by Facilitation Expert | Aug 11, 2016 | Managing Conflict, Prioritizing
Scope creep kills projects. It also kills meetings.
The consensual sphere of Concern, Influence, and Control helps a group become mindful of aspects that could alter the group’s attitudes, beliefs, and decisions. The consensual sphere of Concern, Influence, and Control helps a group to focus, on one issue at a time, or one aspect at a time.
The single most important responsibility of a facilitator is to protect the people or meeting participants. The next most challenging responsibility however is to make it easy for a group to focus on one issue at a time.
The consensual sphere of Concern, Influence, and Control helps separate a discussion into aspects the group controls, aspects they influence, and aspects about which they have no control or significant influence. Since groups seldom perform effectively using a linear approach, consider using a “Bookend” approach for analyzing the sphere of Concern, Influence, and Control. Following are the steps required that can be used to analyze most lists, including prioritizing a list of criteria.
APPLYING THE BOOKEND METHOD TO CONCERN, INFLUENCE, AND CONTROL
Concern, Influence, and Control
Purpose
Effective facilitators shy away from working lists in a linear fashion. The purpose of using a bookend approach is to develop a natural habit of squeezing the grey matter towards the middle, rather than wasting too much time on it.
Rationale
Groups tend to argue about the grey matter that frequently does not affect the decision anyway. For instance, with PowerBalls, you can envision participants arguing whether something is more important than moderate yet less important than high. We know from experience that the most important criteria drive most decisions, so bookends help us identify the critical stuff quickly.
Method
After you have compiled a list of criteria or aspects, compare and contrast them with the simple process explained below:
- Ask “Which of these is the most important?” (as defined by the PowerBalls displayed). With the consensual sphere, our question would be “Which of these is within our control?”
- Next, ask “Which of these is the least important?” With the consensual sphere, our question would be “Which of these is a concern because it is beyond our control?”
- Then return to the next most important . . .
- And to the next least important . . .
- Until the list has been squeezed into the remaining one-third that is moderate…
- If comparing or contrasting Influence, consider asking . . .
- Which is most similar?
- Which is least similar?
- Repeat until one-third remains as moderate.
- For Control consider asking . . .
- What is your greatest strength?
- What is your greatest weakness?
- Repeat until one-third remains as moderate.
______
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.
Related Video
Terrence Metz, MBA, CSM, CSPF, PSP01, HTTO1, is the Managing Director of MG RUSH Facilitation Leadership, Training, and Meeting Design, an acknowledged leader in structured facilitation training, and author of “Meetings That Get Results – A Facilitator’s Guide to Building Better Meetings.” His FAST Facilitation Best Practices blog features nearly 300 articles on facilitation skills and tools aimed at helping others lead meetings that produce clear and actionable results. His clients include Agilists, Scrum teams, program and project managers, senior officers, and the business analyst community among numerous private and public companies and global corporations. As an undergraduate of Northwestern University (Evanston, IL) and an MBA graduate from NWU’s Kellogg School of Management, his professional experience has focused on process improvement and product development. He continually aspires to make it easier for others to succeed.
by Facilitation Expert | Aug 4, 2016 | Decision Making, Meeting Support, Meeting Tools
The Fist of Five approach combines the speed of thumbs up/ down and displays the degrees of agreement that can support more complicated decision spectrums. Using this tool, people vote using their hands and display fingers to represent their degree of support.
Fist of Five Method
Use Fist of Five for Contextual Questions
When groups come to consensus on issues, it means that everyone in the group can support it. They don’t have to think it’s their favorite decision, but they all agree they can live with it. The Fist of Five tool provides an easy-to-use way to test for consensus quickly.
Most of you understand that we despise voting as a decision-making method. The losing vote(s) could represent the highest quality decision. Therefore, we recommend the Fist of Five, promoted in the Agile life-cycle, for contextual issues and NOT issues about content. For example, “Should we take a full 60-minute lunch break today?”.
To use the Fist of Five, the facilitator makes a question clear and asks everyone to show their level of support. Each person responds by showing a fist or several fingers that corresponds to their opinion.
Fist of Five Interpreted
First—a no vote, is a way to block consensus. “I need more information about the issues and require changes for this proposal to pass.”
1 Finger—“I need to discuss certain issues and can suggest changes that should be made.”
2 Fingers—“I am comfortable with the proposal but want to discuss it further.”
3 Fingers—“I’m not in total agreement but feel comfortable enough to let this decision or proposal pass without further discussion.”
