Dispute Resolution: Facilitation - The Use of Mediation Techniques Processes in Resolving Differences in Group Decision-Making

ADVANCED MEDIATION ASSIGNMENT: Dianne Allen ... p.
1 FACILITATION: THE USE OF MEDIATION TECHNIQUES & PROCESSES IN RESOLVING DIFFERENCES IN GROUP DECISION-MAKING
FACILITATION: THE USE OF MEDIATION TECHNIQUES & PROCESSES IN RESOLVING DIFFERENCES IN GROUP DECISION-MAKING
Dianne Allen, 1996
Contents
ABSTRACT ............................................................................................................................... 4 CONTEXT AND STYLE OF THE REPORT ................................................................ 5 FURTHER REMARKS ON STYLE: ............................................................................. 6 1. INTRODUCTORY REMARKS ............................................................................................ 7 2. MEDIATION........................................................................................................................ 10 2.1 THE ELEMENTS OF MEDIATION ..................................................................... 10 2.2 THE MEDIATION PROCESS ............................................................................... 10 2.3 THE CONTEXT OF MEDIATION - COURT-ANNEXED MEDIATION ........... 11 2.4 THE TECHNIQUES OF A MEDIATOR ............................................................... 13 2.4.1. Communication techniques for clarity, common understanding, building common view of matters at issue .......................................................... 13 2.4.2. Negotiation techniques to work through to a consensual agreement of a/the way forward: least damage option/ best alternative ..................... 15 2.4.3. Intervention strategies of the mediator - communication elements; negotiation elements ............................................................................. 16 3. FACILITATION AND THE ROLE OF THE FACILITATOR ............................................ 18 3.1 WHAT IS FACILITATION? .................................................................................. 18 3.2 GENERIC RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN FACILITATION AND MEDIATION . 18 3.3 CONTEXTS FOR FACILITATION....................................................................... 19 3.3.1 Public Process Facilitation ....................................................................... 20 3.3.2 Internal Organisational Processes Facilitation ........................................ 20 3.4 APPLICATIONS OF FACILITATION TO THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT CONTEXT ........................................................................................................ 22 3.4.1 Infrastructure and Land Use Development .............................................. 23 3.4.2 Internal organisational process/es ............................................................ 23 4. GROUP PROCESSES & THE IMPLICATIONS FOR FACILITATORS ........................... 24 4.1 OVERVIEW ........................................................................................................... 24 4.2 THE PROBLEM SOLVING GROUP .................................................................... 24 4.3 APPLICATION OF THESE BASIC GROUP PROCESSES IN A PUBLIC PROCESS FACILITATION ............................................................................. 29 4.4 APPLICATION OF THESE BASIC GROUP PROCESSES IN AN INTERNAL ORGANISATIONAL FACILITATION ........................................................... 30 4.5 OTHER SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS THAT A FACILITATOR MAY NEED TO TAKE INTO ACCOUNT ........................................................................... 33 4.5.1 Size of Group ........................................................................................... 33 4.5.2 The Zero-History Group .......................................................................... 34
ADVANCED MEDIATION ASSIGNMENT: Dianne Allen ... p.2 FACILITATION: THE USE OF MEDIATION TECHNIQUES & PROCESSES IN RESOLVING DIFFERENCES IN GROUP DECISION-MAKING
4.5.3 The Formed Group................................................................................... 34 4.5.4 The Authority of the Group ..................................................................... 35 4.5.5 The Role of Preparation........................................................................... 35 4.5.6 Any Special Awarenesses that may be required: ..................................... 35 5. KNOWLEDGE AND SKILLS A FACILITATOR NEEDS ................................................. 37 CONCLUDING REMARKS .................................................................................................... 39 BIBLIOGRAPHY ..................................................................................................................... 40 Section 1: Introductory Remarks .................................................................................. 40 NOTE 1: OTHER SOURCES/ COMMENTS RECOGNISING THE NEED FOR IMPROVED MECHANISMS TO DEAL WITH DIFFERENCE .................... 40 NOTE 2: CURRENT INDICATORS IN AUSTRALIA OF CONFLICT BETWEEN GOVERNMENT AND COMMUNITY VALUES........................................... 42 Section 2: Mediation 2.1, 2.2, 2.3 & 2.4 ...................................................................... 42 Section 2.1 .................................................................................................................... 43 NOTE 3: THE NATURE OF THE MEDIATION PROCESS ..................................... 43 Section 2.2 .................................................................................................................... 43 NOTE 4: STEPS IN THE MEDIATION PROCESS - THE PRIVATE CAUCUS...... 43 Section 2.3 .................................................................................................................... 44 Section 2.4.2 ................................................................................................................. 44 Section 2.4.3 ................................................................................................................. 45 NOTE 5: INTERVENTION AND THE POSSIBILITY OF BIAS............................... 46 Section 3: Facilitation and The Role of the Facilitator ................................................ 46 NOTE 6: DEFINITION OF "FACILITATION" ........................................................... 46 Section 3.1 .................................................................................................................... 49 NOTE 7: FACILITATION IN THE EDUCATIONAL GROUP CONTEXT .............. 49 Section 3.3 .................................................................................................................... 50 Section 3.3.1 ................................................................................................................. 50 NOTE 8: ORDER & SECURITY & FACILITATION ................................................ 50 Section 3.3.2 ................................................................................................................. 51 Section 3.4 .................................................................................................................... 51 Section 4: Group Processes .......................................................................................... 51 NOTE 9: GROUP PROCESSES BIBLIOGRAPHIC SOURCES ................................ 51 Section 4.1 .................................................................................................................... 53 NOTE 10: OPTIMAL GROUP SIZE ISSUES ............................................................. 53 NOTE 11: BASIC GROUP PROCESSES.................................................................... 54 Section 4.2 .................................................................................................................... 55 Section 4.3 .................................................................................................................... 57 Section 4.4 .................................................................................................................... 58 Section 4.5 .................................................................................................................... 59 Section 5: Knowledge and Skills a Facilitator Needs................................................... 60 ATTACHMENTS .................................................................................................................... 62 ATTACHMENT 1: PERSONAL EXPERIENCE OF GROUPS.................................. 62 ATTACHMENT 2: PERSONAL EXPERIENCES OF APPROACHES TO INFORMALLY FACILITATING GROUP EFFECTIVENESS ....................... 63 The Agenda ....................................................................................................... 64 Group Comfortableness .................................................................................... 64
Procedural Rules ............................................................................................... 65 The One-Text technique ................................................................................... 66 Group facilitation .............................................................................................. 66 ATTACHMENT 3: Training for the Local Government Industry to Complement/ Assist with the Process of Implementation of Award Restructuring Consultative Committee Training Program ...................................................... 70 ATTACHMENT 4: My Framework in undertaking studies in Dispute Resolution ..... 72 ATTACHMENT 5: RESOURCES FOR STRATEGIC INTERVENTIONS USED BY MEDIATORS, FACILITATORS & CONCILIATORS ................................... 74 1. ANALYSIS OF INTERVENTIONS WITHIN PROCESS ........................... 76 2. ANALYSIS OF INTERVENTION STRATEGIES ...................................... 77 3. ANALYSIS OF NEGOTIATION ISSUES INVOLVED INTERVENTION 79 BIBLIOGRAPHY ............................................................................................. 82 ATTACHMENT 6 ........................................................................................................ 82 BIBLIOGRAPHIC RESOURCES FOR FACILITATORS ............................... 82 RECOMMENDED TEXT FOR TRAINING IN GROUP PROCESSES/ FACILITATION ROLES ...................................................................... 83 INTERVENTION: PROCESS & TECHNIQUES............................................ 84 GROUP PROCESSES: THEORY & PRACTICE............................................ 86 NATURAL GROUPS CASE STUDIES........................................................... 87 GENERAL MATERIAL ON GROUPS ........................................................... 88 ATTACHMENT 7: SUN-HERALD EDITORIAL COMMENT ................................. 90 ATTACHMENT 8: EXTRACTS FROM "EQUIPPING STAFF TO HANDLE DISPUTES EFFECTIVELY IN LOCAL GOVERNMENT" ........................... 90 ADVANCED MEDIATION PRESENTATION: ..................................................................... 97
ABSTRACT
The task of facilitating group endeavour is particularly relevant to current social conditions. It is important in the development (or maintenance) of organisational effectiveness. For those involved in, or associated with, local government, community consultation and participative decision-making is becoming an increasingly important part of responsiveness to community expectations. The new legislative context delivered by the Local Government Act, 1993, makes such things part and parcel of the local public policy process. Facilitation is beginning to be seen as a significant tool in such consultative and participative contexts. Its capacity includes an ability to assist in conflict management, or dispute resolution if necessary, having a role to play in helping communities deal with differences which might otherwise develop into debilitating disputes. This report seeks to 1. 2. explore the nature of facilitation of group activity and give some consideration to the task of developing facilitation skills for use in the workplace (especially as applied to local government).
It does this by: 1. 2. looking at the activities and processes used in the alternative dispute resolution process of mediation, and identifying how much common ground there is between mediation and the activities and processes used in facilitating group processes and group decision making.
It then looks, in some detail, at the present level of understanding of group processes. The report then seeks to gather this, and another study*, together, and to conclude with a consideration of the basic requirements in the development of knowledge and skills for facilitators. (The knowledge and skills identified are obviously useful, and applicable, to the mediation of multi-party disputes.) (*Other study: "Equipping staff to handle disputes effectively in local government" Assignment for Dispute Resolution Unit, May 1996)
CONTEXT AND STYLE OF THE REPORT

The purpose, for me, in this report, is to work on bringing together: 1. 2. reflections on my experience and the Dispute Resolution studies, and particularly the Advanced Mediation component,
to build a clearer, explicit understanding of the nature and application of facilitation as a tool for dispute resolution for the workplace (notably local government). SEE ATTACHMENTS 1, 2, 4 FOR REFLECTIONS ON EXPERIENCE
This might then be used as the basis of developing material for in-house training for Shellharbour Council. In this process I have had to explore a new area of knowledge for me: building an understanding group processes. The task has then been to explore how the knowledge of these group processes might instruct the process of facilitating the formation of a consensus decision in a group context. For this I have compiled, and mostly read, the textual material indicated in the bibliography. However, the analytical and evaluative task of integrating this new area of knowledge, by my own style of analysis and synthesis, is, at this stage, incomplete. It is incomplete because: it is a new area of knowledge for me, and my processes requires more time (especially for the gestative process). NOTE ON TERMINOLOGY: Throughout this report the following terms will be used: 1. 2. 3. mediate/ mediator/ mediation facilitate/ facilitator/ facilitation intervene/ intervention
These words come from our "common" lexicon. They can be, and are, used in the ordinary course of conversation.
In the study of "mediation", as an "alternative dispute resolution" process, the terms
"mediation", "mediate" and "mediator", are now used/defined in a way which may imply a limit to their application. "Facilitation" and "Intervention" are not yet so constrained. There may some purpose in clarifying each of these to make the distinction, if any, real. However, in practice, except to associate some terms with some formally recognised process (eg mediation), I doubt if such distinction serves any good purpose. I will mostly use just one of the terms, depending on where I am in the development of the report. Every now and then I will toss in the "other, equivalent" word, to indicate that these things also apply to the other process. This is done on the understanding that the other word or words could just have easily have been used, at most stages, throughout. However, I have not chosen to do this, so that the style of presentation does not become unnecessarily cumbersome, and in the end either frustrating, or confusing, to the reader.
FURTHER REMARKS ON STYLE:

As with previous reports, I have chosen to separate particular components of the content. The basic report is designed to flow reasonably smoothly, as representing my expression of my understanding of the topic. Some of this distills experience. Some of it is the result of study - particularly of the material indicated. Material enunciating the experience components, for the most part, is separated and presented in the Attachments. The results of the study are mostly presented in the Bibliography. Where relevant to my needs, the bibliography is expanded with the textual detail from the source. Some selections represent external confirmation from "another authority"; remarks which support my position (from my experience). Some selections represent, for me, new information, new knowledge, and expressed in a way that I know I cannot better.
1. INTRODUCTORY REMARKS
1. There has been a growing awareness of the need, when dealing with public issues, in [small] communities, to develop mechanisms to build consensus amidst diversity. Such mechanisms need to provide for appropriate recognition, and consideration, of inherent differences in interests/ values, that exist between different sections of a community. This need is not necessarily limited to "small communities". Smaller communities are likely to be more homogeneous. SEE NOTE 1 IN BIBLIOGRAPHY 2. 3. Politics can be/ has been described as: "the art of the possible". Community: the community, in some places in Australia, is no longer characterised by the "homogeneity" of values derived from the British colonial heritage: * nominally Christian * the rule of law * the unquestioned authority of hierarchy - class, privilege, education, economic strength Community: the community is now expressing the differences associated with greater diversity: * the "general community level of education" is such that more people have reached a higher level of general education than in past generations * the strong anti-authoritarian streak is now expressed by challenging authority; any perceived paternalism * the cultural background is more diverse: the dominant immigrant culture of the British, European nominally Christian pre-war and post-war to 1960, now includes orientals of Muslim from Middle East, and Buddhists from IndoChina and African/ Melanesian as well as the indigenous Aboriginal & Torres Strait Islanders * the language is still dominantly English, but there is provision for dealing with the range of non-English language backgrounds to facilitate clear/er communication * there is some recognition and valuing of the "colour" that diversity of culture can bring to community development * there is a growing establishment of different religions and recognition of difference from religious sources: Christian, Muslim, and Buddhist represent the three most readily recognised religions in NSW Newcastle-SydneyWollongong conurbanisation * there has been a strengthening of the secular/ humanism + materialism mindset as an alternative value set to that belonging to any religion
4.
5.
"Environmental awareness" has grown, and with it there are challenges to untrammelled industrial/ urban development, and an endeavour to protect the present quality of lifestyle Change in the law, especially recent changes to Local Government Act, 1993, has increased the right and opportunity for community participation in local government decision-making At the State & Federal level, there has been an increasing capture of major parties by special interest groups and values - the lobbying; the management by media mythologising (going both ways)
6.
7.
SEE NOTE 2 IN BIBLIOGRAPHY 8. Australia is still a country where there has not been any formal expression of violent civil strife extended over time and mobilising the whole community not old enough? not big enough population? not too significant a difference in polity? [US - strong "Protestant ethic" of Pilgrims - founding fathers of the north versus strong economic reliance on Afro-ethnic slavery of south Civil War]; [Britain - Protestant versus Catholic of Reformation and monarchy versus parliamentarianism of the Civil War]; not "close enough" to form into territorial boundary warfare?; etc If we are to keep it that way, especially in the growing concentration of diversity in the coastal conurbation stretching from Newcastle-Sydney-Wollongong, then we need to keep working at developing effective mechanisms to cobble consensus and innovative solutions out of the diversity Some of the mechanisms which allow the community of this part of Australia to "manage" these pressures in the mid 1990s are: 9.1 9.2 the outlet of competitive sport the role of litigation and the courts system, rather than violence and war: but to some extent this is only another formalised competition the development of mediation as an alternative to litigation, especially as it is currently being structured "within the shadow of the courts"
9.
9.3
9.4
the (relatively new) development of consultative processes for partnership and facilitation of group decision-making
10.
What has been described above, as a wider community issue, is also evident in the smaller context of the organisation. All the ingredients are there: 10.1 increasing diversity of demography represented in the staff complement (if EEO policy is having any impact) increasing diversity of interests/ values amongst the staff complement potentially damaging external pressures for performance from a diversity of interests (some of which are mutually exclusive) in the midst of this diversity, the need, for performance sake, to stay focussed to a clear vision, effectively communicated throughout the organisation the need for mechanisms which allow an organisation to make the most of difference while not becoming completely paralysed by internal conflict the added "hot-house" effect of the smaller unit, in closer, and more regular contact, and with even greater, immediate, personal consequences of any failure to resolve differences creatively
10.2 10.3
10.4
10.5
10.6
11.
For organisational health, for the development of organisational mechanisms which allow for growth, and renewal, or continuous improvement (TQM), the ability to deal with internal differences will become a critical performance indicator - dare one say it? - to give the "competitive edge".
2. MEDIATION
2.1 THE ELEMENTS OF MEDIATION
Mediation, as an alternative dispute resolution process, has a number of distinctive elements: 1. the neutral - a person (or persons) who is not a party to implementing the decision or gaining specific personal benefit from the decision - therefore (apparently/ theoretically) has no vested interest in the nature of the decision made the process - an agreed structure to progress through the stages involved in building agreement the responsibility, with the mediator, to assist the parties progress through a negotiation to reach a clearly and mutually agreed position - even if that position is to agree to differ for some fundamental "principle-based" reason/s the responsibility, remaining with the parties to the negotiation, to work at, and if possible, come to, an agreement. The nature of the resolution, the decision made at the end if it is resolved, is within the province of the parties involved, to determine. If the resolution is well-formed, it will be more satisfying to the parties than any other solution. A well-formed resolution is also likely to be within their capacity to deliver (ie compliable). 5. the substantive content of the mediation is confidential to the participants
2.
3.
4.
SEE NOTE 3 IN BIBLIOGRAPHY
2.2 THE MEDIATION PROCESS

The mediation process has a number of clear steps: 1. All parties are given the opportunity to state their case in their way/ words ("day in court") Exploration/ clarification of issues
2.
3.
Development of options
4.
Negotiation of agreement
For the mediator and the participants there are two other steps ancillary to the above, and on which the above rely: 5. 6. preparation for the mediation "wrapping up" after the mediation
These elements/steps will be found in any group facilitation where harmony is to be crafted out of differences. The expression of these elements/ steps will depend on how formal/ informal the facilitation is. SEE NOTE 4 IN BIBLIOGRAPHY
2.3 THE CONTEXT OF MEDIATION - COURT-ANNEXED MEDIATION

