I am the enemy you killed, my friend

All articles
I am the enemy you killed, my friend.
I knew you in this dark: for so you frowned
Yesterday through me as you jabbed and killed.
I parried; but my hands were loath and cold.
Let us sleep now . . .

Wilfred Owen

The other day I bought my poppy as I always do, this time in my local shopping centre. Perhaps more than ever before, though, I have been thoughtful. What does it mean to give money in this way? And what does the poppy symbolize that I have pinned to my coat?

I look back and remember the men who died in the First and Second World Wars. I think of those who still live. And I remember. When I grew up our talk of these wars was laden with ideas of “right” and “wrong”. To have fought was to be proud. Behind the rhetoric lay many unspoken subtleties and a great deal of human suffering.

This year, in the UK, our remembrance spans a full century, from those men who went to the most awful of wars early in the 20th Century to those whose bodies have come home and into the care of grieving family, friends and relatives early in the 21st Century.

Always, the words of Wilfred Owen come to mind. I am the enemy you killed, my friend. For whatever the rhetoric of war – and of our politicians here in 2009 – the men, women and children who die in conflict are just that. Men. Women. Children. Our fellow human beings.

As I remember I also look forward, yearning for a time when we come to differences of view – whether person to person, ethnic group to ethnic group, religion to religion or nation to nation – with the deep understanding of our shared humanity implied in this line in Owen’s poem, Strange Meeting. I think of the clarity of intention, the heart and spirit, the skills needed to make this dream a reality.

And, meantime, I remember all those who are involved in or affected by war. I remember that, whatever “side” we think we are on, we are all doing the best we know how – for now. And I remember that there is a future and that we do have the capacity to learn. If not yet, some time…

Setting up a coaching group – the essential standards

Coaching

Today I’m looking forward to meeting my dear friend and colleague Rosie Miller for a late afternoon “cuppa”. Executive Coaching is at the heart of Rosie’s business as it is of mine and we like to keep abreast of each other’s businesses and to provide support.

In recent weeks we have been exploring the possibility of setting up a coaching group – the Best Year Yet coaching group. We’ve had a variety of expressions of interest but not enough to meet our core criteria for setting up a group – 6 to 8 people who are committed and enthusiastic to join. Last week we looked at the responses we had so far and decided that rather than invest more effort in seeking to attract participants we would let people know we are not going to go ahead. It’s our view that if it proves effortful to set a group up then perhaps that group is not meant to be.

For my part, I feel a sense of joy at taking the decision and I hope this came across in my e-mail to those who had expressed an interest. It’s not that I’m not disappointed – it would have been great to go ahead. And still, I wanted to act on my convictions and I celebrate the decision to hold back from pushing for something that isn’t meant to happen – at least, not yet. I am also grateful to everyone who took part in our discussions, whatever decision (or indecision) they ultimately made. I’ve taken so much learning from the experience and I look forward to carrying it forward.

No doubt Rosie and I shall be reflecting on this experience when we meet this afternoon.

The purpose of nonviolent communication (3): pure natural giving

All articles, Alternative approaches

In the DVD Making Life Wonderful, in which Marshall Rosenberg teaches a group of adults about nonviolent communication, his third of three statements of purpose goes something like this:

whatever is done is done through pure, natural giving

One way to understand what is meant by “pure natural giving” is to reflect on all the times you have chosen to do things out of a sense of duty or obligation. In the family you may well have rules which have been handed down from generation to generation such that there are things that you do out of some sense of what’s expected rather than because you choose to. In the workplace there may be rules – both written and unwritten – that you follow more or less reluctantly because you “have to”. Pure natural giving, by contrast, is the kind of giving that you do because it meets your need to give. It’s the kind of giving that you do with joy.

The difference is not always in what you give or what you do and what you don’t give or do. No, it might equally be in the awareness that you have that you are indeed choosing to give and that your choice does indeed meet your needs. Pure natural giving comes from this awareness of choosing and of choosing to meet your own needs. Consider the difference, for example, between saying “I have to take John through the disciplinary process because his performance is poor and that’s the rules” and saying any one of the following statements:

  • “I am choosing to take John through the disciplinary process because I’m aware that if I don’t I may open myself up to criticism from my boss. Having this job helps me to meet my needs for security – having a home, food to eat etc. – and I don’t want to put my needs at risk”;
  • “I’ve noticed how other members of the team are beginning to show signs of resenting John in the team and I want to do something about it so that everyone’s needs can be met. Taking John through the disciplinary process is one way of exploring the issue and looking for ways forward”;
  • “Over time I’ve observed how John works hard and still falls short of delivering in his job. I want to contribute to John and I believe that taking him through the disciplinary process will help us to explore what the issue is and to find a way forward so that John can thrive in his work”.

