- Papers & Documents @@ -369,7 +387,7 @@
- Intent to win +
- Listening to be understood +
- Power struggles +
- Competition “turf war” +
- Loudest wins +
- Ideas judged by who says them +
- Intent to protect self, others +
- Surface friendly +
- Ideas judged by friendships/relationships +
- Impulsive, based on feeling, low data +
- Influence occurs outside the meeting +
- Limited active or empathetic listening +
- Intent is closure; informed decisions +
- Balance influence and inquiry +
- Focus on issues not personalities +
- Reasoning is made explicit +
- Ask about assumptions without criticizing +
- Influence is based in logic and data +
- Intent to build mutual understanding +
- Listening to understand thoughts and feelings +
- Able to suspend assumptions +
- Energy used to find the right questions +
- “Container” for collective thinking +
- Influence is found in shared meaning created by groups +
- Mix up the format, e.g., combining silent reflection, round robin, breakout groups, plenary, and/or liberating structures (more on these below) +
- Offer different channels for information sharing - verbal, nonverbal, written, visual, informal, formal +
- Track and stack who wants to speak +
- Invite, amplify, and credit “quieter” voices +
- Use active listening - reflect back what you think you are hearing in simple terms and check your assumptions regularly +
- Introverts vs. extroverts +
- Visual, auditory and kinesthetic learners +
- Disciplinary diversity +
- Career stage +
- Language +
- Grids to organize information +
- Conceptual models or mind maps to articulate shared understanding of complex systems +
- Manifestos, abstracts, and other written collateral to distill ideas +
- Woodley, L. et al., A guide to using virtual events to facilitate community building: Making a PACT for more engaging virtual meetings and events. 2021. +
- Tarallo, B. & Monlux, M. Surviving the Horror of Online Meetings: How to Facilitate Good Virtual Meetings & Manage Meeting Monsters. 2021. +
- Lipmanowicz & McCandless. The Surprising Power of Liberating Structures: Simple Rules to Unleash a Culture of Innovation. Liberating Structures Press. 2014.
- Kaner, S. Facilitator’s Guide to Participatory Decision-Making (Revised). 2014. -
- Woodley, L., Pratt, K., & East, J. (2021). A guide to using virtual events to facilitate community building: Making a PACT for more engaging virtual meetings and events. Zenodo. +
- Gray, D. et al., Gamestorming: A Playbook for Innovators, Rulebreakers, and Changemakers. O’Reilly Media. 2010. +
- Bohm, D. On Dialogue. Routledge Classics. 2004.
- Liberating Structures: Including and Uleashing Everyone +
- Liberating Structures: Including and Unleashing Everyone +
- Gamestorming
Inclusive Facilitation
Overview
-Under Construction, stay tuned!
+The success of a collaborative synthesis science project rests in no small part on the ability of the team of researchers to work effectively together and to draw on the full range of expertise, knowledge, and capacity in the group. Effective facilitation of team meetings can go a long way toward unlocking the group’s full potential. This module focuses on inclusive facilitation techniques to enable and encourage full, thoughtful, engaged participation during virtual and in person group meetings. Many of the principles underpinning these techniques can also be applied to other aspects of managing your collaboration, outside the meeting setting.
Learning Objectives
@@ -391,22 +409,383 @@Networking Convers
-Mack White, PhD studnet with Dr. Jennifer Rehage, Florida International University
+Mack White, PhD student with Dr. Jennifer Rehage, Florida International University
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
-
+Mack White, PhD studnet with Dr. Jennifer Rehage, Florida International University
+Mack White, PhD student with Dr. Jennifer Rehage, Florida International University
+Benefits of Enabling Full Participation
+Creating the conditions for all team members to feel welcome and able to fully participate advances diversity, equity, and inclusion in science. As we learned in the Team Science Practices module it also has instrumental benefits, as diverse teams have been shown to be more productive and to produce higher impact results than less diverse teams. In part, that productivity can be attributed to the ability of the group to elicit and work with novel ideas and approaches, allowing more innovative analysis and problem solving.
+Facilitating equitable participation also helps to unleash the full capacity of a team to get things done. Too often, potential contributors opt out of offering their skills and talents to a collaborative endeavor because they feel undervalued or unclear on how to contribute. It might not feel worth their time to try to assert an idea or opinion when it doesn’t feel welcome. A process that creates opportunities for everyone to engage and feel included can help avoid this situation.
+Finally, when the time comes for decision making, effective facilitation can ensure that the full range of questions, opinions, and concerns has been surfaced and weighed before the group makes a decision. This is critical. If you move forward with surface-level agreement, but without true alignment, commitment to the decision is likely to erode over time.
+
+
+
Moving from Debate to Dialogue
+Dialogue is a collaborative effort to understand and learn from each other. Debate, on the other hand, is an oppositional effort to convince the other side that you are right. Inclusive facilitation aims to support dialogue and skillful discussion. Dialogue allows groups to recognize the limits on their own and others’ individual perspectives and to strive for more coherent thought. Dialogue becomes a container for collective thinking and exploration - a process that can take teams in directions not imagined or planned. In dialogue, all views are treated as equally valid, and different views are presented as a means toward discovering a new view. Participants listen to understand one another, not to win. Complex issues are explored and shared meaning is created. When it comes time to make a decision, skillful discussion is required. Both are critical to the collaborative process, and the more artfully a group can move between these two forms of discourse (and out of less productive debate and polite discussion) according to what is needed, the more effective the group will be.
