- Home
- Sociology of Sport
- Recreation and Leisure
- Outdoor Sports and Activities
- Outdoor Leadership
Outdoor Leadership
Theory and Practice
by Bruce Martin, Mary Breunig, Mark Wagstaff and Marni Goldenberg
400 Pages
Outdoor Leadership, Second Edition, is the definitive text for developing student leadership in outdoor and adventure settings throughout the world. Crafted by an author team internationally recognized for their research, teaching, and experience in outdoor and adventure leadership, this new edition provides students with the foundational knowledge they need to develop as competent professionals in the field.
Grounded in Eight Core Competencies
Through Outdoor Leadership, Second Edition, students are introduced to eight core competencies that the authors consider essential to outdoor leadership:
1. Foundational knowledge
2. Self-awareness and professional conduct
3. Decision making and judgment
4. Teaching and facilitation
5. Environmental stewardship
6. Program management
7. Safety and risk management
8. Technical ability
This unique approach to outdoor and adventure leadership will help students meet current professional standards in the field as they prepare for careers in education and recreation. The students move step by step through the materials and assignments, gaining and demonstrating leadership competencies, which they will document through a portfolio of their course experiences. The development of these portfolios is a highly practical and valuable takeaway for students looking to get a leg up as they ready themselves for their careers.
New to the Text
This latest edition of Outdoor Leadership offers new features, material, and resources, including:
• The expertise and perspectives of new author Marni Goldenberg
• A new chapter on program assessment
• A new chapter on developing cultural and social justice competencies as an outdoor leader
• A redistribution of the content on values and ethics (formerly a single chapter) across multiple chapters
• An increased emphasis on international perspectives
• A stronger focus on outdoor leadership in the area of ecotourism
• Revisions to address critical issues in the evolving field of outdoor and adventure leadership
• New ancillaries, including an instructor guide (which includes learning and portfolio activities for each chapter, as well as other new learning experiences), a test package, and a presentation package
Emphasizing Both Theory and Practice
While primarily directed at novice outdoor leaders, Outdoor Leadership, Second Edition, is useful for more experienced outdoor leaders as well, including administrative and supervisory personnel in outdoor leadership organizations. The authors have created a balance between theory and practice as they explore the eight core competencies by doing the following:
• Introducing students to a wide variety of theories and concepts integral to outdoor leadership
• Using chapter-opening vignettes to illustrate the theories and concepts addressed in the chapter
• Acquainting readers with numerous organizations and agencies in which outdoor leaders work
• Offfering a series of learning activities and professional development exercises to transform the theoretical into the practical
Preparing Students for Successful Careers
The result is a highly useful resource that grounds students in the theories, concepts, and competencies that they need in order to be successful leaders in outdoor and adventure settings. This competency-based approach will help aspiring outdoor leaders plan safe, enjoyable, and ecologically responsible expeditions; acquire and showcase their leadership abilities, culminating in a professional portfolio; and develop the knowledge and expertise they need to be effective leaders.
Part I Foundations of Outdoor Leadership
Chapter 1. The Journey Begins
Chapter 2. History of Outdoor Leadership
Chapter 3. Outdoor Leadership as Professional Practice
Chapter 4. Cultural and Social Justice Competency in Outdoor Leadership
Part II Outdoor Leadership Theory
Chapter 5. Theories of Leadership
Chapter 6. Leadership in Practice
Chapter 7. Decision Making and Judgment
Part III Teaching and Facilitation
Chapter 8. Understanding Facilitation
Chapter 9. Facilitating Personal Development
Chapter 10. Facilitating Interpersonal Development
Chapter 11. Challenge Course Leadership
Chapter 12. Teaching Strategies
Part IV Natural Resource and Program Management
Chapter 13. Parks and Protected Areas Management
Chapter 14. Environmental Stewardship
Chapter 15. Program Management
Chapter 16. Safety and Risk Management
Chapter 17. Expedition Planning
Chapter 18. Assessment and Evaluation
Bruce Martin, PhD, is an Associate Professor and Department Chair in the Department of Recreation & Sport Pedagogy at Ohio University in Athens, OH. He has been in higher education since 1998, and he has significant and varied experience as an outdoor leader and instructor. He has worked as a camp counselor, professional river guide, and Outward Bound instructor. He holds certifications through the American Canoe Association as a whitewater kayak instructor trainer and open-water coastal kayak instructor. He is a Leave No Trace Master Educator and is currently certified through the Wilderness Medical Associates as a Wilderness First Responder. Martin has been associated with and served in varying capacities for professional organizations such as the Association for Experiential Education, the Wilderness Education Association, the Leave No Trace Center for Outdoor Ethics, the American Canoe Association, and the Association for Outdoor Recreation and Education. His current teaching and research interests are focused on the practice of outdoor leadership and adventure programming. At Ohio University, he regularly teaches both theoretically oriented and practically based courses related to outdoor leadership, adventure programming, and experiential education. Martin is also author of numerous publications related to outdoor leadership and adventure programming.
Mary Breunig, PhD, has been involved in outdoor and experiential education, with a focus on social and environmental justice, for more than 20 years. She is an associate professor in the Department of Recreation and Leisure Studies and graduate program director of the Social Justice and Equity Studies program at Brock University, Canada. Mary is a research consultant, a past president of the Association for Experiential Education, a former Outward Bound instructor, and a National Outdoor Leadership School instructor. She is both an outdoor enthusiast and an urban flaneur.
Mark Wagstaff, EdD, is a professor of recreation, parks, and tourism at Radford University in Radford, Virginia. He has taught outdoor leadership and adventure education in a university setting for 20 years and has led extended expeditions to develop outdoor leaders for more than 30 years. He has been an instructor for Outward Bound and the Wilderness Education Association (WEA). Wagstaff has worked in the challenge course industry for many years and is also a Leave No Trace master educator. Wagstaff has authored books, chapters, and journal articles on outdoor-related topics. He is cofounder of the Virginia Adventure Education Conference and is a member of several outdoor organizations, including Leave No Trace, WEA, and the Association for Outdoor Recreation and Education.
Marni Goldenberg, PhD, is a professor in the Department of Experience Industry Management at California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo. She teaches courses in recreation, parks, and tourism administration with a focus on outdoor and adventure leadership. She has instructed courses for the Wilderness Education Association (WEA) and North Carolina Outward Bound School, and she has worked as a ropes course facilitator for more than 25 years. Her research focuses on outcomes and benefits associated with participating in recreation and outdoor experiences. She has received several awards for her teaching, research, and service at California Polytechnic and has several publications and presentattions on various outdoor and adventure topics.
Facilitation Styles
Facilitation keeps the learner - rather than the facilitator - central to what is happening. Therefore, a leader should be very thoughtful in selecting the style of facilitation used.
Facilitation keeps the learner - rather than the facilitator - central to what is happening. Therefore, a leader should be very thoughtful in selecting the style of facilitation used. A leader's facilitation style is based on many variables, some of which are internal and some of which are external. Internal factors include beliefs, communication ability, and valuing others. Personal belief systems are strong perceptual filters that affect expectations and behavior. For example, the Pygmalion effect suggests that what we expect or believe about someone is what we get. If we view someone as ineffective, they most likely will live up to that expectation. Our perceptual filters can limit ourselves, too. A frog perceives only things that move as food and therefore will starve in a box of dead flies. We can work toward establishing a rapport with others if we understand how they perceive the world.
External variables, which help the facilitator adjust their style to each specific group, include the following:
- The age and maturity of the group - The younger the group, the more it depends on the leader and requires direct leadership and coaching. The maturity of any group changes as the group interacts.
- The length of the program - Groups generally build skills over time, so a short course or single-day event encourage direct leadership. The longer a group is together, the greater the opportunity to use more indirect methods.
- The expressed goals of the program - The outcome will dictate the style of presenting a challenge and debriefing it. Sometimes a group has no agenda except to have fun and get acquainted, which creates more opportunities for multiple activities with little transfer. However, if a group is working on communication or improving problem solving, the choices might be limited and more translation of the experience might occur.
- The readiness of the group - Some groups can manage safety and conflict because of their experiences together and are ready for more complicated challenges. Other groups take longer to develop the trust necessary to leave the ground or move independently.
Facilitation styles are either direct (i.e., telling or selling) or indirect (i.e., coaching and encouraging while staying focused on the students). The role that a facilitator chooses directly dictates the style of facilitation used. Evidence supports the effectiveness of direct facilitation styles, especially with motivated students. Such a style keeps the leader focused and on task and requires the leader to recognize changes in the group's climate and have a repertoire of activities that are appropriate for the situation. A new facilitator must practice a variety of behaviors and styles to learn what works with different groups.
Nondirective Facilitation
Nondirective facilitation uses a laissez-faire style in which the facilitator creates an opportunity that allows participants to determine which way to go. Although this style is not always comfortable or appropriate, it can be effective when a leader believes that the students can find their own solution to a problem and find that solution rewarding.
Appreciative Facilitation
Appreciative facilitation emphasizes what works well and concentrates on success and achievement (Greenaway, 2004). Identifying moments when the group is working at its best helps the leader identify and emphasize desired behaviors. Sometimes asking what is going well focuses attention on what is working rather than what is not working. This style is based on research related to the Pygmalion effect: The students become what the teacher believes them to be.
Activity Facilitation
Activity facilitation occurs during a group activity. Greenaway (2004) states, "Sometimes the facilitator may simply be enabling a group to achieve a task in the time available" (paragraph 14). To make experiences more meaningful, the facilitator interjects during the activity to influence what is experienced. Most of the time such influence involves changing the rules in some way. There should always be a clear beginning, middle, and end in activity facilitation. Discussing the goal of the activity in the beginning sets a target for the group to achieve. The middle portion is the actual participation in a game, initiative, or other activity. The end is called when the activity has run its course. Some sort of summary, debriefing, or conclusion increases the value of the experience.
Group Facilitation
Group facilitation can apply to groups in any context. Group dynamics in the outdoors can have a greater effect on a person than the outdoors alone. Even if group development is not a priority, group facilitation skills are necessary to keep the group on task. If a primary goal is team building, then group facilitation is absolutely necessary. At a minimum, outdoor leaders want to build a climate for learning and development (Greenaway, 2004).
Directive Facilitation
Adventure programming is a more directive style of facilitation that leaves little to chance. Priest and Gass (2005) developed categories of facilitation techniques commonly used in outdoor settings. The first two - frontloading and framing the experience - occur before and during the experience.
Frontloading is prebriefing or setting the stage before an activity. The facilitator tells the group what they should learn from the experience in order to create focus and a reference point. Framing the experience helps a group make sense of it. Stories or metaphors help the group understand how a particular activity relates to their lives outside of the experience. Taking an activity and making it meaningful by relating it to the needs of participants can be powerful. Instead of climbing a rock, participants may be learning to stay focused on life goals. Instead of jumping off a power pole to catch a trapeze, individuals can reach for goals in their lives.
Other facilitation methods proposed by Priest and Gass typically occur after the experience. One is letting the experience speak for itself. Often it is assumed that learning has taken place simply because the individual took part in an experience. Accomplishing a summit climb rarely needs an explanation, for example. After the difficulty of ascending a peak, just being there is enough for most people. Speaking for the experience, on the other hand, allows the facilitator to interpret the experience for the group. By telling the group what they have learned and how they might apply that new knowledge in the future, the facilitator can emphasize desired outcomes or learning.
Debriefing can occur during or after an experience. The facilitator asks the group to reflect on their experience and to identify points of learning. Levels of questions are used to extract different information from the group. Facilitators must be clear about what types of information they want and the group's ability to respond.
There exist many ways to debrief an experience. Leaders can use journaling, photography, and drawing, to mention a few techniques. Getting thoughtful responses from participants is the key element. Later in this chapter we discuss processing experiences.
When the meaning is not elicited during facilitation, this is just a jump of trust.
©Christine Cashel
Choosing a Facilitation Style
Choosing a style of facilitation is not an easy task. Each style has advantages and disadvantages. Facilitators have their own style based on their values, experience, and personality. Mixing techniques and styles that are different from one's personal style serves the students at a moment in time. Knowing when to take charge, when to back off, and when to negotiate has to do with the situation, the group, the task at hand, and the facilitator's personal style. Over time, facilitators learn when and where to apply a variety of techniques, just as Karen learned to set herself up for success by figuring out which facilitation style worked for her. Establishing an effective facilitation style takes time, practice, and being facilitated by others.
Save
Save
Learn more about Outdoor Leadership, Second Edition.
Ethical Decision-Making Model
The ethical decision-making model requires a leader to work through the following steps: 1. Identify the problem - Gather as much information as possible to clarify the problem.
The ethical decision-making model requires a leader to work through the following steps:
- Identify the problem - Gather as much information as possible to clarify the problem.
- List options - Brainstorm all options, possibly collectively with group members.
- Consider the nature and ethical dimensions of the problem - Which option will have the least chance of bringing harm to the participants or the environment? What decisions will safeguard the well-being of the group and individuals in it? How can a leader best honor group members and the natural environment? Leaders should not try to manage things on their own but rather should involve others, including group members, to ensure that they are seeing the whole issue.
- Apply a principle ethic if appropriate - A principle ethic is a set of rules determined by a governing professional organization or by the current professional standards of behavior. This could be either a professional code of ethics or a company's policies and procedures manual.
- Generate possible actions - Collaboratively brainstorm possible solutions to the dilemma.
- Consider the possible consequences of all options and determine a course of action - This stage involves looking at all the options and the consequences for all relevant parties, including the environment.
- Consider the rights and responsibilities of all people involved - This is referred to as the dignity of risk, whereby an individual holds the right to take risks and the right to fail when engaging in life experiences (Vatland et al., 2011). It is important to choose alternatives that uphold the rights of participants and allow them to accept personal responsibility for their choices and actions.
- Assess the selected course of action - Leaders should be careful that the action chosen does not raise any new dilemmas.
- Implement the course of action - The leader has worked through the process and should be able to justify his or her actions and responses.
Professional Development Exercise
Keep a journal in which you describe decisions that you make during the day. Distinguish between simple and complex decisions. Write a one-page essay in which you draw conclusions regarding the decisions you made during the day. What did you learn?
Learn more about Outdoor Leadership, Second Edition.
Decision Making and Judgment on a Kayaking Trip
Nate and Meg were leading a group of 10 people on a five-day kayaking trip in Apostle Islands National Lakeshore on Lake Superior. On the second day, they had visited the sea caves on Sand Island and were preparing for a 1.5-mile (2.4 km) open-water crossing to York Island.
Nate and Meg were leading a group of 10 people on a five-day kayaking trip in Apostle Islands National Lakeshore on Lake Superior. On the second day, they had visited the sea caves on Sand Island and were preparing for a 1.5-mile (2.4 km) open-water crossing to York Island. It was noon, and the wind was starting to pick up. A few members of the group voiced their need to get out of the boats and stretch their legs. Other members were starting to get hungry. Nate and Meg suggested that the group take a quick snack break while the two of them took a moment to discuss the crossing.
Nate and Meg knew that they had only a couple of minutes to come to a decision. Meg predicted that the wind would pick up as the day progressed, and she suggested that the group make the crossing now despite their discomfort. If the group was unable to get to York Island that afternoon, they would have to backtrack to the mainland, missing out on the trip to the Raspberry Island lighthouse and the day hike on Oak Island. Nate was concerned about the fact that some of the participants were hungry and uncomfortable in their boats. He wasn't sure they should set off on a breezy 1.5-mile crossing under those conditions. He understood that the group would be unable to complete the proposed itinerary but reminded Meg that many interesting options were still available if the group was unable to complete the full loop. He suggested that they return to their previous campsite to have lunch and reassess the group's fitness and the weather conditions.
Although she attentively listened to Nate's concerns, Meg disagreed with his assessment of the situation and his suggestion that the group return to camp. This was her fourth trip in Apostle Islands and she had not yet made the full loop with any of her groups. No other trip leader seemed to come back without completing the proposed itinerary except for her. She was concerned about what people would think of her if she returned without completing the intended trip route yet again. She was also questioning her own decision-making ability and wondering whether her overcautious nature had prevented her from completing the loop on past trips. She wanted to push herself mentally and felt that she had the technical skills and stamina to encourage the group members to push themselves physically. She really did believe that the group would be fine with the crossing. It was just a matter of going for it.
In the couple of minutes that Meg and Nate had been discussing the situation, the wind had begun to blow a bit stronger. This further impelled Meg to conclude that the group should make the crossing immediately before the weather worsened. For Nate, this was a clear indicator that the group should stay on Sand Island. In the end, Nate, Meg, and the group decided that the safest course of action would be to stay on Sand Island. The group enjoyed a wonderful day of hiking.
