Zumeta: Mediators as facilitators

MEDIATORS AS FACILITATORS

ACR ANNUAL CONFERENCE OCTOBER 10, 2014

CINCINNATI, OHIO

PRESENTER:

ZENA D. ZUMETA, J.D. MEDIATION TRAINING & CONSULTATION INSTITUTE

330 E. LIBERTY, SUITE 3A ANN ARBOR, MI, 48104

(734) 663-1155/FAX: (734) 663-0524 EMAIL: [email protected]

WEBSITES: www.learn2mediate.com, www.collaborateatwork.com

© Zumeta, 2014 Mediator as Facilitator

AGENDA

What is Facilitation Types of Meetings to Facilitate Facilitation vs. Mediation Mediators as Facilitators Basic vs. Developmental Facilitation What a Facilitator Does Stages of Facilitation Issues in Facilitation Facilitation Techniques


TABLE OF CONTENTS

AGENDA............................................................................................................................ 2 TABLE OF CONTENTS.................................................................................................... 3 DEFINITIONS OF FACILITATION................................................................................. 4

Comparison of Mediation and Facilitation ..................................................................... 5 FACETS OF FACILITATION........................................................................................... 6 THE BASIC FACILITATION PROCESS......................................................................... 7 KEY INTERVENTIONS OF A FACILITATOR ............................................................ 10 KEY SKILLS OF A FACILITATOR .............................................................................. 11 TIPS FOR FACILITATORS............................................................................................ 12 FACILITATOR CHECKLIST ......................................................................................... 13 AGREE/DISAGREE ........................................................................................................ 14 FACILITATION TECHNIQUES..................................................................................... 15 AREAS FOR GROUND RULES..................................................................................... 17 POSSIBLE GUIDELINES FOR DISCUSSION.............................................................. 18 CONSULTATION ISSUES FOR DEVELOPMENTAL FACILITATION.................... 19 DECISION-MAKING PROCESSES IN GROUPS......................................................... 21 CONSENSUS ................................................................................................................... 22 THE PROCESS ................................................................................................................ 24 METHODS FOR STRAW POLLS .................................................................................. 25 SAMPLE SIX-STEP PROBLEM SOLVING PROCESS................................................ 26 BIBLIOGRAPHY............................................................................................................. 27

Other Facilitation Resources......................................................................................... 28 PREVENTING CONFLICT THROUGH FACILITATION ........................................... 29


DEFINITIONS OF FACILITATION

1. Facilitation is the role of assisting the group in accomplishing its goals.

2. Facilitation is the process of helping a group improve

the way it identifies and solves problems and makes decisions, in order to increase the group’s effectiveness.

TWO TYPES OF FACILITATION 1. BASIC FACILITATION

In basic facilitation, the facilitator’s role is to run a meeting, helping the group achieve the goals of the meeting.

2. DEVELOPMENTAL FACILITATION

In developmental facilitation, the facilitator’s roles are to assist the group to achieve its goals, help improve group effectiveness, and help

the group learn to facilitate itself.


Comparison of Mediation and Facilitation

AREA MEDIATION FACILITATION

GOALS Agreement Goals of the group

PROCESS Set by mediator Set by group

ROLE Neutral – fairly standard Group effectiveness – may vary widely

FORMAT Joint sessions Group meeting

Caucus Small group work

IDEA GENERATION Part of mediation process Structured techniques

GROUND RULES Set by mediator Agreed to by group

AGENDA Set by mediator Set by group IDENTIFYING

PARTICIPANTS Disputants Stakeholders

Relatively Obvious Major pre-facilitation issue METHOD OF DECISION

MAKING Interest-based negotiation Group decides, facilitator leads

PRIOR CONTACT WITH PARTICIPANTS Mediator style Necessary


FACETS OF FACILITATION

• Task What is the task that the group needs to achieve?

• Process What is the process that the facilitator will use to assist the

group in achieving its task?

• Maintenance What is the process the group and facilitator will use to treat its members, and keep up group cohesiveness and morale?

• Process Observation How will the facilitator and group monitor the group’s process

and/or progress?