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+-
+
+
+-
+
+
+-
+
+
+-
+
Diversity in Thinking Styles
+As we learned earlier in the course, people have different thinking preferences which influence what they expect and enjoy in group processes (see Ned Herrmann’s Whole Brain Model below).
+
+
+
+
+
Meeting Design
+ +Tool Highlight: Collaborative Whiteboards
+Collaborative whiteboards are useful tools for capturing ideas from a group during virtual meetings. They range from simple (EasyRetro, Zoom’s whiteboard function) to complex (Mural, miro). Benefits include simultaneous input, the ability to organize information into discrete, movable chunks, and the visual nature of the output.
+Ensuring Equitable Access to Participation
+To tap diverse perspectives and catalyze productivity and creative problem-solving, we need to design meetings (and projects) so everyone can participate fully, rather than just a few. When tackling complex challenges, voices from the edge are often critical to uncovering new insights and innovative approaches. Democratizing participation doesn’t have to be all about controlling the dominant voices in a group; with careful planning and some simple tools, you can design any conversation so that everyone can contribute.
+A few simple techniques can help:
+-
+
Be creative and empathetic when you design your agenda. Think about your participants and what is going to help all of them participate fully and creatively. Beyond the thinking preferences, you may also want to consider these other dimensions of diversity when planning your process design and facilitation:
+-
+
Process Design
+Good meeting design starts with understanding your purpose and objectives, as well as your participants. Once you understand why you need to meet (your overarching goal) and what you want to accomplish (the specific outcomes you are driving toward), you can turn to how you will accomplish your purpose (i.e. the agenda design) and who will play what roles. You want participants to know their role and how to be at their best.
+A good rule of thumb is to allow 2-3x as much time to plan a meeting as its duration.
++
+Limitations of Conventional Meeting Structures
+Differences in thinking and learning styles, disciplinary background, power, and other dimensions of diversity mean that there’s no such thing as a one-size-fits-all approach for participatory processes. Nonetheless, we tend to default to a small set of traditional ways of sharing information and engaging people when we meet. These conventional structures are often either too limiting (presentations, status reports, and managed discussions) or too free-form and disorganized (open discussions and brainstorms) to effectively tap the wisdom of the group (Lipmanowicz and McCandless, 2014). To support the engagement of all participants, we need to break out of those traditional ways of meeting.
+Microstructures for Democratizing Participation
+Books and websites like Liberating Structures, Gamestorming, and the Facilitator’s Guide to Participatory Decisionmaking offer dozens of alternative group processes (see Resources). Known as microstructures or knowledge games, these simple, fun activities are designed to include everyone, distribute control, and unleash creativity. One or more activities can be matched to your intended outcomes and arranged in a sequence to advance the team toward your overall goal. Liberating Structures offers a matching matrix to help you identify microstructures that could fit your needs and an app you can use to browse and assemble strings of activities. Gamestorming organizes their activities into categories (e.g. games for opening, games for decision-making) for exploration.
+Here are a few microstructures that work well for small group virtual meetings. They also work for larger groups and in person settings:
+Tool Highlights: Microstructures
+| Microstructure | +Thinking Preference | +Purpose | +How It Works | +
|---|---|---|---|
| Icebreaker / check in | +Relational | +Connect as a team, start on a positive, human note | +Many versions exist, e.g., one word to describe how you are arriving; one thing you are feeling grateful for today; coolest thing you’ve learned lately; describe where you grew up without using any place names, etc. | +
| Round robin / go around | +Analytical, Relational | +Hear from everyone | +Everyone answers the same prompt. Alternatives to going in order: each speaker calls on the next person after they have shared - keeping track of who has / hasn’t spoken keeps people paying attention; popcorn-style - people share in the order that they feel moved to speak | +
| 1,2,4,all | +Analytical, Practical, Experimental, Relational | +Engage everyone in generating questions, ideas, and suggestions | +Individual reflection; Pair share; Two pairs combine and share as a group of 4; Small groups share highlights with whole group | +
| Min specs | +Experimental | +Specify simple rules the group must follow to achieve your purpose | +1,2,4,all format; Individuals brainstorm things the group must do or must not do to achieve its purpose; Share in pairs or small groups; Pare the list down to the minimum set of rules you could follow and still achieve the purpose | +
| Affinity Map | +Analytical, Relational | +Surface ideas, detect patterns, and analyze | +Brainstorm ideas using sticky notes on a wall or virtual whiteboard; Cluster into categories; If useful, prioritize within categories | +
| Brainwriting | +Analytical, Practical, Experimental, Relational | +Surface and elaborate ideas | +(1) Brainstorm ideas in a google doc or virtual whiteboard (or on index cards in person); (2) Read and add to each other’s ideas; (3) Discuss | +
| What, So What, Now What | +Analytical, Practical, Experimental | +Make sense of past progress or experiences and decide on future actions | +What - As a group, compile the facts and observations relevant to the context; So What - Reflect on the facts and their implications, identify patterns, generate hypotheses; Now What - Draw conclusions - What actions make sense? | +
| Fist to Five / Gradient of Agreement | +Practical, Relational | +Assess degree of consensus; seek closure | +Use when ready to close a discussion or make a decision; Invite participants to rate their level of agreement with a proposal on a scale of 0-5; Five fingers means “absolute, total agreement or support” and a fist means “complete opposition” | +
| Polling | +Analytical, Practical | +Rank alternatives | +Before you start - clarify how you will use the results - are you gathering information or taking a vote to make a decision?; Decide how many votes per person; In person - use sticky dots; Virtually - use +1s in a google doc or a digital polling tool (e.g., Zoom, Mural, slido) | +
| Feasibility-Impact Matrix (see figure below) | +Analytical, Practical, Experimental | +Compare alternatives | +Discuss and agree on definitions for two criteria for evaluating ideas: feasibility of implementation and impact potential; Rate each project idea against these two axes and map them on a 2x2 grid | +
+
+
Module Content
-Coming soon!
