BeraterInnen News 1/2001

44

Facilitation in Different Cultural Contexts

this weaker person is very often a woman. Pretending
to be politically correct men propose a woman for the
job and they even use the same tricks to promote a
female participant. The males flatter, compliment,
supplicate, encourage with beautiful poesy. Unfortu-
nately they don’t show the same curtsey later when
interfering and making life difficult for the facilitator.
Many of the “personalities” felt ashamed when they
got the opportunity to observe their behaviour on
video.

Once, a Kirgyzs group asked me to take the recording
of their group meeting to Mozambique and bring a
recording from Mozambique to watch. It didn’t sur-
prise me that both groups understood exactly what
happened in the other one, although they didn’t under-
stand a word of the conversation. They got the main,
and probably most important part of the communica-
tion just observing the non verbal communication.

Non verbal communication

Another important insight we wanted to confirm was
the importance of the non verbal communication. The
video recording opened our eyes for non verbal signs
that ruled over the verbal communication. They were
of course noticed by the participants although they
were not conscious of its effect during the meeting.

Most of the power games are decided with body
movements. As trained observers sometimes we got
the impression of watching a ballet. Two people taking
the same position means: we do agree, and it is very
difficult to go against an allied pair. Of course the
groups apply a wide range of gestures and postures for
their communication. What interests here is the fact
that to our understanding they are identical wherever
a group meets.

by Tonino Zellweger, LBL

As we were asked to impart Training for facilita-
tors in countries with different cultural back-
grounds, we wanted to know, if the cultural back-
ground was having an influence in the facilitation
style. That would mean, that the training had to be
adapted in each new context to suit its require-
ments.

In 1990 a team at the LBL started with a training for
Facilitators. Since then the training has taken place
twice a year in Switzerland with an average of 12
participants and a changing team of trainers. With
many of the former trainees we stayed in contact and
so it happened that we were asked to train local staff in
Asia (Bangladesh, Bhutan, Nepal, Kirgistan), in Afri-
ca (Mozambique, Mali) and Latinamerica (Bolivia,
Equador, Nicaragua, Peru). As we had developed the
training in Switzerland and for German speaking par-
ticipants the question was raised, if the insights we had
discovered were applicable to groups of another cul-
tural background.

Group behaviour

One of the most impressive sequences of the training
is a team/group meeting recorded on video. We have
done so in all our meetings giving the groups the same
task. To our own surprise the groups behave exactly
the same way all over the world. A group gets together,
somebody “facilitates” the first steps and then a formal
facilitator is chosen.

In all cultures the same tendency is obvious. Strong
male personalities prefer not to facilitate, especially if
there are two (or several) strong personalities present
in the group. It seems that males do not like to have a
public showdown. Everywhere they follow the same
strategy of forming an alliance with the (other impor-
tant) colleague, choosing a weaker person as a facili-
tator so as to interfere whenever they both want. Today

BeraterInnen News 1/2001

45

Part of this non verbal communication is also the
intonation of the voice. Using the voice according to
his/her intention a facilitator can improve his/her
efficiency and make life easier for the participants and
for him/herself. There are typical melodies for: getting
the attention, saying something important, inviting
people to discuss or ask questions. Again we wanted to
know, if the melodies were correctly understood. We
tested the melodies in at least thirty languages and we
found only one where it didn’t work: Malgache.

In all other languages the same melody, the same
intonation was used to underline the verbal communi-
cation. In some occasions we had the effect even
though the audience didn’t understand the words.
Speaking English with the “right” intonation to a
Russian speaking audience gets its attention and in-
duces it to be silent.

One of the lucky coincidences happened in Mali. We
had just finished with the topic of using the voice
where I had given my examples and told the underly-
ing theory when we were invited to a party. One of the
speakers was an old Bambara story teller. As soon as
he started to speak the audience got silent and listened
attentively. It was so beautifully convincing that it was
easy to persuade the trainees.

Differences

The aim of our observation was to find differences in
facilitation due to differing cultural behaviour. First
we thought that there were none. In many a training we
had participants coming from a different background
and the group behaviour and the non verbal communi-
cation never were an obstacle to the mutual under-
standing. After observing many years we found two
cultural differences: social distance and the form of
giving feedback.

Social distance means the distance people put be-
tween them to show there closeness. Of course the
social distance varies according to the situation. In an
elevator or in a crowded bus the social distance is full
physical contact. In these cases we express the dis-
tance with not looking at foreigners. In a more open
area the social distance widens. The more space avail-
able, the wider the distance.

When we tested the social distance in Bangladesh we
were surprised that they observe other rules of social

distance than what we were accustomed to. Being in a
Muslim society and working with a mixed group (male
and female) participants were getting much closer to
each other than what we expected. They even looked
at us, asking what the exercise was all about.

The opposite was the case in Kirigistan. People there
are much less accustomed to being touched. My Lat-
inamerican habit of putting my hands on men and
women equally was probably tolerated because I was
the trainer and unfamiliar with local customs.

The form of giving feedback is another difference we
discovered. There are cultures where it is very difficult
to name somebody’s errors or misbehaviours openly
and publicly. It was very often of no avail to explain the
benefit of a sincere feedback as a help for personal
improvement. It was just too strange, too offensive.
We tried many detours to get the same result. We
labelled the mistakes “what can be improved” or
something similar, but it didn’t change the inhibition
of telling clearly what was not good.

I am sure every culture has its own way of formulating
a critic or a suggestion for change. Unfortunately we
couldn’t stay long enough to find out what the specific
expression was in each place.

Conclusion

Our observation tells us that most rules and behaviours
in facilitation are valid world wide. It was a quite
satisfying discovery that people seem to behave uni-
versally the same way. There is of course a limitation
to our statement: We dealt mostly with people who had
followed a formal education and got a degree. So the
limited conclusion might say that higher staff does
behave similarly world wide.