A monkey and a fish were caught in a terrible flood and were being swept downstream amidst torrents of water and debris.  The monkey spied a branch from an overhanging tree and pulled himself to safety from the swirling water.   Then, wanting to help his friend the fish, he reached into the water and pulled the fish from the water onto branch.   The moral of the story is clear:  Good intentions are not enough.If you wish to help the fish, you must understand its nature.  

-Ancient Chinese Fable

Freidman’s flat world concept is a reality.  ‘India’s global power houses’ co- authored by our own Pradipto with Nirmalya and Suj raise the importance of cross-cultural perspectives  for economic growth and success mediated through leaders with a global mindset. On a marketing plane Kraft foods began its success only after learning and adapting to the reality that the Chinese do not like Oreo biscuits to be made sweet and the Indonesians want them sweeter! So we have three types of Oreo biscuits for three countries and Kraft foods is finally blossoming as a global company with this simple understanding of their global customers. Prahlad has time and again alluded to the opportunities for creative business models for wider application when leaders move with a learning mind and heart beyond their borders. I invite the readers to reflect on the implications of the following ideas which I found very useful to me in my cross-cultural training activities including during the last two months of training work with global company heads and leaders in Seattle.

Cultural types

Terrence Brake has given us this useful framework to look at various dimensions of managing globally.  We must remember that these types are not water tight compartments.  A country like India can have features of more than one type

Applying cultural cross cultural models

In my seminar with leaders from global and Indian Organisations I use the insights from the work done by people like Terrence Brake (shared above), Hofstede, Triandis and  Tramponar to develop deeper appreciation about cross cultural differences.  Non Indians in my workshop become more conscious of relative importance for trust building before decision making.  They also realize the hierarchical nature of our culture and the longer time it takes to get things done initially.  This helps them to work with Indians far more effectively.

Similarly it helps Indian leaders to learn to become more assertive and more explicit in their communication and also lot more structural in the way they manage time. With this heightened appreciation of one another’s culture, global leaders are able to transact business far more effectively.

For reflection

From this idea can you see possible opportunities to enhance your cultural sensitivity with your multicultural clients, collaborators and competitors?  What creative possibilities occur to you in relation to diversity, inclusion in this fast developing global economy?  Most importantly how can coaches demonstrate respect and cultural empathy in helping leaders move to the next orbit of excellence?

I would love to hear from you.

Suggested Readings

1. Argayle, M. (1988). Bodily communication (2nd ed.). Madison: International Universities Press.
2. Auerbach, J.E. (2001). Personal and Executive Coaching: The Complete Guide for Mental Health Professionals. California: Executive College Press.
3. Axtell, R. E. (1993). Do’s and taboos around the world (3rd ed.). New York: The Parker Pen Company.
4. Brake, Terrence.(2002). Managing globally (first American edition).New York: Dorling Kindersley Limited.
5. Hill, C. W. L.(2002). International Business: Competing in the global marketplaces (3rd ed.). Boston: McGraw-Hill.
6. Kumar, N. (2009). India’s Global Power Houses: How they are taking on the world. Boston: Harvard Business School Publishing.
7. Matsumoto, D.(2000). Culture and Psychology.( 2nd ed.)Belmont,CA:Wadsworth.
8. Morris, D., Collett, P., Marsh, P., O’Shaughnessy, M. (1979). Gestures: Their origins and distribution. New York: Stein and Day Publishers.
9. Passmore, J. (2007). Excellence in Coaching: The Industry Guide. London: Kogan Page
10. Richmond, V. P., McCroskey, J. C., & Payne, S. K. (1991). Nonverbal behavior in interpersonal relations (2nd ed.). Englewood Cliffs: Prentice Hall.
11. Samovar, L. A. & Porter, R. E. (2000). Intercultural communication: A reader (9th ed.). Belmont: Wardsworth Publishing Company.
12. Zuckerman, E.L.(2000). Clinician’s Thessarus (5th ed.). New York: The Guilford Press.

-Dr. B J Prashantham

ABSTRACT

Smart CEOs understand the interdependence of strategy and execution and do not get carried away by the so-called glamour of strategy alone. For them the execution of strategy needs as much of their attention and involvement, as does the formulation of strategy. They know that the journey from strategy to desired-results can happen only when the organization imbibes a culture of disciplined-execution and building and sustaining of such a culture is one of the most important jobs of the CEO. They place as much emphasis on their own development, as on the building of the skills and competences across the organization.

Execution – A View from the Top:

About 800 CEOs across 40 countries, who participated in a 2007 survey by the organisation The Conference Board, while identifying 121 different challenges, chose excellence of execution as their top challenge and keeping consistent execution of strategy by top management as their third greatest concern. Sustained and steady top-line growth was second, profit growth was fourth, and finding qualified managerial talent fifth. It appears that these top-5 concerns tell a simple but powerful story – i.e., execution of plans through people is vital to drive revenue and bottom-line growth.
As an Executive Coach now and as someone who has led businesses I have had the opportunity to look at the subject of execution from the outside and inside with much fascination. It is this perspective that I bring to the article.

Execution as a culture and a discipline:

While much emphasis is placed on formulation of strategy and plans – both in B-school curriculum as well as within work places, prudent senior executives and CEOs understand the interdependence of strategy and execution. For them execution is an all-pervading discipline and a significant part of a company’s culture.
Companies aspire to achieve aggressive goals and the congruence of achieved-results with aspirations, is an outcome of relentless focus on execution, right from the CEO, all the way down. The best laid plans can be challenged and a CEO with a bias towards execution constantly strives to narrow the gap between aspiration and results – thereby earning the trust and respect of the board and the shareholders as well as that of the employees.
For a company to make the journey of strategy-to-desired results, it must build the skills and competences required across the levels in the company. A CEO who values the discipline of execution knows that execution an execution culture is built painstakingly over time and losing it is easy. No wonder the CEOs picked “keeping consistent execution” as one of the priorities in the 2007 survey.

Where the rubber hits the road:

Companies that build and sustain an execution culture know that strategy and execution come alive in the fringes and so the execution ability of front-line employees – at the shop-floor, at various customer touch-points etc. is vital.
In such companies, the font-line employees use company operating systems and problem solving approaches like Six-Sigma, supported by the management’s (from CEO, all the way down) strong bias for self-managed teams to enhance their execution abilities. A workplace where font-line is steeped in an execution culture is characterised by a good understanding of the big picture and how the unit / cell / team level goals and action plans are linked to the big picture, standard-work / procedure, data-gathering to understand variance and causes and taking remedial actions, seeking customer (internal/external) feedback, visual score-boards, team-meetings and established escalation processes.
Interestingly, I have noticed that execution oriented cultures tend to demonstrate strong social competencies like confidence, intentionality, relatedness, capacity to communicate and cooperativeness given the emphasis on self-managed teams and teamwork in general.
Competencies that characterize Execution:
In a company that executes, at the middle- and upper-management levels, it is all about providing strong sponsorship to the front-line and setting them up for success. The efficacy of this sponsorship depends on the competence of the managers and the vital few are:

1. Professional Competence: Contemporary, deep domain-expertise; Core-skills of execution: Planning skills – covering goals, timelines, resources allocation and metrics, Risk analysis and mitigation.
2. Managerial Competence: Goal-setting; Delegating with accountability; Managing for performance – setting up and working the reporting and review systems, managing review meetings.
3. Leadership Competence: Clarifying the big-picture and linking it to initiatives; Leveraging interdependence ; Leveraging Diversity; Surfacing issues, stepping up to conflict and conflict resolution; Overcoming fears and limiting beliefs – such as fear of failure.
4. Coaching Competence: Feedback and counselling for performance improvement; Motivating individuals and teams; Understanding teams and team –dynamics; Bias for learning.

Companies that push hard for an execution culture coach their managers to develop the above skills to make them successful at execution. I have always realised that improving leadership and coaching competencies calls for stepping up psychological literacy with a very strong emphasis on continuous self-awareness. An early exposure to and awareness of the Rogerian2 concept of fully-functioning person and the use of self-awareness interventions can help the individual take actions for self-improvement3. Managers focused on execution show significantly higher levels of understanding and use of EI. They deploy the psychological competences of a coach having an inquiry-based approach that balances the managerial, directive-based approach and take a lesson-learning view on failures. Social competencies of managers who are good at execution include skills like being able to step up to conflict by seeing constructive-opportunity in conflict, keeping stake holders included and managing relationships with objectivity while recognising the emotions involved. So contrary to popular belief managers who thrive in execution cultures on a sustained basis are psychologically literate and emotionally intelligent, far from the alpha male that they are made out to be.

CEO leads by example:

The gap between aspirations and achieved results is all about execution and it all starts with the CEO who is:
• Passionate about his / her vision and goals.
• Focused on building a top-team where commitment to vision and values are fundamental for membership while professional competence, accountability for results, espousing constructive-conflict and building trust4 are vital for staying on as a member.
• Driven by the belief that execution is fundamental to strategy and it has to shape it5. Therefore he / she shows equal emphasis and ease in crafting strategy as well as the review of action plans, down to the “last-mile” initiatives.
• Actively engaged in communicating across the various levels of the organisation and uses the opportunities to share vision and talks of actions and results.
• Using every opportunity to have conversations that help uncover realities that could impact the journey to results. Using the knowledge of business to constantly probe and question to bring weaknesses to light and rally the people to correct them5 with the aid operating systems and excellence framework that are established in the company.
• Concerned about alignment and fairness of rewards system with goals-set.
• Championing the vision and goals with all the board and other external stakeholders and enlisting their support to help the organisation succeed.
• Constantly working on his / her self-awareness and demonstrates at all times the fearlessness in putting results before personal status, holding people accountable and shunning personal popularity, valuing reasonable clarity over picture-perfect precision, seeing opportunity in conflict rather than settling for the comfort of harmony and showing his / her vulnerabilities to earn trust6.

