Anyone who has worked in a medium to large organisation will have had occasion to take part in an 'away-day' or facilitated workshop. We may love them or hate them, but few can deny the value of a well-constructed and organised workshop, skilfully facilitated and effectively managed.

These 'away-days' and workshops are commonly used to explore and develop a whole range of issues, including corporate strategies, organisational structures, models for service provision and for determining priorities for resource allocations. They provide an opportunity, away from the workplace environment, to bring together multidisciplinary teams to share ideas, learn from each other and develop common agendas. The workshop draws on the collective knowledge of individuals to create something that is greater than the sum of its parts.

The use of external facilitators is an important aspect of the workshop process. They take an entirely neutral role and have no authority to make decisions. They work with the participants, helping them to explore the issues, generate ideas and define solutions.

An externally facilitated workshop allows all parties to contribute on an equal basis without one side being seen as in control of the process. This is particularly useful were the process brings together customers, service users and people external to the organisation, or several organisations are coming together to develop common strategies and plans. The facilitator can also act as an arbiter when conflicts or disagreements arise. They can search through the information and misinformation to find the evidence, on which all can agree, 'the common ground'.

My experience of numerous workshops has provided an insight into the factors that make a successful facilitator, the workshop process and techniques, and the problem of dealing with the Mavericks. Each of these is covered in the four sections below. This insight will not make you workshop expert or a skilled facilitator. They are quite rare, requiring a combination of knowledge, skill, experience and most importantly the character and ability to get the most out of others. This insight will help you to understand the mechanics of the process and provide an understanding of what is involved in organising a workshop or an 'away-day'.

As in all things, preparation is the secret to success. You must consider the purpose of the workshop and the outcome the organisation is seeking. There is little point in holding a workshop where the answers are already known and the process is more about getting everyone onboard. Participants will quickly see through the tactics and either switch-off or rebel. You also need to be realistic about the objectives and what can be achieved. Workshops are time consuming and cannot provide the answer to complex problems in a few hours.

Second, you cannot expect the workshop to provide the answers neatly bound and presented ready for action. Workshops only inform the decision-makers of the options available, the choices to be made and the level of support for each. Ultimately those that lead must make the choice and someone must set out the case for that choice in a formal document.

Finally, there may be constraints within which the outcome must fit. These should be stated, and justified, from the start. They can be incorporated into a set of ground rules that ensure:

• The process is an inclusive one, with everybody having an equal right to contribute and be heard.
• There is no hierarchy.
• Each person is responsible for their own actions, including whether they participate or not.
• The facilitator is only responsible for the process not the outcome.
• The purpose of the workshop and its objectives are clearly defined.
• All constraints are stated and justified.
• There are processes to deal with conflicts and for participants to raise objections.
• Participants dedicate their time to the process, including switching off their mobile phones.
• The workshop is conducted in an informal an atmosphere as is practical.

The key to a successful workshop is the facilitator. They are the catalyst that builds the collective creativity of the group and allows it to find the solution everyone can support. The facilitator does not require an in depth knowledge of the matters under consideration. Their role is not to contribute to the debate but to help others to contribute.

The facilitator is responsible for planning and directing the workshop, managing the processes and monitoring the outcomes against the objectives. They need to:

• Be skilled in listening, including non-verbal language. If people feel you are listening and understanding they will say much more.
• Have good communication and presentation skills.
• Understand the difference between the process and content.
• Understand team dynamics and team roles.
• Be able to deal with conflict in a constructive way.
• Be supportive, particularly of those who may be unwilling to contribute.
• Be trusted by the group but not take on the role of leadership.
• Be impartial.
• Be flexible, able to think on one's feet particularly where objectives are being missed or processes becoming unproductive.
• Be a good time manager, focusing on the important and ignoring the irrelevant.
• Be good at negotiating, conciliation and mediation.

When working with groups on specific tasks, the facilitator only provides shape and substance to the process, they do not contribute to the content. A good facilitator will:

• Explain the objectives of the task and the outcomes required.
• Set the tone for the session, generally it will be informal, relaxed, and enjoyable.
• Document data and information, record the outcome and the conclusions of the group.
• Avoid a culture of blame or criticism.
• Ask rather than tell.
• Generate discussion by posing problems, challenging assumptions and reflecting comments back to the group.
• Give the group direction to ensure the objectives of the session are achieved.
• Help the group to communicate among themselves and build an atmosphere of co-operation, joint working and shared goals.
• Identify common issues, priorities and assumptions.
• Guide the discussions not lead them.
• Challenge assumptions and views, and seek out the misinformation.
• Feedback to the group and check the accuracy of their understanding.
• Check the outcomes against the targets and validate the results.
• Ensure everyone wins, not through compromise but through real solutions that meet everyone's needs.

