Bubbles

9/8/2016

We never really work with ‘just an individual’ because human beings always exist within systems of relationship. (Malcolm Parlett)

You’re not alone. Neither are your colleagues or clients. OK, you may be alone in a room together (if I can use ‘alone’ and ‘together’ in the same breath like this) for a meeting, a training workshop, a catch-up, a coaching conversation. As you focus intently on the other person or group – their goals, interests, ideas, concerns etc. – it can be as if the wider world and its noisy distractions fade out of existence, at least for a moment. There is just you…and me…and us. Our space.

It is a kind of sacred space and it can feel – spiritual. It has a person-centred quality about it. We may conceive of what we bring as the gift of our presence, attention and expertise. It can be immensely affirming for the other and it ensures they feel seen, heard, valued and understood. It can feel like offering…love. But far be it from us to use the L word in a corporate context! So we will sanitise it for now with culturally-safer words like empathy and respect. Still with me?

Now a sting in the tail. There are some important risks here. In our heartfelt desire to be client-focused, how often do we hear trainers and coaches say things like, ‘My job is to help you reach your goals’ or, in marketing-speak, ‘Your success is my success’? I get the principle but it can lead us to approach our work in a blinkered way, as if the person exists in a relational, cultural and contextual bubble. Where are the ethics in this if our sole focus is on the client or group?

Take the person whose success will undermine the success of peers in other teams or the wider strategy of the organisation. Or the person whose success will impact negatively on people and groups in the wider community, e.g. politically, economically or environmentally. Our well-meaning interventions can inadvertently collude with or even facilitate hidden or unintended consequences. So: what can we do to address this? What are we willing to take responsibility for?

60 Comments

Lisa Bakker

9/8/2016 08:09:52 pm

Thought provoking piece (as usual ;-) ) Nick...I would make a distinction between a bubble and a dot ;-) The way you describe the bubble is from a point of exclusion...two people in their comfy business engaging bubble... I relate to life ( and thus to all the people I engage with including clients) as dots. A dot can be on its own, but it garners traction when connected That's why I coach: to connect the dots Patterns in life and business can be traced back to dots being connected in a certain way... When the dots are connected ones facilitates for oneself (or the team) inclusion (of the/all environments ) But in order for the dots to be connected, and the image to arise, one needs to reconnect to one's source first and foremost...when are we making that the default in business (aka take responsibility for) ? (big grin with wink)

Nick Wright

9/8/2016 08:16:23 pm

Hi Lisa and thanks for the creative insight and metaphor! So it sounds like dots can be a useful antidote to the risks inherent in the splendid isolation that bubble-ness can imply. I like it. :) As I read your note, I couldn't help thinking of Max Lucado's book, 'You are Special (Wemmicks)'. Do you know it? All the best. Nick

Cath Norris, MA, BA, Dip Couns

9/8/2016 08:11:20 pm

A story Nick. She was intent on killing him.She had seen her abuser for the first time in 15 years and her pain and rage was singularly focused on taking his life. At that moment and for the next hour, all that existed was her and I. I did the only thing I trusted; I followed and respected her process, I acknowledged her reality with as much of my presence as I could access and offer her. As she absorbed my understanding of her, of her predicament, she opened more and more to her hurt and rage. She vented, she cried, she released, she moved through. With no barriers or distractions the way was clear for her to meet herself with acceptance and tenderness.

She became ever more tender towards herself. The brittleness, isolation, pain and vulnerability was replaced by a woman accompanying herself tenderly. She became calm, more wholly herself. After 50 minutes she took a huge nourishing breath and told me she no longer wanted to take his life. She didn't want to do that to him or herself. I trust that our heartfelt connection with others is as deep as our heartfelt connection with ourselves. As coaches and therapists we get to support that connection, we educate through the quality of our interaction and the extent to which we can trust that process in and of itself.