Each statement shows that the speaker acts out of a clear awareness both of choosing to act and of meeting his or her own needs by doing so, including the need to contribute to others.

It may surprise anyone who is not familiar with nonviolent communication (or NVC) to hear that pure natural giving is something we do to meet our own needs. It is not that we give whether or not it meets the needs of others. On the contrary! The practitioner of nonviolent communication understands his or her need to contribute to others and seeks feedback to understand the impact of his or her actions. At the same time, pure natural giving is something we do to meet our need to contribute. It is by acting in service of our own needs that our motive is pure and natural. In this sense the practitioner of NVC is “self-full” rather than selfless or even selfish.

I wonder, how does this land with you?

The purpose of nonviolent communication (2): valuing needs

All articles, Alternative approaches

The second of three statements of purpose of nonviolent communication which Marshall Rosenberg outlines in the DVD Making Life Wonderful goes something like this:

valuing another person’s needs being met as much as we do our own

It’s easy to see the level of challenge this might imply. Even in our most loving and intimate relationships there will be times when it seems impossible to honour another person’s needs without giving up on our own. And that’s before we consider all sorts of relationships we have at home and at work, let alone relationships on a larger scale – between political parties, or nations, or ethnic or religious groups…

Rosenberg is quick to differentiate between needs and the means or “strategy” by which we meet our needs. For whether we are discussing who’s turn it is to do the washing up or mediating between rival countries, a discussion held at the level of strategy is likely to lead to an impasse. Once different parties truly understand each others’ needs, however, it becomes much easier to generate ways in which everybody’s needs can be met. In other words, the challenge is not in finding ways in which everyone’s needs can be met: it’s in reaching a point in time in which everybody’s needs are understood and valued.

It’s easy to see how Rosenberg’s second statement of purpose is connected with the first – the intention to achieve equality of connection, in which we see each other’s humanness, free of enemy images or moralistic judgements. For as long as I see another person (or an organisation, or a country, or, or, or…) through the lense of moralistic judgement, why should I chose to connect with their underlying needs?

Nonviolent communication invites its followers to put aside such judgements and to make the connection with needs (one’s own and those of others) central to communication and a means by which equality of connection is attained.

I wonder, how often do you ask yourself “what needs am I seeking to fulfil right now?” when you are talking with others? And what thoughts do you have as you consider this idea?

The purpose of nonviolent communication (1): connection

All articles, Alternative approaches

Every now and then I take time to watch the videos I have of Marshall Rosenberg working with groups to study nonviolent communication (or NVC). And although I’ve been studying NVC for a few years now and have watched the videos Making Life Wonderful a few times, too, I am struck – in about section 6 of 8 – by Marshall’s description of the purpose of nonviolent communication and decide to share it here.

Marshall’s statement of purpose has three parts and the first part goes something like this:

equality of connection with others in which we see each other’s humanness and are free from enemy images or moralistic judgements

Now, the idea of connecting with others is not new. In my own Christian upbringing I was told to love my neighbour as myself. (What do other faiths say? Please share your thoughts on this from your own faith). In my NLP trainings, which I treasure, Ian McDermott placed great emphasis on rapport, describing it as one of the four pillars of NLP. In other words, if you want to be effective, you have to be able to get on with people.

Even so, it seems to me that this clear statement of NVC purpose goes a step further than any objective we commonly set ourselves in our modern day communication with others, where obeying some common laws of politeness (saying please and thank you, kissing your aunt on the cheek etc.) leaves plenty of room to make judgements or to hold enemy images. Indeed, in a world in which we judge, doesn’t judging others in some way free us from the obligation to be polite?

So, the level of challenge implied in this first statement of NVC purpose is great. Some of us may already harbour the odd grudge against our nearest and dearest – the son we describe as “lazy” or the wife we describe as “nagging”. And that’s before we go any further. Having watched the behaviour, for example, of some members of the audience towards Nick Griffin on the recent BBC Question Time it seemed that some were holding enemy images of Mr. Griffin in their minds – and felt justified in doing so.

Signing up to nonviolent communication means seeking to see beyond an individual’s actions and through to the simple humanity of the individual. It means placing ourselves neither above nor below others. It means seeking to understand even those actions we most abhor. The more committed we are in our practive of NVC, the more we return to this simple – and yet challenging – objective. And yes, that’s our son, or wife or colleague in the workplace. It’s Nick Griffin or any other politician you might care to mention. It’s every man, woman or child who has ever committed an act deemed criminal. The list is long…

I wonder, how does this idea land with you? And are you up for it?

