All posts by Dorothy Nesbit

Seeing the unseen: truths about the society we live in

Last week I wrote about the context in which we give feedback and this week I want to point to two more resources which supply insights into the society we live in.  Both provide insights for leaders about the context in which we lead.  This is not just about organisational culture.  It’s also about a wider culture.

The first resource is Walter Wink’s book The Powers That Be:  Theology For A New Millenium.  Winks has written extensively about what he calls the “powers” and this book draws together key points from a number of his books.  Maybe one way to understand Wink’s book is to imagine as a human being without knowledge of the overall size and shape of our planet being taken into space and shown, for the first time, that our planet earth is round and part of a much wider system.  Wink’s provides a compelling case for the idea that we live in a culture which favours violence (he calls it the domination system) and offers an alternative both to using violence to respond to violence and to a passive acceptance of domination by others.  He calls this alternative to classic fight or flight the third way or nonviolence.  I have heard that this book provided inspiration for Marshall Rosenberg’s book Nonviolent Communication:  A Language for Life as well as for Rosenberg’s lifetime commitment to teach nonviolence.  As a fan of Rosenberg’s work I found Wink’s book informed my understanding of this thing called NVC, too.

(Maybe it’s important to recognise in this posting that the subtitle of Wink’s book Theology for a New Millenium points both to Wink’s Christian faith and to the source of his interest.  If you are what often gets called a practising Christian you may find that this book challenges you in your understanding of Christ’s teachings, providing new insights into some key events in Christ’s life based on an understanding of the historical context in which Christ taught people – for example – to “turn the other cheek”.  And if you are not a Christian but simply someone who is seeking to understand the context in which you live and work I hope you will still read Wink’s book and draw insights from it).

Alongside Wink’s book, I recently came across the work of Anne Wilson Schaef and decided to read her book When Society Becomes An Addict.  Schaef is also stepping a long way back to identify a systemic culture she initially called by gender-related names and in this book calls the addictive system.  What fascinates me about this book is the link Schaef makes to the behaviours of the alcoholic.  These include such things as seeking to control, lying, denial and confusion.  And this makes sense to me both as cause and effect of living in what Wink’s calls the domination society.  For if you are seeking to dominate you are unlikely to say “I’m telling you that I’m right and you are wrong because that gives me power over you and encourages you to comply” or “I am dismissing you or your ideas rather than look into them because I know my case is built on foundations that don’t stand up to close examination”.  Equally, if you are subject to domination by others you may well experience confusion when faced with the obfuscation of a dominant other (from parent to boss) and you may well lie in your attempts to protect yourself from the punishments that are built into the system.

What’s this got to do with leadership?  In truth, I hope this is readily apparent:  as leaders, we may choose to perpetuate the domination system or to create something different.  Goleman and his co-authors write about the impact of different leadership styles in their book The New Leaders.  Perhaps another way of looking at it is this:  Wink’s writing together with Wilson Schaef’s provide a context in which to read all sorts of writings about leadership.  If you like, a planet earth view.

PS  Just to let you know, as a member of Amazon Associates UK, I shall receive a referral fee for any books you buy using the links in this posting.

    

Nonviolent communication: finding out more

As they often are, my post for today has been written in advance.  As I sit and write, I am looking forward to taking a week away on a Nonviolent Communication retreat, with Vicky Peirce at The Barn.  As you read, I am mid-way through our five days together.  My past experience tells me that I can expect to be both stretched and nourished by the experience.

Recently, colleagues in the UK community of NVC practitioners have launched a ning group – a kind of social network cum website.  The membership is growing and I expect it to grow further.  You will find it at http://www.nvc-uk.com/ or equally at http://nvc-uk.ning.com/.  This is in addition to a simple information page at http://www.nvc-uk.info/.  There’s also a wealth of information available via the official site of the Center for Nonviolent Communication at http://www.cnvc.org/.

Marshall’s book is also the book I recommend most often to my coaching clients.  Having imbibed BBC Radio 4 all my life, I sometimes call it my Desert Island Disc book.  This is Nonviolent Communication:  A Language for Life.

