Category: facilitation

Webinars, Reflections and Chat

Webinars, Reflections and Chat

Last November I participated in a webinar on designing and facilitating webinars hosted by GFAR.   I had intended to do a deeper dive and reflection, but as I clean up old blog post drafts, some things must be let go! 🙂  That said, some very pragmatic things emerged and were captured, so I’m circling back to share them. Peter Casier, our host, was super well organized and did a great job on follow up.  Peter asked for input on outstanding questions from the chat, collected responses and shared them out. This was fricken FANTASTIC! They comprise the bulk of this very long post!

I was not one of the panel as they had plenty of people, so I decided to focus on the back channel.  I started by sharing related resources, taking notes on key ideas but quickly a bunch of us started interacting with each other. As I’ve noted before, I love the chat “backchannel” – it really helps me pay attention.

Follow Up From Peter Casier/GFAR

Hi all,

Here is our final wrap-up email for our “webinar on webinars”. — With apologies for the delay, but the depth of the feedback the speakers on your unanswered questions (see below), should compensate for this. 🙂  — In the answers, we are joined by Nancy White who was also providing quite some feedback in the online chat channel.

Answers to questions which we were not able to tackle during the webinar itself (or questions which needed further elaboration)

Q: Has anyone used Zoom? https://zoom.us/ 

A: (Peter) Yes, we have tried Zoom, and it looks like a good webinar platform. 

A: (Nancy White) Yes. Besides the fact that it requires a small download, it is now my favorite tool because it facilitates many different kinds of engagement, including video and breakout groups. Warning, the free version is limited to 45 minute meetings!

Q: Which webinar platforms has the possibility of recording

A: (Kelly) WebEx and Adobe Connect both do (not sure of others).

A: (Peter) Most webinar tools allow recording the sessions – which for us, is one of the basic requirements. We used webinars-on-air, Google Hangout, Bluejeans, Zoom, GoToWebinar which all allow recording the session

A: (Pier Andrea) I believe most have – for sure Adobe and WebEx that I’ve used

A: (Leandra) I have used Adobe Connect, Vidyo and Skype for Business, which all allow for recording

A: (April: I haven’t encountered a platform that doesn’t record. We convert our recordings and upload to YouTube, where we can more easily track recording views and ensure the recordings will live on if we ever transfer platforms.

A: (Nancy White) Most, but check, sometimes the free versions have no or limited recording capabilities.

Q: Using Skype for business, can participants call in? Or do all participants need to be in your contact list?

A: (Pier Andrea) I’ve never organized webinars/online meetings with Skype for business but I’ve joined several as participants. And my personal experience is rather negative. I never managed to get connected via the web but always had just to dial in – with all limitations that this has. Maybe things are better now but I remain skeptical of the tool.

A: (Peter) I’ve never used Skype for business, sorry.

A: (Leandra) You create an invitation for the webinar which creates a URL link.  This link is then sent to the participants.  The link allows you to contact via the Web app.  There is also the ability to phone and participate that way.

Q: for Leandra: what tool did you guys at the Uni use before Skpe for Business?

A: (Leandra) Webinars are relatively new at the University, so I am trying out a new concept. I tried Vidyo for the first Webinar, but the software has limitations, and therefore we now use SFB.  The University does have Adobe Connect but it is only for University staff and students and cannot be used for people outside.

Q: To access Skype for Business, does your organization have to have a membership?

A: (Leandra) Yes, you have to purchase a Microsoft License.

Q: In more of a meeting format, what platform would you recommend to combine an in-person group with remote participants? Does anyone have experience using complementary equipment (microphones, etc.)?

A: (Kelly) We’ve used Adobe Connect before for this purpose. Instead of using headphones for the presenter or speaker, we had remote microphones. Harder to hear with them and it was somewhat of a hassle to keep moving the microphones to whichever participant wanted to speak.

A: (Peter) Webinar tools can easily be used for online meetings or teleconferences. Any of the webinar tools we used for actual webinars, we also used for teleconferences with larger participation than what you would normally be able to use with “standard” Skype e.g. “Audio quality” is the most crucial part. If the remote participants are linked into a large onsite meeting, we just hook up the audio equipment (microphones) from the onsite meeting. If it is for a smaller onsite group, we used a Polycom Communicator device (speaker and microphone) https://www.amazon.com/Polycom-Communicator-C100S-Speakerphone-Skype-Grey/dp/B000GG0EFY — much better than using the mike/speaker from a laptop for this purpose.

A: (Pier Andrea) We did this in several occasions using Adobe Connect. You can see some process overview and quick lessons are in this blog post and after action review (not for circulation). Bottom line: it ain’t easy, besides the technical setup & equipment you need more people to manage the process, and people who understand how both online and f2f facilitation work. Key role is for the persons bridging the two. 

A: (Leandra) Skype for Business or Adobe Connect

A: (April: We occasionally do blended events on our Adobe Connect platform. The webinar experience and setup is virtually identical to our webinar only setup, and the in person portion is no different than a live presentation, with a miced speaker at the podium, slides projected behind him or her (which are in turn also projected online). Where the two audiences blend is in the Q&A portion, as we’ll alternate between questions from the room (audience asking directly via a passed mic), and questions online read aloud by the facilitator. It requires additional AV setup to capture the audio properly for the online audience.

