Are they Speakers, Trainers or Facilitators?

The use of the words “Speaker”, “Trainer” and “Facilitator” have been used intermittently as though they are all doing the same sort of thing. In reality each of these are skills in their own right. To group them all together would be like mixing up singers, actors and dancers and viewing them as performers. They are all performers but each has a skill that is honed and crafted. To assume that one would be able to do the same as the other, would be ridiculous and show no respect for any of the professions. Not being able to differentiate the skills and value the differences, only causes additional issues at a time when there is a call for meetings, conferences and events to show a Return on Investment (ROI).

As the concept of a ‘Meeting Architect’* starts to make sense and take hold, all contributors to the industry need to re-evaluate their role and the contribution they make, not only to the aims and objectives of the meeting, event or conference, but also how they collaborate with all the other contributors. These important players will need to re-evaluate their perception of themselves and of their fellow contributors in the future.

Let us identify the differences.

Training sessions are meant to take someone through a process of being able to learn and then apply the knowledge. It’s about helping someone develop the skill and the competence to do something. Training almost certainly will include interaction between the presenter and the delegate. It will probably require exercises and training can be over a prolonged period of time. In other words, it can take a day, two days, five days or more.

The Trainer has the skill to deliver a training session in a way that involves the participants and will often help them explore their learning, rather than tell them. The Trainer will pose questions to encourage the discussion and then do exercises that will allow people to discover and even practice their learning. The skills of a Trainer can be aligned to those of a coach, as training is often a voyage of discovery. The Trainer knows the outcome and will steer the sessions to achieve the outcome over the given period of time.

A workshop tends to be shorter and is normally no more than a day. A workshop tends to focus on a specific subject or an aspect that a group of people want to explore or discuss. Some workshops could be referred to as a short training session. However, the workshop can also be used as an opportunity to bring thinking together or what some people call brainstorming. In these cases the person running it will be more of a Facilitator than a trainer.

The Facilitator will typically either have specialist knowledge, or the ability to facilitate discussion between people that do have the knowledge, or both. A workshop may bring in a person with expertise knowledge to set the scene for the discussion that follows. This person may well present or at least en-capture the situation, highlight the issues and then articulate the desired outcomes. A Facilitator will then draw out any discussion and debate.

Finally we have the Speaker. A Speaker is typically speaking for 30 minutes, 40 minutes or sixty minutes. There are occasions when a Speaker can go longer but because their role is different, time is imperative. The main skill of a Speaker is their ability to impart information in as few words as possible whilst being meaningful. A Speaker has little or no opportunity for interaction and so their skill is to engage the audience and often give them something meaningful that they can make use of.

Of course there are different types of speakers. At one end of the spectrum a Speaker can simply be an entertainer there to amuse, amaze or in some cases inspire the audience. This speaker is closer to an entertainer and in this case the Speaker is not there to impart knowledge or create a desired outcome towards an objective. In this situation, the Speaker raises spirits and relaxes people or makes them feel good.



At the other end of the spectrum, a Speaker is able to impart information of value or interest, in as short a time as possible. The key here is that the Speaker has ‘content’ to deliver and can put the points over in a meaningful manner that the audience can grasp and use. The Speaker can still do this in an entertaining or humorous manner but the essence of the presentation is to add value, provide information, challenge thinking and give them something they can take away and apply to their lives.


Difference between Training and Facilitation:

Training is the development of people to do something. It has a desired outcome and the Trainer has the skills to steer the participants in a direction so that they can do the required outcome. For example, as a result of the training I have the knowledge and a level of ability to do something different. I will now practice what I have learnt and be able to perform accordingly.

Facilitation is the ability to create discussion and draw out people’s thinking. It is to exchange ideas and thoughts in a structured manner. The outcome will not be the participants capable of doing something in particular, but rather that there is peer learning, clarity, consensus and possibly a direction set. For example, as a result of a workshop I understand a different point of view, realize what further skills I need to develop or I understand how I need to adjust my current approach to take into consideration other people’s situations.

Difference between Facilitation and Speaking:

Facilitation allows and even encourages discussion and draws out the thinking of the group with none or little input from the person carrying out the Facilitating. The Facilitator keeps the discussion moving, ensures lively interaction, stimulates the discussion, keeps it focused and draws it to a logical conclusion. The
Facilitator will summarize the outcome and what steps need to be taken as a result of the workshop. People will walk away knowing what should be done as a result. For example, the workshop highlighted the weaknesses in our approach and we now know we need to gather more information to proceed or amend our plan. As a result, we will pull together the new research and meet again to discuss it. In the meantime, I will adjust my approach in the light of what has come out of the workshop.

Speaking shakes up people’s thinking, challenges them to think differently and imparts some knowledge or a perspective that encourages people to consider new options, new approaches or alternative ways of doing things. There may be no specific conclusions but the delegate attending will have understood enough to go away and be able to approach things differently. For example, I realize we have been stuck in a rut and need to approach things differently in the future. I need to tackle certain issues in particular and then implement a measurable system similar to what was described by the speaker.

In some cases, the Speaker is simply entertaining and inspiring. The take-away value is less about the ‘content’ and more about feeling positive or happy. For example, if he can overcome those sorts of obstacles in life, then I should be able to do a lot better at approaching what I see as problems. Look at how he persevered and kept focused through everything that happened, maybe I am allowing myself to become too distracted and easily intimidated by what is happening around me.


All three of these people can and should add value to any meeting, conference or event. Whether it is a short training session, a facilitated discussion or imparting knowledge and challenging thoughts, the three skills bring added value. The key is the ability of the Trainer, Facilitator or Speaker to be able to do two things.

Firstly, to be a professional and hone their skills to be able to deliver to the best of their ability. Each one of them has a different skill that needs to be crafted and developed so that they can deliver at the highest possible level.

Secondly, to be professional enough to set aside their ego and be able to focus on the outcomes desired by the customer AND work with others to achieve this outcome. For example, a Speaker may challenge the thinking of the delegates and then the facilitator may run a workshop to brainstorm ideas that came out of the speech and the other workshops (small training sessions) may show people how to do things differently.

This joined up approach requires Speakers, Facilitators and Trainers to respect each other’s strengths and differences. All three should appreciate each other’s skills and the differences between the skills. Some individuals will make good Speakers and not good Trainers or Facilitators whilst a good Trainer will not automatically have the skills to be a good Speaker or Facilitator.

Having respected each other’s contributions and the value they can offer, then they need to be able to work together to make a meeting or conference a great success. Not only working together between the three of them but also with all the other players that come together to deliver an end result – the objectives of the meeting, event or conference.

The Meeting Architect is likely to re-invent this industry, make it more professional and bring a higher level of results. It will make the industry more professional and will make ROI the norm and not a burden. Most of all it has the potential to make this industry, including speakers, trainers and facilitators, work together in a way it never has before. The time is right and the demand is there, but can the players work together to make it happen? A good start is to use the same language and then appreciate and value the differences and contribution everyone makes.

Paul Bridle
www.paulbridle.com
Paul is speaking at MPI Europe and Middle East Conference in Torino, Italy, March 1 to 3, 2009

*See Meeting Architecture a manifesto by Maarten Vanneste