Wrong

29/5/2020

‘You’re wrong, pal.’ (Simon)

It was a different way to end a coaching conversation. Many leaders and managers would dance and wriggle around it, trying to find a less direct way of signalling disagreement, if at all. At least in UK culture, that is. Simon was coaching a colleague and decided to dispense with the niceties. After all, why waste time and beat around the bush if the answer is obvious? As far as Simon was concerned, the bloke was talking a load of nonsense and that was it. Enough. ‘You’re wrong, pal.’

In fact, the issue his colleague was presenting could have had some fairly significant consequences for a group of vulnerable young people. Simon felt accountable. He saw it as his job to put the bloke straight. The difficulty was how to do this in a coaching conversation. How to present a forceful-enough challenge whilst yet, at the same time, to retain his colleague’s responsibility to own and resolve it himself. This was confronting-coaching on steroids. Simple. ‘You’re wrong, pal.’

So, here’s the thing. What do you do as a leader, manager or coach if a person’s beliefs, values, behaviours, intentions or actions clash fundamentally with your own? What if you foresee serious consequences that they don’t see, or that don’t matter to them? What if it only becomes apparent in the midst of a coaching conversation? Do you stay silent, pose a question, offer an opinion, snatch the reins from them, or do something else? Would you ever assert: ‘You’re wrong, pal’?

62 Comments

Ian Brownlee

29/5/2020 10:53:41 pm

The problem is probably the client's confirmation bias based on their perception of their world. If you confront it directly with logical arguments you often get "blowback" where the person becomes even more entrenched in their position and can often become aggressive in their defence of their ideas. I would not confront them directly. I would ask them to help me understand their way of thinking. I would listen to what dangers they forsee for them personally and then focus on the "emotional" benefits that they could receive from other options. I would use a linguistic "Double bind" structure in talking to them: first the problems followed by the positive benefits for them. Last into working memory, first out!

Nick Wright

29/5/2020 11:11:11 pm

Hi Ian. Yes, if somebody is wedded to a position, whether that be for e.g. rational, emotional or deeper existential reasons - and whether they are aware of it or not (which is where unconscious bias can creep in) - to challenge them and/or their position may simply evoke push-back and reinforce their stance.

I guess the issue that Simon encountered in this scenario was that, having tried more discursive questions to evoke a different level of awareness in his colleague - which, I guess, may have included 'help me to understand' type questions - his colleague was still determined to embark on a specific course of action that Simon found unacceptable.

I'm intrigued by your comment, 'I would use a linguistic double bind structure in talking to them'. That isn't something I'm familiar with. Could you give an example of what that could have looked like in Simon's case, or perhaps in another scenario where you may have used such a device?

Ian Brownlee

30/5/2020 11:32:47 am

End weighting: Action vs benefits or vice versa.
When you make an offer of just one item - “Would you like a cup of coffee?”- it will often be rejected as it may be seen subconsciously as being “imposed”. Basically, “Take it or leave it.”- However, if the person has a specific preference, they will tend to take that option. When you give two choices: “Would you like tea or coffee?”, If there is no strong specific preference, the person will often choose the last option. This is the basic description of the “Double Bind”.

When you give people information in a structured manner, the tendency is for the last information given is that which is remembered best (last in->first out). This is usually known as the recency effect or end weighting/loading. Excellent communicators set up the communication that gives an illusion of choice which helps increase cooperation.
The simple Ericksonian Hypnosis style linguistic double bind of, “Would you like to go into trance later or right now?” Could be answered by, “Who said I want to go into trance.”, or, “Neither, I don’t want to go into trance.” However, I know of no instant in 35+ years of practical application of this technique, both in clinical & business contexts, where this has happened when the hypnotist has done the required priming first.

To paraphrase Dr Milton H. Erickson, “I give my client’s all the freedom they need to follow my suggestions.” (Also applicable in sales, marketing, negotiation & clinical contexts)
The practical application of the double bind in Negotiation or Presentations is:
Problem -> Solution.
Expensive -> less expensive.
Proposal -> interest covered.
something that they can’t do -> something they can do.
Hope this answers your question.