Nick Wright

9/8/2016 08:27:06 pm

Thanks for sharing such a moving story, Cath. It sounds like you entered the (Gestalt) relational field of the woman and her abuser and, in being there with her, something deep within her was transformed. It raises some challenging questions that I encountered when working in community and counselling fields both at the same time. What if, in 'healing' people's hurt through therapy in this way, it diffuses the anger that could have proved the catalyst and energy for wider social change? That itself begs important ethical questions about whose decision that is along with philosophical/practical questions about what creates and sustains healthy social change. Have you encountered these tensions in your practice too? All the best. Nick

cath norris

10/8/2016 10:10:19 am

Hi Nick. Yes I'm aware of that potential for diffusing energy which could be converted into working for systemic change. Interestingly this story has another chapter in which institutional abuse came to light and was successfully addressed by the both of us - I was asked to shift into an advocacy role which I willingly did.
Recognising the systemic roots of personal problems is why I moved into group facilitation. I still maintained a person centred approach, naming and framing individual issues, highlighting when these were also collective, picking up on when a group is ready to step into problem solving and action, supporting the development of strategies.

My sense is that even when working with individuals, if we are authentically open to systemic impact then that effects the kind of space that we hold - what we notice and reflect back and the kind of clients that we are presented with. I think that we inevitably influence the broader field, how explicitly we can do that is based on our clients awareness and intent. Effecting social change is understandably far easier when clients have the support of collective recognition and intent.
I don't think that the limitation rests with a person centred approach, I think it is potentially compounded by the contexts in which we choose to operate.

Nick Wright

10/8/2016 01:34:36 pm

Hi Cath and thanks for sharing the next chapter of the story. It's something about acknowledging boundaries and moving between roles, when appropriate, with consent. Your facilitative approach did remind me of Catherine Widdicombe's approach with AVEC. I had the privilege of being trained then co-training with Catherine some years ago. A remarkable experience.

I do wonder, still, whether the system is always in the clients' awareness - or can be raised into the client's awareness through e.g. reflection. This poses interesting questions about what the coach may bring into the field, into the frame of reference, that the client would not otherwise be aware of and yet may prove very significant. What do you think? All the best. Nick

Sue Gibson-Wilson

10/8/2016 01:03:31 pm

I do NOT take responsibility for my client's success or failure. That is egotistical of me to believe I have that much power. I believe in guiding and facilitating my clients to what THEY believe they need. Thus, I always try to refrain from giving advice! Advice giving implies I know best what is right for each person. In a sense, for me, that is playing God. For example, I had a women who had broken up w her long time alcoholic boyfriend. After 3 months of working w me on building her self esteem, she said he was back in her life and was considering let him move back in. My head was screaming, "Are you kidding me? No!" But I remained quiet and asked her some questions to guide her to making HER decision. She chose to let him move back in. It lasted 2 mo and then she was DONE! If I had tried to persuade her not to take him in, she may have always wondered. Today she KNOWS she's done.

Nick Wright

10/8/2016 01:26:37 pm

Hi Sue and thanks for sharing such a pertinent coaching example. I think it demonstrates how important contracting is in any coaching relationship, not just in terms of what to work on and how but where respective responsibilities (and, by extension liabilities) lay.

It gets complex where, in the type of situation you describe, there may be wider people and factors (e.g. children, other vulnerable people) involved that you may be unaware of and the client is not disclosing or taking account of. I think this is where a wider systemic perspective and approach is very important...but not without its own challenges!

Interestingly, I read a quite sobering paper recently that issued fresh guidance to coaches in the UK - with advice from coaching insurance companies - on potential legal risks and liabilities, in spite of how the coach may perceive their own role and responsibilities vis a vis the client.

All the best. Nick

Yolanda Gray

10/8/2016 01:42:33 pm

I'm not quite understanding what you mean about the impact of someone's success "undermining or negatively impacting" others. When someone (the client) changes inside and lives life from a different, more empowering perspective, it cannot help but impact their environment on all levels. My only responsibility is to help the person who wants to change her life, herself, because her old ways, beliefs are no longer working and in fact, are detrimental to her physical, emotional and spiritual health. I'm not into well-meaning interventions--the work I do is client-focused. Maybe I misunderstood you?

