IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/simgam/v52y2021i3p255-272.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Becoming the Unseen Helmsman - Game facilitator competencies for novice, experienced, and non-game facilitators

Author

Listed:
  • Rens Kortmann
  • Vincent Peters

Abstract

Background . To facilitate game sessions for purposes beyond mere entertainment a facilitator needs to act like an ‘Unseen Helmsman’: steering their ship clear from rocks and storms without the players in the ship realizing. Previous work laid down a competency model for game facilitation . It reviewed several competency models for facilitators of generic (non-game) group sessions. Since no such model comprehensively provided guidelines to facilitate game sessions in particular, a new competency model was proposed using a bottom-up approach with the participation of game facilitation experts. The question remains what lessons may be drawn from this model. Methods. This contribution elaborates on the competency model for game facilitation and draws lessons from it. Thus it aims to empower both novice and experienced game facilitators to become an Unseen Helmsman. Also, it presents learnings for people who are experienced in facilitating groups in general, but who are new to facilitating game sessions. Conclusions. First, lessons for novice game facilitators include familiarising themselves with the core notions of the competency model : the characteristics of a complex systems game (session), and the attitudes, knowledge, and skills for successful game facilitation . Second, experienced game facilitators may learn from existing competency models for generic (non-game) group facilitation . Third, facilitators of generic (non-game) group sessions are encouraged to study the characteristics of game sessions in addition to the specific competencies contained in the competency model for game facilitators.

