Dispute Resolution: Facilitation_the Use of Mediation Techniques Processes in Resolving Differences in Group Decision-making

8/4/2019 Dispute Resolution: Facilitation_the Use of Mediation Techniques Processes in Resolving Differences in Group Decisi

1/99

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 RESOLVINGDIFFERENCES IN GROUP DECISION-MAKING

Dianne Allen, 1996

Contents

ABSTRACT ............................................................................................................................... 4CONTEXT AND STYLE OF THE REPORT ................................................................ 5FURTHER REMARKS ON STYLE: ............................................................................. 6

1. INTRODUCTORY REMARKS ............................................................................................ 72. MEDIATION........................................................................................................................ 10

2.1 THE ELEMENTS OF MEDIATION ..................................................................... 102.2 THE MEDIATION PROCESS ............................................................................... 102.3 THE CONTEXT OF MEDIATION - COURT-ANNEXED MEDIATION ........... 112.4 THE TECHNIQUES OF A MEDIATOR ............................................................... 13

2.4.1. Communication techniques for clarity, common understanding, building

common view of matters at issue .......................................................... 132.4.2. Negotiation techniques to work through to a consensual agreement of

a/the way forward: least damage option/ best alternative ..................... 152.4.3. Intervention strategies of the mediator - communication elements;

negotiation elements ............................................................................. 163. FACILITATION AND THE ROLE OF THE FACILITATOR ............................................ 18

3.1 WHAT IS FACILITATION? .................................................................................. 183.2 GENERIC RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN FACILITATION AND MEDIATION . 183.3 CONTEXTS FOR FACILITATION ....................................................................... 19

3.3.1 Public Process Facilitation ....................................................................... 203.3.2 Internal Organisational Processes Facilitation ........................................ 20

3.4 APPLICATIONS OF FACILITATION TO THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT

CONTEXT ........................................................................................................ 223.4.1 Infrastructure and Land Use Development .............................................. 23

3.4.2 Internal organisational process/es ............................................................ 23

4. GROUP PROCESSES & THE IMPLICATIONS FOR FACILITATORS ........................... 244.1 OVERVIEW ........................................................................................................... 244.2 THE PROBLEM SOLVING GROUP .................................................................... 244.3 APPLICATION OF THESE BASIC GROUP PROCESSES IN A PUBLIC

PROCESS FACILITATION ............................................................................. 294.4 APPLICATION OF THESE BASIC GROUP PROCESSES IN AN INTERNAL

ORGANISATIONAL FACILITATION ........................................................... 304.5 OTHER SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS THAT A FACILITATOR MAY NEED

TO TAKE INTO ACCOUNT ........................................................................... 334.5.1 Size of Group ........................................................................................... 334.5.2 The Zero-History Group .......................................................................... 34


2/99




4.5.3 The Formed Group ................................................................................... 344.5.4 The Authority of the Group ..................................................................... 354.5.5 The Role of Preparation ........................................................................... 35

4.5.6 Any Special Awarenesses that may be required: ..................................... 35

5. KNOWLEDGE AND SKILLS A FACILITATOR NEEDS ................................................. 37CONCLUDING REMARKS .................................................................................................... 39BIBLIOGRAPHY ..................................................................................................................... 40

Section 1: Introductory Remarks .................................................................................. 40NOTE 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........................................... 42Section 2: Mediation 2.1, 2.2, 2.3 & 2.4 ...................................................................... 42Section 2.1 .................................................................................................................... 43NOTE 3: THE NATURE OF THE MEDIATION PROCESS ..................................... 43 Section 2.2 .................................................................................................................... 43NOTE 4: STEPS IN THE MEDIATION PROCESS - THE PRIVATE CAUCUS ...... 43Section 2.3 .................................................................................................................... 44Section 2.4.2 ................................................................................................................. 44Section 2.4.3 ................................................................................................................. 45NOTE 5: INTERVENTION AND THE POSSIBILITY OF BIAS............................... 46Section 3: Facilitation and The Role of the Facilitator ................................................ 46NOTE 6: DEFINITION OF "FACILITATION" ........................................................... 46Section 3.1 .................................................................................................................... 49

