While many people groan at the thought of participating in a group ice breaker activity, we’ve gotten consistent feedback from people who have been to recent rOpenSci unconferences.
Best ice breaker ever!
We’ve had lots of requests for a detailed description of how we do it. This post shares our recipe, including a script you can adapt, a reflection on its success, examples of how others have used it, and some tips to remember. Let us know in the comments if you’ve used or adapted it!
The Choice
I knew we would have a group of 60 to 70 people at unconf17, most of whom didn’t now each other. My objective was to have everyone introduce themselves to the entire group, and I wanted them to have “real� conversations, since immediately following the ice breaker, people would be self-sorting into groups who would collaborate on projects for two days.
After participating in several different flavors of ice breakers in an exercise led by Aidan Budd with a group of scientific community engagement managers, I chose an exercise called the “Human Barometer�, recommended by Cameron Neylon. The script below explains how it works, and there are examples like this one online.
The Script
Ask participants to stand in a line shoulder-to-shoulder facing you. This isn’t important after the start but helps people figure out the process. (Aside: This happens to be a perfect time to talk about your code of conduct!)
The objective of this icebreaker is to have all of you interacting across all perceived levels of who an rOpenSci unconf participant is. Here’s how it’s going to go down.
I’m going to make a potentially controversial statement and then ask you to stand on the spot on the line that reflects your opinion on the continuum between two extremes. For example, if you strongly agree with a statement, you would walk over and stand on your far right. If you strongly disagree, you would walk over to your far left, and many people will stand somewhere in between.
Once you’ve settled, I’ll give you three minutes to talk with the people around you to share opinions on the statement, giving evidence or an example that supports your opinion. Then, I’ll ask for volunteers to introduce themselves to the entire group and share their opinions and evidence. Your challenge is to see if you can change people’s minds about where they’re standing.
Please be sure to say both your first and last name regardless of how recognizable some people think you are. Also be aware that people may have different preferred pronouns. For example, when you’re talking about me behind my back 😉, please refer to me as she or her. Someone else might prefer to be referred to as they or them, as in “They asked me to hold their laptop while they poured a coffee�. I hope people feel comfortable enough to express that here.
Let’s begin…
Question 1: In the R community there are people who identify as #RDogLadies and #RCatFellas (and #RDogFellas and #RCatLadies). So … if you are a cat lover, move to your right and if you’re a dog person stand over here to your left. People agnostic to these animals, or those who identify as #RChickenLadies, should migrate to the middle.
Prior to the icebreaker I recruited two people who had extreme different opinions to illustrate how the ice breaker would work. rOpenSci’s co-founder Scott Chamberlain is an avowed Rforcats person.
Time a 3-minute chat among people standing near each other.
Would someone volunteer to introduce yourself to the entire group and tell us why you have chosen to stand where you are standing?
Continue with brief introductions and sharing opinions to the entire group for 10 to 12 minutes for each question, depending on how interesting the question and responses are. Each person should respond only once during the exercise.
Does anyone wish to move based on what you’ve heard?
Question 2: When I need to do something I’ve never done before, I a) consult an outside authority e.g. read the documentation or talk to an expert and try to understand the big picture OR b) I try to find a working example and modify it for my purposes