*********************************************************************************<\/p>\n
“A Preparatory Model for Collaboration”<\/strong><\/p>\n When we meet, we will become a system of professionals with diverse expertise and a shared purpose, seated around a table, eager to collaborate. NIMBioS has made this possible, generously providing the necessary funding and facilities. We hope to make the most of this opportunity by advancing our purpose to the best of our abilities and by creating new directions or ideas that are more significant to the community than would be the additive sum of our typical individual contributions over three days. We do not yet know what that looks like. We have never before worked as this group. We will have only limited time together: time insufficient for the \u201cforming, norming, storming, performing\u201d phases of group development, perhaps insufficient even to remember the names of the other group members. Our hopes are therefore tempered by practical constraints.<\/p>\n To compensate somewhat, we can prepare ourselves. We can prepare by contemplating two roles each of us may take on during our meeting:<\/p>\n First, each of us may have a unique role as a participant. As a participant, we each will contribute our professional (subject) expertise. Expression of our ideas will induce others to respond and to build upon them. Through this process, we hope to create a shared understanding of what is, what challenges we face, and what actions are needed to further our purpose. Preparing to take on the role of participant means reviewing the purpose of the meeting, bringing to mind what we can contribute.<\/p>\n Second, each of us may take on a facilitative role. As a facilitator, we each have the opportunity to intervene in the system, adjusting the functioning of the group toward greater efficiency, as I will describe shortly. Some have described taking on concurrent roles of participant and facilitator as being \u201csimultaneously on the dance floor and on the balcony [overlooking the dance floor].\u201d Maintaining both perspectives is a difficult skill to master. Were we to select a person to facilitate only, we would likely lose their contribution as participant, and\u00a0we would be challenged to identify enough participants with strong facilitation skills when in subgroups. Instead, we share responsibility for facilitation. We will each occasionally check-in from \u201cthe balcony\u201d and then return to \u201cthe dance floor.\u201d This choice sidesteps the need for an experienced facilitator. There is a large body of literature on collaboration, groups, and facilitation. More pragmatic than expecting group members to prepare by reading the literature is to present, as part of the meeting introduction, the following simple model for collaboration and corresponding interventions. It takes about ten minutes.<\/p>\n The Essential Components of Collaboration<\/strong> are illustrated in the figure below. These components are Task<\/strong>, Process<\/strong>, and Relationship<\/strong>, all of which manifest to some degree in every group member. The degree depends upon personality and circumstance.<\/p>\n The Essential Components of Collaboration<\/p><\/div>\n Task<\/strong> is about getting things done. Group members for whom Task is key will feel satisfied when choices are made, actions are taken, and boxes are checked off. When those members are dissatisfied, they become impatient and may behave in ways that seem careless toward other group members. However, in the absence of Task, little is completed.<\/p>\n Process<\/strong> is about how the group structures its work. Group members for whom Process is key\u00a0will feel most satisfied when the agenda is explicit, objectives are clearly stated, and time apportionments are respected. When these members are dissatisfied, they may demand that the group slow down or they may withdraw from participation altogether. The group may perceive them to be perfectionists. Without Process, the group risks wasting effort by solving the wrong problem or running out of time altogether due to mismanagement.<\/p>\n Relationship<\/strong> is about engaging all participants. Group members for whom Relationship is key will feel most satisfied when every group member appears engaged and satisfied. When these members are dissatisfied, they may become anxious and behave in ways that seem overly sensitive. Without Relationship, the benefit of collaboration will be suboptimal because group members\u2019 expertise will not be fully used.<\/p>\n When all three components are in balance, we collaborate most effectively. That balance and the expertise required to pursue the group\u2019s purpose is all that is needed to advance our shared purpose: no dedicated facilitator is required. For this reason, preparing to maintain balance of Relationship, Task, and Process is a worthwhile investment. Maintenance of balance is a skill requiring repeated effort to master, so having multiple group members intentionally exercising the skill is crucial.<\/p>\n Keeping this model in mind guides facilitation when checking-in on \u201cthe dance floor\u201d from \u201cthe balcony.\u201d We look for any three of the dysfunctions that indicate imbalance and intervene accordingly.<\/p>\n If our self or someone else seems impatient with progress, we can intervene on behalf of Task. An appropriate intervention requires creativity in response to the situation. Drawing attention toward ending the current phase of the process may address Task dysfunction. An example might be to suggest, \u201cWhat other ideas are there? <pause> We seem to have collected all ideas, let\u2019s vote!\u201d Providing an impatient group member with something to do that serves this phase of the process serves both to address the dysfunction and provide relief to that group member: \u201cAlex, would you be willing to write down the ideas as we all suggest them?\u201d<\/p>\n If we notice a lack of direction, we can intervene on behalf of Process. Very often groups forgo Process in favor of discussion, leading to wandering. A reasonable intervention on behalf of Process that is never too early is, \u201cBefore we go any further, what is our agenda?\u201d Even with agenda in place, groups wander. A direct intervention is appropriate and effective: \u201cWait! I think we are straying from the point.\u201d<\/p>\n If we notice participation is imbalanced, Relationship may be an issue. However, the cause might just as well be differences in expertise in the particular topic or in engagement style (see below). What we aim to ensure is that those who have something to contribute, do contribute. We might then serve Relationship by intervening, \u201cWe haven\u2019t heard from you for awhile: what are your thoughts?\u201d Or, perhaps to someone who is going on at length, \u201cExcuse me, we need to give others a chance to contribute, too.\u201d Intervening on behalf of Relationship can be most socially awkward, but failure to do so risks suboptimal results.<\/p>\n![\"The](\"https:\/\/legacy.nimbios.org\/wordpress\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/07\/model.jpg\")
<\/a>