Leaders make decisions and facilitate group decision-making multiple times daily while guiding outdoor trips. For this reason, developing decision-making skills is a key component of outdoor leadership education. Although this concept may seem somewhat straightforward, developing a process of decision making is no small task, in part because there is no such thing as a perfect decision. Consider, for example, Nate and Meg's situation. What do you think is the best decision concerning this scenario? How did you come to your decision?
Developing a process of decision making should not be confused with the need to develop sound judgment. Judgment is based on past experience and the outcomes of decisions that were made. In essence, judgment is a process of gathering relevant data. These data are then used to inform the decision-making process. Both decision making and judgment are competencies that are difficult to teach and learn. Developing these competencies requires the ability to see potential outcomes that may result from a decision. Consider the practice of meditation, which involves "opening the third eye" - the eye that sees and hears everything. The third eye focuses on the sixth chakra in the body, which is in the middle of the forehead between the eyebrows. It is the center of wisdom and seeing and is a symbolic representation of intuitive wisdom that helps people see the big picture more clearly. Outdoor leaders need to adopt this metaphoric third eye as part of the process of developing judgment and decision making. The third eye develops with experience; leaders will begin to see patterns, and their judgment will improve with each experience.
Developing the ability to see the big picture and recognize patterns is integral to decision making and judgment. In many ways, developing a third eye with which to see the big picture is a bit like playing chess. Avid chess players often describe how good players need the ability to make good decisions with the added pressure of time. Perhaps even more important, they need to be able to forecast the result of their decisions. Chess players need to be prepared to adjust their next decision if the forecasted result does not happen, which is often the case. In this sense, playing chess is similar to outdoor leadership. Leadership ability depends in part on a person's ability to make timely, high-quality decisions that anticipate myriad outcomes. One study that tested the effects of time pressure on chess players concluded that expert decision making develops over time and is based on an ability to recognize and respond to patterns (Klein, 2008). It could be similarly concluded that a leader's judgment and decision-making abilities will improve over time with an increased knowledge of how decisions are made and their effects - knowledge that is gained through personal experience.
This chapter introduces the role of judgment in decision making, highlights some of the variables in decision making, identifies the differences between simple and complex decisions, presents models for decision making, introduces methods of decision making, and integrates ideas of decision making and leadership styles. The goal is for the reader to use this theoretical knowledge to develop judgment and decision-making abilities that they can apply to their own outdoor leadership experiences.
Learn more about Outdoor Leadership, Second Edition.
Facilitation Styles
Facilitation keeps the learner - rather than the facilitator - central to what is happening. Therefore, a leader should be very thoughtful in selecting the style of facilitation used.
Facilitation keeps the learner - rather than the facilitator - central to what is happening. Therefore, a leader should be very thoughtful in selecting the style of facilitation used. A leader's facilitation style is based on many variables, some of which are internal and some of which are external. Internal factors include beliefs, communication ability, and valuing others. Personal belief systems are strong perceptual filters that affect expectations and behavior. For example, the Pygmalion effect suggests that what we expect or believe about someone is what we get. If we view someone as ineffective, they most likely will live up to that expectation. Our perceptual filters can limit ourselves, too. A frog perceives only things that move as food and therefore will starve in a box of dead flies. We can work toward establishing a rapport with others if we understand how they perceive the world.
External variables, which help the facilitator adjust their style to each specific group, include the following:
- The age and maturity of the group - The younger the group, the more it depends on the leader and requires direct leadership and coaching. The maturity of any group changes as the group interacts.
- The length of the program - Groups generally build skills over time, so a short course or single-day event encourage direct leadership. The longer a group is together, the greater the opportunity to use more indirect methods.
- The expressed goals of the program - The outcome will dictate the style of presenting a challenge and debriefing it. Sometimes a group has no agenda except to have fun and get acquainted, which creates more opportunities for multiple activities with little transfer. However, if a group is working on communication or improving problem solving, the choices might be limited and more translation of the experience might occur.
- The readiness of the group - Some groups can manage safety and conflict because of their experiences together and are ready for more complicated challenges. Other groups take longer to develop the trust necessary to leave the ground or move independently.
Facilitation styles are either direct (i.e., telling or selling) or indirect (i.e., coaching and encouraging while staying focused on the students). The role that a facilitator chooses directly dictates the style of facilitation used. Evidence supports the effectiveness of direct facilitation styles, especially with motivated students. Such a style keeps the leader focused and on task and requires the leader to recognize changes in the group's climate and have a repertoire of activities that are appropriate for the situation. A new facilitator must practice a variety of behaviors and styles to learn what works with different groups.
Nondirective Facilitation
Nondirective facilitation uses a laissez-faire style in which the facilitator creates an opportunity that allows participants to determine which way to go. Although this style is not always comfortable or appropriate, it can be effective when a leader believes that the students can find their own solution to a problem and find that solution rewarding.
Appreciative Facilitation
Appreciative facilitation emphasizes what works well and concentrates on success and achievement (Greenaway, 2004). Identifying moments when the group is working at its best helps the leader identify and emphasize desired behaviors. Sometimes asking what is going well focuses attention on what is working rather than what is not working. This style is based on research related to the Pygmalion effect: The students become what the teacher believes them to be.
Activity Facilitation
Activity facilitation occurs during a group activity. Greenaway (2004) states, "Sometimes the facilitator may simply be enabling a group to achieve a task in the time available" (paragraph 14). To make experiences more meaningful, the facilitator interjects during the activity to influence what is experienced. Most of the time such influence involves changing the rules in some way. There should always be a clear beginning, middle, and end in activity facilitation. Discussing the goal of the activity in the beginning sets a target for the group to achieve. The middle portion is the actual participation in a game, initiative, or other activity. The end is called when the activity has run its course. Some sort of summary, debriefing, or conclusion increases the value of the experience.
Group Facilitation
Group facilitation can apply to groups in any context. Group dynamics in the outdoors can have a greater effect on a person than the outdoors alone. Even if group development is not a priority, group facilitation skills are necessary to keep the group on task. If a primary goal is team building, then group facilitation is absolutely necessary. At a minimum, outdoor leaders want to build a climate for learning and development (Greenaway, 2004).
Directive Facilitation
Adventure programming is a more directive style of facilitation that leaves little to chance. Priest and Gass (2005) developed categories of facilitation techniques commonly used in outdoor settings. The first two - frontloading and framing the experience - occur before and during the experience.
Frontloading is prebriefing or setting the stage before an activity. The facilitator tells the group what they should learn from the experience in order to create focus and a reference point. Framing the experience helps a group make sense of it. Stories or metaphors help the group understand how a particular activity relates to their lives outside of the experience. Taking an activity and making it meaningful by relating it to the needs of participants can be powerful. Instead of climbing a rock, participants may be learning to stay focused on life goals. Instead of jumping off a power pole to catch a trapeze, individuals can reach for goals in their lives.
Other facilitation methods proposed by Priest and Gass typically occur after the experience. One is letting the experience speak for itself. Often it is assumed that learning has taken place simply because the individual took part in an experience. Accomplishing a summit climb rarely needs an explanation, for example. After the difficulty of ascending a peak, just being there is enough for most people. Speaking for the experience, on the other hand, allows the facilitator to interpret the experience for the group. By telling the group what they have learned and how they might apply that new knowledge in the future, the facilitator can emphasize desired outcomes or learning.
Debriefing can occur during or after an experience. The facilitator asks the group to reflect on their experience and to identify points of learning. Levels of questions are used to extract different information from the group. Facilitators must be clear about what types of information they want and the group's ability to respond.
There exist many ways to debrief an experience. Leaders can use journaling, photography, and drawing, to mention a few techniques. Getting thoughtful responses from participants is the key element. Later in this chapter we discuss processing experiences.
When the meaning is not elicited during facilitation, this is just a jump of trust.
©Christine Cashel
Choosing a Facilitation Style
Choosing a style of facilitation is not an easy task. Each style has advantages and disadvantages. Facilitators have their own style based on their values, experience, and personality. Mixing techniques and styles that are different from one's personal style serves the students at a moment in time. Knowing when to take charge, when to back off, and when to negotiate has to do with the situation, the group, the task at hand, and the facilitator's personal style. Over time, facilitators learn when and where to apply a variety of techniques, just as Karen learned to set herself up for success by figuring out which facilitation style worked for her. Establishing an effective facilitation style takes time, practice, and being facilitated by others.
Save
Save
Learn more about Outdoor Leadership, Second Edition.
Ethical Decision-Making Model
The ethical decision-making model requires a leader to work through the following steps: 1. Identify the problem - Gather as much information as possible to clarify the problem.
The ethical decision-making model requires a leader to work through the following steps:
- Identify the problem - Gather as much information as possible to clarify the problem.
- List options - Brainstorm all options, possibly collectively with group members.
- Consider the nature and ethical dimensions of the problem - Which option will have the least chance of bringing harm to the participants or the environment? What decisions will safeguard the well-being of the group and individuals in it? How can a leader best honor group members and the natural environment? Leaders should not try to manage things on their own but rather should involve others, including group members, to ensure that they are seeing the whole issue.
- Apply a principle ethic if appropriate - A principle ethic is a set of rules determined by a governing professional organization or by the current professional standards of behavior. This could be either a professional code of ethics or a company's policies and procedures manual.
- Generate possible actions - Collaboratively brainstorm possible solutions to the dilemma.
- Consider the possible consequences of all options and determine a course of action - This stage involves looking at all the options and the consequences for all relevant parties, including the environment.
- Consider the rights and responsibilities of all people involved - This is referred to as the dignity of risk, whereby an individual holds the right to take risks and the right to fail when engaging in life experiences (Vatland et al., 2011). It is important to choose alternatives that uphold the rights of participants and allow them to accept personal responsibility for their choices and actions.
- Assess the selected course of action - Leaders should be careful that the action chosen does not raise any new dilemmas.
- Implement the course of action - The leader has worked through the process and should be able to justify his or her actions and responses.
Professional Development Exercise
Keep a journal in which you describe decisions that you make during the day. Distinguish between simple and complex decisions. Write a one-page essay in which you draw conclusions regarding the decisions you made during the day. What did you learn?
Learn more about Outdoor Leadership, Second Edition.
Decision Making and Judgment on a Kayaking Trip
Nate and Meg were leading a group of 10 people on a five-day kayaking trip in Apostle Islands National Lakeshore on Lake Superior. On the second day, they had visited the sea caves on Sand Island and were preparing for a 1.5-mile (2.4 km) open-water crossing to York Island.
Nate and Meg were leading a group of 10 people on a five-day kayaking trip in Apostle Islands National Lakeshore on Lake Superior. On the second day, they had visited the sea caves on Sand Island and were preparing for a 1.5-mile (2.4 km) open-water crossing to York Island. It was noon, and the wind was starting to pick up. A few members of the group voiced their need to get out of the boats and stretch their legs. Other members were starting to get hungry. Nate and Meg suggested that the group take a quick snack break while the two of them took a moment to discuss the crossing.
Nate and Meg knew that they had only a couple of minutes to come to a decision. Meg predicted that the wind would pick up as the day progressed, and she suggested that the group make the crossing now despite their discomfort. If the group was unable to get to York Island that afternoon, they would have to backtrack to the mainland, missing out on the trip to the Raspberry Island lighthouse and the day hike on Oak Island. Nate was concerned about the fact that some of the participants were hungry and uncomfortable in their boats. He wasn't sure they should set off on a breezy 1.5-mile crossing under those conditions. He understood that the group would be unable to complete the proposed itinerary but reminded Meg that many interesting options were still available if the group was unable to complete the full loop. He suggested that they return to their previous campsite to have lunch and reassess the group's fitness and the weather conditions.
Although she attentively listened to Nate's concerns, Meg disagreed with his assessment of the situation and his suggestion that the group return to camp. This was her fourth trip in Apostle Islands and she had not yet made the full loop with any of her groups. No other trip leader seemed to come back without completing the proposed itinerary except for her. She was concerned about what people would think of her if she returned without completing the intended trip route yet again. She was also questioning her own decision-making ability and wondering whether her overcautious nature had prevented her from completing the loop on past trips. She wanted to push herself mentally and felt that she had the technical skills and stamina to encourage the group members to push themselves physically. She really did believe that the group would be fine with the crossing. It was just a matter of going for it.
In the couple of minutes that Meg and Nate had been discussing the situation, the wind had begun to blow a bit stronger. This further impelled Meg to conclude that the group should make the crossing immediately before the weather worsened. For Nate, this was a clear indicator that the group should stay on Sand Island. In the end, Nate, Meg, and the group decided that the safest course of action would be to stay on Sand Island. The group enjoyed a wonderful day of hiking.
Leaders make decisions and facilitate group decision-making multiple times daily while guiding outdoor trips. For this reason, developing decision-making skills is a key component of outdoor leadership education. Although this concept may seem somewhat straightforward, developing a process of decision making is no small task, in part because there is no such thing as a perfect decision. Consider, for example, Nate and Meg's situation. What do you think is the best decision concerning this scenario? How did you come to your decision?
Developing a process of decision making should not be confused with the need to develop sound judgment. Judgment is based on past experience and the outcomes of decisions that were made. In essence, judgment is a process of gathering relevant data. These data are then used to inform the decision-making process. Both decision making and judgment are competencies that are difficult to teach and learn. Developing these competencies requires the ability to see potential outcomes that may result from a decision. Consider the practice of meditation, which involves "opening the third eye" - the eye that sees and hears everything. The third eye focuses on the sixth chakra in the body, which is in the middle of the forehead between the eyebrows. It is the center of wisdom and seeing and is a symbolic representation of intuitive wisdom that helps people see the big picture more clearly. Outdoor leaders need to adopt this metaphoric third eye as part of the process of developing judgment and decision making. The third eye develops with experience; leaders will begin to see patterns, and their judgment will improve with each experience.
Developing the ability to see the big picture and recognize patterns is integral to decision making and judgment. In many ways, developing a third eye with which to see the big picture is a bit like playing chess. Avid chess players often describe how good players need the ability to make good decisions with the added pressure of time. Perhaps even more important, they need to be able to forecast the result of their decisions. Chess players need to be prepared to adjust their next decision if the forecasted result does not happen, which is often the case. In this sense, playing chess is similar to outdoor leadership. Leadership ability depends in part on a person's ability to make timely, high-quality decisions that anticipate myriad outcomes. One study that tested the effects of time pressure on chess players concluded that expert decision making develops over time and is based on an ability to recognize and respond to patterns (Klein, 2008). It could be similarly concluded that a leader's judgment and decision-making abilities will improve over time with an increased knowledge of how decisions are made and their effects - knowledge that is gained through personal experience.
This chapter introduces the role of judgment in decision making, highlights some of the variables in decision making, identifies the differences between simple and complex decisions, presents models for decision making, introduces methods of decision making, and integrates ideas of decision making and leadership styles. The goal is for the reader to use this theoretical knowledge to develop judgment and decision-making abilities that they can apply to their own outdoor leadership experiences.
Learn more about Outdoor Leadership, Second Edition.
Facilitation Styles
Facilitation keeps the learner - rather than the facilitator - central to what is happening. Therefore, a leader should be very thoughtful in selecting the style of facilitation used.
Facilitation keeps the learner - rather than the facilitator - central to what is happening. Therefore, a leader should be very thoughtful in selecting the style of facilitation used. A leader's facilitation style is based on many variables, some of which are internal and some of which are external. Internal factors include beliefs, communication ability, and valuing others. Personal belief systems are strong perceptual filters that affect expectations and behavior. For example, the Pygmalion effect suggests that what we expect or believe about someone is what we get. If we view someone as ineffective, they most likely will live up to that expectation. Our perceptual filters can limit ourselves, too. A frog perceives only things that move as food and therefore will starve in a box of dead flies. We can work toward establishing a rapport with others if we understand how they perceive the world.
External variables, which help the facilitator adjust their style to each specific group, include the following:
- The age and maturity of the group - The younger the group, the more it depends on the leader and requires direct leadership and coaching. The maturity of any group changes as the group interacts.
- The length of the program - Groups generally build skills over time, so a short course or single-day event encourage direct leadership. The longer a group is together, the greater the opportunity to use more indirect methods.
- The expressed goals of the program - The outcome will dictate the style of presenting a challenge and debriefing it. Sometimes a group has no agenda except to have fun and get acquainted, which creates more opportunities for multiple activities with little transfer. However, if a group is working on communication or improving problem solving, the choices might be limited and more translation of the experience might occur.
