REAL HOST VALIDATION / NOT YET PERFORMED
Can this make a small workshop easier to run?
This pilot tests a wheel-led round workflow. Workshop platforms already offer sequences, audience joining and exported results; the idea is a focused experience, not an exclusive invention. Use fictional labels and host the activity on one screen.
← Open the browser-only beta
Before the trial · 2 minutes
Ask an independent trainer or workshop facilitator about their most recent real session. What did they use to choose speakers or assign follow-up work? Where did they switch tools or lose track? Observe their existing method before demonstrating this beta.
Explain: this is an optional local experiment; current ClickTheWheel is unchanged. No participant devices join, no account sync exists, and reload loses the session. Export first. Ask permission before retaining notes; record no sensitive names or rosters.
Run a fictional session · 7 minutes
- Enter four fictional participant labels. Set introductions to Everyone before repeats and speaking turns to Repeats allowed. Set a meaningful round-three task. Start the session.
- Run introductions: choose a person, temporarily skip an unavailable person, then restore them. Explain who can be selected next. Exhaust the cycle; identify why selection stops and what starting another cycle means.
- Undo one selection. Ask the host to predict who is eligible again. Advance to speaking turns, then undo the advance; verify the prior round and exclusions return. Advance again.
- Run two speaking turns. Explain that a repeat is permitted, not guaranteed. Finish early and move to task assignment.
- Choose a participant and read the task in their record. Finish the session. Export CSV and JSON; locate a selection, its round, task and any skipped/early-closed round details.
Do not coach immediately. Note where assistance is needed. Do not count a scripted synthetic run as real-user validation.
Decide whether it earns another session · 3 minutes
Ask: What would you use this for next week? Which step was less clear than your existing tool? What did you still need a spreadsheet, chat or another app for? Would you choose this over your current method, and why? A polite positive reaction is not a repeat-use commitment.
Invite a second voluntary use only through your normal human process; no invitations are sent by this beta.
Capture findings · one row per actual host
| Field | Record |
|---|
| Anonymous host code / date | Use a code, not a contact detail. |
| Real setting / existing tools | Audience size, remote/in-person, present workflow. |
| Task completion | Completed alone / helped / blocked for each step. |
| Observed friction | Exact action, expected outcome, actual outcome. |
| Rule comprehension | Could explain repeats, cycles, skips and undo? |
| Record usefulness | Could find round/task? What was missing? |
| Alternative comparison | Why choose current tool or this pilot? |
| Return use | Expressed intention separately from observed actual reuse. |
Internal decision gate
Trial with five real hosts. Suggested product targets: four complete the core flow without help and three voluntarily reuse it. These are internal learning targets, not Google or AdSense requirements. If unmet, revise or stop the concept based on observed reasons.
Before any live-room promise or production integration, verify account save/reopen, host/guest reconnection and clear data ownership with designated QA records. A successful browser-only beta does not establish those capabilities. Keep all existing ClickTheWheel routes and familiar workflows available.