Facilitators, “Facilitating Competency Based Learning Solutions”, Jan. 2015 (New Delhi, India)

1. Photo Documentation
Facilitators Workshop: Facilitating Competency Based Learning
Solutions
7th
to 10th
January 2015, New Delhi

2. 2 | P a g e
Day 1: 7th
January 2015
Basic Theme of the workshop:
Since the participants of this workshop were the practicing facilitators from different sectors, the workshop
was designed in such a manner that all participants got an opportunity to facilitate the process and rest of
the members participate in the process at the same time once the session was over all participants took a
meta perspective on the way it was facilitated and how to draw learning from the sessions as participants as
well as facilitators.
Introduction of CICM and Participants
Ms. Anita Sharma welcomed all the participants to the workshop and shared the objective of the workshop
and agenda of the day as follows:
 Deeper understanding on Competency and Competency based curricula
 Deeper understanding on shaping learning programmes around identified sets of competencies
 Deeper understanding on facilitating competency based learning programmes.

3. 3 | P a g e
Later the participants were invited to make their introducing using the following format:
 Me as a person
o My Education Background
o My Experience as Facilitator
o My Professional Experience
o Personal
 Me as a facilitator
o My Strengths as Facilitator
o Key Challenges I face as Facilitator

4. 4 | P a g e
Expectation Setting:
Participants were asked to think about their expectation from this programme and write one expectation
each on one card. The terms used for expectation setting was as follows: ‘Hope’ from this workshop and
‘Fears’ about the workshop.
The expectation chart derived the following clusters:
 Most of the participants shared that they would like
to learn from each other’s experience since the
group consisted of facilitators of variety and with
various sector exposure.
 Several views were about having a deeper and varied
understanding about facilitation, different
techniques, roles we play as facilitators and handling
tough situations etc.
 Another cluster of cards represented about taking
deep dive in the term competency and competency
based learning programmes.
 A fear that we are always remaining on the path of continuous change and improvement.
Facilitators’ Perspective:
The session was used as a case for understanding effective use of the tool as well as facilitation of the
same. Following were the discussions on the same:
 Are we taking opening with expectation setting - as ritual in facilitation?
 Expectation setting as a session is useful as it supports both content connect as well as ensure
human connect specially while clustering of ideas and points happen.
 expectation setting is relevant if it contributes in revising the design of the programme
 Expectation setting is demanding and involving
exercise. It could also be used for co-designing
the workshop
 Expectation setting could be used to identify the
outliers and un-interested parties
 Sometimes the intended outcome is not clear to
participants. In such cases, the expectation
setting takes the negative face
 It is important to set the rules very clearly to get
the best results. For example, while taking up
tasks which require demarcation of cards color
& shapes; be precise on the color and shape and also put a sample on the board so that all are on
the same side. If the announcement is correct there will be less chances of error
 As facilitators we need to be aware about the expected outcomes/s of the session, it also included
number of cards given to each member and the time spent on it.
 Important to remember is the point: while clustering, whether the board belongs to the facilitator or
the group!
 A facilitator is someone who is
o helping the group to take decisions without decision making power with himself/herself;

