In complex work, a first answer can be sensible and still be wrong. New data appears. A dependency behaves differently. A customer needs something the process did not anticipate. The costly part is often not the first answer. It is the energy spent defending it after reality has changed.

Being wrong can feel more expensive than it is

The more experienced we become, the easier it is to connect our value with being right quickly. I recognise this in technical discussions and in facilitation. Once I have explained a direction clearly, changing it can feel like losing credibility.

Usually the opposite is true. Credibility grows when a person can say what changed, release an outdated choice and remain responsible for the outcome.

That capacity can be practised before the stakes are high. An improv constraint makes the attachment visible and gives the mind repeated experience of finding another option.

A wrong first answer becomes dangerous when protecting it matters more than using new information.

Three sources and one practical connection

Take That Back appears in Yes, And by Kelly Leonard and Tom Yorton, with the exercise indexed at print page 133. During a scene, the facilitator asks a player to replace the last word, phrase or action with a new choice and continue from there.

Practiced Spontaneity: Resources, Theory and Supplemental Information by Izzy Gesell advises participants not to dwell on mistakes and to proceed even when unsure. Training Course on Applied Improvisation by Impro Path, with Gergely Kiss and Arany Brigitta named as trainers, explicitly includes adaptability, risk taking, problem solving and working with mistakes among its learning themes.

I connect these sources by using New Choice as a workplace practice. The point is not to generate random alternatives. It is to release the first answer, preserve the objective and discover whether another route is available.

Where I see this at work

A team may assume that a requirement needs a system change. New choice: can a process change test the need first? A project may assume that every customer must migrate in one wave. New choice: can one segment create evidence with less risk? A facilitator may plan a detailed discussion. New choice: can a pair exercise make the disagreement safer to explore?

Not every new choice is better. That is not the promise. The value is escaping the false belief that only the first credible answer deserves serious attention.

After several options exist, normal judgement returns. The team compares risk, value, cost, reversibility and evidence. Improvisation opens the field. Decision making closes it responsibly.

Mistake culture still needs standards

I would not use this practice to excuse carelessness, bypass a control or treat a legal, safety or financial boundary as playful material. Some decisions require precision and formal approval.

A useful mistake culture distinguishes a reasonable assumption that proved false from repeated negligence. It rewards early visibility, honest correction and learning. It still expects people to follow agreed safeguards and to change the system when an error reveals a weakness.

The exercise belongs in the space where several safe options are possible and attachment to one of them is reducing the team’s adaptability.

What I want participants to notice

The interesting moment is the pause after the facilitator says New Choice. Some people laugh and move. Others negotiate with the instruction or explain why their first answer was reasonable.

I ask participants to notice that reaction without judging it. Then we connect it to work.

  • How quickly could you release an idea that had already received praise?
  • Did the later choices become safer, stranger or more useful?
  • What part of the objective remained stable while the route changed?
  • How could a leader invite alternatives without making the original contributor defensive?

Sources used

  • Yes, And by Kelly Leonard and Tom Yorton. Take That Back exercise, indexed at print page 133, and the book’s material on using failure.
  • Practiced Spontaneity: Resources, Theory and Supplemental Information by Izzy Gesell. The guiding principles on proceeding when unsure, accepting offers and not dwelling on mistakes.
  • Training Course on Applied Improvisation by Impro Path, with Gergely Kiss and Arany Brigitta named as trainers. The learning themes of adaptability, risk taking, problem solving and working with mistakes.
About the author

Max Grillo is an applied improvisation facilitator. He manages and hosts Rice Cookie Improv, is cofounder of Monday Flow Improv and is a member of the Applied Improvisation Network. He combines workshop practice with more than 25 years of experience in technology and transformation.

More about Max