 ‘Learn your theories as well as you can but put them aside when you touch the miracle of the living soul.’ (Carl Jung) The past 3 months has been an exciting time, developing and running new foundational and advanced coaching courses for an international Christian non-governmental organisation. The former was for people new to coaching and the latter for those with more training and experience. The goal was to enhance the transformational capacity and impact of the organisation by investing in an internal coaching pool, in enabling ‘sacred encounters’. People took part in these programmes from 12+ countries which ensured a fascinating and enriching cross-cultural dimension and experience. Standard coaching is so often embedded in Western cultural assumptions such as individual autonomy or flat hierarchies. These groups of participants helped us to deconstruct and reconstruct diverse culturally and contextually appropriate approaches that could prove far more effective in their own environments. The foundational programme covered: What is coaching; When is it useful and how; Coaching and mentoring; Psychological safety and trust; Presence and listening; Asking good questions; Coaching in the Bible; The GROW model; A co-active approach; Guiding principles; Support and challenge; Going deeper with GROW; Coaching as a manager; Troubleshooting; and Action planning. It was fascinating to experiment with adapting GROW to a collectivist culture. The advanced programme covered: Psychological coaching; Coaching vs counselling; Diverse psychological approaches; Phenomenological approach; Psychological safety and trust; Sinful-wonderful paradox; Christian pastoral coaching; Renewing of the mind; Webs of our own creation; Jumping to confusions; Cognitive distortions; Reflexive coaching; Risks of self-deception; Unlocking fresh thinking. It was designed to dive deeper in the coaching pool. It also included: Blind spots and hot spots; Capabilities vs conversion factors; Developing personal agency; Expanding range of options; Exploration to action; Troubleshooting; and Action planning. I was impressed and inspired by the active engagement of participants who shared their own experiences, questions and ideas throughout. We ended with pointers towards further resources and an opportunity for participants to choose their own next steps. Are you keen to develop your coaching insights and skills? Get in touch!
8 Comments
 ‘Who looks outside dreams; who looks inside awakes.’ (Carl Jung) I’m running a foundation-level coaching programme for participants from Burundi, DRC, Kenya, Lebanon, Mali, Nepal, Philippines, Rwanda and the UK this week. I find the diverse cultural insights and approaches fascinating. The programme is based on John Whitmore’s GROW model because that’s client organisation’s model of choice. At a previous workshop, we looked at how we might adapt GROW to different cultural contexts, particularly those with a more collectivist than individualist orientation. This week we will be looking at how to go deeper at each stage of GROW by asking 2nd level (follow-up) questions. 2nd level questions are challenging and call for trust. Here are some examples of what we might think of as 1st level (often surface-level, or transactional) and 2nd level (often deeper level, or transformational) questions at each stage of the GROW process. The 2nd level questions invite the coachee to build on or delve deeper into their own responses to the 1st level questions – if they want to: Goal. 1st level: ‘What do you want to achieve?’ 2nd level: ‘Why’s that outcome so important to you?’ or ‘What goal might really stretch or scare you?’ Realities. 1st level: ‘What’s holding you back?’ 2nd level: ‘What's your own contribution to what you're experiencing?’ or ‘What truth might another see that you don’t see?’ Options. 1st level: ‘What are your options?’ 2nd level: ‘What (limiting) assumptions are you making?’ or ‘What options have you ruled out because they feel too risky?’ Will. 1st level: ‘What will you do?’ 2nd level: ‘What action will prove you’re serious about doing this?’ ‘If you don’t do it, what will you be telling yourself a month from now?’ I had a valuable conversation with a close friend in Germany this week about how to work with 2nd level questions in such a variety of cultural contexts. He proposed writing a question down; inviting participants to reflect on, ‘How would you pose this question in your culture?’ and, if they wouldn't ask this question, ‘What might you ask instead?’  ‘If you torture the data long enough, it will confess to anything.’ (Ronald Coase) I ran a sense-checking workshop for academic researchers from a variety of different countries and cultures this week. The idea was to double-check the findings from 3 researcher focus groups I ran recently. My intention was to validate, clarify and refine insights and ideas I had heard and distilled from those original groups. So – why is this step important? Firstly, it helps to reduce the risk of my own biases and misinterpretations influencing the results. Secondly, it helps to resolve any unclear points, anything I hadn’t quite understood. Thirdly, it helps ensure that the voices of all are represented in the results, not just those who were perhaps most vocal. Fourthly, it adds credibility and power to the final report. In advance of the workshop, I and a university colleague provided sense-checking workshop participants with a copy of the draft outputs from the focus groups, along with a list of the questions we aimed to explore. The colleague and I opened the workshop with introductions and a brief background and purpose for the meeting, then worked through the questions: To what extent do the summary notes reflect your own experience? Are there any key issues you expected to see, but didn't? Do you think anything has been overstated? Are the terms used clear, accurate and meaningful to you? Are there any differences in how the issues play out across roles or departments? Which follow-up actions would you prioritise, and why?  ‘Research is seeing what everybody else has seen and thinking what nobody else has thought.’ (Albert Szent-Györgyi) Today’s focus group with participants from Colombia, England, Iran and Scotland was an intriguing experience. They are all employed as research professionals at a university and their expertise was evidenced as much by the questions they asked as the insights they shared. As facilitator, I spent much of the time listening to discern underlying themes as they spoke together in free-flow around issues and experiences that matter to them. I was aware of both tuning in to hear and understand, and tuning out to maintain an independent perspective. One of the participants reflected astutely from the outset that the order in which discussion questions had been framed mirrored symbolically something of their experience. The first question was focused on organisational issues, the second on cross-departmental and the third on individual. This represented, for them, a perceived hierarchy of importance in the culture of the university itself – with organisational agendas at the top of the pyramid and individual interests at the bottom. It was a profound insight that proved pivotal to the conversation. In debrief afterwards in a café with the client, we reflected on how best to present the outputs of the focus group to organisational decision-makers. If it’s true that leaders are focused first and foremost on the needs of the institution, whereas the researchers were primarily concerned with issues affecting individuals, we will aim to demonstrate how addressing the researchers’ recommendations would benefit the institution, whilst also hold up an observation of the perceived need to do so, as a mirror to raise awareness of implicit cultural values.  ‘Trust that what needs to be said will come up naturally, either from you or the other person.’ (Liz Dunphy) A commonly-held belief is that the power and potential of coaching resides in asking great questions. It is after all true that a well-worded, placed and timed question can shift our entire perspective, open up fresh possibilities and create a seismic shift in our sense of agency. I’ve experienced that personally and have seen and felt its impact. What else makes the difference? ‘We learn from an early age what the ‘correct’ answers are – those that will win us approval.’ (Rudi Weinzierl) For coaching questions to land well and to do their work without being deflected by defences, there’s something about being in a receptive state of curiosity, of invitation, of a desire and willingness to learn. Yet, deeper still, I notice the mysterious power of presence. Here I am grappling with a complex issue and struggling to find or create a way forward. Somebody I trust comes alongside me, is really present to me, listens actively and intently without even saying a word…and something shifts inside me. It’s like the presence of God – transformational. A new insight surfaces into awareness as if it were released, catalysed by the quality of contact between us. It was already there, perhaps, but hidden from sight or out of reach. In the moment, it can feel like a realisation, a revelation. Questions stimulate and crystallise our thoughts and galvanise our responses. Emergence arises through presence. (See also: Emergence in action learning; Test and learn; Plan vs prepare)  'There is frequently more to be learned from the unexpected questions of a child than the discourses of adults.' (John Locke) My 5 year-old daughter asked me, ‘Dad, why is it cold downstairs but hot upstairs?’ ‘Because warm air rises’ I replied, gesturing a floating-upwards movement with my hands. ‘But why does it rise?’ That’s a great example of a 2nd question. A 2nd question takes us closer to critical reflection. It’s useful in disciplines like coaching and action learning because it challenges a person to think more deeply, pushing beyond surface-level responses to what lays behind, beneath or beyond. Here’s why it matters, with some examples: 1. Uncovering underlying motives Q1: ‘What are your goals for this project?’ Q2: ‘Why are these goals important to you?’ The 1st question may reveal what someone wants, but the 2nd question uncovers why they want it. It reveals a person’s values and motivations, helping to align efforts and understand the true significance of success. 2. Moving beyond assumptions Q1: ‘Why do you believe this solution will work?’ Q2: ‘What evidence have you found that supports this belief?’ The 1st question asks for an opinion, but the 2nd question invites critical examination of that opinion. It challenges the person to consider facts, research or data to foster a more informed and reflective response. 3. Challenging initial reactions Q1: ‘Do you think the new policy is fair?’ Q2: ‘Who benefits the most from this policy, and who might be disadvantaged?’ The 1st question elicits a gut reaction, often based on personal experience or bias. The 2nd question invites a deeper analysis by examining the broader implications, encouraging critical thinking about fairness for all parties involved. 4. Exploring various alternatives Q1: ‘Why did you choose this option?’ Q2: ‘What other options did you consider, and why did you reject them?’ While the 1st question focuses on decision-making, the 2nd question helps a person consider whether alternative solutions were fully explored and whether biases or incomplete information influenced their choice. Would you like support with developing your second question skills? Get in touch!  ‘The power to question is the basis of all human progress.’ (Indira Gandhi) In a small group, Action Learning offers a semi-structured opportunity to address a challenge that is real and important to an individual. With the support of a facilitator, the group (known in Action Learning as a ‘set’) offers questions to that person in three distinct and sequential phases: 1. Questions for clarification; 2. Questions for exploration; 3. Questions for action. I’ll say a bit more about each stage below, including their respective focus’, forms and purposes. Picture this. An individual (known in Action Learning as a ‘presenter’) has shared the crux of a challenge that they are facing and would like to think through in order, if possible, to find or create a solution. The Questions for clarification stage enables peers to ask brief questions: usually simple points of information or something they hadn’t quite understood, e.g. ‘What does that acronym stand for?’, or ‘The person you mentioned – is that your boss, a peer, an other..?’ The answers to such questions are for the peers’ own benefit: to fill an information gap in their own knowledge or understanding. The transition to the subsequent Questions for exploration stage, however, marks a fundamental shift in depth and orientation, where peers ask questions for the presenter’s benefit – to enable the presenter to think more deeply or broadly in relation to the challenge. They aim to stimulate critical reflection rather than, say, to elicit an answer. Whereas Questions for exploration open out and expand the presenter’s insight and awareness, the final stage of Questions for action shifts from divergence to convergence, supporting and challenging the presenter to ground any fresh insights in practical action steps to take things forward. We may see a reframing of language from, say, ‘What could you do?’ (exploration) to, ‘What will you do?’ (action). The presenter leaves with enhanced insight, agency and traction.  ‘Learning is a treasure that will follow its owner everywhere.’ (Chinese proverb) Action Learning facilitator training with different participant groups always surfaces fresh and fascinating insights, emphases and challenges. This week’s ALA training programme was with a group of health professionals in diverse roles and fields of practice ranging from nursing, occupational therapy and podiatry to mental health, speech and language and education. I was inspired by their enthusiasm, personal ethics and genuine commitment to culture change. As we worked through Action Learning principles and techniques and how to enable groups to do it well, we explored 5 shift areas to facilitate a transition: from diagnosis to elicitation; from issue to person; from there-and-then to here-and-now; from first questions to follow-up questions; from reflection to agency. I’ll say a little about each of these dimensions with some practical examples below. The goal in each is to enhance participants’ learning and impact. From diagnosis to elicitation is a shift in who owns the issue from, say, ‘Tell me more about X so I can help you?’ to e.g. ‘What questions is X raising for you?’ From issue to person is a shift in focus from, say, ‘What’s the situation?’ to e.g. ‘What challenge is this situation posing for you?’ From there-and-then to here-and-now is a shift in temporal orientation from, say, ‘What have you tried?’ to e.g. ‘Given what you have tried, what stands out as the critical issue now?’ From first questions to follow-up questions is a shift in depth to move below and beyond, say, ‘How important is this to you?’ to e.g. ‘Given how important this is to you, what are you willing to risk?’ From reflection to agency represents a shift in traction from, say, ‘What sense are you making of this?’ to e.g. ‘What actions will you take to address this?’ A skill of the facilitator is to build the capacity of an Action Learning set to navigate these shifts in service of a presenter.  ‘Stop imagining. Experience the real. Taste and see.’ (Claudio Naranjo) Early predictions that electronic reading technologies would supersede the need for physical paper books proved unfounded. There’s something about holding a book, turning the pages, feeling the paper and smelling the ink that feels tangibly different to viewing text on screen. It’s something about reading as an experiential phenomenon that goes further and deeper than passively absorbing visual input. We’re physical beings and physical touch, movement and feeling still matter to us. I’ve noticed something similar in coaching conversations, stimulated by studies and experiments in the field of Gestalt. Against that backdrop, using physical props that invite physical interaction with those props can create shifts at psychological levels too. I have 4 different packs of cards available*, alongside other resources, and I notice that holding, sifting through and laying out cards can sometimes feel more engaging and stimulating for a client than thinking and talking alone. Each pack has a different purpose and focus. All involve inviting a client to flick through the cards to see which images, words, phrases or questions resonate for them here-and-now. It’s as if, at times, we’re able to recognise someone or something that matters to us, is meaningful for us, by touching and viewing it ‘out there’, rather than ‘in here’. The cards also enable a client, team or group to move or configure them in experimental combinations to see what insights, themes or ideas emerge. (*The Real Deal; Empowering Questions; Gallery of Emotions; Coaching Cards for Managers)  ‘The currency of real networking is not greed, but generosity.’ (Keith Ferrazzi) One of the skills in Action Learning is to distinguish between a presenter who is wrestling with a question from one who has become completely stuck. In the former case, it’s often most useful simply to sit with the presenter in silence while the question does its work. In the latter, the facilitator may offer the presenter an option of ‘peer-consultancy’, if it might help break the mental deadlock. In order to do this well, however, and to ensure that ownership and agency remain with the presenter, the facilitator can follow a specific sequence of interventions and process steps:
A few words of caution. First, beware of introducing the peer-consultancy approach without checking in with the presenter first. If the presenter is deep in thought, such a shift in approach may feel premature of patronising, as if inferring that they’re unable to work out a solution for themselves. Second, beware of any formal or informal (e.g. age, gender, race) hierarchical dynamics in a group. Presenters may feel that they ought to respond to all insights out of respect for those who shared them, or obliged to agree with ideas proposed by someone they regard as an authority figure. |
Nick WrightI'm a psychological coach, trainer and OD consultant. Curious to discover how can I help you? Get in touch! 
Like what you read? Simply enter your email address below to receive regular blog updates!
|
RSS Feed