Facilitation

Summary:

Variations on a theme

Facilitation

Roger_jg 1182509733|%e %b %Y, %H:%M %Z|agohover

In a posting, timedesk writes:

As to the role of facilitator I would like to add a different vision. By narrowing down the facilitator as a person we create a boxed in approach, which could mean lack of facilitors in the end obstructs progress. In my definition a facilitator would be anyone or any company or institution that contributes in reaching community goals, whether as sponsor, partner, coach or whatever role you can imagine. Maybe it will be even more clear to outsiders if we would not even use the phrase facilitator in the first place …

The concept of Facilitator comes from the way Nabuur organises its "villages" around a Facilitator who is at the junction between the real community and the virtual one.

I agree with timedesk that using a Facilitator to run a project corners a volunteer into a box. I will add that the box is wrongly labeled since often the Facilitator will have to take on tasks himself, that the function could overshadow the involvement of others in the project and smother their participation. Also it kind of diminish the responsibility of contributors. It is worth noting that several of Nabuur villages works well without a Facilitator.

I believe that if a group of people start to work on a project, a natural leader will emerge, or some sort of organisation. People will exchange ideas amongst themselves rather than with a facilitator. What's needed is a regular monitoring to ensure the project is not stalled.

What you say?

Roger_jg

Re: Facilitation

Teresa Flanagan 1182603153|%e %b %Y, %H:%M %Z|agohover

Hi Roger and all: Overall, I think that the word "facilitator" is generally misused in our society. In the dictionary the word "facilitation" is defined as: to free from difficulties or obstacles, make easier, aid, assist. I believe that Nabuur, for example was originally looking for people to do all the above, but what ends up happening in this model is that "facilitators" essentially become "project managers"— which was not a responsiblity that they signed up for in the first place. In fact, with the lack of neighbours, facilitators end up taking on many of the jobs
themselves, which as you say, defeats the purpose of facilitation. So perhaps the word "facilitator" is used in this case to entice people to join, because "project manager" has other more serious implications. I agree with you that a well functioning group can govern itself and that a natural overall leader may emerge eventually. But I think that a group still needs someone to start things rolling and keep them rolling—like you are doing now, with this summer on line forum! What the title of that person would be, I don't know.

Re: Facilitation

SolinaJoki 1183121218|%e %b %Y, %H:%M %Z|agohover

Teresa says:

I agee with you that a well functioning group can govern itself and that a natural overall leader may emerge eventually. But I think that a group still needs someone to start things rolling and keep them rolling

I totally agree that the natural leader may emerge from a group, but what about the group that does not have a natural leader. There are many groups to be seen on Nabuur as having stalled without a facilitator.

Or perhaps there is a natural leader who does not have the time or want to take the effort of leading that particular project.

Or perhaps there are two natural leaders to emerge on a project who have trouble working together.

Which brings me back to Teresa's second sentence above. The group still needs someone to keep things rolling, deal with personality conflicts, keep things on track.

Perhaps the role is one of managing personalities rather than technical aspects of the project, the role that we, on the internet, have come to know as moderator. As Teresa states, someone to manage personalities, keep things on topic, maintain motivation, etc. rather than/as well as participating in the project. The moderator who was also involved in the project would not have to be publicly identified as moderator, but rather could play two very separate roles. That way the project members would have technical and creative freedom to take the project where it may without having a "leader" who they felt the urge to defer to.

I belong to an online book discussion group that operates, very successfully, on this principle. The "owner" of the site is moderator, keeps the site functioning, moderates book selections, etc. Each discussion goes where it will amongst the participants, occasionally being "restrained" by the moderator as necessary. For all I know, the "owner" also has a separate persona that he uses to participate in book discussions.

The moderator could operate on the project just as "moderator." No other personal, identifying features that would encourage the group to identify him/her as leader. The moderator would appear to be more a function of the running of the site as pertains to that project rather than a personality involved in the project.

Any thoughts?

Re: Facilitation

Teresa Flanagan 1183144525|%e %b %Y, %H:%M %Z|agohover

In an article called "Building Online Communities for High Profile Internet Sites", the authors Levitt, Popkin and Hatch write: "Communities are organic in nature and site owners can't make them successful or force them to grow. A site owner can only provide the fertile ground on which a community may grow, and then provide some gentle guidance to help the group thrive. Much of the challenge in fostering an online communiy is social rather than technical". In line with fostering a social commitment, a suggestion for moderation/facilitation is to try a rotating schedule, with the interested people in a group, all taking a turn at the type of online moderation that Katie has talked about. This can be done on a strict time basis in that each person takes a turn for several weeks/a month. In this way, the role of moderator is shared, and each person can have a more active and committed role rather than as just an observer or "surfer". I have seen this done online and in a good group, it functions very well. The down side, is that not all of us are born moderators, however, the "job" is only held for a short time. The other point that I want to make is that I think that people who moderate also need to have some project related background knowledge and/or experience.