Coaching the CEO:

Finally, given the paradoxical situation of having to commit to “employee engagement” with a “lonely at the top” feeling, one may be right to conclude that perhaps at the CEO’s job, the psychological competencies assume a much heightened importance. By visibly seeking out executive coaching opportunities for themselves proactively, the CEO can reinforce the fundamental belief that continuous learning for improvement is at the core of the organisation’s execution culture.

The ability to set a purposeful vision, build and nurture a top-team, articulate strategy and following through by keeping employees engaged in actions with an accountability for results are all exciting but daunting challenges for the CEO. This is where CEO coaching for execution can make a huge difference.
The CEO coach who is qualified (as a coach) and experienced (having been a CEO) comes with a strong blend of expertise and experience to hold conversations with the CEO and help the CEO look at his own style and its effectiveness for execution.
These coaching conversations can also respectfully and meaningfully challenge the CEO’s beliefs and behaviours, in the interest of improving the execution within the organisation. The coaching intervention then moves to the next phase where the coach helps the CEO craft sustainable strategies to achieve the outcome and then undertake an objective assessment of progress made by the CEO. In fact, the whole coaching experience in itself can be a proving ground for the CEO’s beliefs about execution.

Derailers that jeopardize execution:

Just as I have noticed several common threads among CEOs who are excellent at execution, I have also seen the existence of the “usual suspect” list of causes that derail execution because of the CEO style.
When the CEO does not spend enough time on execution; does not hold people accountable; does not move fast to replace / change players on his team; does not shed bias towards “pet theories “ his own and others’; does not conversations that surface realities; does not deal with turf-wars; does not commit to resources even after a strong case; does not show genuine interest in coaching his team; does not show tolerance to and take a lessons-learnt view of failures; does not pay attention to rewards and recognition, I have seen execution fail.
Managers in an organisation tend to model their behaviour around what the CEO expects (or tolerates) and consequently, much of the “execution-derailers” that show up at the highest levels in the company, manifest all the way down to the front -line.

Execution – what separates the best form the rest

A CEO’s success depends on deliverables as seen / felt by the customers, the board, the employees, the suppliers and other stake-holders. The consistency and the trend of results over a period of time, despite the vicissitudes of economic and market cycles are vital. Such balanced and consistent performance calls for a CEO who espouses execution and works relentlessly on keeping alive the organization’s execution-culture. Most important execution depends as much on emotional intelligence as it does on strategic insights – a relationship seldom understood.

References:
1 Daniel Goleman (1995), Emotional Intelligence, Bantam Books, NY, USA.
2 Carl Ransom Rogers (January 8, 1902 – February 4, 1987), an influential American psychologist and among the founders of the humanistic approach to psychology.
3 Sharon Daniels, Chief Executive, AchieveGlobal (2010) For a Better Career Outlook, Look Inward, http://blogs.hbr.org/cs/2010/09/for_a_better_career_outlook_lo.html
4 Patrick Lencioni (2002), The Five Dysfunctions of a Team, Jossey Bass, SFO, CA, USA
5 Larry Bossidy & Ram Charan (2005), Execution – The Discipline Of Getting Things Done, Crown Business, NY, USA.
6 Patrick Lencioni (1998), The Five Temptations of a CEO, Jossey Bass, SFO, CA, USA

-Sundar Parthasarathy

Will the approach and perspective of a counsellor who is counselling a client who is an adolescent be different from the approach and perspective of a counsellor who is counselling a couple who are having marital problems? I certainly believe yes!

While the range of skills and the processes adopted by counsellors would be similar in both situations, the contexts of the two clients are very different. In the former, I believe that the counsellor must be cognizant of the challenges of adolescence, the role of the family, the impact of societal pressures, key relationships at play and so on to achieve effectiveness in the counselling relationship. In the latter, the counsellor must be cognizant of the socio-psychological drivers of marital harmony and discord, the role of economics or extended families, in addition to other critical contextual factors. This approach of seeing the client not in isolation but as belonging to a holistic system and understanding the impact of the various sub-elements of the system on the client is what is called a Systems Perspective. Some call this contextual knowledge.

What is relevant to the field of counselling is equally relevant to the field of Coaching. While coaches need to posses the right values and skills and adopt the most appropriate processes and use the most effective tools, they also need to have the right systems perspective in order to be effective in their coaching relationships. In an Executive Coaching context, systems perspective will mean knowledge about the Organisational and business processes, cultural and climate factors, strategic imperatives and the environmental factors and most importantly career life stage issues, needs and dilemmas that impact the client and shapes his or her behaviours.

The importance of a systems perspective for Coaches goes beyond mere effectiveness – it seems a prerequisite. It has been our experience in CFI that when Organisations seek out coaches they almost subconsciously seek out not just the most skilful coach but the coach who brings the greatest systems perspective to his coaching engagement. They do this be seeking our Coaches who have “been there and done that” – coaches who have experienced or witnessed all or some of these system issues and dilemmas. In this article I would like to examine the subject from a variety of perspectives so that Coaches are able to nurture and develop this dimension and also leverage it in their coaching engagements.

Systems perspective in an executive coaching context

Executive coaches are focussed primarily on helping executives in Organisations solve problems and achieve their full potential and through that make a difference to their Organisations and themselves. In that sense Executive coaching engagements are initiated for some very strong business and Organisational reasons that must be well appreciated.

It must also be understood that executives who are seeking coaching support function within the boundaries of an organisation and their performance, effectiveness and even their level of engagement is influenced by a multitude of systemic factors. For coaches to be effective they will therefore need to have a sound appreciation of this systems perspective.

Let us now understand the various dimensions of this systems perspective in an executive coaching context especially as it relates to CXO coaching.

a. Business perspective

Executives at the CXO level are very deeply concerned about and held accountable for the success of the businesses they are leading. The key business levers of growth, profitability, diversification, structural changes and so on impact the client and the client’s work quite often has a lot to do with impacting these dimensions. Coaches who are able to appreciate how these impact his clients are likely to understand their world better and be a lot more empathetic to their situation.

In addition to these key business levers, even business ownership patterns have a profound impact and influence on executives and their own performance and effectiveness. The ways in which a family business works is quite different from the ways in which a global corporation works. Coaches who are cognisant of these subtle differences are able to spot the impact of these contexts on their clients and help them, especially when clients have migrated from one ownership context to another and are struggling to cope.

b. Functional perspective

Closely linked to the business perspective is the functional perspective as it applies to the client. Clients quite often belong to some function or profession and as a result many of their beliefs, concerns and challenges are influenced by the function or profession they belong to. Therefore, when a Coach is dealing with the Head of Sales & Marketing, it would help if the coach had a broad appreciation of the contours of the sales & marketing function, how it works and what its key imperatives are so that he is able to ask him the right questions and gain a deeper understanding about his context at work.

Similarly, when a coach is speaking with a CFO client it would help if he had even a basic understanding about the role of a CFO and some of the typical dilemmas he might face in fulfilling his responsibilities.

c. Career life stage

As executives progress in their careers they pass through various career life stages and transition points. There is a large body of knowledge about the typical needs, issues and dilemmas at each of these career life stages.

For example a functional head who is taking on a cross functional responsibility would have a certain typical set of needs and concerns. A manager migrating from an operating role to a strategic role would have certain typical dilemmas. So also a first time CEO would have his own typical challenges and developmental needs.

Coaches who have experienced or observed these career life stages and transition points are likely to be very quick in understanding their clients and diagnosing the needs of their clients be a lot more empathetic in their interactions.

d. Organisational process

Clients work within Organisations and are most deeply impacted by a whole range of Organisational processes and behaviours. The way in which the Organisations plans, takes decisions, collaborates, manages and evaluates performance, rewards people, shapes careers, manages change, upholds values and so on has a huge impact on the effectiveness of the client. The client’s efficacy is also largely impacted by the extent to which these Organisational processes are aligned to his own values and beliefs and his professional way of working. The client’s dilemmas and development needs can easily be understood by coaches who have experienced these Organisational processes and can relate to it.

Leveraging the systems perspective

How does a Coach leverage his/her systems perspective?

Coaches can use their systems perspective to firstly empathise with their clients. They can ask better questions and help their clients tell their stories more completely and concretely. They can also use this insight to help their clients gain new perspectives and zero in on the agendas that will give true leverage. Most importantly, coaches are likely to establish a far higher connect when their clients experience them as someone who understand where they are coming from.

Developing and nurturing a systems perspective

Executives who have been there and done that tend to quite naturally find it easier to bring the systems perspective into their coaching engagement. Many executive coaches tend to be independent professionals and come from varying backgrounds. While some may have had held executive positions at senior levels, others might have held executive positions at a middle to senior level before having migrated to become trainers, facilitators and consultants.

Whatever might be the background coaches must find ways to constantly stay alive to business and Organisational realities all the time. Given the rapid changes in the business environment, even experienced executives must ensure that their perspectives are current and not outdated. From this point of view the right balance between consulting and coaching will ensure that coaches are able to bring insights from their consulting to their coaching conversations just the same way they would carry the power of their coaching skills into their consulting assignments.

CFI actively encourages it members to share coaching cases with their peers and learn valuable lessons about what their clients need and what their context looks like. By working closely with clients through its consulting practice, CFI ensures that it keeps its systems perspective alive and brings the benefit of this insight to its CEO Coach training.

