# Are you a facilitator?



## BillESC (Nov 29, 2010)

Mods: This is a multi-jurisdictional question, feel free to move if necessary.

Are you a facilitator? 

"An individual who enables couples, groups and organizations to work more effectively; to collaborate and achieve synergy. She or he is a 'content neutral' party who by not taking sides or expressing or advocating a point of view during the meeting, can advocate for fair, open, and inclusive procedures to accomplish the group's work" - Doyle[1]

Think about it, is this something you do? 

Personally, I like to say, "I can make it happen."

I'm a facilitator.


----------



## Pie4Weebl (Nov 30, 2010)

Personally, I make it a life rule to stay away from anyone who mentions "synergy" as they are more often than not sleezy sales guys. 

Judging by your definition, I am not a facilitator, nor do I desire to ever be one. I'm a designer, and that is as far from "concept neutral" as can be. I'll take sides, because I want the show to the best I can make it be, and I will advocate a point of view! The best way to loose design gigs is to be a "facilitator". They want designers to give them what they really want, not what they say they want! How can you possibly accomplish finding out what they really want if all you do in meetings is smile and nod to help "facilitate"?

Personally, I like to say, "I can make that happen, but have you considered if we did this instead" 

I'm a designer, not here to sell warm and fuzzy tripe.


----------



## BillESC (Nov 30, 2010)

When I posed the conceptual question for discussion, I did not expect personal attacks only a civil discourse of the question.


----------



## cpf (Nov 30, 2010)

Good facilitators are hard to find, most times they turn out to be harboring their own pet ideas/hidden agenda all the while putting on an outward veneer of open-mindedness. It's for this reason they get a bad rap, as the first replier demonstrated. 

As for the question: I'm more of the personality you get involved with the development after the 'facilitator' has completed their work, the brainstorming is over, and there's a collection of ideas waiting to be vetted and fleshed out. Everyone has their part in the process, the trick is finding out where you, and your team members, fit before the process gets derailed by irrelevant conflicts (as happens much too often, something which many forum members can attest to no doubt).


----------



## DiscoBoxer (Nov 30, 2010)

I can't help but wonder if the questions is a setup.

However, I am TD at a medium sized church. Being a "facilitator" is a big part of my role. As a leader of any group or a participating person who tries to lead by example, I think you must "facilitate".

There are many people involved in productions and all of them usually have ideas. Some of them are short sighted and bias while others are creative, useful and valuable. Someone has to create a venue for those ideas to be discussed, for cooperation amongst departments to occur, and for hindering issues to be worked out. 

It's important that the folks you engage with, feel a part of the goal and achievement process despite their "titles" or how much experience they do actually have. Facilitating growth amongst your team is vital and sometimes that means being open and honest about their capabilities even when they will find it difficult to hear. 

Facilitating discussion and action are huge if you are in a position to do so. Otherwise the results are usually not good. The larger your group becomes the more important communication and organization will be. Good leaders will approach a meeting with an end result already in mind but that doesn't always mean that they are rigid in how to accomplish their agenda or the agenda of the group.

I am a firm believer in getting organized but I am also against "over-processing" or micro-managing. As a leader, you are tasked with choosing a group of people qualified for a function. If they are not and you hired them or they were there when you became leader, than you must facilitate their growth. Over processing will cause you disconnection (loss of synergy) because you will undermine the very focus you hired them to do with your own motives. If you lead them well, they will follow you willingly.

I was all over on the post but is this the type of discussion you are seeking?


----------



## BillESC (Nov 30, 2010)

cpf said:


> Good facilitators are hard to find, most times they turn out to be harboring their own pet ideas/hidden agenda all the while putting on an outward veneer of open-mindedness. It's for this reason they get a bad rap, as the first replier demonstrated.
> 
> As for the question: I'm more of the personality you get involved with the development after the 'facilitator' has completed their work, the brainstorming is over, and there's a collection of ideas waiting to be vetted and fleshed out. Everyone has their part in the process, the trick is finding out where you, and your team members, fit before the process gets derailed by irrelevant conflicts (as happens much too often, something which many forum members can attest to no doubt).


 
Well articulated.


