Is it necessary to interview each person before the session?

Interviewing each person before the session is not just a courtesy. It is the only real data collection step the facilitator can take before everyone sits in the same room and starts influencing each other. Skipping this step means you enter the session with very little information about what is really happening underneath.

Why sharing a room is not enough

When everyone is sitting together, two invisible forces continuously affect the situation. The first is the power differential: the higher-ranking person speaks first, and the others adjust their views accordingly. This phenomenon is often referred to in organizational research as HiPPO (Highest Paid Person's Opinion), and it overshadows genuine sharing even in teams that seem equal. The second is social pressure: no one wants to be the only one to raise their hand and express a contrary opinion in front of colleagues.

One-on-one interviews separate those two forces. People speak differently when their boss is not sitting next to them, and the facilitator receives information that is closer to reality to design the session.

Interviewing each person for about 15 to 30 minutes is the fastest way to gather scattered information across the team about vision, customers, operations, and past efforts.

Sprint, Jake Knapp / Google Ventures.

When should you interview each person thoroughly

There are four signs that indicate this step should not be shortened:

• Is there a clear disagreement among the parties, even if it hasn't been publicly stated?
• A significant power imbalance in the room, for example, a founder sitting alongside execution-level staff.
• Deciding that has been discussed multiple times but still stuck means there is something that hasn't been said directly.
• The results of the session will be implemented in reality, not just for reference.

According to the preparation guidelines from IAF (International Association of Facilitators), understanding the objectives and interviewing participants before designing the agenda is a foundational part of the preparation process, not optional.

When you can streamline

Not every session needs to interview everyone. It can be reduced to one or two short calls when:

• In a small meeting, one founder is the main decision-maker and there is no opposing party.
• Narrow scope, the questions to be addressed are clear and there is no history of disagreement.
• There are sufficient internal documents to read instead of conducting part of the interviews, such as strategic reports and recent meeting notes.

Even when streamlined, Sinh Vũ still maintains at least one call with the founder to check: what decisions need to be made, what the real constraints are, and who has differing perspectives that need to be considered.

Common errors in the interview stage

• Only ask the founder and assume the whole team thinks the same: founders often do not know how many things the team is holding back.
• Ask general questions instead of addressing real disagreements and constraints. A question like "What do you hope to achieve from this session?" is less useful than "What do you think has been overlooked in previous discussions?"
• Promise to keep confidential and quote verbatim during the meeting. If this is done once, no one will speak honestly next time.
• Combine interviews into a group meeting. This is a structural error: group meetings cannot replace one-on-one interviews because the exact issue to address is the dynamics (power interactions) within the group.

How Sinh Vũ operates in practice

In service S5, pre-event interviews are the first step in the preparation process, not optional. Sinh Vũ interviews the founder and a few key members to clarify three things: what the real decision needed is, what the hard constraints are, and where the disagreements lie. The results are summarized into a preparation document before designing the agenda.

This step often allows the facilitator to ask questions that participants may hesitate to ask each other directly. In multi-party workshops, this is where the quality of the entire day is most affected. Sinh Vũ does not guarantee specific outcomes as effectiveness also depends on each organization and the true openness of those in the room.