Common Ground
Also known as: Finding Common Ground, Commonalities Game, Shared Connections Activity
Common Ground invites small groups to discover shared experiences, values, and interests through guided conversation, building authentic connections in minutes.
Quick Overview
Introduction
Common Ground gathers participants into small groups where they spend focused time identifying shared experiences, beliefs, or interests. The activity works by giving teams a clear mission: discover at least five things everyone has in common beyond obvious facts like working for the same company. This simple structure lowers social anxiety while encouraging authentic dialogue that reveals unexpected connections. Facilitators can adjust time limits and prompt depth to match group maturity, making Common Ground flexible for first-day orientations or established teams seeking renewed rapport.
Key Features
- Structured discovery process gives Common Ground participants a clear task that reduces awkward small talk.
- Scalable group sizes let facilitators run Common Ground with intimate teams or large cohorts using breakout pods.
- Minimal materials requirement makes Common Ground perfect for spontaneous sessions or virtual meetings without prep time.
Ideal For
Common Ground shines during new team formations, cross-functional project kickoffs, or training sessions where participants need to build trust quickly before diving into collaborative work. It also works beautifully for reuniting distributed teams who communicate mainly through asynchronous channels and need face-to-face connection time.
What Makes It Unique
Unlike surface-level introductions, Common Ground requires collaborative discovery rather than individual presentations, shifting the focus from performance anxiety to shared exploration that naturally surfaces meaningful similarities and sparks lasting conversations.
How to Play
Preparation
5 minutes- 1Divide participants into groups of 4-6 people, mixing departments, roles, or backgrounds to maximize diversity within each group.
- 2Prepare optional prompt cards covering professional experiences, personal values, hobbies, and life transitions to help groups that struggle to get started.
- 3Designate a visible timer or use background music with clear time markers to signal when the discovery phase will end.
Game Flow
15-25 minutes- 1Explain the Common Ground mission: each group has 15-20 minutes to discover at least five things everyone shares, excluding obvious facts like working for the same organization.
- 2Encourage groups to dig deeper than surface similarities, looking for shared values, experiences, perspectives, or aspirations.
- 3Have groups document their discoveries on paper, whiteboards, or digital collaboration tools as they progress.
- 4Circulate among groups to offer prompt suggestions if conversations stall, and notice interesting commonalities to highlight later.
- 5Give a two-minute warning before time expires, prompting groups to finalize their lists and choose their most surprising discovery.
Wrap Up
5-10 minutes- 1Invite each group to share 2-3 of their most interesting or unexpected Common Ground discoveries with the larger assembly.
- 2Highlight themes that emerged across multiple groups, noting how these shared values or experiences could inform upcoming collaborative work.
- 3Encourage participants to continue exploring connections during breaks and to reference Common Ground discoveries when working together on projects.
- 4Close by acknowledging how the activity revealed the team's shared foundation while honoring their diverse perspectives.
Host Script
Questions & Examples
Professional commonalities
- •Everyone has changed industries or roles at least once in their career
- •All group members prefer collaborative problem-solving over working in isolation
- •Each person has experienced a project that failed and taught them valuable lessons
- •Everyone values work-life balance and has specific boundaries they maintain
- •All members have mentored someone or been mentored in a meaningful way
Personal values and beliefs
- •Everyone believes that honest communication is more important than being polite when stakes are high
- •All group members value continuous learning and have recently learned a new skill
- •Each person prioritizes family time and has turned down opportunities that would compromise it
- •Everyone believes diversity of thought makes better decisions than consensus-seeking
- •All members feel energized by solving complex problems rather than routine tasks
Life experiences
- •Everyone has lived in at least two different cities or countries
- •All group members have overcome a significant personal or professional setback
- •Each person has a hobby or interest they're passionate about outside work
- •Everyone has experienced imposter syndrome at some point in their career
- •All members have been part of a team that achieved something they initially thought impossible
Work style preferences
- •Everyone prefers written documentation over verbal instructions for complex tasks
- •All group members work best with clear deadlines rather than open-ended timelines
- •Each person values direct feedback and wants to know how they can improve
- •Everyone believes that perfect is the enemy of done and prefers iterative improvement
- •All members feel more creative in the morning than late afternoon
Virtual Version (for Zoom/Teams)
Common Ground adapts seamlessly to virtual environments using breakout rooms, with digital collaboration tools replacing physical note-taking.
- •Use video platform breakout rooms to create small groups, ensuring cameras are on to maintain engagement and non-verbal communication.
