by Michael Patrick

Created on: February 03, 2009

The job of a facilitator is to guide a discussion, not dominate it. Discussion and civil debate is the way we compose and state our opinions, listen to those of others who enhance or oppose us, and learn information or grasp sensitivities we may not have previously considered. That said, the facilitator will always be challenged by persons with strong opinions who may try to dominate the debate and "take over" with strident statements intended to silence opposition.

It happens all the time. Experienced facilitators know the syndrome and there are many easy and polite means available to deal with it.

First, a facilitator should suppress personal opinions and be a neutral moderator. Easier said than done and that's why not all of us can be a facilitator.

Second, the facilitator must introduce him-herself with a clear set of rules for debate and subject points to be discussed. It's important for everyone to understand the rules for the discussion.

Third, in any discussion of a meaningful or sensitive issue comprising more than three people (plus the facilitator), at least one will try to "take over" and attempt to badger less opinionated participants into submission.

Fourth, a good facilitator will be able to encourage the expression of strong positions while ensuring that there are openings for the reflection of others' alternative or opposing ideas and the opportunity to articulate them.

A domineering speaker can be annoying, but it's not as important for the facilitator to stop the speaker as it is to guide the speaker. Remember, the facilitator is an objective leader, not a subjective participant.

It's useful if the facilitator has an easel with a big flipchart pad on which he or she writes down cogent points being made by any speaker. It provides an opportunity to stop a strident speaker with the comment: "That's a good point. Let me write that on the board. What did you say again?"

This tactic recognizes the compulsive speaker for quality but stops him or her long enough to let others digest the comments and develop a response. The facilitator then points to another participant and asks, "What do you think about that?"

Fifth, a smart facilitator will have a prewritten agenda (declared at the outset) of major points of discussion. It's not so important to cover all the points as it is to interrupt a domineering speaker with the declaration: "Okay, thank you for that. Now, let's move on to the next point."

There will always be someone in any group discussion who will, if allowed, dominate out of ego or sincere passion some part of the debate. It is useless to challenge or question such a speaker lest it focus everyone on that person rather than ensuring an open debate of other new ideas.

It's much better to let the domineering speaker talk until he or she runs out of gas. On any one point, there is only so much to say. It takes only a few minutes for the speaker to become redundant and repetitive, at which point it's easy to move on.

There is that rare circumstance when the facilitator faces people who are absolutely unwilling to listen and want only to filibuster their opinions on the rest of the discussion group; people who don't let anyone else talk and won't accept any interruption.

At those times, there are three things a facilitator can do: 1) ask the offenders to leave; 2) stop all discussion; 3) shoot em.

Learn more about this author, Michael Patrick.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.