| 16/05/08 | | Criteria for implementing initiatives in a complex space |
Dave's written a excellent post on how to make progress in a complex environment. It's excellent because it comes at a time when I'm working with a client where their staff have come up with a range of initiatives yet there is a feeling among some of the project members that the initiatives wont make a difference—they are not clear winners.
In hindsight, I should have made my approach clearer to my client and said that we create a process for the client to work things out for themselves and that I don't have the answers. I suspect they're used to the highly controlled and 'expert' facilitator who leads the group to a conclusion that is mostly pre-determined. But I didn't do that. I used a combination of narrative techniques, open space and world cafe approaches so the business folk worked out their own way forward.
Mind you there's a spectrum here. I have insights to share. I've seen many other organisations and their initiatives but I know the context will be different and a tremendous success in one organisation might go nowhere in another. But they are still possible patterns for experimentation. I need to work on other ways to share these ideas and experiences.
I liked Dave's tests for whether an initiative should be tried. To paraphrase:
- If the proposed initiative fits in with things that have happened before and what might happen in the future, give it a go
- If a failure in unlikely to be overly costly and there are things to learn, give it go
I'd like to add another criteria,
- If people in the organisation are taking responsibility for making it happen, give it go
Failure is scary for organisations. But without a safe-fail culture new ideas and new opportunities will never stick.
I do not have to prove that it will work, but I have to show that it is consistent with a view of what has happened and what could happen in the future.
if the experiment through failure or success would supply useful knowledge about the system at an acceptable cost then it is worth running
we need to be aware that we will be running parallel experiments in the expectation of substantial failure.
Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack
| 25/03/08 | | Graphic Facilitation 101 |
I've been following Nancy's visual and graphic facilitation work with interest for a while now, and inspired by a recent conversation with her, decided to try give it a go.
So, a couple of weeks ago, when Shawn and I facilitated a workshop for a HR Practitioner Community of Practice, it was a great opportunity to capture an event using this approach.
I had great fun doing it, and I had a number of interesting conversations with participants about the process and other elements of the work. This really reinforced for me that using visuals helps people engage because it breaks the usual pattern of information transmission, and moves people away from their cognitive bias.
The approach I took was to record at the front of the room, but set back somewhat from the 'floor'. I had some reservations about this, as I was concerned about not accurately capturing what was being said. We overcome this by explaining to the participants that the resulting posters were not intended to be 'minutes', but like stories, are intended to provide a context or emotional cue to remember the conversations. My preference is to work closer to the group as I draw to be able to check what I am recording is representative of the conversation as it happens.
As the old adage goes, "a picture tells a thousand words". Graphic recording is a fantastic way of harvesting conversations, and compliments the narrative approach so well. The work was well-received so I'm confident that it adds real value to a well facilitated event.
Permalink | Comments (6) | TrackBack
| 31/01/08 | | Seven ways to get more from your teleconferences |
Your teleconference system is one of your most important KM technologies.
Here are 7 things a facilitator can do to improve teleconference experience.
- Encourage everyone to be on time . Unlike f2f meetings where people can sneek in and catch up, arriving late at a teleconference meeting seems to be doubly disruptive.
- Introduce everyone. When you walk into a room you can do a quick scan of who's there. That's not so easy on a teleconference so ask each person to announce themselves on arrival (some systems automatically provide announcements) and when everyone is ready to start do a quick whip around of names starting from the person closest to Greenwich then move west. OK, you don't need to do the Greenwich thing but it's quite fun in a global group getting people to work out their longitude.
- Remind everyone of who's speaking. When you have a dozen or more disembodied voices on the line it can be hard to work out who's talking. Get people into the habit of prefacing what they say with their name, for example, "Shawn here, to get our community of practice going ..."
- Reduce background noise. The more people you add to a teleconference the more likely someone will have a noisy background, noisy typing as they take notes or some other annoyance for the rest of the participants. Point out the mute functionality of the system or the handset they are using and asked people to turn off any other device that might interfere with the call (such as mobile phones).
- Rotate start times to be fair to all timezones. If you plan a regular get together on the phone and your participants are scattered around the world, don't leave one geography to do the graveyard shift.