Mediation is currently being projected to become a more integral part of the civil justice system in Australia and other countries with a similar cultural heritage. In this context, there are three key components of mediation which allows it to be recognised (in that milieu): 1. Its delivery of elements of procedural fairness. This is achieved by the adherence to a process with the steps noted above. The role of the mediator: The mediator has no substantive decision-making responsibility. The engagement of the disputants, with the mediation process, is voluntary. The substantive content of the mediation is confidential. If there is a need, later, to resort to litigation, then material "exposed" in mediation is "privileged".
2.
3. 4.
The task of the mediator is to help the parties make progress with that process. This is done by the mediator's participation: chairing the process and applying strategic interventions in order to achieve particular goals along the way.
In the context of court-annexed mediation, mediation, and the mediator, are only necessary if the parties to the dispute cannot (/have not been able to) deal satisfactorily with their differences in a less formal context (the negotiation). They then look to an external party (either an arbitrator, magistrate or judge) to determine the matter by rights at law - litigation. As a process, mediation, whatever other origins it might have, recognises that in some kinds of disputes, the disputants settle "on the steps of the court". Consequently, by raising the issue of exploring the potential of settling the dispute by an alternative process, early in the usual court process, disputants may choose to "give mediation a go". When mediation yields a satisfactory outcome to the disputants, the courts are relieved of otherwise unnecessary litigation, thus increasing their essential effectiveness. The use of a court-annexed mediation process, with the necessary and adequate protections needed to otherwise secure a participant's rights at law, gives such an authorised alternative mechanism to the parties. The mediation, offered as a voluntary alternative, prior to the matter being adjudicated by a legally trained adjudicator, allows the possibility of the matter being able to be resolved on grounds other than rights at law. It is the experience of many that a resolution determined by rights at law is not necessarily in the best interests of the parties, either in the substantive matter, or in the area of the relationship/s of the parties involved. Outside of "the shadow of the court system", mediation can occur when any person acts as that "third party" to help the negotiation process. Here, unless, and until, mediation becomes a practice so common and well-recognised that the role of mediator becomes locked by: 1. 2. 3. the concept of being a clear profession, with appropriate professional standards of consistency of process, together with appropriate ethical standards of conduct,
the matter of process can be a bit more fluid. The more open the process is to further development, the more it can be tailored to meet needs determined either by the nature of the dispute or particular needs of the disputants (eg a process more applicable to cultural background).
2.4 THE TECHNIQUES OF A MEDIATOR

The core techniques which are used by effective mediators are based on the knowledge of, and skills in, communications, and those skills applied in the process of negotiation - or multi-party decision-making.
2.4.1. Communication techniques for clarity, common understanding, building common view of matters at issue
The communication techniques applied in any mediation/ facilitation are: 1. 2. 3. 4. Active listening Rephrasing/ Reframing : (Communication Feedback) Questioning - open & closed to explore the understanding of the parties, to clarify matters at issue Analysis - and reflecting - testing if a certain rephrasing and a new reconstruction will deliver a coherent and acceptable statement with which both parties can agree
The goal of the application of these techniques is to build as much common understanding between the parties as possible. The task is to clarify the nature of the differences: is the difference real, significant, and/or essentially irreconcilable or not? Active listening by the mediator, with a disinterested frame, allows the mediator to hear the parties (so that they feel "heard"). Active listening then yields the data necessary for the mediator to be able to discern any critical components presented at that stage - data for summarising, rephrasing, reframing, questioning, etc. The rephrasing/ summarising of the mediator may allow the disputing parties to hear their antagonists, in a way they have not heard before. The reasons this may occur are: 1. the material has been re-presented by the disinterested third party, not the "antagonist". the material may be presented in terms that assist perception eg being rephrased/ reframed in a way that excludes "toxic" components.
2.
The questioning for clarification, etc, by the mediator, 1. brings to light material known, or unknown, to the parties. This additional information is now "present" in the context of the dispute.
If the material is relevant to the dispute or its resolution, it can be used to contribute to the resolution of the dispute; the identification of common concerns; the development of options, etc.
2.
explores the dispute in an "independent" forum In this way there is an indication of what might be involved in any court context. However, in the mediation the focus is different. There is more concern for building common understanding than for determining facts and/or disputing evidence; and weighting of evidential support for a case, etc
The analysis, by the mediator, in summarising, in setting the scene for looking forward to common interests (with a view to seeking a solution), in posing questions to raise or explore options, in projecting hypotheses of alternative future developments, in challenging with reality testing, etc, helps the parties "perceive" the matter in new terms. Good analysis, yielding changed or adjusted perceptions, will help clear the ground of any necessity to maintain a position, or justify a stance. (Often this goal of changed perception is reached for the parties by simply being "heard" formally, and by an independent party. This occurs both early in the process [the "case" presentation/ the "story" telling] and then throughout the process as the mediator exercises active listening skills.) The process of gaining and giving feedback - continually checking that the understanding remains "common" - is vital. For the group facilitation, or the multi-party mediation, this communication feedback process is probably even more significant than for the two-party contexts for the following reasons: 1. The additional numbers at the table provide the potential for more initial diversity of views. The perception filters/ processes of the parties can generate variance and
2.
internal conflicts during the process.
3.
There may be much more complexity, in the matter at issue, and so more opportunity for misperception to develop, and to derail the process.
The mediator/ facilitator, by modelling: active listening rephrasing/ reframing questioning (especially the "open" question) analysis gives a guide to the disputing parties on effective behaviour in dealing with differences/ conflict. The tendency (in normal human responses) to "mirror" behaviour means the modelling is even more powerful in helping parties to act in more effective manner [than say their "usual" approach] in dealing with this dispute. If the parties have an ongoing relationship, this modelling and mirroring may allow for a context in which the transfer of interaction skills and knowledge becomes possible. When this happens, the parties are assisted so that they become capable themselves of dealing more effectively with the next area of difference, so that the difference does not escalate to a dispute.
2.4.2. Negotiation techniques to work through to a consensual agreement of a/the way forward: least damage option/ best alternative
Negotiation can be described as a specialised communication for the purposes of a particular outcome: agreement. The work of Fisher & Ury, et al, has been to expose a framework for effective, interest-based, negotiation. Since mediation is a structured process to assist parties with a negotiation, the elements of this framework are likely to be found in any effective mediation. The mediator/ facilitator, if involved in giving some basic instruction about negotiation, and when modelling alternative effective behaviour, through the process, will have in mind: 1. Establishing and maintaining a context where there is respect for all parties involved in the negotiation, and their needs as people, and the legitimacy of their interests which need to be recognised in the resolution of the matter 1.1 by modelling acceptance
1.2 2.
by challenging non-acceptance
Exploration of the interests of the parties involved in the negotiation 2.1 2.2 2.3 to find common ground; to clarify where interests clearly diverge; to establish a context for developing options that might be used in building agreement
3.
Development of options - through brainstorming or the use of other techniques for option generation Enunciation of jointly acceptable objective criteria to evaluate relative merits of differences The application of the objective criteria to the options to construct an agreement which represents the "best" solution. The well-formed solution is one where both parties are satisfied that the solution meets as much of their interests as possible without necessarily jeopardising the interest of the other party.
4.
5.
In a dispute which has substantive complexity, and a complex mix of stakeholders, there will be a secondary negotiation: that of agreeing on how to deal with the complexity arising by 6. Consideration of alternatives and the selection of (or design of) an acceptable mechanism for drawing in, and weighting appropriately, each of (the interests in) the matters needing to be taken into account in coming to a decision
2.4.3. Intervention strategies of the mediator - communication elements; negotiation elements

There are a number of intervention strategies used by mediators, to progress deliberations in a mediated negotiation. I have undertaken a detailed analysis of such strategies in a previous assignment. SEE ATTACHMENT 5
These interventions work on: 1. components of the communication - especially where the parties have gotten into bad habits of dysfunctional communication modes
2.
components of the negotiation 2.1 2.2 having a range of options expressing the parties' interests, rather than being limited to (almost) mutually exclusive positions; having some basis (objective criteria) for selecting the best options to formulate an agreement (going for the win-win rather than the win-lose position)
The process of intervention is critical to the effectiveness of the mediation. The mediator is there to provide a structure to the process and to assist the parties to work through the process. Intervention will be required when there are blocks, either to the communication of information process, or the negotiation process. The process of intervention is also a source of possible bias. The bias may be intentional or inadvertent. Interventions, by their timing, frequency, as well as their content, may be used to, or may result in unintentional: 1. focus attention on one area of dispute over another, eg: 1.1 1.2 substance over toxic behaviours [considered a "legitimate" intervention]; substance over emotions [often found to be a counterproductive intervention, since if the emotional content is not dealt with effectively it can come back to haunt the resolution or the compliance]
2.
favour the selection of one option over another, developing a solution that satisfies the mediator more than the mediated, eg family mediation where particular "solutions" for custody of children is favoured over alternatives
3. FACILITATION AND THE ROLE OF THE FACILITATOR
3.1 WHAT IS FACILITATION?

"Facilitate" is defined as "to make easier or less difficult; help forward (an action, a process, etc.)" - Macquarie Concise Dictionary, 1988 "Facilitation" as a term, is most often associated with "process". It can therefore be applied to any process you may want to consider. It terms of group processes, "facilitation" is readily recognised as a necessary, helping tool. SEE NOTE 7 IN BIBLIOGRAPHY
3.2 GENERIC RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN FACILITATION AND MEDIATION

It would be my contention that the facilitation of a group process is generically related to mediation. The generic similarities are: 1. 2. It relies on effective process. It is an intervention to deal with difficulties in communication and/or decisionmaking (the basic component of coming to an agreement in a negotiation). The facilitator is one, who for the sake of the process, acts neutrally to the substance of the matter being dealt with by the group. The facilitator intervenes with actions which seek to contribute positively to the activity and effectiveness of the group. The facilitator, in such interventions, by modelling elements of effective conflict management behaviour, assists the group to deal with communication breakdowns or to progress the process of decision making.
3.
The difference may well lie in the context, and/or the timing:
4. 5.
The "group" context has the potential to be much more complex The "law" of rights, in a "consensual" group context is (? - my knowledge of law is weak here) much less formalised The timing of a facilitation intervention can be more pro-active.
6.
Facilitation is rightly considered to be one of a number of tools in dispute management. It is able to be a pro-active option to use before a difference has escalated to a dispute (which, in turn, might escalate to litigation).
3.3 CONTEXTS FOR FACILITATION

Facilitation can occur either informally, or in a significantly formalised context. There are two basic premises here: 1. 2. Anyone in a group can facilitate its process There are times when a group (any group/ all groups) may need the assistance of an outsider to help with the group with its behaviour/ process
Formal group facilitation is usually required in situations where: 1. 2. the group forming is a zero-history group the formed group, although with a common history and context, has either 2.1 2.2 2.3 2.4 hit an impasse; or become ineffective; or hasn't worked together previously; or needs to experience new skills in group work to improve present performance
For contexts where differences are recognised, and have, or threaten to disrupt the normal group process, outside assistance may be seen to be appropriate/ necessary. Such an outsider will need to have the same element of independence that a mediator in a mediation has; and for the same reasons.
In the informal, internal process, when an individual in a group acts to facilitate the group
process/es, that individual has to leave aside, for the moment, their individual interest (be it substantive, status, normal group role, whatever). For the process of facilitation these other interests are temporarily eschewed, and the knowledge and skills involved in enhancing the interaction (perception, communication, decision making procedures, etc) are mobilised to help the group through the process.
3.3.1 Public Process Facilitation

For the "large scale", public issue, where a formal facilitation is likely to be appropriate, the following elements will be in evidence: 1. 2. The independent, neutral third party - the facilitator, or facilitation team Demonstrable skills, in the facilitator, in the technical areas of communication and negotiation, and sometimes the need and ability to "teach" the group about these aspects of their operation/ processes The gathering/ sharing of all available information; and the identification of areas where additional information is required Selection (and, if necessary: "selling") of the process/es to explore differences, to build consensus - common understanding Exploring what agreed objective criteria might be used on which to base a decision Selection of appropriate group decision-making process to allow group to formulate and agree on the "most effective"/ "least damage" option/ decision
3.
4.
5.
6.
3.3.2 Internal Organisational Processes Facilitation

For interventions dealing with functional difficulties in the operation of organisationally based groups, the facilitator (now often called a "management consultant"): 1. 2. is an outsider to the group with specialist skills to help the group deal with their difficulties.
These skills will include the "usual" communication skills, negotiation skills, and process
skills.
These skills will, more often than not, need to be substantially complemented by skills in discerning dysfunctional group behaviour, its manifestations and its origins. The facilitator will then need to have the kind of interpersonal skills which allows them to help the members of the group "get these things out into the open". The process of exposing such difficulties needs to be handled sensitively, so that the participants: 1. 2. do not feel threatened (unnecessarily) are provided with adequate intra personal knowledge and interaction knowledge to be able to recognise and begin to deal with the dysfunctional elements and then be encouraged to start to deal with these difficulties, openly.
3.
The first approach a facilitator will have with a previously formed group will endeavour to focus on the steps involved in dealing with the perceived problem that the group has. These steps will be the usual ones in problem solving: 1. information gathering; 2. option generation; 3. consideration of objective criteria by which to make a wise judgement in the ensuing decision making stage) The "outsider" cannot be expected to have the same common knowledge of these things as the group, and so the group is encouraged to help the facilitator "get the picture". In the course of that process the facilitator will be observing the elements of the group interaction. These observations may identify interaction difficulties which the group itself does not as yet recognise. If these difficulties come from dysfunctional interpersonal relationships, the facilitator will need to be able to recognise them, and then carefully expose them as other another area of concern "contingent" to the process of dealing with the perceived problem. For the "formed" group, the role of the facilitator will be most powerful if it includes an educative element. If "time-out" can be arranged to defer dealing with the "initial" substantive, presenting problem, then resources can be applied to the group to help it: 1. learn about intra personal and interpersonal dysfunctional behaviour
2. 3.
learn more effective interaction techniques learn alternative process devices to assist group communication; group interactions
4. learn more effective ways to come to a group decision and if, to this, is added the development of the concept of the metacognitive approach to its group processes, then the group can used feedback techniques to assist it to continue to improve its processes. (*metacognitive - not only doing the activity, but (later) endeavouring to stand outside the activity to look at it and discern its nature, effectiveness, etc) Frey (1995) points out that one of the most helpful of facilitation interventions involves this educative component: teaching the group itself to recognise the interactive aspect of their behaviour, to understand how the process recommended assists them deal with that hurdle, so that they are able to become self aware and self regulating in that area and in the long run become independent of the facilitator.
3.4 APPLICATIONS OF FACILITATION TO THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT CONTEXT

In looking at the Local Government workplace, there are many areas where I see such a function having a part to play. Local Government, by its very nature, is dealing with groups: 1. Constitutionally the Council is an elected group, representing the community electing it. The operational side of local government is an organisation ranging in size from 25 to 1200 persons, with a diversity of service functions to deliver. This means that there is a need for internal coordination of activity and the levels of action. 3. It interfaces with the community, either at the level of an individual customer or at the level of representatives from groups or other organisations.
2.
In Local Government, particularly, as it seeks to respond to greater demands for community consultation and accountability, the "public" facilitation will become a more significant contribution to these processes.
The development of this strand of dispute management can be seen in the following examples/ areas:
3.4.1 Infrastructure and Land Use Development

a. b. Lithgow road situation (Stuart McPherson's presentation, May 1996) Balmain peninsula - residential development/ foreshore access/ chemical degradation of site and environmental protection issues (Maureen Wade's presentation, June 1996) Albion Park urban rezoning study, March 1996 - the "charrette" Shellcove development concept plan review, July, 1996
c. d.
3.4.2 Internal organisational process/es

e. f. Staff Committee and Corporate Planning, September 1996 Award Restructuring Consultative Committee, May and July 1996
4. GROUP PROCESSES & THE IMPLICATIONS FOR FACILITATORS

4.1 OVERVIEW
From my study of the noted bibliographic sources, it seems to me that the key elements of group process that may need to be attended to by any group facilitator are: 1. 2. 3. 4. Formation of Group Development of Group Leadership of Group Group Decision-making process/es
For these key elements the issues that arise are: 1. 2. Formation - inclusion/ exclusion issues; personal esteem; group esteem Development - cohesiveness/ tendency to disintegrate issue; ability to deal effectively with differences/ conflict Leadership - status/ type/ function issues; competition for status; inhibiting impact of style Decision-making - rationality/ consensus/ norms for making choices issues
3.
4.
To effectively assist group processes including group decision making, a facilitator will need to know what is going on; what constitutes dysfunctional individual and group behaviour; and have strategies to deal with these elements as, and when, they arise. SEE NOTES 10 & 11 IN BIBLIOGRAPHY
4.2 THE PROBLEM SOLVING GROUP