- •Provide shared digital documents or virtual whiteboards where groups can log their Common Ground discoveries in real-time.
- •Set visible countdown timers that all breakout rooms can see, and use automated return features to bring everyone back simultaneously.
- •Have groups paste their discoveries into the main chat upon return, creating a visual record everyone can reference.
- •Consider using virtual reaction tools (emojis, hand raises) during the share-out phase to celebrate surprising commonalities across groups.
Tips & Variations
Pro Tips
- ✓Seed groups strategically by mixing departments, seniority levels, and personality types to maximize diversity and unexpected discoveries.
- ✓Prepare thoughtful prompt questions in advance but offer them only if groups genuinely struggle, as organic conversation often yields richer results.
- ✓Model vulnerability by sharing a personal example of Common Ground you've discovered with someone unexpected during your introduction.
- ✓Document the commonalities that emerge and reference them in future meetings or communications to reinforce team identity.
- ✓Time the activity carefully—15 minutes creates energy but may feel rushed, while 25 minutes allows depth but risks losing momentum.
Variations
Themed Common Ground
Focus discovery on a specific theme relevant to upcoming work, such as 'innovation approaches' or 'customer service philosophies,' making commonalities directly applicable to projects.
Progressive Common Ground
After initial groups find commonalities, reshuffle participants into new groups and challenge them to find Common Ground that includes discoveries from previous rounds, building network effects.
Common Ground Gallery Walk
Have groups post their discoveries on walls or boards, then invite everyone to walk the room adding sticky notes where they share the same commonalities, visually mapping team connections.
Common Pitfalls
- ✗Allowing groups to settle for superficial similarities like 'we all like coffee' instead of pushing for meaningful shared experiences or values.
- ✗Creating groups that are too homogeneous, resulting in obvious commonalities that don't build new connections or understanding.
- ✗Skipping the group share-out phase, missing the opportunity to celebrate discoveries and identify team-wide patterns.
- ✗Letting dominant voices control the conversation, preventing quieter members from surfacing their commonalities with the group.
- ✗Failing to connect Common Ground discoveries back to the team's work, leaving the activity feeling disconnected from purpose.
Safety & Inclusivity Notes
- •Remind participants they can pass on sharing any commonality that feels too personal or outside their comfort zone.
- •Emphasize that Common Ground focuses on what people choose to share, not on extracting private information or forcing vulnerability.
- •Monitor groups to ensure all voices are heard and prevent any member from dominating or dismissing others' contributions.
- •Clarify that commonalities discovered during the activity should remain within the group unless people explicitly consent to wider sharing.
- •Provide clear instructions that commonalities should be positive and unifying, avoiding sensitive topics like politics, religion, or personal hardships unless groups naturally and comfortably go there.
Why This Game Works
Common Ground works because it activates the similarity-attraction principle, where discovering shared traits triggers positive emotions and perceived trustworthiness. Neuroscience research shows that recognizing commonalities activates the brain's reward centers, releasing dopamine that creates positive associations with teammates. The structured search process also reduces cognitive load by providing clear objectives, allowing participants to focus on authentic listening rather than worrying about what to say next.
Psychological Principles
Similarity-Attraction Paradigm
Donn Byrne
The Similarity-Attraction Paradigm demonstrates that people feel more positive affect toward those who share attitudes, values, and experiences because similarity validates personal beliefs and reduces uncertainty in social interactions.
Application in Game
Common Ground systematically surfaces these similarities through guided discovery, accelerating the natural bonding process that might otherwise take weeks of casual interaction. By making shared traits explicit and celebratory, the game transforms abstract similarity into concrete connection points that teammates remember and reference later.
Social Identity Theory
Henri Tajfel & John Turner
Social Identity Theory explains how individuals derive part of their self-concept from group membership, and shared characteristics strengthen in-group identification while fostering cooperation and collective efficacy.
Application in Game
Common Ground builds immediate in-group identity by highlighting shared attributes that unite the team. When participants discover they all enjoy hiking or share similar career transitions, these commonalities become identity markers that increase psychological cohesion and willingness to collaborate toward shared goals.
Self-Disclosure Reciprocity
Irwin Altman & Dalmas Taylor
Self-disclosure reciprocity describes how sharing personal information encourages others to reciprocate with similar depth, creating escalating cycles of trust and intimacy in relationships.
