12 Critical Facilitation Do’s and Don’ts to Lead Successful Meetings and Workshops

12 Critical Facilitation Do’s and Don’ts to Lead Successful Meetings and Workshops

by | Nov 6, 2018 | Communication Skills, Facilitation Skills, Leadership Skills, Managing Conflict, Meeting Support, Meeting Tools

Our readers and students have clamored for a quick-reference checklist of the most important facilitation Do’s and Don’ts. Therefore, we bring you this brief, yet powerful, set of reminders below (alpha-sorted by the highlighted term or phrase).

Please note that the highlighted facilitation do’s and don’ts are linked to best practices articles that provide additional examples and evidence-based rationale.

facilitation do's and don't

Facilitation Do’s and Don’ts

Facilitation Do’s and Don’ts

Facilitation Don’ts

Active listening:

Make contact, absorb, reflect, and confirm; confirming WHY somebody said something or WHY the facilitator is doing something.

 Don’t allow arguments and discussions to go around you, as facilitator. Make them go through you and provide frequent and thorough reflection so that everyone is driven to understand the same rationale or evidence.

Annotated agenda:

Visualizing and documenting what needs to be done and said in advance, especially instructions for the methodology and tools you plan to use.

 Don’t assume that everyone shares an understanding of the terms being used because filters and biases cause misunderstanding. It’s better to assume that it’s unlikely you have a consensual understanding, even when participants claim to agree.

Decision-making:

Teach your participants the components of high-quality decision-making and illustrate using a decision matrix:

  1. Verify the purpose of your objective
  2. Detail your options
  3. Delineate criteria
  4. Prioritize the criteria
  5. Apply prioritized criteria against the most qualified options
  6. Test the decision quality to see how well it supports the original purpose
 Stop cheerleading with positive remarks such as “great idea” or “I like that.” Dr. Thomas Gordon (Harvard) proved that judgments or affirmations of the positive can be more injurious to group participation than negative comments.

Definition Tool:

Put the MGRUSH Definition Tool in your hip pocket and use it regularly, recalling the five activities a robust definition demands, namely:

  1. What is it NOT
  2. Describe it
  3. Detail the attributes, characteristics, requirements, or specifications
  4. Illustrate it
  5. Get two examples from the business
 Don’t forget the MGRUSH 3-step method for resolving conflict:

  1. Active listening to prevent ‘violent agreement’
  2. Appeal to objectives, from project through enterprise (see Holarchy)
  3. Thoroughly document, then take off-line, typically to the executive sponsor

Deliverable:

Know what DONE looks like; nothing can save a leader when they don’t know where they are going. Hence, codify your deliverable and share it, before the meeting begins. While others call it “right-to-left thinking” some say “start with the end in mind.”

 Don’t rely on “one size fits all” and overuse the same tool (e.g., PowerBalls). Decision-making ranges from the simple to the complicated through the complex, and extends from the qualitative through the quantitative—so use the most appropriate tool in your specific situation.

Focus:

Value the importance of focus and perspective. The hardest thing to do with a group of smart people is to get them to focus on the same thing at the same time. Consequently, remove distractions so that focus is all that remains.

 Avoid using the first person singular, specifically the terms “I” and “me.” Additionally, avoid too many thank-you’s and self-references such as “I think”, “I want”, and “I believe.”

Holarchy:

Connect the dots; provide a holarchy explanation that quantifies the importance and impact of your meeting, typically measured in terms of investment at risk (e.g., $$$) and/ or FTP (full-time person).

 Don’t permit groupthink and reliance on habits and patterns of the past. “We’ve always done it this way” will not persist forever. Hence, incites participants to understand that change can be proactive or reactive.

Preparation:

7:59 AM preparation and interviews. No facilitation class in the world will make you successful when you show up unprepared.

 Don’t forget or skip the MGRUSH professional 7-activity Introduction and 4-activity Review and Wrap. Consider rehearsing the introduction so that the meeting begins smoothly, thus giving participants confidence. Participants remember the last five minutes so close with clear action steps.

Precision:

Rhetorical precision or clarity of word choice increases its importance the more complicated the topic or scope of discussion. Hence, closely monitor and remain vigilant about your rhetoric.

 Don’t permit discussion and comments when you are in a listing mode. Brainstorming demands that during ideation, there should be no discussion. The facilitator is normally the first person to violate this principle.

Roles:

Stress roles in the meeting emphasized that all participants are equals, regardless of title or tenure in the hallway. Then treat everyone the same, and don’t be deferential to “executives.”

 Don’t lead a meeting without first sharing the purpose, scope, deliverables, and simple agenda, preferably in writing and preferably shared with participants before the meeting or workshop begins.

Structure:

Structure your discussion to avoid asking for the deliverable; rather ask for parts of the deliverable that aggregate to the final deliverable. Remember the mathematical expression: Y = f(X) +(x) + (x) and ask about the little “x’s”, not the “Y” or even the large “X’s”.

 Don’t string on virtual participants at the end. Put them in a virtual seating arrangement up front, and call on them first, not last. Next, enforce a protocol even among the live people so that virtual participants know who is speaking.

WHY First:

WHY before WHAT before HOW; Always build consensus around the purpose of something before beginning your analysis and solution development.

 Don’t discount the value of visual feedback. Remember that more is better and it is easier to edit stuff ‘out’ of your final documentation than it is to fully remember what was said. Therefore, capture verbatims and edit later.

______

Don’t ruin your career by hosting bad meetings. Sign up for a workshop or send this to someone who should. MGRUSH workshops focus on meeting design and practice. Each person practices tools, methods, and activities daily during the week. Therefore, while some call this immersion, we call it the road to building high-value facilitation skills.