The typical application of the skills of facilitation, whether formal or informal, is in the context of a "secondary" group - one convened for the purpose of solving a problem. Such a group typically, needs to:
1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6.
become comfortable at a personal level settle on what is the problem having defined the problem, explore the interests of the group members in the problem construct likely win-win options for the group, given the identified interests analyse the relative merits of the win-win options, determining the appropriate objective criteria for such an analysis come to a decision on which action to take
Again, the bibliographic sources indicate that for these processes, there are a raft of tools that are available to help the group make progress. It should be noted that many tools identified in the literature are useful in more than one of the areas of operation of the problem solving group and problem solving process. As noted in my earlier analysis of interventions, the whole "resolution" process tends to be iterative. A "general" tool which can be used to help a group to develop its effectiveness with any or all of the above elements of its process is the "feedback" process. (The "metacognitive" learning about the group operation noted earlier. The process of: reviewing performance; debriefing on any dysfunctional activity: symptom identification; cause diagnosis; possible solutions, etc; testing proposed solutions; reviewing performance, etc.) As noted earlier, the task of a facilitator, especially with a "large" group, will be to have (knowledge of, and therefore access to, a variety of ) procedures, which assist regulate behaviour in process. The facilitator's responsibility, in the preparation stage, will include the task of considering what might be (options for) the appropriate process/es for the various stages. Then, during the facilitation, the facilitator will need to choose and use the selected one/s to ensure that: 1. the participants are included, rather than excluded; 2. the various points of view are heard, and acknowledged by being taken into appropriate account in the decision making stage; 3. any established timeframes are adhered to (or at least recognised and if not adhered to, it is with the group's cognisance) There are some interesting variations on process noted in the documentation, and expounded in case studies, that provide some guidelines here. The bibliography notes the current sources that yield such information.
An indication of some of the "special" tools, for particular areas, is as follows: 1. For: Becoming comfortable at a personal level Johari window input; structure for sharing/ disclosure appropriate to group/ task (Heron's stages (p.26): defensiveness; working through defensiveness; authentic behaviour; closure) (Bormann's "norm emergence" (p.5); cohesiveness (p.9) accounted for by (a) exchange theory; (b) symbolic convergence theory; (c) emergence theory [of roles; leadership; decisions]) (Argyris: (p.4) "Experience suggests that it takes a minimum of three years to develop an effective team among managers. The time involved to create cohesive citizen groups would be longer.") (My experience as cited in Attachment 2) Interventions which assist "becoming comfortable at a personal level", if designed to go beyond the surface and to form a context where there are adequate elements of trust/ openness, will contribute to the effectiveness of all other components of the group process. In assisting the group to become "comfortable" at working together, the facilitator (whether formally nominated, or informally there in the form of the activity of one or more participants) will be engaged in three levels of facilitation: task facilitation transaction facilitation dealing with process blockers Lumsden (1993) enunciates these contributions and the details are contained in the bibliography. 2. For: Settling on the Problem
If the problem is not already externally defined for the group the task here is facilitated by effective group communication, and processes to assist this. [Even if the problem is externally defined, the group will need to explore its "common" understanding of what such a definition means to the group.] The "evidential" / "adversarial case putting" processes can deliver information needed for the task of settling on the problem. However, the tendency to point-score through such a competitive process will be counterproductive for later stages of the group deliberations. Questioning to clarify, and summarising techniques will be used by the facilitator to ensure
that what the group understands is the presenting problem is indeed the actual problem to be dealt with. Other tools which assist include: breaking into small focus groups 3. For: Exploring the Interests of the Group Members
Process techniques to ensure that all participants are able to get their interests "on the table", are important here. Such processes include: 1. 2. 3. 4. individual writing up a brief indication of concerns - the whole group input is collated round robin collection of interests; analysis to group like concerns; to separate dissimilar concerns summarising with some rephrasing may help the group to gather a sense of where there is common ground
4.
For: Development of Options
Moore, C (1994) provides detailed guidelines for the use of three techniques for building ideas in groups that can be used to develop options. They are: 1. 2. 3. the nominal group technique ideawriting interpretive structural modelling
Other alternative techniques (not covered by Moore) include: 4. 5. 6. Brainstorming Delphi technique focus groups
The bibliography gathers this detail together.
5.
For: Analysing the relative merits of options and for determining appropriate criteria for such an analysis
Tools here may include: 1. 2. Brainstorming on community "norms" Seeking any particular expert input that might be needed for very "technical" elements of options
6.
For: Decision-Making
Frey (1995) indicates that Nutt (1984) has identified some 47 different decision making procedures. It needs to be said that decision-making is not just exercised at the end of the process for a problem solving group. Decision-making will be exercised throughout the range of group processes: 1. 2. 3. 4. The Decision to Form - Who to Include/ Who to Exclude Settling on the Problem/s to be addressed Settling on the Criteria used to assess options Settling on the process to determine the preferred option
It is this area of a group's operation where the "rubber hits the road". Legitimate formation, development and leadership processes will set the context for the legitimacy of the outcome of the decision-making. A group that has not formed (or been allowed to form) sufficient cohesion to recognise differences and to deal with those differences amicably and effectively, will come unstuck at this point. Whether the outcome is dysfunctional because of groupthink, or there is no outcome because of excessive antagonism, makes little difference in the end: the group has failed to deliver the goods. My observation, at this point, is that compared to other areas of group process, there has been much research on this area, and there are a number of tools, and a number of developments in the generation of such tools, to assist this stage of the process. The bibliography provides pointers to sources of this information. Again, a responsibility of the facilitator, if they are the process expert, will be 1. 2. to instruct on any new process for the decision making, and to be able to persuade the group to accept the process, Such persuasion may include demonstrating its efficacy and legitimacy in the context. An effective and legitimate process should assist the group to come to a decision which will "feel right" to all the parties; and therefore prove to be compliable. 3. to assist the group execute the process
4.3 APPLICATION OF THESE BASIC GROUP PROCESSES IN A PUBLIC PROCESS FACILITATION

Moore, A & Feldt (1993) provides a practical overview of the task of a facilitator in the public process context. The typical public process facilitation is normally a context of an essentially zero-history group. The typical public process facilitation is also normally conducted in the context of a large group - more than 10. The level of personal knowledge of others within the group is variable. There may be individuals in the group, and sections of the group, who have prior knowledge/ associations with one another. In a typical public process facilitation, the following outworkings of the elements noted in sections 4.1-4.2 can be seen by the role and the activity of the facilitator in: 1. Formation of Group Inviting all the stakeholders Checking that all the stakeholders are there Formal Process of Introductions of all stakeholders to one another, recognition of legitimacy in being part of the group; dealing with any challenges to the same self introduction another delegated the task of introducing Clarifying the Group's authority/ power to effect any decision made
2.
Development of Group Building a sense of intent towards a goal for the group Building a joint understanding of common ground Each stakeholder is asked to present their case Summarising and gathering common areas; identifying and segregating differences Clarifying the nature of Difference Exploring differences in more depth Identifying real differences; identifying any other common ground existing even in differences Looking to find common interests within differences
3.
Establishing necessity (for representatives) to: have authority to settle; maintain adequate communications with groups/ individual interests they are representing to continue to have authority to settle Setting a reasonable goal for the group's ongoing deliberations/ and timeframe for the work to be done Using different group-size-related processes at strategic points to ensure: inclusiveness of communications; thoroughness of information exchange; openness of process to all participants regardless of personality type Documenting of proceedings to develop group memory
Leadership of Group Temporary transfer of leadership responsibility to facilitator facilitator's leadership role in functional terms facilitator's leadership style in relation to the task: the democrat for the consensus building, etc Dealing with any internal dynamic with the potential for dysfunction coming from other sources of leadership available in individuals, and/or recognised within the group and by the group: deferring to authority of status; deferring to authority of power (eg to effect a decision); deferring to authority of technical expertise; deferring to authority of personal reputation, etc
4.
Decision-making Introduction and explanation of different techniques in decision-making Clarifying differences in ways to make decisions, and explanation of relevance to task, in terms of inclusiveness effectiveness congruence with the task/ issue
4.4 APPLICATION OF THESE BASIC GROUP PROCESSES IN AN INTERNAL ORGANISATIONAL FACILITATION

Argyris (1970) and Frey (1995) provide a practical overview of the task of a facilitator in the internal organisational context.
Here, typically, the group is "formed". It has an already established culture of behaviour. Also, typically, the group is smaller: eg the management team; the working party; the committee, etc. The context, history, and past behaviour patterns developed "naturally" in the pre-formed group now determine the key areas where a facilitator's intervention/s will demonstrate the outworkings of the basic elements noted in sections 4.1-4.2. An indication of this application is as follows: 1. Formation of Group
Context Difficulties The formation of the group is an Organisational prerogative - he who pays the piper calls the tune. This can result in a tendency, in the group, to revert responsibility back to the official convenor. It may demonstrate an adherence to "closed ranks" unless the official convenor moves to change it It may not make decisions
Intervention Strategies Questioning/ Challenging: are these the relevant stakeholders? Checking that all the stakeholders are there Option of using Formal Process of Introduction of each of the group members to facilitator as the "stranger": getting a "declaration" of role/ responsibility of each party; formally reinforcing recognition of legitimacy in being part of the group; dealing with any challenges to the same; refocussing individuals to the task by re-emphasising role/ responsibility
2.
Development of Group
Context Difficulties Has been done prior to facilitator's presence problem of past to have developed present level of dysfunction
Intervention Strategies (It is in this area that a facilitator probably comes closest to being a mediator. The group has "got into trouble" with its processes. The group (hopefully) has
future relationship and functionality to look to. The facilitator is now looking to work on: 1. changing perceptions by enhancing present levels of group communication; 2. orienting or re-orienting the group to interest-based negotiation principles; 3. helping the group to deal with any "past" events that are "colouring" the present, etc.) Building a sense of intent towards a goal for the group: clarifying that the stated intent is the most appropriate goal for the group at this stage Building a joint understanding of common ground Each stakeholder is asked to enunciate their understanding of current situation Summarising and gathering common areas; identifying and segregating differences Clarifying the nature of Difference Exploring differences in more depth Identifying real differences; identifying any other common ground existing even in differences Looking to find common interests within differences Setting a reasonable goal for the group's ongoing deliberations/ and timeframe for the work to be done Establishing necessity (for representatives) to: have authority to settle; maintain adequate communications with groups/ individual interests they are representing to continue to have authority to settle
3.
Leadership of Group
Context Difficulties The leader role has been pre-determined. The established basis of the leadership, nominal and actual: status role function The style of the leadership, nominal and actual
Intervention Strategies Temporary transfer of leadership responsibility to facilitator facilitator's leadership role in functional terms
facilitator's leadership style in relation to the task: the democrat for the consensus building, etc Now the internal dynamic (with the potential for dysfunction) coming from other sources of leadership in the group is much more powerful. The presence of the facilitator as an independent outsider may be enough to shift that dynamic. Whether the shift moves now to the facilitator depends on the reactions of the other individuals in the group and their leadership potentials: authority of status; authority of power (eg to effect a decision); authority of technical expertise; authority of personal reputation,
4.
Decision-making
Context Difficulties past decision-making practices disillusionment with their effectiveness
Intervention Strategies Introduction of different decision making practices: process and rules explanation/ description of the new trial application explanation of principles mechanism context of usefulness/ congruence
4.5 OTHER SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS THAT A FACILITATOR MAY NEED TO TAKE INTO ACCOUNT
There are a number of special considerations that a facilitator may need to take into account in dealing with groups. These are:
4.5.1 Size of Group

4.5.2 The Zero-History Group

Other matters that may need to be taken into account when facilitating a zero-history group which have not been dealt with previously in 4.3 are: Zero-history groups do not have bad (dysfunctional) communication strategies to deal with. They have "green fields". However, there are culturally formed "expectations" which the facilitator will need to address, especially if the facilitation involves "new"/ "innovative" techniques. Facilitators working with zero-history groups do not necessarily have clearly defined opponents. Rather, they have an as-yet unknown, mix of differences from different parties. Through the process there is the capacity and opportunity to form (un/ expected) coalitions to build power. There is also the potential, through an effective facilitation, to build a new community-based network with a common objective - more powerful base than without the process. The "natural" factors assisting a facilitator with a zero-history group: 1. 2. need to be heard and understood curiosity - openness to new ideas, additional knowledge to inform, change position
The "natural" factors that work against a facilitator with a zero-history group: 1. 2. 3. 4. the starting level of the unknown -> reservations; -> distrust, etc positions formed (and reinforced) outside of the forum any longer term antipathy between groups or representatives - some of which may come from jousts in other issue areas previously any necessity to maintain an "impossible" "principle" within one or more of the groups/ representatives
4.5.3 The Formed Group

Most of the matters that may need to be taken into account when facilitating the "formed" group have been indicated previously in 4.4. The major difference between the facilitation of a dysfunctional formed group compared with the zero-history group will be the extent to which those dysfunctions arising from patterns of behaviour developed in its history impact the group and are "locked" into its psyche. This will determine how much time and educational effort needs to be applied to addressing these aspects of its operation. For the formed group which is also an ongoing group, the facilitation process may need to be repeated, from time to time. This "revisit" will involve "reinforcing" the learning required to develop new behaviours. It will also endeavour to
identify where progress is being made with performance arising from the practical outworkings of new behaviours and new processes. Where there has been any reversion to "old habits" and poor functioning, this will need to be exposed, and internal corrective mechanisms strengthened.
4.5.4 The Authority of the Group

Particularly for the public process facilitation, one of the questions that will/ should arise, is what authority will the decision of the group have? Is the group equipped to effect the decision? Is the group reliant on other agencies to effect the decision? If the group is reliant on an/other agency to effect the decision, is that agency represented, in some way, in the deliberations of the group? The answers to these questions will impact on the perception of the value of participating, to the full, in the group deliberations.
4.5.5 The Role of Preparation

The logistics of facilitation of a group (especially a large group) are greater. The complexity involved with dealing with the group is greater. Both these factors indicate that a high priority needs to be given to preparation. SEE TEXT QUOTED FROM MOORE, A & FELDT, J (1993) IN SECTION 4.3 IN BIBLIOGRAPHY FOR DETAILED RECOMMENDATIONS FOR SUCH PREPARATIONS
4.5.6 Any Special Awarenesses that may be required:

All the usual concerns relevant to a mediation need to be addressed. The extent to which special attention may need to be given, especially in the preparation of the facilitator, to any particular area, will depend on the nature of the group/ the issue being facilitated. These concerns are usually identified as follows: * * * * Technical Expertise Neutrality Power Ethics
* * *
Gender Cross-cultural issues Language use, including technical jargon
The bigger the group being facilitated the more likely cultural diversity elements need to be prepared for. In the public process context the "political" factor may need to be recognised, and prepared for. Knowledge will be needed of the political principles developing from basic ideologies, and how these might be expressed to be both inclusive and informative. The knowledge of useful analogies and anecdotes, etc to build common ground and understanding of what is going on and how it is going on will be another tool for the armoury. Eg illustrations of same - comparable differences: "you say tomatoes I say potatoes" normalising mutualising useful rephrasing of the similarities in diverse ideologies Christian "love thy neighbour as thyself" Marxist "from each according to his abilities, to each according to his needs" - unwinding the jargon
In different contexts there are different mixes. This will give rise to a different dynamic for each case.
5. KNOWLEDGE AND SKILLS A FACILITATOR NEEDS

The knowledge and skills a facilitator needs has been remarked on, and/or implied, in various commentary remarks through the report to date. They are no less than the skills and knowledge required by anyone seeking to handle a dispute effectively. This can be demonstrated by referring to work done previously, and cited in the bibliography, which enumerates the skills and knowledge required to equip people to handle disputes effectively. In summary these are: "1. The key areas, where skill development is needed, for effective dispute resolution are: 1.1 the interpersonal skills of: 1.1.1 communication 1.1.2 perceiving emotions negotiation skills analysis to help clarify interests invention and creativity in devising realistic options organisational and planning skills
1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5 "2.
The key areas, where knowledge development is needed, for effective dispute handling are: 2.1 interpersonal knowledge 2.1.1 self-awareness & personal development 2.1.2 other-awareness alternative strategy knowledge for 2.2.1 negotiation 2.2.2 counselling 2.2.3 mediation 2.2.4 training
2.2
Training? If you can handle disputes effectively and know how and why - then teach others to do it as well!! 2.3 ethical norms knowledge for 2.3.1 personal behaviour 2.3.2 other party behaviour (including cross-cultural knowledge) 2.3.3 codes of conduct for negotiation, counselling, mediation, training
2.3.4 the community standards expressed in current arbitration/ litigation "3. The key areas, where the development of theoretical understanding is needed, for effective dispute handling are: 3.1 3.2 3.3 3.4 nature of conflict and its role in society nature of power nature of human beings nature of learning"
In addition, to these, from the preceding information, the facilitator needs knowledge and skills to deal with the "group" context. There, the application is of elements of: 1. individual psychology and behaviour and the likely (and not so likely) consequences of the interaction of the variety and potential brought to the group by its individual members the formation (over time) of a group psychology and behaviour and the expression of its form the likely impact of certain strategic interventions to a group context, There are now significant differences compared to the operation of an intervention in, say, a two-party mediation. The context is now one where the impact is being directed at the "group dynamic". That impact will be at two levels: 1. on the individual as an individual in the group, but also 2. on the group as a whole, which may have an expressed group behaviour quite different to the sum of the parts, or a "mean" of the "types" 4. a range of alternative procedures to allow a process to be selected which meets the needs of the problem/ dispute or the particularities of the stakeholders/disputants
2.
3.
The level of depth of knowledge (of group behaviour and group processes) required for facilitation, will, in my view, depend in part on how "old" and "ongoing" is the "group" relationship which the facilitation seeks to enhance.
By comparison, this knowledge, while useful and helpful when facilitating a public process
with an essentially zero-history group, or mediating multi-party disputes, may not be so critical to such a process. In the public process facilitation, and the multi-party dispute mediation, relationships, while important, are in fact more distanced. Certainly, in the multiparty dispute the relationships factor is still considered important and mediation will be chosen over litigation in an endeavour to maintain the relationships, at the very least, so that they can continue to operate at an appropriate "business" level. The public process facilitation and the multi-party dispute tends to be more focussed on the determination of the substantive difference. Further, Argyris (1970) makes the case for additional skills in the facilitator ("intervenor" in his context). These additional skills are in relation to a capacity, at a personal level, to undertake the task of intervention. The important factor identified here relates to an ability to deal with the potentially isolating and the actually isolated context of the role. This is especially acute when intervention is a person's primary role, and that person is operating from a position external to a formed group. The usual "social" support provided in membership of the group is not available. Indeed, the group facilitated may oppose/ resent/ passively resist the intervention. The intervenor can be a convenient scapegoat for dysfunctional groups which do not want change. See details in the bibliography.
CONCLUDING REMARKS
It is worth remembering that any member of a group is able to "facilitate" the group process, and may often do it intuitively. Such activity can be a vital component of preventative measures in the process of handling/ minimising disputes in an organisation, while benefitting from the potential of diversity. For the person/ member of an ongoing group, seeking the long term health/ effectiveness of the group, and wanting to assist in a more informed way, knowledge of group behaviour assists; knowledge of the variety of facilitating processes available, helps. For the organisation wishing to enhance its effectiveness, it needs to be said such training, delivered across the widest spectrum of the organisation, will improve performance in handling differences creatively. This in turn is likely to improve the quality of its decisions and services. An indication is given in Attachment 6 of current bibliographic sources which could be accessed to deliver such information and experiential training.
BIBLIOGRAPHY:
This bibliography is presented in the order of the sections of the report. This allows the bibliography to convey where supportive material will be found, although this process means, at times, there is repetition of citations. Wherever possible the general citations which have been recognised elsewhere (usually earlier) in the bibliography are not repeated. The bibliography also incorporates the notes referred to in the text, which indicate some of the relevant side issues, or additional commentary on the issue, and any associated scholarly reference related. As noted elsewhere, at times this bibliography also includes the relevant text from the source, to provide a clearer indication of support, or to provide (for me) the basic data relevant to the topic at that stage.
Section 1: Introductory Remarks
NOTE 1: OTHER SOURCES/ COMMENTS RECOGNISING THE NEED FOR IMPROVED MECHANISMS TO DEAL WITH DIFFERENCE
Argyris, C Intervention theory and method: a Behavioural Science View. Reading, Mass: Addison-Wesley, 1970 p. 2 ".. about ten years ago the top leaders of one of our largest utilities were warned of increasing organisational rigidities unless they reversed the impact of their administrative controls, norms against open discussion of conflict, and paternalistic personnel policies." "Although a few business leaders have spoken out in an attempt to attack causes, most of them have responded by increasing productivity through new technological advances and passing on costs in the form of higher prices. These reactions can be found in many organisations. The spiralling costs of education, hospital care, religious institutions, and government at all levels are indicative. This has resulted in increasing citizen tension and dissatisfaction. The day of confrontation is near." p.4 "People finally revolted and politicians reacted. If the planners would not focus on the process of implementation and voluntarily involve the citizens,
laws would be passed requiring their participation through citizen groups. But passing a law on participation does not assure its effective implementation. Experience suggests that it takes a minimum of three years to develop an effective team among managers. The time involved to create cohesive citizen groups would be longer." Moore, Allen B & Feldt, James A Facilitating community and decision making groups. Malabar, Fla: Kreiger Pub. Co., 1993 p. vii "We find that the need for facilitation of community and decision groups is dramatically greater now than it was in the past .. The retraction of federal programs and initiatives ... [leaves] local communities to deal with problems on their own ... the problems seem to be more complex, more wicked, and require the mutual attention of several parties in order to be addressed. The need to bring multiple parties together to work out a common agenda relative to the problem means that way must be found to assist groups where no one person or party ought to be clearly in charge." "The ... method to address many of these problems .. has shifted from a reliance on technical experts .. to a need to involve the affected parties into discovering more than one answer and building a sense of ownership in and motivation to follow through on an answer. Facilitation of community and decision-making groups is a way to assist in finding more creative responses to problems, of involving parties in creating and owning their own solutions, and, in the long term, transferring to communities and groups the enhanced ability to work cooperatively." Other Citations which reflect a similar viewpoint include: Dale, AP Lane, MB "Strategic Perspectives Analysis: A Procedure for Participatory and Political Social Impact Assessment." Society & Natural Resources. 1994, 7, 3, May-June, 253-267 Shands, WE "Reaching Consensus on National Forest Use. Forum for Applied Research & Public Policy. 1991, 6, 3, fall, 18-23 Krause, JD "Community Opposition to Correctional Facility Siting: Beyond the "NIMBY" Explanation." Humboldt Journal of Social Relations. 1991, 17, 1-2, 239-262 Hogan, R "Managing Local Government Opposition to Community-Based Residential Facilities for the Mentally Disabled." Community Mental Health Journal. 1989, 25, 1, spring, 33-41 Burton, TL "Some Reflections on the Topic of Coordination of Public Leisure Services
Planning and Management." Loisir & Societe - Society & Leisure. 1981, 4, 2, autumn, 331344 Fainstein, NI Fainstein, SS Armistead, PJ "Citizen Participation in Community Development." Society for the Study of Social Problems. 1979 Howe, B "Some Priorities for Australian Urban Studies." Australian & New Zealand Journal of Sociology. 1973, 9, 2, Jun, 39-41 Herriot, AM "ADR - alternative dispute resolution-: a threat to democracy?" Alternative Law Journal. 1994, 19, 2, 75-77
NOTE 2: CURRENT INDICATORS IN AUSTRALIA OF CONFLICT BETWEEN GOVERNMENT AND COMMUNITY VALUES
A recent critique, raising the issue and mechanisms of social change, was presented in Peter Robinson's Sun-Herald editorial comment on 3/8/96, entitled "Social Engineers By Stealth". A copy of the article is tendered in Attachment 7
Section 2: Mediation 2.1, 2.2, 2.3 & 2.4

