Learn Something New:
Experiential Course on Facilitation
for IUCN Young Professionals and others
Course workbook containing agenda, rapporteur notes,
and hand-outs from all six modules
May-August 2007
Introduction and Justification
The Learning Team wants to help IUCN to be acknowledged as a learning organization which,
rather than reinventing wheels, is creating and sharing knowledge through effective peer-learning
mechanisms across all parts of the world.
As part of this ambitious undertaking, the team proposes an experiential, peer-learning course on
the various aspects of facilitating effective events for IUCN HQ’s Young Professionals plus all
others interested. Young professional Julie Griffin will coordinate this, in collaboration with the
Learning Team.
Concept
The course will run over several weeks, with a one to two hour session every two weeks covering
a particular aspect of facilitation. You will facilitate and lead most of the sessions - because
learning-by-doing is much more effective than just listening to a how-to session - with assistance
from the Learning Team and other participants in the preparatory stages. (Working in teams to
prepare for the sessions will be part of the training and practice.) Co-facilitation of sessions will
also be an option.
Upon successful completion of the course, you will belong to an internal community of practice
and be able to offer your facilitation services to any programme in IUCN in need of help to
design and facilitate events for maximum effectiveness. Your details will be made available on
the CEC portal, along with a new resource bank of facilitation tools and tips.
Objectives

Become more familiar with the concept of facilitation

Explore the characteristics of effective events

Become more familiar with practical tools for designing and managing events

Improve understanding and practice a range of facilitation techniques and tools

Learn new skills to deal with challenging situations

Develop an increased ability to support organizational change

Increase confidence and energy to take on greater leadership roles
Compiled by Julie Griffin
Page 2
3/9/2016
Suggested curriculum for the course
Week
Topic
April 25
Introducing facilitation and principles for further sessions
Purpose, value-added, and application (led by Gillian)
May 9
Pre-event preparation
Working with organizers to define purpose; set the agenda; and consider
pre-event communication and activities with participants
May 23
Establishing means for reflection and learning
Determining appropriate tools and practices for evaluating the success of
events and learning about what could be done differently; giving and
receiving feedback
June 6
Framing space and context
Choosing and setting up the space; taking cultural considerations into
account; welcoming participants and introducing sessions
June 20
Experimenting with specific facilitation tools and techniques # 1
Matching activities and needs
June 27
Experimenting with specific facilitation tools and techniques # 2
Matching activities and needs
Follow up
Putting our learning into practice
Invite colleagues/programmes to include us (in small groups) in designing
and facilitating short events (2 hours each time)
 30 min preparation (facilitators only)
 1 hour doing an activity
 30 minutes de-briefing (facilitators only)
Please consider:
 Are you willing and able to commit to one or two hours every two weeks (over lunch)?
 Are you willing to (co-)facilitate one of the sessions, dedicating one hour of preparation
time and some time after the session to write up your reflections in a learning story?
 What topics do you recommend adding to the list above?
 Any other suggestions?
Compiled by Julie Griffin
Page 3
3/9/2016
Module 1: Introduction
Compiled by Julie Griffin
Page 4
3/9/2016
Agenda - Module 1 - Thursday 26 April
Time
Event
Content
15:30
Session 1
Objectives,
Introduction and
Context Setting

(Main Conference room)
16:00
Session 2
What is Facilitation?
(Main Conference room)
16:35
Session 3
5 Useful
Models/Theories for
Facilitators
(Main Conference room)
17:00
Session 4
Next Module and
Check Out










Facilitator/
Chair
Introduction to course, its objectives and
expected outcomes, Gillian Martin
Mehers, Conservation Learning
Coordinator. (5 min)
Schedule for Module 1 and participant
introductions – Learning zones – 2 part
discussion 1) Pair introductions (10 min)
2) Group discussion (10 min)
Roots and definitions (5 min)
Two inter-related components (5 min)
Qualities of a good facilitator –
visualization/objectification exercise (15
min)
Core skills of a good facilitator (5 min)
Finding F’s exercise – Egon Brunswick
Lens Model (5 min)
Four other models – small group work
and presentation (12 min work, 3 min
each present)
Discussion – individual work
Briefing of next week and roles (2 min)
Check out, Julie Griffin (10 min)
Gillian Martin
Mehers
G. Martin
Mehers
G. Martin
Mehers
G. Martin
Mehers
Julie Griffin
Rapporteur Notes – Module 1
(Notes by Julie Griffin, April 2007)
Session 1: Objectives, Introduction and context setting
Gillian introduced what the course will be about and how it will work.
We used the technique of pair discussions during which each pair discussed what they needed to
be ready to learn. The following stood out to me as elements of a successful context for
learning:
-
the right environment/atmosphere is especially important (e.g. - some said a casual
setting)
an interest in the topic
outside factors (i.e. – stress from work can inhibit one’s ability to focus and learn)
an inspirational person or teacher running the course
relevance to one’s own work or interest (and an ability to see how the new material can
be applied)
Compiled by Julie Griffin
Page 5
3/9/2016
Seeing this list was a good reminder of all the elements that a facilitator, teacher or coach must
take care of in order to create the most enabling learning situation for participants.
Gillian also talked about comfort zones and drew a diagram to explain the idea that each
individual has three zones in which s/he can operate: a Comfort zone, a Eustress zone (good
stress), and a Distress zone (bad stress). Each person has different sized zones, but in this course
we want to operate in the Eustress zone.
Session 2: What is facilitation?
In this session we talked about the definition of this concept by looking at the roots of the word
facilitate. Gillian provided useful definitions which I’ve copied here:
•
•
Facilitation is the skill, the art of guiding others to solve their own problems and
achieve their objectives without simply giving advice or offering solutions.
A Facilitator provides the structure and process – enabling groups to function
effectively and make high-quality decisions.
We also talked about the different types of people that can be running a meeting, since they are
not all necessarily facilitators. Gillian expresses this as a continuum of low to high content input,
and low to high process input.
Compiled by Julie Griffin
Page 6
3/9/2016
This diagram helps to think about when a facilitator is needed. It also highlights that a facilitator
does not need to be an expert in the subject matter of the meeting. Facilitating is a balance
between task (taking care of the objectives of the meeting), and maintenance (managing the
process of how the meeting is running).
The next activity we did was an objectification/visualization activity: we broke into 4 groups
and each group drew a picture of the qualities of a good facilitator. The photos of these will be
added to these notes soon, but for now I’ll cite a few comments from the explanation and
discussion that we had while looking at each drawing:
-
recurring themes: listening skills, ability to synthesize ideas, creativity
conflict can be a good thing
a facilitator can sometime say “no”, but if the facilitator can create a group dynamic
where participants control the group themselves, that is even better
qualities the whole group did not agree upon:
o Should a facilitator be charismatic and draw attention to himself?
o Should a facilitator ever say no to a person or their ideas?
o Should a facilitator be the center of attention?
Gillian also listed these other core skills for a facilitator:
• Route Map for creating a facilitated event including defining the purpose, process and
anticipated outcomes
• Techniques for engaging the key stakeholders
• Creating a climate for success
• Managing the process
• Maintaining direction
• Monitoring progress
• Managing conflict
• Developing action plans
• Reviewing progress against anticipated outcomes
• Ensuring the momentum from a significant event is translated into action
Session 3: 5 Useful Models/Theories for Facilitators
Finally, we did a few small exercises to help us consider the lens through which we perceive any
situation. The Egon Brunswick exercise demonstrates this by having the group read a slide and
count the “F’s” in the text. The facilitator then asks who counted 1 F, 2 Fs, 3 Fs and so on. It is
Compiled by Julie Griffin
Page 7
3/9/2016
apparent that everyone did not count the same way! The group is asked to do it again, and still
the answers do not converge. It shows that people have different ways of reading, different
reading speeds, and even different reactions to how instructions are given.
In summary, the Brunswick lens theory says that your values, beliefs, rules, assumptions, life
experiences, etc, will influence your perceptions, understanding and meaning.
Because we ran out of time at the end, each person was given the last activity as homework.
Gillian distributed copies of a few traditional models to explain facilitation and asked each person
to read their model and try to apply it or observe it in action at work. We will report back at
Module 2 on May 10th. The models were: Kolb’s learning cycle, Johari window, The Ladder of
Inference, and Tuckmans’ model of group dynamics.
The day closed with a review of what was covered, in particular the tools that were used to run
the session. This list is on the wiki page.
Five Useful Models for Facilitators Expanded
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Kolb Learning Cycle
Johari Window
Ladder of Inference
Tuckman’s Model of Group Dynamics
Brunswick (to add)
Model 1: Kolb’s Learning Cycle (and Styles)
Kolb (1984) provides one of the most useful descriptive models of the adult learning process
available, inspired by the work of Kurt Lewin.
A way of using Kolb's learning styles is a cycle whereby we learn. This is different from Kolb's
styles which state that people have preferred static positions regarding these.
Experiencing
Experimenting
Reflecting
Theorizing
Compiled by Julie Griffin
Page 8
3/9/2016
i. Experiencing
First of all, we have an experience. Most experiences are not worth further movement on the
cycle as we are already familiar with them and they need no further interpretation and hence no
need for learning.
ii. Reflecting
Having experienced something which does not fit well into our current system of
understanding, we then have to stop and think harder about what it really means. This
reflection is typically a series of attempts to fit the experience to memories and our internal
models (or schemata).
iii. Theorizing
When we find that we cannot fit what we have experienced into any of our memories or
internal models, then we have to build new models. This theorizing gives us a possible answer
to our puzzling experiences.
iv. Experimenting
After building a theoretical model, the next step is to prove it in practice, either in 'real time' or
by deliberate experimentation in some safe arena. If the model does not work, then we go
through the loop again, reflecting on what happened and either adjusting the model or building
a new one.
So what?
So help people learn by giving them experiences, helping them reflect and build internal models,
and then giving them the means of trying out those models to see if they work in practice.
Taken from: http://changingminds.org/explanations/learning/learning_cycle.htm
Original source: Kolb, D.A. (1984). Experiential Learning. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall
David Kolb has defined one of the most commonly used models of learning. As in the diagram
below, it is based on two preference dimensions, giving four different styles of learning.
Two Preference dimensions
Concrete
Experience
ACCOMODATORS
DIVERGERS
^
Perception
|
Active
Experimentation
<------
-- Processing --------
------>
Reflective
Observation
|
|
V
CONVERGERS
Compiled by Julie Griffin
Abstract
conceptualizatio
Page 9
ASSIMILATORS
3/9/2016
A. Perception dimension
In the vertical Perception dimension, people will have a preference along the continuum
between:


Concrete experience: Looking at things as they are, without any change, in raw detail.
Abstract conceptualization: Looking at things as concepts and ideas, after a degree of
processing that turns the raw detail into an internal model.
People who prefer concrete experience will argue that thinking about something changes it,
and that direct empirical data is essential. Those who prefer abstraction will argue that meaning
is created only after internal processing and that idealism is a more real approach.
This spectrum is very similar to the Jungian scale of Sensing vs. Intuiting.
B. Processing dimension
In the horizontal Processing dimension, people will take the results of their Perception and
process it in preferred ways along the continuum between:

