• Link to X
  • Link to Mail
Tel: +44 20 7229 2729
Bayswater Institute
  • Home
  • About
    • Priya Davda
    • Ken Eason
    • William Maton-Howarth
    • Alexander Hebden
    • Harini Sivaji
    • Simon Bell
    • Corinna Arndt
    • Paul Tucker
    • Aki Ho
    • Gillian Gregory
    • Sara Bhandari
    • Trustees
    • Lisl Klein
    • Harold Bridger
    • Privacy Policy
  • Research & Evaluation
  • Professional Development
    • Wisdom in Groups
    • Workshops
    • Masterclasses
    • Professional Coaching
  • Partners
  • Case Studies
  • News
  • Contact
  • Click to open the search input field Click to open the search input field Search
  • Menu Menu

Groups and Facilitators within Problem Structuring Processes

in Publications/by FiDeeEdit1

Abstract:

Groups and facilitators within problem structuring processes Simon Bell
In problem structuring methods, facilitators often ask of themselves questions such as: what makes a ‘good’ problem structuring group (PSG) and indeed what does ‘good’ mean? How can group dynamics be improved and does it matter in terms of the quality of the problem structuring that that group engages in? On the surface these questions seem to be straightforward. Indeed, those who have helped facilitate many participatory workshops will think they intuitively know the answers to these questions; they can, from their professional practice, ‘feel’ which PSGs are doing well and producing novel insights and those which are functioning less well and perhaps generating something that is less imaginative and more routine as a consequence. The intuitive, practice-learned insight will depend upon a rich array of visual signals that become more obvious with experience. This paper asks whether there is value in being much more open and analytical about these questions and answers. If so, then how can we make the unwritten processes and outcomes of PSGs written? Indeed, open to whom? Finally, how much of any insights learned by facilitators should be shared with those engaged in workshops?

Springer Link

Bell, S. and Morse, S. 2013. Groups and facilitators within problem structuring processes. Journal of the Operational Research Society. 64, pp. 959 -972

Tags: Group Dynamics, Problem Structuring Method, Workshops
Share this entry
  • Share on Facebook
  • Share on X
  • Share on WhatsApp
  • Share on Pinterest
  • Share on LinkedIn
  • Share by Mail
https://www.bayswaterinst.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/header-logo-white-blend-deeper-top.png 0 0 FiDeeEdit1 https://www.bayswaterinst.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/header-logo-white-blend-deeper-top.png FiDeeEdit12017-11-06 22:03:432017-12-17 12:00:56Groups and Facilitators within Problem Structuring Processes
You might also like
DPSIR = A Problem Structuring Method? An Exploration from the ‘‘Imagine’’ Approach
Being, Engaging, Contextualizing and Managing Matrix — a Means for Nonspecialists to Assess Group Dynamics? Embedding Technology in Practice
An Approach to Comparing External and Internal Methods for Analyzing Group Dynamic
Towards Understanding Problem Structuring and Groups with Triple Task Methodology ‘e’
Search Search

Categories

  • All Articles (72)
  • Case Studies (9)
  • Homeworking (7)
  • Methods (19)
  • Mindful Stories (33)
  • News (73)
  • Publications (63)
  • Resources (3)
  • Wisdom in Groups Blog (5)
  • Workshops (3)

Recent Posts

  • Calling All Digital App Developers in Health and Social Care. Can an Online Clinic give you a head start with two critical issues?
  • Pathways to Market for Tech Companies Seeking R&D Funding
  • WORKTECC: Workforce Operations that Realise Knowledge-based Transformational Efficiency gains in Community Care
  • Evaluating the West London Primary Care Navigator Scheme
  • Project Evaluations in the Local Government Association (LGA) Social Care Digital Innovation Programme (SCDIP)

Archives

  • November 2021
  • July 2021
  • June 2021
  • October 2020
  • September 2020
  • August 2020
  • July 2020
  • June 2020
  • May 2020
  • March 2020
  • February 2020
  • December 2019
  • November 2019
  • October 2019
  • September 2019
  • July 2019
  • June 2019
  • May 2019
  • April 2019
  • March 2019
  • February 2019
  • January 2019
  • December 2018
  • November 2018
  • October 2018
  • July 2018
  • June 2018
  • March 2018
  • February 2018
  • January 2018
  • December 2017
  • November 2017
  • October 2017
  • September 2017

Themes

Action Research Automation Climate Change Covid-19 Double Task Electronic Journals Electronic Patient Records Embedding Technology in Practice Ergonomics Evaluation Fear Formations of Terror Group Dynamics Human Factors Imagine Imagine Method Information and Communication Technology ICT Information Systems Information Technology Integration Mindful Stories National Programme for Information Technology NHS NPfIT Organisational Change Organisational Development Policy Problem Structuring Method Project Fear Comic Realistic Evaluation Rich Pictures Social Value / Impact Sociotechnical Systems Sociotechnical Systems Theory Soft Systems Methodology Stakeholder Participation Sustainability Sustainable Development Telecare Telehealth Telemedicine Triple Task Weaponised Fear Wisdom in Groups Work
© Copyright – Bayswater Institute 2017 | Website Design – dwmultimedia.co.uk
  • Link to X
  • Link to Mail
Link to: Smart Cities and M3: Rapid Research, Meaningful Metrics and Co-Design Link to: Smart Cities and M3: Rapid Research, Meaningful Metrics and Co-Design Smart Cities and M3: Rapid Research, Meaningful Metrics and Co-Design Link to: Groups and Indicators in Post-Industrial Society Link to: Groups and Indicators in Post-Industrial Society Groups and Indicators in Post-Industrial Society
Scroll to top Scroll to top Scroll to top