A: (Nancy White) The key thing is to have someone in the F2F setting looking out for and including the remote participants. Sometimes I even go so far as to put a paper \cut out of a person in a chair to help those in the room remember that there are others participating. If you do breakouts, consider if you should have a fully remote break out group (plus a connector person in the room), or mix. If mixed, make sure there is a laptop/device for every breakout. For a fabulous case study, seehttps://wenger-trayner.com/resources/practice/what-equipment-do-we-use-at-betreat/

Q: How can we create webinars, which allow for deep interaction? What tools both technical and facilitation wise are available? Any experiences / examples?

A: (Pier Andrea) For me it’s a matter of facilitation more than tool. Sure the tool may limit your options – or present you with opportunities. In my experience more interaction happens when the group is smaller. So what I would do (using Adobe) is the following:

– start with an icebreaker to get people engaged from the beginning

– have short presentations (8/10 mins) followed by Q&A in chat

– throw in some polls every now and there

– have a second round of interactions with the audience allowing them to use voice (so not just chatting) OR

– break folks in breakout rooms – in here, all participants have mic rights by default. There should be a room facilitator, and one participants that volunteer to take note

– notes are then displayed back in the plenary room for debrefing/harvesting with the all participants

A: (Peter) I agree with Pier Andrea, it is a matter of facilitation.. For me, the interactions/questions are key to the success of a webinar: how much the online audience engages, and feels comfortable to engage with the panel. For me, just a chat channel to get questions and feedback is already enough, but make the audience feel comfortable to ask questions!

A: (Leandra) With Skype for Business, I integrate polls into the webinar to make it more interactive

A: (April) Blackboard Collaborate is designed for a more interactive, classroom style experience, where you can do breakout rooms, where smaller groups of participants can be led through an exercise or question together. I think this style works best when you have an audience that shares a base of knowledge or experiences, and/or when the material is something everyone has something to share (as opposed to a highly technical topic, where it may be more geared toward one way delivery of information, and Q&A is interactivity enough.) For example, I presented on a webinar on learning from failure for a knowledge management group, and then we moved into breakout rooms and shared experiences. Each of the main presenters led a breakout room discussion, and then we all came back together to share what came out of it.

A: (Nancy White) First, deep interactions need to be driven by purpose, ideally shared purpose. So at the very start of planning, make sure the focus is of importance, value/relevance to participants. Even better, engage some/all of them in planning. Second, consider what you mean by deep interaction? This will drive the process and technical design/facilitation.  For example, seehttp://www.fullcirc.com/2009/08/11/raising-the-bar-on-online-event-practices/ For example, maybe the group is trying to do some sense making or ideation – consider a World Cafe online http://www.fullcirc.com/2008/07/10/the-world-cafe-community-virtual-cafes/. What about doing deep team work? Consider Liberating Structures (http://www.liberatingstructures.com ) adapted for online – see http://www.fullcirc.com/2014/09/29/liberating-structures-online/ and  https://docs.google.com/document/d/16QZhwiv7pnBUS3rX6EZ8p2_pFn3suLvPjh42V7qqBLc/edit?usp=sharing and https://docs.google.com/document/d/1X6hNuaNaUe1HteydEP6GHFf3b1HC2RtPYugyJFiCwHI/edit?usp=sharing, (Zoom is the tool we use to facilitate the rapid whole group/small group pattern) 

Q: Are there any platforms that work better or worse for participants in China?

A: (Peter) I am unfortunately not aware of which webinar tools breaking through the Great Internet Wall of China.

Q: How many different languages do you need to work with at any one online event? Are they written languages?

A: (April) I have never done an online event involving with more than one language. It’s hard to get around the need for a common language for this kind of event. 

A: (Nancy White)  Some thoughts here: http://www.fullcirc.com/?s=multilingual

A: (Peter) There are some tools that allow for simultaneous translation of the speakers’ input, but it is not common.. Most of the webinar tools are confined to the language of the speakers, which is a real pity, and in my view, one of the big potentials for future expansion of features!

Q: What connectivity you use? What about not having wifi? How to overcome this problems?

A: (Kelly) We made it a standard practice to always connect via Ethernet cable since our wifi can be spotty in our company’s building. 

A: (Peter) This is a technical IT question. For speakers, their connectivity (and quality of connection) is crucial. The potential bottleneck can be either the wifi, or the actual internet connection from the office to the ISP (service provider). We encourage speakers to connect via an Ethernet cable (as Kelly mentioned) to the LAN, to avoid the bottleneck of wifi used by many other office users. If speakers connect from their homes, we ask them to ensure there are no other family members using the internet/wifi at the moment of the webinar. For our webinars, we always do a test-run with all speakers, prior to the actual webinar, to ensure their connectivity works well (with Bluejeans, we can monitor the quality of their connection remotely). In 50% of the cases, we detect problems during the test run, and debug it before the actual webinar. For us, it is crucial that all technical issues, with the speakers, are debugged BEFORE the webinar, to avoid a speaker dropping off during his/her actual live presentation/webinar. It takes time to test and debug, though. The IT people in your office, are your best friends to give you, as a speaker good connectivity.

