What's your coaching style?

24/4/2014

How would you describe your coaching style? What questions would you bring to a client situation?

In my experience, it depends on a whole range of factors including the client, the relationship, the situation and what beliefs and expertise I, as coach, may hold. It also depends on what frame of reference or approach I and the client believe could be most beneficial. Some coaches are committed to a specific theory, philosophy or approach. Others are more fluid or eclectic.

Take, for instance, a leader in a Christian organisation struggling with issues in her team. The coach could help the leader explore and address the situation drawing on any number of perspectives or methods. Although not mutually exclusive, each has its own focus and emphasis. The content and boundaries will reflect what the client and coach believe may be significant:

Appreciative/solutions-focused: e.g. ‘What would an ideal team look and feel like for you?’, ‘When has this team been at its best?’, ‘What made the greatest positive difference at the time?’, ‘What opportunity does this situation represent?’, ‘On a scale of 1-10, how well is this team meeting your and other team members’ expectations?’, ‘What would it take to move it up a notch?’

Psychodynamic/cognitive-behavioural: e.g. ‘What picture comes to mind when you imagine the team?’, ‘What might a detached observer notice about the team?’, ‘How does this struggle feel for you?’, ‘When have you felt like that in the past?’, ‘What do you do when you feel that way?’, ‘What could your own behaviour be evoking in the team?’, ‘What could you do differently?’

Gestalt/systemic: e.g. ‘What is holding your attention in this situation?’ ‘What are you not noticing?’, ‘What are you inferring from people’s behaviour in the team?’, ‘What underlying needs are team members trying to fulfil by behaving this way?’, ‘What is this team situation telling you about wider issues in the organization?’, ‘What resources could you draw on to support you?’

Spiritual/existential: e.g. ‘How is this situation affecting your sense of calling as a leader?’, ‘What has God taught you in the past that could help you deal with this situation?’, ‘What resonances do you see between your leadership struggle and that experienced by people in the Bible?’, ‘What ways of dealing with this would feel most congruent with your beliefs and values?’

An important principle I’ve learned is to explore options and to contract with the client. ‘These are some of the ways in which we could approach this issue. What might work best for you?’ This enables the client to retain appropriate choice and control whilst, at the same time, introduces possibilities, opportunities and potential new experiences that could prove transformational.

31 Comments

Deborah Pearson

24/4/2014 04:52:55 pm

Have experienced many of these issues/situations in my capacity as a manager.

Nick Wright

25/4/2014 10:31:40 am

Hi Deborah and thanks for the note. Having read the blog, did you have a sense of which coaching approach you would find/have found most helpful? With best wishes. Nick

Jeremy Marchant

26/4/2014 12:59:31 pm

Well, I use coaching as only one of a number of ways I work with a client in any one session, but if I may answer the question, I would say, "self-effacing".

What questions?: "How come?" is my favourite, particularly as in, "how come it suits you that X is happening?" where X is something the client doesn't want to be happening (he/she says).

27/4/2014 06:49:33 am

Hi Jeremy and thanks for the intriguing note. Could you say more about what 'self-effacing' would look like from the client's perspective and experience? I liked your comment about 'how come it suits you'. Reminds me of games in Transational Analysis. With best wishes. Nick

28/4/2014 02:40:44 am

Nick, good question. I’m not at all sure that I know what “self-effacing” looks like from the client’s perspective.

Many years ago I had a course of psychotherapy in which the therapist took her self-effacement to absurd extremes (albeit wholly in line with psychotherapeutic practices at the time)—well beyond the point where it might have been useful to me. So I hope I am not like that!

I think all good coaches are self-effacing, since pure coaching is surely about subscribing to a belief that the client always has all the resources they need (something, incidentally, which I think is indefensible), so why would the coach feel they need to impose their stuff into the conversation?

I am not a coach, though I use coaching techniques (forgive me for not typing out the rationale yet again in a LinkedIn discussion group; I have put it here: www.emotionalintelligenceatwork.com/resources/emotional-intelligence-work-approach-coaching).

So, it won’t surprise you if I say I do not have one style. That would be intolerable—both for me and for the client—in a coaching programme extending over any period of months, let alone years.

I have a number of styles. One of these is being provocative: as in answering the question about my style by saying I am self-effacing (particularly as I think this is not a provocative remark (as I explained above) but, as predicted, readers seem to!)

To be more serious, self-effacement surely looks like not having an interest in the discussion. In the olden days, the English language distinguished between uninterested and disinterested. A judge in court is disinterested in the outcome, but certainly is not uninterested in the case.

If I say I don’t care what the client does, that might seem shocking but, in truth, why should I be concerned that the client does what _I_ think is right? The client should be doing what _they_ think is right—provided they know why they are doing it.