Nick Wright

11/8/2016 02:52:43 pm

Thanks Yolanda. The challenge I'm posing is something along these lines: 'Client-focused is good, but is it enough?' I'm very happy for you to challenge me back! :)

Here's an example from experience. An experienced coach works with a person who wants to set up a charitable project in his local community to support local homeless people. The person succeeds in getting the charity off the ground and thanks the coach for helping him think through his personal vision, goal, motivation and ideas on how best to set it up. So far so good.

The local community development worker (CDW) then becomes aware of the project and contacts the person. It turns out he, the CDW, had been working with social services for 2 years, building a case for the local authority to provide comprehensive and sustainable provision for homeless people in that area - and had almost succeeded.

The case was weakened by the charity project because it was construed by the local authority as having addressed the need and, as a result, the CDW's case fell through. In fact, the charity's own work proved unsustainable within a year and closed down. The CDW felt frustrated and local homeless people were, once again, left without support.

In this example, the coach's client-focused work with the person had been 'successful' in its own right at the time...and yet there were wider systemic implications to that person's success - unintended ripple effects if you like - that didn't feature in the coaching conversations because the focus was on the client.

Does that make sense? All the best. Nick

Robert Hodge

10/8/2016 03:50:34 pm

From a Harvard Business Review of a few months ago, the author spoke to conflict within issues that involve components of Relationship, the Task at hand, the Process by which the Task is to be done, and (the other) one's Identity. People usually focus on the middle two. Working through the outside two is critical to ongoing success as a leader of people. I coach the person to consider all four parts as part of their decision making. They know that I strive to assist them within a context of community and the greater good as they define it.

Nick Wright

10/8/2016 03:51:54 pm

Sounds interesting, Robert. Do you have any examples you could share of what coaching someone in relation to all four dimensions could look like in practice? All the best. Nick

Jonas Berends

10/8/2016 08:45:38 pm

Hello Nick, take a look at CRR Global's ORSC method. I believe their methods may inspire you. Warmly, Jonas

Nick Wright

10/8/2016 08:47:46 pm

Thanks Jonas. Yes, the ORSC method does look interesting and inspiring. Do you know if there are any good books available that explain this approach in practice? All the best. Nick

Bruce Jacobson MD, CPDC

11/8/2016 08:58:59 am

While a coach does help a client to recognize and pursue the future that they are passionate about, contrary to the article this is not done in a vacuum. As a coach lays the foundational work of self-discovery there is a clarification of values that needs to occur. Pursuing one's passions in a manner that conflicts with their core values will lead to emptiness and not fulfillment. The whole person needs to be respected in the coaching process. The client can then be challenged to create a path to their goals that respects those around them.

Nick Wright

11/8/2016 09:16:58 am

Thanks for the interesting comments, Bruce. To clarify: I am not proposing in this article that all coaching is done in a vacuum. I am, however, posing that this is a risk, especially if a coach's focus is purely on enabling the client to be successful in whatever terms the client may use to define that. I agree that if a person pursues their passions in a manner that conflicts with their values, it may well lead to emptiness rather than fulfilment.

However, a client may pursue a course of action that is entirely consistent with their own personal values and yet still takes little account of wider systemic and cultural factors and implications. As a coach, I've sometimes said things like, 'I'm responsible for the process; the client is responsible for the outcome'.

Now I'm not so sure...! To take a very extreme example to make the point, if I had been Hitler's coach and had enabled him to be more successful as leader of the Nazi party, would I bear any responsibility for the outcomes of his actions?

I don't want to paint a pathological view of coaching and its implications. It's equally possible, for instance, that a coach's work with a client could have unintended positive consequences for others beyond the client him or herself! It's also true that neither coach or client could ever understand every possible cultural and systemic implication of the client's decisions and actions.

It's more about awareness: e.g. How far do we believe it's our role to introduce wider systems into the room? Where do we see the boundary lines of our responsibility?

