HOME |
View the ARCHIVES ISSN 1465-8046 |
ACTIVE
Reviewing Tips
|
How to SUBSCRIBE for free |
HELP |
|---|
| Roger
Greenaway's Active Reviewing Tips 9.3 ~ ISSN 1465-8046 A free monthly publication from Reviewing Skills Training ARTips
9.3
Reviewing for Teams
|
|
The previous
issue
'Reviewing for All' is now at
|
| ~ 1
~ EDITORIAL:
PAST, PRESENT & FUTURE PAST: OCTOBER'S ISSUE
Do you ever press
'send' and wish you hadn't?
I had that feeling on
sending out Reviewing For All last
month. I
was quite pleased with
what I sent out but I missed a
connection
with an article of mine
published 10 years ago called 'High
Quality Adventure FOR
ALL'.
Whether or not outdoor
adventure is part of your work, the
basic
message applies - that
'high quality for all' applies to the
whole learning process
and not just to the reflective part.
But I
do still have a hunch
that 9 times out of 10 it is the
reflective
part of the process
that is the least inclusive. In which
case I
hope at least 9 out of
10 readers found some useful ideas in
the
last issue about
Reviewing for All.
If you happen to be an
outdoor educator committed to equal
opportunities, take a
look at High
Quality
Adventure for All
THE PRESENT ISSUE
The NEWS sections
include:
- details of a 2 day
open Reviewing Skills Training at the
end of
January. Book by
Thursday 13th December!
- details of other
training events coming up in early 2008.
- the birth of a new
announcement list 'EXPERIENTIAL-CPD'
that
will keep you up to
date with training events for
experiential
facilitators in the UK.
Free announcements for all providers
of
events that qualify.
Try it out (leaving the list is even
easier
than joining it).
Go to http://reviewing.co.uk
(panel top left)
This issue of ACTIVE
REVIEWING TIPS is the 5th in a series:
REVIEWING FOR TEAMS
will help you choose the reviewing
methods
that will give you most
chance of success in helping a team
to be
more successful in what
they do. They are mostly fun ways of
achieving serious goals.
This issue is also the
3rd part of my DYNAMIC DEBRIEFING
series
in which I integrate
experiential learning theory with
facilitation theory to
produce a model of dynamic debriefing
that
is about:
- sequencing questions
- keeping all learners
engaged
- capturing the rhythm
of learning and change.
- focused questioning.
- keeping in touch with
learners' motivations.
- valuing learners'
experience during the debrief.
- keeping the learning
process moving.
- working with whole
persons throughout the debrief.
- discouraging a
routine approach to a dynamic phenomenon.
FUTURE ISSUES
Thanks you for
suggestions received so far for future titles
which include:
Please fill in the
blank with what you want! My contact
details
are at the end of this
ezine. Yes - you can influence what
appears in Active
Reviewing Tips!
You can even directly
contribute your own ideas. One way of
doing
so is via the recently
reopened Active Reviewing Exchange.
ARTips
Exchange (as it is also
known) is a moderated discussion
group
You can learn more
about it (and join) by visiting
http://reviewing.co.uk
and clicking the link in the top left
panel.
Whether you join the
group or write directly to me at
roger@reviewing.co.uk
I look forward to hearing from you.
Roger Greenaway
|
|
~ 2
~ REVIEWING FOR
TEAMS
After this introduction, 'Reviewing for Teams' becomes more of an index than an article -
because almost every reviewing
technique
in previous issues and
at http://reviewing.co.uk
can be used (or
adapted) for
facilitating reviewing for teams. This article
tells
you how to do so - or
sets you off in a fruitful direction.
As a title, 'Reviewing
for Teams' is deliberately broad. It
could, for example,
encompass any or all of the following:
And then there is the
question of the nature of the team:
- Is it large or small?
- Do they work closely
or remotely?
- What values do they
share?
- How do they see
themselves as a team?
- How are they seen by
others?
- What range of tasks
do they perform?
- How (if at all) do
responsibilities rotate?
- What do they regard
as team success?
- How are they rewarded
for team success?
- How do they relate to
other teams?
