Can open source open minds?
Himmelstein, Jesse
In the IncLudo project, we are making open source games to promote diversityin the workplace. After a year of building and testing game prototypes, wewant to share what we've learned about bias, empathy, icebreakers, taboos, andboard games while pursuing this important but challenging goal.
 This is an open source open minds, lessons learned making games about diversity for the Incrudo project. My name is Jesse. And before I begin, I'd like to apologize. This is not a tech talk, so if you're expecting a tech talk, thank you. So there's some words to. Anyway, so but I am going to tell you about stuff that I find really fascinating, stuff that I've been learning when I've been making games about diversity. And I hope that you find it interesting too. Okay, so like I was saying, my name is Jesse. I work at the Cree Game Lab. So the Cree is a Center for Research and Interdisciplinary, Interdisciplinarity. Sorry, it's hard to say, in Paris. And at the Game Lab, we make open games for science, social change, and for education. So we create games. Usually we team up with researchers and teachers and we create games with them. We teach game design. And in particular, we have a really cool summer school that we call Glass, where we mix science students and game design students over the summer in order to have them make science games together. So we've been writing that for a few years. It's pretty fun. And finally, we do some community events. So we have this club called the Game ADA that Pedro was talking about earlier, where people come and they give talks about game design, about educational games, and all sorts of stuff related to that. Most of the talks are online on YouTube. Some are in French, some are in English. It should be pretty clear when you find them. So if you're interested, don't hesitate to check out our YouTube channel. All right, so this project began when these two guys, these two brothers, Hilmi and Subi, who started a small startup and social entrepreneurship in India, approached the Kree and said that they wanted to make games with us that promote diversity and inclusion in the workplace in India. So I said, hey, that's a great idea. I mean, I don't know anything about diversity or inclusion and I've never been to India, but let's do it. Right? How hard could it possibly be? And so it turns out that diversity is very dangerous, okay, and this is true. Studies showed that it can cause discomfort, create rougher interactions, create a lack of trust, greater perceived interpersonal conflict, lower communication, have less cohesion in the group, and more concern about being disrespected. So why are we trying to do games about diversity again? What's the point? Well, it turns out that diversity is also very advantageous for organizations. Obviously it also is advantageous for a society as a whole, but I won't even argue that point. Just for organizations to be diverse actually brings them a great advantage. And there's all sorts of studies that have shown this. It's really interesting. There's stuff that diversity brings. So the most obvious thing is that, okay, you're a diverse group. You have people of different viewpoints that come, right? That makes sense. What's really interesting is that the dynamics of the group changes when you have people from different backgrounds. So people actually share information better than they would. Perhaps because if you're with someone who you think is very similar to you, you might not think that you really have to talk about something because it's obvious they already know it, right? But if you don't trust that they really know what you're talking about, then you're going to put it out. And if you think that somebody has a different viewpoint than you, you actually do a better job arguing your viewpoint, which means you do more research, you back up your thinking, you think about what you're going to say before you say it. Whereas if you're with people who you generally all agree, you don't do that, you just get lazy and you just say what you want to say. And on the flip side of that too, people with differing opinions or dissenting opinions are actually more likely to bring them up in a group that's diverse. So once again, if you're in a group that everyone else is pretty much like you, you generally try to stick with that like you part. And you won't bring up the, oh, this might not work, you know, kind of viewpoint, which can be very important. All right. It is shown in the corporate world to lead for better performance. Companies make more money when they have, in particular, there's been study with having females on corporate boards, for example. And in the scientific world, it turns out that scientific papers written by groups of authors that are diverse are cited more and have higher impact factors, which is another kind of cool element. And there's a third reason, I think, that probably big companies have started to care about this, which is to avoid really bad PR. I don't know who remembers this thing with Google Photos when it rolled out, was it two years ago? And it was misidentifying people as gorillas. And you know, obviously, right, no one thinks like Google's out to do that, right? That's not what they're trying to do. But it does indicate, well, how come they didn't pick that up, right? And we don't really know, but we can suspect that the reason they didn't notice it before it rolled out is maybe the people testing and doing the QA were not of that background, didn't have that skin color, weren't from that part of the world. And maybe there's a reason that they also have diversity. Okay. So, okay, so diversity is so good. Let's do it. What's the problem, right? I think most people would agree with that point. Most people would agree with that point. In the current political climate, maybe not everyone would agree with that point. But I think a lot of people would think, well, you know, we've moved on, right? Like we know diversity is good. We know people are different than us. It doesn't mean that they're inferior. So, you know, okay, that's good. The problem is that that's not actually, even if we think that way, that's not the way we're really thinking. Because it turns out that as the quote goes, we are not feeling beings who think, oh, no, we are feeling beings who think, not thinking beings who feel. Which means primarily we're driven by emotions. And our thinking can be all kind of wacky afterwards. And in fact, even the fact that we make decisions and our reasons behind the decisions may largely be thought up after the fact. That's been studied too. So people will tend to make decisions and then you justify why you said that, right? So you make decision first, you know, explain later. So that obviously doesn't lead to making really good decisions where you're taking in all the information. And in fact, there are researchers who suggest that our ability to reason did not come from, is not motivated to make really good decisions, but rather to convince other people to join us if we want to do. Which is really crazy. Which means that basically, once again, we're making a decision, then we're justifying it, and then we're going to explain it really well so that other people can agree with us. So that's kind of scary. And in particular, it leads to all sorts of bias. So there's different kinds of bias. Probably the main one that we talk about is called confirmation bias. So that's what they talk about a lot nowadays involving the news. It means that when you get new information and it agrees with what you've already thought, then you tend to accept it as true. If you get information that goes against what you already thought, you tend to disregard it. And if people confront you with information that goes against what you think, often rather than changing your mind, you will probably double down on what you believe and think that there's some kind of like plot to try to get you to change your mind. And in terms of stereotypes, this comes down to people, right? So categorizing people based on what their skin, their age, how tall they are, how pretty they are, whatever kind of thing, and make some kind of judgment about the way they're going to act. And in fact, this is an interesting little side note. It's even been studied that when we see people who we consider very inferior to ourselves, we actually, the part of our brains that light up is not the part having to do with people, but rather the part having to do with objects, which means we are capable of literally seeing people as objects in a, yes, it's true. No, no, no, no, I just disagree. I'm a big statement. You cannot make such a straightforward assumption. Well, this is based on this paper. Yeah, but I don't care about whatever paper, part of brains are not significant in the way we see people. I'm sorry. Okay. I don't know. That's what I've understood so far. Now, obviously the two things can go hand in hand. You can have bias against groups of people. Okay. So it actually makes sense why we act this way, right? Our brains have evolved for a certain reason. We don't know for sure, but most likely it's because we need to make decisions quickly, especially in a more kind of wild situation where there's predators, there's different groups of people. Maybe there were reasons to be scared of other groups of people and it made sense to try to run away or something like that. Okay. So get back to the workplace. In the workplace, obviously, if you want a diverse workplace, well, you have to hire diverse people. Okay. So some of the interesting studies they've done have involved sending out CVs. So some of the put out resumes that are exactly identical except for the name on the top. So in this particular study, there was, they had one person was named, one fake resume was for John and one fake resume was for Jennifer. They sent these out at university laboratories to be hired by faculty members, right? And in this case, it turns out that Jennifer, oh, 10 minutes. Okay. So if Jennifer would be, was judged less