IAF Europe Newsletter
Jan. 2010
INDEX
2
# 4 APRIL 2010
Europe is one of seven regions within the International Association of Facilitators. The IAF Europe team members volunteer their time to plan and support activities and services for IAF members living in Europe, supported by Entendu Ltd.. Contact us at pamela.lupton-bowers@iaf-europe.eu; gary.purser@iafeurope.eu; kristin.reinbach@iaf-europe.eu; rosemary.cairns@iaf-europe.eu, or speak with Ben Richardson or Nicki Cadogan of Entendu at office@iaf-europe.eu.
ABOUT THE NEWSLETTER The IAF Europe Newsletter is published monthly by the IAF Europe Regional Team for members of the International Association of Facilitators living within Europe. Editor: Rosemary Cairns Design: Christian Grambow | www.christiangrambow.com Contributors: Kevin Bishop, Karen Jackson, Malin Morén, Giacomo Rambaldi, Kristin Reinbach, Ben Richardson, Jonas Roth, Roger Schwarz, Ian Taylor Cover picture: More than 100 participants from all over Sweden came to Gothenburg March 11-12 for Sweden’s first major-sized facilitation conference, with 20 different sessions. It was such an inspiring event that organizers Jonas Roth and Malin Morén, both Certified Professional Facilitators, are already planning for next year’s conference April 7-8, 2011. They hope to add an English language track in 2011 so English-speaking colleagues also will be able to attend. Participants also asked for parallel sessions of the most popular workshops, as well as advanced follow-ups. We extend our heartiest congratulations to the Swedish organizing team. (Photo courtesy of Jonas Roth and Malin Morén). Please send your contributions to your Newsletter to rosemary.cairns@iaf-europe.eu
Just as we were finishing this month’s newsletter, we learned the very sad news that Jon Jenkins passed away suddenly in the Netherlands over the Easter weekend. We extend our deepest sympathies and condolences to Maureen and family, and wanted to take a moment to express our gratitude, on behalf of facilitators throughout Europe, for the tremendous work Jon has done to help us all over so many years. Jon was a treasured member of our facilitator community and will be deeply missed by all of us.
2 | IAF EUROPE NEWSLETTER | 02/2010
04
06
07
09
11
15
20
20
21
# 4 APRIL 2010
04 06
CONFERENCE UPDATE By IAF Europe Conference Team
THE SWEDISH FACILITATION FACILITATION DAYS By Jonas Roth, Malin Morén
11
DEMOCRACY WALLS
15
CREATIVITY AND THE FACILITATION FACILITATION PROCESS
By Giacomo Rambaldi
By Karen Jackson and Ian Taylor
07
CHANGE HOW YOU THINK; CHANGE HOW YOU FACILITATE By Roger Schwarz
09
MAKING THE MOST OF OPPORTUNITY OPPORTUNITY By Kevin Bishop
20 20
YOUR IAF NEEDS YOU! By Kristin Reinbach
WHAT YOU TOLD US IAF Questionnaire
02/2010 | IAF EUROPE NEWSLETTER | 3
ARTICLE
4
4 | IAF EUROPE NEWSLETTER | 02/2010
ARTICLE
5
IAF Europe Conference Update Helsinki, Finland. Oct. 15-17 We are pleased to report that the Finnish planning team have announced the theme for the October conference in Helsinki. The conference theme will be;
Paradoxes in Facilitation - Exploring the light and darkness The conference program will be built around the Kalevala, a book and epic poem compiled from Finnish and Karelian folklore. Held to be the national epic of Finland, the Kalevala is traditionally thought of as one of the most significant works of Finnish literature and is credited with helping to inspire the national awakening that ultimately led to Finland's independence from Russia in 1917. Finland is famous as a pioneer in developing and spreading applications of social media, open source, virtuality, and other high culture and technical threads. Having the conference theme and strands so closely aligned to something as significant and central to the Finnish culture makes this conference a unique event that will excite and inspire all facilitators. The four content streams, the Rays of Facilitation, include: 1. Paradoxes - facilitation contradictions, ethics, spirit, culture and philosophy (facilitator self development) 2. Magical Tools - pragmatic tools, processes and approaches (facilitation tools) 3. Myths – case studies, stories, testimonials and experiences (facilitation cases) 4. Rites - drama, art, visuality and movement (alternative medicine)
Register your interest in presenting or contributing to this year’s conference by sending brief details of your proposal by or before April 30, 2010, to the conference office at conference@iaf-europe.eu. You may also call Nicki Cadogan or Ben Richardson in the IAF Europe conference office on +44 (0)1923 271150 or from Finland, you may call the conference office direct on 09 2316 5522. In order to build on last year’s success, and as based on your feedback, we will be living and working on a single campus, nurturing our sense of community and oneness. More ‘personal time’ will be built into the programme to allow greater opportunities for networking with our colleagues in Europe and from around the world, and for processing the things you have heard or learnt during presentations and workshop sessions. Participants will be organized into Tribes, based on Traditional myths and persons in Finnish national epic Kalevala and Finnish history. There are tribes of paradoxes, magical tools, myths and rites. The conference website is being developed and we will let you know when it is available. Once the website goes live, we will be able to take reservations for the conference.
02/2010 | IAF EUROPE NEWSLETTER | 5
ARTICLE
6
The Swedish Facilitation Days “Addictive”, “seriously inspiring”, an “energybooster”. The participants of the first Swedish Facilitation Conference thoroughly enjoyed Sweden’s first major sized facilitation event on March 11-12, top-rating a majority of the sessions and the conference as a whole. With 100+ participants from all over Sweden and 20 sessions, Sweden’s certified CPF’s, workshop leaders and participants joined to create an inspiring and knowledge-building conference, hosted by Jonas Roth, Move Management, and Malin Morén, Lorensbergs Organiationskonsulter, both certified CPF’s. “What made the event truly special were the people and the interaction,” Jonas said. “We’re thrilled and are already planning for next year’s conference April 7-8, hoping to add an English language track, opening up the conference to English speaking colleagues here and abroad.” “Many participants also asked for parallel sessions of the most popular workshops, as well as advanced follow -ups,” Malin said. “Great ideas to be implemented at our next conference on April 7-8, 2011.” Keynote speaker Roger Schwarz held a thoughtevoking video-linked seminar on the importance of being genuine and transparent. Other popular sessions and workshops included the ones on ‘Solution Focus – Methods and Tools’ and the ‘Workshop in Improvisation as Approach’, which both received reviews like: “outstanding” and “gave me tools to use directly in my work”. The session, Facilitation in difficult situations, was another top-rated workshop, sharing real-life cases and an approach to solve seemingly insolvable situations: “To actually sense the feeling in the room when a facilitator didn’t quite make it - lots of learning when things don’t turn out the way they are supposed to”. When Malin and Jonas offered to run a series of workshops preparing candidates for the international CPFcertification, a veritable crowd gathered on the final conference day. More to come on this exciting issue, opening up for more CPF’s in Scandinavia. More voices from the conference: “The sessions on Transparency (Schwarz), Body language and using your Voice as a Tool enforced my feeling that everything is closely connected” “Inspiring, lots of competence and exchange of experience, interesting conversations and joy!!!” ”Two days full of possibilities. Boundless if you dare”
6 | IAF EUROPE NEWSLETTER | 02/2010
Active participation was a feature of Swedish Facilitation Days. (photo courtesy Jonas Roth/Malin Moren)
ABOUT THE ORGANISERS
Jonas Roth, Roth founder and part owner of Move Management AB, specializes in leadership development, change management and facilitation. He holds a PhD in Knowledge Management and is a Certified Professional Facilitator. Malin Morén, Morén founder and part owner of Lorensbergs Organisationskonsulter AB, has an outstanding reputation as a senior consultant, facilitator, course trainer and executive coach. She is a behavioural scientist and a Certified Professional Facilitator.