Limitations

The real dangers of a coach with a strong systems perspective is that he may end up telling his client what he has to do or might even be too prescriptive in his diagnosis. This is a watch out for all coaches in general but more so for those who have been there and done that.

I must also clarify that a system perspective does not mean that the coach must be familiar with the intricacies and business specific domain know-how of his client or even the nuances of the client’s role. What I am talking about is a very broad understanding which can be developed and nurtured through formal managerial education as well as through constant interface with those in business.

Coaches spend a lot of time and effort to become more and more skilful in their conversation, conversant with the right processes and proficient in the use of data to forward the coaching agenda. If they also have a sound systems perspective, they will make a remarkable contribution to their clients.

-Ganesh Chella

The Coach is listening intently to his client as the client narrates in great detail the specifics of the problem he is facing at work. The Coach is deeply attuned to his emotions, his experiences, his intentions and his state of being.  The empathy is complete.  However, the Coach begins to go beyond empathy because he “has been there and done that”.  In his mind, he is very clear about what his client needs to do to solve this particular problem.  While his training as a Coach has led him to believe that giving advice is strictly forbidden his training as an executive is leading him to believe that it is a sin not to tell the client what he should do to solve his problem and allow him to struggle with it. In all my conversations with the coaches we train and the existing coaches with whom we engage in a supervisory relationship, the subject of giving advice always comes up. 

Many wonder if this self imposed restriction on giving advice is a western idea and even suggest that in India, our culture strongly encourages people to pass on their wisdom to others especially because the recipient is more than willing to receive it.  They also argue that they have been chosen by their clients for their credentials and wisdom and it would be unfair not to share it with them merely because they have to adhere to some norm about advice which seems hard to accept.

In this article, I would like to share some of my perspectives about the place of advice in an Executive Coaching relationship.  I would like to look at this from two perspectives – the content and the timing.

 The context of advice

 Advice is a form of challenge, support and encouragement and has its legitimate place in a coaching relationship.  Also, in many helping relationships the helper is not merely a coach but also a manager, a consultant, a skilled expert, an advisor and so on.  In other words, in settings outside of pure executive coaching relationships the subject of giving advice assures real significance.

 In his classic, “Essential of Skilled Helper” which is CFI’s prescribed reading for its Coaches, Gerard Egan has identified information sharing as one of the challenging skills for coaches. 

Gerard Egan clarifies that sometimes clients are unable to explore the problem fully, set goals, and proceed to act because they lack information of one kind or other. For example, when clients tell their stores it might help them to know that they are not the first to have a problem of that kind.  Similarly, when clients are examining what they actually require, sharing relevant information of a factual nature would help them clarify the possibilities and set clear goals. Similarly at the stage of action planning, information sharing could help clients become aware of the typical bottlenecks that they might face.

Gerard Egan sees information sharing as a challenging process because it shows clients new perspectives and is meant to push them to act.

Gerard Egan looks at information sharing as both giving correct information and correcting wrong information. He also sees information sharing as a source of confirmation and support for the clients.

Gerard Egan, however, draws a clear distinction between information and advice.  He sees information as professional guidance and advice as “telling clients what to do”.

Therefore, my view is that it will be useful to stay within the realm of information sharing or professional guidance and refrain from using the term ‘advice’ which tends to focus on telling people what to do.

The timing of advice

Having understood the real meaning of advice which we will now begin to call “guidance”, we can now turn our attention to understanding when such guidance should be delivered.  It is my experience that many of our clients’ problems and unused opportunities arise out of their inability to see their situation completely or accurately or see it through a whole series of mistaken beliefs and assumptions.  Therefore people act and react in a certain manner because they firstly think in a certain manner and have been continuing to think in that manner because they are not aware of this manner of thinking and its impact on their effectiveness.  In this context, you must now start examining the role of guidance in helping clients and when such guidance should be delivered.

When a person is yet to recognise and confront some of his mistaken ways of thinking it is not likely that he will accept guidance to act differently.  For example, if an employee has been failing on his job because of a mistaken way of thinking about customers, peers, team members and his manager chooses to advice him on what he should do, he certainly is not going to change because at that moment, he is still seeing the problem as caused by others and not by his mistaken ways of thinking.  This is where guidance/advice when timed badly, can either be of no use or even destroy the helping relationship over a period of time.

 In this context, it would be useful to pay attention to Gerard Egan’s three stage skilled helper model.

In Stage I, when the coach is helping his client tell his story and tell it completely and then beginning to challenge him, so that he gets new perspectives, his entire focus is on understanding and challenging.  There is very little place for advice at this stage except where information is used as a means of challenge.  If the coach has succeeded in helping his client in challenging himself in helping him see new perspective the client may come around at examining what change will give him leverage.  At this stage, the client begins to look at defining the change agenda and making commitments and taking actions.

Having crossed this stage, client is looking for strategies to implement the change agenda.  This is the stage at which appropriate professional guidance by way of a range of ideas and solutions can be useful.  Even here, the emphasis is on generating ideas, sharing information and correcting mis information. The focus is not telling the client what he should do.

In summary, guidance of any kind is most effective after clients have challenged their ways of thinking and not before that.  We all recognise that we live in a world of information overload.  The average executive has significant access to every source of information and insight.  He also has access to several sources of self help. Yet, we all know that none of these translate into new behaviours.

Therefore, the real benefit that a coach can bring to his client is through his ability to help him challenge himself rather than jump to give him advice on what he should do.  Of course, well informed professional guidance delivered at the right time is always useful.

-Ganesh Chella

Leveraging the power of Alternative Interventions in Coaching – an NLP perspective

The term Neuro Linguistic Programming (NLP) was coined by its co-founders, Richard Bandler and John Grinder, to represent the connection between neurological processes, language and the behavioural patterns that have been programmed into us through our experiences since birth, which can be organized to achieve specific goals in life. Bandler and Grinder claimed that NLP would be instrumental in “finding ways to help people have better, fuller and richer lives”.  

NLP is a simple, skilful method for studying what goes on inside a person (the subjective experience) and the processes that people use to build their unique, distinctive maps or models of the world. It is about how the brain works; how people think, feel, learn, motivate themselves, interact with others, make choices and achieve realistic goals. The objective is to increase the behavioural choices available to us, with a presupposition that the more choices and possibilities we become aware of and make available to ourselves, the more we will become aware of and be able to fulfil our desires.

As an executive coach and an NLP practitioner I find that there are several ways in which I can leverage the simple and practical tools of NLP to forward my coaching relationship.

In the coaching context, NLP is best suited to help the coach a) get into the ideal state for coaching b) build rapport with the client, c) communicate effectively with the client, d) support the client in eliminating his self limiting beliefs and learned limitations which could include low self esteem, lack of confidence, low assertiveness or just about anything that is holding the client back from being the best he could be, and finally, e) build resilience both in herself and in the client.

Let us look at these one by one… 

Get into the ideal state for coaching

The coach can use NLP to explore her own values, beliefs and goals, establish strategies to achieve her goals, and streamline her approach. This will help enhance her coaching skills and make her more effective.  One of the techniques that is often used to get into the ideal state is called “Anchoring”.  This involves associating a particular stimulus to a desired response, to get herself into the desired state for coaching – say the state of being completely tuned in, empathetic, respectful, genuine, non judgmental and non directive towards the client.  The coach would build this ideal coaching state for herself and associate an anchor with it. While working with a client, she could trigger this anchor whenever she needs help in maintaining this state.  The coach could also establish a similar anchor for the client to, for instance, calm him down and bring him back to the present when he gets agitated or negatively associated with his past experiences.

Build rapport with the client

NLP believes that our internal world is manifested in various ways in our external behaviour. If the coach is able to calibrate the client’s nonverbal cues and match her communication style to that of the client at the appropriate sensory level the coach is better able to build understanding and rapport and facilitate the exploration of his needs.  One of NLP best known techniques is “Rapport building” which builds on the premise that people who like each other tend to be like each other. This consists of subtly and unobtrusively mirroring the body language, speaking patterns, tone, pitch, speed and even the breathing rate of another individual.  For example: leaning forward when the client does; speaking slower when the client does; using phrases like “I see what you mean” for a client who is more visual in nature, or phrases like “I have a feeling that you are right” for a client who is operates from the kinaesthetic, help in building the said rapport. By thus building rapport, the coach can create an unconscious empathy with the client and help him get settled and remain comfortable through the coaching sessions.

Communicate effectively with the

According to cognitive psychology, each of us have our own map or model of reality and hence experience the same reality differently. This reflects in the way we think, speak and act. Often pre-existing beliefs, strategies, memories, and decisions cause us to miss out or even hide information by unconsciously deleting, generalizing and distorting information we provide to the person we are communicating with.  

Everything a coach needs to know about successful communication in the context of coaching is encapsulated in the NLP Meta Model which helps the coach ask the right questions and challenge linguistic distortions, clarify generalizations and recover deleted information which occurs in a client’s statements, thus helping her better understand the client’s current situation. Typically, questions may be in the form of “What specifically?”, “How specifically?”, “According to whom?”, “How do you know that?”, “In comparison to what?”, “Was there ever a time when …?”   This helps the coach align the client’s perceptions with reality, which in turn make subsequent goals and action plans more specific and effective in achieving the results required.

For example if the client says “Everybody is mean to me”, he is using the universal quantifier “everybody” to possibly expand a specific painful situation to the level of being persecuted by the universe.  In this case, the coach’s response might be “Everybody?  Which people, specifically?”

