Managing Resistance
Thoughts on Resistance and Dialogue Education
by Matt Myers, GLP
Certified Dialogue Education Teacher
I’ve always thought that teaching using a Dialogue Education approach takes a certain amount of courage that develops over time. Courage can be necessary when a facilitator is designing for an audience that expects a simple Powerpoint presentation or lecture, and is likely to resist small group work or being an active rather then passive learner. For me, my courage increased as I found more and more success with potentially difficult participant groups.
Sometimes, I find it necessary to introduce the teaching methods before I begin teaching. I emphasize how important it is that the participants retain the new information–and that research shows they will learn and retain information best if they actively do something with the content during the session: That we learn best through dialogue!
Other times, if there is resistance, it may be that I have not designed the learning tasks in a way that fully engages the participants, and the learning either feels irrelevant, unsafe, or is not properly sequenced. If I find myself in this situation, then I like to call a break to assess the nature of the problem in the design, share my assessment with the group and then work with them to do a brief redesign–essentially, use formative evaluation and humility, and a willingness to change course, to achieve better results!
But then there is resistance that may have nothing to do with the design or the use of Dialogue Education methods. Perhaps I am seeing faces in a sub group that seem highly irritated, or are distracted and distracting others with side conversation, or are challenging me or other participants in inappropriate ways. I have seen such circumstances arise when teaching a group of people who have worked together for a long time, in an environment that is oppressive or unfair in some way. They see the opportunities for dialogue in the training as an opportunity to challenge the rules or structure or leadership of their organization.
Their challenges may be very legitimate, but it is tricky for the facilitator to know the best way to respond. If you ignore underlying organization issues that arise in a training, the training itself can be totally derailed, or at least lose its effectiveness for many of the group. Yet if you welcome the participants’ use of the training as a forum for expressing discontent about their leadership or organization, then your time together can end up being more of an organizational intervention, rather than the training that was originally intended. This is where good facilitator judgment is required!
Without support from the organizational leadership, I believe it is unwise to attempt an intervention. If the leadership is supportive of changing the objectives of your time together and wants effective facilitation of organizational dialogue, then the facilitator can be very helpful to the organization by offering that service. But if no leadership support exists, then I recommend acknowledging any discontent, and then redirecting to the objectives at hand.
Sometimes, one or two participants will persist with unproductive comments and are just unable to redirect. They continually want to divert the dialogue back to their concerns. If this occurs, I think it is important to meet with them privately at the break, share with them your concerns about what you see them doing and ask that they make a choice to either participate in a way that supports the training objectives or consider excusing themselves from the training. This is difficult, but sometimes necessary if you want to protect the learning opportunities for others. Fortunately, good reflective listening–and just acknowledging the problem–can often help participants refocus on the learning and move on.
For meeting most types of resistance, a thorough LNRA can be very helpful. Information gained from the LNRA can ensure that the training is relevant, safe and well sequenced. It can also help the facilitator anticipate and, to the degree possible, address ahead of time any potential resistance due to organizational dysfunction.
<<back
