Scenario: Different Opinion Written by DrBea on July 31, 2017. Posted in Action Learning, WIAL Action Learning, WIAL Talk As an Action Learning Coach how would you handle the following situation: You ask the team members how we are doing on a scale of 1 – 10. Most of the members say 7 or 8. One says 2. Tags: Action Leaning, Action Learning, Action Learning Coach, WIAL, WIAL Action Learning, WIAL Talk Trackback from your site. Comments (15) Denise Locke August 2, 2017 at 1:01 am | # I would expand on this and ask the team the “what are we ding well” question and the “what could we do even better” question to see if similar points emerge from all of the team members. I would ask the other team members what they thought about the responses to those questions given by the person who gave the score of 2. I would also think about asking the group what 10 looked like to see if there was any congruence in the responses to that. Given the disparity in scores I would definitely intervene again to ask the same question of the group to see if the scores had changed. Before the second intervention on the point I would spend time observing the lower scorer to see if they appeared disengaged or frustrated in any way or were struggling to ask questions to see if there was another context to their low score that I had not already observed. Reply Maria So August 18, 2017 at 11:09 am | # May start with “What the team feel they are doing well” and “What the team can do better” to clarify the definition of “well” / the perception. Then ask what’s the criteria they have for the scoring. How can the team make use of the named criterion to help the team moving towards the ideal way. Reply Gabor Holch August 23, 2017 at 6:19 pm | # This happened to me exactly in the same manner last week. I decided not to intervene, after all we give participants a 1-10 score range so that they can opt for any number between 1 to 10. However, when we moved on to check for a shared understanding of the problem, the reason for the discrepancy manifested itself quite clearly. Before a write-up, all team members except for the one with score 2 agreed that there was a common understanding of the problem. After the write-up, none did. It seemed that the team member with the 2 had simply picked up on the misunderstanding quicker than others, which was then addressed at the remaining discussion. Reply DrBea August 29, 2017 at 2:17 am | # We would want to be very careful not to call anyone out as they are free to give any number they want. Following with – what are we doing well? and what can we do better? is all we need to do as coach. Happy Coaching Bea Reply unri Babb September 4, 2017 at 11:10 pm | # Sometimes it is useful to give that voice with the low score some air time to assess why they hold that position. The coach could ask, ” would you mind sharing with the group you think we are only at a 2?” This response could trigger the next question about “what have we done well/not so well?” Reply Stephanie Brown September 14, 2017 at 12:31 am | # I would stick to the script as written. What are we doing well? Anything else? What could we do better? Anything else? Do we have agreement on this problem- yes or no?…………… Reply Yoge Rajendra September 17, 2017 at 1:09 pm | # “Team, a member has indicated 2. What would be the impact on our session?” Reply Phanit Tiravongchaipunt October 18, 2017 at 10:05 pm | # I would ask the basic question ” what team had done well? ‘ “How can we do it better?” I would also ask the member who gave 2 what should happen in order to fill the gap between 2 to 10. the follow up question will be given to team how team would consider this suggestion. Reply Hans Ploeg September 17, 2017 at 6:32 pm | # I think that for an open process it is good to hear the different opinions. It will make everybody consciously that we all have a different view at a process. For my is the script in this important. See I would ask the members: What are we doing well? What could we do better? Ask the team if we have an agreement on the problem. Reply wthimmes September 21, 2017 at 11:38 pm | # I would begin a round of reflective questions: Why do you say it’s a “2”? I would then ask the rest of the team what they thought. If everyone still maintains it as a “7” and that member maintains it’s a “2” for their own reasons, I would move on. Reply Cheuk Yan Edna Choi September 22, 2017 at 8:20 pm | # I would continue with the health check and ask “what are we doing well?”, followed by “what could we do better?” If no one raised suggestions on the different perspective/opinion, I would further ask “what would be the positive impact of having different perspective towards the team’s performance?” Reply Japheth Lim September 25, 2017 at 3:21 pm | # I would take note of it if it’s the first round. If it’s the second or third round, and the same member indicated 2, i would use the SID approach to call out, “I notice team member has indicated 2 in the first and second round, how does that impact our session. Reply Min Chang October 10, 2017 at 12:02 pm | # 这个环节的目的，是为了让参与者意识到彼此在认知上的差异，无所谓分数高低。 作为教练，遇到这种情况，我会继续追问“我们有什么做的好的地方？有什么可以做的更好？”促进参与者自我反思，形成共识。 Reply ZhuYe Wu October 12, 2017 at 7:24 am | # I would just ask: What were we doing well? What could we do better? Reply jefferson Cua October 17, 2017 at 9:33 am | # Given the situation, I will simply ask why the person gave a 2. Sometimes it is the lack of common understanding of the problem or simply another concern. Whatever the answer is, I will continue by following the script. What are we doing well? What could we do better? how do we proceed? Reply Leave a comment You must be logged in to post a comment.