- How do they cope with
problems? (internal and external)
- How do they make
decisions?
- What kind of
leadership works best for the team?
- What team habits help
and hinder their performance?
- How does the team
learn from experience?
15 questions will do
for now! - enough to show that there
are so
many variables that any
standardised team development
programme
is unlikely to match
the particular needs of a particular
team at
a particular stage in
its life.
Fortunately you can
find out most of what you need to know
about
a team through
reviewing. No team is likely to reach an
agreed
set of answers to the
(fairly random) 15 questions above.
And if
a team is continually
developing, the answers will be
continually
changing - which is
half the fun of working with teams!
The article below will
help you choose the reviewing methods
that
will give you most
chance of success in helping a team to be
more
successful in what they
do. They are mostly fun ways of
achieving
serious goals.
Please tell me if I
have achieved my goal of helping you to
review with teams.
WHEN DOES REVIEWING
BEGIN?
Some of the 15 question
above can be part of a training needs
analysis that you carry
out on the way towards constructing a
training programme and
reviewing strategy. But a training
needs
analysis is itself a
reviewing process. In a sense, reviewing
begins with your very
first question - at which point there
may
no certainty that a
training programme will happen. You need
to
think through which
review questions are best asked in
advance
and which review
questions are best saved until the programme
officially begins - if
it happens.
WHEN THE PROGRAMME
BEGINS
If a team is a group
with a task or objective, then a logical
point for a team review
to begin is with the objective. This
is
what the 'After Action
Review' is good for:
AFTER ACTION REVIEW
''AARs are a simple way
for individuals and teams to learn
immediately, from both
successes and failures ... the format
is
very simple and quick
... In an open and honest meeting,
usually
no longer than twenty
minutes, each participant in the event
answers four simple
questions:
1) What was supposed to
happen?
2) What actually
happened?
3) Why were there
differences?
4) What did we learn?
... Our experience was
that the simplicity of the process
and the
low time requirements
were key to its acceptance.''
Chris Collison and
Geoff Parcell in 'Learning to Fly'
(2001:78)
There is a lot to
recommend the After Action Review
especially
its simplicity. But
this simplicity has a price:
1) The AAR focus on
task achievement can produce good
effects in
the short and medium
term, but the overall reviewing strategy
should also include
space for team and individual
development.
[This is the
task-team-individual balance underlying John
Adair's
Action Centred
Leadership model (ACL).]
2) The simplicity,
brevity and pace of an AAR review does not
allow for in-depth
reviewing - although the 'why?' question
can
pick up the need for a
deeper review. [If 8 people have 4
questions to answer in
less than 20 minutes and the
facilitator
speaks for, say, 4
minutes, that allows 30 seconds per
answer.]
3) Look at question 4
above ('What did we learn?') - the AAR
draws together learning
that has ALREADY happened: the review
itself is not seen as
an opportunity for NEW learning (other
than
learning about what
someone else has already learned).
4) The opening question
'What was supposed to happen?' has
the
merit of getting
straight to the point (and resonates well
with
its origins in the US
military). But just in case that
question
(or the others) don't
suit the occasion, you may want an
alternative to the
useful but limited routine of AAR.
This article continues
as an annotated index to alternative
methods for reviewing
with teams. Some familiar methods are
presented in a new
light. And where my own descriptions are
thin,
I have provided you
with links to other sources.
WHAT WORKED WELL?
Especially - what did
WE do well?
SUCCESS CHART
A symbol representing
the success is placed in the middle of
the
floor. Big labels of
all the contributing factors are
created to
surround it. These
factors also had causes which are also
labelled etc. (Doesn't
work so well when the fans are
turning!)
SPOKES
Take any factor from
the above two exercises and ask how
well did
we (or you
individually) do in relation to this factor.
See the second activity
in this article:
An observation system
that is readily adapted for team
goals. The
team first establishes,
say, 9 goals and 3 observers flash
one of
their three goal cards
to any team member who needs
reminding or
congratulating. Search
this page for 'jogger' (its original
name)
ACTION REPLAY
Some teams will simply
enjoy replaying the best moments (as
a way
of celebrating
success). Ideally they will also want to
replay
moments they were
dissatisfied with. This apparently playful
technique can be really
effective at bringing problems into a
sharp focus - and
learning from them.
