Method guide · Arrange people and ideas
Arrival Board
Keep different routes of reasoning visible even when people reach the same conclusion.
- People
- 6–50
- Base procedure time
- 30 minutes
- Recording
- Shared record
Purpose: Explore through dialogue; Make a decision.
English guide
Text acceptance is not approval of this rendered page, its media, or publication.
How this method works
A wall-based conversation method for preserving different routes of reasoning to the same conclusion. Use it when counting support and opposition hides differences in assumptions among people choosing the same conclusion, leading to conflict again during implementation. Participants arrange their reasons as location cards in chronological or causal order and connect them to a conclusion card with route lines. Routes with different reasons remain separate even when they join the same conclusion, allowing people to distinguish apparent agreement from its underlying grounds. The result is routes to each conclusion and branching points to check before implementation. Do not use it for votes where revealing reasons would compromise safety.
Phase schedule
Minutes are cumulative from the start of the base plan, not a live timer. Read scaling for any additional time. Phase controls do not advance automatically.
Use the arrow keys, Home or End while these controls have focus. The complete phase schedule remains below, including without JavaScript.
- Place the conclusions0–4 minutes from the start (4 minutes)
Action: Place. Participation: Everyone.
Shared record
- Write the reasons4–12 minutes from the start (8 minutes)
Action: Write. Participation: Individually.
Individual record
- Arrange the routes12–18 minutes from the start (6 minutes)
Action: Arrange. Participation: Everyone.
Shared record
- View the routes18–25 minutes from the start (7 minutes)
Action: View. Participation: Everyone.
Shared record
- Choose a check25–30 minutes from the start (5 minutes)
Action: Choose. Participation: Everyone.
Shared record
Facilitation steps
- For 4 minutes, place the conclusions under consideration apart from one another at the right edge of the wall, leaving room for multiple routes into the same conclusion.
- For 8 minutes, each person writes up to 3 reasons for reaching their conclusion and arranges the location cards in causal order from the starting point.
- For 6 minutes, connect the location cards to the conclusion card with route lines, joining routes along the way only where the reasons are the same as someone else's.
- For 7 minutes, silently view the routes and place difference markers at branches where people reached the same conclusion for different reasons.
- For 5 minutes, read the branches together and choose one reason-location to check before implementation and one person responsible for checking it.
If something changes
If
Five minutes into making routes, at least half of the participants still have only one reason-location card.
Then
Ask separately about the event immediately before the conclusion and the criterion used to judge it, and add these as separate location cards.
If
After routes are joined, 80% or more of the group overlaps on one route.
Then
Separate lines whose evidence comes from different sources even if their location cards are the same, and add the source name at each line's starting point.
If
Three minutes after selection begins, 4 or more branches to check remain.
Then
Keep only branches that could change the conclusion and narrow the checks to no more than 2.
Preparation
Materials
- One conclusion card per conclusion, approximately A3
- Three reason-location cards per person, approximately A6
- One route-line tape per person, approximately 1 m long
- Two difference markers per person
- One dark-coloured writing implement per person
Room and setup
- A wall at least 3 m wide where multiple routes of reasoning can join the same conclusion
- One area with enough space to separate each participant's route starting point
Adjust for people and time
With fewer than 6 people, limit conclusions to no more than 2 and keep one route per person. Up to 50 people, place no more than 6 conclusion cards and allow up to 10 routes into each conclusion. Above 50, divide into groups of no more than 10, and transfer only 2 routes with different reasons from each group to the whole-group board. On that board, do not merge routes; bring together only shared points to check.
Safety and non-applicable situations
Do not use this method for votes where disclosing reasons would compromise safety. Keep different reasons visible rather than treating the same conclusion as shared reasoning. Do not merge routes on the whole-group board when combining larger groups.
Historical translation and source notes
These original notes are retained verbatim with their fixed source versions. This historical label does not resolve a source-specific concern or establish current acceptance.
- The final step selects one check, while the third branch narrows the remaining checks to no more than 2. Both source instructions remain without adding a final selection rule.
- The source caps each conclusion at 10 routes but does not specify what to do if more than 10 participants reach the same conclusion within the up-to-50 format. No overflow procedure is invented.
Manuscript's recorded references
These translate the original manuscript's source and rights claims. They remain separate from any current-page notice below; they do not establish new verification.
- Taiwa no Fumen editorial team: Arrival Board
Original description and illustrations
Diagram, print, and video language
Original Japanese guide, diagram, and print view. Their labels and print text have not been translated; an English print edition is not provided here.
English video-library navigation. Original Japanese audio, subtitles and transcripts remain labelled Japanese resources. Their translations are separate later work. No remote player is embedded here.
The manual English phase controls are a navigation aid, not a live facilitation timer. Interactive diagram motion remains pending.
Editorial provenance
Japanese source status and logs are provenance only. They do not mean this English text or interface was field-tested. Historical fixed-text acceptance and hold records remain specific to their recorded versions; displaying them neither asserts current acceptance nor resolves source-specific restrictions.