David, J "Mediation Course Manual", UTS-Centre for Dispute Resolution Model, 1995, page 30 Charlton, R & Dewdney, M "The Mediator's Handbook: Skills and Strategies for Practitioners", LBC Information Services, 1995 Astor, H & Chinkin, CM "Dispute Resolution in Australia", Butterworths, 1992 Moore, CW The Mediation Process: Practical Strategies for Resolving Conflict. San Francisco, Calif.: Jossey-Bass, 1986 Acland, AF Resolving Disputes Without Going to Court: A Consumer Guide to Alternative Dispute Resolution. London: Random House, 1995 Folberg, J and Taylor, A Mediation: A Comprehensive Guide to Resolving Conflicts Without Litigation. San Francisco, Calif.: Jossey-Bass, 1984
Section 2.1
NOTE 3: THE NATURE OF THE MEDIATION PROCESS
According to Bormann, (p.233-4) & Frey (Innovations p.7, 1995) the process used in the UTS model, (and by Acland, Moore, Folberg & Taylor, etc) is typical of John Dewey's steps in "reflective thinking" and/or the typical western analysis/ synthesis approach. Again, in Bormann, (p.235-9) there is mention of an alternative structure of process: the holistic/ intuitive/ creative approach with its elements of: conception; preparation; incubation; illumination and verification. This kind of thinking is more typical of the oriental.
Mediation/ Facilitation in a group with a mixed ethnic background, including the oriental, may need to take this source of difference into account. Bormann, Ernest G. Small group communication: theory and practice. New York: Harper & Row, 1990, 3rd ed. Frey, Lawrence R (ed) Innovations in group facilitation techniques: applications in natural settings. Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Pr., 1995
Section 2.2
NOTE 4: STEPS IN THE MEDIATION PROCESS - THE PRIVATE CAUCUS

I count the "Caucus"/ "Private Sessions", which others count a step in the process, as an intervention strategy, rather than a step in the process. I agree with Dianne Gibson's remarks (12/10/96) that in some disputes, this intervention may well need to be considered as having the same status as a step, since without it, certain critical information may be not adequately taken into account. In my earlier analysis*, I recognised it as an intervention strategy in what is probably best described as an iterative process.
The difference, for this strategy compared to other intervention strategies, lies in the fact that, as a strategy/ option in the process, in the mediation model taught, it is indicated, up front, as a likely component of the process, so all parties "know of it", "know its purpose", "know the rules under which it will operate". By comparison, for the other mediator interventions, if the mediator actually knows what they are doing and to what purpose, it is not necessary for the parties to the mediation to have a similar perception. Indeed, unless the mediator chooses to disclose the purpose, the only time when the purpose might well come into question would be when one or other of the parties to the dispute was to become uncomfortable with the process, because of their "intuitive" /feel that the interventions were not (or were no longer) balanced, and that the mediation was now flawed, for them, by an unacceptable bias.
(See following (Note 5) remarks on neutrality, the role of questioning, etc, from the discussions of 12/10/96) *Allen, D Resources for Strategic Interventions used by Mediators, Facilitators and Conciliators. [Unpublished] Presentation Assignment for course work on Dispute Resolution for the UTS MDR, 4 May, 1996 (Content reproduced in Attachment 5)
Section 2.3
Cumming, F "Legal System Due for Full Shake-Out." Sun-Herald, 13/10/96
Section 2.4.2
Goldberg, Sander, Rogers "Dispute Resolution: Negotiation, Mediation, and Other Processes". Boston: Little, Brown & Co, 2nd ed, 1992 p.17 "Negotiation - communication for the purpose of persuasion - is the preeminent mode of dispute resolution." Fisher, Roger & Ury, William "Getting to Yes: Negotiating an agreement without giving in." London: Century Business, 2nd ed, 1991.
p.xiii "Negotiation is a basic means of getting what you want from others. It is backand-forth communication designed to reach an agreement when you and the other side have some interests that are shared and others that are opposed."
Section 2.4.3
Argyris, C Intervention theory and method: a Behavioural Science View. Reading, Mass: Addison-Wesley, 1970 p.15 "To intervene is to enter into an ongoing system of relationships, to come between or among persons, groups, or objects for the purpose of helping them." p.16-17 The Basic Requirements for Intervention Activity: [1] [2] [3] the generation of valid information the [ability/context] to make a free, informed choice the client's commitment to the choices made
p.19 "Effective intervention in the human and social spheres requires that the processes of help be congruent with the outcome desired." Allen, D Resources for Strategic Interventions used by Mediators, Facilitators and Conciliators. [Unpublished] Presentation Assignment for course work on Dispute Resolution for the UTS MDR, 4 May, 1996 This report drew on material in: Wade, J, "Strategic Interventions Used by Mediators, Facilitators & Conciliators", Australian Dispute Resolution Journal, 1994, Vol 5, p292-304 David, J "Mediation Course Manual", UTS-Centre for Dispute Resolution Model, 1995, page 30 Charlton, R & Dewdney, M "The Mediator's Handbook: Skills and Strategies for Practitioners", LBC Information Services, 1995 Fisher, R, Ury W & Patton B "Getting to yes: negotiating an agreement without giving in", Century Business, 1991
Astor, H & Chinkin, CM "Dispute Resolution in Australia", Butterworths, 1992 Carnevale, PJD & Pegnetter, R "The Selection of Mediation Tactics in Public Sector Disputes: a Contingency Analysis" (1985) 41 Journal of Social Issues 65 Wade, J "The Last Gap in Negotiations: Why is it important? How can it be crossed?", Australian Dispute Resolution Journal, 1995, Vol 6, p93-112
NOTE 5: INTERVENTION AND THE POSSIBILITY OF BIAS

This point was highlighted by remarks of John Hosie, Stephanie Marcinow, Bob Moore, Kevin Obsorn and others, at the Advanced Mediation Presentations, 11 & 12 October 1996. The issues under discussion were: neutrality; the questioning process and types These presentations referred back to work by Astor & Chinkin, Moore and others.
Section 3: Facilitation and The Role of the Facilitator
NOTE 6: DEFINITION OF "FACILITATION"

A very useful summary of facilitation, in respect of group processes, is provided in the Introduction in Frey (1995) Innovations... This source very helpfully reviews: the nature of facilitation, and the increased recognition of its current perceived importance; the literature and research on the processes involved; the historical understanding of facilitation, and its relationship with applied communication research; the issues involved in conducting research into facilitation theory and practice in natural groups as a precursor to a series of reports of the application and effectiveness of a range of different facilitations/interventions used in natural groups.
Other similarly instructive comments are as follows: Moore, Allen B & Feldt, James A Facilitating community and decision making groups. Malabar, Fla: Kreiger Pub. Co., 1993 p.viii "Based on our knowledge of the professional literature in political science, organisational development, small group processes, leadership, and program planning for group learning, but even more important, based on our experience we view facilitators as: * helping a group to stay on task while being neutral to the content; * being of service to a group; * enabling a group to see other action options; * Designing a structured process with a group to analyse a problem situation; * assisting a groups through the decision-making process."
p.xvi "The facilitating leader's role is that of: "listener, questioner, group process director, teacher, consensus builder, sharer of goal setting and decision making, and empowerer of others" (Rees, F How to Lead Work Teams: Facilitation Skills. San Diego: Pfeiffer & Co, 1991, p.21)" p.xvii "Kayser talks about the ".. facilitator as a person who helps a group free itself from internal obstacles or difficulties so that it may more efficiently and effectively pursue the achievement of its desired outcomes for a given meeting" (Kayser, TA Mining group gold. El Segundo, CA: Serif, 1990, pp.1213). Kayser ... sees facilitation being the responsibility pf all those attending a meeting function or event." p.xvii "The guide we use for facilitation .. includes voluntary participation by those individuals and groups who may make the decisions, those who will be affected by the decision, and those who might be opposed to the decision. ... [I]f all parties are involved early in the decision-making process the decision is of better quality and it can be supported by a cross section of the community." Frey, Lawrence R (ed) Innovations in group facilitation techniques: applications in natural settings. Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Pr., 1995 p.5 "an outside consultant ... facilitation typically takes the form of a technique that a consultant teaches a group to use .."
"members' attempts to help their group develop ... facilitation occurs whenever a member's behaviour makes it easier for his or her group to move forward" "Over the years there has been a tremendous growth in the sheer number of group communication facilitation techniques: Nutt (1984) identified 47 different decision-making procedures Some techniques - Robert's Rules of Order, assigning a devil's advocate, brainstorming, and focus groups, .. Delphi Method, .. Nominal Group Technique, or Synectics
"There is also general agreement about why group facilitation procedures, in theory, should work. By focusing and guiding group members' communication and decision-making processes in a structured manner, they reduce the chances of engaging in faulty processes and harness the strength of groups in at least nine ways: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. Procedures coordinate members' thinking Procedures provide a set of objective ground rules Procedures protect groups against their own bad habits Procedures capitalise on the strengths of groups Procedures balance member participation Procedures surface and help manage conflicts Procedures give groups a sense of closure in their work Procedures make groups reflect on their meeting process Procedures empower groups (Poole, 1991, pp75-80)
p.13 "The research reviewed .. suggests that we know much about the facilitation of group communication and the results of such efforts. It is clear that both individual and group behaviour can be influenced by: discussion procedures communication networks members' communicative behaviour communication modalities Moore, Carl M. Group techniques for idea building. London: Sage, 1994, 2nd ed. p.3 "[A] group of expert facilitators... contend ... that the use of such processes can improve the quality of virtually any kind of meeting (but particularly meetings between people who do not have a history of working together) by: * improving the group's productivity,
* * * * *
eliminating confusion, promoting appreciation of the realities that need to be considered by the group, inventing alternatives, using time wisely, circumventing many of the problems inherent in group activity.
"The problems they identified that these processes eliminate or reduce include: * when a group produces only a few ideas, * when a group is dominated by one (or a few) of its members, * when a group distorts its product because members respond too strongly to the status of one (or a few) of the group members, or when the group is unduly influenced by political problems (such as the authority of an elected chairperson or the established rules of procedure used to conduct meetings."
Section 3.1
NOTE 7: FACILITATION IN THE EDUCATIONAL GROUP CONTEXT

In current developments in formal adult education, in a group context, one of key roles required for an effective "teacher" is the ability to facilitate the process of helping their adult students recognise prior learning. The process is, in part, one of extracting content from the participants' experience and allowing participants to learn from one another's experience by establishing an environment in which the information is readily exchanged and appropriately esteemed. Managing Adult Communication, a 15 module training resource "Public Sector Management Course"; Power, Mary R "Educating Mediators Metacognitively" (1992) 3 Australian Dispute Resolution Journal, 1992, Vol 3, 214-226 extract cited in ATTACHMENT 8] (Again, reflecting on pedagogic literature, this is in fact another form of the
Montessori concept of a "prepared environment" with a "prepared adult".) Lillard, PP "Montessori today: a comprehensive approach to education from birth to adulthood". New York: Schocken, 1996 p.16 "It is psychological security, engendered in part by a properly structured environment, which gives children the impulse to try harder to face the unknown, including the unpleasant facts of life." p.21 "the educational plan that Montessori eventually evolved .. contains three essential elements: * a prepared environment * a prepared adult * and freedom with responsibility
Section 3.3
Lumsden, G Communicating in Groups and Teams: sharing leadership. Belmont, Calif.: Wadsworth Pub. Co., 1993 Moore, Allen B & Feldt, James A Facilitating community and decision making groups. Malabar, Fla: Kreiger Pub. Co., 1993 Frey, Lawrence R (ed) Innovations in group facilitation techniques: applications in natural settings. Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Pr., 1995
Section 3.3.1
NOTE 8: ORDER & SECURITY & FACILITATION

It appears to me, from a consideration of Montessori's theory of human learning/ development, that one of the key contributions of the facilitator/ facilitation, is the establishment of an acceptable and effective procedural order. Once the parties have a sense of security in such order, they can then attend to the matter of exploration: taking on/ taking in new information/ other parties perceptions/ concerns; exercising their creativity in being prepared to move outside their "knowns" and then being able to come up with a new and different way of dealing with the problem.
Lillard, PP Montessori today: a comprehensive approach to education from birth to adulthood. New York: Schocken, 1996
Section 3.3.2
Argyris, C Intervention theory and method: a Behavioural Science View. Reading, Mass: Addison-Wesley, 1970 Frey, Lawrence R (ed) Innovations in group facilitation techniques: applications in natural settings. Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Pr., 1995
Section 3.4
Further detail on the current context of NSW Local Government has been tendered in: Allen, D Equipping Staff to Handle Disputes Effectively in Local Government. [Unpublished] Research Assignment for course work on Dispute Resolution for the UTS MDR, May, 1996.
Section 4: Group Processes
NOTE 9: GROUP PROCESSES BIBLIOGRAPHIC SOURCES

There are many books, basic texts, dealing with group processes. Since the theoretical study of groups, indeed the basics of sociology and psychology, are not familiar ground to me, I am limited, at this stage, in my ability to discern the "authoritative" and the "theoretical" from the remainder. My bent, in these studies, is towards the practical - how will this apply to what I am trying to do in the workplace? However, since my preference lies in teaching, even when trying to determine things useful for the workplace, I also seek to know why something works, as well as know the process/es which work/ are likely to work. In the course of this preliminary reading I have come across at least two "critics", Chris Argyris (1970) and Lawrence Frey (1994,1995), who appear to indicate that in this area, at least, I will search in vain. That so far as rigorous studies of effectiveness with interventions (Argyris, 1970) is concerned, and study of real groups (as distinct from artificial groups) (Frey, 1994, 1995) little
has been done. As a result, I have tended to become distracted with a closer concern with citations, and the likely sources, and authority (has stood the test of time by way of opportunity for others to challenge, etc) for what is presented. Within my limited study time frame, I have skimmed or read: (This list is presented in chronological order, to give some indication of their seminal contribution and/or currency; the smaller typeface indicates earlier editions of the material seen in the latest edition indicated in the standard typeface. The additional bibliographic details are indicated elsewhere in this bibliography.)
1963: 1969: Luft, J/ Group processes Bormann, E/ Discussion Group Methods - became "Small Group Communication" Cathcart, Samovar & Henman/ Small group communication : theory and practice Shaw, M/ Group dynamics Napier & Gershenfeld/ Groups: theory & experience.
1970: Argyris, C/ Intervention Theory & Practice

