by Facilitation Expert | Aug 18, 2016 | Meeting Support, Problem Solving
The primary responsibility of a facilitator is to protect the participants. Furthermore, the facilitator helps drive the group toward its desired deliverable. Since the deliverable is built to serve the participants, people should take priority over the issues. To some extent, both people and issues are managed by creating an environment that is conducive to productivity. Easier said, than done, to ensure meeting inclusiveness.
The International Association of Facilitators (IAF) aspires for you to:
- Encourage positive regard for the experience and perception of all participants
- Create a climate of safety and trust
- Create opportunities for participants to benefit from the diversity of the group
- Cultivate cultural awareness and sensitivity
Value of Meeting Inclusiveness
Dr. Edward de Bono provides expert insight into parallel thinking; i.e., there can be more than one correct answer. Listening to others, their perspectives, and rationale creates more robust products. Because of selective perception, the aggregation of all points of view provides stronger insight than any single point of view. When facilitating a group of nine people, for example, look for the tenth answer. Our technique refers to this concept as N+1, where N equals the number of participants, always seeking the +1 perspective, thus encouraging meeting inclusiveness.
Use of Meeting Ground Rules
Remember to embrace and enforce meeting and workshop Ground Rules to create a climate of safety and trust. See our discussion on Ground Rules for additional comments and suggestions.
Key to Innovation
Diversity, or plurality as we prefer to call it (suggesting the beauty of a mosaic rather than the fracturing of something), is undoubtedly the key to innovation. See de Bono’s Six Thinking Hats (modified to Seven Thinking Hats with the MGRUSH FAST technique to also include the “Process” or royal purple view) or other means of facilitating perspective found in your MGRUSH manual or other expert sources such as Roger von Oech’s Creative Whack Pack. Consider special Icebreakers, break-out sessions, or team-building exercises that emphasize the value of plurality because meeting inclusiveness follows integrative exercises. As a result, Scannell and Newstrom offer hundreds of options among other expert tools. Take this opportunity to leverage the tactile sense, and consider some of the professional Legos® activities or others designed to prove the value of plurality and its positive impact on the quality of deliverables.
______
Meetings must rise above the tiny opening of words and embrace the fullness of human insight—through listening, visuals, stories, numbers, and symbols. The transformation begins not with tools, but in mindset. Leave your ego at the threshold, and step into the structures of meetings that get results.
In a world where everyone can engage in decisions that affect them
______
Lead the Change—One Meeting at a Time
Are you ready to transform how decisions are made, problems are solved, and alignment is built in your organization?
True meeting leadership goes beyond setting an agenda. It requires a facilitator who can navigate complexity, balance voices, and drive toward outcomes with clarity and consensus. Our Professional Meeting Leadership Workshop and facilitation training equips you to do just that—blending human-centric methods with structured analytical tools to foster rigor, inclusivity, and results that stick.
- Practice live.
- Get expert feedback.
- Build confidence that lasts.
Whether your meetings suffer from unclear objectives, disengaged participants, or decision fatigue, this workshop will help you identify the root causes, apply proven facilitation techniques, and emerge as the leader every team needs.
Take the first step today—transform your meetings and magnify your impact.
______
👉 Click here to reserve your seat now.
#facilitationtraining #meetingdesign
Because every meeting should be a catalyst for change—not just another calendar event.
______
With Bookmarks no longer a feature in WordPress, we provide the following for your benefit and reference.
______
Terrence Metz, president of MG RUSH Facilitation Training, was just 22-years-old and working as a Sales Engineer at Honeywell when he recognized a widespread problem—most meetings were ineffective and poorly led, wasting both time and company resources. However, he also observed meetings that worked. What set them apart? A well-prepared leader who structured the session to ensure participants contributed meaningfully and achieved clear outcomes.
Throughout his career, Metz, who earned an MBA from Kellogg (Northwestern University) experienced and also trained in various facilitation techniques. In 2004, he purchased MG RUSH where he shifted his focus toward improving established meeting designs and building a curriculum that would teach others how to lead, facilitate, and structure meetings that drive results. His expertise in training world-class facilitators led to the 2020 publication of Meetings That Get Results: A Guide to Building Better Meetings, a comprehensive resource on effectively building consensus.
Grounded in the principle that “nobody is smarter than everybody,” the book details the why, what, and how of building consensus when making decisions, planning, and solving problems. Along with a Participant’s Guide and supplemental workshops, it supports learning from foundational awareness to professional certification.
Metz’s first book, Change or Die: A Business Process Improvement Manual, tackled the challenges of process optimization. His upcoming book, Catalyst: Facilitating Innovation, focuses on meetings and workshops that don’t simply end when time runs out but conclude with actionable next steps and clear assignments—ensuring progress beyond discussions and ideas.
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.
Related Video
Terrence Metz, president of MG RUSH Facilitation Training, was just 22-years-old and working as a Sales Engineer at Honeywell when he recognized a widespread problem—most meetings were ineffective and poorly led, wasting both time and company resources. However, he also observed meetings that worked. What set them apart? A well-prepared leader who structured the session to ensure participants contributed meaningfully and achieved clear outcomes.
Throughout his career, Metz, who earned an MBA from Kellogg (Northwestern University) experienced and also trained in various facilitation techniques. In 2004, he purchased MG RUSH where he shifted his focus toward improving established meeting designs and building a curriculum that would teach others how to lead, facilitate, and structure meetings that drive results. His expertise in training world-class facilitators led to the 2020 publication of Meetings That Get Results: A Guide to Building Better Meetings, a comprehensive resource on effectively building consensus.
