The Introducing Reality of Group Discussions - Articles - Andrew Schwartz

Products - Articles

ReadySetPresent Articles can be purchased for $15.00 and are reproducible for a $1.00 royalty fee per copy. Once purchased, download instructions will be sent to you via email. (PC and MAC Compatible). You can purchase all additional royalty copies by clicking here or visiting the reprints page.

The Introducing Reality of Group Discussions
by Andrew E. Schwartz

The ideal training technique would enable the instructor to supervise all trainees in their work situations to help them see real life applications for what you are trying to teach them. This is not possible, of course, but the presentor can simulate this situation through certain techniques.

The case study and critical incident are among the most useful and effective techniques available to introducing trainees to changes in their on-the-job behavior. They give the employee an opportunity to internalize concepts and skills by applying them in situations similar to their own work environments. There is one crucial difference—in the classroom it is safe to experiment, applying these new skills in a less stressful and risk-laden atmosphere than on the job.

The case study: The case study approach is a group discussion and participation technique, usually involving a small number of people. The purpose of the case is to evaluate a situation to determine what can be learned from it. Trainees are given a detailed description of a situation (real or simulated) to provide a common base for analysis, discussion and problem solving. Useful generalizations drawn from one situation can often be applied to other cases, participants are better prepared for the unanticipated issues that may arise on the job. (After they have applied their learning in a test case) because this approach requires detailed analysis and exploration of numerous avenues of information, it may take several weeks to complete.

Key steps are in the case study approach.

Presenting the case. Assign the trainees a case this permits them to think about it individually before the group discussion in class.
A review of the case. Provide a brief synopsis of the central features of the case by movie, slide, or verbal presentation to start the discussion. A review of the facts and their relationships to one another helps trainees recognize the various elements of the case and grasp their significance.
The case discussion. After the initial review and presentation, a large group can be subdivided into smaller groups (no more than twelve members each to facilitate participation. Observe the interactions within the small groups. It is important that the atmosphere be free, open and informal. Some time is usually spent criticizing the people described in the case - their actions, what they said, the original situation, employment conditions, and so on. Participants must ultimately focus on the lessons learned from the case and how these could be applied in their own work situations. If they get stuck at the point of apportioning blame, it is the job of the presentor to move them along and into the more important aspects of what can be learned from the situation.
Reporting back. The small groups need to periodically reconvene to review their thinking and analysis and compare their findings with each other.
The evaluation and analysis. At the conclusion of each period of study and at the finish of the entire case study, the lessons and principles of this case need to be summarized by the presentor or one of the trainees. At this point, any key points which have been missed must be expanded to emphasize those lessons that the presentor considers essential.

Case studies are not necessarily useful in all situations. They are most useful when participants are involved in broad policy issues as opposed to details of individual job performance - for example, in helping top management people plan market strategies or deal with labor complaints. This approach would be an ineffective method for training how to evaluate employee job performance—although it may be useful in learning how to deal tactfully with an employee’s performance problems.

The case study approach is also effective in testing an individual’s ideas against the ideas of others, and in allowing participants to learn from the experiences of other group members. It permits an exchange of views on complex issues and problems, and inspires reflection on ways to approach problems more effectively. Finally, participants develop the skills of logical thinking and critical analysis as well as the ability to apply principles to their specific working situations.

Before deciding to utilize this training method, consider certain potential difficulties. Realistic cases are difficult to write, requiring a considerable expenditure of time, research, and creativity. Each participant can view the case presented in a different way, which is likely to cause dissension and alternative conclusions among the members of the group. Furthermore, good case studies are complex; they may include many conflicting facts and some leave open several apparent conclusions. It is consequently difficult for trainees to avoid getting bogged down in minor details of the case and thereby miss the overall conclusions.

Case studies require considerable skill on the part of the presentor. He or she must be completely familiar with the case and need to be able to relate the salient conclusions learned to the individual performance of agencies and key decision makers. Case studies are also generally less successful with line level employees than with top management—although this sometimes depends on the nature of the personnel and their job descriptions. For these reasons, other techniques (like the critical incident technique) exist to deal with training situations on other levels.

