Organizational activity game. Organizational and activity games G.P. Shchedrovitsky. Collective development of solutions by game participants

Ministry of Education and Science of Russia

Federal State Autonomous Educational Institution of Higher Professional Education Ural State Federal University named after the first President of Russia B.N. Yeltsin

Faculty of Humanitarian Education

Department of Philosophy

Organizational and activity games G.P. Shchedrovitsky

Ekaterinburg

Introduction

Chapter 1. History of the school G.P. Shchedrovitsky

Chapter 2. Basic schemes of SMD methodology

1 Scheme of mental activity

2 Development step diagram

3 Scheme of the act of activity

Chapter 3. Organizational and activity games

Chapter 4. Example of an ODI game

1 Program, regulations and game results

2 Personal assessment of the game

Conclusion

Bibliography

Appendix 1. Section “Resources” proposed for inclusion in the Energy Development Strategy of the Sverdlovsk Region

Introduction

system-thought-activity Shchedrovitsky imitation game

“You can often hear lately that there was no philosophy in the Soviet Union and nothing was done at all. I understand the basis for such statements and seem to be able to agree that if we are talking about official philosophy, then there are very few things that can be seriously discussed as philosophical. But, I say, the official philosophy is by no means the philosophy of the country. [...]

I believe that in these years - in those forty years that I want to talk about - we have developed our own national school of philosophy, and today we have philosophical ideas that are not inferior to the philosophical ideas of any other country. And in this sense, we have a philosophy, and even, from many points of view, wow!” - this is how the Soviet philosopher and methodologist, public and cultural figure, creator and ideological inspirer of the school of “methodologists”, founder of the Moscow Methodological Circle Georgy Petrovich Shchedrovitsky began his article “We Have Philosophy.”

This paper examines Short story G.P. schools Shchedrovitsky, describes the basic schemes of the SMD methodology he developed, and notes the phenomenon of organizational and activity games. The work also presents a chapter that talks about one of the organizational and activity games conducted by the Ural KMD community - the Expert Development Club "Navigation".

Abbreviations used:

GP - Georgy Petrovich Shchedrovitsky

MD - mental activity

MLK - Moscow Logic Circle

MMK - Moscow Methodological Circle

ODI - organizational and activity game

SMD - systems-thought-activity methodology

Chapter 1. History of the school G.P. Shchedrovitsky

The Moscow Methodological Circle (MMK) is a philosophical-methodological and intellectual-practical school of Georgy Petrovich Shchedrovitsky - “GP”, as many students called him.

The circle arose in the early 50s and finally took shape in 1954 during a discussion on problems of logic at the Faculty of Philosophy of Moscow State University. Initially it was known as the Moscow Logical Circle (MLK). Founding Fathers of MLK - A.A. Zinoviev, G.P. Shchedrovitsky, B.A. Grushin and M.K. Mamardashvili.

In 1958, after a disagreement with A.A. Zinoviev, G.P. became the ideological and organizational leader of the Circle. Shchedrovitsky, and the Circle itself received the name of the Moscow Methodological. Now the GP students have created independent organizations that continue the traditions of the intellectual work of the Circle, and the MMK has turned into a broad methodological movement.

Followers of Shchedrovitsky's school - participants in the methodological movement - conduct developments in cultural studies, legal theory, theory of sociocultural systems, in the methodology of education and science, the methodology of social change, design educational systems, work in financial and organizational-managerial consulting, in the structures of strategic development of local and state authorities.

The school has developed an original approach to the analysis of the widest range of sociocultural and intellectual phenomena - the systems-thought-activity approach (SMA-approach). An outstanding achievement of the GP and his students is the creation of a fundamentally new sociocultural practice - organizational activity games (OAGs), which are a unique tool for the analysis and development of almost any systems of mental activity - organizations, intellectual directions, programs and projects, etc.

During the life of the GP for more than 30 years, the center of the intellectual life of the MMK were methodological seminars, which were led by Georgy Petrovich himself. After the seminars ceased work in 1987 for various reasons, the GP sought to maintain the organizational and ideological unity of the Circle by holding methodological congresses. The first such congress (at first it was modestly called a “meeting”) took place in Kyiv in January 1989. A total of 5 congresses took place.

Already at the first methodological congresses, it became clear that the MMK was turning into a methodological movement - devoid of previous organizational forms of unity, but held together by an intellectual tradition, a common school and the figure of the Teacher - G. P. Shchedrovitsky.

After the death of G.P. Shchedrovitsky, attempts are being made to co-organize his followers - in various regions of the country there are methodological communities conducting ODI games. For example, in the city of Yekaterinburg there is a Ural KMD community - the Expert Development Club "Navigation", which since 2003 has been conducting training seminars in the form of Organizational Activity Games (ODGs).

