Zumeta: Mediators as facilitators

MEDIATORS AS FACILITATORS
ACR ANNUAL CONFERENCE
OCTOBER 10, 2014
CINCINNATI, OHIO
PRESENTER:
ZENA D. ZUMETA, J.D.
MEDIATION TRAINING & CONSULTATION INSTITUTE
330 E. LIBERTY, SUITE 3A
ANN ARBOR, MI, 48104
(734) 663-1155/FAX: (734) 663-0524
EMAIL: mtci@igc.org
WEBSITES: www.learn2mediate.com, www.collaborateatwork.com

AGENDA
What is Facilitation
Types of Meetings to Facilitate
Facilitation vs. Mediation
Mediators as Facilitators
Basic vs. Developmental Facilitation
What a Facilitator Does
Stages of Facilitation
Issues in Facilitation
Facilitation Techniques
© Zumeta, 2014 Mediator as Facilitator Page 2

TABLE OF CONTENTS
AGENDA............................................................................................................................ 2
TABLE OF CONTENTS.................................................................................................... 3
DEFINITIONS OF FACILITATION................................................................................. 4
Comparison of Mediation and Facilitation ..................................................................... 5
FACETS OF FACILITATION........................................................................................... 6
THE BASIC FACILITATION PROCESS......................................................................... 7
KEY INTERVENTIONS OF A FACILITATOR ............................................................ 10
KEY SKILLS OF A FACILITATOR .............................................................................. 11
TIPS FOR FACILITATORS............................................................................................ 12
FACILITATOR CHECKLIST ......................................................................................... 13
AGREE/DISAGREE ........................................................................................................ 14
FACILITATION TECHNIQUES..................................................................................... 15
AREAS FOR GROUND RULES..................................................................................... 17
POSSIBLE GUIDELINES FOR DISCUSSION.............................................................. 18
CONSULTATION ISSUES FOR DEVELOPMENTAL FACILITATION.................... 19
DECISION-MAKING PROCESSES IN GROUPS......................................................... 21
CONSENSUS ................................................................................................................... 22
THE PROCESS ................................................................................................................ 24
METHODS FOR STRAW POLLS .................................................................................. 25
SAMPLE SIX-STEP PROBLEM SOLVING PROCESS................................................ 26
BIBLIOGRAPHY............................................................................................................. 27
Other Facilitation Resources......................................................................................... 28
PREVENTING CONFLICT THROUGH FACILITATION ........................................... 29

DEFINITIONS OF FACILITATION
1. Facilitation is the role of assisting the group
in accomplishing its goals.
2. Facilitation is the process of helping a group improve
the way it identifies and solves problems and makes decisions,
in order to increase the group’s effectiveness.
TWO TYPES OF FACILITATION
1. BASIC FACILITATION
In basic facilitation, the facilitator’s role is to run a meeting, helping the
group achieve the goals of the meeting.
2. DEVELOPMENTAL FACILITATION
In developmental facilitation, the facilitator’s roles are to assist the
group to achieve its goals, help improve group effectiveness, and help
the group learn to facilitate itself.

Comparison of Mediation and Facilitation
AREA MEDIATION FACILITATION
GOALS Agreement Goals of the group
PROCESS Set by mediator Set by group
ROLE Neutral – fairly standard
Group effectiveness – may
vary widely
FORMAT Joint sessions Group meeting
Caucus Small group work
IDEA GENERATION Part of mediation process Structured techniques
GROUND RULES Set by mediator Agreed to by group
AGENDA Set by mediator Set by group
IDENTIFYING
PARTICIPANTS
Disputants Stakeholders
Relatively Obvious Major pre-facilitation issue
METHOD OF DECISION
MAKING
Interest-based negotiation
Group decides, facilitator
leads
PRIOR CONTACT WITH
PARTICIPANTS
Mediator style Necessary

FACETS OF FACILITATION
• Task
What is the task that the group needs to achieve?
• Process
What is the process that the facilitator will use to assist the
group in achieving its task?
• Maintenance
What is the process the group and facilitator will use to treat
its members, and keep up group cohesiveness and morale?
• Process Observation
How will the facilitator and group monitor the group’s process
and/or progress?

