This is a facilitation game that I started during my workshops where people try to visualize their flow and improve it.

It uses the PLöRK (play&work) approach based on Cynefin and Scrum.



90 minutes



1 white board or a large panel

pencils or surliners

large sticky notes (4 in x 6 in) (! use bright colors)

small sticky notes (pink)

small sticky notes (light green)



  • draw the starting point “A” a the left side of the white board
  • draw the ending point “B” at the right side
  • write in a corner (ex. upper left) the question: “Please tell me how is your selling procedure? From customer contact till delivery.”

How the technique works:

  1. The moderator ask to the people to draw individually during 10 minutes on sticky notes how the procedure is seen by each of them. One note per step!
  2. Time-box this operation.
  3. Let the people place on the board each notes from “A” to “B” on the board and help them to comment: “I place this here because I think that…”
  4. When the placement is done. Invite the attendees to face the board and let them improve and discuss on the designed process.
  5. Ask them if they agree on the work done.
  6. Give them a time-box of 15 minutes to consolidate it by regrouping topics, skip overlapping.
  7. Give them 10 more minutes to link each topics together.
  8. Make a review of the work done.
  9. Now tell if that this whole “stream” has a value of 1.000 points, use “pink” sticky notes to value each topics regarding “their earned value” (where they got the cash!). Duration: 30 minutes.
  10. When it’s done. Do the same with the green sticky notes and ask where their customer should get the cash! Duration: 30 minutes.
  11. Debrief.

Learning points:

  • This game is based on value stream mapping and Gemba walk from Lean.
  • Starting with a Simple question
  • The individual vizualisation highlight the “how I see it” (Cynefin Chaotic state)
  • The collective consolidation helps the people to have a consensus on the stream (Cynefin Complex)
  • The “Win” state is where the people use the “pink” notes and discuss where they earn value for themselves.
  • The “/Win” state is where the people needs to understand where the customer get the value.
  • The “Win/Win” emerges during the discussion in the group where the gap becomes highly visible.
  • The attendees can start to review their stream to have a Win/Win situation.


  • How is my day! Use the same approach but from awaking to abed.
  • Agile vs Traditional! Use the same example.
  • Quality gaps! Use this example with pink post-its highlighting value creation and green for quality problems.


8 thoughts on “Take the Win Win WaveTake the Win Win WaveTake the Win Win Wave

  1. Yes/No, I performed it mainly in completely different sectors:
    • Manufacturing
    • Hotels, HR, Organization, CSR
    • Innovation Management
    • Healthcare
    My wish was to find a game that can fill the gap between ideation and business case, and in other hand a game that helps to highlight existing patterns.
    For Agile vs Waterfall:
    • Question: how do you proceed in a waterfall/V-Model?
    • Ask: when do you provide value for you?
    • Ask : when do you provide value to your customer?

    I made this to improve the development process in a big4 company, and it was interesting for them. Here some examples:
    • To see the *selling” procedure
    • The “time and fees” approach that delivers value for the consultant and not for the customer
    • The point of view of the customer was totally skipped away and lights on a completely different approach to their relation with their customer
    • I accentuate the fact that Agile is customer centric and Scrum should deliver customer values at each Sprint to get buy in. So what’s the value of architecture for the user?

    Is this helpful?

  2. Peirre, Some more questions, hope I don’t trouble you 🙂

    Overall in my mind this game is applicable for processes improvement, such as software development process or manufacture. So I cannot imagine how I could use it for such question “Agile vs Traditional! “, could you give 2 or more sample notes generated in phase1?

    I suggest step6 (regroup and eliminate duplication) should be prior to step4 (improve and discuss), what’s your thought?

    My email is, I am very glad to hear critical answers from you, hope get your feedback soon again.

  3. Hi Bob,

    Thanks a lot for your questions. Hereby, the answers:

    [Question] step 1 one note per step!
    [Answer]: At step 1, people can provide as much notes as they want. Only the time-box is fixed.

    [Question], how big/small for the step?
    [Answer]: this step is related to the “chaotic” phase of the Cynefin Model where individuals need to
    express themselves before starting to work a group. The size of answers/notes (?) doesn’t
    matter. The only measure that you can take at this step is “involvement” and
    “participation”. Real work starts later!

    [Question], could you give examples for your sample question?
    [Answer]: how is your day? How does it work here? I want to have this tool! What’s your job? What’s
    the story of your product/service? Etc…

    [Question], how long for step 4?
    [Answer]: Good question! It depends of your event/workshop time-box and team dynamics. Usually
    in 90 minutes, I use to have 10 min (ph1), 15 min (ph2), 15 min (ph3), 10 min (ph4), 5 min
    (review), 15 min (win1), 15 min (win2), 5 min (closing review)

    [Question], what’s the meaning of improve and discuss in step 4, just refine process?
    [Answer]: discover that there is a process and that each attendee needs to coordinate. In
    discussion, I often explain that you couldn’t change people or culture, only the process

    [Question], could the participants just place all notes (processes) from left to right according with timeline?
    [Answer]: Yes, I let people free choice: ex. Engineers like to have guidelines, Designers no. But the
    first iteration is kept free and the next (grouping) drives to timeline it in an emergent way

    [Question], what’s the purpose of 1000 points? is it for looking for the least valuable process (or 0 value), and try to eliminate it?
    [Answer]: Exactly. The objective is to install a sense of prioritization based on relative value.
    “1000 points” is easier to allocate in a time-box. I did tested MOSCOW (must have,
    should have, could have, won’t have) but it didn’t work that well and it reduced the
    focus on “problem solving”. “1000 points” is part of the gamification approach I use
    to apply in the game.

    I thank you for your questions and let’s improve the game together.


  4. I have some questions regarding this game:
    1. step1 one note per step! , how big/small for the step? could you give examples for your sample question?
    2. how long for step4?
    3. what’s the meaning of improve and discuss in step4, just refine process?
    4. step7, what’s the meaning of link? could the participants just place all notes (processes) from left to right according with timeline? could you give example?
    5. what’s the purpose of 1000 points? is it for looking for the least valuable process (or 0 value), and try to eliminate it?

    By the way, I am trying to understand this game and introduce it into my org. Thank Pierre for you wonderful game!

  5. Hi guys,
    Thanks a lot for your replies.

    I’ll add some notes to illustrate in witch context, my colleagues and I perform it (is getting more and more as or key stone).

    – TWWW @ Leadership Training:
    Objective: install participative leadership in Hotels regarding Corporate Social Responsibilities (CSR) improvements
    – Start point “A”: [customer intention to order]
    – Outpoint “B”: [bill paid, starting CRM]
    – each Department Manager design and explain it’s department process in front of a wall by putting on sticky notes
    – when all Department Managers are done then an organizational Complexity Cloud appears
    – ask them to review it, improve it, lean it for more flow
    – distribute “1000 points” for customer satisfaction
    – distribute “1000 points” for earning cash

    – Senior Management Gemba with visualization of business process complexities
    – Team building effect at Senior level
    – Senior Management introduced TWWW at monthly steering committee
    – starting TWWW for Operations to support company alignment

  6. Hi
    Nice game to show how a single process can be so differently used and to replace the customer as a main concern.
    Thanks for sharing.

  7. Hi,

    i really like the approach and will give it try next time when i am faced with identify the curently value stream.

Comments are closed.