Chapter 2. Basic schemes of SMD methodology

2.1 Scheme of mental activity

The world of mental activity, our practical activity, is reality, the real world of our activity, our work, our relationships. And the world of thinking is reality, the ideal world. And due to communication, and then in a reduced form due to the combination of pure thinking with mental activity, a person lives all the time in these two worlds: in the real world and in the ideal world.

The ideal world is the world of science, and vice versa: the world of science is the ideal world, of ideal entities. This is how she was formed, this is how she lives, this is what she develops. And there is nothing wrong with this; on the contrary, a powerful means of analyzing reality appears. Because the same reality is displayed in different ideal mental schemes depending on what language we use and what systems of knowledge and concepts we apply. We, therefore, begin with it as if different sides look (Figure 2.1).

Figure 2.1 - Real world projections

Imagine that this circle is the real world, and we are standing around it. One shot one projection, another - another, in connection with other goals and objectives, the third - a third. Each time - in a different language, for your specific goals and objectives. What we get is a set of projections, each of which is “carried out” into the reality of thinking. Scientists unfold all this according to their own laws - mechanics, thermodynamics, electrodynamics, the theory of gravity, and so on. Organization theorists unfold this in terms of organization, leadership, management. And this is how the world of logos unfolds, which we need so that we can now take all these schemes, begin to impose them in a certain order on reality and see reality through these schemes and with the help of these schemes. We thus combine the world of the ideal with the world of the real. And when we do this, we think. And thinking arises only in this case. This work is actually thinking, as opposed to mental activity.

The mental activity diagram (Figure 2.2) contains a set of principles that determine the correct approach to the study of all phenomena related to thinking and activity.

First of all, it affirms the organic, inextricable connection of every action and every activity with the mental and communicative-semantic processes that prepare them. From this point of view, the very expressions “activity” and “action,” if we leave aside their definition through reproduction schemes, act as expressions of extremely strong idealizations, excessive reductions and simplifications, which in reality can only correspond to extremely rare artificially created and exotic cases. IN real world in social life, activity and action can and should exist only together with thinking and communication. Hence the expression “mental activity” itself, which is more consistent with reality and therefore should replace and supplant the expression “activity” both in research and in practical organization.

At the same time, what was traditionally called “thinking” is divided into two fundamentally different components ¾ « thought-communication" and "pure thinking", each of which lives in its own special process and has its own special mechanisms. These components exist in reality, as a rule, together and in complex interweavings with other components of mental activity ¾ processes of understanding, reflection and mental activity and in the structure of holistic mental activity. Therefore, any of these processes should be considered, first of all, according to their functions in mental activity and in relation to all other processes. Analysis of pure and autonomous processes of thought-communication, understanding, reflection, thinking and mental action, as has usually been done until now, cannot lead to success. Only a specific systemic analysis of the whole can be effective here, in which all the above processes are considered as partial and forming subsystems within the polysystem of mental activity.

Figure 2.2 - Scheme of mental activity

2.2 Development step diagram

We must distinguish between evolution and development. Evolution occurs in nature, can occur in society, and has one core line, namely natural changes. In order to talk about development, it is necessary to have a second core line - an artificial-technical component.

So, for development to occur there must be a subject that controls this development? Yes, and without this development does not happen, cannot happen. It is necessary to have a certain layer or stratum of people involved in the problem of development. The meaning of the historical process according to Hegel is that natural processes of change, or evolution, are assimilated by artificial and technical ideas.

And in order for there to be development management and development, it is necessary to highlight the development process as such, and then continue to manage it (Figure 2.3).

Figure 2.3 - Development step diagram

The managerial point of view is an alternative to the natural science approach. An organizational manager is a person who replaces traditional science.

And it seems that all this is a consequence of the transition to an engineering point of view. Or rather, to the organizational technical level, since engineering is actually a synthesis of technical and scientific research, when the technician knows what he is doing and what the consequences will be.

We need to switch to an artificial point of view. And this today is the main task of our society, our science, and our engineering. Next, we will discuss what the role of an organizational manager can be here and what kind of knowledge he should receive in order to manage in essence, and not pretend that he is managing.

First. It is necessary to gain knowledge about the control object, or about the system (knowledge about the managed system). There are two key focuses here. The object must be taken from the point of view of goals and management tasks, i.e. in a management approach.

Second. Here the moments of a natural, and even scientific, approach to application to this situation begin: forecasting appears: extrapolation, continuation of the described line of development into the future (Figure 2.4)

Figure 2.4 - Forecasting

At the same time, the forecast as such, inserted into the context of organizational work, can never be used by itself separately. This is drawing the trajectory of change, or evolution, of an object, the assumption that we will not make organizational impacts and generally somehow change the emerging trends and rebuild them.

Third. Design task of the ideal. This is a moment of value and purpose.

2.3 Scheme of the act of activity

Just as we imagine the world in the form of buildings made of atoms and molecules, in the same way we believe that the world of activity consists of elementary acts that are organized into complex chains, or molecules, of activity, due to connections of cooperation, communication, due to the introduction certain technologies, etc. And this elementary unit of activity, the so-called act, is depicted by the following diagram (Figure 2.5).

