Root and Stomp it !

Decision by Vote. Perhaps the biggest disadvantage of voting is that it leads to an all-or-nothing perspective: every choice wins or loses. Sure, the result is a decision—and if what matters most
is reaching a decision quickly, then voting works well.
When there are “winners” and “losers,” there’s a risk of psychological and emotional effects that may undermine the effects of the result. Those who did not vote for the winning choice  may not be very committed to supporting the outcome. They may even resist implementation of the decision, openly or covertly, actively or passively. Factions may form.
Another disadvantage with voting is that the group may not address all concerns and answer all questions. It should be remembered that the purpose of a discussion is not only to help the group reach a decision but also to make participants aware of potential problems with that decision. That awareness helps the group plan more effectively to act on the decision.

Why Take Chances?
If you want to avoid a “winners-losers” split in the group, it’s best to use consensus to reach a decision. (With any kind of voting, there are always “winners” and “losers.”) If you’re concerned about the possibility of groupthink, it makes sense to have the vote be private. It might take a minute or two
longer than a show of hands, but it allows participants to vote freely, without feeling pressure from others.
It’s simple to do.The facilitator distributes an index card to each participant.The participants write their vote on the card, fold it, and toss it into the middle of the table.The facilitator collects the cards
and then reads each one and the scribe tallies the vote on the flipchart, whiteboard, or blackboard.

If the decision is to be put to a vote, you can reduce the disadvantages by allowing and promoting extensive discussion, so all participants have the opportunity to present their perspectives and raise questions. If it seems that a vote could divide the group and yet reaching consensus would be difficult or even impossible, the facilitator should encourage the participants to propose compromises.
As a last resort, you or the top authority could intervene and make the decision. Even if the decision is no different from what would have resulted from a vote, a managerial decision allows the opportunity to sum up all of the good points raised in the discussion and to thank the participants for their efforts. The facilitator then resumes leadership of the meeting, so he or she can guide the group in planning to act on the decision.

Taken From : The Manager’s Guide to Effective Meetings

For most agenda items, the purpose of a discussion is to arrive at some decision—if only to consider the items further at another time. In fact, it could be argued that no meeting should end without a decision. (And no, the decision to adjourn doesn’t count!)
Types of Decisions

As suggested in Chapter 2, you should let participants know in advance, on the agenda, how a decision will be made:
• Managerial—you make the call!
• Vote by majority or plurality—just count the votes.
• Consensus—cooperative development of a decision that’s acceptable enough for all members of a group to agree to support.
• Delegation—selected members of the group make the decision.

Managerial Decision. (Because you may be meeting with other managers or with people from outside your unit or the organization, you may not be the top dog. However, because most meetings for which you’re responsible will be with your employees, we’ll word this section accordingly.)

Before the discussion starts, clarify the purpose. If you’d like the group to explore options for you to consider when you make the decision, make that clear, so they will understand your expectations and their responsibilities. If you’ve reached a tentative decision that you want to “try out” with the group,
make that clear, so they know that you’re inviting their perspectives and help in identifying aspects that you may have missed.

Generally, you will probably want to make your decision later, after the meeting. But if the discussion has allowed you to reach a decision and you want to announce it, proceed with care. After a group discussion of an issue, a managerial decision may seem abrupt and autocratic. So, you should take a
few minutes to frame your decision and promote closure.

First, thank the participants for helping you explore the issue from all perspectives. Then, sum up the best points raised during the discussion and how you’ve considered each of them. Next, announce your decision and outline the actions you’re planning based on that decision. You don’t need to be specific about your plans, but just show that you’ve thought things out beyond your decision.

As shown in the continuum in Chapter 2 (Figure 2-2), there are various modes of making managerial decisions:
• The manager makes the decision and announces it.
• The manager makes the decision and explains it.
• The manager makes the decision and discusses implementation issues.
• The manager makes a tentative decision and discusses it before finalizing it.
• The manager and the group discuss the issue and then the manager makes the decision.
• The manager delegates the decision to the group, with limits.
• The manager delegates the decision to the group, to the full limit of his or her authority.