Change How You Think; Change How You Facilitate By Roger Schwarz
When it comes to facilitation, tools and techniques are necessary but not sufficient. What distinguishes a good facilitator from a truly skilled facilitator is the ability to operate from a set of core values and model effective behavior, even in the most challenging situation. In short, our mindset - core values and assumptions - drives our behaviors, which creates results for the group and us. If you are not absolutely clear about your values and how to put them into practice every moment of your facilitation, then you create unnecessary risks for your clients and yourself. However, when you genuinely operate from a set of core values, you can quickly answer the question, “What should I say and do now?” Here are just a few of the important questions and issues that core values help you address: 1.How do I develop ground rules with the group? What do I do when members don’t follow a ground rule? 2.How do I manage group members who are silent, dominating, or off-track? 3.How do I handle resistance to me as the facilitator?
ARTICLE
7
4.What do I do with information group members give me in private? 5.Who is my client (hint: the answer is not the senior leader)? 6.How does meeting with individuals before facilitation reduce my credibility in the facilitation? If you are familiar with the Skilled Facilitator approach, you know that it is based on a set of core values. But even if you are familiar with the approach, you may not know that we have revised the core values so they are easier to use with clients. They are Transparency, Curiosity, Accountability, Informed Choice and Compassion. In short, the Skilled Facilitator approach shows you how to be transparent, curious, compassionate, and accountable while helping a group make informed choices. By modeling these core values, you help your clients learn to do the same. The Skilled Facilitator approach also uses a set of behavioral ground rules for effective groups. The ground rules operationalize the core values for you and the group members. They help you diagnose and intervene in group behavior. If you have followed our work for a number of years, you may have remembered that we previously used
02/2010 | IAF EUROPE NEWSLETTER | 7 Participants in the 2009 Skilled Facilitator workshop enjoy an evening out in London. (Photo courtesy Roger Schwarz)
ARTICLE
8
The four-day workshop held in London last December was the first time the Skilled Facilitator program was offered in Europe (Photo courtesy Roger Schwarz)
sixteen ground rules! We have reduced the ground rules to nine and, emphasize three ground rules that contain the other six: State Views and Ask Genuine Questions, Test Inferences and Assumptions, and Jointly Design Next Steps. Practitioners and our clients have told us the revised core values and ground rules are easier to remember and work with and very powerful. I have been teaching, learning and using the Skilled Facilitator approach for thirty years now. Because it is based on a set of core values, facilitators, consultants, and leaders have found it an extraordinarily-powerful approach to increasing the quality of human interaction in almost any setting. Those who use it create higher quality decisions, increased commitment, reduced implementation time, improved working relationships and personal satisfaction, as well as organizational learning. Are you interested in creating these outcomes for the groups you work with? If so, my colleagues and I will
be in London teaching this revised Skilled Facilitator approach from September 13th-18th, 2010 in an open public workshop. In addition, on September 20th - 21st, we will host an advanced, intensive workshop on the subject for the first time anywhere. The advanced workshop is only open to people who have participated in one of our intensive workshops. I hope to learn and work with you at one or both of these workshops; click here to learn more about either. If you can’t attend one of these sessions, I invite you to subscribe to Fundamental Change, our free monthly e-newsletter. You might also like to purchase a copy of Ground Rules for Effective Groups, a short article that outlines the revised core values and ground rules of the Skilled Facilitator approach. It’s available in both electronic and hard-copy forms.
Roger Schwarz is an organizational psychologist and president of Roger Schwarz & Associates, Inc., a leadership and organization development consulting firm that helps people build better results and relationships. Roger serves as consultant, facilitator, and coach to numerous corporations, governments, and nonprofit organizations, and he speaks to various organizations about facilitative leadership and facilitation. Roger helps teams improve their effectiveness and deal with high-stakes challenging conversations. He is the author of The Skilled Facilitator: A Comprehensive Resource for Consultants, Facilitators, Managers, Trainers, and Coaches, New and Revised Edition (Jossey-Bass, 2002), co-author of The Skilled Facilitator Fieldbook (Jossey-Bass, 2005), and author of the forthcoming The Facilitative Leader. To learn more about Roger Schwarz & Associates, you can visit www.schwarzassociates.com or call +1.919.932.3343.
8 | IAF EUROPE NEWSLETTER | 02/2010
Making the Most of Opportunity
ARTICLE
9
By Kevin Bishop
Have you ever met someone whose work you had read and really enjoyed, and, when meeting them, they had actually lived up to their reputation? Have you listened to someone and been fascinated by the stories they told and the experiences they shared? If you have, did you then wonder how great it would be to work with them? Maybe this is when all your fears, anxieties and doubts start to come in to play. What could I possibly bring to the table that they would be interested in? What do I know that they haven’t already researched or written about? Surely, they only work with other experts in the field, not someone like me? I had exactly that situation in June last year in London when I attended a workshop run by Shawn Callahan from Anecdote in Australia (http:// www.anecdote.com.au). I had been following Shawn, and his business partner Mark Schenk, online for a year or so, and had always enjoying reading about the work they were doing, and the research they were undertaking. Shawn is an expert in the use of all aspects of narrative and story in organisations to create change, and the application of complexity theory to management practices. He had previously worked at IBM Australia, in their famous Cynefin Centre, and moved on to be a consultant and researcher, before establishing Anecdote. The workshop Shawn was running in London was on storytelling for leaders and how to make your strategy stick with stories. The content really hit a note with me. At the time I was working in a very large financial services organisation, trying to develop their ability to lead and create change. The use of story was one approach I had incorporated into my work to a small degree, but the things I was learning from Shawn were opening up a whole world of additional possibility around using story to help drive change within my organisation. I decided half way through the first day of the course that I wanted to work with Shawn and Anecdote. I believed that the work they were doing, their drive to bring humanity back into the heart of organisations, and what they stood for as company were very much aligned with the work I was doing, and the values I held.