THE BASIC FACILITATION PROCESS

1. Helping the group create an agenda, before or during the meeting 2. Structuring the participation of the group (helping everyone in the group feel included

and participating) 3. Facilitating the group procedures and decision - making processes 4. Providing the group memory system 5. Facilitating group maintenance 6. Process observation 7. Facilitating through the Groan Zone 8. Facilitating debriefing 1. Helping the group create an agenda, before or during the meeting Make sure there is an agenda including:

• Starting time • Ending time • Issues to be discussed, sequence of items, and person responsible for presenting

each item • Time allotted for each issue • Actions which need to be taken on each issue • Meeting procedure and decision - making method • Time for debriefing at end of meeting

2. Structuring the participation of the group (helping everyone in the group participate and feel included)

• Help the group find a norm of equal influence • Call on those who have not spoken • Reduce the speaking time of those who would dominate • Where helpful, suggest the group members speak one by one in turn

3. Facilitating the group procedures and decision- making processes The group has decided:

• Its procedures for group discussion and problem - solving • Its decision - making process

The facilitator must help the group:

• Follow the collaborative problem-solving process • Stay on point and at the right stage of the process • Bring up issues with problem statements

The facilitator should:


• Suggest agreements the group may have reached, or directions the group may need to go in

• Help move the process of the meeting forward • Restate opinions and options to neutralize and help the group move toward

resolution 4. Providing the group memory system In order for the group to have a common memory, it must be possible for each member to see what ideas the group has already considered. Most commonly groups use a flipchart and felt - tip markers. The requirements for a good memory system are that it:

• Be visible to all members of the group • Be maintained simultaneously with the group's thought process • Accurately reflect the language of the group members • Be typed up and copied for members by the next meeting as the flipcharts

appeared 5. Facilitating group maintenance In order for the group to function at its best, it must be possible for the group to work harmoniously and with some sense of order and positivity. The facilitator must assist the group in:

• Gatekeeping: inviting people to speak, or moving on to the next person • Harmonizing: calming the group, reducing tension and over - emotionalizing,

pointing out the feelings of the group or a participant • Encouraging the group: to help the group over frustrating times. Can be done by

complimenting the group, putting the frustration into perspective, helping a group recall past processes which got stalled but were ultimately successful, or talking about the benefits of staying with the process.

6. Process Observation Pointing out the way the group is working to help the group overcome a process which is not working, or improve processes that are marginally working. Working with the group to find new processes and approaches. 7. Facilitating Through the Groan Zone

a) Business as Usual -- Familiar Opinions à Decision Point b) New approach: Familiar Opinions à Divergent Zone à Groan Zone à

Convergent Zone à Closure Zone à Decision Point

Divergent Zone: Familiar Opinions Attempted Decision


Diverse Perspectives (The Agony of the) Groan Zone:

Competing Frames of Reference Confusion, Aggravation, Frustration, Disgust, Perplexity, Boredom, Anxiety, Exasperation

Convergent Zone: Shared Framework of Understanding Inclusive Alternatives Synthesis Refinements Decision Point

From Kaner, et. al, Facilitator's Guide to Participatory Decision-Making. New Society Publishers, 1996. 8. Facilitating debriefing At the end of each group meeting, there should be a 5 or 10 minute period for debriefing. The purpose of the debriefing is to allow each group member to reflect on and state how s/he is feeling about the group, the group process, or the result of the meeting. Rules:

1. Start anywhere in the group and go around to each person from there. 2. Each person can say whatever s/he wants, without censoring. 3. No one should reply to anything that is said. This is very important. 4. A time limit should be set for each person, usually 1 or 1 1/2 minutes. 5. The facilitator should time. 6. If the group agrees, anyone can "pass", or decline to say anything. 7. At the end of the debriefing, with group agreement, those who have "passed"

may choose to state something. 8. People can have more than one say with permission from the group. 9. At the end of the debriefing, the group can decide to address any issues which

have come up, either at that time or at another time. 10. Items brought up in debriefing should not be put on the flipchart except by

permission of the group.


KEY INTERVENTIONS OF A FACILITATOR

• Summarizing

what the group is currently discussing, agreements and decisions, actions.

• Clarifying what is being communicated, what the group is doing, what someone

has said, group conflicts.

• Reminding what the task is, when the group is sidetracked, when ground rules are

being violated.

• Making Connections between issues being discussed, decisions being made, goals vs. actions

being discussed.

• Moving Forward with the task, with consensus, with the agenda.

• Observing the process of the group, where things get stuck, how they get un-stuck.


