Category: archives

From the Archives: Making as a Communal Process vs Individual Act

In April of 2014, one of my friends (and fellow blog writer/reader) Ton Zylstra wrote about making as a communal process. (Sorry Ton, it landed in the drafts and languished there until today!)

In the digital age, we add to the mix connectivity, the ability to both make objects, make tools to make those objects and make connections with other makers. Living today, in 2022, in a highly individualistic country, I grasp for more of the communal. With the pandemic, I probably hew more to solitary work. So revisiting Ton’s post has given me food for thought.

reflections of trees in a puddle with autumn leaves floating on top

…making is a communal process. Communal both in its source of knowledge and inspiration, as well as in the context and rationale of where the stuff you made is put to use. Process, as in the full cycle from awareness of issues, ideation, and creation, all the way to application, impact, and sharing the resulting insights again.

Seeing making as an individual act towards a solitary object obscures the layered richness making in the digital age is an expression of. A maker is not doing DIY, but a maker becomes a bridge or boundary spanner between his own local community and other wider global communities, as well as becomes a community hacker.

Ton Zylstra

via Making as a Communal Process vs Individual Act | Interdependent Thoughts.

As a little side bar, from a later draft came the link to a piece on why we tend to value art created by an individual, versus a group. Artists Working Solo Create the Finest Work – Pacific Standard: The Science of Society.

From the Archives: Getting Real About “Experiments” and Learning from Eugene Kim

More from 2014, more form Eugene Kim, more that is still relevant 8 years later. Go figure. (And I am down to 100 drafts from the blog draft archives. FYI, I am deleting straight out about 30% as I go either due to bad links or unremarkable content. About another 30% are simple repointers, like this one. And the rest I’m either saving or reworking. The experiment, haha, continues!)

Child writing phonetically on a white board about having a good idea...
I have a good idea…

What does this mean for groups that are working on anything complex and are trying to learn?

First, be intentional, but hold it lightly. Know what it is you’re trying to learn or understand, and be open to something else happening entirely. Measure something. Be thoughtful about what you measure and why.

Second, be accountable. Track your learning progress. Review and build on previous results. Be transparent about how you’re doing. Don’t use “experiments” as a proxy for doing whatever you want regardless of outcome.

Third, be humble. Despite your best efforts, you may not be able to conclude anything from your experiments. Or, you might draw “convincing” conclusions you might validate again and again, only to discover that you are totally, entirely wrong.

via Getting Real About “Experiments” and Learning.

From the Archives: Knowledge Translation and Knowledge Implementation

hand drawn notes about the Theory U model of change

This old draft from 2014 on knowledge translation rings a bell after a couple of weeks helping out a colleague working with a large international development consulting group grappling with the funder demands of scaling and “localization.” All which sound good in theory, and very messy and complicated in practice. I love Melanie’s focus on practice too. Right up my lane! 

Melanie Barwick, in a guest post on the CRFR blog, speaks sooth:

In a nutshell, this is what I now know.

Knowledge translation and implementation are complimentary but different constructs. Knowledge translation involves helping others to understand the evidence; implementation involves supporting them to make the changes needed to apply the evidence. Impact means capturing that people knew what to do with the knowledge you shared.

Practice change is not one-off. It’s a complex process that has many moving parts, some of which are likely universal but some that are unique to the particular context, and we are still learning what those are. There is alchemy in the practice change recipe. Every context calls for different amounts of the more universal ingredients, and a dash or two or other key elements that are necessary for that particular context. The practice change recipe for child and youth mental health, for health, or education will (I hypothesize) look different from one another.

Practice change calls for structure and an approach that is both adaptive and incremental. There is a method to the madness, and the application of good project management combined with the application of implementation teams, stages, drivers, and cycles will lead to more effective implementation, whatever the context.

The road to practice change – the implementation journey – has far better signage and lighting than it did 14 years ago. As implementation frameworks and theories become more refined, we are digging below the surface of categorical frameworks to identify the ‘what’ and the ‘how’ of changing practice. It is no longer sufficient to direct implementers to identify barriers and facilitators, tailor interventions to populations, facilitate the change endeavor, and measure outcomes without specifying how they are to accomplish these things. We are beginning to identify key factors that are implicated in effective implementation of evidence in practice across different sectors, and we are focusing on how to measure these key elements in a standardized way so that a common story can be told across case studies and contexts. Lastly, there is a growing library of openly accessible resources to help practitioners map their own implementation journey. Researchers are endeavoring to produce both scientific outputs whilst also developing resources and tools that can be of real and practical use in the field. It has never been a more fascinating and illuminating time, and the journey continues.

via CRFR Blog: Getting the Word Out: A Journey in the Science and Practice of Bringing Evidence to Application and Impact.

From the Archives: From idealized to self-aware facilitation

Take into account that “last week” was in February 2014… And if I were writing this today, I would look deeply into creative destruction…

Picture of a paper bag luminaria glowing in the dark

Last week I posted some comments on the dark side of facilitation (on the KM4Dev community list) which have now started to make the rounds of my friend’s blogs. That is an indicator of a couple of things. I have great friends (YES) and maybe I should write something about this on my blog!

First, the list I shared on KM4Dev, as part of a larger conversation on defining facilitation in the international development context. 

