Using Participatory Workshops for Training, Needs Assessment and Decision Making
Admiralty International has used the process of participatory workshops for over 20 years, both as an effective training device and a method of performing a self evaluative needs assessment and gap analysis, and for collaborative decision making. In so doing, we have expanded on the original principles of Robert Chambers in many ways. Used as a teaching methodology, in performing needs assessments and gap analyses, problem solving and decision making applications, we have found that the use of participatory workshops is effective and efficient, and results in robust, long term, self sustained change. We have used this methodology with great success in many countries, as a time tested method of involve all stakeholders, and securing their lasting understanding and support.
Teaching. In the learning situation, the active participation of students results in knowledge that is internalized and owned by the student. That knowledge is no longer “out there” to be recalled, remembered and re-integrated. Rather, the knowledge becomes part of the student’s understanding and philosophy and rises to the level of veritable certainty when called upon. No longer does the student think, “Oh, wait! I know that answer”. Instead, he knows the answer because it is his or hers, retained in knowledge not in memory.
Needs Assessment. The technique involves getting workshop participants to contribute their ideas to identify needs and gaps and to look for possible solutions. Their active participation results in a significant investment by them in the findings, conclusions and recommendations of the group. As we employ it, the process typically begins with an agreement on “rules of the game” and an agenda. The group then produces and agrees explicit Needs Assessment and Gap-Analysis exercise, where the participants discuss and agree on the current state of affairs, what is there about it that should be preserved and what needs changing. It is the workshop that generates the Needs Assessment and Gap-Analysis, not us. It is the workshop participants who will own the problem and the solution. This is key to our participatory workshop technique. Our skilful facilitators involve all participants and draw them in to the discussions, so that the findings, conclusions and recommendations are owned by the group. Once the needs and gaps are identified and discussed, the training program follows naturally and with complete understanding and support of the participants. All agree what is needed and how to achieve it.
Problem Solving and Decision Making. Used in problem solving and decision making, the process is equally powerful. The technique involves getting workshop participants to contribute their ideas for possible solutions and results in a significant investment by them in the findings, conclusions and recommendations of the group.
The Honorable Process of “Nemawashi”. We use the process as an accelerated version of the famous Japanese decision making process of “nemawashi” (根回し). Although somewhat difficult to translate, this word refers to the gardening process of carefully and collectively gathering together the roots of a tree in preparation of transplanting it. In terms of social interaction, the term implies an informal process of discussing an issue and laying the foundation for some proposed change or project, by talking among the people concerned, gathering support and feedback, until such time as all in the group are saying the same thing. Consensus is obtained neither by autocratic dictate nor even by democratic vote where minority rights may be heard but ignored, but rather by creating a process in which natural social cooperation and the desire for a sensible outcome leads to agreement. Successful nemawashi supports change with the consent of all. Our skillful facilitators involve all participants and draw them in to the discussions, so that the findings, conclusions and recommendations are owned by the group.
Most experts use participatory workshops as a way of teaching. We do that, as well, but go further to use them as a vehicle for change. By eliciting agreement and ownership of the workshop participants in a process of change, the change will happen quickly and tranquilly, often almost unnoticed. This is natural change and has the highest probability of being self sustaining.
- 1. Participatory approaches to decision making – What and Why
- 1.1 Autocratic decision making
- 1.2 Democratic decision making
- 1.3 Laissez faire decision making
- 1.4 Nemawashi pros and cons
- 2. Facilitating a participatory workshop
- 2.1 Techniques and Best Practices
- 2.2 Key skills for workshop facilitators
- 2.3 Obtaining full participation
- 2.4 Focusing on the practical and relevant
- 2.5 Rules of the Game
- 2.6 Setting agenda
- 2.7 Needs assessment and gap analysis
- 3. Group dynamics
- 3.1 Natural development of a group: storming, norming and performing
- 3.2 Task leaders, socio-emotional leaders, players and non-players
- 3.3 Agendas and hidden agendas
- 3.4 Dealing with outliers and dissent
- 3.5 Managing group dynamics for mutual benefit
- 4. Organizing participatory workshops
- 4.1 Selecting the facilitation team
- 4.2 Identifying participants
- 4.3 Planning the workshop – content and context
- 4.5 Individual sessions and break-out groups
- 4.6 Developing the schedule
- 4.7 Logistics (big tents to small teas)
- 4.8 Closing a workshop
- 4.9 Harvesting benefits – what happens next?
- 5. Rules of the Game: Dos and don’t of participatory workshops
- 5.1 All participants agree to:
- Use their own best judgment at all times
- Show respect for others and their ideas
- Reject a suggestion only if they have a better one
- Listen and learn from the group
- Acknowledge and learn from mistakes
- Abandon preconceptions and misconceptions, no matter how “sacred”
- Be self aware and introspective – “Know thyself”
- Be honest, direct and open in discussions – “The truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth”
- Be creative, innovative and inventive – Think outside the envelope
- Be bold, take risks, “go where no man has gone before”
- 5.2 All participants agree not to:
- Rush. Good ideas and creativity do not occur on a time schedule
- Lecture others. No one owns the truth.
- Criticize others. Ideas may be challenged, people not.
- Interrupt. There is room for all ideas in the Big Tent and a the Small Tea)
- Dominate. Ego and good ideas are not identical.
- Sabotage. Cheaters never prosper.
- Be too serious or officious. Toda la vida es sueño.