Comments on: From the Road: The Importance of Propinquity

By: Roy Dust

Roy Dust — Mon, 12 Jul 2010 15:59:53 +0000

I agree that making the space available as interactive friendly as possible can make the difference between a great presentation and a poor one.
While in the service I gave many presentations the “Army way”, which was always an auditorium setting and with few exceptions I always left feeling my time was wasted and later follow up, to often proved me right.
It was a requirement for me to present a certain way and the attendees had to be their but, getting them to take part was normally discouraged. Another example of “Army Intelligence.

By: Pat Mc

Pat Mc — Wed, 07 Jul 2010 12:45:49 +0000

I frequently have opportunities at work to use the information in Crucial Conversations and Crucial Confrontations. I work with all women in a hospital and they have made great progress in mastering communication skills with the help of the information contained in both books. Now, I am reading Influencer and I plan to share that information with my managers.

By: Anne

Anne — Wed, 02 Jun 2010 19:32:12 +0000

Hi Steve: I have to admit I was drawn to read this due to the word! I knew I had seen it before but forgot what it meant. As a nurse, I have been involved in many continuing education courses, nursing classes, talked at the head of a class as a guest speaker and worked in small groups. I had never thought about this before today! You are absolutely right. We waste a lot of time breaking into discussion or practice groups when people “count off”. The value of that cannot be dismissed; as those who want to be together are likely to sit at the same group table. Not only do small groupings allow the speaker to roam and listen easier, ergonomically it makes more sense. Seems it would encourage more conversation and learning among individuals, even strangers. What a concept!

By: Trudy

Trudy — Wed, 02 Jun 2010 16:33:35 +0000

I agree with all your comments about space! I am often amazed at how seldom we trainers / facilitators discuss this together.
I would add that sheer numbers are a factor as well. If the topic is sensitive (as many important topics are), discussion is difficult to achieve in any configuration. Often, I mention my insights about spatial relationships and their effect on comfort zones, risk, etc., and clients seem resistant or disinterested, or (at worst) very attached to their current room configuration(s). Even among colleagues, I notice a default mode of classroom style or U-shaped set ups, or meetings with people seated at one narrow table, so that the only person easily visible to all is the person at the head of the table. This set-up reinforces authority and hierarchy. A circle reinforces equal sharing, often quiet and intimate, of a more emotional nature. A U-shape (set up more as an oval with an opening at one end, so that people can see one another easily) reinforces a common focus on analytic problem solving. A 3-person practice group, with one observer to provide feedback, combines new learning and creativity with the comfort of an intimate group.

By: Art Nolting

Art Nolting — Wed, 02 Jun 2010 14:06:54 +0000

My wife and I do consulting work of various sorts with a variety of churches. This is an excellent article about physical setting and space. However, I would like to add that establishing audio/visual needs, i.e., computers, projectors, WiFi, etc. is also very important. No two churches are the same in that regard so you need to establish what will be available and, consequently, what you need to bring. Early setup is also very important to work out the “bugs”, which are inevitably there.