Nick Wright

30/5/2020 12:09:19 pm

Thanks Ian. That's a very helpful explanation. It reminded me of 'embedded commands' in NLP. I liked your paraphrase of Erickson: 'I give my client’s all the freedom they need to follow my suggestions.' That made me smile. :) I guess it's one reason why such techniques can be so powerful in sales and marketing...and one reason why so many people are skeptical ethically about their 'manipulative' intention and effects!

On 'recency effect', I remember reading a related article some years ago that recommended saying what you want someone to do at the end of a sentence; and to say what you want them to do rather than what you don't want them to do. So, for instance, rather than saying to a child in a classroom, 'Please don't TALK', say instead: 'Please be QUIET.' The idea is that the child subconsciously responds to the last thing they hear, regardless of the broader content of the sentence.

Chris Lever

29/5/2020 10:54:22 pm

Love the article. I have no issues with people telling me they think I am wrong on the proviso that this is a considered comment. I was once asked by a well known aid organisation who I would recommend as a guest speaker for a leadership conference. I said ‘ someone of substance that you disagree with’. With some astonishment they said why? I responded by asking them what was the point getting someone whose views they knew and agreed with where the likelihood of change was pretty remote. At least a principled and content rich view that was not theirs would at least start some conversations..... and then who knows what might emerge....

Nick Wright

29/5/2020 11:23:42 pm

Thanks Chris. What a great response to the aid organisation. I'm curious - did they follow up on your recommendation? You reminded me of the notion of an 'echo chamber' where, for whatever reason, people are only willing and interested to hear viewpoints that confirm what they already believe.

I worked with one organisation that wanted to achieve a step change in the quality of its leadership. It had already done lots of conventional leadership development. I proposed a 'Discovery' programme that would involve actively seeking out and engaging with radically different models and cultures of leaders and leadership.

It takes courage and humility to deliberately invite challenge and critique to one's existing beliefs, values, assumptions etc, and to be open to fresh possibilities. Nevertheless, it's also a great way to develop critical reflexivity (see: http://www.nick-wright.com/blog/spots). I guess the challenge Simon faced was what to do when a person is not open in this way, especially if high stakes are involved.

Chris Lever

1/6/2020 07:21:44 pm

Thanks Nick. No they didn’t take the advice and invited a well known and safe speaker. I am sure they had a good time but there again they didn’t move forward. Despite a clear need to progress the patterns were stuck and remain that way. I have declined any more work with them until there is some will to change. I am sad and frustrated but choice remains always with individuals shaped by their system. My role is do all I can to help people make wise good courageous informed choices. Whether they take these choices or not is down to them.... but there again I too can make my own choices.

Nick Wright

1/6/2020 07:24:33 pm

Hi Chris. That's disappointing to hear. It sounds like this short related piece may resonate with you? http://www.nick-wright.com/blog/disruptive-influence

Hemant R. Chalke

29/5/2020 11:25:53 pm

Snatch the reins, simple. That's what I do. Hence not popular n most hated, but it's a responsibility. Have to carry the cross.

Nick Wright

29/5/2020 11:32:10 pm

Hi Hemant. It sounds like you have dealt with similar situations to that which Simon faced. Are you able to share any examples here (albeit within the boundaries of confidentiality): e.g. what the issue was, what 'snatch the reins' involved, and what happened as a result?

Jo Pioro

30/5/2020 12:56:02 am

Im confused who said the statement.....If it was the coach saying you're wrong pal, that's quite a closed statement and doesn't allow for any meaningful discussion. Its also quite inflammatory and a shut down, and I would expect anger to follow. If it was the coachee saying you're wrong to the coach, that's totally okay as we are dealing with humans who have responses to our words. I am challenged daily, weekly and I invite it in a respectful way. I get things wrong, doesn't everybody? Im not a coach but do have some coaching skills. Also it might just be the stage in the relationship where you are both finding your place. If I knew I was right, I would be happy that I had got a reply and then would curious about the defence system the person is using and move forward. I don't want to be right all the time as that's how I learn. Good question! Im interested Nick, just out of curiosity have I commented in a coaching way, or is my answer too therapeutic/clinical?

