Key Insights #1: Facilitated Purpose and Process
I have recently gotten a lot of work and good friend of mine, Nate Scwhagler, suggested that I capture my key insights from each job. This is the first of those learnings.
Yesterday I started laying out an agenda for an upcoming facilitation. It is strategic development with a touch of visioning around different scenarios for a non-profit. When I lay out my agendas two of my focus areas are process/activity and purpose. Purpose was always an after thought to process/activity. I have always been a very process oriented facilitator so I think about what tool or activity I’m going to use and how the data that comes out of it should flow to the next step. My epiphany last night was that I should focus as much on the purpose of each section as the process. Process has a sequential flow of outcomes, and purpose has a sequential flow of reasons.
For example: in process I go from context setting (why are we here, who’s here, what information do we have), to clarification of the challenge (what exactly are we working on), to working on solutions (idea generation to solve the challenge). Mostly I have thought of these as data sets. The purpose of each of these phases is multiple: the first is related to process, we want to get the information we need to move to the next step and work through our challenge. This first purpose can be considered a rational aim (what is the deliverable of this phase) that is cognitively focused. The second purpose may be considered an experiential aim with an affective (emotional) focus. What is the experience people are having? How do they feel coming out of this section?
Just like the data flow in process, purpose has a natural flow to how experience and emotions happen. One framework for looking at this is ORID (Objective, Reflective, Interpretive, and Decisional), which is a focused conversation technique that takes participants through their natural mental process: first you sense (Objective/What?), then you feel (Reflective/Gut?), then you think (Interpretive/So What?), and then you act (Decisional/Now what?). The purpose embedded in each of these phases might look like; O, get the group to feel comfortable with what they already know and can share; R, get the group to respond and connect on an emotional level through shared past experiences and emotions; I, have the group create together; and D, let the group feel their success as they move towards action.
Complete separation of process and purpose is unnecessary and I would argue almost impossible. However, for me the key insight is to find the balance between data (what the group needs to know to be effective at its task) and feelings (how the group needs to feel to be effective at its task). As a male facilitator I have leaned very heavily on the cognitive and data aspects of my skill set and it has served me well. Recently however I have found a strong need to be more focused on the emotional energy of the participants in order to guide them to their greatest level of achievement.
Check out Key Insight #1 technical extension of more…
