Embrace shadow facilitation as part of the job

Photo by Hassaan here on UNSPLASH

Introduction

A separate post introduces nine client system pressures that can be part of the facilitation landscape, typically in the background although sometimes visible in the foreground as well.

Shadow facilitation challenges are often not within your direct control as a facilitator. Client system pressures exist and will show themselves in different ways. Key capacity goals are to anticipate, recognize and prepare as best you can to manage them, rather than trying to ignore them, "wish them away", or treat them as detached from your process management role.

This post provides an overview summary of helpful strategies a facilitator can adapt to confidently manage different shadow facilitation influences as they recombine in different ways to challenge a smooth, effective process.

Facilitation strategies to address shadow facilitation influences

1.      Engage authority with curiosity and clarity. 

Empty chair: leader missing in action when needed

Try to ensure that senior leaders are in-the-room and engaged when matters that are their responsibility and important to participants are being discussed. If they aren't available, confirm who is best placed to respond to different types of issues. Be proactive about drawing on these people, rather than waiting for them to volunteer. Of course, be sure you brief the senior person or designated respondents on their expected roles before hand, and give enough notice that they can prepare. For example, as participants add to a set of critical points, you might say, "Those are strong points. When we've heard from more of you, with 2-3 more rounds of inputs, we'll invite (x) to respond." If you don't get opportunity to brief senior people and those in key respondent positions individually, support internal lead organizers to brief them.

Invite leaders into constructive dialogue when their input may derail or dilute the process.  Offer respectful, well-reasoned alternatives that protect the group’s purpose.  Invite other seasoned participants to contribute. Don't be shy or diffident: you advocate on behalf of the wider purpose and process, not yourself.

2.      Pair honest assessment with appreciative framing. 

Photo by Smit Patel on UNSPLASH

Help clients and event participants explore gaps and issues candidly while also naming strengths and positive achievements. Assign members of an extended facilitation team to maintain a "group memory", flip-charts or presentation slides on which key points are noted and remain up. A group memory serves a different purpose from meeting notes that will be part of a report. It support consolidation of group positions and is available to recap at different points, focus group attention when discussion shifts to action planning.

Balanced attention can be a challenge in complex or tense situations. Keep the group's "eyes on the prize", purpose and what needs to change. Remind regularly of shared responsibility and collective development of solutions, if the group is serious about addressing pain points.  Balance evidence-based organizational critique with celebration of wins. 

As you decide how to manage contributions in the moment, distinguish between expression of opinions and provision of informative evidence or facts. Use guiding questions to elicit the latter, where these exist. In particular, refer regularly to key reference and source documents.

3.      Establish shared process expectations and norms, and actively use them. 

Distil a draft working set of process norms from early planning and preparation. Don't wait until an event starts. Process norms may also be known as ground rules, housekeeping and rules of engagement.

Draw on the organization's values and previous experience with similar processes. Adapt existing sets of process norms if these are available. Be sure that your final reports and process records include the set of agreed process norms and your observations about adherence to them with recommendations for future similar events. Consult lead organizers on their expectations for process norms or "rules of engagement" and integrate specifics.

Clarify early with lead organizers that all participants, including them, will follow the agreed norms, with thoughtful exceptions when the design or quality of exchange calls for it. Your scope for applying norms relatively strictly including to organizers and senior people is weaker without this preparatory step. Any such gentle reminder about norms needs to be done carefully and respectfully: organizers may assume they are exempt.

Take time to confirm and validate the proposed set of process norms with the group, as part of an event opening. Invite additions and refinements. Reinforce the point that the group members share responsibility to adhere to the norms and support others to adhere to them, for a strong process. Empower all to co-implement them. Ensure the extended facilitation team members are clear about their role to "lead from within" on process norms, for example in break-out and working groups.

4.      Prepare senior leadership for success. 

Brief key figures ahead of time on the design, time boundaries and their role so contributions enhance flow and support participant experience.  Sometimes this has to be done “on the fly”, in a brief exchange on arrival. If you do not have access to senior leadership for briefings, provide those who do with essential key messages.

Circumstances permitting, as part of preparation meet with senior leadership and consult on their highest priorities and expectations for an event. Ensure that their needs are met without compromising the priorities of participants.

5.      Hold time with steady, respectful consistency - and some flexibility.

Photo by William Warby on UNSPLASH

Protect the group’s energy and engagement by applying time boundaries event and impartially.  Transparent processes build trust and encourage everyone to contribute meaningfully.

Ensure that time management specifics are addressed in process norms. "Start as you mean to go on" with respect to time, demonstrating all the tools available, e.g.: time cards, bells, timers, music. By the time the first half-day is over, participants will be used to the time reminders and most will respond to them promptly.

As you introduce and close sessions, consistently make reference to how available time will be used, e.g.: In the two hours for this session, we'll hear from a panel of experts for 20 minutes, followed by a 20 minutes Q&A. Then you'll move to working groups for an hour, followed by 20 minutes for brief report-backs on guiding questions that the working group facilitators will share with you." This example illustrates how effective transparency applies both to what the group will be doing and the time available to do it.

