Appropriate and Varied Facilitation Methodologies

There a many tried and trusted facilitation methods. Most facilitators will automatically lean toward small group, face-to-face facilitation, with group work activities and paired role-plays.

But, it is important to ensure that you use interesting and appropriate facilitation methodologies. Below follow a few different suggestions.

Card Cluster

Pin-boards and cards are often at the core of participatory approaches with people who can read and write. They help to visualise ideas, to structure discussions, to summarise results achieved. Please be careful when using cards to place the stress on content as opposed to method. A lot of learners have “had enough” of cards and may refuse to use them unless you make the logical reasoning behind your using them clear. Cards are also dangerous if you are trying to get people to discuss things at a very deep level. The results can disappoint, appear superficial and merely “scratch the surface” of the topic at hand.

Pin-boards are placed in front of a semi-circle of learners, so everyone has a clear view. They are covered with big brown paper (roughly 120 cm x 150 cm), on which the cards can later be glued. Cards should be written in a way that can be read from 8m.

It is important to briefly present the rules for writing cards, as the method doesn’t work when people start writing more than one idea per card or writing in ball-point pens on front and back (it happens, really!).

Use the cards to write one rule on one card and pin them to the board as you present them to show what the cards should look like:

• Use the broad side of the marker.
• Use big and small letters because they can better read from a distance.
• Always start in the upper left corner of the card.
• Write a maximum of three lines on each card.
• Write only one idea per card.

Use different colours of cards to indicate headlines or levels in your structure.

This method enables complex issues and questions to be structured to show distinct areas, connections, similarities and cause and effect and is a sure way of involving the entire (literate) group in the brainstorming process. People who cannot read should be supported by other learners or by helpers. The anonymity of the method helps people to feel free to voice their opinions, especially when they are critical or if the group is heterogeneous.

The Steps

• Distribute cards and markers to each person or in the middle of the floor space – before the session commences, if possible,as it can cause unnecessary disturbances later.
• Your clearly -ormulated question should be visualised for all to see. This way everyone can re-read the task during the silent phase. Use an appropriate coloured heading for the questions.
• Read the rules for writing cards from prepared cards that are pinned to the boards, so all learners can understand the logic and get an idea of what the cards should look like.
• Ask if everyone has understood the question and task.
• Give learners 4-5 minutes (this allows for flexibility) to write their ideas on cards. Don’t limit the number of cards unnecessarily – if the group is under 15 people, consider a maximum of 3-4 cards, but allow them leeway to take more if they need them. This ensures that learners really think of exciting and unusual ideas.
• Look and see when over half of learners are finished and announce quietly that you will begin to collect cards, but that people can continue to write. At the end, collect cards silently and politely and do not read any cards in advance – stay disinterested in the content and concentrate on the process at this time.
• Stress that the ensuing discussion should not go into detail, but merely establish the connections between the cards and shows the variety of content areas. Stress the ensuing process of focussing on individual areas – that the time for detailed discussion will come, but that that time is not yet!
• Read each card aloud, holding the card so that the learners can read it with you and pin it to the board near to other cards of similar meaning. This can either be in straight lines (numbered) or in “bubbles”, which can also show a difference in abstraction or hierarchy in being positioned at the top or bottom of the board.
• Cluster the cards together with the learners, keep summarising the basic meaning of the evolving clusters. If the group cannot decide on the appropriate position of a card, either:
  • start a new cluster,
  • rewrite the card and place the two cards in different clusters, or
  • write a lightning strike or question-mark on the card to ensure that any contention or need for discussion is noted and move on!
• Do not discard any cards!
• Find headings for each cluster – either in plenary or by giving small groups of 2-3 learners the task to find a heading for 1 or 2 clusters and present these to plenary.
• Summarise the results with the group and check that they are happy with the structure, logic and heading – if necessary, re-cluster or adjust the overall structure.
• Prioritising: e.g. using stickers, ask the learners to prioritise the clusters (differentiate between the most important, the most pressing, the most feasible, etc.), which cluster is number two, three and so on?
• Glue the cards to a paper for documentation purposes.

Using Cards In The Background To Support And Document Plenary Discussions

The cards can also be used to subtly provide a parallel visualisation of the content of a facilitated discussion. In this way, it works best with a team of two facilitators. One facilitator maintains constant eye contact with the group, listens to the discussion, steers it to the targets, asks questions to cover any gaps and summarises key stages and results, using the visualisation as it evolves. The second facilitator writes key words from the discussion on cards, pins the cards to the pin-boards, clustering them according to subject matter and giving clusters headings where appropriate.

Learners can observe the points recorded and the flow of the discussion. They recognise which arguments have been already covered and which arguments still must be addressed. Learners get the feeling that they are part of a visible result without the visualisation and the evolving structure obviously dominating and stalling the discussion.

“Spontaneous Combustion” – Brainstorming

Classical brainstorming sessions can be introduced into all stages of the facilitated process. The actual brainstorming is quick, spontaneous and uncomplicated. The consequent summarization, selection and decision-making process can be trickier. We differentiate between verbal and written brainstorming sessions. Verbal brainstorming is not effective in groups of 20 and over, as there is too much disruption and too little participation. Use written brainstorming for larger groups.