Or if the client says “He never listens to me”, the coach might respond with “Never?  Was there ever a time when he did listen to you?”   Or if he says “They don’t like me”, the coach might respond with “Who specifically does not like you?” followed by “How do you know that X doesn’t like you?”  Or if the client says I can’t tell the truth, the coach could respond with questions like “What would happen if you did?”, “What stops you?”, “How do you stop yourself?”

Such questions help the coach elicit a verbal representation of the client’s full experience. They also help her evaluate the client’s answers in conjunction with body language, breathing and voice changes as discussed earlier.  In time, the Meta Model helps the coach become much more effective in empowering the client to find his own answers.

Support the client in eliminating his self limiting beliefs and learned limitations

NLP offers a powerful technique called “Reframing” which helps in dealing with problems by finding and using alternative behaviours. In context reframing, we search for another context where the behaviour is regarded as healthy, while content reframing emphasises the positive connotation of any behaviour and transforms a potentially negative situation into a growing or learning experience. A new attitude is inculcated – “How am I going to use this behaviour?” instead of “How am I going to get rid of it?” As a result, what was earlier perceived as a problem is often no longer one.  The key lies in finding out what exactly is the positive intention at the root of the client’s behaviour.  For example, finding that the positive intention of a teenager’s rebelliousness is to become an independent and capable adult can change how both the parent and the child views that behaviour. To uncover the positive intention, keep asking for what purpose the client said or did something until you arrive at the positive intention. In coaching, we call this finding out the story behind the story. 

NLP has other interesting exercises which the disbeliever might think of as far-fetched but which if followed can bring about a sea change in a client’s experiences by helping him change his mental or emotional state, perceive more opportunities, and make better choices for himself.   The following can give the coach much leverage while working with self limiting beliefs of the client.  The “Belief Change” exercises could help give the client more choices, allowing the subconscious to choose what is best.  The “Perceptual Positions” exercises could get the client to step into the shoes of a future confident and successful version of himself.  From this position, the client could plan on how to get there and explore the values and beliefs that he has to change to become that person.  He could also be made to step into the shoes of a person with whom he is having a conflict, say his boss, to help him see things from the boss’s viewpoint.  The “Swish” technique can help the client eliminate unhealthy habits and mannerisms, even those that he may not even be aware of.  The “Timeline” intervention can help the client sort out events affecting his ongoing experience and could, for example, help him to let go of self doubt.  The “Past Timeline” exercise allows the client, with the help of his unconscious, to transform events of the past and integrate them into the present and future. 

Build resilience

NLP advocates leveraging the resources of the individual, including those resources that the client might currently lack but would like to imagine as being a part of his repertoire. The “State of Excellence” technique can help bring the client to a state in which he has all possible resources available to him in a way that allows him to act with full capability. NLP thus teaches the client self responsibility and self reliance.

NLP practitioners have found that the quality of their own lives has improved dramatically by using NLP as they now are able to come up with better strategies to achieve whatever outcome they want in their lives.   The key learning from NLP is that by using the set of tools and techniques it offers it is possible to bring about a Core Transformation – transformation at the core of our being, which in turn brings about a transformation in the way we think and act, and thence in our reality – our life as we experience it.  We have all the resources that we need inside of us. We have only to let them surface.

Using NLP, coaches can facilitate the greatest impact possible in their clients, both personally as well as professionally. The self talk at the core of NLP is “I am responsible for my own behaviour and I have the resources to handle it!” As coaching speaks the same language, the two disciplines can be integrated easily and harmoniously to the greater benefit of the client, and in many ways even speed up results dramatically making the engagement highly cost effective; a by-product both coach and client will certainly appreciate.

Sources:

Credit for much of this article goes to: Richard P. McHugh, S.J., Ph.D., Mind with a Heart – Creative Patterns of Personal Change, Gujarat Sahitya Prakash, India, 1998, and to the NLP Master Practitioner Course conducted by Dr. McHugh at Ashirwad Bangalore, India, 2009

-Michelle Chaudhuri

Abstract

“Mergers & Acquisitions are a business reality among mid-size corporations.  In such contexts, entrepreneurs constantly seek coaches to resolve some of the professional dilemmas arising out of these crucial decisions.  

In the case I am about to narrate, the entrepreneur was confronted with an acquisition question – “to sell or not to sell”  a company that he assiduously built.  As a coach who worked with the entrepreneur I present the case in the form of a fable to illustrate how a “well structured non prescriptive coaching process” help the coachee come out with a framework that he used as a permanent acid test to resolve this acquisition issue.   The framework evolution happens through a 3 stage process with ample emphasis given to the emotional aspects: 1  Data collection and analysis 2. Reconciling the data, and the Business Context through unveiling the real story. 3. Moving the Coachee from Reconciliation to Action.The Coach also used certain alternate interventions in line with the subject matter expertise that was required to ensure that the coachee was able to reconcile his personal aspirations and had realistic expectations from the market place.”  

The Coachee’s dilemma

I was immersed in a breath taking view of the vast Bay of Bengal from the top floor of my Coachee’s office, when my coachee began talking about a business dilemma he had to overcome. To sell his company or not to sell his Company – that was his question.   He was telling me that a large multinational had offered him 6 million USD and this would mean enough money for him to retire in peace.  Knowing that he owned a large majority of the company, his friends at the Club kept pushing him with some “good” advice like, “What are you waiting for man – Collect the cash and go to the Caribbean”. It was then that the Coach in me awoke to the scene and I decided not to give him free advice like his friends but to skilfully unveil the story behind the question.  If deciding to cash out was so simple for him, I realized I would not be sitting in front of him.

It was my job as a Coach, trained in Skilled Helping to adhere to the strict belief that the answers to the Coachee’s questions lay deep inside his intellect and that it was my duty to shine the torch and get him to own the question and the answer.  Now came the challenge of adapting a structured Coaching model to this M&A situation. I proceeded to acquire as much relevant data as possible through dialogue and assessment tools.

Stage 1 :  The data acquisition and analysis stage.  My first attempt was to understand my coachee’s personality type and to establish the relevance of this acquisition dilemma to his current business context.  I also embarked on series of empathic dialogues, that included the history of his business, his own personal aspirations and his professional outlook for the future.   It was necessary to unveil his current state of mind in the context of the M&A.  This, I surmised could also be a clear pointer as to why he was finding it tough to take a call and why he needed my “Skilled Help.”

The data that was available at the end of this stage was the following :

Personality Type :  My coachee turned out to be a Highly expressed extraverted personality with a large leaning to be a paternalistically driven and gut feel (intuition) based self made individual.  MBTI – type ENFJ.

Business History :

He came from a lower middle class family with no other earning member. Against all odds he started the Company during the early 1990s.

Grew from a small 12 man team doing mass mailing for a leading bank.

Ø  Slowly diversified into becoming their customer service department for letters.

Ø  Grew to handle more than 10000 letters a month.

Ø  By 2003, more units of various multinational banks became his clients.

Ø  Today, his company provides a wide range of banking support services including both back end and front end support for divisions such as credit cards processing, retaining credit card customers, loans processing, customer service, outbound telemarketing for loans etc.  

Ø  With a team strength around 1250 they are a reputed provider of backend services to large banks and are housed in a large 50000 sq feet space which they own.

Personal aspirations –

Ø  To create enough wealth in the next 6 to 7 years, in order to be able to satisfy and fulfil the professional and financial aspirations of his loyal core team members, who have been instrumental in his success and growth.

Ø  To leave behind  a good professionally managed and financially successful conglomerate of companies, for his sons to take over and run independently from the year 2016 onwards (he planned to retire from a full time CEO position)

Ø  To go more “Rural” and attempt to do more and more services with the help of rural youth, thereby achieving “Cost Effectiveness” on one hand and “Satisfaction of contributing towards Society” on the other.  He already was employing 100 people in a rural setting and was proud about how he felt life in the villages around his rural venture had changed for the better.

Armed with this data, it seemed quite infeasible that he would ever sell his company and retire. But obviously he was seeing some merits in a financial exit. May be this was what needed to be probed in the next few coaching sessions.

Stage 2 :  Reconciling the data, the Business Context and the acquisition question through unveiling the real story.

During the coaching sessions, I needed to establish the real issue that was keeping him from selling the Company and then help him evolve a way forward to resolving the same. Some key probes had to be administered and these had to connect the current acquisition question to his context and his aspirations.  It needed two coaching sessions to establish a large enough empathy and to challenge the coachee into getting him to opine on the issues presented below.  The probes were however framed differently and were based on conflicts/feelings that he had raised all through this stage.  The Key Dilemma was then narrowed down to :

1. Was the current offer good enough in his mind in terms of accelerating the wealth that he aspired to create over the next 6 to 7 years ?  How much money did he want in the bank at the end of his tenure and was the current offer in line ?
2. What legitimate apprehensions were preventing him from saying an outright “yes” to being acquired ?
3. Was he feeling that, by selling out he would have too much time on his hands and nothing useful to do given his high energy levels ?  Basically did he feel it was too early to retire ?  This fear was natural given his personality type.  This was his real dilemma.
4. Was it a serious issue that by selling out, he would be perceived as ditching his loyal employees without giving them a fair share of the pie ? Was he concerned that his sons may fritter away his wealth because they had gotten it too early ? His strong paternalistic trait had to be reconciled.
5. More importantly – what were key parameters when he would consider to say a YES! to cash out and when would he say NO!  

Stage 3 : Moving from Reconciliation to Action

Point e above was the final trigger that moved the Coachee into action. He started thinking aloud that unless he came out with a clear set of parameters on “why and when” he would say Yes to acquisition, he would continue on an endless mental debate and feel very stressful.  