- The readiness of the group - Some groups can manage safety and conflict because of their experiences together and are ready for more complicated challenges. Other groups take longer to develop the trust necessary to leave the ground or move independently.
Facilitation styles are either direct (i.e., telling or selling) or indirect (i.e., coaching and encouraging while staying focused on the students). The role that a facilitator chooses directly dictates the style of facilitation used. Evidence supports the effectiveness of direct facilitation styles, especially with motivated students. Such a style keeps the leader focused and on task and requires the leader to recognize changes in the group's climate and have a repertoire of activities that are appropriate for the situation. A new facilitator must practice a variety of behaviors and styles to learn what works with different groups.
Nondirective Facilitation
Nondirective facilitation uses a laissez-faire style in which the facilitator creates an opportunity that allows participants to determine which way to go. Although this style is not always comfortable or appropriate, it can be effective when a leader believes that the students can find their own solution to a problem and find that solution rewarding.
Appreciative Facilitation
Appreciative facilitation emphasizes what works well and concentrates on success and achievement (Greenaway, 2004). Identifying moments when the group is working at its best helps the leader identify and emphasize desired behaviors. Sometimes asking what is going well focuses attention on what is working rather than what is not working. This style is based on research related to the Pygmalion effect: The students become what the teacher believes them to be.
Activity Facilitation
Activity facilitation occurs during a group activity. Greenaway (2004) states, "Sometimes the facilitator may simply be enabling a group to achieve a task in the time available" (paragraph 14). To make experiences more meaningful, the facilitator interjects during the activity to influence what is experienced. Most of the time such influence involves changing the rules in some way. There should always be a clear beginning, middle, and end in activity facilitation. Discussing the goal of the activity in the beginning sets a target for the group to achieve. The middle portion is the actual participation in a game, initiative, or other activity. The end is called when the activity has run its course. Some sort of summary, debriefing, or conclusion increases the value of the experience.
Group Facilitation
Group facilitation can apply to groups in any context. Group dynamics in the outdoors can have a greater effect on a person than the outdoors alone. Even if group development is not a priority, group facilitation skills are necessary to keep the group on task. If a primary goal is team building, then group facilitation is absolutely necessary. At a minimum, outdoor leaders want to build a climate for learning and development (Greenaway, 2004).
Directive Facilitation
Adventure programming is a more directive style of facilitation that leaves little to chance. Priest and Gass (2005) developed categories of facilitation techniques commonly used in outdoor settings. The first two - frontloading and framing the experience - occur before and during the experience.
Frontloading is prebriefing or setting the stage before an activity. The facilitator tells the group what they should learn from the experience in order to create focus and a reference point. Framing the experience helps a group make sense of it. Stories or metaphors help the group understand how a particular activity relates to their lives outside of the experience. Taking an activity and making it meaningful by relating it to the needs of participants can be powerful. Instead of climbing a rock, participants may be learning to stay focused on life goals. Instead of jumping off a power pole to catch a trapeze, individuals can reach for goals in their lives.
Other facilitation methods proposed by Priest and Gass typically occur after the experience. One is letting the experience speak for itself. Often it is assumed that learning has taken place simply because the individual took part in an experience. Accomplishing a summit climb rarely needs an explanation, for example. After the difficulty of ascending a peak, just being there is enough for most people. Speaking for the experience, on the other hand, allows the facilitator to interpret the experience for the group. By telling the group what they have learned and how they might apply that new knowledge in the future, the facilitator can emphasize desired outcomes or learning.
Debriefing can occur during or after an experience. The facilitator asks the group to reflect on their experience and to identify points of learning. Levels of questions are used to extract different information from the group. Facilitators must be clear about what types of information they want and the group's ability to respond.
There exist many ways to debrief an experience. Leaders can use journaling, photography, and drawing, to mention a few techniques. Getting thoughtful responses from participants is the key element. Later in this chapter we discuss processing experiences.
When the meaning is not elicited during facilitation, this is just a jump of trust.
©Christine Cashel
Choosing a Facilitation Style
Choosing a style of facilitation is not an easy task. Each style has advantages and disadvantages. Facilitators have their own style based on their values, experience, and personality. Mixing techniques and styles that are different from one's personal style serves the students at a moment in time. Knowing when to take charge, when to back off, and when to negotiate has to do with the situation, the group, the task at hand, and the facilitator's personal style. Over time, facilitators learn when and where to apply a variety of techniques, just as Karen learned to set herself up for success by figuring out which facilitation style worked for her. Establishing an effective facilitation style takes time, practice, and being facilitated by others.
Save
Save
Learn more about Outdoor Leadership, Second Edition.
Ethical Decision-Making Model
The ethical decision-making model requires a leader to work through the following steps: 1. Identify the problem - Gather as much information as possible to clarify the problem.
The ethical decision-making model requires a leader to work through the following steps:
- Identify the problem - Gather as much information as possible to clarify the problem.
- List options - Brainstorm all options, possibly collectively with group members.
- Consider the nature and ethical dimensions of the problem - Which option will have the least chance of bringing harm to the participants or the environment? What decisions will safeguard the well-being of the group and individuals in it? How can a leader best honor group members and the natural environment? Leaders should not try to manage things on their own but rather should involve others, including group members, to ensure that they are seeing the whole issue.
- Apply a principle ethic if appropriate - A principle ethic is a set of rules determined by a governing professional organization or by the current professional standards of behavior. This could be either a professional code of ethics or a company's policies and procedures manual.
- Generate possible actions - Collaboratively brainstorm possible solutions to the dilemma.
- Consider the possible consequences of all options and determine a course of action - This stage involves looking at all the options and the consequences for all relevant parties, including the environment.
- Consider the rights and responsibilities of all people involved - This is referred to as the dignity of risk, whereby an individual holds the right to take risks and the right to fail when engaging in life experiences (Vatland et al., 2011). It is important to choose alternatives that uphold the rights of participants and allow them to accept personal responsibility for their choices and actions.
- Assess the selected course of action - Leaders should be careful that the action chosen does not raise any new dilemmas.
- Implement the course of action - The leader has worked through the process and should be able to justify his or her actions and responses.
Professional Development Exercise
Keep a journal in which you describe decisions that you make during the day. Distinguish between simple and complex decisions. Write a one-page essay in which you draw conclusions regarding the decisions you made during the day. What did you learn?
Learn more about Outdoor Leadership, Second Edition.
Decision Making and Judgment on a Kayaking Trip
Nate and Meg were leading a group of 10 people on a five-day kayaking trip in Apostle Islands National Lakeshore on Lake Superior. On the second day, they had visited the sea caves on Sand Island and were preparing for a 1.5-mile (2.4 km) open-water crossing to York Island.
Nate and Meg were leading a group of 10 people on a five-day kayaking trip in Apostle Islands National Lakeshore on Lake Superior. On the second day, they had visited the sea caves on Sand Island and were preparing for a 1.5-mile (2.4 km) open-water crossing to York Island. It was noon, and the wind was starting to pick up. A few members of the group voiced their need to get out of the boats and stretch their legs. Other members were starting to get hungry. Nate and Meg suggested that the group take a quick snack break while the two of them took a moment to discuss the crossing.
Nate and Meg knew that they had only a couple of minutes to come to a decision. Meg predicted that the wind would pick up as the day progressed, and she suggested that the group make the crossing now despite their discomfort. If the group was unable to get to York Island that afternoon, they would have to backtrack to the mainland, missing out on the trip to the Raspberry Island lighthouse and the day hike on Oak Island. Nate was concerned about the fact that some of the participants were hungry and uncomfortable in their boats. He wasn't sure they should set off on a breezy 1.5-mile crossing under those conditions. He understood that the group would be unable to complete the proposed itinerary but reminded Meg that many interesting options were still available if the group was unable to complete the full loop. He suggested that they return to their previous campsite to have lunch and reassess the group's fitness and the weather conditions.
Although she attentively listened to Nate's concerns, Meg disagreed with his assessment of the situation and his suggestion that the group return to camp. This was her fourth trip in Apostle Islands and she had not yet made the full loop with any of her groups. No other trip leader seemed to come back without completing the proposed itinerary except for her. She was concerned about what people would think of her if she returned without completing the intended trip route yet again. She was also questioning her own decision-making ability and wondering whether her overcautious nature had prevented her from completing the loop on past trips. She wanted to push herself mentally and felt that she had the technical skills and stamina to encourage the group members to push themselves physically. She really did believe that the group would be fine with the crossing. It was just a matter of going for it.
In the couple of minutes that Meg and Nate had been discussing the situation, the wind had begun to blow a bit stronger. This further impelled Meg to conclude that the group should make the crossing immediately before the weather worsened. For Nate, this was a clear indicator that the group should stay on Sand Island. In the end, Nate, Meg, and the group decided that the safest course of action would be to stay on Sand Island. The group enjoyed a wonderful day of hiking.
Leaders make decisions and facilitate group decision-making multiple times daily while guiding outdoor trips. For this reason, developing decision-making skills is a key component of outdoor leadership education. Although this concept may seem somewhat straightforward, developing a process of decision making is no small task, in part because there is no such thing as a perfect decision. Consider, for example, Nate and Meg's situation. What do you think is the best decision concerning this scenario? How did you come to your decision?
Developing a process of decision making should not be confused with the need to develop sound judgment. Judgment is based on past experience and the outcomes of decisions that were made. In essence, judgment is a process of gathering relevant data. These data are then used to inform the decision-making process. Both decision making and judgment are competencies that are difficult to teach and learn. Developing these competencies requires the ability to see potential outcomes that may result from a decision. Consider the practice of meditation, which involves "opening the third eye" - the eye that sees and hears everything. The third eye focuses on the sixth chakra in the body, which is in the middle of the forehead between the eyebrows. It is the center of wisdom and seeing and is a symbolic representation of intuitive wisdom that helps people see the big picture more clearly. Outdoor leaders need to adopt this metaphoric third eye as part of the process of developing judgment and decision making. The third eye develops with experience; leaders will begin to see patterns, and their judgment will improve with each experience.
Developing the ability to see the big picture and recognize patterns is integral to decision making and judgment. In many ways, developing a third eye with which to see the big picture is a bit like playing chess. Avid chess players often describe how good players need the ability to make good decisions with the added pressure of time. Perhaps even more important, they need to be able to forecast the result of their decisions. Chess players need to be prepared to adjust their next decision if the forecasted result does not happen, which is often the case. In this sense, playing chess is similar to outdoor leadership. Leadership ability depends in part on a person's ability to make timely, high-quality decisions that anticipate myriad outcomes. One study that tested the effects of time pressure on chess players concluded that expert decision making develops over time and is based on an ability to recognize and respond to patterns (Klein, 2008). It could be similarly concluded that a leader's judgment and decision-making abilities will improve over time with an increased knowledge of how decisions are made and their effects - knowledge that is gained through personal experience.
This chapter introduces the role of judgment in decision making, highlights some of the variables in decision making, identifies the differences between simple and complex decisions, presents models for decision making, introduces methods of decision making, and integrates ideas of decision making and leadership styles. The goal is for the reader to use this theoretical knowledge to develop judgment and decision-making abilities that they can apply to their own outdoor leadership experiences.
Learn more about Outdoor Leadership, Second Edition.
Facilitation Styles
Facilitation keeps the learner - rather than the facilitator - central to what is happening. Therefore, a leader should be very thoughtful in selecting the style of facilitation used.
Facilitation keeps the learner - rather than the facilitator - central to what is happening. Therefore, a leader should be very thoughtful in selecting the style of facilitation used. A leader's facilitation style is based on many variables, some of which are internal and some of which are external. Internal factors include beliefs, communication ability, and valuing others. Personal belief systems are strong perceptual filters that affect expectations and behavior. For example, the Pygmalion effect suggests that what we expect or believe about someone is what we get. If we view someone as ineffective, they most likely will live up to that expectation. Our perceptual filters can limit ourselves, too. A frog perceives only things that move as food and therefore will starve in a box of dead flies. We can work toward establishing a rapport with others if we understand how they perceive the world.
External variables, which help the facilitator adjust their style to each specific group, include the following:
- The age and maturity of the group - The younger the group, the more it depends on the leader and requires direct leadership and coaching. The maturity of any group changes as the group interacts.
- The length of the program - Groups generally build skills over time, so a short course or single-day event encourage direct leadership. The longer a group is together, the greater the opportunity to use more indirect methods.
- The expressed goals of the program - The outcome will dictate the style of presenting a challenge and debriefing it. Sometimes a group has no agenda except to have fun and get acquainted, which creates more opportunities for multiple activities with little transfer. However, if a group is working on communication or improving problem solving, the choices might be limited and more translation of the experience might occur.
- The readiness of the group - Some groups can manage safety and conflict because of their experiences together and are ready for more complicated challenges. Other groups take longer to develop the trust necessary to leave the ground or move independently.
Facilitation styles are either direct (i.e., telling or selling) or indirect (i.e., coaching and encouraging while staying focused on the students). The role that a facilitator chooses directly dictates the style of facilitation used. Evidence supports the effectiveness of direct facilitation styles, especially with motivated students. Such a style keeps the leader focused and on task and requires the leader to recognize changes in the group's climate and have a repertoire of activities that are appropriate for the situation. A new facilitator must practice a variety of behaviors and styles to learn what works with different groups.
Nondirective Facilitation
Nondirective facilitation uses a laissez-faire style in which the facilitator creates an opportunity that allows participants to determine which way to go. Although this style is not always comfortable or appropriate, it can be effective when a leader believes that the students can find their own solution to a problem and find that solution rewarding.
Appreciative Facilitation
Appreciative facilitation emphasizes what works well and concentrates on success and achievement (Greenaway, 2004). Identifying moments when the group is working at its best helps the leader identify and emphasize desired behaviors. Sometimes asking what is going well focuses attention on what is working rather than what is not working. This style is based on research related to the Pygmalion effect: The students become what the teacher believes them to be.
Activity Facilitation
Activity facilitation occurs during a group activity. Greenaway (2004) states, "Sometimes the facilitator may simply be enabling a group to achieve a task in the time available" (paragraph 14). To make experiences more meaningful, the facilitator interjects during the activity to influence what is experienced. Most of the time such influence involves changing the rules in some way. There should always be a clear beginning, middle, and end in activity facilitation. Discussing the goal of the activity in the beginning sets a target for the group to achieve. The middle portion is the actual participation in a game, initiative, or other activity. The end is called when the activity has run its course. Some sort of summary, debriefing, or conclusion increases the value of the experience.
Group Facilitation
Group facilitation can apply to groups in any context. Group dynamics in the outdoors can have a greater effect on a person than the outdoors alone. Even if group development is not a priority, group facilitation skills are necessary to keep the group on task. If a primary goal is team building, then group facilitation is absolutely necessary. At a minimum, outdoor leaders want to build a climate for learning and development (Greenaway, 2004).
Directive Facilitation
Adventure programming is a more directive style of facilitation that leaves little to chance. Priest and Gass (2005) developed categories of facilitation techniques commonly used in outdoor settings. The first two - frontloading and framing the experience - occur before and during the experience.
Frontloading is prebriefing or setting the stage before an activity. The facilitator tells the group what they should learn from the experience in order to create focus and a reference point. Framing the experience helps a group make sense of it. Stories or metaphors help the group understand how a particular activity relates to their lives outside of the experience. Taking an activity and making it meaningful by relating it to the needs of participants can be powerful. Instead of climbing a rock, participants may be learning to stay focused on life goals. Instead of jumping off a power pole to catch a trapeze, individuals can reach for goals in their lives.
Other facilitation methods proposed by Priest and Gass typically occur after the experience. One is letting the experience speak for itself. Often it is assumed that learning has taken place simply because the individual took part in an experience. Accomplishing a summit climb rarely needs an explanation, for example. After the difficulty of ascending a peak, just being there is enough for most people. Speaking for the experience, on the other hand, allows the facilitator to interpret the experience for the group. By telling the group what they have learned and how they might apply that new knowledge in the future, the facilitator can emphasize desired outcomes or learning.
Debriefing can occur during or after an experience. The facilitator asks the group to reflect on their experience and to identify points of learning. Levels of questions are used to extract different information from the group. Facilitators must be clear about what types of information they want and the group's ability to respond.
There exist many ways to debrief an experience. Leaders can use journaling, photography, and drawing, to mention a few techniques. Getting thoughtful responses from participants is the key element. Later in this chapter we discuss processing experiences.
When the meaning is not elicited during facilitation, this is just a jump of trust.
