Maintaining Focus in Groups

There is little chance for people to get together as long as most of us want to be in the front of the bus, the back of the church, and the middle of the road” (Braude’s Treasury of Wit and Humor). How to bring individuals together in organizational groups, and expect positive outcomes, is a question whose answer lies as much in the mystery of human nature as with the science of group dynamics.  One promising approach to successful group facilitation is to act as a lens, continually refocusing the group on its origin, its development, and its hopes. It calls for facilitators to recognize the uniqueness of a group’s structure, to help the group focus on itself and its purpose, and to use leadership and facilitation skills to add credibility to the facilitator.

1. A Philosophy of Group Structure

The larger the group the less effective the outcome. If you can control the size of the group, do it. Over fifteen people are difficult to keep focused. Two, three, or five is a good size for resolving detailed technical problems, but such a small group may lack the broad base needed to produce outcomes likely to gain the consensus of the larger organization. Seven to fifteen seems to stimulate the necessary creativity. I attended one meeting where more than 30 people with diverse backgrounds attempted to prioritize a list of problems. Because the group couldn’t reach consensus, the formal leaders had to make final decisions on almost every item. The outcome was so poor they held another meeting within a month, this time with 16 people. In part because of the smaller group, they produced a better product and achieved consensus.

2. Oil and water don’t mix.

Understanding group members, their backgrounds, education, and authority are factors to consider when determining the final size of the group. Avoiding known personality conflicts and obvious differences in knowledge levels can go a long way toward helping the group remain focused on issues and problem solving rather than personal disputes on expertise. When I facilitated a meeting of logistical experts, I failed to recognize a known personality conflict between two authority figures. Members of the group aligned themselves with one or the other. The group’s purpose became blurred and they failed to achieve any of their objectives. The problem may have been prevented by selective invitation or by holding a one-on-one meeting of the two parties before the meeting, to establish ground rules for a truce.

3. Use a wide-angle lens.

Setting an agenda is often the first step for many facilitators. It is often the first misstep. True, groups may seem to wander at first, but it is part of the process of taking ownership of the meeting and its objectives. Set an agenda if the group’s purpose is focused in a narrow beam, such as deciding on loan applications. In most cases, however, agendas appear to be attempts to gain control and can meet with resistance. I watched a Quality Improvement Team facilitator discover the drawback of agendizing a group. He insisted on strict compliance with the agenda and QIT process, frustrating the group to the point that they went out of their way to deviate from the norm. The agenda stifled creativity. What should have taken two months took six, resulting in a complicated solution that was rejected outright. Some members lost faith in the quality improvement process. If you want to focus on an agenda, use a wide angle lens. Make the agenda broad and loose to help maintain focus, not restrict vision.

4. Real men don’t eat quiche.

Defining the group’s social culture is also important. This is commonly done in early stages as the group attempts to identify its task. Edgar Schein explained the dilemma confronting a group in an article entitled “Organizational Culture,” in American Psychologist. He wrote that the group must decide if it will be “...self-destructive and reconstructing versus self-enhancing.” Will the group members be expected to change, set aside, or destroy personal behaviors? Or will they be encouraged to cultivate personal differences? Reconstructing works for high task groups such as the military, where common culture and norms are important. Self- enhancing suits creative groups that require an open flow of ideas, where members can assume the core culture but retain their own norms. In all cases the group must decide its social purpose. Group structure is the complex but important first step for a facilitator to recognize and try to influence. As-with a camera, choose the long lens and all your pictures will be out of focus.