Leadership: Coaching Clarity Needed

What does Leadership Development actually mean?

The folks at CO2 Partners completed a survey some time back of 3,447 individuals, about 90 percent of whom are middle-to-senior-level managers. They asked this question:

“If you were to receive coaching at work, what focus would be of the greatest benefits to you? (Please select all that apply.)”

The  results of the survey of 3,447 individuals, about 90 percent of whom are  middle- to senior-level managers, are as follows:

• Leadership  development: 59.8 percent
• Communication  skills: 47.8 percent
• Organizational  and political savvy: 31.5 percent
• Job performance:  28.3 percent
• Business acumen:  27.2 percent
• Career planning:  26.1 percent
• Life/balance:  21.7 percent
• Health/fitness:  6.5 percent

Gary Cohen, President of CO2 Partners, makes a good point, though, in his interview with Chief Learning Officer magazine. While Leadership Development emerges at the top of the coaching wish list:

"Actually defining leadership development. . . isn’t quite as popular. . .many people do not fully understand what leadership development coaching is or what it entails."

"Leadership is a captivating objective for most managers,” he said. “So individuals feel obligated to choose leadership development, even if they have no clear sense of what it’s all about. Despite this lack of awareness, leadership ranks first on any survey of coaching needs.”

Cohen said, though, that leadership coaching is not well-defined and that it makes sense many people do not fully comprehend exactly what it is.

Get  Clear About These

I agree with Gary about the fuzziness that surrounds leadership coaching. There is an equal amount of fuzziness when it comes to Leadership Development. As a result, the coaching issue can get blurred. So here are some suggestions after a lot of years wrestling with the issue:

When it comes to coaching--or any kind of consulting activity--90% of the success or failure lies in the contracting phase. So:

    a. Get clear about who initiated the coaching request. If it was a boss, make sure to understand what that person is looking for and why. Which means asking "Who really set this process in motion?"

    b. What are the specific results desired from the coaching engagement? While Leadership is a sexy catch-all phrase, maybe the real issues are managing team performance, running better meetings, or initiating conversations with colleagues in other corporate locations. (All three of those have emerged after probing underneath the Leadership umbrella during contracting).

    c. Is coaching the best way to get at the desired growth? The fact of the matter is that some things are skills that can be learned in other ways. And if you ask yourself how you best learned Leadership, the thoughtful answer will probably be "from leading." Be prepared to suggest expanded responsibility. People grow by being lifted up and then stepping up.

Comments

[Wally Bock]

Great and helpful post, Steve. We spend our time chasing after the latest magic spell which will make all things well. Right now, "coaching" is one of those magic spells. The money concept above that can blow away the smoke, is that "90% of the success or failure lies in the contracting phase."

[Mary Jo Asmus]

Steve, thanks for pointing this survey out. Amazing that 5 years ago, you couldn't find any research on organizational coaching, now it's hard to keep up!

I think it's perfectly fine for "leadership development" to remain fuzzy until the coaching begins. The goals of a specific coaching engagement (plan) should be defined more specifically by the individual being coached and their sponsor (usually their manager).

The group that responded to the survey "don't know what they don't know" if they've never been coached. Through the use of feedback processes (360's, other assessments, interviews)and with the assistance of a good coach, clarity will come and an action plan can unfold and be put to paper.

[peter vajda]

Hi Steve,

I think Mary Jo's comment has great merit. Many folks, even folks at work, even leaders, are on the "unconscious incompetence" end of the learning spectrum (unconscious incompetence, conscious incompetence, conscious competence, unconscious competence) and, as she suggests, don’t know what they don't know.

My experience suggests that the "when all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail" take on life and living plays a part in many individuals' response to surveys. Wearing "leader" lenses ( as opposed to "people", "humane", "relationship", "higher mind," "personal" etc. lenses) informs how many view their life, even life at work. Their view is based on their internal map of reality, "the hammer only" map, and thus are coming from a reified, calcified, "written in stone," hardwired response when answering survey questions.

They are often unconsciously driven by their habitual and patterned orientation (beliefs, assumptions, premises, "stories," misperceptions, world views, etc.) which usually revolve around the "technology" of leadership, in this example, and as such, coming from this place, say they want or need support with the standard, technical, left/lower brain-type of issues - a flavor of "focus on your strengths" as this is a non-threatening and familiar place for most – as opposed to "personal" stuff that may require work but which many folks choose to deny or are "unconscious" about. Thus, the huge effort at writing leadership books, crafting workshops, etc., and yet the leadership world still goes very much wanting for something "better."