Evaluating coaching: a formative affair

Coaching

In the lingo of education, I view the evaluation of coaching as a formative (rather than a summative) affair. In other words, when you start to explore outcomes from coaching you are likely to have an impact on the outcomes from coaching. I’m sure scientists have had plenty of opportunity to notice how the act of observing something has an impact on the thing being observed. Today I reflect on this as I respond to a query about evaluating coaching:

We are an organisation that has recently embarked on using coaching as a development tool for our senior managers. As you would imagine we would like to evaluate the effectiveness of the coaching and are looking for any resources that will help us do so. Your experience of what works will also be really useful.

I take a few minutes to share my thoughts and decide to share them here. Broadly speaking, I use three (sometimes four) complimentary processes:

  • The first is the process whereby I contract with the commissioning client where there is one (i.e. the manager commissioning coaching for one of the people he or she manages) and the person seeking coaching (or coachee). At the outset, I facilitate a three-way meeting with the commissioning client, coachee and me to explore the manager’s reasons for commissioning coaching and any expectations the manager has of the employee. Depending on the length of the contract I will then facilitate three-way meetings on an interim basis and at the end of the process to review progress;
  • The second is the process I use with the coachee. Even when there is a three-way process (above) I also explore with the coachee what he or she wants from coaching and seek to agree clear goals. These can be the same as the goals agreed with the commissioning manager but may be different, e.g. when a manager requires xyz changes from an employee which cause the employee to question whether or not s/he wants to continue in a job. For the manager making the changes may be the goal. First though, the employee may want to get clear on whether to sign up to the goal. I’m sure that many coaches will tell you they include ongoing processes of evaluation in their coaching – asking clients what they are taking from each session, for example, as well as holding review sessions. I typically hold two-way review sessions periodically and prior to three-way review sessions (above). I also include some evaluation of coaching as part of a final “completion” session at the end of a coaching contract;
  • In addition, I also have a reciprocal arrangement with a number of trusted coaching colleagues who conduct an interview on my behalf. I started by using this at the end of coaching contracts and increasingly use it periodically with clients who choose to work with me over extended periods. Originally designed to support my learning and development as a coach, I have found the questionnaire I use for this immensely valuable to my clients who are able to reflect on the outcomes from coaching. Where we are still working together, it helps to re-focus – review goals and ways of working together to increase the effectiveness of our work together. Where the coachee is happy to share, I am always delighted to share this feedback with the commissioning manager;
  • Finally, there is the question of how you evaluate coaching across a team, when the coaching might be seen as a “team” coaching project. I have worked on projects where we have included team discussion – contracting and review.

Whatever the situation, given my conviction that evaluating coaching has an impact on the outcomes from coaching, it’s my aim to design all review processes in ways which facilitate further progress.

Putting one’s addictions to good use

All articles

It’s a while since I determined to put my addiction to writing to good use. Starting to blog is one outcome from setting this intention and signing up to the Writers* Bureau course is another.

Of course, if alcoholism is anything to go by, the gap between an addiction and any related activity may be insurmountable. Who would imagine that drinking great quantities of alcohol might predispose one to success as a wine taster? Of course, this is not to suggest that the Training Journal Daily Digest is the writer’s equivalent of cheap cider.

Today I take advantage of a day without appointments to take out Assignment 2# and review it before sending it off to my target publication, the Coaching at Work magazine. I don’t know how the magazine’s editor, Liz Hall, might respond – especially after my posting to the Coaching at Work LinkedIn discussion board last week (“Would you coach Nick Griffin?”) aroused her concern that we might unintentionally post content which is “unlawful, libelous, abusive, obscene, discriminatory or otherwise objectionable”. And if the magazine’s submission guidelines are anything to go by, it may be a while before I find out.

For now though, it’s “phew!” I didn’t imagine it would take me quite so long to make final amendments. Soon, I shall start to plan for Assignment 3#. First, though, I have some catching up to do.

*sic. I never quite feel comfortable about the lack of possessive apostrophe.

Managing your prejudices (5): managing your prejudices in coaching

Emotional Intelligence
“How do you manage your personal prejudices in a coaching situation?”

