Facilitation Guidelines: Learning History Dissemination Workshop
These are the general guidelines we suggest for discussing a learning history.
To make use of the experience captured in a learning history, readers of a learning history need to come together and openly and honestly discuss their reactions to the stories and what lessons it holds for them.Individuals in a team or organization all have different prior experiences and attitudes. Even when they have taken part in a long mutual history, they often perceive the events differently. In the complexity of typical business settings, most people don't have the time, tools and common experience to effectively compare their understanding of what happened. The learning history dissemination workshop is a "managerial practice field" where people can come to a shared understanding of a learning and change process.
To reach a shared understanding of a complex process, it is necessary to slow down the conversation which people typically have in reacting to the written document. Slowing down the conversation allows people to talk about their perceptions of what happened, the interpretations and attributions they made of events, and the generalizations they have for moving forward. Everyone attending the workshop has a responsibility in creating conditions that promote learning for themselves and others.
We suggest the following process to facilitate the Learning History workshop. This process is meant to provide general guidelines for the flow of conversation, not a rigid segmentation of what we talk about.
Phase One: "What happened?" and "Why?" The conversation is best initiated when people link their comments to what is written in the learning history. We generally ask people to describe what surprised them. Stick to key events and descriptions, noting issues that involved learning. In particular, where do you find yourself quickly moving to judgments, blaming people for mistakes, wanting to "fix" things, provide expertise, or otherwise intervene in the described situation?
As people talk, they are adding their own interpretation and attribution to what is written. Often they may be different that what is written in the learning history's left hand column. How is what was described similar or different from what you experienced? Where do you have very alternate interpretations from participants (in the right hand column) or learning historians (in the left hand column) say? How do notes that people made in left hand columns compare?
The facilitator will ask where it was in the text that people found themselves reacting in different ways. He will ask exactly what words led to their interpretations. By going back to that text, we can clarify the perceptions and judgments people bring in their reactions from those that are found in the learning history.
Phase Two: "So what?" and "What next?" Can generalizations and implications be drawn from this learning history? What are the implications of the experiences portrayed in the learning history for present initiatives? How typical and significant are the alternative interpretations that came up in this workshop? In this phase we link the past with the present and future. What are the important questions for people to think about as they leave the workshop? What are the responsibilities of people in the workshop in causing the conditions described? Can we identify in ourselves, or help others see, the implications of our behavior patterns that limit our options? What will help us all move forward?
The facilitator will be helping individuals and the group consider how their comments link to their responsibilities. What might be the causes of the behavior patterns the group wishes would change, and what responsibility do people have, or could they take, in bringing about desired improvements? The facilitator will also remind the group of time boundaries so that next steps can be planned.
[Back to the Abbreviated Table of Contents]