Trust Activity

I recently facilitated a 'trust activity' for a Building High Performance Team session, and since we were limited with the available equipment we had within the training area premise, we just had to make do with strategically positioning the tables into a maze of sorts - careful not to harm anyone. In line with this, I or my partner, Mon, had to make sure that our participants had to be monitored by their partners, and by us - as we had to see potential pitfalls, lest they literally fall down.

Naturally, since this may entail some confidentiality, I shall not mention the company, nor the names of our participants... but as you can no doubt see in their faces, our participants were really enjoying themselves. They gamely followed instructions, took up the challenge and went through the trust activity with gusto (and worked up an appetite in the process, it seemed). You will also notice in these pictures that even when blindfolded, some of the partners seemed to strike the right pose for the camera (so much for candid shots).

To start with, we would come from our lecture room, travel a short distance through the training center's corridors, then enter the breakout room where the tables would be arranged into a maze (guess using the word labyrinth would be too grand).

I've included some pictures of this trust activity, as you can no doubt see... nothing too spectacular, and since I was not using a flashbulb (so as not to alert the blindfolded particpants that I was taking their pictures), some of my pictures would poorly capture movement - hence the blurred effects at times.

The activity entailed forming pairs (or trust partners) and blindfolding one partner in said pair; who would then have to follow instructions of their partner guide. These blindfolded people had to literally trust that their partners would guide them properly.

Interspered within the maze were whiteboard marker pens lying on the carpet; which the blindfolded participants had to pick up - again, just relying on their guides for instructions. In at least two places, there were chairs located, and the blindfolded person would have to once again trust their partner to guide them properly, and let them sit down.

Lastly, before the maze ends, they would have to pick up the last marker pen, position themselves facing the wall - which happens to be made of whiteboard materials, and write their name, while blindfolded, of course.

Overall, it was a fun activity, and I have to confess that this was much more active than previous trust sessions I've had the priviledge to conduct before where the mazes were simply just that - with no added frills of needing to sit or write their names. THough in the past, I'd instruct the partner guide that their blindfolded partner would need to touch a strategically located electric fan or phone.

Next time? I'll try to experiment with texture - see how the blindfolded participants feel through a rubber snake or feather duster and the likes. See how vivid certain imaginations could turn out to be. Who knows, I mught just get a squeal or shriek form a participant, once they realize (or think) they are holding some animal. I will have to make sure, though, that no one would be adversely affected due to sudden high blood pressure from an anxiety attack.

This trust factor is just a short activity - yet many facilitative teachbacks can be borne out of this one activity. For one thing, its main "Aha!" point for this particular run, was to show the need to trust each other, and by extension, their team mates - specially if they are the leads. The consideration being that with delegation of work, one must be ready to impart some authority as well, so their staff can do such work successfully.

Note: I originally intended for this post to appear in another blog where I post most diary-related activities. But after some thought, i realized that the post was more facilitative-focussed. Hence its finding its way inot this particular blog. After all, this is my facilitating focussed blog.

Team Lead School

I just recently finished conducting a 'Team Leads' training, and basically, I was relatively surprised to go through it as easily as I did - considering that it was my very first time to conduct this particular course.

Why was this so? First of all, most of the ideas of said training were covered elsewhere - and in greater detail; specifically with several trainings I've covered in the past. Second, it touches upon leadership, and I can say that I've got a lot of stories (based on experiences - both mine and others) to share, articles I've covered and can expound on and concepts I can present.

End result? I was able to cover the topics given me at record time, as we finished an hour ahead of schedule, and that is without any shortcuts, and without really any need to stretch things (or make up stories). With the ability to explain everything properly, clearly and completely, I felt that I was able to impart what concepts and ideas need to be touched upon.

Now... for some strange reason, this month of July seems to be the month where I needed to show the fact that I could conduct - not one, but three different trainings that I've never conducted before. Granted, I had to go through some manner of 'sitting-in' as preparation time, and it helped... just a bit. See, the aspect of 'sitting-in' is to understand the concept, to see the conduct proper and study the flow of the topics. But can anyone absorb all these things in the first try? Doubtful... not impossible, mind you... just doubtful. Too many things to capture and absorb - all at the same time.

