Five stories from the field, ready to teach as case studies. Each sheet fits on one printed page: audience, duration, goals, session plan, questions and resources. The sheets are written for universities, universities of applied sciences, upper-secondary schools and adult education.
Print or project the sheet, then freely adapt the duration, plan and questions to your course. Each sheet links to the full story and its public resources. The sheet texts are under a CC BY-SA 4.0 licence. You may copy, translate and adapt them. Credit “Fabio Balli, fabioballi.net” and share your versions under the same licence. Photos and linked resources keep their own licences. Have you used a sheet? Let me know through the contact form, choosing “Something else”: your feedback helps improve the sheets.
Breathing Games: co-creating free games to breathe better
Universities and universities of applied sciences in health (nursing, physiotherapy), design and computing; upper-secondary schools (interdisciplinary projects); continuing education in health promotion.
Duration
One 90-minute session.
Goals
Describe how children, clinicians, designers and engineers design a health tool together.
Explain what a free licence changes for the lifespan of a health game.
Plan a first test of a tool with two of the people concerned, before the tool is finished.
Session plan
10 minOpen with a question: why are daily breathing exercises often experienced as a chore? Note the answers on the board.
20 minHave small groups read the story. Each group lists the people involved and what each of them brings to the project.
25 minCompare a proprietary game with a free one. Use the observed effects: a controller validated with 158 children, made from EUR 30 to 70 of components. The games exist in 13 languages.
25 minPut the “Try this week” suggestion into practice. Each group chooses a tool it is designing for other people. It plans a test with two of them: what to note, when and how.
10 minClose with the story's lesson: a validated game does not spread on its own. Ask whom to involve from the start.
Questions to discuss
What do children, clinicians and creators each bring that the others do not have?
Most health games disappear when their funding ends. How does a commons under free licences change this, and what limits do you see?
Why does a validated game not spread on its own? Whom should a project plan for from the start?
About a hundred volunteers translated the games into 13 languages. What does this change for families and care teams?
Curricula : Link with curricula (PER, Lehrplan 21, university programmes): to be specified for your course. Possible themes: health promotion, participatory design, commons and free licences.
Licence : Sheet under a CC BY-SA 4.0 licence, to be credited “Fabio Balli, fabioballi.net”. Photos and linked resources keep their own licences.
Burkina Faso: adolescents create a game to talk about humanitarian aid
Universities and universities of applied sciences in social work, psychology, education and humanitarian action. Upper-secondary schools (geography, citizenship); adult education in participation and child protection.
Duration
Two 45-minute periods, or one 90-minute session.
Goals
Explain why a consultation requires saying clearly what young people decide and what adults decide.
Identify the measures of an ethics protocol for working with children and young people in a crisis.
Analyse how a method passes to a local team, then to other towns.
Session plan
10 minPresent the context: in 2024, children made up more than half of the people affected by the crisis. Consulted in 2022, they said their opinion did not matter. If some people in the group have lived through a crisis or exile, let each of them choose what to share.
20 minHave the story read, especially the “Intervention” and “Ethics and safety” sections. In groups, list the risks named (mockery, fatigue, pressure from adults) and link each measure to the risk it reduces.
15 minThe protocol anticipated fifteen risks. Ask each group to imagine others and to propose a measure for each one.
25 minRun a “Who decides what?” workshop. For a project in your institution, each group draws two columns: on the left, what young people decide; on the right, what adults decide.
20 minCompare with the case study by Terre des hommes, or with the toolkit. Discuss what enabled six members of the local team to take up the method.
Questions to discuss
Why can creating a game help young people who fear speaking out to express themselves?
Which measures of the ethics protocol seem essential to you, and which would you add in your context?
The toolkit credits the children as co-authors. What does this change for the children and for the organisation?
As one team member put it, creating is much easier for children than for adults. Do you agree? Why?
Curricula : Link with curricula (PER, Lehrplan 21, university programmes): to be specified for your course. Possible themes: children's rights, participation, humanitarian action, research ethics.
Licence : Sheet under a CC BY-SA 4.0 licence, to be credited “Fabio Balli, fabioballi.net”. Linked resources keep their own licences.
Emerging Change: when the group agrees without the person in charge
Business and management schools, universities of applied sciences in social work and education; management training and adult education; teacher training.
Duration
One 90-minute session, including a 35-minute exercise.
Goals
Describe Madeleine Laugeri's Three Contracts: vision, cooperation and mission.
Experience a group agreement reached without the person in charge being present, then analyse it.
Identify conditions for success, based on the results and the three failures published in the story.
Session plan
10 minPresent the finding attributed to René Rupert: 65 to 80% of company projects fail, depending on how failure is defined. Collect the group's hypotheses about the causes.
15 minPresent the Three Contracts: the leader holds the vision, the team holds cooperation, and both meet in the mission. An excerpt from Madeleine Laugeri's video can support you.