The basic workshop process, which has three stages, should be treated as an exercise in project management. The facilitator will control and manage each stage taking guidance from the organisation on the objectives while defining the process and systems to be used to achieve the outcomes required. Based on the project management process, the three stages may be defined as:

1. Set the objectives and define the outcomes
2. Identify the resources
3. Define the structure and plan the process

Stage two - project execution

4. Initiate the process
5. Monitor and control the process
6. Review the outcomes against the objectives

Stage three - project close

7. Document the outcomes and act
8. Review and learn

There is a considerable amount of planning required before a workshop can take place. Inadequate preparation is a common reason for workshops failing to deliver. There must be a clear understanding of the objectives of the workshop and the outputs to be achieved. This will dictate the required resources, who should attend and the information to be made available.

It can be useful to give the workshop a clear and perhaps provocative label derived from the workshop objectives. Its regular use before and during the workshops will act as a constant reminder of the purpose of the workshop and create an identity to which everyone can relate.

Next, the structure of the workshop and the processes to be used should be mapped out. The detail will vary depending on the nature of the issues being considered and the outcomes required. Generally it is necessary to divide the process into several stages working from the macro to the micro level. Within each stage there will be a process of:

• data collection
• data collation
• data analysis
• identification of key issues, priorities, solutions, ideas, etc.
• feedback of results

The facilitator should play a lead role in mapping out these processes, defining the methods to be used and allocating the time for each task. They will need to prepare any documentation, identify any equipment required and determine the composition of the groups.

This stage starts as soon as the invitations are issued. Participants should be provided with details of the workshop, its objectives, the timetable, the ground rules and the names of the other participants.

The opening session should always cover the following points:

• The domestic arrangements (beverages, meals, car parking, etc.)
• Safety matters (fire escapes, smoking, first aid)
• Key contacts (for anyone who may need assistance or support)
• Emergency contact arrangements (where messages can be left and collected)
• Any changes to the programme or timetable.

Depending on how disparate the workshop attendees are, it may be necessary to include some form of 'ice-breaker' or brief team building exercise in the opening session. The approach adopted must be appropriate for the objectives of the workshop and the range and background's of the attendees.

One of the more common 'ice-breakers' is to get each person to state their name; who they represent; what they wish to get out of the workshop; and one fact about themselves that no one else in the room may know. Starting this process with the facilitators will help alleviate any initial resistance particularly if the facilitators make the last point as obscure and as humorous as possible.

The next part of the project initiation is the setting out of the ground rules. Although these should have been prepared beforehand and provided to the participants, adding suggestions from the floor will help to develop the sense that everyone's view is important. The processes and workshop techniques being used should also be explained along with any specific arrangements for breakout sessions and the membership of sub-groups.

It is also important for everyone to understand the facilitator's role. They are not in charge and do not have authority over the participants. They there to manage the process and help the participants to find their own answers.

Finally the initiation process should cover the objectives of the workshop, the expected outputs and what happens to the outputs when the workshop is finished. This may be incorporated into a speech by a senior person in the organisation, particularly as this adds to the message that everyone has a role to play in the process.

Before the workshops commence it can often be useful for everyone to 'take a look over the fence'. A 'key-note' presentation by someone who has been dealing with a similar situation elsewhere will help to put the objective of the workshop in context and start to generate thoughts and ideas in the minds of the participants. It will add to the evidence that everyone can draw on, including those who may feel they have little to contribute.

The workshop will then progress through a series of iterations using a variety of collective forums, small teams and focus groups, each given a specific task and associated outcome to fulfil. As each iteration is completed it is important to check back against the original objectives to ensure they are being met, the constraints have not been breached and a gap between what is possible and what is proposed has not developed. Having more than one group working on the same issue will help to give greater credence to the outcomes, particularly where they demonstrate a high degree of synergy.

Project close starts before the end of the workshop. The final session should involve the collective review of the outputs against the objectives. This will ensure the participants gain a general feel for the conclusions that will be written into the final report and presented to the decision-makers. Any strong objections or concerns raised during the workshop and not resolved should also be made known at this point.

The final report or documentation should be prepared and if appropriate published as quickly as possible. The actions and decision making processes that need to follow the completion of the report may, depending on how fundamental to the organisation the outputs are, be a normal part of the organisations procedures or dealt with as a specific project in their own right.

One aspect of the workshop process and project management that is often ignored is project evaluation. Individual workshops may be 'one-off' events, but the process will be repeated many times. If you fail to review and evaluate the process then valuable lessons may be missed.

