Beyond situational coaching: being deliberate in how we foster deliberation

By Elisabeth Goodman, Sunday 18th July 2021

My blog on practising situational coaching has been one of my most widely read posts, with about 8,500 hits in 2020-2021 so far! I wrote it for managers who coach, but I suspect that many professional coaches and also coaching students are reading it too. If so, I think you may find that Maria Iliffe-Wood’s “Coaching Presence” (2014) has even more to offer you in this space.

We may be more or less conscious, when we coach, of shifting between pure intuition:

• going with the flow
• “dancing in the moment”

and deliberately choosing the nature of our next intervention:

• what we say or do
• the tools we bring out for the coachee to use.

Whether we go with the flow, or are more deliberate in our choice, either will determine the nature of our “coaching presence”, and the consequent nature and quality of the coachee’s thinking or deliberation.

Professional coaches, student coaches and managers who practise coaching as part of their ‘regular’ jobs, can all benefit from reflecting on what happened during a coaching session, and what they might do the same or differently next time.

Iliffe-Wood gives us a model that can help us be more deliberate in our choices during a session, and more analytical in our reflections following it. I for one have started to apply the insights that I’ve gained from her approach and I certainly feel that they are helping me to ‘up my game’.

Here is a somewhat basic and rendition of the essence of what I took from her book:

Four coaching modes and four levels of a clients’ thinking

As the illustration above shows, Iliffe-Wood suggests that there are four modes for our coaching, and four levels for our clients’ thinking.

The coaching modes

You might recognise that we tend to use some of the coaching modes more than others.

You might also have a sense, whether from your own reflections or from what you’ve been taught by others, that you should or shouldn’t apply some of these modes.

Iliffe-Wood skilfully shows that each mode does deliver value in terms of the impact that it has on our clients’ thinking.

I have a tendency for example to use the “evident” mode less: to not articulate what I’m noticing, and to not share personal examples. However, as I learn to do so more, I do find that this helps to raise the coachee’s awareness of what’s happening and what they are experiencing, to relax more into their reflections and to be more comfortable and find the words to share more about what they are thinking and feeling.

The “invisible”, “emergent” and “visible” coaching modes come to me more naturally. I particularly enjoy the magic that can happen when I offer a client a coaching intervention that enables them to think about their issue or situation in a different way, as in “emergent” coaching. I find that clients sometimes get stuck with simple verbal processing: whereas exploring their metaphors, drawing, using plasticine or even soft toys, or physical movement can dramatically open up their thinking.

Iliffe-Wood also cross-references the coaching modes to the competencies defined by professional coaching organisations. As I am working towards my next level accreditation (PCC) with the ICF (International Coaching Federation), all of this definitely supports “PCC markers” 7.5, which is where a coach evokes awareness by sharing “with no attachment – observations, intuitions, comments, thoughts or feelings, and invites the client’s exploration through verbal or tonal invitation.”

By the way, for anyone who is worried about the apparently over-directive nature of the “visible” coach mode, the ICF PCC markers couch this kind of intervention in terms of invitation or partnership. For instance:

3.1 Coach partners with the client to identify or reconfirm what the client wants to accomplish in the session

5.3 Coach partners with the client by supporting the client to choose what happens in this session

8.1 Coach invites or allows the client to explore progress toward what the client wanted to accomplish in this session

ICF Professional Certified Coach (PCC) Markers, Revised November 2020. rev. 06.25.21

The four levels of thinking

Iliffe-Wood suggests that we have four levels of thinking: the first being uppermost in our consciousness. This strikes me as somewhat like the most open window of the Johari four-box model: what we know about ourselves and what is also known about us by others. The levels go increasingly deeper into our subconsciousness, until we get to level 4 which includes things that are actually unknown to us.

So a coach can help clients to access the deeper thinking and, Iliffe-Wood suggests, may actually help further in the level 3 and 4 thinking by adding new information and knowledge for the client to reflect upon.

Each of the four coaching modes broadly maps to the corresponding four levels of thinking. However, we would in practice move in and out of each coaching mode, and as Iliffe-Wood says, the invisible coach mode is one to keep coming back to, to allow the client to deliberate more effectively on what they discover during the session.

Conclusion and a reminder of guiding principles

It would be interesting to hear if and how this approach to “coaching presence” deepens the practice of other coaches, student coaches and managers who coach: whether it does indeed offer more than situational coaching.