Taken at the Chowder Bay Leadership Centre, the venue for the Sydney course, left to right: Shawn Callahan, Kevin Bishop and Mark Schenk
I therefore spent that night working on ideas on what we could do together, what I could bring to the table and how I could pitch it to Shawn. Even though I had spent the last 15 years working in the areas of organisational and personal change, in a number of different industries and countries around the world, it was still daunting approaching someone I saw as a world expert to offer to work with them, particularly when they lived in Australia and I was in the UK! After the course I grabbed Shawn and asked if he had a chance for a drink as I wanted to run something past him. He fortunately agreed and, even though I was incredibly nervous, I pitched the idea of Mark, him and I working together in Australia, combining the great work they were doing around influencing change through stories, with the work I was doing on designing initiatives to create behaviour change. Shawn was very open to the idea, but obviously wanted to know more about me, my experiences and my ideas on what we could do together. In the following conversation, Shawn and I shared stories and learnt more about each other, the work I was doing, and me as a person. It took a number of
02/2010 | IAF EUROPE NEWSLETTER | 9 Cutline missing
ARTICLE
10
conversations with Shawn and Mark before we finally the participants really 'getting' the material and, through agreed on how we could work together and what we could the stories they were telling, making the connections back deliver. to their organisations, contexts and lives. For me, there is We ended up building a one day workshop over nothing better than that moment. You can check out some Skype and through emails. We shared ideas and potential more details at: http://www.anecdote.com.au/ areas of focus, challenged and built on each others archives/2010/03/influencing_cha_1.html thinking and created a workshop which we believed would make a real difference to the audience. Reflecting on this whole experience, I suppose three things The workshop we developed focussed on: jump out for me as key 'learnings'; 1. How to create the strategic 1. "The first step to getting the things story of the change, which you want out of life is this: decide what helps everyone understand ...the initial conversation you want." Ben Stein why it's happening and I was very clear about the challenge I was with Shawn where I inspiring them to be part of seeking, and the type of people and proposed working the process (to be presented organisations I wanted to work with. together was one of the by Shawn); Shawn, Mark and Anecdote were exactly scariest of my career. 2. Ways to engage employees in that. This whole story starts the change process to make 2. "Be ready when opportunity comes. sense of what's happening Luck is the time when preparation and with taking that first now, as a springboard for the opportunity meet." Roy D. Chapin Jr. step. future (which Mark would One of the crucial moments in this whole story was when Shawn asked what we cover); and could run a workshop on. If I didn't have a 3. How to design sustainable and clear, well thought through and compelling vision effective influencing initiatives to change for what we could do, one that grabbed his behaviours (my section). interest, then I don't believe the story would have finished the way it did. Not only did I learn a whole lot from Mark and 3. "Courage isn't about not being afraid, it's about Shawn about the subject matter and how they put together understanding that something else is more workshops and participants guides, but I also learnt a lot important than being afraid." Cate Blanchett about myself – my skills, knowledge and experiences. I Although it may sound very strange given my years realised I could actually build on, and add to their work, of experience in facilitating workshops and getting and bring new insights and materials to them, as well as up in front of large groups of people, the initial the participants. My experiences working in the UK, conversation with Shawn where I proposed focussing on people's ability to lead change, and my working together was one of the scariest of my training in influencing and changing behaviours really career. added to the mix. This whole story starts with taking that first step. We ran three workshops, one in Melbourne and two in Sydney, which were a great success. You could see
"
"
Originally from New Zealand, Kevin Bishop has spent the last 15 years working in the areas of organisational and personal change, in a number of different industries, companies and countries around the world. His passion, ignited by researching behaviour change in Samoa for his Masters thesis, is to help people and organisations develop their capability to create, lead and deliver change – successful, sustainable, human-centered change. He is currently based in Scotland, working in one of the biggest ever UK business integrations. He can be contacted at newman_bishop@mac.com
10 | IAF EUROPE NEWSLETTER | 02/2010
11
ARTICLE
Democracy walls By Giacomo Rambaldi
Facilitators like monitoring the pulse of the events they have been organising and at the same time offering participants a medium where they can share their thoughts, creating opportunities for participatory reflections. This adjusts the flow of action and provides a space to take stock of lessons learnt. In addition, sound practice calls for equal opportunities for all participants to express themselves. Creating spaces which favour focused and free expression of ideas while a process enfolds, is one way to go about it. The idea of establishing physical open spaces where people could express themselves in a focused, structured and concise manner came to me while looking at a drawing found in A Trainers’ Guide for Participatory Learning and Action (Jules Pretty et al., 1995).
one of the following introductions to open-ended statements: I discovered that ... I noticed that… I felt that… I learnt that … I would like to suggest…
Purpose
Democracy walls A democracy wall is a structured open space where people can post their ideas and opinions (Figure 1) using A5 paper sheets. Typically a democracy wall consists of five large sheets of craft paper (1.2 m x 1.8 m) each one featuring
To provide a medium for individual participants to
express themselves in a free, focused and concise manner; To generate a written, shared pool of reflections which can be used for further participatory analysis; and To obtain on-the-spot feedback during an event and be in the position to rapidly adjust facilitation to emerging realities and changing circumstances. When working in a multilingual environment introductions should be written in the different languages (Figure 2).