+Techniques for Harvesting Content
+As you go, and definitely before your meeting is over, engage your team in synthesizing and capturing the information that has been discussed. This helps you to deepen understanding, document your workflow and decisions, and pick up easily from where you left off. Use a consistent system - like a running notes document linked in the calendar item. Graphics or drawings can be a valuable complement to oral and written content in making thinking visible.
+
+
+
Consider using:
+-
+
When capturing notes, try to use people’s own words; if necessary ask them to distill long or complex points into a headline you can capture. Invite them to offer corrections if the notetaker didn’t capture what they meant.
+ +Additional Resources
Papers & Documents
-
+
Workshops & Courses<
Websites
-
diff --git a/search.json b/search.json
index fa4d1e1..ce6f70e 100644
--- a/search.json
+++ b/search.json
@@ -410,7 +410,7 @@
"href": "mod_facilitation.html",
"title": "Inclusive Facilitation",
"section": "",
- "text": "Under Construction, stay tuned!",
+ "text": "The success of a collaborative synthesis science project rests in no small part on the ability of the team of researchers to work effectively together and to draw on the full range of expertise, knowledge, and capacity in the group. Effective facilitation of team meetings can go a long way toward unlocking the group’s full potential. This module focuses on inclusive facilitation techniques to enable and encourage full, thoughtful, engaged participation during virtual and in person group meetings. Many of the principles underpinning these techniques can also be applied to other aspects of managing your collaboration, outside the meeting setting.",
"crumbs": [
"Phase II -- Plan",
"Inclusive Facilitation"
@@ -421,7 +421,7 @@
"href": "mod_facilitation.html#overview",
"title": "Inclusive Facilitation",
"section": "",
- "text": "Under Construction, stay tuned!",
+ "text": "The success of a collaborative synthesis science project rests in no small part on the ability of the team of researchers to work effectively together and to draw on the full range of expertise, knowledge, and capacity in the group. Effective facilitation of team meetings can go a long way toward unlocking the group’s full potential. This module focuses on inclusive facilitation techniques to enable and encourage full, thoughtful, engaged participation during virtual and in person group meetings. Many of the principles underpinning these techniques can also be applied to other aspects of managing your collaboration, outside the meeting setting.",
"crumbs": [
"Phase II -- Plan",
"Inclusive Facilitation"
@@ -454,18 +454,117 @@
"href": "mod_facilitation.html#networking-conversation",
"title": "Inclusive Facilitation",
"section": "Networking Conversation",
- "text": "Networking Conversation\nInclusive facilitation is challenging, even when facilitators and participants are quite similar, but when their backgrounds, ages, or positions are different, it can be even more so. This class we’ll talk with Mack White, a graduate student who is serving as PI for the Marine Consumer Nutrient Dynamics synthesis group. He’ll address approaches for inclusive facilitation broadly, as well as the special challenges inherent in facilitating a group of colleagues who are more senior and experienced than he is.\n\n2024 Guests\n\n\nMack White, PhD studnet with Dr. Jennifer Rehage, Florida International University",
+ "text": "Networking Conversation\nInclusive facilitation is challenging, even when facilitators and participants are quite similar, but when their backgrounds, ages, or positions are different, it can be even more so. This class we’ll talk with Mack White, a graduate student who is serving as PI for the Marine Consumer Nutrient Dynamics synthesis group. He’ll address approaches for inclusive facilitation broadly, as well as the special challenges inherent in facilitating a group of colleagues who are more senior and experienced than he is.\n\n2024 Guests\n\n\nMack White, PhD student with Dr. Jennifer Rehage, Florida International University\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nActivity: Rapid Assessment\n\n\n\nPart 1 (~3 min)\nOn your own:\n\nReflect silently on the following questions and provide input via the anonymous poll\n\nWhat’s one thing your group is doing really well to ensure all team members can participate in meetings and project work?\nWhat’s one area where your team has room to improve its inclusive facilitation practices? What could you be doing better?\n\n\nPart 2 (~7 min)\nIn pairs (from different teams):\n\nShare what’s working, what could be improved (2 mins each)\nCompare notes and share suggestions for things to try\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nDiscussion: Rapid Assessment\n\n\n\nWhole group discussion (8 mins)\n\nWhat are some common practices that are working well?\nWhere is our learning edge?