| Both sides previous revision Previous revision Next revision | Previous revision Next revisionBoth sides next revision |
| hosting_craft [2013-10-31 16:34] – maja | hosting_craft [2013-12-17 10:42] – [Session 4: The conversations] maja |
|---|
| |
| |
| ==== Session 1: Hosting, craft and the Host ==== | ==== Session 1: The Host ==== |
| |
| |
| Having an intuition about people's attention helps decide when to let the conversations take their course, when to step up, calm things down or take them sideways. | Having an intuition about people's attention helps decide when to let the conversations take their course, when to step up, calm things down or take them sideways. |
| |
| A course that can help develop your own communication skills and be more aware of how others communicate: Mindfulness in Communication by Edel Maex in Antwerp. Maex uses a tool he calls "Communication compass" in this course, to be able to talk about communication. | A course that can help develop your own communication skills and be more aware of how others communicate: [[http://levenindemaalstroom.drupalgardens.com/content/mindfulness-en-communicatie|Mindfulness en communicatie]] by Edel Maex in Antwerp. Maex uses a tool he calls "Communication compass" in this course, to be able to talk about communication. |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| //next session: 20131216 10-14h: hosting and summarising conversations// | //next session: 20131216 12-16h: hosting conversations// |
| | |
| | |
| | ==== Session 4: The conversations ==== |
| | |
| | After receiving the people, framing a question and setting guidelines, we finally come to the core of the hosting craft: the conversation. The central question for every host is //how to host a group conversation, where everyone's voice is heard, the results are shared and the vision arising from the conversation is collective//? |
| | |
| | Before getting into the myriad of known formats, there are a few basic forms that anyone can host without too many rules: |
| | |
| | === Personal - solo === |
| | |
| | A few minutes of individual contemplation is important when the topics discussed are complex, or emotionally charged. It allows people to explore both their thoughts and their gut-feelings and come up with considered, honest answers. Posing a question and allowing a few minutes for thinking about the question, taking notes and composing one's thoughts can substantially deepen the group conversation. This type of 'conversation' can be used at any moment in a workshop, but works particularly well in the beginning (to connect the participants own experience with the topic of conversations), middle (as a 'breathing space' after expansive, high paced conversations in larger groups) and at the end (a moment of quiet reflection). |
| | |
| | <blockquote>Exercise: This exercise allows the participants to reflect on their personal motivations, as well as connect with the motivations of others in the group. Frame the exercise and pose the question 'what motivates you to get up in the morning and face the day?' (or something similar). Explain that people can individually reflect on the question for a few minutes, write down one or more answers. Give a small bunch of post-its to every participant, instruct them to write one answer per post it. Inform the participants that the answers will be shared with the group, and that the goal is to create a collective map of motivations. </blockquote> |
| | |
| | === Intimate - duo === |
| | |
| | A dialogue in a pair can be experienced as the most intimate, but also demanding type of conversation. Both participants have to be active (either speaking or listening), so no 'drifting' is possible (unless you want to offend your conversation partner). The conversation can be structured in different ways, for example: |
| | * an interview (one person speaks, the other only asks questions, then exchange roles). The value of this kind of conversation is that there is enough space for both people to speak, without the other person stepping in too much, except to ask questions - which can be perceived as encouragement and engagement. Because both participants take turns, they are aware of both roles (speaker/listener) and are more supportive of each other. |
| | * a monologue (one person speaks, the other one listens, then exchange roles), allows a lot of space, but can be experienced as quite confronting. It is important for the listener to give appropriate non-verbal signs to show his/her attention or engagement. This form might work better with participants who know each other well. |
| | * free flow (the common form when we talk with friends). This is the most informal form and it is comfortable for most people. The danger is that one of the people might be dominant and talking most of the time. In this case the facilitator might have to discretely step in to allow some space to the other person. |
| | When reporting to the larger group, it's interesting to let one person report what the other person has said. If the participants know this in advance, they might pay closer attention to what each other are saying. |