All the best. Nick

Christophe Ginguene

11/8/2016 09:18:22 am

Hi Nick, very interesting article. I have few questions for you:
1 - at the end of the article you assume that the growth / change in your client will negatively affect others. Where does this assumption come from ?
2 - how do you know the negative impact ? how do you measure them ?
3 - if one find out that its coaching produce results which are in opposition with its values, isn't it the responsibility of the coach to end the relationship (ethics ?) ?
I do agree with what you wrote and definitely those are points we need to consider when we choose are coachees.
What do we want to achieve and are we clear about it?

Nick Wright

11/8/2016 09:26:21 am

Thanks for your thought-provoking comments and feedback, Cristophe. In response to your questions:

1. I'm not making that assumption at the end of the article. However, I am posing possible scenarios that I believe we, as coaches, would do well to consider.

2. Good question. As coaches, unless the client is aware of and discloses wider impacts, or unless we are working in the wider system ourselves, it's unlikely we will know those impacts. It's one reason why exploring them with the client - raising ethical, cultural and systemic questions, offering support and challenge etc. - can be so valuable and important in coaching. Are we willing to do it, especially if the client doesn't raise these issues themselves?

3. Good question too. Yes, I believe that, as coaches, we need to be very clear about our personal and professional (and organisational, when working in organisations) ethics and values and to be willing to practice and - where appropriate - challenge from that base.

Thanks again! All the best. Nick

Bram Janssens

11/8/2016 10:46:33 am

Almost everything in this world can be used for good or for evil. How must lawyers feel when defending a murderer? As a coach you are responsible for the good results of your client.

Nick Wright

11/8/2016 10:49:20 am

Thanks Bram. 'How must lawyers feel when defending a murderer?' That's an interesting analogy. I'm curious: when you say that, 'As a coach, you are responsible for the good results of your client', what do you believe the coach is responsible and not-responsible for vis a vis any client's actions that flow from coaching? All the best. Nick

Bram Janssens

11/8/2016 12:14:21 pm

Dear Nick, I think responsibility is very limited. The truck that rammed the people in Nice was build with the purpose of transportation. Do you keep the company responsible for the lives lost because they build it?

Nick Wright

11/8/2016 12:16:48 pm

Hi Bram. That's another interesting analogy. Perhaps a different way of framing it in the context of this conversation could be something like, 'If the company had built the lorry in order to facilitate the driver's success in their endeavour, could the company be held responsible for the subsequent actions of the driver?' All the best. Nick

Cath Norris, MA, BA, Dip Couns

11/8/2016 02:43:12 pm

Spot on with your analogy Nick. Coming from a counselling background where there is a legal duty to respond to the risk of 'significant harm to self and others' and argue that we need to be consciously addressing those risks in our coaching.

Bram Janssens

11/8/2016 03:50:20 pm

I do agree that you have to pay attention with whatever you are doing with clients and being conscious never killed anybody eather but responsibility? With the things I learned from coaches, I could easily start a sect, a war, ... ; but I choose not to because of my values and ethics, might as well have gone different... Would that have been the responsibility of my previous coaches if it had gone differently? Don't doubt for a second it isn't. Greetings Nick and Cath ;-)

Cath Norris, MA, BA, Dip Couns

11/8/2016 04:31:02 pm

Bram, we're talking about foreseeable and probable significant risk - the kind which could get you incarcerated if you were a practicing therapist who did nothing...and also the kind which goes against our own core values and principles.

Cath Norris, MA, BA, Dip Couns

11/8/2016 02:46:06 pm

Hi Nick, great conversation folks :)

With regard to coaching someone setting up a homelessness project, I'd really be exploring their core vision, desired outcomes and strategy. That would essentially require exploring what's in the broader field, existing or potentially. If a client is targeted on achieving a clear goal then our contract is one in which we are carrying out a critical path analysis to assess realism, achievabilty and potential barriers. In this instance existing plans would hopefully have come to light as a potential barrier and we could have explored the implications.