\n\nWhat are some common areas you identified where we have room to improve our inclusive facilitation practices?\n\nPlease share an aha moment or idea from your partner that you want to try in your group?\n\n\n\n\nTool Highlight: Polls & Think-Pair-Share\nPolls are useful tools for collecting input. They can be deployed synchronously or asynchronously, anonymously or not. Consider using them before a meeting to understand the group’s starting point and help shape the content. Use them during a meeting to collect real time data. Or use them after a meeting to gather feedback. Zoom’s integrated polling is simple but effective. Other options include slido, mentimeter, and google forms.\nThink-Pair-Share is a common teaching tool that is very effective for engaging groups in reflection and discussion. Starting with individual reflection suits those who like to process ideas in quiet. Discussing in pairs allows everyone to share their ideas and learn from each other before highlights are lifted up to the whole group. “1-2-4-all” is a related microstructure that can be used to rapidly share and sift ideas in any group of eight or more people.",
"crumbs": [
"Phase II -- Plan",
"Inclusive Facilitation"
]
},
{
- "objectID": "mod_facilitation.html#module-content",
- "href": "mod_facilitation.html#module-content",
+ "objectID": "mod_facilitation.html#benefits-of-enabling-full-participation",
+ "href": "mod_facilitation.html#benefits-of-enabling-full-participation",
"title": "Inclusive Facilitation",
- "section": "Module Content",
- "text": "Module Content\nComing soon!",
+ "section": "Benefits of Enabling Full Participation",
+ "text": "Benefits of Enabling Full Participation\nCreating the conditions for all team members to feel welcome and able to fully participate advances diversity, equity, and inclusion in science. As we learned in the Team Science Practices module it also has instrumental benefits, as diverse teams have been shown to be more productive and to produce higher impact results than less diverse teams. In part, that productivity can be attributed to the ability of the group to elicit and work with novel ideas and approaches, allowing more innovative analysis and problem solving.\nFacilitating equitable participation also helps to unleash the full capacity of a team to get things done. Too often, potential contributors opt out of offering their skills and talents to a collaborative endeavor because they feel undervalued or unclear on how to contribute. It might not feel worth their time to try to assert an idea or opinion when it doesn’t feel welcome. A process that creates opportunities for everyone to engage and feel included can help avoid this situation.\nFinally, when the time comes for decision making, effective facilitation can ensure that the full range of questions, opinions, and concerns has been surfaced and weighed before the group makes a decision. This is critical. If you move forward with surface-level agreement, but without true alignment, commitment to the decision is likely to erode over time.",
+ "crumbs": [
+ "Phase II -- Plan",
+ "Inclusive Facilitation"
+ ]
+ },
+ {
+ "objectID": "mod_facilitation.html#moving-from-debate-to-dialogue",
+ "href": "mod_facilitation.html#moving-from-debate-to-dialogue",
+ "title": "Inclusive Facilitation",
+ "section": "Moving from Debate to Dialogue",
+ "text": "Moving from Debate to Dialogue\nDialogue is a collaborative effort to understand and learn from each other. Debate, on the other hand, is an oppositional effort to convince the other side that you are right. Inclusive facilitation aims to support dialogue and skillful discussion. Dialogue allows groups to recognize the limits on their own and others’ individual perspectives and to strive for more coherent thought. Dialogue becomes a container for collective thinking and exploration - a process that can take teams in directions not imagined or planned. In dialogue, all views are treated as equally valid, and different views are presented as a means toward discovering a new view. Participants listen to understand one another, not to win. Complex issues are explored and shared meaning is created. When it comes time to make a decision, skillful discussion is required. Both are critical to the collaborative process, and the more artfully a group can move between these two forms of discourse (and out of less productive debate and polite discussion) according to what is needed, the more effective the group will be.\n\nDebatePolite DiscussionSkillful DiscussionDialogue\n\n\n\nIntent to win\nListening to be understood\nPower struggles\nCompetition “turf war”\nLoudest wins\nIdeas judged by who says them\n\n\n\n\nIntent to protect self, others\nSurface friendly\nIdeas judged by friendships/relationships\nImpulsive, based on feeling, low data\nInfluence occurs outside the meeting\nLimited active or empathetic listening\n\n\n\n\nIntent is closure; informed decisions\nBalance influence and inquiry\nFocus on issues not personalities\nReasoning is made explicit\nAsk about assumptions without criticizing\nInfluence is based in logic and data\n\n\n\n\nIntent to build mutual understanding\nListening to understand thoughts and feelings\nAble to suspend assumptions\nEnergy used to find the right questions\n“Container” for collective thinking\nInfluence is found in shared meaning created by groups",