If you want to find out more about Nonviolent Communication or connect with others who are seeking to practice this approach to relationships with self and other, these are all good places to start.

PS Just to let you know, as a member of Amazon Associates UK, I shall receive a referral fee for any books you buy using the links in this posting.

When your self image takes time to adjust to your new role

As much as I am passionate about my work, I rarely watch television drama with a professional eye.  This evening, though, a classic workplace drama caught my eye:  the promotion.

Mark, senior nurse at Holby City, is encouraged by colleagues to apply for – and gets – the vacant CEO post.  Whilst his colleagues are already looking at him through new eyes, Mark is unsure about his ability to do the job.  His sense of self or self image is out of kilter with his understanding of his new job.

It’s possible that Mark does not have the capabilities to do the job.  (In truth, given my understanding of the job he is leaving behind and the role of CEO, I think this is likely).  Equally, it’s possible that Mark has everything it takes to carry out his new role effectively.  It’s simply a question of aligning his self image to his full capabilities in the context of his new post.

Sometimes, candidates for a new and senior job have a self image which tells them they have everything to do a job and yet this sense of self is not matched by their true capabilities.  These candidates are the recruiter’s nightmare – a kind of headhunter’s Lorelei.  Presenting every appearance of having what it takes they draw others in and they may even present a great front for a while once they are in post.  However, there are only so many times they can blame others for mistakes in their new role before those around them start to see beyond their brash and confident facade.

If you are the employer seeking to fill that critical senior post you will do well to invest in a thorough Executive Assessment.  At Learning for Life (Consulting) we place a three-hour competency based (“behavioural event”) interview at the centre of our assessments.  This helps us to make confident risk assessments of short-listed candidates and to see through any false impressions.  If you let through the over-confident candidate you may find it hard to invite changes, for the over-confidence may be rooted in the candidate’s refusal to face the evidence of their limitations.  Yes, they lie* to themselves – habitually.

If you are one of the Mark’s of this world, you may find that working with a good Executive Coach will help you to adjust your sense of self so that you can step fully into your new role, knowing in every fibre of your being who you are in the context of your new role.  This will boost your confidence even whilst helping you to understand and leverage your strengths – and recognise and manage your limitations.

*And in case you think “lie” is a strong word (in this or any other context) you might like to look out for Dorothy Rowe’s recent book Why We Lie.  I added it to my wishlist on Amazon recently after hearing my namesake talk about her book on BBC Radio 4.

Making the case for a “coaching culture” in your organisation

Today a request (on the Training Journal Daily Digest) for input on how to make the case for creating a coaching culture moved me to write. The person making the request had been charged with making the case by her line manager after suggesting it would benefit her employing organisation. Given the level of experience (as best I could judge from a brief posting) I decided to go right back to the fundamentals. This is what I wrote:

There’s plenty I could say on this subject – creating a coaching culture across organisations (also known as a “high performance culture”) is close to my heart and to my professional interests. First though, I thought I’d suggest you get really clear about the outcomes you desire from preparing a business case – and also about the outcomes your manager wants from this activity.

I’m guessing there may be several, including:

  • Making and testing the case for going down this road, i.e. outlining what this might do for your organisation together with credible evidence to support your assertion and testing what it might take to achieve those outcomes. Together, this constitutes your compelling case;
  • Beginning the process of building support and commitment across the organisation for some kind of investment in this;
  • For your manager there may also be other elements which s/he may not express, such as letting you be the person who tests the idea and fails rather than taking on this risk or beginning to coach you in how to build the case and make it stick so that it turns into a viable proposal which achieves great results across the organisation.

These objectives are illustrative – and just to say that if you overlook any one of your key outcomes you may direct energies ineffectively as you set about making your case.

Derrick Bird: more than a “killer”

Wednesday, June 2, 2010.  As the day unfolds the news begins to emerge of a number of acts of violence in Cumbria.  What began as an ordinary day in an area beloved of holiday makers for its tranquility and outstanding natural beauty ends as another Hungerford, Dunblane, Omagh.