Figure 2.5 - Activity diagram

It shows a little man, like some kind of clot of material (I will tell you later what its functions are), he has some abilities, and, in addition, he constantly uses certain, as they say in psychology, internalized, i.e. "internal" means. What is an interiorized remedy? For example, language for us is an interiorized means. For example, if a person has mastered algebra, its language and all transformations - this is his internalized means.

In addition, a person has a so-called consciousness board. Here we have images. The drawn “scoreboard” emphasizes that we always have not perceptual relations, but intentional relations. Consciousness always works on “enduring” relationships; the world is organized by us through the work of consciousness as if it is placed outside of us. Consciousness always takes outside. Consciousness is always active, not passive.

Next, here will be the source material, natural, which we will transform. Let us denote the arrow for converting material into product. At the same time we place another arrow here, it means transformation. So, the top arrow means transformation, and the bottom one means transformation. In addition, there are necessarily actions, or operations, which we denote as d 1... d To , and certain tools, means - machines with which we work, calculators, computers, calipers and all that stuff. There are also goals like a specific block. And, in addition, knowledge is used. Knowledge comes from outside.

This will be the composition and structure (although it is depicted only in some moments) of the act of activity. This activity is called transformation. As a rule, this is what we do. That's when we move the chair, when we work in some kind of technological process, when we calculate some values, this scheme works every time. We receive some initial material, capture it, apply certain actions, tools, means to it in order to transform it into a certain product that corresponds to the goal, and it comes out further from the act of activity. We use tools and means to do this.

If we have tools and means connected with actions, we get machines, mechanisms. In fact, they film both. Then the activity rises higher: the activity of this person himself becomes action-prime. Let's say, if we look at the actions of an excavator operator, it is not clear what he is doing - digging a pit or operating his excavator. This is a multi-layered, complex activity. Much depends on how he was taught. In the same way, when you learn to drive a car, you control the car. When you have mastered all this, then you drive a car. And in a sense, the edges of the machine are your edges. The same is true for an excavator operator, when he has learned to work, he does not operate the excavator, but digs a pit. The manipulator works in the same way at a nuclear power plant, etc. This is where complex gluing occurs.

And at the same time, a person must have certain abilities - this subjective part. He can receive something through knowledge, something through direct vision of the situation, its assessment. Something due to ability.

Now from this we can assemble complex “mosaics” of relationships between activities. We can build cooperative ties. For example, when the product of one person's work becomes the source material for another. We can create support connections when, for example, the product of one person’s work becomes an instrument, a means of another. Or the product of one person's work - methodological or constructive knowledge - becomes knowledge, a knowledge tool for another.

And we can finally create complex, so-called sociotechnical connections, when this entire structure of one person’s activity becomes the source material in the activity of another. We need to fix this “strange” case: when it turns out that human activity is not aimed at transforming natural material, but at organizing the activities of other people, at directing such activities or at managing.

Chapter 3. Organizational and activity games

“In the form of organizational and activity games, we created a practice for ourselves, for the methodological seminar, since this imitation, game form is practice in the true sense of the word.”

“And the game is a very serious matter with content. We need it because it gives people the opportunity to live, albeit “in vitro,” but freely. A game can make you a person if you get involved in it... - yes, a person “in vitro”. But someone who has lived ten days “in vitro” as a human can remain that way if he remembers what it means to be human.”

“The game solves any social, political, sociocultural issues, creates new models. And this turns out to be true everywhere, since the game can simulate any area of ​​life. Moreover, in the game you can go into the future and see what will happen there in the future.”

(G.P. Shchedrovitsky “We have philosophy”)

For the main contingent of participants, the organizational activity game (OAG) begins with an installation or an orientation report by the organizer. However, for the organizer himself and his “headquarters” the game is already underway; it began long before the orientation report and the installation itself only marks the transition from the preparatory stage to the main stage, from conception and design to organizational and practical implementation. During the preparation, the main array of methodological, organizational and game technical support for the game was developed. At the same time, a volume of work was carried out comparable in contribution to the main stage of the game and several times longer than it in time. Analysis of the design and concept of the game, methodological and theoretical elaboration of the theme and problem nodes of ideas, work process, organizational design, program, planning and game-technical staging of individual episodes and situations - all this remained behind the shoulders of the organizer and his “headquarters”, a group of methodologists and game technicians.

Such intensive work at the preparatory stage is caused, first of all, by the fact that each ODI is unique. No ODI is repeated; Each game is created once to analyze a certain range of problems, specific thematic and mental content, for a unique exemplified situation. For someone who has never taken part in an ODI, all games are similar to each other. From the point of view of such an external observer, any ODI presupposes the presence of several working groups; the program always necessarily contains group, general and reflective activities, and the order of the topics discussed is also established. However, with this method of consideration, only the superficial organizational form of the ODI is “grabbed” - a kind of regulation of the event. At the same time, both the methodological, theoretical and organizational foundations of the game form, as well as the organizational project and program of the game remain unidentified. The game nature of ODIs also turns out to be hidden. "Why do you call this event a game?" - asks an external observer, looking at the ODI program, which he reads as regulations. “Is it better to talk about collective problem solving? You are conducting training, brainstorming.” And often ODI participants say with a noticeable amount of irony: “Game? I have never worked anywhere like I work here.”