Our workshops also provide a superb way to earn up to 40 SEUs from the Scrum Alliance, 40 CDUs from IIBA, 40 Continuous Learning Points (CLPs) based on Federal Acquisition Certification Continuous Professional Learning Requirements using Training and Education activities, 40 Professional Development Units (PDUs) from SAVE International, as well as 4.0 CEUs for other professions. (See workshop and Reference Manual descriptions for details.)

Want a free 10-minute break timer? Sign up for our once-monthly newsletter HERE and receive a free timer along with four other of our favorite facilitation tools.

______

With Bookmarks no longer a feature in WordPress, we need to append the following for your benefit and reference

Critical Questions to Answer with the Business Model Canvas

Critical Questions to Answer with the Business Model Canvas

by | Oct 2, 2018 | Communication Skills, Leadership Skills, Meeting Support, Meeting Tools

The Business Model Canvas was created by Alexander Osterwalder, of Strategyzer®. The canvas provides a one-page primer and template for analysis. Questions and points of view are detailed below.[1] We offer it to support the MGRUSH Business Analyst community. Please modify each and all of the following to help your situation.

UPDATE: MGRUSH has released its Meeting Pathway (infographic guideline) and Workshop Canvas (37 open-ended preparatory questions). Consequently, the Meeting Pathway details a comprehensive meeting and workshop preparation approach that you can now download.

Business Model Canvas — Agenda Steps and Questions to be Addressed

Business Model Canvas Partners Link

  • Business Model Canvas: Partners

    • Who are our significant partners?
    • Who are our significant suppliers?
    • What critical activities do our partners perform?
    • What necessary resources are we acquiring from our suppliers?
      • Value-add from partnerships
        • Acquisition of specialized resources and activities
        • Optimization and economy
        • Reduction of risk and uncertainty

Business Model Canvas Activities

  • Business Model Canvas: Activities

    • What significant activities do our value propositions require?
    • Which activities are the primary drivers of customer relationships?
    • Where does our distribution channel provide value-add?
    • What are the revenue streams for each channel?
      • Categories

Business Model Canvas Resources

  • Business Model Canvas: Resources

    • What significant resources do our value propositions require?
    • Which significant resources do our distribution channels require?
    • What significant resources do our customer relationships require?
    • Which significant resources do our revenue streams require?
      • Types of resources
        • Financial
        • Human
        • Intellectual (patents, copyrights, data, etc.)
        • Physical

Business Model Canvas Value Proposition

  • Business Model Canvas: Value Propositions

    • What value do we deliver to our customers?
    • Which customer needs are we satisfying?
    • Which customer problems are we helping to solve?
    • What bundles of products and services are we offering to each customer segment?
      • Characteristics
        • Brand/ status
        • Customization
        • Design
        • “Getting the Job Done”
        • Newness
        • Performance

Business Model Canvas Customer Relationships

  • Business Model Canvas: Customer Relationships

    • What type of relationships do each of our primary customer segments expect us to build and maintain with them?
    • Which ones have we established?
    • How are they integrated with the rest of our business model?
    • How costly are they?
      • Examples
        • Automated services
        • Co-creation
        • Communities
        • Dedicated personal assistance
        • Personal assistance
        • Self-service

Business Model Canvas Channels

  • Business Model Canvas: Channels

    • Through which channels do our primary customer segments want to be reached?
    • How are we reaching them now?
    • How are our channels integrated?
    • Which channels work best?
    • Which channels are most cost-efficient?
    • How are we integrating them with customer routines?
      • Channel phases
        • Awareness
          • How do we raise awareness about our company’s products and services?
        • Evaluation
          • How do we help customers evaluate our organization’s value propositions?
        • Purchase
          • How do we allow customers to purchase specific products and services?
        • Delivery
          • How do we deliver a value proposition to our primary customer segments?
        • After-sales
          • How do we provide post-purchase customer support?

Business Model Canvas Customer Segments

  • Business Model Canvas: Customer Segments

    • For whom are we creating value?
    • Who are our most important customers?
      •  Diversified
      •  Mass market
      •  Multi-sided platform 
      •  Niche market
      •  Segmented

Business Model Canvas Cost Structure

  • Business Model Canvas: Cost Structure

    • Which costs are most critical to our business structure?
    • What primary resources are the most expensive?
    • What primary activities are the most expensive?
      • Is your business more…
        • Cost-driven (leanest cost structure, low price value proposition, maximum automation, extensive outsourcing)
        • Value-driven (focused on value creation, premium value proposition)
      • Sample characteristics
        • Economies of scale
        • Economies of scope
        • Fixed costs (salaries, rents, utilities)
        • Variable costs

Business Model Canvas Revenue Stream

  • Business Model Canvas: Revenue Streams

    • For what value are our customers willing to pay?
    • For what value do they currently pay?
    • How are they currently paying?
    • What method would they prefer for paying?
    • How much does each revenue stream contribute to overall revenues?
      • Types
        • Advertising
        • Asset sale
        • Brokerage fees
        • Lending/ renting/ leasing
        • Licensing
        • Subscription fees
        • Usage fee
      • Fixed pricing
        • Customer segment dependent
        • List price
        • Product feature dependent
        • Volume dependent
      • Dynamic pricing
        • Negotiating (bargaining)
        • Real-time market
        • Yield management

For a more thorough discussion around business ideas and additional context around the Canvas, turn to “The Entrepreneur’s Foolproof 5-Step Guide to Finding and Validating Business Ideas”.