These more moderate approaches may be a good way to share managerial authority with the group—if you have a very good rapport with your employees, if they understand the continuum, and if they know your reasons for taking the approach that you’ve chosen. Otherwise, be careful, as members of the group may view these approaches as paternalistic, as being only the semblance of shared governance, as conciliatory—or even as a sign of weakness.

If you choose to make a decision in a meeting, you should have strong reasons to do so and you should handle them in the following way:
• Give your reasons for making the decision yourself.
• Express your appreciation for the assistance and support of the group.
• Cite the good points raised in the discussion.
• Present your decision.
• Outline the actions you plan or ask the group to discuss possible actions.
• Move on to the next item on the agenda.

If you indicate on the agenda that the group will be responsible for making a decision, you may decide to change your mind. You have that right, of course, particularly if circumstances change. But that reversal—which is essentially revoking a delegated responsibility—would require the utmost of sensitivity and tact.

Signal the facilitator that you would like the floor. Then, proceed in the manner outlined above, but with even greater care.

Taken From : The Manager’s Guide to Effective Meetings

The facilitator brings the discussion to a close when the timekeeper indicates only a few minutes remain of the allotted time or when interest either wanes or waxes too hot to be productive.

As the timekeeper signals, the facilitator might say simply, “OK, we have three minutes left. Are there any points we haven’t considered?” Then, in the last minute or so, he or she can recap the main points of the discussion by referring to the notes kept on display by the scribe.

It’s a little more involved if the facilitator decides to end a discussion early, for any reason. If it’s because participation has slowed, he or she should ask the members to indicate by a show of hands if they feel ready to reach a decision or (if you’ve specified a managerial decision) to turn the meeting over to you. If, in contrast, the discussion has gotten too hot, the facilitator can propose a choice, if a decision is not urgent: to table the discussion until the next meeting or to move on to a decision.

It’s generally not the responsibility of the facilitator to determine what should be done, but rather to recognize that it may be time for the group to decide on the next steps.

Taken From : The Manager’s Guide to Effective Meetings

Have you ever visited New York? Do you want to experience great New York tours? Well, visiting New York can be one of our best moments as we can find and do lots of interesting things in New York. We can have great sightseeing in the downtown or any great buildings that are interesting to visit. To be able to have comfortable sightseeing, it is better for us to join a trip that is administered by reliable and reputable tour leader.

For the above reason, we can go to Citysightsny.com. The website has been known for their New York City Sightseeing. The website offers various kinds of tour packages that can be chosen. Each package is about visiting the downtown, buildings or parks using bus or on walk. There is information about the costs of each tour and we can book the tour we want online. Since each tour package they offer has various destinations, we can easily choose a tour package that meets our needs. Professional tour leader will assist us during the tour and make everything more comfortable for us.

Further, the website also offers various kinds of daily trips we can choose. Based on its commitment to provide fun, interesting, and entertaining sightseeing experiences to each of their customer, this travel agent can be our consideration. We can visit the website, find further information and book the tour we need online.

Having a group trip can be considered as an attempt to tighten the relationship among the members of the group. To have a comfortable and unforgettable group trip, we must be able to plan everything well. We have to think the destination we want to visit. We will need to prepare adequate accommodation so that every one following the trip can get the right accommodation. We also have to think the transportation we will use to go to the destination. The transportation must be able to deliver us to the places we want safely and comfortable.

As what we can see at Nycbuscharters.com, there are great chances for us to rent bus for our group trip. There are various luxurious and quality vehicles that we can rent; we just need to determine the size of the vehicle we need. New York Bus Charter has excellent on time services, helpful staffs and well maintained vehicles. Dedicated, helpful and courteous drivers will make our trip comfortable and safe. The company provides twenty four hours customers support that will help us anytime we need help.