Thursday, June 3, 2010.  The news of the day is dominated by reporting of the shootings as each new detail is sought out and shared.  Wondering why we are drawn to report in such detail and why I am drawn to watch it, I recognise the shock we all experience at events which are so far outside our mental maps of the world and our need, somehow, to make sense of the tragic events of the day.  Talk of the fact that the weapons used were lawfully held blends seamlessly into questions about our UK gun laws as if, somehow, there must be a way of preventing every such act of violence.

The reportage is – to my mind at least – sensitive and respectful, recognising the shock of a whole community and the need to grieve both individually and as a community.  The events of the previous day will need to be processed and the community will need to find some way of coming to terms with the experiences and the heartfelt losses of the day.

Of course, one option is easy to reach for and already reflected in the language used to describe Derrick Bird, the man who killed 12 people and injured a number of others.  On the one hand witnesses describe him in his full ordinariness:  the man who was a regular in his local pub, sometimes quiet and sometimes joshing with his mates;  the man who had dedicated significant time to caring for his mother.  On the other hand, journalists reach for the descriptions which set him apart – the gunsman, killer.  It is not only that he committed acts of violence.  The language suggests that he was the acts he committed.

I am reminded of a story told by Marshall Rosenberg about teaching nonviolent communication in a prison, when a man convicted of murder told him:  “If I’d known about this [nonviolent communication], I would not have needed to murder my best friend”.  Whilst we may never know for sure the motives that drove Derrick Bird to shoot so many people before killing himself, we can be sure that his was the tragic expression of his unmet needs – needs that he lacked the skill to meet.  His tragedy has become the tragedy of his family, the tragedy of a whole community, the tragedy of a nation.

So, as my heart goes out to everyone involved, I choose to believe that Derrick Bird was more – much more – than the acts he committed on Wednesday, 2 June 2010.  I choose to embrace him in my thoughts with as much love and care as I have for his bereaved family, for those he injured and killed, for their loved ones and for those around them affected by the terrible events of the day.

His is not a legacy I would wish for anyone and yet it can be transformed by our ability to love and to heal.

“Executive” and “Life” Coaching: choosing the right coach for you

Coaching’s leading international body, The International Coach Federation, offers tips for selecting a coach and, well, more tips for selecting a coach, so I think I need to start this posting by answering a question which may or may not be in your minds: why am I providing thoughts when guidance is already available?

The answer is two-fold or maybe three. Firstly, my recent series of postings on “life” and “executive” coaching doesn’t seem complete to me without addressing the question of how to find the right coach for you. Secondly, you’re here reading this blog and you may or may not know about the ICF’s guidance: at the very least, I wanted to supply the link. And thirdly, it’s possible that I may have some thoughts to add.

The ICF’s Tip 2 is know your objectives for working with a coach. I’m going to put this in pole position and adapt it slightly, to know what you want. When you are seeking help and support it helps to know what outcomes you want from your investment. It’s also possible that the help and support you need right now may or may not be coaching. (I want to add a note of compassion here: from some people at least, exploring what you want is the work in which you invest with your partner of choice).

The ICF Tip 1 is educate yourself about coaching. I’m inclined to adapt this, too, to – simply – educate yourself. I have written about a number of different approaches elsewhere on my blog and as I write I am making a mental note to write an overview of some of the approaches that are out there, though this posting is for another day. The bottom line is this:  coaching may or may not be the right next step for you. Meantime, if you do want to read about coaching, the ICF Research Portal also hosts coaching research articles, case studies, journals, etc.)

There’s a tip the ICF doesn’t highlight: know how you want to work with your coach. As well as knowing what outcomes you want from coaching, it helps to know how you want to work with your coach to make progress towards those outcomes. In practice many clients don’t know the answer to this question until they have their first experience of coaching. Still, thinking through this question helps you to decide whether coaching is the right investment for you and also to find the best match for you. (And in case you want to explore what coaching requires of the coach, you might like to read “Executive” and “Life” Coaching: What does each require of the coach?)