The evaluation process can start by asking the participants to complete a questionnaire before they leave the workshop. You can also gather empirical data on which processes work and which processes fail to deliver. This data can be combined with a more formal review that also assess how useful and successful are the outcomes.

These can be divided into two elements, structural and process. Structural relates to the organisation of the workshop sessions, the use of plenary groups, breakout sessions, advocacy and individual working. Processes relate to the way in which the objectives and outputs are achieved within these structures. The choice may vary from session to session, be dictated by the subject under consideration or based on the style and culture of the organisation.

We all have a preferred way of working and studying. Some people are team players; others like to work on their own. Some people are better at learning through traditional 'talk and chalk'; others prefer more empirical methods.

The breakout sessions should be structured to take these differences into account. Using a plenary group for the whole process may mean those who are less confident and unwilling to speak in front of a large crowd exclude themselves. However some issues will need to be openly debated and agreed before the process can move forward.

Creating some diversity within the structure will give opportunities for everyone to contribute and avoid the process becoming just a series of meetings involving the same people discussing the same issues from the same viewpoint.

The participants can be divided into groups that are diverse as possible. You also need to consider whether the membership of the groups should be changed during the course of the workshop. This will stop any factions developing and allow everyone to interact with more people.

A simple technique to achieve the latter is to mark each persons name badge with a coloured shape. By carefully planning the mix of colours and shapes, you can group people in several ways. An alternative method is to create diverse groups but assign them different roles. One group may be asked to consider a task from the users perspective and another from the providers. These roles can be changed at will and to suit the task in hand.

Care must be taken not to continually change the membership or role of the groups. They must be given time to build into a co-operative and productive team. Otherwise you will be testing the facilitators skills to the limit and loosing the creative atmosphere they have worked hard to create.

Occasionally workshops will need to draw on the knowledge of an expert or someone acting as an advocate for a particular cause or viewpoint. Their role is quite different to that of the facilitator. They will offer advice, state facts and provide evidence to the group. Although they contribute to the group's collective knowledge and understanding, they should not set the direction of the discussion or decide the outcome. The former remains the responsibility of the facilitator and the later is the responsibility of the group as a whole.

Data collection is the process of gathering the knowledge, experience, views and ideas of the group and recording them in a form that can be used latter. There are several methods available for this process, the most common being to elect a scribe who writes down on a flip chart the information provided by the group.

An alternative method that helps the later stages of the process is to issue everyone with a set of large post-it-notes and get them to write their points down individually. These are then stuck to a wall and reviewed by the whole group. Where there are known classifications or predefined groupings for the data, the post-it-notes can be colour coded accordingly.

The facilitator may adopt an unconventional style to this process or give the group an obscure exercise. The aim is to change the way the group members think they should be behaving. This can often generate new ideas and spark creative thoughts. The process becomes self-supporting as more group members are drawn into the activity.

During this process, the facilitator will be carefully watching each group member ensuring no one takes control and no one is left out. They will also identify when someone disagrees with the general discussion or the information being used. Individuals must also feel they can raise issues about which they feel strongly without being ignored. Providing everyone with a yellow and red card is a simple method by which this can be achieved. If an individual disagrees (yellow) or objects (red) to a point, they raise a card.

The facilitator can stop the discussion and allow the individual an opportunity to state their case. Whether and how the matter is dealt with must be decided by the facilitator based on the reactions of the group. It is not the facilitator's role to dismiss the objection but to provide the opportunity for the group to consider its validity.

The outcome from this part of the process should be a collection of data representing the views and opinions of the group members. Do not exclude anything at this point, record everything in some form, even if it is only a prompt for further discussion later on in the process.

Having collected a wealth of data, the next stage is to identify the duplicates, common themes and overlaps. The process used will depend on the form in which the data was collected. If each item of data is on a post-it-note then the group can be instructed to move these about into groups each with a common theme. If the information in recorded as a list on a flip chart, the scribe can collate the data as it is received.

The outcome from this part of the process should be a collection of data grouped under a number of headings that reflect the objectives of the task.

At this point all the data collected must be asses to determine if it is:

• Valid - (is it fact or fiction?)
• Relevant - (does it add to the output or is it irrelevant?)
• Important - (is it key to achieving the objective?)
• Achievable - (is it realistic can it be achieved?)
• Complete - (is further information or data required that is not available from within the knowledge and experience of the group?)

This can only be achieved through a process of challenge and discussion where the facilitator takes the group through each point and they collectively decide on its merits.

The outcome from this part of the process will be a number of sets of data that provide the information the group can use to produce the required outcome.

This is the point in the process where the outcomes of the process are identified. The collections of data are moulded into statements that summarise the points raised. These statements should be as specific as possible, non-ambiguous and able to be supported by the evidence in the data. The facilitator will construct these statements from the information recorded and the guidance of the group.