4 Fingers—“I think this is a reasonable idea and am not opposed.”
5 Fingers (such as the waving hand)—“It’s a great idea and I am a major supporter.”
Anyone who holds up fewer than three fingers should be allowed to explain their objections and the team should respond to their concerns. Teams continue using the Fist of Five tool until they achieve consensus (a minimum of three fingers or higher) or determine they must move on without consensus.
Fist of Five Notes
A small problem with this approach is that two standards have emerged and you need to be clear if five fingers mean “full agreement” or “no, stop”. With the method discussed above, a fist (no fingers) implies no support while five fingers means total support and a desire to lead the charge. Typically, more is better.
Another model registers resistance to the proposal so that one finger means total support, two fingers mean support with some minor reservations, three fingers mean concerns that need discussing, four fingers mean “I object and want to discuss”, and five fingers (an extended palm like a stop sign) means “Stop, I am opposed.” Whichever method you embrace, please do NOT use the Fist of Five for making decisions about content, especially important content or client issues. You may however use the Fist of Five for making very minor content decisions such as the substitution of one word for another (wordsmithing–albeit, a lousy group activity).
______
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.
Terrence Metz, MBA, CSM, CSPF, PSP01, HTTO1, is the Managing Director of MG RUSH Facilitation Leadership, Training, and Meeting Design, an acknowledged leader in structured facilitation training, and author of “Meetings That Get Results – A Facilitator’s Guide to Building Better Meetings.” His FAST Facilitation Best Practices blog features nearly 300 articles on facilitation skills and tools aimed at helping others lead meetings that produce clear and actionable results. His clients include Agilists, Scrum teams, program and project managers, senior officers, and the business analyst community among numerous private and public companies and global corporations. As an undergraduate of Northwestern University (Evanston, IL) and an MBA graduate from NWU’s Kellogg School of Management, his professional experience has focused on process improvement and product development. He continually aspires to make it easier for others to succeed.
by Facilitation Expert | Jul 28, 2016 | Decision Making, Meeting Structure, Prioritizing
Strongly encouraged by Steve Jobs, as mentioned in his biography by Walter Isaacson, here is how to facilitate reducing some possible actions a team should consider, down to the final three or four actions your team has the resources to complete.
As mentioned casually in the biography, the concept of prioritization is key to group performance, so we will remind you about three remarkably effective and frequently used facilitation techniques from the MGRUSH method; namely Definition, PowerBalls (aka MoSCoW), and BookEnds. First, before you distill your final list of ten or twelve action items, be prepared to define the full meaning behind the terms first used. Additionally, stay conscious of the team’s perspective and possible biases.
Bias Factors that Demonstrably Affect Group Decision-Making
Everyone poorly estimates the time they need to complete any task. Fallacies and biases put us all at increasing risk of reaching our objectives. Therefore, psychologists call it the planning fallacy and the bias of overconfidence. According to the World Future Society, other significant factors known to negatively impact decision quality include:
- Confusing desirability and familiarity with probability
- Distorting data through selection and repetition
- Forecasting with a preference for change or patterns
- Framing complex issues in a skewed fashion (selective perception)
- Homogenizing multiple data sources (for cost savings)
- Lacking clear confidence intervals (how clean the data is)
- Mistaking correlation for causation (a quite common error)
- Over-immersion in local social values or perceptions
Facilitate Prioritization by Starting with the End in Mind
Are you helping the team define a final output, a desired outcome, or are you having them focus clearly on the next step (that presumably leads to a final output AND a new, desired outcome) or action required?
- Describe the objectives with enough clarity that everyone provides their commitment.
- Next, use our PowerBall tool to build consensus in minutes, not hours. (Known in the Agile world as MoSCoW, see below).
Definition Tool
If you are challenged about the scope, characteristics, or details of some proposed action, consider using the Definition tool. Hence, in its most robust format, a thorough definition answers five discrete questions (See the Definition tool for an example):
- What is the action NOT?
- Describe the action in one sentence or less than 50 words.
- Provide the specific characteristics that make this action clear or unique.
- Draw or illustrate the action or workflow.
- Provide at least two examples from the business to vivify or bring to life the narrative definition.
Once you have a list of ten or so clear and potential actions the team has socialized and understood, then apply the PowerBalls tool (MoSCoW).
Rationale to Facilitate Prioritization
It’s faster to get a group to agree on what NOT to discuss anymore. Therefore, apply the Pareto Principle (aka 80-20 Rule) to help a group eliminate as many options as possible. By deselecting first, the group can stay focused, build traction, and you can facilitate prioritization around the most important or attractive options.