Nick Wright

30/5/2020 01:07:13 am

Hi Jo. Apologies for the confusion. To clarify - Simon made the statement at the end of a conversation, in which he had been coaching a colleague. The dilemma for Simon was how to challenge a colleague on a course of action that he (Simon) profoundly disagreed with. (This may reflect particular difficulties for managers coaching colleagues in a line-relationship, where the manager is accountable for the colleague's actions.) Your reflections and approach sound, to me, consistent with a coaching approach. I guess a parallel situation in a therapeutic relationship could be what the therapist may/ought to do if a client chooses a course of action that the therapist profoundly disagrees with, e.g. owing to the therapist's own professional and ethical values?

Jo Pioro

30/5/2020 11:17:53 am

Thanks for clarifying Nick and I understand better now that I know he was talking to a colleague. Yes I have told colleagues that in my opinion they are wrong. It's a difficult situation, sometimes connected to policies that need to be followed and sometimes our own value systems. I'm trying to learn more about coaching so that's why I asked you if my comments were suitable for a coaching model. Thanks so much.

Nick Wright

30/5/2020 11:28:23 am

Thanks Jo. Yes, you introduce an important point that, in work contexts, the coaching conversation doesn't take place in an abstract bubble - so to speak. There is a wider organisational context (and sometimes a wider regulatory/legislative context), which can include policies, procedures etc. This is where the CCL 'SOGI' model (see: https://ccl-explorer.org/the-sogi-model-for-levels-of-leadership-impact/) can be useful as a tool for exploration; looking at an issue and potential courses of action from 4 different standpoints: society, organisation, group (e.g. team) and individual.

Great to hear of your interest in coaching. There are lots of overlaps with models, methods and tools used in a therapeutic context. Having said that, as in the counselling and therapy world too, there is a diverse range of theory, approach and practice in the coaching world - and not all agree!

Nick Wright

30/5/2020 12:28:49 pm

(If you would be interested to have a glance at some coaching ideas and resources from the psychological coaching arena, have a look through the articles and blogs on this website.)

Jo Pioro

30/5/2020 12:29:22 pm

Thanks so much Nick, I have bookmarked both links and look forward to reading more. Thanks for being kind and sharing your resources.

Gwen Griffith

30/5/2020 10:36:21 am

No- not my style!!! What was the stated goal of the meeting?

Assuming this is leadership coaching: I think I’d pull out my deck of values and have the client clearly find and state their values- if it’s best use of time- to see if the goals match the values. Otherwise I might resort to Jim Collins’ 5 in Good to Great and have the client evaluate himself based on those. How would his actions display the marks of a great leader. Then - his homework may well be some very hard work on consequences of his actions which spring from their values which would emerge in a planning session the next time (and perhaps REVISION due to new learning).

And: he must have 3 conversations with 3 different people who might or preferably *would* have different values (notably a spouse). Gwen

Nick Wright

30/5/2020 10:50:22 am

Hi Gwen. Thank you for such an interesting and practical response. I too have a pack of values cards and find them useful. What if, however, the person's choice of action is consistent with his or her values...yet in conflict with those of the leader-coach? I guess the person may also believe that his or her actions are consistent with Jim Collins' 5 Levels of Leadership, depending on which lens he or she views them through. I like your idea of exploring consequences, and of inviting perspectives from people with different lenses. I guess all of the methods you have suggested represent efforts, by the coach, to raise awareness and challenge the colleague to consider alternative viewpoints and courses of action. I know some coaches who would feel deeply uncomfortable to do that because it feels like the coach guiding the 'client's' agenda. In Simon's case, what if he had already tried such coaching approaches and the colleague retained the same viewpoint and stance as at the start?

Gwen Griffith

30/5/2020 01:44:30 pm

Well - Then, the next week I would come with the challenge of humility for a leader. What would it means to die to your self (Matt: unless a seed fall to the ground and die- you can bear no fruit). That’s another way of getting to measuring consequences.