+ "crumbs": [
+ "Phase II -- Plan",
+ "Inclusive Facilitation"
+ ]
+ },
+ {
+ "objectID": "mod_facilitation.html#diversity-in-thinking-styles",
+ "href": "mod_facilitation.html#diversity-in-thinking-styles",
+ "title": "Inclusive Facilitation",
+ "section": "Diversity in Thinking Styles",
+ "text": "Diversity in Thinking Styles\nAs we learned earlier in the course, people have different thinking preferences which influence what they expect and enjoy in group processes (see Ned Herrmann’s Whole Brain Model below).\n\n\n\nNed Herrmann’s Whole Brain Model",
+ "crumbs": [
+ "Phase II -- Plan",
+ "Inclusive Facilitation"
+ ]
+ },
+ {
+ "objectID": "mod_facilitation.html#meeting-design",
+ "href": "mod_facilitation.html#meeting-design",
+ "title": "Inclusive Facilitation",
+ "section": "Meeting Design",
+ "text": "Meeting Design\n\n\n\n\n\n\nActivity: Meeting Design + Facilitation Likes & Dislikes\n\n\n\nGroup brainstorm (10 mins)\nThink about your own dominant thinking preference(s) - analytical, practical, relational, or experimental. Now think back to meetings and group processes you have been a part of. With this thinking preference in mind, what facilitation or meeting design techniques have you really appreciated? What allowed you to fully participate? Conversely, what did you find frustrating?\n\nOpen the EasyRetro collaborative whiteboard (link provided in the chat and in the notes doc)\nFind the column for the thinking preference you focused on\nAdd the specific practices, tools, or techniques that you like by clicking the grey plus sign at the top of that column - one idea per card\nFeel free to emphasize other people’s ideas by clicking the thumbs up\nAdd a comment or question to any card by clicking the speech bubble\n\nNow consider the expectations and preferences of the other thinking styles noted in the figure above and shared by your classmates. Are there any that you commonly overlook when you are planning a meeting?\n\n\n\nTool Highlight: Collaborative Whiteboards\nCollaborative whiteboards are useful tools for capturing ideas from a group during virtual meetings. They range from simple (EasyRetro, Zoom’s whiteboard function) to complex (Mural, miro). Benefits include simultaneous input, the ability to organize information into discrete, movable chunks, and the visual nature of the output.",
+ "crumbs": [
+ "Phase II -- Plan",
+ "Inclusive Facilitation"
+ ]
+ },
+ {
+ "objectID": "mod_facilitation.html#ensuring-equitable-access-to-participation",
+ "href": "mod_facilitation.html#ensuring-equitable-access-to-participation",
+ "title": "Inclusive Facilitation",
+ "section": "Ensuring Equitable Access to Participation",
+ "text": "Ensuring Equitable Access to Participation\nTo tap diverse perspectives and catalyze productivity and creative problem-solving, we need to design meetings (and projects) so everyone can participate fully, rather than just a few. When tackling complex challenges, voices from the edge are often critical to uncovering new insights and innovative approaches. Democratizing participation doesn’t have to be all about controlling the dominant voices in a group; with careful planning and some simple tools, you can design any conversation so that everyone can contribute.\nA few simple techniques can help:\n\nMix up the format, e.g., combining silent reflection, round robin, breakout groups, plenary, and/or liberating structures (more on these below)\nOffer different channels for information sharing - verbal, nonverbal, written, visual, informal, formal\nTrack and stack who wants to speak\nInvite, amplify, and credit “quieter” voices\nUse active listening - reflect back what you think you are hearing in simple terms and check your assumptions regularly\n\nBe creative and empathetic when you design your agenda. Think about your participants and what is going to help all of them participate fully and creatively. Beyond the thinking preferences, you may also want to consider these other dimensions of diversity when planning your process design and facilitation:\n\nIntroverts vs. extroverts\nVisual, auditory and kinesthetic learners\nDisciplinary diversity\nCareer stage\nLanguage",
+ "crumbs": [
+ "Phase II -- Plan",
+ "Inclusive Facilitation"
+ ]
+ },
+ {
+ "objectID": "mod_facilitation.html#process-design",
+ "href": "mod_facilitation.html#process-design",
+ "title": "Inclusive Facilitation",
+ "section": "Process Design",
