Como você navega em opiniões conflitantes entre as partes interessadas durante uma sessão de facilitação?

Active listening in simple terms listening to understand and not just to respond . Understand the points put forth and without bias. Appreciate the inputs. Reiterate the points to ensure that you have not missed out on anything. Guide the participants to a common ground. Take feedback to ensure that there is no stone unturned. Park the certain discussion point if it's deviating away from the objective or is consuming more than expected time

"How do we want to behave when we disagree?" IMO this is the best question to ask as part of establishing ground rules, especially for groups who are likely to be in conflict.

In the workshops I run with my team, we try to balance facilitated and open discussion. In order for this to work, we need to explain at the beginning of the session, that this is how the session will work (establishing ground rules). Here are some ways how we create space - by facilitation - for conflicting opinions - even among participants of different experience and seniority: ▸ Working together alone (everyone gets time to write their contributions in silence, then we post what they wrote on a wall) ▸ Timed go-around (everyone has 60 seconds to share their view, no interruptions permitted) ▸ Reserving the right of a facilitator to interrupt a participant when this may be to the group's benefit

For medium-sized and bigger workshops (more than 10 participants): When the clash is between different groups, one way to "shake things up" is to ask groups to "trade" one or two participants and continue in the discussion in the smaller groups. In a smaller group, there is more space for listening and understanding than in a bigger forum, and allows space for empathy.

Take 'snapshots' of opinions using constellations continuums, and 'poll' a samples of people by asking: - why are you stood there? - what's it like? It's a quick and effective way to build understanding. You can the distribution of where people are at without everyone having to speak. And you still get insights based on the polling questions. Got this from my Organisation and Relationship Systems Coaching training and one of my favourite activities to re-mix.

This may not work always, but if the group gets stuck, it can be worth trying - in case the two opinions are not completely exclusive to each other: Write down the requirement of both (or all) conflicted groups. Write the "design challenge:" How might we achieve success while satisfying both (or all) the needs described by each of the (conflicted) groups?

While going towards a summarisation, it is not always possible to have a unanimous decision. Help them understand the importance of the solution that has come up against the collective goal rather than individual perspectives. Encourage critical thinking to understand biases and to ensure an analytical approach. And always try to ensure that the collaboration ends on a positive note and a solution everyone can get behind.