Iliffe-Wood’s book is definitely worth reading right the way through to get a greater understanding of the approach that she proposes. Her writing is infused with wisdom too: her principle and guiding beliefs are a salutary reminder for everyone and anyone who coaches.

Her principle belief is that:

“Every person that I meet has a deep well of inner wisdom that they can tap into… they can achieve whatever … they are aiming for… they are genuinely striving to achieve it and… they can do it no matter how high the aspiration.”

Iliffe-Wood (2014 p.5)

And her guiding beliefs cover the coach, the client and the coaching relationship. I’ve just pulled out a few of her headings relating to the client as these seem particularly relevant to me in the context of this blog:

“Clients are whole persons. They are not broken and therefore they do not need fixing….”

“Clients learn best when they have worked things out for themselves..”

“Clients know much more than they think they know..”

Iliffe-Wood (2014, p.7)

“Clients are the expert on themselves and their system. ..[they] know the situation, the organization, the people involved…and therefore they are in a better place… to draw conclusions, make judgements and work out any solutions..”

Iliffe-Wood (2014, p.8)

Notes

References

Goodman, E. (2019). The manage as coach: practising situational coaching. Retrieved from: https://elisabethgoodman.wordpress.com/2019/11/23/the-manager-as-coach-practising-situational-coaching/

Iliffe-Wood, M. (2014). Coaching presence. Building Consciousness and awareness in coaching interventions. Kogan Page

Johari window. See for example: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Johari_window

About the author

Elisabeth Goodman is the Owner and Principal Consultant at RiverRhee Consulting, specialising in “creating exceptional managers and teams”, through group-coaching style workshops and courses, with a focus on the Life Sciences. RiverRhee is a member-to-member training provider for One Nucleus.

Elisabeth founded RiverRhee in 2009, and prior to that had 25+ years’ experience in the Pharmaceutical Industry in line management and internal training and consultancy roles supporting teams on a global basis.

She and her trusted partners help RiverRhee’s clients to exercise choice and realise their potential in the workplace by recognising their individual values and strengths. Together they explore such topics as enhancing their leadership / management, interpersonal and communication skills, and their ability to deal with uncertainty and change.

Elisabeth is accredited in Coaching (ACC – International Coaching Federation, PG Certification in Business and Personal Coaching), Change Management, Lean Sigma, Belbin Team Roles, MBTI (Myers Briggs Type Indicator) and is an NLP (NeuroLinguistic Programming) Practitioner. She is also a member of the APM (Association for Project Management) in which she was a founding member of the Enabling Change SIG.

She is also the founder of The Coaches’ Forum – an international community of interest for coaches to explore ideas and insights as an extension to their personal and professional development.

Leave a comment

The manager as coach: when your people need more support

By Elisabeth Goodman, 6th January 2021

So, another year, another lockdown. We all need as much support to get us through this as we can get. But what kind of support, when, how and how much?

Colin Fisher and colleagues (Fisher, C.M., Amabile, T.M. and Pillemer, J. 2021) have some wonderful insights to share with us from their 10 year research of how leaders can effectively help their teams without micro-managing!

The challenge of knowing if and when to provide support, and in what form

As Fisher et al rightly point out, the remote, flexible and other ways of working prevalent at this time mean that teams are seldom all co-located at work. This means that it’s harder for managers or leaders to be easily aware of if and when their team members need support. When they do provide support, it can also be harder to do so in a way that is totally a-tuned to what the team or the individual needs.

I’ve heard others say that it can be hard to provide the right kind of training to people when not co-located, because you can’t easily spot what they can and can not do, or what do or do not know. And it’s harder to ‘show’ as opposed to just ‘tell’.

For a manager seeking to adopt a more coaching style approach, where the emphasis is on drawing out what an individual knows, rather than giving them solutions, the challenge might also be in knowing when to swap to a more mentoring or teaching mode.

Last but not least, different people will want different types of support to help them deal with greater isolation resulting from the current pandemic. The challenge for the leader or manager is being clear about the actual nature of the support needed – and not provide too much or too little!

So what’s the answer?

Fisher et al (2021) conducted their studies with a consultancy firm, a design firm, and 124 groups in a behavioural research setting. The context was complex cognitive tasks and entrepreneurial decisions.

