 11:39
Your like
Unknown Speaker 11:41
it's like heart It's like knowledge and heart like
Unknown Speaker 11:44
if you have like morale morale.
Unknown Speaker 11:47
Yeah, that's morale. Yeah, so that's it. That's how did you go that was just a wild guess.
Unknown Speaker 11:52
Yeah. That's often a meter certain knowledge and morale. Yeah. There's a zombie game where you have a certain morale view and your your people in your little colony and if you lose the game,
Unknown Speaker 12:05
right so this is this is if they have too much knowledge or too much
Unknown Speaker 12:10
room to tuition dollars, they revolt and too little morale. They revolt.
Unknown Speaker 12:14
Yeah, they revolt in either way. Yeah. Right. Exactly. Yeah. Yeah. So or no, no, it's if you have a lot of morale, that can be really good. And if you have a lot of knowledge, that's really bad. That's the way it goes. And
Unknown Speaker 12:29
because it's disturbing, and you want people to be stupid in speaking a speaker
Unknown Speaker 12:32
Yeah, you don't you want you don't want them to get too smart. But you want them to love you. Yeah. Yeah. As much as you can. But it doesn't the love the loving his in his major. The the what you gain from having high morale is less important than what you lose if your workers are too
Unknown Speaker 12:52
smart. Right. That's a design choice. Yeah. That
Unknown Speaker 12:58
that Jamie stone Meyer. Yeah, yeah. Yeah. But I say guess the parallel. That for me is negative capital and capital capital.
Unknown Speaker 13:11
So
Unknown Speaker 13:12
which is more valuable?
Unknown Speaker 13:15
Negative capital.
Unknown Speaker 13:18
Which may be counterintuitive. Someone just writing down to play the game? Yeah. But the game would reveal through. That's right. That's right. mechanics that this is actually more valuable. Because if I bank or accrue this, I can spend it at a later time for two x or three.
Unknown Speaker 13:35
Yeah, whatever. Exactly. Fire. Yes. Yes, exactly.
Unknown Speaker 13:38
And, you know, short term versus
Unknown Speaker 13:40
that's part of it, like to sit down with the game. Right, like, but you want it to be surprising in a way. So like, if you don't have enough capital capital, then you, you know, become destitute or something like that. In the game. So like, yeah, maybe, you know, as the rounds Go on, there's an exponential curve, that you're like realizing,
Unknown Speaker 14:03
right? You could stay on the linear curve and not lose, but it's not going to allow you to win. Mm hmm. You could just keep like, you gain one capital capital, you spend more capital capital and you continue on that curve. Whereas, you know, you can spend your risk of wait yeah, but then you jump up right and so it's it's kind of jumping graduated
Unknown Speaker 14:24
Yeah, like that. Yeah, exactly. Exactly.
Unknown Speaker 14:32
Sophy also we just made some good decisions.
Unknown Speaker 14:38
Yeah, I think the other thing is like, what's what's what is a part of a given game state and like, can't be changed or influenced by players and what is so like is
Unknown Speaker 14:54
well, like, visible and hidden. That can't be changed by players.
Unknown Speaker 15:01
You mean what information is kept hidden? And what
Unknown Speaker 15:03
is visible? Yes, yeah.
Unknown Speaker 15:06
Unless you want to, like break the game or give someone an ability over it. And this is where it gets really complicated because like one of the player, yeah, archetypes could have an ability only. Right they have, which is you get to look at another player's
Unknown Speaker 15:21
heart. And that might be with social clout and political influence,
Unknown Speaker 15:25
right? It's been this resource, you can do this thing that no one else can do. Right? See, I
Unknown Speaker 15:29
don't even know these are possible choices.
Unknown Speaker 15:34
Like another one of Jamie's games called tapestry, which is only playing against the game.
Unknown Speaker 15:41
Yeah, with the Armada.
Unknown Speaker 15:44
It's a civilization building game, or, you know, there's four different tracks. There's like technology, military exploration, and one more button. Yeah, you're like taking over map, you're building a civilization in one dimension, you want to get to space and like, you know, but every player gets a choice of their civilization, there's like 16 in the box, and they all have like, a specific power to themselves, that gives them a certain advantage, like, but he's balanced it in such a way that it doesn't break the game. It gives them a specific advantage, but everyone has a specific advantage. And so
Unknown Speaker 16:24
yeah, I think I think like this is maybe the game is called, like bullshit jobs. Like, how do you gain your way to a fulfilling life? Despite bullshit jobs? Like how do you develop yourself? Like, when you I'm just thinking about that, like, classic Marx quote, it's like, you know,
Unknown Speaker 16:52
you'd like, after your work is after your four hours of work is done. Then you clean up for supper, you have a long drawn out supper photo, it's like you hunt in the morning, you, you philosophize at night, do you know that quote, it's like, it's like the ideal of the, of the, like, the communist kind of actor capitalism has maximized technological productivity on, you know, on, on sucking out as much surplus labor, or as much surplus value out of laborers while keeping them dumb and uneducated, so that they don't revolt like that it leads to this end state. So like, but like, we're still in the fucking middle of it. And we're in both we have bullshit jobs,
Unknown Speaker 17:51
right? We're still like the pin. The pin stampers Pena Nieto.
Unknown Speaker 17:58
Yeah, Stanford. I mean, that's another thing that we could do. I mean, the four archetypes of David gravers bullshit jobs. Could be I'm not familiar with that. Yeah.
Unknown Speaker 18:11
This is a question I had for yesterday. It's like what what's the context from which the players are playing? Like is it in a bullshit job or is it in like, is it in like a more abstract Corporation? Or are we saying like, you're a burger flipper at McDonald's, or your you know, an iron bolt stamper in the forge or whatever I don't know what the bullshit
Unknown Speaker 18:45
jobs so flunkies goons, duct tape or Xbox tickers taskmasters. Like those five
Unknown Speaker 18:51
those are like those sound like great player archetype.
Unknown Speaker 18:55
Yeah, they're really good. Yep, flunkies who serve to make their supervisors feel important. receptionists administrative assistants door attendance goons who oppose other goons hired by companies lobbyists corporate lawyers, telemarketer public relations specialists duct tape ORS who temporarily fix problems that could be permanently fixed. Programmers repairing shoddy code airline staff who come passengers whose bags do not arrive box tickers who create the appearance that something useful is being done when it is not. Survey administrators in house magazine journalist corporate compliance in house magazine featuring taskmasters who manage or create extra work for those who do not need it. airgo middle management leadership professionals
Unknown Speaker 19:49
So,
Unknown Speaker 19:50
like, maybe maybe it's like develop out of your character archetype, your bullshit job, character archetype. Develop out of your behavioral profile. And you go from like, you go from it all being about you to it all being about the other, like, like the stages of the game, there are four stages of the game. There's the like instrumental stage of the game, there's the institutional stage of the game. There's the, for the socialized stage of the game, there's the individualized, self authoring. And there's the self transforming.
Unknown Speaker 20:42
And you start from one of these five,
Unknown Speaker 20:52
taskmaster, but funky goon food industry and goon and duck taper. Yeah.
Unknown Speaker 21:10
I mean, the interesting thing about these different phases, like
Unknown Speaker 21:14
either like it can be
Unknown Speaker 21:18
distinct, like it can be explicit, or it can be implicit, meaning that based on actions that you take, open up new options for you, or choices that you can make that give better results. So I'm not I might not really understand like, what this action versus this action does behind the scenes, you know, that this is a this is a was it.
Unknown Speaker 21:50
instrumentalist This is an instrument, so it's action, and this is a socialized action, and the socialized action has a more positive impact on the economy of, of that particular player to incentivize them to take this action over this action. Yeah, it might not be readily apparent to them, and it's not certainly not labeled. It's like
Unknown Speaker 22:14
what if these are what if these are like stages of life?
Unknown Speaker 22:16
Like, you know,
Unknown Speaker 22:19
your stage of life? It's like, it's like the turning it's like a you know, there are four phases the stage of life, you have, you know, early adulthood, you have adult, you have midlife crisis, you have
Unknown Speaker 22:35
nearing end of life and you have end of life.
Unknown Speaker 22:39
For you know, are you ever you have retirement, you have midlife crisis, you have family, and you have young professional? Yeah.
Unknown Speaker 22:51
In some ways, this is like, antithetical to kind of the concept of developments. But the game as I am seated, well, the game is conceived here, it's like it's a race.
Unknown Speaker 23:03
No, no, that's not what I'm saying. I'm saying that. This is just what's happening. Like, you know, it's like,
Unknown Speaker 23:11
so, you know, like a video game is different stages. No, no, they're just post like yours. Like, you're either stuck here and you're all set there. Yeah. So it's not it's not a
Unknown Speaker 23:21
it's not a race. It's just, it's what's going to happen to you because of age. Like you're everyone's having a midlife crisis at the same time.
Unknown Speaker 23:27
Everyone's in their young,
Unknown Speaker 23:28
adolescent professional, and they're institutionalized. And then they all like, right.
Unknown Speaker 23:36
Yeah. And so it has the game. It's the phaser instruments are funky, then
Unknown Speaker 23:39
they're socialized. punky. Yeah, they're self authorized, whatever. And then maybe there's a translate. There's a transition point, either. I mean,
Unknown Speaker 23:52
you know, maybe these are the bullshit jobs and these are the not quite bullshit. Jobs.
Unknown Speaker 23:56
Yeah. I mean, yeah, taskmasters become flunkies become. Right? And and box workers become and then like, you know, it's like, that's the difference between a slash and a parentheses. Right.
Unknown Speaker 24:12
I don't know what
Unknown Speaker 24:15
pitch and help know
Unknown Speaker 24:18
why I was just thinking of Oh, archetype.
Unknown Speaker 24:20
Kind of our opposite. So the, the archetype Oh, you know, what we can use is the opposite archetypes.
Unknown Speaker 24:32
I can't believe we're making this comparison.
Unknown Speaker 24:38
I am I No, no, it's really funny. It's really cool. It's gonna be fucking weird, though. For people who don't know
Unknown Speaker 24:45
until they do.
Unknown Speaker 25:04
so ridiculous
Unknown Speaker 25:23
Okay, here we go.
Unknown Speaker 25:33
Okay.
Unknown Speaker 25:38
So the duck taper
Unknown Speaker 25:43
I gotta get out my laptop.
Unknown Speaker 25:49
This erasable, yeah. Where is it?
Unknown Speaker 26:19
It's from
Unknown Speaker 26:22
I'm deciding whether to use this guy named Bill Torbert model of action logics or to use the close opposite which is or the close closest equivalent which is Suzanne Kirk routers, hers are more ridiculous.
Unknown Speaker 26:49
So his
Unknown Speaker 27:02
so his are opportunists, diplomat, expert achiever individuales, strategist, Alchemist
Unknown Speaker 27:11
and Suzanne cook routers are
Unknown Speaker 27:20
impulsive opportunities diplomat, expert achiever individuales strategists, magician ironist
Unknown Speaker 27:33
impulse,
Unknown Speaker 27:34
impulsive, opportunist, diplomat, expert achiever individualist strategist, magician ironist
Unknown Speaker 27:58
strategist.
Unknown Speaker 28:04
ironist you got it and then the other one was hate that's how many there are 1234567 others nine okay I'm gonna read them out. impulsive opportunists diplomat expert achiever individualists strategist individuals
Unknown Speaker 28:27
opportunist diplomat expert achiever individual strategist optimum Alchemist. So let's just use this and it's pretty much the same alchemists and diplomat, others diplomat. Okay, so let's, let's let's just do a gross like matching, so duck tapers who temporarily fixed problems that could be permanently fixed. Programmers repairing shoddy code airline desk staff who come passengers whose bags do not arrive
Unknown Speaker 29:01
duck tapers become
Unknown Speaker 29:04
strategists, diplomats.
Unknown Speaker 29:07
I think that's the flunky. Nice
Unknown Speaker 29:20
while the box tickers achiever
Unknown Speaker 29:24
let's drop a few of these let's draw like add them all in then we can take them back okay so we've got
Unknown Speaker 29:46
so I think going should be ironist
Unknown Speaker 29:54
taskmasters should be
Unknown Speaker 29:58
guns can be at home. Out alchemists.
Unknown Speaker 30:04
Duct tape or it can be magicians.
Unknown Speaker 30:15
Box stickers could become strategists.
Unknown Speaker 30:22
I'm pretty good with that. If we lose a cheaper there,
Unknown Speaker 30:26
well, let's combine and see if there's something interesting here. Okay.
Unknown Speaker 30:32
So what's left?
Unknown Speaker 30:37
Well start. Can you just go over taskmaster? That is definitely
Unknown Speaker 30:42
who manage or create extra work, who do not need it? middle management leadership professionals.
Unknown Speaker 30:51
many opportunities. Okay.
Unknown Speaker 30:57
What about foreign key?
Unknown Speaker 31:01
who served to make the superiors feel important?
Unknown Speaker 31:07
Okay,
Unknown Speaker 31:08
well, I haven't done the math impulsive.
Unknown Speaker 31:14
And
Unknown Speaker 31:16
we're koufos who oppose other goons hired by other companies
Unknown Speaker 31:20
expert. Yeah.
Unknown Speaker 31:30
Again, we don't have we don't have these days, but I just mapped them all.
Unknown Speaker 31:39
So the bullshit jobs are these and they turn into versions of these.
Unknown Speaker 31:55
Alchemist, diplomat,
Unknown Speaker 31:56
expert strategists, magician, the magician,
Unknown Speaker 32:02
magician and Alchemist sound overall.
Unknown Speaker 32:09
Well, one, I mean, yeah, they sound very similar.
Unknown Speaker 32:19
Now you got to keep the ironist guy keep the iron. That's like that's like going from that's like the
Unknown Speaker 32:36
it would be ironic if
Unknown Speaker 32:40
the night became a jester.
Unknown Speaker 32:47
Like the goon the hired mercenary Knight became a jester. That would like never happen. What?
Unknown Speaker 33:08
Maybe? That's also
Unknown Speaker 33:11
that could be seen as a bullshit. Yeah.
Unknown Speaker 33:15
I'm good with this as a starting point.
Unknown Speaker 33:18
Well, I like this idea of like your go like, Well, maybe not your goal. But it's like, you'll be stuck here. And then there'll be a point in time where you flip over, and then you're, yeah, you're enlightened. You're my version. My question is, is the game dictating that progression? Or are your actions accelerating that progression? This is where it was like, the race, the race. Yeah, it doesn't make sense as a race because you you can't you're subject to your development. You can't like,
Unknown Speaker 33:58
yeah, I think I don't think it's a race. So
Unknown Speaker 34:01
then it's just making the best of your just makes more sense. It's like making the best of your current developmental circumstances.
Unknown Speaker 34:09
Like you can try to game it.
Unknown Speaker 34:11
But then everything is going to change. Like once you've once you've like, there, because there's going to be enough turns where you feel like you've won. And then
Unknown Speaker 34:21
what it feels like the state changes in your life every time I knew before. Yes, yes. Doesn't matter. Right. That's right. I used to I took this action spent this resource in the gap is now I can't do that anymore.
Unknown Speaker 34:34
Right. Right. Yeah.
Unknown Speaker 34:36
Either because of changing in your own development or changing your
Unknown Speaker 34:41
from like, the bullshit to bullshit job.
Unknown Speaker 34:46
Yeah, I think I think there's a way to synthesize both. So inside so we just split life at a halfway point and just say,
Unknown Speaker 34:56
you know, you're gonna have there. There's a
Unknown Speaker 35:01
So you're, you're like, you're not enlightened, you're enlightened. You're not enlightened. You're enlightened. And this is like, you know, you're a freshman or sophomore. You're a junior year Junior, your senior, you know,
Unknown Speaker 35:21
right. I'm subject to being the taskmaster in now. I'm exploiting being the taskmaster. Yes. Then I switched. Now I'm an alchemist. And I'm, I can't control it. Now. I can rush Oh,
Unknown Speaker 35:34
yeah. Cuz, you know, like you think about you think about like, the development spectrum. Yeah. You know.
Unknown Speaker 35:53
So I'm, I'm a tyrant, taskmaster? I didn't
Unknown Speaker 36:11
know. Yeah. And I think, yeah, What changes is there's like, there's an exploitative
Unknown Speaker 36:44
that you can exploit the economics and the processes inside of the game in the human self authored stage. Yes. There's a way of like, you feel like you're taking advantage of where you have. Yeah, right. Right. Versus then the dynamics of the game shift that forces you to make where competition and cooperation were nice. Yeah, you're incentivized to compete to compete versus quality versus can be
Unknown Speaker 37:18
nice. Yeah.
Unknown Speaker 37:20
I'm trying to think of how this manifests like in the mechanics of the game. I don't know how you oscillate between that. Or how you demonstrate that, but that's kind of what I get. So like, there's a, just as you said, it's like,
Unknown Speaker 37:41
an antagonistic.
Unknown Speaker 37:46
comparable, so you do it, you do it by, like, the same moves that you did to maximize to overcome this fight against you here. Because the state of the game has changed. State, we should find another word
Unknown Speaker 38:01
for that. But it's yours, but we're losing choices here, come get you here. No.
Unknown Speaker 38:09
Or
Unknown Speaker 38:13
if you know, that be more like, there's like a premium, there's like a chance there's like two turns out of eight in each phase, where if you did choose to be cooperativity, you can gain a slight advantage over others, potentially, maybe I think
Unknown Speaker 38:29
that's a good idea.
Unknown Speaker 38:31
Where you could essentially, like,
Unknown Speaker 38:34
you could just you could just get ahead, like
Unknown Speaker 38:39
I'm trying to figure out how to have the players influence that just a little bit, rather than just being subject to what's being dictated by the game, because then it doesn't feel like your choices matter as much. Because you're like, well, I can only I can only do this.
Unknown Speaker 38:58
Okay, I think it would be fun to have like a eulogy. Like that's the combination of the game is like, you everyone like scores up their their points. And and you like read each other eulogies?
Unknown Speaker 39:14
Yeah, why not?
Unknown Speaker 39:17
It's kind of dark.
Unknown Speaker 39:19
That's how the pandemic legacy game works is depending on how well you've done over the 12 months of the game in which you're playing, you score points, and then there's like, five different little mini narratives on how fucked up or how save the world the
Unknown Speaker 39:38
points you get.
Unknown Speaker 39:43
I mean, it was a little anticlimactic, because it took us a year to play the game. And then you get like a little pair of
Unknown Speaker 39:51
right.
Unknown Speaker 39:52
Yeah, I mean, I get how and why they did it that way.
Unknown Speaker 39:57
That's different from the classic
Unknown Speaker 40:01
pandemic legacy use, you play, there's a different scenario, do you play with the course of a year in the game, and you and you. So you play January. It's a scenario that you set up the board in this way, and the cards are set up in this particular way. With set objectives. If you win, then you move on to February. With a new set of objectives, you open up new components and you get new things. If you lose a January, you can replay it to try and win it again. And they kind of balance it by like, if you lose, you get an extra boom. And if you win, you don't get it. It kind of sold balances it like you get extra help if you keep losing up to the point and then you lose like four times in a row. And then like you lose the game.
Unknown Speaker 40:59
But the story that the story that's told to the game is like, the best in any board game ever period that I've played. There's other board games that do that as well. But I don't want to ruin the game in case you ever pick it up. But like
Unknown Speaker 41:11
I want to play the
Unknown Speaker 41:13
twist.
Unknown Speaker 41:16
About a third of the way through the game is just like, amazing. And then you're just kind of like racing to the end. It's cool. It's so cool. You open up the box. There's eight like little boxes, like black boxes,
Unknown Speaker 41:32
you don't know. And once you've paid once you've played it, then you know it.
Unknown Speaker 41:36
Yeah, yeah. me. I know the whole story. So if I played it again, I would kind of know what to expect.
Unknown Speaker 41:43
So it's a one time play. Pretty much game.
Unknown Speaker 41:47
Connect your game away after we played it. Right?
Unknown Speaker 41:50
Yeah, you can't really replay it. Right. Right. You know, you take a picture of the board at the end.
Unknown Speaker 41:56
Yeah.
Unknown Speaker 42:00
But having five different player boards sounds really cool.
Unknown Speaker 42:05
So we have, right,
Unknown Speaker 42:07
we have a little planer boards here.
Unknown Speaker 42:10
The other thing that I wanted to be clear on was the
Unknown Speaker 42:23
we're talking about the state of the organization or the company. So like all of these individuals are working inside of the same company. Okay,
Unknown Speaker 42:32
yeah, sure. That's an assumption, I think,
Unknown Speaker 42:35
yeah. For, for right
Unknown Speaker 42:36
now. Mm hmm.
Unknown Speaker 42:43
And I think, you know, all of these individuals, well, you know, there'll be there'll be working at odds, so to speak, like in the first phase, which might make it hard to coordinate like the state of the board. It's like every decision they make just flipped something else in the, on the board state, which makes it difficult for other players to like, make their decisions and, but then their decision changed. So it's just kind of a chaotic number of rounds where like, what I'm doing doesn't really, I'm just doing I'm just optimizing for my own benefit. I don't care what happens to the organization. Like it's, it's flipping from external to contingent, it's, or it's flipping from contingent to institutional and it's flipping from upward to downward, divided,
Unknown Speaker 43:39
and bored, bored out or bored and
Unknown Speaker 43:41
bored out and burnt out.
Unknown Speaker 43:53
So there's contingent and institutional
Unknown Speaker 44:01
and then there was
Unknown Speaker 44:06
upward team
Unknown Speaker 44:09
downward.
Unknown Speaker 44:23
And I think
Unknown Speaker 44:31
it's almost like each player has burned.
Unknown Speaker 44:52
Each player has a board, a board and a burn because I don't think it makes sense to have it.
Unknown Speaker 44:57
Everyone on board or everyone
Unknown Speaker 45:00
Right. Yeah. So like I my box ticker, and I'm burned out because I have two boxes to tick. Our team dynamic clearly begins downward. And we're in a continuous state because Yeah.
Unknown Speaker 45:23
Because and
Unknown Speaker 45:28
I guess the question I'm asking myself for like, what, what are the what's the what? And I have my resources.
Unknown Speaker 45:35
Have my,
Unknown Speaker 45:38
my whatever I have my
Unknown Speaker 45:50
negative
Unknown Speaker 45:53
my negative capital, and I've got a lot
Unknown Speaker 45:58
in my
Unknown Speaker 46:00
capital capital.
Unknown Speaker 46:04
I have just a little.
Unknown Speaker 46:15
So
Unknown Speaker 46:26
Oh, yeah, we have this, we have the isomorphisms. And we have.
Unknown Speaker 46:32
So they're like four sided or five sided.
Unknown Speaker 46:37
Instead of an O two sided card? It's like a four sided or a five sided? cube? Is it?
Unknown Speaker 46:47
That's a question. I don't know.
Unknown Speaker 47:00
We also we also had isomorphisms. As
Unknown Speaker 47:05
as a resource.
Unknown Speaker 47:09
Yeah, you can use I think, I think isomorphisms. And your change model? There's four different resources.
Unknown Speaker 47:20
Yeah. So then,
Unknown Speaker 47:26
is it that I have like the capacity for change, and then I choose where to spend it? Or I have five? Was it four or five? But four or five miles a change?
Unknown Speaker 47:38
For models of change? Do I
Unknown Speaker 47:40
have four different types of change resource? And is it Do I know one isomorphism resource and I spend it in one of three ways? Or are there three separate isomorphism resources like creating coercion? isomorphisms. accruing?
Unknown Speaker 48:00
Oh, normative?
Unknown Speaker 48:05
For simplicity's sake, we can just say there's an isomorphism resources spent in a process that is one of the three and the chain of resources spent in a wonderful four ways that if that makes sense to you, and how you're conceiving, it's unclear to me like where they are, and how you spend them.
Unknown Speaker 48:33
So do you spend a certain amount of Isom a certain amount of isomorphisms a certain amount of? So do you accrue and expand an amount? Or is it? Is it qualitative? Its quantitative or qualitative? Is it? Yeah.
Unknown Speaker 48:58
Yeah, it's like is, is your current state of isomorphism? coercive normative or mimetic? It's just one of the three it's not there's not a value associated? Yeah. Right. Or is your model change one of these four? Let's see.
Unknown Speaker 49:20
How many? How many I someone
Unknown Speaker 49:22
asked the question, which is it? You have, how much change do you have? How many isomorphisms? or How much? isomorphism? How many?
Unknown Speaker 49:32
Yeah.
Unknown Speaker 49:41
I see it as like,
Unknown Speaker 49:44
whatever that one is. It's like your,
Unknown Speaker 49:47
your little cube is in like, okay, so I'm in the course of
Unknown Speaker 49:53
the zone here like player board.
Unknown Speaker 49:54
Yeah. Like my little cube is in the corner. So but I take an action it says move it from course. Have to
Unknown Speaker 50:02
lose weight or remove it. You know, it's like why don't have
Unknown Speaker 50:07
another and then the other one is like which?
Unknown Speaker 50:11
Yeah, which model change? Am I in here? Right.
Unknown Speaker 50:22
Last one, complex adaptive responses existential
Unknown Speaker 50:32
complex models of change complex, existential
Unknown Speaker 50:39
responsive, and
Unknown Speaker 50:43
I don't remember.
Unknown Speaker 50:52
It is
Unknown Speaker 51:01
stratified
Unknown Speaker 51:05
which I'm not familiar with. It's
Unknown Speaker 51:07
like stratified
Unknown Speaker 51:12
by waterfall like,
Unknown Speaker 51:13
No, no, no, it's it's a Jax le Jax is levels.
Unknown Speaker 51:20
Oh, okay.
Unknown Speaker 51:30
Great. So, so like this is this is the first version of my player board. Yeah. So for those of you listening to the lab,
Unknown Speaker 51:39
I have six cards in front of me.
