Facilitation Tips: Coming Up for Air (Top-Down) or Diving Deep (Bottom-Up)

In my post two weeks ago I discussed the importance of knowing when to use a “top down” vs. a “bottom up” approach to make change happen, and shared some key principles to help make this important decision.

In this post I want to take it a step further and provide “practical tips” for those that frequently find themselves facilitating groups dealing with these questions (consultant, coaches, facilitators, managers, etc.). The intent is to help them be more effective at what they do based on a deeper understanding of the following specific dynamics:

Southern Humpback Whales at Platypus Bay

Personality Bias: it’s a reality, most of us tend one way or the other – towards “big picture” or detail. It’s not a birth defect or a problem, it’s just the way it is. It’s often the function of personality, culture (low or high context), upbringing, education or profession (ex. engineers vs. marketers). The important thing is to understand the group dynamics and be able to steer, accommodate and course-correct appropriately. You’ll have to actively work to accommodate “patches of discomfort” or “over-zealousness” as you move through the process. Know your audience!

Expertise…at the right time: when thinking “top-down” (my tendency) it’s tempting to stay so high level that some in the group lose touch with “where we’re headed.” This is especially true for those who are “boots on the ground” and firmly rooted in the details of the day-to-day. To produce vision that has traction, it’s important to make sure the expertise (and appropriate level of detail) is connected at the right time so that it “lands” and doesn’t stay “floating in the clouds.” The key is to know the “right time” so that the big picture is sufficiently fleshed out, but not bloated with unnecessary detail.

Allow for Under-Dip: even for “big picture people” there is sometimes a need to descend into a lower level of detail just to make a concept “come alive” or probe for alignment among the group. This often takes the form of citing examples, looking at case studies, a “rabbit trail” into another subject or current problem. The image that often comes to my mind is that of a whale that dives but then regularly comes back up to the surface for air. This has probably been one of the biggest learning areas for me. Once you understand this “has to happen” you can steer the iterative process of descent and rising to the surface through effective synthesis and summarization of conclusions.

Know Where to Stop: whether coming “from the top” or “from the bottom” you gather momentum as things become clearer…especially if the group is converging and progress is being made. The temptation at this stage is to “take it too far.” If coming from the “big picture,” it can be to deep-dive into granularity, thereby losing the power of clarity by clouding it with unnecessary (and often controversial) detail. If coming from “the detail” it can be to overshoot the intent and open unnecessary fronts of discussions on the “big picture existential issues” that undermine the very progress that was just attained.

Bridge the Gap: understand that whatever direction you’re coming from there will be a gap you’ll have to close to be relevant to different types of stakeholders (not enough vs. too much detail). This is where the power of diversity comes in. Actively solicit those that may be “on the other end of the spectrum” to challenge and confront the proposal. While you don’t need to (and often shouldn’t, or can’t) change things just so it works for everyone, it helps to highlight where there may be questions you’ll have to answer, or even gaps and disconnects you need to address.

So next time you take on the challenge of helping a group move forward, first understand from “which end” you need to attack the problem (last blog post), then apply the practical tips above to plan and steer the process.

Picture: Richard Fisher via Compfight