©Christine Cashel
Choosing a Facilitation Style
Choosing a style of facilitation is not an easy task. Each style has advantages and disadvantages. Facilitators have their own style based on their values, experience, and personality. Mixing techniques and styles that are different from one's personal style serves the students at a moment in time. Knowing when to take charge, when to back off, and when to negotiate has to do with the situation, the group, the task at hand, and the facilitator's personal style. Over time, facilitators learn when and where to apply a variety of techniques, just as Karen learned to set herself up for success by figuring out which facilitation style worked for her. Establishing an effective facilitation style takes time, practice, and being facilitated by others.
Save
Save
Learn more about Outdoor Leadership, Second Edition.
Ethical Decision-Making Model
The ethical decision-making model requires a leader to work through the following steps: 1. Identify the problem - Gather as much information as possible to clarify the problem.
The ethical decision-making model requires a leader to work through the following steps:
- Identify the problem - Gather as much information as possible to clarify the problem.
- List options - Brainstorm all options, possibly collectively with group members.
- Consider the nature and ethical dimensions of the problem - Which option will have the least chance of bringing harm to the participants or the environment? What decisions will safeguard the well-being of the group and individuals in it? How can a leader best honor group members and the natural environment? Leaders should not try to manage things on their own but rather should involve others, including group members, to ensure that they are seeing the whole issue.
- Apply a principle ethic if appropriate - A principle ethic is a set of rules determined by a governing professional organization or by the current professional standards of behavior. This could be either a professional code of ethics or a company's policies and procedures manual.
- Generate possible actions - Collaboratively brainstorm possible solutions to the dilemma.
- Consider the possible consequences of all options and determine a course of action - This stage involves looking at all the options and the consequences for all relevant parties, including the environment.
- Consider the rights and responsibilities of all people involved - This is referred to as the dignity of risk, whereby an individual holds the right to take risks and the right to fail when engaging in life experiences (Vatland et al., 2011). It is important to choose alternatives that uphold the rights of participants and allow them to accept personal responsibility for their choices and actions.
- Assess the selected course of action - Leaders should be careful that the action chosen does not raise any new dilemmas.
- Implement the course of action - The leader has worked through the process and should be able to justify his or her actions and responses.
Professional Development Exercise
Keep a journal in which you describe decisions that you make during the day. Distinguish between simple and complex decisions. Write a one-page essay in which you draw conclusions regarding the decisions you made during the day. What did you learn?
Learn more about Outdoor Leadership, Second Edition.
Decision Making and Judgment on a Kayaking Trip
Nate and Meg were leading a group of 10 people on a five-day kayaking trip in Apostle Islands National Lakeshore on Lake Superior. On the second day, they had visited the sea caves on Sand Island and were preparing for a 1.5-mile (2.4 km) open-water crossing to York Island.
Nate and Meg were leading a group of 10 people on a five-day kayaking trip in Apostle Islands National Lakeshore on Lake Superior. On the second day, they had visited the sea caves on Sand Island and were preparing for a 1.5-mile (2.4 km) open-water crossing to York Island. It was noon, and the wind was starting to pick up. A few members of the group voiced their need to get out of the boats and stretch their legs. Other members were starting to get hungry. Nate and Meg suggested that the group take a quick snack break while the two of them took a moment to discuss the crossing.
Nate and Meg knew that they had only a couple of minutes to come to a decision. Meg predicted that the wind would pick up as the day progressed, and she suggested that the group make the crossing now despite their discomfort. If the group was unable to get to York Island that afternoon, they would have to backtrack to the mainland, missing out on the trip to the Raspberry Island lighthouse and the day hike on Oak Island. Nate was concerned about the fact that some of the participants were hungry and uncomfortable in their boats. He wasn't sure they should set off on a breezy 1.5-mile crossing under those conditions. He understood that the group would be unable to complete the proposed itinerary but reminded Meg that many interesting options were still available if the group was unable to complete the full loop. He suggested that they return to their previous campsite to have lunch and reassess the group's fitness and the weather conditions.
Although she attentively listened to Nate's concerns, Meg disagreed with his assessment of the situation and his suggestion that the group return to camp. This was her fourth trip in Apostle Islands and she had not yet made the full loop with any of her groups. No other trip leader seemed to come back without completing the proposed itinerary except for her. She was concerned about what people would think of her if she returned without completing the intended trip route yet again. She was also questioning her own decision-making ability and wondering whether her overcautious nature had prevented her from completing the loop on past trips. She wanted to push herself mentally and felt that she had the technical skills and stamina to encourage the group members to push themselves physically. She really did believe that the group would be fine with the crossing. It was just a matter of going for it.
In the couple of minutes that Meg and Nate had been discussing the situation, the wind had begun to blow a bit stronger. This further impelled Meg to conclude that the group should make the crossing immediately before the weather worsened. For Nate, this was a clear indicator that the group should stay on Sand Island. In the end, Nate, Meg, and the group decided that the safest course of action would be to stay on Sand Island. The group enjoyed a wonderful day of hiking.
Leaders make decisions and facilitate group decision-making multiple times daily while guiding outdoor trips. For this reason, developing decision-making skills is a key component of outdoor leadership education. Although this concept may seem somewhat straightforward, developing a process of decision making is no small task, in part because there is no such thing as a perfect decision. Consider, for example, Nate and Meg's situation. What do you think is the best decision concerning this scenario? How did you come to your decision?
Developing a process of decision making should not be confused with the need to develop sound judgment. Judgment is based on past experience and the outcomes of decisions that were made. In essence, judgment is a process of gathering relevant data. These data are then used to inform the decision-making process. Both decision making and judgment are competencies that are difficult to teach and learn. Developing these competencies requires the ability to see potential outcomes that may result from a decision. Consider the practice of meditation, which involves "opening the third eye" - the eye that sees and hears everything. The third eye focuses on the sixth chakra in the body, which is in the middle of the forehead between the eyebrows. It is the center of wisdom and seeing and is a symbolic representation of intuitive wisdom that helps people see the big picture more clearly. Outdoor leaders need to adopt this metaphoric third eye as part of the process of developing judgment and decision making. The third eye develops with experience; leaders will begin to see patterns, and their judgment will improve with each experience.
Developing the ability to see the big picture and recognize patterns is integral to decision making and judgment. In many ways, developing a third eye with which to see the big picture is a bit like playing chess. Avid chess players often describe how good players need the ability to make good decisions with the added pressure of time. Perhaps even more important, they need to be able to forecast the result of their decisions. Chess players need to be prepared to adjust their next decision if the forecasted result does not happen, which is often the case. In this sense, playing chess is similar to outdoor leadership. Leadership ability depends in part on a person's ability to make timely, high-quality decisions that anticipate myriad outcomes. One study that tested the effects of time pressure on chess players concluded that expert decision making develops over time and is based on an ability to recognize and respond to patterns (Klein, 2008). It could be similarly concluded that a leader's judgment and decision-making abilities will improve over time with an increased knowledge of how decisions are made and their effects - knowledge that is gained through personal experience.
This chapter introduces the role of judgment in decision making, highlights some of the variables in decision making, identifies the differences between simple and complex decisions, presents models for decision making, introduces methods of decision making, and integrates ideas of decision making and leadership styles. The goal is for the reader to use this theoretical knowledge to develop judgment and decision-making abilities that they can apply to their own outdoor leadership experiences.
Learn more about Outdoor Leadership, Second Edition.
Facilitation Styles
Facilitation keeps the learner - rather than the facilitator - central to what is happening. Therefore, a leader should be very thoughtful in selecting the style of facilitation used.
Facilitation keeps the learner - rather than the facilitator - central to what is happening. Therefore, a leader should be very thoughtful in selecting the style of facilitation used. A leader's facilitation style is based on many variables, some of which are internal and some of which are external. Internal factors include beliefs, communication ability, and valuing others. Personal belief systems are strong perceptual filters that affect expectations and behavior. For example, the Pygmalion effect suggests that what we expect or believe about someone is what we get. If we view someone as ineffective, they most likely will live up to that expectation. Our perceptual filters can limit ourselves, too. A frog perceives only things that move as food and therefore will starve in a box of dead flies. We can work toward establishing a rapport with others if we understand how they perceive the world.
External variables, which help the facilitator adjust their style to each specific group, include the following:
- The age and maturity of the group - The younger the group, the more it depends on the leader and requires direct leadership and coaching. The maturity of any group changes as the group interacts.
- The length of the program - Groups generally build skills over time, so a short course or single-day event encourage direct leadership. The longer a group is together, the greater the opportunity to use more indirect methods.
- The expressed goals of the program - The outcome will dictate the style of presenting a challenge and debriefing it. Sometimes a group has no agenda except to have fun and get acquainted, which creates more opportunities for multiple activities with little transfer. However, if a group is working on communication or improving problem solving, the choices might be limited and more translation of the experience might occur.
- The readiness of the group - Some groups can manage safety and conflict because of their experiences together and are ready for more complicated challenges. Other groups take longer to develop the trust necessary to leave the ground or move independently.
Facilitation styles are either direct (i.e., telling or selling) or indirect (i.e., coaching and encouraging while staying focused on the students). The role that a facilitator chooses directly dictates the style of facilitation used. Evidence supports the effectiveness of direct facilitation styles, especially with motivated students. Such a style keeps the leader focused and on task and requires the leader to recognize changes in the group's climate and have a repertoire of activities that are appropriate for the situation. A new facilitator must practice a variety of behaviors and styles to learn what works with different groups.
Nondirective Facilitation
Nondirective facilitation uses a laissez-faire style in which the facilitator creates an opportunity that allows participants to determine which way to go. Although this style is not always comfortable or appropriate, it can be effective when a leader believes that the students can find their own solution to a problem and find that solution rewarding.
Appreciative Facilitation
Appreciative facilitation emphasizes what works well and concentrates on success and achievement (Greenaway, 2004). Identifying moments when the group is working at its best helps the leader identify and emphasize desired behaviors. Sometimes asking what is going well focuses attention on what is working rather than what is not working. This style is based on research related to the Pygmalion effect: The students become what the teacher believes them to be.
Activity Facilitation
Activity facilitation occurs during a group activity. Greenaway (2004) states, "Sometimes the facilitator may simply be enabling a group to achieve a task in the time available" (paragraph 14). To make experiences more meaningful, the facilitator interjects during the activity to influence what is experienced. Most of the time such influence involves changing the rules in some way. There should always be a clear beginning, middle, and end in activity facilitation. Discussing the goal of the activity in the beginning sets a target for the group to achieve. The middle portion is the actual participation in a game, initiative, or other activity. The end is called when the activity has run its course. Some sort of summary, debriefing, or conclusion increases the value of the experience.
Group Facilitation
Group facilitation can apply to groups in any context. Group dynamics in the outdoors can have a greater effect on a person than the outdoors alone. Even if group development is not a priority, group facilitation skills are necessary to keep the group on task. If a primary goal is team building, then group facilitation is absolutely necessary. At a minimum, outdoor leaders want to build a climate for learning and development (Greenaway, 2004).
Directive Facilitation
Adventure programming is a more directive style of facilitation that leaves little to chance. Priest and Gass (2005) developed categories of facilitation techniques commonly used in outdoor settings. The first two - frontloading and framing the experience - occur before and during the experience.
Frontloading is prebriefing or setting the stage before an activity. The facilitator tells the group what they should learn from the experience in order to create focus and a reference point. Framing the experience helps a group make sense of it. Stories or metaphors help the group understand how a particular activity relates to their lives outside of the experience. Taking an activity and making it meaningful by relating it to the needs of participants can be powerful. Instead of climbing a rock, participants may be learning to stay focused on life goals. Instead of jumping off a power pole to catch a trapeze, individuals can reach for goals in their lives.
Other facilitation methods proposed by Priest and Gass typically occur after the experience. One is letting the experience speak for itself. Often it is assumed that learning has taken place simply because the individual took part in an experience. Accomplishing a summit climb rarely needs an explanation, for example. After the difficulty of ascending a peak, just being there is enough for most people. Speaking for the experience, on the other hand, allows the facilitator to interpret the experience for the group. By telling the group what they have learned and how they might apply that new knowledge in the future, the facilitator can emphasize desired outcomes or learning.
Debriefing can occur during or after an experience. The facilitator asks the group to reflect on their experience and to identify points of learning. Levels of questions are used to extract different information from the group. Facilitators must be clear about what types of information they want and the group's ability to respond.
There exist many ways to debrief an experience. Leaders can use journaling, photography, and drawing, to mention a few techniques. Getting thoughtful responses from participants is the key element. Later in this chapter we discuss processing experiences.
When the meaning is not elicited during facilitation, this is just a jump of trust.
©Christine Cashel
Choosing a Facilitation Style
Choosing a style of facilitation is not an easy task. Each style has advantages and disadvantages. Facilitators have their own style based on their values, experience, and personality. Mixing techniques and styles that are different from one's personal style serves the students at a moment in time. Knowing when to take charge, when to back off, and when to negotiate has to do with the situation, the group, the task at hand, and the facilitator's personal style. Over time, facilitators learn when and where to apply a variety of techniques, just as Karen learned to set herself up for success by figuring out which facilitation style worked for her. Establishing an effective facilitation style takes time, practice, and being facilitated by others.
Save
Save
Learn more about Outdoor Leadership, Second Edition.
Ethical Decision-Making Model
The ethical decision-making model requires a leader to work through the following steps: 1. Identify the problem - Gather as much information as possible to clarify the problem.
The ethical decision-making model requires a leader to work through the following steps:
- Identify the problem - Gather as much information as possible to clarify the problem.
- List options - Brainstorm all options, possibly collectively with group members.
- Consider the nature and ethical dimensions of the problem - Which option will have the least chance of bringing harm to the participants or the environment? What decisions will safeguard the well-being of the group and individuals in it? How can a leader best honor group members and the natural environment? Leaders should not try to manage things on their own but rather should involve others, including group members, to ensure that they are seeing the whole issue.
- Apply a principle ethic if appropriate - A principle ethic is a set of rules determined by a governing professional organization or by the current professional standards of behavior. This could be either a professional code of ethics or a company's policies and procedures manual.
- Generate possible actions - Collaboratively brainstorm possible solutions to the dilemma.
- Consider the possible consequences of all options and determine a course of action - This stage involves looking at all the options and the consequences for all relevant parties, including the environment.
- Consider the rights and responsibilities of all people involved - This is referred to as the dignity of risk, whereby an individual holds the right to take risks and the right to fail when engaging in life experiences (Vatland et al., 2011). It is important to choose alternatives that uphold the rights of participants and allow them to accept personal responsibility for their choices and actions.
- Assess the selected course of action - Leaders should be careful that the action chosen does not raise any new dilemmas.
- Implement the course of action - The leader has worked through the process and should be able to justify his or her actions and responses.
Professional Development Exercise
Keep a journal in which you describe decisions that you make during the day. Distinguish between simple and complex decisions. Write a one-page essay in which you draw conclusions regarding the decisions you made during the day. What did you learn?
Learn more about Outdoor Leadership, Second Edition.
Decision Making and Judgment on a Kayaking Trip
Nate and Meg were leading a group of 10 people on a five-day kayaking trip in Apostle Islands National Lakeshore on Lake Superior. On the second day, they had visited the sea caves on Sand Island and were preparing for a 1.5-mile (2.4 km) open-water crossing to York Island.
Nate and Meg were leading a group of 10 people on a five-day kayaking trip in Apostle Islands National Lakeshore on Lake Superior. On the second day, they had visited the sea caves on Sand Island and were preparing for a 1.5-mile (2.4 km) open-water crossing to York Island. It was noon, and the wind was starting to pick up. A few members of the group voiced their need to get out of the boats and stretch their legs. Other members were starting to get hungry. Nate and Meg suggested that the group take a quick snack break while the two of them took a moment to discuss the crossing.
Nate and Meg knew that they had only a couple of minutes to come to a decision. Meg predicted that the wind would pick up as the day progressed, and she suggested that the group make the crossing now despite their discomfort. If the group was unable to get to York Island that afternoon, they would have to backtrack to the mainland, missing out on the trip to the Raspberry Island lighthouse and the day hike on Oak Island. Nate was concerned about the fact that some of the participants were hungry and uncomfortable in their boats. He wasn't sure they should set off on a breezy 1.5-mile crossing under those conditions. He understood that the group would be unable to complete the proposed itinerary but reminded Meg that many interesting options were still available if the group was unable to complete the full loop. He suggested that they return to their previous campsite to have lunch and reassess the group's fitness and the weather conditions.