Balance consistency in time management with value. Sometimes a process is flowing well with all participants engaged: interrupting it to impose a time restriction may be disruptive and counter productive. Time frames are guide posts, not rigid requirements. Check in with participants, for example: "This is a rich discussion. Does the group agree that we can extend it for another ten minutes?" or if time is running, "This is a rich discussion but we've been advised that lunch is ready. I suggest that we pause for now, and adjust the afternoon schedule to pick up the discussion when we reconvene. I'll start with the five people on the speaker's list."

6.      Stay anchored in outcomes, not applause.  

Use the results chain and session objectives to guide in-the-moment decisions about process.  Ensure that session objectives are defined clearly within a strong results chain, increasing trust that a well-crafted process yields value even if immediate feedback varies or pushback occurs.

Avoid “running after” positive feedback, doing what you think the organizers or participants want. What's the best decision in support of a maximally effective process?

7.      Welcome critique and criticism as valuable information for the group. 

With thanks to OpenClipart-Vectors

Anticipate a range of reactions, and meet them with openness. Avoid being defensive about negative inputs or unquestionally accepting of positive ones. Invite evidence, facts, supporting doctrine in the form of policies, procedures, guidance notes. Evidence can legitimately include anecdotal evidence. Draw on the wisdom of the group to triangulate it with other experiences.

Invite verbal clarifications, and don’t try to read body language clues alone. Important as non-verbal communication is for a facilitator to monitor and gauge, making assumptions can lead to misinterpretation. Sometimes what appears to be disengagement or disdain can be deep thinking: sometimes what appears as positive compliance is a facade. Probe people on what they mean when they deliver ambiguous remarks. Push for clarity and confirm shared group understanding, before you try to secure agreement.

Treat resistance and pushback as useful data that can deepen engagement and process quality.  Try to be more than open to it: embrace it!

Watch for "spoilers", people whose purpose in providing critical input appears to be to derail a process more than contribute to it. If you believe that an open plenary is a forum for spoilers, consider adjusting the design to minimize the influence of such people. For example, at a break, convene a meeting with lead organizers to validate your analysis, and propose alternative methods and techniques for sessions that follow. Use table groups (minimize scope of influence and damage), working groups (with guiding steps to a group task supported by a co-facilitator). Change seating arrangements for subsequent days: pair spoilers with senior leaders and strong participants who are briefed on and support the process and its planned results.

8.      Embed evaluation into event design and standard work processes. 

Final evaluation ratings of an event

Support development of a comprehensive evaluation strategy, with informal and formal elements applying across a full process or event cycle. This approach to process evaluation will be new to some people, and many may assume that an "end-of-event" evaluation will be adequate.

Include in the evaluation strategy roles for different extended facilitation team members. If an event has people from distinctly different groups, invite "eyes and ears" representing each group to be part of the extended facilitation team, tasked to bring feedback to daily debrief meetings and alert lead facilitators to any immediate issues.

Set themes in the strategy for “in the moment” evaluation that allows for course correction, feedback on specifics of different programme elements and sessions, and evaluation of results transferred to work post-event.  Design impact tracking that involves managers and is integrated into in regular work processes, including performance evaluation if possible, linking event results to regular work streams. 

Use quick polls, "trolling and polling" where facilitation team members touch base with different participants and ask how things are going for them, observation and experience. In daily debrief meetings, include a standard question, "How did the day go, from your perspective?"

When evaluation is not fully positive, decide as a facilitation team how to address it or adjust plans in response. Keep the participant group informed about the evaluation theme and associated adjustments, so people know you are taking their feedback about satisfaction seriously and responding.

9.      Nurture a safe environment and psychological space. 

Photo by Bernard Hernant on UNSPLASH

People who don't trust a process or feel confident that their inputs will be respected are unlikely to be fully candid or honest. A key part of your facilitation role that spans both visible and shadow dimensions of facilitation is creating a safe and comfortable space.

Use pre-event consultation and in-session check-ins to understand the range of group starting points.  Demonstrate with specific references that their inputs have been heard and matter: for example, use people's own language in summaries of consultation inputs (ensuring you are protecting anonymity).

Reinforce a safe, open climate for contributions.  Openly acknowledge inputs received and recognize emerging patterns to which all contribute.  As noted in the points about evaluation strategy, informally touch base with a cross-section of participants to secure feedback.

Shut down any process that deteriorates into personal conflicts or abuse, immediately. This illustrates a loop back to the beginning of the profile of a facilitator's job, model your own and the organizers' values.

In closing

Shadow facilitation is one dimension of a comprehensive approach to professional facilitation. While it can be challenging to prepare for specific challenges in an event or process, you can be confident that some shadow facilitation challenges will present. Strengthening your capacity to anticipate and respond to such challenges can increase your corresponding confidence to address them.

For more tips, see the tactical series on shadow facilitation at the Facilitate It website. Shadow facilitation - tactical series