Facilitation
...sion. Adults also need to be treated as individuals, and they tend to prefer self-direction and autonomy. They also have the desire to accomplish something, and they prefer objectives that are applicable to the real-world. Adult learners also harbour some scepticism to varying degrees, and are cautious in new situations. This sometimes leads to an identifiable resistance to change on the behalf of the learner, as a result of pre-constructed ideologies. Adult learners expect that the training be of a high quality, as their knowledge is imbibed over a short period of time. In addition, some learners may not have encountered the learning environment in a very long time and thus may have very “rusty” study skills. Finally, these expectations and characteristics are circumnavigated by the fact that adult learners are individuals with many things on their minds, “full plates” if you may. Adding to the complexity that is Adult Education and Training, is the fact that different learners have different styles of learning. Empirically, individuals learn through four distinct modes: - Visual - Auditory - Kinaesthetic - Smelling/Tasting Although most participants will use all four modes, it must be recognised that in most cases, each individual will have a lead, or preferred system. As such, the success of a learning process stands upon several fundamental principles that include all of the above, as well as the training programme itself i.e. the content, the activities and the structure, and finally the skills, techniques and behaviours of the trainer/facilitator. So what then, is the role of the trainer? Trainers play various roles in the training process, roles that include that of consultant, and coordinator, and these roles occur in and around the actual training itself. However, there are three core roles that trainers play. More 3 overlapping circles than 3 points on a triangle, the trainer plays the role of Administrator, Instructor and Facilitator. The Administrator “leads” the participants through the activities, thereby giving clarity to the context. The Instructor role entails the trainer describing the content and the application in such a manner that the participants acquire the skills, practice them and even accept feedback. However, it is the role of Facilitator that is most challenging, in that it is a “guiding” role, one in which participants are allowed to make discoveries, share feelings and consider life after the training, amongst many more. The role of facilitator entails “holding the space” for it all to come together. I have attended several Train-The-Trainer (T3) programmes in the 6 years that I have been training professionally. However, AchieveGlobal’s five basic principles of Trainer Excellence have no match in terms of setting a foundation to ensure a successful, optimal learning experience. They are: 1. “Focus on group dynamics, issues, behaviours” 2. “Take responsibility for safeguarding self-confidence and self-esteem” 3. “Initiate and maintain constructive relationships” 4. “Optimise the learning” 5. “Lead by example” (AchieveGlobal, 1999) As a trainer, I found these basic principles to be beacons of light in guiding me through the opaque milieu that is Training and Development. However, the Bentley book “Facilitation” took my awareness of facilitation techniques to a higher lever, in that Bentley moves away from the structure of facilitation into the quagmire of human behaviours/emotions that contribute to the way one facilitates. I began my exploration of Bentley’s “Facilitation” with a certain degree of scepticism, thinking it was too abstract, too “airy-fairy”. However, in my journey, and in my immediate internalisation and application, I began to marvel at the substance and the depth of understanding of facilitation that he describes. Bentley paints a picture of facilitation as a skill, with a set of techniques harnessed to it. As a result of my previous training as a Trainer, the 5 basic principles above, and my recent learning in the Depth Consulting course, I had reached a state of meta-awareness in terms of my own emotions, anxieties and expectations when preparing for this course. I wanted this process to run successfully in terms of making the objectives as set out by the Learner Guide. In addition however, there were subtle rivulets of alternate issues and outcomes I wanted to engage with in this group. The “Tools for Trainer Excellence” (TFTE) is a 3-day programme. AchieveGlobal has recently subscribed to the strategy of outsourcing its training requirements, as opposed to in-house trainers. AG did have a couple of in-house trainers; however they were dedicated to one or two specific large projects. As such, the rest of the trainers were individuals that AG had a “contractor” agreement with. AG had recently recruited an in-house trainer, Nicole, who was to work on a major roll-out in Johannesburg. In addition, the Cape Town office had sourced two new contract trainers, Brian and Giles. As policy dictated, these 3 new trainers had to undergo TFTE in order to achieve certification as AG trainers. It was my responsibility to facilitate the training. Leaving aside the tornado of emotions, deadlines, anxieties and issues that were raging through me, there were several issues within the group that needed to be brought out. This was a new group of trainers who had never worked together as a unit before. I had to find a way to get them to gel in 3 days, as they would be working closely with each other in the future. In addition, I had to live the example of AchieveGlobal’s values so that they understood AG’s approach to training. The 2 male contract trainers from Cape Town were selected from a panel of interviewees. I was part of that selection process. After struggling to bring this to the attention of management, it was finally mandated that the trainer selected was to be an Affirmative Action candidate (Initially, only one trainer was to be selected). The panel, of which I was the only Black face, could not highlight a suitable AA candidate, although I proposed 2. Giles, who was a relatively inexperienced White male, was eventually selected. It was then proposed that an “alternate”, “backup” trainer be selected, and that this trainer would be an AA candidate. This time the panel chose what I perceived as the least competent candidate, Brian. I had strong question marks centred on Brian’s professionalism and overall appearance. (At least I’m being brutally honest.) These were some of the undercurrents influencing my preparation for the training process. On the last day of the programme, after completing the content and the role-plays, each participant gets to demonstrate his/her mastery of the learned