1970: 1971: 1973:
1975: Delbecq, Van der Ven, Gustafson/ Group techniques for program planning: a guide to nominal group and delphi processes.
1975: 1977: Johnson, D/ Joining together Heron, J/ Facilitator's handbook
1981: Shaw, M/ Group dynamics: the psychology of small group behaviour. 1st ed - 1971, 2nd ed - 1976, 3rd ed - 1981 (matured, but now lacking current developments 1981-1996)
1982: Zander, A/ Making groups effective.
1984: Luft ,J/ Group processes: an introduction to group dynamics. 1st ed - 1963, 2nd ed - 1970, 3rd ed - 1984 (ie a matured view, particularly useful in updating basic theoretical material to 1984) 1987: Johnson, D/ Joining together. 1st ed - 1975, 2nd ed - 1982, 3rd ed - 1987
1987: 1988: Moore, C/ Group techniques for idea building. Robson, M/ Problem solving in groups
1989: Heron, J/ Facilitator's handbook. 1st ed - 1977, 2nd ed - 1989 1990: Bormann, E/ Small group communication. 1st ed - 1969 ("Discussion Group Methods"), 2nd ed - 1975, 3rd ed 1990 (ie matured view) 1990: Hackman, JR/ Groups that work (and those that don't): creating conditions for effective teamwork 1991: Condliffe, P/ Conflict management: a practical guide. 1992: Moore, A/ Facilitating community and decision making groups.
1993: Lumsden, G/ Communicating in groups and teams: sharing leadership. 1993: Napier & Gershenfeld/ Groups: theory and experience. 1st ed 1973 , 2nd ed -, 3rd ed -, 4th ed 1989, 5th ed 1993 1993: Robson, M / Problem solving in groups. 1st ed - 1988, 2nd ed 1993 1994: Moore, C/ Group techniques for idea building. 1st ed - 1987, 2nd ed - 1994 1994: Kaye, M/ Communication management. 1994: Zander, A/ Making groups effective. 1st ed - 1982; 2nd ed 1994 1994: Frey, LR ed/ Group communication in context: studies of natural groups 1995: Frey, LR ed/ Innovations in group facilitation techniques: applications in natural settings 1996: Cathcart, Samovar & Henman/ Small group communication : theory and practice. 1st ed - 1970, 2nd ed - 1974, 3rd ed - 1979, 4th ed - 1984, 5th ed - 1988, 6th ed - 1992, 7th ed - 1996
Section 4.1
NOTE 10: OPTIMAL GROUP SIZE ISSUES
Obviously, size of the group is a significant factor in its effectiveness: 1.1 1.2 For a small decision-making group the optimum size is 5-7 For the most inclusive communications a group size of less than 5 is required
[[the old adage that the best size committee is two: you and me, which functions best when you are away]] This means for large groups (which may be necessary to ensure full representation of a significant number of stakeholders) one of the management/ facilitation techniques used will be the timely oscillation between the plenary sessions (with all participants) and the smaller break-out/ focus group sessions.] Bormann, Ernest G. Small group communication: theory and practice. New York: Harper & Row, 1990, 3rd ed.
NOTE 11: BASIC GROUP PROCESSES

The list of four items for basic group processes is my list at this stage: it could very well demonstrate my essential ignorance of the field, which the present level of reading analysis has not completely overcome. It is useful to compare another way of analysing group behaviour, as reported in Lumsden, G Communicating in Groups and Teams: sharing leadership. Belmont, Calif.: Wadsworth Pub. Co., 1993 p.94 "Tuckman & Jensen (1977) identified five stages of interaction and work development that many groups go through. ..: 1. Forming Initially members get organised and oriented to one another and the group Conflict among members arises when the honeymoon is over. Some groups have an intense, prolonged struggle; others a brief skirmish. A sense of team emerges in the third stage, along with norms for handling conflict and transactional and task processes that work. In this stage, the team completes the work, and members reinforce one another in feeling a sense of accomplishment. The team ends its functions, and members find ways of saying good-bye to the team.
2.
Storming
3.
Norming
4.
Performing
5.
Adjourning
It seems to me, at this stage of my studies on this area, that the value of the Tuckman and Jensen analysis (apart from the rhyming terms as memory aids) is in identifying "storming" and "norming". In a natural group the differences that lead to the conflicts that arise may apply to any of its four components: formation, development, leadership, decisionmaking. So that, in each of these components the processes of storming and norming will be required. If there is the "storm" without the "norm" the natural group will cease to operate/ exist. The question will be: at what stage does the failure to "norm" after the "storm" disrupt the group. I have seen inordinate amounts of time spent on the "constitution" of a group: who can join, on what basis; how will the group structure/ leadership; how
often meet; meeting procedure; voting rights (decision-making procedure); rules of debate (control of communication). I have come to see the "constitution" as the minimal frame of reference - the things on which people prepared to be part of / seeking to be part of a group agree to agree.
Section 4.2
Johari Window: see Luft, J "Group Processes: an introduction to group dynamics". CA: Mountain View, Mayfield, 1984, 3rd ed. Heron, John. The facilitator's handbook. London: Kogan Page, 1989
Bormann, Ernest G. Small group communication: theory and practice. New York: Harper & Row, 1990, 3rd ed. Argyris, C Intervention theory and method: a Behavioural Science View. Reading, Mass: Addison-Wesley, 1970 Lumsden, G Communicating in Groups and Teams: sharing leadership. Belmont, Calif.: Wadsworth Pub. Co., 1993 p.49 Task Processes Facilitator Initiator/ contributor Information/ opinion seeker Information/ opinion giver Elaborator Coordinator Orienter Evaluator/ critic Energizer Procedural Technician Recorder Proposes ideas or solutions Asks for facts, information, opinions, values, clarification Offer facts, statistics, examples, opinions, beliefs Develops examples, extends ideas Pulls ideas, relationships together Summarizes, calls attention to the task Analyzes data, reasoning, conclusions Tries to motivate the group Runs errands, distributes materials Keeps records
Transactional Processes Facilitator Encourager Harmonizer/ compromiser Gatekeeper Standard setter Gives understanding, support Smooths, suggests ways to manage conflict Encourages participation, curbs excess Sets standards for tasks, ethics, goals Observes, gives feedback on processes Goes along with others
Observer Follower Process Blocker Aggressor/ blocker Recognition seeker Self-confessor/ help-seeker Player/ fun-seeker Dominator Special interest pleader
Puts down others, takes, issue, bulldozes, is negative Uses group to boost his/her ego Unloads personal woes, uses group for sympathy Uninvolved in group, creates distractions Manipulates, tries to control Uses team to serve own or another group's interests
Based on KD Benne & P Sheats, "Functional roles of Group Members," Journal of Social Issues, 4 (1948), 41-49 Moore, Carl M. Group techniques for idea building. London: Sage, 1994, 2nd ed. Frey, Lawrence R (ed) Innovations in group facilitation techniques: applications in natural settings. Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Pr., 1995 p.4 "In spite of problems, group decision-making can result in 40-50% increases in productivity over individual decision-making ... the reasons .. were summarized recently by Poole (1991) as follows: * * Groups generally have greater knowledge than any individual Groups have a diversity of perspectives on the situation, which results in better thinking. The greater the diversity (provided differences can be managed), the more
* *
* *
effective the group. Group members can check each other's ideas. Merely being in the presence of others is psychologically arousing. This social facilitation effect stimulates greater effort by group members. Participation in group discussions often increases members' commitment to the decision. Bringing people with different points of view into contact will often surface conflicts which must be resolved for an effective and practical decision to emerge.
Section 4.3
Moore, Allen B & Feldt, James A Facilitating community and decision making groups. Malabar, Fla: Kreiger Pub. Co., 1993 p.xxi-xxii "Considerable preparation is necessary before the facilitated session .. to ..assess: * what is the purpose of the meeting; * who will be attending the meeting; and * why a facilitator appears to be needed? [and to advise the role of facilitator compared to a leader, expert or manager.. that].. facilitators can be effective when the group wants to: * achieve consensus about a decision or plan of action; * use a structured process to focus the group's energy and emotions; * involve multiple agencies and community groups in discussion and decision making about an emotional issue or a common agenda; * include the chairperson as a contributor of content in the discussion and debate; * utilize expert information in the decision-making process (this requires special rules and procedures if the expert is not to overwhelm the group); * produce an action plan for work assignments and project responsibilities; or * engage in problem-solving process to discover creative solutions. p.xxiii-xxiv "Managing the process and facilitating the meeting includes such things as: * starting the meeting to break the ice and set the process in motion, * involving participants in discussing their expectations, * drawing the agenda items from participants, * working on agenda items,
* * * * * * * p.xxiv
checking in with participants to see if the facilitator and the group are on the right track, working toward consensus, managing dominant personalities and members who have hidden agendas, organizing information to make decisions, specifying needed actions gaining commitment to action and designating responsibilities, and closing the meeting."
"[A]fter .. [the facilitated].. meeting .. the facilitator [needs] to wrap up his or her direct involvement and .. hand off the task to the group to ensure carry through and continuity. .. The goal of the [facilitation] .. should be to leave the group members with the potential to act on their own. ... [W]e typically offer to .. come back to the group to review its actions and deviations from the plan. The contents of the text are: Introduction Part 1: The Before Phase or the Design Dance 1. Initiating the Design Dance 2. Issues to Consider in the Design Dance 3. Design for Meeting Space and Equipment Part 2: The During Phase or What you do at the Facilitated Session 4. Facilitator as Manager of the Process 5. Setting the Rules for the Game 6. Consensus Building and Collaborating on Problem Solving 7. Helping Groups Identify and Explore Expectations and Issues 8. Closing the Meeting Part 3: The After Phase or What you do after you thought you were done 9. The Report and Follow-Up 10. Conclusion
Section 4.4
Argyris, C Intervention theory and method: a Behavioural Science View. Reading, Mass: Addison-Wesley, 1970 Frey, Lawrence R (ed) Innovations in group facilitation techniques: applications in natural
settings. Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Pr., 1995
Section 4.5
Kramer, R M "In Dubious Battle: Heightened Accountability, Dysphoric Cognition, and Selfdefeating Bargaining Behaviour" p. 95-120 in Kramer, R M, Messick D M Negotiation as a social process: New trends in theory and research. Thousand Oaks, Calif., 1995. p.100 "Several broad conclusions emerge from this research[: 1.] when individuals feel accountable to others, they are likely to be concerned not only about the objective outcomes associated with a given decision, but with how those outcomes will be perceived and evaluated by those to whom they feel accountable. the effects of accountability in a given context are often quite complex, and depend on the specific form of accountability linking decision makers and a given audience. Thus [depending on the] settings, decision makers may be concerned: [2.1] [2.2] [2.3] [3.] about appearing competent about being perceived as likeable or popular about appearing tough or resolute
[2.]
the effects of accountability on a negotiator's judgment and behaviour depend on whom they feel accountable to and how they construe that accountability. accountability to a single constituency leads to increased use of competitive or contentious bargaining tactics accountability to constituents (who presumably favour tough negotiation standards) induces concern for appearing strong by refusing to make concessions. People respond by employing competitive bargaining tactics that, although obstacles to resolving conflicts on interest, are quite effective in protecting their images in the eyes of constituents.'
[4.]
[5.]
Section 5: Knowledge and Skills a Facilitator Needs

Allen, D Equipping staff to handle disputes effectively in local government.[Unpublished] 1996 SEE ATTACHMENT 8 FOR EXTRACT Part of that report involved the review of a number of bibliographic sources, namely: 8.1 8.2 8.3 8.4 8.5 8.6 8.7 8.8 Dispute Resolution/Goldberg Sander & Rogers, 2nd ed, Little, Brown & Co, 1992 Dispute Resolution in Australia/Hilary Astor Christine M Chinkin. Butterworths, Sydney, 1992 Dewdney, M, Sordo, B and Chinkin C Evaluation ... Charlton, R and Dewdney M The Mediator's Handbook, LBC Information Services, 1995 Zilinskas A, "The Training of Mediators - is it necessary?" in (1995) 6 ADRJ 58-70 Faulkes, W "The Dispute Resolution Industry - Defining the Industry and Establishing Competencies" (1994) 5 ADRJ 285-292 Power, Mary R "Educating Mediators Metacognitively" (1992) 3 ADRJ 214-226 Allen, D, Resources for Strategic Interventions used by Mediators, Facilitators and Conciliators - Presentation Assignment for course work on Dispute Resolution for the UTS MDR, 4 May, 1996.
Argyris, C Intervention theory and method: a Behavioural Science View. Reading, Mass: Addison-Wesley, 1970 p.149 Conditions faced by an Interventionist: Discrepant world Discrepancy between own and client's views on causes of problems and designs of effective systems Discrepancy between own and client's views on effective implementation of change Discrepancy between own ideals and behaviour Marginality Membership in two overlapping but different worlds (in organisation trying to help/ in profession of being an interventionist) Perpetual Client Mistrust Challenge of change -> natural defensiveness Minimal Feedback about Effectiveness
?? Client doesn't/can't understand, so how can they effectively provide valid feedback? Qualities Needed by an Interventionist: Confidence in own intervention philosophy Accurate perception of stressful reality Acceptance of the client's attacks and mistrust Trust in own experience of reality Investing stressful environments with growth experiences Behaviour of an Interventionist to Produce Effectiveness:
Owning up to, being open toward, and experimenting with ideas and feelings Helping others to own up to, and experiment with ideas and feelings Contributing to the norms of individuality, concern, and trust Communication in observed, directly verifiable categories, with minimal attribution, evaluation, and internal contradiction
ATTACHMENTS
These attachments gather together additional information related to this report.
ATTACHMENT 1: PERSONAL EXPERIENCE OF GROUPS

1951 School 1951 Mortdale; 1952-1957 Sutherland; 1958-1962 StGGHS 1954 Brownies member 1960 Confirmation Class; CSSM Camp group member; 1960-66 Sunday School class teacher; 1960-1967 St Paul's Gymea congregational member 1961 1961-1967 Youth Fellowship 1963 1963-1967 GFS leader 1963 1963-1965 EU member (fringe attender) 1966 Part-time teacher Bethlehem College, Ashfield & staff member 1968 1968-1972 High School teacher/ staff member Kiama High School 1968 Member NSW Teachers Federation: local district meetings - Annual Conference 1968, 1969, .. 1971 1971-1976 member of a local community group "Kiama APC": the Kiama Advancement and Protection Committee 1971-1976; 1973: Publication and circulation of "Planning the District - Kiama-Jamberoo-Gerringong"; and public presentation of Kiama APC position on principles for the amendment of the local Town Planning Scheme with guest/ expert speakers; 1975? Chairperson 1971 1971-1973 member of local community group 2 (more radical!) "ROB" = Rejection Of Boral 1971-1973; 1973: Publication of "A Case for Quarrying" 1971 1971-1975 member of South Coast Conservation Society; 1974: submission of "Lake Illawarra Report"; 1974: submission of "Illawarra Region Report" 1974 1974-5 member of Illawarra CRAG ("Coalition of Resident Action Groups") 1971-1975 Observing Kiama Municipal Council 1973 1973- present Settle to membership Christ Church Anglian Church, Kiama 1973 Staff at SCEGGS 1974 Committee member Christ Church Kiama 1974-1995; Secretary 1976-1995 some gap 1974 Staff member at Wollongong University Library Technical Services Division 1975 Staff member at Shellharbour Council - contracted Research Officer 1976 Growth Group [small study/ support group] (Christ Church Kiama) member; 1976present; 1985?- present leader 1976-1992 Chief Librarian - Shellharbour Council 1976 member Illawarra Regional Committee of AACOBS; 1976-1986 1978 member Warilla Advice & Information Centre; 1978-1986 1978 Shellharbour TAFE Committee - Chair Role 1978-1988; Illawarra District TAFE Regional Council; 1979 NSW Advisory Committee of the Australian Broadcasting Commission 1979-1981 1980 Parochial Representative to Sydney Anglican Synod 1980-1995; 2 Archbishop Election synods; one synod committee
1981 Member NSW Committee of Australian Advisory Committee on Bibliographic Services 1981-1987 1985- Secretary to MANEX 1992- Secretary to ARCC
ATTACHMENT 2: PERSONAL EXPERIENCES OF APPROACHES TO INFORMALLY FACILITATING GROUP EFFECTIVENESS

Throughout the experiences noted in Attachment 1, I have been exposed to the modus operandi of a number of different "institutional" ways of delivering group effectiveness, dependent in part on the nature of the organisation, in part on the individual with the role of leadership, in part of the individual composition of the group. I would say that the "point" of real awareness of the issue of group effectiveness, and what contributes to it, and to what extent I had any responsibility in the matter, etc, developed in me in 1968. I suspect the awareness came from two factors: the professional obligation to develop teaching abilities, the need to become an effective participant in the deliberations of the Teachers Federation. On reflection, the "instructive" elements from such experience can be identified as follows: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. Structure: Work-Play-Study-Worship at GFS Teacher training - curriculum development; lesson preparation; lesson presentation; performance improvement Agenda Setting - Kiama Church Committee; MANEX; staff meetings; working party meetings Procedural rules - NSW Teachers' Federation - Anglican Synod Standing Orders - no imputing motives: Anglican Synod One-text method: Annual Report 1987? Study Leave Policy 1988 Permanent Part-time work policy 1989? Building & Space Report Committee Structure Report Delegations Report Various working parties/ one-off meetings Group facilitation: 7.1 Discussion on Salary System 1996
7.
The Agenda
One of the problems that often dogs poorly conceived group meetings is the "working over" of old business: inordinate time rediscussing the minutes of the last meeting. I was involved, with a former Rector of the parish, in using an agenda to focus the Church Committee discussions on substantive issues. This was attempted by categorising agenda items to aspects of ministry, and indicating a prospective time frame to work through the agenda. The minutes of the last meeting then tended to fall into their rightful place - documenting the past (group memory) but not dictating, directing or diverting the current meeting from dealing with the agenda before it.
Group Comfortableness
One of the frustrations I have had (until I realised what was going on) with the Council's MANEX meeting, was the inability to deal with matters quickly. The sense of frustration was exacerbated by the almost universal, underlying critique, of a pressured management, that time was being wasted in these meetings. The MANEX (Management Executive) group was formed in 1985/6 as a result of the new Town Clerk/ General Manager's attempt to put into place "corporate management". It was: the Town Clerk; the Deputy Town Clerk; the Chief Engineer; the Chief Health & Building Surveyor; the Chief Town Planner; the Chief Librarian (me); the Treasurer (when the position was clearly separated from the jurisdiction of the Deputy Town Clerk). It convened, in the early stages, weekly. The agenda was issued beforehand, and when I became secretary the compiling of the agenda was a matter of following up unfinished items and gathering new concerns from any/ all of the participants. There were times when the meeting had clear, new substance to deal with, and was quite productive. There was one meeting which stands out in my memory for the following reason. * The agenda was big. * The group generally worked in a desultory way through it. * Finally the meeting was formally closed. * As the participants stood up and began to move out, one of the senior staff mentioned a matter not raised on the agenda. * It was at that point that the real business of MANEX of that week commenced to be dealt with. It seemed to me, that on the strength of that meeting, in the context of past meetings (and the phenomenon repeated itself in future meetings) that the individuals in the group needed about two hours to "get to know one another again", before they were comfortable enough with one
another to risk raising a difficult and sensitive issue that needed to be dealt with.
Procedural Rules
My experience of the use of procedural rules to facilitate group deliberations is also interesting. At the local group of the Teachers Federation, the "procedural" motion: "that the motion be put" invariably created confusion. There were some members of the group who then delighted in diverting debate to debate the procedural material. When the Chair eventually put that matter, those who hadn't been involved in "playing the game" then voted as if the substantive matter was being dealt with. At the Annual Conference of the Teachers Federation, likely to have been of the order of 1000 people, the use of tight procedural rules kept the debate on track. The experienced Chair knew how to "gag" the nonsense and the bigger group daunted uninformed participation. At the Anglican Synod, a group of over 500 at its busiest/ most controversial stages, the use of a "procedure" called the "formal motion" allows matters where there was not any real opposition to be disposed of "formally", in the early part of the day's proceedings. A second Standing Order, which allows a challenge of "imputing motives" to rule a speaker "out of order" means that "personal" attacks or misrepresentations can be controlled in debates where there was significant controversy, with strongly held and defended positions. For Synod, the procedural motion to gag debate or "go on to the next item of business" takes a different form to that used at the Teachers Federation Conference. The wording of the form is of itself not clear: it is called "the previous question". But for the experienced participants its use has a significantly different purpose: when the "previous question" motion is carried, there is no vote, and the motion before the chair falls to the ground. It is used in two different ways: 1. to hear the mover of a motion, and let them say their piece/be heard on the matter of concern to them, but, if there is support for the procedural motion, to gag any other debate that might become personal, divisive, or irrelevant to the primary synod task/ responsibilities, etc to round off debate on a divisive matter by not, at the end, putting the substantive motion to the vote and so polarise positions to clearly divide the synod
2.
The One-Text technique

