After the final round of The Furious Pigeon, gather your team while the decisions behind those catapult shots are still fresh. Give everyone a moment to catch their breath, then explore a few specific moments together.
For a corporate team in Singapore, the most useful discussion connects what happened during play to an everyday challenge, such as unclear ownership or a rushed handover. Keep the tone curious and focus on what worked and what the team can improve. Use these six questions in order, adapting the examples to the game modes your group actually played.
Were we all working towards the same objective?
Start by asking each person to describe what the team was trying to achieve in one selected round. Listen for differences before discussing the result.
In Nest Destruction, teams balance attacking the opposing nest with defending their own. If your group played this mode, explore whether everyone understood that balance. Someone might have focused on launching as often as possible while another assumed protecting the base came first.
Ask participants to recall the opening plan and the decisions that followed. Identify where individual actions supported the agreed priority and where people worked from different assumptions. A win does not automatically mean the objective was clear to everyone.
Connect this to your next project kickoff. Before dividing the work, have the team agree on what a successful outcome looks like and which priority takes precedence when demands compete.
Which messages helped us act, and which caused confusion?
Ask the team to reconstruct one useful exchange and one that fell short. The exact wording matters: “Over there!” gives a teammate less direction than “Cover the left side.”
Look at what happened after the message. Establish whether the intended person heard it, understood it and responded. An instruction can sound clear to the speaker while leaving the receiver unsure who should act.
For example, if several players responded to the same call for help, discuss how naming one person could have prevented duplication. If nobody responded, check whether anyone acknowledged the request.
Carry this into a workplace handover by naming the recipient, stating the required action and asking for confirmation. For more ways to practise this habit, explore TeamLabs’ guide to improving workplace communication with team building games.
How well did we divide the work and support each role?
Move from messages to responsibilities. Ask participants to describe who collected bird plushies, who used the catapults and, where relevant, who defended the team’s target.
Then examine how those roles depended on one another. A shooter waiting for plushies is a useful starting point. Explore whether supplies were unavailable, collection had no clear owner, or someone needed help keeping up.
Invite the people doing supporting tasks to explain what made their contribution easier or harder. Avoid judging the workload only by the most visible action. Someone collecting resources may have enabled several successful launches without receiving much attention.
For the workplace, identify a similar dependency between colleagues or departments. Agree how the person receiving work will know it is ready, and how the person supplying it can flag a delay before others are left waiting.
What made us change our strategy or stick with it?
Choose a turning point when the original plan came under pressure. This could be a repeatedly blocked approach or a tactic that stopped producing useful results.
Ask the team to separate what they noticed from what they assumed. Repeatedly missing a target, for example, might suggest reviewing the approach. It does not explain the cause on its own.
If you played several rounds, compare one deliberate adjustment with what happened afterwards. Consider whether the change helped and whether another factor, such as the opposition changing tactics, also influenced the result. Give people time to disagree or offer another explanation.
Bring the conversation back to a project that is underway. Identify one signal that should trigger a review of the plan, such as repeated rework. Decide who can call that review so the team can respond while changes are still manageable.
Did everyone have a chance to influence the team?
Ask whose suggestion, observation or encouragement helped during play. Encourage specific examples, including contributions that did not involve taking a shot or giving instructions.
Then invite people to describe any moment when they had something useful to add but could not find an opening. Offer a minute to write first, followed by voluntary sharing. Avoid putting a quiet colleague on the spot or treating silence as proof of disengagement.
Explore how the group reacted to a missed shot or an unsuccessful suggestion. A dismissive comment is worth discussing, as is a supportive response that helped someone try again.
Treat these examples as invitations to improve team habits. For the next meeting, consider gathering suggestions before open discussion begins and allowing colleagues to finish their reasoning before evaluating an idea. Keep observations tied to behaviour in the session; a game is not a personality assessment.
What will we do differently together next week?
Finish the six questions by choosing one change the team can realistically try. Push for a commitment that names the situation, the action and the person responsible for starting it.
For example: “At Monday’s project meeting, the project lead will confirm who owns each action and its deadline. Each owner will acknowledge their task before we move on.”
Agree how you will judge whether the change helped. In this example, review whether fewer tasks needed follow-up clarification. Set a date to discuss the result, perhaps after two meetings, and decide whether to keep, adjust or stop the habit.
Write the commitment where everyone can find it. If the team identifies several improvements, save the others for later. One manageable experiment gives the group a clear way to test whether its debrief has made a practical difference.
FAQs
How long should the debrief take?
As a starting point, allow 15–20 minutes for a small team. Keep examples brief and reserve the final few minutes for the agreed action. Discuss extra time with the organiser beforehand.
Who should lead the discussion?
Choose someone who can listen without dominating, such as a facilitator or team leader. If a manager participates, invite them to share their interpretation after colleagues have spoken.
Should winning and losing teams debrief together?
Let each team reflect separately first. Then invite groups to exchange one useful observation without comparing individuals or turning the discussion into another competition.
What if people disagree about what happened?
Hear both accounts and identify what each person could see or hear at the time. Record uncertainty where necessary. You can agree on a clearer process without settling every disputed detail.
Can these questions work for colleagues from different departments?
Yes. Discuss the shared game experience first, then let each department select a relevant action. Avoid imposing one workplace solution on groups with different responsibilities.