THE BASIC FACILITATION PROCESS
1. Helping the group create an agenda, before or during the meeting
2. Structuring the participation of the group (helping everyone in the group feel included
and participating)
3. Facilitating the group procedures and decision - making processes
4. Providing the group memory system
5. Facilitating group maintenance
6. Process observation
7. Facilitating through the Groan Zone
8. Facilitating debriefing
1. Helping the group create an agenda, before or during the meeting
Make sure there is an agenda including:
• Starting time
• Ending time
• Issues to be discussed, sequence of items, and person responsible for presenting
each item
• Time allotted for each issue
• Actions which need to be taken on each issue
• Meeting procedure and decision - making method
• Time for debriefing at end of meeting
2. Structuring the participation of the group (helping everyone in the group
participate and feel included)
• Help the group find a norm of equal influence
• Call on those who have not spoken
• Reduce the speaking time of those who would dominate
• Where helpful, suggest the group members speak one by one in turn
3. Facilitating the group procedures and decision- making processes
The group has decided:
• Its procedures for group discussion and problem - solving
• Its decision - making process
The facilitator must help the group:
• Follow the collaborative problem-solving process
• Stay on point and at the right stage of the process
• Bring up issues with problem statements
The facilitator should:

• Suggest agreements the group may have reached, or directions the group may
need to go in
• Help move the process of the meeting forward
• Restate opinions and options to neutralize and help the group move toward
resolution
4. Providing the group memory system
In order for the group to have a common memory, it must be possible for each member to
see what ideas the group has already considered. Most commonly groups use a flipchart
and felt - tip markers. The requirements for a good memory system are that it:
• Be visible to all members of the group
• Be maintained simultaneously with the group's thought process
• Accurately reflect the language of the group members
• Be typed up and copied for members by the next meeting as the flipcharts
appeared
5. Facilitating group maintenance
In order for the group to function at its best, it must be possible for the group to work
harmoniously and with some sense of order and positivity.
The facilitator must assist the group in:
• Gatekeeping: inviting people to speak, or moving on to the next person
• Harmonizing: calming the group, reducing tension and over - emotionalizing,
pointing out the feelings of the group or a participant
• Encouraging the group: to help the group over frustrating times. Can be done by
complimenting the group, putting the frustration into perspective, helping a group
recall past processes which got stalled but were ultimately successful, or talking
about the benefits of staying with the process.
6. Process Observation
Pointing out the way the group is working to help the group overcome a process which is
not working, or improve processes that are marginally working.
Working with the group to find new processes and approaches.
7. Facilitating Through the Groan Zone
a) Business as Usual -- Familiar Opinions à Decision Point
b) New approach: Familiar Opinions à Divergent Zone à Groan Zone à
Convergent Zone à Closure Zone à Decision Point
Divergent Zone:
Familiar Opinions
Attempted Decision

Diverse Perspectives
(The Agony of the) Groan Zone:
Competing Frames of Reference
Confusion, Aggravation, Frustration, Disgust,
Perplexity, Boredom, Anxiety, Exasperation
Convergent Zone:
Shared Framework of Understanding
Inclusive Alternatives
Synthesis
Refinements
Decision Point
From Kaner, et. al, Facilitator's Guide to Participatory Decision-Making. New Society
Publishers, 1996.
8. Facilitating debriefing
At the end of each group meeting, there should be a 5 or 10 minute period for debriefing.
The purpose of the debriefing is to allow each group member to reflect on and state how
s/he is feeling about the group, the group process, or the result of the meeting.
Rules:
1. Start anywhere in the group and go around to each person from there.
2. Each person can say whatever s/he wants, without censoring.
3. No one should reply to anything that is said. This is very important.
4. A time limit should be set for each person, usually 1 or 1 1/2 minutes.
5. The facilitator should time.
6. If the group agrees, anyone can "pass", or decline to say anything.
7. At the end of the debriefing, with group agreement, those who have "passed"
may choose to state something.
8. People can have more than one say with permission from the group.
9. At the end of the debriefing, the group can decide to address any issues which
have come up, either at that time or at another time.
10. Items brought up in debriefing should not be put on the flipchart except by
permission of the group.

KEY INTERVENTIONS OF A
FACILITATOR
• Summarizing
what the group is currently discussing, agreements and decisions,
actions.
• Clarifying
what is being communicated, what the group is doing, what someone
has said, group conflicts.
• Reminding
what the task is, when the group is sidetracked, when ground rules are
being violated.
• Making Connections
between issues being discussed, decisions being made, goals vs. actions
being discussed.
• Moving Forward
with the task, with consensus, with the agenda.
• Observing
the process of the group, where things get stuck, how they get un-stuck.