Unknown Speaker 51:43
I have a box ticker card, that on the flip side says strategist, I have a burned out card, which on the flip side says board, I have four negative capital resources, I have one capital capital resources. And I'm currently in the existential model of change in the coercive
Unknown Speaker 52:04
isomorphism is
Unknown Speaker 52:07
don't know at my disposal, or I am subject to it. And I'm not sure which it is yet. We've also have a contingent organizational environment, and the team is down really divided. So this is like the setup phase of bullshit jobs. And then and maybe there's like a star or a dot that shows you like which side of the car to begin on, at setup, or, you know, something like that.
Unknown Speaker 52:40
So we've created these little fiddly bits here, and now we can begin to interact with them, like hopefully in interesting ways. Mm hmm. So we're in the first phase of the game I know there's going to be four phases to this game, because that's what the rulebook told me. And
Unknown Speaker 53:02
the box ticker card tells me
Unknown Speaker 53:07
that my wind condition is
Unknown Speaker 53:11
whatever to have more than 10 Capital capital resources at in the last phase of the game and if that's true, then I win
Unknown Speaker 53:23
the game or something? I don't know.
Unknown Speaker 53:28
If there can be multiple winners in the game everyone can win or everyone can lose or any combination. I don't know. But I I guess what I'm asking is what what am I trying to accomplish? I see the board state now and what am I trying to do?
Unknown Speaker 53:45
Well, I think you're trying to maximize your your personnel your personality attributes. Add a given state at a given stage of the game. So I have a box ticker what am I trying to do? That what stage of the game are you in? stage one? You're you're trying to selfishly control. You're trying to control the world around you to meet your own needs.
Unknown Speaker 54:25
That's true of all the players
Unknown Speaker 54:28
in stage one. Yeah. How does it show specifically for the box tech? Oh, for the box
Unknown Speaker 54:33
sticker, okay, like I need to take more boxes. So that yeah, I think more money so that I keep my job so that
Unknown Speaker 54:41
so who creates the appearance of something that is useful when it is not? So like you're trying to create the appearance that you're being useful as the box sticker,
Unknown Speaker 54:51
why need to do as little work and get rewarded as much as possible?
Unknown Speaker 55:01
Yeah, it's basically to
Unknown Speaker 55:02
do little actual work as possible and yet still
Unknown Speaker 55:06
keep my job, right. You're like, wow, what I'm doing is so important. And I'm gonna tell you all about it. And at the same time, like
Unknown Speaker 55:13
I wasn't doing is literally pushing paper. I'm like not even signing anything or I'm just moving something from one inbox to another
Unknown Speaker 55:21
it right? Well, I'm so tired. I'm like, yeah.
Unknown Speaker 55:29
Survey administrators in house magazine, journalist, social media
Unknown Speaker 55:33
managers, Social Media Manager.
Unknown Speaker 55:36
That's a nice, yeah, that's great.
Unknown Speaker 55:40
What I'm doing is so important.
Unknown Speaker 55:45
Right, I had to read so many tweets, I had to craft so many replies, I had to crop these photos just perfect.
Unknown Speaker 55:56
Are you actually doing creating value?
Unknown Speaker 56:03
So what are the actions that I'm taking? What am I how or what am i changing on the board? Or like, what's missing here for me to interact with?
Unknown Speaker 56:16
Make this archetype
Unknown Speaker 56:19
do as little
Unknown Speaker 56:26
as little work
Unknown Speaker 56:30
for max
Unknown Speaker 56:38
the ward seems like
Unknown Speaker 56:41
Boston
Unknown Speaker 57:08
to like, what might be an interesting game interaction?
Unknown Speaker 57:13
For the box ticker?
Unknown Speaker 57:32
Well, the box ticker. So
Unknown Speaker 57:34
guys, like in a way, they, they want it to be an institutional state, right? Because they just want to keep they want to keep things the same. They want to fly under the radar and do like, right, so maybe there is they're incentivized to do better with the whatever, you know, action they can take on institutional side, as opposed to continue inside. So is there gonna be like,
Unknown Speaker 57:58
so there's gonna be like a little box of cards. And like, every turn, you're gonna like, pull, like you're gonna have some nice, like, stories, the stack of stories, and you're going to put down for each turn, you know, you're going to pull, you're gonna pull a card. Okay? Like if the organization's in a institutional state poll, the institutional box, if it's in a contingency pool, the story of that box, read it out loud. And these are the things that you can do.
Unknown Speaker 58:31
That sounds like a very cool game to play if it's going to be more complex
Unknown Speaker 58:35
to create because you have to write all those cards.
Unknown Speaker 58:40
I mean, but I think it's a cooler game. Yeah. And it skews more into the narrative this realm than the game is round, although keypads games elements. Yeah. Yeah. But did did I've shared with you the Mars simulation already did. Yeah. And all they did was created a keynote presentation. Right? Everyone had boards. There were like five different habitat there were like five modules to the Mars colony. And the goal of game was to have evenly distributed across all modules as many resources because that's how you scored the points. It was like for every trick of you know, five, one of each you got 100 points or whatever. And then each slide in the keynote was like a new but it was like super producers on it look like a video game. They like sound and animations and everything. But each turn they put up a new scenario and it said, oops, the all plants died because the airlock has opened like remove all the resources from that from the from the greenhouse or whatever. So the whole all teams in your playing the team, or teams removed all that. And then everyone shows their action in secret, and then revealed at the end. The other thing was eventually you could talk about the actions you were taking, this was the whole thing about demonstrating non responsive and responsive ways of working. So there were like three or four constraints that were removed at different milestones. In the same way, they were kind of advancing in these four phases. You know, better more optimized actions will be available to players as you move into different phases in the same way that it's like you can you can talk about and reveal your actions before you take them. There is a couple others.
Unknown Speaker 1:00:53
Oh, one was you had to commit to the action even before you learn to like what happened. And then the other ones you can decide after the event happened.
Unknown Speaker 1:01:10
What I'm hearing you describe is
Unknown Speaker 1:01:14
there's like a deck of semi random scenarios, or narratives within each. You were talking about a contingent and then institutional like, in Ico, I would call that like an encounter deck. There's institutional organization encounters and there's contingent organization encounters.
Unknown Speaker 1:01:32
Yeah. And there's like downwardly divided encounters in your team. And there's upwardly divided calendars on your team. And there's board encounters and there's, there's overwhelmed encounters?
Unknown Speaker 1:01:47
And are you resolving each of those every round,
Unknown Speaker 1:01:51
where every round, you're going to pick three?
Unknown Speaker 1:01:55
And they kind of flow together to create a,
Unknown Speaker 1:01:59
like, a situational awareness?
Unknown Speaker 1:02:03
So in a way, there has to be like, if not infinitely good, like?
Unknown Speaker 1:02:10
I'm imagining like you would read the the contingent institutional car, then you would, that would flow into the gallery divided car that would flow into the Yes, burned?
Unknown Speaker 1:02:22
Yeah, or burn or burn overboard?
Unknown Speaker 1:02:25
Yeah. Is each player doing that? Or is this like, yeah, like a whole round? Everyone's dealing with it? Or it's like, on my turn, I draw one of each.
Unknown Speaker 1:02:33
I just, I don't know how it's gonna, I think it has to be for each player. It's a lot of work. To write all those? I guess it's not that many. It's not that much.
Unknown Speaker 1:02:46
Depending on how many rounds you play. Yeah, in each phase, right?
Unknown Speaker 1:02:51
Because they're gonna be four phases of the deck, because,
Unknown Speaker 1:02:56
yeah, the right thing encounters will? Yes, that's right.
Unknown Speaker 1:03:02
Well, yeah, the actions you can take will change based on the level of development in the entity change based on the dynamics,
Unknown Speaker 1:03:18
right, so they're, you know,
Unknown Speaker 1:03:24
and this is, this is where like, this is toeing the line between like a role playing in our entire base game and like, in a game game, tabletop game. What this brings that role playing games can often like is like the strict and stringent structure, in clear, kind of like, algorithmic consequences. In role playing game, I can say like, I want to do this random ass thing like swing from the chandelier and kick this person into a table. Like, I as a game master need to be ready and prepared to adjudicate that indicate, it could be that or it could be I want to pet this cat and drink a beer. Like it could be everything there's nothing in between and you have to like be prepared for that.
Unknown Speaker 1:04:15
The advantage of that is like we can go and explore many different avenues we're not like stuck in the in the predetermined narrative of the of the game, but like, the way like this is different than like the Mario simulation because the keynote presentation of the Mars simulation like never changed as far as I know, it was always the same.
Unknown Speaker 1:04:39
It's only that's a one time play simulation.
Unknown Speaker 1:04:42
Yeah, you play it once in like the series the sequence of events like in like stays the same turn one this happens to commonly turn to this habits. So like if you played it twice, it would be you you could potentially know like what's happening.
Unknown Speaker 1:04:57
In the players choices aren't influencing
Unknown Speaker 1:05:01
In the game, they're not they're just optimized. They're optimizing their resource. You know, they're trying to coordinate decisions as best as possible to, to optimize resources on their board responding to me, this is like the whole, it's funny how it is its own like, artifact of the critique of responses right away, just only.
Unknown Speaker 1:05:29
It's acting like there's no such no such thing as an institutional state.
Unknown Speaker 1:05:35
Or Not only that, but just being directed by the world. Instead of react, maybe that's institutional, like, you only ever exist in a contingent state, you're never in an institutional state.
Unknown Speaker 1:05:49
Or you're always reacting against the institutional state. And from a contingent organization design, yeah. Because your theory of change is
Unknown Speaker 1:06:01
fixed to
Unknown Speaker 1:06:02
one. I mean, based on the game, as we began to construct it, like, what's most interesting for you to pursue, like creating these contingent, these institutional states, these team, these team cards and these like, self cards. But if you had a rate, let's say 100 of each first, like, 300 300 of these little cards,
Unknown Speaker 1:06:34
I mean, more just created an algorithm to do that. Because there's repeat there's repeating sequences.
Unknown Speaker 1:06:43
So yeah, it could be five that repeat the repeat in different ways. And in there's like, a higher likelihood of this combination versus that combination based on the phase.
Unknown Speaker 1:06:53
Yeah, I mean, those I'm not. Yeah, the, the amount, I'm not really concerned about the amount of work once you get going in writing. They're basically matrices, and you're just asking yourself the same questions, responding from a different point of view. So once you internalize that, it just it kind of writes itself. So that's not I think it's more about like, what's going to be most fun to play. Like, how like,
Unknown Speaker 1:07:24
so I ordered a game. Yeah, that I want to play with you should be here later this week.
Unknown Speaker 1:07:32
That
Unknown Speaker 1:07:34
did your concept of this game? closely. mirrors, huh? It's called gloom haven.
Unknown Speaker 1:07:42
Oh, yeah. Yeah, I've wanted to play with me.
Unknown Speaker 1:07:44
That's a very expensive game. Well, this is like, this is it's not the sequel, but it's, it's a far condensed version of Uh huh. So like, it doesn't have like all the crazy miniatures and the giant ass board. It's like, just the book with the maps, okay. And like your player cards. It's like a very slimmed down version. All right, it was like 30 bucks. Oh, well, first of all, like 500 or 100.
Unknown Speaker 1:08:06
Yeah, right.
Unknown Speaker 1:08:09
But that's interesting. Because there's paperboards. There are different trade differentiated from others. There's cards in your hand in which you're making decisions on what you want to do. You know, there's, there's
Unknown Speaker 1:08:24
opportunity costs like choosing this allows.
Unknown Speaker 1:08:28
Each card has two actions. And one is written right side up and one's written upside down. So there's two potential actions on a car, but you can only play one side. So whichever one I choose is face up means that I can't do the other one. So there's this interesting choice, where it's like, well, if I attack I can't heal, or if I move in attack, I can't whatever charge on my weapon or whatever it is. That's an interesting choice mechanic. But there's also this this scenario set up and there's like, a deck of encounters. It's like this happens, how do you respond and influences the game it's like well lose four hit points before you start your next encounter. Or you get this cool bonus item that you can use in your next encounter. If it's a game I really wanted to play but haven't and now they came out this other version I got it.
Unknown Speaker 1:09:30
So I'm reading the sequence of the three cards that the institutional the team and the self card, on my turn are the choices in that are my choices in those cards what I can do or are that is what I can do like on my board in reaction to so
Unknown Speaker 1:09:56
are those encounter cards, changing the board state
Unknown Speaker 1:10:01
I mean, they could be doing any of these things.
Unknown Speaker 1:10:05
You could draw a contingent car that says, Well, now we're in institutional mode. And then you have to flip that. Or you could draw a card. And it's like, well, now your team is up really divided because you all whatever,
Unknown Speaker 1:10:19
I think let's think about it from the other way around. So if you're in a team, and you're you're, you're burnout, you want to change being burnout, which means that you want to distribute your work into the team. If the if the team is in a downwardly divided state and you distribute the work, it's only going to further down really divide the team. So you have to say, Okay, well, can I share, can I observe being burnt out for a little longer? So that I play a, I play a I play a normative isomer morphism to further enhance the team to its normative state, which maximum which gets it closer to being upwardly divided so that I can stop being so burnout
Unknown Speaker 1:11:24
How How did you know that you
Unknown Speaker 1:11:29
needed to move from burned out to bored out?
Unknown Speaker 1:11:32
Because my burnout from the last hand got? I got I inherited more burnout from my last hand.
Unknown Speaker 1:11:40
I couldn't that I couldn't anticipate.
Unknown Speaker 1:11:44
So like, I'm like, doubly burned out. There's like degrees of burnout. And
Unknown Speaker 1:11:52
there's like a little counter.
Unknown Speaker 1:11:56
Totally burned out.
Unknown Speaker 1:12:02
Like, yeah, it goes from like, negative.
Unknown Speaker 1:12:08
It goes from like, burned out at nine over here always zero, or whatever, then
Unknown Speaker 1:12:13
yeah. And it's you like go, Yeah, like it. Like the card says like, if you are in, you lose for burn, burnout, or
Unknown Speaker 1:12:21
whatever it's like,
Unknown Speaker 1:12:22
and if you are, you know, have or if you have under zero flipped to being flipped to being bored.
Unknown Speaker 1:12:31
Right? Or if you're on the burn out, like the downward team card says, if you're burned out, then lose negative capital. Like, I don't want to, I don't want to lose this. So I want I, so I lost. I lost that. And like, well, crap, I need to reduce my burnout. Because it's a downward divided team. So.
Unknown Speaker 1:12:57
So then I take an action that puts me to board
Unknown Speaker 1:13:01
in the downward divided team, which is fine, because I can just be complacent in the downward dynamic. But then the next player with the team to be upward, and then now I'm
Unknown Speaker 1:13:13
the drag on the team. And
Unknown Speaker 1:13:17
I get to expend capital can help,
Unknown Speaker 1:13:19
right? Yeah.
Unknown Speaker 1:13:22
Fuck
Unknown Speaker 1:13:24
Yeah, and I guess, yeah, so what is it in those encounter cards? I mean, what what clearly was absent here is like, what are the actions or choices that I can make? Unlike other actions and choices?
Unknown Speaker 1:13:40
Like, where do those reside? Are they?
Unknown Speaker 1:13:44
Are they on the board? Like here? Or are they like in a worker placement, it's like, you can place your worker in one of these five areas and take these actions. So that's like one way you make a decision. Or it's like, the actions are on my board. And it's like, you're the box ticker. And you can do these things that maybe others can or it just like tells you, here's the five things you can do on your turn. Everyone can do one of those five things. Yeah, I think and or is it like in the cards when it's like, the car tells the story and it constrains your choice? or gives you more options?
Unknown Speaker 1:14:21
What are the three?
Unknown Speaker 1:14:22
Well, these aren't the only three but where did the choices or actions I can take as a player reside? Are they in front of me?
Unknown Speaker 1:14:32
And or unique? Some of them are hidden, some of them are visible.
Unknown Speaker 1:14:39
So there's like a deck of cards that I have. That are my choices.
Unknown Speaker 1:14:45
Maybe Yeah,
Unknown Speaker 1:14:46
and I can play this. You don't know what it is until I flip it over.
Unknown Speaker 1:14:52
Where did this come from?
Unknown Speaker 1:14:54
Yeah, I don't know.
Unknown Speaker 1:14:57
Like does each each player have their own That.
Unknown Speaker 1:15:01
Well, how does that how does that they like they have an engagement. Like I think they form their hand through what they select in the engagements. Like,
Unknown Speaker 1:15:14
oh, okay,
Unknown Speaker 1:15:15
now I'm looking at this like, Fuck, like I know what's gonna happen if I do this or that to my, to my resources?
Unknown Speaker 1:15:32
I know So what?
Unknown Speaker 1:15:34
So yeah. So what if
Unknown Speaker 1:15:39
what if there's multiple stacks of cards on my on my side you need to me the box sticker. I don't know how they're categorized or whatever, but there's cards that I've shuffled and set out.
Unknown Speaker 1:15:55
Those are what I'm going to draw into my hands
Unknown Speaker 1:15:59
to use
Unknown Speaker 1:16:04
what what the encounter cards can dictate is which pile I'm drawing from based on the choice, it's like upwardly divided team, do you do this? Or do you do that? If you do this draw from this pile? If you do that draw from this pile? For the institutional card, okay, this is the situation do you do this? Or do you do that? Okay, I'll draw this and then then I'll draw that and then are you bored? Are you
Unknown Speaker 1:16:32
burned?
Unknown Speaker 1:16:34
Do you do this or that and then I draw like a third card, and then I have three potential actions in my hand, that, then I look at the board state and I play that action, which is one might be
Unknown Speaker 1:16:48
because I was bored.
Unknown Speaker 1:16:53
You know,
Unknown Speaker 1:16:55
crude, a coup for negative capital, or whatever. If you end your turn, or in the round with more than six negative capital, you can you can flip from a downward team to an opera team or whatever, you can flip from boarding to burn, something like that. So that the players decisions are driven by the external circumstances of the encounters, which you know, is represented like here on the board stage.
Unknown Speaker 1:17:30
And what I begin to understand is that
Unknown Speaker 1:17:34
in a, in an upward institutional board state, I'm getting these kinds of cards are these kinds of actions I do or don't like that, or it's moving me further or closer away to my wind state. Cuz I'm trying to figure out like, how I, how I win the game or
Unknown Speaker 1:17:56
Yeah, make meaningful decisions. Yeah.
Unknown Speaker 1:18:01
I think that we're coming at this right now from
Unknown Speaker 1:18:05
a mechanic standpoint. And I'm wondering if it wouldn't help us by changing our perspective from a,
Unknown Speaker 1:18:20
from mechanical to an aesthetic perspective.
Unknown Speaker 1:18:24
Yeah, I can't remember my, from a,
Unknown Speaker 1:18:43
from a
Unknown Speaker 1:18:46
simulationist. In
Unknown Speaker 1:18:52
or from a gaming point of view, to, like, to a simulationist. So, so in other words, like, what,
Unknown Speaker 1:19:02
like, let's play this as if it's ourselves and
Unknown Speaker 1:19:06
and we're playing noun an outcome.
Unknown Speaker 1:19:10
Let's try that. Okay. Let's then make it up, like, through a narrative list approach to try to make better progress. To take it to then extrapolate from the narrative approach into a simulation so that we can further then bringing into a game
Unknown Speaker 1:19:32
to get the mechanic
Unknown Speaker 1:19:33
Yeah, right. Yeah.
Unknown Speaker 1:19:38
Okay, so
Unknown Speaker 1:19:42
I'm gonna stop the lab and and restart it. Okay.
Unknown Speaker 0:06
Okay, new recording.
Unknown Speaker 0:22
So we just went through
Unknown Speaker 0:25
a process of you sort of retelling the differentiation and integration process of your storyteller with your business solution. Self, and you were sort of looking at how that was remaking stimulus, like it has done in the past, and how, In this particular case stimulus is being remade in relationship to your learnings and CDF, and, and, and this opportunity.
Unknown Speaker 1:05
With DCG so
Unknown Speaker 1:08
now I think we should work
Unknown Speaker 1:12
on, not an outcome and
Unknown Speaker 1:16
ask ourselves like.
Unknown Speaker 1:20
And I think, instead of me being in the coach role I think you should be in the coach role, and I think
Unknown Speaker 1:28
we can use kind of mine dilemma or my problem.
Unknown Speaker 1:31
Yeah, how to put yeah how exactly as input so how go shouldn't be like, how am I going to build the business processes and known an outcome to enable you to get work through. Yeah, what I understood your process to have been in the previous lab.
Unknown Speaker 1:49
Yeah, well, okay. So the first question is what, what did.
Unknown Speaker 1:57
Yeah, which processes, did you see as either most broken or most improvable inside of stimulus they believe now an outcome could improve and then we can, we can kind of take that as the input to then see if we can. Yeah,
Unknown Speaker 2:14
you know unpack repack reformat, right.
Unknown Speaker 2:18
Let me just think about that.
Unknown Speaker 2:24
You know, it strikes me that the conflict between your storyteller, and your Business Solutions Architect isn't isn't like there's a lot more juice left in that opposition. Because of what we learned, like
Unknown Speaker 2:52
you're, you're not yet translating
Unknown Speaker 2:56
the experiences that you've had as a creative storyteller, in a variety of contexts that enable you to play that role over to your business architect self. Your Business Solutions Architect self. So, and you also undervalue the negative capital that you have as a business solutions architect. As a result of the capital capital that you've been able to produce successfully through repeatable business processes with your as a, as a storyteller. So like, for example, you don't see your negative capital as being something that actually can upwardly mobilize a multidisciplinary team that you're co leading with your client who really needs because of her own personality challenges and own developmental profiles needs your negative capital, the confidence that you have to convert your negative capital through the relationship because she needs to learn how to do that inside of her business. Mm hmm.
Unknown Speaker 4:19
So,
Unknown Speaker 4:21
now, like, so that's like one. That's like one take. And then, like, what we haven't talked about is the ways that I can be directly valuable because of my experience.
Unknown Speaker 4:39
I can be directly valuable.
Unknown Speaker 4:41
Not in addition to introducing you to the client advising, both the client and you. You know, technically, I can help build you a really badass.
Unknown Speaker 4:58
Hiring funnel. And
Unknown Speaker 5:05
like that's I can, I can do that.
Unknown Speaker 5:14
So that's another, That's another take third take, um,
Unknown Speaker 5:35
I want to
Unknown Speaker 5:38
figure out how to transfer the lab studio salon means of production into stimulus so that becomes stimuluses means of production as well, which may need to be adapted in ways that are unforeseen between us in the roles that we inhabit with one another through these practice sessions, without the client role and without the disciplinary experts. So that would be another take that I would want to solve for
Unknown Speaker 6:19
how.
Unknown Speaker 6:22
So it seems like maybe he went beyond my question, and started to answer the second, but I wanted to be sure that there weren't other processes inside of stimulus that you'd seen as focuses of noun and outcomes and your attention you mentioned stimulus and Chad not understanding the true value of the negative capital that's inside of the business and inside of of
Unknown Speaker 6:49
chat it's easier for me to speak about Sure.
Unknown Speaker 6:55
And also how
Unknown Speaker 6:58
there's unrealized potential in bringing the experience and knowledge and expertise and processes, from the story telling and narrative world into, into the consulting arena. And then you started making suggestions on how you might
Unknown Speaker 7:22
projects you might take up
Unknown Speaker 7:26
in pursuit of that I just wanted to be sure that there weren't other processes that you had
Unknown Speaker 7:31
other understood,
Unknown Speaker 7:32
or other other other areas for for improvement or help.
Unknown Speaker 7:42
Yeah, I mean,
Unknown Speaker 7:48
I think I can help you.
Unknown Speaker 7:53
I can help you. I guess I was just bucketing this in the advisement bucket but like how there is a method that I'm using to advise. I was thinking about like your, your website, and just, you know, how are you going to retell the stimulus story on your website, and I get this unique position to like listen to you. Be the storyteller of yourself. Mm hmm. And, you know, I think I can uniquely help you tell the story to yourself that you're going to retell, on, on the website.
Unknown Speaker 8:34
Yeah, I'm trying to be solution agnostic here so what I'm reading underneath that is that there is a. There's a cognitive dissonance in the story that stimulus is telling itself. And you feel like in being a listener to that story you can better bring out whatever this new version is right. So meaning I was unable to like tell you a new story of like
Unknown Speaker 9:06
you told me a new story.
Unknown Speaker 9:09
But not like clearly and concisely and it was kind of.
Unknown Speaker 9:13
Yeah, I use it still but sure. Okay. So you're trying to understand the business processes that are repeatable inside of noun and outcome and the way that I'm to help me externalize what I'm doing to aid you and DCG.
Unknown Speaker 9:36
Yeah, I mean, very specifically in this moment I'm, I'm trying to understand, or see the problems that you're seeing.
Unknown Speaker 9:44
Okay. Okay. Um.
Unknown Speaker 9:48
All right, so the problems that I'm seeing and so we're sort of in problem, seeking mode. And,
Unknown Speaker 10:02
yeah, like, you're not
Unknown Speaker 10:04
the problem too I'm going to talk in the third person to Chad. Chad doesn't Chad doesn't yet know how to allow a dual process to go on like a left foot, right foot while he's jogging between storyteller and Business Solutions Architect like he's tripping over himself in that process. And, like,
Unknown Speaker 10:29
I, I can.
Unknown Speaker 0:02
The beauty in the name stimulus. I love how
Unknown Speaker 0:06
flexible it is. Yeah, I'm so glad that you do gifted it to me.
Unknown Speaker 0:11
Not that it was his to give to me, but
Unknown Speaker 0:17
he interpreted like it was Yeah, he was like, Oh, I'm I'm giving you I'm getting this. Yeah. But anyways, that's neither here nor there as always thinking about this new configuration, or, you know, new New Revised service offering for,
Unknown Speaker 0:35
for for Casey or even just
Unknown Speaker 0:38
individuals, leaders, team leaders like, Casey
Unknown Speaker 0:46
that's like yeah, stimulus is a beautiful, it's probably no more befitting now than it was.
Nathan Snyder 0:51
Yeah. Before, right. Yeah, I, I agree. I was like, never really. It took me a while to mature.
