Dear Joseph,
In a group I was working with recently, there was a female participant who was constantly trying to impose her own agenda. She was so oppressive that she was disrupting our progress. I gently told her that she was clinging to her ideas and was unwilling to give them up. I told her that we all do this from time to time and asked her to open herself up a bit to other people's ideas. From that moment on she was silent. When I went to him later and asked him how he was, he told me that he was very hurt. I had embarrassed him by excluding him.
I apologized, but added this: When we have strong opinions, we sometimes neglect to make space for others' opinions. I also asked him how else I could handle the situation, and he suggested that from now on I should not point fingers at anyone, but address the group in general. But that seems hypocritical to me.What would I need to do to serve the whole group without causing embarrassment to any one individual?
Signature,
The Facilitator's Dilemma
Dear Facilitator's Dilemma,
Your question took me back in time. I once had a chemistry teacher who used the tactic suggested by your participant. In a huge 200-seat classroom, my friend and I were joking around during the lecture, when he suddenly interrupted the class and said in a commanding voice, like Professor McGonagall in Harry Potter: "Clowning around in my classes is rude and unacceptable!"
The teacher knew who he meant. Everyone in the class knew. Everyone even turned to see how we would react. My friend's face turned red. I'm sure mine was no different.
I think that feedback in the form of "I'm telling you, you understand" is insincere, manipulative and ineffective. Insincere because you are not saying what you really think. They are manipulative because you are trying to align someone's behavior without taking into account what motivates that behavior. They are often ineffective because they replace dialogue and problem solving with monologue.
CRITICAL CONVERSATIONS
The real issue here is that she was embarrassed. The question is: How do you create the conditions for sincerity in a group while minimizing the possibility of embarrassment?
Here are a few suggestions:
2. Ask permission. Coaching is less provocative when it is by invitation. Following your attempt to normalize mistakes, ask participants for permission to offer real-time coaching. For example, you might ask the group: "What would you prefer me to do when we encounter these behaviors - because we are sure to encounter them?" or, "Would you give me permission to interrupt the discussion and not give you personal coaching when the need arises?" Then get each participant's consent. People are less defensive when they receive feedback on their own terms. Research on the perception of pain shows that when the patient chooses the timing of the pain, rather than feeling pain suddenly and unannounced, the pain felt is reduced. What is true for physical pain is even more true for emotional pain.
3. Start small and start early. Finally, make it a rule to give quick feedback during your facilitation. Doing so shows the group that feedback is healthy and normal, not threatening and rare. It is likely that the woman in your group resented you singling her out more than anything else, and this felt like a violation to her. All that aside, defensiveness is a choice. You cannot stop people from choosing to take things personally. Some people carry so much shame inside them that even the most skilled facilitators cannot break their tendency to take things personally. However, using these simple tools, you can make it easier for them.
Good luck!
Joseph