The ICF Tip 3 is to interview three coaches before you decide on one. Professional coaches are used to responding to requests of this kind and benefit from it: just as you want to find the right coach for you they want to find the right clients for them. This part of the process helps you to deepen your understanding of what you want as well as to test the match with your potential coach. It also reassures your coach that you come to coaching from a place of commitment and having “done your homework”.

The ICF Tip 4 follows on from Tip 3, highlighting that when you choose the right coach for you, there should be a connection that feels right for you. In other words, trust your instincts. This is true when you make your initial choice and it’s also true when you start your work together. If your instincts are telling you this isn’t the right person for you to work with, it probably isn’t. Don’t be afraid to draw your coaching to an end and go in search of a better match.

By the time you have gone through these steps, the labels (“executive”, “life” etc.) that have helped you draw up your initial shortlist of coaches should have served their purpose. By now you have had the opportunity to explore in greater depth the match between you and your coach and find the right coach for you. I wish you well with your search.

“Executive” and “Life” Coaching: Finding your place in the marketplace

This posting is written by a coach for other coaches, drawing on the input of colleagues who have insight into what it takes to market ourselves effectively.
Let’s just recognise that “Executive” and “Life” Coaching are labels.  On the one hand, there may or may not be critical differences between the two (for more on this you may like to read my postings “Executive” and “Life” Coaching:  How are they similar? and “Executive” and “Life” Coaching:  How are they different?).  On the other hand, their primary role as labels is to help clients and coaches to find each other who are well suited to work together in a productive coaching partnership.  I am grateful to colleagues for pointing this out and for highlighting that these and other labels are not important to people who know the coach:  rather, labels act as the sign that helps people who don’t yet know you to recognise you as the right coach for them.
A key implication of this is that you need to understand how your perfect client thinks at the point when he or she is looking for a coach.  This is different from the question of what ground you may cover together in the course of your coaching partnership which may take you both by surprise.  This includes understanding the key issues that your clients may be looking to address through coaching and the key outcomes they may be seeking – in marketing speak the “benefits” they may be seeking.  This is not about the kind of undercover marketing that is still popular in the mass market but about a genuine understanding of your clients.
A second key implication is that you need to be able to speak to potential clients in their own language:  as one colleague put it, “in the language that our target clients can hear, understand and desire”.  To quote a colleague this implies that as coaches preparing to market our services we need to “get clear on what the heart of our offer is.  Then get ourselves out of the way of what we think our clients want and are looking for – and listen”.  When we meet the kind of people we most yearn to coach what do they say to us and in what language?  This is the language our marketing needs to use.
I could say so much more, based on the rich input of colleagues from a variety of sources, even whilst recognising that I am an apprentice in the field of marketing.  For now I am simply going to express my thanks to colleagues from the Coaching at Work group on LinkedIn and to fellow students on Kathy Mallary’s sales and marketing programme, Empowerment 2010.

“Executive” and “Life” Coaching: What does each require of the coach?

As I explore the question in this posting’s title, I am fully aware of another question that it implies: to what extent are the requirements of the coach different for Executive and Life Coaching? I make a mental note to offer my own view as part of writing this posting.

Let’s be clear, both Life and Executive Coaching require highly developed coaching skills. Many authors have attempted to describe them and professional bodies also have their definitions. This is a challenge: in truth, the skilled coach embodies a way of being which is reflected at every level, from their readily visible knowledge and skills to the often implicit values, beliefs and even identity on which their knowledge and skills rest.

These coaching skills enable coaches to establish and work with clients in a relationship of deep trust and respect, even whilst addressing difficult areas in the client’s life and work. As well as creating an initial agreement which sets the boundaries of the coaching relationship and defines how coach and client will work together, the coach has to be flexible, responding with curiosity to whatever the client brings. Practitioners of co-active coaching call this “dancing in the moment”, a term which recognises that the coach does not come with the answers but, rather, facilitates the process by which the client finds his or her own answers. Working with clients is likely to involve having conversations of a depth clients have not experienced elsewhere.

