Best practices in dealing with distruptive participants (February sponsored topic)
Let's throw another topic out for discussion. This month we will talk about disruptive participants. The people who don't want to play the game or do the activity. The people who want to be vocal and heckle without seeing it through to a debrief.
What do we do about them to get them involved, or at the very least, to not have them derail the class/activity?
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Greg Koeser on
-
Two Responses on our old website that I wanted to make sure was migrated here: First from Claudia.
claudia arpaia, rome, Italy
good topic! i have got some suggestions... king of participants that I 've meet so frequently ... and my training is experiential, often outdoor training
1. at the very beginning of ant training course I play a warm up activity that is involving even if you, as a participant, do not want to be involved at all ... yes is very simple , it is called 'how many squares (see attached description and tools!);
2. when I present the ground rules I always add the rule 'challenge by choice' ... very clearly ... I assure everybody that they have the right to not participate at all, or participate at the level of involvement that they decide, they do NOT have to say why, they can decide to start an activity and to stop at any step of the activity itself; the only thing that I ask is to stay with the group (do not go away for a walk, do not read the newspaper...)... and I ask if this rule 'challenge by choice' is ok for everybody (it is impossible that someone says 'no')
3. If a participant do not participate for any reason (maybe
3. I ask for help. If a participant decide, for example, to not play that activity ... I ask to HELP me in some way ... 'please could you keep the time? may ask you to help me to check if everybody is following safety rules ... may you take the camera for pictures? ... and so on ...
The point is WHY participants are disruptive? fear? stress? shyness? hungry with their company (and you represents the company) ...
Hope it helps.... and understable ...I am Italian and my English is ... not perfect! :-)
p.s. sorry for my English ... - Attachments:
-
-
HOW_MANY_SQUARES.doc, 29 KB -
how_many_squares_pp_2.ppt, 199 KB
-
-
-
This reply is from Pierre Corbeil, Drummondville, Canada
If the participants are students in a class, then two arguments are possible: 1) trust the teacher and participate in an activity that he has created; 2) the game is course work and you will do it and like it.
However, the fact remains that playing a game is still synonymous with futile activity for many people, of all ages. School has imposed the idea that learning is listening to someone talk and taking notes, the regurgitation of which will produce a reward. Even students can be so locked into this model that they can, yes, complain to higher authority that teaching is not going on.
One can deal with this at a rational level by addressing the fears directly: fear is one of the three big motivators (sex and laughter, since you ask). Besides the conviction that time is being wasted, there is also the fear of novelty and the fear of failure.
It is also possible to organize the game with smaller and larger increments of discovery. Fearful or sceptical participants can be given tasks that will favour at least a small step of discovery. Providing documentation on the game situation, such as chronologies or data, will reassure the participant that he is at least getting information. In debriefing the game, guide the participants into linking the game events with the real-world events or facts.
If the participants are divided into teams, then it is possible to distribute the perplexed among the teams so that they will be supported and guided by the other participants. Inter-personal activity is one key variable in making games good learning tools.
Allowing a participant to merely observe should be a last choice when no other option is available. Some time should be found to discuss the participant's choice later, and within a business environment, should probably be discussed with the participant's colleagues or superior. If there is some kind of block in the participant's mind about active learning, it is helpful to encourage self-evaluation, pertinent to wider questions then a desire or not to participate in a game.
-
Permalink Reply by Jan Fronek on -
Here a few thoughts and questions that help me to cope with this topic (in the field of ADULT training):
1. Set the rules, including "challenge by choice", which means that "you don´t need to participate if you really don´t want to, but stay with group please, there are important things happening". And as stated in another reply below, keep them "on task" - give them some useful little tasks to do.
2. How many are they (those disruptive ones)? Is it just 1-2, is it a half of the group, or all of them? My reactions will be very different in those cases. Should I respond to the behaviour of one exhibitionist? Has the whole group expected something else - so let´s create a space for their current needs.
3. How "disruptive" are they? What do they really do and what is my inner (emotional) reaction to this behaviour? The answer to this builds the basis for an adequate feedback for the participant, which is sometimes enough to make him rethink his actions and join the group.
4. Try to understand them. It is easier said than done, but it is really worth giving a try. Imagine, if you were the one, the disruptive participant, what makes you behave like that? What brings you to this class/training? Were you forced to come? What else would you like to do? What happened to you in last few days? Because firstly you must understand them to be able to show emapthy. And emapthy is an air-cushion for conflicts.
5. Remind the goals of the meeting. "As we have agreed on objectives A, B and C, I suggest doing activity 1, 2, 3, because my experience says it usually helps to achieve the goals. How does your behaviour help to achieve the goals?"
6. Give them options. People like options, it gives them freedom to choose. "OK, I understand it doesn´t make sense to you to participate in this activity. You have 4 possibilities now - you can help me to take pictures of the group, you can stay here in silence, you can go drink a coffee for 20minutes, or just join the group and accept the rules. What do you prefer?"
7. Make notes about their and your behaviour and emotions. Write your trainer´s journal to help you analyze your experiences.
8. People are just people, guidelines do not always work :-)
-
Permalink Reply by Rick Boersma on -
A bit of stream of consciousness....
I think it's fair to say that simulations are not for everyone, and having said that I find that it's pretty infrequent that I have a participant who is overtly disruptive. In those cases i will address it directly, and use some variation on "why are we here?" - making the point that simulations are an important to bridge the gap between theory and practice. I will use analogies that they are familiar with such as CPR and 1st aid training (where 80% of the time is spent in practice) or flight simulators to illustrate. Then I will make the direct link between the simulation we're doing and the course objectives. For instance if the group has spent time reviewing a model (for example Tuckman's Model of Team Development) and ways to move through the stages more quickly, I will say that the simulation is a chance to experience that process and if you apply what you've learned, you will see the benefits in the simulation - assuming the model/theory is actually applicable/useful.