NOTE 7: FACILITATION IN THE EDUCATIONAL GROUP CONTEXT .............. 49 Section 3.3 .................................................................................................................... 50Section 3.3.1 ................................................................................................................. 50NOTE 8: ORDER & SECURITY & FACILITATION ................................................ 50Section 3.3.2 ................................................................................................................. 51Section 3.4 .................................................................................................................... 51Section 4: Group Processes .......................................................................................... 51NOTE 9: GROUP PROCESSES BIBLIOGRAPHIC SOURCES ................................ 51Section 4.1 .................................................................................................................... 53NOTE 10: OPTIMAL GROUP SIZE ISSUES ............................................................. 53NOTE 11: BASIC GROUP PROCESSES .................................................................... 54Section 4.2 .................................................................................................................... 55Section 4.3 .................................................................................................................... 57Section 4.4 .................................................................................................................... 58Section 4.5 .................................................................................................................... 59Section 5: Knowledge and Skills a Facilitator Needs................................................... 60

ATTACHMENTS .................................................................................................................... 62ATTACHMENT 1: PERSONAL EXPERIENCE OF GROUPS.................................. 62ATTACHMENT 2: PERSONAL EXPERIENCES OF APPROACHES TO

INFORMALLY FACILITATING GROUP EFFECTIVENESS ....................... 63The Agenda ....................................................................................................... 64

Group Comfortableness .................................................................................... 64


3/99




Procedural Rules ............................................................................................... 65The One-Text technique ................................................................................... 66Group 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 ...................................................... 70ATTACHMENT 4: My Framework in undertaking studies in Dispute Resolution ..... 72ATTACHMENT 5: RESOURCES FOR STRATEGIC INTERVENTIONS USED BY

MEDIATORS, FACILITATORS & CONCILIATORS ................................... 741. ANALYSIS OF INTERVENTIONS WITHIN PROCESS ........................... 762. ANALYSIS OF INTERVENTION STRATEGIES ...................................... 773. ANALYSIS OF NEGOTIATION ISSUES INVOLVED INTERVENTION 79BIBLIOGRAPHY ............................................................................................. 82

ATTACHMENT 6 ........................................................................................................ 82BIBLIOGRAPHIC RESOURCES FOR FACILITATORS ............................... 82RECOMMENDED TEXT FOR TRAINING IN GROUP PROCESSES/

FACILITATION ROLES ...................................................................... 83INTERVENTION: PROCESS & TECHNIQUES ............................................ 84GROUP PROCESSES: THEORY & PRACTICE............................................ 86NATURAL GROUPS CASE STUDIES........................................................... 87GENERAL MATERIAL ON GROUPS ........................................................... 88

ATTACHMENT 7: SUN-HERALD EDITORIAL COMMENT ................................. 90ATTACHMENT 8: EXTRACTS FROM "EQUIPPING STAFF TO HANDLE

DISPUTES EFFECTIVELY IN LOCAL GOVERNMENT" ........................... 90

ADVANCED MEDIATION PRESENTATION: ..................................................................... 97


4/99




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. explore the nature of facilitation of group activity and

2. 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. looking at the activities and processes used in the alternative dispute resolution

process of mediation, and

2. 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)


5/99




CONTEXT AND STYLE OF THE REPORT

The purpose, for me, in this report, is to work on bringing together:

1. reflections on my experience and

2. 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 ONEXPERIENCE

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. mediate/ mediator/ mediation

2. facilitate/ facilitator/ facilitation

3. 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


6/99




"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 materialindicated.

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.


7/99




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. Politics can be/ has been described as: "the art of the possible".

3. 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

4. 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 Indo-

China 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-Sydney-

Wollongong conurbanisation

* there has been a strengthening of the secular/ humanism + materialism mindsetas an alternative value set to that belonging to any religion


8/99




5. "Environmental awareness" has grown, and with it there are challenges to

untrammelled industrial/ urban development, and an endeavour to protect the presentquality of lifestyle

6. 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

7. 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)


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

9. 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 the outlet of competitive sport

9.2 the role of litigation and the courts system, rather than violence and war: but to

some extent this is only another formalised competition

9.3 the development of mediation as an alternative to litigation, especially as it is

currently being structured "within the shadow of the courts"

9.4 the (relatively new) development of consultative processes for partnership and

facilitation of group decision-making


9/99




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)

10.2 increasing diversity of interests/ values amongst the staff complement

10.3 potentially damaging external pressures for performance from a diversity of

interests (some of which are mutually exclusive)

10.4 in the midst of this diversity, the need, for performance sake, to stay focussed

to a clear vision, effectively communicated throughout the organisation

10.5 the need for mechanisms which allow an organisation to make the most of

difference while not becoming completely paralysed by internal conflict

10.6 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

11. For organisational health, for the development of organisational mechanisms which

allow for growth, and renewal, or continuous improvement (TQM), the ability to dealwith internal differences will become a critical performance indicator - dare one say

it? - to give the "competitive edge".


