Group Works Pattern Language cards

Here’s a set of cards you can download for free, that can be used to help facilitate meetings, train facilitators, refresh your facilitation habits, etc. You an purchase a deck, but you can also download them for free and use as you like. The website includes a variety of ways to put them to use, and they’re even working on an app.

Group Works Deck

Boring Meetings Suck

Well, I was a little sad to see this book’s title is so close to my seminar “Meetings Shouldn’t Suck”, it nonetheless looks pretty promising: http://www.boringmeetingssuck.com/ and has a blog with lots of ongoing content….

How are my meetings? A meeting assessment tool

Hey folks,

Based on the Consensus Basics training we conducted, here’s a self-assessment tool you can use to see how good of a foundation you have for the functionality of your meetings. As always, note that these principles are really useful for any meeting – not just consensus based meetings.

Let us know if you use this and if it helped.

Group-Self-Assessment

Consensus Basics

Thanks to everyone who came out to the training we held in December. It was a great success.   Here’s a quick “cheat-sheet” overview of some consensus basics, as a Word file that you can download (Consensus-Overview) or just read on here below:

What is consensus?

a)      Decisions that are backed by full group

b)     Creative process for finding solutions that meet everyone’s needs

 

            Note that consensus refers to people’s “consent” not necessarilly full agreement with a decision. In other words “I can live with it” or “good enough”.

            Also note, you can use a consensus process without using consensus decision making, although in all cases the decision-making process should be clear.

 

Why use it?

a)      By considering everyone’s viewpoint and needs, can often reach a better solution

b)     Doesn’t alienate people

c)      Decisions are often enacted faster and with greater support

 

When should you us it?

Here are some key questions to ask when considering using consensus:

a)      Do you have the skills to make consensus work?

b)     What’s the group’s relationship to work after the decision?

c)      How accountable is the group to their decisions? How will the effectiveness of their decisions be measured?

d)     Why were the people in this group selected to be in it?

e)      Do you have a commonly agreed upon goal for your decisions?

f)       Are you open to creative or unorthodox solutions?

g)      Will consensus with this group facilitate positive change or protect the status quo?

 

4 Essential Ingredients for consensus (borrowed from Laird Schaub)

a)      Explicit, shared values and purpose for group

b)     Work appropriate for the group

c)      Willingness to engage in process (buy-in)

d)     Belief in the process

 

3 Basic responses to a call for consensus

a)      Agree – usually meaning “I can support this”

b)     Stand Aside – I can’t support this, but I won’t stop it from going forward.

Note: If this happens a lot, then it’s an indication that the group is quite divided and the consensus process may be weak.

c)      Block – This decision cannot move forward

Note: A block must be justified according to the explicit purpose and values of the group, not personal interests. Also, if a person should typically only expect to block a decision a few times in their lives. If it’s happening more than that, then a serious flaw in the process or the person’s understanding of the process must be addressed.

Weighted Voting

This is useful when there are concerns about either A) having the ability to implement a decision or B) people expressing strong opinions without considering the real implications of implementing those opinions.

1. People are asked to vote among a variety of options. This voting can be done a variety of ways including paper or online surveys, sticky dots on flipcharts or white boards, etc.
2. People are asked to mark those votes according to some criteria such as the voters willingness to implement that decision. For example, people might mark a regular vote with a blue dot, but use a red dot to indicate that they have a burning passion to work on that item.
3. Tally the results to see what all the votes were for and which items received highly weighted votes. This can be done in a variety of ways:

• any item that got a special vote (e.g. willingness to implement) might automatically be in a category or accepted as an agreed upon action. This may require further discussion however, depending on the nature of the material. Some participants may have specific objections to certain items being acted upon.
• All votes are tallied up but special votes are given a particular weight (e.g. special votes are worth 3 regular votes). If this is the approach used, you must first consider if it’s okay for an individual highly weight all of their votes. In some cases this would be appropriate and useful information, but in other cases this wouldn’t work.

 

http://detroitfacilitationguild.wordpress.com/2011/09/20/amoeba-discussion/

Amoeba Discussion

This is a useful way to quickly gather information and conduct discussion on a topic while getting input from all participants. It also helps get input from people in a less verbal way and helps add energy to a meeting by getting people out of their seats.

CONS: doesn’t always worked in tight spaces or places with fixed furniture. Also can cause problems for people with mobility disabilities.

1. Tell people that for this part of the meeting, they should move around at any time to show their opinion. They should feel free to move at any time to show any changes in their opinion in the course of the discussion.
2. Ask someone to state an opinion on the topic at hand.
3. Ask that person to stand in a particular place in the room and ask others to move to stand closer to or farther from that person depending on how much they agree with that opinion.
4. Ask someone who is standing still or standing far away from that last opinion to state their opinion.
5. Define a location in the room for that opinion (possibly where that person is already standing) and remind people to move as they see fit to represent their opinion in relation to these different options.
6. Summarize or ask someone in the group to summarize what pattern emerged.
7. Return to step 4 and repeat all following steps as needed.

This process may just highlight different opinions and stances on a topic and can be a useful tool for gathering information and eliciting new information and opinions. However, it can sometimes lead to decision making. As people see the emerging patterns, they may state an opinion or idea which is a modification on other stances which everyone can agree with. Suddenly instead of having 4 different camps across the room, everyone is clustered into one spot: consensus or clarity has emerged!

If trying to create agreement, then modify step 4 and ask for anyone to try to make a statement that they think everyone could agree with and repeat as needed.

Standing Line

This tool is really useful for getting people out of “talking head” mode and general increases energy in the room quickly by getting people to walk around. Also, it creates a really fast way to visually “read” what’s going on with an issue without a lot of discussion while simultaneously getting everyone’s input (including those who may not be especially verbal in meetings).

CONS: doesn’t always worked in tight spaces or places with fixed furniture. Also can cause problems for people with mobility disabilities.

1. Pose a question with two different possible answers (e.g. “Do you support this proposal: yes or no:” or “Do you think chances of this succeeding are: hi or low?” or “What’s a higher priority: economic development or environmental protection?”) or state two opinions or positions (e.g. “We should make membership free: strongly agree or strongly disagree.” or “Some people are racist vs. everyone is racist.”)
2. Assign one answer or position to one side of the room, and the other position or answer to the other side.
3. Ask meeting participants to get up and move to stand one one side or the other, or somewhere in the middle to show their opinion.
4. Note or ask participants to note what pattern emerged
5. Tell participants that they should feel free to move in real-time to show if they have any changes in opinion during the discussion – it’s important for participants to realize that their “position” on the line is welcome to change.
6. Ask clarifying questions as needed: for example, for folks standing somewhere in the middle of the line might be asked to explain why they’re standing where they are.
7. Depending on what’s said or what discussion ensues, it might be necessary to remind participants that they can move to show any changes in their opinion.
8. If useful or necessary, ask someone to define an answer or opinion which doesn’t fit on the defined line. Then define a new area on the floor to represent this opinion and ask people to move to show their affinity among these three options. Return to step 4 and continue forward as needed. Note that this step basically turns “standing line” into “amoeba discussion“.