In addition, the website also has special offers to Dorney Park and Six Flags Great Adventure. These offers can be considered by people needing to save lots of group trip cost. Therefore, if you should manage for a group trip, you had better charter the vehicles from the company.

Don’t expect all participants to contribute equally and in the same ways. They each bring different strengths and weaknesses to the table.

Drive the Vehicles in Your Parking Lot The parking lot is a meeting equivalent of the organization’s suggestion box: it can generate great opportunities—if the ideas and comments don’t just remain there, neglected. It’s a good policy to schedule a discussion in your next meeting whenever there are vehicles in the parking lot. Encourage the participants to “take ’em out for a spin.” Some of the contributions won’t make it around the block—but you may find one that runs great. This method of dealing with off-topic contributions, making them the topic of a special discussion, has three advantages:
• It allows you to make the most of the brains and creativity of your employees (twice).
• It shows that you appreciate all contributions.
• It enables your employees to be involved in deciding the fate of their contributions.

A meeting is often the ultimate in teamwork. An effective and efficient meeting depends not only on each of the participants but also on their interpersonal dynamics. The greatest danger is not conflict, as many managers believe, but groupthink—the tendency of a group of people to seek unanimous agreement in spite of facts that would contradict such agreement.

This phenomenon was identified by Irving L. Janis, author of Victims of Groupthink (Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1972) and Groupthink: Psychological Studies of Policy Decisions and Fiascos (Boston:
Houghton Mifflin, 2nd edition, 1982). Janis notes in his first study:

The more amiability and esprit de corps there is among members of a policy-making in-group, the greater is the danger that independent critical thinking will be replaced by groupthink.

… The social constraint consists of the members’ strong wish to preserve the harmony of the group, which inclines them to avoid creating any discordant arguments or schisms.

The following conditions promote groupthink:
• The group is highly cohesive.
• The group members have worked together for a long time.
• The group values harmony above all else.
• The group members are under considerable pressure to make a quality decision.

How can you recognize groupthink? These are some signs that you might notice in meetings:

• Whenever a member with authority, power, or perceived expertise expresses a position, the others support that position.
• Members consider the risks and weaknesses of a position insufficiently or not at all.
• Members rationalize group views, including poor decisions.
• Unanimity is very important.
• Members seem reluctant to express their feelings.
• The group examines few or no alternatives.
• Members are quick to dismiss different perspectives.
• Members tend not to be critical of each other’s ideas.
• The group doesn’t seek the opinion of experts (especially from the outside).
• Members try to keep out information that conflicts with the group perspective.
• Members exert pressure on fellow members who question or disagree.
• The group doesn’t make contingency plans.

If you suspect a tendency toward groupthink, how do you deal with it? Better yet, how do you prevent that tendency? Here are some general suggestions, for you and for the facilitator:

• Encourage members to raise objections and concerns.
• Assign one or more members to play the role of critical evaluator or devil’s advocate.
• Promote an environment open to questions and alternative perspectives.
• Divide the group into smaller groups to discuss, then compare the results.
• Get input from experts outside the group.
• Require the group to develop a certain number of options before moving toward a decision.
• Instruct the group to first develop a list of criteria for evaluating options—and then ensure that the members use those criteria.

Groupthink vs. Consensus
Groupthink and consensus may seem similar, but there’s a key distinction. It’s groupthink when all the members of a group seem to agree on a decision, but there are some who are censoring themselves and not expressing concerns or who have not resolved some differences they consider important and who are “just going along with the crowd” because they feel pressure to agree and to avoid disrupting the unity. It’s consensus when all members of the group have thoroughly explored a range of choices, considered the risks and weaknesses of each option, and resolved all important differences.

One general way to counter any tendency to groupthink is by helping participants understand and appreciate the value of critical thinking, disagreement, and diversity of thinking. Encourage facilitators to elicit a variety of contributions, encourage thoughtful consideration of all suggestions, and praise members who show the courage to think independently.