This article is reprinted with permission from Participatory Learning and Action, issue 58, June 2008, published by the International Institute for Environment and Development (IIED). You can see the entire issue at http://www.planotes.org/pla_backissues/58.html Published twice yearly, Participatory Learning and Action is the world's leading informal journal on participatory learning and action approaches and methods, reaching over 20,000 readers in 121 countries. Visit the website at http://www.planotes.org/
02/2010 | IAF EUROPE NEWSLETTER | 11
12
ARTICLE
The process A number of elements of the democracy wall have to be prepared ahead of the event. The five statements ‘I discovered that ...’; ‘I noticed that…’; ‘I felt that…’; ‘I learnt that …’ and ‘I would like to suggest…’ are printed on A4 paper and glued at the top left corner of the sheets of craft paper. Use masking tape or drawing pins to fix the craft papers onto a wall. The wall has to be large enough to accommodate all five or them (Figure 3). Each sheet should hang distinctively (ensure that there are 10-15 cm between each sheet). Sequencing (left to right) is important and has to be well thought out depending on the context in which the democracy wall is deployed. If an event includes parallel sessions occurring in different rooms, democracy walls can be set up in each of the rooms. The facilitators may decide to harvest statements made at the end of the sessions or at the end of the day, or to leave them in place for the duration of the event. The intervals of harvest depend on how the organisers plan to make use of the feedback gathered on the walls in the facilitation process. Metacards (A5 sheets of paper) are prepared together with maker pens and snippets of masking tape. Metacards are typically white but could be in different colours, depending on whether the facilitator would like to later disaggregate entries (e.g. by gender, by type of participants, or other). But in my personal experience, the simpler the layout, the easier the process is. If colour coding is adopted, I recommend using pastel colours and avoid strongly contrasting hues like red, blue, green, yellow, or black as these may impact behaviour depending on how colours are associated to meanings in different cultures. Masking tape snippets (see picture) are prepared for use together with marker pens in numbers sufficient to allow participants to freely contribute (to avoid participants having to queue to get a marker pen or tape to stick their card on the democracy walls with). At the beginning of the event, participants are briefed on the purpose of the democracy wall and invited – at scheduled intervals – to enter statements on the five elements of the wall using the metacards. It is important to specify that metacards should accommodate only one concise statement written in capital letters. letters Being able to read the card from a distance of 3-5 metres is extremely important. Statements should be formulated as a continuation of the introduction e.g. ‘I learnt that…’ and followed by the statement on metacard. If some workshop participants are illiterate or cannot write because of physical or visual impairment,
12 | IAF EUROPE NEWSLETTER | 02/2010
Figure 1: Democracy wall at work at a training at ITC, Enschede Netherlands. Photo: Jeroen Verplanke, ITC
facilitators should ensure that full assistance is provided. Those assisting should be known and trusted by the impaired. If communication occurs in a language unknown to some of the participants or facilitators, a translation may be written at the bottom of the metacard. Depending on whether the participants are used to publicly expressing themselves in writing, facilitators may have to start the process by proactively distributing metacards and marker pens to participants or offer them the opportunity to fill in the cards in private (e.g. during a coffee break). Usually the process is self-propelling and once the first cards are stuck on the walls others are increasingly eager to contribute with their ideas (Figure 4). Depending on the purpose of the exercise, the facilitator may group and eventually rank the entries and facilitate a discussion around emerging reflections. The outcome of the discussions may feed back into the process or serve as guidance for future activities or improvements of the process itself (‘I would like to suggest …’)
MATERIALS NEEDED 5 large sheets of craft paper (1.2m x 1.8m) Drawing pins Masking tape (2 inches wide) Scissors Marker pens A5 paper sheets or metacards (at least 15 per
participant) The five ‘introductions’ written or printed separately on A4 sheets of paper in large letters Glue stick
ARTICLE
13
Figure 2: Multilingual democracy wall deployed at the 2007 Web2forDev Conference in Rome, Italy. Photo: Anja Barth, CTA
Advantages The tool offers equal opportunities of expression for all
participants – the outspoken and the shy, the literate and illiterate. It establishes well-defined spaces, which favour focused and free expression of observations, reactions, ideas, emotions, suggestions or complaints while the event enfolds. Statements displayed on the democracy walls may induce coalescing (‘Hi, others share my opinion and sentiments’), and encourage people to contribute opinions and stimulate reflections. From a process management perspective gathered statements are easy to compile (e.g. in a PowerPoint presentation) and emerging issues can be fed back into the debate to enhance reflection and improve analysis.
Figure 3: Facilitator preparing the democracy wall during the Web2forDev pre-conference workshop, Rome, Italy, 2007. Photo: Nynke Kruiderink, IICD
From a process documentation perspective the
gathered statements are important testimonies and on the spot snapshots of perceptions. Democracy walls offer participants the opportunity to share their views and opinions privately, without the need to speak out in public. Statements displayed on the walls allow facilitators to get the pulse of an event and adjust accordingly. After grouping (optional), statements featured on the democracy walls can be presented at the closing session of the event and offer further food for thoughts, reactions and comments on future directions.
Reading the walls Selected statements made by elders during a participatory mapping workshop held on Ovalau Island in Fiji (2005): I learnt new things about my village. I learnt names of places, names we do not use anymore, names that our
Co-published by IIED and CTA, a special issue, Participatory Learning and Action 59 Change at hand: Web 2.0 for development, was produced following the Web 2.0 conference. The entire issue, or specific articles, can be downloaded free at: www.iied.org/pubs/display.php?o=14563IIED The Tips for Trainers section of PLA 59 includes a series of short introductions to some popular Web 2.0 tools: Blogging, Micro-blogging and Twitter, Wikis, Online social networking, RSS feeds, Tagging, Social bookmarking and a glossary of Web 2.0 terms. Each introductory guide provides a brief description of the tool and how it can be used for development purposes, along with links to further information and where applications can be downloaded online.
02/2010 | IAF EUROPE NEWSLETTER | 13
ARTICLE
14
elders used and I am so glad that I and future generations have learnt and will use them again. I discovered that if we look after our environment and our ‘Vanua’, our source of wealth, we will be able to combat poverty. I felt this workshop has been useful for all the people of Ovalau – young and old, even our children have learnt new things. It is a big step forward for them and for all of us. We now have a better understanding of the whole Ovalau landscape and this will be very useful for development planning and resource management. Selected statements made by trainees during a participatory mapping workshop held In Nessuit, Kenya (2006): I learnt that there is hidden truth that can be processed by the community in mapping. I felt I never thought we could make it …. The tracing, cutting, gluing etc. but after finishing the blank model, I felt we were there. It was a turning point to the whole project. I noticed that you don’t get bored when working with people from different professional backgrounds. I noticed that people must work together to achieve their goal. I would like to suggest that participatory 3-D models be done on other hunter-gatherers land (Yiaku and Sengwer). I would like to suggest to include in the plan of activities internal meetings (e.g. in the evening of each day) for discussing about the day and clarifying the activities of the day after. Keeping all updated of what is going on.