KEY SKILLS OF A FACILITATOR
• Listening
• Summarizing and Clarifying
• Harmonizing
• Anticipating
• Asking Questions
• Monitoring the Group
• Monitoring the Topic
• Focusing the Group
• Keeping the Group on Task
• Debriefing the Group

TIPS FOR FACILITATORS
-Know your group:
• What kind of goals are held for this group or by this group?
• What kind of history has the group experienced?
• What are the different needs and experience levels represented?
•What kind of expectations do members have about coming together?
• Are there alliances or enmities present in the group?
• What, if any, norms has the group developed?
- Be ready for changes:
• In direction of the group ~ goals of the group
• In meeting design
- Test out your assumptions
One of the fastest ways for a facilitator to get in trouble is to make an assessment
of the situation in the group and proceed without ever checking if the assessment
was a valid one.
- Establish goals that are clear, appropriate, and observable
• How will you know if a goal is accomplished, what will it look like?
• Break large goals down into achievable objectives.
• Don't try to build Rome in the first hour of the meeting.
- Allow for breaks
• The mind can contribute as long as the rear can endure
- Does your meeting have a beginning, middle, and an end?
Just like a speech, a meeting should have an introduction, body, and conclusion.
Don't begin the thorniest or most involved problem without preparation; and
don't start on it just before the end of the meeting.

FACILITATOR CHECKLIST
Yes No N/A
Did the facilitator:
1. GUIDE the agenda? ____|_____|_____
2. MOTIVATE dialogue? ____|_____|_____
3. ENCOURAGE participation? ____|_____|_____
4. CLARIFY when needed? ____|_____|_____
5. PACE the meeting? ____|_____|_____
6. IDENTIFY interpersonal communication problems?
____|_____|_____
7. SUMMARIZE adequately when needed? ____|_____|_____
8. MANAGE conflict effectively? ____|_____|_____
9. TEST for consensus? ____|_____|_____
10. SOLICIT feedback? ____|_____|_____
11. KEEP the discussion on topic? ____|_____|_____
12. EFFECTIVELY express group feeling? ____|_____|_____
13. AID in establishing a good climate? ____|_____|_____
14. HARMONIZE/bring about harmony? ____|_____|_____
15. PROBLEM SOLVE or help problem solve effectively?
____|_____|_____

16. KEEP to the group problem solving process?
____|_____|_____
AGREE/DISAGREE
Which of the following statements about facilitation do you agree with? Why?
1. Bringing closure to the task of the group is not as important as making sure
everyone is comfortable in the group.
2. An effective facilitator never loses his or her cool with a group.
3. An effective facilitator expresses opinions to help move the group toward its
goals.
4. Building trust within a group is not the responsibility of a facilitator.
5. Effective facilitators are born with innate personality traits that allow them to
function in this role.
6. When difficult issues surface, it is best to avoid those that may tear the group
apart.
7. Sensitive issues, such as race and gender, should be handled outside of the
group, especially when the facilitator is not comfortable with facilitating the
tensions that are present around these topics.
8. In some difficult situations, it is okay to leave the group and defer to another
facilitator.
9. If you are an effective facilitator, personal attacks from group members will
not happen.
10. A facilitator who loses control of a group is not responsible for the
outcome(s).
11. A group that utilizes its own members to facilitate is not as effective as one
with an outside facilitator.
12. Tracking the maintenance and function of a group should be left to an
observer because the facilitator is too involved in the act of facilitating.
13. A facilitator operates from a position of authority.

FACILITATION TECHNIQUES
Tools *
Tools for Brainstorming
Sticky notes
Flipcharting
Small group/large group/individual
Consensus on ideas
No analysis of ideas
Brain mapping
Tools for Analysis
Affinity grouping
Force field analysis
Appreciative Inquiry
Give me a wish
Option comparison grid
SWOT
Is/Isn’t the Problem
Tools for Narrowing
Straw polls
Levels of importance
Multivoting
Nominal group technique
Paired comparisons
Tools for Decision-Making
Consensus
Voting
*See Kelsey and Plumb, Great Meetings! Great Results! 2004
Conflict Resolution and Disruptive Behavior in Groups
Name it, validate it, write it on the flipchart, negotiate it
Ignore the conflict, deal with concerns
Invoke a ground rule (courtesy, one at a time, no yelling, etc.)
Ask the meaning of the behavior, or the concern leading to the behavior
Ask if you have understood the concern correctly
Draw the person aside if possible
Confront the behavior if nothing else has worked

Recording
Agenda
Issues
Ideas
Priorities
Decisions
Actions, deadlines, next meetings, etc. (who, what, when, where and how)
Vary the color of marker in some organized way
Write large and legibly
Get the ideas right (check)
Make sure everyone can see it
Use graphics
Supplies
Flip chart or computer projector
Sheets along the walls
Sticky notes
Markers
Dots and stars
Name tags
Toys
Scissors
Tape

AREAS FOR GROUND RULES
1. How often to meet, place and length of meetings.
2. How to build agendas.
3. Facilitating and recording meetings.
4. Chairing of meetings, if different from #3.
5. Purpose and mission of group.
6. How group makes decisions. (Voting, consensus, Robert's Rules,
etc.)
7. Evaluation of group process and achievements.
8. Operating guidelines:
Attendance, tardiness, revisiting issues and decisions,
participation in decision-making, relationship to authority
structure, replacing group members, etc.
9. Discussion guidelines:
Speaking, interrupting, tone, seating, passing notes, caucuses,
conflicts, etc.
10. Other ground rules as needed.