Unknown Speaker 1:01
Yeah, it was like,
Unknown Speaker 1:03
it's like five years. Yeah.
Unknown Speaker 1:06
Five years.
Unknown Speaker 1:09
A little bit. Alcohol burn off of it.
Unknown Speaker 1:14
was the other thing that gets the longest business entity that I've continuously operated? Yeah.
Unknown Speaker 1:22
I was trying to count the number of LLC for corporations I've
Unknown Speaker 1:25
started in my life and
Unknown Speaker 1:27
it's like, it's like 1010.
Unknown Speaker 1:31
First, what was Lonestar tech
Unknown Speaker 1:33
solutions where I'd like to help
Nathan Snyder 1:35
people with computers strong name.
Unknown Speaker 1:39
The next was Lamborn productions, which was my
Unknown Speaker 1:41
production company.
Unknown Speaker 1:44
And then I had cinematic rebellion. omnistar tackle company, I was that good name? Which is company with time father in law.
Unknown Speaker 1:55
Yeah, corduroy
Unknown Speaker 1:57
was another ever that one.
Unknown Speaker 2:00
And then stimulus group, which was with Nico, and then stimulus media, which is
Unknown Speaker 2:07
and the accompanying
Unknown Speaker 2:09
image that there's a couple others in there that I'm leaving out.
Nathan Snyder 2:14
So you were thinking about the offering with to DCG? In terms of how,
Unknown Speaker 2:30
as an evolutionary step of stimulus, Mm hmm.
Nathan Snyder 2:35
And how is it grown out? grown grown out of? What stimulus has been historically?
Unknown Speaker 2:46
Yeah, I think.
Unknown Speaker 2:49
Yeah, so in this lab, we're taking up stimulus.
Unknown Speaker 2:53
And this question that Nate's asking,
Unknown Speaker 2:57
I think one big realization that I'd had in the course of operations is while I have been interested in storytelling, and filmmaking, I think what's most interesting to me is just solving business challenges. And I had been limiting myself to doing that, you know, film production way, into better, better understanding and uncovering business challenges has been, you know, the more interesting and engaging part of the work that I had done.
Unknown Speaker 3:35
And then once I shared the
Unknown Speaker 3:39
limitation of conceiving of stimulus as a, as a, you know, production studio, then it opened up a whole world of, you know, consulting opportunities. But it opened up my lack of experience and expertise, and practice in that area. And I think that's a big reason why I kind of retreated into,
Unknown Speaker 4:08
you know, research mode.
Unknown Speaker 4:12
But like, a failure of my previous journey through CDF on the cognitive dimension with the first cohort that I had done with you. It was like I didn't have I was still operating a film production company, I didn't have like a professional way to exercise what I was learning in that even even though I like really wanted to build up those capabilities. I wasn't turning it outward, and now it's kind of the business has caught up to that in a way or the business is a blank I've made it a blank slate now so that it can it it can do whatever it wants to do. stimulus has always been like a very loose construct. I think my my, my, my like walk through the professional world is Always been, like, loose and like loose at the edges. You know, there's like a lot of undefined space that I've left open for myself because of like my curiosity, because I know it'll take me there. Or, or I let it take me there. Because I could critique could be like, Well why don't you just do this thing like that you know that you're good at that you have a repeatable business process that like, throws off cash and I can make money. But then like the squirrel part
Unknown Speaker 5:35
of me the squirrel, I call it the squirrel.
Unknown Speaker 5:39
Like, you know, takes what's the other one named? The Well, there's the well when the squirrel
Nathan Snyder 5:49
the well like the deep well,
Unknown Speaker 5:51
yeah. And the squirrel.
Unknown Speaker 5:58
So I was just noticing like hot, like the name stimulus actually is,
Unknown Speaker 6:04
has become much more meaningful over time.
Nathan Snyder 6:09
Because I feel like what I really love to do is like,
Unknown Speaker 6:12
you know, do a little experiment, see what happens. It's kind of like that stimulus response. But it's also like an enabling and empowering
Unknown Speaker 6:21
you know, injection of something.
Unknown Speaker 6:36
But again, I think what I risk is like,
Unknown Speaker 6:40
some continuity and stability in that
Unknown Speaker 6:44
which I'm, I'm fine navigating,
Unknown Speaker 6:47
I think others around me or I have
Nathan Snyder 6:49
a harder time
Unknown Speaker 6:52
getting professional contacts or
Unknown Speaker 6:53
making films last year, or,
Unknown Speaker 6:56
you know, isn't this really what you specialize in? And it's like, well, that was that was so end of 2018. And now it's 2020. And I'm doing something different.
Unknown Speaker 7:08
Like, even with someone like Chris from adidas,
Unknown Speaker 7:14
been like loosely staying in touch with her.
Unknown Speaker 7:18
And have had a couple of email exchanges.
Unknown Speaker 7:22
I had done a like a digital talk for them months ago, like in May, maybe she finally got before she didn't her words, finally got around to sending a thank you. And it was a gift card. So and I was thanking her and just kind of updating her like, what's going on and talking about the research.
Unknown Speaker 7:43
The adult development stuff, like
Unknown Speaker 7:46
I've really been dipping in and she's like, Oh, I can tell by her responses. Like, that sounds really
Unknown Speaker 7:51
cool. But it's
Unknown Speaker 7:53
kind of like, there's like a confusion in her response and that she's like, when I first met Chad, he was making films and marketing content for August. And then he's doing like, you know, responsive, and then now he's like, even doing something different. So I'm just gonna keep critiquing my, my myself in the way in which the stimulus hasn't had that continuity or,
Unknown Speaker 8:24
you know, structure and form.
Nathan Snyder 8:29
What are you saying two things then? On the one hand, from a story perspective, it doesn't have continuity, but from a practice perspective, it does. Meaning, like, the, the way to interpret the name stimulus as either as an experiment of a stimulus and a response, or as this enabling or injection process. And so, on the one hand, you're if you if you only evaluate the business from a story perspective. Yeah, it looks like you're, you know, lacking continuity. Yeah. But if you're looking at it from a solving business challenge, point of view, your methodology reveals, like, the limitations of the storyteller approach
Unknown Speaker 9:33
and, and best practice and then
Nathan Snyder 9:35
best experts. Yeah. And, and, yeah, best press practice. Yeah, that's interesting. That's a different direction than I was going in. But from the other side, from the business challenge perspective, what I'm hearing you say that it reveals is that the idea of a consistent storytelling The narrative is actually faulty both for you personally, but then also, in terms of the business, serving your, how you've evolved.
Unknown Speaker 10:14
What's crystallized for me actually,
Unknown Speaker 10:18
just now is that
Unknown Speaker 10:21
all of my businesses, all of my business practices, and my decision to not to work in, in a traditional employment arrangement or job is to selfishly serve my desire for lifelong learning. And, and in skill development, and kind of working up that ladder of business problems. Mm hmm. So that, that the actual purpose of these businesses has not been to be like a revenue generating enterprise deemed to be a business, it's actually been to serve my needs to, to do so many wide and varied things, and to get these opportunities that I wouldn't have had before. Like, why? Why I tied myself to quality science for a year because I wanted to work with this best practice expert, learn everything I could to be able to do that on my own or improve upon that methodology on my own, you know, while traveling the world. Like it get, like, the kind of money or financial performance is like been an afterthought. Yeah. Which is, I think, why it's been like, that's a big tension for me is like, I see, well, if I were talking about this yesterday, it's like, pursuing the financial performance, or, or other needs, but the biggest tension, I think, in my businesses has been financial performance, and or certainly my own
Nathan Snyder 12:00
development,
Unknown Speaker 12:01
development. Yeah. And learning
Nathan Snyder 12:04
rates, right.
Unknown Speaker 12:06
So like, I mean, this is why this your frame of noun and outcome and how it creates these like self administered PhDs or, you know, brings people together that are interested in doing and pursuing that, and then allowing them an environment in which they can exercise that is so interesting to someone like him perfectly suited to someone like myself. But then again, like I think, what's at risk, there is like actual actual sustainability through, you know, a business model that, that supports that system. Just because of my own history. I have forgone earning, you know, for freedom to pursue and learn, and do the things that I want to do.
Nathan Snyder 12:53
Yeah, it's interesting. I was reflecting last night on there felt to be a deadening of the conversation yesterday, for an avoidance of part of the conversation around, like, the practical things that stimulus can do to
Unknown Speaker 13:17
enable
Nathan Snyder 13:20
this client opportunity that not an outcome is providing to you.
Unknown Speaker 13:29
You mean, I was shying away from it?
Nathan Snyder 13:30
Yeah, I felt that. But maybe I just misread you.
Unknown Speaker 13:35
I was trying to be really skeptical. Yeah.
Unknown Speaker 13:39
And maybe overcompensating just for our personal relationship and like, our personal desires to work together. Sure, like for the betterment of Yeah, ourselves. And one of our partners.
Nathan Snyder 13:51
Yep. Yep.
Unknown Speaker 13:53
Yeah, I was definitely playing the like role of skeptic. I'm trying to be more skeptical of.
Nathan Snyder 14:01
Yeah, it's interesting that so when I'm so when I'm trying to
Unknown Speaker 14:10
help
Nathan Snyder 14:12
you balance the well on the squirrel. When I bite, and I'm doing that through this opportunity with DCG it seems like it's to two negatives. Mm hmm. You know, it seems like it's, we're trying to bring my help towards the well to you, and you're trying to be overly skeptical of the way that I'm doing that to protect our relationship and my relationship with Casey and, and so it seems like that's good that's getting pushed out or something
Unknown Speaker 15:00
Yeah, and maybe maybe I am pushing too hard against that, like, well, this sounds too good to be true. Like, there's a real opportunity. And it's like a win win win all around. And you described it very beautifully. yesterday.
Nathan Snyder 15:13
I was pitching?
Unknown Speaker 15:20
Well, so yeah,
Nathan Snyder 15:21
yeah. We don't have to dwell on that too much. If it's not DCG, that's fine. But let me go try to find another client. I mean, also the practice of trying to realize the opportunity with Casey and DCG. enables stimulus in not an outcome, a pretty safe zone to play in. Yeah, even if it doesn't turn revenues over. So I guess. Like, if so maybe. Yeah, DCG opportunity is low probability. But does taking on the low probability opportunity at DCG increased the probability of being able to repeat that process? and land a client in the near future?
Unknown Speaker 16:19
Yeah. And let me be clear, I want to do it. But I think
Unknown Speaker 16:26
maybe I was feeling a bit vulnerable. And like, there's a bit of a soft spot. And I think it's coincided with me like coming back to the city. And like, aside from the work that I've done in the CDF court, like, I don't have a lot to show for the last three months while I've been on the road. And so yeah, maybe it's just like, you know, my batting average in the last few months has been like,
Unknown Speaker 16:52
zero.
Unknown Speaker 16:55
And
Unknown Speaker 16:57
so like, maybe my self confidence is just
Nathan Snyder 16:59
a little bit low. But I just think you have a lot of negative capital in the bank right now.
Unknown Speaker 17:04
Yes.
Nathan Snyder 17:05
Yes, absolutely. You're just you're just avoiding work to generate
Unknown Speaker 17:11
negative capital. Yeah, yeah.
Unknown Speaker 17:16
And I don't think that I yet understand fully how I can react like, I don't know what the.
Unknown Speaker 17:24
So I think this is where my skepticism comes in.
Unknown Speaker 17:26
It's just, I haven't been exposed to or gone through processes by which I can convert that negative capital into something else.
Unknown Speaker 17:38
For the last 15 years. Like,
Unknown Speaker 17:44
you were talking about this last night, as we were reflecting on yesterday's work sessions, like, clearly, I'm unaware of the negative capital that I have inside of me. It's just it's not. It's not been.
Unknown Speaker 17:59
It's not been.
Unknown Speaker 18:02
I haven't understood. Yeah.
Unknown Speaker 18:08
Going back to the well, like, I don't know, who I know, there's a well, but I don't fully know, like the the wealth of the resources that's available to me there. I know that when I go there that, that it's kind of overflowing with negative capital. But yeah, I think why looking for guidance and help from someone like yourself, and from kind of a, an organizational structure like not an outcome is to is to, to convert that negative capital and like, I want to play the game where ice, I've had my stockpile of negative capital, I want to convert it into other things, I want to convert it into social clout, I would love to become a thought leader at the intersection of these areas that you were talking about, where I'm uniquely situated, I would like to turn it into into finance into capital capital. Mm hmm. I've just not been good at that. I'm really good at generating negative capital, but bad and converting it into other things. Mm hmm.
Nathan Snyder 19:09
Or you've just tried to you've just maximized your stockpile, so that you can play mm, you know, uniquely. So the story is not finished yet. You know, like, maybe up to this point. Yes. You haven't been good at it. But maybe you'll look back in the mirror and say, Oh, well, actually, I was really good at that. And that was actually super strategic. Mm hmm. That I banked so much negative capital in those days.
Unknown Speaker 19:41
I yeah. I don't ever think that it's a bad decision. I think it's just it's frustrating for me to be stuck with
Unknown Speaker 19:46
so much negative capital. Mm hmm.
Nathan Snyder 19:49
Yeah, I think the one of the patterns that I've noticed with you You know, when talking about CDF with Nicole, is that you're stuck in the question. So how is that you're stuck answering the question. So how is that going to make you money? Mm hmm. And that's a really difficult question to answer at this point in time, partly because CDF and development is something that works across time. So it changes, it changes the entire continuity of time, from the beginning of your life to what you can foreshadow is the end of your life. It changes the way that you think about your historical narrative overall. And so because it changes that historical narrative, it has unforeseen consequences on how you're looking at the direct influence of being able to quantify the value of CDF monetarily.
Unknown Speaker 21:00
Yeah, well, yeah, I mean, and the funny thing is, is like, it's not a it's not something that I'm actually struggling with, or that is in conflict. I'm just, I'm just, I am unilaterally making the decision.
Nathan Snyder 21:15
Yeah, but that's a conflict, that you unilaterally make the decisions.
Unknown Speaker 21:19
Yeah. Right. But then, but then avoid it. Yeah. Right. I mean, the the conflicts created this just, I'm, I'm avoiding it by by making the unilateral decisions.
Nathan Snyder 21:32
Right. And it's a it's a, an effective tactic to get to make your own decisions. Yeah. But you, you miss out on the intimacy that you can create with Nicole, my bringing her into that process, and then she misses out on the learning that you can share with her based upon your experience.
Unknown Speaker 21:55
Right. That's why I'm like pushing up against like, I'm not crossing the threshold over and towards five. It's just like, I'm, I'm because I'm not making the efforts for those inner developmental relationships. Because I'm a conflict avoider,
Unknown Speaker 22:08
right. Like, right now? Well, not because of it I.
Unknown Speaker 22:13
It's because of my developmental stage that I'm avoiding, like, that's where my edge is. And therefore, that's why I'm avoiding the conflict, because that's where my potential growth is. That's hard.
Nathan Snyder 22:25
Because it would mean that who you know yourself to be is not who you're becoming Right. Yeah.
Unknown Speaker 22:34
No, I make my own decisions. I do whatever the fuck I want to do. Doesn't matter. Like, what what you make available to me and I make available to you or others? It's just No, I just do it.
Nathan Snyder 22:47
Yeah. Yeah. For me. Yeah. But you have to, like the pain of that has to get severe enough where or you have to get frustrated enough. With yourself?
Unknown Speaker 23:03
Yeah, it's happening. Yeah, it's happening
Nathan Snyder 23:06
to to push, push forward. You know, and pushing forward may not mean pushing forward. It may mean bringing up the caboose.
So we're working.
Unknown Speaker 23:27
Now on
Nathan Snyder 23:29
your we're in your self house primarily. And we are sort of cycling, cycling through yourself house like we're trying to get to an evolving set sense of your professional identity and your personal culture based upon your knowledge of your developmental profile and personality profile.
Unknown Speaker 23:55
So seems like we did a pretty good loop there.
Nathan Snyder 23:57
Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. So I'm just I guess I'm wondering how the loop that we just were in, influences the way that you think about your task house. Mm hmm.
Unknown Speaker 24:13
Yeah, I would love to have stimulus mutually support my own. Everything we've discussed from the from the personal from the south house, while making meaningful contributions to different communities or groups, one being like this. You know, the noun and outcome community and this kind of community of CDF practice, no, those are separate, but those are two communities that I want to be. I want stimulus to help support and contribute to and then like, be more explicit about how stimulus is contributing to my my family as a community. As well, whether that's Nicole and I, or like, my dad has reached out on several occasions for help from me, and I have rebuffed him because I haven't been sure exactly how you know how to best be of help in that, in that relationship, again, like managing and difficult
Unknown Speaker 25:20
interpersonal relationships, right? Because it's my dad, right? Yeah.
Unknown Speaker 25:26
Yeah, so So I see, I'm beginning to see stimulus. While I reduced it to like a selfish instrument for myself, I, I know that it's a part of kind of a larger system of these different communities. And those are the three communities that I would like to contribute most to. And so
Unknown Speaker 25:49
I think
Unknown Speaker 25:50
the process that I need to be comfortable with is like the or the oscillation that I need to be comfortable with is like between this kind of research and this work?
Unknown Speaker 26:01
Well, maybe maybe it's like three, there's like,
Unknown Speaker 26:05
well, there's there's research, and there's work or projects, and there's play or games and tend to interrelatedness between all those maybe in certain games is kind of wrong at this point. For the generation of negative capital and the generation of capital, capital.
Nathan Snyder 26:27
Can you help me understand what you mean by the challenge? I don't know if you use that word.
Unknown Speaker 26:34
Yeah, I guess, coming back to what I was speaking about before, like, I'm really great at generating negative capital. And now I think stimulus needs to be
Unknown Speaker 26:41
better at generating capital capital.
Nathan Snyder 26:45
So what's the what's the mechanism that you want to develop to translate negative capital into capital capital?
Unknown Speaker 26:59
Well, I mean, I have this opportunity that's been given
Unknown Speaker 27:00
to me, like, why not take it and run with it?
Nathan Snyder 27:08
I think for the reasons that you set, it's too close to home. It's you didn't generate the lead?
Unknown Speaker 27:22
I didn't say that. I actually don't have a problem with that. And I think that's one of like, your huge value adds to your entire network, not just for me, but for many people. I know, that's what you do and have done for like, as long as I've known you, for 10 years. Yeah. Yeah. So like, why not? receive the gift? And like, you know, make something of it?
Unknown Speaker 27:54
Yeah.
Unknown Speaker 27:57
I don't see I, I guess it actually, it's maybe even more practical. It's like,
Unknown Speaker 28:04
I know that stimulus can be
Unknown Speaker 28:07
a meaningful contributor to the noun and outcome community through doing this work, or developing this, this work and service offering for DCG. I think what's unclear to me or what seems risky is like the actual, like level one doing of, of the work.
Unknown Speaker 28:31
That's that seems most uncertain. Like
Nathan Snyder 28:37
you Yeah, I mean, you're that's what's the I
Unknown Speaker 28:39
think that's what's most unclear.
Nathan Snyder 28:41
I mean, you're managing me, essentially, to help you determine the level one work.
Unknown Speaker 28:49
And I think that's where
Unknown Speaker 28:52
that is where the that's where I think my lack of self confidence in specifically recruiting and managing that top talent. Like that's, I think, the biggest disconnect. But I think all that's revealing is just like, why not rely on support? Or why not use the support that you're offering to help
Unknown Speaker 29:16
do that.
Nathan Snyder 29:18
So it's is the fear around being able to manage people who do things that you don't know how to do who are better than you in ways?
Unknown Speaker 29:32
I think it's because I've been so great at being a generalist and being able to do everything that it's that kind of for relinquishing of control, that maybe feels most uncomfortable. And like do can do to kind of make the the personal nature of the relationship of like, Casey deserves the best. in DC in DCG, the client like you know, deserves the best. And I've always conceived of myself as the best when that's clearly not always The case that that's like the the self deception?
Nathan Snyder 30:05
Well, you know, one of the things that I know really well about Casey is that she has a tendency to take on, she bites off more than she can chew. And as a result, as a result, she also does that, in terms of her quality, standard, and then detail like she over delivers. Yeah, so what leads her to bite off more than her, she can choose that she over delivers in the things that she says that she can do. And that ends up overwhelming her because she can't. She can't write
Unknown Speaker 30:51
her responsibilities overwhelm her.
Nathan Snyder 30:53
Yeah, she can't do less than 100%. Now, or Casey feels like she's failing, she gives everything 110%. And that type of perfectionism has been very successful for her, but needs a complimentary force, where she relinquishes control, where she empowers others, to collaborate with her, where she helps to develop others, weaknesses in ways so that the work can can get more evenly distributed across the team. So what I'm saying is that where you might guess is that where you feel uncomfortable managing this excellent team, will be a leading indicator for Casey on how she needs to learn to become comfortable in the messiness of working with really excellent people and creating a management environment for them that really helps unlock their full range of capacities. So that's the value add that I think, you know, as that's a major value add, that you bring to the team is your confidence to be in that uncertainty with Casey?
Unknown Speaker 32:25
Yeah, and I think it does really come down to kind of just like,
Unknown Speaker 32:31
I, I think I am very confident in being able to put together a good team and creating a positive generative, hopefully up really divided team dynamic.
Unknown Speaker 32:44
I think it is, it's just like the work outputs
Unknown Speaker 32:47
that I think is is most
Unknown Speaker 32:48
unknown and uncertain
Unknown Speaker 32:49
for me, which just makes me
Unknown Speaker 32:52
uncomfortable, and just kind of I think the nature of the DCG business, like it's, I mean, it's, it's, it's precise, it's complex. It's,
Unknown Speaker 33:06
there's like, real stakes.
Unknown Speaker 33:08
Yeah. You know, yeah. In this business. Yeah.
Unknown Speaker 33:14
Yeah.
Unknown Speaker 33:16
But that I mean, yeah, I mean, as I'm thinking about it, like, that's very easy to, well,
Unknown Speaker 33:21
not very easy, but
Unknown Speaker 33:26
it'll become very clear very soon, like, like how well it's gone or not, and we can just change course, I mean, the
Nathan Snyder 33:34
Yeah. And also, you have to remember what you've done in the past. You've managed multidisciplinary creative teams for for a variety of clients in a variety of contexts. Yeah.
Unknown Speaker 33:45
filmmaking is like the most collaborative. Yeah, endeavor, which is, which is why I, which is why I think it was such a natural pivot for me, you know, from kind of this producer role into like a facilitator and like, you know, excellent citizen team member. Yep. Is I directly took everything that I learned and experience in that world over into
Unknown Speaker 34:12
into that arena. Mm hmm.
Nathan Snyder 34:18
So
Unknown Speaker 34:23
I don't know what if anything useful has been generated, and
Nathan Snyder 34:28
I just think we're working seemed like that's what needed to happen. That's working in the self house. Yeah. How are we doing on time? I think we should. Yeah, is it 30 minutes yet? Yeah. I think we should, we should stop it. Then.
Nathan Snyder 0:00
service to. So I want to I want to start a new lab. I want to provide a service to stimulus. Can I can I do that?
Chad Owen 0:14
It sounds like you're pitching.
Nathan Snyder 0:18
Right? Right. Yeah, I want I want stimulus to higher higher noun and outcome for its intellectual property. Its education and for its its network. So I want you to take this moment. Sure.
Chad Owen 0:39
Yeah. I mean, they're also asking for your coaching as well. Sure. And and implicit, that's implicit. Yeah,
Nathan Snyder 0:45
that's part of the educational model. So like, here's the opportunity that I want to tee up for, for stimulus. And, like, here's how I want to realize one of the value propositions that now now come is making to its agency partners. So because, because now that outcome is so focused on serving agency partners, instead of clients directly, I, I can become this, or noun and outcome and me on behalf of none and outcome can become a bit of a middleman, between clients and consultancies. And in this case, that's the role that noun and outcome is playing here. And then I'm, I'm willing to, and I'm interested in introducing this potential client opportunity to stimulus and you because of our, because you've been trained in similar methodologies, or, or the methodologies of noun and outcome alongside of me for months. And so I feel confident that you're going to be able to deliver the service that I think the client that I have in mind needs. And in turn, I just hope that you see the value in my coaching the education, that educational opportunities that are not an outcome can produce for you. And the reason why you would want to continue to participate in building and now now comes intellectual property so that you can get licensed in the future as a non an outcome. agency partner. So
Chad Owen 2:35
yeah, you don't have to convince me in any of that. I mean, I I'm very curious about the kind of brass tacks brass tech machinations, but I know that's still in progress. So like, you know, I just know that that's, that's there, you know? Sure. will be a for for purpose, enterprise. And there. There's, yeah, yeah. me Yeah, I see it as mutual exchange.
Nathan Snyder 3:04
Mm hmm. Great. I mean, yeah, I mean, I am, I am working to formalize that, but I just, I just want to articulate like, what the what the value is, what the value proposition is, what the unique value proposition is.
Unknown Speaker 3:20
And,
Nathan Snyder 3:21
you know, state that formalize it as best I can, right now, because of how, you know, mutual. This, this really is. So, let me let me get into the details of the client opportunity now. So I want to introduce you to Casey at DCG. And Casey has from the little that I know, has asked me to help her. Think about building a backstage team to support her operational work across the wholly owned subsidiaries that make up the DCG family of companies.
Chad Owen 4:29
A team that she's been given resources and authority to create herself or this is more of an implicit her implicit understanding of her wish as she sees it.
Nathan Snyder 4:45
I mean, it's, um, it is it is part of how her role explicitly is reforming to accommodate the new business. Businesses that DCG is either started or has acquired in the last 12 months.
Chad Owen 5:08
And she demarcated, like, like by becoming the CXO.
Nathan Snyder 5:14
She's she, she wants to, that's a part of her professional agenda. She, at some point, wants to become the CXO part of her, adding her implicitly adding new operational projects to her plate that are going to be supported by an outside consulting team, she is able to gain more implicit accountability over work areas that then in the near future, can be reshaped into her role into her next role for her next.