Figure 4: An Ogiek elder contributes his thoughts (written with the assistance of a student) to a democracy wall during a participatory mapping exercise. Nessuit, Kenya, 2006. Photo: Giacomo Rambaldi, CTA
Selected statements made by participants at the Web2forDev conference in Rome, Italy (2007) : I felt that blogging feels very lonely when everybody else is talking I learnt ... how to blog, ...how to tag; ... what a wiki is ... and what I can use it for ... I noticed that we have to come up with a description of what is understood by web2fordev I discovered that Uganda is really mashing it up ...The UK can learn a lot from what happens there I would like to suggest allocating more time between sessions I would like to suggest creating an Africa working group on Web 2.0
Giacomo Rambaldi, senior programme coordinator at the Technical Centre for Agricultural and Rural Cooperation (CTA) (www.cta.int) in Wageningen, Netherlands, has 27 years of professional experience in Africa, Latin America, Asia, the Pacific and the Caribbean. He holds a degree in agricultural sciences from the State University of Milan, Italy, and is currently engaged in a PhD with the Communication and Innovation Studies Group, Communication Sciences, Wageningen University in the Netherlands. Giacomo has been involved in participatory mapping since the late 80’s. In August 2000 he launched Participatory Avenues www.iapad.org, a web site dedicated to sharing knowledge on community mapping and collaborative spatial information management and in 2004 the Open Forum for Participatory Geographic Information technologies and Systems www.PPgis.Net
14 | IAF EUROPE NEWSLETTER | 02/2010
Creativity and the facilitation process By Karen Jackson and Ian Taylor
This latest instalment from our book, ‘The Power of Difference1’ concerns creativity and how the different creative styles of individuals in a group can both help and hinder the effectiveness of your facilitation. We believe that everyone is creative, with their own creative style, and that all these styles of creativity can make a contribution to problem solving. Many people associate creativity with artistic ability, such as painting, sculpture, pottery, and writing, but these are outcomes relating to a particular capability. Style is about how you go about doing something. We suggest two different styles of ideas generation that can be used with the two different styles of creativity that may be represented in your group.
Pickled shark What does creativity mean? An ancient Hebrew definition of ‘creativity’ implies that creativity concerns the making of life out of nothing and thus is the sole prerogative of God. In our more scientific age, Koestler2 poured cold water on predicting or measuring creativity by declaring that it was not something possessed or understood by ordinary people. Opinions vary as to whether you need a high Intelligence Quotient (IQ). The figure of 120-plus is sometimes mentioned, which suggests that, as the average IQ is 100, most people can never hope to be creative. Other studies show no correlation at all between high IQ and creativity except that a certain level of IQ is needed, but how high/low is this? One of the biggest problems concerns who judges the output, which is presumably how the level of creativity is arrived at. Would different people, themselves at different creative levels, come to different conclusions? We only have to look at modern art to know this to be true from our own experience and reactions. While some people would not see a pickled shark as creative in terms of output, Damien Hirst is laughing all the way to the bank.
Making a difference There have always been creative ‘managers’. The industrial revolution beginning in Great Britain was fathered by scientists and engineers who pioneered the new
technologies, seeking solutions to the social, political, economic, scientific and technological problems of an industrialising society. The Founding Fathers of the United States of America envisioned freeing themselves from Europe’s outdated political thinking with a government that served the people rather than the other way round. Creative ‘managers’ founded the Royal Society of London for Improving Knowledge where men of like ability came together to discuss their ideas3. What these men had in common was this huge desire to improve things and make a difference. On many occasions, these aims are also those of the group you are facilitating. But, if we know the results of creativity when we see them, what does being creative mean and how do we go about it? The management literature is awash with hundreds of different definitions of what constitutes ‘creativity’, most mixing up style and ability, and there is no consensus. There have been attempts to find an agreed definition. One idea was that creative thinking should lead to tangible products, or something that is new, or exclude something that is not valuable. Dr Michael Kirton has summed the situation up when writing: “Many of the distinctions come through differences in what is the main focus of the definition, whether it is the entity undertaking the creativity, the process that is used in its operation, the outcome of the process, or the evaluation from the environment in which it all exists.”4 What is astonishing is that as far back as 1950 psychologists were saying that creative acts can be expected, even if feeble and infrequently, from almost everyone. Sadly, that suggestion has been ignored and now many people in organisations and outside want to label only a favoured few as ‘creative’. Another complication is caused by the word ‘innovation’, which has come into vogue with an equally vague definition that overlaps with creativity to the point where the two terms are often synonymous.
Our idea of creativity Accepting that creativity is a function of style and that we all have different styles leads naturally to the idea that we 02/2010 | IAF EUROPE NEWSLETTER | 15
ARTICLE
15
ARTICLE
16
are all creative. Creativity is a subset of problem solving, of which innovation is at one end of a continuum of style. Everyone can problem solve and be creative: they just do so with different styles and different outcomes. Every style may be appropriate to some problems but not to others – so all styles can make a contribution, more so on some occasions than others, depending on the type of problem being addressed. No one is comfortable for long with problems that require a different style from the one they prefer. Such “coping behaviour” uses up valuable energy and cannot be sustained for long periods. This line of thinking about creativity offers many benefits. The first is that it overcomes an inferiority complex, which often afflicts individuals in all walks of life, who think they are not creative because they do not see themselves as being “artistic” or because they think innovation is the only style of creativity worth having (see below). However, they are all capable of managing their lives and finding solutions to their own domestic problems in a satisfying way. They are all capable of change and functioning adequately in a world that is constantly changing around them, and as we shall see below, have an important function in making change happen. Secondly, some people have been led to believe that other members of the organisation are the ‘creative’ ones, whose jobs are much more glamorous than those of the ‘work-horses’ in the back office. These so-called ‘creative’ people receive much more praise, recognition and reward, and are held up for emulation, especially when a major change programme is in the air, as the type of person the organisation needs at this point in its evolution. As organisations are generally more adaptive in nature, this often leads to great distress among the many individuals who are led to believe that their contribution is no longer worthwhile, and so morale within the organization tends to plummet. We once ran a conference for the top pyramid of a television company – about 60 people. Except for the maintenance people, most participants had a title with ‘Creative’ in it. Giving people a title that includes ‘Creative’ suggests everyone else is not creative, which is not a good way to get the best from team members and causes much smouldering resentment. Our views on creativity gave the organisation’s more adaptive members a chance to fight back. When you are facilitating a group, your strategy should include keeping the more adaptive types happy and smiling at all times. They will not be the early adopters of change, and much effort should go into persuading them
16 | IAF EUROPE NEWSLETTER | 02/2010
that change is necessary. However, once persuaded, they will put their muscle behind the ideas generated, and will make sure that change happens, while the originators or early adopters may have drifted on to other things that appear more novel. Thirdly, it is of crucial importance that people with different styles of creativity appreciate the help they can give one another. By working together, they can solve a range of problems not open to just one type or style of creativity. Thus everyone is valued for what they can contribute.