- Use IM or a chat room to increase richness. This is probably the most important suggestion. Encourage everyone to join a chat room of group instant messaging (such as Skype) and as the call proceeds urge everyone to jot down what they are hearing, share urls, and create an artefact of the meeting. You can use it to jog your memory latter and during the call see what people are getting from the session. I was introduced to this approach by my colleagues at CPSquare and John Smith and I have written a practice note on how to do it.
- Record the call. For those who can't make the meeting simply record the call and share the audio file.
There are a range of other practices you might want to include such as employing additional technology to share screens (I was part of a fascinating teleconference today where one participant shared his screen and showed us how to design sheet metal components using engineering drafting software), share presentations, online voting, whiteboards. You might also want to practice ensuring everyone can be heard especially when there are a group of people in a room sharing a teleconference phone.
So I would love to hear the tips and tricks you've seen work. I'm sure we are going to see and be part of many more teleconferences.
| 11/01/08 | | Using a story spine for a reflection activity |
During a workshop I was recently involved in, I introduced the story spine to a couple of participants to help them to tell a story using the simple framework.
Not only did they embrace it enthusiastically and use it to great effect, unexpectedly the framework was adapted for a different purpose. A small group of onlookers decided to use it as the basis of a reflection activity. They did a great job, and I think it worked really well.
Here's a quick summary of how it might work for you:
- All participants of the group sit in a large circle
- The facilitator asks participants to reflect on an activity (in our case, we were reflecting on our involvement in a year-long training course)
- The facilitator begins by reading out the first part of the story spine, 'Once upon a time...' or 'Way back when ...'
- The person to the left of the facilitator is then asked--without rehearsal or preparation--to develop the story further by providing a brief sentence or sound-byte
- This continues around the circle with each person adding to the story until the facilitator feels that it's time to intervene with additional structure from the story spine. When they feel it is time the facilitator will add the next line i.e. 'Everyday...'
- This goes on until the story (as defined by the structure) is complete.
I recommend that you record the story so that you have an artefact or keepsake, or for transcription purposes. Because of the impromptu nature of the activity this was a bit of an after-thought for us. We did try to record the story using a mobile phone, but I'm not sure that it worked very well. I haven't heard anything!
The 'story' that we ended up with didn't make too much sense in the end, but that is unimportant. What is important is that the improvisations made it a lot of fun, and it also elicited lots of memories and anecdotes. It was also nice to reflect back on our shared experiences and to make sense of what happened as a group, as a collaborative activity.
Permalink | Comments (2) | TrackBack
| 7/12/07 | | The fine art of (not) lecturing |
I just read a great article over at the thestar.com about Nobel laureate Carl Wieman who wants professors to rethink how they teach.
His message? In a nutshell: reduce the load; stimulate the brain.
A lot of what he recommends is not just applicable to teaching science, it's also relevant to anyone who presents information to others or works with groups (meetings, presentations, workshops, training etc).
Basically, we need to up the interaction quotient folks!.
Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack
| 3/08/07 | | Getting On With It |
Scott McCloud ...
Traditional Western art and literature don't wander much. On the whole we're a pretty goal-oriented culture. But in the East, there's a rich tradition of cyclical and labyrinthine works of art ... they (Japanese comics) so often emphasis being there over getting there.
As facilitators, that's what we need to encourage -- being there over getting there!
Far too often does the “get on with it” ghost appear out of nowhere, demanding that we 'cut to the chase'. After all, 'time is money'. These types of messages are also reinforced by the mass media, suggesting that successful people “just do it” and that the frantic pace of modern life requires us to be efficient and economical.
But efficient and effective are two entirely different things.
It never ceases to amaze me, how -- in this quest for efficiency -- we (I say we, as I too have been guilty of this) lose sight of our humanity, attending meetings or working in groups without ever really connecting with others in the room as human beings. Instead, we tend to go about our 'business' like robots or machines: mechanical and routine. Rarely -- one could argue -- is this effective. In this Dilbertesque world how do we achieve anything meaningful?
Well, we need to learn how to wander more, individually and collectively. So, when planning meetings or events for effective collaboration, don't underestimate the need for people to feel 'safe', to explore and to have a sense of belonging before they are really willing to share and contribute.
That's why good facilitators use appropriate icebreakers, warmups, energizers, or whatever you might like to call them -- those activities for getting groups going. Whilst a lot of people might cringe at the thought of doing something 'silly', it is really important to do. People need time to connect, relate, to understand each other, and these types of activities can kick-start that process, as long as the activity is appropriate for the context. For example: a group of alpha males in a business setting is going to require a different approach to a mother's support group!
