**2. Mind Matters: Influencing others**

Within Mind Matters, the player assumes the role of a junior researcher in a fictional company. The player's task is to try out a mind-steering device (**Figure 1**) by temporarily "taking over" game characters and steering their behaviors. By doing so, the player influences the dialog between game characters and, subsequently, the game narrative.

The players are guided to learn about influencing others, by inclusion of three goals in the game:


• improve customer relationship, which entails using effective tactics in game situations where relationships with external parties are at stake.

We have chosen a number of relevant business situations and written personnel files for each in-game character. These files describe the personal background of the game characters as well as their competence profiles (**Figure 2**).

The story of Mind Matters unfolds going through these situations, in which the game characters act out conflict situations. Players can interfere in each situation from which it is immediately clear that leadership behavior in terms of "influencing key stakeholders" is required (**Figure 3**). The player uses the mind-steering device to take control of one of the game characters in a scene and decide which influencing tactic that character will adapt. This determines the dialog, the reaction of the other characters, and the resulting story. Game characters are influenceable in various degrees, depending on their profile, their conversation partner, and the situation they are in. In the meantime, players get an overview depicting the key characters and their current state. This also provides an opportunity to reflect on the actions and their consequences, to read updated personnel files, as well as to study their score sheet, pertaining to their three game goals.

Apart from being able to control or steer the game characters in their conversations, the mindsteering device also enables players to read the minds of all characters involved in the scene, including those who are beyond their control. Reading minds shows situational and generic character-related information and, writing minds, steers the game character in taking one of four allowed actions (**Figure 4**).

**Figure 1.** Mind-steering device.

*legitimating* (behavior seeks to persuade others that the request is something they should com-

*pressure* (behavior includes demands, threats, or intimidation to convince others to comply

*assertiveness* (behavior includes repeatedly making requests, setting timelines for project com-

*upward appeal* (behavior seeks the approval/acceptance of those in higher positions within the

*coalitions* (behavior seeks the aid of others to persuade them to do something or uses the sup-

*personal appeal* (behavior seeks others' compliance to their request by asking a "special favor

*consultation* (behavior seeks others' participation in making a decision or planning how to

*inspirational appeal* (behavior makes an emotional request or proposal that arouses enthusiasm by appealing to others' values and ideals or by increasing their confidence that they can

*ingratiation* (behavior seeks to get others in a good mood or to think favorably of them before

*rational persuasion* (behavior uses logical arguments and factual evidence to persuade others

The Mind Matters game [4] allows the players to experiment with these influencing tactics, tell stories with them, and experience the consequences of their actions, to learn about the

Within Mind Matters, the player assumes the role of a junior researcher in a fictional company. The player's task is to try out a mind-steering device (**Figure 1**) by temporarily "taking over" game characters and steering their behaviors. By doing so, the player influences the

The players are guided to learn about influencing others, by inclusion of three goals in the game:

• do research, which translates into gathering and interpreting information as well as experi-

• improve team spirit, which means trying to find the most effective influencing approach in

pletion, or expressing anger toward individuals who do not meet expectations)

for them" or relying on interpersonal relationships to influence their behavior)

that a proposal or request is viable and likely to result in task objectives).

dialog between game characters and, subsequently, the game narrative.

each situation where the outcomes impact team morale the most

menting with as many influencing tactics as possible

ply with given their situation or position)

with a request or to support a proposal)

organization prior to making a request of someone) and

port of others as an argument for them to agree).

implement a proposed policy, strategy, or change)

asking them to do something) and

leadership competence of influencing others.

**2. Mind Matters: Influencing others**

Soft tactics are:

158 Leadership

succeed)


**Figure 2.** Personnel files of one of the game characters.

• medium soft (ingratiating, rational persuasion, personal appeals)

stance/body language, to give a more complete feedback to the player.

Note that as a player, you have no control over the utterances themselves but decide which

Mind Matters: Influencing Key Stakeholders http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.76248 161

The effect of these adopted influencing attempts is immediate: The controlled character uses the tactic chosen by the player and, depending on their ability and skill, translates this into words. The effect of each influencing attempt can be positive, neutral, or negative. This feedback takes form of the utterances spoken by the characters and the appropriate animated

Following the programmed computational model, the game determines which reply the conversation partner (the character that is being influenced) gives and what impact the dialog has on the key performance indicators (KPIs), team spirit, customer relationship, and research

The accumulated scores on these KPIs determine the narrative of the game. Each interactive situation in the game is based on a different conflict between certain game characters.