A larger problem then overt disruption is quiet disruption. Easier to ignore, but can be insidious if left unchecked. Again, its important to address it sooner rather than later - find out what's the cause and address it. Obviously the reasons can vary, so you have to be flexible and credible in addressing it. As a side-bar issue, often the issue is not the simulation at all, but cynicism on the part of the participant(s) that their organization/management actually "walks the talk" when it comes to the skills, behaviors, competencies, etc. that are being explored in the classroom and sim.
In some cases - and this is especially true with front-line groups in my experience - there is a fundamental aversion to training, and especially classroom training. Keeping the theory/ presentation to a minimum and getting them into the sim/activity and dialogue ASAP is key.
As Pierre points out, shifting people around is also key. Folks tend to sit in their cliques, and one or two "bad apples" will feel freer to act-out and will infect "the barrel" of their table much more quickly if they are sitting with people that they know. In my experience, strangers tend to be more polite. A corollary of this is that shifting people around helps you balance out the strong-team/ weak-group dynamic that can happen and which can undermine a sub-group's morale over the course of a day.
I have also on occasion given individuals the option of leaving the classroom - with the proviso that if they stay they participate actively. I don't think I've ever had someone leave in those circumstances, and although admittedly this might be partially because of extrinsic factors (they have to take the class) I've found that this defuses the situation ...
Which brings me to my final point: credibility. In the case where you can credibly address the concerns of someone who is disruptive, the rest of the class will jump on-side with you, and will usually keep them in line for the rest of the class. This may simply be that they will no longer reward the disruptive behavior by giving the individual the attention they are seeking. There are a number of factors that influence credibility of course : ranging from course content and materials, the efficacy of the sim., but most of all it's about your own confidence as a facilitator, and then trusting and managing the power of group-dialogue.
We use simulations to hold up a mirror to reality - a disruption is the real thing and (I can't believe I'm about to say this) and a teachable moment.
-
Permalink Reply by Sivasailam Thiagarajan on
-
I have a game called "Participants from Hell" which deals with this topic. We have used it in our facilitator training classes. We have also used it during training sessions with participants to help set up ground rules.
You can get instructions for this game at http://www.thiagi.com/pfp/IE4H/september2009.html .
-
-
After analyzing tactics for handling specific types of disruptive behaviors, we induced a set of strategies for reducing, removing, or reconciling all types of disruptive behaviors. Here's the list:
Improve the trust level. Make it easy for the team members to give constructive feedback to each other.
Trust the team. Given time, most teams will bring disruptive members under control.
Trust the process. If you focus on the procedure, disruptive behaviors may stop by themselves.
Develop basic guidelines. During the first meeting, establish ground rules for appropriate behaviors during the activity.
Reward appropriate behaviors. Recognize and reinforce supportive participant behaviors.
Share the responsibility. Ask the participants to handle disruptive behaviors whenever they notice things going wrong.
Model productive participation. Practice what you preach. Ask others to demonstrate cooperative, disciplined behavior.
Divide and conquer. Break the participants into smaller groups. This reduces the size of the group and increases individual air-time.
Try the buddy system. Organize the participants into pairs. Ask each person to control his or her partner.
It takes two. Work with a co-facilitator. Take turns to focus on the participants and on the process.
The silent treatment. If things get tense, declare a time-out. Have the participants analyze what's going on. Discuss their feelings, then return to the task.
Take a detour. Have a standard procedure for tabling a topic and moving on to less-controversial issues.
Send subliminal messages. Decorate the meeting room walls with appropriate posters (for example, Blame the process, not the person!).
Conduct a debriefing. After each meeting, ask participants to evaluate their performance and to establish ground rules for future sessions.
Conduct an off-line meeting. Provide constructive feedback to a disruptive participant during a break.
-
-
I love disruptive participants.
1. In the true spirit of improvisation, I consider everything they do as a gift. I would rather work with disruption than with apathy.
2. All disruptive behaviors contain valuable feedback. Don't suppress the symptoms. Find the cause and co-create appropriate strategies.
Disruption? What disruption?
-
Permalink Reply by François Lavallée on -
One of the problem I encounter with difficult participants is when I AM the difficult participant or part of a group with one. Not when I am the trainer/facilitator. I would say most experienced trainers/facilitators have a pretty good handle on the DP, whether they are from hell or above.
It really hurts when I see how some trainers just seem to ignore the disruption, thereby affecting the pace, the flow of the session. Handling the participants is not all that difficult and Thiagi has the best way to put it : just take it and try to find the gift and the great opportunity they are providing you with!
This being said, I must mention one of the benefits of the last NASAGA conference in Washington DC. I designed a game on the spot during Greg and Scott's session and it deals with Difficult Participants! More precisely with the importance of dealing with them rapidly and efficiently....not IGNORING them! One by-product of the game is to discuss HOW to deal with them. I found that most trainers novice and wise sages are pretty good at finding HOW to deal with them....and that left me dumbfounded as to why they were NOT dealing with them properly. Several soon-to-be-trainers I taught had never had to deal with them and were very nervous about it. I designed the game to make them understand the impact of the disruption and the importance in dealing with properly.
It is a competitive ,TIME sensitive TILE game that is easily set-up, has a game time of about 5-10 minutes and provide a great insight to increase awareness on the impact of DP. It it still in draft form but will be tested extensively by a group of trainer in a few months.
Great many thanks to Greg and Scott....this was jsut the first one....I have since used PANDEMY in a teambuilding activity for a Pharma Company ( will use ....next week!) and modified "Yes dark Lord" for another one.
Games are IT!
© 2013 Created by Brandon Carson.
Powered by
Badges | Report an Issue | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service