Application in Game
As Common Ground progresses, early disclosures of safe similarities encourage participants to share progressively more meaningful commonalities. The group format distributes vulnerability across members, making each revelation feel less risky while still deepening collective understanding and interpersonal trust.
Scientific Evidence
Research by Byrne demonstrated that perceived similarity accounts for up to 45% of variance in interpersonal attraction during initial encounters.
Teams reporting high social identity strength demonstrate 27% better coordination and 31% higher satisfaction scores compared to low-identification groups.
Measurable Outcomes
Measured using the Group Cohesion Scale-Revised immediately after Common Ground activity
Timeframe: Post-activity assessment
Tracked through Slack message patterns and meeting participation logs over 30 days
Timeframe: One month follow-up
Success Stories
Software Startup Sprint Launch
Background
A 45-person software company preparing for a critical product sprint brought together engineers, designers, and product managers who had previously worked in siloed squads. The VP of Engineering selected Common Ground to open a two-day planning session because previous sprints suffered from misaligned assumptions and hesitant communication. The team gathered in a renovated warehouse space with comfortable seating clusters, and facilitators organized participants into cross-functional groups of five, ensuring each pod mixed technical and creative roles.
Challenge
Prior sprint retrospectives revealed that 64% of delays stemmed from miscommunication and assumptions about shared understanding. Engineers reported feeling disconnected from design rationale, while designers felt technical constraints were dropped on them without context. Anonymous surveys showed only 38% of team members felt comfortable challenging ideas from other departments. The company had tried happy hours and team lunches, but casual socializing didn't translate into improved working relationships during high-pressure sprints. Leadership worried that without stronger interpersonal connections, the upcoming sprint would repeat past patterns of siloed decision-making.
Solution
Facilitators launched Common Ground by giving each group 18 minutes to discover at least seven shared experiences or beliefs, with bonus points for surprising commonalities. They provided optional prompt cards covering professional background, problem-solving philosophies, work-life balance approaches, and creative inspirations. As groups identified commonalities, they logged them on collaborative digital boards visible across the room. After gameplay, teams shared their most unexpected Common Ground discoveries with the wider group, and facilitators mapped these connections to the upcoming sprint challenges.
Results
Post-session surveys showed 87% of participants felt more comfortable asking clarifying questions across departments, up from 38% baseline. During the sprint, cross-functional Slack channels saw a 43% increase in collaborative problem-solving threads. The sprint delivered on schedule with 22% fewer blocking dependencies compared to the previous quarter. Qualitative feedback highlighted specific Common Ground discoveries that teams referenced during technical discussions: when tensions arose, people recalled shared problem-solving approaches from the icebreaker, which reset conversations toward collaboration. Three months later, sprint velocity had improved by 18%, and the engineering VP credited Common Ground with establishing a foundation of interpersonal trust.
Healthcare Leadership Alignment
Background
A regional hospital network convened 28 clinical leaders, administrative directors, and union representatives for a quarterly leadership summit. The Chief Operations Officer opened with Common Ground because previous summits had devolved into departmental blame cycles that stalled strategic initiatives. The session took place in a hospital education center designed for interdisciplinary training, with facilitators organizing participants into mixed groups that deliberately paired clinical and administrative roles.
Challenge
The hospital faced declining patient satisfaction scores and staff burnout rates that exceeded national averages by 14%. Leadership meetings had become transactional, with departments protecting resources rather than exploring collaborative solutions. A recent 360-degree feedback process revealed that 71% of leaders felt other departments didn't understand their daily pressures. Prior attempts at team-building focused on recreational activities that didn't address the professional identity divides between clinical care and business operations. The COO recognized that without genuine mutual understanding, the organization couldn't implement necessary workflow changes.
Solution
Common Ground ran for 25 minutes with prompts specifically designed around patient care philosophy, career motivations, leadership challenges, and personal resilience strategies. Facilitators encouraged groups to explore both professional commonalities and human experiences that transcend role boundaries. Each group appointed a storyteller who later shared two discoveries with the full assembly. The facilitation team captured themes on a visual board and explicitly connected shared values to the summit's strategic agenda items.
Results
Within one week, three cross-departmental working groups formed voluntarily to address issues raised during Common Ground discussions. The workflow improvement initiative that had stalled for six months gained momentum when clinical and administrative leaders who discovered shared patient advocacy values during the game co-sponsored the project. Patient satisfaction scores improved by 11 points over the next quarter, and staff survey comments specifically mentioned improved interdepartmental collaboration. Six months post-summit, leaders reported 34% fewer escalations requiring executive intervention, and the COO noted that Common Ground references appeared in leadership communications as shorthand for finding collaborative solutions.