• soft (inspirational appeals, consultation)

(**Figure 5**).

**Figure 5.** Playing style and KPIs.

influencing tactic the game character will adopt.

**Figure 3.** Current state of the influenceable game characters.

**Figure 4.** (a) The scene (upper figure). (b) Read and control the game character's mind.

A game character's mind can be steered into using one of four influencing approaches: (a) a hard, (b) a medium hard, (c) a medium soft, or (d) a soft influencing tactic. The influencing tactics explained earlier are clustered into these four categories:


Note that as a player, you have no control over the utterances themselves but decide which influencing tactic the game character will adopt.

The effect of these adopted influencing attempts is immediate: The controlled character uses the tactic chosen by the player and, depending on their ability and skill, translates this into words. The effect of each influencing attempt can be positive, neutral, or negative. This feedback takes form of the utterances spoken by the characters and the appropriate animated stance/body language, to give a more complete feedback to the player.

Following the programmed computational model, the game determines which reply the conversation partner (the character that is being influenced) gives and what impact the dialog has on the key performance indicators (KPIs), team spirit, customer relationship, and research (**Figure 5**).

The accumulated scores on these KPIs determine the narrative of the game. Each interactive situation in the game is based on a different conflict between certain game characters.

**Figure 5.** Playing style and KPIs.

A game character's mind can be steered into using one of four influencing approaches: (a) a hard, (b) a medium hard, (c) a medium soft, or (d) a soft influencing tactic. The influencing

tactics explained earlier are clustered into these four categories:

**Figure 4.** (a) The scene (upper figure). (b) Read and control the game character's mind.

• hard (pressure, assertiveness, legitimating)

**Figure 3.** Current state of the influenceable game characters.

160 Leadership

• medium hard (coalition, exchange, upward appeals)

This conflict can even evolve during a scene (each action may require a different approach). Player's choice defines how each conflict is resolved.

**4. Mind Matters for formal trainings**

The instruction on how to play this game is inspired by an *inquiry-based learning cycle*, which identifies five distinct phases: orientation, conceptualization, investigation, conclusion, and discussion [5] (see **Figure 7**). In the first two phases of this cycle (*orientation* and *conceptualization*), trainees are asked to formulate hypotheses about a particular question in need of investigation. During the *investigation* phase, trainees check whether a hypothesis is correct or not by conducting several experiments. During the last two phases of the inquiry learning process (*conclusion* and *discussion*), trainees are linking their hypotheses with the evidence collected during the investigation phase. Trainees are also reflecting on their learning processes and

Mind Matters: Influencing Key Stakeholders http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.76248 163

outcomes, comparing and discussing these with other trainees facilitated by a trainer.

The question in the Mind Matters game is: Which influencing tactics yield positive or negative results in specific business situations? During the investigation, trainees are trying out different hard and soft influencing tactics and approaches in order to learn about their effectiveness and impact in different contexts and situations. Conceptually, our *conflict-situational model*

First, trainees are encouraged to consider the influencing tactics (hard, medium, soft), the conflict in a given situation, and the game characters involved in the conflict and to think how

This first phase resembles the orientation and conceptualization phase of the inquiry learning

Second, trainees start investigating in several ways. Initially, trainees may play the game based on their own insights and frame of reference. Then, they might play the game, focusing

Finally, in line with the last two phases of the inquire learning cycle and based on the in-game and post-game feedback trainees receive, they are encouraged to think and discuss together

Note that Mind Matters is also recommended for informal trainings; the same instruction applies; however, the social learning aspect and the discussion among peers facilitated by a trainer are lacking. (Sign up for a 2-months free trial:

to approach this situation. Trainees should ponder these questions:

• Do you take into account the possible implications of decisions?

on maximizing or minimizing their score on one of the KPIs.

**4.1. Didactical approach**

**4.2. Trainer instructions<sup>1</sup>**

cycle.

1

http://www.txchange.nl/leadershipbook).

provides the frame of reference (**Figure 8**).

• What do you want to achieve or want to avoid?

• Do you take a proactive or a more reactive approach?

• Do you differentiate in who is saying what?

To provide additional inspiration, education, and guidance for the player, there is a source of information about influencing in the game, in the form of a booklet. Its contents cover most relevant topics of the theory and practice of influencing and often relate directly to the conflict situations themselves.

The game requires about 45 minutes to play for the first time. Subsequent play troughs take significantly less time, by allowing the player to choose individual interactive scenes directly, in order to experiment with different approaches and experience their outcomes.
