4.3 Pitches, Evaluation and Adjourning

In the first of the last few (2-3) meetings, we deliberately did not show any of our slide sets because we wanted to devote full attention to the teams' pitches and their presentations. In our case, in which we usually had 9 to 10 teams of around 4 people, we organised two online meetings and set aside 3 hours for each. This gave us time not only to listen to the presentations but also to celebrate them. It is, of course, desirable that all participants see the pitches and provide feedback. This is why we made participation in both sessions mandatory.

With regard to the presentation of the pitches, we learned a lot while trying out different approaches. We experienced that when teams are given more than 10 minutes for their presentation, they are very likely to simply reconstruct their project work and approach rather than deliver a pitch. It was only the enforced brevity of a 10-minute pitch that made it possible to get the essence out of the Design Thinking projects and train another future skill: convincing stakeholders and users by keeping it short and precise.

Regarding time planning: as mentioned above, pitches should not exceed 10 minutes. Additional time will be required for:

• Reactions / Applause 😊
• Feedback for teams and pitches
• Comprehension questions
• Transfer questions regarding the next steps
• Handover and technical issues

See   See PowerPoint "Pitches I and II, Evaluation and Adjourning"

Note: (Text highlighted in yellow on the slides indicates that this information needs to be updated and customised to your context

With regard to the evaluation of the pitches by the course participants as well as the facilitator, we have used the following approaches in various forms:

• Structured feedback in response to the pitches following the format: “I / we liked…. I / we wish…” after each presentation (and from every other team)
• A survey ranking of the pitches (in the end) with the question: “Which pitch has inspired you the most?”
• Mini input by the facilitators: A reference to the beginning of the course when the importance of the future skills that are trained with the courses was stressed was linked with an input. Here one of the different models for future skills, e.g. of the World Economic Forum (WEF), The Stifterverband (Germany) or the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) was presented and discussed.
• Sustainability in learning: the participants wrote an email to themselves, scheduled for delayed delivery. (using an online tool) answering a question (of your choice).
• Mutual appreciation: if you work with participants in two locations, organizations, universities, faculties etc., the feedback method warm shower can be recommended. This proved to be highly appreciated, in particular as it shed light on how participants from other locations and organisations were viewed and the value they contributed.
• Evaluation of the procedure, course, outcomes and perceived learnings by the group. In the pilot phase we performed this step with online tools in a separate session, where we could discuss the results with the participants. Later, we integrated the evaluation into the last session with prepared collaboration boards, e.g. mural, miro or similar.
• Depending on your goal with regard to your evaluation, here are some questions you may want to ask:
• What did you learn about your problem-solving skills? (open answers)
• What did you learn about your self-management skills while learning and performing? (open answers)
• Could you improve your skills relating to technology use and development? (Likert scale)
• Team competence, what is key?
• o Team competence describes a cluster of skills that make a person a good team member and have a positive impact on team performance. This includes the ability to integrate into an existing team
• How do you rate your personal competence level when working in a virtual intercultural team on a scale from 0 to 10? (scale)
• Evaluation and grading with prepared forms (by facilitators only). The teams also had to upload their project documentation in which they documented how they used the Design Thinking tools.
• Adjourning: time in breakout rooms for the teams in order to wind up and to say farewell

You may want to skip some of the units mentioned, depending on the context and your learning goals. However, we strongly recommend that the team farewell (adjourning) should be carried out in all cases. Here is how we did it.

Exercise

(group / teamwork in breakout rooms during the last plenary session)

Task: As a final activity, take 10 to 15 minutes in your team for a farewell.

Possible aspects you may want to touch upon when leaving / dissolving your team:

• Celebrate your success as a team, you made it!
• Formulate lessons learned
• What was a real challenge for you personally?
• What was a good and positive experience?
• Would you like to stay in touch and how?
• Say thank you (to the team / single persons)
• Create a physical farewell ritual (and implement it!)

It is easy to see that with a 15-minute framing, a 20-minute presentation plus feedback session for each of the five teams (100 min.) and other selected activities from the above list, three hours are quickly filled. We also realised that three hours of work plus breaks is the maximum for an online session of that type with 40 people if we want participants to stay alert and listen.

A final short wrap up by the facilitators, highlighting major achievements and learnings as well as outlining the next steps (e.g. presenting the results for further action and any necessary evaluation schemes) is highly appreciated.