KEY SKILLS OF A FACILITATOR

• Listening

• Summarizing and Clarifying

• Harmonizing

• Anticipating

• Asking Questions

• Monitoring the Group

• Monitoring the Topic

• Focusing the Group

• Keeping the Group on Task

• Debriefing the Group


TIPS FOR FACILITATORS

-Know your group: • What kind of goals are held for this group or by this group? • What kind of history has the group experienced? • What are the different needs and experience levels represented? •What kind of expectations do members have about coming together? • Are there alliances or enmities present in the group? • What, if any, norms has the group developed? - Be ready for changes: • In direction of the group ~ goals of the group • In meeting design - Test out your assumptions One of the fastest ways for a facilitator to get in trouble is to make an assessment of the situation in the group and proceed without ever checking if the assessment was a valid one. - Establish goals that are clear, appropriate, and observable • How will you know if a goal is accomplished, what will it look like? • Break large goals down into achievable objectives. • Don't try to build Rome in the first hour of the meeting. - Allow for breaks • The mind can contribute as long as the rear can endure - Does your meeting have a beginning, middle, and an end? Just like a speech, a meeting should have an introduction, body, and conclusion. Don't begin the thorniest or most involved problem without preparation; and don't start on it just before the end of the meeting.


FACILITATOR CHECKLIST

Yes No N/A Did the facilitator:

1. GUIDE the agenda? ____|_____|_____ 2. MOTIVATE dialogue? ____|_____|_____ 3. ENCOURAGE participation? ____|_____|_____ 4. CLARIFY when needed? ____|_____|_____ 5. PACE the meeting? ____|_____|_____ 6. IDENTIFY interpersonal communication problems? ____|_____|_____ 7. SUMMARIZE adequately when needed? ____|_____|_____ 8. MANAGE conflict effectively? ____|_____|_____ 9. TEST for consensus? ____|_____|_____ 10. SOLICIT feedback? ____|_____|_____ 11. KEEP the discussion on topic? ____|_____|_____ 12. EFFECTIVELY express group feeling? ____|_____|_____ 13. AID in establishing a good climate? ____|_____|_____ 14. HARMONIZE/bring about harmony? ____|_____|_____ 15. PROBLEM SOLVE or help problem solve effectively? ____|_____|_____


16. KEEP to the group problem solving process? ____|_____|_____

AGREE/DISAGREE

Which of the following statements about facilitation do you agree with? Why? 1. Bringing closure to the task of the group is not as important as making sure

everyone is comfortable in the group. 2. An effective facilitator never loses his or her cool with a group. 3. An effective facilitator expresses opinions to help move the group toward its

goals. 4. Building trust within a group is not the responsibility of a facilitator. 5. Effective facilitators are born with innate personality traits that allow them to

function in this role. 6. When difficult issues surface, it is best to avoid those that may tear the group

apart. 7. Sensitive issues, such as race and gender, should be handled outside of the

group, especially when the facilitator is not comfortable with facilitating the tensions that are present around these topics.

8. In some difficult situations, it is okay to leave the group and defer to another facilitator.

9. If you are an effective facilitator, personal attacks from group members will not happen.

10. A facilitator who loses control of a group is not responsible for the outcome(s).

11. A group that utilizes its own members to facilitate is not as effective as one with an outside facilitator.

12. Tracking the maintenance and function of a group should be left to an observer because the facilitator is too involved in the act of facilitating.

13. A facilitator operates from a position of authority.


FACILITATION TECHNIQUES Tools * Tools for Brainstorming Sticky notes Flipcharting Small group/large group/individual Consensus on ideas No analysis of ideas Brain mapping Tools for Analysis Affinity grouping Force field analysis Appreciative Inquiry Give me a wish Option comparison grid SWOT Is/Isn’t the Problem Tools for Narrowing Straw polls Levels of importance Multivoting Nominal group technique Option comparison grid Paired comparisons Tools for Decision-Making Consensus Voting Option comparison grid *See Kelsey and Plumb, Great Meetings! Great Results! 2004 Conflict Resolution and Disruptive Behavior in Groups Name it, validate it, write it on the flipchart, negotiate it Ignore the conflict, deal with concerns Invoke a ground rule (courtesy, one at a time, no yelling, etc.) Ask the meaning of the behavior, or the concern leading to the behavior Ask if you have understood the concern correctly Draw the person aside if possible Confront the behavior if nothing else has worked


Recording Agenda Issues Ideas Priorities Decisions Actions, deadlines, next meetings, etc. (who, what, when, where and how) Vary the color of marker in some organized way Write large and legibly Get the ideas right (check) Make sure everyone can see it Use graphics Supplies Flip chart or computer projector Sheets along the walls Sticky notes Markers Dots and stars Name tags Toys Scissors Tape


AREAS FOR GROUND RULES

1. How often to meet, place and length of meetings. 2. How to build agendas. 3. Facilitating and recording meetings. 4. Chairing of meetings, if different from #3. 5. Purpose and mission of group. 6. How group makes decisions. (Voting, consensus, Robert's Rules,

etc.) 7. Evaluation of group process and achievements. 8. Operating guidelines: Attendance, tardiness, revisiting issues and decisions,

participation in decision-making, relationship to authority structure, replacing group members, etc.

