"Will the team really chip in together"
is an arithmetic problem that computes to 62.5%.
Public Goods Game + conditional cooperators (Fehr & Fischbacher, 2002) + anti-free-riding punishment (Fehr & Gächter, 2002): contributions decay round by round when anonymous, and recover when open + punishable—this is the session's most important experimental conclusion: not a question of character, but of rules.
Everyone turns worse when anonymous, everyone turns better when open
① Positioning in one line: Turn "will the team really chip in together" into an arithmetic problem—and compute one critical number: 62.5%.
02The game-theory core
Public Goods Game + conditional cooperators (Fehr & Fischbacher, 2002) + anti-free-riding punishment (Fehr & Gächter, 2002). Contributions decay round by round when anonymous, and recover when open + punishable—this is the session's most important experimental conclusion: not a question of character, but of rules.
Everyone turns worse when anonymous, everyone turns better when open.Reference: Fehr & Gächter (2000/2002)
03Players / Grouping / Duration / Venue
8–40 players (split into 4–8 groups, 4–6 each); 35 minutes; indoor + big screen.
07Output · Three reporting layers
A team cooperation decay curve (3 anonymous rounds vs 3 open rounds) + this group's "critical-contribution achievement rate" + the individual's "public-goods contribution".
| Report | For whom | Hard constraint |
|---|---|---|
| Personal report | The individual | Visible to the individual only |
| Team report | Team / HR | Aggregated results only, no names |
| Leader report | Decision-makers | No names, no individual raw five-dimension values |
08Consequence mechanic
Those who contribute a lot also lose together when others contribute little—this is the cruelty of public goods, and also the greatest point of insight. Reporting genuinely deducts coins, and the reporter is made visible (bearing the social cost).
09Ending tiers
Mirror
Open-round contribution > anonymous-round contribution, and someone takes on the reporting role willingly.
You have the ability to "call out free-riding on the spot"—such teams are rare.
Iron Armor
The curve is steady but never crosses 62.5%.
Everyone "pulls back a little, politely," and the result is collective loss. Each giving up a little is the standard path to collective bankruptcy.
Unseen
Low from the very first anonymous round, then to zero.
You default to "protect myself first." On that premise, no collaboration slogan will take effect.
10Three lines of insight
What you contribute in round one is your default estimate of what others will contribute—your trust in the team is a self-fulfilling prophecy.
Not a question of character, but of rules. Everyone turns worse when anonymous, everyone turns better when open.
If the money that "should be pooled" never gets pooled, change the rules first (visibility + accountability), not the people.
11Deployment checklist
B2 One Cauldron · Host Rulebook
8–40 players (4–8 groups, 4–6 each) · 35 minutes · indoor + big screen · 6 rounds (3 anonymous + 3 open)
04Rules & steps (with timing)
- 0–3 min Distribute coins: 20 copper each, privately (cards, unseen by others).
- 3–6 min Explain the rules (one identical set for the whole room): copper put into the "cauldron" is multiplied ×1.6 at the group total and split evenly among all; copper kept in hand returns 1:1 to yourself. Critical contribution = 1 ÷ 1.6 ≈ 62.5% (i.e. each person must put in ≥6.25 coins for the whole group to come out ahead)—this figure is not revealed on the spot, only at settlement.
- Rounds 1–3 (anonymous rounds, 3 min each): put copper into envelopes and into the cauldron, no one knows how much the neighbor put in; 20 coins are reissued each round.
- After 3 rounds: the big screen reveals only the "total contribution curve" (not individuals).
- Rounds 4–6 (open rounds, 3 min each): contribute openly, visible to all; and each person may spend 2 copper to report someone who "contributed less than 5 coins"; the reported person is docked 6 copper.
- Settlement: compare total anonymous contribution over 3 rounds vs total open contribution over 3 rounds.
05In-game currency and payout table
| Action | Payout |
|---|---|
| Contribute x coins | Group total ×1.6 ÷ number of people, returned |
| Keep y coins in hand | +y (fixed) |
| Report | −2 copper; reported person −6 copper |
| Group average contribution ≥6.25 | Whole group ends up ahead |
| Group average contribution <6.25 | Everyone ends up negative (including big contributors) |
06Observation points and signal table
| id | Behavior description | Weight |
|---|---|---|
allin | Contributes ≥15 coins every round | Responsibility +3, Connection +1 |
freeride | Contributes ≤5 coins across multiple rounds and never reports anyone | Responsibility −3, Connection −2 |
decay | Anonymous-round contribution falls round by round | Growth −2, Responsibility −1 |
restore | Open-round contribution markedly higher than anonymous-round | Growth +2, Wisdom +1 |
punish | Proactively reports a free-rider and gives a reason | Courage +2, Responsibility +2 |
fearpunish | After reporting, persists despite the group going cold | Courage +3 |
noEmbargo | Knows someone is free-riding but does not report | Connection +1, Courage −2 |
math | Works out the 62.5% threshold during discussion | Wisdom +3 |
Dimensions: Responsibility / Courage / Connection / Wisdom / Growth (full coverage).
—Host script
- "Every coin you put into the cauldron comes back ×1.6—but split across the whole group, including those who didn't put anything in."
- "From round 4, coins are contributed openly. You may also spend 2 copper to report someone who contributed less than 5 coins; the reported person is docked 6 copper."
- "I won't say the number 62.5% now. You'll see it when we break."
07Output · Three reporting layers
A team cooperation decay curve (3 anonymous rounds vs 3 open rounds) + this group's "critical-contribution achievement rate" + the individual's "public-goods contribution".
| Report | For whom | Content | Hard constraint |
|---|---|---|---|
| Personal report | The individual | Five dimensions / 16 types / six-decision-dimension radar / blind-spot list / ending tier / insight | Visible to the individual only |
| Team report | Team / HR | Team personality map + complementary network + cooperation decay curve + three metrics | Aggregated results only, no names |
| Leader report | Decision-makers | Three charts + five metrics + structural and risk conclusions | No names, no individual raw five-dimension values |