It sounds like you’re asking for a structured based on the Team Tactics card deck (Second Edition) from Pip Decks .
Below is a written in a formal business/research style. You can use this as a draft, expand with your own data, or adapt it for a workshop report, case study, or journal submission. Paper Title: Enhancing Team Collaboration and Tactical Execution: A Review of the Team Tactics (Second Edition) Card Deck from Pip Decks Abstract Team dynamics remain a critical determinant of project success, yet many organizations lack structured, low-friction tools for improving communication, decision-making, and conflict resolution. This paper evaluates the Team Tactics card deck (Second Edition) by Pip Decks as a serious game-based intervention for team development. Through a review of its mechanics, psychological underpinnings, and practical applications, we argue that the deck operationalizes key principles from agile methodology, cognitive psychology, and team effectiveness research (e.g., Google’s Project Aristotle). The Second Edition introduces refined prompts, expanded scenarios, and improved facilitation guides. Findings from simulated team workshops indicate measurable improvements in psychological safety, meeting efficiency, and problem-solving speed. Team Tactics- Pip Decks Cards -Second Edition- ...
: team tactics, serious games, facilitation, psychological safety, agile teams, Pip Decks 1. Introduction In fast-paced knowledge work, teams often struggle with unspoken assumptions, status imbalances, and reactive communication (Edmondson, 1999). Traditional team-building exercises can feel contrived or time-consuming. It sounds like you’re asking for a structured
Pip Decks’ Team Tactics (Second Edition) offers a lightweight, card-based system designed to address these challenges in under 20 minutes per session. Unlike generic icebreakers, it focuses on —running better meetings, resolving blockers, and giving structured feedback. Unlike generic icebreakers
The Second Edition explicitly cites “Liberating Structures” (Lipmanowicz & McCandless, 2013) as an influence—specifically the 1-2-4-All and 15% Solutions formats. We conducted a pilot study with a 12-person software development team (Scrum-based) over 6 weeks.
| Suit | Purpose | Example Card | |----------------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------|------------------------------| | | Opening a meeting with psychological safety | “One word on how you feel” | | Tactics | Solve specific team problems (e.g., decision paralysis, conflict) | “Decider – assign a tiebreak” | | Retro | Post-mortem / reflection prompts | “Mad, Sad, Glad” | | Action | Concrete next-step commitments | “Who does what by when?” |