Moral philosophy has always helped me here, and the challenge usually is with Enneagram 8s. Also, those 8s often are teachable on wisdom- “is this wise”. If I use that question, they realize they might have something to learn (if they are over 40).

Nick Wright

30/5/2020 01:47:56 pm

Thanks Gwen. I can see you wouldn't give up easily! Your mention of the Enneagram reminded me of Richard Rohr's work in this area (e.g. https://cac.org/the-enneagram-an-introduction/)

Gwen Griffith

30/5/2020 01:49:32 pm

Nick- Anyone who works with me understands the need to “explore”— my motto: “explore a wise way before acting” because it’s part of my method.

My care is for my client, I am for their success in the world. Unless there is pure evil at hand, I will prefer my process rather than outright stiff arming the client. Though- I did this once with a very immature and unstable kid who Id known since birth. My words proved prophetic- he did end up in a psych ward, with a new dx, and we are still on speaking terms.

Nick Wright

30/5/2020 02:04:06 pm

Hi Gwen. I can hear that...and I'm impressed by your resourcefulness and the range of tools and techniques you have available to you. It's making me think about my own practice. 'Explore' is certainly a core focus and skill in coaching and OD. The Simon example raises questions about else the coach may (and, perhaps at times, should) do in complex cultural, systemic and ethical situations. I remember one of my earliest clients saying they had found me kind, open, reflective and supportive. However, they wished I had been more challenging. That was a sobering wake-up call for me and my stance has certainly shifted over the years. On that theme, you may find this short related piece interesting? http://www.nick-wright.com/blog/disruptive-influence. I think it relates to your idea of 'prophetic' too.

Thom H Boehm

30/5/2020 10:53:21 am

Well, I would add, "I think" to the "you're wrong", but yeah, I would state my honest opinion.

Nick Wright

30/5/2020 11:01:09 am

Hi Thom. Thanks for the note. Adding 'I think' makes the statement sound less definitive and stark and allows space for conversation and exploration, rather than closing it down with what sounds like a sharp rebuke. Interestingly, your approach, to state your honest opinion, is consistent with Carl Rogers' idea of 'congruence'; that is, to role-model honesty and thereby establish trust - assuming there is sufficient empathy and 'unconditional positive regard' to support it so that the client doesn't feel judged or condemned. 'Opinion' also suggests that you are expressing and owning your own standpoint, yet without asserting it as a definitive truth.

Katharine Lamb

30/5/2020 12:17:12 pm

Wow, you are such a prolific writer! Well done for another thought-provoking blog. :)

Nick Wright

30/5/2020 12:17:59 pm

Thanks Katharine. :) Yes, I do enjoy thinking out loud and I learn so much from others' responses to these ideas.

Tara Parker link

30/5/2020 08:58:31 pm

Great situation to analyze! Being "wrong" or "right" is a personal perspective. It is like beauty, which all lies with the beholder. The concern is the value attached to being "wrong" or "right". My coaching, and personal, experience has taught me that the confidence will guide the desire to be wrong or right. Most of my clients have low self-esteem and therefore look to be wrong because, after alll, that is what self-esteem is all about - being "wrong" or being "right". To counter this idea, I have asked my clients (and everyone else in my life, really) to avoid the "right" and "wrong" mindset. Rather, I ask they take ownership and accountability for their thoughts by saying, "I disagree" or "I agree".

"You're wrong, pal" is not something I would offer to my cilents, friends, loved ones, or mysellf because it doesn't promote mindfulness. "I disagree, pal" encourages a conversation which can keep the client and the coach on track in exploration versus competition.

I can appreciate anyone who can stand by their convinctions or values but I admire those that can respect the boundaries within a relationship realizing being "wrong" or "right" is not the answer. Learning is.

Once again, Nick, you've set my brain to work!

Tara

Nick Wright

31/5/2020 12:48:55 pm

Thank you, Tara - and for sharing from personal and professional experience too. Your reflections on 'being wrong' and 'being right' remind me of Harris' 'I'm OK-You're OK' modes in Transactional Analysis, particularly vis a vis low self-esteem.

