Effective meeting facilitation ensures an efficient transition of activities and discussions. Meeting leaders are required to avail wise facilitators who make meetings more productive. Meeting facilitators are tasked with steering meeting participants towards the attainment of the meetings’ goals and objectives. They use the participants’ insights and knowledge to help all the parties involved achieve their needs. However, the duties and responsibilities of meeting facilitators must be understood to ensure that meeting leaders do not impose themselves on other participants. Facilitators act as advisers, managers, leaders, and participants. Facilitators are advantageous because they promote impartiality, bring fresh perspectives, and ask tough questions. My philosophy is inclined towards adaptability, relevance, and deliberative facilitation.
The Definition of a Meeting Facilitator
A facilitator can be defined as an individual who helps conduct meetings by ensuring that balance, progress, and order are maintained throughout. Although facilitators often take part in meeting discussions, it is advisable that they mainly focus on creating ideal environments for group processes. In cases where facilitators become too involved in proceedings, meeting participants may feel that the role of the overall meeting leader is being duplicated. For instance, the CEO of a company ideally should act as the leader in a meeting. However, the CEO can source the services of a meeting facilitator to assist in the management of proceedings. This means that the facilitator only works to push the CEO's agenda, and not take over the meeting to push his or her opinions.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
The Roles of a Meeting Facilitator
The first role of a meeting facilitator is to act as the meeting adviser. As an adviser, the facilitator will help the meeting’s leader to plan for the meeting and gather the necessary resources. For instance, in a meeting that involves discussions concerning the restructuring of a company, the facilitator may help the CEO identify the key areas of discussions and how they may be categorized. That way, the meeting will transition with minimal time wastage. Alternatively, the CEO may seek advice from the facilitator as the meeting goes on. The facilitator will help the CEO understand sensitive areas that need clarification and how best to address the other participants.
A facilitator’s second role is that of a manager. As a meeting manager, the facilitator works in conjunction with the leader to formulate the agenda. For instance, a facilitator will help the CEO understand the key areas the other participants need to be engaged in, such as how the company restructuring will impact their jobs or whether their employee benefits will be affected. The facilitator also sets the ground rules that will make the meeting more manageable. Often, meetings whose agendas are controversial end up turning ugly. Participants may become profane or highly aggressive. In such scenarios, a facilitator would come in to help the participants understand the consequences of various actions. Setting ground rules before meetings commence helps maintain order. Also, as a meeting manager, the facilitator is in charge of starting the meeting’s proceedings once everyone settles down. Facilitators may also be required to step in when discussions deviate from the main agenda.
A meeting facilitator also acts as the meeting’s leader. Although the roles of facilitator and leader are different, sometimes facilitators are allowed to impose their leadership qualities. For example, a facilitator may constantly remind the participants on the importance of the meeting to ensure that everyone is in the right frame of mind. Also, the facilitator may stimulate participants whose concentration levels are low. As a leader, therefore, a facilitator may take up the role from time to time to ease the burden of the other leaders. Another important leadership quality that most meeting facilitators possess is the ability to challenge dormant participants to become more vocal and offer their insights. Ideally, meetings are meant to be avenues where parties can exchange ideas and concerns and, therefore, all kinds of input should be encouraged.
Meeting facilitators also sometimes take part in the proceedings. Although their roles should be limited to the management of activities, facilitators may sometimes offer their individual views as a way of giving their roles a persona touch. For instance, during a meeting whose main agenda is focused on an impending company restructuring, employees may feel inferior in the presence of company leaders. As a result, some leaders may use the opportunity to impose themselves on their employees as long as the restructuring process goes through. The facilitator may, therefore, offer personal opinions either by agreeing or disagreeing with either party’s contributions. At the end of the day, what matters is having a successful meeting where everyone has a voice. Hence, a participant, the facilitator helps protect the parties involved from exploitation by acting as humanely as possible.
Typical Activities Carried Out By a Facilitator
Meeting facilitators are expected to carry out specific activities as parts of their advisory, leadership, participant, and managerial roles. For instance, a meeting is not successful where all participants are not involved. In such a scenario, the final findings will not be representative of everyone’s individual views. Facilitators must also study the meeting’s dynamics in an attempt to read the participants’ non-verbal cues. Sometimes, participants may find certain discussions boring and this affects their levels of concentration. Facilitators have to look out for such happenings and swiftly attempt to motivate the listeners.
