Organizational Development: A Manual for Managers and ... - FPDL

co-operate will be frustrated and get a shock. Instead of starting with explanation, how meetings
should be organised and conducting, trainer may allow participants to have a very realistic
meeting with absolutely hopeless agenda, film it and demonstrate to them, just allowing to make
their own conclusions, what was wrong.
8.2 FEEDBACK. Trainer should never forget that any change in mental thesauruses is happening
only when getting feedback as the world responds to the certain choice of behaviour. If respond
is different from what was expected – it means that certain settings or algorithms were wrong,
and such experience may destroy these settings or algorithms. To insure this change, trainer
should guarantee that all information, which is used by participants when making decision is
correct and still the same as in the moment of making conclusion. Otherwise, they will blame
wrong information, account on misunderstanding and do not change themselves.
The task is more difficult, when we should build in a new pattern of behaviour. It will happen,
when this new algorithm is chosen as one of available alternatives and brings to trainee’s
positive feelings as a right way of action. For that, trainee should use this algorithm or
procedure correctly, but it may be difficult to reach immediately.
8.3 MANNER. The process may be organised in a way, which would look to trainees like
continuous collaboration, learning one from another, getting fun and making interesting
conclusions. They learn from process, not from trainer, who is in a shadow, just facilitating the
main process. It is most convincing and effective, but also most difficult to manage.
Nevertheless, it is the only way to be successful for the trainer with the lack of practical
experience in the field of trainees’ activity.
Sometimes trainer can afford to be a “guru” (teacher, the one who knows all answers), but it is
only in a case when he feels strong enough not in theory of the subject, but also in all
corresponding fields and in the practical affairs close to the trainees’ experience. His age and
educational experience, in comparison with those in the group, should also be sufficient not to
put participants in discomfort and feeling of dissonance. To be “guru” is also risky. Some
participants may decide to challenge trainer, demonstrating their advantages (based on
theoretical background or practical experience) against trainer’s weaknesses in this or that
particular matter. Then it may become a problem to keep a face, and some trainers may be not
assertive enough to manage with such challenges.
Best results will be reached in a case, when trainer (or team of trainers) is able to vary manners,
being “guru” in certain moments (sometimes good at the beginning of the course, to build
respect and confidence), withdrawing in other moments (looking like facilitator or even servant).
He should also be colleague or client, friend, man or woman, citizen or foreigner – all the time
not far from what the group expects and what is needed by the process design.
205