Unknown Speaker 6:07
You know, her next
Chad Owen 6:12
we're calling essentially doing the job before she gets it.
Nathan Snyder 6:17
Yes, exactly transition to it, because in ways that that role doesn't exist. So
Unknown Speaker 6:22
they need the way those companies operate often.
Nathan Snyder 6:26
Yeah. So, um, right. So that's, that's the course, that that that Casey hopes to go on, in order to, you know, make this make this career move in getting promoted to the, to the level of CXO from the VP of platform development. So her role today is focused on platform, which does encompass there, they're CCGs wholly owned subsidiaries, but has been historically predominantly focused on the you know, that the the debt equity exchange that they have made with over 100, hundred and 50, I think, external, independent startup businesses in the blockchain and crypto space. So she's been historically responsible for overseeing the variety of stakeholder relationships that are necessary both internally inside of DC G's own management environment and also externally in terms of like, banking partners, and strategic business partnerships, that that exists outside of the DCG ecosystem, but the cheese connected to so that the platform itself generates a reason for why the startups externally want to take cash from DCG in exchange for equity in their businesses, because they not only bring this cash, but but through the platform, and Casey's work, she's able to create a super ordinate value for that equity debt, cash exchange in their portfolio,
Unknown Speaker 8:37
so synergistic.
Nathan Snyder 8:40
Yeah. And so as, as that has succeeded in the in the overall space, the blockchain, crypto space has matured slightly, DC G's strategy is has changed directions, there's been less of a focused on kind of seeding investments into the space externally into startups. And I'm a move towards growing startups inside of the portfolio or acquiring them to become wholly owned subsidiaries. So DCG is making a move to consolidate the overall space within its own holding company strategy
Unknown Speaker 9:26
structure.
Nathan Snyder 9:30
And so Casey's role is not
Chad Owen 9:32
going away. They helped create the market and now they want to go and pick the best specimens and incorporate them.
Nathan Snyder 9:38
Yeah, that's exactly right. Yeah. So so that's working extraordinarily well for them. And they've recently acquired this. This company named luno, who is a major exchange in the international markets
Unknown Speaker 9:56
who
Nathan Snyder 10:00
Yeah, it's so. So DCG is sort of asking how to, and that's a 400 person organization. So they've never bought an organization that was that size before, and also have this much strategic importance in the sense that buying an exchange puts them puts DCG in a direct competition with many of the investments that they have made into startups historically, because a lot of those investments have gone into exchanges, or technologies that support exchanges, which hope to be acquired by them in the future. So DCG from a strategic and competitive standpoint, is repositioned itself as a result of this luno acquisition in ways that it is not even clear yet how it has repositioned itself strategically, in terms of the response that the market will will make. So the result of that for Casey is a new opportunity for her to move many of her platform tactics that she's created with community and and, and business development, externally to do so internally, now between the variety of wholly owned subsidiaries that can pose the DCG family of companies. So her platform has moved from x being primarily externally focused to primarily internally focused. And that means a whole new set of explicit and implicit roles that she's going to be playing to, to operate in this, this qualitatively new business of DCG, after the luno acquisition.
So the KC needs help to make this reversal from being externally oriented with her VP, a platform role to being internally oriented. And she, um, she's not able to hire a team, internally to support her. Like she was able to hire a team to support her externally. So she was able to hire someone to work under her in her VP of platform, platform role Her name's Sam, she's not going to be able to do the same thing internally to support her this time around or not, not yet, at least. So the idea is to build KC, a multi disciplinary consulting team to maximize her time spent to develop this internal platform like she did, externally, with through their venture arm now with their wholly owned subsidiaries. Mm hmm. So the, the idea would be that stimulus would become that the stimulus team would become that consulting partner that allows Casey to extend her accountabilities and responsibilities that are occurring as a result of her reformulating her role, which eventually then helps her get promoted into the CFO role. So that she would be overseeing both the internal and external platform as it were.
Chad Owen 14:18
What what I mean, I know, I'm not talking to Casey directly. So these are just assumptions or inferences on your part. But like, what do you what do you think are the main components or kind of resources that would need to be on that stimulus team in order to support Casey?
Nathan Snyder 14:41
Yes, so I think it's a someone who has like, a very like a visual orientation and can do like front end You know, WordPress, equivalent design, UX design, UI UX design, so someone who can is sort of versatile across the domain of digital visual representations that include like, information architectures, in decks in, in writing, but also can extend to doing website development. And yeah, and, and designing graphics, or managing managing people who have, you know, expertise, more more discrete expertise, but you know, has enough domain knowledge to to bridge both of those, those worlds of visual communication and user experience design.
Unknown Speaker 16:02
Yes, that's what's a very visual visual designer.
Nathan Snyder 16:06
Yeah, so that's one, that's one role. Another role is someone who is a, like, you know, has, you know, five or seven years of experience in project management that both has happened in sort of like a waterfall environment, so that they can do the kind of Gantt charts but also is seasoned in terms of like the nuvo product project, Product Management and project man, sorry, I'm just a project management, I won't talk about project management. So they can do Gantt charts from from a, you know, project management standpoint. And they have done you know, they've, they've worked in, in probably like, in the, in the blockchain Bitcoin space as a project manager. So, they'll have enough experience with like, both conventional finance, project management and kind of product product development, so that they've managed both, they've managed projects, which are have a product, digital nature to them, as well as conventional finance projects. And they can do so they're versatile, both in the waterfall world, and they're versatile in the agile and Scrum world. Okay, the third, the third role is like a business analyst. This is someone who can take raw data, and they're probably like an associate business analysts. So they, you know, have had enough cycles inside of a finance based organization of going from raw data, and raw data and business strategy to composing, you know, decks of information and excel models to help with the financial dimension of forecasting and planning. So that they would be skilled, as, you know, they'll be they'll be skilled in the math and the finance and the accounting necessary to be able to translate that into, you know, narratives and business cases. Yeah.
Chad Owen 18:51
And the analysis. Yeah.
Nathan Snyder 18:53
And do that do the analysis. So that would be the third role. And then, and then I'm assuming sort of someone who can do the client, the client interfacing, you know, because of course, they those three roles, or people would not, they would not be facing, they're probably not account facing, and if they are there, it's in it's in a, an organized meeting by led by whoever the account manager is. So which I would imagine you, I would like you to be that account manager. Or that's what Casey's expecting that I've communicated. So, so those, those would be three like, contractors, I think that stimulus would ideally hold on retainer, and then that retainer would be covered by the retainer that stimulus was able to Create with DCG. And so Casey, Casey would ask for a budget, specifically a consulting budget for, you know that that stimulus retainer. And so you would on behalf of stimulus represent those people to KC, and then probably, at some point, the CEO and COO, and CFO to vet, you know, to that stimulus. But I think at first that would just, we'd have to do, you'd have to do a few cycles to just to, you know, get your feet wet.
Unknown Speaker 20:46
Sure, yeah.
Chad Owen 20:51
I think what I'm most curious about is
how you see, how do you see this as a developmental opportunity for noun an outcome to help stimulus meet this opportunity?
While I'm confident that I could say thanks for the connection, Nate, like, I'll follow up with Casey and get more details. And then whenever you know, you're cut out of the picture. For a number of reasons, I don't want to do that. But like the most being, like, I think it only has like a 20% likelihood of being successful. So I guess what I'm saying is, I see a lot of, if
Nathan Snyder 21:39
I'm cut out, if I'm cut out. Yeah.
Chad Owen 21:42
So So yeah. So what I'm saying is like, I want to co prosecute this opportunity with you in, in a way that's
like, I guess what I'm most interested in is an outcome from which a noun an outcome of which I'm a participant in, you know, will become a partial owner in just by the nature of the participation, like, I would like noun an outcome to have a process to better develop the agency's, regardless of whether stimulus like wins that opportunity with DCG. I see that as an outcome of never an outcome having successfully developed stimulus.
Nathan Snyder 22:34
Getting the DCG contract.
Chad Owen 22:36
Yeah. Ah, yes. So,
Nathan Snyder 22:39
so, yes. So that's great.
Chad Owen 22:42
Thank you not gonna be like my full attention. But like, I think a lot of I'm willing to pretend want to participate in in that part of the process, because I think it will lead to a better likelihood of the of the
Nathan Snyder 22:55
outcome. I mean, yeah. And I think the way that, you know, you you're doing that right now, by in some ways, you're stepping into a coach role with me. And I think that you, you, you coaching me on how to develop now now comes service to stimulus, not only develops that service for stimulus and other agency partners, but also gives you a
gives you a platform give gives you a set of experiences to stand on as you're developing stimulus, the business of stimulus going forward. So, I heard you in the coach role, asking me how not an outcome was going to develop stimulus in a way that was going to result in increasing the likelihood of the DCG de DCG contract closing So you said it was sort of like a 20% close the likelihood was by cutting me and now now come out, and just taking a referral, the likelihood of it closing was 20%. So we want to close that divide between 20 and 100%. Right. So we have an 80% you know, margin that we need to
Unknown Speaker 24:36
Yeah, or or even more
Chad Owen 24:38
20% was a generous
Nathan Snyder 24:40
Yeah. Okay. So, um, so how, how, what, how and what? How will noun an outcome develop a service offering to develop stimulus to increase the likelihood to close the DCG. Deal? Well, I think so and you're, you're prompting me as a coach to do that. That's right. I'm, I'm in the client, I'm in the client role. And so the ways that you're interacting with me as a coach, mirror the ways that you might act with Casey as a consultant,
Unknown Speaker 25:30
Mm hmm.
Nathan Snyder 25:32
So, and then the ways that I'm asking for your help, in developing noun an outcome service offering to serve as stimulus mirrors the ways that you're going to be asking the team that you can prize to deliver on the DCG work to help you develop stimulus. So I think those are the parallels. Um, those are the parallels that we're working with, from a from a sort of a business development standpoint. So.
And you were asking, you're asking specifically, like, how is this developmental in nature? I think as well, meaning how is the How is the ways that we're going to develop not an outcome to develop stimulus to develop DCG developmental and in nature? So it seems to be like the underlying relationship between stimulus and now now come is that we work on this developmental go ahead? Well,
Chad Owen 26:48
yeah, it's a hope. Right, we have to make it happen.
Nathan Snyder 26:56
I just so what, so what roles so now that, you know, you've coached me to delineate the the parallels relationally, between the these various kind of stakeholders, and in stimulus is business in and not an outcome? Where, where, where do you want to go? Quick, do you want to go next? Or where should I go next? If you want to, if you want me to be in the client role?
Unknown Speaker 27:32
Yeah, I mean, it sounds like,
Chad Owen 27:38
Well, given your current understanding of what stimulus isn't, does, this is a new team dynamic? And this is a new service offering.
Unknown Speaker 27:50
Okay, so.
Chad Owen 27:56
Yeah, so I guess the question is, how would you begin with a client agency, when they're faced with forming a new team and that team providing a relatively new service for their clients?
Or where might you have, you know, where might you point stimuluses attention at first?
Cuz we did like a little bit of enacting here, but I never actually interpreted your context of the potential engagement.
Unknown Speaker 29:12
That's true.
Nathan Snyder 29:13
Yeah. Do you want to do that?
Chad Owen 29:17
What No, No, I'm not. I'm stepping back into stimulus the client and asking you to coach me, what should I do?
Nathan Snyder 29:27
Okay, so you're switching from being? My coach, would you're asking a great question. And I was thinking about how I would.
I was asked you were asking me about how I would specifically help stimulus work with developing a new service to Service this client. And then you went to saying, Well, you know, you know, if I switch and I take your position, Nate, if you're thinking about that you're not thinking about, you know, being in the role of of client to me, or yeah client to me, like because I'm, you're in my coat, you're my coach right now I'm not your coach, I'm a client to you. So you're, you're sort of saying, Well, one of the things that I could imagine you're doing right now, Nate, as a coach to me is asking me to reinterpret the opportunity of DCG. Is that right? Mm hmm. Okay.
So how, how would you? How would you reinterpret the opportunity at DCG? In a way that develops? So in a way that you're asking me to turn around the question on you, you're asking because you asked me that question, essentially. And then you're saying, well, maybe it would serve me better to answer it myself. So you're, you began to coach yourself now through this enactment? Yeah. Okay. Great. Now I see what's going on. took me a long,
Chad Owen 31:22
it's Well, yeah, but it's kind of happenstance. This like fluidity of role? I am trying to be better at calling it out. But in my mind, I'm, I'm switching back and forth, kind of faster than like, what's showing appear on the screen?
Unknown Speaker 31:38
Right. Right.
Chad Owen 31:41
Yeah. But like, I don't know, I guess maybe I'm experiencing it or or describing it to myself is like, that's what inter developmental like dynamics, that's that, is it? Sure.
Nathan Snyder 31:54
Sure. And we can increase the discipline and diligence by which we hold roles, or we can turn it even down further, and not use roles at all, and just deal with, you know, the level of dialogue and as it's as it's occurring.
Chad Owen 32:15
To go back to the question that I asked you in by asking us really asking myself,
it seems to me like there's
Yeah, it sounds to me, like there's a role that exists inside of the DCG organization, but not, but it's not fully defined or clear or even like leadership's not fully aware of what that role is, and what those responsibilities are. And sounds like Casey has the best idea or picture of what that is. And if that role is going to come into existence, it's going to be by her own doing. And so therefore, you know, because it's because it's a an integral component, or an important component of her professional agenda. To realize herself in that kind of position.
Given the organizational dynamics and resources she has available, it's easier and more efficient for her to work with an external team to accomplish that, as opposed to an internal team. And I'm guessing that's just because of like, budget and the way that they hire and or work with consultants that just makes that easier. You know, increasing the headcount, even if it's like part time, you know, by threes, like probably a big deal for DCG, whereas hiring a consultancy is not as much of a big deal
Unknown Speaker 34:11
for them.
Chad Owen 34:17
What's unclear to me is kind of how Casey's doubling down on her unique ability and really focusing on her strengths by delegating this work to consultancy so that's maybe one place where I could start in conversations with her. To better understand how she sees herself applying herself more fully. In what she's freeing herself up to to do. I think the functions of the three roles you've described are pretty clear.
Having someone with a business analyst experience in financial modeling and, and financial analysis work with, with some with some strategy and recommendations thrown in someone with project management experience that's worked in the crypto or blockchain world that's comfortable working and in, in totally digital and somewhat esoteric product environments. And someone with strong UX, and in visual design experience that can, they can both do kind of, you know, information, presentation design, as well as, you know, coding up a website, or, or getting content onto a website.
Just based on those roles and descriptions, it sounds like what Casey really wants to focus on is leadership activities, strategy, and strategic decision making activities. And just like really doubling down on that network that she's created and built, of which he or she, she's like, the Maven or the hub of
Unknown Speaker 36:45
that's, that's what I got. Cool.
Nathan Snyder 36:55
So
Chad Owen 37:02
the other thing that's a little unclear to me that I would just like to explore is that what's what's the working relationship and dynamic? I know, you said that there's the account manage the account? Well, I left that out of that description. And yeah, I'm curious how both Casey and the end DCG more broadly, kind of conceives of, or works with and relates to the stimulus team. But that's, that's just something that I would inquire more about.
Nathan Snyder 37:43
I think, um, there's a relationship between what you said you you left out and and a slight, a slightly different angle that I saw a possibility for you to take on the opportunity with Casey to be that is you. You saw this team is helping Casey. Advance strategically. And in terms of her in terms of her leadership influence inside of DCG.
Unknown Speaker 38:30
I think.
Nathan Snyder 38:32
I think that's also true. I think that's true. The other side of that, I think, is what is required to fulfill on the to uniquely fulfill the CXO role. And I do think strategy, and leadership is is definitely a part of that picture. I'm just wondering, what else is a part of that picture? I think, and this is some research that I think, you know, you might want to do with Casey, and as part of your value add, and, you know, so so the, what comes to my mind when I think about the CXO role is experience. And it's, it's like, it's the experience of, of
it's, it's not the it's not the, it's not the how, or here, let's talk about the games. It's not, it's not as much focused on the mechanics, it's more focused on the relationship between the aesthetics and the dynamics, whereas the operational role is more focused on the mechanics and the dynamics with the aesthetics being the the least Important. Yeah, so I think I think Casey's very focused on the aesthetics and the interplay interplay between the aesthetics, and the mechanics, which is the dynamics. So that's what she wants to grow into as her CXO role. So the, the, in terms of your ask about, like, what stimulus can uniquely offer to her through the account management role, I think is participating in a team environment, in an upwardly divided team environment that's comprised of these parts, but the sum is greater than those parts of the team that you're able to curate. So in some ways, it's the team that you're able to lead internally, because of being in the account manager role with DCG gives Casey, a North Star of facilitating a multidisciplinary team. so that she can use what she learns as being in ways she could even be a lead at that team and times that time. So in other words, because you're in the account management role, you can elect her to lead that team externally. And you become, you take on the role of being her employee in ways in that team. so that she can experience and learn to facilitate and lead strategically inside of a team that foreshadows what her future leadership looks like. So that she can then cultivate that type of team dynamic in the experience aspect of her of her role in the future. So in other words, like you and I are trading roles with one another here, I think the opportunity is for you to trade roles with Casey because of the internal external dynamic, with the with between her being internal at DCG, and you being external to DCG, but having an internal dynamic with inside of stimulus gives her and by herberg, coming into stimulus, and in participating in a leadership way internally gives her an experience through stimulus externally to go practice, the type of experience that she wants to cultivate inside of her, you know, operational execution of her work is the CXO internally at DCG in the future.
Chad Owen 42:51
And what I just heard is the beginnings of a service offering of nano an outcome towards agencies like stimulus in that in in, and I think this is a is a competency and capability of yours. Yeah, specifically. Yep. Yep. I mean, you have a lot of experience, right? And like, in worker platform and MVC, like, you know, trying to create these teams, yeah. In a way they were like, are they were kind of artificial, or like, forced somewhat, right? There's an there's an interesting mutuality, it's almost like your fates are intertwined. It like specifically like between stimulus and DCG, in a way that like they weren't at work or in MVC, right? Yeah. Which is why this is like maybe a little bit different. But like, the stakes in the configurations, different, there's that internal external, but there's also I think, higher stakes in there for like, he would just get more real participation, I guess. Also, because I think it's a huge group that
Unknown Speaker 44:09
there's a lot of
Chad Owen 44:13
like, I think every agency dreams of having clients participating with them in that way. So like, if you can help develop that capacity or capability in in agencies like that could fundamentally change how agencies interact with their clients. And they think that's like just a win, win, win, win
Nathan Snyder 44:34
all around. That's super cool, man. Because it has a lot to do with also the positioning of the relationship, which is why I don't want to work directly with clients. You know, like, I'm, I just, I want to help, like, frame the opportunity with Casey so that
Chad Owen 44:52
that's what I'm doing. I'm like, pushing you out.
Nathan Snyder 44:54
Yeah, right. No, that's awesome. It's awesome. No, thank you for bringing my attention. To that, yeah, man.
Yeah, you're well, you're pushing me even further away from both you and Casey in some ways to say like, how, how am I doing what I'm doing? Like, how did I gain these experiences, I mean, I pulled, I mean, I created worker platform because directly like because I wanted it to become the new benchmark that VSC was setting its entire work. It's it the relationship between the capability and the capability architecture and the and the organizational structure, capability architecture and organizational structure, I was trying to model a new interface between, you know, who people are developmentally and how they work and what they work on, and how they're doing what they should be doing. And, and, and for whom and what they can do. So, I was recomposing the, a total organizational environment that lives on the outside of the SEC, so that we could use that as a, as a benchmark for what should for the changes that need to be happening on the inside of the organization. Um, and yet the pilots that we ran, the incentives weren't aligned between? Well, for me, they weren't aligned. And for the people, that participants that we had, they weren't aligned, because for for them, they were going to find out that they were being overpaid. And they were underperforming. And for me, the incentive was diminished, because I was building a whole new business, and didn't have any long term value. And I was using, I was expanding my, you know, both my negative capital and my capital capital, in a way that was wasteful, because it didn't give me any long term stake in the game. And I was, I was just, you know, building someone else's, someone else's business for a paycheck. And that's that really, especially because of Casey's job, changed my entire financial composition. So I don't I think the incentives in this case inversely are super aligned. Casey, you know, as an employee of DCG, is on this accelerated growth curve, she's getting paid really well. And she can get paid even more well, by by taking on a new role, it's there is there's a new level of management that gets created here. So it's upwardly divided already. By by providing a service to stimulus noun an outcome gets product or get service development done. And, and by having you work on the service development of not an outcome, inversely, you get experience and education in how to go then deliver a service uniquely in and develop a service and stimulus so that you can offer it to DCG. And so by DCG paying stimulus for what you're able to deliver in terms of an outcome for Casey's needs, you're able to then pay for a noun, an outcome, a noun, an outcome for the education and licensing that you're getting from our participation with one another. And by by paying for that service, you're able to benefit from that service, through creating it, but also through receiving its benefit from my experiences in the past, to contribute to further developing your business in stimulus. So yeah, like, that's the kind of reciprocal win win win that we're creating here. And you win, you win in two ways you win short and long term with inside of
Chad Owen 49:38
a split between, right, it's like yeah, like there's labor into that an outcome. There's cash into them and outcome but then there's also cash into my pocket.
Nathan Snyder 49:47
Right. And you're taking the lion's share of the DC d d DCG. contract, insulating the potential conflict of interest between In case you and I, if I were to try to deliver that service directly, and in ways I'm teaching Casey how to receive the benefit from from stimulus because of my implicit relationship with her because I'm not in a consulting relationship with her directly.
Chad Owen 50:21
Well in and still you providing the value? Yeah. Through stereos.
Nathan Snyder 50:27
Yeah, that's right. That's right. Yeah. Well, I'm really feel like I'm providing value to you. And, and you are in, you're going to navali come up with your own way of doing doing something similar with Casey. But yeah, like, there's a lot of symmetries that we can find here. How did how did my response go for you? Did you? Did that succeed? Did you push me in the direction that you saw was possible?
Chad Owen 51:00
Yeah, I think you expand it and elaborated it even beyond where I thought you might go.
I think I think we should, we should call it here pretty soon. But I
yeah, I think we explored a little bit about what the opportunity is, as presented from DCG. And then some of the opportunities of that that affords both noun an outcome and stimulus, I think even maybe more so that the opportunities it provides not an outcome. Because that's where I was directing the focus of the conversation. And
because this has been kind of, you know, some DCG or not an outcome focused labs. I think the next time Well, yeah, to two other labs that I would like to do is I'd love to like, just experiment with a couple of like prototype components or mechanics from none and outcomes SPG but then I would also like to have you inhabit, like your role and now an outcome to help stimulus develop either the beginnings of the team or the beginnings of the process to get to the team or the service offering that you know, it could be discussed and or pitched to DCG when the time's right. So I guess those are kind of two forks and we can pick up either of those whenever
Nathan Snyder 52:55
Yeah, I mean, I think we should pick it up tomorrow morning. And, and go from there. Let me look at my so I think
Nathan Snyder 0:01
Okay, so let's look at the the differential process development model.
Unknown Speaker 0:16
Doc.
Nathan Snyder 0:20
So here's, here's my best description of this thing, right. So, the basic SPG model is a four turn engine, and there are either three or four sub parts to each to each gear that that have to, in order for the engine to turn on, each gear has to be ignited one at a time, and to complete a turn. So what I'm looking for you to do is help me translate my understanding of this basic SPG model into the language of and models of the MDA. The NBA, the N, MDA, game design and game research approach, and also the three, the three attribute model of simulationist game list and narrative list. So that's what I'm looking for help on in this lab.
Chad Owen 2:00
So the it's kind of a shorthand, it's GNS theory, or for gamers to narrative distance simulations. Okay.
Unknown Speaker 2:17
And
Chad Owen 2:19
it's more applicable to tabletop role playing games, but I think it's also applicable to two board games as well. And I brought up this image of this board game called soaking. Because you're describing the kind of intertwines
Nathan Snyder 2:36
Oh, cool. Wow, that's literal.
Chad Owen 2:41
And the way this works is, it's so solchen, I think, is the My name for their calendar. Yeah, turn this middle gear, and it turns each of the other gears. Cool. And like, you place a worker down. And then as the days go by the workers, the gears advance getting, giving them access to kind of higher powers and abilities. It's a really fun game. And if you want to play it, we can play it online to this server spinning race, this image popped up.
Unknown Speaker 3:13
Oh, it's awesome. I'm
Chad Owen 3:19
so that was how I was kind of like internalizing, yeah. What you're saying here, and when I when so when I read your model of outcomes SPG. Like, it sounded very much like you because it was very game honest. And but it's also kind of dialectical in nature
Unknown Speaker 3:43
and algorithmic forms. So it
Chad Owen 3:55
does that's one maybe aspect of game missed games as they can or are algorithmic, there's lots of if then, you know, kind of your processes that are that are happening in in those types of games.
Unknown Speaker 4:15
Because like choice matters, choice matters. Yeah,
Nathan Snyder 4:20
right. Yep.
Unknown Speaker 4:25
Sorry, I don't
Unknown Speaker 4:27
know. I'm
Chad Owen 4:30
raising a simulation this game like the rules are like, more tyrannical or like pre determined. And a narrative is it's like anything fucking goes like, there's no guardrails, no bumpers, no blinders.
Unknown Speaker 4:52
And, like,
Chad Owen 4:56
the game as you described it, to me, also sounded like A role playing game because this first, like choose a workplace from which to orient. The assumption that I'm hearing behind that is that, like you're inhabiting a role, and you're like inside of an organization, and that you're going to, like, enact it. It wasn't clear to me kind of like, what my board was, you know, and like what pieces I had to manipulate? Me. So yeah, this it sounded to me like, like a game, like a conversational game. So it's like, I'm interested in talking about myself, and my professional agenda. That's how that's how we would get into.
Nathan Snyder 5:56
That's so cool, man. It's It's so relevant regulatory, for me to listen to your thought process.