Eberhard Bohrisch

26/4/2014 01:01:31 pm

I call it system-oriented as far as the functioning of my thoughts and emotions are concerned. My actual acting within an coaching-relationship is client-centered.

27/4/2014 06:51:03 am

Hi Eberhard. Would you be happy to say something more about what 'system-oriented' and 'client-centred' would look like in practice? With best wishes. Nick

27/4/2014 11:25:17 am

Hi Nick, thanks for the question!
Client-centered is the old therapy-concept of Carl Rogers, how deeply influenced me because of is humanistic approach. Client-centered means that the coach is focused on his client emotions, and thoughts. The client and his interests are always leading the process.
System-oriented means that I perceive and interpret not world not in terms of causality but as an open system of subsystems. I'm thinking in networks a level of perception. The consequence is that I have to deal with the problem that I have to process more information as is consciously possible (7 ± 2). That can only be done by a high degree of mindfulness and awareness and with trust in the ability of my whole brain (not only the working memory) to make adequate proposals and on the clients' personality to select what is useful for her / him. The methodology of my work contains questioning with the goal to focus on complexity (to see always the other possibilities) an e.g. circular questioning or reframing and action-methods as e.g. constellations or time-line.
I know that I would have to extend. But I would like to leave it like this.
Greetings!
Eberhard

1/5/2014 04:06:24 am

Nice to hear of another coach influenced by Carl Rogers, Eberhard. It is extraordinary that not all coaches are "client-centred" but apparently so. I am also strongly influenced by DW Winnicott.

Coming from a background of IT systems analysis, I am also influenced by this experience - it serves me well as a practitioner whether I am coaching or doing something else. However, I do not see the need to embrace all possible complexity - on the contrary, it is about keeping it simple.

Where I differ from Bernhard is that I don't call myself a coach; I am not one. I apply many other techniques if I feel the client might find them useful. One of these is to teach my clients models. I have invariably found that these enable them to gain insight into what’s going on for them. This in turn facilitates the shifts they need to make.

Rev. Dr. Constance Cook-Core

26/4/2014 01:02:17 pm

Empowerment.

27/4/2014 06:52:17 am

Hi Constance. Empowerment strikes me as an important goal in coaching. Would you be willing to say more about what approach you use to enable it? With best wishes. Nick

Ashiya Hudson

26/4/2014 01:03:00 pm

I have a direct style of coaching. I use plenty of affirmations to boost confidence and build trust, but I strongly believe in addressing issues both directly and honestly.

27/4/2014 06:55:42 am

Hi Ashiya and thanks for the note. I agree with you that it's easier (or more acceptable to the client) to be direct when the relationship is built on trust and that, sometimes, being direct and honest can build trust too. It sounds like authenticity is an important value to you. Would you be willing to share some examples of what your 'direct and honest' coaching style looks like in practice? With best wishes. Nick

DR. VERNA JACKMAN-BISHOP

27/4/2014 07:21:22 am

Interesting.....

27/4/2014 07:23:06 am

Hi Verna. Could you say a little more about 'interesting...'? I'm interested to hear more! With best wishes. Nick

Luis A. Marrero

27/4/2014 07:22:13 am

Thanks for your sharing your post, Nick. My short answer is that my coaching style is what the client needs. Though a logoteleologist, I am fortunate to have experience and knowledge of various approaches. I am client-centric and will select the method most appropriate for her or his situation. The goal and context will help determine that.

27/4/2014 07:24:27 am

Hi Luis. Many thanks for the note. I've never heard of logoteleology before. Could you say a bit more about what it means and looks like in practice, perhaps with some examples from your experience? With best wishes. Nick

27/4/2014 11:34:24 am

Greetings from Massachusetts, Nick. A pleasure to meet and to LinkedIn with you.

Logoteleology is a branch of Viktor Frankl's logotherapy. Logoteleology is meaningful purpose psychology. You can read about it in my book, "The Path to a Meaningful Purpose: Psychological Foundations of Logoteleology" (www.logotelos.com) and in my blog: http://authorluismarrero.wordpress.com/

My web page is www.bostonimp.com

Logoteleology is the scientific study of the meanings that enable individuals and communities to thrive.It comes from three Greek words:

1. Logos - meaning

2. Thelos - will (motivation)

3. Telos - purpose or ends

The raison d'être of logoteleology is to deal with an existential problem: "Mankind does not suffer from a lack of answers. Rather, it suffers despite the answers being available."

I research, publish, and aid people and organizations to deal with such paradox. I do so by analyzing meaning DNA's and their influence on motivation and purpose. To explain it briefly, I have stated that "What you mean, masters you."