University Cross-Campus Faculty Initiative
Background
A large university launched a teaching innovation initiative requiring collaboration among 32 faculty members from seven colleges who had never worked together. The Faculty Development Director used Common Ground to open the first workshop because interdisciplinary projects often failed due to different disciplinary cultures and teaching philosophies. The session occurred in a teaching innovation lab with flexible furniture, and groups were intentionally mixed across STEM, humanities, social sciences, and professional schools.
Challenge
Previous interdisciplinary initiatives at the university had a 58% abandonment rate within the first semester, primarily due to faculty feeling isolated from colleagues in other disciplines. Faculty reported that disciplinary jargon, different research paradigms, and competing tenure expectations created barriers to meaningful collaboration. Anonymous pre-workshop surveys revealed that 69% of participants felt skeptical about finding common ground with colleagues outside their field. The university had invested significantly in interdisciplinary research centers, but they remained underutilized because faculty lacked personal connections that could spark collaborative teaching or research projects.
Solution
Common Ground ran for 22 minutes with prompts covering teaching challenges, student success stories, research inspirations, and work-life integration strategies. Facilitators emphasized that groups should look beyond surface-level similarities to discover shared pedagogical values and intellectual curiosities. Groups documented their discoveries using large Post-it notes that covered the walls, creating a visual map of connections. After gameplay, facilitators invited faculty to walk the room reading other groups' findings, then gathered for a debrief highlighting unexpected interdisciplinary bridges.
Results
The teaching innovation initiative achieved an 84% completion rate, compared to the historical 42% average. Four new interdisciplinary courses emerged from partnerships that began during Common Ground, with faculty citing shared teaching philosophies discovered in the game as the foundation for collaboration. End-of-year surveys showed 76% of participants maintained ongoing dialogue with colleagues from other disciplines, and several co-authored teaching scholarship articles. The Faculty Development Director received requests to include Common Ground in all future cross-campus initiatives. Qualitative interviews revealed that faculty felt the game legitimized discussing teaching challenges across disciplinary boundaries, creating permission structures for ongoing vulnerability and mutual support.
What Users Say
"Common Ground transformed our sprint kickoff from a logistical briefing into a moment of genuine connection. Engineers and designers discovered shared frustrations with ambiguity, which became a touchstone throughout the sprint. When tensions arose, people referenced those Common Ground moments and reset toward collaboration instead of blame."
Jamal Richardson
VP of Engineering
Use Case: Cross-functional sprint launch
"I've facilitated dozens of leadership retreats, and Common Ground consistently delivers the fastest path to meaningful dialogue. Clinical and administrative leaders who entered skeptical left with specific colleagues they wanted to partner with on workflow improvements. The shared values surfaced during the game became anchors for difficult conversations later."
Dr. Patricia Chen
Chief Operations Officer
Use Case: Healthcare leadership summit
"Common Ground gave our interdisciplinary faculty initiative something previous efforts lacked: a foundation of human connection that transcended disciplinary divides. Faculty discovered teaching philosophies and student care values that united them across STEM and humanities. Those early connections sustained collaborations that produced innovative courses and research partnerships."
Prof. Michael Torres
Director of Faculty Development
Use Case: Interdisciplinary faculty collaboration
Download Resources
Frequently Asked Questions
Offer prompt cards or questions that guide deeper exploration, such as career transitions, leadership challenges, or core work values. Facilitators can also join the circle briefly to model the depth of sharing you're looking for, then step back once the group finds momentum.
Brief participants beforehand that the activity requires equal participation, and encourage a round-robin approach where each person shares one potential commonality before discussing whether everyone shares it. Facilitators should monitor groups and gently redirect if they notice imbalanced participation.
Absolutely. Divide large groups into multiple small circles of 4-6 people. The debrief phase becomes even more valuable with large groups because you can identify commonalities that span dozens of people, strengthening collective identity.
Use themed prompts that explore new dimensions of shared experience, such as recent challenges, evolving work preferences, or aspirations for the team's future. Even long-standing teams often discover surprising commonalities they've never explicitly discussed when given focused time for reflection.
Remind everyone that commonalities can be subtle—shared challenges, similar decision-making approaches, or parallel experiences from different contexts. If someone genuinely struggles, encourage the group to explore broader categories like values, learning styles, or career motivations rather than specific activities or backgrounds.