By Marc Steinlin
We tend to “transfer” our habits and principles from predominantly face-to-face processes almost 1:1 to the virtual realm. We prepare a workshop, participants “arrive” and then we go full steam for as long as we think is needed.
In the physical space, this may work: people gather for two days, and we try to get the maximum mileage out of this opportunity. Let them work for six hours per workshop day to get the full benefit out of the rare chance of being together in the same location.
The virtual space doesn’t require and doesn’t allow for the same. Each of us being homebased, allows us to meet repeatedly over longer periods of time without much additional effort. At the same time, we can’t keep up our attention and energy for similar time spans as we are able to do when we meet physically.
Hence rhythm, intensity and formats of interaction and engagement oscillate over time in the virtual realm, whether over several days or weeks:
This becomes an important principle in our virtual process design and planning.
Here is a practical example:
We had planned a 5-day physical programme start-up workshop with about 25 participants from three countries, guided by a European-based development agency. Due to travel restrictions we have now had to redesign this workshop for the virtual realm. The purpose was, and still remains, to connect as a programme team and identify common ground. And more particularly, to identify a theory of change and a shared vision to unite the team, as well as working modalities and an action plan for the first implementation period.
While in the physical space that would have become a very intense workshop week, we have now come up with an alternative design attempting to achieve the same outcomes in the virtual space:
This is a 10-weeks schedule, which replaces a 1-week workshop that would have had about 5 weeks of lead/preparation time plus 1-2 weeks of post-processing time. The total time of engagement is comparable to that of a full workshop week (i.e. about 30 hours), but it is spread out over several weeks with online sessions no longer than two hours each.
The process schedule goes through “waves of intensity” (as indicated in the top row) which are structured along our common design pattern of Divergence-Emergence-Convergence. This wave pattern allows participants to settle into a trot with intense productive peaks and slower, more quiet valleys which serve to: a) “recover” from more intense moments and dedicate their attention to other matters, and; b) prepare in their own time and pace for the next peak.
The process alternates between asynchronous contributions (top and bottom row) and synchronous sessions (middle row), making use of corresponding virtual tools (on turquoise stickies).
Some sessions are individual work (yellow stickies), some are small group work (light blue stickies) and some are plenary sessions (pink stickies). While the latter are important to stich different threads together and build common ground, they reach their limitations as people tend to get exhausted. The other work forms hence allow us to keep making progress whilst also providing variation.
There are many patterns and structures, i.e. this is by no means a blueprint. What is key is to craft a process which unites purpose and needs of the process, with resources and natural limitations of the participants. When we succeed in doing so, collaboration in the virtual realm can be as effective and more resource and cost efficient than meeting face-to-face.
We look forward to hearing from you on info@i-p-k.co.za to advise you on how you too can convert physical meeting and workshop agendas into virtually facilitated processes.