Nick, I think you've hit on a very real problem with person centred approach. It's great for supporting folks to become conscious of where they are at and where they want to be. It's a great method for supporting self directed exploration. It's predominantly a right brain tool for supporting profound self reflection and relationship.

When a client shifts from relating to wanting to achieve something I think we need to incorporate more of a left brain response which brings in and makes conscious the how's and wherefores. This enables more directed questioning within the framework of supporting the client to realistically achieve their self directed goal.

If someone wanted to persist with a goal which would harm others I would be shifting back into a right brain listen and understand contract. I'd be listening for and naming the pattern that originates from, potentially supporting connection to old hurts being projected outwardly and also naming that tendency...With all the compassion and understanding which accompanies right brain person centred relating.

We need to be adept at noticing when the contract shifts, at naming when old wounds are influencing decisions and goals and be prepared to shift back into working on relating rather than achieving.

Nick Wright

11/8/2016 03:15:53 pm

Hi Cath and thanks posting such interesting reflections. I agree with you that contracting - e.g. what we are here to do; what the focus and parameters are of our work together, how we will agree to do it etc. - are critical. This can provide the context for the coach and client to explore a goal, an issue or whatever at different relational, cultural and systemic levels rather than these perspectives being something that the coach imposes onto the client.

If the client is not interested or willing to explore these wider dimensions it can leave the coach with an ethical and practical dilemma, especially if the coach is aware of potential wider implications of the client's choices. It's not that all client choices have intentional or detrimental effects on others - far be it from it - but I do think it's part of the (Gestalt) 'field' and its impacts that, as coaches, we do well to consider and pay attention to.

All the best. Nick

Mohan Srivastava

11/8/2016 02:47:43 pm

We have seen FORTS located every where in the world. Why? We have built fort to protect to defend. Human mind has been trained since childhood to protect from influences of external ideas , personalities, which does not fit in our perceptional attitude and principles made by conditioning of our mind.
Believe me when we have clear and kind heart with pure love the vibrations around us make other person to accept our views wholeheartedly without any subjectivity. Thus breaking the bubble is not needed instead people automatically accept you. For example Swamy Vivekananda address in parliament of Religion in America. Regards.

Nick Wright

11/8/2016 03:21:43 pm

Thanks Mohan. I think that 'forts' with a defensive purpose is an interesting and useful metaphor. One reason for creating and sustaining bubble relationships can be that they can feel safer, more contained, more manageable etc. for both coach and client. Bursting the bubble can evoke anxiety and defensive routines, especially if the challenge to consider wider relational, cultural and contextual factors can makes the coaching issue or assignment feel overwhelmingly complex or unmanageable. All the best. Nick

Jivana Kennedy

11/8/2016 02:49:11 pm

"What if, in 'healing' people's hurt through therapy in this way, it diffuses the anger that could have proved the catalyst and energy for wider social change?" I love this question Nick!!!

Nick Wright

11/8/2016 03:46:50 pm

Thanks Jivana. The question first occurred to me whilst training as a community development facilitator amongst a group of counsellors, led by a group of psychotherapists. A fascinating experience! I think the idea was inspired by Martin Luther King (I used to read a chapter of his writings every day) who commented on how, in the civil rights movement, one of the greatest risks to achieving radical social and political change was any intervention that alleviated some of the immediate pain and frustration but did nothing to create the conditions for long-term, sustainable justice and peace. Profound stuff. All the best. Nick

Jivana Kennedy

11/8/2016 03:48:02 pm

“And the day came when the risk to remain tight in a bud was more painful than the risk it took to blossom.” Anais Nin Abso fuggin lutely!