5. 5 | P a g e
o makes things easier without decision making authority
 The tone of the facilitator is very important while reading out the cards collected from the
participants. In situation where only the facilitator is speaking, one needs to speed read the cards
 Once a facilitator shifts the responsibility of speaking he/she must remain energetic in the process
and it should not sound of giving up the process.
 Facilitator could invite other participants to present their cards
 Facilitator should have
o Clarity on the intent of the session;
o eye contact with the group
 what can’t be achieved should be communicated upfront
 Good to use the, ‘I’, ‘We’, ‘It’ model for expectation setting, it is also important to fulfill the ‘I’ part
of it.
 It will be useful to reconsider our assumptions as facilitators about the participants.
 It is important to create new spaces for participants in order to:
o Re-energise
o Create process for communication to happen by reducing power dynamics in the group
o Movement of facilitator
o Eye-contact with all at the same time
Space is your best co-Facilitator
Post lunch session began with re-arranging of seating arrangement.
From facilitation point of view, it was explained that:
 Seating should be arranged I a way that it
o increases the energy level
o increases the eye-contact and avoid being
biased;
o space for the facilitator to move around
and exert his/her authority
 facilitation is about reducing power and
encouraging equality; it is about symbolism and
imaginaries
 sitting system more often reflect stereotypes of the authorities and doesn’t erode it too quickly;
 Facilitator should not always be standing – he could sometimes sit – as standing is a powerful
position. This also depends o the rapport facilitator has built with the groups
Understanding Competency and Competency Development Process:
Mr. Mohan Dhamotharan facilitated the session on Competency and Competency Development Process, he
shared that:
 A combination of Knowledge, Skills and Attitude only is not Competency.
 In Veda: Knowledge is inter connected with Action. Even while defining the term knowledge we do
not mean the same. Competency is the ability to perform successfully in the changing situations and
contexts that may also be imperfect

6. 6 | P a g e
He further talked about the terms: Symbol, Data,
Information, Knowledge and Wisdom:
Discussing the competency levels used in
competency based learning programmes, Mohan
introduced the 5 step competency development
process as follows:
He mentioned that as facilitators we need to have the competency to deal with different cross cultural
contexts and change our behaviors according to the changing contexts. Also, that while facilitating it is
important to know the stage of the group (forming, storming, norming and performing)
Using the competency development spiral, it was mentioned that it is a slow process and requires time.
Unconscious Competency Unconscious Incompetency
Conscious Competency Conscious Incompetency
Level 1:
Self Immersed
Focus: I
Level 2:
Perspective,
Realise other's
behaviour
Focus: I, You
Level 3:
Change the
perspective
Change our
own behaviour
Focus: I, You
Level 4:
Mentoring
Help others to
move to
different levels
Focus: I, You
Level 5:
Co-Create
Create
something new,
you didnt loose
your identity
but keep
transforming
Focus: We
Derived from
knowledge
and has
a bigger impact
Processed
information
leading
to learning &
experience
Removed
uncertainty
of data
with a subject
Structured
symbol1,2
A,B
Symb
ol
Wisdo
m
Knowle
dge
InfoData

7. 7 | P a g e
The points where the person escapes the
transformational changes and legitimizes the
incompetency (moving from unconscious
incompetency to conscious incompetency) was
clearly marked. It was also agreed that learning can
be reinforced by creating emotional triggers like
SHAME.
Ram Bhat also introduced the 5 step competency
development, especially used for the competency
like: People first.
The next point discussed in details was the Theme-centered interaction (TCI). TCI is a concept and a method
for working in groups. Its aim is social learning and development of the person. Ruth Cohn's original purpose
was to "enable a healthy person to remain healthy". Here "health" not only refers to individual well-being,
but also to political responsibility in the world.
The method is most important for group moderation. It says that in group processes, interests of the
individual subjects (I), the developing relational pattern of the group (WE) and the problem at hand, the
theme (IT) must be in dynamical balance. This is symbolised by a triangle where
individual, group and theme form the corners. Whenever one corner dominates,
there are negative side effects. E.g. when the theme dominates, this may be a sign
that people hide problems, no group feeling and no personal relationships
develop. In WE-centered groups, individual views and needs are suppressed and
group dynamics may get so overwhelming that no work is done. The theme gives
communication a productive focus, but it must be balanced with the other needs.
The „WE“of the group develops from centering around a theme, that is why TCI is termed „theme-
centered“.
The triangle itself is placed in a circle, symbolising the GLOBE, that is the organisational, physical, structural,
social, political, ecological surroundings, in a narrow and wider sense, which condition and influence the
team work of the group, and which in turn are influenced by the work of the group. The globe can create
disturbances and it can upset dynamical balance, shifting weight to one corner of the triangle. Thus one
must always be conscious of the globe and the constraints it produces and take it into account.
The discussions also turned around the understanding of the Tuckman's Forming, Storming, Norming, and
Performing model. This model help new team become effective more quickly.
It is well known that one can't expect a new team to perform well when it first comes together. Psychologist
Bruce Tuckman first came up with the memorable phrase "forming, storming, norming, and performing" in
his 1965 article, "Developmental Sequence in Small Groups." He used it to describe the path that most teams
follow on their way to high performance. Later, he added a fifth stage, "adjourning" (which is sometimes
known as "mourning").
Forming: In this stage, most team members are positive and polite. Some are anxious, as they haven't fully
understood what work the team will do. Others are simply excited about the task ahead. As leader, you play
undifferentiated I,
self-immersed
differentiated I
understand You
I-You interaction:
WE
WE becomes "Ba"