POSSIBLE GUIDELINES FOR DISCUSSION
1. Explain reasons behind statements.
2. No side conversations. Show respect for whoever is speaking.
3. No repeating things that have already been stated.
4. Listen with an open mind.
5. Seek a resolution that is comfortable for everyone.
6. If you state a problem, give a potential solution.
7. Keep the tone positive, not accusatory.
8. Be concise; no speeches.
9. Disagree respectfully but openly, not just to some people but to
the whole group.
10. Do not interrupt the speaker.

CONSULTATION ISSUES FOR DEVELOPMENTAL
FACILITATION
1. Entry
2. Assessment
3. Planning and Negotiation of Intervention
4. Implementation
5. Evaluation
6. Reporting, Refinement and Review
7. Moving out of the System
OTHER POSSIBLE CONSULTING ROLES FOR
DEVELOPMENTAL FACILITATORS
1. Team building
2. Training
3. Conflict Coaching
4. Mediating
5. Basic Facilitation
6. Organization Development

ISSUES IN DEVELOPMENTAL FACILITATION
1. Who is the client?
Need to determine who the paying client is, and who can assist in or
prevent your being successful
2. What is the problem?
Do assessment; then report back to the client for planning the
intervention.
3. Training vs. intervention
DEALING WITH THE POLITICS OF ORGANIZATIONS
1. Who hired me?
2. What did they want me to do? Can I renegotiate this as we go
along?
3. H.R. vs. line management
4. Management vs. supervision vs. employees
5. Does the organization really want this to be done?
6. Do I have a “champion”?
GROUP ASSESSMENT
1. Methods:
Instruments
Interviews
Surveys
2. Goals of management and group members
3. Assessment of impediments to reaching goals of management and
group members
4. “Reading” the organization

DECISION-MAKING PROCESSES IN GROUPS
1. Authoritative decision making
Person in authority makes the decision. Pro: fast, person with most
knowledge may be making the decision. Con: people below may
resent the decision; person with most knowledge may not be making the
decision.
2. Consultative decision making
Person in authority consults with others, then makes decision. Pro:
fast, but still gets knowledge and opinions from others. Con: Others
may not agree; decision may not be what those with knowledge
recommended.
3. Majority vote
50% plus 1 makes the decision. Pro: fast; easy to count. Con: 49%
can resent the decision. May not be a thoughtful, knowledgeable
decision.
4. Super-majority vote
2/3 or 3/4 makes the decision. Pro: most people agree or the decision
is not made. Con: may still be a large contingent not agreeing. May
not be a thoughtful, knowledgeable decision.
5. Strict consensus
All in the group must be able to live with the decision and support the
decision. Pro: everyone agrees and supports; issues get thoroughly
discussed. Con: takes time; may be difficult to get everyone's
agreement.
6. Modified consensus
All in the group but one (or more, depending on the size of the group)
must be able to live with the decision; all must support it. Pro: Strong
agreement, issues get thoroughly discussed. Con: One or two people
may be unhappy.

7. Attempt strict or modified consensus, then switch to modified
consensus or vote.
Try to get agreement of everyone with complete discussion of issues; if
that does not work, go to easier decision-making process. Pro:
Complete discussion, easier decision to make. Con: still may not have
complete agreement.
8. Straw polls.
A useful method to determine the amount of support for an idea in a
group without committing to a formal vote. Pro: fast, easy. Con: May
lead to commitment too early.
CONSENSUS
Consensus is the cooperative development of a decision with the goal of
reaching a decision everyone in the group can live with.
Consensus is not the same as full satisfaction. The decision should
be acceptable enough so that the whole group can support it,
though each individual may not love it, or even feel it is the best
decision.
Consensus:
• Promotes full discussion of options
• Allows the full participation of everyone
• Is sensitive to minority opinions and concerns
• Develops groups and teams, and builds cooperation and support
• Increases listening and respectfulness
• Has the potential of leading to better decisions
• Increases the support of decisions by the group
Challenges of consensus processes:
• Everyone speaks
• Strong facilitation is necessary
• The group can be dominated by one or more persons
• Some people can participate less
• One or a few individuals can block decision-making

TYPES OF CONSENSUS PROCESSES
Strict Consensus
Everyone in the group must agree to the outcome or it is not implemented.
Modified Consensus
A defined number of people may disagree with the outcome and it is
nevertheless implemented. This number should be decided prior to the
discussion of a topic, so that the group understands how a decision is made.
Combination Consensus Process
The group tries once or twice for strict consensus before it makes a decision
by modified consensus.