Methodologists, gaming technicians and organizers of ODI play with each other in a kind of mental-active and positional “chess”, playing out possible moves, situations, positions, strategies. Such a game about possible options for the upcoming game puts the organizers in a special position: by the time of the orientation report, they, unlike other participants, are already included in the game. They play - and the “launch” of the ODI, the unfolding of its main stage, is carried out only insofar as the organizers themselves play. Methodologists and game technicians succeed in drawing other participants into ODI to the extent that they themselves are involved in the game. The organizers constitute a kind of epicenter of the game. This reveals a peculiar pattern of playful forms of mental activity (MA).

The opening report represents the transition from one stage of the game to another. It “folds up” the results of the preliminary game of methodologists and game technicians and outlines the promising lines of the new “big” ODI. The organizer of the game does not just present to the participants the idea and concept, organizational design and program - he begins to play out the situation, reproduce the results of the preparation game in reflection and reflective thinking and express these results in the communication text. The installation records the main difficulties that the organizer sees before the start of the game, the problems that the groups will encounter, the principles of constructing the upcoming work and the various possible trajectories and strategies for the movement of the game participants and working groups. The question arises: what does it mean to understand this text as a setting for a game? What is the playful nature and playful meaning of the orientation report?

The organizational design and program of the game, the introduced representations of the work process and methodological schemes of activity reflect the future MD, set MD guidelines for the prospective reflection of the game participants and in this sense (functionally) can and should be considered and interpreted as the “rules” of the game. However, neither during the installation nor in the first days of the game, the participants, experiencing enormous difficulties in the process of self-determination and mutual determination, do not perceive organizational documents and mental patterns as rules and guidelines.

So, neither game technicians nor participants who first entered the ODI consider the organizational and methodological concepts specified in the program and introduced in the orientation report as the rules of the game. Do not consider or use; in this regard, these ideas are not rules for them; both the first and the second are right, but right in different ways.

The first guideline for a participant in the game is the theme. The formulation of the topic not only outlines the general contours of the thematic area, and therefore the contours of future discussions and discussions, the theme of the game indirectly sets the plan for work processes and the game form. Reconstruction of work processes and the game form according to a given formulation of the topic requires from the game participant not only a general idea of ​​the complete game MD, but also an understanding of possible connections and relationships in the MD - constitutive of the game and constituted by the game. From this point of view, the theme sets a special type of connection between the MD being played out and the “external” and “production” MD, from which the goals for the game are set. What is this connection? What can theme analysis and thematic analysis in general give to a player in terms of self-determination?

If the organizer of the game invites participants to play “Designing a new type of university” or “Programming scientific research and design development for the leading institute of the industry,” then the natural conclusion is about the nature of the main work process. The plan of work processes (or plot content) has already been identified, outlined in the topic and specified culturally and historically; This means, in a sense, in an extra-game way: through typological and activity definitions. We understand that the participants in the game will “design” or “program”, and where this does not work out for one reason or another, they will play “design” and “programming”. The situation becomes more complicated if we encounter formulations of a different type; ODI "City" or "Ways and methods of enhancing the educational process in the system of advanced training" is conducted. Based on the formulation of the topic, we can no longer clearly identify the central work process. It can be assumed that the game will be devoted either to an “analysis of the situation” in the field of advanced training or “urban studies”, or to the problematization of existing approaches to the topic and research methods; however, confirmation of such a hypothesis should be sought in other organizational documents, in the project and program of the game.

Imitation in ODI is nothing more than the creation of the future. This does not mean that the organizers and participants of the game are not interested in the current situation; however, they did not gather for the game in order to reproduce this situation “as closely as possible to reality.” This “real” situation is needed only as a fulcrum for programming and planning the future. The current state of affairs requires in-depth analysis, but the purpose of such analysis is to criticize and transform this situation. The use of the ODI method requires the organizers and participants of the game to shift the status of “reality” from the existing situation to the one being designed and grown in the game. If we follow the prevailing understanding, then “imitation” is interpreted rather as imitation, as the reproduction in some artificial conditions of the natural “fabric” of events and relationships. The basis of the imitative attitude in ODI is a focus on the future, the use of schemes and mental representations as a fundamental project.