competent, would not be as hired as often. And if they were hired, wouldn't be paid as much. So that's kind of, that's kind of scary too. Okay. And if you think that hiring based on CVs is bad, well, it turns out that interviews are much worse. In fact, some people suggest that interviews are probably the worst way to hire people because it's when you have the most bias because you're communicating with them, you come down, you talk about stuff that you enjoy in common and you're not judging them based on what they, what they need to be doing. Okay. Just a quick side note, really interesting example they've done is for orchestras. So it used to be in the U.S. there were very few females in orchestras. I think it said 1970, it was less than 5%. And the way they got around this is doing these blind, these blind, what's it called when you're getting hired? I can't think of any. Blind, blind, blind recitals. So people would come, they put up a curtain and they play behind the curtain. And actually at some point in some orchestras they made people take off their shoes because there was a thing that people could hear when it was a woman walking, when it was a man walking. It's just, it's crazy. Okay. So let's go on to games. So when we started this project, making games to promote diversity, we started with the assumption that most of ideas were not going to be very good and that we needed to, so our conclusion is that we need to try a lot. So basically we structured our projects so that we started with prototypes, a bunch, then we cut them down to just four. That's what we're doing now. And we're going to be developing then for the next year and then putting them out there. All our projects, well it's open source, otherwise it wouldn't be here. We also do, we're going to put out all our data as open data so all the analytics we get back. And the process itself is open. We're trying to put it all on our blog so people can reproduce our ideas, try different things that we didn't do, etc. Okay. So we started with game jams and with working with the organizations that we're going to be at. And this was, I was going to go through all the different ideas that we tried, but I'm not going to have time. So we tried abstract platformers, online comic captions, five minute debates about celebrities, automatic stereotype generators, a whole lot of different stuff. And we put all these things out there. We had our testers in India try them and rank them based on how engaging they thought they were and how much they learned. And based on that we picked these four games. So one of them is, let's see, so hired is a game where you, we kind of teach about bias. So we give people biases and you have to hire someone. And so you pick up cards and everyone's trying to hide their bias because if someone else finds out they're out of the game. And so you come up with these really funny arguments where you're kind of trying not to say why you don't want to hire women because you have to come up with funny things. It works out pretty well. Pimmy State is a game for learning about different regions of India. It's too hard for me, but for people who live there they can play it. This is kind of a weird physical game where you pretend to be pirates that all have different physical handicaps and you have to play a cooperative game. And another day is a visual novel that we're creating now about you being a HR manager at a, oh, sorry, I lost the microphone. One second. All right, so we don't have a lot of time, but I just wanted to say a few things that we learned with this process so far. So one thing is that we've learned to favor concrete ideas over abstract ones. Once again, based on the assumption that the abstract things, people might agree in the abstract about diversity, but might not act that way in a concrete decision making process. We found that getting people to talk is really, really, really valuable. And for that, board games actually surprisingly good. So when we started this, we were going to make only video games. And then it turns out most people wanted board games. You can play them. Well, they actually also work well for a company. Like you bring everyone in through a meeting room, you put a board game on a table, people can start to play, or a card game, or other kind of tabletop game. People can start to discuss, oh, this happened to me, this happened to my aunt. You can start discussing things that way. We also found that in general, people really do like to find out about each other. And they also like to share things about themselves. It's just that it's a little scary and you're worried about being judged. And so by putting them in a game context where they feel comfortable, you can make that process a lot easier. All right. In terms of the process, we found that game jams are really fantastic as a way to start. Come up with lots of different ideas and try a lot of things out. We found that using paper prototypes are really great too. So even for video games, to not just code something, but to do stuff on paper and try to make a board game that would act like the final video game is a great process because it's really quick. And you can change the rules. You can change the rules like 10 times in an hour and you don't have to, which you could never do with, well, maybe if you're an incredible coder you could. On the flip side, that's hard for other people to accept. Sometimes if you have a paper prototype, people don't take you seriously. So that's a little harder that way. OK. And having a diverse team obviously also makes a big difference. This seems very obvious, but actually when we were starting the project, we were mostly guys and none of us were from India. So we thought, oh, it's so cool. We're going to work with the Indian partner. It won't be a problem. They'll teach us stuff. But there's stuff that's hard to learn all on your own. And so as we started hiring more people who were Indian, who were women, it made things a lot easier. So in conclusion, diversity and inclusion are good things for organizations. And that over time, our bias has moved from something that we, you know, it's just out there, some overt thing into some implicit thing that's within ourselves that is harder to address for that reason. Because people don't think that they're biased. None of us think that we're biased. We all think that we're very rational. Games have been shown to help people tackle difficult subjects. And we found that ice breaker and tabletop games are really great for getting people to start to discuss. And finally, with prototyping, it's a great way to start any process like that. So to get back to the original question about can games really improve diversity and inclusion in the workplace, my answer is you have to wait. And hopefully I'll tell you next year. Okay. Thank you very much. And I think we have time for questions. Sounds good. I rushed a little bit because I don't know. Eight minutes. Oh, that's all right. Plenty of time. Okay. Any questions? Yeah? I was really interested in the game you mentioned about having to hide your bias. Oh, okay. So how does it actually work? Okay. So the way it works is that you pretend that you're all management at a company and that you have to hire somebody for a position. And then, so it's a random, right now it's cards and then we're going to move it to a mobile game. But right now it's a card. And so you see the people with a fake CV. And then everyone has a secret bias card. So for example, mine maybe is like, you know, don't want to hire a woman, maybe someone else that don't want to hire, I know, Muslims or something like that. And then what you do is you argue about who you should hire. And you don't want to hire the person that your bias is about. But if it's really obvious and I'm like, yeah, you know, I don't know, she's going to go on print a leave at some point. Well, then they'll know that that's my bias. And so they can call me out, et cetera. And you try to like get the, so you're trying to fight for it, but without really letting it in. It's kind of cool. But what the discussions that come out are really funny. Yes. I'm curious about the recruitment process. Who were the people coming? How did they came there? Why? How many? For the game jams or in India or in China? Oh, yes. Okay. So it's very, two very different things. So let me just go back to this slide real quick that we're talking about. Oh, sorry. I'm supposed to repeat the questions and I forgot myself. So the question was about the recruitment process for the different events. So when we were in India, we basically did like board game making events with the different groups that ZMQ, who is our Indian partner, is in touch with. So there's companies, there's nonprofit organizations, and there's also government, parts of the government. So these are basically contacts of theirs that were interested in promoting diversity in their workplace. And in Paris, what we've done is more kind of use our Gemini community of people who are interested in making games. Maybe don't know so much about diversity, although that's not totally true. There are people who really do. And kind of get them to say, okay, let's make games for over the weekend. How many people will learn the work? Okay. Well, for the game? Shoot. How many? I think for the Paris one, it's around 50 people or something like that, I would say. 40 to 50? Yeah. In India, we've done smaller things. We've done it also at school with a bunch of students. Yeah. Any other questions? Yes? How do you measure the impact of the impact? That's it. Okay. So the question is, how do you measure the impact? So that's really hard. It's really hard because there's a few different things. You could try to measure the impact of the game in terms of what people learned. And that is difficult in itself. We have to have a very specialized standard questionnaires. And the other attempt is to try to see what the organizations actually do in real life. So that's what ZNMQ is planning on doing. So the basic is the idea to see if the management makes