Active experimentation: Taking what they have concluded and trying it out to prove that it
works.
 Reflective observation: Taking what they have concluded and watching to see if it works.
Four learning styles
The experimenter, like the concrete experiencer, takes a hands-on route to see if their ideas will
work, whilst the reflective observers prefer to watch and think to work things out.
1. Divergers (Concrete experiencer/Reflective observer)
 Divergers take experiences and think deeply about them, thus diverging from a single
experience to multiple possibilities in terms of what this might mean.
 They like to ask 'why', and will start from detail to constructively work up to the big
picture.
 They enjoy participating and working with others but they like a calm ship and fret
over conflicts.
 They are generally influenced by other people and like to receive constructive
feedback.
 They like to learn via logical instruction or hands-one exploration with conversations
that lead to discovery.
2. Convergers (Abstract conceptualization/Active experimenter)
 Convergers think about things and then try out their ideas to see if they work in
practice.
 They like to ask 'how' about a situation, understanding how things work in practice.
 They like facts and will seek to make things efficient by making small and careful
changes.
 They prefer to work by themselves, thinking carefully and acting independently.
 They learn through interaction and computer-based learning is more effective with
them than other methods.
Compiled by Julie Griffin
Page 10
3/9/2016
3. Accomodators (Concrete experiencer/Active experimenter)
 Accommodators have the most hands-on approach, with a strong preference for doing
rather than thinking.
 They like to ask 'what if?' and 'why not?' to support their action-first approach.
 They do not like routine and will take creative risks to see what happens.
 They like to explore complexity by direct interaction and learn better by themselves
than with other people.
 As might be expected, they like hands-on and practical learning rather than lectures.
4. Assimilators (Abstract conceptualizer/Reflective observer)
 Assimilators have the most cognitive approach, preferring to think than to act.
 They ask 'What is there I can know?' and like organized and structured understanding.
 They prefer lectures for learning, with demonstrations where possible, and will respect
the knowledge of experts. They will also learn through conversation that takes a logical
and thoughtful approach.
 They often have a strong control need and prefer the clean and simple predictability of
internal models to external messiness.
 The best way to teach an assimilator is with lectures that start from high-level concepts
and work down to the detail. Give them reading material, especially academic stuff and
they'll gobble it down. Do not teach through play with them as they like to stay
serious.
So what?
So design learning for the people you are working with. If you cannot customize the design for
specific people, use varied styles of delivery to help everyone learn. It can also be useful to
describe this model to people, both to help them understand how they learn and also so they
can appreciate that some of your delivery will for others more than them (and vice versa).
http://changingminds.org/explanations/learning/kolb_learning.htm
David Kolb’s own website: http://www.learningfromexperience.com/
(David Kolb, Professor of Organizational Development, Case Western Reserve, Cleveland, Ohio,
USA)
More on this: http://www.learningandteaching.info/learning/experience.htm
Compiled by Julie Griffin
Page 11
3/9/2016
Model 2: Johari Window
The Johari Window model is a simple and useful tool for illustrating and improving selfawareness, and mutual understanding between individuals within a group. The Johari Window
tool can also be used to assess and improve a group's relationship with other groups. The Johari
Window model was developed by American psychologists Joseph Luft and Harry Ingham in the
1950's, while researching group dynamics. Today the Johari Window model is especially relevant
due to modern emphasis on, and influence of, 'soft' skills, behaviour, empathy, cooperation,
inter-group development and interpersonal development.
Over the years, alternative Johari Window terminology has been developed and adapted by other
people - particularly leading to different descriptions of the four regions, hence the use of
different terms in this explanation. Don't let it all confuse you - the Johari Window model is
really very simple indeed.
Interestingly, Luft and Ingham called their Johari Window model 'Johari' after combining their
first names, Joe and Harry. In early publications the word actually appears as 'JoHari'. The Johari
Window soon became a widely used model for understanding and training self-awareness,
personal development, improving communications, interpersonal relationships, group dynamics,
team development and inter-group relationships.
The Johari Window model is also referred to as a 'disclosure/feedback model of self awareness',
and by some people an 'information processing tool'. The Johari Window actually represents
information - feelings, experience, views, attitudes, skills, intentions, motivation, etc - within or
about a person - in relation to their group, from four perspectives, which are described below.
The Johari Window model can also be used to represent the same information for a group in
relation to other groups. Johari Window terminology refers to 'self' and 'others': 'self' means
oneself, ie, the person subject to the Johari Window analysis. 'Others' means other people in the
person's group or team.
The four Johari Window perspectives are called 'regions' or 'areas' or 'quadrants'. Each of these
regions contains and represents the information - feelings, motivation, etc - known about the
person, in terms of whether the information is known or unknown by the person, and whether
the information is known or unknown by others in the group.
The Johari Window's four regions, (areas, quadrants, or perspectives) are as follows, showing the
quadrant numbers and commonly used names:
1. what is known by the person about him/herself and is also known by others - open
area, open self, free area, free self, or 'the arena'
2. what is unknown by the person about him/herself but which others know - blind area,
blind self, or 'blindspot'
3. what the person knows about him/herself that others do not know - hidden area,
hidden self, avoided area, avoided self or 'facade'
4. what is unknown by the person about him/herself and is also unknown by others unknown area or unknown self
Like some other behavioural models (eg, Tuckman, Hersey/Blanchard), the Johari Window is
based on a four-square grid - the Johari Window is like a window with four 'panes'. Here's how
the Johari Window is normally shown, with its four regions.
Compiled by Julie Griffin
Page 12
3/9/2016
This is the standard representation of
the Johari Window model, showing
each quadrant the same size.
The Johari Window 'panes' can be
changed in size to reflect the relevant
proportions of each type of
'knowledge' of/about a particular
person in a given group or team
situation.
In new groups or teams the open free
space for any team member is small
(see the Johari Window new team
member example below) because
shared awareness is relatively small.
As the team member becomes better
established and known, so the size of
the team member's open free area
quadrant increases. See the Johari
Window established team member
example below.
Johari Window Model - Explanation of the Four Regions
Refer to the free detailed Johari Window model diagram in the free resources section - print a
copy and it will help you to understand what follows.
Johari quadrant 1 - 'open self/area' or 'free area' or 'public
area', or 'arena'
Johari region 1 is also known as the 'area of free activity'. This is the information about the
person - behaviour, attitude, feelings, emotion, knowledge, experience, skills, views, etc - known
by the person ('the self') and known by the group ('others').
The aim in any group should always be to develop the 'open area' for every person,
because when we work in this area with others we are at our most effective and
productive, and the group is at its most productive too. The open free area, or 'the
arena', can be seen as the space where good communications and cooperation occur,
free from distractions, mistrust, confusion, conflict and misunderstanding.
Established team members logically tend to have larger open areas than new team members.
New team members start with relatively small open areas because relatively little knowledge
about the new team member is shared. The size of the open area can be expanded horizontally
into the blind space, by seeking and actively listening to feedback from other group members.
This process is known as 'feedback solicitation'. Also, other group members can help a team
member expand their open area by offering feedback, sensitively of course. The size of the open
area can also be expanded vertically downwards into the hidden or avoided space by the person's
disclosure of information, feelings, etc about him/herself to the group and group members.
Also, group members can help a person expand their open area into the hidden area by asking
the person about him/herself.
Compiled by Julie Griffin
Page 13
3/9/2016
Managers and team leaders can play an important role in facilitating feedback and disclosure
among group members, and in directly giving feedback to individuals about their own blind
areas. Leaders also have a big responsibility to promote a culture and expectation for open,
honest, positive, helpful, constructive, sensitive communications, and the sharing of knowledge
throughout their organization. Top performing groups, departments, companies and
organizations always tend to have a culture of open positive communication, so encouraging the
positive development of the 'open area' or 'open self' for everyone is a simple yet fundamental
aspect of effective leadership.
Johari quadrant 2 - 'blind self' or 'blind area' or 'blindspot'
Johari region 2 is what is known about a person by others in the group, but is unknown by the
person him/herself. By seeking or soliciting feedback from others, the aim should be to reduce
this area and thereby to increase the open area (see the Johari Window diagram below), ie, to
increase self-awareness. This blind area is not an effective or productive space for individuals or
groups. This blind area could also be referred to as ignorance about oneself, or issues in which
one is deluded. A blind area could also include issues that others are deliberately withholding
from a person. We all know how difficult it is to work well when kept in the dark. No-one works
well when subject to 'mushroom management'. People who are 'thick-skinned' tend to have a
large 'blind area'.
Group members and managers can take some responsibility for helping an individual to reduce
their blind area - in turn increasing the open area - by giving sensitive feedback and encouraging
disclosure. Managers should promote a climate of non-judgemental feedback, and group
response to individual disclosure, which reduces fear and therefore encourages both processes to
happen. The extent to which an individual seeks feedback, and the issues on which feedback is
sought, must always be at the individual's own discretion. Some people are more resilient than
others - care needs to be taken to avoid causing emotional upset. The process of soliciting
serious and deep feedback relates to the process of 'self-actualization' described in Maslow's
Hierarchy of Needs development and motivation model.
Johari quadrant 3 - 'hidden self' or 'hidden area' or 'avoided
self/area' or 'facade'
Johari region 3 is what is known to ourselves but kept hidden from, and therefore unknown, to
others. This hidden or avoided self represents information, feelings, etc, anything that a person
knows about him/self, but which is not revealed or is kept hidden from others. The hidden area
could also include sensitivities, fears, hidden agendas, manipulative intentions, secrets - anything
that a person knows but does not reveal, for whatever reason. It's natural for very personal and
private information and feelings to remain hidden, indeed, certain information, feelings and
experiences have no bearing on work, and so can and should remain hidden. However, typically,
a lot of hidden information is not very personal, it is work- or performance-related, and so is
better positioned in the open area.
Relevant hidden information and feelings, etc, should be moved into the open area through the
process of 'disclosure'. The aim should be to disclose and expose relevant information and
feelings - hence the Johari Window terminology 'self-disclosure' and 'exposure process', thereby
increasing the open area. By telling others how we feel and other information about ourselves
we reduce the hidden area, and increase the open area, which enables better understanding,
cooperation, trust, team-working effectiveness and productivity. Reducing hidden areas also
reduces the potential for confusion, misunderstanding, poor communication, etc, which all
distract from and undermine team effectiveness.
Compiled by Julie Griffin
Page 14
3/9/2016
Organizational culture and working atmosphere have a major influence on group members'
preparedness to disclose their hidden selves. Most people fear judgement or vulnerability and
therefore hold back hidden information and feelings, etc, that if moved into the open area, ie
known by the group as well, would enhance mutual understanding, and thereby improve group
awareness, enabling better individual performance and group effectiveness.
The extent to which an individual discloses personal feelings and information, and the issues
which are disclosed, and to whom, must always be at the individual's own discretion. Some
people are more keen and able than others to disclose. People should disclose at a pace and
depth that they find personally comfortable. As with feedback, some people are more resilient
than others - care needs to be taken to avoid causing emotional upset. Also as with soliciting
feedback, the process of serious disclosure relates to the process of 'self-actualization' described
in Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs development and motivation model.
Johari quadrant 4 - 'unknown self' or 'area of unknown activity'
or 'unknown area'
Johari region 4 contains information, feelings, latent abilities, aptitudes, experiences etc, that are
unknown to the person him/herself and unknown to others in the group. These unknown
issues take a variety of forms: they can be feelings, behaviours, attitudes, capabilities, aptitudes,
which can be quite close to the surface, and which can be positive and useful, or they can be
deeper aspects of a person's personality, influencing his/her behaviour to various degrees. Large
unknown areas would typically be expected in younger people, and people who lack experience
or self-belief.
Examples of unknown factors are as follows, and the first example is particularly relevant and
common, especially in typical organizations and teams:






an ability that is under-estimated or un-tried through lack of opportunity,
encouragement, confidence or training
a natural ability or aptitude that a person doesn't realise they possess
a fear or aversion that a person does not know they have
an unknown illness
repressed or subconscious feelings
conditioned behaviour or attitudes from childhood
The processes by which this information and knowledge can be uncovered are various, and can
be prompted through self-discovery or observation by others, or in certain situations through
collective or mutual discovery, of the sort of discovery experienced on outward bound courses
or other deep or intensive group work. Counselling can also uncover unknown issues, but this
would then be known to the person and by one other, rather than by a group.
Whether unknown 'discovered' knowledge moves into the hidden, blind or open area depends
on who discovers it and what they do with the knowledge, notably whether it is then given as
feedback, or disclosed. As with the processes of soliciting feedback and disclosure, striving to
discover information and feelings in the unknown is relates to the process of 'self-actualization'
described in Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs development and motivation model.
Again as with disclosure and soliciting feedback, the process of self discovery is a sensitive one.
The extent and depth to which an individual is able to seek out discover their unknown feelings
must always be at the individual's own discretion. Some people are more keen and able than
others to do this.
Compiled by Julie Griffin
Page 15
3/9/2016
Uncovering 'hidden talents' - that is unknown aptitudes and skills, not to be confused with
developing the Johari 'hidden area' - is another aspect of developing the unknown area, and is
not so sensitive as unknown feelings. Providing people with the opportunity to try new things,
with no great pressure to succeed, is often a useful way to discover unknown abilities, and
thereby reduce the unknown area.
Managers and leaders can help by creating an environment that encourages self-discovery, and to
promote the processes of self discovery, constructive observation and feedback among team
members. It is a widely accepted industrial fact that the majority of staff in any organization are
at any time working well within their potential. Creating a culture, climate and expectation for
self-discovery helps people to fulfil more of their potential and thereby to achieve more, and to
contribute more to organizational performance.
A note of caution about Johari region 4: The unknown area could also include repressed or
subconscious feelings rooted in formative events and traumatic past experiences, which can stay
unknown for a lifetime. In a work or organizational context the Johari Window should not be
used to address issues of a clinical nature. Useful references are Arthur Janov's seminal book
The Primal Scream (read about the book here), and Transactional Analysis.
© alan chapman adaptation, review and code 1995-2006, based on ingham and luft's original
johari window concept.
http://www.businessballs.com/johariwindowmodel.htm
Interactive johari’s window - http://kevan.org/johari
Compiled by Julie Griffin
Page 16
3/9/2016
Model 3: The Ladder of Inference
We are so skilled at thinking that we jump up the ladder without knowing it:




We tacitly register some data and ignore other data.
We impose our own interpretations on these data and draw conclusions from them.
We lose sight of how we do this because we do not think about our thinking.
Hence, our conclusions feel so obvious to us that we see no need to retrace the steps we
took from the data we selected to the conclusions we reached.
The contexts we are in, our assumptions, and our values channel how we jump up the
ladder:


Our models of how the world works and our repertoire of actions influence the data we
select, the interpretations we make, and the conclusions we draw.
Our conclusions lead us to act in ways that produce results that feed back to reinforce
(usually) our contexts and assumptions.
Our skill at reasoning is both essential and gets us in trouble:

If we thought about each inference we made, life would pass us by.
Compiled by Julie Griffin
Page 17
3/9/2016



But people can and do reach different conclusions. When they view their conclusions as
obvious, no one sees a need to say how they reached them.
When people disagree, they often hurl conclusions at each other from the tops of their
respective ladders.
This makes it hard to resolve differences and to learn from one another.
http://www.actiondesign.com/resources/concepts/ladder_intro.htm
The Ladder of Inference
Excerpt from The Fifth Discipline Fieldbook. Copyright 1994 by Peter M. Senge, Art Kleiner,
Charlotte Roberts, Richard B. Ross, and Bryan J. Smith. Reprinted with permission.
We live in a world of self-generating beliefs which remain largely untested. We adopt those
beliefs because they are based on conclusions, which are inferred from what we observe, plus
our past experience. Our ability to achieve the results we truly desire is eroded by our feelings
that:




Our beliefs are the truth.
The truth is obvious.
Our beliefs are based on real data.
The data we select are the real data.
For example: I am standing before the executive team, making a presentation. They all seem
engaged and alert, except for Larry, at the end of the table, who seems bored out of his mind.
He turns his dark, morose eyes away from me and puts his hand to his mouth. He doesn't ask
any questions until I'm almost done, when he breaks in: "I think we should ask for a full report."
In this culture, that typically means, "Let's move on." Everyone starts to shuffle their papers and
put their notes away. Larry obviously thinks that I'm incompetent -- which is a shame, because
these ideas are exactly what his department needs. Now that I think of it, he's never liked my
ideas. Clearly, Larry is a power-hungry jerk. By the time I've returned to my seat, I've made a
decision: I'm not going to include anything in my report that Larry can use. He wouldn't read it,
or, worse still, he'd just use it against me. It's too bad I have an enemy who's so prominent in the
company.
In those few seconds before I take my seat, I have climbed up what Chris Argyris calls a "ladder
of inference," -- a common mental pathway of increasing abstraction, often leading to misguided
beliefs:






I started with the observable data: Larry's comment, which is so self- evident that it
would show up on a videotape recorder . . .
. . . I selected some details about Larry's behavior: his glance away from me and apparent
yawn. (I didn't notice him listening intently one moment before) . . .
. . . I added some meanings of my own, based on the culture around me (that Larry
wanted me to finish up) . . .
. . . I moved rapidly up to assumptions about Larry's current state (he's bored) . . .
. . . and I concluded that Larry, in general, thinks I'm incompetent. In fact, I now believe
that Larry (and probably everyone whom I associate with Larry) is dangerously opposed
to me . . .
. . . thus, as I reach the top of the ladder, I'm plotting against him.
It all seems so reasonable, and it happens so quickly, that I'm not even aware I've done it.
Moreover, all the rungs of the ladder take place in my head. The only parts visible to anyone else
are the directly observable data at the bottom, and my own decision to take action at the top.
Compiled by Julie Griffin
Page 18
3/9/2016
The rest of the trip, the ladder where I spend most of my time, is unseen, unquestioned, not
considered fit for discussion, and enormously abstract. (These leaps up the ladder are sometimes
called "leaps of abstraction.")
I've probably leaped up that ladder of inference many times before. The more I believe that
Larry is an evil guy, the more I reinforce my tendency to notice his malevolent behavior in the
future. This phenomenon is known as the "reflexive loop": our beliefs influence what data we
select next time. And there is a counterpart reflexive loop in Larry's mind: as he reacts to my
strangely antagonistic behavior, he's probably jumping up some rungs on his own ladder. For no
apparent reason, before too long, we could find ourselves becoming bitter enemies.
Larry might indeed have been bored by my presentation -- or he might have been eager to read
the report on paper. He might think I'm incompetent, he might be shy, or he might be afraid to
embarrass me. More likely than not, he has inferred that I think he's incompetent. We can't
know, until we find a way to check our conclusions.
Unfortunately, assumptions and conclusions are particularly difficult to test. For instance,
suppose I wanted to find out if Larry really thought I was incompetent. I would have to pull him
aside and ask him, "Larry, do you think I'm an idiot?" Even if I could find a way to phrase the
question, how could I believe the answer? Would I answer him honestly? No, I'd tell him I
thought he was a terrific colleague, while privately thinking worse of him for asking me.
Now imagine me, Larry, and three others in a senior management team, with our untested
assumptions and beliefs. When we meet to deal with a concrete problem, the air is filled with
misunderstandings, communication breakdowns, and feeble compromises. Thus, while our
individual IQs average 140, our team has a collective IQ of 85.
The ladder of inference explains why most people don't usually remember where their deepest
attitudes came from. The data is long since lost to memory, after years of inferential leaps.
Sometimes I find myself arguing that "The Republicans are so-and-so," and someone asks me
why I believe that. My immediate, intuitive answer is, "I don't know. But I've believed it for
years." In the meantime, other people are saying, "The Democrats are so-and-so," and they can't
tell you why, either. Instead, they may dredge up an old platitude which once was an assumption.
Before long, we come to think of our longstanding assumptions as data ("Well, I know the
Republicans are such-and-such because they're so-and-so"), but we're several steps removed
from the data.
Using the Ladder of Inference
You can't live your life without adding meaning or drawing conclusions. It would be an
inefficient, tedious way to live. But you can improve your communications through reflection,
and by using the ladder of inference in three ways:



Becoming more aware of your own thinking and reasoning (reflection);
Making your thinking and reasoning more visible to others (advocacy);
Inquiring into others' thinking and reasoning (inquiry).
Once Larry and I understand the concepts behind the "ladder of inference," we have a safe way
to stop a conversation in its tracks and ask several questions:



What is the observable data behind that statement?
Does everyone agree on what the data is?
Can you run me through your reasoning?
Compiled by Julie Griffin
Page 19
3/9/2016


How did we get from that data to these abstract assumptions?
When you said "[your inference]," did you mean "[my interpretation of it]"?
I can ask for data in an open-ended way: "Larry, what was your reaction to this presentation?" I
can test my assumptions: "Larry, are you bored?" Or I can simply test the observable data:
"You've been quiet, Larry." To which he might reply: "Yeah, I'm taking notes; I love this stuff."
Note that I don't say, "Larry, I think you've moved way up the ladder of inference. Here's what
you need to do to get down." The point of this method is not to nail Larry (or even to diagnose
Larry), but to make our thinking processes visible, to see what the differences are in our
perceptions and what we have in common. (You might say, "I notice I'm moving up the ladder
of inference, and maybe we all are. What's the data here?")
This type of conversation is not easy. For example, as Chris Argyris cautions people, when a fact
seems especially self-evident, be careful. If your manner suggests that it must be equally selfevident to everyone else, you may cut off the chance to test it. A fact, no matter how obvious it
seems, isn't really substantiated until it's verified independently -- by more than one person's
observation, or by a technological record (a tape recording or photograph).
Embedded into team practice, the ladder becomes a very healthy tool. There's something
exhilarating about showing other people the links of your reasoning. They may or may not agree
with you, but they can see how you got there. And you're often surprised yourself to see how
you got there, once you trace out the links.
http://www.solonline.org/pra//tool/ladder.html
Compiled by Julie Griffin
Page 20
3/9/2016
Model 4: Tuckmans’ Model of Group
Dynamics
Forming - Storming - Norming - Performing
This model was first developed by Bruce Tuckman in 1965. It is one of the best known team
development theories and has formed the basis of many further ideas since its conception.
Tuckman's theory focuses on the way in which a team tackles a task from the initial formation of
the team through to the completion of the project. Tuckman later added a fifth phase;
Adjourning and Transforming to cover the finishing of a task. Tuckman's theory is particularly
relevant to team building challenges as the phases are relevant to the completion of any task
undertaken by a team.
One of the very useful aspects of team building challenges contained within a short period of
time is that teams have an opportunity to observe their behaviour within a measurable time
frame. Often teams are involved in projects at work lasting for months or years and it can be
difficult to understand experiences in the context of a completed task.
Forming

The team is assembled and the task is allocated.

Team members tend to behave independently and although goodwill may exist they do
not know each other well enough to unconditionally trust one another.

Time is spent planning, collecting information and bonding.
Storming

The team starts to address the task suggesting ideas.

Different ideas may compete for ascendancy and if badly managed this phase can be
very destructive for the team.

Relationships between team members will be made or broken in this phase and some
may never recover.

In extreme cases the team can become stuck in the Storming phase.

If a team is too focused on consensus they may decide on a plan which is less effective
in completing the task for the sake of the team.

This carries its own set of problems. It is essential that a team has strong facilitative
leadership in this phase.
Norming

As the team moves out of the Storming phase they will enter the Norming phase.

This tends to be a move towards harmonious working practices with teams agreeing on
the rules and values by which they operate.

In the ideal situation teams begin to trust themselves during this phase as they accept
the vital contribution of each member to the team.
Compiled by Julie Griffin
Page 21
3/9/2016

Team leaders can take a step back from the team at this stage as individual members
take greater responsibility.

The risk during the Norming stage is that the team becomes complacent and loses
either their creative edge or the drive that brought them to this phase.
Performing

Not all teams make it to the Performing phase, which is essentially an era of high
performance.

Performing teams are identified by high levels if independence, motivation, knowledge
and competence.

Decision making is collaborative and dissent is expected and encouraged as there will be
a high level of respect in the communication between team members.
Adjourning & Transforming

This is the final phase added by Tuckman to cover the end of the project and the break
up of the team.

Some call this phase Mourning, although this is a rather depressing way of looking at the
situation.

More enlightened managers have called Progressive Resources in to organise a
celebratory event at the end of a project and members of such a team will undoubtedly
leave the project with fond memories of their experience.

It should be noted that a team can return to any phase within the model if they
experience a change, for example a review of their project or goals or a change in
members of a team.

In a successful team when a member leaves or a new member joins the team will revert
to the Forming stage, but it may last for a very short time as the new team member is
brought into the fold
http://www.teambuilding.co.uk/Forming_Storming_Norming_Performing.html
(Note: Similar description but with more focus on leader’s role)
Bruce Tuckman's 1965 Forming Storming Norming
Performing team-development model
Dr Bruce Tuckman published his Forming Storming Norming Performing model in 1965. He
added a fifth stage, Adjourning, in the 1970's. The Forming Storming Norming Performing
theory is an elegant and helpful explanation of team development and behaviour. Similarities can
be seen with other models, such as Tannenbaum and Schmidt Continuum and especially with
Hersey and Blanchard's Situational Leadership® model, developed about the same time.
Tuckman's model explains that as the team develops maturity and ability, relationships establish,
and the leader changes leadership style. Beginning with a directing style, moving through
coaching, then participating, finishing delegating and almost detached. At this point the team
may produce a successor leader and the previous leader can move on to develop a new team.
This progression of team behaviour and leadership style can be seen clearly in the Tannenbaum
and Schmidt Continuum - the authority and freedom extended by the leader to the team
increases while the control of the leader reduces. In Tuckman's Forming Storming Norming
Performing model, Hersey's and Blanchard's Situational Leadership® model and in
Tannenbaum and Schmidt's Continuum, we see the same effect, represented in three ways.
The progression is:
Compiled by Julie Griffin
Page 22
3/9/2016
1.
2.
3.
4.
Forming
Storming
Norming
Performing
Features of each phase:
Forming - stage 1
High dependence on leader for guidance and direction. Little agreement on team aims other
than received from leader. Individual roles and responsibilities are unclear. Leader must be
prepared to answer lots of questions about the team's purpose, objectives and external
relationships. Processes are often ignored. Members test tolerance of system and leader. Leader
directs (similar to Situational Leadership® 'Telling' mode).
Storming - stage 2
Decisions don't come easily within group. Team members vie for position as they attempt to
establish themselves in relation to other team members and the leader, who might receive
challenges from team members. Clarity of purpose increases but plenty of uncertainties persist.
Cliques and factions form and there may be power struggles. The team needs to be focused on
its goals to avoid becoming distracted by relationships and emotional issues. Compromises may
be required to enable progress. Leader coaches (similar to Situational Leadership® 'Selling'
mode).
Norming - stage 3
Agreement and consensus is largely forms among team, who respond well to facilitation by
leader. Roles and responsibilities are clear and accepted. Big decisions are made by group
agreement. Smaller decisions may be delegated to individuals or small teams within group.
Commitment and unity is strong. The team may engage in fun and social activities. The team
discusses and develops its processes and working style. There is general respect for the leader
and some of leadership is more shared by the team. Leader facilitates and enables (similar to the
Situational Leadership® 'Participating' mode).
Performing - stage 4
The team is more strategically aware; the team knows clearly why it is doing what it is doing. The
team has a shared vision and is able to stand on its own feet with no interference or participation
from the leader. There is a focus on over-achieving goals, and the team makes most of the
decisions against criteria agreed with the leader. The team has a high degree of autonomy.
Disagreements occur but now they are resolved within the team positively and necessary changes
to processes and structure are made by the team. The team is able to work towards achieving the
goal, and also to attend to relationship, style and process issues along the way. team members
look after each other. The team requires delegated tasks and projects from the leader. The team
does not need to be instructed or assisted. Team members might ask for assistance from the
leader with personal and interpersonal development. Leader delegates and oversees (similar to
the Situational Leadership® 'Delegating' mode).
Compiled by Julie Griffin
Page 23
3/9/2016
Tuckman's fifth stage - Adjourning
Bruce Tuckman refined his theory around 1975 and added a fifth stage to the Forming,
Storming, Norming, Performing model - he called it Adjourning, which is also referred to as
Deforming and Mourning. Adjourning is arguably more of an adjunct to the original four stage
model rather than an extension - it views the group from a perspective beyond the purpose of
the first four stages. The Adjourning phase is certainly very relevant to the people in the group
and their well-being, but not to the main task of managing and developing a team, which is
clearly central to the original four stages.
Adjourning - stage 5
Tuckman's fifth stage, Adjourning, is the break-up of the group, hopefully when the task is
completed successfully, its purpose fulfilled; everyone can move on to new things, feeling good
about what's been achieved. From an organizational perspective, recognition of and sensitivity to
people's vulnerabilities in Tuckman's fifth stage is helpful, particularly if members of the group
have been closely bonded and feel a sense of insecurity or threat from this change. Feelings of
insecurity would be natural for people with high 'steadiness' attributes (as regards the 'four
temperaments' or DISC model) and with strong routine and empathy style (as regards the
Benziger thinking styles model, right and left basal brain dominance
http://www.businessballs.com/tuckmanformingstormingnormingperforming.htm
Compiled by Julie Griffin
Page 24
3/9/2016
Module 2: Giving and Receiving Feedback
and the Stages of the Facilitation Process
Compiled by Julie Griffin
Page 25
3/9/2016
Agenda – Module 2 – Thursday 10 May
Time
Event
Content
Facilitator/
Chair
15:30
Session 1
Check in
(Main Conference room)
Session 2
Giving and Receiving
Feedback

Quick check-in activity: Getting everyone
into the room. Visual check-in (10 min)
Sarah Gotheil

During this course, we will be having
participant facilitators take on pieces of
facilitation work. After each session, we
will take 5 minutes to give feedback on
their work.
In this session we will identify:
a) What kind of feedback we want and
b) How we wish to receive it (10 min).
Giving feedback to Sarah and Ivo (10
min)
Ivo Mulder
15:40


16:00
16:05
16:10
Session 3
Objectives of the Day,
Introduction to the
Module
Session 4
Stages of the
Facilitation Process
Introduction to Module 2, its objectives and
expected outcomes (5 min).
Gillian Martin
Mehers