+ "text": "Process Design\nGood meeting design starts with understanding your purpose and objectives, as well as your participants. Once you understand why you need to meet (your overarching goal) and what you want to accomplish (the specific outcomes you are driving toward), you can turn to how you will accomplish your purpose (i.e. the agenda design) and who will play what roles. You want participants to know their role and how to be at their best.\nA good rule of thumb is to allow 2-3x as much time to plan a meeting as its duration.",
+ "crumbs": [
+ "Phase II -- Plan",
+ "Inclusive Facilitation"
+ ]
+ },
+ {
+ "objectID": "mod_facilitation.html#sharing-the-load-of-effective-meeting-facilitation",
+ "href": "mod_facilitation.html#sharing-the-load-of-effective-meeting-facilitation",
+ "title": "Inclusive Facilitation",
+ "section": "Sharing the Load of Effective Meeting Facilitation",
+ "text": "Sharing the Load of Effective Meeting Facilitation\nIt’s very difficult to both facilitate a conversation and engage fully in it as a participant. If you add taking notes on top of that, it’s sure to become overwhelming. So recruit some help. The number of roles you need to fill will depend on the size of the group and the complexity of the process. Share and rotate duties over time:\n\nProcess facilitator - sets tone and pace, mediates conflicts, and ensures all voices are being heard, interpersonal dynamics are positive/effective, and group is staying on task\nMeeting chair (optional) - keeps an eye on the overall vision and progress of the meeting\nTimekeeper - may also be the chair or facilitator\nNotetaker - captures action items and notes, often in a google doc that can be viewed and added to by others; may also produce a meeting summary\nScribe - captures important points that can be seen in real time by the whole group, usually on a whiteboard or flipchart\nSpotter - keeps a running list of who is waiting to speak (especially in large groups or intense discussions)\nRelationship monitor - tracks group dynamics and actively works to help everyone feel included and engaged on personal and social levels\nParticipation monitor - engineers opportunities for participation, quells interrupters, amplifies and credits the messages of quieter participants.\n\nAs you get to know your team members, you can start to match people to these different roles based on their skills and recruit them to help.",
+ "crumbs": [
+ "Phase II -- Plan",
+ "Inclusive Facilitation"
+ ]
+ },
+ {
+ "objectID": "mod_facilitation.html#limitations-of-conventional-meeting-structures",
+ "href": "mod_facilitation.html#limitations-of-conventional-meeting-structures",
+ "title": "Inclusive Facilitation",
+ "section": "Limitations of Conventional Meeting Structures",
+ "text": "Limitations of Conventional Meeting Structures\nDifferences in thinking and learning styles, disciplinary background, power, and other dimensions of diversity mean that there’s no such thing as a one-size-fits-all approach for participatory processes. Nonetheless, we tend to default to a small set of traditional ways of sharing information and engaging people when we meet. These conventional structures are often either too limiting (presentations, status reports, and managed discussions) or too free-form and disorganized (open discussions and brainstorms) to effectively tap the wisdom of the group (Lipmanowicz and McCandless, 2014). To support the engagement of all participants, we need to break out of those traditional ways of meeting.",
+ "crumbs": [
+ "Phase II -- Plan",
+ "Inclusive Facilitation"
+ ]
+ },
+ {
+ "objectID": "mod_facilitation.html#microstructures-for-democratizing-participation",
+ "href": "mod_facilitation.html#microstructures-for-democratizing-participation",
+ "title": "Inclusive Facilitation",
+ "section": "Microstructures for Democratizing Participation",
+ "text": "Microstructures for Democratizing Participation\nBooks and websites like Liberating Structures, Gamestorming, and the Facilitator’s Guide to Participatory Decisionmaking offer dozens of alternative group processes (see Resources). Known as microstructures or knowledge games, these simple, fun activities are designed to include everyone, distribute control, and unleash creativity. One or more activities can be matched to your intended outcomes and arranged in a sequence to advance the team toward your overall goal. Liberating Structures offers a matching matrix to help you identify microstructures that could fit your needs and an app you can use to browse and assemble strings of activities. Gamestorming organizes their activities into categories (e.g. games for opening, games for decision-making) for exploration.\nHere are a few microstructures that work well for small group virtual meetings. They also work for larger groups and in person settings:\n\nTool Highlights: Microstructures\n\n\n\nMicrostructure\nThinking Preference\nPurpose\nHow It Works\n\n\n\n\nIcebreaker / check in\nRelational\nConnect as a team, start on a positive, human note\nMany versions exist, e.g., one word to describe how you are arriving; one thing you are feeling grateful for today; coolest thing you’ve learned lately; describe where you grew up without using any place names, etc.