any changes in their procedures. So, because I didn't talk about that, but there's a lot of things that organizations can do to try to promote diversity in the workplace. It's not just like, you know, talk about how good diversity it is. There's like very concrete things, you know, like that you can do so. You can make the hiring process more open. You can make people have to write down everything they want about a candidate before looking at the CVs. And that way you can argue it. Actually, if you're interested in that, there's a really fantastic talk by an HR researcher at Google called something bias diversity at Google or something like that. And it's really fantastic. It goes through all these different hiring practices that they've done at Google to make it better. So, for example, on the interview thing, they basically are trying to get rid of a typical interview where you would just kind of talk to the person and ask them questions. And they've replaced it with like a script. So like, you know, this is the first question. And then the answers are this, this or this, you know, and these ones are good and these ones are bad. Now, next question, you know, and the answers are this, this and this. Which is, it's kind of strange because it feels very robotic. You know, it's like, well, we're replacing people with, you know, an algorithm. But at the same time, it does get rid of the bias, right? Because it's something is standardized and it's not about that. Yes, maybe we'll go to him first since you've already asked a question if that's okay. Yeah. Maybe the question and answer is our bias because they're written by people. Ah, yes, that's possible. Sorry, you had another question. Okay, sorry. Sorry, I'm not going to describe the game as a particular game because I want to know what is the part of cooperation and competition in your game because competition, I think, is over in our society. It means us to collect the description as an example of a competitive game by excellence is monopoly and there are no more and more cooperation gates. That's true. And so some piece movement and so on. All right. Yeah, so the question was about competitive versus cooperative games. So in this, okay, so just a quick thing about competition and cooperation. What's cool is that both things can go nicely together. Like typically in team games, there's a cooperation between the people on the team and there's a competitive thing between the teams, right? And that's an element where you can mix it. I wouldn't agree that competition is bad like by itself because I feel like there is, it is something that motivates us and as long as it's within a game context where we understand we're in a game, we're competing in the game and when we get out of the game, we're not competing in the same way. I think it's acceptable. In this particular games, sorry, let me just skip to the ones that I picked. Yeah, Hyatt is competitive. Paira Partaj, this one is non-competitive right now, but when we tried it in India, they kept saying we want a scoring system. We want to be able to know if we're better than the other ones. We're thinking about making it competitive just to add people. So have people play in a team, but once again, have the teams compete. How many cards did you get through, that kind of thing. This is a visual novel. You just play on your own, so it's not competitive. And Pin My State, you could play it competitively if you wanted, but you don't have to. It's more like an icebreaker. So maybe time for one more question. Yeah. I just wanted to respond to that in another way. To me, diversity is fundamental of life. I mean, if you don't have diversity, you have death, right? It's just a natural process that applies to quite many social process. So I'm curious why you promote diversity as a competitive behavior, because you promote it in the workplace as a competitive asset. Whereas on the contrary, I think it's pretty much the competition that kills diversity. So I find there's a bit of a contrast. So there was an observation about how diversity is something that creates cooperation, if I understand correctly, and why are we trying to promote competitivity, which is, why are we trying to promote diversity as something that's competitive, as an advantage? I guess the reason that if you're trying to bring diversity into an existing social structure made of companies that are competing, then it makes sense to sell it to them as a competitive thing. I guess that's the answer. I don't think it's going to be a good thing to sell it to a real Italian or anything else. If you were in a different social structure where you could be, people would be much more collaborative, then I think it would be wonderful. I don't know. I think it would be a different society altogether. It's good. All right. Maybe we should stop there. Well, thank you very much. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you.
 This is an open source open minds, lessons learned making games about diversity for the  Incrudo project.  My name is Jesse.  And before I begin, I'd like to apologize.  This is not a tech talk, so if you're expecting a tech talk, thank you.  So there's some words to.  Anyway, so but I am going to tell you about stuff that I find really fascinating, stuff  that I've been learning when I've been making games about diversity.  And I hope that you find it interesting too.  Okay, so like I was saying, my name is Jesse.  I work at the Cree Game Lab.  So the Cree is a Center for Research and Interdisciplinary, Interdisciplinarity.  Sorry, it's hard to say, in Paris.  And at the Game Lab, we make open games for science, social change, and for education.  So we create games.  Usually we team up with researchers and teachers and we create games with them.  We teach game design.  And in particular, we have a really cool summer school that we call Glass, where we mix science  students and game design students over the summer in order to have them make science  games together.  So we've been writing that for a few years.  It's pretty fun.  And finally, we do some community events.  So we have this club called the Game ADA that Pedro was talking about earlier, where people  come and they give talks about game design, about educational games, and all sorts of stuff  related to that.  Most of the talks are online on YouTube.  Some are in French, some are in English.  It should be pretty clear when you find them.  So if you're interested, don't hesitate to check out our YouTube channel.  All right, so this project began when these two guys, these two brothers, Hilmi and Subi,  who started a small startup and social entrepreneurship in India, approached the Kree and said that  they wanted to make games with us that promote diversity and inclusion in the workplace in  India.  So I said, hey, that's a great idea.  I mean, I don't know anything about diversity or inclusion and I've never been to India,  but let's do it.  Right?  How hard could it possibly be?  And so it turns out that diversity is very dangerous, okay, and this is true.  Studies showed that it can cause discomfort, create rougher interactions, create a lack  of trust, greater perceived interpersonal conflict, lower communication, have less cohesion in  the group, and more concern about being disrespected.  So why are we trying to do games about diversity again?  What's the point?  Well, it turns out that diversity is also very advantageous for organizations.  Obviously it also is advantageous for a society as a whole, but I won't even argue that point.  Just for organizations to be diverse actually brings them a great advantage.  And there's all sorts of studies that have shown this.  It's really interesting.  There's stuff that diversity brings.  So the most obvious thing is that, okay, you're a diverse group.  You have people of different viewpoints that come, right?  That makes sense.  What's really interesting is that the dynamics of the group changes when you have people  from different backgrounds.  So people actually share information better than they would.  Perhaps because if you're with someone who you think is very similar to you, you might  not think that you really have to talk about something because it's obvious they already  know it, right?  But if you don't trust that they really know what you're talking about, then you're going  to put it out.  And if you think that somebody has a different viewpoint than you, you actually do a better  job arguing your viewpoint, which means you do more research, you back up your thinking,  you think about what you're going to say before you say it.  Whereas if you're with people who you generally all agree, you don't do that, you just get  lazy and you just say what you want to say.  And on the flip side of that too, people with differing opinions or dissenting opinions  are actually more likely to bring them up in a group that's diverse.  So once again, if you're in a group that everyone else is pretty much like you, you generally  try to stick with that like you part.  And you won't bring up the, oh, this might not work, you know, kind of viewpoint, which  can be very important.  All right.  It is shown in the corporate world to lead for better performance.  Companies make more money when they have, in particular, there's been study with having  females on corporate boards, for example.  And in the scientific world, it turns out that scientific papers written by groups of  authors that are diverse are cited more and have higher impact factors, which is another  kind of cool element.  And there's a third reason, I think, that probably big companies have started to care  about this, which is to avoid really bad PR.  I don't know who remembers this thing with Google Photos when it rolled out, was it two  years ago?  And it was misidentifying people as gorillas.  And you know, obviously, right, no one thinks like Google's out to do that, right?  That's not what they're trying to do.  But it does indicate, well, how come they didn't pick that up, right?  