Social dynamics such as peer pressure, social status, and group affiliation can significantly influence collaborative learning. This pressure may lead individuals to trust information provided by their peers even if it contradicts their own beliefs or knowledge. However, this can also lead to the exclusion of outsiders or dissenting viewpoints, hindering critical thinking and innovation in collaborative learning environments.
In what ways have you seen biases introduced by social dynamics affect the quality and diversity of learning outcomes in collaborative settings?
3 Likes
I was partnering with an executive coach to bring coaching techniques into small teams in a manufacturing environment that had been very “top-down” driven. The focus was to create a common language to support safety on the floor (there had been an incident…) and within a group was a senior lead who was very outspoken about the waste this effort was. In the breakout groups he was in, there was almost no conversations, no output, no participation and the share-out’s were his and his alone.
My colleague chose this person for an impromptu group demonstration and quietly modeled the techniques and behavior allowing the man to gesticulate wildly, raise his voice, and continue t be upset while modeling the process being shared to the teams. Eventually, the man became engaged rather than enraged and ultimately became a champion of the new safety protocol and processes.
It was a masterful example of challenging the social dynamics in an intentional manner to open up the framework in place and create new outcomes that led to a safer, and productive, workplace.
1 Like
It’s truly impressive how individuals can turn what might appear initially troubling into valuable learning opportunities. The workplace’s social dynamics play a pivotal role in determining whether these transformations happen. Mastering facilitation skills as a trainer can elevate such events into unforgettable learning moments.
3 Likes
Hi Catherine,
@Kettyjura ,
A fantastic topic !!! I can speak like Bill @WJRyan has to a professional experience. It was during a Safe Space training approximately seven years ago, where there were definitely points of view brought into focus, that many of us in attendance had not considered. With that said,
the training was purely voluntary and then eventually, unfortunately ended( due to lack of interest, funding or maybe other things I am probably unaware of). The idea of a Safe Space was new, and of interest to few- not the majority which lead to, I believe, unfortunate, but real lack of communication for collaborative learning opportunity missed by many. Seems like perhaps obvious biases might have been present, however, the group dynamic was very supportive outside of the group as well as during the sessions. The sessions rule of no discussion of what happened in each session was allowed outside of each session. So, it is difficult to know if there was any intentional disturbance directly affecting the quality and diversity of learning outcomes in my own community of practice environment. I didn’t experience any of it directly or indirectly.
1 Like
Thank you @Roxann. You have raised an important point about ground rules that guide our ways of being. Biases and alliances will often arise where interests vary. I believe that as facilitators, if we can anticipate relevant ground rules to create safe spaces, this would be key to addressing diverse interests during trainings particularly when touching on sensitive topics at the workplace.
2 Likes
Great point @Kettyjura. In my situation, one of the key behaviors being brought into the workplace was setting the shared, agreed upon ground rules centered on how to communicate with teammates in a safe environment. While our focus was to enable an increased application across operational production lines of employee safety, the result opened up broader conversations over time in respectful, safe, place.
2 Likes