How to Help Resolve Business Arguments
June 14, 2012 5 Comments
- Active listening
1. Active listening
So much material, here at this blog site and elsewhere, focuses on the skill and benefits of active listening, that we not delve into too much detail. As session leader (aka facilitator) you may find your participants at times, in violent agreement with each other. Occasionally you have subject matter experts (aka participants or SME) who do not listen to themselves and may be uncertain as to what they said. Frequently, since people can only concentrate six to eight minutes at a time, someone “wakes up” without hearing fully what was said.
With all the examples above, plus the more obvious disagreements, active listening is critical because the participants need a neutral and thorough reflection of what was said. With active listening, you make contact, absorb, provide reflection, and then confirm if your reflection is accurate. Many issues get resolved when the arguments are properly shaped in the hands of a neutral party, the facilitator. But what do you do when active listing fails?
Alignment is a wonderful consulting term. It includes three syllables and remains abstract enough that it is never clear exactly how to do it. Frankly, it is easy, once you understand the holarchy.
We invest much more time elsewhere discussing the intricacies of the table illustrated below, so for now let us focus simply on alignment. Specifically, we seek to ask the participants to align each of the arguments with the objectives, and ask in sequence:
- Which argument best supports the project objectives, and why?
- Which argument best supports the program objectives, and why?
- Which argument best supports the business unit (ie, organizational) objectives, and why?
- Which argument best supports the enterprise objectives, and why?
As you can tell, we are working upwards in the objectives column. With each question, some portion of arguments will be resolved, and yet others will remain unresolved. Ultimately, the most important question is the last one, asking which argument best supports the enterprise objectives, and why. Yet some people and issues are very stubborn, and active listening and alignment will not necessarily resolve all arguments. Then what?
We need to document the rationales from the questions above. Ensure that each why is captured, understood, and illustrated with examples form the business. Take this document, in printed form (not hanging out in the aether as a verbal argument) back to the4 executive sponsor, or decision executive, or steering team, or decision review boards, or whomever you call it and ask them for their help.
Most sponsors will ask the project managers, analysts, and other team members at some time or another “Do you need my help for anything?” What they are asking you is NOT if you want them to do your job for you. They are asking, have you reached an impasses that you are unable to reconcile. Now is the time for escalation. This is the type of help they are asking about.
Guest what they do to arrive at an answer? They use the holarchial questions mentioned above, typically with greater insight and understanding about the connectivity of various projects, than we might have in our own little box. They look at the arguments and ask to what extent does each support the project objectives (ie, reason for the meeting), the program objectives (ie, reason for the project), the business unit objectives (ie, reason for the program or initiative), and the enterprise objectives (ie, reason for the business units). The holarchy is indispensable for resolving arguments, and to help facilitators prevent scope creep during their meetings.
The FAST curriculum on Professional Facilitation Skills details the responsibilities and dynamics mentioned above. Remember friends, nobody is smarter than everybody, so consult your FAST Facilitator Reference Manual or attend a FAST professional facilitative leadership training workshop offered around the world (see MG Rush for a current schedule — an excellent way to earn 40 PDUs from PMI, CDUs from IIBA, or CEUs).
- SMART Versus DUMB Criteria (facilitativeleadership.wordpress.com)
- How to Facilitate Virtual Meetings: Teleconference and VideoPresence (Part 3 of 3 – Conclusion) (facilitativeleadership.wordpress.com)
- How To Actively Listen (facilitativeleadership.wordpress.com)
- How to Facilitate Virtual Meetings: Teleconference and VideoPresence (Part 2 of 3 – During/ Real Time) (facilitativeleadership.wordpress.com)
- Future Facilitative Leadership Factors (facilitativeleadership.wordpress.com)
- How to Facilitate a Consensual Sphere of Concern, Influence, and Control Using the Bookend Method (facilitativeleadership.wordpress.com)
- The Role of Session Leader (facilitativeleadership.wordpress.com)
- The Project Manager vs. the Business Analyst (project-pro.us)
- How to Facilitate Virtual Meetings: Teleconference and VideoPresence (Part 1 of 3 – Preparation) (facilitativeleadership.wordpress.com)