And we don't really know, but we can suspect that the reason they didn't notice it before  it rolled out is maybe the people testing and doing the QA were not of that background,  didn't have that skin color, weren't from that part of the world.  And maybe there's a reason that they also have diversity.  Okay.  So, okay, so diversity is so good.  Let's do it.  What's the problem, right?  I think most people would agree with that point.  Most people would agree with that point.  In the current political climate, maybe not everyone would agree with that point.  But I think a lot of people would think, well, you know, we've moved on, right?  Like we know diversity is good.  We know people are different than us.  It doesn't mean that they're inferior.  So, you know, okay, that's good.  The problem is that that's not actually, even if we think that way, that's not the way we're  really thinking.  Because it turns out that as the quote goes, we are not feeling beings who think, oh, no,  we are feeling beings who think, not thinking beings who feel.  Which means primarily we're driven by emotions.  And our thinking can be all kind of wacky afterwards.  And in fact, even the fact that we make decisions and our reasons behind the decisions may largely  be thought up after the fact.  That's been studied too.  So people will tend to make decisions and then you justify why you said that, right?  So you make decision first, you know, explain later.  So that obviously doesn't lead to making really good decisions where you're taking in all  the information.  And in fact, there are researchers who suggest that our ability to reason did not come from,  is not motivated to make really good decisions, but rather to convince other people to join  us if we want to do.  Which is really crazy.  Which means that basically, once again, we're making a decision, then we're justifying it,  and then we're going to explain it really well so that other people can agree with us.  So that's kind of scary.  And in particular, it leads to all sorts of bias.  So there's different kinds of bias.  Probably the main one that we talk about is called confirmation bias.  So that's what they talk about a lot nowadays involving the news.  It means that when you get new information and it agrees with what you've already thought,  then you tend to accept it as true.  If you get information that goes against what you already thought, you tend to disregard  it.  And if people confront you with information that goes against what you think, often rather  than changing your mind, you will probably double down on what you believe and think  that there's some kind of like plot to try to get you to change your mind.  And in terms of stereotypes, this comes down to people, right?  So categorizing people based on what their skin, their age, how tall they are, how pretty  they are, whatever kind of thing, and make some kind of judgment about the way they're  going to act.  And in fact, this is an interesting little side note.  It's even been studied that when we see people who we consider very inferior to ourselves,  we actually, the part of our brains that light up is not the part having to do with people,  but rather the part having to do with objects, which means we are capable of literally seeing  people as objects in a, yes, it's true.  No, no, no, no, I just disagree.  I'm a big statement.  You cannot make such a straightforward assumption.  Well, this is based on this paper.  Yeah, but I don't care about whatever paper, part of brains are not significant in the  way we see people.  I'm sorry.  Okay.  I don't know.  That's what I've understood so far.  Now, obviously the two things can go hand in hand.  You can have bias against groups of people.  Okay.  So it actually makes sense why we act this way, right?  Our brains have evolved for a certain reason.  We don't know for sure, but most likely it's because we need to make decisions quickly,  especially in a more kind of wild situation where there's predators, there's different  groups of people.  Maybe there were reasons to be scared of other groups of people and it made sense to try  to run away or something like that.  Okay.  So get back to the workplace.  In the workplace, obviously, if you want a diverse workplace, well, you have to hire  diverse people.  Okay.  So some of the interesting studies they've done have involved sending out CVs.  So some of the put out resumes that are exactly identical except for the name on the top.  So in this particular study, there was, they had one person was named, one fake resume  was for John and one fake resume was for Jennifer.  They sent these out at university laboratories to be hired by faculty members, right?  And in this case, it turns out that Jennifer, oh, 10 minutes.  Okay.  So if Jennifer would be, was judged less competent, would not be as hired as often.  And if they were hired, wouldn't be paid as much.  So that's kind of, that's kind of scary too.  Okay.  And if you think that hiring based on CVs is bad, well, it turns out that interviews  are much worse.  In fact, some people suggest that interviews are probably the worst way to hire people  because it's when you have the most bias because you're communicating with them, you  come down, you talk about stuff that you enjoy in common and you're not judging them based  on what they, what they need to be doing.  Okay.  Just a quick side note, really interesting example they've done is for orchestras.  So it used to be in the U.S. there were very few females in orchestras.  I think it said 1970, it was less than 5%.  And the way they got around this is doing these blind, these blind, what's it called  when you're getting hired?  I can't think of any.  Blind, blind, blind recitals.  So people would come, they put up a curtain and they play behind the curtain.  And actually at some point in some orchestras they made people take off their shoes because  there was a thing that people could hear when it was a woman walking, when it was a man  walking.  It's just, it's crazy.  Okay.  So let's go on to games.  So when we started this project, making games to promote diversity, we started with the  assumption that most of ideas were not going to be very good and that we needed to, so  our conclusion is that we need to try a lot.  So basically we structured our projects so that we started with prototypes, a bunch,  then we cut them down to just four.  That's what we're doing now.  And we're going to be developing then for the next year and then putting them out there.  All our projects, well it's open source, otherwise it wouldn't be here.  We also do, we're going to put out all our data as open data so all the analytics we  get back.  And the process itself is open.  We're trying to put it all on our blog so people can reproduce our ideas, try different  things that we didn't do, etc.  Okay.  So we started with game jams and with working with the organizations that we're going to  be at.  And this was, I was going to go through all the different ideas that we tried, but I'm  not going to have time.  So we tried abstract platformers, online comic captions, five minute debates about celebrities,  automatic stereotype generators, a whole lot of different stuff.  And we put all these things out there.  We had our testers in India try them and rank them based on how engaging they thought they  were and how much they learned.  And based on that we picked these four games.  So one of them is, let's see, so hired is a game where you, we kind of teach about bias.  So we give people biases and you have to hire someone.  And so you pick up cards and everyone's trying to hide their bias because if someone else  finds out they're out of the game.  And so you come up with these really funny arguments where you're kind of trying not  to say why you don't want to hire women because you have to come up with funny things.  It works out pretty well.  Pimmy State is a game for learning about different regions of India.  It's too hard for me, but for people who live there they can play it.  This is kind of a weird physical game where you pretend to be pirates that all have different  physical handicaps and you have to play a cooperative game.  And another day is a visual novel that we're creating now about you being a HR manager  at a, oh, sorry, I lost the microphone.  One second.  All right, so we don't have a lot of time, but I just wanted to say a few things that  we learned with this process so far.  So one thing is that we've learned to favor concrete ideas over abstract ones.  Once again, based on the assumption that the abstract things, people might agree in the  abstract about diversity, but might not act that way in a concrete decision making process.  We found that getting people to talk is really, really, really valuable.  And for that, board games actually surprisingly good.  So when we started this, we were going to make only video games.  And then it turns out most people wanted board games.  You can play them.  Well, they actually also work well for a company.  Like you bring everyone in through a meeting room, you put a board game on a table, people  can start to play, or a card game, or other kind of tabletop game.  People can start to discuss, oh, this happened to me, this happened to my aunt.  You can start discussing things that way.  We also found that in general, people really do like to find out about each other.  And they also like to share things about themselves.  It's just that it's a little scary and you're worried about being judged.  And so by putting them in a game context where they feel comfortable, you can make that process  a lot easier.  All right.  In terms of the process, we found that game jams are really fantastic as a way to start.  Come up with lots of different ideas and try a lot of things out.  We found that using paper prototypes are really great too.  So even for video games, to not just code something, but to do stuff on paper and try  to make a board game that would act like the final video game is a great process because  it's really quick.  And you can change the rules.  