Go between these, this three, this three dimensional model? And how the descriptive elements that you're using the disk to articulate each aspect of the model can be related to what I've designed here. So I was hearing you say that? It's, it is gamiss, because of its algorithmic nature, but its narrative. So because of its roleplay nature. And so together that makes it most unlike a simulation? Since the simulation, well, I'm not actually sure. How are you saying that this is most unlike the simulation? This approach?
Chad Owen 7:15
Like there's no established world or board or there's like, no reality? Mm hmm.
Unknown Speaker 7:28
Like, I'm not
Nathan Snyder 7:28
Yeah. Yeah. What are you playing with it? No, there's no world.
Chad Owen 7:33
Right? The world is just the conversation from which like, the players are creating, which is like, super narrative.
Nathan Snyder 7:41
Yeah, right. Yes, yes.
Chad Owen 7:45
Like, what what's not here is like all of those, like, you know, out, like the data and the outputs that you were talking about, that's like, feeding into, like, for this like for this to be simulation is it's like layout these like eight cards that are like describing, like, you know, the current environment or the situation or whatever. And like, given that, then you're then reacting to or like inhabiting or speaking from one of these houses. So like, I was trying to gamified this even more. And it's almost like, there's three decks of cards in front of you, there's a self over one organization deck in front of you. And you just, and then there's like a prompt from each of those. And then once you've chosen one, then you go into that deck. And then maybe there's like three different colors. And each colors like work context, personal value, professional gender, whatever. And then as you go further into that deck, then you like, go into the change deck, and then you go eight lanes. So you're kind of like, but all it really means is, it's just like, if you choose this, then you're prompted with this or this question. So like, rather than, you know, like programming if then or, you know, just like reading from a Google document, you could have the players like drawing from these cards. Yeah, the cards is kind of a physical element in that, that you're that you're managing, which like, in some sense helps. Because like, this is a hard thing that I have found in dialectical conversations is like, you can get lost if you're not kind of putting in, like waypoints and markers for yourself. And so I think, like the proper like, figuring out like, what the props can and should be in this game, I think it's really important.
But like, what I still don't know is Like what? Like, I'm curious to know like, what, what the questions are So like I've chosen,
I'll choose an easy one I've chosen self. And I've chosen professional agenda like that. That's where I'm at. What what's the next thing? That happens? Like I got? It's unclear to me like, what turn?
Unknown Speaker 10:25
Two is?
Chad Owen 10:33
Or is it just that, like, I draw all these like six cards in minutes? Like, then we have a conversation, like, based on these six things that I draw? It's like, self
Unknown Speaker 10:46
professional agenda,
Chad Owen 10:48
existential normative enactment. And then it's like, go, or like, Yeah, what happens?
Nathan Snyder 11:03
So let me describe a bit more about the economy of the game. As I think about it, and let's return back to answering. What should the turn dynamic be? Again, can you help us not lose sight of the MDA framework here, either. So I think we've done a good job at delineating the words on the page and their relationship to the three the DNS, the DNS Uri, but I don't think that we've done the same for the the MDA framework. Yeah,
Chad Owen 11:50
it's, it's interesting, because I feel like I feel like this is, is creating a conversational dynamic within it. But it's unclear to me what the mechanics are the generate that and what the experience on the player side is. So like, I have a strong sense of what the intent is, but not how it realizes that and what the players actually do.
That is to say, I have like, it's a big deal for what the dynamics of the game are, but it's the little mechanics and aesthetics.
Nathan Snyder 12:30
Okay, all right. Can you what is the Can you illustrate how you see the dynamics being clear, but the aesthetics and the midst of mechanics not being clear in what's written?
Chad Owen 13:03
Yeah, I want to be sure I'm using the terminology correct. So that algorithms within what you've delineated, I think, are pretty clear. Mechanics.
Nathan Snyder 13:13
Okay.
Chad Owen 13:16
But like, what's happening at the time of plays unclear to me? Like literally, what is happening while the game is going on? Like, you know, am I am I choosing from a list? Am I randomly assigned to these things? And that's the
Nathan Snyder 13:36
dynamic, right? Yes. So you're saying the dynamic isn't clear. Actually, it's the mechanic that's fairly clear. But because the aesthetic is so absent, you don't understand the relationship between the mechanic and the aesthetic? And that's what is causing the dynamic to be so absent?
Chad Owen 14:00
Yeah, yeah. It's like, yeah, the mechanics are like the runtime or, like, the instructions, the dynamics is that what happens in real time. And the aesthetics is like the emotional response from a player. So it's the dynamics in the settings that are unclear to me. Just because I don't think the mechanics are like fully described, just like what happens with time play, that's all. Okay,
Nathan Snyder 14:33
I'm just saying I'm having a super fun time playing.
Chad Owen 14:36
And this is and this is only natural, because like the designer comes from a mechanics first point of view. Like you're coming at it from the mechanics, the dynamics, and then the aesthetics. I'm coming at it from the opposite direction is Diplo Ha. Oh, yeah. From aesthetics, then dynamics in men I like in the same way you like sit down to uncover a game like you don't fully understand or like or into it. The mechanics, you just kind of like, do what you're being told. But then eventually you internalize the mechanics and the strategy and like, figure out how to win. But like, the designer, like has the spreadsheet that has like, like, the designer knows what the best cards are, and the optimal plays are in like, could algorithmically tell you how to win the game because they, they created it. But like, the player doesn't have access to that they can only like, go through the act of play to them understand the mechanics.
Cuz the mechanics is even different than like, what is like what the rules are, the mechanics is like a conflict economy within the game. Are you familiar with the game wingspan?
Nathan Snyder 15:55
I haven't, I haven't played it yet, though.
Chad Owen 15:59
It's fascinating. There's like 300 bird cards, and they have different attributes. And Elizabeth Hargreaves the Creator, and she just created a spreadsheet that like, you know, gave these like hidden values, or weights to each of these attributes. And then like, there was like a, you know, there's a standard deviation that, you know, that the cards like didn't really fall outside of, but like, there are better birds mechanically in the game. And there are worse birds in the game. And there's no an acceptable range. But like, the player doesn't know what that is, the player only sees like, how many eggs it has, what kind of nest it is, what its powers are. But like there's a numerical value. It's in Hurst like designer spreadsheet that tells her which cards are faster or optimal and which ones are not or sub optimal. I guess what I'm saying is like, the true mechanics of the game are like still hidden inside of your head, and we just like need to, like better get at them. And as I'm talking about this, I think what one way to do that would be like to try to play the game in real time, like, try to create some of the dynamics to then like, better flesh out and understand what dogs are like.
So like, I've just asked you, I've essentially asked you like, how do we play this game? Like I see turn one. And I've chosen self and I've chosen professional agenda, we get to turn Part Two in like, I don't know what to do.
Nathan Snyder 17:36
What do you see being written beneath? The? The turn will the turns that you've selected? So you've you've you've done turn his turn. Are you saying Chad that you've done? Turn part one, choose a workplace to orient?
Unknown Speaker 18:00
And now
Unknown Speaker 18:04
you're
Nathan Snyder 18:06
you're not sure how to proceed through? Turn part two through four? Because you haven't read any more about the game dynamic or aesthetic in this document?
Chad Owen 18:29
No, I think it's and sorry, if I'm being dense, just like, I don't know, that you haven't. There's not enough information here for me to know, like, what change what a change model is, let alone what each of these four is. So I don't know what to choose. Yeah, not a meaningful choice for me in this moment.
Nathan Snyder 18:51
So you're saying that the the gameplay isn't clear enough for you to help you determine what the meaning of the choices that you've made are, nor what choices that you have?
Chad Owen 19:07
proceeding I know that I need to choose something, but I don't have the knowledge to know what choices are optimal. So tell
Nathan Snyder 19:14
me, tell me what's missing from the gameplay section that you would need in order to proceed in your turn.
Chad Owen 19:37
I will need something like do I live in a responsive world existential world or environment complex adaptive world or a stratified world? I think maybe that's what this is asking me. But again, I I don't know enough about those four change models to understand
Nathan Snyder 20:00
Okay, so if you if you just put in your, in your thought process, if you put the next part of your turn to the side for a moment, and you opened your attention to the other aspects of what are written here. What stands out?
So what what this says here is,
Chad Owen 20:28
yeah, it's like what like what, like what, what is the current state of my organization? in its in, its in one of these two states. And
and I think by beginning to,
yeah, again, it's a little unclear.
Nathan Snyder 21:06
So when you read
Unknown Speaker 21:09
when you read
Nathan Snyder 21:11
in the table below, we need to formulate an algorithm, which results in upward or downward team contribution of the player, which has a byproduct of either burn, which has a byproduct of either burnout or bore out. For example, negative capital produces upward contribution, depending on work level complexity, one through three of the team that that player is on, which could lead them to either burnout or bore out. Capital capital is the opposite of negative capital. political influence is the opposite of social clout. Pitch is the opposite of asking for help. The player profile determines how the algorithm will impact their state impact their state states individually in a team and in the organization overall.
Chad Owen 22:08
So in a way, we need to visit this first and then create an optimal algorithm to kind of get us out of the situation is that what's kind of being asked here?
Nathan Snyder 22:28
So So really, your your attention is focused on what's missing, in terms of the the aesthetic, like the aesthetic is so absent, that it's pretty impossible for you to focus on the relationship between the mechanic and the dynamics?
Chad Owen 22:50
Well, it's, it's still even unclear to me how the dynamics are realized in real time based on the mechanics that you've laid out here. And like, that's fine. This isn't written. like Yo, I know. I know, like a game design document. This is just like a first draft.
Nathan Snyder 23:04
Right, right, right. No, no, I don't I it's okay.
Chad Owen 23:07
Because I'm still trying to figure out the order of operations here. Right.
Nathan Snyder 23:11
Yeah. Yeah. And I'm trying to use your intuition in like, you're like, reaching for an initial impression, as like the basis of my further design. Yeah. So I'm like interviewing you about where your attentions at when you look at this document? Because you have the expertise that I don't in the game design frameworks that we're using.
Chad Owen 23:43
Yeah. So we really want to play this game. I'm having trouble accessing. Well, so how, yeah. So how do we get there?
Nathan Snyder 23:53
Well, I mean, we are playing right now. We're playing the game. It's just we're not aware. Like you said to me, you're already neat. You're already I see a lot of you reflected in what you've written here. In also, I see a lot of you reflected in how you're being a player to my game. So, um, yeah, we're, we're definitely playing. Now. Can anybody decipher what the fuck is going on?
Unknown Speaker 24:30
Now, I don't know.
Nathan Snyder 24:33
Because, you know, I think what makes this interesting is that like, what you're full of in terms of your knowledge of game design, I'm empty of and in ways Well, you're more you're more balanced. I'm, I'm like, in comparison, you know a lot more about my constructs of organizational algorithms than I do. Your constructs of game design. But I think that that is really the wit, the the that is the dynamics between us right now. And in a lot of ways, like the mechanics that you're using, I'm trying to learn. And that that is the aesthetic. Whereas inversely, you're trying to learn about my mechanics, which are written here, which is creating another side of the aesthetics. So you're trying to learn my mechanics is I'm trying to learn yours. My mechanics are this organizational algorithm thing? It your your mind, your mechanics are the game design, the game theory, the GNS theory and the MDA framework. So that's where there's an equip, there's an equivalency here. And in any one moment, like, You're, you're the player teaching me how to become the game designer, just as much as I'm a player of your game design and teaching you how to become a designer.
Chad Owen 26:28
Right, we're both doing both for one another, right this moment?
Nathan Snyder 26:32
Yeah. And so we're switching, we're switching roles back and forth, treating what we're able to extract from one another's own epistemological frameworks.
Chad Owen 26:57
Yeah, I'm kind of ready to dive back in. Okay.
Nathan Snyder 27:02
Where do you want to go?
Chad Owen 27:06
I think that was, that was like a one round of trying to play the game. And I'm gonna like try to play the game like one more time. All right.
Unknown Speaker 27:17
So
Chad Owen 27:19
so I'll play a stimulus. And I'll be kind of a representative of stimulus here, where I'm focusing on reorganizing to accommodate a contingent variable. That is,
I'll just use your example internal effectiveness, which I'll just define is financial performance.
So I see the table.
Unknown Speaker 28:03
So like,
Chad Owen 28:05
our aim in playing the game is to generate an algorithm which will upward Li or downwardly divide my contribution to stimulus through the lens of financial performance? In my tracking here,
Nathan Snyder 28:20
yeah, you're doing great.
Unknown Speaker 28:28
So
Chad Owen 28:30
I guess I see each it's it seems like helping pitch, social clout influence and negative impact and capital capital are just two different ends of the spectrum and put them here on a on a matrix, I guess. Am I trying to up two minds for one or the other of these? Or am I just simply describing kind of my current situation with regards to this?
Nathan Snyder 29:02
So to begin with, to answer your question, let's just forget capital capital and negative capital for the moment, let's just focus on the two by two of pitch and political influence versus Health and Social clout. Okay. So to
Unknown Speaker 29:31
to increase
Nathan Snyder 29:35
to increase financial stability, which is the contingent variable. You need to reorganize stimulus is what I understand your the move that you're proposing to make to be that right. Yeah. So you have you have you have a choice here. Do you Want to spend a resource? Or do you want to ask for ask for a resource. So the resource that you can spend is you can either
Unknown Speaker 30:19
pitch
Nathan Snyder 30:22
or attempt to politically influence the organization.
And you can pitch in a way that is either a pitch for help, or a pitch to gain social clout. If you pitch for help you spend, you spend capital capital, but you gain negative capital. If you pitch for social clout, you spend negative negative capital and you gain capital capital. What do you want to do?
Chad Owen 31:07
I think I need to gain capital capital, it's financial stability, I'm looking for ya.
Nathan Snyder 31:13
Right. So you're gonna, you're gonna, you're gonna use social clout and spend negative capital to get capital capital. So, you know, now, now that I said this out loud, and we were we proposed that as a, what you could do, and what the expenses on your choice, what we didn't discuss was the political influence. So we didn't talk about how you can you can spend, you can use political influence in two ways, either through help, or through social clout. And the cost of that choice. So you have you have the algorithm here is, again, a two by two. And what we're trying to figure out is the choice that you actually have, and there's actually four, there's, there's four choices, the first choice sets up a potential of two other choices. But there's four in total. So
Unknown Speaker 32:30
let me see if I can give it back to you
Chad Owen 32:34
could get the charts not doing it for me? Right, right. The resource I have in front, so I assume I have some capital capital and I have some negative capital.
Unknown Speaker 32:46
Right? Correct.
Chad Owen 32:48
Maybe in this moment, because I've described to
Nathan Snyder 32:52
you've more negative capital than you have capital capital.
Chad Owen 32:55
Correct. Because I'm seeking financial, I'm seeking capital capital is correct, is the contingent
Nathan Snyder 33:01
variable.
Unknown Speaker 33:03
So
Chad Owen 33:10
So what so what I like, like, that's the player card, you know, that I like I picked up is the one that's strapped for cash, because that's my contingent variable. And like, I set up my player board, and I'm like, Well, fuck, I don't have any money. So then I'm looking at my board and being like, Okay, what can I do to accrue capital capital? And I see that I can,
Nathan Snyder 33:36
you've got six months of negative capital in the bank, because you just studied CDF for six months.
Chad Owen 33:42
Right? Right. Right. It's not money. It's brains, right? It's like, it's not little money tokens. It's like brain tokens, right? Lots of brain tokens, not many money tokens.
Unknown Speaker 33:51
It's my I can see that I can
Unknown Speaker 33:58
I can
Chad Owen 34:03
I can combine so like I can pitch for help or I can pitch for social clout or I can use political influence for help or use political influence for social clout and the right will either gain or lose my brands or my money.
Nathan Snyder 34:23
Yes, yes. Yes. Exactly.
Chad Owen 34:27
Now, can I take Can I like
Unknown Speaker 34:31
so the action
Chad Owen 34:34
so this is an action. This is an action. This is like
Unknown Speaker 34:42
a benefit for
Nathan Snyder 34:49
having about we call this well. How about we call this a process? How about we call pitcher process and no no help help us an outcome.
Chad Owen 34:58
Yeah. That's what I was looking for.
Okay. Okay, so I like I almost did it. So. So there's like two things I can I can say, I can move, I can place my worker, I can pitch or I can place my worker, I can do political influence. And they generates help. And so help for me means?
Nathan Snyder 35:35
Well, it depends. It depends. It depends Have you used, which process you used? So, so let's talk about this
Chad Owen 35:48
political income influence for help seems like capital capital, right? Because that's me going to the organization saying, I need a budget for this to do this, or something like that. Right? That's right. And so then,
Nathan Snyder 36:00
and they're gonna say, and they're gonna say, just just to just to, they're gonna say, tell me about the repeatable process that you're going to take in order to give us back our money. So you've just spend, you've just spent negative capital through political influence your network, and you've pitched them an idea, and they're gonna say, well,
Chad Owen 36:26
well, the negative capital is extracted, because it's represented by political influence, which is like a, it's also in a way a resource, isn't it? Because Because future, future negative capital that I earned can be spent through political influence to then get capital capital?
Nathan Snyder 36:49
Yes, it could go that way. That's true. But that depends on the state of the game.
Chad Owen 36:56
Right, but capital capital can be used to generate negative capital through some means through
Nathan Snyder 37:07
an either the organization if the organization isn't in a contingency state, that could be true.
Chad Owen 37:15
And but you're right. So it's like, there's like two sides to that board. And that actions in the process like,
Nathan Snyder 37:21
and you're not, you're not also you're not accounting for the two other states that are going on simultaneously, the team state and and the individual state, because you are dealing with either burnout or bore out in any moment, and your team is either upwardly or downwardly divided. So you have to calculate, you have to say, Okay, in this move, you have used to do a few things you have to think about, yeah, how much resource do you have? But then what are the states of the game? Because there there are three states that you have to constantly be aware of the organizational state, the team state, and in the individual state, if you're in if you're in bore out, you need negative you need to introduce negative capital, because you've sold your time for too much efficiency. Yeah, if you're, but but and then, depending on the inner developmental dynamic of the team, it's either upwardly or downwardly divided. And so if you're burnout on an on an upwardly divided team, you might want to spend some of that capital to gain to gain negative capital so that you could upwardly mobilize that team. But if you do, so that might flip your organization from an institutional seed to a contingency state.
Unknown Speaker 38:43
I have created the game.
Nathan Snyder 38:45
Okay, sweet. You got it. Operating?
Unknown Speaker 38:51
Well, I know.
Chad Owen 38:55
I can see the game playing in real time. It just it was not clear to me until Yeah.
Unknown Speaker 39:02
So like,
Chad Owen 39:14
I'm trying to find an analog.
Nathan Snyder 39:20
Let's, let's make it more complex and then make it more simple. Well,
Chad Owen 39:27
I will start from simple, okay, because that's where my mind is that. Yeah, it's almost like so so that so the game boards comprised of
Unknown Speaker 39:42
at least four
Chad Owen 39:45
cardboard cards, like, whatever, you know, half, half, half sheet size. One for the organization for the team for the individual and What am I leaving out? For states,
Nathan Snyder 40:04
so the self is either in a burnout or burn bore out state and you're they're bored of your burnout.
Unknown Speaker 40:10
Right? The team
Nathan Snyder 40:13
or the downward, the state of the organization is either leaning towards contingency or leaning towards institution. So it's just those three. Yes. Yeah, those are the three. Those are the three states. That's, that's right.
Unknown Speaker 40:28
On each side of the board, so in a
Unknown Speaker 40:34
burnout,
Chad Owen 40:37
downwardly divided, external contingent on board state, I can see on those sides of those cards, what happens if I'm spending negative, it'll tell me how I can spend or receive negative capital? Or Yeah, receive capital? capital. Right? In that state? If I use capital capital for political influence, for social for help, that could potentially flip the surfboard into a bore out or into a neutral state or something?
Nathan Snyder 41:18
No, there's no neutral state, there's no neutral state.
Chad Owen 41:21
Okay, so then so then maybe it flips, it always.
Nathan Snyder 41:26
It's always like, that's what turns the game, right. So you can't
Chad Owen 41:29
get that maybe it maybe it doesn't act like that. Maybe it kind of cascades where like, it's actually like, it, it kind of loops on itself. So it's almost like, you actually can't influence the self board until you've kind of like, taken care of the team and or the organization board, until there's like, like a holy grail state or whatever. And it's like, only in this like, unicorn of circumstances can you actually like, flip the state all the way from like, bore out to burn out? Well, you
Nathan Snyder 42:00
can ask for help, you can ask for help. You know, that's the point of help. It's like, right, but
Chad Owen 42:07
then if I do that, that might actually change the dynamics of the team. Right. So it's like, we have to find out what the interrelatedness between all of those are, like? Like how the economy or what are the consequences between actions?
Nathan Snyder 42:21
Okay, so in help, that so that's, that's where I think there might be there's, I think what we're talking about is actually like, we're talking about it from one player's point of view. But what happens in that one player's mind influences the next player, but that player that it influences may be maybe a different type of player than the player that we're in right now. So, so let's say so here's, here's another view on this. So
Chad Owen 42:52
like, as I like that, like, like, there's, yeah, I think what you're delineating it's like, the resources or the economy, or the processes and the algorithms or the equations, functions might be different between players, because they're playing different types of players. So it's not like each it's not like catana wrist or whatever, where every player is the same. It's something it's more like role based. I don't know what games you have ever played with that makes a difference. But yeah, it's like, Whatever. I'm the fighter, you're the wizard. It's kind of theirs,
Nathan Snyder 43:26
right? And you might have a whole different mechanism, like your player might be have a whole different set of mechanisms, then the player that we were just in, let's talk about some of those.
Chad Owen 43:37
Well, let's just use CDF, right? So someone who's whose center of gravity for versus center of gravity, three, those people will respond differently to capital capital and haha.
Nathan Snyder 43:50
Yeah, that's, that is that's awesome. I mean,
Chad Owen 43:53
it doesn't have to be that explicit. But like, you could create No, no.
Nathan Snyder 43:57
Yeah, we could do that. You're right, we could we could say here are the here's a three person, you know, here's a person that's going across three Ed steps or five Ed steps. And, and yeah, we could look at it like that,
Chad Owen 44:10
for sure. Or just like, even simpler. It's just like, here's someone with the center of gravity to one with three and one with four, they will influence and interact with the system very differently. Well, that'd be weird, because then how do you do the upward and downward dynamics of the team if the players of the team?
Nathan Snyder 44:29
Yeah. Well, you know, you could totally do it. But can we just pause on this? Because I want to, we've we've neglected the change model, the isomorphisms in the intervention. And I think, if I were to help you see those aspects of the possible mechanisms here, then you would be able to help delineate the player types from one another and then bring them into a more reciprocal whole
Unknown Speaker 45:03
Can we do that? Or? Or no? Yeah, of
Nathan Snyder 45:10
course, okay. So, the change model is maybe we need to even change the change models name because the the choice of responsive existential complex or stratified influences the state of the organization in either contingent or an institutional state. For example, like, the each one of these is different. So, a responsive if you choose responsive, that is, that is sort of a negative, it will have a negative consequence, if the organization is in an, it could have a, it should say two different way, if you choose responsive, and then the organization is in an institutional state, that can be a very good thing, because you move it into a contingency state. If you however, if you choose existential, and the organization is in an institutional state, it might stay the same. Mm hmm. Um, a complex adaptive state is more like a contingent state. So, if if you if you choose the complex adaptive change model and the organization's in a contingency state, it's likely to stay the same. So, you can see the change models as a stabilizing force or a disruptive force to the institutional state at a given time. Similarly, the the intervention operates in a similar way. So, when you ask for help, and the if you use interpretation, that is going to have an that's going to have, so if you're in pitch, and the respondent uses interpretation, that's going to have an effect on the success of the the outcome of help. So, so if so, like and that this is where the battling, I think comes in between dice rolls between players. So, if you chose, if you chose if you chose pitch and help in your example, right. And so, you you are going to pitch me for help you we're going to spend you we're going to spend capital capital and receive negative capital. And I chose, I chose instead of I chose enactment versus interpretation, enact meant might cost more capital capital, but benefit by giving you more negative capital, like exponential negative capital over interpretation, which might cost little capital, but is expensive from a negative capital standpoint.
Chad Owen 48:40
Yeah, I've already. So I'm imagining this is a simultaneously reveal game, where the players have the choice to the players have like one of each of those cards for the change model, or let's just say the change model and the intervention. And like, we choose them in secret on our turn, based on like, we can see, it's like, well, you get a little bit of a boost if you actually choose interpretation in this moment, or you get a little bit of a boost if you choose responsive, but if that's not met by the same on the other side, or if it's met by something that's actively counteracts it, then that's like, so there's it's not like a bluffing, but there is like a bit of a betting or gambling. Yeah, because literally there's like choose a foreground
Nathan Snyder 49:39
and a background, right? There's a or there's a there's a backstage and a front stage.
Chad Owen 49:44
Right. And it's like well, am I What am I cooperating or am I not cooperating? like yeah, I might, like, you know, the printed the prisoner's dilemma. It's like, well, if I actually screw them over, it really benefits me but if we both choose to screw with each other over then I was a little screwed in that maybe it cost us more capital, capital and negative capital. And I think what the game can do is, is what I mean, I think the whole point is to teach, right? And so then the lesson is like, Oh, wait, we're in a situation this, like, we fucked it up by playing this game. So let's not fuck it up in real life, let's actually like, yeah, let's let's spend the capital Capital One, when you pitch me for help, Judy enactments so that we can actually double down on our return on negative capital, instead of spending the capital capital and then having to spend negative capital on top of it, because we're doing interpretation instead. Something like that.
