Past Perspectives - Crisis in Binni

The players in the Crisis in Binni game take on roles as members of the Binnian Government, UN Negotiators, UN Protection forces, and key political figures in Binni.

Each player has a personal briefing that sets objectives and provides key background information relevent to their role, and the player take decisions, interact with other players, and deploy resources under their control. The experienced Past Perspectives Game Control team then ajudicate results and provide realistic feedback on the player decisions.

Here is an example of how Crisis In Binni might be organised for a 30 participant event - with some description of the various roles. There are six main teams of participants usually divided up randomly to discourage cliques and organisational hierarchical issues (though they inevitably arise). Alternatively, the teams could be organised around departments or workgroup teams if the client prefers.

Team Role / Activity in the game Team benefits

1. UN World Food Programme(WFP)
(4 people) Operational planning of food shipments. Dealing with distribution in the ground. Negotiating with possibly hostile warlords. Negotiating with UN peacekeepers over protection. The local warlords see the WFP as a meal ticket and it is this team's job to not only plan the logistics of moving food to the crisis area, but to ensure it doesn't all go to the wrong people. Problem solving under pressure. Negotiation with other teams, regarding resources and access to the crisis zone.Forward planning.

2. Government of Binni
(4 people) President and his (or her) political supporters. Staying in charge during a crisis - both politically and possibly militarily. Negotiating with supporters, the UN and political opponents (mainly tribal warlords) . This team is in a difficult position because it can easily be sidelined - the challenge is to remain at the centre of the decision-making process and thus maintain the government's legitimacy. Negotiation and decision making under time pressure are the keynotes for this team Negotiation skills and an ability to 'cut a deal' are developed.

3. UN Security Council sub-committee
(6 people) A coalition of the willing. Each team member represents the interests of a major world power - including the USA, the UK, France and others. Each has to be seen to be doing something, and this group has to agree what that is and how quickly. Each member of this team has a national perspective to reflect. And those perspectives are often greatly at variance - so strong committee work is developed, as well as negotiating skills and diplomacy.

4. UN Intervention Forces
(6 People) The joint headquarters of a multi-national force inserted into Binni to ensure the aid gets through. Each member of this team has some military resources provided by their national government they can use to protect the aid. However they have to work within the 'rules of engagement' laid down by their home government and the UN Security Council. Planning, problem solving and logistics are important for this team - but so is the minimum application of force. Team members don't have to be a master tacticians - the military decisions are simplified and accessible to the non-expert. The key value here is practice in making quick but consensual decisions taking account of a wide range of rapidly changing factors.

5. UN High Commission on Refugees (UNHCR)
(4 people) Another UN organisation aiming to report on the crisis and ensure that refugees are not forgotten. Increasingly aware of a massive problem, the UNHCR can only work through other agencies - the UNWFP and the UN Intervention Force - both of whom may have their own ideas. They are also face to face with the Tribal Warlords. Managing with no resources is the main theme for this team. Careful consensus-building and convincing argument is the key for this team.

6. Tribal Warlords
(6 people) This isn't a coherent team, but a group of competitors. Each member of this team has to maximise their personal political gain out of the situation. The warlords are strong in their own geographical areas - but have to tread a tightrope. If they are too belligerent, the UN forces might see that as a reason to attack them militarily, if not assertive enough they will be sidelined by the others and fail to exploit the crisis. Hard nosed pragmatism is the order of the day for this team. Forming working alliances among themselves, as well as decision making and negotiating with all the other teams.