Re: Facilitation

Roger_jg 1183369639|%e %b %Y, %H:%M %Z|agohover

I will quote only one sentence:

A site owner can only provide the fertile ground on which a community may grow, and then provide some gentle guidance to help the group thrive.

I believe this is fundamental. One can not force people to come and join a community and contribute to it, but one can create a fertile ground. Again, these writers also point at teh fact that technology is not enough,. A cursory look at MySapce is enough to be convince. MySpace is one of the most messy, ugly and user unfriendly environment that one could have come up with but IT WORKS!

Why, because it is simple! It does the job!

The idea of a rotating moderator is also interesting because people can then experiment contributing in a different function.

Keep the suggestions and observations coming !

Thx
~R

Re: Facilitation

Roger_jg 1183369277|%e %b %Y, %H:%M %Z|agohover

HA AH! (Hercule Poirot Style!)

The Book club is a very good example. People join a book club because they have a passion, and interest in reading book. If I understand well the modus operandi of your book club, the moderator choose a book that the member have to read (!) and then discuss it.

That is interesting because there is sense of community, conviviality, of exchange of idea and of reward. What do you get back form your involvement in the book club? A personal satisfaction to have read a new book, discovered a new 'world", been exposed to others' thoughts, hence personal growth.

This is this kind of environment a OVO should aim at creating, a place where the volunteer are getting something back in return for their contribution.

~R

Re: Facilitation

timedesk 1182621336|%e %b %Y, %H:%M %Z|agohover

You could take an even different view. I am the moment working on over 7 projects at http://www.villagetalk.net . Basically the local folks that asked me for asssitance are the facilitators, that bridge the gap between vision and realization. My role as archiotect is limited to make the proper connections with outsiders that could make thinks work. So in Nabuur's vision I would be the facilitator. In my vision, the locals who know exactly what to do are the facilitators.

Re: Facilitation

Roger_jg 1182667602|%e %b %Y, %H:%M %Z|agohover

Ben

I tend to agree with you and this discussion crosses over with many other. I don't want to blur all of them, but what you are saying parallels what I think about many local projects. Only one example:

When a community wants to built a school, do they really need 5 online volunteer looking for blueprint? I can't believe a community does not know how to built a basic structure that would work perfectly well as a school!

What help do they really need???

It is a really about problem solving vs. mediation
I think Teresa's "matchmaking fits you approach very well!

Roger

last edited on 1182667764|%e %b %Y, %H:%M %Z|agohover by Roger_jg + show more

Re: Facilitation

Teresa Flanagan 1182697505|%e %b %Y, %H:%M %Z|agohover

Here's an example of how I see Ben's version of facilitation happening. The National University of Rwanda has asked the university at which I work to help them develop educational programs to train the thousands of nurses in Rwanda who lack postsecondary training, but are greatly needed in Rwanda's ailing health care system. This training will be mostly done online. They are seeking computers, internet connections, educational software, experts in e-learning curriculum that will focus on AIDS prevention and mental health counselling etc. The Rwandans have made the decisions as to what they need for this program. So, the infrastructure exists at the university in terms of a building and human resources, but what they need help with is the technology. So, my point in all of this, is that although this is being done at a higher level of education, on line education could potentially be offered at other ie. secondary schools in Rwanda. Connections between the two countries have already been established, and it is just a question of making contact with the people here already involved in this area. I would see this as my role to establish/facilitate those contacts and pass them along to those who would be interested.

Re: Facilitation

timedesk 1182725416|%e %b %Y, %H:%M %Z|agohover

Theresa,

Your scenario is just what I am working on at http://www.villagetalk.net . Once finalized it is an on-line university as it's using http://www.dotlrn.org . It automatically connect you to http://www.dotlrn.org/users/
cheers
Ben

last edited on 1182726934|%e %b %Y, %H:%M %Z|agohover by timedesk + show more

Re: Facilitation

timedesk 1182725694|%e %b %Y, %H:%M %Z|agohover

..

last edited on 1182727028|%e %b %Y, %H:%M %Z|agohover by timedesk + show more

Re: Facilitation

timedesk 1182726856|%e %b %Y, %H:%M %Z|agohover

Theresa, I just read you posting again. Effectively all you need is a way to redistribute knowldege on-line. well that's what dotLrn does almost free of charge, provided you have a nerd at hand to manage the software.

last edited on 1182727277|%e %b %Y, %H:%M %Z|agohover by timedesk + show more

Re: Facilitation

Roger_jg 1182735230|%e %b %Y, %H:%M %Z|agohover

Ben,

Interesting platform.

I posted it in teh IT platform for us to discuss at another stage.

~R