Techniques to ensuring everyone is heard
Effective engagement is inclusive of a diverse range of perspectives. In deliberative processes, this is critical, as deliberation is underpinned by representativeness (which we discuss further here). When one or a few voices dominate the conversation, this becomes difficult to achieve.
It’s a challenge we’ve seen arise across many processes, including the online deliberations we recently facilitated for local councils developing their community visions. In one process, a participant constantly sought to dominate the conversation in all plenary (whole group) conversations.
Let’s explore a case study based on our recent experiences and consider some ways to navigate this common issue.
THE CHALLENGE - A DOMINANT VOICE IN ONLINE DELIBERATIONS
Let’s call our participant with a dominating voice David. David tries to be the first person to speak every time the floor is open. Not only does David want to speak forcefully, he also reacts very strongly to being asked to wind up his comments. He talks over others, including the facilitator.
This is especially evident in the ‘walk though’ of the final recommendations, where each recommendation is considered by the whole group, final high-level edits are completed, and a vote is taken to see if it will reach the 80% majority to be included in the community panel’s final report. At this point the group is working to finalise their recommendations and their time together is coming to an end. David wants to say something about every recommendation, and proposes minor word changes that don’t affect the intent of the recommendations.
We all know a David and may have come across this type of participant in face-to-face meetings. Working online has meant that many people with dominant communication styles have realised that they have to wait their turn to speak. When someone interjects in a Zoom meeting, other participants are muted so no one else can be heard.
THE IMPACT OF DOMINANT VOICES
There are several impacts of dominant behaviour:
Many group members participate less, as they want to avoid an argument or conflict.
Some quieter people withdraw completely.
Less information or views about the issue under discussion will be raised across the whole group.
The group can be diverted to just one aspect of an issue.
Other participants find the process boring and uncomfortable.
The outcome of the process is less balanced, possibly skewed towards one perspective.
The unfortunate outcome is less diverse voices and perspectives making it into the process, which we have addressed further here.
UNDERSTANDING THE DOMINANT PARTICIPANT
Many people who exhibit dominant behaviour are often totally unaware of the impact they are having on the group. They don’t notice they are speaking first, they don’t see others withdraw, they don’t see the time wasted.
Additionally, this behaviour is understandable given the way traditional meetings and politics/democracy are played out. People who are successful in public life have usually learnt how to debate and ‘grandstand’. They expect to have a platform to express their arguments, be able to speak to the whole group and seek to convince others to their point of view.
Deliberative processes are unfamiliar territory for this type of participant because traditional advocacy formats are not in play. The participant is asked to work in small groups and to discuss and collaboratively develop ideas.
During one deliberation, a participant asked the facilitation team on the fourth day of the process when he would be able to input his ideas. He didn’t understand the group had spent four days doing just that in many different small group formats – he was waiting for his turn to speak to the whole group.
In another process, a few prominent people simply resisted small group work until most of them had had a chance to say something to the full group.
This gives us an insight into the reasons and thinking behind this behaviour – many people have no skills or experience in working with others in this way.
WHAT WE CAN DO TO ADDRESS THE PROBLEM
People often exhibit dominant behaviour because they feel that they are not being heard. So, it's important that they, like anyone else, are allowed to express their views. Facilitators need to be skilled at active listening techniques like paraphrasing so that the person hears and sees that they've been understood. So, step into, rather than trying to block this behaviour.
A range of techniques can be used to ensure everyone else is also heard:
Let the participant dominating know they have already spoken and that you’re going to invite others to speak and have their turn before coming back to them.
Have agreements in place (preferably developed by the group) that include listening to each other.
Facilitators ensure no one interjects or speaks over the top of others.
If the group is small, invite everyone to hold a circle conversation (speak in turn around the circle).
Do the work in pairs and small groups. This allows everyone, including the quieter people, an opportunity to speak.
Observe the groups and identify whether any require the support of a facilitator.
Invite the whole group to have input into when it’s time to move on. Participants will often indicate when they no longer want to be held up and wish to move on.
FURTHER RESOURCES
Do you want to learn more about how to bring new and diverse
perspectives into your process?
Download our free resource on engaging with diverse voices to learn our top tips.
