What can/will go wrong in a group activity - part 1

Not meaning to sound like a "glass half empty" type, but it would be short sighted for any group leader to ignore the distinct possibility that a group process can miss the mark. In fact, most honest facilitators will confess that they are not immuned to Murphy's law. Eventually, what can cause some challenges, will.  This reality check shouldn't scare anyone off taking some risks with a group - in fact it should only heighten your awareness and preparation for those bumps in the road.




Four COMMON obstacles for group facilitators are;

1. participants resist participating
2. participants don't understand your activity instructions
3. someone dominates the activity debrief dialogue
4. the final outcomes are not what you are hoping for the group

This week we'll tackle the first two, and check in next week for the rest. For each problem, learn some signs that something bad is brewing, tips to help AVOID IT as well as what to do if it does actually happen (without crying).

1.  PEOPLE RESIST PARTICIPATING

• you might hear some side conversations
• shudder to think, but be prepared for eye-rolling
• outright refusal
• suggestions to do something else

Prevent it!

• be crystal clear with yourself about why you are choosing this activity for this group for your desired outcome
• start the session with VERY CLEAR communication around the purpose of the gathering/activity
• ease any stress by reassuring participants that you won't be getting them to do anything crazy or uncomfortable
• if you know your group, check in with "resistors" before hand and even find roles for them to keep them committed and engaged.

Deal with it!

• don't make a huge deal about it
• create a role for "an observer" or "timekeeper" and ask them to help out that way
• if you have some group agreements - you may need to re-visit them if any are broken

2.  PARTICIPANTS DON'T UNDERSTAND YOUR DIRECTIONS

• Dazed an confused looks
• Chatter - everyone asking everyone (but you) what to do
• Hopefully questions to ask for clarification

Prevent it!

• make sure YOU understand your own instructions!
• practice the activity before hand
• chunk up your directions, repeat them slowly step by step and ask for a thumbs up as you go along

Deal with it!

• stop and start again.
• find out if anyone DID understand and have them help you explain
• give an example, role play or demonstrate
• whatever you do, try not to get frustrated, don't take it personally and DON'T make the participants feel dumb (that will always end in disaster)

These are adapted from author Brian Cole Miller, who, I'm sure has experienced these challenges.  Have you?  Tell us what you did to deal with them! Comment please, we'd love to swap stories!

Why bother with group agreements?

Worth taking the time for, developing group agreements (aka guiding principles or ground rules ) can be a facilitator's wild card to move a group towards great work and away from falling to pieces.

Let's be honest, many groups say the following classic excuses NOT to create group rules:

"We know each other, we don't need to have rules."

"Boring... we know what they will be...respect, listen, don't interrupt...why bother rehashing what we already know?"

"We are too rushed."

Time for a pradigm shift.  Time to re-define what group agreements and the process of creating them can actually do for you and your group.

#1 Group agreements are public commitments to each other in the collaborative effort. Imagine the shift in attitutdes and behviours when people set an intent to be responsible for their own reactions and level of participation... and then say it out loud! Perhaps this would actual mean that people would stay engaged, stay off their cell phones and generously share their ideas - all without having to be asked!  They act as a reminder that participants need to handle their own feelings/reactions/learning to be accountable. 

#2  Group agreements are also the get out of jail free card if interactions do get tense. As a group member or facilitator, having written agreements can be used to remind those who slip into less than agreeable behaviours (side talking, rolling eyes, accusatory or inflammatory statements, ect.) that it is not ok.  Let's hope your group never goes there but trust us, going through the process of creating group agreements can PREVENT negative behaviour as well as SAVE you when all hell breaks loose.

Any stories about group agreements - when they worked and when they didn't? We'd love to hear from you.

Watch for a future blog on WHAT CAN GO WRONG IN A GROUP - how to prevent it (if you can) or how to deal with it head-on!

Related Blogs
Turning Cantakerous into Cooperative
Derailed by Group Dynamics

Collaboration Trap: M-O-N-E-Y

There are three big, heart-stopping, "watch-your-step" traps to avoid when building community. Attempts at coordination, cooperation and collaboration can take a turn south when these three elements are neglected. Learned from both experience (good and bad) as well as what we discovered from research and many interviews over the course of writing Raising the Village, the three traps are… money, burn out and territorial issues.

This week, lets look at the power of the green stuff (or gorgeous colourful cash in Canada). 

Money can be a difficult subject for many people to talk about. When we are referring to funds that support community, it often gets politicized and interlocked with power and influence. In the world of community not-for-profits, we don’t want it to be, but one of the biggest threats to sustained collaborative relationships is money.  Most social programs and services are funded in a patchwork way, stitched together from a variety of sources: government, charities, foundations, grants, local businesses, and consumers. Funding opportunities are usually created and distributed with narrow deliverables and strings attached.  

