Schuman S. - The IAF Handbook of Group Facilitation (2005)(en)

empathic understanding, and genuineness goes a long way in making this job easier and the outcomes more successful. The group becomes more engaged and open, and the members feel cared for, progressing to a performing stage of development faster than with a facilitator who does not display these characteristics.

Understanding personality styles has other potential benefits as well: facilitators can judge whether they are a suitable match for a client. Despite the notion of maintaining a balance, clashes of personality, in conjunction with other issues of power and culture, make it much harder to have an effective ongoing relationship. Understanding personality acts as a measure to the facilitator on whether to proceed.

Finally, an understanding of personality can help a facilitated group move forward effectively. If all those in the group know their particular strengths and those of their colleagues, they can develop their planning accordingly. For some personalities, working with people with similar temperaments is ideal. Others want to network with a variety of people with different styles. Some are natural idea people but get impatient if action does not occur quickly. Others are excellent at looking at how decisions made in the group will fit with priorities in the larger organization. Having these ways of operating made transparent to all often improves group functioning and helps build cohesiveness and ability to function positively as a team.

The issue of personality inventorying raises two important questions. Is there time in a facilitation to add yet another item to the agenda? And if the facilitator is not a psychologist or does not have a background in personality assessment, what can she use? My experience with the first question is that taking thirty minutes at the beginning of work with a group saves more time than it uses, based on later group effectiveness. The second answer is a little more complicated. The Myers-Briggs Type Indicator and the DISC are wonderful instruments, but both can be time-consuming to administer, score, and use the results for the purposes described, including generating an applied understanding by participants. In addition, the instruments should be administered by someone trained and certified in their use. If I facilitate a group that will be together for a long period and if time is not a limiting factor, I will choose one of these. However, most often I do not have that luxury.

As a result, when a group will be together for only a short time, the facilitator might use a simple and quickly administered instrument. There are many commercial ones available that fit these criteria. Among those most readily available are the Keirsey Temperament Sorter (Keirsey and Bates, 1984) based on the Myers-Briggs,

Facilitation: Beyond Methods

39

True Colors (Miscisin, 2001), and What Color Is Your Personality? (Ritberger, 1999). In addition, Linda Vogelsong and I have created an easily used instrument, Four Seasons, which appears in Appendix 3A at the end of this chapter. Although it does not claim to assess personality types, it is useful for helping a group understand the resources that members bring to it.

Difficult Behaviors

When working with individuals, every facilitator is likely to see difficult behaviors emerge. Some go as far as to say that all of us have a “difficult person” hiding inside waiting to emerge. That being said, individual problem behavior poses serious challenges and opportunities for the facilitator. The challenges are to identify what has triggered the behavior, understand the form it is taking, and not be exploited by it. The opportunity is to respond in a way that provides for growth of the individual and the group. There are many descriptions of these archetypal problem behaviors in the literature and of ways of dealing with them (see Exhibit 3.2). The problem is that the behaviors tend to be more complex than the overt behavior would indicate and are inherently difficult for facilitators.

Where possible, identifying the situation that is triggering the behavior is a first step. In many cases, it is the facilitation experience itself. Since facilitation often leads to change, it may be perceived as threatening. Some personality types have more difficulty with change than others. However, a person’s response to change goes beyond personality; it involves the person’s expectations regarding survival within the organization and imagined outcomes. Consider the following case study:

An organization hires a facilitator to assist in what they regard as needed change. In the group is Sally, a senior executive who pays lip-service to the change effort but through her behavior in the group continually blocks efforts to plan the change. She pressures subordinates who wish to move forward with changes to maintain the status quo, does not complete work she has agreed to do for the group, and disrupts group meetings with whispered conversations to peers.

Picture a meeting with Sally as a participant. For the facilitator, the first action should be internal, that is, he should not allow himself to be triggered by Sally’s behavior by varying his facilitation efforts or in focusing on one individual’s behavior. The key to dealing successfully with the problem behavior is formulated action as opposed to reaction or ignoring the behavior.