----------



## mstaylor (Nov 30, 2010)

In my building I am a facilitator of sorts, if I understand the term correctly. I am in charge of advancing and loading in and out shows. I advance the show and then interact with the various depts to make sure the show happens as well as possible but also how it fits with other events before and after it. Sometimes I have to shortchange my dept to acommedate other depts. 
I have expanded my scope over the years and now oversee many projects in the facility. As a result I have manage projects and events to get the best result for least expenditure. 
I don't know what that makes me, a pain many say, but I do like to get things done.


----------



## museav (Nov 30, 2010)

BillESC said:


> "An individual who enables couples, groups and organizations to work more effectively; to collaborate and achieve synergy. She or he is a 'content neutral' party who by not taking sides or expressing or advocating a point of view during the meeting, can advocate for fair, open, and inclusive procedures to accomplish the group's work" - Doyle[1].


I really think that "I can make it happen." represents being proactive and not necessarily being a facilitator. I would even say that the definition provided seems to define someone who tries to create an environment that lets things happen effectively but that does not directly make anything happen. And that is more the definition provided by the International Association of Facilitators that "A facilitator is an individual who's job is to help to manage a process of information exchange. While an expert's" role is to offer advice, particularly about the content of a discussion, the facilitator's role is to help with HOW the discussion is proceeding. In short, the facilitator's responsibility is to address the journey, rather than the destination." So apparently a facilitator would more allow things to happen rather than to make them happen.

I would also guess that people here are likely most often part of collaborations specifically in order to express or advocate a point of view. And I believe that one can have and even advocate a point of view while also still being being fair, open or inclusive, they are not mutually exclusive although I do find that sometimes those who believe that they are being neutral and not taking sides may not be perceived that way by everyone else involved.

It also seems that "not taking sides or expressing or advocating a point of view during the meeting" would be a contradiction with "can advocate for fair, open, and inclusive procedures to accomplish the group's work." How do you advocate what you define as fair, open and inclusive without advocating a point of view? How do you take responsibility for an agenda without having an agenda?

So basically, I think the definition provided is lacking both in general terms and in practical application. Was there a bigger issue that you were trying to address?


----------



## mstaylor (Nov 30, 2010)

Well said Brad. That was where I was coming from in my post, I am the get things done/figure it out guy. I don't think facilitator really applies. The way the definition reads it is almost the opposite of what I would think it means.


----------



## Pie4Weebl (Nov 30, 2010)

Ah, thanks Brad for putting it clearer than I could come up with! 

Bill I am sorry if you took it as an insult to you, it was not intended to do so. Your post nearly struck a nerve reminding me of a sales guy for a company I used to work for. He would LOVE your definition of a facilitator, someone who is there but doesn't actually move the project forward in any real way. He loved to help facilitate the clients requests, even when they put an unreasonable burden on those actually doing the gig. You want to lower the budget but not cut any gear, no problem just cut half the number of stage hands!


----------



## ruinexplorer (Dec 1, 2010)

So, I'm trying to figure out where a "facilitator" falls in the theatrical community. The producer has the money, the director has the vision, the designers make it happen. There is an established heirarchy to bring about a production. 

I can see how the Technical Director at a road house is in some ways a facilitator. While, by no means should the TD be outside the realms of an expert, their duties often include moderating the desires of the production with the restrictions of the facility and enabling the best production in that space. However, this role is still outside of the established definition. 

Bill, since you relate to the position of facilitator, maybe you could help further the discussion by granting examples of how what you are doing is being a

> 'content neutral' party who by not taking sides or expressing or advocating a point of view during the meeting, can advocate for fair, open, and inclusive procedures to accomplish the group's work.


This way, maybe we could learn how a model from the business world could help to make productions better. So far in my experience, I haven't found where this could help a production. However, I could see where a facilitator may be able to enhance the administrative side of a facility between a board of directors and the staff.


----------



## museav (Dec 1, 2010)

Not production related, but just a couple of weeks ago I was part of a kick-off meeting for a new construction project. Lots of topics to cover with the people in the room representing probably over $3,000/hour in billable costs. Having someone facilitate the meeting so that it could progress as effectively as possible and didn't get off track probably saved that project thousands of dollars. I could possibly see the same general concept applying to a production kick-off or planning meeting.