The different styles of creativity The styles of creativity range along a continuum from more adaptive to more innovative. We described this theory in “Beancounters” and “loose cannons”: Understanding why people in groups think so differently, in the October 2009 IAF Europe Newsletter. http://www.iafeurope.eu/newsletter/newsletter_october09.pdf In summary, an individual with a more adaptive creative style works within the paradigm and prefers to do things ‘better’, using structure as a resource. This type will be patient, prudent and careful, implement change only when supported by others, and generally move more incrementally towards the desired goal. Problems will be solved within the paradigm in which the question was posed. These people generally get on well with their fellow team members. They do not produce huge numbers of ideas but if they are intelligent enough, will produce a few really good ones that will solve the problem. If true to type, they are generally quite efficient and only challenge the rules with good reason. They do not set out with the attention of breaking them. The Japanese are brilliant exponents of this type of creativity. They continually improve their products and services incrementally, in small steps. How many different types of Sony Walkman are there? (And did you know that it was originally designed to stop its inventor annoying other people with his music choice?) The individual with the more innovative creative style works across and between paradigms and prefers to do things ‘differently’, despite the surrounding structure, which might be seen as hampering. This type will take more risks, be disruptive, and be unaware of any need for group cohesion. While the more adaptive will accuse the more innovative of breaking the rules, the latter will simply say that they are challenging or reinterpreting them and that rules are only there as a guide. The more adaptive are
geared towards challenges and threats from inside, while the more innovative are geared towards challenges and threats from outside. The British are good at this type of creativity – making a change outside the original paradigm. The steam engine, jet, railway, and hovercraft are all products which required a leap of the imagination. However, they are not so good at seeing the commercial potential of these ideas and other people often develop them in a way they had not foreseen, thereby making money out of them.
Who is more creative? The question is often asked as to who is the most creative – an adaptor or an innovator? Dr Kirton cites the example of Howard Carter, the archaeologist who found the tomb of Tutankhamen. Some think Carter used intuitive guesswork to find the tomb when so many others had failed. Far from it. Carter used a grid system to cover the area of the desert where he thought the tomb might be, and specifically looked for areas of depression where there might have been substantial diggings. He tried many areas of his grid before he found what he was looking for. Once inside the tomb, Carter worked painstakingly to ensure that the objects were taken out from above with as little disturbance as possible and that careful records were kept of where all the artefacts had been placed. He didn’t just jump into the tomb area and start handing things up willy-nilly to his amazed assistants. So was Carter an innovator or an adaptor? Dr Kirton believes he was an intelligent well-trained adaptor and that this example demonstrates that intelligent adaptors can be just as creative, if not more so, than innovators. Innovators tend to lose interest and want to move on to the next thing before they have put the results of their thinking into effect. While there are people with a more innovative creative style who pay attention to detail and are very professional in completing the task, many innovators lack the long-term persistence and patience necessary to carry a change through to its end. They nearly always have to convince more adaptive people of the possibilities before things really get moving. Once a more adaptive person is on board, the more innovative can be sure that their ideas will come to fruition.
shout out solutions. Depending on your own creative style as a facilitator, you will either have enjoyed or endured this. You may use this process yourself as part of your toolbox of facilitation skills and if you do this frequently, you may be very good at it. But the unstructured way in which it is done and the rather dubious results may not have been encouraging. Quantity does not necessarily mean quality. Such an exercise makes certain assumptions. The first is that an unstructured session like this is ‘creative’ and that everyone can do it or learn to do it. Many fortunes have been built on the idea of ‘making you more creative’. In fact we discussed some of this in the last instalment on the left- and right-side aspects of the brain, much of which is now discredited and itself has boiled down to a matter of style and process. The truth is that people can learn to be creative in a way that does not necessarily represent their natural style. One of our clients, while not having an innovative style himself, is able to run an innovative technique of brain-storming almost as well as we can, because he has seen us do it so many times that he has learnt the drill. However, this is an example of ‘coping behaviour’ and is costly in terms of energy. You may find that this is also true of the group you are facilitating. Some members may be more adaptive, some more innovative. Why make them practice another style when they have a perfectly good style of their own that can be harnessed to produce ideas? Why not let those who like producing ideas for the sake of it, and making connections across paradigms,
ARTICLE
17
Using creativity in facilitation You have probably been involved in a facilitation where someone has suggested ‘brainstorming’ ideas in order to solve a problem. With no more ado, someone grabs the pen and you all stand around the flipchart and Howard Carter, the archaeologist who found the tomb of Tutankhamen, was more likely an adaptive thinker than an innovative thinker, says Dr. Michael Kirton. (Photo credit: Wikimedia)
02/2010 | IAF EUROPE NEWSLETTER | 17
ARTICLE
18
Figure 1: Preparing for Help/Hinder
have the chance to do it and enjoy themselves, while those with a more adaptive style use techniques which favour their style so they too can enjoy themselves? In other words, it is ‘horses for courses’. There is no reason to make people feel uncomfortable and switch them off. They can make a contribution within their own comfort zone. What follows are two methods of generating ideas: one for those who are more adaptive and one for those more innovative. If in doubt, get people to self-select the group they want to join with you monitoring procedures.
Technique for Old Ideas – Help/Hinder Use a whiteboard or two sheets of flipchart paper placed horizontally on the wall or a projected spreadsheet. Although flipcharts or whiteboards may seem rather antiquated technology, they are useful in providing a focus around which everyone can stand. Always prepare plenty of these in advance. There is nothing worse than having to stop in mid creative flow for the paperwork to be prepared, and if the ideas are written any old how or transcribed by someone who was not present, good ideas may be lost. Even if you cannot project a spreadsheet from a laptop, it is always useful to have one person recording everything that goes on to the flipchart. For one thing, you do not have to carry all the pieces of paper back to a plenary if you are working in several groups. Secondly, it gets over the transcription problem. It is a case not of either/or, but of both. Divide the space into four equal parts with three vertical lines, starting from the left, as follows in the Figure 1. We’ll take the example of ‘To lose weight’. Always start with the ‘Help’ column. What ‘big’ ideas would help you? Four or five big ideas might be ‘diet’, ‘exercise’, ‘lifestyle’ and
18 | IAF EUROPE NEWSLETTER | 02/2010
‘nutrition’. Leave a gap between each idea big enough to write several smaller ideas in the next column. Now turn to those that ‘Hinder’. A Hinder idea might be ‘addiction’, ‘hunger’, ‘will-power’, ‘genetic disposition’. Try to avoid just putting the same ideas in each of the Help and Hinder columns. The problem with big ideas is that there is no action in them. You cannot ‘do’ a diet. You can be ‘on’ a diet, but as a result of ideas leading to actions, which we now come to in the ‘Maximise’ column on the left. The idea of ‘diet’ makes you think of smaller ideas such as ‘join a slimming club’, ‘understand the meaning of information labelling on food’, ‘eat more fruit’, ‘eat less fat’. Now you can turn to the fourth column, ‘Minimise’. What can you do to ameliorate the things you don’t like doing under ‘Addiction’? Can you find reduced-fat chocolate bars and restrict them to one every other day?