Much of the activity of local government rests on the adoption, by Councillors, of an officer's report, with its action recommendations. Consequently, in acting to "coordinate" a number of "corporate reports", especially in the period 1985 to present, I have "naturally" used what amounts to the one-text technique: 1. A meeting is convened of the "recognised" interested parties.
2.
Initial discussions are held on the scope of the problem to be dealt with in the report. An initial indication is sought of available information, likely contributors of necessary information etc. After the meeting, the discussion is "minuted" by the formulation of a draft report, by me. The draft report indicates the thrust of the argument, the information at hand - or its likely source; notes any unresolved issues, etc. The draft is circulated and becomes the agenda for the next meeting. Meetings, with discussion, challenging the content of the draft, followed by additional drafting/ redrafting, gathering in other information, etc are held until the group is essentially satisfied that the report reflects their "best advice". For some issues there may be a secondary circulation, to a wider range of interested parties, when the draft is closer to its likely final form, to see if there is any additional input needing to be taken into account.
3.
4.
5.
6.
Group facilitation
One of the groups where my role includes giving technical advice, and operating as the "honest broker", is as an ex-officio member of the Award Restructuring Consultative Committee. This Committee was formed under the auspices of the Local Government (State) Award, 1991. It is a consultative committee, with representatives from staff (unions) and management (Divisional Directors and Councillors). The primary purpose of the Committee was to consult on elements of the process of implementing the new award, with a new structure for remuneration based on skills (as distinct from a single classification rate). The process is part and parcel of the thrust for change in the industrial landscape moving from centralised award agreements to enterprise based agreements in the context of the
federally encouraged micro-economic reform. In mandating the formation of consultative committees (a significant departure from "usual" practice for most local government bodies) the Unions and the Local Government & Shires Association (the peak employer body) also sought to provide support to the industry, by way of initial (and later support) training for consultative committees. [See detail in Attachment 3]
Over the period since the formation of the Committee, there has been a number of devices used to assist participation and consultation at various levels of the process. These include: 1. 2. 3. 4. Briefings with external experts Discussions related to the briefings, facilitated by the external expert The formation of Subcommittees to meet separately, and discuss in depth issues, and come back to the full Committee with recommendations The provision of a pre-meeting gathering of staff to discuss amongst themselves concerns: there are five different segments of the workforce represented, with eight individuals, and at this stage little signs of any coordinated effort to achieve common goals At least two "facilitated", open discussions: 5.1 in March 1993 to consider options of enterprise bargaining versus the "technical approach" of a refined skill-based job evaluation in May 1996 to consider alternative options in defining ways of progressing within the salary structure
5.
5.2
For the March 1993 discussions, which I facilitated, a four stage process was adopted: 1. Initial report/ debate discerning that a more extensive discussion than usually applies at the general meeting was needed to assist the committee determine the best way to go A detailed briefing of one of the subcommittees, augmented by interested parties, with the external expert providing information on the most probable option A night meeting of the whole Committee, augmented by alternates, any interested Councillors, any interested Directors or Line Managers. The structure of this session was: 3.1 3.2 Overview of progress to date, summary of information from the external expert Division into ARCC Subcommittees and a committee of General Manager and Councillors (not members of subcommittees), with
2.
3.
3.3 3.4 4.
specific discussion questions to address Reporting back of Subcommittee deliberations Gaining of general indication of preferred way forward
Formal report back to the whole Committee at its next meeting, with a recommendation for ratification, together with a proposed process and timetable for its implementation.
For the May 1996 meeting which again I facilitated, the process involved:
1.
the raising of the issue in general terms, with some options identified, at an ordinary Committee meeting, together with the recommendation that special meeting be convened for the purposes of discussing the matter; and that staff be canvassed for any other suggestions they might have there were a number of staff meetings held when the matter under consideration was raised, together with the basic concerns related to time to undertake the process, resources, and likely outcomes, and the invitation for suggestions formally put one written staff submission was received; comments of options/ concerns made at other staff discussions were collated a business paper indicating the nature of the question before the Committee, options at hand a week before, the openness of the meeting to receive any other options, the task on the day of further brainstorming to create other likely solutions, suggested criteria to evaluate options, and the fact that the meeting would not be making a decision, but providing information for a further report/ formal decision-making meeting (to allow for any necessary reporting back to constituents, gaining authority to settle on their behalf etc) was circulated the Committee on the day was augmented by any other interested parties: alternates; Union Representatives; a Union Organiser; additional management/ Councillors, according to interest a room was prepared with 6.1 6.2 an open U-shaped tables and chairs for the participants; three coloured boards 1. "Status Quo" 2. "The "Anglican" Position" (for the middle ground); 3. "Radical Change".
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
The boards were placed in the above order from left to right as seen from the
seated positions of the participants. 6.3 6.4 the notified options were placed on paper on one or other of the boards the established criteria were noted on another board to the side
7.
The options on the boards were spoken to briefly to explain their import. I did this to allow for " no ownership" of one or other of the positions by either management or staff Additional options were then raised. These were drafted and placed on the appropriate board When the group was satisfied that it did not want to add any more options the discussion then sought to identify which options did not meet the current criteria - and two additional criteria were developed: "timeliness" and "capacity to measure productivity gains" Eventually, close to the end of the meeting's scheduled time of closing, some eleven (from a recorded 25) options remained under consideration. These were then identified by numbering 1-11; and the numbering was done from left to right: from board 1 to board 3. Then to give the meeting some sense of "closure" to the discussion, to find if there was enough common ground to proceed - but on the clear understanding that the question of any binding decision was held over to the next meeting the participants were asked to nominate their top three preferences as 1, 2, 3. These preferences were then collected and collated From that poll it was evident that the "Present Course" Option, with or without the "Similar Approach [to a Previous Stage]" was most favoured. Two participants chose not to nominate their choice/s. The matter was then reported back to the full committee: reporting all the options, and the poll results. One participant raised the question of a "contrived" result. It was not contrived [by me] since the selected option was not the option which I personally considered to be necessarily in the best interests of the council at this stage. However, on reflection: the left to right order, the 1-11 numbering from left to right, and the possibility of the pejorative nomination of the boards "status quo"; "radical", etc could have been construed as "directing" the decision making. Since this issue was raised, the report to the full Committee made particular
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
effort to raise the question of the Committee's satisfaction with the process and its nominal outcome, and if there was concern to keep the matter open for further debate. This report also noted that further effort on creative problem solving and effective consideration of the various party interests could yield a collaborative effort to develop an option better than any of the options considered on the day. Even on the day some had noted that the options considered were not necessarily "mutually exclusive". 16. On the day of the decision-making meeting the matter was not further challenged and the recommendations which implemented the "straw poll" result were then adopted without further debate. The Committee accepted a process that was promised to be at least two years in the accomplishment. There was the formation of a separate Special Sunset Committee to consider, within that general option, which of a number of particular ways forward, might best accomplish that option.
ATTACHMENT 3: Training for the Local Government Industry to Complement/ Assist with the Process of Implementation of Award Restructuring - Consultative Committee Training Program
The NSW Local Government Industry Training Committee developed training for council staff and elected representatives who became involved in the local Award Restructuring Consultative Committees. An indication of the content and thrust of this training, delivered over two days and mostly in 1992, is detailed as follows: 1. Backgrounding information to set the scene: 1.1 SEP and Economic Reform Agenda 1.2 The New Award 1.3 Award Restructuring - practical aspects The Consultative Committee 2.1 Member Roles, Rights and Duties 2.2 the Constitution of the Committee 2.3 Monitoring and evaluating the Committee The Decision Making Process 3.1 Creating & Implementing Collaborative Decision making 3.1.1 Nominal Group Technique 3.1.2 Syndicate Group Exercise 3.1.3 Discussion Group Exercise 3.1.4 SWOT Analysis
2.
3.
3.2 3.3 4. 5. 6. 7.
3.1.5 Brainstorming Joint decision making is recommended; reaching consensus through consultation Decisions should be made after consultation
Award Restructuring and Workplace Reform Program of Council Communications with constituents and other stakeholders Introducing and Managing Change Meeting Skills 7.1 The Effective Meeting 7.1.1 7.1.2 7.1.3 7.1.4 Good Agendas Minutes & Minute taking Duties & Skills of Chairperson Committee Members Contributions
8.
Review and Action Plans
This initial training has been complemented by a second program: "Improving Consultative Committee Effectiveness" This two-day program covers: 1. Where Are We? Reviewing Our Current Position * "Mentors" and identifying the current position of the CC * Establish how effective the CC has been * Identify areas where the CC can improve * Commence an action plan to increase effectiveness How Did We Get Here? Reviewing Committee Skills * Identify effective committee and interpersonal skills * Review the Key Principles for more effective interactions * Review the interaction and Process Guidelines to ensure effective meetings and to solve problems Paradigms. The Business of Discovering the Future * Identify what Paradigms are * Determine how Paradigms will affect our Council * Conduct a SWOT Analysis and a Brainstorming Session Managing the Stresses of the Consultative Committee * Identify those problems that are causing you stress
2.
3.
4.
* * 5.
Develop an action plan to manage stress Apply stress management techniques to the CC work
I Make a Difference on the Consultative Committee * Identify key elements that can make your job rewarding * Establish how you can make a difference on the CC by having a positive attitude * Develop a sense of self worth by taking responsibility for your world and your role on the CC Handling Conflict in the Consultative Committee * * * Review the common sources of conflict Consider the power of perception and its role in conflict Develop an action plan for handing conflict in the CC
6.
7.
Reaching Agreement in the Consultative Committee * Identify why reaching agreement is important to the success of the CC * Define the role and benefits of consensus in the decision making process * Use effective models and identify what's needed to reach consensus Action Planning, Workshop Evaluation and Open Forum
8.
(At this stage the CC at Shellharbour Council does not see the need to undertake this training. Some of the content has been delivered in the context of other training provided in the period 1993-1996 at Shellharbour Council: Interaction Management training; Customer Service training. Also the CC has not "fallen over" or "fallen out". Its deliberations appear to still be effective. The occasions when there has been fairly fundamental dispute between the staff and management have been worked on (in some cases over a period of about six months) until resolved.)
ATTACHMENT 4: My Framework in undertaking studies in Dispute Resolution

As noted elsewhere, my background is primarily organisational. My current role (since August 1992) at Shellharbour Council is: Executive Assistant to the General Manager. That role can be defined as either assisting the executive process (decision-making); or executing the assistance (doing what needs to be done to assist) the task of general management (management of the whole, and/or generic management functions).
In that role, the recent focus has been what might be called "project management" for the process of implementing award restructuring and developing personnel policy and system/s. The activity of consulting the stakeholders and cobbling consensus from the variety of viewpoints, exercises my skills in exploring information, considering options, explaining new areas (for the organisation) of the technical components of "personnel", managing difference.
I am looked to to be the "honest broker" in the process. It could be considered to be part of "mediation" prior to a full blown dispute. And indeed, it is much easier to deal within that context than to consider what additional skills I might need if the process gets off the rails to the extent that a dispute displays all the normal features of a positional industrial dispute. My background also includes teaching. And it is this focus of training, as a significant input to contribute to organisational effectiveness, that is also of great interest to me personally. At this stage there is very little spare resource to apply to the task, so there has to be a very close scrutiny of what resources are deployed on what activities. Again, I trust my role and contribution has been to deliver this input in an effective and strategic way. My intellectual curiosity has been applied to the effectiveness (or otherwise) of the organisation over a significant period (20+ years now). It commenced with a reasonably intensive period of 18 months in the role of "Research Officer" (1975-1976). One of the "questions" that I sought to answer was the hypothetical: how close to the wall is Shellharbour Council? when will it "fall over"? Are there any indicators, from other local government body's experience, which might predicate such a demise?
Since then, (1976-1984) my observation was more of a watching brief from the distance of the Library, where the more intensive focus was on its effort and effectiveness. Then in 1985, with a change in leadership, and an endeavour to implement corporate management, my involvement has both fluctuated and been deployed on a variety of organisational issues. Consequently, I see myself as having a role (probably a subversive one since it is not necessarily openly recognised) of "organisational development". I came to know of the formal studies in Dispute Resolution by attending a three-day workshop offered to the industry-at-large, as well as being the "Dispute Resolution in Commerce" elective unit, in November 1995. The Council's recently adopted EEO Management Plan (a mandatory requirement of the Local Government Act, 1993) included the adoption of a formal grievance procedure, something which was relatively new to the organisation. It seemed to me someone needed to know a bit about how disputes might be dealt with (more) effectively.
I am more than happy to leave being a "mediator" to those with the skills and interest in being involved in helping others in that way. I am more than happy to leave the "mediation" option as an alternative dispute resolution process to assist the court system operate more effectively. The focus of my interest is: are these skills, do these procedural options have any applicability to the organisational context?: specifically to help me to help Shellharbour Council fulfil its role more effectively. So, my focus, my interest, my attention, in these formal studies, is on understanding the generic elements, and then how to apply them to the particular workplace I am dealing with. For this reason, I think, I see a wider application of the skills and process. As I look back on my occupational (and ancillary) experience, it seems to me that there is any number of places where the deliberate development of these skills, knowledge of these processes, could contribute positively to our present social milieu. So I see "facilitation" as an advancement of the skills and knowledge of mediation - having a wider, less formal, application, often in a more complex context, requiring an ability to deal effectively and equitably with more parties and to help them develop their consensus on an action decision for matters which may well be, of themselves, complex.
ATTACHMENT 5: RESOURCES FOR STRATEGIC INTERVENTIONS USED BY MEDIATORS, FACILITATORS & CONCILIATORS
The following presentation seeks to work on the framework presented by John Wade in the Australian Dispute Resolution Journal, 1994, Vol 5, p292-304, of "Strategic Interventions Used by Mediators, Facilitators & Conciliators", to explore additional options presented by: 1. 2. 3. 4. Script Anecdote Visual Aid Research/ Literature Support
The sources used to give the integrated result are primarily: 1. 2. 3. 4. Script - Wade's article(1993/4) & The Mediator's Handbook/ Charlton & Dewdney (1995) Anecdote - Getting to Yes/ Fisher & Ury (2nd ed, 1991); Aesop's Fables; Proverbial sayings Visual Aid - many & various Research - Dispute Resolution in Australia/ Astor & Chinkin (1992)
In his article, Wade indicates 44 strategic interventions (adapted & expanded from 36 identified in PJD Carnevale & R Pegnetter, "The Selection of Mediation Tactics in Public Sector Disputes: a Contingency Analysis" (1985) 41 Journal of Social Issues 65). The scripts Wade gives for the interventions are context related - directed to the context of marital disputes. Wade finishes up his paper recommending that mediators may find the list a useful tool for reflective analysis of their own approach, perhaps including reflection on effectiveness. I would like to re-iterate that recommendation, and add to it two others: 1. for new mediators, the checklist may be a useful tool for preparation - developing options for "scripts" for likely interventions - here the context (which may well be other than marital dispute) will direct the nature of the script, as well as determine, perhaps, the more relevant/ likely kinds of intervention. for new mediators, the checklist might prompt the development of some "personal" anecdotal material - say worked up from an individual's own "biases" in background, which, because they are individual, will help to develop an individual intervention style.
2.
One of the issues in mediation arises from intervention: what is its form? and is its form "neutral"? Preparation, and reflection, will help a new mediator clarify this and improve elements of this in their own performance. For guidance in such preparation, Wade notes, from other sources, that the effectiveness of mediator interventions may well depend on the intervention being 1. brief, and clear; 2. balanced (not demonstrating bias in content to one or other of the parties; and not delivering bias in terms of floor time or language intensity of one or other of the parties) In the course of preparing this paper, and bringing together the various sources, I found it profitable to analyse this list in a number of ways: 1. how did the list reflect intervention in any/ all of the steps in the mediation process? how did this list reflect the intervention strategies presented in the more generic terms used by Charlton & Dewdney?
2.
3.
how did the list reflect the various aspects of the Fisher & Ury process of principled (or interest-based) negotiation?
The results are tabulated together, with a range of alternatives/ additional options where relevant: with script, anecdote, visual aid and research background.
1. ANALYSIS OF INTERVENTIONS WITHIN PROCESS