Nick Wright

11/8/2016 03:49:02 pm

Thanks Jivana. That's a vivid analogy for bursting the bubble! :) All the best. Nick

Jivana Kennedy

11/8/2016 03:57:05 pm

"So: what can we do to address this? What are we willing to take responsibility for?" Perhaps see: 'The Presence Process' ~ Michael Brown

Steve Kopp

11/8/2016 02:49:46 pm

Hey Nick, JL Moreno spoke about the smallest human unit being two or more. I find when I work with an individual, I typically begin with a social atom, so we can map out the important current relationships. I know I don't work with an individual in a vacuum, and their atom allows me at least a glimpse of the individual in a larger contest. (If you want some info on Social Atoms - I had done a workshop - posted my handouts at www.dreamer2doer.com They are fairly simple to use, yet yield considerable information. Feel free to check it out. Thanks again for your posts... Steve K

Nick Wright

11/8/2016 03:55:20 pm

Hi Steve and thanks for posting the link to your website. I found your social atom piece, 'We are one: trust, risk, expand through psychodrama' very interesting. It reminds me of stakeholder mapping, yet a richer version of it and, thereby, potentially more enriching with clients and groups too. All the best. Nick

Debbie Nicol

12/8/2016 08:06:59 am

Hi there!! Nice article and one close to my heart! Succes when it is at the expense of othees is not success at all! And hence the outdated-ness of so many performance management systems that reward the 'what' without the 'how'!

Nick Wright

12/8/2016 08:20:18 am

Thanks Debbie. I think that's a great point. It's one reason why I spend more time team/inter-team coaching than individual coaching these days. It provides opportunity to observe, experience and work with a network of relationships and culture directly in the room.

I met an inspiring HR leader in Vietnam who rejected individual-orientated performance conversations in favour of team and organisational performance, e.g. 'How are we doing?', 'What will our success look like?', 'How are we enabling each others' success?' It fitted well Vietnamese culture and the Christian beliefs and values of that organisation.

I worked with a similar Christian NGO where we emphasised inter-dependence, based on the biblical metaphor of the 'body of Christ' and pragmatic realities of working inter-nationally. This meant mapping dependencies and taking proactive steps to build mutually beneficial goals, relationships and ways of working.

All the best. Nick

Ray Lamb

12/8/2016 10:54:17 am

Very interesting and potentially tricky territory! My first thought was a question, "What is my role as coach?" For me right now the best and simplest answer is, "To create an environment that facilitates the best thinking in my client." I do this largely through connection and full attention on the client. How to deal with the wider systems? I find a couple of questions useful when actions emerge to which the client is committed. "What might be the implications / consequences of these decisions and/or actions?" and, "What ethical considerations might there be to these decisions / actions"
I might be invited to contribute my knowledge and experience, and the client always has the final say on how this is factored into decisions etc. I would just repeat the questions about consequences and ethical considerations.
I feel there's more here, and as I read it back, somehow seems complete!

Nick Wright

12/8/2016 11:20:51 am

Thanks Ray. Your framing of the role, the contract and questions you pose sounds clear and wise to me!

In my experience, some of the tricky aspects include: potential great opportunities or negative implications/impacts of clients' decisions that lay outside of their awareness, knowledge or understanding in that moment; potential ethical, contractual or legal culpability of the coach if, having worked with the coach, the client takes decisions that turn out to be disastrous - especially if, in their view or that of the sponsoring organisation, the coach failed to raise or address these issues adequately. I heard recently that coaching insurance companies are starting to pay greater attention to these and similar issues too!

On the broader front though, since such cases are likely to be exceptional rather than the norm, I believe that coaching that pays attention to wider relational, cultural, ethical and systemic factors and dynamics holds the potential to be more powerful and transformational that that which focuses on the client's goals or success in relative isolation. If the client really doesn't want to 'go there', that raises a whole new set of tricky issues!

All the best. Nick

Ray Lamb

13/8/2016 07:03:57 am

Nick. Yes exceptional situations indeed. In over 3.5K hours I've never even had a sniff of these issues; and surely I can only be culpable if I am advising the client, which really is rare. I do agree that supporting the client to explore wider systemic issues has the potential to create great shifts in awareness, and so manifest new possibilities for action, commitment and responsibility. I do believe we can only invite this wider exploration; should never judge reluctance to go there, and instead explore the assumptions being made by the client that stop or make them avoid such considerations.

Nick Wright

13/8/2016 09:56:15 am

Hi Ray. My experience has been different and I've coached a similar number of hours - which makes me quite curious!