For the online audience: there is not much support we can give. When we send the audience the link to the webinar, a few days before the webinar, we send them a link to self-test their connectivity and browser setup, so they can prepare. But it is impossible to provide technical assistance all online subscribers, though.. 

A: (Leandra) In Mthatha, the University has worked with Vodacom to install towers in the more remote areas.  They have also placed routers in the hospitals and residences for the students to be able to connect to the internet.

A: (April) Hard line internet connection is typically most stable. Where a presenter lacks stable wifi, we will ask him or her to dial in on a phone line and we can advance slides for them. Many platforms allow participants to dial in rather than connect via internet for the audio portion, and will have a list of toll-free numbers for various countries of operation (though not all).

Q: How many can join webinar at a time – size of audience effectively handled via webinars?

A: (Kelly) With our Adobe Connect license, we have up to 500 participants able to join. When we first started, it was only 100 but now we regularly have over 100. I know Adobe Connect can be pricey, and I think with the 500 limit it might be more. 

A: (Peter) This depends on the webinar tool you use, and the subscription you have to their service. e.g. the default Bluejeans subscription allows for 100 real time participants. If we want more, we need to take another subscription (with a steep price!). The prices go up, by the amount of simultaneous participants you want, for each webinar tool. I have yet to find a webinar tool that allows me to dynamically increase the maximum amount of simultaneous participants, based on individual webinars.. Most services want you to subscribe to a fixed scheme with a fixed amount of online participant. 

A: (Pier Andrea) I guess it depends a bit on the scope/purpose of the webinar. Also, there’s a limitation in terms of number of attendees you can have with the various webinar platforms (i.e. you may need to pay more if you want to accommodate a larger audience). In general, if I have an audience of 100+, I’d like to have a larger facilitation team, and a more skilled host/MC – to ensure we stay on track while trying to engage the audience

A: (Leandra) Each of the different webinar tools can accommodate various different sizes of audiences.

A: (April) It depends on the platform and your subscription, but in terms of an optimal number, it depends a bit on the webinar format and audience, and the size of the team putting it on. You need to be able to effectively manage their tech issues, keep on top of the chat, incoming questions etc. We regularly have webinars of 100 people or more for Agrilinks with a team of 3-4 working the webinar – an AV tech, online

A: (Nancy White) This always goes to PURPOSE. If it is more information dissemination, you can scale larger. If you have an effective breakout and harvest strategy, you can go larger. If you need deep interaction, listening and “talking time,” keep it smaller.  The knowledge and practices we have about group  size OFFLINE are pretty similar online.http://www.fullcirc.com/2012/09/24/chris-corrigan-on-group-size-in-innovation-and-open-design/

Q: What’s the etiquette for subscribing webinar attendees from your general listserver ?

A: (April: We do not subscribe webinar attendees to our mailing list without their explicit permission. We recently have started adding a registration question to get mailing list signups for those who aren’t  already on the mailing list.

A: (Peter) We keep a database of people who attended past webinars. We send them an email when a new webinar is coming up, but it is up to them to subscribe or not.

Q: How do you handle different time zones, taking into account internet limitations outside of the office (after work hours)?

A: (Kelly) We typically aim for 8 or 9 AM EST so that it’s not too late for others in different time zones. This, of course, does not really account for people in the US that are in later time zones.

A: (Peter) It is difficult to schedule a webinar to “hit” ALL timezones. We typically schedule our webinar around 13:00 or 14:00 CET (Rome time), which is rather late for Asia and early for the Americas, but a good compromise. Often the timing of webinars is also dictated by the availability of the speakers. So, it depends really on your target public (and their time zones). 

A: (Pier Andrea) Well, if you are organizing a webinar for a global audience, there will always be someone that will have to wake up early or work late in the day. Normally, I’d arrange the schedule based on the speakers’ availability/location first, then on the location of the majority of the potential audience.

A: (April) It’s good to be cognizant of your core audience and where they are located, if you have a larger base in one area or another. It’s impossible to find a time that fits working hours everywhere in the world. You can consider switching time zones to accommodate different audiences or if it’s something mission critical like a webinar on internal policy changes, you could hold it a few times in different time zones. Of course, with recordings, people can always listen after the fact at a convenient time. 

Q: Are there any of the platforms which is “technically” better in using less bandwidth?

A: (Leandra) Skype for Business is bandwidth friendly

A: (Peter) Each webinar tool is a compromise (does it record, does it allow you to show video or presentations, how many online participants does it allow for, what are the bandwidth requirements…). Before committing to a single webinar tool, you need to try it out. For sure, for speakers, there is a persistent need for excellent connectivity, but different tools require different bandwidth for participants to view the webinar. Some are very demanding on bandwidth, even for participants…

Q: Do you advice to rework/edit the recording of the webinar before putting it online?

A: (Kelly) Before putting it online, I usually watch it and cut out any silences or awkward breaks (i.e. if our internet went down for a minute or two). Not sure if it makes that much of a difference but I think it provides a nicer viewing experience. 