Here's a brief summary if you're unfamiliar with it: http://freetothink.co.uk/2013/08/09/i-im-ok-youre-ok/

I find it helpful as an observational and analytical tool because it enables us to reflect on the underlying psychological and relational dynamics in a conversation. 'You're wrong, pal' could suggest an 'I'm-OK-You're Not OK' stance.

I agree that 'I disagree' makes a similar point to 'You're wrong', whilst leaving the door open for conversation. In that sense, it's a more open stance. It also removes overt moral overtones from the discussion which can sometimes be helpful too.

Having said that, some issues are less a matter of personal perspective and more, perhaps, linked to legal, regulatory, policy or agreed (or stipulated) 'good practice'. In that case, a leader-coach may need to step in more directively if required.

I imagine if I was in Simon's situation, I may say something like, 'If I were to take my coaching hat off for a moment...there's something I need to say to you with my leader-manager hat on.' This could help avoid confusion created by overt-directing whilst in coaching mode.

Rekha H

4/6/2020 01:14:25 pm

How else can we deal with this situation?

Nick Wright

4/6/2020 01:15:08 pm

Hi Rekha. I'm intrigued. If you were to imagine yourself in this situation, what might you do?

Rekha H

4/6/2020 01:54:55 pm

As a trainer many times I have to be very clear to certain trainees. They also tend to influence even others.

Nick Wright

4/6/2020 01:56:02 pm

Hi Rekha. Does that mean you would confront them directly, in the group?

Rekha H

4/6/2020 02:19:04 pm

But I have tried talking to them one on one it sometimes doesn't seem to work.

Nick Wright

4/6/2020 02:32:02 pm

Hi Rehka. Some of the ideas in this short related piece may be of interest? http://www.nick-wright.com/blog/when-things-get-stuck

Rekha H

4/6/2020 04:36:28 pm

Thank you Nick. I appreciate your effort. Yes, I will follow this with my fresh engineering grads joining corporate.

Nick Wright

4/6/2020 04:37:02 pm

You're welcome, Rekha. I hope it goes well!

Ian Stimpson

4/6/2020 03:57:57 pm

My approach would be to ask the entire group how they feel about "You're wrong, pal"? How would you feel if spoken to like that? Are there other ways the message could be conveyed that might be more effective?
You could find that more effective in that situation.

Nick Wright

4/6/2020 04:09:22 pm

Hi Ian. Just to check...do you mean that, if in a group setting, one participant said 'You're wrong, pal' to another participant, you would invite the group to comment and offer alternatives?

Judit McAlley

4/6/2020 04:39:22 pm

Never. If the client's values, beliefs and views are so different that they literally "push" my buttons and I cannot remain objective and keep them in the focus then I would pause. I would explain and rather end the coaching sessions and recommend another coach. As how I see it, coaching is helping and supporting the clients finding their own responses (regardless of what I think they should do).

Nick Wright

4/6/2020 04:45:08 pm

Hi Judit. Yes, there are situations in which our best course of action is to recommend the client works with a different coach instead. I'm curious: In terms of 'objective', is a coach ever truly objective? If so, what would that mean? One of the challenges of leader-coaching is that the leader is often accountable for the person's work and, therefore, at times must take issue with the person's behaviour, decisions, actions etc. if the leaders considers them e.g. unethical, damaging or dangerous.

Judit McAlley

4/6/2020 04:59:17 pm

Let me check if I understand it correctly: You coach a leader who has people working for him/her for which they are accountable for. One of those team members' behaviour is unethical, damaging or dangerous. How can you as coach remain objective and not give your view on that team member's behaviour so that you don't direct the leader in the coaching conversation? Is my understanding correct?

Nick Wright

4/6/2020 05:03:31 pm

Hi Judit. That's a slightly different scenario...but an equally interesting and challenging one. Can you say more about how you would approach such a situation? I'd love to hear more!

In Simon's situation, he was a leader in an organisation and coaching a colleague who worked in the same organisation.