Coupled with this dynamic is that of leadership coaching, where many leadership coaches have never done any inner, personal or process work on themselves and so are unwilling or unable to broach the deeper, personal side of leadership with their clients. So, it's the "technology" of leadership that they choose to focus on, when in many situations that's the last thing they need to explore but caught up in the "focus on their strengths" safe, non-threatening mindset, and/or feeling lacking and inadequate, or fearful, of entering the "soft" realm of things leadership, they keep on keeping on with the "technical" side of leadership coaching.

These coaches, too, don't know what they don't know or, if they do, choose not to go there. So, it's the surface stuff, playing at being a better communicator, or having better business acumen, etc., but all the while ignoring the "leadership elephant in the room" – the personal side of leadership. It's both leaders and coaches colluding to "play at" leadership rather than jump into the realm of the unknown and uncomfortable and work towards true change and transformation.

Finally, the deepest question is, "Who is it that is responding to the survey?" "Who am I?" The ego-driven, role-playing and position player will respond one way. The authentic person, who understands their self on a deeper level, who truly wants to evolve, and allow their whole person to show up, will respond in another.

Yes, as you say, people grow up by standing up and being supported to stand up. Many, whose emotional, spiritual and psychological legs are fragile, shaky, wobbly and undeveloped, sadly will never get to stand up..leaders or coaches. And, crutches in these circumstances serve no purpose.

[Mary Jo Asmus]

Peter,

I loved your "add" to this discussion. I had never considered that so many of my clients, in coming from a left-brain lens, hadn't considered the softer side within their set of leadership beliefs. I like the way this thought provides a bit of grace to the coaching relationship - i.e., we need to begin where our clients are and not judge - and guide them where they need/want to go.

It also explains why I've often reflected about what other leadership coaches coach on; speculating that many appeared to coach only within what you call the "technology of leadership". Although I have no way of knowing for sure if this is true, I find that this technology is often only the beginning. The deeper dive into leadership includes working within the client's authentic self, and helping to transform - or at least guiding them to journey further along the path.

In addition, the point about coaches who haven't done their own work (on themselves) - bravo, well put. And a reminder that we do our best work when we, too, stay on the journey.

[Steve Roesler]

Mary Jo and Peter,

OK, you've enabled me to sit back, take it easy, and ponder your combined depth and breadth of experience(s).

Without the inner work, whatever transpires is most likely to be a transaction at an intellectual level. If the sponsor/client is paying for "change", they may get something "different" without the related substance.

[Martin Haworth]

I reckon that the key to working with clients who claim they desire coaching in leadership skills, is to just start working with them, hearing where they are coming from.

By aligning your coaching to who they are, without outcomes too precisely defined, and trusting the coaching relationship, the client will get there - with your help, of course.

[Becky Robinson]

Joining the conversation late, but glad to read all these great comments.

Steve, I agree wholeheartedly that people have a hard time defining leadership. At Mountain State, in promoting the leadership development programs, we constantly have to define and defend the value of leadership.

My favorite sentence of this post: People grow by being lifted up and then stepping up.

[R J Hall]

Those bosses asking for coaching assistance for their leaders don't necessarily know what they specifically want to be covered or how exactly it should play out. Same way if the coachee is asking for the leadership guidance. It would be nice if they had specific items, but that's just not always reality.

Sometimes we, as coaches, have to hear what they think they're looking for (trying not to "lead the witness") and then make appropriate suggestions from our toolboxes.

[Wally Bock]

Congratulations! This post was selected as one of the five best independent business blog posts of the week in my Three Star Leadership Midweek Review of the Business Blogs.

http://blog.threestarleadership.com/2009/07/08/7809-midweek-look-at-the-independent-business-blogs.aspx

Wally Bock

[Steve Roesler]

Martin,

Crisp, succinct, and sensible.

I find that we need to have an agreement so that there is a foundation for a "starting" point. Like most journeys in life, the destination(s) can change as things unfold.

Sounds as if your experiences are similar?

[Steve Roesler]

RJ,

That "lead the witness" phrase is a biggie. Like it a lot.

Let's face it: when people start out in that kind of relationship, they may not know "exactly" what they want. I don't know of any other way to consult or "coach" honestly than to have honest conversations along the way. If they really are honest, then for sure things will move in different directions as a result of each person being in a somewhat different place at each step of the engagement.

I'm tucking that "witness" thing away for future use. Thanks, RJ.

[Steve Roesler]

Becky,

Glad that single line had a lot of meaning for you. There's a lot underneath of it when we consider that "lifting up" implies that I'm responsible "to" you; "stepping up" means that you are responsible "for" you.