The game is a breakthrough into the future. The essence of ODI is the creation of problem situations and their resolution through the organization of collective mental search and the creation of conditions for self-organization of game participants. By developing mental patterns and structures on the “board”, the game not only forms and develops mental abilities and “pure” thinking among the participants in the game. The game determines the possibilities and boundaries of using these schemes in collective MD, refutes or confirms the claims of “pure” thinking from the point of view of MD and the tasks of organizing MD. ODI turns out to be a global experiment on the practicality of thinking and the possibility of realizing mental ideas. Here we come close to another point in the widespread idea of ​​\u200b\u200b“imitation” and imitation relationships. Today, imitation is often confused with modeling; Recently, the term “simulation modeling” has gained currency. We are confident that “imitation” and “modeling” are two different approaches to mastering sociocultural and mental reality.

ODI is created on the basis of existing activity schemes and MDs, organizational forms and organizational documents; the predetermined nature of these “representations” is a condition for the “launch” of the game and its normal course. Going beyond the boundaries of existing schemes and ideas must be controlled and manageable. Otherwise, the continuity of MD and the rules of its development are violated. However, the meaning of ODI is to intensify the thinking and MD of the collective, in which and due to which the inherent patterns and structures would be overcome; this is the situation of the development of the MD and all participants in the game. Development is an artificially natural process, artificially controlled and managed, and most importantly, assimilated into artificial ideas. It is necessary to overcome the existing ideas and schemes of organization so that, as a result, new ideas and schemes of organization are built - more powerful and more effective in terms of organizing and managing the collective mental activity of those freely gathered to solve a complex problem situation.

Chapter 4. An example of an organizational-activity game

4.1 Program, regulations, participants and results of the game

From October 30 to November 7, 2010, the Ural Youth Energy Forum was held in the Yubileiny sanatorium (Verkhny Tagil) in the format of an organizational and activity game “ Strategic priorities for energy development in the Sverdlovsk region" The program and regulations of the game are presented in Table 4.1.

The following issues were discussed at the game:

-problems of involving “new” energy resources in the “new” economy of the country and the Ural region, including the development of the concept of a peat cluster in the regional economy;

-problems of launching an innovative economy;

-problems of launching development management (enterprise, economy, country);

-problems of modern quality and lifestyle in their systemic relationships and mutual influence.

The goals of the game that were presented to the participants:

-connecting representatives industry personnel reserveelectric power industry to the discussion on the issues of developing regional concepts and programs for energy development;

-implementation of an innovation systemformation of a personnel reserve through the organization of collective thinking and activity - system-thought-activity methodology, as a promising ideological direction;

-participation in building a system of social reproductionthrough organizing a broad public discussion on the problems of energy development in the country and region;

-participation in formation of a general ontological (worldview) picturebased on the activity approach of representatives of the personnel reserve, as a necessary condition for ensuring a breakthrough in the regional economy;

-development of the information society in the regionthrough organizing a discussion using the Internet.

Table 4.1 - Program and regulations of the organizational and activity game

The first day: Review of existing strategic developments in the economy and energy sector of the country and region. Main challenges, tasks and guidelines. October 30, Saturdaystartendtime10:0011:001:00

Tutoring

Need help studying a topic?

Our specialists will advise or provide tutoring services on topics that interest you.
Submit your application indicating the topic right now to find out about the possibility of obtaining a consultation.

Organizational-activity game is a gaming method of active social-psychological learning, a type of operational games, during which, using modeling of the organization of professional activities, students solve current theoretical and practical problems, developing the reflexive component of creative thinking.

Unlike a business game, the goal of which is to solve an actual pedagogical problem, the goal of an organizational-activity game is to solve a theoretical or practical problem. A task is a situation in which it is necessary to find a certain order of actions (algorithm) to achieve a goal and in which the implementation of this algorithm requires certain skills. The problematic form of organizing activity, communication, reflection and thinking, used in an organizational-activity game, means that the players are placed in conditions where they do not know what and how to do, what methods of activity, communication, thinking, reflection, etc. they should develop. .P.

Organizational and activity games are considered to be games for the development, methodologization of thinking, and the development of generalized techniques for productive mental activity. An organizational-activity game develops the ability to act in a wide area with unsteady boundaries, accustoms to collective mental activity, and restructures the thinking of participants. It differs from a business game in that it is held over a longer period of time (usually over five days), involves the participation of a wide range of organizers: director, screenwriter, methodologists and game technicians, and the mandatory and widespread use of reflective techniques.

In an organizational-activity game, a hierarchical level of interaction is established: game, game-technical, methodological, which involves the involvement of specialists in the game - directors, screenwriters, methodologists and game technicians.

The components of preparing the manager, directors and screenwriters for the organizational and activity game are:

Analysis of the problem of practical activities of specialists and their characteristic mistakes;

Determining for the study group the level of complexity of the problem presented in the game;

Clarification of the level of formed abilities among students.

In the game, not only the players, but also the director and screenwriter experience difficulties in modeling and restructuring interactions as development progresses storyline. This gives rise to the need to organize reflection, to attract methodologists - specialists in organizing reflective analysis of activity.

