ROTI – Return On Time Invested

ROTI stands for Return On Time Invested: it is a quick assessment of the perceived usefulness of a meeting, workshop, or training session. The game has all participants vote simultaneously using their fingers, from 1 to 5. It makes visible the relationship between the time spent and the value received, without lengthy debate or mandatory justification. Low or average scores mainly serve to identify a concrete improvement for next time.

Walkthrough

1. 1

   Set the intention

   1 min

   At the very end of the meeting, workshop, or training session, the facilitator announces: "Before we leave, I propose a ROTI: Return On Time Invested. The aim is not to judge individuals, but to find out if the time invested was useful. Your vote will help us improve the next session. This will take between 5 and 10 minutes." Participants remain in place and prepare to respond quickly.

   Tip — Set the context before people start packing up: otherwise, the voting becomes scattered and loses its collective snapshot effect.

2. 2

   Present the voting scale

   1 to 2 min

   The facilitator clearly states the five ratings, without summarising: "5 means excellent, I gained much more than the time invested; 4, above average; 3, just profitable; 2, useful but not worth all the time spent; 1, time wasted." They clarify that everyone chooses the rating that corresponds to their personal feeling. It is not about finding an acceptable average, but capturing each person's real experience.

   Tip — Display or write out the full scale if possible: this prevents participants from confusing 3 with a poor score or 4 with a neutral score.

3. 3

   Vote simultaneously

   1 min

   In person, the facilitator asks: "Choose your rating now, but do not show it just yet. On my signal, everyone votes at the same time with the fingers of one hand." They count down "3, 2, 1, vote" and everyone shows between 1 and 5 fingers. The simultaneous voting limits social influence and allows for an immediate reading of the group. The facilitator observes the distribution without commenting on it immediately.

   Tip — Ask participants to prepare their hand close to their body before the signal: the votes come out truly together and the more hesitant ones are less likely to copy their neighbours.

4. 4

   Quickly read the distribution

   1 min

   The facilitator looks at the raised hands and calmly announces what they see: "I see a majority around..., and a few votes at..." They can count if the group is small, or simply identify trends if the group is large. They thank participants for their honest voting. They avoid defending or justifying the content experienced, in order to keep the exercise focused on learning.

   Tip — If you receive a 1 or a 2, take a breath before speaking: your neutrality conditions the quality of the feedback that will follow.

5. 5

   Question the votes of 1 to 3

   2 to 4 min

   The facilitator explicitly addresses those who voted 1, 2, or 3: "What could have raised your score by one point?" They gather short, future-oriented, action-focused responses. Participants can speak if they wish, without being forced to justify themselves individually. The facilitator reformulates into concrete needs: pace, content, clarity, usefulness, format, or participation conditions.

   Tip — Ask for "one point more" rather than "why this score": the phrasing reduces defensive criticism and brings forth applicable improvements.

6. 6

   Choose an improvement for next time

   1 to 2 min

   Based on the feedback from scores 1 to 3, the facilitator identifies a realistic improvement and states it aloud: "For next time, I will note that we need to..." They choose an observable action rather than a vague intention. If several suggestions emerge, they prioritise the one that comes up most often or the one that is easiest to test. Participants thus hear that their vote is genuinely used to adjust the process.

   Tip — Conclude with a single clear decision: too many commitments dilute the effect of the ROTI and give the impression of a collection without follow-up.

Variants

• Remotely, the facilitator asks everyone to prepare a number from 1 to 5 in the chat, then to send it only on the signal. The meaning of the scores remains the same: 5 excellent, 4 above average, 3 just profitable, 2 useful but too long, 1 time wasted.
• For a large group, the facilitator reads the general trend without seeking an exact count, then asks only those who voted 1 to 3 to suggest a short improvement. This keeps the format within 5 to 10 minutes.
• For a team that knows each other well, the facilitator can ask after the vote: "What is the smallest change that would earn the group an extra point?" The discussion remains focused on a testable action for the next session.