----------



## xander (Dec 1, 2010)

ruinexplorer said:


> So, I'm trying to figure out where a "facilitator" falls in the theatrical community. The producer has the money, the director has the vision, the designers make it happen. There is an established heirarchy to bring about a production.


 
In my opinion, the only real "facilitator" (whatever that may mean exactly) in a theatrical production, is the Production Management office. The only "agenda" they have is the budget. They are not responsible for any artistic decisions. They are not responsible for finding out how to accomplish the artists' visions. Their sole purpose is to hire/oversee/purchase the right people/products to get the job done. In budget.

What do you guys/gals think?
-Tim


----------



## BillESC (Dec 2, 2010)

museav said:


> Not production related, but just a couple of weeks ago I was part of a kick-off meeting for a new construction project. Lots of topics to cover with the people in the room representing probably over $3,000/hour in billable costs. Having someone facilitate the meeting so that it could progress as effectively as possible and didn't get off track probably saved that project thousands of dollars. I could possibly see the same general concept applying to a production kick-off or planning meeting.



No hidden agenda. I happened across the Doyle defination and thought it interesting and worthy of discussion.

In my business model, I am a facilitator in many instances. Often a client will desire X and not have a clue what's involved. This will involve a tent, catering, furnishings, decoration, lighting, sound, video, etc., although my portion may only cover a few of the services being contracted, once the job is signed each of the services present needs to interact. When so many components come together, somewhere there needs to be a facilitator. The person who ultimately makes it happen.


----------



## museav (Dec 2, 2010)

BillESC said:


> When so many components come together, somewhere there needs to be a facilitator. The person who ultimately makes it happen.


As I see it a person who plans and organizes the resources required to complete a project, which appears to be what you noting, is someone serving in a Project Management role rather than a facilitator role. In your example, figuring out who needs to be involved seems an 'expert' role while then getting all the right pieces and players in place and "making it happen" would seem to be a project management role. A facilitator would tend to be more off to the side addressing processes and procedures that allow the work of others to happen efficiently and effectively but not actually doing the work.


----------



## BillESC (Dec 2, 2010)

museav said:


> As I see it a person who plans and organizes the resources required to complete a project, which appears to be what you noting, is someone serving in a Project Management role rather than a facilitator role. In your example, figuring out who needs to be involved seems an 'expert' role while then getting all the right pieces and players in place and "making it happen" would seem to be a project management role. A facilitator would tend to be more off to the side addressing processes and procedures that allow the work of others to happen efficiently and effectively but not actually doing the work.



Brad,

It's difficult to remain off site when you're a one man operation and have a large AV contract. I see it as I have a bunch of crap to do and my life will be easier if everyone works with me as I wish to work with them. Collectively the event happens.


----------



## ruinexplorer (Dec 2, 2010)

BillESC said:


> Brad,
> 
> It's difficult to remain off site when you're a one man operation and have a large AV contract. I see it as I have a bunch of crap to do and my life will be easier if everyone works with me as I wish to work with them. Collectively the event happens.


 
I don't think that anyone is questioning the work being done or the desire to make sure that the event happens. I think that the question comes in as to whether the role you play is that of a facilitator or project manager or simply an interested party. As you stated in your definition, the facilitator is content neutral, and while you may be neutral to the services that you are not offering, your position is not fully neutral to accomplishing the ultimate goal. I think that with your experience in the industry, there may be instances where you could play the role of a facilitator if you had no role in the actual event, but only the planning stages. As you mentioned in your example, the client often has a vision of what they want for an event, but does not necessarily have the expertise in what it takes to make the event happen. It sounds like many of the clients that you work with don't always work with a single production company, but a few who provide specific services. The way I see it, a facilitator would be helpful in the planning stages of one of these events to have the technical teams be able to work with the client in figuring out how to make the technical elements come into play and helping the client to be able to "wrangle" the different teams into a cohessive unit come event day. Obviously, as Brad put it, if there is a project manager, that person would provide the expertise needed and be the point of contact between the client and technical teams from start to finish.


----------

