EFFECTIVE GROUP WORK (communication, decision-making and action) depends on active listening, clear speaking, and respect for each person.
1. COMMUNICATION
a. ACTIVE LISTENING
In our natural listening pattern, attention goes IN and OUT:
- outward to speaker,
- then inward to process (check against your own perceptions,
beliefs, opinions),
- then outward for more information, etc.
When focussed inward, you may miss some of what's being said on the outside,
even if your ears hear the words.
When preoccupied with getting your own point across, you may
- focus on it so as not to forget it, and
- lose the focus on understanding what the other person
is saying.
Active listening means you try to
- get the whole picture of what the other person
is saying
- understand what they mean so you can
- respond fairly rather than with a knee-jerk
reaction.
Practical tip:
jotting down quick notes about
- any concerns that arise in your mind in response to
what the speaker is saying, and
- any comments you want to contribute
helps you to remember your own point so you can focus on listening.
b. CLEAR SPEAKING
It's helpful if the speaker punctuates their presentation with highlights to introduce each elaboration of a point. Elaboration doesn't mean rambling, simply explaining.
Different styles of processing require different modes of presentation, and
therefore of highlighting:
- auditory --> spoken key phrases
- visual --> written keywords, sketches, diagrams
c. RESPECT FOR EACH PERSON
Each person in a group has a valid contribution to make. We can explore the issues together, as allies rather than as adversaries, add our strengths rather than subtract from each other. If there is a fence, it's between us as a group and an issue we face together, not erected as a barrier between each of us and whoever disagrees.
As an ally, you can:
- refrain from automatic objection and rejection.
- make sure you understand what the other person
is saying by
- asking clarifying questions and
- mirroring to them what you believe they are
saying.
- find common ground and
- share what you like about their idea before
you express your
- concerns (not rejection);
- ask constructive questions (how can we...?)
|
APPROACH AS AN ALLY |
| ADVERSARIAL APPROACH |
| - same side of the fence | - opposite side of the fence; |
| - people seen as resources | - people seen as obstacles; |
| - willingness to co-operate | - lack of flexibility; |
| - concerns | - objections; |
| - common ground | - rejection; |
| - "How can we make this work?" | - "That won't work"; |
| - "power-with" strength | - "power-over" struggle; |
2. DECISION-MAKING
VOTE OR CONSENSUS
Reaching a group decision by vote can appear to be more efficient than trying to find consensus. It really depends on how the pre-decision discussion is led: if only the more vocal members are heard and they're kept to a time limit, it can be less time-consuming than consensus. In that scenario, however, issues are more likely to be squelched than resolved. "Efficiency" doesn't necessarily result in "effectiveness." A group is more effective - that is, it has more power to achieve desired results - if it's not plagued by unresolved interpersonal conflicts.
Reaching consensus is a daunting proposition only when people adopt an adversarial stance. Then they're likely to get stuck in seemingly irreconcilable camps, no matter how long they keep "discussing" (read: arguing).
Following the suggested approach, however, leads relatively easily to a point at which an option can be agreed upon - not because it satisfies everyone completely, but because everyone has been given the means to find their way from their own individual zone of discomfort to a compromise they can feel comfortable with.
The possibility always exists that someone could block a consensus decision indefinitely if they can't find enough inner flexibility to compromise and work with rather than against others. It might then be appropriate to allow for a combination process, whereby consensus is sought for as long as possible, but voting determines the final decision.
3. ACTION
Once a decision is reached, it needs an action plan to be effective:
Being organized requires neither regimentation nor hierarchy. An action plan
simply outlines the ways in which individual efforts need to move if they are
to enhance those of others rather than block them. It's the practical dimension
of the approach we've been describing: clarity and respect as the basis
for EFFECTIVE GROUP WORK.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Effective Group Work - copyright 1997-2001 by Marian Buchanan - authored for
C: