But what sorts of problems does improv solve?

[Communicators] want to create a safe environment where two-way communication is accepted, where there’s an avenue for not only development of new ideas, but for negative feedback, too. One concrete way to recognize whether your organization is having ineffective communication is if people are saying things in meetings or public, and then saying the opposite one-on-one. If you’re in a meeting and someone says “you bet boss, that’s the best idea I’ve heard,” and then walk out and he says “that is the most insane thing I’ve ever heard,” then you know there’s a communication problem.

How can improvisational exercises fix that?

There is an exercise I use called “the conducted story.” Four or five people stand in a line and one person starts telling a story. When I put my hand up in “stop” motion the person speaking has to stop in midsentence. Then I point to another person and he or she has to start from there. So if the new person is stuck in his own head, the story falls flat.

Here’s an example from a workshop I did. We started a story about James Bond. The person said “James Bond walked into a bar and had a gizmo on his arm. This gizmo…” That’s where I stopped him and pointed to the next person, and she said “Catwoman was also there and she ordered a drink.”

After they finished the story I asked if there was an idea that was dropped. Was there anyone’s initiation that was missed? They knew automatically. It was the gizmo. Rather than heighten the idea she was given, this person was stuck in her head. I asked the guy who started the initiation how he felt when his idea was dropped. He said, “It hurt. I felt like I offered a good idea to the group.” The second person had no idea that she had done that, and she felt bad about it.

So you’re comparing this to what happens when somebody skips over an idea in a meeting.

What happens when you offer up an idea in a meeting and it falls on deaf ears and you think it’s a good idea? Well, the next time you have a good idea you might keep it to yourself and that’s to the detriment of the group. The thing is that person didn’t even realize that she did that. It wasn’t like she changed the story or consciously said, “I don’t like his idea.” All she thought was, “It’s time for my idea.”

Suppose someone provides an idea that just isn’t right for the situation. How can you turn that down without alienating the person?

All we’re talking about is ideas—no investment except for a few minutes of time. If it’s healthy two-way communication, there’s a point where you stop and analyze the idea, say we have explored it, and now it’s time to decide a course.

Clearly developing a fictional story isn’t going to work in real situations. How might a communicator actually apply these principles to, say, a meeting on a plant floor?

If you’re in a group setting and ideas are being tossed around, you explore a little further and build on good ideas. The meeting becomes more dynamic. It’s an interactive environment rather than one where people stay in their heads, just waiting to give out their own ideas without working as a team.

And the outcome?

Initially there are positive team feelings. Then the feeling is anticipation that this stuff is going to be put to work. Over time though, you’ll see that some people got more out of it than others. Like any other kind of training you have to see who’s going to put the exercises to practical use. We don’t live in a vacuum, and it’s not all nice-nice. We don’t always agree, but why not consider possibilities?