35 minFirst announce that the exercise is experiential: anyone may observe rather than take part, and knows whom to turn to if it affects them. Present the purpose and the frame, for example the group's working rules for the term. Then leave the room for 20 minutes. When you return, welcome the common proposal as it is, or adjust it together.
20 minDebrief: what helped the group, and what got in its way? Compare with the three failures in the story: too little shared time, too few people, a co-facilitation without prior agreement.
10 minClose on the role of authority according to the story: set the frame, then trust.
Questions to discuss
What changed in the group when the person in charge left the room?
According to the story, the constant presence of authority puts people in competition for its recognition. Do you see this in class or in meetings?
At Nescafé, Curt Blattner applied the Three Contracts with 250, then 500 people. He estimates that his unit's results were multiplied by three: how could such an estimate be checked?
The FAVI case is often taught in management. In 2017, researchers asked whether its system would outlive its leader, Jean-François Zobrist. How does a team that agrees without its manager change this dependence?
Curricula : Link with curricula (PER, Lehrplan 21, university programmes): to be specified for your course. Possible themes: leadership, group dynamics, change management, adult learning.
Licence : Sheet under a CC BY-SA 4.0 licence, to be credited “Fabio Balli, fabioballi.net”. The book, the video and the other linked resources keep their own licences.
Prenons soin ensemble: a festival to reclaim our health
Universities and universities of applied sciences in health, social work, law and the arts; continuing education in health promotion; adult education.
Duration
One two-hour session.
Goals
Describe the four steps of the method: welcome and listen to each other, agree on priorities, pool resources, take care through the group.
Experience a sharing circle, where each person speaks without receiving answers or advice.
Analyse how people with different knowledge produce shared content that can be reused after the event.
Session plan
20 minOpen with the “Try this week” suggestion: each person says what they are going through, with no answer or advice from others. Make clear that anyone may pass.
20 minPresent the festival: nine days, prepared in 122 days with 115 co-hosts, 65 activities and 25 sharing circles. Then present the four steps, using the Method page.
35 minShare out excerpts of the synthesis among the groups. Each group notes one proposal and the different kinds of knowledge that shaped it.
30 minApply the first two steps to a health question in your institution. Groups first listen to each other, then choose a single priority; the other ideas are noted for later.
15 minClose: how can this work be reused by others, like the synthesis published under a free licence?
Questions to discuss
Why start by listening to each other, before looking for solutions?
A lawyer who took part speaks of a “decompartmentalisation between the legal and civil society”. What conditions make this possible?
The festival invited people to define together the rules that affect them. In your field, which health rule should be defined with the people concerned?
What does publishing the synthesis in ten languages, under a free licence, change for people who were not there?
Curricula : Link with curricula (PER, Lehrplan 21, university programmes): to be specified for your course. Possible themes: health promotion, citizen participation, health law, commons.
Licence : Sheet under a CC BY-SA 4.0 licence, to be credited “Fabio Balli, fabioballi.net”. The festival photos, taken from the synthesis, are also under CC BY-SA 4.0, with the credit shown under each photo.
EUvsVirus: organising a very large group within a few days
Universities and universities of applied sciences in management, computing, engineering and public health. Upper-secondary schools (group work, interdisciplinary projects); adult education in project management and volunteer coordination.
Duration
One 90-minute session.
Goals
Explain how a clear frame allows a very large group to organise itself within a few days.
Recognise common failures of large hackathons, and what prevents them.
Write, for a group project, a three-line frame: where to contribute and whom to ask.
Session plan
10 minPresent the context: in spring 2020, 380 volunteers set up the hackathon in less than a month. In three days, 20,900 people work on 39 challenges.
20 minHave the story and its diagram “From hackathons to game jams” read. In groups, note the failures described: information overload, wasted resources, lost motivation.
25 minPut the “Try this week” suggestion into practice. For a real group project, each group writes in three lines where each person can contribute and whom to ask. Groups swap their texts and improve them.
20 minDiscuss what came after the event: 2,150 projects submitted and 117 teams invited by the European Union. With Open Geneva and the Geneva Health Forum, a follow-up aimed at freely reproducible equipment. What makes a project last?
15 minClose with the story's question: what if we collectively had the capacity to overcome any crisis in a matter of days?
Questions to discuss
What is a clear frame for 20,900 people? How does it differ from a detailed plan?
Why can too much information make a team lose its motivation?
Why encourage free licences during a crisis hackathon? Who benefits afterwards?
What should be planned before the event so that projects last after it?
Curricula : Link with curricula (PER, Lehrplan 21, university programmes): to be specified for your course. Possible themes: project management, teamwork, open innovation, crisis management.
Licence : Sheet under a CC BY-SA 4.0 licence, to be credited “Fabio Balli, fabioballi.net”. The diagram, photos and linked resources keep their own licences.