[1] The Business Model Canvas and Meeting Pathway and Meeting Canvas are licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 1.0 Generic license and thus available for restricted distribution

RenDanHeYi Adoption Canvas

ALTERNATIVELY — CONSIDER THE QUANTUM MANAGEMENT APPROACH THAT FOLLOWS:

RenDanHeYi Adoption Canvas

RenDanHeYi Adoption Canvas Intended to Support Zero-distance with Customers

______

Don’t ruin your career by hosting bad meetings. Sign up for a workshop or send this to someone who should. MGRUSH workshops focus on meeting design and practice. Each person practices tools, methods, and activities daily during the week. Therefore, while some call this immersion, we call it the road to building high-value facilitation skills.

Our workshops also provide a superb way to earn up to 40 SEUs from the Scrum Alliance, 40 CDUs from IIBA, 40 Continuous Learning Points (CLPs) based on Federal Acquisition Certification Continuous Professional Learning Requirements using Training and Education activities, 40 Professional Development Units (PDUs) from SAVE International, as well as 4.0 CEUs for other professions. (See workshop and Reference Manual descriptions for details.)

Want a free 10-minute break timer? Sign up for our once-monthly newsletter HERE and receive a free timer along with four other of our favorite facilitation tools.

_____

With Bookmarks no longer a feature in WordPress, we need to append the following for your benefit and reference

How Structured Facilitation Training Can Save Your Arse and Boost Your Career

How Structured Facilitation Training Can Save Your Arse and Boost Your Career

by | Sep 4, 2018 | Communication Skills, Facilitation Skills, Leadership Skills, Managing Conflict, Meeting Structure, Meeting Support

Structured meetings and workshops positively impact organizations and stakeholders–even permeating cultures. Here are a few straightforward benefits of facilitation training that support structured meetings.

Business wisdom demands the application of knowledge, stuff that is ‘in−formation’ (not static). Compound the dynamism of information with the challenge of organizing a group of people, where nobody is smarter than everybody.  Groups of people fail (or operate at sub-optimal levels) either because they don’t care, don’t have the talent, or don’t know how. Meetings and workshops with structure (aka interactive design❖) have always been stressed by MGRUSH.  Structured facilitation training instructs HOW TO get a group of people to focus on the right question (topicality) at the right time (sequencing).

Structured facilitation training largely teaches you how to think by affecting your greatest power, the power of choice. From choosing which foot to place on the floor first, after rising in the morning, to what to wear when retiring for the evening, each day presents itself with thousands of choices. Without structure, groups are not naturally capable of focusing on the same thing, at the same time. Their choices become confused, chaotic, and sometimes catastrophic. Structured facilitation training is the process of making it easier for people to be more effective in leading groups, teams, meetings, and workshops. It includes three primary components: leadership, facilitation, and methodology.

Facilitation Training

Structured Facilitation Training Explains the Holarchy of Decision-making

Three Aspects of Structured Facilitation Training

The structure provides a method for transforming the abstract (thoughts) into the concrete (products). In elementary school, we learned about the WHY, WHAT, and HOW. In professional group environments, they equate to:

  1. Leadership [Why we are doing something],
  2. Facilitation [What you can do to be more effective], and
  3. Meeting Design [How do you lead a group from the Introduction to the Wrap].

Differences Between Structured Facilitation and “Kum-bah-yah”

The differences between structured and unstructured facilitation training begin with different deliverables. The structured world seeks outputs such as product requirements or priorities resulting from root cause analysis. The unstructured world seeks outcomes such as community awareness or peace in the Middle East.

Structured VS Unstructured Facilitation Training

With structured facilitation, arguments can be resolved by appealing to the objectives within the structural holarchy. The unstructured world depends on building trust and increasing awareness but has no surefire method for driving consensus. The structured world reminds us that all arguments may be resolved by appealing to enterprise objectives. The unstructured world does not necessarily share any common purpose, scope, or objectives to resolve disagreements.

Structured Facilitation Training Includes

Meetings capture a huge investment of time. Unproductive meetings affect P & L, morale, and the potential growth of your biggest asset, your people. As frequent and important as we attend meetings, little (if any) structured training has been provided to help us become better meeting participants, and more importantly, effective meeting leaders. Creating highly effective meetings depends on improving three areas of your behavioral skills, namely:

 

WHY —

Leadership training ensures that we begin with the end in mind. WHY do we meet equates with what DONE looks like? The best facilitators in the world will fail miserably if they don’t know where they are going.  The worst facilitators can still succeed when the deliverable is clear and has an impact on the quality of life of their meeting participants.

WHAT —

Once it has been made clear where we are going, facilitation skills make it easier to know WHAT to do to ensure a successful meeting. Unfortunately, we have developed poor muscle memory over the years. Some behaviors need to be ‘unlearned’ before new behaviors are embraced. The only way to change such behaviors is through practice and immersion. Talking heads (i.e., the instructor’s lips are moving) won’t do it. Only active participation and practice will work at instilling effective and facilitative behaviors. 

HOW —

Even a great facilitator who knows where they are going (i.e., What DONE looks like) still needs help. They need to know HOW they are going to get there. How will they lead a group of people from the meeting Introduction to the Wrap?  While the best methodology or approach (i.e., Agenda) has more than one right answer, there is one wrong answer — if the meeting leader does not know HOW they are going to do it.

Practical Benefits of Structured Facilitation Training

  • Analysis of business requirements:  policies (WHY), rules (WHAT), and procedures (HOW) 
  • Application environments such as AGILE, Design Sprint, DMAIC, JAD, Kaizen, Kanban, Lean, LeSS, RUP, SAFe, SAP, Scrum, SDLC (waterfall), SOA, and XP
  • Business agility, architecture, holistic decision support, product development, process improvement, and program alignment
  • Popular deliverables include gap analysis, planning of all sorts, prioritization with levels of increasing complexity, and team and project charters
  • Project and portfolio management approaches that demand consensus-based prioritization
  • Work products like Daily Stand-ups, Kick-offs, Innovation and Creativity Sessions, Logical Models, Look-backs, Product Backlogs, QFD, Retrospectives, Reviews, Root Cause Analysis, SIPOC, Stand-ups, Use-Cases, and User Stories

Help Yourself to Some Additional Revenue Too

Because innovation drives profit, most people have ignored structure to secure breakthrough ideas. Understand why listening to the voice of the customer makes economic sense.

