Group agreements: permission to be different
Steve Ray looks at how the humble agreement embraces diversity and dissent.
In the many years I’ve been a facilitator, I have always found the process of creating group agreements the most important cornerstone for any group that wants to do good work together. Any group that has made time to generate agreements, and that’s had the conversations that explore the different needs of everyone in the group, has already practised collaboration and experienced the power that diversity brings to a group.
The individuals of the group have also discovered the paradox of agreements: designed not to get people to agree on everything, but to help people know that the strength of a group is to be found in its diversity, its support for dissenting ideas and the fact that everyone has something to contribute.
That’s all within the context of the agreement-forming process being done well of course. Hence the point of this article, which is to dig a bit deeper into what’s needed to make them sing.
We agree on the how, not the what
Agreement formation is all about establishing an environment in which we can collectively feel comfortable enough to step in and contribute to the work of the group – to truly be a participant, not a bystander. It’s not the content we are agreeing on, it's the way in which we engage. So it’s actually okay to disagree if that’s what the group is after.
What’s most important in the process is for people to feel like they have a bit of a road map of how interaction between everyone will unfold. Knowing that things such as listening to each other will be valued. Knowing that other important things are more likely to happen: all voices being allowed to contribute, “dumb” questions being okay, speaking kindly, being respectful of different opinions, coming back on time after breaks, having fun together, and so on are. These are all examples of agreements that might be generated by a group to help them work well together.
When agreement-making fails
When agreements fail we need to ask ourselves whether or not their formation followed a process where they had the best chance of surviving when they were tested. Agreements are there for those moments when we lose awareness of the needs of others because we have become so caught up in the content. If there is integrity in their formation, then agreements can act like a gentle web holding and catching people even in moments when individuals are no longer conscious of them. Some part of their unconscious seems to remember the commitment they made to both themselves and others at the beginning – revealing the power of the social contract and our desire at a deep level to work well together.
There are common traps where we fail to honour agreement-formation. For example, unless group members feel truly engaged in and responsible for the creation of the agreements, the final words on the page will have no power. So any facilitator-generated list of “agreements” is just a list of rules in disguise. Or, if as facilitators, we rush the process because we want to get on to the “real work” we’ve missed the point that this is the real work – potentially the most important work of the session.
The biggest fail in the process of creating agreements is choosing not to do them at all. To do this is to leave the group as a “collection of individuals” who have been denied the opportunity to engage in the wrestle of the differing needs in the room that can help reveal what’s important and what’s needed uniquely by everyone. Skipping agreements also means an opportunity to create “groupness” has been lost – the chance for tangible connection between the individuals born of the experience, gone.
Without agreements, the group is a minefield, a place where individuals will often sit back watching – trying to figure out the dynamics at play, often too fearful to engage in the content because they haven’t yet worked out if it’s safe enough to say anything at all.
Think about how effective a group is in this environment, and what kind of quality outcome is possible. A group where no agreement-forming has taken place makes the work of the facilitator so much more difficult because the responsibility for the group rests solely with them. The opportunity for group members to act more coherently and take responsibility for how they show up can so easily be lost when the value of agreement formation is misunderstood.
Don’t borrow from prior lists of agreements
Agreement-making in my view never works if you use the approach “here’s one I made earlier”. What’s good and important for one group may be irrelevant to another. As a facilitator we should be cautious of offering any suggestions unless, from experience, our offerings are likely to be important to the needs of the group and have yet to be mentioned by anyone else.
An example where this might happen is when it feels like you are coming towards the end of the process. If it hasn’t come up I might ask a group "what do you want to do about confidentiality? Is it important in this space?" So there’s an offer, but it's over to the group to work through the details themselves. "What do you want to do about devices?" is another question that is important to put to the group because there is such a spectrum of expectations on the value of devices and their potential impact on the effectiveness of a group if not discussed.
So when people hear the needs of others in the group, they are more confident that someone else isn’t idly texting to a friend in the middle of an important group moment later because they now know the device is being used for taking notes (for example). It turns out you can be flexible. People's varying needs can be met if space is given for discussion and context is provided.