8. 8 | P a g e
a dominant role at this stage, because team members' roles and responsibilities aren't clear. This stage can
last for some time, as people start to work together, and as they make an effort to get to know their new
colleagues.
Storming: Next, the team moves into the storming phase, where people start to push against the boundaries
established in the forming stage. This is the stage where many teams fail. Storming often starts where there
is a conflict between team members' natural working styles. People may work in different ways for all sorts
of reasons, but if differing working styles cause unforeseen problems, they may become frustrated.
Storming can also happen in other situations. For example, team members may challenge your authority, or
jockey for position as their roles are clarified. Or, if you haven't defined clearly how the team will work,
people may feel overwhelmed by their workload, or they could be uncomfortable with the approach you're
using.
Some may question the worth of the team's goal, and they may resist taking on tasks. Team members who
stick with the task at hand may experience stress, particularly as they don't have the support of established
processes, or strong relationships with their colleagues.
Norming: Gradually, the team moves into the norming stage. This is when people start to resolve their
differences, appreciate colleagues' strengths, and respect your authority as a leader.
Now that your team members know one-another better, they may socialize together, and they are able to
ask each other for help and provide constructive feedback. People develop a stronger commitment to the
team goal, and you start to see good progress towards it. There is often a prolonged overlap between
storming and norming, because, as new tasks come up, the team may lapse back into behavior from the
storming stage.
Performing: The team reaches the performing stage when hard work leads, without friction, to the
achievement of the team's goal. The structures and processes that you have set up support this well. As
leader, you can delegate much of your work, and you can concentrate on developing team members. It feels
easy to be part of the team at this stage, and people who join or leave won't disrupt performance.
Team formation usually follows easily recognizable stages, known as "forming, storming, norming, and
performing." Psychologist Bruce Tuckman, who created this memorable phrase, later added a fifth stage,
"adjourning" or "mourning."
Keeping the nature of the workshop in mind all the participants
were invited to highlight the sessions they would be facilitating in
the following days:
The day ended with a task to write “My Epitaph”.

9. 9 | P a g e
Day 2: 8th January 2015
Ms. Anita Sharma shared the agenda of the day with
participants that included:
 My Epitaph: Experiencing the tool, Discussion on the
tool in terms of facilitation
 Shaping learning programmes around identified sets
of competencies
 Experiences and Processes in designing ALEP
 Sharing insights on Competency Assessment Test
My Epitaph
Mr. Ram Bhat began the session by asking the participants to write “My Epitaph” and share the same, if they
would like to. Some of the participants wrote their epitaph on cards while some had it on paper. Almost all
were willingly shared the same.
While discussing the tool he directed the participants to follow the rules:
 Visualise: What I want people to remember me for? Or What I want people to write on my epitaph?
 Explore: Is it what people feel now about you?
 Decide: What competencies I require to ensure people feel that way about me?
The tool and its facilitation was then discussed in details.
The tool:
 It was commonly agreed that this can be very intense session in real workshop as the topic touches
the most emotional aspect of an individual. It forces one to think about himself/herself once he/she
is gone. It was very well experienced in the session too where one of the participants became very
emotional about it.
 It was also brought to notice that, it is important as a facilitator to decide which exercise is to be
done when (The timing of the exercise).
Facilitators’ Perspective:
 Each session requires a proper closure. It is not clear as to how the facilitator should handle this tool
to bring closure.
 Facilitator sometimes, when challenged by the group, loses control of the process;
 Facilitator normally should avoid explaining the process twice – this leads to chaos;
 Facilitator should bring clarity to avoid challenges of interpreting the question
 In some cases, facilitator does not need to reveal everything.
 The facilitation and the facilitator has to balance his/her own emotions while facilitating this tool as
it looked to be a very sensitive topic as well as a tool.
 On facilitation it was shared and agreed that clear announcement of the steps to be followed and
then remaining with these steps is very important in order to complete the process.
 It was also felt that this tool not necessarily touches the aspects of competency development.