The poor evaluation of ideas represents the number one cause of failure for newly introduced products. Frequently customers either don’t need the new product (i.e., technology push) or the product does not work as expected. Structured facilitation improves the quality of evaluation and decision-making, ensuring that the best concepts become commercialized.

Focus groups stress qualitative aspects and may not effectively represent the market at large. Offline research tends to be overly quantitative and sterile, frequently subject to close-ended questions/ answers when conditional knowledge may be more important to informed decisions. While one-on-one interviews afford deep probes, they confine the knowledge to what already exists; i.e., they stay “in the box”.

Surveys help track results but lack the ability to provide leading indications of unmet needs and unexplored issues. Web-based discussions drive further but do not support solid decision-making principles. Concept testing provides qualitative feedback but lacks the quantitative rigor needed to support decisions. Conjoint analysis, also known as “Com-Pair” (and other terms), supports decision-making but does not help generate new ideas or options.

Structured Workshops Integrate the Best of All Methods

Structured workshops generate breakthrough ideas, create strategies, and ensure alignment with more customers. Group dynamics stimulate, leading to higher quality ideas and decisions. However, without solid facilitation, dominant personalities may introduce bias. Starting with customer pain points and leveraging the input from other methods mentioned above, a collaborative approach will always generate higher quality decisions than those made in a vacuum or subjected to seen and unseen biases.

Facilitation training prepares you to challenge with reflexive questioning, the “pregnant pause”, and other tips to secure evidence and support. Nobody is smarter than everybody, especially in the hands of a professional facilitator.

[1]Wisdom To Inspire

[2]I’m Still Learning

______

Don’t ruin your career by hosting bad meetings. Sign up for a workshop or send this to someone who should. MGRUSH workshops focus on meeting design and practice. Each person practices tools, methods, and activities daily during the week. Therefore, while some call this immersion, we call it the road to building high-value facilitation skills.

Our workshops also provide a superb way to earn up to 40 SEUs from the Scrum Alliance, 40 CDUs from IIBA, 40 Continuous Learning Points (CLPs) based on Federal Acquisition Certification Continuous Professional Learning Requirements using Training and Education activities, 40 Professional Development Units (PDUs) from SAVE International, as well as 4.0 CEUs for other professions. (See workshop and Reference Manual descriptions for details.)

Want a free 10-minute break timer? Sign up for our once-monthly newsletter HERE and receive a free timer along with four other of our favorite facilitation tools.

______

With Bookmarks no longer a feature in WordPress, we need to append the following for your benefit and reference

Do NOT Attempt a Design Sprint Without a Professional Facilitator

Do NOT Attempt a Design Sprint Without a Professional Facilitator

by | Aug 7, 2018 | Decision Making, Meeting Structure, Meeting Tools, Scrum Events

What is a Design Sprint? Created at Google Ventures, a Design Sprint represents a methodology that helps teams complete a five-day workshop for building and testing some problem-solving product or solution (prototype).  A prototype might include a product on a screen, on paper, a service, a physical space, or an object.

Created by Google Venture’s Jake Knapp, along with Braden Kowitz and John Zeratsky, a Design Sprint leads participants from an abstract idea to a workable prototype. The five-day deadline, intensive teamwork, and facilitative focus provide an effective way to generate ideas and evaluate them quickly. The title of their book published in 2016 is “Sprint: How to Solve Big Problems and Test New Ideas in Just Five Days”.  According to the creators, they used Design Sprints on everything from Google Search to Google X.  Not surprisingly, the Design Sprint method relies heavily on methodology led through highly effective, professional facilitation.

Design Sprint Workshop

Design Sprint Agenda

We recently collaborated with Jessica Olsen, CSPF from The Doolittle Institute to build a five-day agenda (the creators never mention the term ‘agenda’ and prefer using a checklist) based on the Design Sprint methodology.  We have liberally modified some of their suggested tools to include MGRUSH tools provided in our Certified Structured Professional Facilitator training.  Note in particular that we have a distaste for voting because it involves winners and losers.  As consensus fighters, we provide decision-making options based on using criteria and structured analysis.

As described by the University of Chicago’s Booth School of Business, “listen in if you have a big opportunity, challenge, or idea and need perspective, insights, and practical answers.”

Design Sprint Agenda — Day One, MAPPING

Agenda Step

Estimated Time

Notes and Tools

Introduction
15 to 45 minutes
 Duration depends on the number of participants and the length of icebreakers.  Follow the MGRUSH Introductory seven-step introductory sequence, stressing roles:

  1. Introduce yourself: stress neutrality, meeting roles, and workshop impact.
  2. State the workshop purpose and get an agreement.
  3. Confirm the workshop scope and get an agreement.
  4. Show the workshop deliverables and get an agreement.
  5. Cover the administrivia (e.g., safety moment).
  6. Explain the workshop Day Four agenda (preferably through metaphor or analogy).
  7. Share the ground rules.

a)     (Optionally) Have the attendees introduce themselves

b)    Have Decider[1] make some quick rah-rah comments

Long-term Goal
15 to 75 minutes
 Using Breakout Teams, treat much like a vision statement of the prototype being built. Consider using either the Purpose tool or the Temporal Shift tool.