MISSING PERSON
An intuitive and
logical way of moving a team forwards.
See the 11th activity
in this article:
Or try one of my
variations: The Outsider
STONES
Only described here in
outline - but that might be enough.
HORSESHOE
Very familiar to
readers of Active Reviewing Tips. It is so
handy
that it is best
reserved for key team issues on which there
is
likely to be a
significant spread of opinion.
See the third activity
in this article:
TURNTABLE
Alternative views of
the team as it is now or as we'd like
it to
be are discussed in a
way in which everyone sees and speaks
from
each of the views. It
works well in combination with
Horseshoe
e.g. if using Horseshoe
before and after to see what
indiviudals
really think.
HUMAN SCULPTURE
There is no description
on reviewing.co.uk but I have
contributed
to the first two below:
and this is an
interesting variation I'd like to try:
SOCIOGRAM
A simple tool. I prefer
just to put them on display (like a
photo
display) rather than
attempt discussing them. Words don't
necessarily add value
to good pictures (or diagrams).
BELBIN TEAM ROLES
In the right hands
(qualified ones) this provides a useful
way of
helping individuals
think about the team as a whole and their
role within it. In the
wrong hands people might walk around
for
years with
self-limiting labels - whether kept in place by
themselves or by their
stale, unimaginative colleagues.
TUCKMAN STAGE OF GROUP
DEVELOPMENT
In my experience, teams
only sometimes go through these
stages,
but there are occasions
where this perspective on group
development may help a
team through hard times - if used
wisely.
TEAMWORK METAPHORS
Many critics have
pointed out that it is unhelpful for teams
to
adopt unsuitable
metaphors from the sports world (or any
world)
even if they do make a
refreshing change from naval and
military
metaphors /
clichés embedded in workspeak - welcome
aboard, all
hands on deck, let's
pull together, scan the horizon ... But
because teams can be so
complex, finding an apt metaphor can
really help people
communicate about how they see the nature
and
essence of a team. So,
for a change of metaphor, try...
Tuning into the Music
of Groups: A Metaphor for Team-Based
Learning in Management
Education.
Metaphors we organize by
ACTIVE IMAGES OF
TEAMWORK
This follows on from
teamwork metaphors. It involves each
team
member demonstrating
(with the whole team) their own values
and
aspirations about good
teamwork.
BACK TO THE FUTURE
The team version
involves everyone thinking about what from
the
past and present will
help them achieve their objective.
OBSERVERS
One of many ways of
noticing, giving and receiving positive
feedback.
WARM SEAT
Good for team leader
feedback if the question is a good one:
Alternatively try:
SEQ: STYLE, EFFECT,
QUESTION
This is a less direct
form of feedback and it is a reminder
that
feedback is not
necessarily just about good/bad judgements.
This
method gets round
defensiveness (or reluctance to criticise)
while also providing
useful feedback.
SIMULTANEOUS SURVEY
This is a quick way for
everyone to receive face to face one
to
one feedback - based on
the carefully chosen questions that
they
want to ask. It is
helpful for everyone to read out their
questions in advance.
This also allows the facilitator (and
the
team) to suggest better
questions if anyone is asking
questions
that are unlikely to
give them valuable and balanced
feedback.
FUTURE WALKING
This exercise allows
the team to walk through and experience
their own Force Field
Analysis or SWOT diagram. It makes the
paper exercise much
more real - sometimes too real.
METAPHOR MAP
A team that has been
together for a while can use this
reviewing
exercise to learn from
the past and move on - especially
suitable
between projects or
before a major change.
DREAM DRAWING
Everyone's pictures of
the future (for the team) can be
compared
and assembled. To
prevent artist's block, partners listen and
draw their partner's
dream out of sight of the person
describing
their dream (e.g. back
to back).
PICTURE THIS
And to avoid artist's
block altogether ask: In three years
from
now, if the strategy is
successful, what does our team /
organisation look like
- and where are you in this picture?
Ask
participants to each
choose an image from a stimulating
variety
of picture postcards.