Suggested Citation

  • Rens Kortmann & Vincent Peters, 2021. "Becoming the Unseen Helmsman - Game facilitator competencies for novice, experienced, and non-game facilitators," Simulation & Gaming, , vol. 52(3), pages 255-272, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:simgam:v:52:y:2021:i:3:p:255-272
    DOI: 10.1177/10468781211020792
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/10468781211020792
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/10468781211020792?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Gert-Jan de Vreede & Fred Niederman & Ilse Paarlberg, 2002. "Towards an Instrument to Measure Participants' Perceptions on Facilitation in Group Support Systems Meetings," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 11(2), pages 127-144, March.
    2. L. Alberto Franco & Mie Femø Nielsen, 2018. "Examining Group Facilitation In Situ: The Use of Formulations in Facilitation Practice," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 27(5), pages 735-756, October.
    3. Etienne Rouwette & Ingrid Bastings & Hans Blokker, 2011. "A Comparison of Group Model Building and Strategic Options Development and Analysis," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 20(6), pages 781-803, November.
    4. Heide K. Lukosch & Geertje Bekebrede & Shalini Kurapati & Stephan G. Lukosch, 2018. "A Scientific Foundation of Simulation Games for the Analysis and Design of Complex Systems," Simulation & Gaming, , vol. 49(3), pages 279-314, June.
    5. Kate Thornton & Pak Yoong, 2011. "The role of the blended action learning facilitator: an enabler of learning and a trusted inquisitor," Action Learning: Research and Practice, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 8(2), pages 129-146, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Henner Gimpel & Vanessa Graf-Seyfried & Robert Laubacher & Oliver Meindl, 2023. "Towards Artificial Intelligence Augmenting Facilitation: AI Affordances in Macro-Task Crowdsourcing," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 32(1), pages 75-124, February.
    2. Midgley, Gerald & Cavana, Robert Y. & Brocklesby, John & Foote, Jeff L. & Wood, David R.R. & Ahuriri-Driscoll, Annabel, 2013. "Towards a new framework for evaluating systemic problem structuring methods," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 229(1), pages 143-154.
    3. Lami, Isabella M. & Tavella, Elena, 2019. "On the usefulness of soft OR models in decision making: A comparison of Problem Structuring Methods supported and self-organized workshops," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 275(3), pages 1020-1036.
    4. Francis Marleau Donais & Irène Abi-Zeid & E. Owen D. Waygood & Roxane Lavoie, 2021. "A Framework for Post-Project Evaluation of Multicriteria Decision Aiding Processes from the Stakeholders’ Perspective: Design and Application," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 30(5), pages 1161-1191, October.
    5. Bruno M. B. Pinto & Fernando A. F. Ferreira & Ronald W. Spahr & Mark A. Sunderman & Leandro F. Pereira, 2023. "Analyzing causes of urban blight using cognitive mapping and DEMATEL," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 325(2), pages 1083-1110, June.
    6. F. Ackermann & M. Yearworth & L. White, 2018. "Micro-processes in Group Decision and Negotiation: Practices and Routines for Supporting Decision Making," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 27(5), pages 709-713, October.
    7. Marieke de Wijse-van Heeswijk, 2021. "Ethics and the Simulation Facilitator: Taking your Professional Role Seriously," Simulation & Gaming, , vol. 52(3), pages 312-332, June.
    8. Jan HG Klabbers, 2018. "On the Architecture of Game Science: A Rebuttal," Simulation & Gaming, , vol. 49(3), pages 356-372, June.
    9. Scott, Rodney J & Cavana, Robert Y & Cameron, Donald, 2016. "Recent evidence on the effectiveness of group model building," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 249(3), pages 908-918.
    10. Sondoss Elsawah & Elena Bakhanova & Raimo P. Hämäläinen & Alexey Voinov, 2023. "A Competency Framework for Participatory Modeling," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 32(3), pages 569-601, June.
    11. Uyen-Phuong Nguyen & Philip Hallinger, 2020. "Assessing the Distinctive Contributions of Simulation & Gaming to the Literature, 1970-2019: A Bibliometric Review," Simulation & Gaming, , vol. 51(6), pages 744-769, December.
    12. Kevin R. Glover & Alec Bodzin, 2019. "Psychometric Testing of a Value-Achievement-Cost Motivation Survey for 12th Grade Health Sciences Students for Use in Simulation-Based-Games," Simulation & Gaming, , vol. 50(6), pages 789-811, December.
    13. Geertje Bekebrede & Ellen Van Bueren & Ivo Wenzler, 2018. "Towards a Joint Local Energy Transition Process in Urban Districts: The GO2Zero Simulation Game," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(8), pages 1-20, July.
    14. Vanessa B. Schramm & Fernando Schramm, 2018. "An Approach for Supporting Problem Structuring in Water Resources Management and Planning," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 32(9), pages 2955-2968, July.
    15. Willy C. Kriz & J. Tuomas Harviainen & Timothy C. Clapper, 2018. "Game Science: Foundations and Perspectives," Simulation & Gaming, , vol. 49(3), pages 199-206, June.
    16. Asif, Muhammad & Inam, Azhar & Adamowski, Jan & Shoaib, Muhammad & Tariq, Hisham & Ahmad, Shakil & Alizadeh, Mohammad Reza & Nazeer, Aftab, 2023. "Development of methods for the simplification of complex group built causal loop diagrams: A case study of the Rechna doab," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 476(C).
    17. Alexandre de A. Gomes Júnior & Vanessa B. Schramm, 2022. "Problem Structuring Methods: A Review of Advances Over the Last Decade," Systemic Practice and Action Research, Springer, vol. 35(1), pages 55-88, February.
    18. Federico Cosenz & Guido Noto, 2016. "Applying System Dynamics Modelling to Strategic Management: A Literature Review," Systems Research and Behavioral Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 33(6), pages 703-741, November.
    19. Nuno Videira & Rita Lopes & Paula Antunes & Rui Santos & José Luís Casanova, 2012. "Mapping Maritime Sustainability Issues with Stakeholder Groups," Systems Research and Behavioral Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 29(6), pages 596-619, November.
    20. Joeri van Laere & Jessica Lindblom & Marieke de Wijse-van Heeswijk, 2021. "Complexifying Facilitation by Immersing in Lived Experiences of on-the-fly Facilitation," Simulation & Gaming, , vol. 52(3), pages 346-363, June.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:simgam:v:52:y:2021:i:3:p:255-272. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.