10/99




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

2. the process - an agreed structure to progress through the stages involved in

building agreement

3. 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

4. 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, iswithin 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


2.2 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")

2. Exploration/ clarification of issues


11/99




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. preparation for the mediation

6. "wrapping up" after the mediation

These elements/steps will be found in any group facilitation where harmony is to be craftedout of differences. The expression of these elements/ steps will depend on how formal/

informal the facilitation is.


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.

2. The role of the mediator: The mediator has no substantive decision-making

responsibility.

3. The engagement of the disputants, with the mediation process, is voluntary.

4. 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".

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 strategicinterventions in order to achieve particular goals along the way.


12/99




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 theirdifferences 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 ofotherwise 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. the concept of being a clear profession,2. with appropriate professional standards of consistency of process,

3. 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).


13/99




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. Active listening

2. Rephrasing/ Reframing : (Communication Feedback)

3. Questioning - open & closed to explore the understanding of the parties, to

clarify matters at issue

4. 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 thedifference 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".

2. the material may be presented in terms that assist perception eg being

rephrased/ reframed in a way that excludes "toxic" components.

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.


14/99




If the material is relevant to the dispute or its resolution, it can be used to

contribute tothe 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.

2. The perception filters/ processes of the parties can generate variance and


15/99




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


16/99




1.2 by challenging non-acceptance

2. Exploration of the interests of the parties involved in the negotiation

2.1 to find common ground;

2.2 to clarify where interests clearly diverge;

2.3 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

4. Enunciation of jointly acceptable objective criteria to evaluate relative merits

of differences

5. 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.

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 gotteninto bad habits of dysfunctional communication modes


17/99




2. components of the negotiation

2.1 having a range of options expressing the parties' interests, rather than

being limited to (almost) mutually exclusive positions;

2.2 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 substance over toxic behaviours [considered a "legitimate"

intervention];

1.2 substance over emotions [often found to be a counterproductive

intervention, since if the emotional content is not dealt with effectivelyit 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



18/99




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.


3.2 GENERIC RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN FACILITATION ANDMEDIATION

It would be my contention that the facilitation of a group process is generically related to

mediation.

The generic similarities are:

1. It relies on effective process.

2. It is an intervention to deal with difficulties in communication and/or decision-

making (the basic component of coming to an agreement in a negotiation).

3. 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.


19/99




The difference may well lie in the context, and/or the timing:

4. The "group" context has the potential to be much more complex

5. The "law" of rights, in a "consensual" group context is (? - my knowledge of

law is weak here) much less formalised

6. The timing of a facilitation intervention can be more pro-active.

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. Anyone in a group can facilitate its process

2. 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. the group forming is a zero-history group

2. the formed group, although with a common history and context, has either

2.1 hit an impasse; or

2.2 become ineffective; or

2.3 hasn't worked together previously; or

2.4 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


20/99




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 theinteraction (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. The independent, neutral third party - the facilitator, or facilitation team

2. 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

3. The gathering/ sharing of all available information; and the identification of

areas where additional information is required

4. Selection (and, if necessary: "selling") of the process/es to explore differences,

to build consensus - common understanding

5. Exploring what agreed objective criteria might be used on which to base a

decision

6. Selection of appropriate group decision-making process to allow group to

formulate and agree on the "most effective"/ "least damage" option/ decision


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. is an outsider to the group

2. with specialist skills to help the group deal with their difficulties.

These skills will include the "usual" communication skills, negotiation skills, and process


21/99




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. do not feel threatened (unnecessarily)

2. are provided with adequate intra personal knowledge and interactionknowledge to be able to recognise and begin to deal with the dysfunctional

elements

3. and then be encouraged to start to deal with these difficulties, openly.

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 yetrecognise.

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


22/99




2. learn more effective interaction techniques

3. 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.

2. 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.

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.