THE PROCESS
1. The group uses the problem solving process it normally uses.
2. Once the group has settled on a few ideas for discussion, each idea should be
thoroughly discussed, with maximum participation from the group.
3. When the group seems to be settling on a focus or moving toward a decision, a
straw poll should be taken to test the direction the group is going in resolving the
issue.
4. If the straw poll indicates agreement, take a formal consensus.
5. A formal consensus taking is going one by one around the group with each person
indicating Yes, No, or Support.
6. If the straw poll indicates some disagreement, probe for the reasons behind each
opinion.
7. Questions helpful for a consensus process:
• What is your concern?
• What changes would allow you to support this?
• What are your objections?
• What is it that is most important to you?
8. See if the group can meet the needs of the minority.
9. Summarize the new approach or decision.
10. Take another straw poll.
11. Take a formal consensus if appropriate.
Group Member Responses in Consensus Process
Group members may:
1. Consent, or agree to the decision.
2. Support the decision, even if they don't feel they can consent.
3. Say no, and attempt to block the decision.

METHODS FOR STRAW POLLS
1. Hands
All in favor raise hands; all opposed raise hands
2. Thumbs
In favor: thumb up
Questions: thumb across
Opposed: thumb down
3. Five Fingers
One finger (not the middle -- thumb?): In favor
Two fingers: Mostly in favor
Three fingers: Questions
Four fingers: Mostly opposed
Five fingers: Opposed
4. Ten Fingers
You get the idea…..
If the group cannot reach a resolution, consider the following:
1. The group may not have enough information to make a good decision. Help the group
look at getting more information.
2. See if the group wants to make a decision, even if it is not at the usual level of
acceptability.
3. The group can table the issue and come back to it later.
4. The group can agree that it will not act until the decision is more acceptable.
5. The group may be willing to do another brainstorming.
6. A resource person may be able to help look for other options, or evaluate options.

SAMPLE SIX-STEP PROBLEM SOLVING PROCESS
√ 1. PROBLEM: Define the problem and Develop a Problem Statement
√ 2. INFORMATION: Identify Information which would help describe the
problem and its parameters
√ 3. CAUSES: Identify Potential Causes of the problem
√ 4. OPTIONS: Identify Possible Solutions which would satisfy all sides, and
Criteria for the Best Solutions
√ 5. SOLUTION: Select the Best Solution for all
√ 6. IMPLEMENT/REVIEW: Implement the Solution and Review Success

BIBLIOGRAPHY
Dee Kelsey and Pamela Plumb, Great Meetings! Great Results! How
to Facilitate Like a Pro. Hanson Park Press, 1997,2004.
Kaner, et. al, Facilitator's Guide to Participatory Decision-Making.
New Society Publishers, 1996.
Roger Schwarz, The Skilled Facilitator: A Comprehensive Resource
for Consultants, Facilitators, Managers, Trainers, and Coaches, New
& Revised, 2002, Jossey-Bass
Roger Schwarz, The Skilled Facilitator Fieldbook: Tips, Tools, and
Tested Methods for Consultants, Facilitators, Managers, Trainers,
and Coaches, 2005, Jossey-Bass
Ingrid Bens, Advanced Facilitation Strategies: Tools & Techniques to
Master Difficult Situations, 2005, Jossey-Bass
Alice Collier Cochran, Roberta's Rules of Order: Sail Through
Meetings for Stellar Results Without the Gavel, 2004, Jossey-Bass
Sandor P. Schuman (Editor), The IAF Handbook of Group Facilitation:
Best Practices from the Leading Organization in Facilitation, 2005,
Jossey-Bass

Other Facilitation Resources
1. International Association of Facilitators,
14985 Glazier Avenue, Suite 550, St. Paul, MN 55124
Phone: 800-281-9948 or 952-891-3541.
Fax: 952-891-1800
Email: Office@iaf-world.org
Website: http://iaf-world.org
2. Listserv: Grp-facl
Website: http://www.albany.edu/cpr/gf/
3. IAF Linked-In Discussion Group
Website: www.linked-in.com