Questions
30 to 60 minutes
 Using Breakout Teams, develop a list of Design Sprint Questions to be answered by the end of the fifth day. Consider using three of the Six Thinking Hat tools, and in this sequence, namely:

  • White Hat (Neutral Objectivity) — Questions about data, facts, figures, information, examples, and other types of evidence
  • Black Hat (Logical Negative) — Questions about risk, problems, obstacles, and likely causes of failure in reaching the vision
  • Red Hat (Emotional View) — Questions about biased views, hunches, “gut”, and feelings

Mapping
30 to 60 minutes
 Using Breakout Teams, build something akin to a process flow diagram.  Consider using the Creativity tool to capture key customer benefits, applications, or other uses. In the words of the authors:

“List customers and key players on the left. Draw the ending, with your completed goal, on the right. Finally, make a flowchart in between showing how customers interact with your product. Keep it simple: five to fifteen steps.” (pg 66) [2]

Expert Views
60 to 120 minutes
 Facilitate expert views from your Design Sprint team and guests from the outside. For about fifteen to thirty minutes each, capture their vision, research, how things work, and previous efforts or considerations. Other team members listen, observe, and write down notes. Consider strengthening your questions with the Perspectives tool.

How Might We (HMWs)
30 to 60 minutes
 Team members convert their notes into opportunity statements (HMWs), akin to Scrum Stories. Use the Purpose tool format. Consider strengthening your questions with the Perspectives tool (pg 75).

Prioritizing
30 to 60 minutes
 First, consolidate with the Categorizing tool or some equivalent approach.  Consider various and appropriate prioritization tools ranging from Perceptual Mapping to the Decision Matrix tool. (NOTE: If using an MGRUSH tool, note that you will separately need to build criteria and apply the prioritized criteria against the HMWs.) For less formal cultures, consider a Scrum method of prioritization such as the Team Circle or even Planning Poker. The creators recommend voting (pg 80).

Updating
30 to 60 minutes
 Given new input from the experts and the HMWs, consolidate into an updated Long-term Goal, updated Questions, and a consolidated map.

Selection and Testing
15 to 30 minutes
 According to the creators, “Circle your most important customer and one target moment on the map. The team can weigh in, but the Decider makes the call.” Test back to Long-term Goal to ensure alignment.

Review, Preview, and Wrap
5 to 15 minutes
 Use the standard MGRUSH four-activity approach, namely:

  1. Review and summarize what the group accomplished.
  2. Review any open items: Assign responsibility and detail how the group can expect to be updated.
  3. Guardian of change: determine what the group agrees to tell their superiors and other stakeholders.
  4. Improvement: Use a quick Plus/ Delta for any quick fixes needed over the next four days.

  Day One Things We Like

  • Remember to take breaks every sixty to ninety minutes 
  • ABC: Always be capturing
  • Take care of humans

 Day One Things We Would Change

  • Ask for permission. Ask the group for permission to facilitate. NOTE: The facilitator does not need to ask to do their job. They will properly confirm roles and impact during the Introductory sequence.
  • Keep asking, “How should I capture that?” NOTE: (With a marker silly.) Rhetorical precision demands that the question confirm WHAT we captured and provide an accurate reflection of the speaker’s intent.
  • Decide and move on. Slow decisions sap energy and threaten the sprint timeline. If the group sinks into a long debate, ask the Decider to make a call. NOTE: Poor quality decisions sap precious resources. Long debates are not available when the method and discussion are structured, especially when the focus of decision-making ought to be on the criteria and not on the options.

 

Design Sprint Agenda — Day Two, SKETCHING

Agenda Step

Estimated Time

Notes and Tools

Introduction
5 to 10 minutes
 Follow the MGRUSH Introductory seven-step introductory sequence, stressing roles:

  1. Reconfirm meeting roles and impact of deliverables.
  2. Review the workshop purpose and get agreement.
  3. Review the workshop scope and get an agreement.
  4. Reconfirm the workshop deliverables and get an agreement.
  5. Cover administrivia (e.g., safety moment).
  6. Explain the workshop Day Four agenda (preferably through metaphor or analogy).
  7. Reconfirm the ground rules.

Lightning Demos
2 to 3 hours
 Take turns providing three-minute tours of favorite solutions from other products and domains within the same company. Capture all the ‘big ideas’ preferably using both narrative and sketching. Based on personal favorites, biases, or expertise, decide on afternoon assignments.

Notes
15 to 45 minutes
 For each person, articulate, codify, and confirm (pg 110).

Ideas
15 to 45 minutes
 Have each make some rough doodle sketches (pg 111).

Crazy 8
10 to 15 minutes
 Have each follow the Crazy 8 sketching method (pg 112).

Sketches
30 to 60 minutes
 For each, create a three-panel storyboard showing customers throughout the solution. Keep in mind the following rules:

  • Make it self-explanatory
  • Keep it anonymous
  • Ugly is OK
  • Words matter (rhetorical precision)
  • Give it a catchy title

Review, Preview, and Wrap
5 to 15 minutes
 Use the standard MGRUSH four-activity approach, namely:

  1. Review and summarize what the group accomplished.
  2. Review any open items: Assign responsibility and detail how the group can expect to be updated.
  3. Guardian of change: determine what the group agrees to tell their superiors and other stakeholders.
  4. Improvement: Use a quick Plus/ Delta for any quick fixes needed over the next three days.

 Day Two Things We Like

  • NOTE: Effective facilitation of discussion around the Demos becomes critical.

 Day Two Things We Would Change

  • Referring to a 1959 Yale study on brainstorming as ineffective. NOTE: We’re willing to bet that ideation rules were not imposed and that the analysis component was very weak. Listing is easy, it’s the analyzing that’s tough and it requires structure to break down issues into focal points for facilitated discussion and consensual understanding.

