The LSP method is defined as a “thinking, communication and problem-solving technique for real groups with real problems in real time.”
At the annual Global Community Meeting in Denmark, October 5 – 6 facilitators from around the world shared and discussed their experiences and exploration of facilitating the process online and still maintain the authenticity of the method.
The measuring stick for success or failure is not whether or not you can do something online that LOOKS like LSP to someone not familiar with LSP. Neither can online facilitation in itself be justified as a way of generating revenue as long as f2f delivery is not possible, because of covid restrictions.
The essential questions comes down to: “In which cases/context can we remotely and online facilitate an experience that is authentic LSP and provides real value to the customer.
LESSONS LEARNED
Context A:
You are remotely facilitating a group that are already trained in and comfortable with using LSP to help them think, communicate and problem-solve the group’s challenges.
In this situation it is possible to deliver authentic LSP and real value through online facilitation. It requires significant preparation, commitment and discipline on both sides. The shorter the workshop and the less complex a goal the better chances for success.
Context B:
You are remotely facilitating a group that has no prior experience with the LSP method.
In this scenario the first lesson learned is that you can deliver authentic LSP and real value as long as the size of the group you are facilitating is limited to ONE participant.
The second lesson learned is that you can use the online approach as a way to market LSP in that you can give the participants an experience of the power of LSP as thinking and communication technique. The lesson learned is that we in these situation can’t deliver authentic LSP. We can help them imagine the real power in a f2f delivery.
Participant in the Global meeting in Billund, Denmark
Per and Robert
Online LSP seems to be a popular topic of discussion at the moment. I would be really interested to understand why, in your opinion, for Context B, numbers should be limited to one participant? I would also be interested to understand how you define ‘authentic LSP?’ Thanks
With authentic LSP is meant when the experience for the participants and the facilitation of that experience is consistent with both the words and spirit of the LEGO SERIOUS Play etiquette, formulated in the early days of development the method (at the time we were organised as Executive Discovery owned by LEGO).
Based on experience it is not possible to respect this commitment, if you have groups with more than one participant in each remote location
Thank you for your reply.
So am I right in thinking that this sense of ‘authenticity’ that you write of, in the way you have defined it (ie. consistency with both words and spirit, only one person etc), only applies with respect to the LEGO Serious Play approach as practised by the AoMT (ie. the approach that came out of Executive Discovery)?
No, my impression is that there are a number of entities, who deliver LSP following the etiquette from ED. Naturally we believe we do, but it is my impression that a number of other companies and organisations do as well.
So those companies which adhere to ED etiquette (is that the seven applications?), you are saying that this would be the authentic approach to LSP. Does that mean, those companies which have adopted, I guess what we know as the ‘open source’ approach (five applications), are practising something that is less authentic or not authentic, in the way that you have defined ‘authentic LSP’?
The value/result of a LSP workshop is closely tied to the quality of the facilitation. The LSP etiquette outlines the behaviour and code of conduct for the facilitator and the participants in a LSP workshop and the values/beliefs this behaviour and code of conduct are grounded in.
When there is synergy between these elements and the technique itself the method is authentic, at its best and will deliver high value thinking, communication and problem-solving. If you have facilitated face-2-face workshops for real groups with real challenges in real time, you will know what we are talking about. Based on experience taking this full scale on-line in context B merely becomes a surrogate that delivers very limited output value for the participants.
The etiquette was created by the team at Executive Discovery when we developed LSP 20 years ago. It was included in the original facilitator manuals and inspired parts for the open source document. The seven AT’s are something we developed in the Association of Master Trainers many years later, so a totally different thing, but consistent with the etiquette.
Thank you for clearing that up, very helpful. And thank you for carrying on the conversation with me, that is very kind of you.
I understand completely what you are saying when all the elements come together synergistically. What I’m wondering, however, is whether applying the ‘etiquette’ of ‘face to face’ LSP to its online counterpart, immediately places online at an unfair disadvantage, and we should instead be trying to explore what online LSP etiquette might be in its own right, and on its own terms? To say that you can only do context B with one person seems to be judging an apple with a pear, rather than trying to judge an apple against an apple. Online and ‘face to face’ are different, so one would imagine different criteria are needed for each.
Perhaps you can also help clarify for me the seven ATs. I was under the impression this was open source rather than belonging to the AoMT?
The modular workshop design system with the Seven AT’s and the four step Core Process are part of the development by the AoMT. They were first published in our facilitator manual and later in the book by Per Kristiansen and myself. I started the development of these after I left ED and began working on my own with LSP. When Per and I formed the Association, the AT’ s system was transferred to the Association. What LEGO made open source is what is described in the open source document.
Hi Robert, just to let you know that you’ve answered part of my last question, but you have not actually published the question itself. Thanks
hi Guy, I am to blame for that. I had approved your comments, I think a couple of days ago, but while cleaning out SPAM comments, I must somehow have “un-approaved it”. It is up now
Per
No problem at all, no need for any sense of blame. It’s great to have the opportunity to engage.
I’ve got two questions for you/Robert if I may, not sure where/how to post it, but it’s been something I’ve wondered about for awhile:
1) In the Skills Build, why a tower? Is there a significance to the tower of any other object?
2) The different LSP kits, what was the thinking behind the kits, as in were the bricks specifically chosen for each kit? Or was it just a representative selection of different bricks for the different sets to enable different types of stimulation to take place in someone’s thinking?
Thanks, guy
1) The tower is our only recommendation as first exercise. It has been that way for the past 7 – 8 years. It requires no prior LEGO constructions skills, so everyone will have a success – also if you are an experienced LEGO builder. Based on our experience it is by far the safest, quickest, easist and most robust way of driving home the learning points, which are essential when you start a workshop
2) The bricks were initially specifically chosen for each kit, partly based on some learning and development research, but predominatntly through a trial and error process. The first kits were literally made in Robert’s kitchen when he lived in the US. Once the content was found, only minor updates have been made, partly when a piece went out of production, partly based on the increased understanding of the dynamics in a workshop. The topic is also addressed in your facilitator manual chapter 3
Thanks, Per