| | |
| | <blockquote>Exercise (from Appreciative Inquiry): Frame the conversation as an exercise in finding out which situations are inspiring and energising for the participants, and investigating which factors made this situation possible. Explain that the session will happen in pairs, where one person speaks first, while the other one 'interviews' them, using a given set of questions, and takes notes. After five minutes, they swap roles. At the end, the person who took notes reports about their partner's experience to the whole group, focusing less on a specific situation and more on the characteristics that could be generalised. Task: |
| | * Think of a time when you felt inspired and energised (at work). Describe the situation. |
| | * How did you feel? |
| | * What did you do? |
| | * What made this situation possible? |
| | At the end, the person who took notes reports in a few words the feelings, actions and resources that make inspiring situations possible. The facilitator (or a volunteer) summarises the key points. </blockquote> |
| | |
| | |
| | === Active - trio === |
| | |
| | Talking between three people makes for an active conversation. The introduction of a third person in a dialogue creates a new dynamics, that is less intimate, but can be more energised. Again, many forms are possible: |
| | * one person talks, the other two ask questions |
| | * one person talks, one asks questions, the third one takes notes and reports (everyone should have a chance to inhabit every role) |
| | * everyone talks when they want, they share the same piece of paper to make notes… |
| | |
| | <blockquote>Exercise in active listening. Explain that the group will be split in several trios. There will be three rounds of five minutes, where one person speaks, the second one listens, paraphrases, asks clarifying questions and the third person takes notes. Every person should have a chance to take on each role. At the end everyone's stories will be summarised by the persons who took notes (so everyone gets to report back). The question is //What surprised or delighted you in this year?//. At the end, everyone reports back, not their owns story, but the one they noted down, summarising the highlights of the year. The facilitator (or a volunteer) summarises the key points.</blockquote> |
| | |
| | |
| | === Diverse - break-out groups === |
| | |
| | This is a very common way to split large groups into smaller ones (4-7 people), in order to allow everyone to have a chance to speak and to have a conversation with new people. The challenge or breakout groups is to find a quick way for people to move into the groups without using time and attention. If the choice of breakout groups isn't free, there needs to be a quick and easy way to mix people who don't know each other (colours, symbols, numbers, rows, pre-assigned randomised groups…). You have to be clear and concise in your instructions, to avoid delays and confusion. For example, you can say: |
| | * //in the next exercise we will break out into smaller groups. We will take 20 minutes to explore the question "xxx". At the end of this period, one of you will summarise the findings to the whole group. In order to for you to get a chance to talk to new people, we have pre-assigned you to a specific breakout space. In your participants' packs you have received notebooks in different colours. Choose the breakout space of the same colour and take your place. You can find the question and instructions written down in each break out space. Now when you're ready feel free to move to your designated space and start the conversation. I will come around to help with the process and answer any questions that might arise.// |
| | In a break-out group it helps to have one or two people to moderate the conversation, take notes and report back to the group. There are (at least) two ways to assign the moderator/reporter: |
| | * pre-assigned. You and/or the organisers of the event can decide beforehand who should moderate and/or report from each breakout group. You can brief them before hand about the topic and some basic moderation principles, so they in a way become your 'ambassadors'. This is useful if the topic is complex, you need to get to specific results, you need someone with specific prior knowledge, the time is short, and/or you want to be sure that the moderators/reporters have the appropriate social intelligence and facilitation skills. |
| | * emerging spontaneously on the spot. This allows for more 'organic' conversation, where the group itself agrees on the roles, they 'own' the process and feel more engaged. The risk is that the loudest voices might dominate the group, and that the report might be biased towards one person's opinion. |
| | |
