Workshop 3: Conducting the Invisible

Duration: 4 hours
Participants: 10–15 students
Format: In-person or hybrid
Ideal for: advanced students, those aspiring to research leadership roles, or professionals looking to refine their soft skills in research.

Materials:

  • Printed fictional brief (see below)
  • Role cards with secret motives
  • Colored pens and uniquely shaped sticky notes
  • A physical baton (or simple object used as symbolic baton)
  • Audio system for ambient sound and silence cues
  • Collective whiteboard or Miro/FigJam board
  • Handout: “Invisible but Essential” reflection sheet

Learning Goals

By the end of this workshop, students will:

  1. Recognise the invisible dimensions of research leadership.
  2. Learn to manage ambiguity and tension without defaulting to formal method.
  3. Understand their role in conducting emotional, cognitive, and team alignment across a research initiative.
  4. Develop awareness of presence, silence, and timing in how insights emerge.
  5. Practice non-verbal planning and misinterpretation as part of the research process.

Before the Workshop

Pre-Workshop Spark Email (sent 48–72 hours before):
Subject: “Have you ever led something no one noticed?”
Body: This session is not about research methods.
It’s about what happens before methods — and what stays after them.
Invisible alignment. Tension in the room. The silence before a project starts.
We’ll explore research leadership not as control, but as presence.
Optional: Watch this 45-second clip from Fellini’s Prova d’Orchestra. (link)
Bring a moment from your past where you were essential — but unseen.

Structure & Facilitation Plan

PART 1 — Opening the Score (30 min)

  • Greet students with ambient rehearsal room sounds playing quietly.
  • Display a still from Prova d’Orchestra — musicians looking away from the conductor mid-chaos.

 

Facilitator Says:
“What happens when you’re holding the structure — and no one’s following?
That’s the role we’ll explore today. You are the conductor — not of music, but of tension, tempo, alignment.
You don’t always get credit. But the team falls apart without you.”

Optional Video Prompt: 60-second clip from Prova d’Orchestra — conductor trying to gain control of a fragmented group.

Personal Share by Facilitator: “In my second job, I spent days mediating team tensions after a messy workshop. I documented everything, aligned perspectives… and no one saw that work. But it saved the project.”

Student Prompt: Write down: “When was I invisible but essential?” (Use shaped sticky notes.)
Stick to a shared board (digital or wall). Don’t comment yet.

PART 2 – Brief With Gaps (45 min)

Distribute fictional brief (printed or projected):

Fictional Research Brief: “Productivity Assistant”
A team is developing a productivity app that summarizes meetings from Slack, email, and calendars.
They want to “validate the problem” with research — in 10 days, £3K budget.
The designer is confident in the prototype. PM has promised Q2 release.
No user research has been conducted. You’re now on board.

Group Task (small teams):

  • Identify gaps, contradictions, pressures.
  • Redefine the real research need.
  • Choose a metaphor for your role: Conductor? Librarian? Mediator? Cartographer?

 

Cross-Pollination Step:
After 15 minutes, share one surprising gap your group found with another group. What did they miss?

Explicit Link to Learning Goal:
“This activity helps you recognize ambiguity and tension — and how research leadership begins with sensing what’s unsaid.”

PART 3 – Silent Planning Round (30 min)

Instructions:

  • Each student plans a research approach in silence — no talking.
  • Use distinct pen colors for each person.
  • Sketch, annotate, diagram.
  • After 15 mins, pass it to a partner who interprets it aloud to the group.

Facilitator Cue: “You’re interpreting another person’s tempo, not their blueprint. Where do you see doubt? Where is the rhythm of inquiry?”
Feedback Layer:

  • Planner listens as interpreter explains.
  • Then clarifies — “What you missed is…”

Debrief (What → So What → Now What):

  • What did you notice in silent planning?
  • So what: How did ambiguity force you to listen differently?
  • Now what: How will you plan more visibly in future, or be clearer in ambiguity?

PART 4 – Live Alignment Simulation (45 min)

Role Play Setup:

  • Assign roles: researcher, PM, designer, product lead.
  • Whisper hidden motives:
    • PM: “Make it look good to leadership. Time matters more than truth.”
    • Designer: “Protect your current design. Don’t want big changes.”
    • Product lead: “Believe this is already validated. You want reinforcement.”

Simulation Begins:
Researcher must guide a 10-minute scoping meeting.

Facilitator Rules:

  • Don’t rescue.
  • Let silence sit.
  • If it stalls, gently ask:
    • “Researcher, what are you sensing here?”
    • “Whose voice is not being heard?”
    • “What tension do you feel in the room?”

Surprise Turn:
At minute 8, pause simulation. Ask:
“If you could say one sentence now that would realign the room, what would it be?”

Debrief:

  • What did you hold?
  • What couldn’t you say?
  • When did the room shift?

PART 5 – The Baton and the Invisible Gesture (30 min)

Facilitator holds the baton. “This is not about control. It’s about presence. This baton doesn’t command. It invites coherence.”
Each student passes it and shares: “The moment I led without being seen was…”
Link to Learning Goal: “Today you practiced conducting across silence, tension, and competing agendas — without imposing. That’s invisible leadership.”

PART 6 – Reflection & Future Letter (30 min)

Instructions:

  • Write a letter to your future self in research.
  • Use this structure:
  • I used to think leadership was…
  • Now I see that alignment also means…
  • One invisible gesture I’ll carry forward is…

Optional Share: 1 line read aloud.

Final Output:
Collect all letters or phrases into a visual display titled: “Invisible but Essential”

Evaluation Framework

Evaluation Criterion: Invisible Facilitation Skills

  • Description: Demonstrates ability to influence team alignment through listening, reframing, and non-directive questioning.
  • Assessment Method: Facilitator observation using a checklist during simulation (e.g., use of open-ended prompts, withholding dominance, creating space for resolution).

 

Evaluation Criterion: Role Awareness and Empathy

  • Description: Identifies and responds to conflicting team needs without defaulting to hierarchy; demonstrates ability to hold multiple perspectives.
  • Assessment Method: Assessed during group debrief and individual reflection: students must name one moment of tension and how they responded or could have.

 

Evaluation Criterion: Reflective Application

  • Description: Synthesises workshop experience into future-oriented personal insight; articulates how invisible leadership might apply in real-world contexts.
  • Assessment Method: Evaluated through the Letter to Future Self, scored on relevance, depth, and ability to generalize the insight beyond the exercise.