Author: tinadickens

A regular question that comes up in the coaching training I run and the coaching supervision groups that I work with is ‘What is the difference between work and life coaching?’ and more specifically, ‘At what point does workplace coaching stray into the realms of life coaching / something else, and what should I do about this?’

Whilst grappling with this in a recent supervision session, we developed what I think is a clear model which can help to answer these questions. It highlights the difference between the two coaching practices and also helps to define when to refer a workplace coaching client to another professional, perhaps a life coach, therapist, counselor etc., all depending on the presenting issue. The model is outlined here:

Clearly, when we are coaching we are always dealing with the full person. However, in a workplace context coaches are typically engaged to help improve performance or effectiveness in the workplace, often sponsored (and paid) by the employer. In such cases there needs to be clarity for the coach about what topics to coach and what not to coach and this is what was raised in the supervision.

The model above shows that a workplace coach still works with the person but that the focus is on the person in work. However, work topics are not immune to personal pressures; this can range from being regularly late for work due to caring responsibilities or finding work stressful because the hours a job demands eats into personal / home life considerably. The question remains though, when does a workplace coach refer?

The conclusion using the model above is that there is always a grey area (work / life boundary) which I would argue is very much part of workplace coaching, but that if the topic of the coaching has strayed out of that dotted area altogether it is no longer the realm of the business / workplace coach but should be referred to a life coach or other appropriate support professional. This has certainly helped me when supporting both workplace coaching clients and those I supervise, to more easily see when it’s time to refer!

“If you can’t accept it, change it. If you can’t change it, leave it.” Anthony Gucciardi

I recently came across the above quote and it summarised something that I have observed in my now 6 years as a freelance coach, coach trainer and supervisor.

Coaches often find themselves working with people who are unhappy or dissatisfied with the ‘status quo’ in their life. These people can be stuck in a rut, psychologically or for some other reason, perhaps they feel they are caught in a trap financially or stuck in a job they hate because it accommodates their personal life. What this quote highlighted to me that anyone in such a situation has three choices, and even if they stick with the status quo, they can do so having explored the other two choices, meaning that the status quo becomes an informed choice rather than a stuck position. So, what do these choices look like?

1. Change it
Change isn’t always easy but changing small things can be very powerful; having a mature conversation with the ‘difficult’ colleague about what you find hard in working with them (I had a colleague who insisted on drumming the desk next to me all day with his fingers and it turned out he didn’t realise he did it!) and discussing how you could both work together differently, could turn a sour relationship into a productive one. Looking for people who like the tasks you hate and may willingly take them on, can be a simple way to change the things that are causing you to be dissatisfied.

2. Leave it
If work really is that bad what is stopping you looking for another job? Coaching can help people to overcome the barriers that are stopping them and allow them to have the confidence to move to a totally new environment, maybe pursuing a long-held dream.

3. Accept it
You may find it hard working with a particular colleague or there may be aspects of your job that you’ve come to hate but in many cases there is truth in the phrase ‘better the devil you know’. So how can people learn to accept it? There are a range of options:
a. Explore the pros as well as the cons of the situation
b. Explore why someone chose to be there in the first place and what the other options are. This often results in people remembering what is good about their situation.

So what will you do? Change it, accept it or leave it? Could some coaching help you work through what are essentially three choices? Once these are broken down into three choices, the obvious choice can be easy to see.

In many organisations coaching is more than just a standalone activity to support the development of individuals. For good reason, it is often adopted as a means of encouraging development of an empowering or open culture. With the idea of questioning and listening at coaching’s core and with a belief that everyone has the potential within themselves to achieve, it is an obvious line for organisations to take to develop in this way.

However, despite good intentions I have seen that this approach often falls at the first hurdle or fails to develop beyond a pocket of good coaching practice, even where there is a strategic desire for coaching to take hold. My experience of working with a wide range of organisations and the research that I have carried out, has led me to conclude that this is often down to the fact that not all the necessary activities have been carried out to ensure that coaching is holistically embedded in the organisation.

