There are no absolute rules. Facilitation requires a sensitivity to the ways in which a group functions. Equally, the role of the facilitator is not set in stone; it is determined by the needs of the group (as understood by the group itself as much as by the facilitator – the facilitator must always and repeatedly be authorised by the group). These needs and functions vary along many lines (place, time, imperatives, distractions, dynamics within the group). We need to learn strategies, and we can only learn by doing -

A facilitator needs to facilitate (to make easy, facil) the negotiation of a number of overlapping tensions. Not to resolve them or overcome them, exhaust them or deny them, but to let them play out productively.

The tension between task (what the group wants to get done) and maintenance (ensuring that the group holds together, wants to remain together – but it was pointed out that this is itself a task, the politics of how we relate is essential to our broader politics as much as it is to the success of our actions).

The tension between making decisions and letting our ideas elaborate themselves – we do need to decide, but we also need to let things cook. We need moments of silence and an engagement with ideas that seem out of place (don’t look at people strangely, don’t ignore their comments if they appear irrelevant at first – there is value in that which appears as unproductive). But we also need to not get stuck in a discussion that exhausts us and stops us from dealing with those issues and decisions which we feel are more important. We need conflict (this is where thought happens), but we must find ways of avoiding the automatic disagreements which can happen between people who have already decided to fight. We must find an adequate rhythm and pace for our meetings.

The tension between inclusion and exclusion. Absolute inclusivity is an impossibility, and an extreme exclusivity is terrible. We need to ensure that there is space for all to speak while also making sure that we have focus and parameters. This is not easy and the task is shared equally by those who are comfortable with speaking and those who are not. Responsibility is always shared, but good facilitation lets this responsibility be owned (together). We need to make all (especially new people) comfortable in the space; to let all know what is happening and where the group is at (without this, the group will easily fall apart).

This extends beyond a ‘formal’ meeting to the group as such – in the tension between our social relations and our desire to work together towards political action. That people feel comfortable saying dangerous things (as they might with friends), but that they don’t talk without focus. We must let our personal relations play out, but we should not let them overdetermine everything that happens. The sharing of facilitation amongst a group is essential to all this, as is a sensitivity to all of these tensions in contexts other than meetings (actions, social interactions…)

The tension between the need to distribute leadership functions (we need to get things done) and the formation of informal hierarchies. To some extent, hierarchies are unavoidable, but it would be the task of facilitation (and the group in general) to expose these in a safe and secure environment – and to find strategies for dealing with them. Again, everyone is responsible for this (not just those who have become ‘dominant,’ not just the facilitator).

Facilitation is the skill of letting things happen. It is a skill which we must all learn and learn together. It is impossible to see and include absolutely everything; we will always miss things. But by trying and sharing we can begin to get better.