 

Design Sprint Agenda — Day Three, DECIDING

Agenda Step

Estimated Time

Notes and Tools

Introduction
5 to 10 minutes
 Follow the MG RUSH Introductory seven-step introductory sequence, stressing roles:

  1. Reconfirm meeting roles and impact of deliverables.
  2. Review the workshop purpose and get agreement.
  3. Review the workshop scope and get an agreement.
  4. Reconfirm the workshop deliverables and get an agreement.
  5. Cover administrivia (e.g., safety moment).
  6. Explain the workshop Day Four agenda (preferably through metaphor or analogy).
  7. Reconfirm the ground rules.

Prototype Selection
2 to 4 hours
 Consider the creators’ method described below or substitute a more rigorous decision-making tool such as a Perceptual Map a Decision Matrix or both.
Art Museum
Pre-work
 Should be done the night before by affixing sketches on the wall, friendly for touring, like an art museum.
Heat Map
pg 133
 In silence the creators recommend applying dot stickers to the most compelling parts or ideas, one sketch at a time.
Speed Critique
pg 136
 Discuss the compelling parts of each sketch, one sketch at a time, for three minutes. The original sketcher then replies if they feel the group missed something. Capture stand-out ideas and review concerns and questions.
Straw Poll
pg 138
 The creators recommend each team member place one vote on their favorite and support it with their rationale.
Decision
(Supervote)
pg 141
 Creators prefer ‘Note and Vote’ with Decider making the final decision. The advantage of the creators’ method is the combining of elements from multiple sketches, as parts of each sketch, rather than the entire sketch, may be used to build the forthcoming prototype.

Rumble
(Optional)
 Decide if the winning ideas can fit into one prototype, or if conflicting ideas require two or three competing prototypes (a Rumble). Note and Vote instructions on pg 146.

Storyboard
2 to 4 hours
 Build a storyboard to frame the prototype. The creators’ method recommends drawing a large grid, selecting an opening scene, and a flow that might be expected from the customer’s point of view. Illustrations are preferred over narrative comments.

Review, Preview, and Wrap
5 to 15 minutes
 Use the standard MGRUSH four-activity approach, namely:

  1. Review and summarize what the group accomplished.
  2. Review any open items: Assign responsibility and detail how the group can expect to be updated.
  3. Guardian of change: determine what the group agrees to tell their superiors and other stakeholders.
  4. Improvement: Use a quick Plus/ Delta for any quick fixes needed over the next two days.

Day Three Things We Like

  • Illustrations are preferred over narrative comments. NOTE: A picture is worth a thousand words and a sketch (metaphor or analogy) is worth a thousand pictures.

Day Three Things We Would Change

  • NOTE: With the proper method, consensus can be driven but you MUST consider criteria discretely from options.

Design Sprint Agenda — Day Four, PROTOTYPING

Agenda Step

Estimated Time

Notes and Tools

Introduction
5 to 10 minutes
 Follow the MGRUSH Introductory seven-step introductory sequence, stressing roles:

  1. Reconfirm meeting roles and impact of deliverables.
  2. Review the workshop purpose and get agreement.
  3. Review the workshop scope and get an agreement.
  4. Reconfirm the workshop deliverables and get an agreement.
  5. Cover administrivia (eg, safety moment).
  6. Explain the workshop Day Four agenda (preferably through metaphor or analogy).
  7. Reconfirm the ground rules.

Prototyping
4 to 6 hours
 Assign roles: Makers, Stitcher, Writer, Asset Collectors, and Interviewer. Consider breaking the storyboard into smaller scenes and assigning each scene to team members (pg 187).
 
“
 Making (two or more team members)
 
“
 Stitching
 
“
 Writing
 
“
 Asset Collections (two or more team members)
 
“
 Interviewing

Trial Run
30 to 60 minutes
 Identify necessary corrections, ensuring that the Decider and Friday’s Interviewer attend.

Calibrations
30 to 60 minutes
 Make changes, finish the prototype, and finalize the Interviewer guide for Friday.

Review, Preview, and Wrap
5 to 15 minutes
 Use the standard MGRUSH four-activity approach, namely:

  1. Review and summarize what the group accomplished.
  2. Review any open items: Assign responsibility and detail how the group can expect to be updated.
  3. Guardian of change: determine what the group agrees to tell their superiors and other stakeholders.
  4. Improvement: Use a quick Plus/ Delta for any quick fixes needed over the final day.

 Day Four Things We Like

  • Divide and Conquer. NOTE: Assigning discrete roles for building the prototype(s).
  • Suggestions in Kick-Off Slides:
    • If your product is on a screen, try tools like Keynote, PowerPoint, InVision, or Marvel.
    • If it’s on paper, design it with Keynote, PowerPoint, or Word.
    • With a service, use your Sprint Team as an actor.
    • If it’s a physical space, modify an existing space.
    • If it’s an object, modify an existing object, 3D print a prototype, or prototype the marketing.
  • Goldilocks quality. NOTE: Create a prototype with just enough quality to evoke honest reactions from customers (pg 170).

 Day Four Things We Would Change

  • NOTE: Day Four is a solid, collaborative, and productive day—well constructed.

 

Design Sprint Agenda — Day Five, TESTING

Agenda Step

Estimated Time

Notes and Tools

Introduction
1 to 2 hours
 Create two rooms, one for interviews and one for observation. Position hardware and set up a video stream to the observers’ room (pg 202).

Five Interviews
4 to 6 hours
 Following Interviewing protocols for prototyping
(pg 212).  Team members capture notes, issues, successes, and problems.