9. Discussion guidelines: Speaking, interrupting, tone, seating, passing notes, caucuses,

conflicts, etc. 10. Other ground rules as needed.


POSSIBLE GUIDELINES FOR DISCUSSION 1. Explain reasons behind statements. 2. No side conversations. Show respect for whoever is speaking. 3. No repeating things that have already been stated. 4. Listen with an open mind. 5. Seek a resolution that is comfortable for everyone. 6. If you state a problem, give a potential solution. 7. Keep the tone positive, not accusatory. 8. Be concise; no speeches. 9. Disagree respectfully but openly, not just to some people but to the whole group. 10. Do not interrupt the speaker.


CONSULTATION ISSUES FOR DEVELOPMENTAL

FACILITATION 1. Entry 2. Assessment 3. Planning and Negotiation of Intervention 4. Implementation 5. Evaluation 6. Reporting, Refinement and Review 7. Moving out of the System

OTHER POSSIBLE CONSULTING ROLES FOR DEVELOPMENTAL FACILITATORS

1. Team building 2. Training 3. Conflict Coaching 4. Mediating 5. Basic Facilitation 6. Organization Development


ISSUES IN DEVELOPMENTAL FACILITATION

1. Who is the client? Need to determine who the paying client is, and who can assist in or prevent your being successful

2. What is the problem?

Do assessment; then report back to the client for planning the intervention.

3. Training vs. intervention

DEALING WITH THE POLITICS OF ORGANIZATIONS

1. Who hired me?

2. What did they want me to do? Can I renegotiate this as we go along?

3. H.R. vs. line management

4. Management vs. supervision vs. employees

5. Does the organization really want this to be done?

6. Do I have a “champion”?

GROUP ASSESSMENT

1. Methods: Instruments Interviews Surveys

2. Goals of management and group members 3. Assessment of impediments to reaching goals of management and

group members 4. “Reading” the organization


DECISION-MAKING PROCESSES IN GROUPS

1. Authoritative decision making

Person in authority makes the decision. Pro: fast, person with most knowledge may be making the decision. Con: people below may resent the decision; person with most knowledge may not be making the decision.

2. Consultative decision making Person in authority consults with others, then makes decision. Pro: fast, but still gets knowledge and opinions from others. Con: Others may not agree; decision may not be what those with knowledge recommended.

3. Majority vote

50% plus 1 makes the decision. Pro: fast; easy to count. Con: 49% can resent the decision. May not be a thoughtful, knowledgeable decision.

4. Super-majority vote

2/3 or 3/4 makes the decision. Pro: most people agree or the decision is not made. Con: may still be a large contingent not agreeing. May not be a thoughtful, knowledgeable decision.

5. Strict consensus

All in the group must be able to live with the decision and support the decision. Pro: everyone agrees and supports; issues get thoroughly discussed. Con: takes time; may be difficult to get everyone's agreement.

6. Modified consensus

All in the group but one (or more, depending on the size of the group) must be able to live with the decision; all must support it. Pro: Strong agreement, issues get thoroughly discussed. Con: One or two people may be unhappy.


7. Attempt strict or modified consensus, then switch to modified consensus or vote.

Try to get agreement of everyone with complete discussion of issues; if that does not work, go to easier decision-making process. Pro: Complete discussion, easier decision to make. Con: still may not have complete agreement.

8. Straw polls.

A useful method to determine the amount of support for an idea in a group without committing to a formal vote. Pro: fast, easy. Con: May lead to commitment too early.