Functions of methodologists in the organizational-activity game:

Ensuring the unity of the director, screenwriter and ideologist in constructing the plot of the game;

Constructing the “driving” trajectory of players and their interactions;

Development of the storyline up to finding a way out of a difficult situation that is set by the plot;

Finding a way out of a difficult practical situation (through working with the plot).

The functions of professionally trained game technicians include the appropriate organization of group work (problematizing players, conducting group reflections during the game - self-analysis, etc.).

Composite Core Technologies in the organizational activity game:

Mnemonics (development of a system of concepts);

Psychotechnics (control of the system of motives);

Circuit design (translation of concepts into graphic form);

Group technology (organization of group work);

Sociotechnics (using social experience as a means of learning).

The results of organizational and activity games are:

Firstly, the development of students’ thinking, the development of techniques for productive mental activity, the ability to analyze reality, formulate theoretical and practical problems and solve them;

Secondly, the formation of collective mental action and learning collective thinking;

Thirdly, during the game, problem-type situations are translated into task-type situations, socially organized activities and social practices develop, new goals, ideals, and values ​​are formulated; such updating of the players’ professional preparedness occurs either as a result of qualitatively simulated activity conditions, or as a result of systemic criticism of the activity;

Fourthly, the result of the game is the rapid emergence and development of groups, up to teams with complex architecture of micro-groups, teams are formed to transform practice.

Structure and features of preparation and conduct of organizational and activity games

The technology of the preparatory part of the organizational-activity game comes down to the following. First of all, a topic is selected that accumulates a current theoretical and/or practical problem that takes place in the this moment in the professional activities of specialists.

During the preparatory period, the selection of game participants is carried out. It is advisable to include practitioners from similar fields of activity in the playing groups. Team compositions are selected in connection with the identified problems.

Advance preparation of students for the organizational and activity game includes:

Subject-specific preparation (studying literature, lectures given, solving test problems);

Schematic training (mastering symbols and signs);

Reflective-psychological preparation (thinking through personal strategies for action in the classroom).

Each organizational and activity game is usually held for five days and is divided into the following stages: self-determination; problem analysis; determination of the system of values ​​and goals of activity; determination of the system of means of carrying out activities; building a project for the changed activity.

These stages correlate with the phases of the psychological mechanism of the game:

Acceptance by participants of regulatory requirements for gaming activities;

Awareness of difficulties in the practical and mental plans of activity to resolve the problem;

Forming the need for restructuring one’s own activities and personality;

Building a strategy for professional self-change.

In the first phase, students in a state of “as they are in life” enter into gaming activities. They become players and define themselves in the game. Participants correlate the goals and rules of participation in the organizational-activity game with their own goals. They form ideas about their activities, a presentation occurs - the process and methods of presenting, presenting themselves to others.

In the second phase, participants analyze their practical activities and formulate existing problems. At the heart of each game is necessarily a problematic situation that has developed in one or another area of ​​practice.

At this stage, a process of reflexive ascent from the abstract to the concrete occurs when analyzing activity, i.e. “reflexive adjustment”, when difficulties in practice are analyzed, the main subjects of practice and their relationships are identified, a problem field is built and problems are formulated.

In the third, “critical” phase, participants compare ideas about “what they are” with ideas about “what they should be” in order to overcome difficulties in activity. Participants discover the non-identity of these ideas and realize that the reason lies in themselves, in the nature of their activity. At this phase, they are faced with a choice and carry it out: either rebuild their activities and themselves, or give up trying to solve the problem and live as before. Participants develop a need for their own self-development, and through clarification of the values ​​and goals of their professional activities, they turn to the synthesis of new knowledge and abilities to master this activity.

At this phase of the game, in order to find out the reasons for difficulties in practical activities, participants analyze situations at a theoretical abstract level. Working with concepts or theoretical schemes requires the development or clarification of theoretical concepts, for the construction of which the logic of “ascent from the abstract to the concrete” is used.

At this phase, participants in organizational-activity games develop the ability to create a business atmosphere during discussion, as well as an understanding of the dynamics of group processes. It is at this moment that the players have a need to “be different” in order to overcome difficulties in collective activity.

In the fourth phase, participants build a strategy of self-change and self-development, feel the need to be different, and build projects for changed professional activities. The perceived need of participants in organizational-activity games to “be different” and act “differently” becomes the motive for their activities both within the framework of the game-based educational process and after the game, in practice.

Managing an organizational and activity game requires great flexibility and creativity from the organizers at all stages of its preparation and implementation.

This is a special form of organization and a method of stimulating collective mental activity aimed at solving problems.

Essence of ODI

Essence of ODI

this game is a complex of interrelated methods or techniques (mental-intellectual, socio-psychological, etc.) that provide a logically substantiated change of various types of collective, group, micro-group activities aimed at creating a “game product” - a text containing a solution to a given or even problem formulated during the game itself. Solving the problem is the subject of this game.