Notes
Concurrent
 Gather notes on a pre-built grid using a row for each prototype or section of a prototype and a column for each customer being interviewed (pg 219).

Patterns
30 to 60 minutes
 Observe, discuss, and capture using the Notes above (pg 222).

Back to the Future
30 to 60 minutes
 Review Sprint Questions from Day One. Decide which patterns are most important moving forward. Also, review Long-term Goals from Monday to fortify the next steps. Stress the opportunity from both the successes and the failures.

Next Steps
30 to 60 minutes
 Agree on an action plan going forward and consider applying some type of Roles and Responsibilities Matrix such as a RASI chart using the MG RUSH method for budget, timing, and resource estimations. Allow for the possibility of additional Sprints (on the same topic), albeit likely briefer than five days (See Kick-off slide #45).

Review, Preview, and Wrap
5 to 15 minutes
 Use the standard MGRUSH four-activity approach, namely:

  1. Review and summarize what the group accomplished.
  2. Review any open items: Assign responsibility and detail how the group can expect to be updated.
  3. Guardian of change: determine what the group agrees to tell their superiors and other stakeholders.
  4. Improvement: Use a more substantial Evaluation Form to obtain feedback on overall performance.

 

Day Five Things We Like

  • Incredible capacity of structured, group activities.

Day Five Things We Would Change

  • Voting: Need we say more?

 

[1] ‘Decider’ is one of three primary roles in a Design Sprint, the other primary roles include ‘Facilitator’, ‘Interviewer’, and ‘Sprint Team.

[2] Refers to the page number in the creators’ book, “Sprint – How to Solve Big Problems and Test New Ideas in Just Five Days”.  Additionally, the MG RUSH style encourages using fewer periods (full stops) than in American English.

______

Don’t ruin your career by hosting bad meetings. Sign up for a workshop or send this to someone who should. MGRUSH workshops focus on meeting design and practice. Each person practices tools, methods, and activities daily during the week. Therefore, while some call this immersion, we call it the road to building high-value facilitation skills.

Our workshops also provide a superb way to earn up to 40 SEUs from the Scrum Alliance, 40 CDUs from IIBA, 40 Continuous Learning Points (CLPs) based on Federal Acquisition Certification Continuous Professional Learning Requirements using Training and Education activities, 40 Professional Development Units (PDUs) from SAVE International, as well as 4.0 CEUs for other professions. (See workshop and Reference Manual descriptions for details.)

Want a free 10-minute break timer? Sign up for our once-monthly newsletter HERE and receive a free timer along with four other of our favorite facilitation tools.

______

With Bookmarks no longer a feature in WordPress, we need to append the following for your benefit and reference

Agile vs Waterfall? Don’t Risk Failure By Using the Wrong One

Agile vs Waterfall? Don’t Risk Failure By Using the Wrong One

by | Jun 5, 2018 | Meeting Agendas, Meeting Structure, Meeting Support, Scrum Events

A professional facilitator handles several types of assignments, from planning to design. However, most facilitators must also provide a method for securing the deliverable. Although a different role, the ‘methodologist’ responsibilities make up the most important part of preparing for many meetings.

How will you lead the group successfully with meeting design from the Introduction through the Wrap? You will find more than one right answer. Therefore, when weighing Agile vs. Waterfall benefits, consider how the Stacey Matrix arrays projects from the simple through the chaotic.

An Adapted Stacey Matrix: Agile vs Waterfall

Agile vs Waterfall, Stacey Matrix

Agile vs Waterfall — Stacey Matrix

Stacey’s original two dimensions included Agreement (among stakeholders) and Certainty (about cause and effect relationships within the project). Hence Agilists made Stacey’s matrix popular by substituting Requirements for Agreement and Technology for Certainty. Therefore, Requirements capture WHAT solution must be built and Technology unveils HOW to provide the solution. Consequently, the primary dimensions range from the clear or known, to the vague or unknown. The quantity of people involved gives a softer, yet third dimension that also directly increases the complexity. Therefore, the balance of this article discusses the five primary zones or areas delineated on the matrix. They include:

  1. The Simple
  2. Politically Complicated
  3. Technically Complicated
  4. Zone of Complexity
  5. The Chaotic

Five Zones Overview: Agile vs. Waterfall

The Waterfall mindset demands substantial, up-front planning. Agile frameworks launch quicker, with a much narrower scope during each increment (or Sprint when using Scrum). When the cause and effects are clear and mastered, Waterfall optimizes resources and returns on investment. However, as the customer’s scenario constantly changes, Agile permits adaptation and quick adjustment. Waterfall works especially well with large construction projects and broad-scoped hardware installations. Hence, Agile may be better suited for software products, where the market demands constant and frequent change. When tasks are clearly defined, the waterfall optimizes the sequencing and resource allocation. Therefore, results ought to be consistent, predictable, and repeatable. As tasks require frequent collaboration and adjustments, Agile lends a sense of quick response and flexibility not associated with Waterfall. The following table compares the attributes of the five zones. Most models apply identical content to the Complicated Zones. We split the zone into two because the challenges of each demand a different method. When the lack of clarity derives from stakeholders, plan carefully before proceeding (Waterfall). When uncertainty derives from the technology or software, consider the Agile approach, and prepare to change along the way. A brief discussion follows about each.

Zones     Attributes

Simple

Politically Complicated

Technically Complicated

Complex

Chaotic

Positioning

 Telling: Rational decision-making and control, orderly, traditional project management, and organizational development Selling: Political decision-making and control; compromise, negotiation, persuasion, coalition building, relationship building Consulting: Judgmental decision-making, ideological control, intuition, learning organizations, systems thinking Co-creation: Collaborative ideation, visioning, iterative improvement, knowledge management, creativity, innovation Disintegration or massive avoidance

Focus or Control

 Monitoring, Standards, Guidance. Evidence-based Negotiation Strategic or Adaptive Planning Learning, Creativity, Trial and Error, Empirical Disorder and chaos until novel patterns emerge.