CONSENSUS Consensus is the cooperative development of a decision with the goal of

reaching a decision everyone in the group can live with. Consensus is not the same as full satisfaction. The decision should be acceptable enough so that the whole group can support it, though each individual may not love it, or even feel it is the best decision. Consensus:

• Promotes full discussion of options • Allows the full participation of everyone • Is sensitive to minority opinions and concerns • Develops groups and teams, and builds cooperation and support • Increases listening and respectfulness • Has the potential of leading to better decisions • Increases the support of decisions by the group

Challenges of consensus processes:

• Everyone speaks • Strong facilitation is necessary • The group can be dominated by one or more persons • Some people can participate less • One or a few individuals can block decision-making


TYPES OF CONSENSUS PROCESSES

Strict Consensus Everyone in the group must agree to the outcome or it is not implemented. Modified Consensus A defined number of people may disagree with the outcome and it is nevertheless implemented. This number should be decided prior to the discussion of a topic, so that the group understands how a decision is made. Combination Consensus Process The group tries once or twice for strict consensus before it makes a decision by modified consensus.


THE PROCESS 1. The group uses the problem solving process it normally uses. 2. Once the group has settled on a few ideas for discussion, each idea should be

thoroughly discussed, with maximum participation from the group. 3. When the group seems to be settling on a focus or moving toward a decision, a

straw poll should be taken to test the direction the group is going in resolving the issue.

4. If the straw poll indicates agreement, take a formal consensus. 5. A formal consensus taking is going one by one around the group with each person

indicating Yes, No, or Support. 6. If the straw poll indicates some disagreement, probe for the reasons behind each

opinion. 7. Questions helpful for a consensus process:

• What is your concern? • What changes would allow you to support this? • What are your objections? • What is it that is most important to you?

8. See if the group can meet the needs of the minority.

9. Summarize the new approach or decision.

10. Take another straw poll.

11. Take a formal consensus if appropriate.

Group Member Responses in Consensus Process

Group members may: 1. Consent, or agree to the decision. 2. Support the decision, even if they don't feel they can consent. 3. Say no, and attempt to block the decision.


METHODS FOR STRAW POLLS

1. Hands All in favor raise hands; all opposed raise hands 2. Thumbs In favor: thumb up Questions: thumb across Opposed: thumb down 3. Five Fingers One finger (not the middle -- thumb?): In favor Two fingers: Mostly in favor Three fingers: Questions Four fingers: Mostly opposed Five fingers: Opposed 4. Ten Fingers You get the idea…..

If the group cannot reach a resolution, consider the following: 1. The group may not have enough information to make a good decision. Help the group

look at getting more information. 2. See if the group wants to make a decision, even if it is not at the usual level of

acceptability. 3. The group can table the issue and come back to it later. 4. The group can agree that it will not act until the decision is more acceptable. 5. The group may be willing to do another brainstorming. 6. A resource person may be able to help look for other options, or evaluate options.


SAMPLE SIX-STEP PROBLEM SOLVING PROCESS √ 1. PROBLEM: Define the problem and Develop a Problem Statement √ 2. INFORMATION: Identify Information which would help describe the problem and its parameters √ 3. CAUSES: Identify Potential Causes of the problem √ 4. OPTIONS: Identify Possible Solutions which would satisfy all sides, and Criteria for the Best Solutions √ 5. SOLUTION: Select the Best Solution for all √ 6. IMPLEMENT/REVIEW: Implement the Solution and Review Success


BIBLIOGRAPHY Dee Kelsey and Pamela Plumb, Great Meetings! Great Results! How to Facilitate Like a Pro. Hanson Park Press, 1997,2004. Kaner, et. al, Facilitator's Guide to Participatory Decision-Making. New Society Publishers, 1996. Roger Schwarz, The Skilled Facilitator: A Comprehensive Resource for Consultants, Facilitators, Managers, Trainers, and Coaches, New & Revised, 2002, Jossey-Bass Roger Schwarz, The Skilled Facilitator Fieldbook: Tips, Tools, and Tested Methods for Consultants, Facilitators, Managers, Trainers, and Coaches, 2005, Jossey-Bass Ingrid Bens, Advanced Facilitation Strategies: Tools & Techniques to Master Difficult Situations, 2005, Jossey-Bass Alice Collier Cochran, Roberta's Rules of Order: Sail Through Meetings for Stellar Results Without the Gavel, 2004, Jossey-Bass Sandor P. Schuman (Editor), The IAF Handbook of Group Facilitation: Best Practices from the Leading Organization in Facilitation, 2005, Jossey-Bass


Other Facilitation Resources 1. International Association of Facilitators, 14985 Glazier Avenue, Suite 550, St. Paul, MN 55124 Phone: 800-281-9948 or 952-891-3541. Fax: 952-891-1800 Email: [email protected] Website: http://iaf-world.org 2. Listserv: Grp-facl Website: http://www.albany.edu/cpr/gf/ 3. IAF Linked-In Discussion Group Website: www.linked-in.com


