Facilitator, Trainer,… or a bit of both?

I’ve recently completed certification with the International Association of Facilitators, and it reminded me of one of the biggest differences between training and facilitation: the absence of content and the importance of neutrality.

In true facilitation, my role is not to say “That’s great” or “I love that” because even small affirmations can subtly steer the group. Instead, facilitation is about holding the space, guiding the process, supporting group autonomy and staying neutral on content and opinion. It’s also about recognising the influence a facilitator holds simply by choosing who speaks first, or the inclusiveness of the environment that is created.

But here’s the thing: there’s no “right” or “wrong” role. What matters is being clear on what you need, and what will best serve your team and the task at hand:

● A trainer who brings content to teach and facilitates the learning process
● A facilitator who stays neutral on content but designs and guides the process
● Or a blend, a “trainalator” someone who facilitates but also draws on expertise to spark ideas, ask curious questions, and help shape thinking

I work across all three, training in project management, board governance and leadership; facilitating team retreats and even planning sessions in sectors outside my expertise; and as a trainalator – my happy place - supporting charities, not-for-profits and government organisations to develop strategic plans.

So, next time you engage someone—what do you need: facilitator, trainer, or trainalator?