Many coaches can point to an extensive professional training that underpins their work, together with ongoing professional development: working with their own coach and working under the supervision of another coach is likely to be the tip of the iceberg. For me, this implies an authenticity as a learner which has been developed over a number of years. It’s not only that the coach has developed his or her craft but also that he or she is a learner who sees learning as an ongoing, life-long commitment.

This commitment to learning makes a number of significant contributions to coaching, whether Life or Executive. The coach has knowledge and insight that clients may not have. This ranges from (for example) insights into the way organisations work, through insights into the way individuals work to insights into the experience of being a learner. Thus, the coach’s professional development as a coach is a beginning but not the end. The coach who has learned to ask challenging questions more widely in his or her life is well equipped to ask questions in coaching. The coach who has faced his or her own fears is able to support clients in facing their own, even though they may not be the same as the coach’s.

It’s at this point that I come to the differences in the requirements of the coach of Life and Executive Coaching. For me this is a “both… and” question: at times, in the words of Niels Bohr, the opposite is also true. Each coach needs to be able to command the respect and trust of his or her clients who may have different expectations of their coach. The life client may be in search of empathy and understanding from a coach who is going to work with him or her in every area of his or her life. The executive client may look for signs that the coach has a deep understanding of life at the top of an organisation. Both may look for knowledge. Both may look for relevant experience. Both may look for a coach who has a passion for the field in which s/he works.

At the same time, such things as knowledge and past experience can be an impediment to coaching if they are not coupled with the kind of skills as a coach and a learner that I have described above. The executive-turned-coach may be trading on knowledge whilst lacking the skills to facilitate the client’s own process or, worse still, whilst having been ineffective in a senior executive role. The life coach may have deep empathy for the client who is going through experiences he or she has also struggled with and be poorly equipped to help the client to find the learning that will heal and transform.

In my view and in the view of many coaches, the most able coaches can and do support clients with both the life and the work piece so that the label Life or Executive Coach reflects more than anything a positioning in the marketplace. (I say more about this in my postings “Executive” and “Life” Coaching: Finding your place in the marketplace and “Executive” and “Life” Coaching: choosing the right coach for you).

Perhaps the quote below, from a colleague who responded to my posting on this subject, best illustrates the paradoxes inherent in trying to distinguish between different kinds of coaching:

For years I have literally battled with, disliking “life coach”, and focusing on small business coaching yet my greatest gift and my greatest joy in coaching is the “life” piece which is needed in the foundation to be successful in business.

But my clients are ready to hire for this – they want to hire me to help their business. They always say the “personal part” is such a bonus and now they know what they know they can’t imagine not having it. But they GROANED at doing any personal stuff up front, and wanted to get on to the business!

“Executive” and “Life” Coaching: How are they different?

Now, it’s easy to be cynical when it comes to the question of what makes the difference between Executive and Life Coaching. What would the cynics say? Some would talk of the greed of Executive Coaches, whose fees can be 10 times or more the fees charged by life coaches. Equally, some would talk of these fee levels as a sign that client egos are standing in the way of rational judgment. And some courageous coaches would admit that setting their fee levels in line with the corporate market can help them to create the presence they seek in the marketplace even whilst feeling uncertain and anxious about selling their services. All of these things may be true – though not always. It seems unlikely that the corporate marketplace is universally naive or that coaches are generally greedy. So in what ways are Executive and Life Coaching different and how does this justify the significant difference in fees?

A key difference – which is nonetheless easily overlooked – is in who buys and for what purpose. In Executive Coaching, the buyer is the organisation and the purpose is typically to benefit the organisation. Executive Coaching has as its primary emphasis the individual in the context of the business. In Life Coaching, the buyer is the person seeking coaching and any emphasis on the individual’s work is in the context of the individual’s life and/or career. Executive Coaching is holistic, working with the whole person. At the same time it has as its primary area of focus the individual in the context of the business or organisation. Life Coaching, like Executive Coaching, is holistic, working with the whole person. Unlike Executive Coaching, however, Life Coaching is about the person’s whole life, as well as about the whole person.

