leading a workshop help

iexist, I think we need a bit more to go on.

Any chance you could give folks a rough outline or what you want to cover in those wider topics? Also, what format are you thinking? Powerpoint? Smaller discussion groups? Short readings?

With some information like that, I think it might be easier for folks to help out with ideas.

Good luck in any case!

I would suggest you acting in a facilitating role that moves discussion along as well as simple participant. For best results, encourage a "round the circle" format of discussion so everyone can participate, take a moment to set up the discussion, add your bit then pass the torch. Set a rant-time-limit for all, including yourself. You must police this for yourself and others. When the discussion gets back to you, move it forward with new questions and your two cents, pass the torch. Bring notes but be prepared to off-the-cuff

My approach would be (may not work for you):

Prep (before the day):
Get post-its and pens and a flipchart or large pieces of paper.
Create a blank timetable on a large piece of paper which breaks the time available for your discussion into 10 (or whatever seems appropriate for the time available) equal chunks.
Draw some concentric circles on a big piece of paper.

Stage 1. Agreeing what to discuss- creating an agenda as a group. (try to speed through this stage, it's just to give you a vague structure for the discussion and gauge what the group want to talk about):

1.1 Ask everyone to write 2 or 3 topics they would like to discuss which relate to the theme/ questions you have chosen. Each person writes their topics/ titles/ ideas on a post-it. Ask people for additional contributions until you have an appropriate number titles/ topics- aim for a few more topics than you have time to discuss.

1.2 Ask people to decide as a group which topics/ titles to discuss and stick each of the chosen topics into a specific time slot (on the pre-prepared time table).

To complete 1.2 above- there are various ways of voting for topics to include on the timetable. My favoured method was to have all the topics stuck to a piece of paper with some concentric circles (10 seems like a good number). At first all topics are stuck in the outermost circle. Each participant could move any topic they 'voted' for (ie deemed of interest) one ring closer to the centre. The topics which end up closest to the centre (ie recieved the most votes) would be placed on the board (in an order which seems logical- if one topic can flow into the next so much the better). You can also amalgamate topics which seem very closely related at this stage. If you think everyone will move every topic, they'll all end up in the same circle and the vote is pointless. So you may want to limit it (say each person can vote for 2 topics each of which they can move by 1 circle). You should 'park' the topics which aren't selected and say something conciliatory, 'I think this one would be interesting, it's a shame we don't have time to discuss them all!' so people whose idea wasn't selected don't feel left out.

Stage 2. The meat of the discussion:
Use the timetable which is now filled with the 10 (or whatever number you allocated in the timetable) topics that recieved the most votes as a guide. You discuss each topic/ title in turn trying to keep the group vaguely to the time slots to ensure that each of the topics/ideas the group wants to cover are given a fair airing. Keep checking how long each topic gets discussed for- the time table is only a guide so you don't have to stick to it religiously- but you can say 'if we spend much longer on x, we won't have time to talk about y'- easier than saying 'shut up, you're talking too much!' Also maybe people will say, sod y, lets drop that from the agenda and talk more about x (thats fine, especially if the group mainly agrees on which topics are the most important). As the discussion develops, you can take notes under the heading for each topic on a large piece of paper. You can also say to people that they should check what you write and can add their own notes if you miss a key point. They can write on post its and stick these to the paper you're working from (so burden of recording the discussion is not all on you, and it means if people can't get a word in they can write their thoughts instead).

Summary:
Make sure you leave a bit of time at the end to try to read back the 'key points' from the notes and attempt to join up the topics and summarise the discussion. This is your opportunity to bend what they said into supporting your commie indoctrination. The notes you took on the big paper will help this (hopefully).