10. 10 | P a g e
 What could be the good practice in such case:
o To start an intimate process, it requires appropriate space, sanctuary, environment
o Process should be laid clearly beforehand; do not clarify the process once it has started
o Facilitator should have the capacity to hold the emotions and space
As an alternative to this tool, one could use onion model to explore the core of self. Or it could be replaced
by visioning exercise, imaging exercise, etc. Facilitator also needs to understand the cultural sensitivities
while dealing with tools which require introspection
I=One could also think of using tools which provide clear “I” time and then bring it to “We” time; share the
process later.
Shaping learning programmes around identified sets of competencies
Mr. Mohan Dhamotharan, while talking about the subject mentioned about a book titled, “Transformative
Learning” by Mezirow Cranton as an effective read. The triple model of learning by Argyris and Schon was
also discussed. The group agreed that for technical learning, one doesn’t need to go deeper; while for
transformational learning, reflection is important. Experiences say that PowerPoints do not powerfully
changes the attitude. The competency based learning strengthens the WILL of the person.
He further talked about the process and mentioned:
For a good programme design, it is important to be clear as to which competencies are to be addressed. The
competency development can take place in many ways such as:
 Focus group discussion with ‘Best’ performing colleagues
 Analyse the job description
 Link the work with the goal of the organisation
 Check future demands – especially those emerging in horizon
 Use triangulation with third party, etc
The facilitator mentioned that most of the time we do an assessment and set the bar from the better
performers but it is also important and would be good to take the analysis from the lower performers
perspective, identify the challenges they face and design module along with those challenges.
The second step could be to Identify:
 The environment
 Facets
 Polarities (Which Competencies and why)
 Readiness to pick it up
 Motivation and timing of the intervention
 Relevant trigger for the process of learning
The next question important to answer in the process of shaping a learning programme based on the
identified set of competencies could be:
How do you trigger the motivation required for continuous action? As a culture we focus on the present
capacity building needs but it is also important to have a culture of capacity building for future.
The facilitator taking lead from the competency development cycle mentioned the following:

11. 11 | P a g e
Sharing by LBSNAA:
Mr. Ram Kakani representing LBSNAA (GIZ developed a co-designed module on leadership with LBSNAA for
its officer trainees-IAS) presented the experience on how GIZ and LBSNAA together were successful in co-
designing a leadership module and later successfully implemented the same.
The process of designing involved the following stages:
 Identification of the competencies
 Agreement on these competencies
 Designing a module around it and
 Training the trainers within LBSNAA
 Implementing the module with Officers Trainees-IAS
He shared that there were four competencies identified for the module on leadership:
 People First, Leading Others, Integrity and Self-Awareness and Self Control
Tools and exercises used for each of these competencies:
 People First: Vision Mandala (an exercise where people create a vision for the society keeping mind
the client group they will be handling in future)
 Leading others: 2 members drawing, 8 members drawing, 20 members rope exercise (Three
exercises linked with the concept of leading others from smaller team to large team and how the
leadership and followership changes in all the three situations)
 Integrity: Value Diamond (an individual exercise linked with self and self-values. It explores the core
value set of an individual and how they have been managing these values)
 Managing Self & Self Control: Sculpting, Value Diamond, Photo In-Sights, Yatra Patra
Unconscious
Incompetency
Unconscious
Competency
Conscious
Competency
Conscious
Incompetency
We need to become
aware about it
We need the interest to
changeThere needs to be a
desire to change
We need to take action to
achieve this level