\n\n\nRound robin / go around\nAnalytical, Relational\nHear from everyone\nEveryone answers the same prompt. Alternatives to going in order: each speaker calls on the next person after they have shared - keeping track of who has / hasn’t spoken keeps people paying attention; popcorn-style - people share in the order that they feel moved to speak\n\n\n1,2,4,all\nAnalytical, Practical, Experimental, Relational\nEngage everyone in generating questions, ideas, and suggestions\nIndividual reflection; Pair share; Two pairs combine and share as a group of 4; Small groups share highlights with whole group\n\n\nMin specs\nExperimental\nSpecify simple rules the group must follow to achieve your purpose\n1,2,4,all format; Individuals brainstorm things the group must do or must not do to achieve its purpose; Share in pairs or small groups; Pare the list down to the minimum set of rules you could follow and still achieve the purpose\n\n\nAffinity Map\nAnalytical, Relational\nSurface ideas, detect patterns, and analyze\nBrainstorm ideas using sticky notes on a wall or virtual whiteboard; Cluster into categories; If useful, prioritize within categories\n\n\nBrainwriting\nAnalytical, Practical, Experimental, Relational\nSurface and elaborate ideas\n(1) Brainstorm ideas in a google doc or virtual whiteboard (or on index cards in person); (2) Read and add to each other’s ideas; (3) Discuss\n\n\nWhat, So What, Now What\nAnalytical, Practical, Experimental\nMake sense of past progress or experiences and decide on future actions\nWhat - As a group, compile the facts and observations relevant to the context; So What - Reflect on the facts and their implications, identify patterns, generate hypotheses; Now What - Draw conclusions - What actions make sense?\n\n\nFist to Five / Gradient of Agreement\nPractical, Relational\nAssess degree of consensus; seek closure\nUse when ready to close a discussion or make a decision; Invite participants to rate their level of agreement with a proposal on a scale of 0-5; Five fingers means “absolute, total agreement or support” and a fist means “complete opposition”\n\n\nPolling\nAnalytical, Practical\nRank alternatives\nBefore you start - clarify how you will use the results - are you gathering information or taking a vote to make a decision?; Decide how many votes per person; In person - use sticky dots; Virtually - use +1s in a google doc or a digital polling tool (e.g., Zoom, Mural, slido)\n\n\nFeasibility-Impact Matrix (see figure below)\nAnalytical, Practical, Experimental\nCompare alternatives\nDiscuss and agree on definitions for two criteria for evaluating ideas: feasibility of implementation and impact potential; Rate each project idea against these two axes and map them on a 2x2 grid",
+ "crumbs": [
+ "Phase II -- Plan",
+ "Inclusive Facilitation"
+ ]
+ },
+ {
+ "objectID": "mod_facilitation.html#techniques-for-harvesting-content",
+ "href": "mod_facilitation.html#techniques-for-harvesting-content",
+ "title": "Inclusive Facilitation",
+ "section": "Techniques for Harvesting Content",
+ "text": "Techniques for Harvesting Content\nAs you go, and definitely before your meeting is over, engage your team in synthesizing and capturing the information that has been discussed. This helps you to deepen understanding, document your workflow and decisions, and pick up easily from where you left off. Use a consistent system - like a running notes document linked in the calendar item. Graphics or drawings can be a valuable complement to oral and written content in making thinking visible.\n\n\n\nMaking thinking visible, Credit: Nancy Margulies, World Cafe, Flickr\n\n\nConsider using:\n\nGrids to organize information\nConceptual models or mind maps to articulate shared understanding of complex systems\nManifestos, abstracts, and other written collateral to distill ideas\n\nWhen capturing notes, try to use people’s own words; if necessary ask them to distill long or complex points into a headline you can capture. Invite them to offer corrections if the notetaker didn’t capture what they meant.\n\n\n\n\n\n\nActivity: Team Planning\n\n\n\nPart 1 (~1 min)\nOn your own:\n\nThink about an upcoming team meeting that hasn’t yet been planned\n\nWhy will you be meeting? What do you think should be the purpose of that meeting?\n\n\nPart 2 (~20 min)\nIn your project team:\n\nIdentify a facilitator, timekeeper, reporter for this breakout session\nDecide whether you want one notetaker or shared notetaking\nDecide as a group which upcoming meeting you want to focus on\nUse round robin or silent google doc’ing to hear everyone’s answers to the prompt\nPlan your next meeting together (resources: EasyRetro board, tools highlighted above)\n\nAgree on the meeting purpose\nIdentify 1-3 intended outcomes\nDraft an agenda for the meeting\nWhat activities will you use to make your meeting inclusive? Can you include an activity that preferences each thinking style?\nIdentify roles and responsibilities\nWhat’s your plan for harvesting content?\nIdentify any prep work for participants and for the facilitator(s)\n\nDiscuss:\n\nHow might things get off track?\nWhat’s your plan if they do?\n\nModify your plan as needed\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nDiscussion: Team Planning & Wrap Up\n\n\n\nWhole group discussion (10 mins)\n\nWhat activities did you identify to help make your meeting inclusive to all the thinking styles on your team?\nAnywhere where you would like advice from the group?\nAre there other questions you are holding related to inclusive facilitation?",