A: (Peter) We always “publish” the recording “as is”, within 24 hours after the actual webinar. This is the raw recording. In the 30 webinars we did in the past 3 years, we only had one occasion where a speaker had problems with his connectivity. In that case, we re-recorded his presentation, and inserted that into the recording before we published it. So, in general, we publish the raw recording. For GLF, we are now also editing the recording afterwards (and it takes a while before that is done), with a condensed (10-15 minutes) video and audio (podcast) summary of the webinar. 

A: (Pier Andrea) With Adobe, I normally just use the Adobe recording if the audience is just internal. This recording gives you a timeline on the side bar, so you can skip to different moments of the recording (e.g. a question in the chat, a change of presentation, etc). When I need to make a recording completely public, I export the Adobe recording in flash, then do some light editing (top&tail, fade in/fade out). When possible, I also find it useful breaking down the recording is smaller videos (for example, one for each presentation) to make it more digestible. But never underestimate how time consuming it could be to edit videos!

A: (Leandra)  I always edit the webinar before adding it to the website.  I do this to remove any white noise.  Also to tidy up the presentation.

A: (April): See below. Not recommended unless there are egregious issues. It’s good also to look at how many people look at the recordings and other post-event products, and decide accordingly much effort to put into polishing them. 

Q: With the recording of the webinar, or even with the live webinar, is it possible to turn off (or edit out) the audio alert when a member of audience joins or leaves? What tool is good for editing white spaces and lenghty pauses in webinar?

A: (Kelly) Yes, you can do both of these things in Adobe Connect. You can also turn off sound notifications in WebEx.

A: (Peter) Most webinar tools allow you to configure the webinar to disable audio alerts when people leave or join. I saw that in our “webinar on webinars”, this was mis-configured (my apologies), where we had continuous audio alerts. Normally, this should not happen.

A: (Leandra)  I use Articulate replay

A: (April) Our AV technician will occasionally edit big gaps in a recording using standard video editing software, but I would say it’s not worth the effort to try to smooth out the usual occasional pauses or momentary technical difficulties. People come to expect these momentary issues as part of a webinar. It can be useful to hold off on starting the recording until the moderator is done with the “can you hear me now” type banter and ready to introduce the speakers/topic, however.

Q: What webinar tool have you used and what did you find as the pro/cons of it?

A: (Pier Andrea): As many of the other speakers, I use Adobe Connect. And I love it! Below some pros and cons:

Pros 

Link opens in browser

No need to install anything – often if you use a company laptop you’re not allowed to download and run new programs, need to ask IT to fix it, it can be a hurdle that discourages/prevents participation in the webinar

Performs well in different bandwidth settings 

Break out rooms

Allow for multiple conversations, eg. group work

More options to participate

More intimate environment – less fear to talk into the black box

Competitive pricing

Easy to use – upload & share content

Export content, meeting recording

Different room layouts – more importance to video, presentation or chat

Solid and simple phone app (OS and Android)

Cons

Mic issues, at time users don’t find it easily to activate. Or flash is disabled by accident and need to be fixed in browser settings.

No shared accounts allowed – one person per account – I always need to be in the room, or share my login details

You need to append some standard text to the event link to force it to open in the browser – otherwise in some instances, the ‘native’ link to join may trigger the download of the Adobe addin, which may not always be possible 

No dial in options (or not that I know of)

A (Peter): We tried and tested many webinar tools over the years. Each webinar tool has advantages and limitations, and it is up to you to define which features are more important. It goes from bandwidth requirement, technical features, easy of registration, etc… In the tests we did about 2-3 years ago, Bluejeans came out as a winner. Meanwhile the market evolved, and for GLF, we are now trying Crowdcast (but even that tool has advantages and disadvantages).

A- (Leandra): We used Vidyo for the first webinar and now we are using Skype for Business, I did investigate other webinar tools, but the University wanted me to rather make use the software available at the institution.

Pros: It is easy to use, especially if the presenters are not very computer literate. – If you do not have SFB, the Webb app is easy to install. – As the organizer of the webinar, I am able to control a lot of the backend operations (such as muting microphones, videos etc).

Cons:Polls are not visible when participants use a tablet to view the webinar

A: (Nancy White) See http://www.fullcirc.com/2013/01/07/quick-revisit-of-web-meeting-tools-what-is-your-favorite/ – Old, but helpful on the picking criteria. Tools change quickly. My main preferences are tools that a) allow the organizers to give as much (or little) control to the participants, which includes peer to peer chat (vs “question” tools or chat that only goes to the moderators – see http://www.fullcirc.com/2011/11/16/why-chat-streams-are-critical-to-live-events/ ), tools that allow some visual (especially shared white boards for smaller gatherings and co-creation), IF you use video, display is useful vs distracting (i.e. not fixed and dominating always over everything), and of course, bandwidth suitable/reliable. For example, Skype used to be a solid option for small gatherings with video. That is not true now for the free version and I use Zoom instead.