Although she attentively listened to Nate's concerns, Meg disagreed with his assessment of the situation and his suggestion that the group return to camp. This was her fourth trip in Apostle Islands and she had not yet made the full loop with any of her groups. No other trip leader seemed to come back without completing the proposed itinerary except for her. She was concerned about what people would think of her if she returned without completing the intended trip route yet again. She was also questioning her own decision-making ability and wondering whether her overcautious nature had prevented her from completing the loop on past trips. She wanted to push herself mentally and felt that she had the technical skills and stamina to encourage the group members to push themselves physically. She really did believe that the group would be fine with the crossing. It was just a matter of going for it.
In the couple of minutes that Meg and Nate had been discussing the situation, the wind had begun to blow a bit stronger. This further impelled Meg to conclude that the group should make the crossing immediately before the weather worsened. For Nate, this was a clear indicator that the group should stay on Sand Island. In the end, Nate, Meg, and the group decided that the safest course of action would be to stay on Sand Island. The group enjoyed a wonderful day of hiking.
Leaders make decisions and facilitate group decision-making multiple times daily while guiding outdoor trips. For this reason, developing decision-making skills is a key component of outdoor leadership education. Although this concept may seem somewhat straightforward, developing a process of decision making is no small task, in part because there is no such thing as a perfect decision. Consider, for example, Nate and Meg's situation. What do you think is the best decision concerning this scenario? How did you come to your decision?
Developing a process of decision making should not be confused with the need to develop sound judgment. Judgment is based on past experience and the outcomes of decisions that were made. In essence, judgment is a process of gathering relevant data. These data are then used to inform the decision-making process. Both decision making and judgment are competencies that are difficult to teach and learn. Developing these competencies requires the ability to see potential outcomes that may result from a decision. Consider the practice of meditation, which involves "opening the third eye" - the eye that sees and hears everything. The third eye focuses on the sixth chakra in the body, which is in the middle of the forehead between the eyebrows. It is the center of wisdom and seeing and is a symbolic representation of intuitive wisdom that helps people see the big picture more clearly. Outdoor leaders need to adopt this metaphoric third eye as part of the process of developing judgment and decision making. The third eye develops with experience; leaders will begin to see patterns, and their judgment will improve with each experience.
Developing the ability to see the big picture and recognize patterns is integral to decision making and judgment. In many ways, developing a third eye with which to see the big picture is a bit like playing chess. Avid chess players often describe how good players need the ability to make good decisions with the added pressure of time. Perhaps even more important, they need to be able to forecast the result of their decisions. Chess players need to be prepared to adjust their next decision if the forecasted result does not happen, which is often the case. In this sense, playing chess is similar to outdoor leadership. Leadership ability depends in part on a person's ability to make timely, high-quality decisions that anticipate myriad outcomes. One study that tested the effects of time pressure on chess players concluded that expert decision making develops over time and is based on an ability to recognize and respond to patterns (Klein, 2008). It could be similarly concluded that a leader's judgment and decision-making abilities will improve over time with an increased knowledge of how decisions are made and their effects - knowledge that is gained through personal experience.
This chapter introduces the role of judgment in decision making, highlights some of the variables in decision making, identifies the differences between simple and complex decisions, presents models for decision making, introduces methods of decision making, and integrates ideas of decision making and leadership styles. The goal is for the reader to use this theoretical knowledge to develop judgment and decision-making abilities that they can apply to their own outdoor leadership experiences.
Learn more about Outdoor Leadership, Second Edition.
Facilitation Styles
Facilitation keeps the learner - rather than the facilitator - central to what is happening. Therefore, a leader should be very thoughtful in selecting the style of facilitation used.
Facilitation keeps the learner - rather than the facilitator - central to what is happening. Therefore, a leader should be very thoughtful in selecting the style of facilitation used. A leader's facilitation style is based on many variables, some of which are internal and some of which are external. Internal factors include beliefs, communication ability, and valuing others. Personal belief systems are strong perceptual filters that affect expectations and behavior. For example, the Pygmalion effect suggests that what we expect or believe about someone is what we get. If we view someone as ineffective, they most likely will live up to that expectation. Our perceptual filters can limit ourselves, too. A frog perceives only things that move as food and therefore will starve in a box of dead flies. We can work toward establishing a rapport with others if we understand how they perceive the world.
External variables, which help the facilitator adjust their style to each specific group, include the following:
- The age and maturity of the group - The younger the group, the more it depends on the leader and requires direct leadership and coaching. The maturity of any group changes as the group interacts.
- The length of the program - Groups generally build skills over time, so a short course or single-day event encourage direct leadership. The longer a group is together, the greater the opportunity to use more indirect methods.
- The expressed goals of the program - The outcome will dictate the style of presenting a challenge and debriefing it. Sometimes a group has no agenda except to have fun and get acquainted, which creates more opportunities for multiple activities with little transfer. However, if a group is working on communication or improving problem solving, the choices might be limited and more translation of the experience might occur.
- The readiness of the group - Some groups can manage safety and conflict because of their experiences together and are ready for more complicated challenges. Other groups take longer to develop the trust necessary to leave the ground or move independently.
Facilitation styles are either direct (i.e., telling or selling) or indirect (i.e., coaching and encouraging while staying focused on the students). The role that a facilitator chooses directly dictates the style of facilitation used. Evidence supports the effectiveness of direct facilitation styles, especially with motivated students. Such a style keeps the leader focused and on task and requires the leader to recognize changes in the group's climate and have a repertoire of activities that are appropriate for the situation. A new facilitator must practice a variety of behaviors and styles to learn what works with different groups.
Nondirective Facilitation
Nondirective facilitation uses a laissez-faire style in which the facilitator creates an opportunity that allows participants to determine which way to go. Although this style is not always comfortable or appropriate, it can be effective when a leader believes that the students can find their own solution to a problem and find that solution rewarding.
Appreciative Facilitation
Appreciative facilitation emphasizes what works well and concentrates on success and achievement (Greenaway, 2004). Identifying moments when the group is working at its best helps the leader identify and emphasize desired behaviors. Sometimes asking what is going well focuses attention on what is working rather than what is not working. This style is based on research related to the Pygmalion effect: The students become what the teacher believes them to be.
Activity Facilitation
Activity facilitation occurs during a group activity. Greenaway (2004) states, "Sometimes the facilitator may simply be enabling a group to achieve a task in the time available" (paragraph 14). To make experiences more meaningful, the facilitator interjects during the activity to influence what is experienced. Most of the time such influence involves changing the rules in some way. There should always be a clear beginning, middle, and end in activity facilitation. Discussing the goal of the activity in the beginning sets a target for the group to achieve. The middle portion is the actual participation in a game, initiative, or other activity. The end is called when the activity has run its course. Some sort of summary, debriefing, or conclusion increases the value of the experience.
Group Facilitation
Group facilitation can apply to groups in any context. Group dynamics in the outdoors can have a greater effect on a person than the outdoors alone. Even if group development is not a priority, group facilitation skills are necessary to keep the group on task. If a primary goal is team building, then group facilitation is absolutely necessary. At a minimum, outdoor leaders want to build a climate for learning and development (Greenaway, 2004).
Directive Facilitation
Adventure programming is a more directive style of facilitation that leaves little to chance. Priest and Gass (2005) developed categories of facilitation techniques commonly used in outdoor settings. The first two - frontloading and framing the experience - occur before and during the experience.
Frontloading is prebriefing or setting the stage before an activity. The facilitator tells the group what they should learn from the experience in order to create focus and a reference point. Framing the experience helps a group make sense of it. Stories or metaphors help the group understand how a particular activity relates to their lives outside of the experience. Taking an activity and making it meaningful by relating it to the needs of participants can be powerful. Instead of climbing a rock, participants may be learning to stay focused on life goals. Instead of jumping off a power pole to catch a trapeze, individuals can reach for goals in their lives.
Other facilitation methods proposed by Priest and Gass typically occur after the experience. One is letting the experience speak for itself. Often it is assumed that learning has taken place simply because the individual took part in an experience. Accomplishing a summit climb rarely needs an explanation, for example. After the difficulty of ascending a peak, just being there is enough for most people. Speaking for the experience, on the other hand, allows the facilitator to interpret the experience for the group. By telling the group what they have learned and how they might apply that new knowledge in the future, the facilitator can emphasize desired outcomes or learning.
Debriefing can occur during or after an experience. The facilitator asks the group to reflect on their experience and to identify points of learning. Levels of questions are used to extract different information from the group. Facilitators must be clear about what types of information they want and the group's ability to respond.
There exist many ways to debrief an experience. Leaders can use journaling, photography, and drawing, to mention a few techniques. Getting thoughtful responses from participants is the key element. Later in this chapter we discuss processing experiences.
When the meaning is not elicited during facilitation, this is just a jump of trust.
©Christine Cashel
Choosing a Facilitation Style
Choosing a style of facilitation is not an easy task. Each style has advantages and disadvantages. Facilitators have their own style based on their values, experience, and personality. Mixing techniques and styles that are different from one's personal style serves the students at a moment in time. Knowing when to take charge, when to back off, and when to negotiate has to do with the situation, the group, the task at hand, and the facilitator's personal style. Over time, facilitators learn when and where to apply a variety of techniques, just as Karen learned to set herself up for success by figuring out which facilitation style worked for her. Establishing an effective facilitation style takes time, practice, and being facilitated by others.
Save
Save
Learn more about Outdoor Leadership, Second Edition.
Ethical Decision-Making Model
The ethical decision-making model requires a leader to work through the following steps: 1. Identify the problem - Gather as much information as possible to clarify the problem.
The ethical decision-making model requires a leader to work through the following steps:
- Identify the problem - Gather as much information as possible to clarify the problem.
- List options - Brainstorm all options, possibly collectively with group members.
- Consider the nature and ethical dimensions of the problem - Which option will have the least chance of bringing harm to the participants or the environment? What decisions will safeguard the well-being of the group and individuals in it? How can a leader best honor group members and the natural environment? Leaders should not try to manage things on their own but rather should involve others, including group members, to ensure that they are seeing the whole issue.
- Apply a principle ethic if appropriate - A principle ethic is a set of rules determined by a governing professional organization or by the current professional standards of behavior. This could be either a professional code of ethics or a company's policies and procedures manual.
- Generate possible actions - Collaboratively brainstorm possible solutions to the dilemma.
- Consider the possible consequences of all options and determine a course of action - This stage involves looking at all the options and the consequences for all relevant parties, including the environment.
- Consider the rights and responsibilities of all people involved - This is referred to as the dignity of risk, whereby an individual holds the right to take risks and the right to fail when engaging in life experiences (Vatland et al., 2011). It is important to choose alternatives that uphold the rights of participants and allow them to accept personal responsibility for their choices and actions.
- Assess the selected course of action - Leaders should be careful that the action chosen does not raise any new dilemmas.
- Implement the course of action - The leader has worked through the process and should be able to justify his or her actions and responses.
Professional Development Exercise
Keep a journal in which you describe decisions that you make during the day. Distinguish between simple and complex decisions. Write a one-page essay in which you draw conclusions regarding the decisions you made during the day. What did you learn?
Learn more about Outdoor Leadership, Second Edition.
Decision Making and Judgment on a Kayaking Trip
Nate and Meg were leading a group of 10 people on a five-day kayaking trip in Apostle Islands National Lakeshore on Lake Superior. On the second day, they had visited the sea caves on Sand Island and were preparing for a 1.5-mile (2.4 km) open-water crossing to York Island.
Nate and Meg were leading a group of 10 people on a five-day kayaking trip in Apostle Islands National Lakeshore on Lake Superior. On the second day, they had visited the sea caves on Sand Island and were preparing for a 1.5-mile (2.4 km) open-water crossing to York Island. It was noon, and the wind was starting to pick up. A few members of the group voiced their need to get out of the boats and stretch their legs. Other members were starting to get hungry. Nate and Meg suggested that the group take a quick snack break while the two of them took a moment to discuss the crossing.
Nate and Meg knew that they had only a couple of minutes to come to a decision. Meg predicted that the wind would pick up as the day progressed, and she suggested that the group make the crossing now despite their discomfort. If the group was unable to get to York Island that afternoon, they would have to backtrack to the mainland, missing out on the trip to the Raspberry Island lighthouse and the day hike on Oak Island. Nate was concerned about the fact that some of the participants were hungry and uncomfortable in their boats. He wasn't sure they should set off on a breezy 1.5-mile crossing under those conditions. He understood that the group would be unable to complete the proposed itinerary but reminded Meg that many interesting options were still available if the group was unable to complete the full loop. He suggested that they return to their previous campsite to have lunch and reassess the group's fitness and the weather conditions.
Although she attentively listened to Nate's concerns, Meg disagreed with his assessment of the situation and his suggestion that the group return to camp. This was her fourth trip in Apostle Islands and she had not yet made the full loop with any of her groups. No other trip leader seemed to come back without completing the proposed itinerary except for her. She was concerned about what people would think of her if she returned without completing the intended trip route yet again. She was also questioning her own decision-making ability and wondering whether her overcautious nature had prevented her from completing the loop on past trips. She wanted to push herself mentally and felt that she had the technical skills and stamina to encourage the group members to push themselves physically. She really did believe that the group would be fine with the crossing. It was just a matter of going for it.
In the couple of minutes that Meg and Nate had been discussing the situation, the wind had begun to blow a bit stronger. This further impelled Meg to conclude that the group should make the crossing immediately before the weather worsened. For Nate, this was a clear indicator that the group should stay on Sand Island. In the end, Nate, Meg, and the group decided that the safest course of action would be to stay on Sand Island. The group enjoyed a wonderful day of hiking.
Leaders make decisions and facilitate group decision-making multiple times daily while guiding outdoor trips. For this reason, developing decision-making skills is a key component of outdoor leadership education. Although this concept may seem somewhat straightforward, developing a process of decision making is no small task, in part because there is no such thing as a perfect decision. Consider, for example, Nate and Meg's situation. What do you think is the best decision concerning this scenario? How did you come to your decision?
Developing a process of decision making should not be confused with the need to develop sound judgment. Judgment is based on past experience and the outcomes of decisions that were made. In essence, judgment is a process of gathering relevant data. These data are then used to inform the decision-making process. Both decision making and judgment are competencies that are difficult to teach and learn. Developing these competencies requires the ability to see potential outcomes that may result from a decision. Consider the practice of meditation, which involves "opening the third eye" - the eye that sees and hears everything. The third eye focuses on the sixth chakra in the body, which is in the middle of the forehead between the eyebrows. It is the center of wisdom and seeing and is a symbolic representation of intuitive wisdom that helps people see the big picture more clearly. Outdoor leaders need to adopt this metaphoric third eye as part of the process of developing judgment and decision making. The third eye develops with experience; leaders will begin to see patterns, and their judgment will improve with each experience.
Developing the ability to see the big picture and recognize patterns is integral to decision making and judgment. In many ways, developing a third eye with which to see the big picture is a bit like playing chess. Avid chess players often describe how good players need the ability to make good decisions with the added pressure of time. Perhaps even more important, they need to be able to forecast the result of their decisions. Chess players need to be prepared to adjust their next decision if the forecasted result does not happen, which is often the case. In this sense, playing chess is similar to outdoor leadership. Leadership ability depends in part on a person's ability to make timely, high-quality decisions that anticipate myriad outcomes. One study that tested the effects of time pressure on chess players concluded that expert decision making develops over time and is based on an ability to recognize and respond to patterns (Klein, 2008). It could be similarly concluded that a leader's judgment and decision-making abilities will improve over time with an increased knowledge of how decisions are made and their effects - knowledge that is gained through personal experience.
This chapter introduces the role of judgment in decision making, highlights some of the variables in decision making, identifies the differences between simple and complex decisions, presents models for decision making, introduces methods of decision making, and integrates ideas of decision making and leadership styles. The goal is for the reader to use this theoretical knowledge to develop judgment and decision-making abilities that they can apply to their own outdoor leadership experiences.
Learn more about Outdoor Leadership, Second Edition.
Facilitation Styles
Facilitation keeps the learner - rather than the facilitator - central to what is happening. Therefore, a leader should be very thoughtful in selecting the style of facilitation used.
Facilitation keeps the learner - rather than the facilitator - central to what is happening. Therefore, a leader should be very thoughtful in selecting the style of facilitation used. A leader's facilitation style is based on many variables, some of which are internal and some of which are external. Internal factors include beliefs, communication ability, and valuing others. Personal belief systems are strong perceptual filters that affect expectations and behavior. For example, the Pygmalion effect suggests that what we expect or believe about someone is what we get. If we view someone as ineffective, they most likely will live up to that expectation. Our perceptual filters can limit ourselves, too. A frog perceives only things that move as food and therefore will starve in a box of dead flies. We can work toward establishing a rapport with others if we understand how they perceive the world.
