Full Circle Associates

Pete Bradshaw's recent post about learning communities spawed a thread on facilitation that caught my eye. Pete and Andy Roberts, also of Ultralab (there is a thread here today! All Ultralab, All the Time!)Pete referenced a paper from 2002 that talked about the importance of facilitation. Andy asked if it was time to question this approach. In the interchange, I sensed two different interpretations of facilitation, which begged me to scare up a few of the classics:

The Concise Oxford Dictionary:

Definition: Facilitation: v.t... make easy, promote, help forward, (action or result); hence ~A’tion.

Brad Spangler at BeyondIntractability.org includes the neutrality issue in his definition. Can we be neutral when we are from within? (This brings up some comparisons to the role of the researcher in action research):

Facilitation (or group facilitation) is a process in which a neutral person helps a group work together more effectively.

Ned Reute on the International Association of Facilitator's site wrote:

A facilitator is someone who uses some level of intuitive or explicit knowledge of group process to formulate and deliver some form of formal or informal process interventions at a shallow or deep level to help a group achieve what they want or need to do or get where they want or need to go.

The folks at Facilitate.com (consultants) describe a facilitation core competency which suggests that facilitation is not a role of one member.

So What the Heck do We Mean in the Context of Online Groups?
First of all, I don't think we can make any sweeping comments as context varies between groups and matters enormously. A small, longstanding group may self facilitate with ease and finesse. A large network-like group may also self facilitate (or is it self regulate?) and it means something completely different. A short term, diverse group may greatly benefit from the hand of a facilitator. In complex situations, pairs of process and content facilitators may enable a group to achieve it's goals.

So when Pete references a facilitated model in his paper, I think it is helpful to think about the possiblity that there are many facilitated models and that the very notion of facilitation can be different across them. Not all facilitation is external. It can be self-facilitation. It can be various combinations.

The one thing I would say is that there is something quite different between facilitation and coercion. I have seen a lot of stuff written about facilitation as a top down, controlling activity. In my book - and my biases and values are clearly showing -- facilitation is about helping people do things for themselves. Not doing it for them, nor controlling how they do it. There are times when leaders, for example, are facilitative. There are other times they are directive or controlling. There is a difference.