 Additional resources  – here are some examples from Kelly, on webinar roles and scripts:

Webinar Roles & Responsibilities

Kelly

  • Open the webinar room at 8:00 a.m.
  • Check webinar room set up and ensure presentations are uploaded.
  • Greet presenters at 8:30 and assist with any troubleshooting
  • Check in with presenters for any questions and remind them of the flow
  • Start the webinar recording when the webinar begins
  • Introduce webinar and role as facilitator
  • Co-facilitate Q & A
  • Set up central command room
  • Move “Who’s Speaking” Slides

John (Logged in as SPRING Project—Use Green Text)

  • Collect questions in the chat pod during presentation and pastes them into Google doc during the Q & A session
  • Pastes question and identification into the chat pod as Sarah asks them
  • Troubleshoot audio as necessary. For canned responses click here.
  • Monitor chat pod, encourage comments and responds to requests
  • Introduce new speakers in the chat box (i.e. Sally Abbott is now speaking)
  • Monitor chat pod, encourage comments and responds to requests
  • Monitor audio and mute’s speakers when they are not speaking

Sarah

  • Introduce webinar topic and presenters
  • Input on script
  • Introduce webinar topic and presenters
  • Co-facilitate the Q & A period 

Cathy

  • Live tweet webinar, highlight important questions and quotes.

SPRING Webinar ‘Day Of’ Checklist

Before

Room Set Up

□      Ensure one drop cord and Powerstrip are in the room the day before.

□      Set up and test Ethernet Router on at least two computers

□      Place labeled Ethernet cords designated location for each presenter

Webinar Set Up

□      Import contacts from Webform into Constant Contact, schedule reminder email

□      Log in to the room as “named host” AT LEAST one hour before the webinar begins and open the room 30 minutes before the webinar begins.

□      Phones silenced

□      Open audio bridge for webinar room

□      Run Audio Wizard and test audio

□      Review all layouts and ensure that

□      Polls are Open and set to Broadcast

□      all chat boxes are cleared

□      PowerPoint presentations on all layouts are queued up correctly.

□      Once all layouts are set, lock pods (Pods→Move & Resize Pods- unchecked)

□      Test presenters’ connection and audio. Ensure all presenters at JSI are connected to Ethernet cables and that no presenters or staff are using Google Chrome.

□      Ensure everyone can communicate through presenter-host chat and remind presenters of the flow

□      Welcome people in chat and audio as they join

□      Welcome people via audio every 5 minutes starting 20 minutes before the start time

□      Ensure Record is enabled prior to beginning

During

□      Record Webinar

□      Monitor chat window and presenters’ chat

□      Participate in chat as possible; acknowledge most participants as they enter

□      Monitor email

□      Share resources and links as they are mentioned.

After

□      Conduct After Action Review

□      Thank presenters via email/phone

□      Send Chat text to yourself (→ through the menu of each chat pod)

□      Export polls

□      Check recording to ensure good sound and links work

□      Ensure final materials are saved to the Google Drive

□      Send web content and link to recordings and presentations to KM Officer via Google Docs

□      Prepare Follow Up Email in Constant Contact

□      Test Follow Up Email

□      Send Follow up Email

□      Complete Webinar Report

□      Send Webinar Report to KM Advisor

Additional resources 

http://www.fullcirc.com/2014/11/17/beyond-the-webinar/
and tons more http://www.fullcirc.com/?s=webinar plus a guide https://docs.google.com/document/d/1ASt3SnX7gymyAL9x7ULmNZae9o-_RmnUUJSC3iPiYnc/edit?usp=sharing

– A report on selecting a webinar tool done a little while ago: http://www.blogtips.org/review-of-webinar-tools/

Building an Online Liberating Structures Practice 90 Minutes at a Time

Liberating Structures has become central to my practice over the years. I have dabble with using LS online, but the call to do more online is getting stronger, particularly in introducing people to LS and getting immediately to hands on use. I wanted to share some 90 minute “studios” that I have been facilitating in different contexts to introduce LS in the domain context of the participants. In other words, the examples here may be in education, the approach can work with any domain simply by changing the invitations used with the structures. Also, I’ve used the studio approach face to face and it really works well. I’ll write that up another time!

Why 90 minute studios?

First, the term “studio” comes from the UdGAgora, work a team of us, led by Tanis Morgan of JIBC, with the University of Guadalajara on increasing learner engagement. It was structured as a participatory, hands on online and offline learning experience around the idea of a studio where content is only introduced, and the learning is focused on execution or use of the content. (More of our work with UdG here.)  A studio also conjures up the space of an artist, and in many ways, the use of Liberating Structures is a form of social artistry. And yes, I like the term.

Second, the experience shared here recaps what we did at the e/Merge Africa Festival of Learning online event in July, hosted by, among others, the amazing Tony Carr from University of Capetown.

90 minutes is a useful length of time online. It is just on the edge of “too much time” in terms of participant attention, and it is long enough to get an introduction to the content and use 2-3 structures applied to that group’s real domain/needs. Face to face, you can get 3 or even 4 structures in a 90 minute segment, but our experience is that things take longer online due to acclimatization to technology (in our case, Zoom) and the subtleties of converting a process to online.

Multiple 90 minute studios can be scheduled over time. Right now 3 rounds of studios seems to build enough traction for people to begin experimenting with and adopting LS into their practice, but I have not done a rigorous follow up. That would be a wonderful experiment. AND, you can do a stand alone studio – absolutely!

Studio “Strings”

Liberating Structures are often used in a sequence called a “string.” What follows are some different strings for studios, options and my rationale behind each string.