Column 1 of the composite table analyses the likely application of the intervention with respect to one or other (or more than one) step in the "process" model indicated in the UTSCentre for Dispute Resolution Model from "Mediation Course Manual"/ Jennifer David, 1995, page 30 The Steps are: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. Mediator's opening statement Parties' Statements List of issues Discussion Past Orientation - Private Meetings Problem Solving - Joint Session Problem Solving - Private Meetings Agreement
I would note that the "Stages" nominated in Charlton & Dewdney, page 7, appear to me to be better categorisations for the purposes of this kind of analysis than the UTS-CDR list of steps. The analysis of application of the intervention in one or other or more than one of these stages is given in Column 2. The Stages they identify are: 0. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. Pre-mediation Mediator's Opening Statement Parties' Opening Statements & Mediator's Summaries Issue Identification & Agenda Setting Clarification & Exploration of Issues & Development of Options Caucus Sessions Final Negotiations Mediation Outcomes Post-mediation
The weight of interventions (which on reflection, is probably not unexpected) are designed to assist the negotiation process: clarifying the issues, developing options and working up the agreement.
The interventions would appear to apply equally as well and as frequently to Stages 3-6 of the Charlton & Dewdney process model. The analytical comparison served to clarify for me that: 1. The private meeting is an element of strategic intervention. The slight difference between it, and other intervention strategies, is that the parties have notice of it: of its propriety, function and potential. The process of mapping out an agreement is more than likely to be iterative: between the three key stages 3, 4 & 6, and between private and joint sessions to undertake elements of Stages 2-6 until the effective agreement is settled.
2.
In his article, Wade notes that "the interventions may be reflexive or practised during intake sessions". Other commentators note the need for a mediator to be flexible in approach. So, many of these interventions will be useful at any stage - not necessarily as indicated in this analysis.
2. ANALYSIS OF INTERVENTION STRATEGIES

Charlton & Dewdney deal with intervention strategies in pages 123-179. From this section, the following list has been derived: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. Active listening Clarifying questions Future projection Hypothesising Identifying Leading statements Mutualising Neutralising Normalising Option generation Option identification (Note: Reframing can convert wants, demands and positions into options; and negatives into options) Power balancing or equalising Prioritising Questions - clarifying Questions - closed Questions - open Reality Testing - including the "sleep-easy" test Refocussing Rehearsing
20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. 27.
Reframing Role reversal - or the less threatening Creating an Analogy Summarising Ongoing relationship - including the "Sweetener" Confrontation Appealing to fairness Yerbut The Last Gap
The analysis of the Wade scripts has been undertaken to indicate the nature/ category of the intervention. The results are provided as an annotation (in brackets) in Column 4. I should note that I found that sometimes the text of the (Wade) script did not necessarily reflect what might have been expected from the short description given. Being an analyst be nature, I have responded more positively to the generic categories used by Charlton & Dewdney, rather than the Wade short descriptions. This helped highlight a need to appreciate the "specifics" nature of the Wade list, and the likelihood of that kind of list being more helpful in preparing a new mediator for their role, as well as giving a further indication to the new mediator that creativity and flexibility in utilising general guidelines may well be the difference between effectiveness and ineffectiveness, in a mediation.
The analysis also led to the identification of a number of important interventions which occurred in the Charlton & Dewdney presentation but which were missing in the Wade list. (The Charlton & Dewdney handbook was written after the Wade article, and they acknowledge the source/stimulus in the Preface). I have added these to the table. The most notable omission was of "The Last Gap", a step enunciated by Wade in 1995, in a further article in the Australian Dispute Resolution Journal, Vol 6, p.93. This is an interesting reflection of the ongoing development of his analysis of process. Also, I found it interesting to note the nature of the most frequent interventions: one would expect clarifying and summarising to feature here, and they do. What is probably more instructive, is that reality testing, normalising and neutralising also scored highly. This again underlines the fact that a mediator is assisting parties who have difficulty with the "objective" approach to a negotiation - the build up of habits in past interactions has reached the stage where bilateral negotiation has become impossible. The interactions and perceptions have become personalised, maybe even "toxic", to the extent that they can't see the wood from the trees.
The mediator, as an outsider, independent of usual interactions, simply by their presence, and then by their interventions, keep calling the participants back to a more objective viewpoint, while reminding them, on the way, that their dysfunctional behaviour in negotiation is "usual" for people undertaking mediation.
3. ANALYSIS OF NEGOTIATION ISSUES INVOLVED INTERVENTION

Fisher & Ury identify four basic elements of negotiation, and suggests the strategy for dealing with each element. They are: P. I. O. C. PEOPLE INTERESTS OPTIONS CRITERIA Separate the people from the problem Focus on interests, not positions Generate a variety of possibilities before deciding what to do Insist that the result be based on some objective standard
These elements are further analysed as follows: P. PEOPLE Separate the people from the problem P1 Negotiators are people first P2 Every negotiator has two kinds of interests: in the substance and in the relationship P3 The relationship tends to become entangled with the problem P4 P5 P6 Positional bargaining puts relationship and substance in conflict Separate the relationship from the substance; deal directly with the people problem Perception P6.1 Put yourself in their shoes P6.2 Don't deduce their intentions from your fears P6.3 Don't blame them for your problem P6.4 Discuss each other's perceptions P6.5 Look for opportunities to act inconsistently with their perceptions P6.6 Give them a stake in the outcome by making sure they participate in the process P6.7 Face-saving: Make your proposals consistent with their values Emotion P7.1 First recognise emotions: theirs, and yours P7.2 Make emotions explicit and acknowledge them as legitimate P7.3 Allow the other side to let off steam P7.4 Don't react to emotional outbursts P7.5 Use symbolic gestures Communication P8.1 Listen actively and acknowledge what is being said P8.2 Speak to be understood
P7
P8
P9
P8.3 Speak about yourself, not about them P8.4 Speak for a purpose Prevention works best P9.1 Build a working relationship
I.
INTERESTS Focus on interests, not positions I1 For a wise solution reconcile interests, not positions I1.1 Interests define the problem I1.2 Behind opposed positions lie shared and compatible interests, as well as conflicting ones I2 How do you identify interests? I2.1 Ask "why?" I2.2 Ask "why not?" Think about their choices I2.3 Realise each side has multiple interests I2.4 The most powerful interests are basic human needs I2.4.1 Security I2.4.2 Economic well-being I2.4.3 A sense of belonging I2.4.5 Recognition I2.4.6 Control over one's life I2.5 Make a list I3 Talk about interests I3.1 Make your interests come alive I3.2 I3.3 I3.4 I3.5 I3.6 Acknowledge their interests as part of the problem Put the problem before your answer Look forward, not back Be concrete but flexible Be hard on the problem, soft on the people
O.
OPTIONS Generate a variety of possibilities before deciding what to do O1 Invent options for mutual gain O2 Diagnosis O2.1 Premature judgement O2.2 Searching for the single answer O2.3 The assumption of the fixed pie O2.4 Thinking that "solving their problem is their problem" O3 Prescription O3.1 Separate inventing from deciding O3.2 Before brainstorming O3.3 During brainstorming O3.4 After brainstorming O3.5 Consider brainstorming with the other side O4 Broaden your options O4.1 Multiply options by shuttling between the general and the specific O4.2 Look through the eyes of different experts
O5
O6
O4.3 Invent agreements of different strengths O4.4 Change the scope of a proposed agreement Look for mutual gain O5.1 Identify shared interests O5.2 Dovetail differing interests O5.3 Ask for their preferences Make their decision easy O6.1 Whose shoes? O6.2 What decision? O6.3 Making threats is not enough Insist that the result be based on some objective standard
C.
CRITERIA C1 C2 C3
C4
C5
Insist on using objective criteria Deciding on the basis of will is costly The case for using objective criteria C3.1 Principled negotiation produces wise agreements amicably and efficiently Developing objective criteria C4.1 Fair standards C4.2 Fair procedures Negotiating with objective criteria C5.1 C5.2 C5.3 C5.4 Frame each issue as a joint search for objective criteria Reason and be open to reason Never yield to pressure "It's Company Policy"
Column 3 records the result of this analysis. This analysis highlighted for me the preponderance of the "person" element of the process [The aspects occurred in the following frequency: P=55; I=32; O=43; C=23]. Within this category the areas of "Perception" [P6=28] and "Communication" [P8=13] occur most frequently in the analysis. And within the "Perception" element, the issue of empowerment [P6.6] and face-saving [P6.7] had the highest frequency. In view of the fact that empowerment is one of the objectives of the use of the mediation alternative to the adjudicative process of dispute resolution, this weighting of functions of intervention as a practical outworking is of interest. Also, the weighting occurring with "face-saving" would appear to support Charlton & Dewdney in their comments on this issue on p.132-135.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Wade, J, "Strategic Interventions Used by Mediators, Facilitators & Conciliators", Australian Dispute Resolution Journal, 1994, Vol 5, p292-304 David, J "Mediation Course Manual", UTS-Centre for Dispute Resolution Model, 1995, page 30 Charlton, R & Dewdney, M "The Mediator's Handbook: Skills and Strategies for Practitioners", LBC Information Services, 1995 Fisher, R, Ury W & Patton B "Getting to yes: negotiating an agreement without giving in", Century Business, 1991 Astor, H & Chinkin, CM "Dispute Resolution in Australia", Butterworths, 1992 Carnevale, PJD & Pegnetter, R "The Selection of Mediation Tactics in Public Sector Disputes: a Contingency Analysis" (1985) 41 Journal of Social Issues 65 Wade, J "The Last Gap in Negotiations: Why is it important? How can it be crossed?", Australian Dispute Resolution Journal, 1995, Vol 6, p93-112
ATTACHMENT 6
This attachment gives some consideration to the resources which might be brought to bear on the task of training facilitators. The level of exploration of this aspect is limited to a survey of current basic bibliographic sources. It needs to be enhanced by a survey of course work options and alternative non-bibliographic resources, in order to be a more useful organisational resource.
BIBLIOGRAPHIC RESOURCES FOR FACILITATORS

The following list, and evaluative remarks, indicate, from the material I have vetted, those which I think provide the most useful information for any person seeking to be equipped to facilitate a group, or seeking to build on current knowledge and skills to engage in more effective facilitation activities. If it were necessary for me to nominate one for use as a base text, in order to conduct a systematic training program in the development of the understanding of group processes, and mechanisms to facilitate such processes, my choice at this stage would be Lumsden.
* * * *
* * *
I like the style. The learning theory/ teaching structure of the book reflects current thinking on variety of learning styles, and adult learning models. The philosophical premises appear congruent with the task, and my values. The ongoing case study allows for analysis of issues under discussion, and provides a case study which allows the whole to be seen integrated - reflecting the natural complexity of group processes, and yet opening up the concept that the study of such complexity is manageable. The exercises: they are needful in this area of learning because of the nature of learning experientially for this task. The analytical forms used in a number of exercises will help expose elements of group behaviour so that it can be studied. Its currency (1993) means it is able to reflect recent developments.
An overview of this, and other resources, and the reasons why the student facilitator might go to them for instruction, are as follows:
RECOMMENDED TEXT FOR TRAINING IN GROUP PROCESSES/ FACILITATION ROLES

Lumsden, G Communicating in Groups and Teams: sharing leadership. Belmont, Calif.: Wadsworth Pub. Co., 1993 Part 1: Your Roles in Groups and Teams 1. Groups and teams: Communicating for success 2. Leadership and responsibility: Influencing Your teams Part 2: Leadership to create teamwork 3. The "work" in teamwork: Starting the Process 4. The "Team" in teamwork: Bringing Individuals together Part 3: Leadership through Task Processes 5. Task Questions and Resources: Launching your Inquiry 6. Logical and Critical Thinking: Analyzing Information 7. Innovative and Creative Thinking: generating New Ideas 8. Problem Analysis and decision Making: Follow Clear Systems Part 4: Leadership through Transactional Processes 9. Team Communication and Climates: Connecting through Language 10. Nonverbal Cues and Meanings: Enhancing Team Messages 11. Listening and Questioning: Developing Team Dialogue Part 5: Challenges to Leaders and Leadership
12. 13. 14.
Teams and Designated Leaders: Fulfilling Role Expectations Team Pressures and Conflicts: Meeting the Challenges Team Problems and Participation: Managing the Obstacles
Part 6: Team Projects and Reports 15. Group Formats and Approaches: Planing Public Meetings 16. Written and Oral Reports: Presenting Team Findings Epilogue
INTERVENTION: PROCESS & TECHNIQUES

Argyris, C Intervention theory and method: a Behavioural Science View. Reading, Mass: Addison-Wesley, 1970 Introduction Part 1: Theory and Method 1. The Primary Tasks of Intervention Activities 2. Competent and Effective Interventions and Organisations 3. Organisational Entropy (Entropy = Tendency to become disorganised) 4. The Unintended Consequences of Rigorous Research 5. Organic research 6. Effective Intervention Activity 7. The Primary Intervention Cycle and Levels of Dialogue 8. Ineffective Intervention Activity 9. Cases of Ineffective Intervention Activity Part 2: Effective Intervention Activities: Case Illustrations 10. Meeting with the Prospective Client System 11. Introductory Sessions with Two Top Management Groups 12. Selecting a Client System 13. Diagnostic Activities 14. Diagnostic results of a Top Management System 15. Feedback of Diagnosis 16 Terminating Ineffective Client Relationships Looks like the seminal document addressing the process of intervening in organisations, with the combination of research/theory informing action; and then results being reviewed for "proof" of predicted results. Argyris is frequently cited in organisational context/ dispute resolution context. His other work moves into the area of skill training for organisational effectiveness.
Moore, Allen B & Feldt, James A Facilitating community and decision making groups. Malabar, Fla: Kreiger Pub. Co., 1993 Introduction Part 1: The Before Phase or the Design Dance 1. Initiating the Design Dance Acquiring Information for Design Decisions Finding Out who your Client is Information Gathering Choice of Facilitation Team 2. Issues to Consider in the Design Dance Dealing with Naive Expectations about what can be done Selling the Notion of Intensive Group Work Sessions Special Considerations with Zero-history Groups Diversity in Group Composition Heterogeneous Groups Group Size and Design for Process 3. Design for Meeting Space and Equipment Part 2: The During Phase or What you do at the Facilitated Session 4. Facilitator as Manager of the Process 5. Setting the Rules for the Game 6. Consensus Building and Collaborating on Problem Solving 7. Helping Groups Identify and Explore Expectations and Issues 8. Closing the Meeting Part 3: The After Phase or What you do after you thought you were done 9. The Report and Follow-Up 10. Conclusion Provides practical guidelines for a facilitator with the whole process of facilitation: from the engagement to undertake the process, to its finalisation. Heron, John. The facilitator's handbook. London: Kogan Page, 1989
Designed to address the learning context. Deals primarily with facilitation processes appropriate to the six components of facilitating learning (planning; meaning; confronting; feeling; structuring; valuing) at three levels: (hierarchical mode; cooperative mode; autonomous mode)
GROUP PROCESSES: THEORY & PRACTICE

Luft, J Group Processes: an introduction to group dynamics". CA: Mountain View, Mayfield, 1984, 3rd ed. Part 1: Group Processes in Perspective 1. Basic Issues Early Efforts to Understand Group Behaviour The Group Mind Group Structure and Norms Social Structure and the Self Group Roles 2. Stages of Group Development 3. The Laboratory Method in the study of Group Processes 4. Outcomes of Group Training and Learning Part 2: Models and Metaphors 5. The Johari Window: A graphic Model of Awareness in Interpersonal Relations 6. The Zucchini Connection: How People See One Another 7. The Circumplex Model and Bales's Interaction Process Analysis 8. Multiple Group Membership: the Bumblebee Hypothesis Part 3: Groups and Interpersonal Influences 9. Leadership and Group-Process Laboratories 10. Communication 11. Individualism as reductionism: the Search for a Group-Level Paradigm 12. The Speed of Social Change and the Effect on Human Interaction Part 4: Applications 13. Groups, Organisational Behaviour, and Structural Intervention 14. The Teacher and Group Processes 15. Group Processes and Clinical Psychology 16. Theory and Practice: the Jutenheim Discovery Explores basic issues and dilemmas fundamental to all groups: leadership, communication, group effectiveness, and conflict. Models and metaphors includes: Johari window; Zucchini connection; Bales's Interaction process analysis.
Applies knowledge of group processes to typical group contexts - generally organisational behaviour, teaching context, clinical psychology.
Final unit deals with apparent discord between theory and practice.
Moore, Carl M. Group techniques for idea building. London: Sage, 1994, 2nd ed. Provides detail of three practical processes: NGT; Ideawriting; ISM.
NATURAL GROUPS CASE STUDIES

Frey, Lawrence R (ed) Group Communication in Context: studies of natural groups. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 1994 Challenges that studies of groups/ group communication in is mostly limited to students, zero-history groups in a laboratory setting solving artificial task assigned by researchers. -> "social psychological error" - Farris (1981) -> Examples of research in context of natural groups It looks at the case studies under the following headings: (a) (b) (c) (d) (e) Creating and sustaining group identity The effects of the context on group communication group developmental processes destructive group communication patterns decision-making group interaction
Frey, Lawrence R (ed) Innovations in group facilitation techniques: applications in natural settings. Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Pr., 1995 Introduction gives a good overview of the field; Body of text -> examples in five areas: a. promoting effective group problem solving and decision making b. encouraging constructive dialogue to resolve conflict and differences c. developing feedback techniques for empowering groups d. generating information in groups e. building teams Epilogue dealing with paradox and promise of studying real people solving real problems and ethical issues related:
a. b. c. d. e.
gaining access to the natural setting impact of natural setting on facilitation process choice and research design (lack of control) getting groups to accept facilitation efforts (lack of control) ethical decisions that must be made in conducting research in natural settings getting a group or an organisation to accept and act on the results of the studies
GENERAL MATERIAL ON GROUPS

