Best of all, cognitive dissonance studies are frequently very funny.

Another great quote about cognitive dissonance (and people’s desperate desire to avoid it):

“Finally, perhaps the most important way people deal with cognitive dissonance is to prevent it in the first place. If someone is presented with information that is dissonant from what they already know, the easiest way to deal with this new information is to ignore it, refuse to accept it, or simply avoid that type of information in general. Thus, a new study that says ice cream is more fattening than originally thought would be easily dealt with by ignoring it. Further, future problems can be prevented by simply avoiding that type of information — simply refusing to read studies on ice cream, health magazines, etc.”

Hey Frost, great article. Just a small digression, can you throw me a link to the abstract, maybe in my email? This is intriguing and I’d like to read more about it. Thanks!

“Groups” are not the same as “teams”. The enlightened raid leader knows the difference.

Great post! Thank you.

@Grim:The raid is not the guild was Frost’s #1 statement! It’s not appropriate for the raiders to cause guild drama over a raid issue (raid drama however, is slightly more appropriate, if immature).

Lets consider for a moment if the raid was the guild. The Raid Leader is also likely the GM and if you’re going to disagree with him/her to the extent that there is ugly drama, you’re going to get a swift gkick (if the GM is a good manager).

Option 3 is what I am in atm, the raid is an official part of the guild, but separate. Raid drama again, should not cause guild drama but if there is a disagreement where raid leader and raider cannot agree, there is a next level of authority to go to (the GM). Again, causing drama in the guild over a raid issue will get a swift gkick.

The separation between raid and guild is a very important concept. If the person has a problem with the raid, it affects the raid not the guild.

So the important concept here to avoid drama is that the raiders understand the authority of the raid and the guild and how they relate. In Frost’s case, they don’t. If you don’t like the raid, don’t be in it and it doesn’t affect the guild at all. In my case they do, if you don’t like the raid, talk to the GM who has the authority to change something if it has to (he won’t without a major, major, major cause but he can). The second case is identical to the first except there is no distinction between the guild and the raid, if you don’t like the raid, leave the guild.

If the extent of the relationship between the guild and the raid is clearly expressed and any paths of disagreement/problem solving are clearly laid out, anyone causing drama is not someone you want in the raid/guild anyway.

TL;DR: Drama llama’s are bad, clear authority structure identifies and distinguishes Drama llama’s and legitimate complaints.

I certainly think that if your raid has no problems, there’s no reason to change! However if you are having conflict or problems with the raid team, I believe that revamping to set things up right will mean less drama in the long run.

There’s always the possibility for negative ramifications within the guild, especially if you have some drama queens in there. However I think if things are handled well, people will understand. You just need to take a ground up approach — ask where they want to raid, select a leader (however you want to), and then explain that you are doing what’s best for the most people. Give the raid team a new name to help separate it in people’s minds, make it its own entity. Then post the rules for that team and invite people to sign up.

Ideally if things are handled a bit diplomatically and unemotionally people will respond in kind.

And again, if some people choose to quit because they don’t like the way it’s set up, that’s fine. You should encourage them to enjoy the game however they want

“some people lead well and others follow well. There is no shame or glory in either. Leaders would be nothing without followers and vice versa.”

Absolutely!

I worry a little bit about this changing of raid teams within the guild. It seems to me that while everything you say is logical and efficient, there’s a real chance for ugly drama when raid teams are changing, pushing people out and pulling other people in. While that’s supposed to be a raid team issue, isn’t it very likely to affect the guild as a whole and/or lead to ugly raid team rivalries?

They only way I can see that not happening is if the guild is very large and the raid teams are just a microcosm of the guild.

Added on top of this, he was very biased on choosing who would go (aka not following his own attendance rules), then we’d get in there and he would spend 10-20 minutes (I kid you not) discussing and rolling for loot. Made for incredibly sluggish pace trying to clear anything. He became very emotional and got his feelings hurt when I sent him a message with a few suggestions on how to streamline things.

A dictatorship IS needed INSIDE the raids (for the most part). You need a drill sergeant there pushing you to your best performance, that’s how people really start pushing. But even if you don’t agree with that, I’m sure you can agree with this: slow raids make for bored players. Bored players make for poor raids. Having to take 15-20 minutes to explain each and every fight, each and every time for newbies in the raids is NOT conducive to clearing content.

Organization and a clear leadership structure is pivotal in having a fun, efficient raid. Think of your 10-mans as military units… you want to know the people you’re running with and want to be able to count on them to have your back, and they know you have theirs. There’s a reason the military is not a consensus based group… some people lead well and others follow well. There is no shame or glory in either. Leaders would be nothing without followers and vice versa.

There are some real gems of wisdom here. Thank you.