MoSCoW Corresponds to Must Have (High), Should Have (Moderate), Could Have (Low), Won’t Have (Null)
CAUTION When You Facilitate Prioritization
Be aware that an optimal approach requires to prioritize the criteria, not the options. Therefore, if you find yourself prioritizing options, reverse-engineer them by asking WHY. Then by simply asking, the responses generate the criteria or rationale used for the prioritization. (Also, know that you need to have an agreed-upon purpose to facilitate prioritization and resolve arguments.)
Method to Facilitate Prioritization
The following steps should be read with an understanding that the ‘hot linked’ activities and procedures used below to facilitate prioritization are explained more fully elsewhere on this site on “Facilitation Best Practices” and found in the MG RUSH curriculum. You will discover that PowerBall measurements provide flexible instruments for measuring anything. Consequently, for simple decision-making, use the following steps:
- Establish the purpose of the object the team is considering (i.e., Purpose of _______ is to . . . So that . . .). Hence, you have now established WHY this action is important.
- Build your list of options (e.g., Brainstorming). Additionally, strive for creativity and innovation by encouraging more, even wild ideas. Set the list of options aside.
- Build your list of decision criteria (be prepared to define each “criterion”).
- Look at the criteria to see if any options are in direct violation. For example, if Sally is allergic to flowers, then “buying her flowers” presents an option that should be eliminated. However, using SCAMPER we might discover other options such as silk flowers, a painting of flowers, etc.
- Ask the participants if they can support the remaining options. If someone objects, consider eliminating that option if numerous others are satisfactory to everyone.
- Once your participants can support the remaining options, you have consensus, however, you don’t yet have your deliverable.
- To improve the quality of your decision, unveil the visual legend for PowerBalls. Finally, always use the economic definitions shown.
NOTE:
The terms in black will change. They could be full, empty, half-full. They could be frequent, rarely, occasionally. However, the economic definitions always work. You may also find the tool called something else such as Harvey Balls, MoSCoW, etc.
NEXT . . .
- Apply the PowerBalls and prioritize the criteria, using the Book-End rhetoric, explained fully below. Here we ask, “Which is most?”, “Which is least?”, etc., and squeeze in on the moderate stuff.
- Find the option(s) that best aligns with and supports your stated purpose (Step 1). Therefore, appealing to the previously built purpose statement confirms the most appropriate or impactful criteria.
Apply Bookends Rhetoric to Avoid Wasting Time with Lists
Effective facilitators shy away from analyzing lists linearly. The purpose of using our Bookends Method is to develop a natural habit of squeezing the grey matter towards the middle, rather than wasting too much time on it.
The Rationale of Bookends
Groups tend to argue about a grey matter that frequently does not affect the decision anyway. For instance, with PowerBalls, you can envision some participants arguing whether something is more important than moderate yet less important than high. We know from experience that high criteria drive most decisions, so bookends help us identify the most important stuff quickly.
The Bookend Rhetoric
After you have compiled a list, compare and contrast different items with the straightforward process as explained below:
Use the Bookends Rhetoric to Avoid Wasting Time with Lists
- Ask, “Which of these is the most important?” (as defined by the PowerBalls displayed).
- Next ask, “Which of these is the least important?”
- Then return to the next most important
- And to the next least important
Until the list has been squeezed into the remaining one-third that is moderate.
If comparing or contrasting illustrations, consider asking…
- Which is most similar?
- Which is least similar?
Repeat until one-third remains as moderate.
For discussions consider asking . . .
- What is your greatest strength?
- What is your greatest weakness?
Repeat until one-third remains as moderate.
Definitions to Facilitate Prioritization
The definitions provided in the iconic legend above apply to all situations and can be equated or converted to numbers, such as:
- 5 or a solid ball means high “Pay any price.”
- 1 or an empty circle means low or “Want it for free, not willing to pay extra for it.”
- 3 or a half-filled ball means moderate or all the other stuff between high and low, meaning we are “willing to pay a reasonable price” without being forced to define “reasonable.”
