Who is holding the other side?

The meeting ends with an agreement that seems clear. The next day, while working on your part, you discover that a colleague is taking a different direction. You think back to what was said: no one raised objections, yet you left the room with two different ideas of the same project.

This can happen even among capable people who respect each other and have worked together for years. Knowing each other makes many things easier; others end up being taken for granted. We rely on an understanding that, in that moment, needed a few more words.

When I think about an experience to offer a working group, this is also where I begin. I am interested in what happens between the intention to collaborate and the moment when people must genuinely agree, with a task in front of them and a colleague viewing it from another perspective.

A piece that does not fit makes the issue rather obvious.

Imagine being away from the office with the people you work with, facing a challenge no one yet knows. You have a goal and a defined time; after receiving instructions, it is up to you to decide how to proceed with the available resources. Someone starts thinking about a solution, while you first want to understand how to organise the work. A colleague you usually only discuss deadlines with proposes an idea you had not considered.

After a while, you find yourself holding one side of the structure steady. To secure it, you need someone to support the other end, but the person who could help is focused on their own work. You ask for a hand and together look for a position that works.

Collaboration there has a very concrete form. The piece stays upright only while you manage to coordinate.

I thought you were taking care of it

In a building challenge, dividing tasks seems a reasonable way to proceed. It is, provided it remains clear how the parts will come together. Anyone changing a measurement needs to tell the person preparing the adjacent piece. A decision made to simplify your own work may create a problem for a colleague who is pursuing theirs with equal commitment. This is a point I would pause over: everyone can do their assigned task well, while the shared result still suffers. Coordination was missing, or no one noticed that a change affected others too.

Perhaps you recognise something from your work. A request passes from one department to another, is interpreted and returned when it is already difficult to correct. The recipient thinks information is missing; the sender was convinced they had said everything. Looking at the sequence makes it possible to understand where you needed to speak to each other.

With a construction in front of you, that point can be observed as it happens. Work can be paused and each person asked to show how they imagined the result. Two different drawings on the same table give the group something precise to discuss.

When designing a Team Experience, I therefore seek a challenge in which people truly need one another. I want them to share a choice and see the effect of their decisions on the common work. Being able to complete everything separately and simply place the results together at the end would leave out an important part of the experience.

There is also a very simple satisfaction in seeing something begin to work. The piece you worked on fits beside a colleague’s. A solution improves because someone worked on it after you. Looking at what you have made, you can also recognise the value of help that, in everyday haste, you might have dismissed with a distracted thank you.

I find myself thinking of dance, which is part of my life. In partner work, knowing your own steps is of little use without attention to what the other person is doing. Sometimes you need to wait a moment or make an intention clearer. This image also helps me look at collaboration: your contribution takes shape in relation to someone else’s.

Wait, show me

Before choosing, I want to understand which idea has not yet found space.

Faced with an unfamiliar task, it can feel natural to look for whoever seems most confident. Having someone propose a direction helps people begin. But if the group immediately relies on the first solution, it may give up possibilities that have not had time to become understandable.

Let’s return to the table, where a colleague is suggesting a different connection between two parts of the construction. His explanation is a little unclear and, when someone reminds him that a decision has already been made, he lets it go. The group continues without fully understanding what he was suggesting.

He could be asked to demonstrate it with the materials. Would it make sense to try before discarding the suggestion? Everyone could then assess it, including those who did not understand the explanation. Here, creativity intertwines with listening: it also concerns willingness to examine a proposal arriving in a form different from what we expect.

The person leading can do a great deal at this stage. They can ask for an opinion before expressing their own, or let a colleague lead part of the work. The role remains recognisable outside the office, and how it is exercised still matters. Someone with an idea can tell whether there is room to discuss it from how the first objection is received.

I care particularly about this aspect when preparing the experience. Participants should be able to find a contribution that suits them, even if an unfamiliar activity immediately makes them think they have little aptitude. Someone can help by observing a problem others missed or helping two people clarify what they are trying to do. Manual ability is one resource available in the group, alongside others that deserve space.

The pleasure of play also belongs here. An unusual construction can spark curiosity and offer a chance to laugh together. But the challenge’s pace needs care: excessive haste could put everything back in the hands of those who already know how to proceed, sidelining the very people we wanted to involve.

For me, supporting the group means paying attention to these moments. Instructions and materials need careful preparation so everyone knows how to participate. Within this frame, choices belong to the participants. A difficulty may deserve some time before someone intervenes from outside to solve it.

This is also why preparation begins with a discussion with the organiser. A newly formed team has a different history from a group that has worked together for years. Knowing why you want this day helps choose a sensible proposal and give it a sustainable pace. I want to understand which opportunity you wish to offer people and how you intend to follow up on what emerges.

Before putting everything away

When the construction is finished, people want to take a photo and celebrate the result. That pleasure is part of the day. I would keep a little more time to revisit together how you got there. This is the debrief: a guided conversation about the experience just lived. It can begin with a specific episode, such as changing the design after a test or the moment when part of the group found itself waiting without knowing what to do.

Take the waiting. Those standing still may have thought time was being wasted; those working believed they were leaving others space to handle another part. Telling both perspectives helps explain how the situation arose. The question becomes: which information would have enabled better coordination?

My role in this discussion is to help the group remain close to what happened. I would start with the moment when a proposal went unanswered, letting those involved describe how they experienced it. Words such as “we don’t listen to each other” may indicate a real difficulty, but cover too much to understand where to act.

Attention also helps recognise what was useful. Perhaps someone asked to check a connection before continuing, and the group avoided redoing part of the work. Understanding how you received that request may be as useful as examining a difficult moment.

Then comes a question whose answer I would leave to participants: where do you recognise something similar in your work?

A building exercise has different rules and consequences from a business project. The connection gains value when the team identifies a precise similarity and decides it is worth exploring. One step may be enough, such as how you communicated a change of direction, compared with a work situation you know well.

The next meeting is already in the diary

Where can we follow up on what we have just seen?

Think of a concrete situation your group will face in the coming days. It could be starting an assignment or a handover between colleagues. Try connecting it to a moment in the challenge when you coordinated well or needed to understand each other sooner. From there, choose an adjustment to test. If during construction you discovered too late that you envisaged different results, at the next meeting you can ask those involved to describe what they expect to deliver. Discussion will let you check the shared understanding while there is still room to correct it.

To give the attempt continuity, agree who will propose it and set a time to discuss it again. Did you clarify something earlier than usual? Did an ambiguous point remain? The answers will help you decide whether to keep that adjustment or adapt it.

This is a possibility I want to leave a team: a shared reference to return to. An experience concrete enough for someone to say “that thing is happening to us again”, and for others to know which moment they mean. From there, conversation can resume with fewer preliminary explanations.

This is why, before choosing an experience to share with colleagues, I would also invite you to consider the follow-up. What space can you give to what they want to tell? If the day produces a reasonable proposal, will there be willingness to try it? The answer also concerns the organiser and how they will participate back at the office.

I return to the request for help in front of unfinished work: who is holding the other side? Someone needs a hand and must find a way to ask; someone else needs to notice that, for a moment, their contribution is needed elsewhere. I like pausing over gestures like these because people can describe the same moment from different perspectives. Discussion can reveal what they want to try doing together next time.

Return to articles