Robert, I share your dislike of silly icebreakers... But also I worry that you may be taking the term "superpower" too literally. I think most people use it more metaphorically, not meaning that it's a strictly inborn trait or that they are one of only five beings in the world that can do the thing. I have personally found it very very helpful to define my own "superpowers" in that metaphorical sense. For example, I sometimes say that my superpower is getting stuff published in peer-reviewed journals. I don't mean that I've always been great at it or that I don't need to practice or that nobody is better at this than I am; what I mean is that, through a combination of innate ability, extensive training, and ferocious persistence, I can coax a publishable paper out of meager data more often than most other people. This is distinct, for example, from other aspects of publishing such as being technically skilled in innovating methods or collecting the data. By having this clarity about what I'm great at, and what I'm merely OK at, I can collaborate more effectively with people with complementary "superpowers."
Then we should ask the question: What are you good at doing? -- Which is a simple, clear, human question. Framing things that we are good at doing as superpowers, sets up the belief that excellence is somehow reliant on superhuman ability -- whether one takes this literally or not, the language frames the expectation. And as I wrote, that's what I object to. I also object to anything that's a cringey cliche.
I agree that "What are you good at doing?" is a very good question (and I love your icebreaker built around it). I'd just add that, when asked by an interested individual in a 1-on-1 or small-group conversation, "What is your superpower?" seems to me like a fun chance to demystify an accomplishment or status for my conversational partner. For example, someone might ask me, "How do you publish so much despite being at a community college? What's your superpower?" The "correct" answer, and the answer I'm happy to give, is never "I was genetically gifted to do X better than anyone else" but rather an answer that reveals the "superpower" to be some combination of luck, skill, talent, etc. It's a great opportunity to be informative while gently undercutting the premise that I really do have a literal superpower.
Robert, I share your dislike of silly icebreakers... But also I worry that you may be taking the term "superpower" too literally. I think most people use it more metaphorically, not meaning that it's a strictly inborn trait or that they are one of only five beings in the world that can do the thing. I have personally found it very very helpful to define my own "superpowers" in that metaphorical sense. For example, I sometimes say that my superpower is getting stuff published in peer-reviewed journals. I don't mean that I've always been great at it or that I don't need to practice or that nobody is better at this than I am; what I mean is that, through a combination of innate ability, extensive training, and ferocious persistence, I can coax a publishable paper out of meager data more often than most other people. This is distinct, for example, from other aspects of publishing such as being technically skilled in innovating methods or collecting the data. By having this clarity about what I'm great at, and what I'm merely OK at, I can collaborate more effectively with people with complementary "superpowers."
Then we should ask the question: What are you good at doing? -- Which is a simple, clear, human question. Framing things that we are good at doing as superpowers, sets up the belief that excellence is somehow reliant on superhuman ability -- whether one takes this literally or not, the language frames the expectation. And as I wrote, that's what I object to. I also object to anything that's a cringey cliche.
I agree that "What are you good at doing?" is a very good question (and I love your icebreaker built around it). I'd just add that, when asked by an interested individual in a 1-on-1 or small-group conversation, "What is your superpower?" seems to me like a fun chance to demystify an accomplishment or status for my conversational partner. For example, someone might ask me, "How do you publish so much despite being at a community college? What's your superpower?" The "correct" answer, and the answer I'm happy to give, is never "I was genetically gifted to do X better than anyone else" but rather an answer that reveals the "superpower" to be some combination of luck, skill, talent, etc. It's a great opportunity to be informative while gently undercutting the premise that I really do have a literal superpower.