re: consensus workshops | <– Date –> <– Thread –> |
From: ruddick (ruddick![]() |
|
Date: Fri, 12 Dec 1997 10:50:53 -0600 |
Oberservation: seems to be a problem with professional jargon. Noting that several on the list have reported that they hired someone for a workshop on consensus building and were surprised that what they got was not about doing productive meetings and getting to a quality solution-- If you hire someone to do training in "consensus building" then they're going to focus on defining group values and building teams and cohesiveness. If you want to learn how to do meetings that are more efficient and focused, and to reach higher-quality decisions, then you want to hire someone to do training in "group problem-solving" or "decision-making" procedures. The two types of training are different--and you should probably expect highly-paid professionals to respond to the title you give to the session rather than the goals you might describe for it. I speak as a Ph.D. and college professor in communication--I've done teaching/training in group problem solving, and I've seen how professional trainers respond to our professional jargon. An offer--I'd be willing to do some really cheap workshops in group problem-solving for coho groups. It would be a way for me to have closer contact with the movement (something Dayton, OH currently doesn't offer me). TR
-
re: consensus workshops ruddick, December 12 1997
- RE: consensus workshops Rob Sandelin, December 13 1997
Results generated by Tiger Technologies Web hosting using MHonArc.