| | The breakout-moderators' task is the same as yours, but in a smaller group: they make sure that everyone is introduced and heard, as well as guide the conversation towards a meaningful conclusion, in a specified amount of time. It helps to have a big paper (or other writing surface) on the wall or table of each break-out group, so that the participants can jointly note things down and jointly see and agree what the coming out of the conversation (the paper can be taken back into the bigger group to use as a reporting tool). Reporting back from breakout groups can be tedious if there are many of them, and if the people reporting attempt to describe the whole conversation. You should give clear guidelines about how the conversation should be reported (e.g. 3 key points, only conclusions). You can also choose to have a visual or physical reporting (a wall of notes and diagrams, or [[http://dramaresource.com/strategies/still-images-a-freeze-frames|still image/freeze frame]] representations made by the whole breakout group. However you decide to do the reporting, you have to give every group about the same amount of time - which is easier said than done. Gently but firmly, you help the reporters get to the point and note down most important insights, that you can pool together from all groups and make a group-wide summary at the end of the session. |
| | |
| | <blockquote> We didn't have enough people to practice break-out conversations, but an exercise would be: Frame the conversation in the whole group. Give instructions about the break-outs, the topic, etiquette, duration and format of the conversation, as well as the format of the reporting to the larger group. Assign moderators and reporters (or let them emerge from the group). Find a quick and easy way for people to find which breakout group to go to. During the conversations, walk around and remind people of the topic and the instructions (if needed). Host the reporting and summarise the key points at the end. </blockquote> |
| | |
| | === Unifying - whole group === |
| | |
| | Usually done in a circle, or semi-circle, with or without a table in the middle (be aware that some people have a problem with the circle). The benefit of a whole group conversation is that everyone can be involved and no reporting back is needed. In practice there are always people who speak longer and louder and others who remain silent. There are different ways to try to include everyone's voice in the conversation: |
| | * a listening circle: going around clock-wise or counter clock-wise, where one person speaks, the others listen and do not ask questions or add anything until the circle is completed; |
| | * 'pop-corn' with a talking piece (a soft squishy ball helps people who are nervous about speaking, but anything will do): similar to listening circle but in unpredictable order, chosen in different ways: |
| | * people picking up a talking piece from the middle of the circle when they are ready to speak |
| | * the speaker offers the talking piece to the person they want to hear next) |
| | * facilitator or a volunteer pick names out of a hat… |
| | |
| | <blockquote>Exercise: [[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exquisite_corpse|cadavre exquis]] in a circle. Try out three different listening circles using the talking piece. Frame the exercise as a collaborative storytelling, where each person says one sentence, and the next one builds on it. First try out the circle where one person starts and gives the talking piece to the person on their left. Next put the talking piece in the centre of the circle, let one person start and pass the talking piece to a person whom they'd like to hear next. Finally, put the talking piece in the centre and invite the participants to pick it up and speak when they feel ready. </blockquote> |
| | |
| | In all of the conversation forms above, the role of the host is the same: |
| | * Explaining the exercise and what is expected (framing flow and topic) |
| | * Moderating/Facilitating the conversation |
| | * Steering conversations to the topic/question |
| | * Keeping watch over group dynamics and people's energy levels ('holding the space') |
| | * Including everyone in the conversation |
| | * Reminding people of instructions and house rules (discretely) |
| | * Time keeping and announcing (think about what would be an appropriate prop - bells, cymbals, alarm, gong, wine glass, soft->loud music…) |
| | * Summarising, summarising, summarising |
| | * Note taking (or harvesting, can be delegated if there is someone else available). |
| | |
| | Using a combination of solo, duo, trio, break-outs and circles, you can design many different flows and formats. When combining different conversation forms together, think about what kind of conversation is most appropriate for the topic and the goals. Some need more contemplation or intimate sharing, others more active and unifying conversations, some can benefit form having all the forms above, put together in a 'logical flow. We will deal with how to design flows in one of the next sessions, For now, think about how the different conversation forms would fit in a [[http://sustainabilitythinking.files.wordpress.com/2011/10/scharmertheoryu21.jpg|U format]]. |
| | |
| | |
| | Next time (January 2014): 'Harvesting': note taking and summarising, with a side note on listening and public speaking. |
| | |
| | |
| |
| |
timbo