I am sought by clients who want meaningful purpose psychology methods to better understand why they get the results they get, and how to improve. I use interviews and psychometrics to aid in meaning analysis. When clients understand the meaning they give to themselves, others, and situations -- and their implications and impact -- they are in a better position to select better options. Those inclined to do therapy practice logoteleotherapy (or the short version teleotherapy) which means "healing through meaningful purpose".

I and other certified and licensed logoteleologists also facilitate meaningful purpose laboratories, and do OD work.

There is more to meaningful purpose psychology; but this, I hope, is a sufficient explanation of some of its fundamentals.

27/4/2014 11:57:36 am

Hi Luis. Greetings from the UK. Thank you for such a helpful and inspiring response. I will certainly subscribe to your blog. The existential perspective you refer to resonates deeply with my own personal experience. I'm reading a book called, 'Existential Perspectives on Coaching' by van Duerzen and Hanaway (2012) at the moment - have you come across it? With thanks again and very best wishes. Nick

28/4/2014 02:37:28 am

Hello Nick. I will take a look at the book you suggest in Amazon (I am currently writing the second book in the logoteleology anthology). Thanks for sharing.

Happy to find professionals who care for the meaningful. Once you become familiar with meaningful purpose psychology, let me know if you wish to collaborate. We (Boston Institute for Meaningful Purpose) currently have initiatives to expand globally, and we welcome exploring synergy with like-minded partners.

Again, thanks, and well wishes. Luis

Doug Wilson

27/4/2014 11:27:06 am

Coaching styles shoud be related to the needs of the particpant and their level of maturity in the issue.
Asking socratic question of a person who has no content knowledge makes no more sense than lecturing an experienced person who just needs to determine how to apply what they know to a given situation.

27/4/2014 11:30:49 am

Hi Doug and thanks for your response. I like your comment about the level of client maturity in an issue. I've found in my own experience that new middle managers, for instance, often benefit most from mentoring that helps them build up their knowledge and ideas base whereas experienced senior leaders often benefit most from a more non-directive reflective approach that processes their wider experience. With best wishes. Nick

John Panigas

28/4/2014 07:10:50 am

That's an interesting comment Doug. Level of "maturity" can mean many things. It's my experience that maturity is multi-layered in a business owner. I have had the most success with being very interested in past behaviours and how decisions are made by the client. Looking for patterns of behaviours makes the relationship richer and we are able to get to core issues quicker and more efficiently.

George Anderson, MSW, BCD, CEAP

28/4/2014 02:39:12 am

Nick,
Thanks for your question. I often find this type of comment puzzling.

28/4/2014 07:11:32 am

Hey Nick, Great post!
I believe that as a coach being inquisitive is important. Without becoming a pain I spend a lot of time on asking why? This has led to great exchanges with clients and ultimately to great epiphanies.

Sharman Jeffries link

30/4/2014 08:50:53 am

What a great discussion flow! i would describe my working style with clients as solution focused, creative and psycho educational, using a range of methods depending on the client, their needs and goals.

Jennifer David

19/5/2014 03:41:47 am

Hi all, I tend to be client centred, I find that it empowers the client.

Yepi link

16/7/2014 01:58:05 am

What a great initiative here. I'll look around the site and see if I can offer any additional ideas. Thanks.

minecraft 8 link

4/8/2014 02:28:03 am

Thanks for this informative post. It help me a lot. And it gave mo ideas on how to make more money in marketing business. I hope lots of people visit this site so they can easily learn this informative post.

Michael Craig

11/8/2014 07:35:15 am

Thanks for asking Nick. I start off with myself - my own perceptions are key to the process, and how I see the client. Using an approach I can only describe as "Divine Listening," I simply accept that the person in front of me is a Divine Being who knows - deep down - everything he or she needs to know to solve the problem or complete the situation. Then I use a simple feedback method in Discovery to take statements the client says and test them - to see whether or not their inner and outer decision-makers are in sync . . . or "congruent" with their desired outcome. The third phase is to test whether or not they even have Access to their inner decision-maker (and if not, get that), and finally I take them through a Resolution phase,or simple visualization that helps them integrate the new decision into their mind and body. The whole thing is remarkably effective, since its based on the nature of the mind itself.

Cheryl White

11/8/2014 07:35:45 am

Aahh, great question. Until now I really had not thought about my coaching style, especially since I have "Bambi legs" right now. I would say that my style is client focused. I allow the client to determine where we go on a call. I get their request and ask how they want to spend their time and allow them to speak. Then use reflection and powerful questioning as the access point to the client's awareness. As Michael said, the clients already have everything they need to solve their problems, I (we) get to help them to see the possibilities in choice. What I have found is that allowing the client to "drive" they are able to generate practices that support their transformation and goal achievement. The practice areas give the client the chance to choose a different way of being or doing things to move them forward.