Groups and facilitators within problem structuring processes

Abstract

In problem structuring methods, facilitators often ask of themselves questions such as: what makes a ‘good’ problem structuring group (PSG) and indeed what does ‘good’ mean? How can group dynamics be improved and does it matter in terms of the quality of the problem structuring that that group engages in? On the surface these questions seem to be straightforward. Indeed, those who have helped facilitate many participatory workshops will think they intuitively know the answers to these questions; they can, from their professional practice, ‘feel’ which PSGs are doing well and producing novel insights and those which are functioning less well and perhaps generating something that is less imaginative and more routine as a consequence. The intuitive, practice-learned insight will depend upon a rich array of visual signals that become more obvious with experience. This paper asks whether there is value in being much more open and analytical about these questions and answers. If so, then how can we make the unwritten processes and outcomes of PSGs written? Indeed, open to whom? Finally, how much of any insights learned by facilitators should be shared with those engaged in workshops?

Keywords:

• facilitation
• workshops
• problem structuring methods

Acknowledgements

The research leading to the discussion presented in this paper was funded by the European Commission's Seventh Framework Programme (FP7/2007–2013) under grant agreement n° 217207 (POINT project, www.point.pb-works.com). The authors express their gratitude to all of their colleagues in POINT, but especially Louis Cassar and Liz Conrad (Malta), Zuzana Valkovcova and Daniela Babicova (Slovakia), Jari Lyytimäki and Kautto Petrus and (Finland), Henrik Gudmundsson (Denmark), Markku Lehtonen (UK), Tom Bauler and Léa Sébastien (Brussels). Without their support the Triple Task workshops would not have been possible.