Now, this wasn't all just natural talent, mind you (though soem of that did help me too), as I admit to having had to spend some time preparing for this conduct by reading and absorbing the slide topics... for adopting the idea, and seeing how I could present it. Connect it to my experience - and barring that, to use someone else's experience. But it wasn't that much work - as the concepts were easy to understand and relate to. I strive to be able to explain the 'What's in it for me' a.k.a. W.I.I.F.M. factor for each topic, with respect to my explanation.

I may not be so lucky next time though, hence the need to still prepare some more. But at least, in this particular case, I was successful... and success does breed (or sustain) confidence.

How do I know if I did right? Simple... I knew my goals, I met expectations - both mine and my participants, and I felt that I was able to help and contribute to their (my client's) knowledge (or skill). In the end, it may be them (my clients), who will determine my evaluation, and this can come off as a formal evaluation - but my inner-self will be the one I need to listen to... hence I don't take too much stock in the evaluation's importance.

Not to sound too proud or boastful, but I've not taken stock of my evaluations for quite some time... If my participants may think if its good, well then good. If its bad, I assess the reasons. Sometimes, if these items have merit - and this is looking at such in an unbiased manner, then I'll consider - and make adjustments. If not (meaning no real merit - as the participant may be missing the mark) then I just chalk it up to experience, or (bad) luck and look forward to the next conduct.

In the end, if my inner-self says I did good... who's to say otherwise? I'm confident enough to know that I did good, and that is what is important. Having said that, I know I did good today.

An Uplifting Comment!

Nothing too profound this time around... just wanted to share a comment from a participant of a training I recently conducted. This was in Accenture and the training was about John Beck's Leader's Window, which I conducted with Naira Orbeta. The comment came from one of our participant - Jon Aves, one of the company's (up and coming) project manager.

I quote what Jon said: "I attended two trainings this week , both by Johns - the first one, was by John Maxwell, and the second by John Beck, and I must say that between these two, I learned a whole lot more with Beck's Leaders; Window - as conducted by both Butch and Naira, than from Maxwell". WOW!!!

Jon then confirms to the rest of his fellow participants that his comment should not be taken lightly, since the company spent millions to have that one day training with Maxwell. Though I'd have to consider the backgrounder of said Maxwell training, I can't deny that I did feel energized by said comment.

But let me put things into perspective - at least, from my end. Credibly conducting Beck's training was never an issue to me - I know that I'm very competent, and as Rory mentioned while said training was happening, 'I seem to know it like the back of my hand' - well, I do... this is not hubris, but just plain and simple fact.

I would not normally be moved by comments saying that I'm good, or the training I conducted was great - 'been there, done that', so what else is new...

Make no mistake though, I still appreciate these type fo comments, and appreciate the genuine gratitude accompanying it, but nothing really move me to remember such comment beyond the training. Perhaps because I realized early on that I can't afford to rest on my laurels, so I set these aside and focus on my next assignment.

Jon's comment was different, though, he:
a) indirectly stated that the Maxwell training was less effective than Beck's;
b) likewise stated, in the same breath, that Naira and I gave him more value for his time (never mind the comparative cost) with the training we conducted, than Maxwell personally conducting his course in Manila.

Make no mistake, I respect Maxwell very much - and would hope to be as successful as the man in the talk circuits, someday. I've several of his books, and would consider his as one influence when it comes to my taking in ideas that I often pass around and use in my talks. He's up there amongst the authors I admire, together with Covey and Blanchard... so imagine how such a comment would impact me. Heck, lets just say that I envied Jon that he was able to attend such a course through company sponsorship. I'd love to sit and listen to John Maxwell talk.

That said, it would also be hard to dismiss said comment as fanciful, as I gauge Jon Aves to be a person who says what he thinks - not one who fancies exaggerations, nor does he seem to be one to conduct white washes. Jon can epitomize what an Accenture leader is, so I don't think he was just playing on the audience for spotlight time, nor was he being political in talking favorably about those in front of him.

Jon's comments would have to be seen in a credible manner - at least, as credible as its source... and Jon seems credible.

So yeah... great comment. It may not add to my financial surplus - it definitely does nothing else but add to the many accolades I've received; most of them forgotten. But this particular comment falls uniquely into the category of my having been compared - well, sort of... to John Maxwell and his works.

Jon's comments strongly validated the Leader's Window - and it likewise validated both Naira and me with it.

More informative (and in that sense, getting better value for money) than John Maxwell's talk... wow.

Thanks, Jon. Great validation.