With so much already said (see postings 1 – 4 in this series), what’s left to say that’s new or different when it comes to managing your personal prejudices in a coaching situation? As I ponder what I aim to bring I am aware that I want to reiterate thoughts I have already shared:

  • Continuing to learn: I could as easily end with as start with an emphasis on my own learning for, surely, my ability to manage my personal prejudices in coaching is a reflection of my learning at a given point in time. My ongoing investment in my own learning (via coaching, supervision and other means) together supply the resources I bring as a coach;
  • Acting from a set of values and principles: Coaching is not coaching in which the coach knows the answers and the answers come from the coach. To me, this implies that no matter what I may think at different points in a coaching meeting it is for me to be open and curious, perhaps to have a view and still not to be wedded to the idea of being right. Out of this openness and curiosity come questions which build my own understanding as well as that of my client. These and other values and principles from which I work support openness and reduce the likeliness that personal prejudices (on either side) will limit the effectiveness of coaching;
  • Disclosing – or not: Being aware of my prejudices opens up the possibility of disclosing them. With this comes the responsibility to choose. When might I disclose them? When might I not? In general, when I have broad faith in a bias I may choose to disclose it – to offer it to my client as a possibility, openly and without attachment. Equally, there are times when it is for me to notice a prejudice and to set it aside. Of course, there are times when my broad view (that X might work or that Y is unlikely to be effective) may prevail – but only because I have asked questions which invite open exploration. It is not my aim to lead my client in line with my own prejudices;
  • Letting clients own their own decisions: One of the key ways in which I manage my personal prejudices in coaching is by remembering that my clients’ decisions are not mine to take. Even when I have a view that my client is choosing a path which may fail to meet his or her needs (or failing to choose a path which will meet his or her needs) it is for my client to know what suits. In truth, I find that the process of working with clients is such that I rarely have a strong sense of unease at a client’s decision. When I do, it may be for me to make observations or to ask questions to test a client’s thinking and still, no client decision is ever mine to make.

Phew! Over five postings I have explored prejudice and what it means to manage my prejudices. Sometimes I have wondered – am I taking the whole question too seriously? At other times I have been aware of how barely I am scratching the surface of this subject. There is always more to be said.

Meantime, I welcome your views.

Managing your prejudices (4): keeping your prejudices under observation

Emotional Intelligence,
“How do you manage your personal prejudices in a coaching situation?”

In recent days I have been exploring what constitutes a prejudice, wondering why we might (or might not) choose to identify and manage our prejudices and identifying some common examples of terms which are widely used without any sense that they may be inherently prejudicial.

Now though, it’s time to get closer to the question: “How do you manage your prejudices in a coaching situation?” It seems to me that the way we manage our prejudices in coaching is a reflection of our approach more widely in life. So I begin by reflecting on the approaches which, together, constitute my response to my own prejudices:

  • Keeping my beliefs under observation: Perhaps my starting point for managing my prejudices has been to develop the ability to notice my beliefs and to examine them on an ongoing basis. I like to think that some of my more rough-edged prejudices are long since gone and still, I continue to notice and examine my beliefs;
  • Broadening my experience: My beliefs are rooted both in my education and in my experience. Over the years I have embraced many opportunities to broaden my experience, both for the inherent pleasure and interest new experiences can provide and with a view to broadening the “database” on which my beliefs are based;
  • Testing my beliefs against reality: Many beliefs are simply generalisations and I’ve found it helpful to test generalisations against new information – again, and again, and again… I’ve also found it helpful to notice how much research there is to suggest that the beliefs we hold predict our reality. A belief is just a belief;
  • Letting go of being “right”: At any point in time I hold beliefs and still, I lay no claim to being right. I may stand true to my beliefs over a considerable length of time and debate them robustly with others. At the same time, it is my choice to hold the belief that my views may or may not be “right”. From this place, I have no investment in maintaining a belief and can easily review it and replace it in the light of new insights or information;
  • Choosing my prejudices wisely: Since I am bound to hold beliefs, it is my aim to choose them wisely. For me this implies gaining clarity about the purpose I have for holding a given belief and examining my beliefs to ensure that each one is fit for purpose. Perhaps one of the most fundamental beliefs I have chosen to adopt is that we all have needs and communicate in order to meet our needs and to contribute to the needs of others (this is the essence of Nonviolent – Compassionate – Communication or NVC). This means that I am guided in my communication by this belief and I hope that adopting this belief makes it more likely that needs will be met;
  • Being present to individuals and to their experience: Nothing pains me more than seeing a child being “forced” to say hello to an adult. For whilst it may or may not be “polite” to say hello, it seems to me that over time everyone pays the price for enforcing such general rules. You could say that one prejudice I choose to hold is to favour connecting with individuals and their experience over holding general rules;
  • Responding with compassion, humour and insight: Am I without prejudice? Absolutely not. And even whilst seeking to choose beliefs that honour my needs and the needs of others I am sometimes taken by surprise by my own prejudices. Since one of my prejudices is that I must get things “right” it’s taken me time to be able to come to such moments with humour and compassion and to take from them the learning that will help me to move forward.

Having identified my preferred ways of managing my prejudices I wonder, what does a coaching situation require over and above these approaches? What might be needed that’s different? This is the question to which I return tomorrow.