Gillian Martin
Mehers
Session 5
Fishbowl Exercise
Focus on Stage 1:
Preparation




17:05
Session 6
Homework

17:15
Session 7
The Next Module and
Check Out
End of Session


17:30
Merja Murdoch
Compiled by Julie Griffin
Introduction to the stages of the
Facilitation process:
o Stage 1: Preparation
o Stage 2: Delivery; and
o Stage 3: Follow-Up (5 min)
Fishbowl Technique – Real life “Client”
and Facilitators discussion – “I have an
event coming up, can you help me
facilitate it?”
Fishbowl group discussion 10 minutes,
then observer observations (15 min).
Brainstorming design techniques for this
purpose (10 min) Rapporteur
Checklists – presentation and discussion
(10)
Review of homework: 5 Useful
Models/Theories for Facilitators - small
group discussion. How might we have
noticed application of our model in the
last hour and a half? (10 min)
Briefing: next week and roles (5 min)
Check out and reflections (10 min)
Page 26
Lizzie
Crudgington
Gillian Martin
Mehers
Merja Murdoch
Julie Griffin
3/9/2016
Rapporteur notes – Module 2
Agenda:
Module 2 - Agenda - Preparation.pdf
1) 'Please draw how you feel!'
This was the question Sarah posed in the 'check-in' session, asking each participant to take 5 minutes to
draw how they feel. Once done, because we were sat round in a square behind desks, everyone held up
their drawing to show the whole group. Any questions people had about individual drawings were posed
to the artist themselves, and there was some discussion about what we observed.
Observations
 That in several cases, people who worked together or had spent time together that day had very similar



drawings (eg including the same features)
That the discussion would have been different if we had placed our drawings on the desks and walked
around them all, which was planned originally but changed due to the room set-up
That it helped both the group to understand how each other felt, and the facilitators to see if their plans
would work with this group on this day, and whether there was any individual or small group of participants
who might change the dynamic
That it cleared people's heads and helped them focus on the session ahead
2) 'How do you like your feedback?'
Giving and receiving feedback is an important part of a facilitated session, both for the group to feel part
of the process and for the facilitator to understand how their planning translated into actual running of the
session, and for everyone to see whether they had achieved their set goals.
Ivo facilitated a discussion on how people like to receive feedback, taking into consideration that we
would be doing this for all facilitators in the future sessions.
What: do you like to receive written or verbal feedback, in plenary or individually, right then or later?
How: do you like direct, honest feedback or something more diplomatic if it's in front of a group. If it's
individual do you like more honesty?
Group discussion around being a facilitator - we did this whilst giving feedback on the facilitators of this
session
- Clarity of instruction is crucial
- Timing is important and the facilitator should make sure it's on track
- It's good to focus on new ideas that are coming out in the group discussion and make sure the same
point isn't being repeated by different people (eg ask 'is this a new point to add or has it been covered?')
- Think about your body language - is it welcoming, relaxed but formal? Is your voice clear and potentially
slower if there are different languages in the room?
- Useful to ask for a scribe so the facilitator can focus entirely on the group
What and how to give feedback
What (ie what do you want the feedback to be on)
- Body language
- Body positioning in room
- Use of language (clarity / good choice of vocab?)
- Variety in tone of voice
- Clear instructions
- Good eye contact
- Connection, diversity of people and different parts of the room
- Time-keeping and good allocation of timing
- Matching of exercise to task
Compiled by Julie Griffin
Page 27
3/9/2016
How (ie how do you want that feedback to be delivered)
- Positive first, then any 'less positive' feedback should be framed as constructive, appreciative
- Honest
- Constructive recommendations and ways to improve
- Sincere
- Personal - ask the person what they want
Mechanisms
- some people preferred written feedback which can be more honest, can be kept, and can be revisited. It
can also be sent after the event rather than overloading with information
- some people preferred group discussion which can eliminate focusing too much on one individual's
feedback (which is very personal and could be skewed)
3) 'Where do I start?'
There are several stages a facilitator should go through when beginning to plan a session:
 Preparation
o assessment of the situation
o discussion of contract of agreement between the client and facilitator
o education
 Design
o consultation with relevant parties (attendees, organiser, experts)
 Delivery
o rechecking of contract between parties, delivery of session
 Follow-up with participants and organiser
4) 'What exactly do you want from me as a facilitator?'
We used the Fishbowl technique to simulate the discussion that might take place when a 'client'
approaches you to be their facilitator.
Observations
This is often described as a listening game, helping to obtain detail from a large group of people.
1. Our group chose one 'client' and three 'facilitators' to move their chairs into the centre of our circle,
facing inwards towards each other and therefore with their back to the group. The smaller
circle represents the 'fish', and the larger group is the 'fish-bowl' round the outside of the room, in this
situation, unable to
contribute but instead must focus on observing. For them this is a listening exercise.
2. The client first described one meeting they are overseeing in the near future, then the facilitators
questioned the client on the preparations etc, imagining that they had been asked to facilitate it. The fish
spoke amongst themselves with those outside the circle listening.
3. Near the end, someone in the outside circle told the group they only had 3 minutes left, and to consider
what details they had not retrieved that they wanted and what they should ask to ensure they understand
completely what the client wants.
Some good questions asked and what they helped show:
 Who is coming, how many, what experience do they have and why are they coming / why is the client

organising the meeting? Has the group worked together before and do they know each other? Will they work
together again? (helps you understand the context and participants)
Have you thought about the social / cultural setting around the meeting you are arranging? (helps
understand the mindset of participants and the external factors that might influence their participation)
Compiled by Julie Griffin
Page 28
3/9/2016