PREVENTING CONFLICT THROUGH FACILITATION
by Janice M. Fleischer and Zena D. Zumeta
Friends and family members often ask us, "So, tell us what you do again? It has to do
with big meetings, right?"
The question is also a good one for dispute resolution professionals today, as more and
more mediators are being asked to do facilitations, and there are important differences
between mediation and facilitation (see Comparing Facilitation and Mediation, below).
So, what is facilitation? According to Webster's New Collegiate Dictionary, "facilitate"
means "to make easier."
That is what facilitators do: We make it easier for people to accomplish whatever goal
their meeting may have been called for. More specifically, we help people think in terms
of interests, not positions. According to common definitions, by statute or otherwise,
"facilitation" is: The use of a third party neutral to help multi-party work groups
accomplish the content of their work by providing process leadership and process
expertise.
A Pre-Conflict Process
This emphasis on "process" is probably the most defining difference in mediation and
facilitation. In many ways, facilitation and mediation are similar, but in the most
elementary way, they are drastically different: Facilitation is primarily used pre-conflict
or at least pre-crystallized conflict.
Think of facilitators as holistic physicians. We encourage people to call us in before any
conflict has crystallized, to help avoid the conflict and have people work collaboratively
toward their common goal. That doesn't mean there isn't the potential for conflict, or that
pockets of conflict haven't already erupted. Although facilitation can be used in conflict
situations, and therefore belongs on the conflict continuum, an important characteristic of
facilitation is its use as a preventative measure.
Facilitators oversee the organization and progress of meetings to alleviate as much
tension as possible so that people can get past their individual agendas and get on with
the group work that needs to be done. Facilitation is a transformative experience, both for
the facilitator and the facilitated. We have watched stakeholders entrenched in their
positions change from obstinate advocates to cooperative collaborators in a matter of
months. It is as gratifying and exciting as mediation, and has an extra benefit, the fact that
you, as the facilitator, have the ability to assist folks in avoiding any conflict and just
getting their work done.

One essential element of facilitation is its involvement with groups, small or large, and
their processes, whether they are public in nature, such as a government agency, or
strictly private concerns, such as a corporate board of directors. In this regard,
facilitations can range from a one-time board retreat to a public policy gathering of
governmental, civic, advocacy, business and geographic or ethnic parties that meet over
several months or years to accomplish its task.
Similarly, the size of groups can range from as small as five people up to several
hundred. That a facilitator is working with groups, and not individuals, creates distinctive
dynamics, in that each type of group must be handled differently, and the convener(s) of
each group may have different expectations of the facilitator. This in turn calls for unique
skills and tools in consensus building (See Structured Techniques for Working With
Groups)
In describing the facilitation as a process, we think of a story: It has a beginning, a middle
and an end. Facilitation is a story in collaboration and consensus. To facilitate, you must
pay attention to the beginning (pre-meeting agenda, surveys, protocols); the middle
(meeting guidelines for participants, using your skills to keep the meeting moving and on
track, keeping the group memory) and the end (preparing a meeting report and follow up
duties).
In the beginning, the facilitator needs to meet with the convener(s) of the meeting to
establish exactly what is being asked of the facilitator. Is she more of a moderator, or a
leader of the group? Is he expected to run the meeting, or simply to keep a record and be
a watchdog to make sure the group does not go too far afield. The possibilities are varied
and should be defined immediately. This will help you as a facilitator decide if this is the
type of situation you are comfortable being involved in, and how to shape the next steps,
designing the agenda for the meeting and other "housekeeping" duties.
It is during this part of the beginning chapter that the facilitator will discuss where the
group will meet, how often, who will handle administrative functions (meeting notices,
survey preparation, mail-outs, typing of group memory flip chart notes, etc.), how
participation is to be determined, who will represent different stakeholder groups,
decision-making protocols, whether the media should be involved, deadlines and
resources for work to be done (i.e., money and time).
The beginning chapter ends with the setting of the agenda, which is developed with input
from the conveners as well as possible input from participants. Participant input can be
obtained through mail-out surveys, telephone or personal interviews or meetings. The
facilitator must know the group and the work to be accomplished before attempting to
design a preliminary overall agenda for the total of the meetings as well as specific
agendas for each meeting.
The middle of the facilitation consists of the facilitated meetings themselves. The
facilitator must structure the participation of the group by helping everyone feel included
and encouraging participation. This may involve helping the group identify common

