Facilitating with Technology
New Technology and New Techniques to:
Increase Project Team Productivity
Optimize Individual Time
[email protected]
[email protected]
All Rights Reserved 1991-2000
(312) 664-1948
(847) 673-2288
Scenario

Project team needs to make a
collaborative decision

Decision is needed within a short time

Team members have limited time for
additional meetings
Jordan-Webb - All Rights Reserved 1991-2000
Collaborative Team Activities

In meetings, project teams will
perform some or all of the following
activities in various combinations and
iterations while producing their
desired outcomes and deliverables
Jordan-Webb - All Rights Reserved 1991-2000
Collaborative Team Activities








Ideation
Organization
Analysis
Evaluation
Integration
Exploration
Proposition
Decision
Jordan-Webb - All Rights Reserved 1991-2000
Conventional Response
(Work Harder!)

Organizing a Project Team Meeting
– Anyone who has tried to organize a meeting has
probably found out that it is very hard work!
– Just trying to agree on a mutually convenient date &
time, contacting team members, re-organizing
calendars and then re-scheduling when key members
cannot attend are some of the more complex
aspects.
– This is before taking into account the planning of the
desired outcomes, deliverables and activities of the
Jordan-Webb - All Rights Reserved 1991-2000
meeting.
Conventional Response
(Work Harder!)

Organizing a Project Team Meeting
– The notion to “work harder” to get things organized
ignores the fact that there are technologies and
techniques that can allow your team to “work
smarter”.
– The following worst case scenario represents how the
activities at a conventional 5-day planning workshop
might be organized - requiring all participants to be
present at all times.
Jordan-Webb - All Rights Reserved 1991-2000
Conventional Action Steps
(All Meetings Face-To-Face)

Phase I (face-to-face, synchronous)
– Orientation + Ideation + Organization
– Analysis + Evaluation

Phase II (face-to-face, synchronous)
– Ideation + Organization
– Analysis + Evaluation

Phase III (face-to-face, synchronous)
– Integration of Phases I & II + Exploration

Phase IV (face-to-face, synchronous)
– Exploration + Proposition

Phase V (face-to-face, synchronous)
– Proposition + Decision + Closure
Jordan-Webb - All Rights Reserved 1991-2000
Today’s Response
(Work Smarter!)

Organizing a Project Team Meeting
– The notion to “work smarter” to get things
organized utilizes technologies and techniques
that transform the concept of a “meeting” that no
longer requires everyone to be at the same place,
at the same time, for all of the time.
– In the new model of a meeting, activities
performed while participants are separated can be
integrated with activities that teams must perform
when they are face-to-face.
Jordan-Webb - All Rights Reserved 1991-2000
Today’s Response
(Work Smarter!)

Organizing a Project Team Meeting
– The following scenario represents how the
activities of a conventional 5-day planning
workshop might be re-organized into both
distributed and face-to-face activities, requiring
only one (1) day of face-to-face time.
– While some of the distributed activities would be
conducted at the same time (synchronously),
participants could join other distributed activities at
any time (asynchronously)
Jordan-Webb - All Rights Reserved 1991-2000
Today’s Action Steps
(Distributed + Face-To-Face)

Phase I (distributed, synchronous)
– Orientation + Ideation + Organization
– Analysis + Evaluation

Phase II (distributed, asynchronous)
– Ideation + Organization
– Analysis + Evaluation

Phase III (distributed, synchronous)
– Integration of Phases I & II + Exploration

Phase IV (sub-grouped, distributed, asynchronous)
– Exploration + Proposition

Phase V (face-to-face, synchronous)
– Proposition + Decision & Closure
Jordan-Webb - All Rights Reserved 1991-2000
Group Support Technology for
Virtual and Distributed Teams

Optimal Utilization of People - Your Most Valuable Resource
– Helping Individual Time Management
– Supporting Knowledge Management

Optimal Utilization of Time - A Non-Renewable Resource
– Reducing Cycle-Time and Expense
– Enhancing the Ability to React to Change

Support for Collaborative Decision-Making
– Bridging Time & Place Constraints
– Providing Structure & Group Memory

Better Outcomes
– Asking Better Questions
– Getting Better Answers
Jordan-Webb - All Rights Reserved 1991-2000
Groups Across Time and Place
Robert Johannsen’s Four Square Model
Same Time
Same Place
Different Time
Same Place
Same Time
Different Place
Different Time
Different Place
Jordan-Webb - All Rights Reserved 1991-2000
Technology for Group Work

Group Decision Support Systems
provide work environments & tools that:
– enable groups to do real work in:
• the same place - face-to-face
• different places - distributed
• any place - virtually
– enable teams to collaborate at:
• the same time - synchronously
• different times - asynchronously
• any time - virtually
Jordan-Webb - All Rights Reserved 1991-2000
Small Group Technology Support
(Synchronous, Same Time - Same Place)
Leader
Participants have
access to shared
workspace in
a fixed meeting space
Jordan-Webb - All Rights Reserved 1991-2000
Small Group Technology Support
(Synchronous, Sub-Grouped, Same Time - Same Place)
Leader
Sub-Group
A
Sub-groups have
access to shared
workspace in
a fixed meeting space
Sub-Group
B
Jordan-Webb - All Rights Reserved 1991-2000
Sub-Group
C
Virtual Group Technology Support
(Synchronous or Asynchronous, Same or Different Time - Different Place)
Leader
Participants join from a common
workspace or from their
own workspace at a
mutually agreed upon time
or at a time
convenient to their own schedule
Jordan-Webb - All Rights Reserved 1991-2000
“Out of the Box” Planning for
Virtual and Distributed Teams

Context for out-of-the-box planning
– Envisioning or creating group processes that do not exist within our current
frame of reference

Current State
– Difficult to coordinate individual schedules for face-to-face sessions
– Expensive and time consuming to convene teams for multiple days

Desired State
– Easy setup for distributed sessions while minimizing face-to-face sessions
– Team collaboration from convenient places at convenient times

Bridging the Gap
– Enabling facilitators and planners to design new processes that “distribute”
certain activities across time and place boundaries when:
• such activities might not necessarily require a face-to-face interaction
• time constraints make face-to-face interaction impossible
• budgetary constraints make face-to-face interaction impractical
Jordan-Webb - All Rights Reserved 1991-2000
Next Steps & Action Items

Contact us and help us learn about Your Organization
– Paul Collins
(847) 673-2288 [email protected]
– Reginald Taylor
(312) 664-1948 [email protected]
End Presentation
Jordan-Webb - All Rights Reserved 1991-2000