Judit McAlley

4/6/2020 05:55:05 pm

I see. I have experience with both situations.

When I was in Simon's situation I didn't regard it as coaching. I used coaching tools when it was suitable, but I was also in the role of the leader who needed to provide directions to their team. In that case, I gave and would still give direct feedback if necessary. It's a combination of being a leader, mentor and coach.

In the situation I described, it was actually easier. I could coach my client to identify and improve his leadership skills to deal with his team member's behaviour. I kept my focus on the client and stopped myself going into judging the client's team member for their behaviour.

Nick Wright

4/6/2020 06:03:44 pm

Thanks Judit. Really interesting comments. We could regard coaching as a cultural style of leadership as well as a set of tools or skills that can be deployed in leadership. Would you agree? This short piece may be of interest? http://www.nick-wright.com/christian-coaching-culture.html

In your second scenario, it raises some interesting questions such as 'who is the client' (in some forms of coaching or therapy supervision, for example, the coaches' clients may form part of the contract, by extension) and 'what responsibility does the coach have for the client's actions in relation to third parties'?

Shalini S.

4/6/2020 06:32:24 pm

Well Nick I am not a trainer but would like to attempt answering this. I wouldn't snatch the reins from them but instead would ask them questions in a manner they would start questioning what they believed in. With my interactions with people I have realised you will have a handful who are hell bent on looking at things their way. Force won't work but yes you will need lot of patience, keep your ego aside and post questions and facts. It does slow them down and probably shut them up for good if they don't wish to learn:)

Nick Wright

4/6/2020 06:36:01 pm

Hi Shalini. Yes, posing powerful questions can create a real shift, if the person is willing and able to consider them. This short related piece may be of interest? http://www.nick-wright.com/blog/good-question

Bassima Ibo

5/6/2020 07:27:33 am

One of the main skills I learned as a Training Officer is to stay on patience. It is very offensive to use hands gestures and say it loudly: You are wrong!!!Things could be better by saying Let’s try to do it differently. Allow your audience than to judge. Remember that as a Trainer you need to be smart enough with lots of examples to convince your audience.

Nick Wright

5/6/2020 08:59:18 am

Hi Bassima. Thank you for sharing insights from a training context. Yes, patience can certainly be a virtue when working with people and groups. The question of 'offensive' is an interesting one. It partly depends on culture; partly on the trust in the relationship and in the group; partly on the expression and way in which it is spoken.

I can imagine, for instance, a great difference between a hostile trainer pointing their finger at me angrily and shouting, 'You're wrong, pal!'...vs...'A warm and friendly trainer smiling at me and saying, gently, 'You're wrong, pal...but I still love you!' - perhaps whist gesturing a socially-distanced hug. :)

I think, 'Let's try it differently' could be a great response. We could also reflect back what we've heard first, to ensure the person feels heard and understood, then e.g. offer to explore the potential consequences (positive and negative) from a variety of standpoints.

These could include, for instance: the person; his or her customers or clients; his or her team; the organisation's senior leadership and management; wider shareholders/investors; funders or beneficiaries.

The tricky issue for Simon was that he had tried a number of exploratory techniques with his colleague, and his colleague was nevertheless unwilling to budge on an issue and intended course of action that Simon perceived to be potentially harmful to clients, and risky for the organisation reputation-wise. What to do then...?

Chris Campbell

5/6/2020 06:46:16 pm

I've had one of these. My values were seriously challenged. I continued with mainly open questions in the session but I realised that I was struggling not to feel judgement towards the coachee. I knew I couldn't continue with that coaching relationship and advised them after that I didn't feel we were suited and refunded their payment.

Nick Wright

5/6/2020 06:56:14 pm

Hi Chris. Thank you for sharing honestly from personal experience.

I'm intrigued. Did you reflect back to the coachee what was going on for you? Could such direct feedback form part of awareness-raising for the client (cf 'congruence' in Rogerian counselling)...if they are open to it? It sounded like you acted congruently when it clashed with your own values - and that's important.