You can change the rules like 10 times in an hour and you don't have to, which you could  never do with, well, maybe if you're an incredible coder you could.  On the flip side, that's hard for other people to accept.  Sometimes if you have a paper prototype, people don't take you seriously.  So that's a little harder that way.  OK.  And having a diverse team obviously also makes a big difference.  This seems very obvious, but actually when we were starting the project, we were mostly  guys and none of us were from India.  So we thought, oh, it's so cool.  We're going to work with the Indian partner.  It won't be a problem.  They'll teach us stuff.  But there's stuff that's hard to learn all on your own.  And so as we started hiring more people who were Indian, who were women, it made things  a lot easier.  So in conclusion, diversity and inclusion are good things for organizations.  And that over time, our bias has moved from something that we, you know, it's just out  there, some overt thing into some implicit thing that's within ourselves that is harder  to address for that reason.  Because people don't think that they're biased.  None of us think that we're biased.  We all think that we're very rational.  Games have been shown to help people tackle difficult subjects.  And we found that ice breaker and tabletop games are really great for getting people  to start to discuss.  And finally, with prototyping, it's a great way to start any process like that.  So to get back to the original question about can games really improve diversity and inclusion  in the workplace, my answer is you have to wait.  And hopefully I'll tell you next year.  Okay.  Thank you very much.  And I think we have time for questions.  Sounds good.  I rushed a little bit because I don't know.  Eight minutes.  Oh, that's all right.  Plenty of time.  Okay.  Any questions?  Yeah?  I was really interested in the game you mentioned about having to hide your bias.  Oh, okay.  So how does it actually work?  Okay.  So the way it works is that you pretend that you're all management at a company and that  you have to hire somebody for a position.  And then, so it's a random, right now it's cards and then we're going to move it to a  mobile game.  But right now it's a card.  And so you see the people with a fake CV.  And then everyone has a secret bias card.  So for example, mine maybe is like, you know, don't want to hire a woman, maybe someone  else that don't want to hire, I know, Muslims or something like that.  And then what you do is you argue about who you should hire.  And you don't want to hire the person that your bias is about.  But if it's really obvious and I'm like, yeah, you know, I don't know, she's going to go  on print a leave at some point.  Well, then they'll know that that's my bias.  And so they can call me out, et cetera.  And you try to like get the, so you're trying to fight for it, but without really letting  it in.  It's kind of cool.  But what the discussions that come out are really funny.  Yes.  I'm curious about the recruitment process.  Who were the people coming?  How did they came there?  Why?  How many?  For the game jams or in India or in China?  Oh, yes.  Okay.  So it's very, two very different things.  So let me just go back to this slide real quick that we're talking about.  Oh, sorry.  I'm supposed to repeat the questions and I forgot myself.  So the question was about the recruitment process for the different events.  So when we were in India, we basically did like board game making events with the different  groups that ZMQ, who is our Indian partner, is in touch with.  So there's companies, there's nonprofit organizations, and there's also government, parts of the  government.  So these are basically contacts of theirs that were interested in promoting diversity  in their workplace.  And in Paris, what we've done is more kind of use our Gemini community of people who  are interested in making games.  Maybe don't know so much about diversity, although that's not totally true.  There are people who really do.  And kind of get them to say, okay, let's make games for over the weekend.  How many people will learn the work?  Okay.  Well, for the game?  Shoot.  How many?  I think for the Paris one, it's around 50 people or something like that, I would say.  40 to 50?  Yeah.  In India, we've done smaller things.  We've done it also at school with a bunch of students.  Yeah.  Any other questions?  Yes?  How do you measure the impact of the impact?  That's it.  Okay.  So the question is, how do you measure the impact?  So that's really hard.  It's really hard because there's a few different things.  You could try to measure the impact of the game in terms of what people learned.  And that is difficult in itself.  We have to have a very specialized standard questionnaires.  And the other attempt is to try to see what the organizations actually do in real life.  So that's what ZNMQ is planning on doing.  So the basic is the idea to see if the management makes any changes in their procedures.  So, because I didn't talk about that, but there's a lot of things that organizations  can do to try to promote diversity in the workplace.  It's not just like, you know, talk about how good diversity it is.  There's like very concrete things, you know, like that you can do so.  You can make the hiring process more open.  You can make people have to write down everything they want about a candidate before looking  at the CVs.  And that way you can argue it.  Actually, if you're interested in that, there's a really fantastic talk by an HR researcher  at Google called something bias diversity at Google or something like that.  And it's really fantastic.  It goes through all these different hiring practices that they've done at Google to make  it better.  So, for example, on the interview thing, they basically are trying to get rid of a typical  interview where you would just kind of talk to the person and ask them questions.  And they've replaced it with like a script.  So like, you know, this is the first question.  And then the answers are this, this or this, you know, and these ones are good and these  ones are bad.  Now, next question, you know, and the answers are this, this and this.  Which is, it's kind of strange because it feels very robotic.  You know, it's like, well, we're replacing people with, you know, an algorithm.  But at the same time, it does get rid of the bias, right?  Because it's something is standardized and it's not about that.  Yes, maybe we'll go to him first since you've already asked a question if that's okay.  Yeah.  Maybe the question and answer is our bias because they're written by people.  Ah, yes, that's possible.  Sorry, you had another question.  Okay, sorry.  Sorry, I'm not going to describe the game as a particular game because I want to know  what is the part of cooperation and competition in your game because competition, I think,  is over in our society.  It means us to collect the description as an example of a competitive game by excellence  is monopoly and there are no more and more cooperation gates.  That's true.  And so some piece movement and so on.  All right.  Yeah, so the question was about competitive versus cooperative games.  So in this, okay, so just a quick thing about competition and cooperation.  What's cool is that both things can go nicely together.  Like typically in team games, there's a cooperation between the people on the team and there's  a competitive thing between the teams, right?  And that's an element where you can mix it.  I wouldn't agree that competition is bad like by itself because I feel like there is, it  is something that motivates us and as long as it's within a game context where we understand  we're in a game, we're competing in the game and when we get out of the game, we're not  competing in the same way.  I think it's acceptable.  In this particular games, sorry, let me just skip to the ones that I picked.  Yeah, Hyatt is competitive.  Paira Partaj, this one is non-competitive right now, but when we tried it in India, they kept  saying we want a scoring system.  We want to be able to know if we're better than the other ones.  We're thinking about making it competitive just to add people.  So have people play in a team, but once again, have the teams compete.  How many cards did you get through, that kind of thing.  This is a visual novel.  You just play on your own, so it's not competitive.  And Pin My State, you could play it competitively if you wanted, but you don't have to.  It's more like an icebreaker.  So maybe time for one more question.  Yeah.  I just wanted to respond to that in another way.  To me, diversity is fundamental of life.  I mean, if you don't have diversity, you have death, right?  It's just a natural process that applies to quite many social process.  So I'm curious why you promote diversity as a competitive behavior, because you promote  it in the workplace as a competitive asset.  Whereas on the contrary, I think it's pretty much the competition that kills diversity.  So I find there's a bit of a contrast.  So there was an observation about how diversity is something that creates cooperation, if  I understand correctly, and why are we trying to promote competitivity, which is, why are  we trying to promote diversity as something that's competitive, as an advantage?  I guess the reason that if you're trying to bring diversity into an existing social structure  made of companies that are competing, then it makes sense to sell it to them as a competitive  thing.  I guess that's the answer.  I don't think it's going to be a good thing to sell it to a real Italian or anything else.  If you were in a different social structure where you could be, people would be much more  collaborative, then I think it would be wonderful.  I don't know.  I think it would be a different society altogether.  It's good.  All right.  Maybe we should stop there.  Well, thank you very much.  Thank you.  Thank you.  Thank you.  Thank you.  Thank you.  Thank you.  Thank you.  Thank you.  Thank you.  Thank you.  Thank you.  Thank you.  Thank you.  Thank you.