External variables, which help the facilitator adjust their style to each specific group, include the following:
- The age and maturity of the group - The younger the group, the more it depends on the leader and requires direct leadership and coaching. The maturity of any group changes as the group interacts.
- The length of the program - Groups generally build skills over time, so a short course or single-day event encourage direct leadership. The longer a group is together, the greater the opportunity to use more indirect methods.
- The expressed goals of the program - The outcome will dictate the style of presenting a challenge and debriefing it. Sometimes a group has no agenda except to have fun and get acquainted, which creates more opportunities for multiple activities with little transfer. However, if a group is working on communication or improving problem solving, the choices might be limited and more translation of the experience might occur.
- The readiness of the group - Some groups can manage safety and conflict because of their experiences together and are ready for more complicated challenges. Other groups take longer to develop the trust necessary to leave the ground or move independently.
Facilitation styles are either direct (i.e., telling or selling) or indirect (i.e., coaching and encouraging while staying focused on the students). The role that a facilitator chooses directly dictates the style of facilitation used. Evidence supports the effectiveness of direct facilitation styles, especially with motivated students. Such a style keeps the leader focused and on task and requires the leader to recognize changes in the group's climate and have a repertoire of activities that are appropriate for the situation. A new facilitator must practice a variety of behaviors and styles to learn what works with different groups.
Nondirective Facilitation
Nondirective facilitation uses a laissez-faire style in which the facilitator creates an opportunity that allows participants to determine which way to go. Although this style is not always comfortable or appropriate, it can be effective when a leader believes that the students can find their own solution to a problem and find that solution rewarding.
Appreciative Facilitation
Appreciative facilitation emphasizes what works well and concentrates on success and achievement (Greenaway, 2004). Identifying moments when the group is working at its best helps the leader identify and emphasize desired behaviors. Sometimes asking what is going well focuses attention on what is working rather than what is not working. This style is based on research related to the Pygmalion effect: The students become what the teacher believes them to be.
Activity Facilitation
Activity facilitation occurs during a group activity. Greenaway (2004) states, "Sometimes the facilitator may simply be enabling a group to achieve a task in the time available" (paragraph 14). To make experiences more meaningful, the facilitator interjects during the activity to influence what is experienced. Most of the time such influence involves changing the rules in some way. There should always be a clear beginning, middle, and end in activity facilitation. Discussing the goal of the activity in the beginning sets a target for the group to achieve. The middle portion is the actual participation in a game, initiative, or other activity. The end is called when the activity has run its course. Some sort of summary, debriefing, or conclusion increases the value of the experience.
Group Facilitation
Group facilitation can apply to groups in any context. Group dynamics in the outdoors can have a greater effect on a person than the outdoors alone. Even if group development is not a priority, group facilitation skills are necessary to keep the group on task. If a primary goal is team building, then group facilitation is absolutely necessary. At a minimum, outdoor leaders want to build a climate for learning and development (Greenaway, 2004).
Directive Facilitation
Adventure programming is a more directive style of facilitation that leaves little to chance. Priest and Gass (2005) developed categories of facilitation techniques commonly used in outdoor settings. The first two - frontloading and framing the experience - occur before and during the experience.
Frontloading is prebriefing or setting the stage before an activity. The facilitator tells the group what they should learn from the experience in order to create focus and a reference point. Framing the experience helps a group make sense of it. Stories or metaphors help the group understand how a particular activity relates to their lives outside of the experience. Taking an activity and making it meaningful by relating it to the needs of participants can be powerful. Instead of climbing a rock, participants may be learning to stay focused on life goals. Instead of jumping off a power pole to catch a trapeze, individuals can reach for goals in their lives.
Other facilitation methods proposed by Priest and Gass typically occur after the experience. One is letting the experience speak for itself. Often it is assumed that learning has taken place simply because the individual took part in an experience. Accomplishing a summit climb rarely needs an explanation, for example. After the difficulty of ascending a peak, just being there is enough for most people. Speaking for the experience, on the other hand, allows the facilitator to interpret the experience for the group. By telling the group what they have learned and how they might apply that new knowledge in the future, the facilitator can emphasize desired outcomes or learning.
Debriefing can occur during or after an experience. The facilitator asks the group to reflect on their experience and to identify points of learning. Levels of questions are used to extract different information from the group. Facilitators must be clear about what types of information they want and the group's ability to respond.
There exist many ways to debrief an experience. Leaders can use journaling, photography, and drawing, to mention a few techniques. Getting thoughtful responses from participants is the key element. Later in this chapter we discuss processing experiences.
When the meaning is not elicited during facilitation, this is just a jump of trust.
©Christine Cashel
Choosing a Facilitation Style
Choosing a style of facilitation is not an easy task. Each style has advantages and disadvantages. Facilitators have their own style based on their values, experience, and personality. Mixing techniques and styles that are different from one's personal style serves the students at a moment in time. Knowing when to take charge, when to back off, and when to negotiate has to do with the situation, the group, the task at hand, and the facilitator's personal style. Over time, facilitators learn when and where to apply a variety of techniques, just as Karen learned to set herself up for success by figuring out which facilitation style worked for her. Establishing an effective facilitation style takes time, practice, and being facilitated by others.
Save
Save
Learn more about Outdoor Leadership, Second Edition.
Ethical Decision-Making Model
The ethical decision-making model requires a leader to work through the following steps: 1. Identify the problem - Gather as much information as possible to clarify the problem.
The ethical decision-making model requires a leader to work through the following steps:
- Identify the problem - Gather as much information as possible to clarify the problem.
- List options - Brainstorm all options, possibly collectively with group members.
- Consider the nature and ethical dimensions of the problem - Which option will have the least chance of bringing harm to the participants or the environment? What decisions will safeguard the well-being of the group and individuals in it? How can a leader best honor group members and the natural environment? Leaders should not try to manage things on their own but rather should involve others, including group members, to ensure that they are seeing the whole issue.
- Apply a principle ethic if appropriate - A principle ethic is a set of rules determined by a governing professional organization or by the current professional standards of behavior. This could be either a professional code of ethics or a company's policies and procedures manual.
- Generate possible actions - Collaboratively brainstorm possible solutions to the dilemma.
- Consider the possible consequences of all options and determine a course of action - This stage involves looking at all the options and the consequences for all relevant parties, including the environment.
- Consider the rights and responsibilities of all people involved - This is referred to as the dignity of risk, whereby an individual holds the right to take risks and the right to fail when engaging in life experiences (Vatland et al., 2011). It is important to choose alternatives that uphold the rights of participants and allow them to accept personal responsibility for their choices and actions.
- Assess the selected course of action - Leaders should be careful that the action chosen does not raise any new dilemmas.
- Implement the course of action - The leader has worked through the process and should be able to justify his or her actions and responses.
Professional Development Exercise
Keep a journal in which you describe decisions that you make during the day. Distinguish between simple and complex decisions. Write a one-page essay in which you draw conclusions regarding the decisions you made during the day. What did you learn?
Learn more about Outdoor Leadership, Second Edition.
Decision Making and Judgment on a Kayaking Trip
Nate and Meg were leading a group of 10 people on a five-day kayaking trip in Apostle Islands National Lakeshore on Lake Superior. On the second day, they had visited the sea caves on Sand Island and were preparing for a 1.5-mile (2.4 km) open-water crossing to York Island.
Nate and Meg were leading a group of 10 people on a five-day kayaking trip in Apostle Islands National Lakeshore on Lake Superior. On the second day, they had visited the sea caves on Sand Island and were preparing for a 1.5-mile (2.4 km) open-water crossing to York Island. It was noon, and the wind was starting to pick up. A few members of the group voiced their need to get out of the boats and stretch their legs. Other members were starting to get hungry. Nate and Meg suggested that the group take a quick snack break while the two of them took a moment to discuss the crossing.
Nate and Meg knew that they had only a couple of minutes to come to a decision. Meg predicted that the wind would pick up as the day progressed, and she suggested that the group make the crossing now despite their discomfort. If the group was unable to get to York Island that afternoon, they would have to backtrack to the mainland, missing out on the trip to the Raspberry Island lighthouse and the day hike on Oak Island. Nate was concerned about the fact that some of the participants were hungry and uncomfortable in their boats. He wasn't sure they should set off on a breezy 1.5-mile crossing under those conditions. He understood that the group would be unable to complete the proposed itinerary but reminded Meg that many interesting options were still available if the group was unable to complete the full loop. He suggested that they return to their previous campsite to have lunch and reassess the group's fitness and the weather conditions.
Although she attentively listened to Nate's concerns, Meg disagreed with his assessment of the situation and his suggestion that the group return to camp. This was her fourth trip in Apostle Islands and she had not yet made the full loop with any of her groups. No other trip leader seemed to come back without completing the proposed itinerary except for her. She was concerned about what people would think of her if she returned without completing the intended trip route yet again. She was also questioning her own decision-making ability and wondering whether her overcautious nature had prevented her from completing the loop on past trips. She wanted to push herself mentally and felt that she had the technical skills and stamina to encourage the group members to push themselves physically. She really did believe that the group would be fine with the crossing. It was just a matter of going for it.
In the couple of minutes that Meg and Nate had been discussing the situation, the wind had begun to blow a bit stronger. This further impelled Meg to conclude that the group should make the crossing immediately before the weather worsened. For Nate, this was a clear indicator that the group should stay on Sand Island. In the end, Nate, Meg, and the group decided that the safest course of action would be to stay on Sand Island. The group enjoyed a wonderful day of hiking.
Leaders make decisions and facilitate group decision-making multiple times daily while guiding outdoor trips. For this reason, developing decision-making skills is a key component of outdoor leadership education. Although this concept may seem somewhat straightforward, developing a process of decision making is no small task, in part because there is no such thing as a perfect decision. Consider, for example, Nate and Meg's situation. What do you think is the best decision concerning this scenario? How did you come to your decision?
Developing a process of decision making should not be confused with the need to develop sound judgment. Judgment is based on past experience and the outcomes of decisions that were made. In essence, judgment is a process of gathering relevant data. These data are then used to inform the decision-making process. Both decision making and judgment are competencies that are difficult to teach and learn. Developing these competencies requires the ability to see potential outcomes that may result from a decision. Consider the practice of meditation, which involves "opening the third eye" - the eye that sees and hears everything. The third eye focuses on the sixth chakra in the body, which is in the middle of the forehead between the eyebrows. It is the center of wisdom and seeing and is a symbolic representation of intuitive wisdom that helps people see the big picture more clearly. Outdoor leaders need to adopt this metaphoric third eye as part of the process of developing judgment and decision making. The third eye develops with experience; leaders will begin to see patterns, and their judgment will improve with each experience.
Developing the ability to see the big picture and recognize patterns is integral to decision making and judgment. In many ways, developing a third eye with which to see the big picture is a bit like playing chess. Avid chess players often describe how good players need the ability to make good decisions with the added pressure of time. Perhaps even more important, they need to be able to forecast the result of their decisions. Chess players need to be prepared to adjust their next decision if the forecasted result does not happen, which is often the case. In this sense, playing chess is similar to outdoor leadership. Leadership ability depends in part on a person's ability to make timely, high-quality decisions that anticipate myriad outcomes. One study that tested the effects of time pressure on chess players concluded that expert decision making develops over time and is based on an ability to recognize and respond to patterns (Klein, 2008). It could be similarly concluded that a leader's judgment and decision-making abilities will improve over time with an increased knowledge of how decisions are made and their effects - knowledge that is gained through personal experience.
This chapter introduces the role of judgment in decision making, highlights some of the variables in decision making, identifies the differences between simple and complex decisions, presents models for decision making, introduces methods of decision making, and integrates ideas of decision making and leadership styles. The goal is for the reader to use this theoretical knowledge to develop judgment and decision-making abilities that they can apply to their own outdoor leadership experiences.
Learn more about Outdoor Leadership, Second Edition.
Facilitation Styles
Facilitation keeps the learner - rather than the facilitator - central to what is happening. Therefore, a leader should be very thoughtful in selecting the style of facilitation used.
Facilitation keeps the learner - rather than the facilitator - central to what is happening. Therefore, a leader should be very thoughtful in selecting the style of facilitation used. A leader's facilitation style is based on many variables, some of which are internal and some of which are external. Internal factors include beliefs, communication ability, and valuing others. Personal belief systems are strong perceptual filters that affect expectations and behavior. For example, the Pygmalion effect suggests that what we expect or believe about someone is what we get. If we view someone as ineffective, they most likely will live up to that expectation. Our perceptual filters can limit ourselves, too. A frog perceives only things that move as food and therefore will starve in a box of dead flies. We can work toward establishing a rapport with others if we understand how they perceive the world.
External variables, which help the facilitator adjust their style to each specific group, include the following:
- The age and maturity of the group - The younger the group, the more it depends on the leader and requires direct leadership and coaching. The maturity of any group changes as the group interacts.
- The length of the program - Groups generally build skills over time, so a short course or single-day event encourage direct leadership. The longer a group is together, the greater the opportunity to use more indirect methods.
- The expressed goals of the program - The outcome will dictate the style of presenting a challenge and debriefing it. Sometimes a group has no agenda except to have fun and get acquainted, which creates more opportunities for multiple activities with little transfer. However, if a group is working on communication or improving problem solving, the choices might be limited and more translation of the experience might occur.
- The readiness of the group - Some groups can manage safety and conflict because of their experiences together and are ready for more complicated challenges. Other groups take longer to develop the trust necessary to leave the ground or move independently.
Facilitation styles are either direct (i.e., telling or selling) or indirect (i.e., coaching and encouraging while staying focused on the students). The role that a facilitator chooses directly dictates the style of facilitation used. Evidence supports the effectiveness of direct facilitation styles, especially with motivated students. Such a style keeps the leader focused and on task and requires the leader to recognize changes in the group's climate and have a repertoire of activities that are appropriate for the situation. A new facilitator must practice a variety of behaviors and styles to learn what works with different groups.
Nondirective Facilitation
Nondirective facilitation uses a laissez-faire style in which the facilitator creates an opportunity that allows participants to determine which way to go. Although this style is not always comfortable or appropriate, it can be effective when a leader believes that the students can find their own solution to a problem and find that solution rewarding.
Appreciative Facilitation
Appreciative facilitation emphasizes what works well and concentrates on success and achievement (Greenaway, 2004). Identifying moments when the group is working at its best helps the leader identify and emphasize desired behaviors. Sometimes asking what is going well focuses attention on what is working rather than what is not working. This style is based on research related to the Pygmalion effect: The students become what the teacher believes them to be.
Activity Facilitation
Activity facilitation occurs during a group activity. Greenaway (2004) states, "Sometimes the facilitator may simply be enabling a group to achieve a task in the time available" (paragraph 14). To make experiences more meaningful, the facilitator interjects during the activity to influence what is experienced. Most of the time such influence involves changing the rules in some way. There should always be a clear beginning, middle, and end in activity facilitation. Discussing the goal of the activity in the beginning sets a target for the group to achieve. The middle portion is the actual participation in a game, initiative, or other activity. The end is called when the activity has run its course. Some sort of summary, debriefing, or conclusion increases the value of the experience.
Group Facilitation
Group facilitation can apply to groups in any context. Group dynamics in the outdoors can have a greater effect on a person than the outdoors alone. Even if group development is not a priority, group facilitation skills are necessary to keep the group on task. If a primary goal is team building, then group facilitation is absolutely necessary. At a minimum, outdoor leaders want to build a climate for learning and development (Greenaway, 2004).
Directive Facilitation
Adventure programming is a more directive style of facilitation that leaves little to chance. Priest and Gass (2005) developed categories of facilitation techniques commonly used in outdoor settings. The first two - frontloading and framing the experience - occur before and during the experience.
Frontloading is prebriefing or setting the stage before an activity. The facilitator tells the group what they should learn from the experience in order to create focus and a reference point. Framing the experience helps a group make sense of it. Stories or metaphors help the group understand how a particular activity relates to their lives outside of the experience. Taking an activity and making it meaningful by relating it to the needs of participants can be powerful. Instead of climbing a rock, participants may be learning to stay focused on life goals. Instead of jumping off a power pole to catch a trapeze, individuals can reach for goals in their lives.
Other facilitation methods proposed by Priest and Gass typically occur after the experience. One is letting the experience speak for itself. Often it is assumed that learning has taken place simply because the individual took part in an experience. Accomplishing a summit climb rarely needs an explanation, for example. After the difficulty of ascending a peak, just being there is enough for most people. Speaking for the experience, on the other hand, allows the facilitator to interpret the experience for the group. By telling the group what they have learned and how they might apply that new knowledge in the future, the facilitator can emphasize desired outcomes or learning.