Click here to view a video that explains brainstorming techniques: how to innovate in groups.

The following rules apply for all brainstorming processes:

• Every idea is in!
• No criticism or discussion of ideas!
• Don’t fear silence – use it!
• Enjoy!

Verbal Brainstorming

You NEED visualisation, because brainstorming is an associative process, where people pick up on what’s been said and read to trigger off further ideas. Firstly, visualise your question in a stimulating way (e.g. use red ink to stimulate criticism, blue to stimulate vision, etc.) to help learners focus on the issue. Second, build up the atmosphere for creative and open brainstorming by introducing the topic with your whole body. Look at the learners and transport them through a short story or key image to a personal identification with the topic. Make them feel the topic and its importance. Stress the need to voice all ideas, however unusual, as the selection process will follow afterwards: “It doesn’t matter if the idea is thought through or not – we want ALL ideas!” The learners are encouraged to keep their statements short and succinct.

In a team of preferably two facilitators write down EVERY single idea that comes and don’t judge any of the ideas as either good or questionable. Allow for silence passages of thought within this associative process and, if needed, draw the learners’ attention to the ideas already voiced to trigger further associations.

Close the brainstorming session (e.g. after 10 minutes) clearly and indicate that the selection and prioritising process has begun. Don’t ask the learners to negatively get rid of the “rubbish” as this will de-motivate the originators and is unnecessary. A lot of “rubbish” will have helped produce innovative and unusual ideas. Formulate the question for the selection process carefully and clearly and decide if you want to establish the most important, the favourite, the most pressing or the most relevant, etc. ideas. Underline these with different colour ink to indicate similarity or “clusters” or stick stickers to the ideas to stress their priority.

Written Brainstorming

The card method described above is also a brainstorming method. We also use a different written method to activate large groups in brainstorming processes. Armed with a thick felt-tip pen in one hand and a cup of coffee in the other, the learners are invited to meander around a “market place” of pin-boards and – literally – leave their mark. The boards are clearly and stimulatingly (use pictures!) characterised by questions, ideas, project plans, etc. and have ample space to write down ideas. The learners gather around the boards, exchange ideas and write them down or simply work alone, associating the topics already formulated. This process can be supported by facilitators at each board who “remind” those engaged in discussions to write down their ideas.

Mapping - Simple Relationship Mapping

Mapping is a simple visual task where learners analyse a given set of relationships or networks.

This exercise is implemented in a few simple steps:

• Learners identify all the role players in a specific setting and write their names on cards.
• The relationships between the role players are then analysed as being either positive or negative by connecting the various cards with coloured strips (red for negative, green for positive, white for neutral).
• The details of the negative and positive relationships are written on the coloured strips connecting the role players.
• The learners then look at the map and:
  • identify relationships that could be improved,
  • indicate where relationships should be established, and
  • draw attention to key focal players (i.e. role players who are connected to many others and form hubs in the map) and suggest how to engage or enlist the support of these key players.

In its simplest form, this tool is useful as an awareness raising tool for the learners in the exercise. The facilitator guides the learners through the process and play devil’s advocate, testing some of the relationships on the map.

In some cases, this exercise could also be used to compare networks or systems. An example is to map the commercial farmers association and its relationships, and to then map the small farmers association and its relationships. This exercise might lead to the small farmers associations deciding to work closer with the commercial farmers associations or to design new products and services that fill the gap in its offering to its members.

Mapping - Mind Mapping

The mind-map (see also chapter “Visualisation”) can also be used as a facilitation method of extracting ideas from learners and increasing their analytical and problem-solving successes. The facilitator can merely provide the central issue or subject as a starting point (literally placed at the trunk or centre of the board), or if the “main branches” are also prepared in order to steer the discussion in a series of preconceived directions. Even if the latter approach is conducive to reaching the goal, it is still sensible to provide a couple of empty branches for learners to create their own focal points.

The steps:

Allow for a few moments of open brainstorming to generate a few ideas, then...

• Start to arrange them in a hierarchical (from “main branch” to “twig”) and associative fashion, according to the logic of the learners. “If we’re talking about ‘renovating houses’ as a main branch, the details are: a) providing secure doors, b) reducing dangerous materials, b.1) asbestos, mould, etc.”
• Use symbols instead of words, if possible.
• Facilitators can choose to write the main branches in capital letters, switching to small letters and maybe a different colour pen for the various levels of “twigs”.
• Summarise and use the visualisation to suggest where the discussion should give more details.
• Prioritisation can be introduced to show selection or consensus: learners prioritise thoughts (e.g. with stickers) or even attach their names to sections of the “tree” for subsequent break-away groups.
• Individual “branches” and their “twigs” can form the basis for further detailed mind-maps.

The results should be easy to read and provide a structure for further thought. The “picture” will be able to be carried on into the finest details as well as provide an overview of the subject. Be careful to write horizontally and have enough space to go into detail. Examine the mind map with the learners to establish further connections between ideas and highlight them with coloured lines visually.