Can_open_source_open_minds_Lessons_learned_making_games_about_diversity_for_the_Inc_0_131.png Can_open_source_open_minds_Lessons_learned_making_games_about_diversity_for_the_Inc_132_383.png Can_open_source_open_minds_Lessons_learned_making_games_about_diversity_for_the_Inc_384_923.png Can_open_source_open_minds_Lessons_learned_making_games_about_diversity_for_the_Inc_924_2615.png Can_open_source_open_minds_Lessons_learned_making_games_about_diversity_for_the_Inc_2616_3395.png Can_open_source_open_minds_Lessons_learned_making_games_about_diversity_for_the_Inc_3396_4019.png Can_open_source_open_minds_Lessons_learned_making_games_about_diversity_for_the_Inc_4020_7295.png Can_open_source_open_minds_Lessons_learned_making_games_about_diversity_for_the_Inc_7296_8147.png Can_open_source_open_minds_Lessons_learned_making_games_about_diversity_for_the_Inc_8148_8711.png Can_open_source_open_minds_Lessons_learned_making_games_about_diversity_for_the_Inc_8712_10631.png Can_open_source_open_minds_Lessons_learned_making_games_about_diversity_for_the_Inc_10632_13607.png Can_open_source_open_minds_Lessons_learned_making_games_about_diversity_for_the_Inc_13608_14831.png Can_open_source_open_minds_Lessons_learned_making_games_about_diversity_for_the_Inc_14832_15395.png Can_open_source_open_minds_Lessons_learned_making_games_about_diversity_for_the_Inc_15396_15743.png Can_open_source_open_minds_Lessons_learned_making_games_about_diversity_for_the_Inc_15744_16331.png Can_open_source_open_minds_Lessons_learned_making_games_about_diversity_for_the_Inc_16332_16379.png Can_open_source_open_minds_Lessons_learned_making_games_about_diversity_for_the_Inc_16380_16751.png Can_open_source_open_minds_Lessons_learned_making_games_about_diversity_for_the_Inc_16752_17471.png Can_open_source_open_minds_Lessons_learned_making_games_about_diversity_for_the_Inc_17472_17627.png Can_open_source_open_minds_Lessons_learned_making_games_about_diversity_for_the_Inc_17628_17999.png Can_open_source_open_minds_Lessons_learned_making_games_about_diversity_for_the_Inc_18000_18311.png Can_open_source_open_minds_Lessons_learned_making_games_about_diversity_for_the_Inc_18312_19775.png Can_open_source_open_minds_Lessons_learned_making_games_about_diversity_for_the_Inc_19776_21503.png Can_open_source_open_minds_Lessons_learned_making_games_about_diversity_for_the_Inc_21504_23231.png Can_open_source_open_minds_Lessons_learned_making_games_about_diversity_for_the_Inc_23232_24467.png Can_open_source_open_minds_Lessons_learned_making_games_about_diversity_for_the_Inc_24468_26807.png Can_open_source_open_minds_Lessons_learned_making_games_about_diversity_for_the_Inc_26808_26903.png Can_open_source_open_minds_Lessons_learned_making_games_about_diversity_for_the_Inc_26904_33575.png Can_open_source_open_minds_Lessons_learned_making_games_about_diversity_for_the_Inc_33576_33767.png Can_open_source_open_minds_Lessons_learned_making_games_about_diversity_for_the_Inc_33768_36659.png Can_open_source_open_minds_Lessons_learned_making_games_about_diversity_for_the_Inc_36660_36780.png
This is an open source open minds, lessons learned making games about diversity for the Incrudo project. My name is Jesse. And before I begin, I'd like to apologize. This is not a tech talk, so if you're expecting a tech talk, thank you. So there's some words to. Anyway, so but I am going to tell you about stuff that I find really fascinating, stuff that I've been learning when I've been making games about diversity. And I hope that you find it interesting too. Okay, so like I was saying, my name is Jesse. I work at the Cree Game Lab. So the Cree is a Center for Research and Interdisciplinary, Interdisciplinarity. Sorry, it's hard to say, in Paris. And at the Game Lab, we make open games for science, social change, and for education. So we create games. Usually we team up with researchers and teachers and we create games with them. We teach game design. And in particular, we have a really cool summer school that we call Glass, where we mix science students and game design students over the summer in order to have them make science games together. So we've been writing that for a few years. It's pretty fun. And finally, we do some community events. So we have this club called the Game ADA that Pedro was talking about earlier, where people come and they give talks about game design, about educational games, and all sorts of stuff related to that. Most of the talks are online on YouTube. Some are in French, some are in English. It should be pretty clear when you find them. So if you're interested, don't hesitate to check out our YouTube channel. All right, so this project began when these two guys, these two brothers, Hilmi and Subi, who started a small startup and social entrepreneurship in India, approached the Kree and said that they wanted to make games with us that promote diversity and inclusion in the workplace in India. So I said, hey, that's a great idea. I mean, I don't know anything about diversity or inclusion and I've never been to India, but let's do it. Right? How hard could it possibly be? And so it turns out that diversity is very dangerous, okay, and this is true. Studies showed that it can cause discomfort, create rougher interactions, create a lack of trust, greater perceived interpersonal conflict, lower communication, have less cohesion in the group, and more concern about being disrespected. So why are we trying to do games about diversity again? What's the point? Well, it turns out that diversity is also very advantageous for organizations. Obviously it also is advantageous for a society as a whole, but I won't even argue that point. Just for organizations to be diverse actually brings them a great advantage. And there's all sorts of studies that have shown this. It's really interesting. There's stuff that diversity brings. So the most obvious thing is that, okay, you're a diverse group. You have people of different viewpoints that come, right? That makes sense. What's really interesting is that the dynamics of the group changes when you have people from different backgrounds. So people actually share information better than they would. Perhaps because if you're with someone who you think is very similar to you, you might not think that you really have to talk about something because it's obvious they already know it, right? But if you don't trust that they really know what you're talking about, then you're going to put it out. And if you think that somebody has a different viewpoint than you, you actually do a better job arguing your viewpoint, which means you do more research, you back up your thinking, you think about what you're going to say before you say it. Whereas if you're with people who you generally all agree, you don't do that, you just get lazy and you just say what you want to say. And on the flip side of that too, people with differing opinions or dissenting opinions are actually more likely to bring them up in a group that's diverse. So once again, if you're in a group that everyone else is pretty much like you, you generally try to stick with that like you part. And you won't bring up the, oh, this might not work, you know, kind of viewpoint, which can be very important. All right. It is shown in the corporate world to lead for better performance. Companies make more money when they have, in particular, there's been study with having females on corporate boards, for example. And in the scientific world, it turns out that scientific papers written by groups of authors that are diverse are cited more and have higher impact factors, which is another kind of cool element. And there's a third reason, I think, that probably big companies have started to care about this, which is to avoid really bad PR. I don't know who remembers this thing with Google Photos when it rolled out, was it two years ago? And it was misidentifying people as gorillas. And you know, obviously, right, no one thinks like Google's out to do that, right? That's not what they're trying to do. But it does indicate, well, how come they didn't pick that up, right? And we don't really know, but we can suspect that the reason they didn't notice it before it rolled out is maybe the people testing and doing the QA were not of that background, didn't have that skin color, weren't from that part of the world. And maybe there's a reason that they also have diversity. Okay. So, okay, so diversity is so good. Let's do it. What's the problem, right? I think most people would agree with that point. Most people would agree with that point. In the current political climate, maybe not everyone would agree with that point. But I think a lot of people would think, well, you know, we've moved on, right? Like we know diversity is good. We know people are different than us. It doesn't mean that they're inferior. So, you know, okay, that's good. The problem is that that's not actually, even if we think that way, that's not the way we're really thinking. Because it turns out that as the quote goes, we are not feeling beings who think, oh, no, we are feeling beings who think, not thinking beings who feel. Which means primarily we're driven by emotions. And our thinking can be all kind of wacky afterwards. And in fact, even the fact that we make decisions and our reasons behind the decisions may largely be thought up after the fact. That's been studied too. So people will tend to make