Putting the outcomes is some order or rank may not be essential or a part of the objective of the workshop session. However, at some stage in the process priorities will need to be set. The process can be based on the consensus view of the group or by a system of weightings and scoring undertaken by each participant.

The final stage in the process is feeding back the results first to the group and then to the whole workshop. The group feedback is often undertaken by the facilitator who quickly recaps the process the group has followed, the outcomes that has been agreed and the summary to be presented to the whole workshop. The group then nominates a spokes person to make presentation. The other participants should also be given an opportunity to question and challenge the outcomes of the group.

The whole process of data collection, collation, analysis, scoring and feedback will be repeated several times over the course of a workshop. The outcomes from one session may become the subject of further and more detailed analysis in the next session. Alternatively, each session may deal with a single stage in a complex process. These should all be defined as part of the preparation for the workshop.

However, do not underestimate the potential for workshops to generate new issues and ideas that need to be incorporated into the process. Facilitators must ensure there is a degree of flexibility within the programme to accommodate such events.

One large room, with a capacity to accommodate all the participants is essential. This should be supported by smaller rooms for the breakout sessions. The large room should only be used by several groups at the same time if they can be adequately separated and not over heard by each other.

Breaks and catering should be provided in a separate area so the noise of setting-up and clearing away does not interrupt the workshops.

Always visit the location and consider the following factors:

• Ventilation - Will it be adequate when the room is full? Is it noisy?
• Acoustics - Do you need a sound system? Few people have strong voices that can reach the back of a large hall.
• Layout - Can everyone see the screen, or does the OHP or projector obstruct the view?
• Are the chairs comfortable?
• Are the breakout rooms easily accessible?
• During work sessions can everyone be seated around a table or in a circle, so no individual can become the focal point of the group?
• Is there adequate parking?
• Is the venue able to provide sufficient equipment (flip charts, etc.) for every room?

Ensure you have a wide cross section of participants. Consider providing people outside your organisation, particularly members of the public financial or logistic support so they can attend. Provide everyone with a name badge and arrange for a small group of key personnel to welcome them to the workshop and circulate among those from outside the organisation.

Time management is a key part of the workshop process. Be realistic about the time allowed for each task and session the stick rigidly to the programme. Trying to change the process and timings on the fly will lead to workshops running over and missed objectives.

Limit sessions to 60 minutes where ever possible. Individuals can become very absorbed in the tasks. Concentrating for long periods can be very exhausting and people will become tired and unresponsive. Facilitators should also allow themselves time to prepare between sessions and time to collate results.

A Maverick is defined as an unorthodox or independent-minded person. It is derived from the name of an American engineer and rancher S A Maverick who, at a time when cattle barons held considerable economic and political influence, would not brand his cattle. Today the term has a slightly derogatory meaning and is assigned to anyone who is seen as unwilling to follow the accepted norm or acts in a way that may be at variance to the best interests of the majority.

Within the workshop setting Mavericks can be beneficial, acting as 'devils advocate' and challenging views and opinions to ensure they stand-up to scrutiny. However, they can also be very destructive, grabbing the focus of the workshop and disrupting the process. The latter will be working at several levels all with the sole aim of ensuring the outcome is based on their views and ideas.

The tactics they employ include:

• Intimidating other participants to either follow their viewpoint or make them feel sufficiently uncomfortable not to contribute.
• Deriding the whole process by either claiming the outcome has been predefined or the process is fatally flawed.
• Manoeuvring themselves into a position of power or a bargaining position that must be agreed before progress can be made.
• Developing supporting factions by lobbying participants before the workshop.
• Using evidence, misinformation and hearsay to counter viewpoints opposite to their own.

Dealing with mavericks is not easy. The facilitator's preparations for the workshop should include the selection of attendees and the identification of those with strong views. Not inviting someone because they may disagree with the process or potential outcome will serve to diminish the validity of the process. Mavericks must be faced and their concerns dealt with.

Often workshops are related to major organisational change, and individuals may well feel threatened by the process or potential outcome. They might consider their function or position in the organisation could be downgraded or subjected to open criticism, they may feel their position is at risk or changes will be outside of their control.

Ensuring the facilitators meet these individuals as part of the workshop preparation process will help to identify their concerns and how they should be managed. This decision can only be made based on an understanding of the individual and the implications of the workshop.

Workshops are best reserved for major issues, complex problems and bringing together organisations, users and the public to deal with sensitive issues. They are not an exercise to be entered into lightly. However, facilitators can be used to great benefit in situations where a workshop would be inappropriate or excessive.