40	The IAF Handbook of Group Facilitation

Exhibit 3.2

Describing and Addressing Difficult Behaviors

Behavior	Description	Facilitator Approach
Hostile	Although these people	The Tanks respond best to “I”
Aggressives	seem to be loud and	messages and use of their
	angry, they fall into three	names. This means that the
	categories. These include	facilitator starts almost each
	the Tanks, who are char-	sentence with their name and
	acterized by being loud	says, “I’m really concerned
	and aggressive, attacking	with [whatever the behavior
	both behavior and people.	is and its impact on the
	Next are the Snipers, who	group].“ Saying, “You did
	take aim at an issue and	this,” is a challenge to this
	shoot at it, but often	behavioral type, but having
	behind the backs of others	the facilitator own the prob-
	so they can hide. Finally,	lem often makes for good
	there are the Rockets.	outcomes. Snipers, once iden-
	These are people who	tified, need to have specific
	totally explode, often	examples of their behaviors
	burning a fuse for awhile	described and, if culturally
	and then flying off into	appropriate, often respond
	outer space.	well to eye contact. Finally,
		regarding Rockets, all the facil-
		itator can do is to listen and
		let the fire go out. No amount
		of discussion is likely to help
		until the upset is expressed,
		and then the facilitator can
		work by getting clear facts and
		then offering concrete help.

Clams		Unlike Hostile Aggressives
		who exhibit overt action,
		Clams use silence and non-
		participation. Sometimes
		it is just shyness, but other
		times it may be a way of
		acting out. They are often

Ask specific questions and wait for an answer, even if it takes several minutes.

Unfortunately, the group may feel uncomfortable and answer for this person. When talking with the Clam alone,

Facilitation: Beyond Methods

41

Behavior	Description	Facilitator Approach
Clams	unresponsive to questions	the facilitator can describe the
(continued)	and may use the discomfort	lack of participation and ask
	of others to control the	the Clam about his feelings
	group.	about the process. Again, it
		is important to wait for an
		answer. If the problem is shy-
		ness, the individual might be
		encouraged to run a movie
		in his or her mind and then
		describe it. This often takes
		some of the pressure off and
		increases this person’s comfort.
		However, if the same quiet
		symptoms indicate a passive-
		aggressive behavior, it is
		important to have a full dis-
		cussion of the behavior and
		the potential implications
		for the group.

Super		Facilitators often love
Agreeables		having Super Agreeables
		in a group. They promise
		to do whatever is needed
		and praise the results of
		the group. Unfortunately,
		they rarely follow through
		on what they promise
		but do come up with
		pleasant excuses for their
		lack of action.

These people need to be called on their behavior and held accountable. However, it will depend on the nature of the role of the facilitator if they are the appropriate person to take on the task. Some groups will have team leaders or people hierarchically responsible for the group’s performance, and this is behavior that should be turned over to them. At the same time, depending on the maturity of the group, pressure may come up within the group. The facilitator’s role then is to ensure that any upset is directed to performance and does not become personal.

42	The IAF Handbook of Group Facilitation

Behavior	Description	Facilitator Approach
Super		Again, depending on the
Agreeables		group’s maturity, this is often
(continued)		an excellent time to visit or
		revisit group norms

The		Carcinogens are people
Carcinogens		who complain all the time.
		They not only decry the
		people and the process
		involved, but they have the
		skill and ability to spread
		their negativity to other
		members of the group.

Although discussing the situation in private with the individual may be helpful, this is the single most destructive type of behavior a group can experience. It is often best for all concerned if the person be encouraged or asked to leave the group. Too often, people put up with the behavior despite the negative impact. (As we will discuss below, even this apparently difficult behavior can have a positive effect on the group and the organization in terms of learning and growth.)

The Experts		As the name implies,
		this individual puts on
		the appearance that he
		or she already has the
		knowledge and expertise
		to solve whatever prob-
		lems or tasks the group is
		dealing with. Sometimes
		they do, in fact, have a lot
		of knowledge; other times
		they have little but use it
		strategically to look good.