Napier, Rodney W, Gershenfeld, Matti K. Groups: theory and experience. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Co., 1993, 5th ed. 1 Perception and Communication Selective Perception and the Individual Selective Perception and Culture Selective Perception and Group Behaviour Selective perception and Communication Factors that Inhibit Communication in a Group Understanding Communication in Groups Factors that Influence Group Communication Membership Relationship of groups and Membership Types of Membership Why people join groups Multiple Memberships Reference Groups Factors increasing Attractiveness of Membership Factors Decreasing Attractiveness of membership Attractiveness of Membership and group Success Norms, Group Pressures and Deviancy Goals Leadership A Systems View of Small group Behaviour Group Problem Solving and decision Making The Use of Humour in Groups The Incredible Meeting Trap The Evolution of Groups Small Group Processes: Three Contemporary Applications Making Large Groups More Effective
3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
In Chapter 11 has examples of contemporary small group applications - Selfhelp groups; Total Quality Management groups; Focus groups. In Chapter 12 has examples of effective facilitations for natural groups when large. Bormann, Ernest G. Small group communication: theory and practice. New York: Harper & Row, 1990, 3rd ed. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. The Nature and Development of Group Discussion and Small Group Communication Problem-Solving Group Discussion Planing and Participating in Group Discussions Cohesiveness and the Task-Oriented Small Group Fantasy chains and Group Culture The Social Climate of Groups Roles Norms Leadership Group Decision Making and Problem Solving Ethics
Chapter 1 provides a useful overview and analysis of progress to date
Johnson, D Joining Together: Group theory and Group Skills. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1987, 3rd ed 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. Group dynamics Leadership Decision making Group goals and group structures Communication within groups Controversy and creativity Conflicts of Interest The Use of Power Leading Learning and Discussion Groups Leading Growth and Counselling Groups Team Building Psychological Benefits of Group Membership Epilogue
Combination of theory and experiences to develop an understanding of group dynamics and effective group skills.
ATTACHMENT 7: SUN-HERALD EDITORIAL COMMENT ATTACHMENT 8: EXTRACTS FROM "EQUIPPING STAFF TO HANDLE DISPUTES EFFECTIVELY IN LOCAL GOVERNMENT"
The following material was compiled for my report "Equipping Staff to Handle Disputes Effectively in Local Government" My conclusions, from the information in the sources* reviewed, are: "1. The key areas, where skill development is needed, for effective dispute resolution are: 1.1 the interpersonal skills of: 1.1.1 communication 1.1.2 perceiving emotions negotiation skills analysis to help clarify interests invention and creativity in devising realistic options organisational and planning skills
1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5 "2.
The key areas, where knowledge development is needed, for effective dispute handling are: 2.1 interpersonal knowledge 2.1.1 self-awareness & personal development 2.1.2 other-awareness alternative strategy knowledge for 2.2.1 negotiation 2.2.2 counselling 2.2.3 mediation 2.2.4 training
2.2
Training? If you can handle disputes effectively and know how and why - then teach others to do it as well!! 2.3 ethical norms knowledge for 2.3.1 personal behaviour 2.3.2 other party behaviour (including cross-cultural knowledge) 2.3.3 codes of conduct for negotiation, counselling, mediation, training
2.3.4 the community standards expressed in current arbitration/ litigation "3. The key areas, where the development of theoretical understanding is needed, for effective dispute handling are: 3.1 3.2 3.3 3.4 nature of conflict and its role in society nature of power nature of human beings nature of learning "
*SOURCES REVIEWED:
REVIEW OF LITERATURE OF DISPUTE RESOLUTION - WHAT INSIGHTS THE LITERATURE MAY PROVIDE ON TRAINING IN HANDLING DISPUTES:
My review of the literature of dispute resolution is not exhaustive, nor does it intend to be exhaustive. I have started with the recommended reading of the course, together with some exploration of the collection at the UTS Library, Quay Street. Then, because there is not very much yielded directly in these sources, which is appropriate to my objective, I have needed and, in some cases, been able to chase back through their references. The detail of my findings in this regard are as follows:
8.1
Dispute Resolution/Goldberg Sander & Rogers, 2nd ed, Little, Brown & Co, 1992
p.164-171 looks at the issue of mediator qualifications, and cites SPIDR (1989) material. This notes regulations from the Florida Supreme Court requiring credentials: master's degree in social work, mental health, behavioural or social sciences; psychiatrists; attorneys; and certified public accountants. SPIDR believes that performance criteria such as 1. neutrality 2. demonstrated knowledge of relevant practices and procedures 3. ability to listen and understand 4. ability to write a considered opinion for arbitrators and "... while recognising the difficulty of the task, the Commission believes that it is possible to test for competence and well worth the effort it entails ..."
8.2
Dispute Resolution in Australia/Hilary Astor Christine M Chinkin. Butterworths, Sydney, 1992
p.213-241 looks at the issues of mediator training, ethics and responsibility p.219-221 discusses content of training and there identifies: 1. process (of mediation) 2. interpersonal skills 3. negotiation skills 4. techniques for 4.1 breaking an impasse 4.2 eliciting additional information 4.3 diffusing or dealing with emotions 4.4 prioritising interests 4.5 developing a range of options 4.6 creating an atmosphere conducive to frank and open exchange of views 4.7 proposing a recourse to further expert opinion and advising on access to such opinion p.220 notes methods of training including: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. practical exercises experiential learning role plays simulation exercises brainstorming group work constructive feedback from trainers and fellow trainees full debriefing observation and critical evaluation of mediation videos lectures imparting information (limited)
p.220 notes that training needs to go beyond technical skills to include: 1. 2. 3. understanding conflict substantive knowledge relevant to the context of the disputes to be mediated mediation ethics 3.1 what constitutes appropriate ethical behaviour 3.2 what codes of conduct apply to the mediator mediation standards of practice personal development of the mediator 5.1 understanding mediator's own personality 5.2 understanding the mediator's own style 5.3 5.4 understanding the issues that the mediator brings to mediation understanding of the impact of disputes and disputants on the mediator
4. 5.
p.221 notes the theoretical perspective required: 1. 2. 3. nature of conflict and its role in society nature of power nature of human beings
8.3
Dewdney, M, Sordo, B and Chinkin C Evaluation ...
p.104 discusses the question of a mediator having experience in the particular substantive area - especially of litigation in the area, and noted 1. the research does not indicate/ support experience as being a necessary precursor to success (if success is measured as settlement), but notes that in their sample the more experienced mediators were allocated to the more difficult tasks experience leading to self-confidence in the mediator with the matters in dispute can assist establish the credibility of the mediator and inspire confidence in the disputants with the process the greater risk of the downside where the mediator may breach the principle of not giving legal advice
2.
3.
and concludes "Perhaps the requirement of specialist litigation experience should be recommended for complex cases only."
8.4
Charlton, R and Dewdney M The Mediator's Handbook, LBC Information Services, 1995
p.168-179 deals with communication skills and their application in mediation, and notes: 1. 2. 3. passive listening active listening reframing changing words: 3.1 paraphrases 3.2 summarises 3.3 puts a series of statements into a more logical sequence or groups the statements into sub-issues 3.4 re-states an issue in more general terms 3.5 neutralises negative statements 3.6 mutualises parties' statements changing the context of the statement: 3.7 redefines a positional statement in terms of underlying interests 3.8 restates one party's interests in terms which are mutually acceptable
3.9
4.
stresses the positive elements from one party's communication and plays down the negative ones 3.10 minimises the differences between the parties' perspectives 3.11 changes the time context from the past to the future questioning 4.1 closed questions 4.2 open-ended questions 4.3 hypothetical questions
8.5
Zilinskas A, "The Training of Mediators - is it necessary?" in (1995) 6 ADRJ 58-70
notes the following from Cruikshank: 1. Knowledge 1.1 of theory of negotiation and mediation 1.2 of strategies, stages and tactics in both negotiation and mediation (the process) 1.3 of the rules applicable to legal disputes (substantive and procedural knowledge - the context in which the dispute will be mediated) 2. Skills 2.1 the actions and intellectual processes of mediation from pre-mediation to settlement by the parties including analytical, communication, organisational and planning skills 3. Attitudes 3.1 the ethics, values and professionalism exhibited by the mediator in relationship to personal values and established codes of professional conduct
8.6
Faulkes, W "The Dispute Resolution Industry - Defining the Industry and Establishing Competencies" (1994) 5 ADRJ 285-292
This was disappointing. It only raised the issue of the need to define competencies.
8.7
Power, Mary R "Educating Mediators Metacognitively" (1992) 3 ADRJ 214-226
makes the case for the nature of the training reflecting an understanding of how adults learn (metacognitive approach) and then identifies the following techniques (from Moore): 1. reframing to allow parties to see the issue in a new way 2. 3. 4. expanding the pie by adding issues trading components of differing importance to negotiators seeking solutions which meet all needs
from Fisher comes: 1. conflict resolving skills 1.1 active listening 1.2 summarising 1.3 being assertive 2. dispute resolution skills 2.1 ???
from Effron notes 1. Communication theory 1.1 listening skills 1.2 perceiving emotion skills from Folberg & Taylor notes 1. abilities in 1.1 isolating issues 1.2 testing reality 1.3 assessing needs 1.4 directing negotiations 1.5 information sharing 1.6 motivation from Egan notes 1. counselling skills modern counselling strategies for keeping clients focussed: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. taking the client's concerns seriously coming to a contractual working arrangement with the client guiding the client in choosing which issues to focus on first helping the client explore and clarify relevant issues in terms of specific experiences, behaviours and feelings using summaries or getting the client to summarise as a way of remaining concrete and of keeping the client from rambling understanding the client's perspective even when you think his or her perspective needs to be transcended using communication skills, especially probing questions, to make sure that the client gets a fuller understanding of the problem situation
from Astor & Chinkin comes 1. 2. understanding of the relevant law understanding of the dynamics of human relationships
others include:
1. 2.
ability to analyse and conceptualise beyond the "common sense" level ethics
from Argyris comes: 1. framebreaking - recognising the link between facts and emotions skills in reframing issues and situations
8.7
Allen, D, Resources for Strategic Interventions used by Mediators, Facilitators and Conciliators - Presentation Assignment for course work on Dispute Resolution for the UTS MDR, 4 May, 1996.
My own analysis of the nature of interventions (using the Wade list) noted the importance of understanding (and therefore having appropriate interventions for) issues of: 1. 2. 3. Having 1. 2. 3. skills in analysis to help clarify interests; skills/knowledge with inventing/ raising realistic options; knowledge of objective criteria for reality testing the perceptions involved in interpersonal interactions communication emotion
will assist the other aspects of the mediation when the negotiation being facilitated is the "principled interest-based" negotiation approach.
ADVANCED MEDIATION PRESENTATION:

My first major assignment, to deal with the compulsory dispute resolution unit, has looked at the issue of, and a proposed process to, equipping staff in local government to handle disputes. My second assignment, for the unit on negotiation, looked at the import of delivering training in negotiation skills in the workplace, to a workplace group, with a workplace relationships context, using experiential learning techniques, and the issue that may arise when such training runs into individual "frames" that are fundamentally dysfunctional; and if the learning reaches in far enough to result in a "framebreaking" outcome. In my presentations so far, I have sought to bring to the group something they might take away as useful to them, in their operations in the field: In my presentation on Strategies: Conclusions from my analysis: Attempts to find additional anecdotes/ visuals -> cartoon for humour In my presentation on negotiation: Accessible case study on power, gender, crosscultural concerns The King and I; and centering - I Whistle a Happy Tune use of relationship - March of the Siamese Children - Home Sweet Home mediating intervention - Queen and love Note: American view/ resolution necessity Alternatives worth considering: Twelve Angry Men; A Man for All Seasons
This time my assignment looks at Facilitation as an advanced mediation process; and my studies have taken me into the area of group dynamics and applied techniques. My output for the class, if this area is of interest to you, is an evaluative bibliography of the current material on groups, and facilitation, and possible applications in the workplace.
QUESTIONS FOR PRESENTATION: 1. How, if at all, would you like the balance of time spent on workshop content (presentation & discussion); workshop activity (simulation/ role plays & debriefs); assignment (verbal and written presentation) to be adjusted to yield a better course result for you? Present is: Workshop = 3 days = 20% 50% content; 50% simulation/ role play (experiential learning) Assignment = (12) days = 80% = 30% presentation (1 day) + preparation = 50% written (11 days including preparation for presentation) 2. What aspect of the course participation is inhibiting you from getting the most from it, and why do you think this is so? ? ? ? ? Preparation: little or no guidelines given to allow for preparing for it - eg prereading; issues list; revision required Time allocation/s: total amount; distribution Content: Presented material - variety; depth Method: mixture of lecture/ discussion; experiential learning; assignment
(What studies is this unit contributing to? MDR?; GCDR?; LLM?; CLE?; Other?)
3.
What aspect of the course (structure/ content) do you consider is its greatest strength which should be recognised and then maintained? Structure: Combination of Input & Practice: Theory & Application Content: Source of Input: Externally Directed / Internally Selected
Rules: Task: 1. 2. 3. We will be dealing with three questions about your perceptions of the effectiveness of the course work experienced to date The process involves getting everyone's point of view We will be doing that by giving everyone the opportunity, in a one-on-one interview, to indicate their opinion in response to the same questions We will then bring together the group's responses
4.
Gathering Information/ Opinions (1 minute each question - total of 6 minutes) 1. 2. 3. You have one minute to ask your question and have it answered. You can take notes of the answer You have one minute to answer the question asked of you. In asking your question, you may ask whatever additional questions come to you, to get as much information and as clear a picture of the response of the person you are asking
Bringing the information together: (2 minutes to compile; 1 minute to report back total 5 minutes) 1. 2. All the 1s together, all the 2s together, all the 3s together Gather from your notes: 2.1 Statements of Facts - from the total result more than half (4, 5, 6) agreed on an idea or a response to a question Trends - from the total result more than one agreed on an idea or a response Unique Ideas - creative original thoughts that warrant the attention of the participants
2.2 2.3
3. 4.
Compile these on Butcher's Paper for presentation to the whole group Report this back to the group
Looking at the exercise & its purpose/ effectiveness (4 minutes maximum)
(Developed from Napier, Rodney W, Gershenfeld, Matti K. Groups: theory and experience. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Co., 1993, 5th ed.; Chapter 12 Making Large Groups More Effective)

Dispute Resolution: Facilitation - The Use of Mediation Techniques Processes in Resolving Differences in Group Decision-Making

Caricato da

Informazioni sul documento

Titolo originale

Copyright

Formati disponibili

Condividi questo documento

Condividi o incorpora il documento

Opzioni di condivisione

Hai trovato utile questo documento?

Questo contenuto è inappropriato?

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

Dispute Resolution: Facilitation - The Use of Mediation Techniques Processes in Resolving Differences in Group Decision-Making

Caricato da

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

ADVANCED MEDIATION ASSIGNMENT: Dianne Allen ... p.

CONTEXT AND STYLE OF THE REPORT

In the study of "mediation", as an "alternative dispute resolution" process, the terms

FURTHER REMARKS ON STYLE:

SEE NOTE 3 IN BIBLIOGRAPHY

2.2 THE MEDIATION PROCESS

2.3 THE CONTEXT OF MEDIATION - COURT-ANNEXED MEDIATION

2.4 THE TECHNIQUES OF A MEDIATOR

internal conflicts during the process.

2.4.3. Intervention strategies of the mediator - communication elements; negotiation elements

SEE NOTE 5 IN BIBLIOGRAPHY

3. FACILITATION AND THE ROLE OF THE FACILITATOR

SEE NOTE 6 IN BIBLIOGRAPHY

3.1 WHAT IS FACILITATION?

3.2 GENERIC RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN FACILITATION AND MEDIATION

3.3 CONTEXTS FOR FACILITATION

3.3.1 Public Process Facilitation

SEE NOTE 8 IN BIBLIOGRAPHY

3.3.2 Internal Organisational Processes Facilitation

3.4 APPLICATIONS OF FACILITATION TO THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT CONTEXT

3.4.1 Infrastructure and Land Use Development

3.4.2 Internal organisational process/es

4. GROUP PROCESSES & THE IMPLICATIONS FOR FACILITATORS

4.2 THE PROBLEM SOLVING GROUP

For: Development of Options

The bibliography gathers this detail together.

4.3 APPLICATION OF THESE BASIC GROUP PROCESSES IN A PUBLIC PROCESS FACILITATION

4.4 APPLICATION OF THESE BASIC GROUP PROCESSES IN AN INTERNAL ORGANISATIONAL FACILITATION

Context Difficulties past decision-making practices disillusionment with their effectiveness

4.5.1 Size of Group

4.5.2 The Zero-History Group

4.5.3 The Formed Group

4.5.4 The Authority of the Group

4.5.5 The Role of Preparation

4.5.6 Any Special Awarenesses that may be required:

Gender Cross-cultural issues Language use, including technical jargon

5. KNOWLEDGE AND SKILLS A FACILITATOR NEEDS

1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5 "2.

Section 1: Introductory Remarks

Section 2: Mediation 2.1, 2.2, 2.3 & 2.4

NOTE 3: THE NATURE OF THE MEDIATION PROCESS

NOTE 4: STEPS IN THE MEDIATION PROCESS - THE PRIVATE CAUCUS

NOTE 5: INTERVENTION AND THE POSSIBILITY OF BIAS

Section 3: Facilitation and The Role of the Facilitator

NOTE 6: DEFINITION OF "FACILITATION"

NOTE 7: FACILITATION IN THE EDUCATIONAL GROUP CONTEXT

NOTE 8: ORDER & SECURITY & FACILITATION

Section 4: Group Processes

NOTE 9: GROUP PROCESSES BIBLIOGRAPHIC SOURCES

1970: Argyris, C/ Intervention Theory & Practice

NOTE 10: OPTIMAL GROUP SIZE ISSUES

NOTE 11: BASIC GROUP PROCESSES

settings. Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Pr., 1995

Section 5: Knowledge and Skills a Facilitator Needs

ATTACHMENT 1: PERSONAL EXPERIENCE OF GROUPS

ATTACHMENT 2: PERSONAL EXPERIENCES OF APPROACHES TO INFORMALLY FACILITATING GROUP EFFECTIVENESS

The One-Text technique

Review and Action Plans

ATTACHMENT 4: My Framework in undertaking studies in Dispute Resolution

1. ANALYSIS OF INTERVENTIONS WITHIN PROCESS

2. ANALYSIS OF INTERVENTION STRATEGIES

20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. 27.

3. ANALYSIS OF NEGOTIATION ISSUES INVOLVED INTERVENTION