Nathan Snyder 50:42
Yeah, just like that. Just like that. And then, so that the last piece here that we haven't talked about, is the isomorphism. So like the change model, the isomorphisms, in use have to do with the way that you are, it has to do with what you were talking about between competition and cooperation. So if you're competing, you Well, if you're in a if you're in a competitive mode, it influences how you interpret normative mimetic and coercive isomorphisms, rather than if you're in a cooperative mode. So and this has to do with the, this has to do with social clout and political influence, in particular, in the sense that when when you are using political influence you're using you're, you're using these three types of isomorphisms. And when you're when you have social clout, you're using these three types of isomorphism. So in the social clout, depending on the current composition, of normative mimetic, and coercive isomorphisms determines the is determined also by the, the unique amount of ice and these three types of isomorphisms in the political influence. So I guess, um, so maybe, maybe there are four types of resources. There are there's capital, capital, negative capital, there's intervention, and there's isomorphism.
Chad Owen 52:49
You'll have to elaborate on isomorphism
Nathan Snyder 52:52
Okay, so, yes, necessaries? Right, so isomorphisms are well, there's so there's so related to the, the, the intervention, in a sense that in any moment, um, what what we're what we're doing in an organizational environment communicatively we're intervening in any moment. So we're, we're either we're either doing an interpretation, which is mostly what's happening in the real world. We're mostly doing interpretation and attentional support. And we're implicitly in acting out our roles. It until we do things like what you and I do we trade roles with one another. We trade organizations with one another. So we enact, we enact what we've just learned from the other person.
Unknown Speaker 53:55
And
Nathan Snyder 54:00
so, so do you need me to go through so interpretation, I'll just formally define these things. So interpretation is when you reframe, or retell the thing that you just heard back to the person in a in a different way to to help them through you re articulating it in a manner. It also interpretation, it also happens when you ask a question. And your your, your question helps them reinterpret the thing that they just said, from your point of view. That's different than attentional support, which is like Chad, when we talk in these abstract terms, how does that make your body feel? Do you feel anxious Do you feel Do you feel anxiety? Do you feel curious? Like what what does what when I change when I change from asking you to listen to me in terms of these things, Like abstract concepts that I'm defining. And you listen for me from like, an emotional standpoint, based upon how your body is responding to what I'm sharing with you, how does that change the way that you're participating here? Right? So that's a demonstration, I'm just did an enactment with you, I changed where your attention was from this, like, abstract verbal thing to this, like, emotional and body experience that you're having, as you're listening to me, that would be different than Okay, Chad. Now, can you do what I just did? For you back to me in a way that you could see help me helping, and we like, do a take on that. So now, how does that relate to isomorphisms isomorphisms are a term from sociology, they have to do with communication theory, and how language is used to either course. Which which is a coercion happens when you have, you have a majority of people that another voice is speaking to whom to share a set of normative assumptions. They have a set of shared beliefs, values, they're enacting what they think they should be doing what they ought to be doing. And that's a normative. That's the way a coercive isomorphism relates to a normative isomorphism. So normative isomorphism is a representation of the consensus of the normative values, paradigms, underlying beliefs of the majority, the coercion, or it's like the incumbent force, the coercion, the coercion is the outside disruptive force that's attempting to coerce the norm into something else, right to flip the majority to flip the majority or to break the majority up the, the and then the mimetic. isomorphism is like, what either normative or coercive isomorphisms are using as like soundbites to try to infect the other with. So like Trump, you know, we could look at like Trump's tweets, are a medic, coercive, he's using a mimetic, he's using mimetic strategy, through social media to coerce the majority, or to speak to the minority in these various ways. So these are, like, you know, like the three dimensions of the game, the DNS model, they're hard to separate from one another, because they make their their differences make up a unity a whole. So, yeah, is
Chad Owen 58:04
it important to have them here in the game.
Nathan Snyder 58:09
So because the the parallel with the organizational states is the is the change model in the outside world. So like, these change models sort of exist in the game space, all the time, they're influencing the state of the play as is the internal dynamics like the individual that end the team. But the individual and the team sort of sit on the inside of the organization where the isomorphisms and the change model sits on the outside. And that's the balancing force of the organizational states.
Unknown Speaker 58:58
Now, is the institutional state derived from
Chad Owen 59:03
the makeup of those states?
Unknown Speaker 59:07
Um, I guess I found
Nathan Snyder 59:10
the isomorphic, which that the the state, the state of the organization is comprised of both the internal realities and the external realities that that organizations facing.
Chad Owen 59:25
My question is,
Unknown Speaker 59:27
is
Chad Owen 59:31
if I have an individual if the individual is burnout, the team is downward, the change is existential. And the isomorphism is course of does that mean therefore, the organization is contingent or institutional, or do you choose one of those and then you and then the others fall
Nathan Snyder 59:54
out of that you've? You and you interview verbalized the model faster than I was able to listen. So, yeah, you have to slow down with me and ask the question again, sorry for being slow. No, no.
Chad Owen 1:00:21
Somewhat sure delineated this kind of inside and outside, please change and isomorphism outside and team and individual inside, I've gotten that. And it sounded like you were kind of on the fulcrum you were putting whether it's in a contingency or institutional state. So what I'm asking is, if the board state says, burnout, downwardly divided, existential coercive, like, does that then like automatically, like by rule, flip it to one state or the other to contingency or institutional? Or is it the other way around? Do I choose? Do I flip that first and say, No, I'm internal arm? contingent or institutional? And then that gives me the option of these two change models. These this isomorphism? This?
Nathan Snyder 1:01:12
I'm not sure. I'm not sure that order of operations not related. No, no, they're everything's interrelated. But I'm not sure that order of operations, it depends on which way that you're going in the game. Like, you know, you could look at the water cycle from the point of view of like, you know, water evaporating into the clouds, the clouds condensing, and then going higher up in the atmosphere forming into ice, the ice then in the clouds, pulling the clouds down into the atmosphere, then leading into snow, and then the snow leading into water and the water, you could go, you know, you could you could go you could take the water cycle, either way around, you can start in any place is what I'm saying? Yeah.
Unknown Speaker 1:02:04
What did that? Well, I'm just I
Chad Owen 1:02:06
yeah, I get I'm not seeking an answer so much as like seeking the structure and in putting these together more as we're talking about them. Sure. I didn't expect you to have an answer there. Oh, okay. Yeah. All right. Yeah, I know. But you're not you're not you're not, I guess, like, fully, it seems like I've internalized your understanding quite well. You're not pushing back on me on that. So I feel like I kind of
Nathan Snyder 1:02:32
Yeah, you got it. That's I'm saying you you did internalize the model. I just so I do think that. So let's come back to our definitions of institutional and contingent right. In an institutional state means that the the organization is seeking it seeking external legitimacy for its existing accommodating form meaning like, the organization is a can is you know, a container whose volume is one leader. And what has happened is that like, it has poured out some volume of water into something else. And the the challenges the organization is asking, do we need a different container to accommodate the amount of volume that's now in our, in our leader bottle? Or meaning? Do we need a new bottle? Or should we just refill our bottle? In a contingent state? The answer is refill the fucking bottle. In a in a contingency state, it's changed the bottle. Institutional state? No, the institutional state would not change the accommodating form. It would just try to seek more external legitimacy to fill itself back up. Like it has been historically. So like so like,
Chad Owen 1:04:18
because you use you use the same term twice. I just wanted to give you my my sorry, I'm sorry about that. Okay.
Nathan Snyder 1:04:28
Are you following with my metaphor?
Chad Owen 1:04:30
Yes, but you use the same term twice, which confused me.
Nathan Snyder 1:04:33
Okay. So I'm not sure when
Chad Owen 1:04:36
the contingency state is we need a new bottle. Yes. The institutional state is just fill the bottle backup,
Nathan Snyder 1:04:45
fill a bottle backup, okay. And the difference also is in in that fill the bottle back up as a strategy is is because the institution is able to get external support to make that happen. It's able to go get outside capital and financing because of its political affiliations, or new customers because they have a business model that works. Yeah, right. Yeah, don't change what's not broken. But, but then if the organization is a contingency, if it's designed institutionally to be a contingent, organization, organizational structure, often they'll say fuckin reorganized, downsize that shit, maximize profitability, reorganize to internal effectiveness, because we can always scale back up.
Unknown Speaker 1:05:47
Fire people,
Nathan Snyder 1:05:50
cut departments, we don't need that big of a bottle any longer, because the volume of the bottle is only so big, that's just wasted space. Mm hmm. Let's reorganize based upon the size of the bottle because the bottle is is is infinitely, you know, resizeable to the amount of volume that we have at any given time. So we can downsize,
Chad Owen 1:06:13
dribble to the person to the process.
Nathan Snyder 1:06:16
Yeah, it's totally configurable. There's no, there is no, there's no historical memory, to bring things back to some of what it what it should be normatively. Right? That's why the isomorphisms are so important. Is that that the ISO Moore's the ISO morphisms are the communicative theory, or, instead of differently, they are the communication medium by which the organization is resizing itself in these different states.
Chad Owen 1:06:49
Is it like you You know, that an organization is in a contingency state? Because it's because there's no normative isomorphisms? Or because
Nathan Snyder 1:07:00
that's a data point. Yeah, sure. You could, you could analyze the communication processes of the organization. And you could look at the Slack channel, email exchanges, what the board of directors has said in their annual report, the memo that went out from the CEO to his VPS. And you could say, okay, like, based upon what's being said here, and type type type apologizing, that this the utterances from these three different isomorphisms, you could say, oh, that that organization design, based upon how these different stakeholders are communicating with one another is an institutional organization design, dealing with a contingency, and it's either going to seek external legitimacy to come back to its accommodating form, or that is a that is a that is a contingent based organization design. That's, that is fighting against what it's been historically in order to reorganize itself to be most internally effective for today's state. Again, based upon what these different how these different stakeholders have communicated, and their use of these three different isomorphisms.
So, this is where like communication theory meets sociology, sociology, in the field of organization design, and
Chad Owen 1:08:40
now I understand how isomorphisms can or are a kind of resource in the game, because a contingent Oregon, an organization in a contingent state is going to have more mimetic and or coercive isomorphism research sources versus an institutional organization which would have higher normative,
Nathan Snyder 1:09:15
yeah, and mimetic. Yeah. Or, you know, medic medic can go either way. Source oil. Yeah. Exactly. So So coming back, you would, you would
Chad Owen 1:09:25
spend or gain those resources. That's a good you're in a situation in the game where you're stuck in an institutional organization, you understand that in order to get to your win state, you need to transform into contingent state, therefore, you would spend mimetic and coercive, yeah. So a lot of state of your organization, right? Yes. Yeah. And yeah, right. So then you spend that then you be able to flip over into a contingency state thing. You could adapt a responsive change model.
Nathan Snyder 1:10:06
Yeah. So let's talk about this. So I came up with this, I came up with this while I was at undercurrent, really this whole, this whole stimulation came came in a lot of ways from from undercurrent when I started being like, fuck these pilots that we're running to deal with the silos inside of these institutional, organizational environments is super taxing. And it takes so long to prove the scientific guess, that we're making about our theory of change. Like, if you were to use a responsive theory of change, rather than like an existential theory of change. That would increase the probability that the the institutional organizational environment could reorganize through teams
to help turn the organization into a contingent based organization to deal with the ineffectiveness of the existing management hierarchy. That's that that deals in terms of institutionally, you know, running decisions up the flagpole, not knowing who's responsible, really
Chad Owen 1:11:25
dividing teams creating burnout, right?
Nathan Snyder 1:11:29
Yeah, right. So So I was like, man, if we had a simulation, that just allowed us to, like model the the existing organization, as we understand it through our qualitative research, like let's plug in the guesses that we're already making. Among the strategists, that are the things that we're using to then compile our case for change using responsive, and then we are medically we're trying to coerce the majority, into a new theory of change responsive from existential, to flip the organization from an institutional to a contingent based environment.
Unknown Speaker 1:12:16
Bless you, bless you.
Chad Owen 1:12:30
Did so the game was an accelerant or mimetic device?
Nathan Snyder 1:12:35
Yeah, that's right.
Unknown Speaker 1:12:36
Yeah. Yeah.
Nathan Snyder 1:12:38
But But, you know, I couldn't I wasn't as good as I was using. I was using this algorithm. I've been using this algorithm for a long time. I just couldn't see it objectively, where I could like articulate the algorithm.
Chad Owen 1:12:57
Well, I mean, I think you've done it well enough for me today, where I could create a game by which that is the goal. And there are steps that you have to take and resources that need to be managed in order to get to that, I mean, it'll be very simple within this first go round, but I think I have
Unknown Speaker 1:13:18
I have a,
Chad Owen 1:13:20
I have a little bit of sense of like, resources and economy decisions that can be made processes, and how things are converted into other things. And then, like, how you flip the different states of the board, how that influences all of it. But you know, we could say it's like, because in a way, like, you can almost create this as like a single player game, that it's just like a puzzle that you have to solve. You don't even necessarily have to do it in relation to other players. You know,
Nathan Snyder 1:13:49
it could have been what I call an Automator. And,
Chad Owen 1:13:53
yeah, yeah, or but not even that, it could just be, it could just be a puzzle, like, limited resources. These are the algorithms in front of you decisions you can make. And this is the outcome that you have to get to. And it's just like, okay, I do this, I thought that oh, well, that changes. Okay. So I did it, and it flips that, okay, but flip this back, you know, Mm hmm. So it's like, so then you're like, flipping the different cards in the board. And it's like, only when they're all facing, you know, the green side or whatever, then it's like, okay, we've achieved we achieved the contingent responsive. I mean, it's never really divided, right?
Nathan Snyder 1:14:33
It's never gonna be, you know, I, the, it, you're always you're always trying to maximize. It's never perfect. Everything that you do has, you know, it's it's an open system. It's not a it's not a perfect third, third, third thermodynamic system, you
Chad Owen 1:14:53
know, right. Right. But I but all in all, I mean, to say it's like it Given this external circumstance, this is where you're trying to move the organization. Can you move it there? It's not that like, it's going to be that and stay that forever.
Nathan Snyder 1:15:07
Yeah, yeah. But I guess I guess the, maybe the title of the game should be entropy. You know, like, that's really what I'm trying to point out, like with these algorithms is that, like, the organization is constantly like going towards a state of entropy. It's constantly being disrupted. And as a result, the accommodating structures that exists both internally and from an organization design standpoint, are the thing that's creating the limits of stability that hold the organization back from achieving, like, what is idealized? Is this like, radical 10 x result that everyone's looking for in every activity that they're doing? That's why they're obsessed with this term of like, is it scalable? Well, is it scalable, as a question that has to do with this, like, constant tragic gap that we're always feeling as individuals, teams and organizations between what the ideal utopia kind of potential is, and the reality or the actuality that we think exists. But I'd say the difference between reality and actuality is that we don't realize how entropic our existing system is, which is the thing that by not understanding, it keeps our gap intact, because our gap is actually just an immunity, that that is the thing that's stabilizing and re animating the organization, keeping it relatively stable in the way that it's been. And so, like, we have to, that's a great thing. And it's also what's really holding us back from radical new potentials of reorganizing for the future.
Chad Owen 1:16:54
So one thing that was illuminating for me in use, saying that is the potential for games to help push people from context into process thinking, in real time? Yeah. And like, Yeah, because of like, the immediacy of the game, and you're seeing it happening in real time. So like, you're going from that kind of that fixed? No, that's the real world, isn't hasn't always be the real world, right? versus like this person, you know, on any given turn, like the organization's flipping and changing in front of their eyes, and they're like, wait a minute, like, you mean, all this is going on all the time inside the organization? Like, yes, it's red light, green light. And then like, Well, fuck, like, Well, what do I do is like, Well, yeah, exactly. That's why you're having all these issues. So yeah, I think then what? Yeah, a byproduct of that is both moving from context to process, but also being a more strategic thinker. Because then because you're more aware of the processes that are in play, you can begin to hold them in your mind and understand. If I change it, well, then you're almost moving into relationship, because then you're looking at the interrelatedness between all the different parts. Again, this, I put my researcher hat back on, I'm like, trying to make some assertions about how games can be props, or processes for, like, for CDs.
Nathan Snyder 1:18:40
Yeah, I mean, that, that expanded your research aims from what you articulated earlier, because before, you're really just talking about the relationship between play and work. And now you're sort of adding this whole other dimension of like, education, learning or development. And seeing games, by seeing games is a way that can change the way that we relate to work and play can actually be, can influence the way that we think about our learning and development, but also in turn, we can use games to refocus us in our learning and development that changes the way that we work and play.
Chad Owen 1:19:20
Yeah, and not only that, but you know, reaching even further back into like lean startup. It's like,
yeah, the simulation is better than starting and running the fucking company for 25 years to see if it works.
Unknown Speaker 1:19:45
That's great.
Unknown Speaker 1:19:46
That's also
Unknown Speaker 1:19:50
Yeah.
Unknown Speaker 1:19:52
Yeah, exactly. Exactly. Why do we need to do that? We don't. I mean, that's the way
Unknown Speaker 1:19:57
so it's like, Yes, yeah, like How How
Chad Owen 1:20:03
old Yeah, like this is fucked up, like, lean is all about eliminating the waste. But we were being pushed in that ideology to start companies and like do shit.
Unknown Speaker 1:20:17
When? Yeah, like, it's like we don't want to fulfill that mission.
Nathan Snyder 1:20:22
Yeah, it's like we're wasting our human capital in order to maximize the reduction of waste through our company apparatus.
Chad Owen 1:20:29
Right? Right. Right,
Nathan Snyder 1:20:32
by like serving customers, like underlying needs. It's sort of like, Well, what do we sacrifice in terms of our own developmental potential as a result of that? Because, like, if what people need is toothbrushes, why the fuck would we want to build toothbrushes for people? Like, let someone else do that? I mean, that's the way I feel. I don't just I don't want to just build a business because I can, like, you know, what's, and furthermore, like, what's the reason that the business doesn't exist in the first place? Well, maybe because it's a shitty business to be in. Doesn't mean that it shouldn't happen. Just means it like maybe someone else is better at it than I am. So yeah.
Chad Owen 1:21:22
Yeah. Or it's just a form of arbitrage, or just getting there first. Right. to, to. Yeah, to take advantage of that arbitrage opportunity.
Nathan Snyder 1:21:39
So it seems like you sort of you we finished our game.
Unknown Speaker 1:21:47
Wow.
Chad Owen 1:21:53
I have a, I don't say I have a fully formed picture of a game in my mind. But I feel like I could begin to prototype this game.
Unknown Speaker 1:22:02
Mm hmm.
Chad Owen 1:22:05
Like, create components, and begin to work on rules, you know, you said you'd like to hire me to to better. to better define this, I feel like I actually have enough information, where I, like I said, like, it could prototype it. So I guess, do you feel like that would be you know, a worthwhile use of like four or five hours of my, my time to come back to having some components where we can maybe fill in a couple of blanks decision be some things that I don't like it, but like,
Unknown Speaker 1:22:43
I feel like I I know, like,
Chad Owen 1:22:46
you know, there's there's resources, there's kind of cards, there's a board state, and then there's like the ways in which they interact with one another, I guess just, you know, do we want to turn it into a prototype that we could play more fully? Or do you want to continue to oscillate? You know, between now coming before grounded, stimulus in the background, etc? Yeah,
Nathan Snyder 1:23:11
yeah, I guess I was just, I was just going to ask to be able to answer your question, I think I need to know more about how in noun an outcome hiring you to do that four or five hours of prototyping, you would be able to make a meaningful step forward for stimulus?
Chad Owen 1:23:36
Well, you'd be my first client.
My first non paying client, which I think isn't isn't meaningful, like, I have I have lacked the, yeah, I've lacked the kind of motivation to complete a prototype of world of work, I think, because it's, well, because I haven't had a client say, or because I haven't had a client hire me for it, so to speak. It's, it's been speculative up to this point, for the most part, but all I'm saying is like, you know, I've had a discussion, where I think we both have an idea of what this game like, looks and feels like. And we could potentially sit down and play it and that is a, that's more motivating to mean then then maybe world of work, which is probably like a couple a few more weeks away. But I feel like by the end of the week, we could play a version of this game. And therefore, I would be exercising my game design skills in such a way and kind of creating, you know, a suite. I'd be building my toolbox of I've been building this game in the same way that I'd be building components of the game for world of work.
I mean, the other thing is that, you know, I could be the first player as stimulus, and whatever the outcome from the game would be nice, be supportive
Unknown Speaker 1:25:23
of me. Mm hmm.
Chad Owen 1:25:29
I mean, like, I can do it in parallel with word of word,
Unknown Speaker 1:25:34
too.
Chad Owen 1:25:37
Because I mean, I would love to have the conversation with Casey to better understand what's going on with her and with DCG. And to better inform world of work. I think maybe that's the other reason why I haven't spent too much time on it is because it's been absent, like a client or a client player, to use as like a source of research and playtesting.
Unknown Speaker 1:26:05
It's not to say that it couldn't use you.
Nathan Snyder 1:26:16
It's interesting because I My mind went in the inverse direction from you. I was thinking that I was trying to maximize for the time that you spend working as a partner in noun an outcome provides you not only ownership in noun an outcome, but also work opportunities that support you to develop personally, in ways that are trance transferable back into stimulus.
Chad Owen 1:27:01
I, I feel that I just I didn't state it.
Nathan Snyder 1:27:07
Oh, no, it's fine. But it's interesting how you did state it though, because what it what it brought to light is that I'm not an outcome can play the role of client to its clients, in the sense that you can practice a new service offering on noun an outcome, or with me, and put me in the client role. And we can prototype the service exactly what I think
Chad Owen 1:27:41
yeah, that's exactly what I'm hiring you to do. I think that that's what I said, but I didn't say it that way.
Nathan Snyder 1:27:46
No, you did say the second the second way. Yeah. You said it. You said it. Like you interpreted my question. Bye, bye. saying, well, what's missing for me right now as a client to get towards my end goal of, you know, find money. And so I'm gonna, I'm gonna use this in interaction as a test for my new service offering as a game designer.
Chad Owen 1:28:21
Mm hmm. But that's, that's
Nathan Snyder 1:28:24
a different service game design is a different service than the one that we're considering. With Casey.
Unknown Speaker 1:28:36
Yes.
Unknown Speaker 1:28:40
And DCG
Chad Owen 1:28:44
Yeah, in again, I pushed a tenant for the way because I think it's this game, like, the DCG game will fall out of this game design process of which we're now in. I think,
Nathan Snyder 1:29:00
what if DCG doesn't need a game? What if they need a different service?
Chad Owen 1:29:11
Well, yeah, we don't we don't know.
Nathan Snyder 1:29:14
Hmm. Well, I have a more I have a more clear sense of things now, which I haven't told you about. But,
Unknown Speaker 1:29:24
um,
Unknown Speaker 1:29:26
yeah.
Nathan Snyder 1:29:31
Maybe we should. Maybe we should cut here on this take.
Unknown Speaker 1:29:35
And then
Nathan Snyder 1:29:37
and then spend some time with
Unknown Speaker 0:02
All right.
Nathan Snyder 0:04
So you asked me when we just briefly talked about what I want to work on today. And I was thinking about that, because I wasn't immediately. Sure. When you asked, as I think that, I find that the agenda items really result from a process of dialogue between us oftentimes. So it's hard for me to answer that question. Before we start, I guess starting by starting is oftentimes the the way to get to an agenda, or sort of that we realized that we were do we had an agenda item that we accomplished as a result of having discussed it. So in that vein, I guess I am thinking about our last conversation, and the ways that you were relating your, your sense of risk to our construct of working together, and how your behavioral profile influences like the jobs that we can do together, the financial components of the way that we organize ourselves in our business activities, and how that relates to your personal life. And I thought about what was missing from that conversation? Oh, had to do with my not knowing of your, like, like, your research or something like that. Like, what? How, what are you actively using the work environments that we participate in together to help you research in the world? And, you know, I, I know that we're doing that I just don't know. Like, I don't think I've heard you tell me the story of that.
Chad Owen 2:30
Um, I think I have shared it with you before. Yeah, he just not well articulated.
I see. Yeah, I think I see myself wanting to.
So like one of the main branches or forks of this research is, is CDF how I want to incorporate that in into the research it, I guess, how I would like to exercise or practice that is like still in question. So in a way, like this work, is a way for me to experiment to do that. Or it's like to discover what the branches off of CDF are. And I think where I've been coming alive, most of the work that I've done over the past few years has been at the intersection of work and, and play, or just the tension between work and play. Everything from like, the attitude of an individual and how they show up to work all the way down towards like, what I'll just call playful work where like, the actions in which you're taking are might be considered play, but you're getting work done. So it's Yeah, it's like either playful work or work full play.
Unknown Speaker 4:26
And
Chad Owen 4:29
another fork of that is is games in gamification and game design as it relates to work. And I think that comes down to things like resource management. You know, strategic thinking, decision making, and how being a better game designer can help you understand those things and being Better game player can help you with those things and that those skills and attributes are helpful when doing your work.
I think the other the other aspect of that, too, is just working better together in in teams. So it's like another branch from CDF. You know, sports teams play better if they understand one another better. And therefore, I think that's why CDF is that's an analog as to why CDF is useful. And I just I want to apply it to work.
How all all of those things are interwoven. I don't know. But I say my, I suspected they can be interwoven. Mm hmm. It's just I haven't I haven't experimented enough to find out. It's like, they've been, they've been silos of my life and interest in I haven't like, they've been going like this. And I haven't started to, you know, put them together in a more perpendicular way.
Nathan Snyder 6:19
Right.
Unknown Speaker 6:20
Yeah. And I guess, um,
Chad Owen 6:26
and it might not work. But like, I just don't know yet.
Nathan Snyder 6:37
And, and so just to just see us, or to invite Nicole Nicole's psychological profile into our conversation. In listening to yourself, having just told me the general outline of your research story right now? What would feel like? How would Nicole respond to you telling her about your research story?