It is also important that facilitators informs participants about the meetings’ progress and steer focus that will ensure timely finalization of proceedings. It becomes difficult for participants to remember the various issued that have been discussed in the absence of a facilitator. Therefore, facilitators, through their advisory roles as meeting planners, should advise participants on the progress as well as the various agreements that have been reached. Additionally, the facilitator role cannot be effective if a meeting lacks focus. In the absence of a clear set of goals and objectives, meetings become non-effective. Facilitators, hence, should be very attentive to detail as this helps avoid deviations from key agenda. However, facilitators must desist from spreading lies, rumors, being judgmental, and showcasing an egoistic personality. Facilitators should acknowledge that the meetings are not about them but the participants. It is wrong for facilitators to impose themselves on the participants by focusing on their personalities rather than on the agenda. Also, the propagation of lies and unsubstantiated rumors demeans the role of a facilitator. For instance, when discussing the best way to carry out company restructuring, a professional facilitator will stick to the use of certified facts such as published books of account. As a professional, the facilitator should also move quickly to quash any facts that the company’s management recognizes as untrue.
The Advantages of Having a Meeting Facilitator
In the course of fundamental discussions, it is important to encourage the use of facilitation because facilitators help foster neutrality, bring fresh perspectives to the table, and ask tough questions where participants are reluctant to. As earlier stated, everyone’s voice deserves to be heard during meetings. However, not everyone possesses effective communication skills. As such, the opinions of non-vocal participants may end up being discredited. In their role, facilitators can read meeting dynamics and identify where instances where decisions are not impartial. To an organization, the maintenance of neutrality during meetings can go a long way in ensuring that employees remain loyal to the collective goals and objectives. Facilitators also enliven discussions by introducing new concepts during the meetings. For instance, a facilitator may make use of case study research which can help relate discussions to similar occurrences in the past. Finally, because facilitators are neutral, they also help the participants to ask controversial questions which may otherwise go unasked.
My Personal Philosophy on Facilitation
My philosophy on facilitation is based on the virtues of adaptability and relevance to produce solutions that are both satisfactory and applicable. My philosophy is also inclined towards the role of deliberative facilitation by following from the front. Moore (2012) states that deliberative facilitation ends up “creating a kind of deliberation that approximates the ideal without exercising power in a way that undermines it” (p. 158). The author notes that earlier studies showed that the role of facilitation should be free from coercion and acts of constraint. Past authors indicated that participants should not be forcefully involved in discussions or acts they do not support and that the process should involve high levels of freedom (Asmuß & Svennevig, 2009). However, I support the role of deliberative facilitation. I believe that facilitators’ key focus should not be on the participants themselves but rather on how the best results can be achieved. Deliberative facilitation involves “the framing of publics, the handling of expertise, the conduct of deliberation, and…bringing a deliberation to a conclusion” (Moore, 2012, p. 146). This means that although facilitators need to remain aware of the participants they are addressing, much of the focus should be on the conduction and conclusion of the deliberation process. That is, the agenda comes first and all other factors follow.
On the other hand, I also believe that the role of facilitation is best suited to individuals who stick to the agenda and adapt to different situations. A good facilitator is one who allows all the ideas and opinions brought out in a meeting are heard by all the participants. There should be no attempt to suppress any ideas unless they go against the rules and regulations. Where views are suppressed, solutions become inefficient. This is because the solutions are not representative of the entire group of participants but are only executed to benefit a section of them. Therefore, I believe that effective facilitation should not be guided by personal sentiments towards a given issue. Although facilitators may not agree with certain issues discussed in the meetings, personal opinions should only be addressed impartially. A facilitator should not be seen to take sides but should help the different sides in a discussion to come to a consensus. Remaining relevant too is important in facilitation. After all, deviations from the discussion topics during meetings demean the importance of predetermined agendas. I have always regarded pertinence as an important tool in the realization of personal and collective goals and objectives. The same significance should be applied to the process of facilitation.
In conclusion, effective meeting facilitation ensures an efficient transition of activities and discussions. Meeting facilitators are tasked with steering meeting participants towards the attainment of the meetings’ goals and objectives. Facilitators’ major roles during meetings are offering advice to the leaders, managing conversations, leading from the front, and participation in discussions. Organizations should utilize the use of meeting facilitators because they promote impartiality, bring fresh perspectives, and ask tough questions. Finally, I believe that facilitators should be adaptive, relevant, and focused on deliberative facilitation.
References
Asmuß, B., & Svennevig, J. (2009). Meeting talk: An introduction. The Journal of Business Communication (1973) , 46 (1), 3-22.
Moore, A. (2012). Following from the front: theorizing deliberative facilitation. Critical policy studies , 6 (2), 146-162.