The purpose of the organizational and activity game:

solving a theoretical or practical problem given within a specific situation. The situation reflects both problems and tasks.

Structure of a specific situation

• Problem for its resolution it requires the construction of a theoretical concept that transforms the problem into a task.

• The task- this is a situation in which it is necessary to find a certain order of actions (algorithm) to achieve a goal, and the development of this algorithm requires certain skills (intellectual, communication and organizational) from the participants.

Problem form of organization

Problem form of organization

activities,

communication, reflection and processes of mental activity of participants in an organizational game means that the players are placed in conditions where they do not know what and how to do, what methods of activity, communication, thinking, reflection they must develop and apply, that is, they are in conditions of maximum uncertainty.

ODI stages:

1) Entry of the team into a problematic situation;

2) Analysis of a problem or problematic situation;

2.1 Entering players into the game;

2.2 Work in groups;

3) Construction of a project (algorithm) of activity.

The activities of specialists in solving complex complex problems of managing socio-economic systems are modeled based on real information about their condition.

• The activities of specialists in solving complex complex problems of managing socio-economic systems are modeled based on real information about their condition.

• Roles in ODI are conditional. Decisions are made outside the framework of staff structures.

• The difference in role goals and the interaction of roles is ensured, which is ensured by the presence of personal interests of the participants in the game

• Use of collective activities.

• Having a common goal among the gaming team.

• Collective development of solutions by game participants.

• Implemented in the “decision chain” process;

• Multiple alternatives are provided

• Managing players' emotional stress.

• Development of a common solution

Final reflection

The subject of awareness, assessment and:

• actions of leading players, their effectiveness, timeliness

• contribution of different participants to the creation of the final product

• thought processes of members of various teams, thought patterns used by them to develop group products

• processes of intra-team and inter-team communication

• group dynamics processes

• participants' satisfaction with the results obtained.

After completing the game, it is appropriate to discuss the progress of the game together with the participants and listen to their opinions, suggestions and wishes on the methodology of the game, as well as on the relationship between the game management and the participants.

After completing the game, it is appropriate to discuss the progress of the game together with the participants and listen to their opinions, suggestions and wishes on the methodology of the game, as well as on the relationship between the game management and the participants.

Crisis of adolescence

The end of adolescence is associated with the crisis of adolescence. The main content of this crisis is the meeting real life with her ideal ideas. The more aware of the discrepancies between what “he himself came up with about himself and his life” and what at some point he realized as reality, the more acute the internal experiences.

Business, role-playing, organizational activity games.

Business game – modeling of processes and decision-making mechanisms. In a business game, the process of making decisions takes place under the conditions of a stage-by-stage, multi-step clarification of the necessary factors, analysis of additional information received and generated during the game. During the game, participants analyze the situation, make and discuss decisions, and also enter into certain relationships with each other, which can be in the nature of competition, cooperation, formal interaction, etc.

In a business game, the following stages are distinguished.

1. Introduction to the game.
2. Dividing participants into groups.
3. Studying the situation.
4. Discussion of the situation in groups. Development of group structure.
5. Game process(analysis of the situation, decision making, its execution).
6. Summing up the game. Analysis of group activities. Assessing the performance of participants and groups.
7. Analysis optimal option.
8. General discussion.

Role-playing game This is a method of simulating reality, which is characterized by improvised performance of roles. Procedure role playing game, includes two stages: organizing the game and group discussion. At the stage of organizing the game, the following stages can be distinguished: 1) familiarization of the participants with the game situation. 2) distribution of roles; 3) organization of space for role-playing games; 4) the role-playing game itself.

Organizational activity game is a type of operational games, a form active learning resolving problem situations through modeling cognitive research and organizing social and production activities. Therefore, another name for organizational games is the term problem-based games.

Unlike a business game, the goal of which is to solve an actual practical problem, the goal of organizational-activity games is to solve a theoretical or practical problem given within a specific situation.

Like all types of mental activity, ODI goes through three stages in its deployment.

1. The preparation stage, at which the main idea and concept of the game are developed, the main working goals that must be achieved with the help of the game are formulated (here the game acts as a means of achieving these goals and it is in this function that it is considered and designed), organizational projects, programs and plans are developed games, possibly also scripts of its most significant moments and other organizational documents; In terms of time, this stage can take from several days to several months or even years (see the table of conducted ODIs). At the same stage, during discussions of various aspects of the game, teams of organizers, methodologists and game researchers are formed; the number of these teams varies depending on the thematic and mental activity content of the game, as well as on the various circumstances and conditions of its implementation.
2. The main stage in which game form(given by the organizational project and the game program), pre-designed and programmed work processes are carried out, producing and generating products and results that correspond to the goals of various participants in the game - customers, organizers, methodologists, researchers and all players without exception (if they make efforts to achieve them). This stage, as a rule, already during project development is divided into a number of phases, each of which has its own special functional purpose.
3. The stage of exiting the game and generalizing experience has, as its name suggests, a dual purpose and, accordingly, unfolds as if through two parallel channels. This is a very important and fundamental part of the entire ODI, which must be designed by the organizers. In practice, this stage has no final boundary and is completed at different times and in different ways for different participants, depending on the circumstances of their life and work; one or another result of the game is necessarily included in the entire subsequent life and work of the participants.

