How to run a meeting like a Restorative Justice Talking Circle.

I posted earlier on emotional room, ending that post with reference to Interactive Meeting Format, and a link to Moving Beyond Icebreakers, where I learned this term.  The specific 6 part format they provide makes sense, but I modified it down to the four stages of Circle process, I know and love.

Not everyone is comfortable with Circle, so over time, I have found ways to engage bits without making people freak-out and shut down.  On the same hand, I’ve gotten quite confident at running a Circle, with skeptical people.  (imagine a circle of attorney’s!)

Running a meeting like a Circle,  I’ve promoted the interactive meeting format to include:

1.) an indication on the written agenda that ‘interactive meeting format’ will be used.  

2.)start and stop on time (promote respect that everyone is important and we respect everyone’s time equally).  I promoted this to a chronic late arrival, and he stopped coming to the meetings!

3.)comments specific to agenda items (you can include this in the written area, and by offering a place for people to add items on the agenda, giving them a space to share)

4.)a roll call/opening question (a question that everyone can answer, specific to the group’s purpose)

4.)meeting ranking at the end ( a simple 1 worse, 10 best and why)

Unlike a Circle, there is not explanation at the beginning, no talking piece, no values written on paperplates, no committment to those values, no open and close ritual.

YET – what I have found, is that the roll call question, can center people to speak one at a time.  It also reminds us of our meeting mission.  The SCVRJP board of directors uses this meeting format.  As a director, its been very informative, interesting and inspiring to hear from my board members.  I have gotten feedback about what they learned during our fundraiser, or what they think is the best offering of SCVRJP.  It has given them insights from each other.  Personally I think our group synergy, is in part to this meeting format.

The other really great thing that comes out of this process is the ranking of the meeting at the end.  It’s very simply going around the room and giving the meeting a score of 1-10.  I think it’s like a Circle, because its a ‘check-out’ round.  People explain their number briefly.  It starts to get the group to understand what people want and need from a meeting.  One time a lower ranking was offered, because the meeting got slightly off track.  The very next person gave it a higher ranking, because the meeting got slightly off track.  One person needs structure, the other loves the conversation that evolves.

A story emerged once, a person shared they had been in a different meeting that was a 3, the person running it fell asleep!  That gave us all a context of a ‘boring’ meeting!

I explain that  structure offers freedom.  In Circle by following this structure, it creates a freedom for people to really express themselves.  I think the interactive meeting format provides the same sort of structure, a structure around sharing, respect and equality.

I’ve implemented this in a few settings, multi-disciplinary teams coming together, and the SCVRJP board, where it is used consistently.  I no longer do the agenda’s for the other teams, so I’ve noticed the format is no longer used.  I definately think all the experience in Circle has given me some group facilitation skills.

At the end of Circle we take turns acknowledging each other, using the values in the Circle center.  I got “true” for being caring for every person, true to the Circle itself.  It made me smile.