Recognizing Power Imbalances in Decision Making
Critically reflecting on biases, stereotypes, and power dynamics
Dear collaborative discussion friends,
This week we are highlighting an activity that helps participants examine the role power plays in our society, specifically in group decision making. This activity shows how power can work in both obvious and more subtle ways. It demonstrates how power can reinforce the status quo, including existing biases and stereotypes. Participants are also encouraged to critically examine and challenge existing power dynamics.
This activity is contributed by Janice McMillan, Associate Professor based in the Centre for Innovation in Learning and Teaching at the University of Cape Town in South Africa. It is one of the many activities in the Culturally Responsive Collaboration Module.
If you missed the previous activity plan newsletter, Identities & Issues Intersections, you can access it and our other weekly newsletters by subscribing below.
This week's activity:
Activity 4.7 – Recognizing Power Imbalances in Decision Making
Reflecting on and challenging existing power dynamics
This activity helps participants reflect on the way different biases, assumptions and stereotypes both influence and are influenced by the power dynamics in a group, which in turn affects how the group arrives at any particular decision. Participants are organized into small groups and introduced to a scenario in which a decision has to be made. Each person is then randomly given an envelope with beans and asked to choose a stakeholder to play in the given scenario based on the number of beans they have. The number of beans represents the number of times they can contribute to the discussion and, therefore, the amount of power they have. Participants then share what stakeholder they have chosen to role play with their group. Each group then engages in a discussion about the chosen scenario, with the aim of reaching a decision by the end of the conversation.
Prepare for the Activity
Gather a stack of envelopes and put a different number of beans, ranging from 0 - 5, in each envelope. The beans represent the number of opportunities this person will have to speak during the discussion (and thus power or influence in the discussion).
Create a relevant scenario for small group discussion, use the scenario shown below, or select one from the What IF...Scenarios collection.
Organize participants into small groups (6-8 ppl). Begin by introducing the learning goals of this activity:
Critically examine how assumptions and stereotypes influence decision making.
Illuminate how power works covertly in many contexts.
Introduce the Scenario
Share and review the scenario chosen for the small group discussion. If required, read it aloud as a full group and answer any questions.
Sample Scenario:
You are a community group living in a place where jobs are scarce, poverty is rife, and there are not many opportunities for making a decent living. The community is quite cut off from neighboring communities as the train that used to link the community doesn’t run anymore due to the lines being faulty. You are able to receive some funding for a project and the community has to decide between the building of a resource center for youth skill building OR repairing the train line.
A community meeting is being called to decide which of the 2 options the community will vote for.
Break into Small Groups and Distribute Envelopes
Invite participants to break into small groups (6-8 ppl). Shuffle the envelopes and distribute them randomly to participants in each group. Instruct participants that they are not to reveal the contents of their envelope or how many beans they have.
If doing this activity online, use the private chat function to distribute numbers to each participant, which will indicate how many times a person can speak during the discussion.
Ask participants to now imagine a character who might have the level of influence or power represented by the number of beans in their envelope. Explain that the character they choose should be a stakeholder in the scenario introduced to them. For example, if you are discussing a public health issue like COVID, then they might imagine:
A child (0-1 beans)
Doctor (4 beans)
Vaccine CEO (5 beans)
Sick person (0-2 beans)
Parent (2 beans)
Business owner (1-3 beans)
Essential worker (1-3 beans)
Grandparent (1-2 beans)
Hospital CEO (4 beans)
CDC director (1-4 beans)
Allow each participant to choose their own character based on their perception of power related to the stakeholder. While you can provide a general list of stakeholders for the issue you are discussing if required, it is best to not provide details on what power (number of beans) each stakeholder holds. Rather, leave it open for them to decide.
Explain that they can only contribute to the discussion the number of times indicated by the number of beans in their envelope. The discussion is over once everyone’s beans have been exhausted.
Introduce Stakeholders
Ask participants to introduce themselves as the stakeholder they chose. Instruct groups that a variety of stakeholders should be represented within their group. So, if two participants end up choosing the same stakeholder, explain that one person will need to choose a different persona. Once everyone has decided on a stakeholder, explain that they will be role playing as this stakeholder in the discussion.
Remind participants once again that no one should reveal the number of beans they have to their group.
Discuss the Scenario
Invite each group to start their discussions. Explain that at the end of the discussion, the group must come up with a decision or vote on the proposal (no additional comments can be added).
Instruct participants that each time a participant speaks, they will put one bean on the table. If doing this online, after the group has reached a decision or voted, ask participants to share with their group the number they were assigned.
So, at the end, the group will not only have reached a decision, but also clearly know how much power or influence each person had.
Debrief as a Full Group
Come back together as a full group and discuss the following questions:
What did your group decide?
What impact, if any, did the number of contributions/power have on the discussion outcome?
What impact did the number of beans (power) have on you as a discussant? What did you notice yourself doing that you otherwise would not have done?
Which stakeholders held more or less power? Does this seem accurate to you? How would you represent their power?
What would it look like for power to be more fairly distributed within discussions and society? What can we do as individuals to notice and disrupt this power dynamic? What could you have done differently in this discussion?
In addition to these debriefing questions, the full description of Activity 4.7 Recognizing Power Imbalances in Decision Making includes reflection questions, a practice journal prompt, and additional resources to help participants dive deeper.
Dive Deeper by Pairing Activities Together
Activity 4.7 can be paired together with Activity 5.2 Developing an Awareness of Stakeholders. Start with Activity 5.2 Developing an Awareness of Stakeholders and ask participants to use the Identifying Stakeholders Worksheet to generate a list of stakeholders for the chosen topic of discussion. Use the last column on the worksheet to invite participants to reflect on how much power they think each of the stakeholders have in this scenario. This initial exploration of power can serve as a segue into Activity 4.7. Participants can use the list of stakeholders generated in Activity 5.2 as a reference when choosing which stakeholder to role play during their discussion and when reflecting back on power dynamics during the debriefing part of the activity.
If you try out this activity, please share with us what you think:
We hope this toolkit activity helps participants critically examine the relationship between biases, stereotypes and power imbalances and enables them to challenge the unfair distribution of power in society and in discussions.
Looking forward to collaborating,
Ritu Thomas & the Collaborative Discussion Team