In an integrated approach—where design, facilitation, and management work closely together—the process consultant and planning group mem- bers usually make the basic decisions about the type of participation (mandatory, invitational, restricted, open, or combination) required to achieve outcomes. The management function is to monitor that discussion and ask questions that raise the implications of these decisions:
• Is it important for us to know which municipalities people are repre- senting at thisopenseminar? If so, what is the most efficient way for us to gather that information?
• Are participants in thismandatorysession aware that their supervisor expects them to be present until 5:00 p.m.?
• Do we have the right kinds of participants registered to make this invitationalworkshop a real triumph?
tent than to have them outside the tent criticizing what is going on inside. Can we think of anyone whom we need to bring inside the tent for thisinvitationalprocess?
• Do we have the right people at thisinvitational session to ensure appropriate follow-up and implementation? For example, what about advocacy groups that will refuse to be involved in implementation if they aren’t involved in the decision-making process at this session?
• Are staff aware that the first day of the board meeting isrestrictedand that they are invited to be present on the second day?
• Are participants aware of thecombinationof attendance requirements for this session? For senior managers it is mandatory and for market- ing staff it is optional.
In addition, you may find yourself facing one or more of the following circumstances.
Sometimes facilitated processes have a group ofpreferredparticipants who are a session’s top priority and then other groups of participants whom they will welcome if they can’t get every- one they want from the primary group.
For example, you may prefer to have only experienced facilitators in a training ses- sion on group development but decide that you will take people who have related experience if space is available.
Many processes havesecondarypartic- ipants—those who are not present in the session but who would benefit from, or need to be involved in, the process out- comes. When developing a participant list, keep linkages and communication with secondary participants in mind, asking, for example, who will be present at the event and who could follow up with secondary participants in their areas of interest?
Situation.You are organizing a restricted and confidential 1.5-day summit for partners in a large legal firm. The purpose of the sum- mit is to decide how to develop and implement a mandatory retirement package for aging partners.
5
When it comes to participants and process, it’s quality in, quality out.
Decisions.You and other staff make these decisions:
• Invite the managing partner and his direct reports.
• Include three outside human resource consultants to provide creative expertise as problem solvers.
• Invite two retired partners who have already experienced mandatory retirement from the firm.
• Involve the outside experts and retired partners during the first half day.
Result.A participant comments:“We heard from experts in the field of early retirement. Then we spent time talking with partners in our firm who had already experienced this. Then it was our turn.
We had to translate our firm’s values into a program that wouldn’t alienate current partners. It wasn’t easy, but it worked—and we had lots of real-life experience in the room to make it happen.”
When the criteria for participation have been set for a limited number of places, ensure that each participant wears more than one hat: for exam- ple, a participant who is afemale leaderfrom awestern state,is adynamic change agent,and has a lot ofexperienceandexpertisein the topic area might be considered to be wearing seven hats in relation to a particular event.
When alist of potential participants is lacking,consider asking each of a small core group of four or five stakeholders to suggest three or four other people who might want to become involved. In this way you can build a list through referrals and can also initiate communication and coalition build- ing. For example, an invitation to a research collaborative might include this request:
You are one of an initial core group of invitees to this meeting. We would like to have about 30 leading researchers from diverse dis- ciplines taking part. Please provide by return e-mail the names of two researchersoutside your field of expertisewho you think would be interested in attending this workshop and collaborating with colleagues from across the country to achieve the purpose stated previously. For each recommended participant, please provide:
• Name, current position, phone, e-mail
• Experience, expertise, or other qualities this person could contribute to the purpose of this workshop
When your planning committee does not want to get involved in the politics of participant selection, develop a list of organizations that fit your criteria and request that the organizations name their delegates. If the plan-
5
5
an organization to send, an initial phone conversation to express the request verbally can be followed up with a note.
A common question is whether participants should attend asrepresen- tatives of their organizationsor asexperts in their own right,or asboth.The answer to this question lies in the purpose of the process. Organizational representatives bring their organization’s perspective and authority to dis- cussions, whereas individual experts bring specific knowledge, under- standing, and experience in relation to a topic.
Questions also frequently arise about the appropriateness of observers in mandatory, invitational, or restricted processes. Allowing observers may be a reasonable policy for conferences and seminars when space is avail- able, the numbers are already large, and observers’ presence will be less noticeable. During smaller facilitated sessions, the presence of observers can often complicate the process.
In team development workshops that are designed to address issues and where the conversation is often intense, having others—such as observers—present, regardless of their goodwill and skill, jeopardizes the interpersonal climate necessary to build effective relationships. It is also likely to inhibit participants’ open and candid discussion and action on real issues.
A client may want to be an observer rather than a participant in an inter- nal organizational workshop to ensure that his or her goals are being met.
This is typically a fair request, particularly if the client is funding the work- shop. But do clarify how the observation is to be conducted. Does the client want to be introduced at the beginning and then observe for a short time, returning at the end of the workshop? Or does he or she want to come in periodically to see how things are going? Consider how this obser- vation might affect participation.
Finally, when thinking about involving the media, consider all possible angles. If media representatives are observing and taking notes at a session, keep in mind that they will report on what they find potentially “interesting” to read- ers. Representatives of the media are usually welcome at conferences involv- ing expert speakers and general discussions that focus on reporting on research and new perspectives. They are commonly excluded from decision- making sessions that bring together disparate views through collaborative
5
processes that may seem quite contentious to outsiders but are a necessary part of building agreement. A central consideration is whether you want these intense discussions reported in the media or whether you would pre- fer to announce the results of the discussions through a press release or some other mechanism.
Here is a sample statement from the chair of a board of governors explaining the board’s decision to exclude media from a high-profile pol- icy development roundtable on a controversial issue.
We have received several inquiries about the possibility of having the media present at this roundtable. Given that this is our initial session on this topic and we want to entertain a variety of wide- ranging perspectives in our discussions, your Board of Governors has decided not to invite media participation at this time. There will be future opportunities for the media to be present at ses- sions, when our approach and policy are at a more mature stage of development.