What ensued from these was an unfolding of a wonderful 4 point framework that the coachee articulated. The highlights are as follows :

   The acquirer had to be a large multinational with an ability to offer substantial growth to the current senior and middle management team. The Company would not be sold to another family business or an unknown brand just because the acquisition price was good.

b.      The acquirer had to be culturally conscious of the loyalty and hard work that the team had put in and should not plan to indiscriminately cut costs and bring down headcount for at least 3 years.

c.      The valuation must be in the region of USD 10 million or higher.

d.      The acquisition should not prevent the Owner (Coachee) from pursuing business outside of the current customers and should in no way be a bottleneck to the globalization and rural service aspirations.

The coachee re-iterated firmly that this 4 point framework would be his acid test framework for any potential acquisition in the future.

Alternate Interventions :

For the coachee to arrive at this framework, the following alternate interventions were deployed through 3 sessions of Stage 3:

a.   

1. The Coachee had to read selected Chapters of the Harvard Business Essentials of Strategic Alliances.  This was to help the Coachee understand the motivations of an acquirer and their expectations.
2. A Series of conference calls with Investment banking experts.  This was to give the Coachee a sense of what kinds of valuations to expect from an acquirer.  It also gave him a perspective on whether he could cash out at a later date, should circumstances change.
3. A series of meetings with Corporate lawyers on how M&A agreements are structured. This was to give the coachee a clear idea of certain negotiable and non-negotiable expectations which acquirers set as conditions for the owners pre and post the acquisition.

And Finally :

It was more than 5 months, when the coachee suddenly called me. He told me “Hey Coach ! I rejected 2 acquisition proposals based on the 4 point framework, but here I have one that fulfils the top 3 criteria well. However, they are willing to pay me more money if I compromise on the 4^th criterion for the next 3 years. I have decided to go with the deal “.  I asked him if he was happy, satisfied and had no conflicts. He said “Yes” and I replied “Congratulations!!”.   Silently, I thanked my Coaching guide for constantly re-affirming to me that what really works is a structured non-prescriptive coaching process. 

-N.Raghunandan

Leveraging the power of Alternative Interventions in Coaching – a transactional analysis perspective

As change catalysts, Executive Coaches have to enable coachees to develop newer ways of thinking, feeling or acting (cognitive, affective or behavioural change).

To enable this, a key skill in Coaches is the ability to understand and articulate human behaviour, thoughts & feelings. Since this human behaviour is couched in an organizational context, a sound grasp of group dynamics is obviously essential.

In other words, Executive Coaches need a sound understanding of the theory of human behaviour and also familiarity with the use of the right techniques that can enable change.

Transactional Analysis (TA) as a ‘theory of personality’,  provides a framework to understand and articulate human behaviour in relation to groups; as a ‘theory of social intercourse’, it also provides a set of tools and techniques to enable change. The “underlying philosophy is one of mutual self respect and caring”, which encapsulates CFI’s coaching values.

This article seeks to outline how coaches can use some elements of TA to understand human behaviour and also how to use some of the techniques of TA to enable change in their coachees.

TA was developed by Eric Berne and deals with several aspects of human behaviour: Ego states, which is a structural analysis of personality; Transactions & Strokes which look at communication patterns; Scripts, the analysis of specific life dramas that persons compulsively play out; Life Positions, attitudes with reference to others/the world; Games, Ulterior Transactions played for specific payoffs. Naturally, a discussion of all the above elements is beyond the scope of this article. I will limit myself to how the Ego States model can be used as a framework for understanding human behaviour and as a technique to enable change.

Ego States: A Framework of Personality & a Technique to catalyse behaviour change

According to Berne, all personalities are made up of three ego states – Parent, Adult & Child. At any given point in time, a person operates in one of the three distinct ego states. (The parent and child are subdivided into two each, making it five behaviour styles). All three ego states are important for a healthy personality.

The Three Ego states can be defined as follows:

The Parent Ego state contains the attitudes and behaviour incorporated from external sources, primarily parents. Outwardly, it often is expressed toward others in prejudiced, critical behaviours or nurturing behaviours. Inwardly it is experienced as old Parental messages which continue to influence the inner Child.

The Adult Ego state is not related to a person’s age. It is oriented to current reality and the objective gathering of information. It is organized, adaptable, intelligent, and functions by testing reality, estimating probabilities, and computing dispassionately.

The Child Ego state contains all the impulses that come naturally to an infant. It also contains the recordings of the child’s early experiences, responses, and the ‘positions’ taken about self and others. It is expressed as ‘old’ (archaic) behaviour from childhood.

Case Illustration: A client was advised to investigate a private school for his son. When he reported his findings about the school where the teaching was informal and creativity encouraged, three distinct reactions were easily observable. First, he scowled and said, “I cant see how anyone could learn anything at that school. There’s dirt on the floor!” Leaning back in the chair, his forehead smoothed out as he reflected, “Before I decide, I think I should check on the school’s scholastic rating and talk to some of the parents.” The next minute, a broad grin crossed his face, and he said, “Gee, I’d love to have gone to a school like that!”

Born To Win – By Muriel James, Ed.D., and Dorothy Jongeward, Ph.D.

Let’s take the example of AK, the head of a Business Unit in a large consumer products company. When AK is ticking off her team member for not meeting his KRAs or setting limits/rules for the performance of a task, she is operating out of her Controlling Parent ego state. When she is providing comfort for failure and support for better performance, she is operating out of her Nurturing parent.

When she identifies the reasons for the poor performance and problem solves to ensure there is no repeat, she is operating out of her Adult ego state. When AK boisterously invites her team to enjoy a celebratory party for a successful completion or creatively finds an out of the box solution to a knotty problem, she is operating out of her Free child. Finally, when she is adhering to organizational policies to ensure that tasks are completed or when she is complying with the expectations of others, AK is operating out of her Adapted Child. (For a quick reference guide of all the behaviours, check ‘Behavior Styles’ table below)

Behavior Styles Table

**It is critical to look at supporting tone and other body language clues. Cannot be perceived in isolation.

 Thus, the ego states are sources of thoughts & feelings, manifested by corresponding patterns of behaviour, accompanied by typical verbal & non verbal signals. And each of us has all the ego states available to us as a repertoire. In most cases, though, we operate from only one predominant ego state that we draw from, which isn’t consciously chosen or wielded.

How Ego States can be used in Coaching: For the Executive coach, the model facilitates recognition of behaviour patterns & styles that the coachee is operating from; this throws light on several aspects of the coachee’s personality which can feed into coaching goals and in some cases, can be the coaching goals.

SS, CFO in a multinational organization began the coaching discussions with the need to improve his performance & productivity. He maintained that his stress levels were very high and that this has impacted his performance and deliverables. Upon deeper inquiry, we found that the stress was caused by the demands of several business units which competed for his time constantly. The problem statement emerged as his inability to refuse unreasonable demands on his time, as well as his hesitation to be ‘unpopular’.

We completed a 360 degree and gathered feedback from his stakeholders, the results of which tied in with our (coach & coachee) own leadership assessments of the coachee’s primary source of behaviour as ‘Adapted Child’. We used an ego gram to map the behaviour pattern, which expectedly showed a high bar on Adapted Child. (See figure 1) One of the coaching goals was then identified as strengthening his Critical Parent (to set rules & limitations) and Adult (to engage in problem solving with stakeholders rather than concede to their demands), and reducing the Adapted child and Nurturing Parent.

The strength of the model for the Executive Coach lies in its simplicity and comprehensiveness. The ego states model can thus facilitate the coach & coachee in recognizing coachee’s behaviour patterns/styles and also provide a framework for guiding their change agenda. It can be used specifically in coaching agendas when leadership style is the key ingredient.

It must however be cautioned that the ego states must be used more as a means to understand the coachee and should not be used to label the coachee because that would go against our belief of respect and our faith  in the coachee as a “becoming person.”

References:

Transactional Analysis in Psychotherapy, Eric Berne, M.D.

Games People Play, Eric Berne, M.D.

What Do You Say After You Say Hello? Eric Berne, M.D.

Scripts People Live, Claude Steiner

TA Today, Ian Stewart & Vann Joines

Transactional Analysis for Trainers, Julie Hay

Born To Win, Muriel James & Dorothy Jongeward

The ultimate test of a coaching engagement is often the visible change that your client is able to demonstrate to herself or himself, to you and of course to his or her sponsor.

Often times, in the course of our engagement, we and the client believe that this process of change has indeed begun – it is evident from your interactions, from you sense of his receptiveness, from his genuine acceptance and his visible commitment. Yet, you may be unable to show clear evidence of this change early enough. More importantly, you are often unable to convince the occasionally impatient sponsor that the process of change has indeed begun.

You may even feel like appealing to the sponsor: “Hey, you know what, my client has indeed begun to change and that is true. If you try hard, you can see it for yourself!”

So, is it possible that someone has begun to change but you and others are yet unable to see it? Is there an invisible work in progress state?

As I began to research this, I stumbled up this interesting five stage model of change developed by DiClemente and Prochaska (1998). This model helped me answer this question rather well.

The fundamental premise behind their model is that behavioural change is seldom a single discreet event – a switch which goes from off to on.

The model suggests that change is often a gradual slow process that people go through over a period of time, starting with first being unaware and uninterested and even unwilling to change (pre-contemplation stage) to then moving to a stage where the person is considering the need to change (contemplation) to a stage where the person is deciding and actually preparing for the change (preparation) to a stage where the person is taking specific action towards the change and (action) to finally a stage where the person will maintain the change momentum and prevent relapse (maintenance).