"crumbs": [
"Phase II -- Plan",
"Inclusive Facilitation"
@@ -476,7 +575,7 @@
"href": "mod_facilitation.html#additional-resources",
"title": "Inclusive Facilitation",
"section": "Additional Resources",
- "text": "Additional Resources\n\nPapers & Documents\n\nKaner, S. Facilitator’s Guide to Participatory Decision-Making (Revised). 2014.\nWoodley, L., Pratt, K., & East, J. (2021). A guide to using virtual events to facilitate community building: Making a PACT for more engaging virtual meetings and events. Zenodo.\n\n\n\nWorkshops & Courses\n\n\n\n\n\nWebsites\n\nLiberating Structures: Including and Uleashing Everyone",
+ "text": "Additional Resources\n\nPapers & Documents\n\nWoodley, L. et al., A guide to using virtual events to facilitate community building: Making a PACT for more engaging virtual meetings and events. 2021.\nTarallo, B. & Monlux, M. Surviving the Horror of Online Meetings: How to Facilitate Good Virtual Meetings & Manage Meeting Monsters. 2021.\nLipmanowicz & McCandless. The Surprising Power of Liberating Structures: Simple Rules to Unleash a Culture of Innovation. Liberating Structures Press. 2014.\nKaner, S. Facilitator’s Guide to Participatory Decision-Making (Revised). 2014.\nGray, D. et al., Gamestorming: A Playbook for Innovators, Rulebreakers, and Changemakers. O’Reilly Media. 2010.\nBohm, D. On Dialogue. Routledge Classics. 2004.\n\n\n\nWorkshops & Courses\n\n\n\n\n\nWebsites\n\nLiberating Structures: Including and Unleashing Everyone\nGamestorming",
"crumbs": [
"Phase II -- Plan",
"Inclusive Facilitation"
diff --git a/sitemap.xml b/sitemap.xml
index e1786f4..e4e8c54 100644
--- a/sitemap.xml
+++ b/sitemap.xml
@@ -2,110 +2,110 @@
https://lter.github.io/ssecr/proj_teams.html
- 2024-10-23T15:30:22.391Z
+ 2024-10-29T15:26:00.023Z
https://lter.github.io/ssecr/mod_next-steps.html
- 2024-10-23T15:30:22.387Z
+ 2024-10-29T15:26:00.023Z
https://lter.github.io/ssecr/mod_stats.html
- 2024-10-23T15:30:22.391Z
+ 2024-10-29T15:26:00.023Z
https://lter.github.io/ssecr/instructors.html
- 2024-10-23T15:30:22.387Z
+ 2024-10-29T15:26:00.019Z
https://lter.github.io/ssecr/policy_ai.html
- 2024-10-23T15:30:22.391Z
+ 2024-10-29T15:26:00.023Z
https://lter.github.io/ssecr/policy_attendance.html
- 2024-10-23T15:30:22.391Z
+ 2024-10-29T15:26:00.023Z
https://lter.github.io/ssecr/mod_data-disc.html
- 2024-10-23T15:30:22.387Z
+ 2024-10-29T15:26:00.019Z
https://lter.github.io/ssecr/policy_conduct.html
- 2024-10-23T15:30:22.391Z
+ 2024-10-29T15:26:00.023Z
https://lter.github.io/ssecr/CONTRIBUTING.html
- 2024-10-23T15:30:22.335Z
+ 2024-10-29T15:25:59.947Z
https://lter.github.io/ssecr/mod_facilitation.html
- 2024-10-23T15:30:22.387Z
+ 2024-10-29T15:26:00.019Z
https://lter.github.io/ssecr/mod_credit.html
- 2024-10-23T15:30:22.387Z
+ 2024-10-29T15:26:00.019Z
https://lter.github.io/ssecr/policy_pronouns.html
- 2024-10-23T15:30:22.391Z
+ 2024-10-29T15:26:00.023Z
https://lter.github.io/ssecr/mod_project-mgmt.html
- 2024-10-23T15:30:22.387Z
+ 2024-10-29T15:26:00.023Z
https://lter.github.io/ssecr/mod_reproducibility.html
- 2024-10-23T15:30:22.391Z
+ 2024-10-29T15:26:00.023Z
https://lter.github.io/ssecr/fellows.html
- 2024-10-23T15:30:22.363Z
+ 2024-10-29T15:25:59.975Z
https://lter.github.io/ssecr/mod_thinking.html
- 2024-10-23T15:30:22.391Z
+ 2024-10-29T15:26:00.023Z
https://lter.github.io/ssecr/proj_milestones.html
- 2024-10-23T15:30:22.391Z
+ 2024-10-29T15:26:00.023Z
https://lter.github.io/ssecr/mod_version-control.html
- 2024-10-23T15:30:22.391Z
+ 2024-10-29T15:26:00.023Z
https://lter.github.io/ssecr/mod_data-viz.html
- 2024-10-23T15:30:22.387Z
+ 2024-10-29T15:26:00.019Z
https://lter.github.io/ssecr/mod_wrangle.html
- 2024-10-23T15:30:22.391Z
+ 2024-10-29T15:26:00.023Z
https://lter.github.io/ssecr/mod_findings.html
- 2024-10-23T15:30:22.387Z
+ 2024-10-29T15:26:00.019Z
https://lter.github.io/ssecr/mod_spatial.html
- 2024-10-23T15:30:22.391Z
+ 2024-10-29T15:26:00.023Z
https://lter.github.io/ssecr/mod_team-sci.html
- 2024-10-23T15:30:22.391Z
+ 2024-10-29T15:26:00.023Z
https://lter.github.io/ssecr/mod_reports.html
- 2024-10-23T15:30:22.387Z
+ 2024-10-29T15:26:00.023Z
https://lter.github.io/ssecr/policy_usability.html
- 2024-10-23T15:30:22.391Z
+ 2024-10-29T15:26:00.023Z
https://lter.github.io/ssecr/index.html
- 2024-10-23T15:30:22.387Z
+ 2024-10-29T15:26:00.019Z
https://lter.github.io/ssecr/mod_interactivity.html
- 2024-10-23T15:30:22.387Z
+ 2024-10-29T15:26:00.023Z
Websites
-
-