Is a physical meeting the best way to achieve your objective? (maybe the client hasn't really considered other
ways they could better achieve their desired outcomes)
What support staff and resources do you have? (how much will the facilitator need to bring themselves or
factor in)
Have you asked the participants what they want to get out of the meeting? (maybe there are different
objectives between participants and organiser, or amongst participants, these should come out in the open as
soon as possible)
How much of the client's specifications are flexible? (are there things that can be changed to help the
facilitator)
Who is going to follow up on the work if objectives are not met? (will the facilitator be expected to help with
follow up)
Supporting materials
- Five stages of facilitation preparation:
Module 2 - Can You Facilitate this Course for Us.pdf
This document explains the process you should go through having been asked to facilitate a session - the stages you
should cover as you prepare for that session
- Steps to designing small workshops:
Module 2 - Steps to designing small workshops.pdf
This provides an overview of the logistical preparation for your workshop - a checklist of things to consider to make
sure everything runs smoothly on the day
- Tips for training international groups:
Module 2 - Tips For Training International Groups.pdf
Many groups you facilitate will include participants from all nationalities - here is some advice on how to make sure
everyone contributes and benefits from the session.
- Designing effective workshops - doing things differently:
Different tools to use for different situations
Module 2 - Steps to designing small workshops.pdf
Preparation for next session
Co-facilitators: Pamela and Nils. Rapporteur: please volunteer! We'll contact you soon about a preparation session
together.
If you couldn't make the module, have a look at these notes and if you'd like to discuss anything before the next
module, please email cec@iucn.org .
Facilitation Course: Module 2 Handout
Can You Facilitate This Workshop For Us?
Five Stages for Preparation
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Assessment
Contract
Education
Design
Consultation
1. Assessment
In the assessment stage, you are finding out some key parameters (decisions already
taken), what is the purpose of the event, and then making an assessment of the right kind
of contribution that can be made to helping the “client” achieve his/her goals. This stage
also gives you the information you need to start to draft a design for the workshop. Here
are some key questions:
Compiled by Julie Griffin
Page 29
3/9/2016
a. Parameters/decisions already taken (Questions to ask the client)
i.
ii.
iii.
iv.
v.
How long is the workshop?
How many people are expected?
When is it?
Where will it be held?
How flexible are the answers to 1-4 above?
b. Purpose (Questions to ask the client)
i. What are your set objectives? (can these be further refined?)
ii. What is your purpose, or other purposes vis-à-vis:
1. Outcomes (changes and impacts you want to see in the
medium term)
2. Outputs (physical products in the short term – decisions,
documents, products, timelines)
3. Feeling of the group at the end of the workshop, or over
time (energized, committed, connected, curious…)
c. Design (Questions to ask the client)
i. What do you have in mind already in terms of a design?
ii. How flexible is your current design?
d. Final Assessment (questions you ask yourself)
i. Do they really need a facilitator? Or something else: trainer,
coach, chairperson, logistics specialist
ii. How much flexibility do I have?
iii. Will I be able to substantively contribute to helping them meet
their goals? YES/NO
iv. Is there the flexibility in the team to change things? YES/NO
v. Is there the time to change things? YES/NO
vi. Is there the support or the buy-in for change? YES/NO
vii. Am I talking to the right person? Is this person a decision-maker?
Do I need to be talking to someone else too? YES/NO
viii. Does the decision-maker trust in facilitation and the process?
YES/NO
2. Contract
This is not a written document, but a conversation that you have with the client that tells
them, based on your assessment, exactly what you can and cannot do for them:
a. What are you realistically able to do under these circumstances, for
example
i. I can help you facilitate your workshop
ii. I can help you design your workshop and brief your team on the
facilitation techniques
Compiled by Julie Griffin
Page 30
3/9/2016
iii. I can recommend another facilitator
iv. I think a training course would be more appropriate for your
goals, etc.
b. What support do you need, for example
i. For this size of group we will need a second facilitator, or other
people to help
ii. We need a small budget to cover some costs
iii. I need someone who can help with the logistics aspects of this so
that I can concentrate on the dynamics and reaching our goal
c. Is this acceptable to you?
3. Education
a. Is there anything you need to help the client understand before you get
further into the process? Do they need to learn/understand more about:
i.
ii.
iii.
iv.
What facilitators do and don’t do?
How group processes work?
Some of the tools?
The psychology behind facilitated processes?
b. If they do not need any additional information, is there anyone in the process
who does (the decision-maker?)
4. Design
a.
What additional information would you need to develop an interesting design for the
workshop?
i. What kind of workshops have these participants been to before?
ii. What kinds of things do they like to do?
iii. Are there any tools that are overused? Or that other people have suggested
that they try?
iv. What pieces of the agenda do you already have to work with, for example:
1. There needs to be some content input at the beginning and three
panelists have already been lined up.
2. The group needs to go on a site visit to collect some information.
3. There is a lot of high level interest in this workshop so there needs
to be protocol time that allows speeches to be made at some point.
4. There is a lot of disagreement and time needs to be spent
understanding all of the different perspectives of the
problematique, etc.
v. What are some of the logistics parameters that you need to work with:
1. The venue is far away from the hotel, so the days need to start
flexibly in case the buses are late.
2. The hotel can only cater lunch at a certain time.
Compiled by Julie Griffin
Page 31
3/9/2016
3. The coffee break area is a walk from the workshop room, so coffee
breaks need to be longer.
vi. How might some cultural considerations provide some insight into your
design vis-a-vis dynamics, logistics, etc?
1. How might the agenda need to take into consideration church
services, or prayer time
2. What is the local custom for lunch times, dinner times?
3. Additional Resource: Training Across Cultures book, or one
chapter “Tips for Training International Groups” (Annex 1)
vii. How might human beings’ physiology inform you about the design?
1. People fall asleep after lunch if they are not active or interested (a
boring speaker, or a slow film will be one way to help people catch
up on their sleep)
2. Variety does a lot to keep people interested, so does surprise
3. Long hours with no breaks, or insubstantial breaks, will not inspire
creativity, etc.
viii. Work with a template and put into place some of the things that are already
agreed or need to happen, and then focus on the purpose of the individual
sessions – how can you best get to where you are going in terms of purpose
and outputs\outcomes?
5. Consultation
Test out your draft design with the client for questions and feedback, even several times if
necessary. At some point, call it finalized and stick to it for documentation purposes (you can
always change things a little during the session to be responsive to participants’ needs.)
Designing Effective Workshops: Doing Things
Differently
Training
Components
Preparation
Room set up
Compiled by Julie Griffin
Traditional
Approach
None –
participants
receive a schedule
and logistics
information
Chairs in theatre
style or classroom
style
Other Options
Prepare a session workbook and send in advance
(people will read it on the plane, train or bus)
Have an email conference with a moderator
Have a live, interactive internet chat on the
session topic.
Provide useful web links for background research.
Give a questionnaire to collect background about
people, their expectations and contributions to
the session – collate and send results prior to the
session (or at least refer to it in the introduction
and your design).
Radial set up with tables
Circle of chairs with tables at the walls
Change the set up occasionally during lunch or
day to day for variation.
Page 32
3/9/2016
Participant
Introductions
Go around the
room and ask
name and
institution.
Plenary discussion
Open the floor
and take questions,
with the speaker
answering them
one by one.
Brainstorming/ideas Plenary
collection
participants shout
out ideas and
facilitator writes
them down
Illustrating points
Give an example
Presentations
1 hour lectures
followed by Q&A
in plenary
Keeping on schedule
Just hope it does
Small group work
Put groups in the
corners of the
room and give
them a time to
work followed by
a report.
In session reporting
and capturing
results of discussion
People stand up
and talk, a staff
member is asked
to take notes and
prepare report of
discussion.
Compiled by Julie Griffin
Images activity
Paired interviews
Opening Circle with a leading question about
expectations of the workshop, etc. can also pass
around something, like a stone to indicate whose
turn it is.
Carousel discussion
Samoan Circle
Buzz groups generating questions
Fishbowl
Carousel discussion
Cards and pinboard
Small group work and reporting
Buzz groups
Use a game (exploratory or confirmation mode), a
video, a case study, a site visit, a stakeholder
discussion
Panel of opposing views followed by breakout
discussions with individual panelists.
Powerpoint presentation with games illustrating
points and audience able to break in with
questions (managed)
Keep it short (15-20 mins) and follow it with
above plenary discussion idea.
Set up workshop norms at the beginning –
discuss expectations for being on time, for
speakers etc. and have people commit to this.
Introduce a timing system for speakers at the
beginning (if at the back of the room use cards for
5 mins (Green card), 1 min (yellow card) and stop
(red card)), or a bell for 1 min and stand up for
stop.
If at the front of the room, stand up at 1 min and
move closer to the speaker as time runs out.
Make the last person in the room in the morning
after the start time sing a song for the group.
Have people pay a small amount for the time they
are late, collect and use to buy a treat for the
group on the last day of the workshop.
Select the groups in a different way each time
(random, draw a number from a hat, on a regional
basis, or assignments)
Give each group a template with questions to
answer on a transparency or flip chart to make the
questions clear, presentations parallel and results
collectable.
Have group select rapporteur and other roles.
Always have the reporter use a visual/job aid,
with questions and answers from the discussion
(e.g.transparency or flip chart) and collect this.
Ask reporter to integrate the salient discussion
points after her/his report and then hand in the
job aid the same day.
Page 33
3/9/2016
Energizers
Stand up and
stretch
Evaluation
Form to fill in
Video the presentations if you might want to use
them again, e.g. as an example for the next
training session.
At the onset of the event ask for rapporteurs for
each discussion and have them send the report at
the end of the session.
Have someone lead the group in a stretch
(different person each time)
Play a game which helps people get to know each
other better: Climb a mountain or An Amazing
Group of people
Go outside to have a discussion
Change the format of the room occasionally, so
people are not always looking in the same
direction at the same wall.
Ask people to sit by someone they don’t know
and sit somewhere different every day.
Closing circle to ask everyone their reflections on
the workshop and what could be improved.
In plenary, two flip charts to record one thing
people learned and one thing to improve.
Mood barometer
Gillian Martin Mehers 27.08.03
Progression of Training
Before
Preparation:
Preparation
at home
(send prep.
documents,
web links,
email
conference,
live
interactive
chat.)
(often
opportunity
lost)
Stage 1
Information:
Introductions
Setting the
stage
New
information
in
Compiled by Julie Griffin
Stage 2
Collection:
Participants
collect
further
information
themselves
(on topics
most useful
to them)
Case study,
site visit,
stakeholder
discussions
Stage 3
Reflection:
Participants
work with info
together
through
discussion and
analysis
sequence, peer
learning to
synthesize
Page 34
Stage 4
Reporting:
Reporting
stage and
evaluation
(Self and for
organizers)
After
Applying:
Forum for
exchanging
views on how
people are using
info and new
ideas
3/9/2016
Schedule –
1 hour of activities/demos (paper team, images, cards)
1 hour of discussion (present docs, matrix, add from parts)
1 hour of individual or small group work with reporting (give a template to design a one day
workshop) (mood barometer)
Paper tear
Images- Select an image that illustrates one feature of a very effective workshop
Cards – Brainstorming in the key features of effective workshops, grouping, renaming,
prioritization – talk about each one
Tips for Training International Groups1
By Gillian Martin Mehers, Director of Capacity Development, LEAD
International
Imagine a workshop where: Some people are early and some are up to 45 minutes late; some
people never say a word in a plenary session; some people argue incessantly with anything the
lecturer says; some people do not eat anything at lunch and retreat to their rooms (and don’t
come back for some time); some people get very upset with the agenda and try to get others to
undermine it; some people will not play the teambuilding games; some will try to take over every
small group process; all of these disruptions together are really irritating some people, including
you! These are all things that can happen at international workshops (granted many of these can
also happen at national workshops, but probably not all at the same time). You might wonder
what is going on with your group – you are witnessing very different sets of behaviour than you
might see in your own country. Can culture help to explain any of these and what can you do?
Understanding cultural identity in a diverse international group is often a question of
understanding the group’s cultural mix: Are there any dominant cultural groups? Any “cultures
within cultures” (e.g. diverse regional groups)? Any tensions that may be exposed by the theme
of the training (e.g. north-south)? It might take longer to prepare yourself for an international
group because not only will you need to be informed about the particular characteristics of the
cultures present, but the possible dynamics amongst them. Some of these dynamics may only
arise as the training progresses and the individual personalities of participants start to assert
themselves, which can make it challenging to prepare for an international training session.
Having said that, there are a number of things you can do even if you do not know what the
cultural mix will be or if you don’t have experience working with the cultures represented.
Remember: no one is a pure representative of any one culture! Here are seven tips that might be
useful:
1. Build time into the agenda to generate the information you need to
work effectively with the international group.
To do this, you might need to build in several introductory activities that let participants describe
their backgrounds, express their expectations, share their attitudes, and position themselves
within the group. There are many simple introductory exercises that resemble standard
1
From Martin Mehers, Gillian (ed), Training Across Cultures: A Handbook for Trainers and
Facilitators Working Around the World, 2004, LEAD International, London.
Compiled by Julie Griffin
Page 35
3/9/2016
icebreakers but are actually aimed at generating just this kind of information. These exercises not
only help you better understand the group’s diverse background but also illuminate the diversity
for the rest of the group, bringing the cultural context and everyone’s background and
experiences into focus. Hopefully this will make participants mindful that attitudes about the
training process and content may differ and that it is important to respect this. These
introductory activities will also serve to highlight similarities in the group, and may help you take
a step towards developing a shared “workshop culture” for the training session.
2. Be explicit about workshop norms
In a group where attitudes about time, deference to a speaker or authority, or speaking openly
may differ, it could be helpful to set up or brainstorm a set of workshop norms for the group. In
a short brainstorming session, a group can quickly set out some “rules” that they would adopt
together during the training session, which might be as simple as being on time, speaking in turn,
or respecting differences of opinion. These can be posted and become a “culture” that the group
shares. If you do not have time to do this in a participatory fashion, you can also set out these
guidelines ahead of time and ask for comments. Bear in mind, however, that some cultures
respond better to a more facilitative approach to decisions that affect the group. Finally, it helps
to build commitment to these norms—and respect for you—if you model them yourself!
3. Adopt a more facilitative approach and include ample time for
discussion
Some training sessions are lecture heavy and while that might be satisfactory to some cultural
groups, it will not be to others who expect to participate more actively in the delivery of content.
Also, with an international group, the sheer diversity in the room will require you to incorporate
numerous qualifiers. Be aware that this will take some of the teeth out of your material and that
you might fare better with a more facilitative approach. For example, plan sessions that begin
with a question to the group followed by a discussion, then gently introduce content that you can
match or juxtapose with the comments from the discussion. Discussion will always take longer as
people will feel the need to raise issues or express points of view that were not addressed by you
or the other participants. There should be enough time allowed for this, as this can often be the
richest learning opportunity of the day.
4. Use a variety of training methods
In some cultures, people do not question openly a plenary speaker; they sit in silence to listen to
presentations and there is little or no discussion following the presentation. In others, people
cannot wait to make points against the presenter and will feel comfortable interrupting a speaker
(as in their culture they are often encouraged by the speakers themselves to do so). Participation
in a plenary session or larger audience can also be affected by people’s own perceptions of their
language ability. In international groups, chances are you will hear a lot from native English
speakers (if your session is in English) and less from people for whom English is their second or
even third language. For all of these reasons, there is a strong argument for mixing your
methodology during the training. Don’t rely heavily on the “plenary presentation followed by
Q&A” model of delivery, instead, frequently change the learning activities to reflect the
differences in learning and participation styles in the room. Mix your activities, introduce small
group work, paired activities, individual questionnaires, etc. Also use brainstorming techniques,
games, and problem-solving activities that put everyone in a participatory role. Some people will
want structure, others will yearn for open, creative time (which can even be gently structured), so
change your delivery methods frequently.
Also consider including sessions that group participants by region as well as by national groups, if
possible. This helps to ease language fatigue; it is very tiring to operate outside your own
language over a very long day. Grouping people by language can also help them talk through the
Compiled by Julie Griffin
Page 36
3/9/2016
learning and help each other fill in gaps, if they exist, in their understanding of the training
material. So, if the training can incorporate, at carefully spaced intervals, activities where people
can be in same-language groups, that is much easier on people and can greatly improve overall
participation and comprehension.
5. Remember that most people, if not all, are operating outside their
own cultural context
At an international workshop, nearly everyone is a visitor to the culture in which the training is
being held, so you will need to be sensitive to cultural misunderstandings that can affect
participants’ attention and performance, both in and outside the training room. This can include
food, language challenges, and generally functioning outside their own cultures and comfortlevels. Consider a few guidelines:
 With food, make sure there are always vegetarian options and it is best to avoid pork, as
many cultures do not eat it (or even go near it).
 With international groups, make sure cocktails have plenty of non-alcoholic options, and
don’t call them “cocktails”, but “receptions”, as again, some cultures will react strongly
to social events that revolve around alcohol (or will worry that people at home looking
over their training agenda will do so.)
 Make certain that you are aware of any holidays that fall during your training period.
Ramadan, for example, is a month-long annual holiday in the Muslim world that has
many special features you will have to consider for those adhering to them, such as
arranging breakfasts before sunrise, periodic time for prayer during the day, no food or
drink during the day, and large meals after sunset.
6. Adjust your language to the group
If you know that a majority of the participants do not have as their first language the one being
used for the training, then you need to consider the way you speak - particularly if you, yourself,
are a native speaker of that language or completely fluent. For such a group, it will be appreciated
if you try to adjust your speech somewhat - if you try to slow down, pronounce words more
clearly, and watch your use of idioms or expressions that may not be widely known. It is also
helpful to use rephrasing, particularly if you notice that people may not have captured the
meaning of an unfamiliar term or turn of phrase. At this point, you can immediately offer
another, more standard version of the phrase. Make sure your attempts to make things clearer do
not end up being too simple, and thus sounding patronizing!
Using a second language for training can also affect timing. Any group discussion activity in
which a mixed group has to talk in a common second language is going to take longer than if
everyone could speak their first language. For example, if you normally allow 20 minutes for a
particular session in your home country (where everyone is speaking their native language), you
need to allow at least another 10 minutes (one-third longer) for a mixed group. You also might
need to wait longer when you ask the group questions; no matter how good people’s language
ability is, it still takes some time to process a question and formulate a response in a language
outside of one’s own.
7. Incorporate teambuilding and joint problem-solving activities
For a group that is very culturally diverse, extra effort should be made to help people work
together and overcome the distance that commonly emerges when people feel they do not know
one another. Teambuilding can help people move from the “norming” stage (very polite and not
very committal) of group development to a “performing” stage, where they feel like they are a
team and engaged in working together on some activity. Teambuilding activities also enhance
peer learning, as the focus of interaction is between the participants themselves rather than
between the trainer and the group as a whole. It is, however, necessary to monitor the
Compiled by Julie Griffin
Page 37
3/9/2016
acceptability of the games—some cultures will not play games if it involves physical proximity to,
or touching, the opposite sex. If the group includes people from cultures where this is not
acceptable, consider ways to adapt these games to avoid close physical contact among players. If
your teambuilding is successful, the interaction will spill over into other workshop activities and
even social time. Whereas you might have seen people sticking to their national groups at the
beginning of your training, you should increasingly see people talking to and eating with people
from other parts of the world.
Working with international groups can be challenging, but fascinating. In the constant application
of your training content to a multitude of cultural situations, you can draw examples and
opinions from all corners of the world, and the learning will be enriched with both the diversity
and similarities of the cultures present. Using some of the above tips might help make your
training run more smoothly, be more acceptable to a greater number of participants in the room,
and help people focus on your workshop, instead of the fact that, like you, they are in an
international setting, away from the familiar training environment of home.
Organizing a Small Workshop
Logistics and Documentation Checklists
Each workshop is unique, and at the same time, some steps are repeated or only slightly modified
for every event. Below are a series of checklists that can be helpful for the logistics and
documentation side of organizing workshops. Hopefully this won’t be your role as the facilitator:
this will depend on the ‘Contract’ you make with the client (see “Can You Facilitate This
Workshop For Us?” Stage 2). In any event, it is a useful job-aid that you can use and share with
others.
These checklists relate to:
 Hotel
 Travel
 Visas and Invitation Letters
 Participants
 Expenses
 Workshop Documentation (including Reporting)
 Equipment and Office
Done
To Do
Responsible
Deadline
Hotel
Select Hotel with appropriate facilities:
 Number of bedrooms
 Number of workshop rooms
 Number of computer, office or
other rooms
Select meals (report any special dietary
requirements)
Select coffee breaks within workshop
Make reservation
Compiled by Julie Griffin
Page 38
3/9/2016
Send confirmation to hotel
Make budget
Arrange for payment mechanism (credit
card? bank transfer? advance payment?
contract?)
Prepare and send rooming list to hotel
Send arrival times and flight details to
hotel if arranging for hotel airport pickup
Done
To Do
Responsible
Deadline
Responsible
Deadline
Responsible
Deadline
Travel
Inform participants of how to travel
(class, dates, destinations)
Send participants information about
airport transfer to hotel
Create list of arrival/departure times of
participants
Arrange any on-site travel (e.g. shuttle
buses, etc.) or meet-and-greet services
Check to see if airport departure tax
Done
To Do
Visas and Invitation Letters
Check on the web to see who needs a
visa and inform participants
Send all participants an invitation letter
from the local partner (fax to those not
needing visa and courier to those who
need to apply for visa)
Ask participants to apply for visa when
necessary long in advance, and to inform
the organizer if they have any problems
Done
To Do
Participants
Ask for participants names
Make a participants list including name,
Compiled by Julie Griffin
Page 39
3/9/2016
title, institution, address, telephone, fax
and email (Contact information)
Prepare nametags for all participants
If necessary, collect short bios from
participants to create bios list (ask
participants to update their bios if you
already have them)
Send Reimbursement of Expenses form
to all participants
Send Waiver of Liability form to all
participants, collect with signatures (if
needed)
Ask for special needs or dietary
requirements
Done
To Do
Responsible
Deadline
Responsible
Deadline
Expenses
When possible, pay all travel associated
expenses before the meeting (local
transportation, visas, tickets, airport
taxes, etc)
Collect all Reimbursement forms from
participants and make payments
accordingly
Get Travel and Accident insurance for all
participants, or ensure that they have it
Calculate per diem rates (meals, airport
transportation, miscellaneous expenses)
and distribute to participants at the
meeting
Done
To Do
Workshop Documentation
Create Fact sheet (one page description)
Create overview agenda (short agenda)
Create detailed, day-by-day agenda
Create Workshop Documentation
including:
 Fact sheet
 Short agenda, organized by
sessions
 Long agenda related to short
Compiled by Julie Griffin
Page 40
3/9/2016
agenda
 Participants list
 Bios (where necessary)
 Background information on each
session
 Place to write notes
 Evaluation form (if necessary)
Send electronic copy of Workshop
Documentation to participants in
advance of workshop
Format all documentation and organize
by day
Copy documentation with 5 extra copies,
and bind
Give copies of documentation or Fact
Sheet to put on web (if necessary)
Reporting and Facilitation
Assign facilitator for each session
Assign recorder who will write report or
design another reporting mechanism
Collect materials produced during
workshop for report
Final Report (if applicable)
Send draft to participants for comment
Send final report to participants
Give copy to put on the web (if
necessary)
Done
To Do
Responsible
Deadline
Equipment and Office
Make an equipment list for on-site needs
(overhead projector, LCD projector, slide
projector, screen, flip charts, video
projector, tv, computer, printer,
photocopier?)
Make an office materials list of things to
bring (markers, flip chart paper, printer
paper, transparencies, transparency
markers, masking tape, bluetack, scissors,
pins, colored paper, etc.)
Ask facilitators or speakers for additional
Compiled by Julie Griffin
Page 41
3/9/2016
needs
Find space in hotel which can be used for
office if needed
Created by GMM 10 August 1999 adapted on 9 May 2007 for Facilitators Course
Compiled by Julie Griffin
Page 42
3/9/2016
Module 3: Establishing means for reflection
and learning
Compiled by Julie Griffin
Page 43
3/9/2016
Agenda – Module 3 – Thursday 24 May
Facilitator/
Chair
Time
Event
Content
15:30
Session 1
Welcome
Session 2
Check in
(Main Conference room)
Session 3
Models for thinking
about facilitation
Welcome, overview of agenda and finding a
rapporteur.
Quick check-in activity: Pair discussions and
report back to get in the ‘learning zone’
(10 min)
4 Useful Models/Theories for Facilitators small group discussions and plenary reporting.
(Plenary explanation: 2 min)
 We will go over the models that were
distributed in Module 1. Small groups will
discuss (7 min) then report to the group
on: explain the model, how it can be
useful to facilitators and some examples.
(3 min each + 5 min questions after each)
 In this session we will:
a) Verify our understanding of each model
b) Identify the usefulness of the model for
facilitators and identify examples
 Feedback for Pamela and Nils
We will examine how the models can be used
to understand and deal with various scenarios
of meetings or facilitation experiences.
15:35
15:45
16:35
Session 4
Applying the models
to real-life scenarios
17:15
Session 5
Closing and next
module
17:30
End of Session
How will you apply your learning in the
coming week?
Gillian Martin
Mehers
Nils Häger
Pamela
Donaubauer
and Nils Häger
Julie Griffin
Gillian Martin
Mehers and
Lizzie
Crudgington
Lizzie
Rapporteur notes - Module 3
Session 1: Welcome
Session 2: Check-in
Paired group exercise, during which we were asked to talk about the things that made us happy.
Volunteer pairs then explained what their companion felt and vice versa.
Observations:


This was a good exercise to get people in a good mood and to break off from their work
and the “baggage” they came into the room with
A comparison was made towards the previous week’s ice-breaker (drawing how one felt)
and some mentioned they preferred it  useful to see how the different techniques can
be used and which ones we’d prefer using in our facilitating style
Session 3: Models for thinking about facilitation

4 Useful Models/Theories for Facilitators - small group discussions and plenary reporting.
Compiled by Julie Griffin
Page 44
3/9/2016


We went over the models that were distributed in Module 1. Small groups discussed and then
reported to the larger group on: explaining the essence of the model, how it can be useful to
facilitators and some examples.
Please read the models in order to find out their essence. Below is how they can be useful
and some examples.
Kolb Learning Cycle






It builds on experience
It lets people “discover” new concepts themselves
Since people come into the process with their experiences, and then they go over the
theory, this helps them to better understand it
Participatory – get new ideas when discussing
It covers different types of learners
Example: Forest Landscape Restoration workshop:
o Concrete experience: participants were asked to bring pictures and materials
from their projects to the workshop
o Reflective observation: group-work was used to discuss the issues and
brainstorm the thematic areas
o Abstract conceptualization: a concept with instructions on what to do in the
field was developed
o Active experimentation: fieldwork
o And this led to developing new project ideas, proposals, etc.
Tuckman’s Model of Group Dynamics






Descriptive of process over time, but model does not explain how to move from one
phase to another, or causes of success or failure
Tells a facilitator where a group might get stuck
Describes the different behaviours a facilitator will have as one moves across the process
(guiding & directing, coaching, facilitating & enabling, delegating & overseeing) and
where he needs to be more/less prominent
It helps to see changing group dynamics over time
Example: the Apprentice TV show
o People must build/produce something
o Sometimes they work well with each other and the process moves ahead
smoothly
o Sometimes it gets blocked in the Storming phase because of clashes between
participants
Example 2: My Green IUCN
o As new people join we re-enter into the Forming phase
o New issues are raised/ better direction given (Norming phase)
o The cycle keeps repeating itself
Johari Window


There are different parts of people that we are not aware of and that are important when
facilitating a process  to achieve better results. Some of these behaviours could be
shrunk or expanded in order for processes to work better, and they often do change over
time
It reminds us that we don’t know everything about others
Compiled by Julie Griffin
Page 45
3/9/2016



It is useful to be aware of what people may be hiding (consciously or unconsciously) and
can also help to then reflect this towards ourselves, to analyse what we are doing/ how
we are behaving
Useful to know that hidden behaviours may be manipulative vs. the blind spot that we
are unaware of
Example:
o If someone talks too much they may not realize they are doing it (blind area).
How does the facilitator help to change this to improve group dynamics? (see
one of scenarios below)
o Feedback exercises help people to identify behaviours they are not aware of.
Ladder of inference

The model is useful to make us step back/ deconstruct conclusions:
 This makes us aware that sometimes in our behaviors we jump to conclusions,
without realizing that we are affected by our perceptions, past experiences, mental
frames (=”lens”) etc. and thus our conclusions may be “wrong”
 It’s useful in order to try to understand others (their motivations, etc.) and why
certain things happen




It is important to test one’s inferences before reaching a conclusion
Note the difference between when it is an inference vs. when it’s reality (based on data)
Sometimes we make automatic assumptions that do not necessarily reflect reality
Example:
o During meetings which involve people of different cultures, notions of time can
be very different, and people will jump to their conclusions without taking into
consideration the “cultural factor”
o A facilitator should help people to see how they reach conclusions and help
them better do it

We then moved on to provide feedback for Pamela and Nils.
Session 4: Applying the models to real-life scenarios
We were given different scenarios (one at a time) and had to propose ways in which the four
models above could help us deal with the situation.
Scenario 1
You are facilitating a 15 people workshop. One of the participants seems particularly challenging:
he’s negative, loud, aggressive, disagreeing and disruptive.
Observations:
 Johari Window (JW): is it his blind area or a hidden area? Facilitator could ask the group
whether they feel there is tension in the room and if they want to discuss it; or how they
feel the task is going.
 Ladder of inference (LI): maybe he reminds you (facilitator) of someone you don’t like
and you are making your own conclusions about him. You can check with someone else
in the room (easier if you already know someone) to see if he is disruptive only to you or
to everyone.
 Tuckman’s model of group dynamics (TGD): maybe this is the Storming phase of the
process, or the re-Forming phase (e.g. due to a new participant joining the group) and
the facilitator can try to get other people involved in the discussion to create balance.
Compiled by Julie Griffin
Page 46
3/9/2016


JW: maybe you are not being a good facilitator and he is trying to do it for you. Check
your blind spot. and/or ask him if he has facilitator experience and is applying it
Get him to rapporteur or if you can’t throw him out, ask the group how the process is
going so that they may suggest it instead.
Scenario 2
You are facilitating a 24 people workshop. Even after several days several people say nothing.
You wonder if they are getting bored.
Observations:
 LI: who says they are bored? Are you jumping to conclusions? Maybe they’re
uncomfortable to speak in big groups and in smaller groups they may be talking
 JW: maybe they have spoken a lot in smaller groups and are unaware (blind spot) that
they are not talking in the plenary.
 JW: after several days you should be able to tell if they are bored. Check your blind spot.
 TGD: what stage are we at? Is it the Forming stage of a longer process so things may
change?
 Kolb Learning Cycle (KLC): maybe they are people who prefer reflecting to talking, and
are processing the information and may only start talking later
 Could use a talking object to get everyone to speak, or split the group up into smaller
groups
 Could it be related to room position (maybe they are sitting right at the back and feel left
out)?
Scenario 3
You are facilitating a number of workshops, and are repeatedly running out of time. People are
starting to notice.
Observations:
 JW: if you haven’t noticed, it’s your blind area. Do an evaluation at the end of each
session to discuss issues and problems.
 TGD: maybe this is the Storming phase and it is normal that people are not performing
well (taking a bit longer than usual); this will change as time goes on.
 LI: what time did you start? Did people arrive late?
 KLB: you can learn from the process and change your style along the way until it works
Session 5: Closing and next module
How will you apply your learning in the coming week?
Compiled by Julie Griffin
Page 47
3/9/2016
Module 4: Framing space and context
Compiled by Julie Griffin
Page 48
3/9/2016
Agenda – Module 4 - Thursday 7 June
Facilitator/
Chair
Time
Event
Content
15:24
Session 1
Welcome
Session 2
Check in
(Main Conference room)
Session 3
Opening and
Contracting with
Participants Scenarios for
Experimentation
Welcome, overview of agenda and finding a
rapporteur. (5 min)
Quick check-in activity: Linking with the last
module (10 min)
Abi Powell
Activity briefing – Divide into three small
groups (5 min)
 We will each randomly select a workshop
facilitation scenario;
 Individually develop the 2 minute opening
(5 min to script)
 Deliver it to our group (2 minutes each x
5/6 people) (total 15 min)
Plenary reflections on the exercise (5 min)
How culture plays a role in facilitation;
 Greetings from around the world (5 min)
 Cultural paradigms activity (20 min)
Julie Griffin
How culture plays a role in context and space
decisions
 Introduction to a checklist (5 min);
 Building Activity – four tables will build
the physical space for four scenarios from
Session 3. (15 min build)
 Table Walk – participants will walk from
table to table to hear and look at the
different layouts – discussion about
cultural considerations. (5 min per table)
Feedback for Abi, Julie and Catarina (5 min)
Gillian Martin
Mehers
15:35
15:45
16:15
Session 4
Cultural Paradigms
and Facilitation
16:35
Session 5
Working with Space,
Context and Culture
17:15
17:30
Session 5
Closing and next
module
Reflection on tools and space for this session,
and link with cultural considerations within
IUCN (or institutions generally). (10 min)
Abi Powell
Gillian Martin
Mehers
Catarina
Wolfangel
Gillian Martin
Mehers
Catarina
Wolfangel
End of Session
Rapporteur notes - Module 4
Session 1: Welcome
Session 2: Check-in
 Check in activity where participants demonstrated greeting from their own culture or other
cultures where they have lived and/or visited
 Abi asked us what did we notice, and how do the greetings reflect a culture
 Observations were made that the greeting often shows the degree of formality within a
culture, also the amount of personal space which people are comfortable with (i.e., in
Northern European countries people appear to need more space)
Compiled by Julie Griffin
Page 49
3/9/2016
Session 3: Opening and Contracting with Participants - Scenarios for Experimentation





Participants were divided up into four small groups, within these groups people were
assigned a scenario
After reading and reflecting on the scenario, each person had to think about how to
introduce themselves to the audience described in the scenario
The idea was to give the audience some background about yourself and your facilitation
experience to establish credibility. It is also a chance to say what you are bringing to the
group and some norms for how you will all work together. Some suggested contracting steps
(see resources from this module):
o Who you are
o Why you are here
 History
 Purposes
 What you do
 Whom you see as client
 What you will for them now
Within the small groups, participants practiced their introduction and then gave feedback to
one another
Some reflections on this exercise
o Need to be careful about using thinking words (ummm)
o Need to use atone that establishes authority – you are giving instructions
o But can ask if anyone wants clarification or has any questions at the end
Session 4: Cultural Paradigms and Facilitation










Gillian gave a brief presentation on understanding culture (see resources for this module)
Essentially to be interculturally effective we need to understand our own culture
Behaviour is just what we see, however this stems from values, belief and assumptions which
we might not be aware of at first glance
Misunderstandings are derived from what people see on the behaviour side
Being aware of underlying values, beliefs and assumptions can help facilitators understand
the differences and why people behave in a certain manner
But not all differences are cultural, there are also personal differences
i.e. types of behaviour
o Universal – eating
o Cultural – eating from own plate
o Personal – eating in front of TV
There are 5 types of cultural assumptions (see resources for this module for more
information)
o Locus of control – internally controlled vs. externally controlled
o Concept of self – individualist vs. collectivist
o Power distance – more democratic vs. hierarchical structure
o Of time and people – monochromic vs. polychromic
o View of human nature – benign vs. skeptical
Participants took some time to reflect on where their culture fits under the continuums
between the extremes of each cultural assumption (ex – do Canadians tend to believe that
fate has little or no importance or do they believe that they have limited control over their
destiny)
Everyone plotted where their culture fit under each cultural assumption
o There was quite a high degree of diversity between cultures
o For example Brazilians and Italians tend to have a more hierarchical society
compared to Finns and Americans
Compiled by Julie Griffin
Page 50
3/9/2016
o
o
o
o
There can also be difference within a society especially between urban and rural
areas
Power distances can be related to a patriarchal type of society
There can be a transference of culture from one country to another, especially if you
are working for an international organisation
It is important to be aware of these assumption within cultures when facilitating –
can help with the ladder of inference model (see Module 3)
Session 5: Working with Space, Context and Culture