When we apply this model to a typical coaching situation, things begin to suddenly fall in place.

Pre-contemplation

At this stage the person has not yet begun to see the need for change and believes that current styles and approaches are fine. This is where we commence our coaching journey. This is the stage where we begin to listen to the stories of our clients and also build a trusting relationship through our empathy and understanding.

Contemplation

At this stage, the person has begun to think about the need for change. This is achieved by bringing new perspectives and challenging old ways through feedback and assessment. Through this, the person is beginning to become open to the need for change. The person is also looking at how things will get better with change and begins to make a firm decision to change.

Preparation

At this stage, the person starts preparing to make the change. This involves establishing a clear goal, evolving action strategies and drawing up implementation plans. This is a stage of transition and therefore accompanied by a certain sense of uncertainty.

Action

This is the stage in which the person actually takes steps to attempt new behaviour. The person tries new things and puts plans into action. There is bound to be trial and error as the person embarks on a new path.

Maintenance and relapse prevention

This is the all-important phase of making the change sustainable. This is the stage where the coach needs to help the client stay committed and ultimately become an advocate for others to change.

The fine lines separating Contemplation – Preparation – Action

In reality, clients may spend a fair amount of time in contemplation and preparation, in thinking through the new inputs, figuring out the pros and cons, getting to grips with potential behaviours and so on.

However, while all this is happening, we or even the sponsors may not see visible change. However, if we are truly insightful and empathetic, we can sense that the client is contemplating and preparing.

These are the stages where we as coaches therefore actually invest the most effort. Similarly, clients may also take a lot of time in mastering actions. Often, there is a fair amount of relapse from action back to contemplation and revised preparations during this period.

I believe that it is important firstly for us as coaches to recognise these often-invisible stages in the change process and be a lot more empathetic with our clients as they navigate these stages. It is equally important for us to use this awareness to gently sensitize our sponsors and even set realistic expectations. Of course, we must adopt innovative stage relevant tools and intervention strategies to help clients move forward.

Beyond all this, it is important that we recognise that behavioural change is a deeply human process that is bound to have multitudes of layers and its inevitable motions of progress and relapse before launching into sustainable change.

In that sense, behavioural change is more akin to metamorphosis than to turning on the light!

-Ganesh Chella

One of the most common coaching needs is this – to help a leader think and act more strategically.

Now, the moment one is presented with such a need, one is naturally drawn to connect this with the cognitive ability to think strategically.

In fact most competency frameworks focus on the “thinking dimension” of being strategic.

Viewed in this manner, we as coaches are likely to run into some rough weather.

The first question that might confound us is this – can we as coaches actually help someone develop their thinking skills? Is it not something that needs to be taught over a long period of time? In fact, the various skills associated with thinking are seldom taught in school or college. While we have so many subjects in school and college, there is seldom a subject called “thinking”.

So, given one’s upbringing, exposure, personality preference, intelligence and work exposure, one may or may not develop a wide range of thinking skills.

Also, in the early days of one’s career, the emphasis is on doing – doing lots and doing well. And unfortunately, we lead ourselves to believe that good doing means no thinking.

Given all these complexities, when someone steps into Leadership Coaching, one can often be found wanting in the thinking dimension – and more specifically in the strategic thinking dimension. When organisations refer to “being strategic”, they are also referring to focusing on what is important and vital rather than just exigent.

Having witnessed and seen several hundreds of coaching engagements, my conclusion is that it is not the job of a coach to teach thinking, even strategic thinking. Defined in this manner, it can be a long and complex and even difficult expectation.

What coaches can certainly do is to help the leaders nurture a strategic orientation. A strategic orientation by leading them to develop habits that aid the process of being strategic – that aid them to behave in ways that are more strategic. Challenge beliefs that prevent them from being strategic. Dealing with aspects of emotional intelligence that if nurtured can support the cognitive process. (like being impulsive, not regulating one’s emotions in problem solving and decision making, not being grounded, not being empathetic).These are things that a coach can certainly work with their coachees on. But they cannot make them more strategic thinkers. They can help them become leaders who can be more strategic in what they do and how they do it.

Based on my experiences and the experiences of my fellow coaches, here are a few things that coaches do to promote strategic orientation or good habits to be strategic. I present them in the form of eight questions that coaches can get their coachees to ask themselves.

1. Do I have the time to be strategic or do the strategic or important things? How do I spend my time?
Coaches often find that the manner in which leaders spend their time needs change. They might be spending time doing things that are best done by their team members. This is one reason why the ability and willingness to delegate is often linked to the ability to be strategic.

This is one area that coaches engage in quite often, in order to promote strategic orientation.

2. How much of my time is spent thinking?

Many leaders grow up to believe that a packed day busy “doing” things is the best sign of being effective. The limiting belief that working hard is necessary and being seen as working hard is important is often common. So, having empty spaces in one’s calendar and using it to think can often be seen as a sin.

Overcoming this limiting belief and getting into the habit of reflection is another thing that coaches work with their coachees on.

3. Am I able to view my role and my work situations from perspectives broader than they are today – perspectives that are broader and more holistic and keep the context in mind?

Quite often, in conversations that a coach has with a coachee, the coach will be able to spot views that are somewhat myopic, narrow, or just limiting. They might define their roles in a certain way, they might fail to read the context, they might miss certain facts or choose not to see them. They may not even feel empowered to think about larger matters – that is not my job; tell me what I should do. So, the sense of agency can promote strategic orientation.

As a result, their perspectives may not be strategic. In other words, one’s language defines one’s world. Coaches can help coachees change their language in a way that they are more expansive, holistic and broad.

Altering beliefs, world views and ways of looking at one’s role and the world can help.

It can also be about understanding the strategic plans of the Organisation and seeing what role one can pay to achieve it.

4. Am I articulating in ways that are far sighted, inspiring, clarity promoting or do I end up muddying the waters, talking only actions and what is in front of my nose?

The manner in which one communicates reflects the way one is processing things. It is this communication that gets picked up be key stakeholders and used as pieces of evidence to judge if the leader is strategic or not. And often in a somewhat hasty manner.

Coaches often help their coachees be more thoughtful and prepared and deliberate in the way they communicate so that they elevate conversations, bring clarity and lead to inspiration.

It could be about describing the future of one’s industry, one’s function, asking questions that promote thinking, speaking in a way that others listen, being reflective so one can bring much needed clarity. It could also be about being more intellectually rigorous.

5. Do I solve problems symptomatically or structurally? Are my solutions single loop or double loop? (https://hbr.org/1977/09/double-loop-learning-in-organizations)

Leaders solve problems in ways that are different. Some do quick fixes. Some go to the root cause. Others question fundamental assumptions and start by saying everything is up for questioning.

Coaches may be called upon to help coachees solve problems in ways that are befitting their positions. This might call for challenging assumptions, asking deep questions and overcoming fears.

6. Can I plan for the long-term?

Planning for the long-term calls for reading the environment, spotting trends and opportunities, making assumptions and seeing patterns.

Coaches are often called upon to help coachees make long-term plans for their businesses. This may call for a certain level of coaching and a certain level of mentoring too.

7. How well am I able to build and maintain relationships?

Building and maintaining relationships calls for the ability to step back and view things in perspective – what battles should I pick up, what relationships matter, what is the political landscape, who are my well wishers and who should be and so on. When do I be candid and when diplomatic. When is the truth best not told?

Being naïve about relationships is not being strategic.

8. Am I able to make complex and balanced decisions considering various factors

Making major decisions like redefining business models, go to market strategies redefining purpose and direction are all complex and call for a lot of clear thinking.

This is yet another expectation for leaders and entrepreneurs. Coaches and mentors often support these decision-making processes by asking the right questions and bringing in the right perspectives.

You can see that coaches and sometimes mentors can help their coachees develop a certain strategic orientation, a certain set of habits in thinking and acting and communicating that can push them in the path of being more strategic.

The idea is to not teach them strategic thinking but to support them to act in ways that are strategic.