skills by taking the group through a 20-40 minute training session. The Trainer selects a programme from AG’s suite of courses, prepares for it overnight, and delivers it in front of a video camera. This 40 minute training session is then followed by a 10 minute period of feedback, which is also recorded. The manner in which feedback is posed is also monitored. The Group had worked really well until this point, without any distractions, or overtures on the part of the participants. My initial perception of Brian was overcome as his ability to workshop and his intellectual capacity was beyond reproach. I discovered that Giles had an invaluable “human touch” to him that made him generate empathy, and allowed to him to engage with his fellow participants very quickly. In addition his high level of self-awareness was highlighted in his ability to construct very good feedback sentences that maintained the self-confidence and self-esteem of his fellow participants. Nicole was the most natural trainer. Although young, her wealth of ABET training experience was demonstrated in her ability to guide the training process. Her style was almost regal, and she was very quick to notice behaviours identifying a dip in attention and motivation, and to carefully bring those back on board. This last portion of the training was the most challenging for the trainer, in that I had to give the floor to the participants, and disengage from my active participation to regress into a passive facilitation role. It was my responsibility to watch closely the performance of the participant-trainer, was well as the interactions amongst the participants themselves, but to remain a ghostly presence for the entire presentation. This was where my skills as a facilitator would be tested, in terms of my natural penchant to either ignite or rescue a situation. For good measure, there was to be a spanner in the works. Each participant was given a card in which a particular “challenging behaviour” was to be enacted whist a fellow participant was facilitating a session. As we had practiced encountering challenging behaviours and techniques and responding to them, it was now at ideal opportunity for the trainer-participant to be faced with such a situation, from an fellow participant, and to understand and respond positively to it. This is sometimes potentially perilous, as some participants become over-eager in their attempts to dramatise a particular challenging behaviour, to the point where the presentation often becomes derailed. As a facilitator, I have to stop myself from jumping in to rescue the situation, as this situation is one of the best projectors as to what really happens in a group process. My Reflection Growing Pains! That’s the only way I can describe my learning of the skill of facilitation. I used to take my skills as a trainer for granted. I was confident, nay, over-confident of my ability to walk into a classroom, and razzle and dazzle MY participants, be the best LECTURER they ever had, SHOW them the best way to do things, have a comfortable CONTROL over the environment…. Can you see where this is going? Whilst completing the Depth Consulting course, and especially after revisiting my skills in preparation for the TFTE programme, I took a snapshot of my profile as a facilitator, and began assassinating factors I wanted eliminated. It was intellectual genocide, and it was all done in the name of learning and growth. By nature I am a very introspective person. I tend to spend a lot of time reflecting on my behaviours and performances, and I tend to focus more on the negatives than the positives. I’m positively accomplished at berating myself to extreme measures, and I beat myself up for the smallest things. Deconstructing a facet of my competencies, my training and group facilitation skills, was therefore not an endeavour I was particularly looking forward to. Still, my vision is to be the best person I can possibly be, and the only way for me to do that is through a process of learning and growth. I felt that the training programme went really well. The participants enjoyed the course, and did very well in the final Mastery test. I received very scores on the Appraisal forms, and managed to submit my resignation via telephone in between. So yes on the surface, it went well, just another day in the classroom. Not really. I arrived home utterly exhausted every day, not from my efforts in actually training, but from my conscious efforts to manage expectations, let the group process evolve, monitor my own state of being, measure and subjugate my initial responses and instincts, on top of monitoring the group, identifying indicator behaviours, enhance the learning process and just empowering these new trainers. It was an exercise in what often felt like “quasi-supportive-leadership”, not stimulating the directives or direction, but more finding ways in which it could be achieved safely. After all, Bentley stated, “There are many similarities between what people often describe as leadership and facilitation.” (2000: 32) It was not the programme that required the most effort and concentration, it was the process. Instinctively, I am a leader. During periods of empathy or even antipathy, I find myself standing up to be counted. I’m comfortable around silence, yet I detest indecision. I’m a spur, a driver; I’m a spark and a catalyst. I assume incendiary positions in order to move processes along sometimes. I’m effervescent, opinionated, passionate, often loud and animated. I’m fearless, and will not resort to conformity. I’m a protector, and a nurturer, yet I can be effectively dangerous when pushed too far. I’m also pretty laid back, and almost nothing phases me. Yet I’m a very good follower, and acutely loyal. I have developed my listening skills, and my ability to empathise often overwhelms me. I’m receptive to emotive stimuli, and I have developed a wide range of identifiable emotions. I have the ability foster trust in others, and I follow with initiative. I’m soft spoken, sensitive, hurt easily, and very self-conscious. I don’t trust easily. I find myself seeking some form of recognition; that is probably why I strive for achievement, yet I’m uncomfortable when recognition is proffered upon me. I’m highly strung, I’ve recently discovered anxiety, and I definitely think too much. I’m painfully shy to this day, and I’ve had to overcome my shyness by projecting an air of aloofness, almost over-confidence. I’ve refused to be a subject to my fears, and from my teens I set about consciously defying my fears, and disseminating and dissecting them so as to ensure that they never force me to stand petrified in the face of a threat. Still, I understand that I can come across...