denominators goals, calling on those who have not spoken, reducing the speaking time of
those who would dominate, and helping to identify who may be missing from the table as
the meeting progresses.
In this regard, the facilitator also ensures that group procedures are adopted and adhered
to. Decision-making guidelines and protocols are developed with the group, group
etiquette is discussed and accepted, discussion guidelines are agreed upon, the method of
presenting theories, ideas, positions, etc., must be outlined by the group and the facilitator
must obtain a "buy in" by the group. If the group has a specific "charge" - such as
drafting a written recommendation to some governmental entity on a specific subject -
the group will have to decide how consensus will be defined and what the priorities will
be.
Group 'Memory'
One extremely important aspect of this chapter of the facilitation is the keeping of the
group "memory." This generally consists of keeping notes of the group's activity on a flip
chart, which is important both during and after the meeting. During the meeting, it
provides a visual confirmation that the views of each speaker are being heard and
considered by the group. After the meeting, it provides the basis for the meeting report.
The flip chart can be maintained by the facilitator or a second person, which can be
especially useful if the group is large. If the recording is done by a second person,
though, it is important that the facilitator and recorder think similarly enough that the
record-keeping is in sync with the focus of the group process.
Using a flip chart is an art in itself that must be learned and practiced. At minimum,
though, it must be:
* visible to all members of the group;
* maintained simultaneously with the group's thought process;
* accurately reflect the language of the group members, and
* typed and copied for the members by the next meeting as the flip charts appeared.
Group Maintenance
The facilitator must facilitate group maintenance. Several techniques and skills come into
play here.
One is "gatekeeping," that is inviting people to speak, keeping others at bay, etc. Another
is "harmonizing," or calming the group, reducing tension and emotions, and pointing out
the feelings of the group or of a participant.
Facilitators bring attention to how a group is working, a task that must be done delicately,
usually with suggestions for a different process, or for opening the discussion to
suggestions for a different process. This could also just be a "heads up" that the group has

moved away from its stated discussion item and a discussion of whether it wants to
continue forward or go back.
These techniques require several additional skills. For one, a facilitator must pay attention
to the body language of the members of the group: Are they paying attention? Do they
need a break? Are there separate (and distracting) conversations going on? Is there
outside noise that is interfering with the members' ability to hear what is being said?
The facilitator must help and encourage the group through frustrating times. This can be
done by complimenting the group, putting frustration into perspective, recalling other
times the group was stalled and succeeded in moving forward, and talking about the
benefits of staying with the process.
Finally, the facilitator should "debrief" the group before it adjourns. This is done for 5-to-
10 minutes, but allows each group member to reflect upon and state how they are feeling
about the group, the group process or the result of the meeting. Like flipchart
management and other aspects of facilitation, debriefing is a skill that must be learned
and practiced.
Tips For Debriefing a Facilitation
* Start anywhere in the group and go around to each person from there
* Each person can say whatever they want without censorship of any kind
* No one should reply to anything that is said
* A time limit should be set for each person (we suggest l-to-1.5 minutes) which should
be announced and enforced by the facilitator
* Anyone can "pass," or decline to say anything
* At the end of the debriefing, those who passed should again be asked if they want to
say something
* People can have more than one turn to speak, but only with the permission of the group
* At the end of the debriefing, the group can decide on when to address the issues raised
* Points raised in the debriefing should not be put on the flip charts unless the group so
instructs the facilitator
The Report
The last chapter of the facilitation story is the report recording the items covered at the
meeting. It typically includes a table of contents, introduction, background, explanation
of procedure, process and guidelines, as well as the transcription of all the flip-chart notes
put into the context of the meeting. This is an important aspect of the process because it
provides either a basis for what work will be included at the next meeting or a guide for
what work must now be done by group members and by when.
Some facilitated meetings do not require reports. For example, the purpose of the
meetings may have been to accomplish the writing of a document as a group, and the
document itself serves as the report.

Like mediation, facilitation can be an important part of a dispute resolution professional's
repertoire of skills and services. But it is worth taking the time to learn the differences
between the two, and to master facilitation as a unique process that can be used to help
clients.
A Comparison of Facilitation and Mediation Shows Some Similarities,
But Also Some Important Differences
Facilitation and mediation may be compared along several dimensions, beginning with
the two main differences: goals and process.
Goals: In mediation, the goal is to get an agreement. In facilitation, it is to assist a group
in accomplishing the "content of their work," whatever that may be. Familiar examples
include a vision statement and plan for implementation of a depressed area of a city, a
strategic plan with action items for an organization, the preparation of recommendations
to a decision making body, an effective retreat, solving a particular problem and writing
regulatory rules.
Process: Mediation typically follows a fairly set process that is determined primarily by
the mediator, but which is dependent on the type of mediation (e.g. family, civil,
community) and style of the mediator (e.g. facilitative, evaluative, transformative). The
outcome is determined by the clients. In facilitation, however, the group (or
representatives of the group) determines the process as well as the outcome.
Neutrality: Neutrality is a central tenet of mediation. While the facilitator certainly cannot
be biased, strict neutrality is often an irrelevant issue, since many groups do not have
"sides" and are not resolving long-standing conflicts.
Open Sessions: In both mediation and facilitation, the neutral will use me open or plenary
session (often called a joint session in mediation) to gain and share information,
encourage communication, promote problem-solving between the parties and prioritize
issues. In facilitation, the open session may also be used for the actual drafting of
documents.
Caucus vs. Small Group Work: In mediation, a private session with one party or parties
may be used to develop support and trust, explore settlement options Or communicate
privately about the strengths and weaknesses of a party's case. In facilitation, small
groups are often used to accomplish a specific task, often for the larger group, but just as
often may not be necessary.
Generation of Options/Ideas: In mediation, the parties propose solutions and options with
the mediators guidance and additions. In facilitation, the parties may be led through a
series of structured techniques - brainstorming, nominal group technique, etc. - to solicit
ideas and generate and prioritize options. The facilitator does not become involved in the
creation of options or ideas, but rather is limited to the role "record keeper."