People either whine too much about money or don’t whine enough and take on a "make do," limiting attitude. Some people act irrational when money is dangled in front of them. How many people have experienced the end of the fiscal year rush when one-time only “pots of money” are grabbed at by organizations, using the trendy need or theme of the day or who you know?  The inconsistency of funding opportunities and allocation unavoidably creates the perception that funding is unpredictable and unfair. This perception feeds into the panic about funding.

Raising the Village Consulting helped set up one group process in which the agencies who were submitting a proposal to a funding competition were required to sit in a room with all the other organizations asking for money. While a tad awkward at times (!!) – proponents shared their ideas with passion rather than secretly submitting them. The entire group had the pleasure of hearing the many fantastic ideas and... at the end of the evening many of the proposals changed because they all heard the true priorities that lay beneath the proposals. Agencies that typically would have kept to themselves were inspired to engage with new partners. The excitement of how to help each other's great ideas was palpable. For example, two proposals were so similar that the agencies involved said, "lets do this together" and decided to submit a joint proposal – saving a ton of money and increasing the likelihood that they would both get a piece of the proverbial pie. Another organization said, you don't need to ask for "x" - we'll give that to you for free!

This sort of process takes practice and a huge dose of trust. Our hope is that processes like this can replace traditional funding competitions more often. We also believe strongly that community collaboratives can play a strong role in shaping community priorities, allocating community dollars and maximizing the use of the limited money out there.

Village Raising Question:

What are your tips to help AVOID the money trap when working in community?

RTV#41 The Devil's Advocate

A Year of Raising the Village. Week #41 – The Devil's Advocate

For nearly 4 centuries, when an individual became a candidate for sainthood in the Roman Catholic Church, decision makers relied on the Advocatus Diaboli, or devil's advocate, to investigate all the negative aspects of the candidate's life and their work. The idea was that with a thorough investigation that uncovered all the unfavorable information for the Church leadership, the decision making process would be better informed.


A lone dissenter in an otherwise unanimous group may be enough to generate more creative and complex thinking within the entire group. The question is - are devil's advocates (essentially pretend dissenters) just as effective? Authors of the book Yes! - Goldstein, Martin and Cialdini, share that there is conflicting evidence about how helpful the devil's advocate approach is.

On one hand, studies showed that a real dissenter is more persuasive as the group sees the arguments as more valid than the devil's advocate.   With a real dissenter, the group searches to understand what makes the dissenter believe what they believe in order to broaden their perspective.

At the same time, other findings support that experience with devil's advocates also strengthen confidence in decisions because the group believes that they have considered, and subsequently dismissed, all possible alternatives. In addition, practicing with a devil's advocate may help a group's climate to become more open where opposing views are accepted so that the safety for true dissenters is higher and they speak up.

Village Raising Question

What do you think? What has your experience been with using devil's advocates in a group decision making process?


Try the RTV Know it Design Experience to learn more about leading a great group.  We offer a customized process designed to help you get clear on your goals AND find the process to enhance the goal. Apply for our first free scholarship now: ( APPLY HERE!!!!) . All applications are due by October 15th at midnight PST. We’ll announce the winner on Monday, October 24th right here on our blog.

RTV #33 - Turning Cantankerous into Cooperative!

The glass is half full AND half empty!

A Year of Village Raising, Week #33. Turning Cantankerous into Cooperative.

It's a dangerous thing to look at community building through glasses so "rose coloured" that the complexities of human nature is dulled down to an insipid, pleasant monotone. People are COMPLICATED and working with people is COMPLEX! In your village-raising activities, keep your eyes wide open for personalities, characteristics and quirks that make life more interesting, and may create a little more work!

"Difficult people" is a common label used in group facilitation resources. We cringe when we hear that. Similar to parenting, it is the behaviour that might be difficult, not the person! Taking the time to understand why the behaviour is coming across as difficult is one of the keys to turning cantankerous into cooperative!

Think of someone that comes across as confrontational, disagreeable and contrary (at least sometimes!).  Ask yourself these questions to uncover their cooperative sweet spot.

1. Start with yourself - how are you coming across? Are you being clear? Are you threatening the status quo in a way that makes change scary? Are you consistently approachable, equitable and transparent? What is it about you that could be a trigger for this behaviour?

2.  Is the person in over their head? Is the behaviour a defensive mask of a lack of confidence and/or ability? Is there a way to offer training opportunities or group learning that evens the playing field?