Studio 1 – What is Liberating Structures and Why Should I Care?

Purpose: Provide just enough experience with and information about LS so that participants want to try it and/or learn more. It’s like that yummy food sample in the market that draws you in.

  1. Impromptu Networking in pairs or 1-2-4-All to immediately demonstrate how distribution of power (in this case to everyone in pairs) can change interaction, particularly online where we have been “presented to” to death! Debrief by showing the LS microstructures underneath Impromptu Networking/1-2-4-All and transition into…
  2. Brief introduction to LS (slides and chat) to get the fundamentals visible. (An example here of slides for three studios in the education domain.)
  3. Users Experience Fishbowl to hear from real practitioners in the domain share the good, the bad and the ugly of using LS in their work. What is great about doing this online is you can tap into practitioners anywhere which is super powerful.
  4. 15% Solutions to get participants to think about something they can do with what they learned NOW.
  5. Point to resources and, if appropriate, future studio opportunities.

Studio 2: Real Application of Liberating Structures

Purpose: Use LS to do something real in the domain of the participants that gets results in 90 minutes.

In the application studio, we find someone in the organization/group/network domain who has a real need or challenge and we design a string of LS for them to use in addressing that need. The practitioner(s) are in the center and the other participants are essentially watching a coached design session. Note: this session always seems too short, but I hesitate to go to 2 hours!

  1. Something to “lift off from where we left off” from the first studio. A fun way is to get the practitioners to briefly share their challenge, then have the whole group do some creative destruction to make way for innovation with TRIZ .
  2. Next we get to the issues. The team shares their challenge  with options like Celebrity Interview using Purpose to Practice and Matchmaker for draft string. I notice that we blur the boundary between structures as we get intensely into design. The other participants are in “watching mode” but also able to contribute via chat. We have everyone NOT on the design team turn off their cameras in this phase.
  3. What, So What, Now What with everyone to debrief, re-point to resources, microstructures, LS values and invite for session #3 as appropriate. Sometimes if we need to close rapidly and lost our debrief time, I close with “Just Three Words” (10 mins)

String 3: Diving Deeper into Liberating Structures

Purpose: Peel back enough layers to reveal the basic structure of LS, some related complexity theory and show that there are many layers of value in using LS.

The intention behind this studio was for people who attended #1 and #2. What often happens is we get new folks, so you need to be attentive to give at least a little context at the front end. The string should be very flexible and often I use the beginning of this studio to find out what people want to try and do, and then wrap the explanation and theory around it.

  1. Reset Context/Liftoff with Impromptu Networking around burning questions, or  What, So What, Now What? This can be very rich in pairs or triads. From the results, we choose what structure to do next.
  2. Discuss user groups, the LS Slack, immersion workshops, website, book, app and other resources.
  3. Do an Ecocycle on our LS practices (or other domain related topic) to expose people to one of the richer but (in my opinion) harder to initially grasp LS.
  4. And complete with 15% Solutions to stimulate follow up, action and behavior change. For example, if this was with a team working on learning and diffusion, we would explore the next opportunity they needed to unleash and engage people in the work, and what LS they might try.  If we skip Ecocycle, I love doing 15% Solutions and then Troika Consulting to use peer input to deepen and refine  an idea.

Implications of LS online

All of the Liberating Structures mentioned above have been successfully and repeatedly done online. We are still experimenting with other LS. They do require the type of break out room capability that Zoom has. The use of video cameras really enhances the process – and sometimes people don’t have cameras, or even microphones, so make sure that is addressed in your preparations. There are certainly some particular tips about doing these structures online, but that will have to wait for a later post!

Resources and Examples

Recordings and artifacts from the e/Merge series on LS for Increasing Online Learning Engagement in July, 2018.

Adaptive Strategy Development

Introduction

Designing in complex and emergent contexts challenges the traditional log frame approach. With a set of Liberating Structures we can create a more adaptive and  actionable strategy  for project design and development that contextualizes the plan into a fuller picture of the landscape within which it operates. This is a very belated follow up on the application of the process with the good folks at the University of Illinois for the INGENEAS project where we used this approach in April. 

Liberating Structures are easy-to-learn microstructures that enhance relational coordination and trust. They quickly foster lively participation in groups of any size, making it possible to truly include and unleash everyone. Liberating Structures are a disruptive innovation that can replace more controlling or constraining approaches. They are engaging, easily learned and replicated and “complexity friendly.” To learn more about Liberating Structures, please visit http://www.liberatingstructures.com.

With a fully engaged and flexible approach, challenges such as complex international development projects can work with emerging contexts, rather than struggle against them.  Business with rapidly changing markets can develop a portfolio of approaches to respond quickly and accurately. 

As a process, participants in all parts of a system can engage, probe and sense on the ground, and loop the learning back into the strategy e for iterative improvements. Monitoring and evaluation approaches that require flexibility to work in complex contexts are designed as part of the landscape, not afterwards.

Framing the strategic planning as an adaptive landscape versus a document situates the work in its complex setting. By complex, we mean we may not be able to predict outcomes, even with extensive expertise, and only understand causality after the fact. For example, most international development work operates partially and sometimes mostly in complex settings. So the use of complexity-based approaches helps us work more productively and adaptively in these contexts.

