Communication via leader

Editors rating: 
No votes yet
Users rating: 
Your rating: None
No votes yet
Alternative names: 
Constrained Communication, Activity variation
Level of process: 
Intent or purpose: 
Improve understanding of how teams work when communication is constrained.
Used as component of: 
Team building, Leadership development, Communication workshops. This can be used in a variety of situations such as: Conflicts Creativty, a group deciding too quickly, Difficult people and/or situations, Disagreements, Silent Participants, and Undiscussable Topics.
Recognizable Components: 
Team building and leadership experiential training
Types of Participants: 
Any who have to communicate within or between teams
Usual or Expected Outcomes: 
Participants learn how to combine planning and execution skills with the the difficutlies often faced in real world communication, and importance of putting good communication plan as a priority. Some breaking of the rules is likely and is useful in feedback, considering the potential pitfalls of not following the chains of communication.
Level of participation: 
Lessons can be learnt from whatever level of participation occurs. Best with strong desire in participants to succeed at activity.
Ideal Conditions: 
Participants who have already taken part in some experientail team building activities.
Potential Pitfalls: 
If not strongly facilitatted, adherence to the rules may break down either through deliberate subversion (in order to "win") or by participants getting carried away.
How is success evaluated: 
How well were the rules adhered to? Did the team(s) succeed in the activity? Do they recognise during feedback that this is a good analogy of real-world challenges? Have they learnt lessons in how to improve communications?
Examples of successes and failures: 
Succeeds where suitable activity is chosen and well-facilitated. Once nearly drwoned a director, due to delays in team communicating a warning to him about the un-preparedness of a raft, whcih could have been a failure (except the lesson was well-learned from this, and good H&S skills by the facilitators prevented any real danger).
Type of Facilitator-Client Relationship: 
Facilitator should have good knowledge of actual real-world activities and culture at the client, to ensure exercise can be related to these during feedback.
Level of Difficulty to Facilitate: 
Facilitation skills required
Facilitator Personality Fit: 
Facilitator must be comfortable monitoring multiple activities at same time, and strong enough to enforce some strict rules.
Setting and Materials: 
A sufficiently complex team building activity, that requires the participants to be doing multiple tasks at one time to succeed. Enough room that the participants can split into multiple sub-teams that will not easily over-hear each other.
Resources Needed: 
None, unless required for base activities.
Pre-Work Required: 
Facilitator must be sure the activity chosen is suitable.

The basic process is to run any team-building experiential activity that requires the participants to be doing multiple tasks at one time, which at some point requrie a level of co-ordination. (An example is a challenge that requires the building of equipment - a raft, hoist, etc while others are preparing to use this by mapping out routes, preparing guide ropes etc, although can also be done with smaller scale and indoor "construction" type activities). Make them split into sub-teams to do the tasks, either during their initial planning or by allocating them.
Appoint or allow them to choose a leader (who is not part of one of the sub-teams).
Instruct them that NO direct communication is allowed between the sub-teams, they can only communicate via the leader. The facilitator must enforce this strictly, and have penalties for any who break this rule (e.g. make them start the current task again).
Run the activity to its end, succesful or not, and then debrief.

How flexible is the process?: 
Follow-Up Required: 
Ensure that the debrief focuses on the issues of communication and leadership, rather than on the mechanics of the activity itself. The focus should be on how the difficulties of having to communicate via certain channels makes the task more complex, but that this is often a real-world constraint and is there for good reasons. If anyone broke the rules, then discuss the impact of this - if everyone is expecting that communication WILL go via the leader and in one case it doesn't, what impact can this have?
Bernard Gore
Derived from: 
Variant experienced in some team building activities, extracted as a generic variation that can be applied to many activities.
Epistemological Framework: 
History of Development: 

Variant experienced in some team building activities, extracted as a generic variation that can be applied to many activities.

License Model: 
Free (or unattributable)
Namesort descending City Country
Dynamic Vision Consultanting PORT ELIZABETH South Africa