Your Answer:

1C. It's a fact of life — community building life, at least — that every group is responsible for the behavior of the group. A "do nothing" response lets down the group rather than designing a way for the group to constantly improve and be aware of strengths and weaknesses. An end of the meeting evaluation might be helpful with questions such as, "Was every voice heard in this work session?"

To view the other answers, scroll down:

1A. The consequences of this can be both good and bad. On the good side, it might work! It's always possible that the domineering talker never gets any good feed back and is genuinely unaware of the problem. On the other hand, dealing with the person in private can make the group feel that the facilitator really has no leadership role and the dominant member is just overrunning everyone since the entire group sees no facilitator response.

1B. Breaking into small groups — perhaps trios or pairs — might work to increase the participation of others and therefore create some balance. Trios are perhaps the best, since in a pair, the heavy talker can still be overbearing. Setting ground rules for small group work is vital. For example, you might direct trios to let each person have 3 minutes to answer a question, then report to the large group.