Could you use chocolate as a reward for when you have lost specific numbers of pounds? And so on. None of this is rocket science but it does put together in a systematic way all the ideas that might lead to useful actions. This method will make those people on the more adaptive side of the group you are facilitating very happy as it has produced some sensible ideas that they can see the point of.
Technique for New Ideas – Get Fired This technique is called ‘Get Fired’, because that is what would happen if you took the ideas to your boss in their raw state (i.e. before you had worked them through.). Some people think the name ‘Get Fired’ gives the wrong impression to suggestible people - so then you can suggest it is a shortened form of ‘Get Fired Up’ (i.e. with ideas). The aim is to move from ideas that will solve the problem but are generally not acceptable, to ideas that are acceptable. Many wild and wacky ideas have a germ of a solution within them, which can be exploited. It’s likely to appeal to the more innovative in your group. As the leader, you must prepare the paperwork or spreadsheet as previously. Again the goal state must be clearly visible in green. The group generates ten to twenty ideas. In this case, using our example ‘To lose weight’, you might ‘go on a hunger strike’, ‘chop your arm off’, or’ go in for the Roman style of banqueting’. Now bear in mind that these are still ‘ideas’, not suggested actions, so don’t get worked up about them. The ‘Get Fired’ solution does not have to be taken literally, it is simply suggestive of various starting points. All the above would solve the problems but presumably would not be acceptable. Choose two or three of the most interesting, promising or wild ideas that have been generated. Spend five minutes developing each one of the solutions. Beware of coming up with ‘intermediary impossibles’ or ‘noble intentions’. An ‘intermediary impossible’ is something which in itself cannot be done. For example, you cannot just ‘diet’ (abstract), since dieting requires a (concrete) understanding of exactly which foods you’re going to cut down on and how. A ‘noble intention’ is thinking of having the same shape you had at age twenty-one. The aim is to use the starting point as a trigger for coming up with ‘potentially practical solutions’ (PPSs). For example, where would ‘going on hunger strike’ lead you to? What other ideas does it associate with? It may make you think of going on strike against business lunches
which you know are a problem for you. What particular food do you want to ‘strike out’? What about bread, or cakes and biscuits? In the next example you could do the same with the idea of ‘cut off’, changing it to ‘cut out’ and so on. By making these connections and crossing paradigms, you will produce some ideas that you did not get from Help/Hinder, although there will always be some degree of overlap. However, do not be concerned if the ‘Get Fired’ technique does not provide anything startlingly new. It also acts as an insurance policy that you have got everything possible out of ‘Help/Hinder’. What you are looking for all the time are ideas which will solve the problem. While this is supposed to be fun, bear in mind that some people will not enjoy it at all and it may be kinder to excuse them as they only act as a brake on those who do enjoy the process. Being clear about what you are trying to achieve and discussing what you all think the problem is before plunging in, will save you much time as everyone will be correctly focused. Keep the goal stated up front. Do not force people into using techniques with which they are uncomfortable – there are techniques for all creative styles.
Notes 1. Jackson, K., Taylor, I., (2008), The Power of Difference, Management Books 2000 2. Koestler, A. (1967) The Act of Creation (New York: Dell). 3. Evans, R. and Russell, P. (1989) The Creative Manager (London: Unwin Hyman). 4. Kirton, M. J. (ed.) (1994) Adaptors and Innovators: Styles of Creativity and Problem-solving (London: Routledge), rev. pbk edn. 5. ibid.
ABOUT THE AUTHORS Karen Jackson and Ian Taylor are directors of The Deva Partnership Ltd., a consultancy that specializes in working with teams in solving business issues. (www.devapartner.com). They have over 40 years’ experience in working in both private and public sectors, and their client list includes blue-chip organizations from a variety of sectors. Their book, The Power of Difference, Exploring the value and brilliance of diversity in teams, published by Management Books 2000 (mb2000.com), brings together Karen's DPhil research and Ian's practical experience with project teams and 'virtual 'teams.
02/2010 | IAF EUROPE NEWSLETTER | 19
ARTICLE
19
MEMBER NEWS
20
What you told us February survey results
Your IAF needs you! Let’s take it to the next level with a local level and more members! As you all know, IAF began an initiative last year to develop a new way of belonging at a local level – chapters. A chapter is a local organization of IAF that is closer to you, allowing you to network locally while also being active in IAF regionally and globally. An organization can only be as wonderful as their members and their ideas – so we would like to recruit a greater pool of great members adding to it and make lots of your ideas reality. We want to make some of it happen soon, and would like to share your perspectives as part of our input to the next IAF global board meeting (April 19 and 24). Kristin Reinbach (in charge of chapter and membership growth in our regional team ) is currently preparing two surveys which we plan to send out to you by the end of this week. One survey is asking all of you to add your ideas as a member to the problem solving challenge: “How can we get more people involved into IAF - how can we involve IAF members more?" The second survey will be conducted with all the people already taking care of a chapter or who are interested in setting one up as well as those leading associations. It will be very much about what is needed to make things work. Skype sessions may be scheduled with some of you to understand more closely the current needs – just check the concurring box in the survey link you’ll receive. The European Team and IAF as a whole is looking forward to your ideas and suggestions – if you should have any questions, please contact Kristin Reinbach at kristin.reinbach@iaf-europe.eu.
20 | IAF EUROPE NEWSLETTER | 02/2010
A number of you expressed interest in learning the results of our February survey of IAF members living in Europe, using Zoomerang. If you want to see the full results, email Nicki Cadogan at office@iaf-europe.eu, and she will send you the link and password. We heard from 69 of you – a bit less than a quarter of IAF members in Europe. You represented a range of years of membership in IAF, with 9 members for less than one year, 15 for 1-3 years, 18 for 3-5 years, and 27 for five years or more. One-third (23) came from the United Kingdom, 17 from the Netherlands, and the rest from 17 other countries. In total, you speak 16 languages, and 41 of you work in more than one language while 11 of you work in more than two languages. Most of you (59%) work in small organizations (1-5 staff), while 25% of you work in large organization (300+ staff). More than two-thirds (70%) work in the private sector, 57% in the public sector, 37% in the voluntary sector, and 22% of you working in academia, international organizations, or a range of sectors. Defining your current role was challenging, with almost half of you indicating your role as “other” than consultancy (21%), project management (7%), systems development (4%), training (7%) or neutral process facilitation (15%). You listed 31 answers under “other” and most reflected that you played a variety of roles, not just one.
Two-thirds of you (69%) have attended IAF Europe conferences, and 64% of you definitely will be attending future conferences. Eighteen of you are interested in becoming a Certified Professional facilitator within the next two years.