Chad Owen 7:22
I think she would do it from one of two stances, either a. How does that put? Like, how does that further or not the aims and objectives like of our family? Or if she were speaking from a higher level, it may be something more along the lines of, you know, this, this sounds really cool. But I think you would be, you know, like, it would behoove you to, like, enact this, like, sooner rather than later. I think simpler. It's like she would she would instigate me to explore this, but in like, a, maybe a more practical way than I've been speaking about it. She might be like, Huh, like, who is the client? And what is the team that you would like to apply this towards? And could you? Could you, is it realistic that you could get them as a client?
Nathan Snyder 9:01
Okay, sounds like a good, good. jumping off point.
Chad Owen 9:07
Yeah. And maybe those are kind of from the same stance. have kind of like managing or keeping the integrity of the family unit. I was trying to think of like, what, what someone from a higher stage from myself would ask me to spur me to further development but as because I'm unaware of that I it's just inaccessible to me.
Nathan Snyder 9:39
So what
Chad Owen 9:39
sounds cool, but how do you know like, how do you know or how do you know that this will or could work
Nathan Snyder 9:50
and what will work mean?
Chad Owen 9:56
Like turned into You know, turn into consulting business activity. I like working directly with a client and getting paid.
Nathan Snyder 10:29
Okay? Well, if we were to start answering a question like, who would you enact this with? And how can you really? How could you realistically get them as a client? What would we take away from your research?
Chad Owen 10:54
This is the this is my problem with the paradox of playful work is, like if you're like, and this is why I'm unsure of the definitions, but it's like, if you're playing by definition, you can't be working. And if you're working by definition, you can't be playing. Because play is defined as a purely recreational activity done for the sake of the activity. Whereas work is towards accomplishing a task towards a goal.
And this is where games are most interesting to me, because I think they operate most at the intersection between these two things. Because there's many definitions of games, but there's like clear rules and a clear goal. Otherwise, it's not a game, it's just play. But games are also done for enjoyment. And there can there are often like tangible outcomes of games.
So I think, what I've what I've kind of done here is created a bit of a synthesis between play in work. And my hypothesis is that the answer is games.
But how does this take away from the research? I think it's just, um,
yeah, I think what I'm trying to manage is like, the more client focused I am, maybe the less playful I am. Whereas if it's more researcher, not client facing, the more playful I can be, but again, as I'm tested, I don't know.
Nathan Snyder 13:03
Okay, so let's, let's zoom in on the complications that arise by being client focused. How does being client focused, take away from your research?
Chad Owen 13:24
I don't, I mean, I don't, I don't know that it, it does. A critical part of game development is playtesting. And I can do that with clients. And I think I can do it in a safe enough way. You know, to as sick so as to like, not break their business, you know, I'm not, I'm not telling I'm not saying hey, install holacracy and like, this is how you do it. It's like not it's not as huge as something like that. Because games can serve as interesting proxies for like real world work. It creates this interesting environment where like, I don't know that there's any reason for me not to do you know, the playtesting with the clients. So in a way they're like necessary for the research.
Nathan Snyder 14:21
What when you say they aren't, they're necessary for the research, what do you mean
Chad Owen 14:26
clients as as players or playtesters?
Unknown Speaker 14:37
Nice.
Chad Owen 14:40
And there may be, you know, non paying, there may be a few non paying clients at first. I mean, we ourselves are in a way, we're paying with our time.
And I'll just like, so maybe with non paying clients, it's a bit easier with paying clients, you're somewhat beholden to their
Unknown Speaker 15:20
goals.
Chad Owen 15:24
And, you know, because it's a transaction, like I would be bending the research towards their needs not, I would be tempted to bend the research towards their needs, their organizational needs, as opposed to like what, you know, the game development or scenario planning game development process needs. But I think that's a short term.
It's a short term compromise, I'm willing to make.
Like, I'll still be developing like the game development engine, you know, the, it's not going to be completely bespoke.
It could, that's a risk, like just taking on client project after client project, you're like not developing an asset, an underlying asset or IP that's, you know, generating value or wealth. You know, it's either intellectual or financial wealth inside of that we're going to have inside of stimulus.
Nathan Snyder 17:03
So So on the one side, you have, you have risk of not developing underlying IP that generates value beyond the time you're selling to clients. Whereas if you merely sell your time to clients, you're beholden to their goals, and sacrifice, your research, but also the underlying IP, I guess, if you do and if you just focus on the IP, what happens?
Chad Owen 17:51
Well, there's no revenue and you know,
Nathan Snyder 17:59
so if there's no revenue, if there's no revenue, what happens?
Chad Owen 18:11
Well, then I can no longer justify this, you know, kind of research project and service line. Yeah, I mean, it Yeah, I can't justify it. You know, given the the runway in time and money that Nicole and I are kind of allocating to this of, you know, six months or so.
Nathan Snyder 18:43
Okay, and how does the the risk on either side of this equation relate to CDF?
Chad Owen 18:56
CDF is well, currently, almost wholly on the research side of the equation, meaning I haven't directly incorporated CDF into client engagements. Like, just aside from kind of my internalization of it.
And so the detention for me is to more kind of outwardly openly integrate the CDF frameworks into the client work.
Because right now, it's just you know, backstage or in the background.
This is this. This is also kind of just Similar to the tension of developing the IP and working in the background versus working directly with clients and getting paid.
Yeah, and what's transpired over the last six months is I've been very research focused, not client work focused.
Nathan Snyder 21:18
So it seems like the, the two by two here is work in play, research and clients.
So like, what, you know, what quadrant? Are we in a given time?
Okay, um, so
cool. Um, that was, that was the that was, like, a good beginning to our time together today. But I don't want to go too much deeper in it for this moment, because I think that will circle you know, will will, will cycle around these topics, again, just another in another context. So, yeah. Is there something that you want to? Do you want to switch roles now? Do you want to? Do you want to? Yeah, where's your mind at right now?
Chad Owen 22:55
The question I'm asking myself is, are you and I practicing this kind of dialectical questioning with one another? Or are we taking up kind of one of our professional agendas or kind of organizational concerns in this meeting? I'm fine with it, either. But I think maybe my assumption is that we're kind of practicing this dialectical questioning. And so then, maybe I maybe we can just switch roles, and I can do something similar for you.
Although, I've done a little bit of that last time.
Nathan Snyder 24:04
Yeah. Yeah.
Okay, so that is a potential approach to go into the practice of dialectical questioning.
Let's see an alternative.
I mean, yeah, we played last time. We sort of played SPG Are we? We played the meta game?
Chad Owen 25:03
we're generating questions for SPG.
Nathan Snyder 25:06
Yeah. So I don't I don't know if I'm, yeah, we could so we could review, critique and reconstruct?
Did we, um, we didn't record last session Did we?
Chad Owen 25:32
Did Did you not get the link? I created a podcast feed for all.
Nathan Snyder 25:36
Oh, I did. I did. Yes.
Chad Owen 25:38
That's right. Cool. should be able to just copy and paste that URL. RSS.
Nathan Snyder 25:44
Your I know, I saw it now that I know that I remember. So another agenda. And so we could literally like, review. Last s SPG. At two x.
Unknown Speaker 25:56
And I also had it transcribed
Chad Owen 25:58
by otter.
Nathan Snyder 26:02
Hmm, okay. Yeah. Okay. So
I'm just thinking, What? Where do we what do we want to take is foreground and background? So do we want to have no no in the foreground? And stimulus in the background? Or vice versa?
Chad Owen 27:22
I'm thinking No, no coming?
Nathan Snyder 27:25
In the foreground? And what would that what would that mean to you?
We work on noun an outcome versus in stimulus.
Unknown Speaker 27:41
Yeah.
Unknown Speaker 27:44
But it could be
Chad Owen 27:47
kind of you taking a slightly more active role. And so you already kind of stepped into an active developmental role doing dialectical question in for an agency member myself. Mm hmm. And we can keep along those lines. But kind of pausing here to understand how we're kind of keeping that dynamic. But it's, you know, we're continuing in non an outcome developing its developmental practices, like, alongside agency partners. And yeah, and kind of, you know, what's going to fall out of that is a better SPG.
Nathan Snyder 28:39
So in other words, we don't really have to worry so much about the, what's foreground and what's background as long as we stay aware of the reciprocal nature of how values being generated between as we switch roles with one another?
Chad Owen 28:59
I think so. Yeah, establishing this that this is a lab where Chad as a member of stimulus has come to work with get help from coached by Nate as a representative of not an outcome. Uh huh.
Nathan Snyder 29:20
I guess I'm also looking at it the other way around, because what you do by enabling me to coach you is develop the lab methodology and the coaching methodology by which now now come services its clients. In addition, today, we, up to this point focused less about less on directly delivering value to stimulus and in ways that I was seeing what I was doing was helping on Aboard you as a partner in noun and outcome based upon your own research. But maybe you don't see it that way.
Chad Owen 30:13
Well, I think we're doing exactly the first.
Nathan Snyder 30:16
Not not the second.
Unknown Speaker 30:19
The seconds a little,
Chad Owen 30:22
uh, maybe murkier? Yeah. I guess maybe I didn't hear an invitation. If that's what was missing.
Nathan Snyder 30:29
To begin with. We just dived in. Yeah, just open. Yeah. Right. Well, that's interesting. Yeah. No, I didn't, I didn't make an invitation. Um, well, let me say a bit more about since it's obscure, the, the non invitation thing that I did. So I, in the, in this like, third, in the third move from Mike and I, his time together in the car, we really ended up
we ended up focusing on sort of the third leg of the noun an outcome stool, which is focused on creating like a self administered PhD for each one of our members. own research that the business provides them a research context for and so the the clients that noun and outcome takes on both the services the service client, the, the other consultancies that it serves, as well as the highly skilled labor based businesses are the kind of to research areas or or like, kind of cultural areas that noun and outcome members can research themselves within and also research others in within. So I've been thinking about that association of researchers, as one role that we play in this third kind of leg of the stool of downturn outcome as a what the sky, Joe element calls a turtle accuracy, which I don't know, have I shared any of that with you before?
JOHN, figure, you know, okay, so this idea of a turtle autocracy is a. So it's an organizational and decision making structure that has its alternative to some of these other forms of organizing. And the idea is that turtles are people who are interested in researching a topic over the long term, and are sort of open minded. And don't take don't have strong takes, where they are sort of limiting the possibilities of their research. Because they have to be a person with expertise a person with ideas. Rather, they can be a person with strong ideas, but is prepared to slowly experiment with them over the years, and you'd be proven wrong in some cases. So there's a whole sort of method, a self organizing methodology around a turtle autocracy that I think fits really well with the way that a noun an outcome can serve the developmental ambitions of its associated members. And that differs from what outcome what not an outcome serves as a service methodology to its client partners on either side of that the highly skilled labor side of the equation or the digital first consultancy side of the equation. So that's what I felt that we were doing earlier is that we had we had sort of, without an invitation for And into that type of dialogue, in part with one another last week. Well, we had did two things last week, I guess. One was we worked on the SPG. And the other was we kind of worked through some of the challenges that you were feeling in returning back to your New York Life and Work. Yeah. So I think we're still, I think we're still working on our agenda at this point. But now, I've talked a lot so
Chad Owen 35:45
well, I think you were actually kind of doing both. It's just I didn't understand that the content of what we're talking about kind of had a hidden agenda on your side, which is, you're wanting to help illuminate both for yourself. And for me, what my were like, building the, what is my two? What is what is what what am I as a turtle? Right, what's the path that me and my turtle shell are going on? Yeah. But you were doing it in a way that I was experiencing as like, like, Oh, this is like the practice of noun and outcome like this is how an agency partner is going to be participating and getting value out of interacting within working inside of that, and outcome, because it was done in a dialectical manner. Mm hmm.
Nathan Snyder 36:37
Yeah, yeah. That's, that's, it's interesting to point out the ways that there, there's like a common second nature to the mode of working and noun an outcome that expresses itself, whether I'm helping a another associate, work on their own turtle, ah, cracy or I'm being helped by an associate like you on noun an outcome or I am on behalf of now now come providing a service to an agency partner, there is a there is an underlying dialectic that is instigated by this manner of, of listening, primarily, and then speaking, secondarily. So
I can see how, because of that underlying nature of the, of my communication, it was a bit confusing without an invitation to know what contexts that we're working in.
Chad Owen 38:09
Yeah, and I don't want to have to make too much of it. I just, I'm calling it out. Because I think maybe we do run the risk of that kind of that process or kind of like being too subtle or hidden.
Nathan Snyder 38:23
Oh, yeah. Uh huh. Right, right. Right. Yeah. And by calling it out, we can sort of make an object of it, and then further created into something that like, is an object to be worked on and to leverage to generate more organizational value independent of the context that we're Yeah,
Chad Owen 38:44
yeah. And wanted to be sure that we weren't taking it for granted. That's cool.
Nathan Snyder 38:47
Yeah, thanks. Um, you know, what strikes me is that we didn't we didn't do last time. You're not in the SPG. And I think that this is where I want I want to go. We worked on the SPG. On on stimuluses, SPG. We didn't work on noun and outcomes underlying IP. And what you just pointed out to me was that there is an underlying nature to the way that we are learning to work with one another through dialogue. And like, like that, learning like that is more second nature. There is a there's an set of there's a set of underlying principles. Underneath this idea of SPG that make me able to help play stimuluses SPG in a way that helps stimulus create its own game. Mm hmm. off of off of
noun and outcomes IP. So that was sort of that was where my attention went was like, we never had a meeting about that. I just sent you a document. And then we, like, quickly started playing stimuluses game, like two or three weeks ago, like, which was, which was that text thread, but before the text thread, I wrote this document that had a bunch of like, like, principles to it, that I think would be useful for us to look at. So that would be out of the agenda items that I can see here. Where I would suggest we focus. Okay. So I'm Brett, so in the in the in this meeting, now, like, I want to hire you, too. To be my coach. Can you do that for me?
Unknown Speaker 41:40
Sure.
Nathan Snyder 41:41
Okay. Now I am
Unknown Speaker 41:48
opening a file, what is the file name?
Nathan Snyder 42:03
Is it in this world of work document?
Unknown Speaker 42:06
I don't know that it is. This is most of my boards.
Nathan Snyder 42:24
Yeah, this is the glossary
Unknown Speaker 42:26
is where I wanted to work. Okay.
Nathan Snyder 42:44
So maybe you want to drive the screen now?
Is this Do you wanna work in Rome? Or is this Have you translated this into Rome yet?
Chad Owen 43:11
I haven't. Okay. Yeah. I am still trying to figure out my Rome workflow, I think. I think what I'm going to try and do is just kind of, as I go back through and process this document, again, this week is kind of atomize it right? In Rome. Because like, where I get stuck is like, you can clearly see that I'm like treating this like, I'm going to publish it but like it's nowhere. at stake. Right? I just Yeah, I just need to like go back to its component parts. And then I can I can, I can. I can put it together and build. So cool. Cool.
Nathan Snyder 44:00
Yep. All right. So I'm not sure this is the right document for us to really be working in. But, um, since World of Work is stimuluses version of the SPG
Chad Owen 44:15
um, let me just just kind of
Unknown Speaker 44:20
Yeah, I know there was another document this isn't
Nathan Snyder 44:25
Yeah, if you take that into room, I'm gonna find this other document.
Chad Owen 44:34
This is what I this is what you said in first, this
Nathan Snyder 44:46
SPG glossary? Yeah, yeah, this is the one this is what I this is what I want us to work on. Okay.
Chad Owen 45:05
So this differential process development, this is kind of the process in which we were talking about,
Nathan Snyder 45:11
right?
Unknown Speaker 45:18
Yes, yes. Yes. Yes.
Nathan Snyder 45:24
So, so I think I think the dividing line here is you you're building a, a narrative based roleplay game called world of work, and the
in order for in order for the overall strategy of games to be productized and to yield data, so that that data can be translated into a digital game. And that digital game can feed data into predictive modeling for buying out businesses. We need a turn. We need like a we need like a more of a euro game like mechanical. Yeah, I'm more. Yeah. And so the dialectic is between stimuluses role based avatar or role based narrative play game and the tabletop version? What did you call it? Sorry? This?
Chad Owen 47:05
Yeah, I mean, just a quick, a quick aside into kind of game definitions. They can kind of be thought to operate on three different spectrums. There's the
Nathan Snyder 47:18
simulation. Hold on before you do before you do this. Let me so what do we call this game design? I'm just I'm just going to get into Rome real quick. Sure. Yeah. Okay, so you're going on to say that there are three definitions of game game designs?
Chad Owen 47:47
Yeah, are there there's three? spectrums?
Nathan Snyder 47:52
Okay.
Chad Owen 47:53
So there's, there's simulationist a hockey game missed. And there's narrative this. I bring this up because I'm hearing you describe a need for more game and more simulation in a noun and outcomes version of the game. Whereas your understanding world of work, as a narrative is first with some aspect of a game and simulation. Again, it's a spectrum but I just wanted to give us a shared lexicon, man.
Nathan Snyder 48:35
Yeah, that's, that's sick. Really, really, what I would like to do is I'll have the IP developed likey to the point that a noun an outcome can help an agency like stimulus design, game it games within any one of these paradigms or any one of these spectrums. So so like right now towards any
Chad Owen 49:11
industry and any any kind of like, organizational need, like ideally,
Nathan Snyder 49:15
right? That's right.
Chad Owen 49:17
So like that. That's like, my holy grail is like, if I can create games to do to quote unquote, do business like, I've fuckin I won,
Nathan Snyder 49:25
you won. You won the game. Okay, Dude, what's the name of the so the narrative iist approach? What do we call these spectrums? I don't think it's spectrums of the right word.
Unknown Speaker 49:44
Are you
Nathan Snyder 49:44
ready? Are you referencing something in your mind? Like a resource that's outside of? Yes, your memory? Yes.
Chad Owen 49:52
Yes, I learned this for I need to go back to the source. I took a I took a role playing game design course. And it, it's from that this is like in broader kind of tabletop gaming theory. But yeah, I mean, I can I can go to sources on this.
Nathan Snyder 50:17
So this would be like, just to put a bookmark.
Unknown Speaker 50:24
These are like attributes of games, attributes of games. Yeah.
Nathan Snyder 50:50
So So delineating, like, turning these three attributes into a dialectical not, I think, is part of what? I've views your research.
Chad Owen 51:12
Meaning like, what makes it simulationist? and what isn't? What is it not in? What is gamester? What is it not? And how is it interrelated to the others?
Unknown Speaker 51:21
Mm hmm. And how,
Chad Owen 51:24
yeah, that's right. Yeah. And how is the experience different within each? And how is kind of, like, what is it better or worse suited for in terms of like, what the game is doing? Or what is pointed out?
Nathan Snyder 51:38
Yeah, well, you know, if you, you could talk about those three things logically from one another. Right. But like, what you're saying is that they're inherently. They're inherently related. And, like, if you were to incorporate process thinking into the inherent relationships between these three different attributes, what would resolve is not just like contextual ways of being able to reconfigure games, but the way that games can actually lead to transformation potential within the social reality, which that game is being played within. Mm hmm. So that and I think,
Chad Owen 52:19
like, it has to happen across all three,
Nathan Snyder 52:21
right, right. Yep. Okay. Very cool. So let's go back to um, so I'm so, do you hear me making a delineation between the narrative s and the game missed? attribute in order to create the simulation approach.
Chad Owen 52:54
I was just simply hearing you describe the noun and outcome game or meta game as, as more simulationist and more gameness then how I've conceived of world of work. So, for example, Euro games are like 80% gain nest and then the rest is split between simulationist and there to this. So like, I did find find the resource I can share it with you a bit later, but my understanding is that it like the game is aspect shows up in the like worker placement, gaining resources engine building the economy, actually know their economy, to some degree is still gayness. The simulation is an aspect is more about trying to recreate the world world inside of the game and having game mechanics mirror kind of the real world, of which it's being represented by. Whereas narrative is is is more it's more story based, where the act of play is more evocative of story as in stories coming out of the game, or you're playing the game. Like through inheriting these roles, or speaking like a character, etc, generating like a story or a narrative in it, so like, while a game can have a premise, many games don't tell a story. So the premise of settlers of 10 is like you're settling an island. And the only story that's being told is like how that city's growing or I just got robbed like that's as far as the narrative wrist. Angle goes. Risk like those a little Further in that it's like, oh, no, like, Argentina just conquered QA. And now they're going for Venezuela or whatever. That the you know, the kind of campaign that these armies wages like, is a slightly bigger story than what's told them the game like Settlers of Catan. But like, it doesn't go as far as like Dungeons and Dragons where like we needed a tavern and would go and slay a dragon. Like that's super narrative, this, but it also incorporates gaming elements, because you roll dice to figure out what happens. And it's also simulation is done, then it's like, well, battle ax does more damage than a dagger, which mirrors what you know what it is, like, in real life.
And I'm trying to understand that these really only apply in kind of tabletop games, or, or if they go beyond. Like, I'm specifically thinking about sports. But that might just be something altogether.
Nathan Snyder 56:14
Well, I think sports are like, simulations. broadcasters are like narrative lists. And players relate like tabletops. Yeah.
Chad Owen 56:31
Like, I'm just thinking, they're the ones that are like, subject to the rules, like the game, like the game is part is like, well, what are the rules of what can I do? What can I not do?
Nathan Snyder 56:41
You know, I was just thinking of one of the reasons from using your frames, that the Michael Jordan documentary is so illuminating. And interesting is because he's, he's like a player. You know, he's, he, you're, you're, you're getting to see how he relates to the narrative just as,
Chad Owen 57:04
right. He's just like, I wanted to be the best player that ever lived in that. And his actions were solely devoted to that. Yeah. So how can he be a dick? How can he be a whatever a bad teammate? Because he's like, No, you don't understand. I was just trying to be the best player that ever lived.
Nathan Snyder 57:27
But it's so funny to see him still in that role in a lot of ways. Like, that's how he relates to the historical narrative.
Chad Owen 57:37
Well, because he, because he was a player, like he didn't create it. Like you said, it's like the broadcasters and the writers and the journalists and the fans. You know, putting all their hopes and dreams on this onto him.
Yeah, I mean, just I, I'm noting this, just for myself. Like, there, there have been studies around the eight types of enjoyment that players receive when playing games, there's like a whole research body around that. But again, that's something is I'm trying to better clarify. gains, you know, I'm just like, this could be extremely relevant, like in the same way that you build a developmental profile. What is their gamer profile?
Unknown Speaker 58:33
Yes. How?
Nathan Snyder 58:39
Yeah, to support the linkages between CDF and a, the eight types of gamer profiles, or the eight types of enjoyment that gamers benefit from when playing. I just started reading this book by James Hellman called
the soul, the souls code in search of character and calling and I think he doesn't excellent synthesis in the section that I'm reading right now around motivational theory. And he talks about motivational theory for example, being different between like a psychodynamic view and an analytic psychology view. And so, how, I think that there is a really interesting parallel to create between what we understand is the CDF profile, whose behavioral components are book are based upon a psychologist with A, at least hidden to me right now motivational theory embedded in that and if you change the motivational theory, how does the kind of types of enjoyment change? But then how does also the developmental profile change potentially in the way that we understand it instead of CDF? So I think that there's a, what I'm saying is that there's a linkage between the motivational theories of the types of enjoyment, the types of enjoyment that you're articulating, and then that of the need press questionnaire. So that might be something that we share as a research project going forward. Because I want to understand the other ways of motivation that could reinterpret the developmental profile, using helmets work, as you might be able to reinterpret the way that these eight types of enjoyment relate to motivation and developing a player profile that includes development in it. But again, that's that's sort of our research. I think that's the that's like, a researchy conversation. Yeah, not Oh, cool.
Unknown Speaker 1:01:25
Yeah, very cool.
Nathan Snyder 1:01:28
Ah, this is so bad.
Chad Owen 1:01:32
Here's the, here's the paper.
And here's, here's the video, I'll share it with you. Out of zoom as well. This is the video of like, this is the game design seminar video from the class that I took. Cool.
Yeah, what they're doing is like creating a formal approach to game design and game research.
Nathan Snyder 1:02:26
So these are this is these are eight, this is it. These are eight motivational types of games. What is this?
Chad Owen 1:02:36
These are? So they frame it as like the aesthetics of games. So like, what makes games fun, as well. So like, they're trying to move away from Oh, this game is fun, to a more directional vocabulary. Mm hmm. And this is it. So like, you can, you can phrase it as as like, this game is fun, because blank, because it's challenging. And because you get to do it in a social framework. Or this game is fun, because there's a lot of uncharted territory to discover. And it's a very fantastical, or, yeah, so they're they're creating. Again, they're giving kind of hard attributes. To better describe the aesthetics of the game. They have this whole like MDA framework where they talk about the mechanics of the games, the dynamics of the game, and the aesthetics of the game.
Nathan Snyder 1:03:47
So what is this numbered list?
Chad Owen 1:03:52
Is that a eight types of ways to aesthetically describe the game? It's a taxonomy. It's not. It's not all encompassing, but these are the eight that they found most useful or helpful.
Nathan Snyder 1:04:11
But this is in the aesthetic component, right? Yeah. Cool.
Chad Owen 1:04:20
So like, in the aesthetics is like the direct experience of the players. The mechanics is like what the designers have put into the game. And then the dynamics is what sits in the middle that is like, the interplay between the mechanics that generates the aesthetics, and the reaction of the players based on aesthetics that go back into the game through the dynamics into the mechanics, so it's kind of like a like a sideways hourglass, you know, dude,
Nathan Snyder 1:04:54
you're, this is amazing. Here, you've got So, you've you've really blown my mind.
Unknown Speaker 1:05:06
Well then let's just keep going.
Nathan Snyder 1:05:09
Oh, okay. I want to hire you right now to help me. Um, understand the principles from the point of view of the three attributes and MDA framework as you understand it.
Chad Owen 1:05:39
You want me to help you better describe now and outcomes game in these using these terms?