PREVENTING CONFLICT THROUGH FACILITATION by Janice M. Fleischer and Zena D. Zumeta Friends and family members often ask us, "So, tell us what you do again? It has to do with big meetings, right?" The question is also a good one for dispute resolution professionals today, as more and more mediators are being asked to do facilitations, and there are important differences between mediation and facilitation (see Comparing Facilitation and Mediation, below). So, what is facilitation? According to Webster's New Collegiate Dictionary, "facilitate" means "to make easier." That is what facilitators do: We make it easier for people to accomplish whatever goal their meeting may have been called for. More specifically, we help people think in terms of interests, not positions. According to common definitions, by statute or otherwise, "facilitation" is: The use of a third party neutral to help multi-party work groups accomplish the content of their work by providing process leadership and process expertise. A Pre-Conflict Process This emphasis on "process" is probably the most defining difference in mediation and facilitation. In many ways, facilitation and mediation are similar, but in the most elementary way, they are drastically different: Facilitation is primarily used pre-conflict or at least pre-crystallized conflict. Think of facilitators as holistic physicians. We encourage people to call us in before any conflict has crystallized, to help avoid the conflict and have people work collaboratively toward their common goal. That doesn't mean there isn't the potential for conflict, or that pockets of conflict haven't already erupted. Although facilitation can be used in conflict situations, and therefore belongs on the conflict continuum, an important characteristic of facilitation is its use as a preventative measure. Facilitators oversee the organization and progress of meetings to alleviate as much tension as possible so that people can get past their individual agendas and get on with the group work that needs to be done. Facilitation is a transformative experience, both for the facilitator and the facilitated. We have watched stakeholders entrenched in their positions change from obstinate advocates to cooperative collaborators in a matter of months. It is as gratifying and exciting as mediation, and has an extra benefit, the fact that you, as the facilitator, have the ability to assist folks in avoiding any conflict and just getting their work done.


One essential element of facilitation is its involvement with groups, small or large, and their processes, whether they are public in nature, such as a government agency, or strictly private concerns, such as a corporate board of directors. In this regard, facilitations can range from a one-time board retreat to a public policy gathering of governmental, civic, advocacy, business and geographic or ethnic parties that meet over several months or years to accomplish its task. Similarly, the size of groups can range from as small as five people up to several hundred. That a facilitator is working with groups, and not individuals, creates distinctive dynamics, in that each type of group must be handled differently, and the convener(s) of each group may have different expectations of the facilitator. This in turn calls for unique skills and tools in consensus building (See Structured Techniques for Working With Groups) In describing the facilitation as a process, we think of a story: It has a beginning, a middle and an end. Facilitation is a story in collaboration and consensus. To facilitate, you must pay attention to the beginning (pre-meeting agenda, surveys, protocols); the middle (meeting guidelines for participants, using your skills to keep the meeting moving and on track, keeping the group memory) and the end (preparing a meeting report and follow up duties). In the beginning, the facilitator needs to meet with the convener(s) of the meeting to establish exactly what is being asked of the facilitator. Is she more of a moderator, or a leader of the group? Is he expected to run the meeting, or simply to keep a record and be a watchdog to make sure the group does not go too far afield. The possibilities are varied and should be defined immediately. This will help you as a facilitator decide if this is the type of situation you are comfortable being involved in, and how to shape the next steps, designing the agenda for the meeting and other "housekeeping" duties. It is during this part of the beginning chapter that the facilitator will discuss where the group will meet, how often, who will handle administrative functions (meeting notices, survey preparation, mail-outs, typing of group memory flip chart notes, etc.), how participation is to be determined, who will represent different stakeholder groups, decision-making protocols, whether the media should be involved, deadlines and resources for work to be done (i.e., money and time). The beginning chapter ends with the setting of the agenda, which is developed with input from the conveners as well as possible input from participants. Participant input can be obtained through mail-out surveys, telephone or personal interviews or meetings. The facilitator must know the group and the work to be accomplished before attempting to design a preliminary overall agenda for the total of the meetings as well as specific agendas for each meeting. The middle of the facilitation consists of the facilitated meetings themselves. The facilitator must structure the participation of the group by helping everyone feel included and encouraging participation. This may involve helping the group identify common


