Organisational Behaviour

Marathon event or horse race

Leave a comment

Marathon

London has just hosted a marathon. Have you noticed what every runner does at the beginning? They start their watch.

During a marathon, every competitor monitors their own progress – minutes per mile, time at five miles, personal best. For the majority, where they finish in the field is of little interest; it’s your personal time that is important – each person performing against an individual target.

Paula Radcliffe has won the event three times:  in 2002, 2003 and 2005. Her 2003 winning time of 2:15:25 remains the world record twelve years later. This year, she joined the mass of runners.

We tend to refer to it as an “event” rather than a “race” because every single person has their own unique objectives. Apart from a very small number of competitors, the most important thing about the event is not the person who crosses the finishing line first, in the fastest time.

Women, men and wheelchair competitors compete on the same course. High profile professionals, like Paula Radcliffe, run with people who may only ever do one marathon – tens of thousands of personal aims that are unique but complementary.

Not only do runners have an objective of a time, but they also have an objective of raising money to improve the lives of other people.  And, finally, the people of London, Boston, Berlin, Tokyo and New York get a free spectacle, providing valuable support to the runners – an event of great collaborative purpose.

Horse race

Let’s make a contrast between a marathon event with a horse race. In a horse race, there is almost total focus on the horse that comes first. Little interest is shown in those finishing second or third. And, what are the rest called? Dismissed as “also-rans”.

Effective organisations

Some organisations are like a horse race – accolades given to a few high profile, senior performers while little acknowledgement is given to support staff.

The more effective organisations have an approach similar to a marathon – everybody has objectives to which they are committed and against which they can measure themselves.  And everybody relies on everybody else to help them achieve their aims.

The top sales person can only be effective if the receptionist is bright and cheerful, the packer gets the goods on the truck and the driver has a full tank of fuel. Here, numerous people with individual aims are all integrated within the wider purpose of the organisation. All people are treated with respect and their individual contributions acknowledged.

So, do you work in a horse race organisation – only one winner and everybody else  an “also ran”?  Or, is it more like a marathon event?

Facilitation

Why I don’t hold a pen: The perils of pen holding

2 Comments

sharpie-flip-chart-blueI don’t hold a pen when facilitating.

The only thing I do with a pen is, when asked to do so by the participants, to put a flash mark on a card on which they want clarification or over which they disagree. The event is their event, so all contributions are written by the participants and I would never change that.

 

The criteria of a facilitated event

Let’s have a look at five criteria of a facilitated event and the impact of the facilitator using a pen.

The first criterion is that the focus is live issues. Now, those who know most about the issues faced by the unit or company are those who are actually engaged in the work. I do not have their knowledge of the company, nor do I have their experience of the culture. This means the participants must take ownership of the process.

Second, all contributions are accepted. Our job, as facilitators, is to demonstrate that every single contribution matters, regardless of apparent superficiality or humour or spelling or grammar – let the group sort that out. Let the participants assume responsibility for the success of the activity.

Third, not only are all contributions accepted but all contributions are equal. Regardless of seniority, ability to shout, velocity of your vehicle – your contribution will be considered. Standing at the front, holding a pen, is about power and inequality and that is contrary to the philosophy of facilitation.

Fourth, ownership of contributions and discussion is with the participants. Ownership is firmly given to the group from the start – it’s their event, their issues. Every person has a pen and access to cards. Individuals will see their contributions, in their own handwriting, visible to all, posted on the boards. They will see how each of their cards, and those of their colleagues, contribute to the progress of the group.

Fifth, a well facilitated event is phased, participants see progress from the start to the final agenda item: action. The output is action to which all have contributed and to which all are committed – they have created their own future.

The impact of the interfering facilitator

If you hold a pen and write contributions from the group, there is a temptation to edit or paraphrase. You may feel that they have used too many words, it’s unclear to you, it sounds like jargon, you can’t see the relevance. This is not our responsibility. It is arrogant to think that we know better. If there is any editing or paraphrasing, it should be done by the participants because they own the contributions.

Altering in any way, for whatever reason, something a participant wishes to contribute is contrary to the principles of facilitation. It disempowers the OLYMPUS DIGITAL CAMERAindividuals and it elevates the facilitator beyond their authority. Remember: there is no higher authority than the group.

If an individual has strong feelings about something, writing it themselves, in their own words, is very satisfying. If you then suggest editing that contribution, they will not be happy. Also, you risk losing the vivid, powerful and colloquial nature of their idea.

A final point on the facilitator damaging the process by interfering. If you alter an individual’s contribution in any way, for any reason, then everyone will follow your example – you will have lost the commitment of the group.

That’s why I don’t carry a pen. And don’t you be tempted either.

Facilitation

Re-establishing facilitation as an effective activity: 1. The current state

1 Comment

The big questions

I feel I need to start this blog by addressing the central issue: what exactly is facilitation?

I am writing a book on the subject, so have recently been researching what others think. One frequent lament of facilitators is: “What do you say when people ask you: ‘What exactly do you DO?’”

And the next most frequent question is: “How can I convince senior managers of the benefits of facilitation?”

The current state

I agree that it may be difficult to explain what facilitation is and how to sell it. But, it seems to me, those asking these questions, do not themselves understand what facilitation really means. No wonder they fail to convince other people.

For example, many books and articles on facilitation start in identical fashion – by going to the dictionary. Dictionaries do have a purpose – they can help when learning a foreign language. But trying to establish the meaning of a concept from a dictionary is like claiming to understand a person’s life and character by reading their tombstone.

So, what does the dictionary say? The definition you will generally find is “to make it easy, possible or less difficult.”

Not only is this unhelpful, but it is misleading, if not palpably wrong. In no way does this explain facilitation. You might as well say “I’m good at making tea.” Focusing on “making it easy”, appears to me to place the emphasis too much on support and not enough emphasis on challenge: avoiding disagreement and providing comfortable chairs, good pens, still and fizzy bottled water, mints, soft music….

You think I’m joking?

One facilitation blog I contribute to, asked a question about what a facilitator should look for when selecting a venue. After a string of suggestions, one person responded with:

Hey everyone, I am surprised no one mentioned anything about toilets! Have spacious, clean and well ventilated toilets does make a difference, and significantly add to the comfort of the atmosphere.

Great posts up there, can’t wait to read more.

And this is how the word is used:

“Next week I am facilitating a time management course”
“I have to facilitate a coaching session with someone tomorrow”
“I am thinking of facilitating a career move.”

Books on the topic refer to “learners” and “trainees”; to “training” and “presentations.” Using participatory techniques does not make your intervention facilitation.

These references are to a process that does not focus on the work itself – not the organisation’s services, staff, clients, suppliers, nor its procedures. I am going to be blunt: this process remains superficial. It is pretend, not real. It misrepresents the role of facilitation.

So, this is where I find facilitation positioned: spread so thinly over any human activity involving communication and decisions, that it has lost all meaning. No wonder people struggle to explain what they do; no wonder they fail to sell the benefits to managers.

Before presenting my ideas to a wider audience in a book, I want to explore them here, on this blog and with your help.

My aim is to re-establish the central purpose and reputation of this effective and powerful activity, to distinguish it from other processes such as training, coaching, running a meeting or acting as an MC at a darts competition.

engage // collaborate // commit