12. 12 | P a g e
He further mentioned different videos used during the implementation of the module:
 People First: Pranab Mukherjee Addressing the IAS officers
 Leading Others: Abdul Kalam talking about the importance of managing failures as leaders
 Integrity: Mr. Shreedharan (Metro Man)
 Self-Awareness & Self Control: Dalai Lama Video
Sharing insights on Competency Assessment Test
Mr. Ram Kakani shared a list of different competency assessment tools:
1. Motivation: Maslow’s Framework “Hierarchy of Needs”
2. Work Place Big Five: 05 parameters with 05 sub-components each
3. MBTI Personality Types
4. Campbell Leadership Descriptor
5. KOLB’s Learning Type Framework
6. Thomal Kilman Inventory of Conflict-Negotiation Styles
7. Leadership Styles
8. EQ Inventory
9. Importance of our Senses: Fr. Joseph (Seeing, Reading, Talking etc)
10. Blake’s Leadership Grid
He mentioned that all these tools are available and can be explored for different purposes. He also agreed to
share the links of all these tools readily available for use. Details of few of these tools can be found as
annexure 1.
Mr. Sanjeev Vasudev shared the Self-Assessment Tool (SAT) created by GIZ for the Action Learning and
Exposure Programme. He made a power-point presentation and highlighted the following points:
The purpose of SAT is to:
 A tool that offers ease-of-use to assess one’s competency level on a flexible, private basis over
approx. 30 minutes
 Purpose is to administer on a pre (baseline: module 1) and post (impact: module 5) basis
 Offer both results as a comparative assessment to understand one’s shift in understanding of one’s
competency
 Present in a pictorial booklet form as a memoir of one’s engagement with ALEP
Background work done for SAT:
 18 in total, offered as a choice of 5 “best” applicable answers over 9 sections of 2 questions each

13. 13 | P a g e
 A web based delivery module developed that allows multiple logins through a confidential random
password generated and shared with user through their mail account
 Ease of use through development of a comfortable UI, and support to be ensured
 Jumbled order of choices ensured integrity, Superior’s assessment taken separately
SAT Screen:
Experiences:
 Seemed daunting at first but became comfortable after 2-3 questions
 More than one option seemed applicable, had to choose best applicable
 Few users couldn’t access email directly
 Quality of response based on level of “language connotation” understanding
 Not truly comparative from an improvement perspective since not drawn on a scale basis
Suggestions:
 Need to refine the 18 Qs and make them easy to understand & choose w/o ambiguity
 Look at language clarity critically
 Can we frame Qs that can convert to a scale of competency allowing better pre/post comparison?
 Need to better prepare the participant before commencing SAT effort
 Need to Plan infrastructure better