Debriefing can occur during or after an experience. The facilitator asks the group to reflect on their experience and to identify points of learning. Levels of questions are used to extract different information from the group. Facilitators must be clear about what types of information they want and the group's ability to respond.
There exist many ways to debrief an experience. Leaders can use journaling, photography, and drawing, to mention a few techniques. Getting thoughtful responses from participants is the key element. Later in this chapter we discuss processing experiences.
When the meaning is not elicited during facilitation, this is just a jump of trust.
©Christine Cashel
Choosing a Facilitation Style
Choosing a style of facilitation is not an easy task. Each style has advantages and disadvantages. Facilitators have their own style based on their values, experience, and personality. Mixing techniques and styles that are different from one's personal style serves the students at a moment in time. Knowing when to take charge, when to back off, and when to negotiate has to do with the situation, the group, the task at hand, and the facilitator's personal style. Over time, facilitators learn when and where to apply a variety of techniques, just as Karen learned to set herself up for success by figuring out which facilitation style worked for her. Establishing an effective facilitation style takes time, practice, and being facilitated by others.
Save
Save
Learn more about Outdoor Leadership, Second Edition.
Ethical Decision-Making Model
The ethical decision-making model requires a leader to work through the following steps: 1. Identify the problem - Gather as much information as possible to clarify the problem.
The ethical decision-making model requires a leader to work through the following steps:
- Identify the problem - Gather as much information as possible to clarify the problem.
- List options - Brainstorm all options, possibly collectively with group members.
- Consider the nature and ethical dimensions of the problem - Which option will have the least chance of bringing harm to the participants or the environment? What decisions will safeguard the well-being of the group and individuals in it? How can a leader best honor group members and the natural environment? Leaders should not try to manage things on their own but rather should involve others, including group members, to ensure that they are seeing the whole issue.
- Apply a principle ethic if appropriate - A principle ethic is a set of rules determined by a governing professional organization or by the current professional standards of behavior. This could be either a professional code of ethics or a company's policies and procedures manual.
- Generate possible actions - Collaboratively brainstorm possible solutions to the dilemma.
- Consider the possible consequences of all options and determine a course of action - This stage involves looking at all the options and the consequences for all relevant parties, including the environment.
- Consider the rights and responsibilities of all people involved - This is referred to as the dignity of risk, whereby an individual holds the right to take risks and the right to fail when engaging in life experiences (Vatland et al., 2011). It is important to choose alternatives that uphold the rights of participants and allow them to accept personal responsibility for their choices and actions.
- Assess the selected course of action - Leaders should be careful that the action chosen does not raise any new dilemmas.
- Implement the course of action - The leader has worked through the process and should be able to justify his or her actions and responses.
Professional Development Exercise
Keep a journal in which you describe decisions that you make during the day. Distinguish between simple and complex decisions. Write a one-page essay in which you draw conclusions regarding the decisions you made during the day. What did you learn?
Learn more about Outdoor Leadership, Second Edition.
Decision Making and Judgment on a Kayaking Trip
Nate and Meg were leading a group of 10 people on a five-day kayaking trip in Apostle Islands National Lakeshore on Lake Superior. On the second day, they had visited the sea caves on Sand Island and were preparing for a 1.5-mile (2.4 km) open-water crossing to York Island.
Nate and Meg were leading a group of 10 people on a five-day kayaking trip in Apostle Islands National Lakeshore on Lake Superior. On the second day, they had visited the sea caves on Sand Island and were preparing for a 1.5-mile (2.4 km) open-water crossing to York Island. It was noon, and the wind was starting to pick up. A few members of the group voiced their need to get out of the boats and stretch their legs. Other members were starting to get hungry. Nate and Meg suggested that the group take a quick snack break while the two of them took a moment to discuss the crossing.
Nate and Meg knew that they had only a couple of minutes to come to a decision. Meg predicted that the wind would pick up as the day progressed, and she suggested that the group make the crossing now despite their discomfort. If the group was unable to get to York Island that afternoon, they would have to backtrack to the mainland, missing out on the trip to the Raspberry Island lighthouse and the day hike on Oak Island. Nate was concerned about the fact that some of the participants were hungry and uncomfortable in their boats. He wasn't sure they should set off on a breezy 1.5-mile crossing under those conditions. He understood that the group would be unable to complete the proposed itinerary but reminded Meg that many interesting options were still available if the group was unable to complete the full loop. He suggested that they return to their previous campsite to have lunch and reassess the group's fitness and the weather conditions.
Although she attentively listened to Nate's concerns, Meg disagreed with his assessment of the situation and his suggestion that the group return to camp. This was her fourth trip in Apostle Islands and she had not yet made the full loop with any of her groups. No other trip leader seemed to come back without completing the proposed itinerary except for her. She was concerned about what people would think of her if she returned without completing the intended trip route yet again. She was also questioning her own decision-making ability and wondering whether her overcautious nature had prevented her from completing the loop on past trips. She wanted to push herself mentally and felt that she had the technical skills and stamina to encourage the group members to push themselves physically. She really did believe that the group would be fine with the crossing. It was just a matter of going for it.
In the couple of minutes that Meg and Nate had been discussing the situation, the wind had begun to blow a bit stronger. This further impelled Meg to conclude that the group should make the crossing immediately before the weather worsened. For Nate, this was a clear indicator that the group should stay on Sand Island. In the end, Nate, Meg, and the group decided that the safest course of action would be to stay on Sand Island. The group enjoyed a wonderful day of hiking.
Leaders make decisions and facilitate group decision-making multiple times daily while guiding outdoor trips. For this reason, developing decision-making skills is a key component of outdoor leadership education. Although this concept may seem somewhat straightforward, developing a process of decision making is no small task, in part because there is no such thing as a perfect decision. Consider, for example, Nate and Meg's situation. What do you think is the best decision concerning this scenario? How did you come to your decision?
Developing a process of decision making should not be confused with the need to develop sound judgment. Judgment is based on past experience and the outcomes of decisions that were made. In essence, judgment is a process of gathering relevant data. These data are then used to inform the decision-making process. Both decision making and judgment are competencies that are difficult to teach and learn. Developing these competencies requires the ability to see potential outcomes that may result from a decision. Consider the practice of meditation, which involves "opening the third eye" - the eye that sees and hears everything. The third eye focuses on the sixth chakra in the body, which is in the middle of the forehead between the eyebrows. It is the center of wisdom and seeing and is a symbolic representation of intuitive wisdom that helps people see the big picture more clearly. Outdoor leaders need to adopt this metaphoric third eye as part of the process of developing judgment and decision making. The third eye develops with experience; leaders will begin to see patterns, and their judgment will improve with each experience.
Developing the ability to see the big picture and recognize patterns is integral to decision making and judgment. In many ways, developing a third eye with which to see the big picture is a bit like playing chess. Avid chess players often describe how good players need the ability to make good decisions with the added pressure of time. Perhaps even more important, they need to be able to forecast the result of their decisions. Chess players need to be prepared to adjust their next decision if the forecasted result does not happen, which is often the case. In this sense, playing chess is similar to outdoor leadership. Leadership ability depends in part on a person's ability to make timely, high-quality decisions that anticipate myriad outcomes. One study that tested the effects of time pressure on chess players concluded that expert decision making develops over time and is based on an ability to recognize and respond to patterns (Klein, 2008). It could be similarly concluded that a leader's judgment and decision-making abilities will improve over time with an increased knowledge of how decisions are made and their effects - knowledge that is gained through personal experience.
This chapter introduces the role of judgment in decision making, highlights some of the variables in decision making, identifies the differences between simple and complex decisions, presents models for decision making, introduces methods of decision making, and integrates ideas of decision making and leadership styles. The goal is for the reader to use this theoretical knowledge to develop judgment and decision-making abilities that they can apply to their own outdoor leadership experiences.
Learn more about Outdoor Leadership, Second Edition.
Facilitation Styles
Facilitation keeps the learner - rather than the facilitator - central to what is happening. Therefore, a leader should be very thoughtful in selecting the style of facilitation used.
Facilitation keeps the learner - rather than the facilitator - central to what is happening. Therefore, a leader should be very thoughtful in selecting the style of facilitation used. A leader's facilitation style is based on many variables, some of which are internal and some of which are external. Internal factors include beliefs, communication ability, and valuing others. Personal belief systems are strong perceptual filters that affect expectations and behavior. For example, the Pygmalion effect suggests that what we expect or believe about someone is what we get. If we view someone as ineffective, they most likely will live up to that expectation. Our perceptual filters can limit ourselves, too. A frog perceives only things that move as food and therefore will starve in a box of dead flies. We can work toward establishing a rapport with others if we understand how they perceive the world.
External variables, which help the facilitator adjust their style to each specific group, include the following:
- The age and maturity of the group - The younger the group, the more it depends on the leader and requires direct leadership and coaching. The maturity of any group changes as the group interacts.
- The length of the program - Groups generally build skills over time, so a short course or single-day event encourage direct leadership. The longer a group is together, the greater the opportunity to use more indirect methods.
- The expressed goals of the program - The outcome will dictate the style of presenting a challenge and debriefing it. Sometimes a group has no agenda except to have fun and get acquainted, which creates more opportunities for multiple activities with little transfer. However, if a group is working on communication or improving problem solving, the choices might be limited and more translation of the experience might occur.
- The readiness of the group - Some groups can manage safety and conflict because of their experiences together and are ready for more complicated challenges. Other groups take longer to develop the trust necessary to leave the ground or move independently.
Facilitation styles are either direct (i.e., telling or selling) or indirect (i.e., coaching and encouraging while staying focused on the students). The role that a facilitator chooses directly dictates the style of facilitation used. Evidence supports the effectiveness of direct facilitation styles, especially with motivated students. Such a style keeps the leader focused and on task and requires the leader to recognize changes in the group's climate and have a repertoire of activities that are appropriate for the situation. A new facilitator must practice a variety of behaviors and styles to learn what works with different groups.
Nondirective Facilitation
Nondirective facilitation uses a laissez-faire style in which the facilitator creates an opportunity that allows participants to determine which way to go. Although this style is not always comfortable or appropriate, it can be effective when a leader believes that the students can find their own solution to a problem and find that solution rewarding.
Appreciative Facilitation
Appreciative facilitation emphasizes what works well and concentrates on success and achievement (Greenaway, 2004). Identifying moments when the group is working at its best helps the leader identify and emphasize desired behaviors. Sometimes asking what is going well focuses attention on what is working rather than what is not working. This style is based on research related to the Pygmalion effect: The students become what the teacher believes them to be.
Activity Facilitation
Activity facilitation occurs during a group activity. Greenaway (2004) states, "Sometimes the facilitator may simply be enabling a group to achieve a task in the time available" (paragraph 14). To make experiences more meaningful, the facilitator interjects during the activity to influence what is experienced. Most of the time such influence involves changing the rules in some way. There should always be a clear beginning, middle, and end in activity facilitation. Discussing the goal of the activity in the beginning sets a target for the group to achieve. The middle portion is the actual participation in a game, initiative, or other activity. The end is called when the activity has run its course. Some sort of summary, debriefing, or conclusion increases the value of the experience.
Group Facilitation
Group facilitation can apply to groups in any context. Group dynamics in the outdoors can have a greater effect on a person than the outdoors alone. Even if group development is not a priority, group facilitation skills are necessary to keep the group on task. If a primary goal is team building, then group facilitation is absolutely necessary. At a minimum, outdoor leaders want to build a climate for learning and development (Greenaway, 2004).
Directive Facilitation
Adventure programming is a more directive style of facilitation that leaves little to chance. Priest and Gass (2005) developed categories of facilitation techniques commonly used in outdoor settings. The first two - frontloading and framing the experience - occur before and during the experience.
Frontloading is prebriefing or setting the stage before an activity. The facilitator tells the group what they should learn from the experience in order to create focus and a reference point. Framing the experience helps a group make sense of it. Stories or metaphors help the group understand how a particular activity relates to their lives outside of the experience. Taking an activity and making it meaningful by relating it to the needs of participants can be powerful. Instead of climbing a rock, participants may be learning to stay focused on life goals. Instead of jumping off a power pole to catch a trapeze, individuals can reach for goals in their lives.
Other facilitation methods proposed by Priest and Gass typically occur after the experience. One is letting the experience speak for itself. Often it is assumed that learning has taken place simply because the individual took part in an experience. Accomplishing a summit climb rarely needs an explanation, for example. After the difficulty of ascending a peak, just being there is enough for most people. Speaking for the experience, on the other hand, allows the facilitator to interpret the experience for the group. By telling the group what they have learned and how they might apply that new knowledge in the future, the facilitator can emphasize desired outcomes or learning.
Debriefing can occur during or after an experience. The facilitator asks the group to reflect on their experience and to identify points of learning. Levels of questions are used to extract different information from the group. Facilitators must be clear about what types of information they want and the group's ability to respond.
There exist many ways to debrief an experience. Leaders can use journaling, photography, and drawing, to mention a few techniques. Getting thoughtful responses from participants is the key element. Later in this chapter we discuss processing experiences.
When the meaning is not elicited during facilitation, this is just a jump of trust.
©Christine Cashel
Choosing a Facilitation Style
Choosing a style of facilitation is not an easy task. Each style has advantages and disadvantages. Facilitators have their own style based on their values, experience, and personality. Mixing techniques and styles that are different from one's personal style serves the students at a moment in time. Knowing when to take charge, when to back off, and when to negotiate has to do with the situation, the group, the task at hand, and the facilitator's personal style. Over time, facilitators learn when and where to apply a variety of techniques, just as Karen learned to set herself up for success by figuring out which facilitation style worked for her. Establishing an effective facilitation style takes time, practice, and being facilitated by others.
Save
Save
Learn more about Outdoor Leadership, Second Edition.
Ethical Decision-Making Model
The ethical decision-making model requires a leader to work through the following steps: 1. Identify the problem - Gather as much information as possible to clarify the problem.
The ethical decision-making model requires a leader to work through the following steps:
- Identify the problem - Gather as much information as possible to clarify the problem.
- List options - Brainstorm all options, possibly collectively with group members.
- Consider the nature and ethical dimensions of the problem - Which option will have the least chance of bringing harm to the participants or the environment? What decisions will safeguard the well-being of the group and individuals in it? How can a leader best honor group members and the natural environment? Leaders should not try to manage things on their own but rather should involve others, including group members, to ensure that they are seeing the whole issue.
- Apply a principle ethic if appropriate - A principle ethic is a set of rules determined by a governing professional organization or by the current professional standards of behavior. This could be either a professional code of ethics or a company's policies and procedures manual.
- Generate possible actions - Collaboratively brainstorm possible solutions to the dilemma.
- Consider the possible consequences of all options and determine a course of action - This stage involves looking at all the options and the consequences for all relevant parties, including the environment.
- Consider the rights and responsibilities of all people involved - This is referred to as the dignity of risk, whereby an individual holds the right to take risks and the right to fail when engaging in life experiences (Vatland et al., 2011). It is important to choose alternatives that uphold the rights of participants and allow them to accept personal responsibility for their choices and actions.
- Assess the selected course of action - Leaders should be careful that the action chosen does not raise any new dilemmas.
- Implement the course of action - The leader has worked through the process and should be able to justify his or her actions and responses.
Professional Development Exercise
Keep a journal in which you describe decisions that you make during the day. Distinguish between simple and complex decisions. Write a one-page essay in which you draw conclusions regarding the decisions you made during the day. What did you learn?
Learn more about Outdoor Leadership, Second Edition.
Decision Making and Judgment on a Kayaking Trip
Nate and Meg were leading a group of 10 people on a five-day kayaking trip in Apostle Islands National Lakeshore on Lake Superior. On the second day, they had visited the sea caves on Sand Island and were preparing for a 1.5-mile (2.4 km) open-water crossing to York Island.
Nate and Meg were leading a group of 10 people on a five-day kayaking trip in Apostle Islands National Lakeshore on Lake Superior. On the second day, they had visited the sea caves on Sand Island and were preparing for a 1.5-mile (2.4 km) open-water crossing to York Island. It was noon, and the wind was starting to pick up. A few members of the group voiced their need to get out of the boats and stretch their legs. Other members were starting to get hungry. Nate and Meg suggested that the group take a quick snack break while the two of them took a moment to discuss the crossing.