denominators goals, calling on those who have not spoken, reducing the speaking time of those who would dominate, and helping to identify who may be missing from the table as the meeting progresses. In this regard, the facilitator also ensures that group procedures are adopted and adhered to. Decision-making guidelines and protocols are developed with the group, group etiquette is discussed and accepted, discussion guidelines are agreed upon, the method of presenting theories, ideas, positions, etc., must be outlined by the group and the facilitator must obtain a "buy in" by the group. If the group has a specific "charge" - such as drafting a written recommendation to some governmental entity on a specific subject - the group will have to decide how consensus will be defined and what the priorities will be. Group 'Memory' One extremely important aspect of this chapter of the facilitation is the keeping of the group "memory." This generally consists of keeping notes of the group's activity on a flip chart, which is important both during and after the meeting. During the meeting, it provides a visual confirmation that the views of each speaker are being heard and considered by the group. After the meeting, it provides the basis for the meeting report. The flip chart can be maintained by the facilitator or a second person, which can be especially useful if the group is large. If the recording is done by a second person, though, it is important that the facilitator and recorder think similarly enough that the record-keeping is in sync with the focus of the group process. Using a flip chart is an art in itself that must be learned and practiced. At minimum, though, it must be: * visible to all members of the group; * maintained simultaneously with the group's thought process; * accurately reflect the language of the group members, and * typed and copied for the members by the next meeting as the flip charts appeared. Group Maintenance The facilitator must facilitate group maintenance. Several techniques and skills come into play here. One is "gatekeeping," that is inviting people to speak, keeping others at bay, etc. Another is "harmonizing," or calming the group, reducing tension and emotions, and pointing out the feelings of the group or of a participant. Facilitators bring attention to how a group is working, a task that must be done delicately, usually with suggestions for a different process, or for opening the discussion to suggestions for a different process. This could also just be a "heads up" that the group has


moved away from its stated discussion item and a discussion of whether it wants to continue forward or go back. These techniques require several additional skills. For one, a facilitator must pay attention to the body language of the members of the group: Are they paying attention? Do they need a break? Are there separate (and distracting) conversations going on? Is there outside noise that is interfering with the members' ability to hear what is being said? The facilitator must help and encourage the group through frustrating times. This can be done by complimenting the group, putting frustration into perspective, recalling other times the group was stalled and succeeded in moving forward, and talking about the benefits of staying with the process. Finally, the facilitator should "debrief" the group before it adjourns. This is done for 5-to-10 minutes, but allows each group member to reflect upon and state how they are feeling about the group, the group process or the result of the meeting. Like flipchart management and other aspects of facilitation, debriefing is a skill that must be learned and practiced. Tips For Debriefing a Facilitation * Start anywhere in the group and go around to each person from there * Each person can say whatever they want without censorship of any kind * No one should reply to anything that is said * A time limit should be set for each person (we suggest l-to-1.5 minutes) which should be announced and enforced by the facilitator * Anyone can "pass," or decline to say anything * At the end of the debriefing, those who passed should again be asked if they want to say something * People can have more than one turn to speak, but only with the permission of the group * At the end of the debriefing, the group can decide on when to address the issues raised * Points raised in the debriefing should not be put on the flip charts unless the group so instructs the facilitator The Report The last chapter of the facilitation story is the report recording the items covered at the meeting. It typically includes a table of contents, introduction, background, explanation of procedure, process and guidelines, as well as the transcription of all the flip-chart notes put into the context of the meeting. This is an important aspect of the process because it provides either a basis for what work will be included at the next meeting or a guide for what work must now be done by group members and by when. Some facilitated meetings do not require reports. For example, the purpose of the meetings may have been to accomplish the writing of a document as a group, and the document itself serves as the report.