When I started by coaching individuals, these type of issues rarely surfaced. In retrospect, I believe that's mostly because they lay outside of the client's e.g. awareness, knowledge, areas of interest, concern etc. In other words, the way in which the client e.g. experienced, perceived, construed, interpreted, filtered their situation and what they wanted to focus on created its own boundaries to the conversation.

When I started to coach in dyads (e.g. peers who were experiencing tensions in their relationship), I noticed that, quite often, how they had construed themselves, their colleague, the relationship between them etc. beforehand was quite different to what I observed and experienced in the room. I experience the same phenomenon when I coach people in teams. I can see, hear and feel e.g. impacts of their behaviour on wider team relationships, culture and systems directly.

When I moved into OD, I saw even more striking examples of how the actions of a person or team in one part of the organisation could impact - positively or negatively or both, and often inadvertently - on people and teams in other parts. This mirrored what I had observed in by background in community development and international development.

I think these experiences influence my views about the potential risks of coaching in what I have referred to provocatively as a bubble. I have done it and I see coaching colleagues do it. It's not that everything that that happens within the bubble represents a pathological risk to everything outside of it. Sometimes it's about e.g. mildly frustrating a colleague of missing an opportunity.

On the culpability question, it's something I've only just started to think about differently recently. A month or so ago, I would have agreed with you that, say, I can only be culpable if I am advising the client. That may be true legally, although a client may argue that the questions we posed 'led' them along a certain path of thought or that our failure to raise certain critical questions was negligent.

That's not, however, the main thing I'm thinking about. Here's a thought experiment: Say, to use the example of a controversial public figure, Donald Trump invites me earlier in his career to coach him so that he's better able to handle his nerves when speaking in public. If I agree and, as a result of our work together, he improves and...over time...is elected President of the United States.

His presidency has all kinds of implications and impacts for millions of people all over the world. Given that my work with him - which is one piece of a much larger jigsaw - was 'successful' in that it enabled him to achieve his goal, it could be argued that I, in some small way, contributed to the consequences that follow. It's not a 'hard' form of responsibility, but it could challenge the notion that coaches are entirely 'neutral'.

All the best. Nick

Larry Tyler

13/8/2016 04:08:55 pm

Good point Nick. My staff is very involves with training new associates. Lets me observe what is going on.

Nick Wright

13/8/2016 04:10:07 pm

Thanks Larry. I'm interested: can you say a bit more about how that helps you and others to 'burst the bubble'? All the best. Nick

Larry Tyler

13/8/2016 08:47:43 pm

Nick. Sharing the training duties helps keep the training one on one and still have the group involved. Some of my Managers my be recently promoted and still remember how they felt when they were trained. It is one on one and still a group effort at the same time. It also becomes a shared responsibity. One of the staff may connect better that other members. Part of what we teach are core values as in Giving back to the community, Integrity and mutual respect and Pride of ownweship. At that point we have done our due diligence and gave the person what we know about the job and what we feel is important as far as core values. We can only influence and set an example. I am not sure we can prevent anyone from making bad choices or choices different than ours. I have been a mentor and teacher to a group where the Fathers can not see their kids unless they have a job and stay out of trouble. So out of a class of fifty we were lucky to have five fathers change their life.

Ravi Kanadia

13/8/2016 08:48:26 pm

Nicely written.

Nick Wright

13/8/2016 08:49:27 pm

Thanks Ravi. All the best. Nick

Alison Simmons

14/8/2016 09:22:38 pm

We have to hope that everyone has equal opportunity to our intervention and that we do our best for each. Someone's success is never dependent upon training, coaching or mentoring in my experience, there are many more pieces in the jigsaw. We are just one part of the picture and provided we do our best for each individual, to encourage and enable them to achieve their potential, we have done all we can. The rest is up to them eh?