In practical terms, the differences arising from the question of who buys can be subtle: after all, the ground covered by an Executive Coach and a Life Coach with the same client may be the same along with the outcomes. The high flying executive may use coaching to identify his or her next career move, for example, and this may or may not be with the same organisation, even when coaching is funded by the individual’s employer. And whether coaching is funded by the business on behalf of an individual or by the individual him- or herself, the client is always the individual concerned. It is to this person that the coach has a primary duty.

At the same time, there are important financial distinctions between Life and Executive Coaching – and not just the difference between the funds each buyer can command. These are also distinctions in the value to each buyer of the outcomes of coaching. Improvements in a senior executive’s performance, for example, translate into results (including bottom line results) that affect the whole organisation. Often, these bottom line results come via changes in the senior executive’s behaviour and this in turn may come from changes in his or her way of being. The driven executive may learn to engage staff and harness their motivation rather than to leave them two steps behind. The passionate and brilliant executive may learn that good ideas still need to be sold (and how). Over time, the return on investment can make the investment in coaching seem modest.

So far I have spoken in terms of the buyer and the value to each buyer of Life and Executive Coaching and this could suggest that there is no difference between the two. At the same time, many coaches have struggled to succeed as Executive Coaches whilst some Executive Coaches make poor other-than-business coaches. So what does it take to succeed in each discipline? If you’re interested to explore this question you might want to read “Executive” and “Life” Coaching: what does each require of the coach?

“Executive” and “Life” Coaching: How are they similar?

The Association for Coaching offers definitions of various types of coaching beginning with “Personal/Life Coaching”. Using Anthony Grant’s words (University of Sydney, 2000) Personal/Life Coaching is defined as: A collaborative solution-focussed, results-oriented and systematic process in which the coach facilitates the enhancement of work performance, life experience, self-directed learning and personal growth of the coachee. The Association’s definition of Executive Coaching begins with the words As for personal coaching, but… It’s easy to see that coaching of all kinds has aspects in common.

Grant’s definition – like many others – points both to the “what” and to the “how” of coaching. Coaching is an outcome-oriented process which, potentially, addresses all areas of clients’ lives. In his definition of Personal/Life Coaching Grant identifies key areas of outcome as enhancement of work performance, life experience, self-directed learning and personal growth of the coachee. It’s easy to see that, whether coaching is funded by the employer for a senior executive (Executive Coaching) or funded by the individual for his or her own purposes (Personal or Life Coaching) these outcomes might apply. On the surface at least, there are similarities in the “what” of Executive and Life Coaching.

Grant’s definition also implies similarities in the “how” of coaching, describing coaching as a collaborative solution-focussed, results-oriented and systematic process in which the coach facilitates (…). This definition helps to differentiate coaching from other forms of intervention (advice, training, therapy…). At the same time, it suggests that the “how” of both Executive and Life Coaching have a great deal in common. Both require an ability on the part of the coach to facilitate their client’s learning process, supporting the client in identifying and moving towards desired outcomes. Coaching is a holistic activity which requires of the coach an ability to engage with the client in the round – to engage with the whole person.

It follows that whatever the coach is offering and however he or she labels his or her own work, Executive Coaches and Life Coaches have a skills set in common and both have to be highly developed in these skills. (I say more about this in my posting: “Executive” and “Life” Coaching: What does each require of the coach?). Equally, both are circumscribed by the coach’s code of ethics. These codes of ethics vary not because of the context in which a coach practices so much as because various supervisory bodies have different ethical codes.

So much for the ways in which Executive and Life Coaching are similar. What about their differences? If you are interested to read more, you can find some thoughts in my posting: “Executive” and “Life” Coaching: How are they different?