“The real life and dark sides of a facilitator below. I’m sure there are a few people here who can add to this list. ;-)

Nancy

  • called in after everything is really messed up (tip: build relationships before client lists)
  • is not briefed on the deeper, real and often problemmatic issues (“Oh, this is a fantastic group.” Right! Tip: develop a good set of questions to help discern the issues)
  • is asked to facilitate, but not included in design of a (really bad) agenda (tip: refuse to do this unless the designer was brilliant!)
  • runs into very interesting gender issues that are often unspoken, unrecognized (tip: pay attention to and make gender issues discussable)
  • has to facilitate in really BAD rooms in large international organizations (chairs nailed to floor. tip: go outside.)
  • sometimes is given great trust w/ sponsors and groups and all have a transformative experience. LIVES for these moments (tip: debrief: why was this so good? How can we do this again?)
  • mistakes conflict as something that must be shut down (tip: conflict is often the flag that you hit a core issue. Use it generatively)
  • sometimes crazy arrogant and drives to their own agenda (tip: self awareness is a facilitators best friend)
  • does not build capacity in others (tip: co facilitate, mentor, give up control)
  • actually facipulates  (tip: be honest when your approach has any manipulative elements. Use that in your favor, transparently)
  • leaves after the meeting so does not live the consequences (good, bad or otherwise) (tip: what about simple follow up… how are things going? What did we learn?)
  • is not an integral part of the organization (tip: when hiring, hire at least SOME people with facilitation skills and talents. This should not always be an outside job! Let’s co-source, not outsource)
  • is serving the sponsor, not the group (tip: power is always in play. Discuss and use it generatively. It is OK to challenge your client, and essential as a consultant.)
  • works hard to facilitate listening but sometimes fails (tip: learn how you listen and always work hard. There are lots of ways to improve)
  • doesn’t speak the local language and mistakes happen through interpretation (tip: first choice, hire facilitator who speaks the language. Second choice, have a more spacious agenda to really deal with meaning making across multiple languages.
  • takes him/herself too seriously (tip: use fun. seriously!)
  • has no repertoire or gets stuck in one approach/or is flip flopping all over the place (find the balance) (tip: always be learning. Invite your facilitees into that learning process. Build capacity all around)”

Ewen added some great stuff about the positives and dark sides of co-facilitation — and he knows of what he speaks because I’ve co-facilitated with him! I encourage you to read the post.

What both our lists surface is that facilitation, like anything else, holds tensions, dualities and can be idealized or mythologized to the point of uselessness. Dave Snowden often maligns facilitation/facilitators (a.k.a. “fluffy bunnies” ) and my sense is he is talking about that rather self-involved and idealized side of facilitation. I’m not!

Ewen quoted these as ways to navigate co-facilitation. I think they often apply to solo facilitation:

What does it take to overcome that dark side?

Shared experience: Knowing each other definitely helps – the more of a common history you have built with one another, the better it is as you know each other’s strengths and weaknesses and can co-design around this. Talk about it together and explore what you both enjoy doing (or not).

Co-creation and exploratory design: Grapple with the big picture together, toy around with objectives and translating them in work forms in an exploratory conversation, and when it comes to the details of who does what, fear not asking very practical, very silly-looking questions (“do I speak before or after you for the participant’s introduction?”, “After your summary comments do you want me to transition to the next session and announce coffee break?”).

Curiosity and openness: Embracing change and the unknown with an open mind is the key to joint facilitation, particularly if the latter involves dual improvisation (as it works on the principle of ‘yes AND’, not ‘yes BUT’…)

Generosity: Rather than play the card of keeping to one’s sessions and ideas, bring the other person along in your reflection, and show them you are interested in their ideas, in finding good ideas together. Who gets the credit doesn’t really matter, developing strong relationships by working hard on a joint initiative is a lot more important.

Joint reflection and an open heart, to discuss frankly what went well or not, much beyond blaming each other or uncritically praising each other or both (even though some sense of achievement can be really helpful in boosting the duo’s morale). In cases when you disagree on how the other ran a session, discuss it as soon as possible and reflect together. And if, at the end of the gig, there’s a consensus that the two facilitators can’t work each other, being conscious of that is also helpful for the future ;) though in most cases facilitators should be able to negotiate an amicable solution together, as that’s also our job isn’t it?

Focus on the task at hand. At the end of the day, keeping in mind that you have to do a fine job at getting the best out of the participants and achieving objectives set (or whatever better pursuit was identified along the way).

Humour and talking in self-derision… this really talks to the examples that Nancy mentioned above and it will help focus on what really matters, i.e. not you as facilitators.

Once again, fun, focus and feedback seems like a winning formula!

So what keeps us out of that morass? Well, I have some insights as I fall into the morass now and again, and it is always a great moment of learning. As my own practice evolves, here are some of the questions I’m using to be a more self-aware facilitator.

  • Where can we channel power and energy. I used to say “give it away” but that implies it has a steady or singular owner. It doesn’t.
  • Where can we strategically use “private conversations in public” (Hat tip Neil McCarthy) to expose our own questions, uncertainty or missteps as both transparency, moments of learning and to open up the possibility of different ways forward?
  • Where is it ok to use “performance art” in the process of facilitation and when does it mask things unproductively?
  • When acting as an expert, be a fox, not a hedgehog. (Alas, broken link…)

From the Archives: Does having 8 legs give the Spidergram more… legs?

Sometimes I wonder what I was intending with a blog draft. Maybe I should have just deleted? 🙂

I was looking for something amongst my Slideshare uploads and noticed that the Digital Habitats Community Orientation Spidergram Activity had..,. whaaat? 40,305 views? Mama mia! (Update: that was in 2014. Apparently we lost views. Today it says 39,706 views! LOL)

Digital Habitats: stewarding technology has been out since 2009, but it appears that people are still finding value from the artifacts. That is gratifying.

Psst, you can get a free PDF of the book here: https://technologyforcommunities.com/2016/12/happy-holidays-free-download-of-digital-habitats/ – Or you could buy a paper copy! LOL!

Screenshot of a slide deck on Slideshare