So we can do a good job composing the group, have a good representation of diverse information available. But we're only going to make a good decision if those group members share their unique information and perspectives. So, think about the fact that sometimes in groups, let's take a group of size six. If you have a group of size six, most likely if they are discussing a problem, there are probably two people who are going to want to talk all the time. There's probably another two people who want to talk occasionally. And then there's probably two people who are simply going to watch the other four people talk. These two people who simply watch are what are known as spectators. And spectators spell the death of high-quality decision making because a spectator is someone who is not sharing their information with the group and that creates another source of process loss. A group's decisions can not benefit, they can't be more informed by the information perspectives that are not shared with the group. Now, what are the sources of participation problems? Turns out we know a lot about where participation problems come from because, of course, people like me spend our time teaching very large courses. My typical MBA classes that are face to face have about 60 students in them, and that creates a lot of participation problems. We know that participation problems are definitely driven by group size, the larger the group, the more diversity of information available, but also air time is at a premium. It's hard to get a word in edgewise when there are a lot of other people fighting for a chance to speak. We also know that people learn or actually get comfortable spectating. Particularly in a classroom setting, I know that if people don't talk at the beginning of a course, often they become very comfortable not talking, and it's hard to get them to participate later on. And we also know that some people and some cultures are naturally less participative, and that culture word there both refers to culture in the sense of big C that is cultures of countries, but also cultures of companies. Some companies actually create cultures where it's very common for people to not participate. Good example of this is when I used to teach in Thailand during the summer. I would go over to University and teach for about a month during the summer after the school year here had ended. The first time I did that I was a little unprepared for the culture of Thailand in terms of what goes on in their classrooms. So I arrived on the scene the first day and I knew I was going to be teaching two hours a day, four days a week for about a month. And the first day I was there I ran out of material to talk about 30 minutes into my class, and the reason I ran out is I could not get anybody to participate. I would actually point to people and say what do you think about this and people would just shake their heads at me. And this was a little perplexing for me so that at the end of the 30 minutes when I run out of material for today, I said well, I guess we'll just call this a short class today. And I started gathering up my materials to go back to my apartment and decide what I was going to do to solve this participation problem. When I turned around and noticed there was a line of about 20 students who all had questions and comments they wanted to talk to me about. So, I waited in and answered all of these comments and questions. And when I got to the last student, I said, listen, I know you have a question you want to ask me. But before you ask me your question, I have a question for you. All of these questions and comments from your classmates would have really enriched our classroom discussion. Why didn't anybody say any of this during the class? He said, let me explain. In our culture it's considered an insult to ask questions during class. So no one's going to ask during class because we don't want you to be embarrassed or lose face or anything. I thought about that for a minute, I said, okay fine. I answered his question and went back to my apartment, I came back the next day with two things. First thing I came back with was an announcement for the class. My announcement was that in my culture it's considered an insult not to ask questions during class. It suggests that you are not interested in the material or not paying attention and I will be very embarrassed if none of you ask questions during class. The second thing that I provided was a small piece of paper. It was about a two inch piece of paper that was bright red and passed it out to everyone in the class. And I said to pass this course you have to return this piece of paper to me. So write your name on it, and when you are ready to make your first contribution to our classroom discussion, raise your hand with your piece of paper in it. That will signal to me that you are making your first contribution. And I will give you priority over anyone else who is trying to participate. Once you have participated I will collect your participation card and you will have fulfilled your obligation to the class. One of the things that I learned from that experience is how important it is to structure interaction in groups to ensure that everyone gets involved and participates in the discussion. So, how do we overcome participation problems? Well, one structural advantage we can use is the idea of breaking into smaller groups. So if we have a large group, we can break into smaller groups, what I call buzz groups. A buzz group might be two or three people. And if you take a class, like a 60 student class and break it into 20 groups of three and give everybody maybe five or ten minutes to buzz a little bit about the question. Then you can bring the group back together. And everybody can talk about what they discussed in their smaller groups. Now, notice this gives us two immediate advantage. The first advantage is that it multiplies the amount of air time available rather dramatically, because now instead of fighting with 59 other people for air time, you're only fighting with two other people for air time. But the other advantage is that in a large group of 60 students in a classroom, nobody's going to notice if two or three people never talk in the class. But if you're in a group of only three people, somebody's going to notice if you're not talking and they'll be able to re-engage you in the discussion. Another thing we can do to overcome participation problems is to start meetings by getting everyone talking. Even something as simple as just introducing yourself or saying why you're at the meeting gets people talking. And one of the things that we've found is that once you get people talking they will continue talking because in participation the biggest difference is between zero and one. When people don't talk they get used to not talking, they learn to spectate, the group loses their information. So if if you can get people talking at the beginning, it's easier to keep them talking. And finally, the last thing we can do to overcome participation problems is to be vigilant about spectators. I always tell people that you don't have to be the leader to be a leader in a group, and this is a great example. If you notice someone is not engaged, maybe you want to say something to them. Maybe you want to say gee, you're not saying anything, are you okay with where the discussion is going. What can we do to get your thoughts incorporated into this. So being a good leader often means identifying spectators and re-engaging them in the discussion. Here at the University of Illinois we have very international classes. And one of the things that we find is that some students are a little reluctant to get involved in the classroom discussions because they're a little unsure of their language skills. They may feel uncomfortable about their ability to speak English and it may be that by the time they figure out what the question is or what their answer should be, the discussion has already moved on. It's very important in those situations to create a little structure that helps them feel a little more comfortable and gives them a chance to get their unique information, their unique perspectives, and experience and expertise into the discussion. One of the things that I found very useful to do is I'll often go talk to those students and say, listen you don't seem to be participating. Are you uncomfortable participating? Is there something that's stopping you? And occasionally what I'll do is try to set up a way for them to have a better chance than other students to get involved. At least for the first time, because of course once people start talking they're going to keep talking. So what I've done with a number of our international students is I'll go to them and say, listen, if you're concerned about your language skills, if you're concerned that the speed of the class is stopping you from having an opportunity to participate. I will tell you what the first question I'm going to ask next week is and I'll give you a week to think about it and I'll make sure to call on you first. That gives them time to plan their response to the question. It gives them time to feel a little more comfortable and to get prepared, so they're more likely to get involved in the discussion. And once again, getting people involved in the discussion makes it more likely that they will stay involved in the discussion, and that the group will get the opportunity to take advantage of the unique information that they have to provide.
