Search results

The purpose of this paper is to elaborate on the role of a group facilitator when taking a dialogical stance. A special interest is facilitator’s processual responsiveness and its potential for supporting a dialogic approach to process facilitation.

Theoretically, the article is based on dialogue and dialectic relationship theory. Empirically, it is based on pragmatic analysis of excerpts from audio recordings of a two-day process facilitation with an organizational group called KUDIAS.

The analysis highlights the importance of processual responsiveness of the facilitator in terms of focused attention to the process as well as to the interpersonal relations between the participants in the process. Being processually responsive, the facilitator supports the process in becoming dialogic toward all participants’ perspectives and in creating a climate characterized by curiosity, wondering, exploration and recognition. However, facilitator’s processual responsiveness also requires the ability to balance the process between support and confrontation.

Processual responsiveness is developed and discussed theoretically as well as empirically.

More and more organisations are using teams to solve problems, plan for the future and improve products, processes and services. One method of enhancing group effectiveness is to use a facilitator. Facilitators, however, need to be trained in order to accomplish their role effectively. This can only be achieved successfully if trainers are aware of the competencies and skills needed to undertake the facilitation process. Explores the facilitation process and presents both the general and specific competencies that are essential for facilitation. General competencies are those that are vital no matter what type of group is meeting. Specific competencies, on the other hand, are those that are distinctive to the level of group development. Groups that are highly experienced and well‐developed will require the facilitator to have more sophisticated skills than groups that are less‐developed.

Literature indicates that the business case for projects is difficult to use and suggests that there are organizational factors that can facilitate effective use of the business case. This paper aims to identify such facilitators, measure their presence and importance, and relate them to the actual practice of business case processes.

A cross sectional quantitative method was used, with data on facilitators and business case process usage gathered through an online questionnaire.

The findings for the 43 organizational facilitators are that each one is considered more important than its presence in the respondents' organizations. High correlations emerge between the presence of the facilitators and the use of business case processes, indicating the pivotal role of the facilitators.

The research was conducted for business IT projects implemented by organizations based in South Africa. It furthers our understanding of project business cases and suggests additional research avenues in this area.

The findings indicate that organizations could improve key facilitators at an affordable cost. Such improvement would enable more effective use of the business case throughout the project's lifetime – from initial concept until planned benefits have been substantially realized. Better use of the business case would also support governance and increase the success rate of business IT projects.

Organizational facilitators of business case processes are identified and categorized for the first time, leading to measurements of their perceived importance and presence in organizations. Hence, the relationship between these facilitators and actual business case usage is determined, suggesting areas of optimum impact.

Describes a 15‐year learning journey, working with clients to develop skills facilitation. Set against the backdrop of the changing role of facilitation in UK business – from the domain of the training room, via use of designated facilitators working with quality groups, to a central place in leadership and management practice. Case studies and details of competence research illustrate different approaches to skills development. Suggests that the influence of context on the facilitation role is crucial, and needs to inform the type of development process suited to a particular situation. Anticipates that facilitation will be acknowledged increasingly as a central process of organization change rather than limited to designated positions. Facilitating in “unknown territory” will require people to discard pre‐prepared scripts, dispense with the safety of “facilitator neutrality” and be open to profound processes of change.

The need for developing new entrepreneurial ways of thinking and acting has been in the agenda for the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development and the European Union countries. In line with their agenda, the Nordic Council of Ministers has been preoccupied with the development of entrepreneurial mindsets among the adult population. Seeking to meet the urgent need for developing entrepreneurial thinking, the Nordic Network for Adult Learning, together with the Nordic Council of Ministers, has elaborated and tested a Scandinavian model for stimulating entrepreneurial mindsets through the transformative learning circles. Based on the study of the TLC pilot project, this chapter explores the process of facilitation of entrepreneurial learning. The literature on entrepreneurial learning and education emphasises on the importance of facilitation; however, this issue is yet to be addressed in-depth. This chapter seeks to fill in this gap and contribute to our understanding of the role that facilitators play in the entrepreneurial and transformative learning processes. Drawing on the social constructionist approach to learning, this chapter discusses how facilitators and learners (entrepreneurs) become co-creators of knowledge and learning experiences.