14. 14 | P a g e
Day 3: 9th
January 2015
Ms. Anita Sharma shared the agenda for the day with the participants.
The day was planned for discussing the experiences of CICM, particularly
Action Learning and Exposure Programme (ALEP) and its five modules.
Besides this the also had a session on experiences on moderation.
The day was planned in a manner that different participants involved in
different modules were encouraged to share their views while following
these points for all the modules: The Intent, Content, Process and
Experiences. A session on experiences in Facilitation was also planned.
Experiences and Processes in Designing & Implementing ALEP Module 1 &2
Mr. Ziaul Hoda shared the details of the project titled, “Strengthening Management Capacities for
International Cooperation (CICM)”. He highlighted the three different fields of actions in this project as
follows:
1. Action Learning and Exposure Programme (ALEP): Consists of 05 different modules and works with
DEA (Under Secretaries and equivalent positions from DEA, Line ministries, State departments and
PSUs)
2. High Level Dialogue: (works with high level positions in DEA, Ministries to talk and highlight the
future of International Cooperation in relation with Germany)
3. Training Provider Network: (works with Indian training providers under government who are
working on the aspects of capacity building of the similar positions as mentioned for ALEP)
This discussion was followed by a presentation by Mr. Ram Bhatt, who was part of the module 1
(Strengthening Competencies for International Cooperation) & 2 (Experiencing cooperation in the Field) as
co-facilitator. He highlighted few points from module 1 & 2 where he was appreciative about the process
followed.
He talked about the tools: Socio-gram as a tool for in depth introduction that provides opportunity to the
people to think and reflect about themselves in the very beginning of the ALEP cycle. It was also an
important tool to create spaces for people at the individual level. Though there were issues related to the
time spent on it but it was felt that it was worth spending the time since it set the tone of the following
workshop.

15. 15 | P a g e
He also talked about journaling as a reflecting tool where the concept of speed writing was brought in to
capture the very first and original response about one particular situation for the participants. The beauty of
this tool was that it very clearly provide that protected space for participants where they can write without
the fear of thing being share din the group.
He further talked about the field visit in Module 2 which he and the group felt was an important aspect for
the participants as for many of them it was for the first time they were observing the impact of the desk
works they do in their offices. It was a space created to give the participants an exposure to the real life
situations in project and also to confront with the ultimate beneficiary.
Experiences and Processes in Designing & Implementing ALEP Module 3
Mr. Ziaul Hoda shared the Module 3 of ALEP titled, “Excellence in Professional performance”. He talked
about four aspects of the module: Intention of the module, Competencies covered by the module, Process
followed and Experiences.
He shared that this module was designed with the intention to, “reflect
on workplace practices and gaps & to develop competency in order to
prioritise tasks, plan them and manage efficiently”.
This module aimed to cover a lot of competencies (a total of 13
competencies from 7 clusters).
A lot of efforts were put in to ensure properly plan this module whereas
because of the nature of this module a lot of things had to be brought
into the agenda till the last minute. Some on the spot changes and
effective facilitation by the lead facilitator helped this module become a
success. The participants felt very high after this module.
This module focused on two major aspects: MfDR and Value chain of
International Cooperation. While these were the major aspects a lot of
other aspects were covered such as: Presenting influentially,
Communication skill and Negotiation skills.
Experiences and Processes in Designing & Implementing ALEP Module 4 & 5
Ms. Anita Sharma shared a brief about the Module 4 i.e. Study tour to Germany and Module 5 i.e. Looking
Forward. She mentioned that the study tour to Germany is a space created where the participants get a
chance to interact with their counterparts in Germany and get involved in discussions. Besides this this
module also provides an in-depth understanding on MfDR and Cross Cultural aspects.

16. 16 | P a g e
While talking about module 5, she mentioned that the module is the concluding one in the last cycle most of
the time was spent on feedback and participants taking the lead of the session. But based on the feedback in
cycle 2 there would also be some input sessions.
Experiences on Moderation
Mr. Ram Bhat, Ms. Pragya Taneja and Mr. Ziaul Hoda facilitated and shared their understanding about the
experiences in moderation.
It was agreed among the presenters that while sharing the experiences, Pragya and Zia will bring in their
learning and experiences from the Trianing on ‘Facilitation techniques for meetings and workshops for
stakeholders coordination’ attended in Thailand and Ram will bring in his experiences in facilitation and
moderation.
Pragya in her session shared the details of the process followed in the Training and highlighted the following
points:
 The process followed was: introduction to the Facilitator/Moderator tools, Application of these tools
and Exercises to practice these tools.
 Topics covered during the training were: Presentation techniques, Listening exercise,
Communication process, Questioning by Moderators, Visualisation techniques, 3 steps of
moderation, Moderation tool-box, Steering group-
work, Handling processes of group dynamics and
how to give feedback.
 She talked about the communication and different
roles of sender and receiver while in the process of
communication.
Zia talked about the experiences of facilitation, he
mentioned that the experiences are based on his own
observations, experiences as facilitator and also observation
of the facilitation style used in the training.
He mentioned the
following points:
Facilitation: It is about an
environment of openness
and trust so that people
start working towards
their objective/s.
Abilities of a facilitator:
He mentioned that while there is a long list about abilities but there are a few which are more important:
listening, communication, questioning, handling group dynamics, remain neutral, use feedback, empathy
and flexibility.

