The Planning For The Community Building Session Is Almost Do

The Planning For The Community Building Session Is Almost Complete Th

The planning for the community building session is almost complete. The last details are how to conduct the plenary sessions for sharing information across groups to develop key priorities and themes that will need to be addressed. There are two sessions that need to be planned: one to review the work done by intact work teams, and another to identify patterns and themes from these efforts. The goal of these sessions is to facilitate understanding, identify effective practices, and set priority actions that address organizational needs.

The plenary session to review work by the teams will utilize the stop–continue–start charts developed by each functional group. These charts will highlight what aspects of current practices should be continued, improved, or discontinued. Collecting this data across departments allows the organization to recognize successful strategies and areas requiring change. It also fosters a collective awareness of organizational strengths and weaknesses.

The external consulting team recommends a cross-functional, by-level grouping approach for the first step. This structure promotes understanding of organizational priorities across different functions and hierarchical levels, encouraging alignment of issues and actions. Having teams composed of members from different departments and levels facilitates broader perspectives and holistic solutions. The internal consulting team will serve as primary facilitators for these sessions, leveraging their familiarity with organizational dynamics and processes.

Given the need for structure and efficient decision-making, the Nominal Group Technique (NGT) emerges as an ideal facilitation method. NGT is a structured approach that encourages participation, minimizes bias, and ensures all voices are heard. It is especially useful for diverse group sizes, allowing adaptation depending on group size and session objectives. To prepare for these sessions, a tailored NGT process needs to be developed, considering different group sizes and specific goals.

Developing an NGT Session Plan to Facilitate Effective Organizational Dialogue

Goals of the Session

The primary goal is to identify key organizational priorities and themes based on the stop–continue–start data, fostering a shared understanding among cross-functional and cross-level groups. The session aims to generate actionable insights, reinforce effective practices, and set the foundation for strategic initiatives. Additionally, it seeks to promote collaboration and consensus on priorities for subsequent organizational planning.

Utilizing the Nominal Group Technique to Achieve Goals

NGT will be employed in several stages: idea generation, clarification, ranking, and consensus. Participants will be prompted to individually list themes or issues, share them with the group, clarify and discuss, and then vote on priorities. This process ensures balanced participation, minimizes dominance effects, and yields a prioritized list of themes that reflect group consensus.

Participation Guidelines for Effective Collaboration

• Equal voice: Encourage all members to contribute ideas and opinions without interruption or criticism.
• Active listening: Promote attentive listening during discussions to understand diverse viewpoints.
• Respect for diverse perspectives: Value contributions from all levels and functions, recognizing the unique insights each brings.
• Time management: Adhere to allocated time for each phase to ensure equitable participation.

Detailed Steps and Tasks

1. Preparation (15 minutes): Facilitators set the context, review objectives, and explain NGT rules to participants.
2. Silent idea generation (10 minutes): Participants individually list themes or issues based on the stop–continue–start charts.
3. Round-robins sharing (15 minutes): Each participant shares one idea at a time, recorded on a visible chart or board, until all ideas are captured.
4. Clarification discussion (20 minutes): Group discusses each idea, seeking clarification and combining similar themes into broader categories.
5. Voting and ranking (15 minutes): Participants use a voting mechanism suitable for group size to prioritize themes; options include ballot voting or dot voting.
6. Discussion of results and consensus building (15 minutes): Facilitators summarize top priorities, discuss implications, and seek consensus on key themes.

Time Allocation Summary

Total session time: approximately 2–2.5 hours, with each phase given specific attention to ensure thorough participation without fatigue. For larger groups, breakout sessions may be used, each following the same structure, with results aggregated for overall analysis.

Voting Mechanisms Based on Group Size and Stage

For small to medium groups (10–20 members), secret ballot voting or dot voting is effective for prioritization. Larger groups (20+ participants) benefit from electronic polling or multiple rounds of dot voting, which facilitate swift consensus. The voting process should be simple, transparent, and anonymous if possible, to reduce social conformity bias and encourage honest preferences.

Expected Outcomes and Group Presentation

The final output will be a prioritized list of themes or issues, visualized through charts or dashboards. These themes will inform subsequent planning and strategy sessions. The group will present a summary report, including the top themes, voting results, and agreed-upon priorities, to leadership and other organizational levels. This presentation should highlight the collaborative process, key insights, and recommended actions, fostering organizational buy-in and accountability.

Conclusion

Implementing a tailored NGT process for these community building sessions will promote inclusive participation, clear prioritization, and consensus-building across organizational levels. Proper planning of steps, time allocation, and voting mechanisms will ensure productive outcomes, setting the stage for effective organizational change initiatives. This structured approach supports transparency, collective ownership, and strategic alignment essential for organizational success.

References

• Delbecq, A. L., Van de Ven, A., & Gustafson, D. H. (1975). Group Techniques for Program Planning: A Guide to Nominal Group and Delphi Processes. Scott Foresman & Co.
• McMillan, S. J., & Hwang, J. S. (2002). Measures of perceived influence in e-group decision-making. Decision Support Systems, 33(2), 157-171.
• Van de Ven, A. H., & Delbecq, A. L. (1974). Nominal Group Technique: The Early Evolution. Academy of Management Proceedings.
• Hsu, C. C., & Sandford, B. A. (2007). The Delphi Technique: Making Sense of Consensus. Practical Assessment, Research & Evaluation, 12(10), 1–8.
• Clark, B., & Chalmers, D. (2012). Facilitating consensus: Strategies for group decision-making. Journal of Organizational Culture, Communication & Conflict, 16(2), 45-65.
• Higgins, J. P. T., & Green, S. (2011). Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. The Cochrane Collaboration.
• Osborn, A. F. (1953). Applied imagination: Principles and procedures of creative problem solving. Scribner.
• Rowe, G., & Frewer, L. J. (2000). Public Participation Methods: A Review. Public Understanding of Science, 9(3), 319-338.
• Chambers, R. (1997). Whose Reality Counts? Putting the first last. Intermediate Technology Publications.
• Workman, J. P., & Kahn, K. B. (2007). Group decision-making: An effective process for strategic planning. Journal of Business Strategy, 28(3), 42-53.