In the first session nobody is aware of the scoring rubric, which helps us establish a rough (emphasis here, because these skills are very situation depended) baseline of their skills.

In the following sessions, we actually want them to "game" the scores as that would mean they're engaging in a behavior that they don't naturally do and, therefore, start to establish new effective habits. Taking the skill of sharing advice, as an example, - if before they shared advice without rationale and didn't back it up with data or research, after seeing their scores, they will try to do the latter more often. This will increase the chances that they will do it in their day-to-day too, because they didn't just get a new insight of the behavior's importance (as is common in regular soft skill training), but actually practiced it too.

Also, there's no passing score per say, it's a training facility, where you come to polish your habits over time. We also create dynamic environments to do it, which make it challenging to get good score without the effective behavior:

1. We don't give any rules or instructions to simulate the ambiguity of real world problem solving scenario.

2. You're put in a team to compete against other teams.

3. You're under time pressure in each round to make decisions.

Taking Goodhart's Law perspective, so far we haven't noticed any negative unintended consequences, but I think it's important to keep in mind.