Grounded in the principle that “nobody is smarter than everybody,” the book details the why, what, and how of building consensus when making decisions, planning, and solving problems. Along with a Participant’s Guide and supplemental workshops, it supports learning from foundational awareness to professional certification.
Metz’s first book, Change or Die: A Business Process Improvement Manual, tackled the challenges of process optimization. His upcoming book, Catalyst: Facilitating Innovation, focuses on meetings and workshops that don’t simply end when time runs out but conclude with actionable next steps and clear assignments—ensuring progress beyond discussions and ideas.
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.
Terrence Metz, president of MG RUSH Facilitation Training, was just 22-years-old and working as a Sales Engineer at Honeywell when he recognized a widespread problem—most meetings were ineffective and poorly led, wasting both time and company resources. However, he also observed meetings that worked. What set them apart? A well-prepared leader who structured the session to ensure participants contributed meaningfully and achieved clear outcomes.
Throughout his career, Metz, who earned an MBA from Kellogg (Northwestern University) experienced and also trained in various facilitation techniques. In 2004, he purchased MG RUSH where he shifted his focus toward improving established meeting designs and building a curriculum that would teach others how to lead, facilitate, and structure meetings that drive results. His expertise in training world-class facilitators led to the 2020 publication of Meetings That Get Results: A Guide to Building Better Meetings, a comprehensive resource on effectively building consensus.
Grounded in the principle that “nobody is smarter than everybody,” the book details the why, what, and how of building consensus when making decisions, planning, and solving problems. Along with a Participant’s Guide and supplemental workshops, it supports learning from foundational awareness to professional certification.
Metz’s first book, Change or Die: A Business Process Improvement Manual, tackled the challenges of process optimization. His upcoming book, Catalyst: Facilitating Innovation, focuses on meetings and workshops that don’t simply end when time runs out but conclude with actionable next steps and clear assignments—ensuring progress beyond discussions and ideas.
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.
In a world where everyone can engage in decisions that affect them
______
Lead the Change—One Meeting at a Time
Are you ready to transform how decisions are made, problems are solved, and alignment is built in your organization?
True meeting leadership goes beyond setting an agenda. It requires a facilitator who can navigate complexity, balance voices, and drive toward outcomes with clarity and consensus. Our Professional Meeting Leadership Workshop and facilitation training equips you to do just that—blending human-centric methods with structured analytical tools to foster rigor, inclusivity, and results that stick.
- Practice live.
- Get expert feedback.
- Build confidence that lasts.
Whether your meetings suffer from unclear objectives, disengaged participants, or decision fatigue, this workshop will help you identify the root causes, apply proven facilitation techniques, and emerge as the leader every team needs.
Take the first step today—transform your meetings and magnify your impact.
👉 Click here to reserve your seat now.
#facilitationtraining #meetingdesign
Because every meeting should be a catalyst for change—not just another calendar event.
______
With Bookmarks no longer a feature in WordPress, we provide the following for your benefit and reference.
______
Related video
Terrence Metz, president of MG RUSH Facilitation Training, was just 22-years-old and working as a Sales Engineer at Honeywell when he recognized a widespread problem—most meetings were ineffective and poorly led, wasting both time and company resources. However, he also observed meetings that worked. What set them apart? A well-prepared leader who structured the session to ensure participants contributed meaningfully and achieved clear outcomes.
Throughout his career, Metz, who earned an MBA from Kellogg (Northwestern University) experienced and also trained in various facilitation techniques. In 2004, he purchased MG RUSH where he shifted his focus toward improving established meeting designs and building a curriculum that would teach others how to lead, facilitate, and structure meetings that drive results. His expertise in training world-class facilitators led to the 2020 publication of Meetings That Get Results: A Guide to Building Better Meetings, a comprehensive resource on effectively building consensus.
Grounded in the principle that “nobody is smarter than everybody,” the book details the why, what, and how of building consensus when making decisions, planning, and solving problems. Along with a Participant’s Guide and supplemental workshops, it supports learning from foundational awareness to professional certification.
Metz’s first book, Change or Die: A Business Process Improvement Manual, tackled the challenges of process optimization. His upcoming book, Catalyst: Facilitating Innovation, focuses on meetings and workshops that don’t simply end when time runs out but conclude with actionable next steps and clear assignments—ensuring progress beyond discussions and ideas.
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.
Terrence Metz, president of MG RUSH Facilitation Training, was just 22-years-old and working as a Sales Engineer at Honeywell when he recognized a widespread problem—most meetings were ineffective and poorly led, wasting both time and company resources. However, he also observed meetings that worked. What set them apart? A well-prepared leader who structured the session to ensure participants contributed meaningfully and achieved clear outcomes.
Throughout his career, Metz, who earned an MBA from Kellogg (Northwestern University) experienced and also trained in various facilitation techniques. In 2004, he purchased MG RUSH where he shifted his focus toward improving established meeting designs and building a curriculum that would teach others how to lead, facilitate, and structure meetings that drive results. His expertise in training world-class facilitators led to the 2020 publication of Meetings That Get Results: A Guide to Building Better Meetings, a comprehensive resource on effectively building consensus.
Grounded in the principle that “nobody is smarter than everybody,” the book details the why, what, and how of building consensus when making decisions, planning, and solving problems. Along with a Participant’s Guide and supplemental workshops, it supports learning from foundational awareness to professional certification.
Metz’s first book, Change or Die: A Business Process Improvement Manual, tackled the challenges of process optimization. His upcoming book, Catalyst: Facilitating Innovation, focuses on meetings and workshops that don’t simply end when time runs out but conclude with actionable next steps and clear assignments—ensuring progress beyond discussions and ideas.