The way to deal with the expert depends on the subcategory of behavior. For the “expert” who is like a hot air balloon, it is easy to stick in

a pin by asking for detailed expansion of what he or she is talking about and making it available to the group. That type of expert deflates easily; this behavior is often just a way of responding to personal insecurity. The Expert who

Facilitation: Beyond Methods

43

Behavior	Description	Facilitator Approach
The Experts		really does know a great deal
(continued)		is much more difficult. Build-
		ing on this knowledge as a
		foundation, putting him or her
		in charge of gathering more
		information, or channeling
		the existing knowledge pro-
		ductively for the group is a
		challenge.

The	These are people who
Indecisives	cannot or will not make
	a decision, something
	very difficult in a group
	where participation and
	agreement are often keys
	to success. Behind the
	indecisiveness is a desire
	to avoid hurting other
	people’s feelings and/or
	low self-esteem, which
	makes sitting on a fence
	an easier choice than
	making the wrong decision.

First, find out what is on the Indecisive’s mind, and then facilitate a conversation on both possibilities and implications. Once a decision is reached, give personal support.

Next, the source of the behavior needs to be investigated. Since this was a longterm planning effort, the facilitator was able to talk to Sally individually and to her boss. It turned out that Sally had a combination of issues that had grown because her company had not acted on them. Her behavior originated from the belief that her organization did not need to change and that she was concerned that she would lose power if it did. When she started showing blocking behavior in other arenas, which had been reported to the CEO, it turned out that her company had no history of confronting personnel problems among executives. Some people were afraid of Sally, and the CEO was concerned about losing a valued contributor, so nothing had been done.

44	The IAF Handbook of Group Facilitation

When the facilitator has some understanding of the problem, he has the responsibility to take action. The action can take several forms. The first needs to be expressing concerns about the behavior directly to Sally. From psychology, we can apply transactional analysis (Berne, 1961), where we learn that the conversation must be an Adult-Adult transaction. To get a reasoned and nondefensive response from Sally, the facilitator needs to be as objective as possible in reporting observations and concerns and encourage responses and agreement. The facilitator should use “I” messages in reporting his observation to avoid blame, and this can take a couple of forms.

From an appreciative inquiry approach (Cooperrider and Dutton, 1999), the facilitator might take Sally through the following steps:

1.Ask Sally when in the past she had been in a similar situation and felt that it had gone well.

2.Ask her to examine her role and how she contributed to the success. Inquire about her wishes for this facilitation process if it could be as successful.

3.Get her to come up with her wishes for how she would be able to both help the facilitation effort in the future and deal with the identified difficult behavior.

From a mediation point of view, the same situation might proceed differently beginning with an objective overview of the concern, moving to an identification of the facilitator’s feelings about the situation, and inviting the same from Sally. Next, the facilitator could ask what is needed to overcome the identified issue and share his view. Finally, Sally is asked to identify her needs and desired outcomes, with the goal of reaching agreement.

If the behavior does not change, the next step is to discuss the concerns in as objective a way as possible within the group. This will provide the members with an opportunity to set norms to overcome the concerns. The group needs to feel safe for this to occur. The same format for discussion as was illustrated for use with Sally can be used with the group. If this is viewed as too risky or if it is done and does not change behavior, the facilitator’s responsibility may be to describe the behavior to the person to whom he is reporting, depending on agreements made with the client when the facilitation is contracted for.

In each of these interventions, there is the opportunity for change and growth starting with the individual, moving to the group, and eventually to the organization.

Facilitation: Beyond Methods

45

Essentially, the facilitator has to check his own reaction, identify the difficult behavior and its cause, if possible, and then act discreetly and objectively, beginning at the source.

Group Development

We have thus far examined personality and behavior that affect the group but come from the individual. Group dynamics are separate issues that have a potential impact on the process track. In this section, we look at some of those dynamics as well as techniques that will help smooth the journey of the group.