Five-Level Numeric Alternative (plus Null) Where More is Better
- Low Importance
- Moderately Low Importance (if necessary)
- Moderate Importance
- Moderately High Importance (if necessary)
- High Importance
Ø. NULL or Will NOT have
MoSCoW Alternative
Alternatively, in the Agile world, PowerBalls also equate to MoSCoW, whereby:
- M equals Must have and equates to a solid ball, or the number 5
- S equals Should have and equates to a half-filled ball, or the number 3
- C equals Could have and equates to an empty circle, or the number 1
- W equates to Won’t have or the null (the ‘o’ makes the mnemonic easier to remember)
With MoSCoW or PowerBalls, separate the most/ least important criteria, force-fitting one-third high and one-third low. Cluster the remaining one-third and code them as moderate by default, without discussion. Attempt to force fit one-third of the candidates as each high, low, and moderate—but be flexible. Appeal to the high criteria and isolate the option(s) that best support the purpose statement. Additionally, to advance understanding further or to optimize or guide discussion (if required), appeal to some of the fuzzy factors that may be difficult to measure objectively.
When you need help creating a robust definition of an option or a criterion that may be arguable, turn to the Definition Tool for support. If you discover the PowerBall technique is not robust enough, use something more suitable for complicated prioritization such as the MGRUSH Scorecard tool or Perceptual Mapping.
______
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.
Related video
Terrence Metz, MBA, CSM, CSPF, PSP01, HTTO1, is the Managing Director of MG RUSH Facilitation Leadership, Training, and Meeting Design, an acknowledged leader in structured facilitation training, and author of “Meetings That Get Results – A Facilitator’s Guide to Building Better Meetings.” His FAST Facilitation Best Practices blog features nearly 300 articles on facilitation skills and tools aimed at helping others lead meetings that produce clear and actionable results. His clients include Agilists, Scrum teams, program and project managers, senior officers, and the business analyst community among numerous private and public companies and global corporations. As an undergraduate of Northwestern University (Evanston, IL) and an MBA graduate from NWU’s Kellogg School of Management, his professional experience has focused on process improvement and product development. He continually aspires to make it easier for others to succeed.
by Facilitation Expert | Jul 21, 2016 | Scrum Events
We love Agile and an Agile mindset. You should too.
For most of you, some version of Agile methodology will replace or at least substitute for waterfall SDLC (software development life-cycle) and PDLC (product development life-cycle). For many of you, it already has. ‘Agile’ and ‘facilitation’ are terms so intertwined, that they are nearly redundant and remarkably powerful.
An Agile mindset compelled us to become Registered Educational Providers through the Scrum Alliance. Therefore, alumni of our MGRUSH workshops may now receive up to 40 SEUs (Scrum Educational Units). Here’s why.
- Roles, artifacts, and ceremonies align wholeheartedly with our instruction about meeting consciousness (understanding responsibilities), competence (managing artifacts), and confidence (facilitating events).
- Both Agile and MGRUSH structured facilitation stress the importance of rapid planning. We call it the WHY before the WHAT before the HOW. Agile notes three levels of planning sessions, for Agile teams. Therefore, we roughly approximate below with traditional Business Planning. With the conviction that “Individuals and interactions over processes and tools” (Agile Manifesto, 2001), consensual planning becomes essential.
Facilitation Planning Sessions
| Business Planning |
Agile Rapid Planning |
| Strategy |
Release |
| Portfolio |
Sprint |
| Product |
Daily |
- The increasing resolution behind different levels of ‘requirements’ speaks loudly to the MGRUSH preference, to start broad and work narrow. Prioritization Tools in MGRUSH have long promoted CRUD, MoSCoW, Story Sizing and other recommended Agile steps. Additionally, we recommend building user stories using the MGRUSH Purpose Tool, whereby . . .
. . . important because . . . so that . . .
- Agile supports stress-tested workshops such as Release Planning agendas that virtually ensure success. Meetings, even Daily Scrums, embrace rules to ensure that everyone gets done faster. Remember, you don’t have to have rules. However, without structure the terms ‘discussion’, ‘percussion’, and ‘concussion’ remain closely related.
- Life cycle meetings such as a Design Review encourage the participation of necessary roles, without the redundancy of too many people (7 plus or minus 2) or the gap of missing stakeholders. Retrospectives follow our established Content Management tool with the three-question method leading to changes for the next sprint or release.
- Significant meetings such as Planning, Design Review, Pre-Planning, Final UAT, and Iteration Retrospectives are structured by clearly defined deliverables from each step in the agenda. We love that because it is easy to lead when you know where you are going. Perhaps most importantly the Agile Community understands the importance of operational definitions. Critical terms such as “DONE” are clearly defined and not subject to non-productive arguments.
- Finally, Agile facilitation encourages scenario development and visual support to galvanize consensus. Process or Activity Diagrams, Wireframes, Mockups, Clear Criteria, and Specifications by Example are all encouraged, if not mandated. Love it.