Click here to view a video that explains brainstorming techniques.

Break-Away Groups

A plenary discussion in a workshop is the ideal place for a workshop to begin, synchronise thoughts, prioritise, work out group conflict or dilemma, feedback and close. However, a workshop should not only take place in plenary discussions, as this will limit the creative potential of focussing on smaller aspects of the whole issue, lead to boredom and frustration, encourage long-winded or dominant learners to take over and reduce the majority of the learners to passive listeners and limit the commitment of learners to take on the responsibility for the implementation of individual measures.

Break-away groups are thus vital in allowing learners to choose areas of interest to them, actively discuss and shape the results and engage in minute planning on a detailed level. But they shouldn’t be viewed by the facilitator as “time out”. They must be carefully planned and prepared. The facilitator is responsible for the following 4 essential aspects of break-away groups:

Sort break-away groups EITHER according to learners’ personal choice (i.e. project groups, groups working together for more than one session, using joint expertise) OR according to random selection to deliberately separate homogenous groups and create interdisciplinary discussions (i.e. for short term work, preparation of decisions, feedback, reflection).

Alternatives to the Presentations of Break-Away Groups

The choice of method must give justice to the necessity of including any potential additions and criticisms or support of the whole plenary to the results of the break-away groups. In situations where the main emphasis is placed on basic informing of learners of the break-away groups’ main direction of thought, the reporting should be as brief and entertaining as possible. Six reports made by tired learners of 15 minutes each using the illegible scrawl of a brown paper at the end of a day’s work before dinner is nobody’s idea of fun and can dampen the otherwise animated atmosphere of the workshop. 

The choice of method must give justice to the necessity of including any potential additions and criticisms or support of the whole plenary to the results of the break-away groups. In situations where the main emphasis is placed on a basic informing of learners of the break-away groups’ main direction of thought, the reporting should be as brief and entertaining as possible. Six reports made by tired learners of 15 minutes each using the illegible scrawl of a brown paper at the end of a day’s work before dinner is nobody’s idea of fun and can dampen the otherwise animated atmosphere of the workshop.

Prioritising, Ranking and Selection

Variation 1: Personal Choice

Goal: Each participant selects his/her single personal choice or “most pressing option” from a list of alternatives in order to:

• reduce the range of further thought,
• show the range of group interests or opinions,
• give individual learners a clear issue for their further work.

Steps: This simple selection process can take place at any given times in the workshop and can help to cut short a lengthy discussion of alternatives. It involves:

• reading through the list of alternatives,
• giving the learners clear instructions on how the result of the selected options and those not selected will be used in the following steps (what the implications are),
• giving each participant a means of selecting their personal choice (e.g. a sticker for lists on flipcharts or boards or a pebble to place on a floor-mapping),
• summarising the results for the learners and carrying through what was said before the selection commenced.

Variation 2: Ranking with “football scoring”

Goal: Having generated several options, each one (e.g. possible solutions, names for products, etc.) is systematically voted on by all learners to show a ranking of all options.

Steps: This voting process is like the way football results are scored to form league tables. For every win, 3 points; for a draw, 1 point, and for a lost game 0 points. The comparative scoring can be based on e.g. strength of confidence in the options, personal choice, amount of knowledge (much, some, none):

• Read the list of options.
• Show learners the scoring possibilities. (E.g. “You have one vote for each option. There are 8 options, so each participant will vote 8 times – once for each option. If you think that the option we are currently voting on is very relevant, hold up your green card, if you think the option is fairly relevant, hold up your orange card, and if you think the option is not relevant, hold up your red card. We will be counting the amount of each colour card and giving 3 points for each green card, adding to that 1 point for each orange card and adding 0 points for each red card raised.”)
• Make it clear what will happen with the result (is this a decision-making process or is it merely illustrative?).
• Read each option in turn and get each participant to raise one of his/her coloured cards. Each participant has the individual choice and can, theoretically, allocate the same number of points for every option.
• Add up the points at the end of all the voting and present the “hits”.

Variation 3: Prioritising and selecting according to one criterion

Goal: After conducting a card cluster, the various clusters can be prioritised to show the way for the next steps in the process (i.e. “Where do we want to set up working groups?”, or selecting issues to focus in the ensuing plenary discussions).

Steps: The main thing to be aware of is clarity of criterium and of making sure learners have enough time to think, read and decide. Read the question exactly as written and explain. The question must have a clear evaluation criterion (e.g. most urgent, most relevant, most critical for the success of…, etc.).

• Explain how to place the stickers/pebbles and how many each participant will receive (take the number of options, divide it by two and round it up) and, for more than 5 stickers, set a maximum of two per field.
• Ask the learners to put their stickers on the board – all at the same time (simultaneously). Show the field for the stickers and hand out the stickers (if not already handed out before).
• Count the stickers and write the amount with a thick pen directly on the stickers. Point out the “hits” once finished.
• The result of the multi-sticker question makes the priorities visible. This may be the agreed decision-making process, or it may act as information before the decision is made.

Click here to view an explanation about the use of break-away groups.