Listen to thisStaff meetings are supposed to provide an opportunity for management and staff to come together to solve problems, share information, decide on child management approaches and pool ideas to develop agency policies and procedures. Often times there are periodic meetings like the weekly staff meeting to hear announcements, update progress on some continuing issues and other topics for which an agenda should be provided in advance and followed. At other times, a meeting may be called to address a particularly troublesome and/or urgent problem.
Frequently meetings can become a source of frustration for staff (and management). Topics are not addressed systematically, existing interpersonal conflicts erupt disrupting the flow and focus of the meeting and information sharing goes on and on. Although there are many causes of boring and ineffective staff meetings, one cause may be the unsystematic or shoot from-the-hip method of addressing problems that meeting leaders sometimes employ. This may work for new and small agencies for a short while but as the agency increases in size, complexity and age, the lack of a problem solving model (which is understood and agreed to by meeting participants) can lead to the kind of problems mentioned above. One such model the “CIDI MODEL” which might fit child care agencies is discussed below.
The CIDI model utilizes the following four basic steps which should be followed sequentially:
1. Clarification
2. Information giving/sharing
3. Deciding
4.Implementing.
Step 1. Clarification
Once an agency has decided on the need to address a particular problem ,
it is obviously important to first seek to clarify it and to understand
the negative impact it has on the agency . A question asking technique
is employed in this model using some or all of the following questions:
What is the problem? A clear statement of the problem is often quite difficult for the staff to agree upon but it is a necessary first step
What are the forces operating in the agency causing the problem?
What kind of a problem is it? Is it a policy or procedure problem? Is it a service delivery problem or is it an agency culture problem?
Who or what is adversely affected by the problem?
Who or what is benefiting from the problem? Surprisingly some problems that exist in an agency have certain payoffs for some persons or units.
What will the agency look like if the problem is not solved or reduced?
What action steps has the agency been using in the past to address this problem if any? Why have they not been working?
Once these questions have been answered hopefully leading to increased clarity of the problem the next step in the problem solving process is to find the right action steps to work on the problem.
Step 2. Information giving/sharing
This step utilizes a process which stimulates the meeting to generate of
a wide range of action ideas to solve the problem. The process referred
to as Brainstorming is now well known in organizations throughout the
country if not the world. It helps the meeting generate action ideas to
address the problem and has the additional advantage of creating an
atmosphere of creativity and spontaneity, which can contribute to an
increase of energy of the meeting. For Brainstorming to be effective
there are three basic rules which must be followed if it is to be
useful:
All of the action ideas expressed at the meeting are to be viewed as potentially useful and not to be evaluated – at this time
These action ideas are to be written on a flipchart or chalkboard making sure to use the same words of the person generating the idea
Have a timekeeper to keep track of the time allotted to this process and to announce when time is up – which suggests the meeting has run out of action ideas – it is ready for the next step
Step 3. Testing
This important step involves evaluating the feasibility of the action
ideas advanced in the Brainstorming step and selecting those, which are
most realistic and promising. Several techniques can be tried to test
their feasibility. They include:
role playing which can be an effective way to test an idea or suggestion.
using outside expertise i.e. research findings or a consultant familiar with the agency or the problem being worked on
establishing a devil’s advocate role to legitimize disagreement
Several obstacles to this step exist:
a lack of understanding or lack of experience with the problem being discussed may impede effective reality testing. Without understanding or experience, opinions may be given disguised as facts. This is especially problematic if these opinions are expressed by the more influential members of the agency
another obstacle is “Groupthink”. This phenomenon hinders effective problem solving by preventing members from challenging action ideas that are getting broad, enthusiastic support
Finally if there is no it may be necessary to appoint a working party to further study the problem and potential action steps and recommend well tested and thought out action steps.
Step 4. Implementing
In order to implement those action steps a comprehensive plan has to be
developed. These plans often consist of at least six subtasks:
identifying the wide range of tasks that need to be performed to implement the selected action steps
establishing a sequence for the performance of these tasks
assigning staff and management to perform these tasks
specifying times when these tasks are to be performed
identifying a process as to how and when the working parties can report their progress to each other
organizing a party to celebrate the completion of the tasks of the action plan
Conclusion
The CIDI problem solving model does require some training and practice
before it can be used easily and effectively. After some practice
sessions with it, problems with which the agency is struggling have a
good chance of being solved or at least reduced. New policies, programs
and procedures that emerge from such a process can lead to improved
service (and better meetings!)