The critical incident technique: The critical incident technique focuses on the performance of an individual in the way that the case study focuses on the performance of an organization or groups. Because it deals with the details of a specific job in a specific work-related situation, it is both effective and useful with line level personnel.

A critical incident requires a brief scenario of a situation or incident that is at a realistic decision point. The situation may be as routine or unusual as necessary for the purpose of the instruction; however, it must present a problem which is actually relevant to trainees in their work. The situation then becomes a mechanism by which the trainees are allowed to imagine themselves in the situation; it elicits their responses in a safe environment. Their analysis takes place in small group discussion in which they must (1)determine what they know and need to know from the situation and then (2)seek more information from the presentor. The presentor serves as the resource person as each group seeks additional information. The presentor, however, cannot reveal any information about the situation’s outcome—only information that has lead up to the situation.

Once all the groups have exhausted their questions (or the time is up) reconvene the large group and have each smaller group present its findings, the issues involved, and the decision for action.

As with the case study, the situation in the critical incident is introduced in the large group and discussed in small groups. Similarly, the most important part of the technique is the evaluation and analysis. However, the critical incident is an excellent approach to handle routine correctional problems in a safe, constructive atmosphere. It is extremely useful in preparing employees to deal with sensitive and potentially dangerous situations which they may encounter on the job.

Steps in using the critical incident technique:

The incident. Read, review, or assume roles. Begin the investigation of the incident situation.
Fact-Finding. Collecting the details of the incident occurs in the small group discussions where the participants determine what they know about the situation and what else they need to know before making a decision. They decide what questions to ask the instructor.
The issue. When the groups have all the facts needed to decide the case, they need to identify what they consider to be its central issues.
The Decision. Each trainee or group writes a decision on the incident and cites the central issues identified. The group members state how they would like to see the situation handled and why. Individuals or groups with varying responses to the same situation may be allowed to debate their rationale for the decision.
The Evaluation (the most important stage). In large groups the instructor guides the groups to focus on broader issues of the incident to analyze potential solutions to determine if the alternative courses of action will cause more trouble and to determine if the root causes are still present in the situation. Evaluate the exercise by centering on WHAT WAS LEARNED BY THE EXERCISE AS A DEMONSTRATION OF THE CRITICAL INCIDENT TECHNIQUE, not on who has the best decision to the incident itself.

During the course of the critical incident discussions, roam between the groups, observing how they function and answering the questions arise during the fact finding process. Remember that the same information needs to be given to each group when they ask questions on the same material.

Advantages and Disadvantages. The critical incident technique is a problem-solving and decision-making process that teaches the participants how to gather information relevant to a problem or situation about which they need to make a decision. It encourages:

Analysis of facts.
Evaluation of decisions.
Use of intellect and judgment.
Consideration of feelings.
Development of high interest.

The success or failure of the critical incident technique depends heavily on the skill of the instructor or discussion leader, who needs to have all the facts necessary to answer the fact-finding questions. The instructor need to not inject his or her own values, opinions, or philosophies by words, expressions, gestures, or vocal tones.

The critical incident technique is not suited for top executives or high level managers because they are usually more interested and concerned with the “Big Picture” than with the intricacies of individual job performance. They are attuned to policy issues.
The debate over the facts of the situation and the merits of various decisions can degenerate into intensive and sometimes meaningless arguments.

Both the critical incident and the case study techniques are powerful training techniques when used properly and with considerable planning. Both depend heavily, however, on a highly skilled, effective, and organized presentor and must not be attempted without comprehensive experience and complete confidence.

Andrew E. Schwartz, CEO, A.E. Schwartz & Associates of Boston, MA a comprehensive management training and professional development organization offering over 40 skills specific programs and practical solutions to today's business challenges.

When ordering, if you need an extraction program to unzip the file please visit one of these sites below.
These programs all have free trials that can be used to unzip our files. Make sure you have your pop-up blockers disabled.

Winzip - http://download.winzip.com/winzip120.exe
Winrar - http://www.rarlab.com/rar/wrar380.exe

Purchase this article for $15.00.
Articles are Reproducible for a $1.00 royalty fee per copy.