Nathan Snyder 1:05:46
Yes. Okay. All right. So
you know what? Yes. Oh, you know what, let's, um, let's cut that. Let's cut right now on this on this video and start a new video
Unknown Speaker 1:06:30
and
Enjoy the transcript below or read and comment online here: https://otter.ai/s/Kf_VOQkPRE6g_JWl0tbu8w
——————————
Nathan Snyder 0:00
To the development process on ourselves. So you and I, like we're doing right now recording ourselves, facilitating ourselves in a lab that's conducting a scenario planning session. Will when when when we hit cut on the video become an asset that can get used as a prompt for inviting other players into the scenario planning session. On noun an outcome?
Yeah. So
like I looked at, I looked at the, just to zoom out a little bit,
I looked at the interactions that you and I were having, like over text message that day, as as being the game like that we were playing with one another.
And, like, it didn't.
It wasn't a formalized game, because we were fought, we were in the process of attempting to formalize it. And I think that there was something that would be lost if the game is only formalized. In other words, like, the open dimension of the gameplay is something that is maybe even more important than the outcomes of the game itself.
Chad Owen 1:46
I, I absolutely agree in this principle of playing to find out, I think is, is really important to that. Mm hmm. I think because what that kind of
Unknown Speaker 2:02
cuts through is,
Chad Owen 2:06
yes, it can be documented instruction in a certain way, but the game doesn't come into existence until you're playing it. Mm hmm. And the interactions and reactions between players is, is like where the process of the game on the folds. Yes. And the game is more like a tool set that you can bring different elements to when you're playing the game. And like, so what I have, have now prepared are like different tools that I think we could use to bring into the playing of the game.
Nathan Snyder 2:48
Mm hmm. Right, instead of, instead of those tools, creating a game that you then play, we're using the tools to make the game as we
Unknown Speaker 3:00
play it.
Chad Owen 3:03
Yeah, it's like our toys in the sandbox that we can pick up and use whenever we want. But we're still just in that sandbox. Mm hm.
Unknown Speaker 3:16
And
Nathan Snyder 3:17
so is the thesis that we believe that by bringing people into a sandbox full of toys, they fill it up with sand that we can then turn into castles and by turning their sand into castles with our tools, they become better able to become scenario planners within their own organizations.
Chad Owen 3:56
Yes, and I think I think it has an even more like developmental consequence in that people can begin to make object what they have previously been subject to, because of the imaginative and kind of safe place space that's created in in the dialogue or conversation between between individuals, and like, and then the byproduct is becoming better or good scenario planners. Mm hmm. Mm hm. That's a hypothesis though, because I have only ever gone through similar experiences in a like purely fictional, imaginative narrative. That's very much in kind of like an escapist sort of realm. Not a, this is like very related to my work, and therefore there's there's real risk You know, in, in playing too hard in this or there's, you know, barriers around like, whatever confidentiality, vulnerability, whatever. Mm hmm. It's easy if you're playing like orcs and elves, right, it's hard if you're, if you're holding real individuals real consequences in your mind.
Nathan Snyder 5:26
Right? Hey, I gotta take, I gotta hit the head for a second.
Chad Owen 5:44
Yeah, I mean, all this is untested. So I think the sooner we start playing on ourselves and invite others, the better.
Unknown Speaker 5:57
Great.
Chad Owen 6:04
I don't know if this is pertinent or relevant. But I was only seeing the outputs of yours. And Mike's conversations, I really don't know how that was being generated in real time. Nor kind of what you felt like, and of the task or purpose of those, that dialogue
Unknown Speaker 6:28
was,
Chad Owen 6:31
I don't know if you want to revisit that and take that as, as an input or if you or if you just want to continue in a different direction.
Unknown Speaker 7:04
So is your question. How did Mike and I arrive at the three?
Unknown Speaker 7:15
The three moves that I wrote you about?
Unknown Speaker 7:19
Two weeks ago?
Unknown Speaker 7:20
Yeah. Yeah.
Chad Owen 7:26
You described them as moves, which was interesting to me. I was kind of curious, what generated each of those.
Unknown Speaker 7:34
Oh, yeah.
Nathan Snyder 7:36
Well, let me look here. So the first move really came out of the work I did in preparation of the trip that culminated in our first conversation before I even got on the road with Mike, when I arrived in Michigan, so that was the first time that meeting was the first time I articulated to you the relationship I envisioned, occurring between stimulus and noun an outcome as a byproduct of the DCG contract. funding the activity funding the time that you were able to spend in noun and outcome building the intellectual property and education for stimulus to be able to derive value to generate value and then deliver value to DCG.
Unknown Speaker 9:08
So go ahead.
Chad Owen 9:13
And, and each subsequent move was just a you taking the prior move as ground and kind of an instruction to the next.
Nathan Snyder 9:26
Yeah, yeah, basically, well, to take off the claim to take the other way around to take the previous move is the finger by which that was ground in the in the proceeding or in the substance in the
Chad Owen 9:40
Yeah, former I did it wrong.
Unknown Speaker 9:43
Yeah. Yeah. The so that's right.
Chad Owen 9:46
And
Nathan Snyder 9:50
but but the contents of those, the, what was ground becoming figure in the next move are important.
Unknown Speaker 10:06
They're important because how we
Unknown Speaker 10:12
go about
Unknown Speaker 10:14
developing
Nathan Snyder 10:17
the relationship between noun and outcome, and its agency partners reformulates, the service generation and delivery of our clients organizations. So how do I work on behalf of noun an outcome for stimulus becomes how stimulus can reformulate the way that it works with a client like DCG.
Chad Owen 11:03
In, in, if you can recall how you were generating these moves? Did you have a stimulus providing a service to DCG as kind of an outcome in which you were working towards? Or was it more procedural in nature and kind of Van stimulus providing the service to TCP like fell out at the end?
Was your assumption going in that stimulus needed to or was going to provide a service to DCG? And these moves or ways of you getting there? Or? Or was it more happenstance?
Nathan Snyder 12:00
I mean, in in ways, it's both mean, it's both indirect it's it's both direct and indirect.
Unknown Speaker 12:14
There are ways that we could look at it.
Unknown Speaker 12:18
Where there was ways that we could look at the moves that were made.
Nathan Snyder 12:37
There's there's ways that we can look at the
Unknown Speaker 12:41
moves that were
Nathan Snyder 12:44
made as a way to generate value directly to DCG. But also, alternatively, for example, ways that noun an outcome was directly attempting to generate value for itself.
Unknown Speaker 13:06
So
Nathan Snyder 13:12
yeah, I'm not I'm not sure. Making it into an either or feels like it is limiting the
Chad Owen 13:23
Yeah, but I think your answers helping me better understand how you are approaching it.
Nathan Snyder 13:29
It's not it could be look be looked at as a cause and effect. But you could also say, Well, I'm looking at that as cause and effect is a byproduct of a bunch of other unrelated conversations that were had. That we would
Chad Owen 13:44
Yeah. And I also see it as as as complex. And I think maybe what I'm questioning is, well, how did how did you come to conceive of it in such a complex manner? In your response, just now told me that, that you're, you're you're considering the interrelatedness of all of the organizations, not just stimulus and DCG, it's now now come to itself. And it's some, you know, agency participants. And those agency participants to towards their clients. Yes, because someone may look at this and be like, well, this is a very convoluted way to get to stimulus providing a service to DCG.
Unknown Speaker 14:34
Yeah, totally.
Chad Owen 14:36
But, but yeah, I'm not advocating for one way or the other. I'm just I'm trying to better understand how you were formulating this. And I think it's because you were, you're optimizing for that, that that mutual value, and that code generation of value between all of the entities kind of at each stage. contribution to one is not just a contribution to one, but to, to more than one. Right? Yeah.
Unknown Speaker 15:13
I'm here, I'll just share my screen if you allow me.
Nathan Snyder 15:17
Instead of you clicking on that yourself already already did. So I think I think the partnership cube is really the the thing that we're turning on?
Unknown Speaker 15:34
And the
Nathan Snyder 15:40
what's my way in here? So, like,
Unknown Speaker 15:48
so what are we doing in this conversation? Why am I showing this to you?
Nathan Snyder 15:59
We're trying to prepare for a meeting next week. And maybe we don't, we don't need to, maybe we just need to start by starting and we are already doing that. But the way that I'm,
Unknown Speaker 16:17
I'm
Nathan Snyder 16:22
the way that I'm relating to this conversation is through this, this partnership cube, and we can look at these is, this can be a cube, it can also be a stacked hierarchy. So like, you could say, like the most from
Unknown Speaker 16:46
so
Unknown Speaker 17:40
I need to get rid of potential here. But, um,
Nathan Snyder 17:47
so because human potential sort of the basis by which this operates, yes, it makes sense to keep on that in the queue. But it was confer convenience. So I guess, I'm like, how do we coordinate this whole stack of this whole seven layer stack is what we're focused on, trying to do as a
as a conservative code generating and describing
Chad Owen 18:23
this through through the act of play.
Nathan Snyder 18:38
So right now, you're, you're working, you're working to understand and interpret me. And I think that we're in kind of the partner and a partner role inside of not an outcome. And we're in a lab. We are, you are, you're sort of in the interviewer, and I'm in the client mode. I you're trying to help me figure out our agenda for next week's meetings. And I'm describing to you the this partnership cube and how it relates to the this notion of play, and the game.
Chad Owen 19:39
Just one revision, I think I'm trying to understand how to begin playing with you. Yeah, more than what our agenda for next week should be.
Unknown Speaker 19:49
Right? Right.
Chad Owen 20:02
In May, perhaps that's me saying that I believe we should begin playing next week, and therefore, that's why I'm trying to get to the right.
Unknown Speaker 20:13
Okay, so what else? So, yeah,
Nathan Snyder 20:18
I'm just going to, I'm just going to inhabit my role here. Go ahead.
Unknown Speaker 20:24
Sure, as client.
Chad Owen 20:33
So last week, or the week before, it's all blurring together, you'd be gone to describe your perspective as kind of a key contributor to now an outcome of these different worlds of work. And one being more kinds of work for higher quality of life, take my salary, and another being more of a work for equity and partnership. And so those is kind of two ends of one spectrum. Another spectrum I heard you describing was one where there is there is purposeful work and developmental work. that's being done or that's, that's kind of its its reason. And then there's also can educational or skill based work. And again, I saw those on two different spectrums. When I put those together, I came up with kind of four different types of organizations that might dominate in a world where, you know, different combinations of those things is, is true. And so that's where that kind of that cross matrix can came about. So there's, there's in a way, for scenarios or for futures, where one of these organizations I said dominates, but you know, it's either it's, it's, it's either in Vogue, or is is more successful, or there's higher growth amongst those types of organizations. I'm curious for you now, you know, you can decide whether you would like to choose a scenario based on what's most interesting to you, or what you feel of a more likely future than the others. And that can be kind of the basis from which we begin to design, you know, the scenario that we take through the scenario planning game. Or we can focus on, you know, entirely different drivers or uncertainties, but I think these are pretty good to begin with.
Unknown Speaker 23:17
So, you're proposing to
Nathan Snyder 23:22
begin the game without going through the drivers and, and trends, revealing the uncertainties?
Because you feel like we've already done that.
Chad Owen 23:45
Well, yeah, I guess. I'm proposing that that this is good enough for us just to begin
Unknown Speaker 23:58
Okay. All right, we will
Chad Owen 24:00
have to we will have to return to kind of generation this this trends, drivers uncertainties generation process. But in the interest of forward momentum, I think we can move ahead. So
Unknown Speaker 24:36
how did how did you arrive?
Chad Owen 24:41
So Nate, you're you're envisioning the creation of a new organization. in that organization will come into existence in a world that.dot.in world that will be dominated by players such as quirks, and takedown, or will be dominated by
these dolls are developmentally focused, or kind of in between organizations like venture studios that are coming together you know, to take bets on products and startups or, or freelance alliances more like Yak collective, where it's it is a piece of work for hire, but it has developmental focus, so not an outcome. You know, it's coming into existence in not just one of these four, but these four or four potential futures and just curious, which is most interesting for you to explore. Now, we can return into others, you know, and do this process more than once. He
Unknown Speaker 26:05
Yeah, the the developmental doubts.
Chad Owen 26:11
Cool. So, in that world of working for equity is dominant. And doing work that is developmental in nature is also
Unknown Speaker 26:27
dominant.
Chad Owen 26:32
Great. So that's, that's a given of that, that reality. Now, one thing, I'll share my screen. So the question I'm asking myself is, what are we playing to find out? And so dramatic? I'm framing this game in terms of what I call a dramatic question. And that's that is what are we playing? Find out. And there's kind of a Madlib version of this. That I feel like we can generate together to kind of figure out what it is what what that question is. So the things in bold are kind of the parts of this map and that we have to fill in, but you're working on a project alongside a team who are doing various tasks. So the question is, can you achieve this objective or your objective given the constraints of your environment and resources, even after complications arrive to avoid certain consequences and
Unknown Speaker 27:52
unintended consequences? Yeah, that's good. That's good. Yep.
Unknown Speaker 27:59
So so this is the
Nathan Snyder 28:01
Madlib. Okay. Yeah, right. Right. So you are working on insert project alongside of insert team, who have insert tasks. Got it?
Chad Owen 28:15
Unfortunately, I don't have any playbooks for us to work from in this moment, but I can kind of, I can improvise.
Nathan Snyder 28:22
Yeah, that's exactly how we should build this, you should verbally Give me the playbooks. And then we should Yeah, look at the transcript and then start writing them.
Chad Owen 28:34
So so we're going to need a few more players to go through this game. So as we're going through this, think of three other individuals that you would like to bring with you through this game. And each of these players is going to be inhabiting one playbook or avatar. Okay, you're playing the role of the spotlight player or the protagonist. Yeah. And so you're, you're going to be generating what your objective is. And you're also be
Unknown Speaker 29:08
and this is a is up for
Chad Owen 29:13
debate. But I see that the protagonist is generating the objective and the tasks for this madman and in the what are we playing to find out there's three other players that are representing what I'm calling the organization. So that's the people in the in the in the structure of the organization in which you're working under and in collaboration with them, but doesn't just have to be kind of your specific company. It can also be others. There's also someone that's embodying the environment that I see kind of driving what the constraints that are working against you are and potential consequences. based on what's what's going on in the environment, and then there's this kind of chaotic player of this, this throwing up these obstacles or complications in front of you as you're trying to reach your objective. So the next, the next step in this, as we're kind of creating a scenario to then game is, what do we plan to find out? It's answering this question. So we can, we can spend a moment here to go through and kind of understand. And we can begin wherever you would like. As you're inhabiting your role as a founding member of nano an outcome, what your objective is, what the what the project, of the creation of the company looks like, or it's kind of its first client engagement or agency engagement and specific particular tasks that are incumbent to to achieve that, that that project and that objective.
And as you're speaking, let me know, maybe from which playbook you're speaking from, as yourself or their organization.
Unknown Speaker 32:03
All right, cool. Um,
Unknown Speaker 32:07
is this in Rome? This is this is great. Yeah.
Unknown Speaker 32:09
This is great.
Unknown Speaker 32:13
This is on your
Nathan Snyder 32:16
you're not doing this on Rome's interface, though, right?
Unknown Speaker 32:20
I am. It's styled just a little bit differently. How did you upload that style?
Chad Owen 32:28
There's a plugin. Can you see this?
Unknown Speaker 32:32
Yeah.
Unknown Speaker 32:34
Yeah, no. All right, like
Unknown Speaker 32:38
so so normally looks like yeah, this is my favorite.
Unknown Speaker 32:44
No, this one looks great. Um,
Nathan Snyder 32:51
so you want to know what what perspective I'm gonna play from?
Chad Owen 32:58
I'm sorry. We're killing in the Madlib? Yeah, just choose a place to start. And then we can we can begin filling in the dramatic question in admin.
Unknown Speaker 33:07
All right, let's start with the protagonist then. Okay.
Unknown Speaker 33:18
Do you want to prompt me?
Chad Owen 33:21
Well, maybe what I mean, let's, I just want to confirm with you that like the, the, the founding or starting amount and outcome is is a project from which we're going to work from founding the outcome?
Well, we can begin with what what what is your personal objective in the creation of noun and outcome?
What do you hope to gain by creating this new entity?
Unknown Speaker 34:06
So
Unknown Speaker 34:13
yeah, I mean,
Nathan Snyder 34:34
well, the way that I would approach answering a question like that is through my understanding of myself house.
Unknown Speaker 34:46
So, like, I
Nathan Snyder 34:51
you know, I'd pull up my room database and
Unknown Speaker 34:58
I'd go to not enough Come and I'd go like, to my
Nathan Snyder 35:07
self house descriptions. And I'd look in particular about like how noun an outcome can help me with my, with my professional culture, and the ways that my professional culture holds back my professional agenda. So to me, a noun and outcome is a work environment that is designed to help maximize my professional agenda.
Unknown Speaker 35:58
I'm
Nathan Snyder 36:00
leveraging the,
by leveraging the obstacles of my professional culture that generate the gap between what I hope to be able to do professionally and what I'm able to do professionally. So I guess like, I look at, like what noun an outcome is going to do for me as being less, I'm really not as focused on what noun an outcome is going to do for me, but more about how it's going to do it for me, because I believe if I focus on how it's going to do that, for me, I will get to a variety of what's that I find to be advantageous
Chad Owen 37:22
in addition to step stepping into the self house to understand why and how noun an outcome will benefit you, or how else are you? How else are you understanding the purpose of noun and outcome?
Nathan Snyder 38:05
Yeah, I mean, the the purpose of a noun an outcome is to create a more directly reciprocal relationship between mental and manual labor is supported by a, in a developmentally enriching, educational by supported by a developmentally enriching educational opportunities for a myriad of stakeholders involved in
Unknown Speaker 38:52
bringing noun and outs, noun and outcomes,
Unknown Speaker 38:58
business model to life.
Chad Owen 39:09
This is all really helpful for me to understand how to get at the objectives or the purpose. I'm curious what some of the wants or outputs are even tasks or jobs to be done. Do you see in front of you to get there?
Unknown Speaker 39:33
Yeah, well,
Nathan Snyder 39:40
I mean, right now I, at the broadest level, organize the infrastructure areas that need developed in now now come in, in three in three ways. So primary Really, the the, the job to be done context that I'm focused on is to provide a to provide a service on behalf of not an outcome to other service based consulting agencies
Unknown Speaker 40:25
who are
Nathan Snyder 40:28
whose executive team is downwardly divided at stratum three.
Unknown Speaker 40:37
And currently
Unknown Speaker 40:41
not doing more than $5 million worth of revenue.
Unknown Speaker 40:49
And
Nathan Snyder 40:50
are dealing with a set of complications in their business as a result of their downwardly divided executive team where that executive team is caught spending too much of their time delivering the service that that consultancy provides to its clients, which is taking away the time that they that executive team needs to spend redeveloping their business to stay in business to be able to continue to develop and continue to deliver the value that they do today to their clients in the future. So the second context of where my jobs to begin get derive from
Unknown Speaker 41:40
is through
Nathan Snyder 41:42
is through the educational component of noun an outcome where my like, you know, my turtle autocracy question is what is the relationship between adult development and organization design.
Unknown Speaker 42:07
And I am researching that through
Nathan Snyder 42:14
learning about two developmental instruments and practicing with those developmental instruments. And then the third component that I'm least involved with at this point is, or the third context where I drive jobs to be done that I'm least involved with at this point is offering a service to manual labor based businesses for a minority equity stake in in those businesses to develop a portfolio of assets in a manual labor based businesses.
Chad Owen 43:25
Great, yeah, me, you gave me more than I needed. Okay.
So we talked about kind of the objective and purpose here that you're interested in exploring with regards to the future of non outcome tasks or jobs to be done contexts that you find yourself in in order to get there.
Unknown Speaker 43:52
Who
Chad Owen 43:56
Yeah, so who you coming into relation to or relationship with in order to do that both inside and outside of them and outcome? Right, aka like, what's what does the team look like?
Unknown Speaker 44:20
Yeah, well,
Nathan Snyder 44:40
I mean, most directly, there's, there's one team that I'm on with, you to with with this guy named Chad to develop one of the service offerings. Which is the scenario planning game for our agency partners that they will play in order to get an education to then further license them as a noun and outcome service provider or to repackage not an outcome service for its clients
Unknown Speaker 45:26
or just directly for itself for its own value. And then
Nathan Snyder 45:35
I'm on a team with Derek to build, really the operating model and
Unknown Speaker 45:50
the
Nathan Snyder 45:53
business model of noun an outcome where I'm also for, and then with Mike, I'm on a team with him to perform the due diligence and envision the service offering we will provide to blue collar or to manual labor based businesses. And then I'm in a research cohort with this guy named Chad, Mike and Helen is supported by a mentor named Otto.
Unknown Speaker 46:42
I have
Nathan Snyder 46:44
and that that research cohort leads me to have a set of probably like six to a dozen different people that I have interviewed or are waiting to be interviewed, that could become either partners to noun an outcome, they could be come. They could become like, students in noun and outcomes, turtle autocracy. Or they could be they could be the, I don't know, I forget what the first thing that I said, JC partners in our Okay, it could be partners, clients, I don't think Yeah, they could be and then they could be clients to noun an outcome. And then fourth, they could be
Unknown Speaker 47:43
they could be a
Unknown Speaker 47:46
freelance talent that noun an outcome
Unknown Speaker 47:51
deploys
Unknown Speaker 47:53
in it
Nathan Snyder 47:55
in it in either it's well into its clients, we can just say,
Unknown Speaker 48:02
Hey, I have about five minutes, and then I have to shoot off.
Chad Owen 48:07
Sure.
What's your single biggest obstacle to beginning?
Unknown Speaker 48:27
Um,
Unknown Speaker 48:30
what's my single biggest obstacle?
Nathan Snyder 48:44
I think getting people to self initiate to self
Unknown Speaker 48:51
to self direct,
Nathan Snyder 48:54
in a coordinated enough fashion to serve the noun and outcomes purpose and operate within its well to Yeah, to operate within its operational model to work within its operational model. So to just to say that, again, my biggest obstacle is to initiate people to self direct their work in a way that fulfills not an outcomes purpose through its operating model.
Chad Owen 49:48
So it sounds like team finding the right team members is, is a big obstacle to beginning Recommended team members.
Unknown Speaker 50:04
Hmm.
Unknown Speaker 50:06
Well,
Nathan Snyder 50:07
yeah, I guess I'm saying if if I can find team if I can initiate Yeah. Okay, team members? Sure.
Chad Owen 50:22
I'm trying to place the constraint outside of yourself. You're putting the responsibility on yourself. I'm seeing if I see something outside of yourself. All right.
Unknown Speaker 50:31
Yeah. That, that that makes sense.
Chad Owen 50:37
What is at risk? If this doesn't work?
Unknown Speaker 50:46
Mmm hmm.
Unknown Speaker 50:57
What's at risk? My
Unknown Speaker 51:11
life at risk?
Nathan Snyder 51:21
My time is, I mean, is is the biggest risk
Chad Owen 51:25
of wasted time? Yeah.
So there's like an opportunity costs.
Unknown Speaker 51:45
Yeah, opportunity costs.
Chad Owen 51:53
I'll need to find a better way to get.
Unknown Speaker 51:56
Um,
Chad Owen 51:58
I think we have like, one more minute left. So, so what I've done, I didn't want to bombard you like with the notes that I was taking. But I think what I've begun to do is try to understand what questions can help them get at filling in these Madlib elements. And, you know, understand what like a conversational flow might look like in order, you know, for us to co create the scenario with, with these individuals, what was kind of missing from this was this specific angle of a world dominated by developmental vows. So it's just feedback from myself to? Well, we're we're trying to understand questions to ask. And I think what I would do a second time to re ask you those questions through the lens of like this, this world of very developmental work dominating, as well as working for equity. I will, yeah, what I will have to do is write kind of questions that need to be answered in the playbooks that, that do that. So there's kind of a regeneration of the questions inside of the playbook that then generates the scenario. Because what I'm envisioning is, it's actually the responsibility of the individual that is inhabiting that role to come up with these elements. So you as a spotlight player actually wouldn't control everything, because I don't think that's really appropriate. When you're talking about areas just because there's so much that is out of your control. I think that kind of mirrors the like uncertainty.
Unknown Speaker 53:43
And so you need to be uncertainty,
Nathan Snyder 53:45
you need to abstract and ask yourself, What questions do I need to ask to get someone playing your role
Unknown Speaker 53:54
to, to produce
Unknown Speaker 53:58
in a conversation like this?
Chad Owen 54:01
Yes. And I and I, I think how that happened is Yeah, it's like, I have the organization would like inhabit in personify noun and outcome as the organization and like, here's my will, and my purpose and my drive, it's like, it's not like in conflict, but like instigating you as the protagonist. In the same way that the environment is like instigating or making moves against the player that the players in reacting to and their answers in the same way a futures like throwing up these, these things in front of them. And then it's kind of through this conversation, that we're like doing this world building here. And then I think we have a cool co created understanding of the broader world. And then we can, like, begin to actually play out. Like, then we ask ourselves, like we begin the next session asking ourselves this question and Then, and then we start, again, kind of playing off one another where we have these, you know, set of makers, one of the players, it's it's trying to answer the question of this dramatic question for what happens?
Unknown Speaker 55:16
Yes. Great. Um,
Unknown Speaker 55:20
great. Well, let's start.
Chad Owen 55:21
Great. I have a lot more to work on the playbooks.
Unknown Speaker 55:23
Nice. I can Okay. Good,
Nathan Snyder 55:26
good, man. Well, I think this is a really productive time. And I'm glad we were able to meet this week. And, yeah, um, you know, Monday, I'll plan to, well, let's plan to try to let's try to talk on Sunday, so that we hit the week with a bunch of data from Casey. And that feels like half that's happening in parallel to what you're doing here. With me.
Chad Owen 55:54
So that's, and it's very helpful to inform this as well.
Nathan Snyder 55:59
Great. Cool, man. Well enjoy the next couple of days in Maine. I'm going to go to my mom and yes, say goodbye to my family before we head back to Brooklyn. Yeah, safe driving. Alright. See you Chad. Thank you. I'm talking. Cool. All right, man. Talk Sunday.
Unknown Speaker 56:16
Bye bye.