Remember: Please tell
me if I have achieved my goal of
helping
you to review with
teams. If you want to discuss your ideas
with
others, view the
'interactive' option: No.3 just below.
|
|
NEW: EXPERIENTIAL-CPD
is a brand new announcement list for UK
events. See option 4
below.
INTERACTIVE: If you
want to discuss reviewing ideas with
other
subscribers choose
option 3 below.
1) YOU ARE HERE:
Active
Reviewing Tips for Dynamic Experiential Learning
A free newsletter to
recharge your reviewing and facilitation
skills maximum
frequency: monthly
2) RECENTLY REVIVED:
Adventure
Plus
Adventure and
Experiential Education SiteFinder Ezine
Free site reviews for
outdoor educators, trainers and
researchers
maximum frequency:
monthly
Go to http://reviewing.co.uk (panel top left) 3) THE INTERACTIVE
PARTNER TO ACTIVE REVIEWING TIPS
Active
Reviewing Exchange (ARTips Exchange)
Active Reviewing
Exchange is a moderated discussion group for
subscribers to the
Active Reviewing Tips newsletter.
This group is for
facilitators to exchange ideas stimulated
by
the newsletter and to
help each other develop ideas and
practices
in active learning.
The focus is on
maximising learning from experience - using
reflection and
discussion or more creative and dynamic
methods.
4) A BRAND NEW LISTING
OF UK EVENTS
EXPERIENTIAL-CPD
(continuing professional development)
Experiential-CPD is a
new moderated announcement list where
you
can announce or learn
about upcoming training events in the
UK
for outdoor educators
and experiential trainers - on topics
such
as facilitation skills,
groupwork skills, course design,
activity
design, working with
specific client groups, etc.
Short, relevant
announcements are welcome from all UK
providers
of CPD for outdoor
educators and experiential trainers.
(Announcements may be
delayed for a week or so to group them
into
one message.)
Go to http://reviewing.co.uk
(panel top left)
|
|
Dynamic Debriefing is
the title of the chapter I wrote for
the
Handbook
of Experiential Learning
(Silberman, April 2007)
Part 1 defines
debriefing and asks 'What is Dynamic
Debriefing?'
Part 2 on The Role of
the Facilitator is now at
Here is Part 3
[also available
in Russian
]MODELS OF DEBRIEFING
If the purpose of
debriefing is to facilitate learning from
experience,it follows
that a complete model of debriefing
would
need to integrate
experiential learning theory with
facilitation
theory. Just as there
are different kinds of experiential
learning, so there are
different kinds of facilitation. This
creates many potential
combinations for producing a theory of
debriefing!
John Heron (above) is one of the few
writers who
combine both kinds of
theory. Below is a list of what I would
consider to be the
minimum requirements for a complete model
of
debriefing. Against
each requirement, I have suggested models
that have the potential
for fulfilling that requirement - if
known.
A complete model of
debriefing would include:
1.
A
model for sequencing questions to create a suitable flow and
direction
to a learning conversation.
There are so many
sequencing models to choose from (mostly
presented as cycles)
that these are discussed later in a
separate
section on 'sequencing
in debriefing'.
2.
A
model for keeping all learners engaged when debriefing in a
group.
The pattern '1-2-All'
is a good way to start a debrief (or a
new
stage within a
debrief). '1' = solo thinking time or writing
time
or making a brief
personal statement; '2' = talking in pairs;
'All' = whole group
discussion. This kind of preparation
helps to
generate higher levels
of involvement and a higher quality of
group discussion. At
any time, you can reverse the process
using
'All-2-1'. The same or
different pairs talk together and each
individual makes a note
of their learning or of the next step
they wish to take. If
appropriate, a session can end back in
the
whole group with each
individual invited to speak.
'1-2-All-2-1'
can be used with most
question sequences - because it is
about
patterns of interaction
rather than about the content of
what is
said.
3.
A
model that captures the rhythm of learning and change.