______
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.
Terrence Metz, MBA, CSM, CSPF, PSP01, HTTO1, is the Managing Director of MG RUSH Facilitation Leadership, Training, and Meeting Design, an acknowledged leader in structured facilitation training, and author of “Meetings That Get Results – A Facilitator’s Guide to Building Better Meetings.” His FAST Facilitation Best Practices blog features nearly 300 articles on facilitation skills and tools aimed at helping others lead meetings that produce clear and actionable results. His clients include Agilists, Scrum teams, program and project managers, senior officers, and the business analyst community among numerous private and public companies and global corporations. As an undergraduate of Northwestern University (Evanston, IL) and an MBA graduate from NWU’s Kellogg School of Management, his professional experience has focused on process improvement and product development. He continually aspires to make it easier for others to succeed.
by Facilitation Expert | Jul 14, 2016 | Communication Skills, Facilitation Skills, Leadership Skills, Managing Conflict, Meeting Structure, Meeting Support, Meeting Tools
Don’t let meeting problems become a burden
Ever develop that sense of deja vu about not getting anywhere during a meeting?
Meeting problems are indicative of resistance that is generated during a meeting. However, resistance can be prevented and mitigated with professional behavior. Here’s what to do about the most common meeting problems.
1. Meeting Problems — Lack of clear purpose
All too frequently, meetings are held for the primary benefit of the meeting leader, typically the group’s director, supervisor, or project manager. The session leader has decided to schedule a series of weekly meetings in advance, typically for their convenience. They anticipate needing the time of others to raise the fog high enough so that they can determine what they need to get done over the next week, until the next meeting.
SOLUTION FOR MEETING PROBLEM — #1:
Carefully articulate the purpose and deliverable of the meeting, preferably in twenty-five words or less. If you are unable to clearly explain why you are having the meeting and the meeting’s desired output (i.e., “What does ‘DONE’ look like?”), then you are not prepared to be an effective meeting leader. If you are the participant, demand a written statement that details the purpose, scope, and deliverable of the meeting, preferably in advance, or don’t attend.
2. Meeting Problems — Unprepared participants
Lack of clear purpose (mentioned above) is the main reason participants show up unprepared. Before and sometimes during the meeting, they remain unclear about what “showing up prepared” looks like.
SOLUTION FOR MEETING PROBLEM — #2:
Beyond a written statement about the meeting’s purpose, scope, and deliverables, participants need an advanced understanding of the agenda. The agenda explains how the meeting will generate results so that participants can get out. Nobody wants more meetings or longer meetings. Detailed questions determine agenda topics (e.g., What are our options?). Ideally, participants should know the questions to be asked during the meeting before it begins, so that they can attend prepared and ready to respond.
3. Meeting Problems — Biased leadership
Nothing will restrain the input of participants faster than a leader who begins to emphasize their answer. Participants will then hope the leader exposes an entire position before they begin to make contributions, so that they know where they stand, and avoid embarrassment about being “wrong”.
SOLUTION FOR MEETING PROBLEM — #3:
Leaders should embrace neutrality. If they want others’ input and opinions, then ask and listen. If they don’t want others’ ideas, they should not have a meeting. There are more cost-effective means for informing and persuading than hosting meetings. Being neutral is like being pregnant, you either are or you’re not—there is no grey area.
4. Meeting Problems — Scope creep (strategic and tactical blending)
All too often, meetings dive deep into the weeds (i.e., HOW or concrete methods) or challenge the purpose (i.e., WHY or ultimate intention). Nobody wants more meetings, they only want results.
SOLUTION FOR MEETING PROBLEM — #4:
To avoid scope creep in the meeting, carefully craft a written statement reflecting the scope (see item number one above). Carefully police the scope of an issue so that participants don’t go too deep into the weeds. Thus ensure that others do not argue about the reason for a project, as project approval is beyond the scope of most meetings. For pertinent strategic issues that are beyond the scope of the meeting, capture them in a “Refrigerator” (aka “Parking Lot”) to preserve them until you can meet in a workshop forum that discusses strategic issues, their implications, and what needs to be done about them (recommendations).
5. Meeting Problems — Poor or non-existent structure
Lack of structure applies both at the meeting level (i.e., agenda) and within each agenda step. Structure enhances flexibility and gives you a method for delivering ‘done’. Most leaders are competent at soliciting ideas (i.e., creating a list) but remain frail during the analysis activity. Therefore, use our Meeting Pathway and Meeting Canvas regularly.