Another way is to avoid expressing your opinions and offering suggestions until the other participants have contributed and to encourage and welcome critical reactions to those opinions and suggestions—not always easy, but definitely necessary.

Taken From : The Manager’s Guide to Effective Meetings

The facilitator and the scribe work together to keep the discussion focused on the agenda item at hand and progressing toward the objective(s). We often talk about keeping a discussion “on track”—as if it were a train. Well, the problem with that analogy is that it’s simplistic.

Since trains run on rails, they’re either on track or off track. Discussions, in contrast, can wander all around a subject without truly being “off track”—all the while they’re not really “on track.” So, it makes more sense to continually monitor the discussion in terms of the results, to keep it focused on the objective(s).

Sometimes a facilitator will be so intent on keeping a discussion focused, however, that the group misses out on valuable opportunities. On occasion, even often, a participant will bring up an idea or make a suggestion that’s really good, but not really germane to the discussion. Should the facilitator allow the group to pursue it or does the group continue on track?
There’s a third option—run a parking lot. When a participant contributes something that seems to be outside the scope of the discussion, the facilitator can indicate to the scribe to write it down. The facilitator may make that decision or may ask the group, with a simple question—“parking lot?” Also, any participant may propose relegating a contribution to the parking lot, a suggestion that the facilitator and/or the group may then accept or reject.

The parking lot accumulates contributions so they aren’t forgotten but don’t lead the group off on
tangents. Recording contributions that are outside the discussion scope respects concerns of the group and assures participants that the points recorded will be addressed, although not at present.

Make sure to address these points in some way as soon as is practical. Otherwise, participants will perceive that the parking lot is where contributions go to die and they’ll be less likely to offer any comments or ideas that are not on the straight and narrow path of the discussion.

Parking lot An area—e.g.,
on a separate page of a flipchart or on a board— where the scribe records any comments, ideas, or suggestions that are off the topic at hand or otherwise outside the scope of the discussion.
Also known as an idea bin, a tangent bin, or an issues board.

Taken From : The Manager’s Guide to Effective Meetings

A primary responsibility of the facilitator is to manage participation. This means that he or she is to make sure that each person is allowed the opportunity to contribute. It’s essential to prevent any member from dominating and to engage all members in the discussion.

Every member of the group should understand and accept that he or she shares responsibility for the meeting. One way to help ensure that understanding and acceptance of responsibility is by providing every person that you invite to the meeting with a list of responsibilities, as illustrated in the sidebar.

The facilitator should encourage expression of differences of perspective and opinion. The best way to do this is to avoid judging any contributions. In fact, it’s the responsibility of the facilitator to help the group get the most out of every contribution. He or she should make sure that all members of the group understand each contribution, asking the contributor to explain or paraphrase if necessary. Then, he or she should accentuate the value in the contribution: e.g., “That’s a perspective we’ve been missing here” or “What’s most interesting in your comment is….”

Job Description for Meetings Make copies of this guide to distribute to people in advance of the meeting, with the agenda. Responsibilities of Meeting Participants:
• Read the agenda carefully prior to the meeting.
• Prepare to participate in the meeting.
• Arrive on time with your copy of the agenda.
• Contribute—and encourage your fellow participants to contribute.
• Pay attention to what others contribute and respect them.
• Build on others’ contributions.
• Work toward the objectives of the meeting.

Participants should be encouraged to do the same, to seek out value in every contribution and to respect and appreciate it. A friend once commented, “A relationship is good when two people have the best intentions toward each other and assume that the other also has the best intentions.” That truth seems to apply to meetings as well: members of the group should always work for the interests of the group and assume that all share that spirit.

Part of the facilitator’s responsibility to manage participation is to direct traffic. What this means and how important it is depend on the group and the purpose of its activity.