Like mediation, facilitation can be an important part of a dispute resolution professional's repertoire of skills and services. But it is worth taking the time to learn the differences between the two, and to master facilitation as a unique process that can be used to help clients. A Comparison of Facilitation and Mediation Shows Some Similarities, But Also Some Important Differences Facilitation and mediation may be compared along several dimensions, beginning with the two main differences: goals and process. Goals: In mediation, the goal is to get an agreement. In facilitation, it is to assist a group in accomplishing the "content of their work," whatever that may be. Familiar examples include a vision statement and plan for implementation of a depressed area of a city, a strategic plan with action items for an organization, the preparation of recommendations to a decision making body, an effective retreat, solving a particular problem and writing regulatory rules. Process: Mediation typically follows a fairly set process that is determined primarily by the mediator, but which is dependent on the type of mediation (e.g. family, civil, community) and style of the mediator (e.g. facilitative, evaluative, transformative). The outcome is determined by the clients. In facilitation, however, the group (or representatives of the group) determines the process as well as the outcome. Neutrality: Neutrality is a central tenet of mediation. While the facilitator certainly cannot be biased, strict neutrality is often an irrelevant issue, since many groups do not have "sides" and are not resolving long-standing conflicts. Open Sessions: In both mediation and facilitation, the neutral will use me open or plenary session (often called a joint session in mediation) to gain and share information, encourage communication, promote problem-solving between the parties and prioritize issues. In facilitation, the open session may also be used for the actual drafting of documents. Caucus vs. Small Group Work: In mediation, a private session with one party or parties may be used to develop support and trust, explore settlement options Or communicate privately about the strengths and weaknesses of a party's case. In facilitation, small groups are often used to accomplish a specific task, often for the larger group, but just as often may not be necessary. Generation of Options/Ideas: In mediation, the parties propose solutions and options with the mediators guidance and additions. In facilitation, the parties may be led through a series of structured techniques - brainstorming, nominal group technique, etc. - to solicit ideas and generate and prioritize options. The facilitator does not become involved in the creation of options or ideas, but rather is limited to the role "record keeper."


Agenda Design and Ground Rules: As the owner of the process, the mediator will set the agenda and ground rules after the parties have identified the issues. In facilitation, the facilitator assists in designing an agenda with input from the convener(s) and/or the group, which owns the process. Invoking Ground Rules: In both facilitation and mediation there are difficult parties. In mediation, the mediator might call a caucus or invoke a ground rule to change the behavior of that party. In facilitation, the group invokes the ground rule, or the facilitator might pull the person aside at a break to talk with him/her. Identifying the Parties: One important difference in the two processes is the identification of the parties. In most mediations, who the parties are is generally fairly obvious. In facilitation, just as in public policy mediations, identification of all stakeholders is an important part of the pre-facilitation process, especially if consensus-based decision making is the method to be used. Methods of Decision Making: In mediation, the process of decision making is interest-based negotiation and compromise. In facilitation, the group decides the process of decision making and the facilitator helps to lead it. Role of the Neutral: In mediation, the role of the mediator remains constant, as a catalyst for change in the parties' communication. In facilitation, roles of the facilitator may vary greatly depending on the needs and desires of the group or its conveners. Prior Contact with Parties: In mediation, contact prior to the actual beginning of mediation with the parties and their attorneys is a matter of the mediator's style. In facilitation, prior contact with the convener(s), stakeholders and others is a necessity to properly plan the meeting and understand the goals of the meeting. Biography Zena D. Zumeta, J.D., is president of Mediation Training &Consultation Institute and The Collaborative Workplace in Ann Arbor, Michigan. She has been a mediator and facilitator since 1981. She is a past president of the Academy of Family Mediators and the Michigan Council for Family and Divorce Mediation and a past national board member of SPIDR. She is a nationally known trainer of mediators, and provides training, facilitation and consulting in organizations and workplaces. She has presented on mediation and facilitation at AFM, SPIDR and NCPCR conferences, and on mediation and collaborative processes at the International Association of Facilitators. Email: [email protected] Janice Fleischer, J.D., is currently the Coordinator for the South Florida Office of the Florida Conflict Resolution Consortium, a university based program established by the


Florida legislature whose mission is to provide facilitation and mediation services in the public policy arena.

Ms. Fleischer practiced law until 1990 when she became a Florida Supreme Court certified mediator and joined the Mediation/Arbitration Division of the 11th Judicial circuit. After leaving the Mediation/Arbitration division, she mediated independently for the court system. She teaches mediation at the University of Miami School of Law and is Chair of the Southern Division of the Florida Mediator Qualifications Board, a board that hears grievances filed against mediators. She is immediate Past-President of the Florida Association of Professional Family Mediators and is Region III Vice President of The Society of Professionals in Dispute Resolution, (SPIDR) an international dispute resolution organization. Additionally, she has served as faculty for the National Judicial College. Ms. Fleischer is a frequent presenter and speaker at state and national conferences, including AFM, the Academy of Family Mediators, SPIDR, and the Florida Dispute Resolution Center Annual Conference. Ms. Fleischer is a primary trainer in public policy, facilitation, mediation and interpersonal conflict resolution. She is a member of the ABA and is a Vice-Chair of the Legislative Committee of the ABA Section of Dispute Resolution.

Zumeta: Mediators as facilitators

Education

Transcript of Zumeta: Mediators as facilitators