September 28 & 29, 2020 | Virtual
Please login or join to subscribe to this thread
It's pretty difficult to do this as a participant and not the facilitator. One of the best ways to avoid this is for the facilitator to help the group develop ground rules for the meeting.
One idea might be to explicitly support the facilitator in regaining control: "Folks, I think we've already gone over this and made some good decisions so why don't we close this out?"
As Kiron pointed out, it is sort of difficult if you are not the facilitator.
Facilitating a session requires soft skills that enable the facilitator to keep control by reacting to different types of stakeholders. You cannot just shut down all participant in the same way and letting one know that they've said enough, for now, will be different. If you are a skilled facilitator then even as a participant you could apply the appropriate technique/s. There is a host of information on the web so I won't cut and paste ;)
There are times when it is justified to overrun but then the facilitator should create a breakout session so that those not interested/impacted can get on with their lives. If you are one of those I would interrupt and asked to be excused if you feel that you cannot add or receive any value from the discussion. You will be amazed at how many others in the room will then do the same. Those who have an interest in the discussion and then continue at their leisure. Again it is up to the facilitator to decide whether this is OK as an informal discussion or extended/new formal meeting.
If the facilitator isn't doing his or her job, you might have to step in as the facilitator in self-defense - either that, or suffer through perhaps hours of a painfully meaningless meeting. Depending on the facilitator's weakness you might only need a quick interjection as per Kiron's example, or you might have to assume control of the meeting. It's not preferable, but the alternative is worse.
Please login or join to reply