“In an orderly meeting, only one member speaks at a time,” according to Eli Mina in The Complete Handbook of Business Meetings. You’ve probably participated in great meetings that were a little less than orderly. That’s especially true when the conversation (to use the Michael Begeman term) is a “conversation for possibility,” to maximize creativity and generate ideas. And there’s a lot of productive territory between orderly and chaotic.

Sometimes a little disorder is good, allowing enthusiasm and energy to drive the discussion. But there may be times when the facilitator will need to control the flow, using signals like a traffic cop—a hand up or extended palm outward to stop someone from talking and a hand signaling another to continue. (Silent signals are generally better than adding more words to the noise.)

But the advice offered by Mina is sound in principle:
“Interruptions are avoided, except when absolutely needed.

Regardless of how contentious the issues are, civility and mutual respect are maintained.” His basic guideline could be posted at every meeting—“Discussions are ‘hard on the issues’ but ‘soft on the people.’”

The facilitator should help the group handle not only the “hard” but also the “soft.”
As we’ve emphasized from Chapter 1, meetings are work. And you emphasize that fact in your planning, in your agenda, and in all else.

But it’s important to keep in mind the words of wisdom quoted at the beginning of Chapter 3: “There is a legitimate social component to meetings…. You should never overlook the social side of work rituals—even in meetings that are ‘all business.’”

All participants should feel comfortable around each other. A certain amount of conversation and joking is natural and healthy, if it makes the group more productive.

The facilitator should allow and even encourage this social side of the group—but also know when and how to limit the socializing and return to the business of the meeting.

Taken From : The Manager’s Guide to Effective Meetings

The facilitator then opens the discussion. If the environment feels right and the topic is interesting, that may be all that’s necessary to start a discussion. However, if participants are slow to contribute, the facilitator may ask them open-ended questions, so participants cannot answer with just “yes” or “no.” He or she may need to keep repeating the main questions, patiently, to draw out contributions.

As mentioned in Chapter 3, if a discussion isn’t going well, the facilitator can change the dynamics by dividing the group into dyads or triads. He or she gives the clusters one or two questions and a few minutes to discuss them, then asks each cluster to share the results with the rest of the group. good facilitator is someone who can bring out the best in the participants. This happens only if the facilitator shows appreciation and respect for each participant for his or her unique experience, knowledge, and skills. People who feel appreciated and respected tend to contribute.

As participants contribute, the facilitator listens. As necessary, he or she asks for clarification. That may mean asking participants to restate, to define terms, to explain, to provide reasons, to cite facts, to give examples.

The facilitator should encourage involvement, by exploring with queries (e.g., “What else?” and “Any other thoughts?”) and asking follow-up questions (e.g., “Why?”). Some people recommend crediting contributors (e.g., “Let’s get back to what Adriana suggested. How could we build on that idea?” and “Sean mentioned something interesting. Who would like to react to his statement?”). However, this may be unnecessary—and even potentially dangerous, because linking people and contributions can draw attention to the people and away from the contributions and the collaboration. If the group builds on a contribution, the participant will feel appreciated—and that’s what really matters.

To draw out shy participants, the facilitator can ask them for their thoughts about the item under discussion. Or, better yet, he or she can circle the participants, so the natural dynamics of collaboration induces the quiet participants to join in. To quiet those who talk too much, offer a thank-you and ask for the comments of those who haven’t yet spoken.

At all times, everybody—the facilitator, the other participants, and you—should keep the following questions in mind for guidance:
• “Are we focusing on the issue?”
• “Are we being as productive as possible?”
• “Are we spending our time appropriately at this moment?”

The facilitator should summarize any lengthy contribution— and immediately check on the accuracy of that summary. He or she should also contain digressions, by asking participants to return to the point or by summarizing contributions to guide the group back to the point.

As the facilitator helps the participants express their ideas, concerns, opinions, and reactions, he or she should be scanning the faces of the other participants, attentive to any signs that somebody might not be understanding. If so, then he or she works to clarify.