Three of Bion’s principles can affect the facilitation: dependency, pairing, and fight or flight. Dependency is what can happen when a group believes that it cannot function without the facilitator. Instead of being seen as someone who gives power to the group, the group tries to pass the power to the facilitator. This is not surprising since so many people are used to a hierarchical structure, where the power does in fact reside with the person who wields the pen (or marker). Pairing and grouping do not refer to relationships that people had prior to their participation in the group but rather develop as a product of the group work. More often than not, the pairing or grouping is by gender and, at least in theory, is about alliances being formed to define positions of power. Finally, fight or flight is about our natural response to stress. When pressure builds in the group, some would rather leave; others turn on members of the group or the facilitator.

In each of these naturally occurring conditions, the facilitator has a chance to move the work of the group forward by raising them as a basis for discussion. That transparency builds trust and understanding and provides reassurance in the group’s development. Dependency issues can be lessened by beginning the facilitation with a discussion of the role of the facilitator. This can be reinforced if the issue reemerges or seems problematic. In addition, since there are times when a facilitator may step out of that role, some symbolic gesture that shows it happening (such as, “I’m now removing my facilitator’s hat for a moment”) will help the group. Simply being aware that pairing and grouping will occur is usually all that is needed by the group unless its appearance creates difficulties. If a fight-or-fight response shows itself in the group, it is important to diagnose its source. One potential source is the progression into Tuckman’s storming stage that certain individuals have discomfort with. Alternatively, it may have to do with pressures that the group is experiencing, such as time or task completion. Regardless, spending a few minutes paying attention to it—asking the group how they see their behavior,

46	The IAF Handbook of Group Facilitation

what feelings have been generated because of it, why they see it occurring, and what they want to do about it—lessens the pressure significantly.

Group Stages

Another aspect of group process that involves a natural cyclical flow are the stages of development of the group. Shown in Exhibit 3.3, they should be seen less as a progression from beginning to end and more a continuing and sometimes revolving cycle.

Exhibit 3.3

Tuckman’s Stages of Group Development and

Some Corresponding Facilitation Techniques

Stage	Description	Facilitation Techniques
Forming	Group members are often	Set operational ground
	overly polite. They are	rules, such as starting and
	learning about their task, the	ending meetings on time.
	process, and the role of the	Focus on the task, and
	facilitator. They are beginning	draw a rough map of the
	to develop bonds and establish	group’s schedule. Collec-
	ways in which the group will	tive agreement on how to
	operate.	function effectively overall
		will come later, but the
		facilitator should begin
		the discussion with clear
		expectations.

Storming		A product of the three areas
		described in Bion’s work
		relative to dependency,
		pairing, and fight-or-flight,
		almost every group that is
		successful will go through
		this stage and for some, such
		as our “Spring” personality
		types (see Appendix 3A), it is
		particularly uncomfortable.

This is a time for the group to reflect on what is going on, to examine the process track. It is also a time for the facilitator to give reassurance that the difficulties are normal. Finally, it is the catalyst for the third stage, norming.

Facilitation: Beyond Methods

47

Stage	Description	Facilitation Techniques
Norming	It is the group’s choice to go	As in storming, taking time
	beyond initial procedural and	away from task to deal
	ground rules created in the	with the process develop-
	forming stage in order to	ment is one of the most
	enhance performance. The	important contributions a
	group is maturing, and they	facilitator can make at this
	truly begin to own their	stage.
	uniqueness.

Performing	Work gets done, the group
	is productive, and the parts
	work well together. It is easy
	for the group to slip from this
	stage or devolve into storming.

Less needs to be done on process and more on task except to appreciate and celebrate the group’s performance.

Adjourning	There is often a feeling of
	sadness and impending loss,
	particularly in groups that
	have functioned well and
	been together over some time.

A celebratory event, encouraged by the facilitator, can become an important passage for the group by providing acknowledgment of what has been produced and as a signal for the future.

Source: Based on Tuckman (1965) and Tuckman and Jensen (1977).

The Group Newcomer

Tuckman’s work was meant to describe group functioning, but there are other considerations that should be accounted for. A group does not methodically go from the first stage through the last. It is a continuous evolution, which may mean going back to earlier stages or progressing to new ones. If a group is mature, it has developed its own equilibrium. That balance is potentially disrupted by the addition of a newcomer entering the mix. Much has been written about how the group may

48	The IAF Handbook of Group Facilitation