Planning Type

 Operational or Predictive Planning Strategic or Adaptive Planning Strategic or Scenario Planning Adaptive or Scenario Planning Rapid action and improvising skills

Cause & Effect

 Relationships between cause and effect are evident. Apply best practices and use defined process controls. Cause and effect can be understood by analyzing or investigating the system and its mechanisms. Apply good practices. Cause and effect can be understood by analyzing or investigating the system and its mechanisms. Apply good practices. The relationship between cause and effect can only be perceived in retrospect, but not in advance. Inspect and Adapt. No clear relationships between cause and effect even if inspected.  The approach is to Act, Sense, and Respond and we can discover novel practices.

Example

 Drilling for oil in the Permian Basin. Improving air quality or building an oil pipeline through North America. Sending a payload to Mars or beyond the edge of our known solar system. Raising a child. Every child is unique resulting in unpredictable outcomes. “Running of the Bulls” (event held in Spain), or the turbulence in the tip vortex from an airplane wing

Comments

 A ‘right’ answer exists, best practices and detailed recipes, fact-based, traditional management Frequent disagreement about the value and purpose of the project More than one right answer possible, fact-based, coordination of expertise, reliance on techno-rationale Empirical methods focused on the identification, selection, and development of increments High turbulence, no patterns, tension, need to create stability, experience may hinder progress

1. The Simple Zone: Agile vs. Waterfall

When the final result or “DONE” of a project resonates with everyone, especially large projects, Waterfall stays an obvious choice. Relying on fact-based and evidence-based decisions, projects will advance in an orderly fashion, generating few surprises. You have all worked with recipes in the kitchen before. Not only are the activities clear and sequenced, but the results are repeatable as well. Best practices serve as the benchmark for both guiding tasks and comparing results.

2. Politically Complicated Zone: Agile vs. Waterfall

As requirements become less clear, or even conflicting, waterfall may remain the best choice. How many project dollars have you seen wasted because people could not agree on the purpose or value of the project? Agile affords productivity while people are negotiating, but you risk working on the wrong stuff without the coalition building encouraged by Waterfall. Always remember –  WHY before WHAT before HOW.

3. Technically Complicated Zone: Agile vs. Waterfall

As the value of adaptive thinking increases, such as embracing innovative technology for the first time, the Agile mindset may be favored. When cause and effect must be analyzed or investigated, the Agile mindset becomes preferred. Knowing that more than one right answer exists, a clear and frequent feedback loop with stakeholders helps optimize decisions. Consequently, as Development Teams advance and grow, they become learning organizations, capable of increasing productivity and innovation.

4. Zone of Complexity: Agile vs. Waterfall

The empirical process control method demands Agile as conditions become increasingly complex. As contrasted with a fully defined process control (Waterfall), empirical methods demand transparency, frequent inspection, and adaptation. Therefore, Agile frameworks promote all three aspects or “legs.” Scrum, in particular, requires inspections at the conclusion of each Sprint. Teams receive immediate and prompt feedback to help modify later Sprints, without much delay. Do not forget to look at Agile, a mindset, as “Being” while Scrum, a framework, represents “Doing”. Hence, an empirical process depends on experimentation and continuous improvement to optimize the performance of project teams.

5. The Chaotic Zone: Agile vs. Waterfall

Most recommend Kanban as an Agile approach to deal with chaos. With Kanban, there are no Sprints. Therefore teams, using WIP (Work in Progress), continually deliver and update their product backlog. Hence, as output increases, novel patterns may emerge to help projects migrate from the chaotic to the complex. In chaotic conditions, experience may be useless. However, experimentation may be invaluable. Therefore Act, Sense, and Respond – serve as one way out of chaotic conditions.

The Facilitator: Agile vs. Waterfall

In conclusion, what does it all mean to facilitators? Since most of us are called upon for the best method to conduct meetings, planning, negotiations, decision-making, etc., the methodological impact trumps the facilitator’s learnings. Hence, you begin to see where helping to manage the political uncertainty becomes paramount for many projects to succeed. You can also sense that ‘removing impediments’ becomes quite like ‘making it easy.’ In the Waterfall world when meetings evidence highly productive participants and output, our role shifts to that of scribe or documenter. However, with Agile, the role shifts to that of a referee, trying to clear a path so that Development Teams can do what they do best—build a new product. In both situations, when we have done our jobs well, it is time to get out of the way and be of service. Related Articles: http://www.designisdead.com/blog/making-sense-of-agile

______

Don’t ruin your career by hosting bad meetings. Sign up for a workshop or send this to someone who should. MGRUSH workshops focus on meeting design and practice. Each person practices tools, methods, and activities daily during the week. Therefore, while some call this immersion, we call it the road to building high-value facilitation skills.

Our workshops also provide a superb way to earn up to 40 SEUs from the Scrum Alliance, 40 CDUs from IIBA, 40 Continuous Learning Points (CLPs) based on Federal Acquisition Certification Continuous Professional Learning Requirements using Training and Education activities, 40 Professional Development Units (PDUs) from SAVE International, as well as 4.0 CEUs for other professions. (See workshop and Reference Manual descriptions for details.)

Want a free 10-minute break timer? Sign up for our once-monthly newsletter HERE and receive a free timer along with four other of our favorite facilitation tools.

______

With Bookmarks no longer a feature in WordPress, we need to append the following for your benefit and reference