John Dewey used the
analogy of armies moving and resting;
George
Kelly wrote about tight
and loose construing; Kurt Lewin
used the
terms freezing and
unfreezing; for David Kolb it was
convergent
and divergent thinking;
for Terry Borton it was about
switching
between analytic and
contemplative modes. Borton recommends
that
questions based on his
'What? So What? Now What?' cycle are
asked
"... in two quite
different manners. The first is the
analytic
mode ... hard-driving,
pointed, sharp, logical, tough and
rigorous. But [writes
Borton] it is difficult for people to
change if they are put
under much pressure, so we also
employ a
contemplative mode, a
more relaxed approach which avoids
picking
at one's self and
allows alternatives to suggest themselves
through free
association and metaphor." (Borton, 1970:89)
These
various to and fro
motions are like the rhythm of pistons
driving
a wheel:
over-dependence on one piston could bring learning
to a
grinding halt. The
alternation of activity and debriefing
provides a large, slow,
two-stroke rhythm; there is also
scope
within debriefing to
facilitate these 'to and fro' rhythms of
learning and change.
4.
A
model for focused questioning.
The debriefing funnel
uses a succession of filters that
focus in
at every stage (Priest
and Gass, 1997:196). The six filters
are:
review, recall and
remember, affect and effect, summation,
application and
commitment. Priest and Gass describe it as an
expansion of Borton's
three questions: 'What? So What? Now
What?'
The image of the funnel
and its filters clearly aligns the
model
with Borton's analytic
mode but provides little
encouragement for
divergent or
contemplative thinking as part of the debriefing
process. A more
complete model might include an inverted
funnel
to prompt lateral or
creative thinking or to promote a
helicopter
view. The authors do
encourage adaptation of this model and
encourage readers not
to be bound by a single view of
debriefing
as the only way to
guide reflection. Thiagi's advice on
preparing
questions for
debriefing follows a similar pattern - moving
from
'open' to 'probing'
questions within each of his six stages:
How
do you feel? What
happened? What did you learn? How does it
relate? What if? What
next? (Thiagarajan & Thiagarajan,
1999:37-47)
5.
A
model that keeps in touch with learners' motivations.
'Ripples on a Pond'
(Race, 2003) emphasizes the driving force
that is missing from
other learning models. Professor Phil
Race
has developed his model
based on questions he has asked to
'tens
of thousands of people'
from schoolchildren to training
managers.
He places 'wanting to
learn' (or, as a second best 'needing
to
learn') at the centre
of his ripples model. The ripples lead
outwards through doing,
making sense, feedback, training and
understanding. Race
says you should also ripple inwards and
keep
revisiting the central
'wanting to learn'. As an example, the
right kind of feedback
(at the third ripple) adds to people's
desire to learn. The
outer ripples will disappear if there
is no
energy at the centre.
Race points out that unlike cyclical
models
of learning, all
factors in his model are involved at the
same
time. This is why he
writes: "Any model based on a cycle
won't
do". If following a
cycle too rigidly, the learning process
becomes fragmented and
loses touch with the whole as well as
losing touch with the
heart: 'wanting to learn'.
6.
A
model that recognizes the importance of what learners'
experience
during the debrief.
Race (above) underlines
the importance of learners wanting to
learn, but this sixth
'requirement' goes further by
recognizing
that the quality of the
experience during the debrief also
has a
significant impact on
learners' motivations. It can also
have a
significant impact on
their learning and development: both
the
experience being
debriefed and the experience of the debrief
are
potential sources of
learning and development. These
possibilities are
explored further in the next section about
'the
experience of
debriefing'.
7.
A
model that helps to keep the learning process moving.
Perhaps 'spinning
plates' is an apt metaphor here. It
illustrates
how a facilitator needs
to pay attention to many different
factors when debriefing
in a group - and especially to the
plate
that is most likely to
fall next. The plate 'most likely to
fall
next' may well be the
'wanting to learn' plate (as in Race's
model) but it could be
any plate that has escaped recent
attention - and this
keeps changing. (Greenaway, 2004)
8.
A
model about working with whole persons throughout the
debrief.
This is partly about
how models are readily misinterpreted.
As
soon as a model can be
used as a sequence, it is - whatever
its
author might say.
Borton writes of his 'Sensing,
Transforming,
Acting' model: "The
model's three divisions are arbitrary,
for
the processes do not
function in a simple 1-2-3 fashion, but
are
interwoven in a dynamic
fashion." (Borton, 1970:78). After
describing all the
factors in his 'Ripples in a Pond'
learning
model, Race writes:
"All these factors are involved at once"
(Race, 2003). It is
difficult (though not impossible) to
represent dynamic,
simultaneous or interweaving processes in
a
model. Unfortunately,
anything that looks like a sequence or
a
cycle is likely to get
applied as a one-thing-at-a-time
linear
process - even when
this is not the author's intention. Many
debriefing models are
designed to be about working with whole
persons, but are
interpreted and applied in ways that
fragment
the integrated process
intended by its originator. Borton
warned
"do not dissect to
disintegration," but many users of his
'What?
So What? Now What?'
model do not know of author's warnings
nor of
his advice about using
the model.
9.
A
model that discourages a routine approach to a dynamic
phenomenon.
A primary function of a
model is to provide a useful
simplification of
complex realities. Is it possible to
create a
model that simplifies
while also staying in touch with the
complex reality that it
models? In my own model of the
debriefing
cycle (Greenaway,
2002), I use the four playing card suits
(diamonds, hearts,
clubs and spades) with each suit
representing
a stage of a learning
cycle (facts, feelings, findings and
futures). A joker
(representing freedom) is at the centre of
the
cycle as a reminder
that reality is more complex. Unlike
other
cards, the joker has no
preordained meaning - it is a wild
card
that has an infinity of
possible uses and it can be played
at any
time. On its own, the
joker would have little power, but
when it
is ever-present as an
option within a cycle (for the
facilitator
or participants) the
joker tends to bring about whatever is
needed. The joker makes
it easy to customize or even abandon
the
model. This inbuilt
flexibility helps to ensure that
debriefing
is both 'appropriate'
and 'dynamic'. As a wild card, the
joker
refuses any label, but
is often seen wearing the blue hat
(process overview) of
Edward de Bono's 'Six Thinking Hats'
model
(de Bono, 1985).
However, a multicolored rainbow hat would
better
suit the image and
function of the joker. (Greenaway, 2004)
A
complete model
of
debriefing would include all of the above
(and more). But once a
model gets too big and cumbersome, it
loses its value as a
practical model even though it may have
the
virtue of being more
complete. Perhaps, every model should
include a wild-card
joker as a reminder that a model is only
a
guide and that good
practice arises from using models
intelligently?
... to be continued in
the next issue of Active Reviewing
Tips
where you can learn
about 'The experience of Debriefing' -
another extract from my
chapter on Dynamic Debriefing in Mel
Silberman's 'Handbook
of Experiential Learning' (2007). See
Amazon.co.uk: <http://digbig.com/4rwnf>
or
Amazon.com:<http://digbig.com/4rwng>
|
|
~ 5
~ EVENTS:
REVIEWING SKILLS TRAINING OPEN WORKSHOPS
JANUARY
2008: UK
Active Reviewing Skills
for Facilitators and Trainers
Ripley Castle
HG3 3AY
Thursday 31st Jan -
Friday 1st Feb 2008
JANUARY 2008: Denmark Organisationspsykologerne
& Reviewing Skills Training
present ...
ON THE
EDGE:
a 2 day
seminar for consultants who are helping
individuals and groups
to improve their performance and
learning
in working situations.
The seminar combines active reviewing
with
artistic work.
January 15th and 16th
2008
Copenhagen
Trainers: Roger
Greenaway and Claus Dahl.
Details: <http://www.ingerbillund.dk>
MARCH
2008: London
Eureka! presents ...