23/99




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. Lithgow road situation (Stuart McPherson's presentation, May 1996)

b. Balmain peninsula - residential development/ foreshore access/ chemical degradation

of site and environmental protection issues (Maureen Wade's presentation, June 1996)

c. Albion Park urban rezoning study, March 1996 - the "charrette"

d. Shellcove development concept plan review, July, 1996

3.4.2 Internal organisational process/es

e. Staff Committee and Corporate Planning, September 1996

f. Award Restructuring Consultative Committee, May and July 1996


24/99




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. Formation of Group

2. Development of Group

3. Leadership of Group

4. Group Decision-making process/es

For these key elements the issues that arise are:

1. Formation - inclusion/ exclusion issues; personal esteem; group esteem

2. Development - cohesiveness/ tendency to disintegrate issue; ability to deal

effectively with differences/ conflict

3. Leadership - status/ type/ function issues; competition for status; inhibiting

impact of style

4. Decision-making - rationality/ consensus/ norms for making choices issues

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:


25/99




1. become comfortable at a personal level2. settle on what is the problem

3. having defined the problem, explore the interests of the group members in the

problem

4. construct likely win-win options for the group, given the identified interests

5. analyse the relative merits of the win-win options, determining the appropriate

objective criteria for such an analysis

6. 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 onany 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 toensure 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.


26/99




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 developan 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 (whetherformally 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


27/99




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. individual writing up a brief indication of concerns - the whole group input is

collated

2. round robin collection of interests;

3. analysis to group like concerns; to separate dissimilar concerns4. 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. the nominal group technique

2. ideawriting3. interpretive structural modelling

Other alternative techniques (not covered by Moore) include:

4. Brainstorming

5. Delphi technique

6. 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. Brainstorming on community "norms"

2. Seeking any particular expert input that might be needed for very "technical"

elements of options

6. For: Decision-Making


28/99




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. The Decision to Form - Who to Include/ Who to Exclude

2. Settling on the Problem/s to be addressed

3. Settling on the Criteria used to assess options

4. 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 thegoods.

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. to instruct on any new process for the decision making, and

2. 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


29/99




4.3 APPLICATION OF THESE BASIC GROUP PROCESSES IN APUBLIC 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:


- 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


- 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


30/99




- Establishing necessity (for representatives) to:

- have authority to settle;

- maintain adequate communications with groups/ individualinterests 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


- 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 ANINTERNAL ORGANISATIONAL FACILITATION

Argyris (1970) and Frey (1995) provide a practical overview of the task of a facilitator in the

internal organisational context.


31/99




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:


Context Difficulties

- The formation of the group is an Organisational prerogative - he whopays 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



- Has been done prior to facilitator's presence

- problem of past to have developed present level of dysfunction


(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


32/99




future relationship and functionality to look to. The facilitator is now looking

to work on:

1. changing perceptions by enhancing present levels of groupcommunication;

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



- 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


- Temporary transfer of leadership responsibility to facilitator- facilitator's leadership role in functional terms


33/99




- 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) comingfrom 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


- past decision-making practices

- disillusionment with their effectiveness


- 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 FACILITATORMAY 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



34/99




4.5.2 The Zero-History Group

Other matters that may need to be taken into account when facilitating a zero-history groupwhich 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. need to be heard and understood

2. 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. the starting level of the unknown -> reservations; -> distrust, etc

2. positions formed (and reinforced) outside of the forum

3. any longer term antipathy between groups or representatives - some of which

may come from jousts in other issue areas previously

4. 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


35/99




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 correctivemechanisms 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


36/99




* 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 andunderstanding 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 hisneeds"

- unwinding the jargon

In different contexts there are different mixes. This will give rise to a different dynamic for

each case.


37/99




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

1.2 negotiation skills

1.3 analysis to help clarify interests

1.4 invention and creativity in devising realistic options

1.5 organisational and planning skills

"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

2.2 alternative strategy knowledge for

2.2.1 negotiation

2.2.2 counselling2.2.3 mediation

2.2.4 training

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


38/99




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 nature of conflict and its role in society

3.2 nature of power

3.3 nature of human beings

3.4 nature of learning"

In addition, to these, from the preceding information, the facilitator needs knowledge andskills 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

2. the formation (over time) of a group psychology and behaviour and the

expression of its form

3. 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

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


39/99




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 multi-party dispute the relationships factor is still considered important and mediation will be

chosen over litigation in an endeavour to maintain the relatio

Documents

Dispute Resolution: Facilitation_the Use of Mediation Techniques Processes in Resolving Differences in Group Decision-making