decisions and then you justify why you said that, right? So you make decision first, you know, explain later. So that obviously doesn't lead to making really good decisions where you're taking in all the information. And in fact, there are researchers who suggest that our ability to reason did not come from, is not motivated to make really good decisions, but rather to convince other people to join us if we want to do. Which is really crazy. Which means that basically, once again, we're making a decision, then we're justifying it, and then we're going to explain it really well so that other people can agree with us. So that's kind of scary. And in particular, it leads to all sorts of bias. So there's different kinds of bias. Probably the main one that we talk about is called confirmation bias. So that's what they talk about a lot nowadays involving the news. It means that when you get new information and it agrees with what you've already thought, then you tend to accept it as true. If you get information that goes against what you already thought, you tend to disregard it. And if people confront you with information that goes against what you think, often rather than changing your mind, you will probably double down on what you believe and think that there's some kind of like plot to try to get you to change your mind. And in terms of stereotypes, this comes down to people, right? So categorizing people based on what their skin, their age, how tall they are, how pretty they are, whatever kind of thing, and make some kind of judgment about the way they're going to act. And in fact, this is an interesting little side note. It's even been studied that when we see people who we consider very inferior to ourselves, we actually, the part of our brains that light up is not the part having to do with people, but rather the part having to do with objects, which means we are capable of literally seeing people as objects in a, yes, it's true. No, no, no, no, I just disagree. I'm a big statement. You cannot make such a straightforward assumption. Well, this is based on this paper. Yeah, but I don't care about whatever paper, part of brains are not significant in the way we see people. I'm sorry. Okay. I don't know. That's what I've understood so far. Now, obviously the two things can go hand in hand. You can have bias against groups of people. Okay. So it actually makes sense why we act this way, right? Our brains have evolved for a certain reason. We don't know for sure, but most likely it's because we need to make decisions quickly, especially in a more kind of wild situation where there's predators, there's different groups of people. Maybe there were reasons to be scared of other groups of people and it made sense to try to run away or something like that. Okay. So get back to the workplace. In the workplace, obviously, if you want a diverse workplace, well, you have to hire diverse people. Okay. So some of the interesting studies they've done have involved sending out CVs. So some of the put out resumes that are exactly identical except for the name on the top. So in this particular study, there was, they had one person was named, one fake resume was for John and one fake resume was for Jennifer. They sent these out at university laboratories to be hired by faculty members, right? And in this case, it turns out that Jennifer, oh, 10 minutes. Okay. So if Jennifer would be, was judged less competent, would not be as hired as often. And if they were hired, wouldn't be paid as much. So that's kind of, that's kind of scary too. Okay. And if you think that hiring based on CVs is bad, well, it turns out that interviews are much worse. In fact, some people suggest that interviews are probably the worst way to hire people because it's when you have the most bias because you're communicating with them, you come down, you talk about stuff that you enjoy in common and you're not judging them based on what they, what they need to be doing. Okay. Just a quick side note, really interesting example they've done is for orchestras. So it used to be in the U.S. there were very few females in orchestras. I think it said 1970, it was less than 5%. And the way they got around this is doing these blind, these blind, what's it called when you're getting hired? I can't think of any. Blind, blind, blind recitals. So people would come, they put up a curtain and they play behind the curtain. And actually at some point in some orchestras they made people take off their shoes because there was a thing that people could hear when it was a woman walking, when it was a man walking. It's just, it's crazy. Okay. So let's go on to games. So when we started this project, making games to promote diversity, we started with the assumption that most of ideas were not going to be very good and that we needed to, so our conclusion is that we need to try a lot. So basically we structured our projects so that we started with prototypes, a bunch, then we cut them down to just four. That's what we're doing now. And we're going to be developing then for the next year and then putting them out there. All our projects, well it's open source, otherwise it wouldn't be here. We also do, we're going to put out all our data as open data so all the analytics we get back. And the process itself is open. We're trying to put it all on our blog so people can reproduce our ideas, try different things that we didn't do, etc. Okay. So we started with game jams and with working with the organizations that we're going to be at. And this was, I was going to go through all the different ideas that we tried, but I'm not going to have time. So we tried abstract platformers, online comic captions, five minute debates about celebrities, automatic stereotype generators, a whole lot of different stuff. And we put all these things out there. We had our testers in India try them and rank them based on how engaging they thought they were and how much they learned. And based on that we picked these four games. So one of them is, let's see, so hired is a game where you, we kind of teach about bias. So we give people biases and you have to hire someone. And so you pick up cards and everyone's trying to hide their bias because if someone else finds out they're out of the game. And so you come up with these really funny arguments where you're kind of trying not to say why you don't want to hire women because you have to come up with funny things. It works out pretty well. Pimmy State is a game for learning about different regions of India. It's too hard for me, but for people who live there they can play it. This is kind of a weird physical game where you pretend to be pirates that all have different physical handicaps and you have to play a cooperative game. And another day is a visual novel that we're creating now about you being a HR manager at a, oh, sorry, I lost the microphone. One second. All right, so we don't have a lot of time, but I just wanted to say a few things that we learned with this process so far. So one thing is that we've learned to favor concrete ideas over abstract ones. Once again, based on the assumption that the abstract things, people might agree in the abstract about diversity, but might not act that way in a concrete decision making process. We found that getting people to talk is really, really, really valuable. And for that, board games actually surprisingly good. So when we started this, we were going to make only video games. And then it turns out most people wanted board games. You can play them. Well, they actually also work well for a company. Like you bring everyone in through a meeting room, you put a board game on a table, people can start to play, or a card game, or other kind of tabletop game. People can start to discuss, oh, this happened to me, this happened to my aunt. You can start discussing things that way. We also found that in general, people really do like to find out about each other. And they also like to share things about themselves. It's just that it's a little scary and you're worried about being judged. And so by putting them in a game context where they feel comfortable, you can make that process a lot easier. All right. In terms of the process, we found that game jams are really fantastic as a way to start. Come up with lots of different ideas and try a lot of things out. We found that using paper prototypes are really great too. So even for video games, to not just code something, but to do stuff on paper and try to make a board game that would act like the final video game is a great process because it's really quick. And you can change the rules. You can change the rules like 10 times in an hour and you don't have to, which you could never do with, well, maybe if you're an incredible coder you could. On the flip side, that's hard for other people to accept. Sometimes if you have a paper prototype, people don't take you seriously. So that's a little harder that way. OK. And having a diverse team obviously also makes a big difference. This seems very obvious, but actually when we were starting the project, we were mostly guys and none of us were from India. So we thought, oh, it's so cool. We're going to work with the Indian partner. It won't be a problem. They'll teach us stuff. But there's stuff that's hard to learn all on your own. And so as we started hiring more people who were Indian, who were women, it