The scribe records the main points of the discussion, on a flip chart or other chosen medium, to allow participants to follow along better and make corrections or request clarification. He or she should try to reduce contributions to their essence, to document the discussion concisely. However, to the extent practical, he or she should use the key words used by the contributor. If a contribution is too long, the scribe should ask the person to summarize it.

As we noted in Chapter 3, grammar and spelling don’t matter here. What matters is to maintain a running record of the discussion that all participants can follow.

Post and Point If discussions often slow down, go off track, or even get derailed, consider this idea. Print the three guiding questions presented here on a sheet of flipchart paper and then post the sheet just before a meeting begins, as you post your agenda and your ground rules (if you do). Then, when a discussion stalls or starts taking a turn, the facilitator (or any other group members) can point to the questions.A word to the wise is sufficient; a gesture is more efficient.

Deal with the Digression When the group is digressing, it’s generally best for the facilitator to try to bring the group back to the point. But sometimes it’s more appropriate to deal with the digression.

The authors of The Team Handbook (p. 7-22) suggest that the facilitator comment on the digression:“We’ve had trouble sticking to this point. Is there something about it that makes it so easy to avoid?” The answers may be surprising and reveal something worth pursuing. If not, then at least the group has dealt with the digression and can return to the issue at hand.

The scribe should print in large letters (at least an inch high, depending on the size of the room), allowing a lot of space around contributions, to allow other points to be added. It’s usually good to use markers of various colors, for easier reading— although too many colors can make the chart busy and confusing. Blue or black are best as main colors; red should be used only to highlight, as it’s harder to read from a distance.

The scribe should stand to the side of the chart or board as much as possible, to not obscure the writing. He or she should regularly scan the faces of the group, to check for signs that participants are having trouble reading the writing.

As the scribe fills a sheet of paper, he or she should tear it from the flipchart and tape it to a wall or tack it to a bulletin board, putting the sheets up in order and/or numbering them. The role of scribe is obviously not just a clerical function. In fact, in meetings with a lot of participation, the scribe takes a more active role to help the facilitator with his or her responsibilities.

As mentioned above, the facilitator should focus on maintaining the pace and the flow of the interaction and ensuring full and productive participation. The scribe can make sure that he or she isn’t missing anything in all the activity. This is especially important when there are a lot of participants contributing and when it’s necessary to clarify and paraphrase and sum up contributions.

The scribe and the facilitator should be constantly checking with each other, to confirm their understanding of contributions and to control the pace and flow of the discussion.

Taken From : The Manager’s Guide to Effective Meetings

Conducting discussions is often the most demanding of the facilitator’s responsibilities. As a friend once noted, “There are two types of conductors: one drives a train down the track and the other manages to get all the instruments in the orchestra to play together.” The same is true of conducting a meeting— except that a facilitator is expected to do both, to keep to the schedule and to help all members of the group work together.

To conduct a discussion properly, the facilitator must do the following:

• Open the discussion
• Manage participation
• Keep the discussion focused
• Close the discussion
It’s so simple—on paper. However, as mentioned in Chapter 2, the role of facilitator requires many skills.

To Discuss or Not to Discuss?

You’ve planned the agenda and indicated which items you expect the group will discuss. However, sometimes reality refuses to fit our plans. There may be issues that don’t generate any discussion because of lack of interest or lack of information or for other reasons. Or, more frequently, issues for which you’d planned no discussion seem to be a hot button.

The facilitator is on the spot to make decisions based on “the will of the people” and his or her own judgment. You should refrain from following your instinct to intervene and manage the situation. Allow the group and the facilitator to arrive at a decision— if you want meeting roles to have any authority and responsibility and if you want participation to mean passionate engagement.

However, if the facilitator and other members of the group seem unable to reach an agreement, the facilitator must decide. If he or she seems to be caught, don’t prolong the agony: if the facilitator looks to you for help, suggest a decision in as few words as possible—or even a gesture. Then, expect the facilitator to resume control of the meeting and move on.

Taken From : The Manager’s Guide to Effective Meetings