Networking and learning What do you want from a conference? Most of you are keen on networking and being part of a community, and on actively learning new skills, techniques and tools. One person summarized the thinking well: “Sharing good practice, meeting people with similar and different outlooks, having the chance to do and/or try something different, learning from shared experiences, seeing products and materials I haven't seen before.” You see the key benefits of IAF membership in Europe as being networking (78%), professional development (75%), annual conference (71%), CPF facilitation (64%), regional newsletter (42%), and workshops and other events (41%). Other benefits you would like include local activities, more training, and business promotion or support. We asked you to rank what is most important to you about IAF membership, giving you a listing of items and 7 potential rankings. CPF qualification was ranked first by 35% and second by 17%. Professional development was ranked first by 24% and second by 22%. Only 9% of you ranked the annual conference first, 19% second, and 26% third. While two-thirds of you ranked networking in second, third or fourth place, only 8% of you ranked it first. Most of you read the IAF Europe Newsletter –
37% of you said always, and 57% said sometimes. Four people said they never read it. You find Tools and Techniques (ranked first by 51%, second by 20%) and Case Studies (second by 35% and first by 16%) most interesting, but there did not seem to be a clear pattern in ranking other items. You listed some ideas for future Newsletter articles, including regular membership surveys on specific issues, regional profiles of European facilitation markets, updates on technology and how to use it, advertising of materials and resources, and reviews of books, films and events.
Local focus From a local perspective, you are most interested in face to face meetings, self-development workshops for a fee, and local mini or non-residential conferences. Most of you (46%) said you found it easy to get answers to questions about membership; development opportunities, contributing, and advertising promoting an event; 35% of you had never had to ask, and 10% found it difficult to know where to look for answers. A recent IAF global survey found that most of the 213 current members who responded joined IAF to network with other facilitators (49%) or to get access to the CPF program (44.6%). More than half most value networking (49.3%) and publications (46.4%) as membership benefits. Almost two-thirds would like to see more professional development activities, while more than half are keen to be able to network and attend events locally and would like to help set up local groups. Almost 40% would like to see online networking.
Welcome, new and returning members (March 2010) We are delighted to welcome new members who joined IAF in March:
Jean Balfour, UK Sue Banjo, UK Federico Bussi, Italy
Goranka Crete, France
Merel de Boer, Netherlands
Susanne van Loon, Netherlands
Carolina de Monchy, Netherlands
Peter van Veen, UK
Trevor Durnford, Sweden Martin Gilbraith, UK
We are equally delighted to welcome back the following members who renewed their memberships during March:
Liliana Mircescu, Switzerland Luciana Niven, Switzerland Tadej Petek, Slovenia
02/2010 | IAF EUROPE NEWSLETTER | 21
MEMBER NEWS
21
MEMBER NEWS
22
Workshops and Meetings 2010 Find out more details about specific events listed here by visiting the Workshops and Meetings section of the IAF Europe Forum (http://www.iaf-europe.eu) If you would like to let others know about an event you are organizing, please email rosemary.cairns@iaf-europe.eu. Find out more details about specific events listed here by visiting the Workshops and Meetings section of the IAF Europe Forum (http://www.iaf-europe.eu) If you would like to let others know about an event you are organizing, please email rosemary.cairns@iaf-europe.eu.
APRIL 2010 9th European AI Network meeting, April 9-10, Bled, Slo-
venia Group Facilitation Methods, Apr. 13-14, London UK (ICA:UK) Facilitation Skills Program, Spring 2010, Glasgow, Kinharvie Institute of Facilitation, April 13-14; May 18-19; and June 2-3. (Christine Partridge) Making Meetings More Effective, April 21-22, Glasgow (Kinharvie Institute of Facilitation) Basic Consultation Processes, April 21, Bedfordshire UK (Consultation Institute) IEMA Change Management workshops, Apr. 28, London UK (facilitator Penny Walker) Group Work Skills, April 28, Manchester, UK (ICA:UK)
MAY 2010 Introduction to Group Facilitation, May 11, Manchester
UK (ICA:UK) Making consultation meaningful, May 12, Devon, UK
(Consultation Institute) Group Facilitation Methods, May 12-13, Manchester UK (ICA:UK) Maximizing Participation – How to Hold Large Scale Interventions, May 13, Glasgow (Kinharvie Institute of Facilitation) Consultation Before and After, May 13, Bedfordshire, UK (Consultation Institute) Group Facilitation Methods, May 18-19, Belfast, Northern Ireland (ICA:UK) The Facilitative Trainer, May 26-27, Glasgow (Kinharvie Institute of Facilitation) Resilient Cities 2010 Congress, May 28-30, Bonn, Germany
JUNE 2010 CPF Certification Event (in Dutch), June 17, Rossum, The
Netherlands
22 | IAF EUROPE NEWSLETTER | 02/2010
June 23 - deadline for submitting Part 1 documents for
CPF Certification Event to be held Sept. 23 in Netherlands Group Facilitation Methods, June 29-30, London, UK
(ICA:UK) Accountability works! sustaining outcomes in changing
times, Jun. 30 – July 1 July, London (The Centre for Public Scrutiny)
JULY 2010 Deadline for submitting Application Part 1 for Certification
Event in Helsinki Oct. 13-14 Participatory Strategic Planning, July 14-15, Manchester
UK (ICA:UK) IEMA Change Management workshop, July 20, Leeds UK
(facilitator Penny Walker) July 23 - deadline for submitting remaining Part 1 docu-
mentation for CPF certification event in Netherlands Sept. 23
AUGUST 2010 Aug. 13 - deadline for submitting remaining documents
for CPF Certification event in Helsinki Oct. 13-14 Aug. 23 – invitations extended to stage 2 for CPF Certifi-
cation event in Netherlands Sept. 23
SEPTEMBER 2010 Invitations to Stage 2 of Certification event in Helsinki
extended Sept. 13 Skilled Facilitator workshop, Sept. 13-17, London UK
(Roger Schwarz) Advanced Skilled Facilitator Workshop , Sept. 20-21,
London UK (Roger Schwarz) Group Facilitation Methods, Sept. 21-22, Manchester UK
(ICA:UK) CPF Certification Event (in Dutch), Sept. 23, Rossum, The
Netherlands. Action Planning, Sept. 23, 2010, Manchester UK (ICA:UK)
OCTOBER 2010 IEMA Change Management workshop, Oct. 12, Newcas-
tle upon Tyne (facililitator Penny Walker) Group Facilitation Methods, Oct. 12-13, London, UK
(ICA:UK) Facilitator Certification Event, Oct. 13-14, Helsinki, Finland IAF Europe 2010 Conference, Oct. 1515-17, Helsinki, Finland