made things a lot easier. So in conclusion, diversity and inclusion are good things for organizations. And that over time, our bias has moved from something that we, you know, it's just out there, some overt thing into some implicit thing that's within ourselves that is harder to address for that reason. Because people don't think that they're biased. None of us think that we're biased. We all think that we're very rational. Games have been shown to help people tackle difficult subjects. And we found that ice breaker and tabletop games are really great for getting people to start to discuss. And finally, with prototyping, it's a great way to start any process like that. So to get back to the original question about can games really improve diversity and inclusion in the workplace, my answer is you have to wait. And hopefully I'll tell you next year. Okay. Thank you very much. And I think we have time for questions. Sounds good. I rushed a little bit because I don't know. Eight minutes. Oh, that's all right. Plenty of time. Okay. Any questions? Yeah? I was really interested in the game you mentioned about having to hide your bias. Oh, okay. So how does it actually work? Okay. So the way it works is that you pretend that you're all management at a company and that you have to hire somebody for a position. And then, so it's a random, right now it's cards and then we're going to move it to a mobile game. But right now it's a card. And so you see the people with a fake CV. And then everyone has a secret bias card. So for example, mine maybe is like, you know, don't want to hire a woman, maybe someone else that don't want to hire, I know, Muslims or something like that. And then what you do is you argue about who you should hire. And you don't want to hire the person that your bias is about. But if it's really obvious and I'm like, yeah, you know, I don't know, she's going to go on print a leave at some point. Well, then they'll know that that's my bias. And so they can call me out, et cetera. And you try to like get the, so you're trying to fight for it, but without really letting it in. It's kind of cool. But what the discussions that come out are really funny. Yes. I'm curious about the recruitment process. Who were the people coming? How did they came there? Why? How many? For the game jams or in India or in China? Oh, yes. Okay. So it's very, two very different things. So let me just go back to this slide real quick that we're talking about. Oh, sorry. I'm supposed to repeat the questions and I forgot myself. So the question was about the recruitment process for the different events. So when we were in India, we basically did like board game making events with the different groups that ZMQ, who is our Indian partner, is in touch with. So there's companies, there's nonprofit organizations, and there's also government, parts of the government. So these are basically contacts of theirs that were interested in promoting diversity in their workplace. And in Paris, what we've done is more kind of use our Gemini community of people who are interested in making games. Maybe don't know so much about diversity, although that's not totally true. There are people who really do. And kind of get them to say, okay, let's make games for over the weekend. How many people will learn the work? Okay. Well, for the game? Shoot. How many? I think for the Paris one, it's around 50 people or something like that, I would say. 40 to 50? Yeah. In India, we've done smaller things. We've done it also at school with a bunch of students. Yeah. Any other questions? Yes? How do you measure the impact of the impact? That's it. Okay. So the question is, how do you measure the impact? So that's really hard. It's really hard because there's a few different things. You could try to measure the impact of the game in terms of what people learned. And that is difficult in itself. We have to have a very specialized standard questionnaires. And the other attempt is to try to see what the organizations actually do in real life. So that's what ZNMQ is planning on doing. So the basic is the idea to see if the management makes any changes in their procedures. So, because I didn't talk about that, but there's a lot of things that organizations can do to try to promote diversity in the workplace. It's not just like, you know, talk about how good diversity it is. There's like very concrete things, you know, like that you can do so. You can make the hiring process more open. You can make people have to write down everything they want about a candidate before looking at the CVs. And that way you can argue it. Actually, if you're interested in that, there's a really fantastic talk by an HR researcher at Google called something bias diversity at Google or something like that. And it's really fantastic. It goes through all these different hiring practices that they've done at Google to make it better. So, for example, on the interview thing, they basically are trying to get rid of a typical interview where you would just kind of talk to the person and ask them questions. And they've replaced it with like a script. So like, you know, this is the first question. And then the answers are this, this or this, you know, and these ones are good and these ones are bad. Now, next question, you know, and the answers are this, this and this. Which is, it's kind of strange because it feels very robotic. You know, it's like, well, we're replacing people with, you know, an algorithm. But at the same time, it does get rid of the bias, right? Because it's something is standardized and it's not about that. Yes, maybe we'll go to him first since you've already asked a question if that's okay. Yeah. Maybe the question and answer is our bias because they're written by people. Ah, yes, that's possible. Sorry, you had another question. Okay, sorry. Sorry, I'm not going to describe the game as a particular game because I want to know what is the part of cooperation and competition in your game because competition, I think, is over in our society. It means us to collect the description as an example of a competitive game by excellence is monopoly and there are no more and more cooperation gates. That's true. And so some piece movement and so on. All right. Yeah, so the question was about competitive versus cooperative games. So in this, okay, so just a quick thing about competition and cooperation. What's cool is that both things can go nicely together. Like typically in team games, there's a cooperation between the people on the team and there's a competitive thing between the teams, right? And that's an element where you can mix it. I wouldn't agree that competition is bad like by itself because I feel like there is, it is something that motivates us and as long as it's within a game context where we understand we're in a game, we're competing in the game and when we get out of the game, we're not competing in the same way. I think it's acceptable. In this particular games, sorry, let me just skip to the ones that I picked. Yeah, Hyatt is competitive. Paira Partaj, this one is non-competitive right now, but when we tried it in India, they kept saying we want a scoring system. We want to be able to know if we're better than the other ones. We're thinking about making it competitive just to add people. So have people play in a team, but once again, have the teams compete. How many cards did you get through, that kind of thing. This is a visual novel. You just play on your own, so it's not competitive. And Pin My State, you could play it competitively if you wanted, but you don't have to. It's more like an icebreaker. So maybe time for one more question. Yeah. I just wanted to respond to that in another way. To me, diversity is fundamental of life. I mean, if you don't have diversity, you have death, right? It's just a natural process that applies to quite many social process. So I'm curious why you promote diversity as a competitive behavior, because you promote it in the workplace as a competitive asset. Whereas on the contrary, I think it's pretty much the competition that kills diversity. So I find there's a bit of a contrast. So there was an observation about how diversity is something that creates cooperation, if I understand correctly, and why are we trying to promote competitivity, which is, why are we trying to promote diversity as something that's competitive, as an advantage? I guess the reason that if you're trying to bring diversity into an existing social structure made of companies that are competing, then it makes sense to sell it to them as a competitive thing. I guess that's the answer. I don't think it's going to be a good thing to sell it to a real Italian or anything else. If you were in a different social structure where you could be, people would be much more collaborative, then I think it would be wonderful. I don't know. I think it would be a different society altogether. It's good. All right. Maybe we should stop there. Well, thank you very much. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you.
This is an open source open minds, lessons the workplace. In the workplace, obviously, if So when we started this project, making games to teach about bias. So we give people biases and workplace. And in Paris, what we've done is more description as an example of a competitive game and why are we trying to promote competitivity,