Process facilitation as part of a complex intervention for changing or improving practices within workplaces is becoming a common work method. The aim of this study was to investigate what characterizes the process-facilitating role in a complex intervention.

The present study focuses on a complex work environment intervention targeting eight organizational units (workplaces) in the Swedish healthcare sector. The study applies a mixed-method approach and has been carried out in two steps. First, a qualitative process evaluation was performed. Secondly, an evaluation was conducted to see to what extent these identified conditions and mechanisms affected the quantitative intervention effect in term of sickness absence.

The analysis shows that the facilitating role consisted of three overlapping and partially iterative phases. These phases involved different activities for the facilitating role. Depending on how the facilitating role and the intervention were designed, various supporting conditions were found to significantly affect the outcome of the intervention measured as the total sickness absence.

It is concluded that the facilitation is not static or fixed during the change process. Instead, the facilitation role develops and emerges through the process of support during the different implementation phases.

The facilitative role of performing support is based on a combination of support role activities and expert role activities. The support role focuses on support activities, while the expert role includes capacity building through knowledge- and legitimacy-oriented activities.

This study contributes to earlier research by developing a methodological approach for carrying out process facilitation in complex interventions.

Personal development involves individuals acting and reflecting on the world and themselves, and learning from this. The practical issues faced by facilitators in setting up and running self‐development groups are discussed. The structure of the process is focused on and a number of guidelines presented.

Reports part of a grounded theory study in which 15 facilitators, already experienced in conventional meetings, were trained to become facilitators of face‐to‐face electronic meetings. Presents a model ‐ “Active reflection” ‐ of the reflective practice processes used by the trainee facilitators. Active reflection is a term which describes the trainees’ accounts of the two complementary action reflection processes: reflection on action (thinking back on what was done) and reflection in action (thinking about the action while one is doing it). Identifies a number of implications for group support systems facilitation training and practice.

The study describes the implementation of a novel strategy, entitled the Action Learning Set Facilitation Model, to develop internal facilitation capability to lead change. The Model incorporated the Novice-Experienced-Expert pathway, a facilitation development approach underpinning the integrated-Promoting Action on Research Implementation in Health Services Implementation Framework, with action learning methodology.

A mixed-methods descriptive approach reports the results of 22 interviews, 182 Action Learning Sets and 159 post program survey data sets to explore facilitator experiences, strengths and potential application of the Model.

At program completion, five novice (of 174) and one experienced (of 27) facilitator transitioned to the next facilitation level. The three groups of facilitators described positive change in confidence and facilitation skill, and experience of action learning sets. Inconsistencies between self-report competence and observed practice amongst novices was reported. Novices had decreasing exposure to the Model due to factors related to ongoing organisational change. Internal facilitators were considered trusted and credible facilitators.

There are practical and resource implications in investing in internal facilitation capability, noting proposed and real benefits of similar development programs may be compromised during, or as a consequence of organisational change. Further research describing application of the facilitation model, strategies to enhance multisystemic support for programs and evaluation support are suggested.

The Action Learning Set Facilitation Model offers promise in developing internal facilitation capability supporting change in organisations. Critical success factors include building broad scale internal capability, stable leadership and longitudinal support to embed practice.

This is the first application of the facilitation component of the integrated-Promoting Action on Research Implementation in Health Services implementation framework embedded to action learning sets as an implementation science strategy for leader development supporting organisational change.

Effective team development, facilitation and creative problem solving are three components that can help improve group problem solving and decision making. Group meetings can be notoriously ineffective and inefficient. They can be significantly improved if the facilitator and problem champion are aware of, and can influence, the variables that affect the group’s processes. This paper explores the elements involved in developing teams, enhancing facilitation skills and utilising creative problem‐solving techniques. These three areas are discussed in turn before presenting a model that shows the relationships that exist between them. This model is a useful framework for facilitators, problem champions and group participants because it can help in the preparation and support of group meetings. In addition, the model can also help managers to develop training courses for team development and facilitation.