For coaching to be a truly successful activity, four key cornerstones of action have to be implemented, as shown in the model below, the Coaching Culture Kite (CCK).

These cornerstones of a successful coaching culture are often implemented in isolation, sometimes two or three of them are used, but without all four it can be very difficult to create the truly ‘safe space’ which is an essential ingredient of a coaching culture. If any of these aspects are missing the coaching jigsaw will never be complete:

• Without a clear strategic reason for introducing a coaching culture, there will be a disconnect between current and future strategic planning and a lack of impetus to introduce coaching conversations into the everyday dialog of an organisation. A board level sponsor to back up the strategic thinking about coaching provides someone to support the necessary time and financial commitments that introducing and maintaining coaching requires, as well as having someone to ensure that coaching remains wedded to the strategic vision of the board.
• A willingness to invest time and / or money is essential because a coaching culture does not happen without people giving up time from the day job to carry out formal coaching or changing day to day behaviours to listen properly and ask the searching questions necessary for a coaching culture (as well as going through the initial pain of watching people learn for themselves). In order for behaviours to change people need training on how to do this, another cost of either time (if carried out with internal resources) or money (if outside resources are needed).
• For coaching to become embedded through an organisation, people have to see that it is working. This is best done through the sharing of good practice and successes at the coal face of the organisation. This approach helps to ensure that coaching is seen as something for everyone and not just another top down or HR led intervention.
• Even the most informal coaching cultures need a framework to define the boundaries and purpose of coaching in the organisation and the ethics surrounding this. Responsibility for these factors and the day to day management of coaching resources (people and collateral) needs to rest with someone (often but not always HR or Learning and Development) to ensure that good practice is carried forward day in, day out and year in, year out.

Only with a balance of these four cornerstones can the ‘safe space’ for a truly successful coaching culture come about.

A number of times in my coaching practice I have worked with clients who are nervous about speaking out, perhaps through lack of confidence, a concern that their views won’t be taken seriously or sometimes due to their behaviour preferences – they are simply happy to take a quieter role in the team. However, most modern working environments are ones where the loudest and most vocal are the ones who get noticed, so this reticence to speak out can be a genuine hindrance for people who want to move on in their careers.

Such clients in senior roles often get feedback that they need to speak their opinions more clearly and to push back more – in fact this can be the sole reason for their coaching. When exploring this with clients, it often transpires that they have been taught that speaking up is on a par with being rude or disrespectful; these people are often used to playing the listener role in their teams. So how can they develop their thinking to enable them to push back to peers and even managers to help them move on?

Working with such a client recently, we identified that he considered anything other than acceptance of the other person’s opinion as a possible confrontation; that by putting forward an alternative view he may be seen as difficult. This seemed a strong view so we unpicked it further and as a result identified the Spectrum of Dialogue, a definition that there can be many ways of communicating viewpoints, most of which are far from confrontational.

The Spectrum of Dialogue starts off with a simple response; for example, I acknowledge your view and agree with it. It then moves to stating your point; for example, I acknowledge your view but my view is different, it is …. The next is to ask questions to understand the other person’s view; for example, please can you explain why your view is the right one? What evidence do you have to support this view? Such questions allow you to understand the other person’s view, so they can genuinely convince you. Without this how can you change your mind? And how can they change theirs?

Sometimes though there is a need to be more firm. So, the final stage of the spectrum is challenge; where you stand your ground and make a statement that your view is the one to be followed; good leadership sometimes calls for firm decisions by the person who is in the position of authority, so challenge and firmness can often be fully justified.

Defining the client’s conversations and discussions in this way, empowers them to see that they can have an opinion without being seen as difficult. By stating their case or asking questions to better understand the other person’s viewpoint they are simply being professional and inquisitive.

I’m delighted to say that not only has the client put this in to practice but he’s recently been promoted to a more senior management role! This was a small part of the excellent work that he does but certainly helped him to push back and stand his ground, as was expected of him.

So how can the Spectrum of Dialogue help you to be clearer in your communication to get what you want? Could it help you to justify why you are due for a promotion or ready to take on new work? Don’t forget, you will be asking in the nicest possible way!