I had an experience with a potential coaching client. He contacted me and I asked what he hoped could be achieved through working together, what his aspirations were. He described in detail how he wanted to become incredibly rich (financially) and all his goals focused around that. I felt myself go cold and withdrew.

I didn't say why, other than that I didn't think I was the right coach for him. On reflection I wish I had been more congruent. All I could think at the time was, 'I have no interest in helping the rich get richer.' A consultant reflected that back to me when I was developing my own website and that helped me sharpen and articulate my own values.

Chris Campbell

6/6/2020 07:34:14 pm

The coachee actually asked me why before I had a chance to ask if he wanted to know why. I didn't have a problem sharing, but that doesn't mean I necessarily did it in the best way. On reflection, I am still happy with how I responded, but only because I responded with congruency. He seemed to take it reasonably well but who knows what ended up going through his head after leaving me and whether I could have communicated it better...

Nick Wright

6/6/2020 07:38:13 pm

Thanks Chris. I think that unless we, and the client, are willing and able to work with the fundamental difference in values as part of the coaching and development process itself, to walk away with integrity intact can be the best and healthiest option for both parties.

Vasudevan Mukundan

22/6/2020 11:29:38 am

I would try with a little conservative phrase such as "If you allow me, can I offer a contradicting view" and then try to make him understand he is wrong.

Nick Wright

22/6/2020 11:32:00 am

Hi Vasudevan. Yes, in my experience, if we invite someone to invite feedback, and if they do so willingly, they are more likely to hear and respond well to the feedback we offer. I guess the next question that comes to mind for me is: what do you do if he or she says 'no'?

Nick Wright

24/6/2020 11:13:23 pm

I just read a very interesting and useful blog by a therapist, Mark Tyrrell, called, 'Should you ever pass judgement on your clients?' It contains some very pertinent insights and ideas that are relevant to this conversation: https://www.unk.com/blog/should-you-ever-pass-judgement-on-your-clients/

Heather Palmer

25/6/2020 05:50:12 pm

Definitely - coaching is about enabling the honest credible and successful way forward. (in my opinion) open to challenge as always!!

Nick Wright

25/6/2020 05:51:32 pm

Hi Heather. Are you saying you would be willing to be very honest with the client, if in your view it would enable a successful way forward for the client?

Heather Palmer

25/6/2020 09:32:00 pm

Yes - enabling success through honest interventions in my view is purposeful.

Nick Wright

25/6/2020 09:33:25 pm

Hi Heather. And what if the person's success - as they see it, would be detrimental to others' success or wellbeing - as you see it?

Heather Palmer

25/6/2020 09:50:05 pm

This conversation could go on for a period of time. Nick - my assumption is that detriments would be explored - however I stick to my guns of honest coaching rather than “playing” to the client” ( especially paying clients) would bring about a more valued expression of professionalism for coaches and the business of coaches. I strongly believe in the worth of coaching but it does need to be honest and credible - not wish washy and what the client wants to hear. It must have ultimately impact (in my opinion). Good to chat.

Sara-Louise Goode

26/6/2020 12:23:12 pm

Great question! I think it depends on how good your rapport is with the client. Sometimes a direct approach to stimulate a response works great, other times it will make people defensive and closed off to new ideas. My approach would be to get the client to fully explore the consequences of their current idea... encourage them to see how it may ‘play out’, and then offer an alternative approach and consequences to explore. If they really cannot see the ‘wood for the trees’ and it was something that really went against my values, I would have to make a more direct approach. I find most clients are drawn to you because of shared values, and will often follow a different path once they’ve become aware of the incongruencies.

Nick Wright

26/6/2020 12:26:46 pm

Thank you, Sara-Louise. I agree. The quality of relationship and trust makes a very significant difference to how a person may respond. Enabling the person to explore risks and consequences (including those that may lay outside of their awareness, interest or concern) would be a great way to address this kind of scenario.

Wrong

Leave a Reply.

Nick Wright

Archives

Categories

Wrong

Leave a Reply.

​Nick Wright

​Archives

Categories

Nick Wright

Archives