Group work is carried out according to regulations and takes on average 45-90

Organizational activity game (OAG) is one of the methods for solving complex economic, social, organizational, pedagogical and other problems.

The ODI was developed and described by the outstanding domestic methodologist G.P. Shchedrovitsky. He held a number of games on current issues in education. His students widely use ODI to develop education in the country, including higher education.

The essence of ODI is revealed in its name. The game is called organizational because it is specially organized, designed and programmed. For this purpose, an organizing committee is being created. Each game has its own personal leader or two leaders who carry out the process of organizing and managing the game, monitoring its progress and regulations.

The game is called activity-based, since its participants act as active subjects of the game, figures. In ODI there is no division into students and teachers, into leaders and followers, into superiors and subordinates. But, as in a children's game, ODI can have both more active (leaders, ringleaders) and less active (inert, followers) participants. Such division in ODI depends on the degree of involvement of each participant in the game, on his desire to make the maximum contribution to the advancement of the problem under discussion, on the accuracy in following the rules of the game.

A few words about the essence of the game. Children play not because they get some kind of material result, they are attracted by the process of play itself. The result of children's play is the development of children's consciousness and personality, their understanding of the life meaning of the roles they play, and the acquisition of the ability to listen to each other, communicate and interact with each other.

It’s the same in ODI: it does not pursue the goal of teaching you something, giving you any information. The purpose of the ODI is to collectively discuss the topic or problem raised, to develop mental means of analyzing and understanding the problem, to identify possible approaches and solutions. The main gains in the game are the development of the participants themselves, their internal advancement in their own activities.

Each participant is included in the game voluntarily; roles in the game are not assigned, but are chosen by the players themselves and determined during the game. The game always has rules, following which supports and preserves it. Without the rules, the game is meaningless.

And at the same time, every game is creativity. Whether it was successful or not depends entirely on the imagination and thinking of the players, on their orientation towards cooperation and understanding of the other, the ability to accept or propose a new rule and the method of its implementation. What is the organization of ODI?

Division into teams. ODI can have a very different number of participants (from 20-30 to 200 or more). The number of participants in the game is determined by the complexity and global theme of the game. All ODI participants are voluntarily divided into groups and teams. The basis for dividing participants into teams is the organizational project. The organizational project fixes the problems included in the theme of the game (complex problem).

Each team solves a common problem from the point of view of its problem, from its own angle. Discussion of a complex problem from the perspective of specific problems allows us to see it in full, holistically, in its interconnections and relationships. Dividing players into teams in ODIs provides a common platform (space) for the game in which each team must offer its own approach to a common theme.

Organization of work by day. Thematic planning is the basis for organizing ODI. The unit of thematic planning is the day, i.e. Each day of the game is dedicated to a specific theme. The distribution of the sequence of topics is associated with consistent progress in the implementation of a common topic. The topic of each next day is based on the results obtained from the previous day.

Program, regulations, game organizers. ODI is built according to the program and regulations that each participant receives. The game is supervised by ODI organizers: ODI leaders and group (team) leaders (game technicians).

How is the ODI going?

ODI takes place strictly in accordance with the developed program and game script. The game begins from the kick-off report leader, which determines the relevance of the ODI topic.

Every day of the game is built on the same principle. First comes group work. The group discusses the topic of the day from the point of view of the group's problem. In the time allotted by the regulations, the group must prepare a report or message for 10-15 minutes. One of the group members makes a presentation.

Then there is a general meeting (the general springboard of the game). Representatives of the groups make prepared reports. At the bridgehead, a group approach to a common topic is implemented, positions clash, and approaches to understanding the problem of the day are developed.

After the general meeting, a lecture can be organized by one of the participants or organizers of the game on specific problems of the ODI topic.

Another day begins from reflection, those. from a discussion of how and to what extent the group has progressed in its chosen approach over the past day of play, how this approach relates to the approaches of other groups, and what aspects of their own work should be restructured or clarified in this regard. After this, group work begins on the topic of the day.

At the end of each day, the organizers of the game conduct orgreflexia. It discusses how much the planned result for a given day was achieved, how the groups progressed during the game, what difficulties were encountered, and adjustments are outlined to continue the game the next day.

What are the ODI results?

The results of the ODI are different for each participant. They depend on his value orientations and interests, the degree of involvement in the game, level of activity, etc. The main result of the game is the player’s awareness of values ​​and meanings in activities and in life, his reflexive capabilities, self-determination in the profession, and the acquisition by each participant of skills and means of collective mental activity. Such acquisitions form an important basis for the successful mastery of a profession and its further development.