SOLUTIONS FOR MEETING PROBLEM — #5:
Determine in advance:
- What are you going to do with the list?
- How will you lead them to categorize items?
- Should you categorize, or perhaps push on to specific measurable details?
- If prioritizing, have you separately identified the criteria?
- How are you going to lead the group to apply the criteria to the options that lead to a prioritized list?
6. Dealing with the Meeting Problem — “They’re all Priority One!”
A group would not prioritize a list of activities because they felt that all were very important and that prioritizing them would allow some to drop off and not get done. The support organization had only a limited number of resources and limited time. First of all, how do you get a group to set priorities?
Dealing with Meeting Problems
SOLUTIONS FOR MEETING PROBLEM — #6:
- Separately develop the criteria that prove the importance of the activities.
- Admit that all the actions are top priority or they would not have been discussed.
- Ask them to prioritize the criteria, one relative to each, other using the Bookend tool.
- Build a Decision-Matrix to align the criteria with the activities and develop a sense of relative importance, without omitting anything.
7. Dealing with the Meeting Problem — “Don’t Measure Me”
An organization is culturally biased against SMART measures and hard objectives during a business process improvement initiative. Hence, history has caused them to resist, cheat, or fall victim to objective measures. Since the facilitator must get the group to define SMART measures and objectives, what should they do?
SOLUTIONS FOR MEETING PROBLEM — #7:
- Follow a method that allows the group to define their measures—by first defining the rewards, benefits, risks, challenges, and then associated measures.
- To ensure that key measures have been identified, ask participants to draw upon benchmarking of competitors and other industries
- Have the group identify their concerns with SMART objectives and develop strategies or actions to address their concerns. Consider the Content Management tool.
8. Dealing with a Meeting Problem — One-Day Wonder
A diverse group has one day to define an improved critical scheduling process. Because the improved process needs clear roles and responsibilities, how do we get them going?
SOLUTIONS FOR MEETING PROBLEM — #8:
- Define a limited deliverable very clearly with the project manager. Focus on what can be done within the time frame.
- Have the participants complete before the workshop, such as benchmarking, assessment tools, etc.
- Conduct a quick team-building exercise at the start to pull the team together as quickly as possible.
- Timebox steps as necessary with precise rhetoric that questions “Did we get the most important stuff?” and NOT “Did we get everything?”.
9. Dealing with Meeting Problems — Two Groups
We have two groups, each from a different office, yet each is jointly responsible for a project. One was actively involved upfront (the project manager is from that area) while the other was not involved in the initial meetings. The second group feels no ownership even though they have a key role. How do you get them together?
SOLUTIONS FOR MEETING PROBLEM — #9:
- Meet with the second group first in developing the workshop and to help them understand what has developed, their role, and clarify the issues that concern them.
- Meet with executive management to reinforce their support for the project because their visible support motivates others.
- Launch a formal kick-off meeting and provide some team-building exercises.
10. Dealing with Meeting Problems — Executive Solution
A workshop designed to focus on business process improvement opportunities. The workshop develops the goals, objectives, principles, and strategies of the initiative. The executive participated in the workshop. However, after the workshop, the executive decided to change the output to suit himself.
SOLUTIONS FOR MEETING PROBLEM — #10:
- Publish the original results for distribution to all stakeholders as soon as possible.
- Also, have the project manager intervene on behalf of the project team members.
- Carefully document the risks and rewards associated with the mandated change.
- Next time, emphasize ground rules about consensus building and educate the executive, before the workshop, on empowerment, ownership, and accountability.
It’s not easy to lead a successful meeting. No one ever said it was. Success begins with clear thinking and understanding of how to avoid the most common problems with meetings.
______
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.
Terrence Metz, MBA, CSM, CSPF, PSP01, HTTO1, is the Managing Director of MG RUSH Facilitation Leadership, Training, and Meeting Design, an acknowledged leader in structured facilitation training, and author of “Meetings That Get Results – A Facilitator’s Guide to Building Better Meetings.” His FAST Facilitation Best Practices blog features nearly 300 articles on facilitation skills and tools aimed at helping others lead meetings that produce clear and actionable results. His clients include Agilists, Scrum teams, program and project managers, senior officers, and the business analyst community among numerous private and public companies and global corporations. As an undergraduate of Northwestern University (Evanston, IL) and an MBA graduate from NWU’s Kellogg School of Management, his professional experience has focused on process improvement and product development. He continually aspires to make it easier for others to succeed.