...................................
This may seem overly complicated, because it is. I wouldn't expect too much from a discussion like this, I used to do 'workshop' facilitation regularly in a previous job and never really seemed to come away from 'successful' discussions with any tangible benefits! The main thing is to avoid ranting yourself and make people feel like their contribution is valued (not let anyone dominate or others feel shut-out) that is why I found systems like this useful- they achieve bugger all except a more genial and ordered discussion in my experience with some semblance of direct democracy and less burden on the facilitator to be in control of what is discussed (you are facilitating their discussion not forcing them to listen to you or stick to your idea of what is relevant to the theme which you chose). I understand if you want to ignore this advice- its much easier to demonstrate how this helps in action rather than trying to explain it and it can be adapted/ abandoned/ used quite fluidly. Its good to go with the flow sometimes too and if you want to actually lead the direction of the discussion yourself more directly you might be disappointed with the topics they select. I would actually say this approach of getting the group to agree the agenda before the discussion starts takes some pressure off you as facilitator because if discussion degenerates into irrelevant bollocks at least they sort of decided for themselves that was what they wanted to talk about. Good luck! Let us know how it goes.

Let me know if any of this is not clear and if you want me to try to explain it better (I am posting drunk again and am not clear at the best of times!).

Sock is great as a verb.

iexist, what's the total time frame we're talking about here?

So, while I think Wotsit's advice above is really good, in my experience, if attendees aren't versed in these sort of events, that sort of procedure - no matter how democratic - can feel a bit daunting.

Personally, I think it's okay for you take the lead on driving topics and conversation. If people are new to this kind of thing, they're going to expect you to anyway. Of course, a quick "Is there any topics in particular anyone wants to discuss?" at the beginning is probably a good idea, too.

As for facilitation/chairing, you know how to build a contribution 'stack'? It's also might be a good idea, to come up with a hand gesture for a direct response. I personally like two hands up for a direct response (but I wouldn't go any further than that with hand gestures - no f*cking agreement jazz fingers, that sh*t's not allowed, iexist). In any case, don't let people abuse it.

Other than that, you seem to already be aware of the big rule of running a meeting: being aware of your own talking.

Equally, however, it's also important to not be afraid to deal with ramblers. Obviously, it's a fine line to walk - you want to people to feel they can express themselves - but you don't want anyone to dominate a conversation. Perhaps, before the meeting, practice some 'moving the conversation on' techniques that you feel comfortable with.

The flip side of this is, as a topic of conversation is winding down, to make sure you invite any final contributions as to open the way for people to chime in who might not have spoken up yet.

Oh, and build in some breaks - probably five minutes or so after you finish a given topic.

I'd definitely be keen to see your 'talk plan thingy' once it's ready if you feel like sharing...

Yeah I would actually agree that in this instance it might be better to go with your original ideas finessed with Chilli's advice and what Boze said was sensible n'all.

Actually, iexist fwiw, from re-reading your posts I think you will do just fine, your questions are nice and open and also clearly will provoke (probably some awful and some good) opinions to be shared and you seem to be aware of many potential pitfalls already.

I used 'participatory' or 'open space' stuff (which is what my suggestion was based on) quite successfully, and found it much less pressure than facilitating huge discussions, but that was generally in much bigger groups of people where you had lots of separate issues (which not all people were keen on talking about at length) and 'break out' meetings to timetable and lots of topics up for discussion (which people could ignore or participate in drop-in drop-out as we had lots of rooms and an emphasis on self-facilitating groups).

I think I was probably suggesting the wrong tool for the job in this case so hope you didn't spend too long trying to digest my ramblings there!

yeah, you got this sussed imo, hope it goes well! (edit: oops, I downed your post- meant to up it!)

yeah on the right hand side of the post 'box' it has 'up, down, spam, quote, reply' buttons. I clicked wrong one cuz up and down are upside down (down is up and up is down).

sussed is basically 'figured out well'.

Wait, what's a con?

con
Bloody or Damn Stupid in french =
c'est con!!

It's damn stupid!!

when is this happening iexist? are you planning to write about how it goes?

Aha! Do I spy something you may want to try differently this year per chance? Could get the party started..?

Nah, that's weird, man.

Good luck!