We were divided up into 5 groups and each given a variety of materials (stones, playdough,
wooden blocks) to use to construct a room plan for facilitating a workshop or discussion as
described in the scenarios provided at each table (see resources for this module for more
detail on scenarios)
Scenario 5 – Annual staff meeting and you are running a session to improve group
communication and team building. You are in a medium sized room with table and chairs
arranged in a circle
o Important to use the available space
o Informal atmosphere and set up required
Scenario 2 – IUCN’s senior management team (10 people) is meeting in the West Room for
a strategic planning exercise. The atmosphere is a little tense and you have been given 2
hours. The room’s tables and chairs are arranged on the standard U-shape
o The group had been deciding between a continuous U and a split U
o The continuous U is a more formal structure can could be dominated by a few
people
o The split U means that it would be possible to split the participants into smaller
groups
 This can save time and more ground can be covered
 But splitting people up can create divisions of opinion
o The table would be wither removed or made into a solid block, this is because
people can “hide” behind their tables and there is a need for equality
Scenario 6 – One of the companies that rent the main conference room at IUCN has heard
that IUCN has a trained pool of facilitators. There are approximately 50 people, mostly
Europeans and an equal number of men and women. You are in the main conference room
and everyone is seated in rows behind table facing the front
o The group has likely been listening to power point presentations for an hour of so
o Dividing the participants into smaller groups (12-12/group) gets people moving and
will re-energise the session.
Scenario 4 – The Arabian Plant Specialist Group has come together for a three day Red List
training workshop. They are anxious about learning this complicated process in a short
period of time. You are in a medium sized room with tables and chairs arranged in a circle
o Cultural considerations would be extremely important
o There needs to be sufficient coffee and lunch breaks and calm and comfortable
atmosphere
Scenario 1 – You have been invited to facilitate a portion of an after-lunch side event at
IUCN’s Congress in Barcelona on biofuels with about 40 participants. You are in a large
room full of chairs and a podium with a microphone at the front.
o Start in a semi circle to introduce the session
o Do a check in to gauge where they stand on biofuels
o Break them into smaller groups with a mix of opinions to discuss specific
questions/sub topics
o Bring them back to the plenary and gauge their opinion again to see if there has been
any change
Compiled by Julie Griffin
Page 51
3/9/2016
Checklist of what to consider when planning a facilitation session (specifically the physical space)
 Number of people
 Any religious or national days
 Gender breakdown
 Cultural mix
 Power issues (knowing what titles are beforehand)
 Cultural biorhythms (timing of lunch)
 Importance of food
 Topic (goals for discussion)
 Sense of time of participants (might need to plan buffers of time)
 History of any major conflicts between participants
 Languages abilities
 Cultural considerations
Session 6 Closing and Next Module
 Feedback to facilitators
 Next session to be decided
Compiled by Julie Griffin
Page 52
3/9/2016
Cross-cultural paradigms activity
Objective: To discuss a set of 5 cultural paradigms, and to use one’s own culture as the
basis for reflection.
Materials. Flipchart paper, markers, handouts
Time needed: 20 minutes (5-7 minutes personal or group work), 2 minutes posting, 10
minutes discussioin
Sequence
Step 1: Powerpoint presentation (6 slides) to indtorduce the 5 cultrual paradigms with
questions
 Time and Space
 Power relationships
 Locus of control
 Perception of self
Step 2: Small group or individual work – people work within regional(national groups to
place themselves on each othe 5 cultural continuums
Step 3: Each group /individual posts their responses on an aggregated continuum
Step 4: Discussion: What might we infer from these differences – what might we not
infer (how does the ladder of inference give us additional insights). Discussion of
personal, cultural, universal (2 slides if wanted).
WHAT IS CULTURE?
TYPES OF BEHAVIOR
The things
people say
and do
Behaviour
Values
Beliefs
Assumptions
UNIVERSAL
CULTURAL
PERSONAL
Eating
Eating from your
own plate
Eating in front of
the television
Taken from Gillian’s slides:
We will look at 5 fundamental concepts in the field of intercultural communication
corresponding with various dimensions of the human experience
•
The Locus of Control
Compiled by Julie Griffin
Page 53
3/9/2016
•
•
•
•
Concept of Self
Power Distance
Of Time and People
View of Human Nature
(Sources: Gardenswartz & Rowe, Hall, Hofstede, Rotter)
The Locus of Control
Internal:
 fate has little importance
 there are few things that can’t be changed
 where there’s a will, there’s a way
 life is what I make of it
External:
 fate plays a major role
 people have limited control over destiny/external events
 success is partly a result of good fortune
 life is what happens to me
Concept of Self
Individualist:
 self is the smallest unit of survival
 personal fulfilment is the greatest good
 independence and self reliance is highly valued
Collectivist:
 the family unit is the smallest unit of survival
 looking out for others protects one’s self
 group harmony is the greatest good
 identity is mainly a function of one’s membership / role in a primary group
Power Distance
Low:



High:




more democratic management style
power is less jealously guarded
subordinates take initiative and are not overly deferential to managers
more authoritarian
power is centralised
deference to authority
managers hold on to power
Of Time and People
Monochronic:
 time is a limited commodity and must be used carefully
 people are very conscious of time
 schedules and deadlines are sacred
Polychronic:
Compiled by Julie Griffin
Page 54
3/9/2016



people are more casual about time
deadlines and schedules are approximations and can be easily adjusted and changed
people may do several things simultaneously and can’t really be interrupted
View of Human Nature
Benign:
 people are inherently good
 people should be trusted unless they prove otherwise
 one person’s success doesn’t have to come at someone else’s expense
Skeptical:
 people are not inherently good or bad
 never trust anyone without a good reason
 people can not be counted on to be fair
 one person’s success comes at the expense of someone else
Cultural Assumptions
Locus of Control
INTERNAL
EXTERNAL
INDIVIDUALIST
Concept of Self
COLLECTIVIST
LOW Power distance
Power Distance
View of Time and People
MONOCHRONIC
BENIGN
2
3
SKEPTICAL
4
Cultural Assumptions –
Examples from LEAD
5
Cultural Assumptions – discussion
questions
EXTERNAL
Pa
Br kist
a a
N zi n
Za ige l / I
m ria nd
ia
bi
Se a
ne
ga
l
In
do
ne
si
a
R
us
si
a
Locus of Control
U
S
N A
Z
U
K
POLYCHRONIC
View of Human Nature
1
INTERNAL
HIGH Power distance
• How easy did you find it to identify a position
on each continuum that reflected your
national culture?
• What does it mean if someone on one side of
the continuum has to work with someone on
the other side?
• Do people choose to be on different sides of
the continuum?
• Have you ever worked with someone from a
different position on a continuum?
Compiled by Julie Griffin
Page 55
• Can you give an example of where different
cultural positions have caused confusion or
misunderstandings?
3/9/2016
Introducing yourself and contracting with
the group
When you introduce yourself to a group – your clients – it’s important to take time to tell them
who you are. By giving some background about yourself and your facilitation experience you
establish credibility. This is also a chance to say what you are bringing to the group and some
norms for how you will all work together. This is an informal introduction and does not replace
the contract you have established with the meeting organizer beforehand.
Contracting Steps (oral or written)
(Adapted from Reddy Phillips, Consultants to Organizations)
What to say
1. Who you are…
2. Why you are here …
a. History …..
b. Purposes ….
c. What you do (use examples) ….
d. Whom you see as client …..
e. What you will do for them now ....
Example
“I am x, my title, role, goals…”
“I am here because”
“x asked me”
“to do x”
“in the past I have done x, y, z”
“I will do x for you”
“today we’re going to”
Option:
3. Discuss your (consultant) expectations of group members
4. Ask for group members’ expectations of you and the process
a. concerns they may have…
b. risks they may see…
Leave time for questions the group members may have
Scenarios for practicing introductions and contracting
1. You have been invited to facilitate a portion of an after-lunch side-event at IUCN’s
Congress in Barcelona. There are approximately 40 people in the room from every
continent, and more or less equal numbers of men and women. Most of the participants
are high level conservation practitioners. The session will run in English. The side event
will be a facilitated, interactive session on the controversial subject of biofuels. You are
in a large room full of chairs and a podium with microphone at the front.
2. IUCN’s senior management team (approximately 10 people today) is meeting in the
West Room for a strategic planning exercise. You have been invited by Bill Jackson to
facilitate the second half of the morning session, but the others in the group do not
know what you are planning or why exactly you are invited. Your task is to facilitate a
roadmap for the future of the regionalization and decentralization of IUCN. The
atmosphere is a little tense and you have been given just 2 hours. The room’s tables and
chairs are arranged in the standard U-shape.
3. It’s September 2008, and you are running the regular Tuesday morning IUCN staff
meeting. Julia and Gillian have asked you to facilitate in their absence. There will only be
a few announcements, so there would be time for a facilitated activity to get staff
thinking about what they want to get out of the upcoming Congress. About 35 people
have showed up and everyone is talking amongst themselves. All the tables and chairs
Compiled by Julie Griffin
Page 56
3/9/2016
are lined up in straight rows facing the front.
4. The Arabian Plant Specialist Group has come together to for a three day Red List
training workshop. You are in the role of facilitator/teacher to explain how to use the
red list tools to assess plants and to facilitate discussions on the strategy for getting plant
assessments done. The members are mostly men, and are all botanists or ecologists from
various countries of the Arabian peninsula. They are anxious about learning this
complicated process in a short period of time. You are in a medium sized room with
tables arranged in clusters.
5. Your own department is having its annual staff meeting away from Headquarters. Your
HQ colleagues as well as colleagues from other regional offices are there, and you have
been asked to facilitate a session on the second day from 4-6pm. Almost everyone
knows each other, but they do not know you in the role of facilitator. You will run a
session to improve group communication and team-building. You are in a medium sized
room with the tables and chairs arranged in a circle.
6. One of the companies that rent the main conference room at IUCN has heard that
IUCN has a pool of trained facilitators. They have invited you to come to one of their
meetings to help with a controversial discussion. Your 2 hour session is sandwiched
between numerous powerpoints given by company employees. There are approximately
50 people, mostly Europeans, with equal numbers of men and women. You are in the
main conference room and everyone is seated in rows behind tables facing the front.
Compiled by Julie Griffin
Page 57
3/9/2016
Module 5: Using our Tools, Adapting Them,
and Learning a New One…
Compiled by Julie Griffin
Page 58
3/9/2016
Agenda – Module 4 – Thursday 7 June
Facilitator/
Chair
Time
Event
Content
15:30
Session 1
Welcome
Session 2
Check in
(Main Conference room)
Session 3
Matching Tools to
Contexts- Scenarios
and Solutions
Welcome, overview of agenda and finding a
rapporteur. (5 min)
Quick check-in activity: Remembering our
tools – pairs discussion and plenary questions
(10 min)
Activity briefing – Divide into groups of three
people
 Each group will devise a scenario using a
job aid (10 min)
 Each scenario will be posted, and the
teams of three people will move between
the scenarios and provide their ideas on
the best tools for each situation, using our
list and recording on a flipchart matrix.
Each group will look at 3 boards. (5 min
per board)
 The scenarios will be discussed as a group
(15 min)
Each person designs one adaptation of the
Carousel Technique – one idea on one blank
card. The idea is briefly described and the
purpose.
-How can we adapt the Carousel to different
forms, purposes, dynamics? (10 min)
With the ideas generated, play the 7 point
game to identify the top ideas.
The top 3 ideas are described by their
authors.(30 min)
Feedback for Facilitators (5 min)
Reflection on application and adaptation of
the tools – what more would we like?(10 min)
15:35
15:45
16:30
Session 4
Adaptation – The
Many Faces of the
Carousel Technique
16:35
Session 5
New Prioritization
Tool – 7 Points
17:15
Session 6
Closing and next
module
17:30
End of Session
Gillian Martin
Mehers
G. Martin
Mehers
Julie Griffin
Lizzie
Crudgington
L. Crudgington
G. Martin
Mehers
Rapporteur Notes – Module 5
Notes by Julie Griffin, August 2007
Tools /activities highlighted in bold
Sessions 1 and 2: Welcome and Check in
The class started with Gillian informally asking everyone how they were doing and if anyone had
done any facilitation recently. She then asked us to find a partner with the birthday closest to our
own, and with that partner look over the list of tools from previous classes (pair discussions
and plenary discussion). The aim was to remember the tools we’ve learned.
Observations:
Compiled by Julie Griffin
Page 59
3/9/2016