They highlighted some key behaviours and principles that led to effective supporting behaviours by leaders and managers:

1. Starting with a coaching-style approach

The effective leaders did not simply wade in with advice and other forms of more directive support. Instead, they:

• listened to what the individuals or teams were saying about what their issues were
• asked clarifying questions to aid their own and the team members’ understanding
• adopted a collaborative approach
• made their intentions clear

As the authors point out, the manager to team member relationship is a complex one. A manager is also responsible for the evaluation associated with performance reviews. For a team member to ask for support can feel vulnerable. If a manager offers unsolicited support, however well meant, it can put an individual on the defensive.

Adopting a coaching-style approach as described above could help to mitigate some of these risks.

2. Adopting a ‘pull’ rather than ‘push’ style

Fisher et al (2021) advocate three key strategies, which have this ‘pull’ rather than ‘push’ style in common:

• Picking the right time to intervene: waiting until people have actually begun the work, so that they have an understanding of the work and of the issues involved. They will then be in a position to ask for help if and when they need it, and it will also be clearer to both parties as to what kind of help is needed.
• Making it clear, from the start, that you are available to help – and what form that help can take.
• Providing the right form of intervention as and when it is needed. The authors talk about “the rhythm of involvement” taking two alternative forms:
  • “concentrated guidance” over a short period of time to support specific tasks but still without taking over
  • “path clearing” again potentially hands on but brief and intermittent

Concluding thoughts

I find it interesting to consider the above in the context of two four-box models:

Situational coaching as described by Ibarra and Scoular (2019) – does Fisher et al’s approach seem more like situational coaching? It certainly has a strong under-tone of starting from a “non-directive” mode or more conventional coaching approach, but allowing for a switch into any of the other three modes described by Ibarra and Scoular as the situation demands.

The situational leadership model (see for example The Ken Blanchard Companies, n.d.), where the “supporting” / “coaching” quadrants seem to relate closely to Fisher et al’s approach.

All of the above, for me, would also seem to align well with an effective approach to delegation. Managers often struggle with if and how to intervene if the work is not going as planned. Fisher et al’s recommended strategies would seem to address these concerns.

All in all, Fisher et al’s research would seem to provide some very helpful guidance for leaders and managers in terms of if, when and how to provide support. Team members could benefit from their guidance too, in terms of knowing how they might influence their managers to provide the type of support that they need.

A closing message for me though, is the importance of staying in touch, of communicating regularly, of staying informed: to provide support in general terms, and to make it easier to judge if, when and how more specific support might be needed.

NOTES

References

Fisher, C.M., Amabile, T.M. & Pillemer, J. (2021). How to help (without micromanaging). New research points to three strategies. Harvard Business Review, January – February, 123-127

Goodman, E. (2019). The manager as coach: practising situational coaching. Retrieved from https://elisabethgoodman.wordpress.com/2019/11/23/the-manager-as-coach-practising-situational-coaching/

The Ken Blanchard Companies (n.d.). The SLII model. Leadership styles. Retrieved from https://www.kenblanchard.com/Products-Services/SLII

About the author

Elisabeth Goodman, ACC is the Owner and Principal Consultant at RiverRhee Consulting, a consultancy that specialises in “creating exceptional managers and teams”, through coaching, courses and workshops, and with a focus on the Life Sciences. RiverRhee is a member-to-member training provider for One Nucleus.

Elisabeth founded RiverRhee Consulting in 2009, and prior to that had 25+ years’ experience in the Pharmaceutical Industry in line management and internal training and consultancy roles supporting teams on a global basis.

She is developing her coaching practice, with a focus on helping individuals to be true to themselves and exercise choice in the workplace by enhancing their leadership / management, interpersonal and communication skills, and their ability to deal with uncertainty and change.

Elisabeth is accredited in Coaching (ACC – International Coaching Federation), Change Management, Lean Sigma, Belbin Team Roles, MBTI (Myers Briggs Type Indicator) and is an NLP (NeuroLinguistic Programming) Practitioner. She is also a member of the APM (Association for Project Management) in which she was a founding member of the Enabling Change SIG.

Elisabeth is working towards her PG Certification in Business and Personal Coaching with Barefoot Coaching and the University of Chester.

The manager as coach: practising situational coaching

By Elisabeth Goodman, 23rd November 2019

What is situational coaching and when to use it?