Agenda Design and Ground Rules: As the owner of the process, the mediator will set the
agenda and ground rules after the parties have identified the issues. In facilitation, the
facilitator assists in designing an agenda with input from the convener(s) and/or the
group, which owns the process.
Invoking Ground Rules: In both facilitation and mediation there are difficult parties. In
mediation, the mediator might call a caucus or invoke a ground rule to change the
behavior of that party. In facilitation, the group invokes the ground rule, or the facilitator
might pull the person aside at a break to talk with him/her.
Identifying the Parties: One important difference in the two processes is the identification
of the parties. In most mediations, who the parties are is generally fairly obvious. In
facilitation, just as in public policy mediations, identification of all stakeholders is an
important part of the pre-facilitation process, especially if consensus-based decision
making is the method to be used.
Methods of Decision Making: In mediation, the process of decision making is interest-based
negotiation and compromise. In facilitation, the group decides the process of
decision making and the facilitator helps to lead it.
Role of the Neutral: In mediation, the role of the mediator remains constant, as a catalyst
for change in the parties' communication. In facilitation, roles of the facilitator may vary
greatly depending on the needs and desires of the group or its conveners.
Prior Contact with Parties: In mediation, contact prior to the actual beginning of
mediation with the parties and their attorneys is a matter of the mediator's style. In
facilitation, prior contact with the convener(s), stakeholders and others is a necessity to
properly plan the meeting and understand the goals of the meeting.
Biography
Zena D. Zumeta, J.D., is president of Mediation Training &Consultation Institute and
The Collaborative Workplace in Ann Arbor, Michigan. She has been a mediator and
facilitator since 1981. She is a past president of the Academy of Family Mediators and
the Michigan Council for Family and Divorce Mediation and a past national board
member of SPIDR. She is a nationally known trainer of mediators, and provides training,
facilitation and consulting in organizations and workplaces. She has presented on
mediation and facilitation at AFM, SPIDR and NCPCR conferences, and on mediation
and collaborative processes at the International Association of Facilitators. Email:
mtci@igc.org
Janice Fleischer, J.D., is currently the Coordinator for the South Florida Office of the
Florida Conflict Resolution Consortium, a university based program established by the

Florida legislature whose mission is to provide facilitation and mediation services in the
public policy arena.
Ms. Fleischer practiced law until 1990 when she became a Florida Supreme Court
certified mediator and joined the Mediation/Arbitration Division of the 11th Judicial
circuit. After leaving the Mediation/Arbitration division, she mediated independently for
the court system.
She teaches mediation at the University of Miami School of Law and is Chair of the
Southern Division of the Florida Mediator Qualifications Board, a board that hears
grievances filed against mediators.
She is immediate Past-President of the Florida Association of Professional Family
Mediators and is Region III Vice President of The Society of Professionals in Dispute
Resolution, (SPIDR) an international dispute resolution organization. Additionally, she
has served as faculty for the National Judicial College. Ms. Fleischer is a frequent
presenter and speaker at state and national conferences, including AFM, the Academy of
Family Mediators, SPIDR, and the Florida Dispute Resolution Center Annual
Conference.
Ms. Fleischer is a primary trainer in public policy, facilitation, mediation and
interpersonal conflict resolution. She is a member of the ABA and is a Vice-Chair of the
Legislative Committee of the ABA Section of Dispute Resolution.

Zumeta: Mediators as facilitators

Empfohlen

Empfohlen

Weitere ähnliche Inhalte

Was ist angesagt?

Was ist angesagt? (19)

Andere mochten auch

Andere mochten auch (7)

Ähnlich wie Zumeta: Mediators as facilitators

Ähnlich wie Zumeta: Mediators as facilitators (20)

Mehr von Association for Conflict Resolution (ACR)

Mehr von Association for Conflict Resolution (ACR) (20)

Kürzlich hochgeladen

Kürzlich hochgeladen (20)

Zumeta: Mediators as facilitators