Finding a partner according to closest birthday was a good way to get people
moving and talking. Be careful not to let people take too much time – it’s not a perfect
method so just encourage people to partner up even if they are not sure they ‘got it
right’.
Rather than have every pair report back, Gillian asked a few questions to the whole
group about what they discussed with their partner. This was a good way to save time.
Session 3: Matching Tools to Contexts and Scenarios
We divided into groups of three or four people and each group created a scenario, using the
template in the job-aid pack. This included having to describe the group, the location and
purpose of the session. Each group then moved to a different scenario and discussed tools that
could be use to achieve the aims of the proposed scenario.
After 5-10 minutes developing a tool at each of the scenarios, we brought the groups back
together to hear some reflections.
Reflections and observations on the matching tools:
 It is good to practice thinking of what tools/activities can be used.
 It takes time to figure out how to adapt a tool. Most tools must be adapted at least a little
bit.
 For each scenario, at least one of the suggested activities was an icebreaker. This
highlights the importance of introductory activities that build trust, loosen people up and
get people in the right frame of mind. This doesn’t happen very much at HQ, but we
agreed it would be beneficial to do more often.
Reflections and observations on the activity:
 This adaptation of the Carousel technique worked well to get the information, but
the groups needed more time.
 Lesson learned: keep the scenario template short and simple, request participants to
create simple scenarios that won’t take the others too much time to understand.
 The scenarios became the questions, so it is important to provide a good framework for
their design, just as you would take care designing the questions for each station if you
were doing it yourself.
Sessions 4 and 5: Adapting the Carousel technique, and a new
prioritization tool
Lizzie handed out blank note-cards to each participant and asked us to create a new version of
the Carousel technique and write it on one side of our card (individual idea writing). Once we
had each designed a new and creative activity, we ranked the cards using the 7-points system.
The 7-point system gets people moving and allows ranking of a number of ideas by comparing
only 2, 3 or 4 at a time. Each person holds one or two idea cards in their hand and randomly
finds a partner, they discuss and decide how to divide up 7 points between the cards without
using fractions. So you might decide to give 5 points to one and 2 points to the other. This goes
on for several rounds and then you add up the points for each card to see which were the
strongest ideas.
Lizzie asked those with the highest ranking cards to read the title of the game so the author could
identify him/herself and explain it in more detail for the rest of the group.
Some examples of adapting the Carousel
Compiled by Julie Griffin
Page 60
3/9/2016
Classic
Questions on flipcharts
Bullet points
Writing
Flipcharts and coloured pens
All contributing to all questions sequentially
In one room
Summary report back
In-session
Short time frame
Creative
Tasks
Writings a paragraph, statement, news story,
play script
Drawing, collage, 3D modeling
Envelopes, laptops, email, wiki, modeling
materials, magazines
Mixed contributions to a selection of questions
/ tasks
In a number of rooms, locations, virtual spaces
Performance report back, gallery walk
Pre or post session
Longer (still limited) time frame
Observations on adapting the Carousel:
 There are many ways to quickly adapt games.
 It is possible to modify: physical lay-out, method of collecting ideas (written, drawn,
sculpted, acted out, etc), numbers of questions, sizes of groups, etc.
 When facilitating, make sure the way you frame the introduction of an activity is
appropriate to your group. Some groups are more willing to play “games”, others will
feel more comfortable if they are told they will be doing an “activity”.
 What can the Carousel achieve: ‘get into others’ shoes’ and understand challenges faced
by others, reinforce shared ideas, push people to be more creative and identify new ideas,
generate lots of input in a short time, gather input from everyone, small group work,
move around, etc.
See the Annex of these notes for the adaptations created during this session.
Observations on the activity:
 Getting individuals to write out ideas is a quick way to generate many ideas.
 The 7-point system is complex, but can be easily explained if some of the directions are
written down (e.g. on flipcharts).
 A confident facilitator makes an activity sound manageable.
Session 6: Feedback and closing
Gillian facilitated a group discussion to give feedback to the facilitators and asked if anyone had
reflections on the course.
Observations and reflections:
 How do you link a “fun game” to the more serious objectives of a meeting?
o Sometimes the process in the activity is the result – e.g. getting people to talk
about ideas or understand concepts more clearly.
o Follow up by summarizing the discussion and drawing links to the meeting’s
objectives. Use questions to get the group to identify the links themselves.
Facilitation Course Module 5 - Handout
Tools/games
(Generally speaking we have covered: icebreakers, different ways to present information,
techniques for giving feedback, and ways to reflect and evaluate.)

Paired discussions/interviews
Compiled by Julie Griffin
Page 61
3/9/2016















Speaking for another person (putting yourself in "other's shoes")
Brainstorming
Work on flipcharts
Rapporteuring
Plenary questions and answers
Small group work
Visualisation/Objectification (drawing in small groups)
Movement around the room ("Gallery Walk" to each flipchart) for reporting
Presenting/Reporting
Non-traditional room layout
Using different parts of the room for workshop activities
Games
Reflection and Feedback
Icebreaker: drawing how you feel
Fishbowl
Requested other games/tools<




Alternative options for carousel
Dumi’s games
Presenting and report
Plenary questions and answers
Facilitation Course: Module 5 Handout
Matching Tools to Context Scenarios and Solutions
Write your answers in this column to create
a scenario. It will also help you understand
the context you’ll be working in.
6. Who
a. What is the profile of the
participants?
b. How many people?
c. How well do they know each
other already?
Compiled by Julie Griffin
Page 62
3/9/2016
7. What / Why
a. What is the purpose of the
meeting/workshop?
8. Duration
9. Location
10. Notes on Task
a. Add any notes or
descriptions of what the
group is trying to achieve.
11. Notes on Maintenance
a. Add any notes or
descriptions of what issues
the group may be facing, or
that may need to be
addressed. For example,
tensions within the group,
skepticism about facilitation,
frustrations, etc.
Carousel Activity
The carousel technique is a way to get as many people as possible to discuss several different
subjects in a limited amount of time. It is also an excellent way to bring some energy into
discussions. Here are the steps to the Carousel Activity. There will be a facilitator who will
organize and run the activity for the group.
Steps of play:
1. The whole group is divided into four mixed sub-groups, one per issue to be discussed.
Each group should be equal sized, thus have approximately 15 persons. (Note: If you use
this activity in other settings, the number of sub-groups can vary, depending on the
number of people there are, and how many subjects need to be discussed (one subject
per group).
Compiled by Julie Griffin
Page 63
3/9/2016
2. Each sub-group is allocated a home “station” with its own flip chart, pens etc., and
carries out a defined task, recording the results preferably in one particular colour. Each
group should have its own colour of pen to identify itself.
3. After an agreed time, each group moves physically to the “station” of the neighbouring
group, leaving one person behind at the home station as the “station representative.” We
will shift between stations after 20-minute periods.
4. The person left behind by each group explains to the newly arrived group what his or
her home group has done. The newly arriving group then comments on and adds to the
former group’s work. These comments are recorded on the flipcharts, preferably in the
arrivals’ colour. They can add points or comment on the points that were already written
by the previous group.
5. After the given period of time, the groups move on to the next station – and so on until
they arrive back to their home station.
6. At their home station, their representative now explains how the visiting groups have
responded to their original efforts, and they tell the representative what kind of
discussions they have had around the room.
7. After review of the results each group draws together its conclusions, which are
presented briefly in plenary.
This activity provides a way to gather ideas and comments from the group around key questions
in a structured way.
Carousel adaptations created by
participants
Visual Capture Carousel
Steps: Divide the group into equally sized sub-groups and follow the same process as for the
classic carousel, except that instead of people capturing ideas in words they use drawings only
and create a visualization of the situation / issue being explored. Rotate groups as in the classic
carousel (still using different coloured pens to add / edit), and end up with a gallery walk where
everyone is presented with the drawings and an explanation.
Example of Use: Could be used for a multi-stakeholder analysis, for example exploring the
various stakeholder perceptions about a Holcim cement plant (each flipchart would require
people to adopt the perspective of a different stakeholder group and imagine their perception of
the plant)
Virtual Carousel
Steps: Before a meeting, collect and refine ideas using a wiki website. Wiki pages replace
flipcharts. People work in sub-groups (for example RCOs / Programme teams) and create / edit
a wiki page from their offices. Groups rotate through the various pages. Changes are
automatically tracked in the wiki system. At the actual meeting, someone from each group
presents conclusions using a laptop connected to the wiki on the internet.
Compiled by Julie Griffin
Page 64
3/9/2016
Example of Use: Collecting RCO input into the various aspects of a paper being prepared in
headquarters, such as on ideas for the Congress theme.
Creative Communication Carousel
Steps: Follow the same process as the classic carousel except that this time, rather than a bulleted
list of ideas, give a task at each flip-chart. Tasks could include creating a newspaper front page;
drafting a role play between specified parties; writing a short speech to open a debate, etc. Rotate
groups as in the classic carousel to add / edit the work of the former group. In plenary at the
end, ask people from the original group present the conclusions creatively - e.g. as a news
reporter, acting out a role-play, presenting the short speech, etc.
Example of Use: Use it for thinking about different audiences at the Congress, such as local
participants from Barcelona, participants from elsewhere in Spain, and international participants.
The task at each flipchart might be a newspaper front page: one a local newspaper, one a national
newspaper and one an international newspaper.
Water management visual carousel
1. Each flipchart has a map of a river section (sub-catchment or catchment) with key
landmarks (dams, wetlands, towns, etc)
2. The first group adds where they think water infrastructures such as a dam should be
3. The following groups draw/write impacts on the rive (i.e. fishers need to move
upstream, wetland dries out)
4. The first group returns and reflects (agrees or disagrees) on the impacts contributed by
other groups
Discussion in plenary
Agenda Bender Carousel
Steps:
1) 4 agendas divided into columns of Time, Item, Subitem
2) Each part of the proposed agenda is on pieces of velcro with some blank ones spare
3) First group builds the agenda items and subitems by sticking them in their proposed order in
the relevant column
4) Second group rearranges / adds to that
5) Third and fourth groups rearranges / adds to, and adds into the timing column the proposed
times for each part of the agenda
6) First and second group gets to revisit at the end to check timings
Note - one person should remain at each stand throughout to share any reasoning from previous
groups.
4 agendas could be done in parallel eg for days at Congress
Changing Colors or Chameleon Carousel
Steps:
1) Different groups of people are formed – “Blue people”, “Yellow people”, “green
people” etc. This could be done by asking them their preferred color among X number
of options, or asking the color they best associate themselves with, or by choosing a
colored card from a bag…)
2) Each group prepares a “color” scenario responding to a given question or situation.
Sufficient time must be allowed for this to be done.
Compiled by Julie Griffin
Page 65
3/9/2016
3) After a period of time (depending on number of people, complexity of question to work
on…) the whole group moves to another colored scenario and tries to add some of
“their color” to the other group’s situation – like putting a bit of yellow characteristics
into the blue scenario.
4) After the 3/4 different groups have gone around the room (rooms in case there’s many
people in each group), they all get back together and go over all of the scenarios
proposed and the additions. The idea of the plenary session at the end is to come up
with a “rainbow” scenario that everyone feels associated with.
Example: What would an ideal world look like in your color? Green world? Yellow? Red?
Colors are associated with certain characteristics and are “perceived” differently by different
people. It is interesting to see how much of those perceptions can be changed/modified after
getting to know other perspectives. The idea behind the whole group moving and not leaving one
of its members to explain to others what the scenario was, is precisely to let the new group
interpret what the other colored group wanted to say without intermediaries.
Compiled by Julie Griffin
Page 66
3/9/2016
Module 6: Making the most of Materials and
Framing to Fit
Compiled by Julie Griffin
Page 67
3/9/2016
Agenda – Module 6 – Monday 27 August
Time
Event
Content
15:30
Session 1
Icebreaker
15:45
Session 2
Overview
Session 3
Discussing and
practicing facilitation
concepts
(using Open Space
Technology)
Lucky dip for facilitation tools: presenting
creative ideas for making the most of
materials. (15 min)
Overview of agenda and format, and finding a
rapporteur. (5 min)
Divide into two groups, learn how Open
Space Technology works (assign mystery
facilitators 11 & 12 for session 4)
 Each person then writes their proposed
discussion topic(s) on a card (15 min)
 Cards get placed on the board
 Three rounds of discussions, each round
may have 3-4 simultaneous discussions (3
x 15 min)
 Debriefing on the use of OST (5 min)
How does the framing style affect participants’
interaction and experience?
 Plenary reflection on how previous
activity was opened / framed. One
person from each group explains to the
other group the style (2 x 2 min).
Participants share their experience /
thoughts (capture) (5 min)
 Divide into two groups, each develops a
frame for a two and a half minute activity
closing (7 min)
 One person from each group presents
their closing (2 x 2 min)
 Reflection and plenary discussion (5 min)
Feedback to facilitators (written)
15:50
16:55
17:20
17:30
Session 4
Framing (opening and
closing) Open Space
Technology
Session 5
Feedback
End of Session
Facilitator/
Chair
Lizzie
Gillian
Lizzie and Julie
Mystery
Facilitator (1)
Mystery
Facilitators (2-9)
Mystery
Facilitator (10)
Lizzie
Mystery
Facilitators
(11&12)
Mystery
Facilitator (13)
Mystery
Facilitators
(14&15)
Julie
Mystery
Facilitator (16)
Draft Rapporteur notes – Module 6
We used Open Space Technology to decide which aspects of facilitation we wanted to discuss in
small groups. Through this we identified approximately 8 conversations to have over 4 time slots.
In each of the 4 time slots there were 2 or 3 conversations occurring simultaneously.
Key ideas from conversation on “Following Up”:
- use a virtual platform for monitoring tasks and keeping in touch
- write down next steps with names
- identify a person to be follow-up tracker; this person is nominated to check in with
participants to ensure they follow up
Key ideas from conversation on “Facilitating Multi-Lingual Groups”:
Compiled by Julie Griffin
Page 68
3/9/2016
-
pair non main language speakers with peer translators; provide guidance and groundrules
for translators (and all other participants behaviour towards translators)
provide ‘own language’ breaks
use visual cues – e.g. divide groups by colors, make collages, use colored stickers as
identifiers
do silent activities
keep an online laptop at each table for quick translation
provide phrasebooks or dictionaries
Key ideas from conversation on “Updating”:
- ask participants “what is your specific objective?” and ask them to identify how this
affects the others or links to others’ objectives
- provide one page documents before the meeting about your topic
- provide a template for powerpoint updates with a limited number of slides
- identify what you want to learn about
Key ideas from conversation on “Framing”:
- establish credibility by the way you frame the activity or session
- IUCN is an evidence based organization and its staff like to be given examples and
evidence that your activity will work (e.g., this activity/game has been used by Red List
experts in the past and they considered an efficient and useful tool…)
- Talk to an expert from the group beforehand to get their advice on best ways to frame
activities for them
More resources
www.welearnsomething.pbwiki.com
www.welearnsomething.com
Compiled by Julie Griffin
Page 69
3/9/2016