The Six Essential Questions of the Adaptive Strategy Landscape

The strategy landscape, or “knotworking” as it is increasingly called,  is framed around six essential questions and held together through the Ecocycle. These questions frame, drive and help us evaluate our strategy.

  1. PURPOSE: Why, why, why is this work important to us and the wider community?  How do we justify our work to others?
  2. CONTEXT: What is happening around us that demands a fresh/new/novel approach (creative adaptation and change)?
  3. BASELINE: Where are we starting, really?
  4. CHALLENGE: What paradoxical challenges must we face to make progress?
  5. AMBITION: Given our purpose, what seems possible now?
  6. ACTION & EVALUATION: How are we moving/breaking away from the present and moving toward the future? How do we know?

The questions, particularly the focus on purpose and ambition pull a group into possibilities as they make choices and identify next steps.  While they seem linear, there are feedback loops. As the group discovers new things, they may come back and modify earlier “answers.” 

The Ecocycle

The Ecocycle provides the glue across the six questions and helps us recognize that we are always working in emerging contexts. To fully exploit knowledge and practice that has been vetted and ready for scale (maturity), we also have to pay attention to what is no longer adding value (creative destruction), what is needing to be birthed (networking) and then iteratively developing those ideas (birth) until they reach their own maturity. The Ecocycle illuminates the pulling from gestation to birth to maturity to creative destruction where strategy-and-tactics are combined.  A new mindset pops into view. It can also help assess current state of activities, assets, relationships and resources, as well as identify future possible actions. 

Strings for Each Question

Liberating Structures are most often used in a combination. The six questions are engagingly answered through a series, or “string” of Liberating Structures. There are a range of structures that can be used for each question. Here are some examples:

PURPOSE: Why, why, why is this work important to us and the wider community?  How do we justify our work to others?

  • 9 Whys   – Make the Purpose of Your Work Together Clear. When we dig into our assumptions, our true purpose may reveal itself – and surprise us!
  • 1-2-4-All – Engage Everyone Simultaneously in Generating Questions, Ideas, and Suggestions. Thinking alone, clarifying in pairs then building a sense of ideas across larger groups help us step beyond the “usual” ideas and observations and facilitate input from all – even the quiet folks.
  • Drawing Together – Reveal Insights and Paths Forward Through Nonverbal Expression. We tap into different parts of our brain, may reveal new insights and prevent jumping to premature judgement or closure.

CONTEXT: What is happening around us that demands a fresh/new/novel approach (creative adaptation and change)?

  • Mad Tea – Connecting with others to reveal surprising truths and action steps. Using rapidly rotating paired conversations, we also provide a smaller, safer space to reveal initial ideas, fears, and issues.
  • Discovery and Action Dialog – Discover, Invent, and Unleash Local Solutions to Chronic Problems. We build on our strengths, even the ones we didn’t know we had!
  • Users Experience Fishbowl – Share Know-How Gained from Experience with a Larger Community. 

BASELINE: Where are we starting, really?

  • What, So What, Now What? – Together, Look Back on Progress to Date and Decide What Adjustments Are Needed.
  • TRIZ – Stop Counterproductive Activities and Behaviors to Make Space for Innovation.
  • Critical Uncertainties – Develop Strategies for Operating in a Range of Plausible Yet Unpredictable Futures. We get out of our “thinking ruts.”
  • Note: The baseline also gives us a starting point for monitoring and evaluation design at the start, not the end of our work!

CHALLENGE: What paradoxical challenges must we face to make progress?

  • TRIZ – Stop Counterproductive Activities and Behaviors to Make Space for Innovation. It is amazing how liberating it is to STOP something. We do too much adding…
  • Wicked Questions – Articulate the Paradoxical Challenges That a Group Must Confront to Succeed. Finding the AND instead of the EITHER/OR.

AMBITION: Given our purpose, what seems possible now?

  • 25/10 Crowd Sourcing – Rapidly Generate and Sift a Group’s Most Powerful Actionable Ideas. Get some initial ideas on the table rather than trying to design the perfect solution. Especially by committee!
  • 15% Solutions – Discover and Focus on What Each Person Has the Freedom and Resources to Do Now.  Empower immediate action, results and iterative improvement.
  • Troika Consulting – Get Practical and Imaginative Help from Colleagues Immediately. Sharpen ideas for launch.

ACTION & EVALUATION: How are we moving/breaking away from the present and moving toward the future? How do we know?

  • What, So What, Now What? – Together, Look Back on Progress to Date and Decide What Adjustments Are Needed. At the micro or macro level, for process and for the actual work or practice.
  • Ecocycle – Analyze the Full Portfolio of Activities and Relationships to Identify Obstacles and Opportunities for Progress. Situate the work.
  • WINFY – Surface Essential Needs Across Functions and Accept or Reject Requests for Support. Identify how we work together practically and honestly.
  • Purpose to Practice – Design the Five Essential Elements for a Resilient and Enduring Initiative. Get the work GOING!