-Ganesh Chella

You could be a leader, manager, team member or colleague. How do you know if you are communicating adequately?
We are not talking about the effectiveness of communication from a skill perspective but the adequacy of communicating from a relationship perspective in terms of a habit and a sensitivity – the act of trusting enough to share and disclose, keeping people informed, of making the other person feel cared for, feel included, respected and valued.
The true judge of whether we are communicating adequate or not is not us but the other person. How well and adequately we communicate in an interpersonal relationship is always “in the eyes of the beholder”.
Be it employee engagement surveys and culture surveys about organisations (and therefore leadership) or 360 surveys about individuals or nay other sensing exercise, inadequate communication almost always figures as an area that needs attention.
When critical communication does not happen in a relationship in a given situation, the typical responses from the other person are something like this:
“You did not tell me”, “You could have told me”
“I did not know”, “How am I supposed to know”
“You could have taken me into confidence”, “I did not feel included”
“I don’t know what’s going on in your mind”, “Why don’t you say something?”
“Why don’t you open up and share?”
Have you been asked these questions? Have you asked someone these questions?
Well, if the expectations are so strong and the relationship is so important, why don’t people communicate?
At the heart of this “blind spot” or “failure” if I should use a strong word is the lack of “perspective taking”. The inability to see things from the point of view of the other person. The inability to see how the world might look from that other person’s eyes. This is also called lack of “cognitive empathy”. It is the inability to comprehend how it feels to be left guessing, left wondering, to know that something is going on but you are not sharing, that you are lost in your bubble. The other can feel it and is perhaps sponging your emotional state but remain helpless.
Individuals are unable to take the perspective of the other because they are so caught up in their own world. So, irrespective of what is going on, what is holding people back?
There could be many things but three come to my mind.
Fears
Fear is a big reason for people not to communicate and hold back. I am afraid that I will be judged, will be mistaken, the relationship will turn sour, that you cannot deal with what I have to say, that you are too fragile.
Of course, the fear of trusting others with my views and opinions and feelings is another huge one.
In an increasingly transparent world, leaders are expected to transcend this fear and share what is going on. To deal with that vulnerability is important today.
One of the biggest reasons for performance reviews not delivering on its promise is the fear of being candid and open.
Beliefs and Assumptions
Leaders, managers and team members might be making many assumptions or holding several unhelpful beliefs that prevent them from sharing.
You will not understand
You will understand
You know what is going on and you can wait
I will look weak and sound like I want help
There is no use
The last time I took the effort and shared you did not understand so why try
It is better to sulk and get attention than share and get dismissed
Often times when teams are working together on projects and there is need for coordination and cooperation, one team members might be working on something but may fail to let others know where he or she stands and what the issues if any are.
One of the reasons for town halls and all hands meeting to be seen as a waste of time is the fact that it lacks candour.
Intentions
Sometimes, people have intentions when they do not communicate.
I better get this done and then report.
I am still working on it, so let me complete it
Do not want to disturb you.
I must have something tangible to share.
Many enabling functions in organisations like HR and Finance are often accused of not communicating enough. They may have great intentions, grand plans they wish to unfold but no one knows what is cooking.
The consequences
More often than not, relationships weaken than strengthen as a result of under communication.
Under communication can make things look worse than they actually are.
It is also a failed opportunity to ask for and receive help
It can lead to managers being misperceived as not acting on things.
In an Organisational context, it can weaken trust and allow misinformation to spread.
Sadly, instead of taking a small simple step like walking across and talking, we might end up inviting an OD consultant to come in and do an intervention to improve collaboration!

-Ganesh Chella

We keep hearing more and more organisations talk passionately about “their culture” and how they wish to preserve and protect it.

Leaders and management gurus swear by culture and often quote Peter Drucker who said, “culture eats strategy for breakfast”. So, culture is holy and you might even wonder if there can at all be a shadow side to it?

Culture is powerful and precisely for that reason, from a leadership effectiveness perspective, I would like to raise two uncomfortable questions about company culture.

The first thing that concerns me is that culture is often times used as a filter. Yes, culture is often referred to in the context of “whether a person fits in or not”. HR is called upon to ensure that hires from outside “fit into the culture”.

In a world that appears so seamless, so standardized and where organisations swear to being inclusive and so embracing of diversity, where gig work defines how things get done and attrition is huge and contingent workforce is your real workforce, I often wonder about the place of culture in this new scheme of things. How does “fitting in” fit in with this new world? Who is supposed to fit in? After all, everyone talks about trust, collaboration, being seamless, being agile, being passionate about execution and other similar things.

What it does is pose huge challenges especially for leaders hired from outside – there is resistance, push back and a lot of stress. Unfortunately, the onus is almost entirely placed on the individual to sort out the adjustment issue. Older the organization and more tenured the employees, greater the challenges. This makes me wonder if “being accepting of others” should be one of the cultural pillars for organizations of tomorrow.

This brings me to the second concern and is best explained by the famous adage, “the culture of an Organization is but the shadow of the leader”. Therefore, in reality, when top leaders, especially successful founders say they want employees, especially senior leaders to “fit in”, they are actually asking people to align or fall in line. They are saying that their style defines the culture and they want employees, especially senior leaders to align to their style. The critical element here is of course success. Yes, when they are successful, they run the risk of personalsing reasons for success and believe that it has to do with their magic presence and style and in many gives them the right to make that the default culture.

Now, often times, an inspiring leader’s style and influence on culture can do a lot of good. It can inspire, elevate and excite employees. If the leaders also grow and evolve, they find ways to learn, adapt and ensure that while the core is retained, there are adaptive changes made and such changes show flexibility to new ideas and new ways of doing things.

But, it can also go the other way. Leaders who are somewhat narcissistic and not self aware and pursue their own agendas can end up creating toxic workplaces and believe that it is good culture.

New comers who come in with the hope of driving change often end up colliding, not with others resistance but the leader’s style. That is why building relationships becomes so key to survival for new comers.

So, if you are a founder, entrepreneur and leader, please ask yourself if you are aware of the influence of your style on culture and seek feedback to know that it is functional and not otherwise. Is your style continuing to have a positive impact on the organisational fabric or are you being rigid just because you are financially successful?

If you are a new comer, respecting this reality and building relationships is key because what you might be confronted with is a conflict with a person and not an inanimate Organisation.

If you are a member of the leadership team or HR, you have a role to play in ensuing that “culture” is not an excuse for inflexibility and rigidity. Seize opportunities to talk about culture, respecting diversity in the real sense and remain open to new ways of doing things as long as it builds on the core.

But then, there is a socio-political reality to all this you see.

Remember the famous comic strip…..

Credited to “Wizard of Id” comic strip of May 3, 1965.

-Ganesh Chella

The most important step in setting up a successful coaching engagement is the process of the coachee finding the right coach.

Be it a single coachee for whom the Organisation needs to find the right Internal Coach Program and executive coaching certification or a cohort of coachees for whom the Organisation needs to find the right panel of coaches, be it finding a coach directly or through a coach provider, or be it a coachee directly trying to find a coach for themselves (typically entrepreneurs and business owners), the process is quite crucial and everyone needs to get it right.

So how does it really work? In my role as a coach provider for over 15 years, I have seen many methods work petty well – yes, there is no single golden way to do it.

Given that it is a partnership and an alliance, we can use the analogy of marriages (merely to bring clarity). When we talk about marriages, we often ask if it love or arranged. The truth is that even in marriages it is not so black and white – there are variations and combinations – there are arrangements and hard facts and then there is compatibility. As far as coach and coachee pairing is concerned, most often it is part arranged and part love. That is perhaps why the term “chemistry” creeps into these discussions. More about that later.

The arranged part

In most cases, there is some kind of a sponsor or facilitator who plays a crucial role in setting up the engagement. It could be the Manager, the leader of the business with active involvement of HR.

Their role in the “arrangement” part is to be rigorous in verifying that the basics are in place in shortlisting coaches.

Often times, sponsors (Manager and or HR) have a very sound understanding of the coachee(s), their needs and preferences. Especially where managers and HR have spent time in formal or informal talent discussions, they are in a position to make an informed choice keeping the interest of the coachee in mind.

Armed with these insights they look at professional credentials and coaching credentials.

Does the coach have the right professional credentials that will help them deliver value to the coachees – a successful career, been there and done that, the rich and varied work and life experiences that will be of value to the coachee. While coaching is “technically” content free, they do look for familiarity with the industry and broad context because that really helps.

Then comes coaching credentials. What is the quality of the coach education program they went through? What has been the track record as a coach? What is the range of work done?

Sponsors will also attempt to gather some references if needed. That can be a great source of comfort.

The sponsors and HR may meet the panel of coaches and then make an informed final selection or a shortlist.

Where the coachee has implicit trust in the Manager and HR and genuinely believes that they have their best interest in mind, the coachee will typically go with the coach presented to them by the sponsors.  Of course, there is the usual caveat that the coachee has the freedom to meet the coach and turn down the selection should they have a serious concern – something that happens very rarely.

In certain organisational cultures, they let the coachee truly make the final decision. They typically present a panel of maybe 2 coaches and let the coach choose.

Chemistry and compatibility

Now, if a panel of coaches pass through these two vital filters, then confirming the choice or choosing one of them is where good human judgment, gut feel, leap of faith, trust and other subjective factors come to play, because one is now looking at the human side of the coach – the person, the being. This is the chemistry part, or in our analogy the “love” part.

So, what does chemistry or compatibility really mean, from the coachee’s point of view?

Good chemistry and compatibility may mean saying yes to all or at least some of these questions:

1. Do I feel comfortable in this person’s presence, can be myself, open up and feel comfortable sharing?
2. Do I respect this person? And does this person seem to respect me for who I am?
3. Do we have things in common – views, values, concerns?
4. Do I get the sense that this person will accept me for who I am and not judge me?
5. Am I eager to learn from this person?
6. Does this person inspire confidence?
7. Did I experience empathetic presence and good listening?
8. Was this person interested in me?
9. Was there something endearing about this person? Someone I wish to meet again and work with.

Truth is that seasoned and successful coaches are likely to have worked quite a bit on themselves and their “being” dimension. It is therefore fair to say that they will score fairly well on these dimensions. That indeed is the true test of a coach.

Coachees can hit it off so to speak with their coaches in their first interaction or the chemistry can grow over a few meetings. Of course, in some rare cases, it can also deteriorate over time.

In summary, some arrangements (to verify Professional credentials and coaching credentials) and some love (ascertaining adequate chemistry and compatibility) make for a good coach – coachee relationship.  This way, the responsibility of making it work is shared by all involved.

-Ganesh Chella

The ability of any manager or leader to develop the people working for them has always been considered important and even essential. It has been considered a critical competence, a competitive advantage and a key factor in fostering good engagement. It is now evident that employees not only expect it from their managers and leaders but believe that it is perhaps the most important contribution they can and need to make.

Tomes have been written about what it takes to develop people. A lot is now being said about the need for a coaching culture within organizations. 360-degree assessments focus sharply on this competence and unfortunately many managers and leaders come out wanting.