TIPS FOR TRAINERS
CONFERENCE
Thursday 13 March 2008
and Friday 14 March 2008
Central London
TIPS FOR TRAINERS
PRE-CONFERENCE WORKSHOPS
Wednesday 12 March 2008
Tips For Trainers In
Action, Facilitated by David Gibson
Facilitating Effective
Reviews, Facilitated by Dr Roger
Greenaway
MARCH
2008: Derbyshire
I am providing a
workshop on 'Making Reviewing an Adventure'
at
the Festival of Outdoor
Learning (7-9th March, 2008)
'Using
Experiential
Learning to Develop Team Skills'
This workshop outline
(and this newsletter) may give you some
ideas for the kind of
workshop you would like to invite me to
provide for your
organisation or network. See:
** Please contact roger@reviewing.co.uk
if you want more
information about these
events or if you are interested in
hosting an open
workshop closer to your home - or a
customised
trainer-training event
for your organisation or network. **
Other events on my
calendar are 'closed' events designed for
the
particular needs of a
client (and are not shown here).
|
|
TEAMWORK LINKS
selected reviews of
websites about teams, teamwork and team
building exercises.
IDEAS ON TEAMS AND
TEAMWORK
Bob Willard distils
ideas from 40 books and presents them in
well
indexed paragraphs. The
original site disappeared earlier
this
year but you can still
retrieve this valuable document here:
TEAM LEARNING:
UNLOCKING ORGANISATIONAL POTENTIAL
This report draws on a
literature review as well as
interviews
with practitioners to
develop a checklist for the practice of
team learning. It finds
that team learning involves:
* building
self-awareness, ownership and choice around
the prior
assumptions,
beliefs and behaviour of each individual
member of
the team
* identifying
values and beliefs which they can share
and
promote with
personal and group commitment
* creating
goals which are consistent with those
values and
beliefs
* learning
together, through practical application
over a period
of at least
three months and with appropriate support
and
context,
behaviours consistent with those values and
beliefs.
Report compiled by Mary
Ann Kernan with the support of
Campaign
for Learning, published
by The Talent Foundation, 2003
|
|
Please support SAVE THE
CHILDREN by buying your books (and
any
other Amazon goods) via
the ACTIVE LEARNING BOOKSHOP.
The
teambuilding-working-playing-learning 'bookshelves' are
at:
where you will also
find this review of Against Teambuilding:
AGAINST TEAMBUILDING
Teambuilding exercises
can get a bad name because they do
not go
far enough. In fact,
the whole concept of 'building' a team
has
been challenged by Ian
Cunningham in his article 'Against
Teambuilding' in
'Organisations and People' [Vol.1, No.1,
(1993)
Pages 13-15]. He
prefers the concepts of 'team working' and
'team
development', warning
that 'teambuilding' can have negative
consequences such as:
* A team becoming closed and precious -
and out of touch with
the rest of the organisation - through
thinking itself
special and different.
* Overuse of instruments and tests (e.g.
Belbin, Myers-
Briggs) so that the team's language and
thinking is
distorted.
* Emphasis tends to be on quick fix
events - the assumption
is that once the team is 'built' it's OK
to leave them to it.
* Issues in the team are explored at a
shallow level only.
People's articulations of problems are
taken at face value
without exploring hidden agendas, power
plays, status seeking
etc.
* Trainers and consultants often use
exercises that are quite
disconnected from work practice. Many fun
exercises and
simulations have a poor record of
creating sustainable change
inside organisations.
By whatever name, it is
teams that make the world go round.
What
do you have in your
toolkit for making teams 'go round'?
Roger's Active Learning
Bookshop has now raised over
£500 for
Save the Children since
January 2006. Thanks to everyone who
has
been shopping at the
Active Learning Bookshop.
If you have other
purchases you want to make at Amazon
please go
there via <http://reviewing.co.uk/reviews>
Not only do
you get a
good deal, so do
children around the world who need our help.
I worked for Save the
Children for 4 years so I know about
the
value and quality of
the work they do.
|
|
Your friends can
receive the next and future issues
Why keep it a secret?
FUTURE ISSUES: READERS
LIKE YOU
What would make you
think of a future issue as 'Reviewing for
Me'? or 'Reviewing for
the People I Work With'? Your answer
will
help me to extend the
'Reviewing For _' series by writing for
readers just like you!
Please send your answer
to Roger at: roger@reviewing.co.uk
|
Each
month Active
Reviewing Tips brings you:
|
ARCHIVES FREE Subscription CONTENTS of this issue
HOME |
HELP |