3. Consider the strengths of the person, are they being used? Are the being used at appropriate times?  (first question: do you even know their strengths?)

In our travels, we have found that people who have amazing critical thinking skills, or those who are deliberative about risks or those who are involved to work, not to make friends often come across as "difficult" to others who are more idea driven, action eager and glass half-full. Make sure that there is a shared understanding of the various stengths that people bring, and USE them...otherwise, you'll find people fighting the process to try to get some kind of contribution in at all cost.

4.  A group check-in might be in order! Is the group's direction on the same track as when people first got involved? Or has it evolved and left some people out?

5. Is the difficult behaviour actually not difficult at all - but adding a dose of healthy conflict, richness, depth and diversity of thinking? If so, yet people are feeling "bothered" by the behaviour, it might be a time to shake things up. Don't allow group-think to alienate those that have the courage to think differently!

So raise your half-empty and half-full glass up to healthy conflict that keeps community builders on their toes!

Be a Mischief-maker

Be a Mischief-maker!
Photo Copyright Tammy Dewar

We are huge Seth Godin fans. His little nuggets of counter-intuitive thinking evoke something deeply motivating and, to be honest, uncomfortable. His opinions shoot out like little burrs that get stuck in the brain and, frankly, bug us until we translate his “business” and “marketing” focused brilliance into something that is relevant as community developers.

His book “Tribes” appealed first because of the title with it’s very village-like sound.  For the first two/thirds, we found it validating and aligned with our penchant towards change and innovation; it was like preaching to the converted. By the time we got to the last 100 pages we were feverish with anticipation to sink our teeth into something.  He did not disappoint.

After closing the book we were determined to be more of a mischief-maker than I ever was before. He convinced us that leadership requires more bravery and if we want to change things, improve things and create a better future…we simply have to do things differently than what has been done before.

“If you are not over the top, you’re not going to have any chance at all of making things happen.”  (pg 86)

When we look around at the work done in the area of the early years and the people who have done the work, we want to celebrate the consistent, focused, caring diligence of these individuals who GET it (that our society can prevent many social issues by investing in quality early years for children). We are also compelled to shout out a call to action: Let’s not work our tails off to maintain the status quo! 

Usually fear gets in the way of positive change. Along with fear of the unknown (which takes a little confidence) there is the fear of being criticized. Lets not worry about potential criticism when we make great things happen. Lets reframe criticism as an earned “ badge of honour” because it means we have blown away people’s expectations. Let’s raise a little mischief and start being remarkable.

Village Raising Question:

How can you create something that critics will criticize because it challenges the status quo?

Creating An Elephant Friendly Zone.

If given the choice would you choose six big or six small elephants? Your response may depend on whether you are recruitment staff for a circus or safari expedition or thinking of elephants in the meeting room. Many of us have heard, and may have even used, the phrase elephants in the room -the issues, comments, questions or topics that people don’t want to say out loud for various reasons. Perhaps words are unspoken due to perceived conflict, a clash of personalities, or a moment of self doubt in your own knowledge and power. Essentially elephants are THINGS NOT SAID.

So what does the size of elephants have to do with anything? A colleague of ours once asked us if we would choose six big or six small elephants. She said- there is always going to be elephants but we can decide on the size of the elephant. The bigger the elephants the less space in the room. We couldn’t agree more (thanks Cathy). Now take a moment to literally picture elephants increasing in size before your very eyes. If elephants are not spoken and instead given time to grow in size – how would people move in a room? How would people feel free and open to focus and concentrate on the important work of Raising the Village?

The objective is NOT to have an “elephant free zone” but to create a small elephant friendly zone if you will. Decreasing the size of elephants can be supported by the group facilitator AND the group.

Responsibility of the facilitator(s) is to:

• be aware of when energy changes in the room, watch for change in body language
• acknowledge what is witnessed and bring it out in the room for clarity
• speak the unspoken question or concern
• guide the conversation with an open principle
• provide various ways for elephants to cleanse themselves (i.e. provide a written evaluation sheet asking participants to share any elephants, posting a sheet on the meeting room wall, or maybe it’s repeated use of the language and concept – given that the concept lands well with the group).
  

Responsibility of the participant’s is to:

• speak directly to any personal elephants – issues and feelings- rather than “side talk” or after meeting talk. Bring those elephants forth- you’ll be amazed at how “speaking your truth” in an open way benefits the whole group.
• voice any elephants they notice herding in the room
• ask for a process to bring up elephants in the room
• celebrate those that speak up – see their opinions as value-added to the group growth

Village Raising Question:
Creating an elephant friendly zone takes courage, insight, and perhaps a desire to walk on the “wild side”. What are your ideas for welcoming elephants into the room?