One of Sir John Whitmore‘s legacies was the GROW coaching model, an apparently simple yet highly effective tool to help managers and coaches: “unlock people’s potential to maximise their own performance.”

Illustration of GROW coaching model as used in RiverRhee’s courses for managers

[I’ve written about the GROW model elsewhere, see for example Coaching applied to Project Management.]

One of the common challenges for those involved in coaching is knowing when to provide the answers, as opposed to encouraging people to find the solutions for themselves.  Herminia Ibarra and Anne Scoular, in the November-December 2019 issue of Harvard Business Review, would seem to have the answer. (See “The leader as coach”, pages 111 – 119.)

Styles of coaching. Illustration from Ibarra and Scoular’s article “The leader as coach” in HBR Nov-Dec 2019, pp. 111-119

Ibarra and Scoular’s model describes different styles of coaching based in how much information or advice a manager or coach is sharing vs. the insights and solutions they elicit from the person they are coaching.

The directive approach may work best for more junior or less experienced people.

The ‘laissez-faire’ approach is best used when team members are best left alone because to interfere would be to hamper their productivity.

The non-directive approach is the one involving a manager’s or coach’s best questioning and listening skills to elicit the wisdom, knowledge and creativity of the people being coached.

The situational approach is where the manager or coach has mastered the art of judging and balancing when to impart knowledge vs. helping others to discover it themselves based on the situation involved.

Developing managers’ skills in situational coaching

The HBR authors give examples of  the value of the listening and questioning skills inherent to coaching, such as:

• Enriching the quality of the “high-value” conversations that managers and leaders will have with people at various times in the year.  These conversations may relate to important issues or the exploration of new ideas.
• Enhancing the skills of those interfacing with clients to arrive at solutions that the clients have helped to shape.

The authors suggest that the best way to develop skills in situational coaching is to first develop skills in non-directive coaching until it becomes second nature, and then balance it with “helpful” directive coaching.

Practising with the GROW model is an ideal way to start.  Here are a few extra tips from the article:

• Goal.  Ask what they want to get out of the conversation for instance “What do you want when you walk out of the door that you don’t have now?”
• Reality. Avoid asking ‘why’ as this may lead to non-productive streams of thought such as self-justification.  Focus instead on what, where, when and who to help them draw out all the factual elements of what is currently happening.
• Options. If people are struggling to come up with options, and broaden their perspective, you could ask something like “If you had a magic wand what would you do?”
• Will.  As well as asking people what they will do as a result of their reflection, you could ask them how likely they would be, “on a scale of one to 10” to act upon their decision. If their commitment is less than eight it might be worth going through the GROW model again.

Finally, the HRB authors give examples of how leaders can help build coaching capabilities and a culture of learning in organisations by:

• Giving examples of the benefits of coaching (the “why”), as in the high-value examples cited above
• Role modelling from the top, as the latest CEO at Microsoft, Satya Nadella has done by soliciting ideas from everyone in a supportive and non-judgemental way
• Providing opportunities for the development of coaching skills (through workshops, learning programmes and tools)
• Removing barriers to learning, such as organisational or individual reviews that instil fear rather than a climate of open exchange and reflection.

Notes

Sir John Whitmore and his colleagues at Performance Consultants International, suggest that adopting a coaching approach in organisations will give greater purpose and meaning to the people who work there. (See “Coaching for Performance.  The principles and practice of coaching and leadership” for more on this and on the GROW coaching model.)

Elisabeth Goodman is the Owner and Principal Consultant at RiverRhee Consulting, a consultancy that specialises in “creating exceptional managers and teams”, with a focus on the Life Sciences. (We support our clients through courses, workshops and personal one-to-one coaching.) Elisabeth founded RiverRhee Consulting in 2009, and prior to that had 25+ years’ experience in the Pharmaceutical Industry in line management and internal training and consultancy roles supporting Information Management and other business teams on a global basis. RiverRhee is a member-to-member training provider for One Nucleus.

RiverRhee delivers training, workshops and one-to-one coaching in range of management and team member skills

Elisabeth is accredited in Change Management, in Lean Sigma, in Belbin Team Roles, MBTI (Myers Briggs Type Indicator) and is an NLP (NeuroLinguistic Programming) Practitioner. She is a member of CILIP (Chartered Institute for Library and Information Professionals) and of APM (Association for Project Management) in which she was a founding member of the Enabling Change SIG.