Breaking agreements is not a deal breaker
People will inevitably break agreements, because we are all human. What we don’t want to do is act as if someone has broken a RULE. Rules have an energy about them, like they are inviolable laws that if broken will have nasty consequences. When agreements are broken then it's the job of a really good facilitator to notice and name what they are seeing and mirror that to the group: "hey everyone, I'm noticing we're talking over the top of each other as we get into what is clearly a hot topic. Let's remember our agreements and try to leave a bit of space for people to contribute well before we jump in. But it's great to see there is so much energy on this".
In my experience, when agreements – as formed by the group – are broken, there is often something important going on. When there is some emotional charge coming into the space things that matter are being discussed. As facilitators, we need to catch these moments and dig deeper to find out what's going on:
"Hey can we pause here? There's a bit of conflict coming up and I'm noticing some frustration in the room. Let's just slow down and make sure we keep breathing, like we mentioned in the agreements. What do you think is going on?"
When agreements are in place, you can give the group a chance to reflect on what is happening so they have the power to shift and work better together. As facilitators we are here to empower the individuals of the group, not to control them. Helping people to step into their responsibility to work well together becomes possible with agreements.
The key to agreement forming
The way agreements are created is the key to their power. How have they been put together? What was the process? Done well, they build enough safety for people to feel like they can take risks. A safe enough space or a brave space is what you are trying to facilitate, all of which is transparently communicated to the group so everyone is brought into the underlying purpose of what you are creating together.
Agreement creating is a high-end facilitation skill where we, the facilitator, need to be totally tuned in to both the needs of the individuals and the emerging dynamics between those individuals. Committing a mere five minutes to the process in lip service fashion, is pointless as the alchemy of agreement-making is in the forging that happens within the conversations between people - facilitated with awareness and care. Through these conversations, trust and safety start to appear - the very foundations needed for the group to do great work together.
Checklist
Here's a template for an agreement-forming process that, with good facilitation, can work wonders.
We are of service to the group
This is most important to remember when we are facilitating. We need to faithfully capture what’s offered from the group, and be careful not to paraphrase if we want people to feel heard.
Start with a blank whiteboard/butchers paper sheet
You’re starting from scratch. I ask one simple question that has never failed me: "What's going to help us work well together today?" As a facilitator you are part of the process but are also making it clear you are not the "boss", just another punter but with a particular role. You are focusing largely on process, not content, to help the group do good work together.
Watch what’s happening
As people make suggestions you are looking for nodding heads of approval or equally, crossed arms or frowns of uncertainty or dissent to help you uncover what else is important to others, some of whom may not at first speak up. Flag to everyone what you are seeing as you begin to scribe. “Okay, I’m seeing a few heads nodding so let’s capture that suggestion”. To a potentially different view and reading the body language: “Ang, you look deep in thought. Is there anything you’d like to add?” You are facilitating the conversation and modelling that it's okay to have disagreement because this is about finding out the different needs of the people in this particular group.
Validate and stand by people’s suggestions
Some agreements will be really important to some people, and not to others. But, the key is that those who offer a suggestion, are really heard by the whole group and where needed you stand by them: "It sounds like ‘let's not speak over the top of each other’ is a big one for you Lucy. Does that make sense to everyone? Speaking over the top can be a sign that we are not listening to others. I know I have to personally watch out for that one when I get excited as a group member."
It’s all about the conversation
The magic of agreements is in the conversations that happen when they are first formed. Because here’s the really amazing thing: it’s not all about the words you capture, but rather, what happens to a group and its members during the conversations. People change. They connect, they feel heard and they start to tune into the needs of others, whether they agree with them or not.
When we start from a premise and a belief that we can reach agreement on how we work well together, mountains can be moved. When we realise that we are not signing up to a contract that asks us all to agree on everything, any one of us can begin to trust the space, the people in it and the facilitator. When we are encouraged to listen to everyone and in turn are heard by others when we speak, we step in with a willingness to truly collaborate. We discover that diversity brings strength to the group and that it's okay to disagree. It turns out we can both disagree and be respectful of each other’s different ways of seeing, knowing that a different perspective to our own actually brings more to the table, not less.
When agreements are generated through a process that is underpinned by strong principles, it’s possible to create spaces of incredible potential because we move into a zone where being right or having the best argument is no longer the goal. The goal instead shifts to one where embracing difference and seeing what emerges is what matters. When we are able to sit with difference even if we don’t agree, new ways of seeing and being together in the world are possible.