Nate and Meg knew that they had only a couple of minutes to come to a decision. Meg predicted that the wind would pick up as the day progressed, and she suggested that the group make the crossing now despite their discomfort. If the group was unable to get to York Island that afternoon, they would have to backtrack to the mainland, missing out on the trip to the Raspberry Island lighthouse and the day hike on Oak Island. Nate was concerned about the fact that some of the participants were hungry and uncomfortable in their boats. He wasn't sure they should set off on a breezy 1.5-mile crossing under those conditions. He understood that the group would be unable to complete the proposed itinerary but reminded Meg that many interesting options were still available if the group was unable to complete the full loop. He suggested that they return to their previous campsite to have lunch and reassess the group's fitness and the weather conditions.
Although she attentively listened to Nate's concerns, Meg disagreed with his assessment of the situation and his suggestion that the group return to camp. This was her fourth trip in Apostle Islands and she had not yet made the full loop with any of her groups. No other trip leader seemed to come back without completing the proposed itinerary except for her. She was concerned about what people would think of her if she returned without completing the intended trip route yet again. She was also questioning her own decision-making ability and wondering whether her overcautious nature had prevented her from completing the loop on past trips. She wanted to push herself mentally and felt that she had the technical skills and stamina to encourage the group members to push themselves physically. She really did believe that the group would be fine with the crossing. It was just a matter of going for it.
In the couple of minutes that Meg and Nate had been discussing the situation, the wind had begun to blow a bit stronger. This further impelled Meg to conclude that the group should make the crossing immediately before the weather worsened. For Nate, this was a clear indicator that the group should stay on Sand Island. In the end, Nate, Meg, and the group decided that the safest course of action would be to stay on Sand Island. The group enjoyed a wonderful day of hiking.
Leaders make decisions and facilitate group decision-making multiple times daily while guiding outdoor trips. For this reason, developing decision-making skills is a key component of outdoor leadership education. Although this concept may seem somewhat straightforward, developing a process of decision making is no small task, in part because there is no such thing as a perfect decision. Consider, for example, Nate and Meg's situation. What do you think is the best decision concerning this scenario? How did you come to your decision?
Developing a process of decision making should not be confused with the need to develop sound judgment. Judgment is based on past experience and the outcomes of decisions that were made. In essence, judgment is a process of gathering relevant data. These data are then used to inform the decision-making process. Both decision making and judgment are competencies that are difficult to teach and learn. Developing these competencies requires the ability to see potential outcomes that may result from a decision. Consider the practice of meditation, which involves "opening the third eye" - the eye that sees and hears everything. The third eye focuses on the sixth chakra in the body, which is in the middle of the forehead between the eyebrows. It is the center of wisdom and seeing and is a symbolic representation of intuitive wisdom that helps people see the big picture more clearly. Outdoor leaders need to adopt this metaphoric third eye as part of the process of developing judgment and decision making. The third eye develops with experience; leaders will begin to see patterns, and their judgment will improve with each experience.
Developing the ability to see the big picture and recognize patterns is integral to decision making and judgment. In many ways, developing a third eye with which to see the big picture is a bit like playing chess. Avid chess players often describe how good players need the ability to make good decisions with the added pressure of time. Perhaps even more important, they need to be able to forecast the result of their decisions. Chess players need to be prepared to adjust their next decision if the forecasted result does not happen, which is often the case. In this sense, playing chess is similar to outdoor leadership. Leadership ability depends in part on a person's ability to make timely, high-quality decisions that anticipate myriad outcomes. One study that tested the effects of time pressure on chess players concluded that expert decision making develops over time and is based on an ability to recognize and respond to patterns (Klein, 2008). It could be similarly concluded that a leader's judgment and decision-making abilities will improve over time with an increased knowledge of how decisions are made and their effects - knowledge that is gained through personal experience.
This chapter introduces the role of judgment in decision making, highlights some of the variables in decision making, identifies the differences between simple and complex decisions, presents models for decision making, introduces methods of decision making, and integrates ideas of decision making and leadership styles. The goal is for the reader to use this theoretical knowledge to develop judgment and decision-making abilities that they can apply to their own outdoor leadership experiences.
Learn more about Outdoor Leadership, Second Edition.
Facilitation Styles
Facilitation keeps the learner - rather than the facilitator - central to what is happening. Therefore, a leader should be very thoughtful in selecting the style of facilitation used.
Facilitation keeps the learner - rather than the facilitator - central to what is happening. Therefore, a leader should be very thoughtful in selecting the style of facilitation used. A leader's facilitation style is based on many variables, some of which are internal and some of which are external. Internal factors include beliefs, communication ability, and valuing others. Personal belief systems are strong perceptual filters that affect expectations and behavior. For example, the Pygmalion effect suggests that what we expect or believe about someone is what we get. If we view someone as ineffective, they most likely will live up to that expectation. Our perceptual filters can limit ourselves, too. A frog perceives only things that move as food and therefore will starve in a box of dead flies. We can work toward establishing a rapport with others if we understand how they perceive the world.
External variables, which help the facilitator adjust their style to each specific group, include the following:
- The age and maturity of the group - The younger the group, the more it depends on the leader and requires direct leadership and coaching. The maturity of any group changes as the group interacts.
- The length of the program - Groups generally build skills over time, so a short course or single-day event encourage direct leadership. The longer a group is together, the greater the opportunity to use more indirect methods.
- The expressed goals of the program - The outcome will dictate the style of presenting a challenge and debriefing it. Sometimes a group has no agenda except to have fun and get acquainted, which creates more opportunities for multiple activities with little transfer. However, if a group is working on communication or improving problem solving, the choices might be limited and more translation of the experience might occur.
- The readiness of the group - Some groups can manage safety and conflict because of their experiences together and are ready for more complicated challenges. Other groups take longer to develop the trust necessary to leave the ground or move independently.
Facilitation styles are either direct (i.e., telling or selling) or indirect (i.e., coaching and encouraging while staying focused on the students). The role that a facilitator chooses directly dictates the style of facilitation used. Evidence supports the effectiveness of direct facilitation styles, especially with motivated students. Such a style keeps the leader focused and on task and requires the leader to recognize changes in the group's climate and have a repertoire of activities that are appropriate for the situation. A new facilitator must practice a variety of behaviors and styles to learn what works with different groups.
Nondirective Facilitation
Nondirective facilitation uses a laissez-faire style in which the facilitator creates an opportunity that allows participants to determine which way to go. Although this style is not always comfortable or appropriate, it can be effective when a leader believes that the students can find their own solution to a problem and find that solution rewarding.
Appreciative Facilitation
Appreciative facilitation emphasizes what works well and concentrates on success and achievement (Greenaway, 2004). Identifying moments when the group is working at its best helps the leader identify and emphasize desired behaviors. Sometimes asking what is going well focuses attention on what is working rather than what is not working. This style is based on research related to the Pygmalion effect: The students become what the teacher believes them to be.
Activity Facilitation
Activity facilitation occurs during a group activity. Greenaway (2004) states, "Sometimes the facilitator may simply be enabling a group to achieve a task in the time available" (paragraph 14). To make experiences more meaningful, the facilitator interjects during the activity to influence what is experienced. Most of the time such influence involves changing the rules in some way. There should always be a clear beginning, middle, and end in activity facilitation. Discussing the goal of the activity in the beginning sets a target for the group to achieve. The middle portion is the actual participation in a game, initiative, or other activity. The end is called when the activity has run its course. Some sort of summary, debriefing, or conclusion increases the value of the experience.
Group Facilitation
Group facilitation can apply to groups in any context. Group dynamics in the outdoors can have a greater effect on a person than the outdoors alone. Even if group development is not a priority, group facilitation skills are necessary to keep the group on task. If a primary goal is team building, then group facilitation is absolutely necessary. At a minimum, outdoor leaders want to build a climate for learning and development (Greenaway, 2004).
Directive Facilitation
Adventure programming is a more directive style of facilitation that leaves little to chance. Priest and Gass (2005) developed categories of facilitation techniques commonly used in outdoor settings. The first two - frontloading and framing the experience - occur before and during the experience.
Frontloading is prebriefing or setting the stage before an activity. The facilitator tells the group what they should learn from the experience in order to create focus and a reference point. Framing the experience helps a group make sense of it. Stories or metaphors help the group understand how a particular activity relates to their lives outside of the experience. Taking an activity and making it meaningful by relating it to the needs of participants can be powerful. Instead of climbing a rock, participants may be learning to stay focused on life goals. Instead of jumping off a power pole to catch a trapeze, individuals can reach for goals in their lives.
Other facilitation methods proposed by Priest and Gass typically occur after the experience. One is letting the experience speak for itself. Often it is assumed that learning has taken place simply because the individual took part in an experience. Accomplishing a summit climb rarely needs an explanation, for example. After the difficulty of ascending a peak, just being there is enough for most people. Speaking for the experience, on the other hand, allows the facilitator to interpret the experience for the group. By telling the group what they have learned and how they might apply that new knowledge in the future, the facilitator can emphasize desired outcomes or learning.
Debriefing can occur during or after an experience. The facilitator asks the group to reflect on their experience and to identify points of learning. Levels of questions are used to extract different information from the group. Facilitators must be clear about what types of information they want and the group's ability to respond.
There exist many ways to debrief an experience. Leaders can use journaling, photography, and drawing, to mention a few techniques. Getting thoughtful responses from participants is the key element. Later in this chapter we discuss processing experiences.
When the meaning is not elicited during facilitation, this is just a jump of trust.
©Christine Cashel
Choosing a Facilitation Style
Choosing a style of facilitation is not an easy task. Each style has advantages and disadvantages. Facilitators have their own style based on their values, experience, and personality. Mixing techniques and styles that are different from one's personal style serves the students at a moment in time. Knowing when to take charge, when to back off, and when to negotiate has to do with the situation, the group, the task at hand, and the facilitator's personal style. Over time, facilitators learn when and where to apply a variety of techniques, just as Karen learned to set herself up for success by figuring out which facilitation style worked for her. Establishing an effective facilitation style takes time, practice, and being facilitated by others.
Save
Save
Learn more about Outdoor Leadership, Second Edition.
Ethical Decision-Making Model
The ethical decision-making model requires a leader to work through the following steps: 1. Identify the problem - Gather as much information as possible to clarify the problem.
The ethical decision-making model requires a leader to work through the following steps:
- Identify the problem - Gather as much information as possible to clarify the problem.
- List options - Brainstorm all options, possibly collectively with group members.
- Consider the nature and ethical dimensions of the problem - Which option will have the least chance of bringing harm to the participants or the environment? What decisions will safeguard the well-being of the group and individuals in it? How can a leader best honor group members and the natural environment? Leaders should not try to manage things on their own but rather should involve others, including group members, to ensure that they are seeing the whole issue.
- Apply a principle ethic if appropriate - A principle ethic is a set of rules determined by a governing professional organization or by the current professional standards of behavior. This could be either a professional code of ethics or a company's policies and procedures manual.
- Generate possible actions - Collaboratively brainstorm possible solutions to the dilemma.
- Consider the possible consequences of all options and determine a course of action - This stage involves looking at all the options and the consequences for all relevant parties, including the environment.
- Consider the rights and responsibilities of all people involved - This is referred to as the dignity of risk, whereby an individual holds the right to take risks and the right to fail when engaging in life experiences (Vatland et al., 2011). It is important to choose alternatives that uphold the rights of participants and allow them to accept personal responsibility for their choices and actions.
- Assess the selected course of action - Leaders should be careful that the action chosen does not raise any new dilemmas.
- Implement the course of action - The leader has worked through the process and should be able to justify his or her actions and responses.
Professional Development Exercise
Keep a journal in which you describe decisions that you make during the day. Distinguish between simple and complex decisions. Write a one-page essay in which you draw conclusions regarding the decisions you made during the day. What did you learn?
Learn more about Outdoor Leadership, Second Edition.
Decision Making and Judgment on a Kayaking Trip
Nate and Meg were leading a group of 10 people on a five-day kayaking trip in Apostle Islands National Lakeshore on Lake Superior. On the second day, they had visited the sea caves on Sand Island and were preparing for a 1.5-mile (2.4 km) open-water crossing to York Island.
Nate and Meg were leading a group of 10 people on a five-day kayaking trip in Apostle Islands National Lakeshore on Lake Superior. On the second day, they had visited the sea caves on Sand Island and were preparing for a 1.5-mile (2.4 km) open-water crossing to York Island. It was noon, and the wind was starting to pick up. A few members of the group voiced their need to get out of the boats and stretch their legs. Other members were starting to get hungry. Nate and Meg suggested that the group take a quick snack break while the two of them took a moment to discuss the crossing.
Nate and Meg knew that they had only a couple of minutes to come to a decision. Meg predicted that the wind would pick up as the day progressed, and she suggested that the group make the crossing now despite their discomfort. If the group was unable to get to York Island that afternoon, they would have to backtrack to the mainland, missing out on the trip to the Raspberry Island lighthouse and the day hike on Oak Island. Nate was concerned about the fact that some of the participants were hungry and uncomfortable in their boats. He wasn't sure they should set off on a breezy 1.5-mile crossing under those conditions. He understood that the group would be unable to complete the proposed itinerary but reminded Meg that many interesting options were still available if the group was unable to complete the full loop. He suggested that they return to their previous campsite to have lunch and reassess the group's fitness and the weather conditions.
Although she attentively listened to Nate's concerns, Meg disagreed with his assessment of the situation and his suggestion that the group return to camp. This was her fourth trip in Apostle Islands and she had not yet made the full loop with any of her groups. No other trip leader seemed to come back without completing the proposed itinerary except for her. She was concerned about what people would think of her if she returned without completing the intended trip route yet again. She was also questioning her own decision-making ability and wondering whether her overcautious nature had prevented her from completing the loop on past trips. She wanted to push herself mentally and felt that she had the technical skills and stamina to encourage the group members to push themselves physically. She really did believe that the group would be fine with the crossing. It was just a matter of going for it.
In the couple of minutes that Meg and Nate had been discussing the situation, the wind had begun to blow a bit stronger. This further impelled Meg to conclude that the group should make the crossing immediately before the weather worsened. For Nate, this was a clear indicator that the group should stay on Sand Island. In the end, Nate, Meg, and the group decided that the safest course of action would be to stay on Sand Island. The group enjoyed a wonderful day of hiking.
Leaders make decisions and facilitate group decision-making multiple times daily while guiding outdoor trips. For this reason, developing decision-making skills is a key component of outdoor leadership education. Although this concept may seem somewhat straightforward, developing a process of decision making is no small task, in part because there is no such thing as a perfect decision. Consider, for example, Nate and Meg's situation. What do you think is the best decision concerning this scenario? How did you come to your decision?
Developing a process of decision making should not be confused with the need to develop sound judgment. Judgment is based on past experience and the outcomes of decisions that were made. In essence, judgment is a process of gathering relevant data. These data are then used to inform the decision-making process. Both decision making and judgment are competencies that are difficult to teach and learn. Developing these competencies requires the ability to see potential outcomes that may result from a decision. Consider the practice of meditation, which involves "opening the third eye" - the eye that sees and hears everything. The third eye focuses on the sixth chakra in the body, which is in the middle of the forehead between the eyebrows. It is the center of wisdom and seeing and is a symbolic representation of intuitive wisdom that helps people see the big picture more clearly. Outdoor leaders need to adopt this metaphoric third eye as part of the process of developing judgment and decision making. The third eye develops with experience; leaders will begin to see patterns, and their judgment will improve with each experience.
Developing the ability to see the big picture and recognize patterns is integral to decision making and judgment. In many ways, developing a third eye with which to see the big picture is a bit like playing chess. Avid chess players often describe how good players need the ability to make good decisions with the added pressure of time. Perhaps even more important, they need to be able to forecast the result of their decisions. Chess players need to be prepared to adjust their next decision if the forecasted result does not happen, which is often the case. In this sense, playing chess is similar to outdoor leadership. Leadership ability depends in part on a person's ability to make timely, high-quality decisions that anticipate myriad outcomes. One study that tested the effects of time pressure on chess players concluded that expert decision making develops over time and is based on an ability to recognize and respond to patterns (Klein, 2008). It could be similarly concluded that a leader's judgment and decision-making abilities will improve over time with an increased knowledge of how decisions are made and their effects - knowledge that is gained through personal experience.
This chapter introduces the role of judgment in decision making, highlights some of the variables in decision making, identifies the differences between simple and complex decisions, presents models for decision making, introduces methods of decision making, and integrates ideas of decision making and leadership styles. The goal is for the reader to use this theoretical knowledge to develop judgment and decision-making abilities that they can apply to their own outdoor leadership experiences.
Learn more about Outdoor Leadership, Second Edition.
Related Books
