Send Protocol Fatigue Out of this League!
When you work in the “protocol” business, you hear that word a lot. However, when I hear the word protocol, I get excited! A few years ago, a colleague made us buttons that recognized us as a “Certified Protocologist.” I wore my button with pride! But unfortunately, not everyone appreciates protocols like I do.
In most organizations that use protocols to accomplish work, you will run into people with “protocol fatigue.” These people may have trouble recognizing protocols as “tools” to help solve problems more efficiently and effectively and may instead recognize them as “new” and “different,” something that isn’t so appealing to some because it requires new material to be learned and retained. These people are going to exist, so how do we use new and exciting protocols without pushing our fatigued colleagues further into the mud?
First and foremost, I encourage you to avoid using the word “protocol,” when you do so. Once, as I worked with a group of teachers, I needed them to engage in conversation around a topic. I broke the topic into three questions, and after dividing my staff into groups of three, I gave individuals time to reflect on each question before giving them approximately 90 seconds to speak. In a nutshell, I just described the NSRF “Microlabs Protocol.” However, when I had the teachers do this, I never used the word protocol. I got the input I needed from the staff, and I’m confident that some teachers used this same “unnamed” instructional strategy in their classrooms soon after.
Sometimes, protocol fatigue occurs when you’re not showing your participants something new. Often, in trainings, I encounter participants who have learned some version of a protocol in the past, or perhaps a member of their staff had been previously trained and the protocol had already been used. This should never be a problem! Protocols are not made to be used only once; instead, they are like tools in a toolbox. Just as we wouldn’t throw away a tool after using it only once, protocols should be kept as well, put safely away until they are needed again. As a facilitator, it is important for me to help participants see the various directions our conversation can go because of the wisdom in the room and because of the focusing question for which a presenter may be seeking answers. Unless the participants and the topic are exactly the same, and no work has been completed since a person’s last attempt at the protocol, the protocol will produce different results!
Admittedly, some exercises in NSRF protocol handbooks have outcomes that are designed to be the same. However, these exercises are almost always labeled as an “Activity” rather than as a protocol. When a participant repeats these activities, they may immediately decide that repeating one can be a waste of time...but an open-minded individual will see that it’s not, and as a facilitator, you can help a participant to see this. For example, with an activity such as “Compass Points,” I might assume that if I was found to be an “East” last time, I will be again...but you might be surprised to know that participants often change directions as the time in their career progresses. Even if that is not going to be the case, I hope participants would see the benefit of learning about the directions of new participants. If I can communicate these points to participants prior to beginning the activity, I may have more generous and effective participation.
Lastly, if you are running into a real lack of desire to participate in an activity that has been done before, differentiate and appeal to participants’ creative inclinations. At a training last summer, I had a group that had experienced the Compass Points Activity before...but instead of eliminating the activity from our agenda (I thought it was important to revisit for its implications on our common vocabulary), I reshaped it, asking participants to create “party invitations” that appealed to each direction’s partying needs :)
What are some ways you can creatively meet your organization’s needs without advancing protocol fatigue?
In most organizations that use protocols to accomplish work, you will run into people with “protocol fatigue.” These people may have trouble recognizing protocols as “tools” to help solve problems more efficiently and effectively and may instead recognize them as “new” and “different,” something that isn’t so appealing to some because it requires new material to be learned and retained. These people are going to exist, so how do we use new and exciting protocols without pushing our fatigued colleagues further into the mud?
First and foremost, I encourage you to avoid using the word “protocol,” when you do so. Once, as I worked with a group of teachers, I needed them to engage in conversation around a topic. I broke the topic into three questions, and after dividing my staff into groups of three, I gave individuals time to reflect on each question before giving them approximately 90 seconds to speak. In a nutshell, I just described the NSRF “Microlabs Protocol.” However, when I had the teachers do this, I never used the word protocol. I got the input I needed from the staff, and I’m confident that some teachers used this same “unnamed” instructional strategy in their classrooms soon after.
Sometimes, protocol fatigue occurs when you’re not showing your participants something new. Often, in trainings, I encounter participants who have learned some version of a protocol in the past, or perhaps a member of their staff had been previously trained and the protocol had already been used. This should never be a problem! Protocols are not made to be used only once; instead, they are like tools in a toolbox. Just as we wouldn’t throw away a tool after using it only once, protocols should be kept as well, put safely away until they are needed again. As a facilitator, it is important for me to help participants see the various directions our conversation can go because of the wisdom in the room and because of the focusing question for which a presenter may be seeking answers. Unless the participants and the topic are exactly the same, and no work has been completed since a person’s last attempt at the protocol, the protocol will produce different results!
Admittedly, some exercises in NSRF protocol handbooks have outcomes that are designed to be the same. However, these exercises are almost always labeled as an “Activity” rather than as a protocol. When a participant repeats these activities, they may immediately decide that repeating one can be a waste of time...but an open-minded individual will see that it’s not, and as a facilitator, you can help a participant to see this. For example, with an activity such as “Compass Points,” I might assume that if I was found to be an “East” last time, I will be again...but you might be surprised to know that participants often change directions as the time in their career progresses. Even if that is not going to be the case, I hope participants would see the benefit of learning about the directions of new participants. If I can communicate these points to participants prior to beginning the activity, I may have more generous and effective participation.
Lastly, if you are running into a real lack of desire to participate in an activity that has been done before, differentiate and appeal to participants’ creative inclinations. At a training last summer, I had a group that had experienced the Compass Points Activity before...but instead of eliminating the activity from our agenda (I thought it was important to revisit for its implications on our common vocabulary), I reshaped it, asking participants to create “party invitations” that appealed to each direction’s partying needs :)
What are some ways you can creatively meet your organization’s needs without advancing protocol fatigue?
Comments
Post a Comment