If the group has assembled with the ultimate goal of solving a problem, or getting something done -- then by all means it should get on with that task -- but only after some time to enjoy fellowship in order to bind their experience.
Remember, it's all about the journey, not the destination. So enjoy the ride!
Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBack
| 23/07/07 | | Collecting stories - the role of the imaginary person |
Aiden Choles has just posted a nice piece on how he used role play within an anecdote circle to collect stories. This is how it happened. He was starting to explore the prevalent myths in the organisation he's working with when one of the participants mentioned change house cleaners.
It turns out that at a point in time in the past, there were Change Houses on mine shafts where the miners would change into and out of their underground clothing before and after shifts. These Houses were significant social convergence points and the Change House Cleaner was party to all the gossip and everyday talk that the miners shared with each other. And so, the Cleaners developed a valuable social currency as they became nodes of communal information.
But it has been some time since the Change Houses were around, but the character of the Change House Cleaner still lives on. And so when speaking of a rumour in the organisation, people ask where they got the information. The answer: “The Change House Cleaner told me.”
Aiden's next step in the anecdote circle is ingenious. After discovering the change house cleaners Aiden pulls up an empty chair and says it is the change house cleaner and starts to ask the group questions about this imaginary person.
I asked if the Cleaner was a man of woman.
“Man!”, they said unanimously.
And what is his name?
“Simon!”
Okay, what else would Simon tell us about this organisation?
“He would tell us about the shafts that are about to close.”
“He would tell us about who is sleeping with who”.
“He would tell us about our CEOs secret life”.
“But wait”, someone said, “I was speaking to Simon this morning and he was telling me about the situation in Zimbabwe”.
From that point on a new and passionate conversation started revealing more about what really was happening in that organisation.
(Thanks to Matt Moore for the link)
Permalink | Comments (2) | TrackBack
| 31/01/07 | | Peer assist animation |
When you’re steeped in a discipline like knowledge management you start to assume that everyone knows about techniques like After Action Reviews and Peer Assists. Of course this is untrue. Steve Dale over at Dissident has discovered this neat Flash animation that describes the peer assist process. I particular like the idea of rotating peer assists.
Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack
| 29/01/07 | | Exploring the language of facilitation |
Last week Johnnie Moore, Tom Guarriello and I connected (3 world times uniting) and had a great conversation exploring language of facilitation. Johnnie summed it up well with:
It's a suitably non-linear conversation touching on lots of themes - the power of metaphor, the role of narrative, and the impact of body language and silence. We talk about how in using language we often miss how it shapes our experience and how easily it can both unite and divide us. Is there something going on in groups of people that is beyond language? How does the institutional language of organisations constrain their behaviour? I also get to sound off about the dangers of premature encapsulation.
Thanks to Johnnie, he has compiled our conversation into a podcast. You can download it from here. Enjoy!
Permalink | Comments (2) | TrackBack
| 16/01/07 | | Exploring the language of facilitation |
Do you facilitate groups? Have you ever thought about the language that you use whilst facilitating? What insights can language give you about your facilitation?
We have just had an article published in the IAF Group Facilitation: A Research and Applications Journal titled “exploring the language of facilitation”.
Some quotes from our paper:
“Whilst language is the means by which facilitation is realised, there has been little research to date investigating language use in facilitation.”
“Language is all around us. Like a fish in water, we are immersed in language, through words, every day. As Hall (2005) describes, one may think of language as a spell.”
“In business and organisations it may come as no surprise that there is an attitude favouring action over talk (Weick, 2004), yet in many ways it is through the very act of talking and speaking that sense is made and action enacted (Weick, 2005).”
You can download a full copy of the paper here. Enjoy!
Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack
| 16/12/06 | | How can you become a better facilitator? |
Almost a month ago after identifying some metaphors which described various styles of facilitation (eg. Conductor, Chameleon, Dictator) I asked What kind of facilitator are you? Following on from this, Simon Kneebone and I delivered a session at the Australian Facilitators Conference in Geelong exploring facilitator archetypes through story. We’ll be publishing more around this in time to come, but for now, I’d like to invite you to take our survey around exploring your shadows in facilitation. Gestalt theory has what's called the paradoxical theory of change. It suggests that one doesn't change by trying to be what one is not, rather, change occurs by us being who we already are. When it comes to considering the shadow elements of ourselves, we already start to change by becoming familiar with these elements of ourselves which we may for so long a time ignored, neglected or repressed. Click here to take the survey.
Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBack
| 10/12/06 | | The PreMortem - anticipating a plan's weaknesses |
One of the techniques I’ve recently introduced to my lessons-learning projects is what Gary Klein calls a PreMortem. As we all know, a PostMortem helps us learn why a patient has died. A PreMortem explores why a project might die in the future. Here’s how Gary describes the approach. I find it works well at the end of an open space after the planning process is complete. It injects an additional level of realism into the plans.
Step 1: Preparation. Team members take out sheets of paper and get relaxed in their chairs. They should already be familiar with the plan, or else have the plan described to them so they can understand what is supposed to be happening.
Step 2: Imagine a fiasco. When I conduct the PreMortem, I say I am looking into a crystal ball and, oh no, I am seeing that the project has failed. It isn’t a simple failure either. It is a total, embarrassing, devastating failure. The people on the team are no longer talking to each other. Our company is not talking to the sponsors. Things have gone as wrong as they could. However, we could only afford an inexpensive model of the crystal ball so we cannot make out the reason for the failure. Then I ask, “What could have caused this?”
Step 3: Generate reasons for failure. The people on the team spend the next three minuted writing down all the reasons why they believe the failure occurred. Here is where intuitions of the team members come into play. Each person has a different set of experiences, a different set of scars, and a different mental model to bring to this task. You want to see what the collective knowledge in the room can produce.
Step 4: Consolidate the lists. When each member of the group is done writing, the facilitator goes around the room, asking each person to state one item from his or her list. Each item is recorded in a whiteboard. This process continues until every member of the group has revealed every item on their list. By the end of this step, you should have a comprehensive list of the group’s concerns with the plan as hand.
Step 5: Revisit the plan. The team can address the two or three items of greatest concern, and then schedule another meeting to discuss ideas for avoiding or minimising other problems.
Step 6: Periodically review the list. Some project leaders take out the list every the list every three to four months to keep the spectre of failure fresh, and re-sensitise the team to the problems that may be emerging. (pp 89–90)
Klein, G. (2003). Intuition at Work: Why Developing Your Gut Instincts Will Make You Better at What You Do
Permalink | Comments (5) | TrackBack
| 23/11/06 | | When collaborations go bad |
Here’s a great video describing how a collaboration between Rob Fulup and Michael Schrage (author of Serious Play
In one of my first blog posts (Back again bemoaning the limitations of text), three blog-sites ago, I made the observation that communication tools and artifacts (perhaps related to boundary objects) are important devices for co-creating meaning. Back then I was particularly interested in the role of diagrams.
The ability for collaborators to sketch diagrams as a way to create and communicate ideas has considerable advantages over collaborating using a discussion forum approach that relies predominantly on text . The key difference lies in the fact that a diagram is co-created and its meaning is developed through the interchange between the collaborators. The meaning of words, however, are generally predefined and significant effort is required to convey accurately what you mean.
In the case of Rob and Michael they used a software tool that enabled them to capture and prioritise their ideas and project them on a wall. Nothing new there. Mindmanger could be used, for example. I think the real transformation was facilitated by Bernie as he asked questions, rephrased statements and gently guided the conversation.
Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBack
| 14/11/06 | | What kind of facilitator are you? |
At the upcoming Australian Facilitators conference I’m looking forward to the “Facilitator Archetypes” workshop that I’m running alongside a great cartoonist, Simon Kneebone. This workshop was inspired from some work we did earlier this year exploring language in facilitation. When I asked “what metaphor describes your style of facilitation” I had no idea it would result in such an interesting collection of characters. Characters like; The invisible facilitator. Facilitator as chameleon. Facilitator as dictator. Facilitator as conductor. Thanks to Simon, we have translated our initial findings into some great cartoons that capture these characters. I can’t wait to see what characters emerge from our workshop!
Figure 1. The invisible facilitator
Figure 2: Facilitator as Chameleon
Figure 3: Facilitator as Dictator
Figure 4: Facilitator as Conductor
Figure 5: Facilitation is like moving with the elements and sailing the seas
Figure 6: Facilitation is like a parent holding a bicycle and then letting go
What metaphor describes your style of facilitation?