17. 17 | P a g e
While sharing about his experiences on facilitation from the training in Thailand he shared:
 One of the positive aspect was the effort put into
preparation by the facilitator for each of the session which was very
important for the sessions to be effective.
 The venue, location, and logistics to facilitate learning was
at par and,
 Respect to the tools and material by the facilitator was
something very important.
While these were the highlights of the sessions there were certain
observations on facilitation that did not match the facilitation
standards:
 It is important to treat adults as adults (in true sense)
 Misutilisation of the authority of a facilitator
 Non-flexibility (No Plan B)
 No “I” moment in the training
 Absence of walk the talk
 Getting into self defense
Ram while concluding the session mentioned about a term AURA for designing facilitation:
 A: Attention of the participants
 U: Understanding (ensure)
 R: Retention
 A: Application
Day 4: 10th
January 2015
Ms. Anita Sharma shared the agenda for the day. The day was planned to have a discussion around Kolb’s
cycle of learning, Behavioural Change Communication (both session facilitated by Mr. Aziz-ur Rehman),
followed by clarification on ALEP and Feedback on the workshop.
Self-Awareness
The day started with a session on Self Awareness by Ms. Aanandi Mehra. A specific seating arrangement was
made where participants were asked to take seat in a circular form. The session led to a peaceful internal
journey which was effective and all of the participants appreciated the importance of finding time for one
own self. It was a very intriguing sessions that focused on Self-awareness.
Kolb’s cycle of learning
Mr. Aziz-ur Rehman facilitated a discussion on the Kolb’s cycle of learning by taking different examples. The
session brought forth a lot of questions, clarifications on the cycle and a common understanding about the
cycle was developed among the participants.
The key takeaways from the discussion are as follows:
 The cycle does not have a starting or end point.
 It looks like a cycle but has the spiral effect in terms of learning.

18. 18 | P a g e
 Depending on the situation, contexts, level of participants one can start from anywhere in the cycle.
 It can be applied to any training workshop set up.
Behavioural Change Communication
Aziz facilitated this session and shared about the antecedents, behaviour
and consequence as the three driving factors in Behavioural Change
Communication.

19. 19 | P a g e
Suammrisation on Facilitation by Mr. Mohan Dhamotharan
 As Facilitators you are hired/paid to: Control Yourself
 While in the process of communication it is important to reflect: is it necessary, important and
kind—what I am going to say as facilitator.
 It has to be Authentic You and not copying others
 There needs to be a clarity on what you expect from: Yourself (as facilitator), facilitation, process and
participants.
 Important to be aware about the philosophy of facilitation and keep reflecting on how brain works.
 Hold the space in a manner that something collaborative emerges.
 Balance: patience and achieving outcome
 No Feedback but Feed forward
 Facilitation:
o Artistic aspects, Aesthetic aspects
o Scientific: cognitive, thinking, in holistic way
o Craftsmanship
o Normative: values
 Important to observe: who are the minority in the group in terms of religion, ideology etc and
protect their interest as facilitator. If needed give them more opportunities.
Feedforward
Ms. Anita Sharma requested the participants to share their feedforward for the workshop as well as their
recommendations:

20. 20 | P a g e
Moments