Nick Wright

14/8/2016 09:29:13 pm

Thanks Alison. I think that's a really important point that we are not the only influence on a person's success (or not). That can help us keep our own interventions in perspective. At the same time, it can be useful at times for us to enable a person to consider the wider influences on and implications of their 'success' so that our work with them is rooted in a wider awareness and context. Does that make sense? All the best. Nick

Alison Simmons

15/8/2016 09:33:47 am

The importance or relevance of any intervention depends upon the relative influence of other factors. It is always helpful to try to explain things in a wider context assuming the receiver is capable of understanding it. No matter where you are in life, there is always a wider context to be understood so that one can deal with the inevitable constraints that the wider context implies. I am struggling to grasp the "training bubble" idea and the problem it gives rise to - are you contemplating the importance of learning transfer into the workplace, when you describe the "bubble"?

Nick Wright

15/8/2016 10:03:04 am

Thanks Alison - and good question. Here's an example: I was invited to run assertiveness training for a group of staff in a small organisation.

I was curious so posed a question to the contractor, 'Why this, why now?' They said, in confidence, that a new manager had been appointed and staff in the manager's team were struggling to cope with the manager's highly directive and, at times, abrasive style.

This opened new questions, e.g. 'How far is a highly directive management style a cultural value and aspiration in the organisation?', Is the manager aware of their impact on staff in the team?', 'How far were questions of cultural fit explored at interview?', 'Has the line-manager's own manager raised this with the manager?' etc.

Stepping outside of the training bubble (in this case, a simple request for an assertiveness workshop) enabled us to explore wider relational, cultural and systemic issues and to design a different and more effective intervention for the team and organisation.

Alternatively, we could have run with the assertiveness workshop and, in that case, I would pose e.g. 'What's the change you want to see?' and 'What else needs to happen for that to happen?' Does that make sense? All the best. Nick

Hellen Mumo

15/8/2016 10:04:42 am

Good read Nick....

Nick Wright

15/8/2016 10:05:14 am

Thanks Hellen. :) All the best. Nick

Yinka Fedden

15/8/2016 11:11:27 am

Thanks Nick - a thoughtful piece!

Nick Wright

15/8/2016 11:12:14 am

Thanks for your thoughtful feedback, Yinka! All the best. Nick

David Bayne

15/8/2016 12:13:17 pm

Hi Nick I think your left brain is getting in the way! it seems like you are overanalysing everything and this is the biggest challenge of all. When we over think every situation we get caught up in the world of duality. When the focus is purely on cooperation and care we can only be on the right track. More importantly why I teach is to ensure my energy and the energy of my clients are vibrating at a higher level. Doing that creates an environment whereby only good things will happen and people who are vibrating at that same level appear. If we drop that energy we find bad kharma occurs. So focus on the good and good things will occur. Focus on the bad and the bad will appear. Your choice.

Nick Wright

15/8/2016 12:16:48 pm

Hi David. Intriguing response. ;) I too believe that positive thinking and appreciative approaches can create a positive effect. However, do you really consider that it is 'overanalysing everthing' to pay attention to potential wider implications of our coaching practice..? All the best. Nick

David Bayne

16/8/2016 08:51:30 am

It's not up to us as coaches to determine the effect a product or service has on anything outside of the business itself. Who are we to determine that? If you decide to work with a client and you find out what they do could be not aligned to your values or beliefs by all means let that client go and work with someone else. If you feel strongly about ecology may I suggest you review your career path. Who's to say our opinion on the environment or the effects of someone else's decision will affect something else is correct anyway! It's not our field of expertise. Focus on what you do best...being a coach!

Pete Mosely

15/8/2016 12:35:32 pm

Interesting thoughts. I feel that clients decisions need to be explored with them in terms of the 'ecology' of the outcomes - who and what will their decision affect - and how. By doing this, wider impacts get explored throughly and better decisions get made.

Nick Wright

15/8/2016 12:36:26 pm

Thanks for the note, Pete. I think 'ecology' is a good way of thinking about and approach this. All the best. Nick

Bubbles

Leave a Reply.

Nick Wright

Archives

Categories

Bubbles

Leave a Reply.

​Nick Wright

​Archives

Categories

Nick Wright

Archives