So, it is obvious by now that developing people is easier said than done.

Why so? What does developing people really mean and why is it so hard?

It is hard because managers and leaders need to make fundamental changes in themselves and their values and styles if they need to be able to develop others. It is not merely a skill. It is a mind-set.

There are four fundamental shifts or changes that we as Manager as Coach and leaders need to make if we need to be able to truly develop another person.

1. Modify our ways of thinking about performance, results, perfection

Most managers and leaders in Organisation have been brought up to believe that they are as good as what they produce and deliver, that they need to be unfailingly competent, that they need to be perfect and nothing else matters.

The tendency to catastrophize about their performance, results and perfection leads managers and leaders to constantly focus on themselves and how they will look and less about their people. As a result, the mind space for others gets restricted. Developing others is not about us – it is about others.

2. Broaden our understanding of what our people want

Many managers and leaders believe that they “take good care of their people” and that is all to it. They are right that many do take care of people but in a benevolent way. Developing people is not about taking care of them. It is about supporting them to take care of themselves. It is about empowering them. It is about truly understanding what they really want – that they want growth and development and not mere benevolence.

3. Reinvent our style of getting work done

Managers often believe that it is more efficient to tell than to ask – to instruct than to listen. Time pressures, task demands and a challenging environment are often cited as reasons to tell people what to do rather then let them find answers.

Developing people is all about not prescribing and directing but about asking and that can be a shift that many can struggle with. Yet, that shift is at the very heart of development. Delegation, empowerment and freedom to act are not just ingredients of good style – they are tools for development.

4. Revisit our relationship with our people

For the first three shifts to happen, we need to start right at the foundation – our relationship with our people. Is it contractual, are they instruments to achieve our results or are they human? Do we show respect, value their competence, see their potential, get excited about their aspirations or we merely engage in transactions?

CFI’s Talent Development Programs starts with developing oneselves – developing an individual’s ability to look beyond their success, anxieties and needs.

Managers and leaders may need help and support to make these shifts and when they do, they will begin to practice the art and experience the joy of developing others.

-Ganesh Chella

Have you ever coached leaders who tend to take the moral high ground but do it by ending up taking the emotional low road? And therefore find the need for coaching support?

Maybe a few examples would help throw more light.

People who work for the leader will often complain that the leader is insensitive, harsh, demanding. at times abusive, lacks emotional regulation or has a poor temperament.

As you engage with these leaders, they will tell you that even at their age, they are the hardest working, the ones who turn up first and leave last and wonder why today’s employees are insincere. They will tell you how their colleagues in other functions will run amuck but for their careful oversight. They will tell you that they just cannot tolerate people who don’t have an eye for details, perfection, sincerity, honesty, discipline, professionalism, competence and the list will go on. They will tell you how they are used to telling people the truth on their face and they are ok with it and they feel it is important to do it.

They will tell you how things are just not the same, how the culture has deteriorated, how people today just don’t care about customers the way they used to and so on.

Often times, they might be viewing the world against their standards and always seeing it as failing.

They believe that their way of dealing with it is to tell it as it is, never mind other’s readiness for it, tell it with anger because only if they are angry do people listen, punish people because those who make mistakes must be punished and so on.

As you engage with them, you may even realise that they have similar view about people in their personal lives.

The truth is that from their logical bubble, they are “right”. Unfortunately, they may not realise or recognize that in the process many of the people around them are “wronged”.

Are such people coachable? Of course, they are because they are often toughest on themselves. Unforgiving about themselves. They are talented, full of many virtues and yet transacting with the world in a way that is somewhat dysfunctional.

The core issue is that people with such great talent may perhaps need to focus on being “related” more than being “right”. By being related, they may have a chance that others will feel inspired by their standards, not perspired by it.

The truth is that there is a bit of this in many of us – the thing of being unhappy when the world is not the way we would like it to be. The thing of using our standards to judge others. It is perhaps even automatic. But then, that is why social intelligence and emotional intelligence becomes important. Where we begin to recognize that virtue lies between the extremes – the ability balance our moral standards with our emotional intelligence.

Now, I am sure some of us are wondering if the reverse happens too – emotional high road and moral low road – where individuals make it about how they feel rather than what they did or did not do. Well, that is for exploration another time!

Started posting articles on LinkedIn since 2015. I celebrate my seventh year by starting this weekly post on matters of leadership, people and organizations. Hope it gets you thinking – that is what grey matters is all about!

-Ganesh Chella

First things first. I am not using the term wounded healers in the same way that Psychologist & Psychiatrist Carl Jung used it.

I am using it in the specific context of coaching to imply that in my experience, the most authentic and effective coaches are the ones who have experienced difficulties and challenges of varied kinds (wounds as I call them) or are perhaps continuing to face them and from those difficulties (wounds) bring out wisdom that can heal others they come in touch with. Perhaps it is that process of having healed their wounds or overcome their difficulties that they feel deeply motivated to help and heal others.

Executive coaches have been executives for long and hard. They have had careers filled with a fair share of ups and downs.

Be it building and maintaining relationships, expressing our emotions effectively, dealing with conflicts, coping with failures, managing our guilt, overcoming our unhelpful ways of thinking, tolerating stress, dealing with career anxieties, navigating the allowable dishonesties of Organisational life, all of us as coaches have had our fair share of highs and lows. This real and authentic experience is what makes for a real coach.

It is through this window of authenticity and through this identity of being a wounded healer that coaches are likely to make the deepest possible connection with their coachees. It is through that first hand experience that we are able to respond or challenge with authenticity because we are coming from a place of having been there and experienced it.

It is not by presenting ourselves as perfect, as having arrived, or as being complete, flawless and exemplary that we make a connection. In fact, presented in that manner may even be intimidating, a sense that I will not be understood or even worse a state where the coachee feels “I am afraid to tell you who I am because you may not like the who that I am and that is all I have”. (John Powell).

So, to be comfortable in my skin with all my gifts and my flaws makes me authentic.

To be able to therefore present myself as an equal and a co-traveler rather than as an expert make me trust worthy.

To however not burden my coachee with my issues and focus on the coachee makes me empathetic.

To seek peer guidance to be sure that I am staying within these ethical boundaries makes me responsible.

To accept all of this and feel good makes me human.

As I write this, I am reminded of the movie Good Will Hunting. Robin Williams as Dr. Sean Maguire really drives home this point.

-Ganesh Chella

In the field of Insurance, a pre-existing condition is defined as a health condition that existed prior to applying for health or life insurance.

I borrow this terminology merely to describe an often-experienced situation by Executive coaches when they are called upon to coach leaders.

The presented situation is something like this. The Organisation believes that the leader with many years of experience needs to improve his interpersonal relationships and it is beginning to impact his performance and his ability to work with peers and other stakeholders.

A discerning coach will want to know more about the situation before jumping in and signing up the coachee. He will ask how this executive with a successful track record of over many long years is suddenly encountering challenges with relationships. He will want to know what has changed or led to this need suddenly emerging in the life of the leader.

Another typical situation is that the leader is unable to carry his team along. Again, a discerning coach will want to know how this leader was able to lead teams and deliver results for several years. It would be hard to assume that this need to be able to lead a team suddenly sprung up.

I can add to the list things like inability to collaborate, poor managerial effectiveness and so on.

Often times, organisations may seek coaching support for a leader for a need that to them has now become exigent. They ask for a coach and a coach who does not explore the context well enough is likely to sign up the coachee assuming that what is presented is indeed all that is there to it. That it is a need that has recently emerged.

The truth is that managers and leaders may have pre-existing conditions in the form of long-standing competency gaps or difficulties or inabilities.

So, what caused them to become exigent now and how come the leader managed to carry on well all these years is important to explore.

Expanded role demands are one big reason for a pre-existing condition to flare up as a crying need. If a leader was in a stable environment with a few critical relationships to manage, chances are he somehow managed it notwithstanding the fact that he was not good at it and did not like it. Maybe he developed certain rules, had some work around, leveraged certain personal connections, and also relied on his manager to cope with this aspect of his role though he was never good at it. It did not come to him naturally.

He is then found to have potential for a new position based on other criteria and moved in there. Unfortunately, this relationship dimension may assume huge significance. That is when the gap flares up.

Similarly, one could be just okay in leading a team and managed to get by because the team was tenured, matured and there was stability. A sudden change and a manifold increase in team size can lead to the gap flaring up. It is one thing to lead a small team of 10 individual contributors. It is another thing to manage a team of 20 managers.

Similarly, a structural change or environmental change can lead to a pre-existing condition getting thrown up as a huge gap. A founder of a company may have run his business at his own pace for years and suddenly when he seeks funding and an investor sits on his board, he may find him lacking a performance ethic and not driven. Truth is, he may never have been driven in that manner but was fine given the autonomy he enjoyed.

It could also be that the gaps tend to get magnified when leaders have to act out of their preferences. Or use their less developed strengths suddenly.

In summary, many leaders are able to carry on with pre-existing conditions until things change.

Now, lets get back to the coach signing up such a coachee. The important question for a coach to ascertain is if the need was indeed a pre-existing one and what changed. The next logical question is if it is indeed coachable. Or is it a case of someone in a wrong position. If coaching is indeed the way forward, the coach needs to be able to ascertain the coachee’s own awareness of this reality and motivation to address it. If not, the coach may like to dimension the risks of not being able to make a difference.

Coaches are not magicians and may not want to show a certain bravado in claiming that any situation and condition is coachable, with success.

Knowing the context and how the need came about might be useful in ascertaining the possibility of coaching being able to make a real difference.

-Ganesh Chella