The Visual Canvas

When working in complex contexts, there is often a lot to track and wrap one’s head around. Some of these things are simple next steps, clear data, and identified issues. Others are less certain. We have developed a visual canvas with Ecocycle at the center, surrounded by the six questions for capturing and making sense of the most important findings of the group as they work through the process. Keeping both the questions and the Ecocycle visible throughout the process helps ground and reground as the group progresses. Often post it notes are used so that as new data, insights, and challenges are surfaced, the canvas can be updated. At the end, there is a “story spine” that can support the telling of the strategy story to others.

The visual can be on a large piece of paper on the wall for face to face groups, or a digital artifact online with movable digital notes.

Examples from Other Groups

I have used this approach with a number of groups over the past three years. The results have been:

  • From the Fire Adaptive Communities retreat

    Surprising – One group not only entirely rethought their approach, but the use of Liberating Structures also reshaped their process.

  • Fast – Quick, iterative interactions revealed far more than traditional SWOT approaches. People are usually amazed at how much they can get done in a day in developing their strategy and implementation.
  • Possibly threatening – If one or more people come in to the process thinking they know the outcome and their agenda will prevail, this approach can destabilize them and stimulate sabotaging. It is important that everyone knows that Liberating Structures engage and unleash everyone and if you open that Pandora’s box, you need to be ready to listen to and respond to that engagement.
  • New questions –  Some of the things that have surfaced in this work include: how to mine the past without falling into thinking traps in complex contexts where the past may not help us understand our path towards the future; understand how this approach supports and makes visible the decision making processes and finally, how to weave it into developmental evaluation.

Inspirations/Resources

This was developed off of the initial inspiration from Keith McCandless, co-founder of Liberating Structures, and conversations with Fisher Qua and Eva Schiffer. The first draft was developed to support a strategic planning workshop at the University of Illinois for the INGENEAS project. 

Chris Corrigan on Complexity Principles and Participatory Process Design

Ah, Kismet! Chris Corrigan posted a great blog a while back about complexity and participatory design process. I had slipped the quote into a draft post and rediscovered it today. I want to build on his brain dump! He is building on Sonja Blignault  blogging on Paul Cilliers’ work on complexity. See Cilliers’ seven characteristics of complex systems and the implications of complexity for organizations. In another post I’ll dip into these multiple layers! Stay tuned for my riff!

  1. Complex systems consist of a large number of elements that in themselves can be simple.
  2. The elements interact dynamically by exchanging energy or information. These interactions are rich. Even if specific elements only interact with a few others, the effects of these interactions are propagated throughout the system. The interactions are nonlinear.
  3. There are many direct and indirect feedback loops.
  4. Complex systems are open systems—they exchange energy or information with their environment—and operate at conditions far from equilibrium.
  5. Complex systems have memory, not located at a specific place, but distributed throughout the system. Any complex system thus has a history, and the history is of cardinal importance to the behavior of the system.
  6. The behavior of the system is determined by the nature of the interactions, not by what is contained within the components. Since the interactions are rich, dynamic, fed back, and, above all, nonlinear, the behavior of the system as a whole cannot be predicted from an inspection of its components. The notion of “emergence” is used to describe this aspect. The presence of emergent properties does not provide an argument against causality, only against deterministic forms of prediction.
  7. Complex systems are adaptive. They can (re)organize their internal structure without the intervention of an external agent.

See also: 

Building Online Meeting Muscles – chunking and practice

I’ve been both working with some distributed communities of practice and talking to different folks in my networks about online meeting practices. I’m feeling a resurgence of the kind of interest we saw in the earlier waves of online interaction. There is a pattern that I realize I use, but had not written about it. It is nothing new nor earthshaking, but every once in a while it is worth a moment of reflection and reification.

Many people have been migrating to Zoom for online meetings, both for its ease of use, decent video and chat, but also because it allows breakout groups, something that can be VERY useful for engagement and deeper work. Other groups are adopting tools like Slack and Trello.

So we have new tools. That means we either need new or adapted practices, especially if we are seeking to move away from top down, presentation oriented meetings. (My version of a waste of time!)  Here are a few heuristics I’m using to initiate and build the online meeting practices and muscles.

  • Experiment/introduce a new practice, then make sure you briefly debrief it. Use it again in the next meeting. It gets easier to do, and the work gets deeper and more meaningful. Encourage people to be curious and withhold judgement until they get to that moment of greater depth. Right now it seems that new practices really bear fruit on the third use.
  • In the second meeting of a sequence, use the first practice and add just one more. Then in subsequent meetings you start rolling off some practices to save for when they are most useful, and introduce others. Debrief, practice and then use discernment of what you should stop doing, keep doing, change or start over. This builds an online interaction repertoire.
  • Explain just enough so that people interested in using the processes and methods themselves have a starting point to carry the practices elsewhere. Offer links to resources or deep debrief to the interested. Don’t torture the others by droning on about process.
  • In debrief, some useful questions can be (drawn from Liberating Structures and elsewhere): what was liberated or enabled by this process? How was it structured? Where else might you use it? These three questions help people be aware the role process plays in their experience, success or failures.
  • Finally, don’t expect people, including yourself, to be instantly comfortable and competent with new practices. Take a learning stance. Be an experimenter. Laugh at and learn from failure. If you are leading the charge, role modeling this stance makes a huge difference.

Your ideas? Practices?