Coaching is different than mentoring: Understanding the style and listening differences

Coaching fits in well with a systems/process view of work, as effective coaching
not only leads to performance and business results gains, but also improvements
in relating to team members as well as encouraging continuous improvement.
Coaching is the core of both continuous improvement and professional
development, as managing relationships improves both efficiency and
effectiveness, since it links the people-based elements with the task-based
elements within the process.

Oftentimes, I’ve heard in practice coaching and mentoring used as
interchangeable terms, as they both impact professional development, although
there are clear differences- namely approach, temporal, and leader involvement.
It is not usual to find that someone plays the role of both a coach and mentor,
but coaching requires skills beyond that of mentoring (Dalakoura, 2009).
Coaching involves a different mode of listening compared to mentoring, as
employees need guidance  in raising their own self-awareness and  motivation,
which goes beyond the knowledge and experience shared in mentoring (Hicks and
McCracken (2009).

Listening to employees is crucial in guiding my decisions in choosing between
the three types of coaching I apply in my position: performance coaching,
behavioral coaching and developmental coaching; these choices impact how
employees' leadership development is applied at the line level. Self-development
is a major advantage of coaching. Dalakoura (2009) stated this self-development
is important, as it promotes continuous learning, and it's not just a matter of
leaders themselves initiating development, but development is encouraged by
employees, other managers and HR leaders as part of a system. Coaching is a tool
that helps others succeed, as Berg and Karlsen (2007) explained, since it
fosters self-confidence and contributing to actions that create results; thus,
coaching is action-oriented. They went on to state coaching challenges employees
to develop their personal goals, strategies, and achieve results now and in the
future, supporting- but not directing- employees.

Whereas coaching techniques involve guiding employees by clarifying ambivalence,
finding exceptions and summarizing, which fosters employees' self-discovery, 
mentoring involves giving advice based primarily on the mentor's own experience,
values and beliefs  (Hicks and McCracken, 2009). MacLennan (1995) explained
coaching is a relationship with someone to learn with, whereas mentoring is a
relationship with someone to learn from. Also, MacLennan made a distinction in
the level of involvement, as he stated no one can unknowingly be a coach,
whereas someone can unknowingly be a mentor. Although coaching can last for
extended periods, it is in practice temporary, and mentoring is often a
long-term approach used to sustain the gains from coaching.
What are your thoughts?
 
References:

Berg, M. E., & Karlsen, J. T. (2007). Mental models in project management
coaching. Engineering Management Journal, 19(3), 3-13. Retrieved from
http://search.proquest.com/docview/208964459?accountid=29086?accountid=29086

Dalakoura, A. (2010). Differentiating leader and leadership development. The
Journal of Management Development, 29(5), 432-441. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/02621711011039204

Hicks, R., & McCracken, J. (2009). Mentoring vs. coaching-do you know the
difference? Physician Executive, 35(4), 71-73. Retrieved from
http://search.proquest.com/docview/200000273?accountid=29086?accountid=29086

MacLennan, N. (1995). Coaching and mentoring. Brookfield, VT: Gower.

Authentic 4 step process for coaching through bad news

“I have some good news and some bad news.” It’s a serious task often downplayed in television and movies, yet many managers and leaders spend their day communicating and dealing with news.  As constant change makes the organizational environment more unpredictable, how we deliver bad news and understand the emotional impacts affects trust, fear and focus, which could impair our organizations. Communicating bad news and coaching to move on effectively involves being authentic, candid, courageous and emotionally intelligent.

Communicating bad news is a dreaded but necessary task we often encounter, but getting through delivering the message is only part of the picture, as coaching through bad news helps us get to the positive and build that which is good. It’s a bigger picture approach that involves creating and maintaining a healthy environment for sharing news by building trust, understanding the common types of bad news and anticipating the emotional reaction, and executing a process to manage and coach through the bad news. A bigger picture approach is especially important as more organizations become increasingly virtual and e-coaching becomes more prevalent.

I have found out the hard way early on my career about ineffective approaches for dealing with bad news, and both those approaches backfired. One approach involved not communicating bad news- rather attempting to deal with it myself- which erodes trust and is selfish to the extent it put my needs ahead of others. Another approach involved spinning or sugarcoating the message, which diluted its impact as well as made me appear all over the place instead of focused on improvement.

Here is an effective process that engages employees, builds trust and helps us move from the bad news:

1)     Prepare and communicate one clear, consistent message. Getting to the point, without diluting or sandwiching the message between other items. Don’t say “I have bad news” or “I have some good news and some bad news”, rather, thank the audience for listening and be authentic. Don’t extend the process by dribbling out bad news, deliver it all so open communication can happen. Clarify and confirm the news and facts, anticipate questions for serious news.

2)     Be quiet and listen after you deliver the message. It’s about your audience, not you, so this gives them a chance to let the message sink in and acknowledge their feelings about it.

3)     Lead authentically. Be respectful of feelings, keep in mind this is a business problem where expressing concern but not blame is important. You want to empathize besides being assertive.

4)     Move on and follow-up. After delivering the message, listening and empathizing, focus on the positive and move on. This is an opportunity to monitor the issue and engage employees, moving forward with a mutual understanding and plan of action, building their confidence rather than micro-managing them.

As shown above, bad news requires skillful communication whether or not it is performance-related. Performance-related bad news is often related to missed expectations either at the group or individual level, and follows some sort of human resource protocol within the organization. The other type of bad news, situational bad news, involves changes or errors often beyond the direct control of the organization. In either type of bad news, the process above helps guide moving on effectively. Furthermore, understanding emotions and motivators helps anticipate the type of emotional reactions to bad news, so you can more fully empathize with employees. The slides below provide some guidance on anticipating emotional reactions.

Trust is a critical piece to dealing with and moving on from bad news. Communicating a clear message without trust is like walking through a minefield, according to Covey, Whitman and England (2009). They explained how important it to “move with the speed of trust”, as bickering in low-trust situations not only escalates problems but drags down performance. They provided three guidelines that help build a trusting organizational environment:

1)      Create transparency. Spin, clichés and politics erode trust; verifiable truths grow trust.

2)      Keep your commitments. Doing what you promised to do rebuilds trust, whereas poor follow-though impairs it.

3)      Extend trust to your team. Treating your team as trustworthy increases trust in you.

Successfully communicating and moving on from bad news involves a coaching process coupled with authentic, candid, emotionally intelligent behavior. It’s a recipe that affects trust and confidence crucial to your organization surviving especially given the constantly changing environment.

What are your thoughts?

Reference:

Covey, S, Whitman, B, and England, B. (2009).  Predictable results in unpredictable times: how to win in any environment. Salt Lake City, Utah: Franklin Covey.

Three business coaching approaches for peak performance: How business coaching is like Vulcan Chess

Business coaching in an organizational setting seems to be like a game of Vulcan Chess. In Vulcan Chess, as demonstrated by Star Trek’s Spock, chess moves involve considering moving up or down any number of levels, augmenting traditional chess moves. Business coaching really involves thinking along three levels, similar to how Vulcan Chess involves considering moves along three dimensions. Unlike Vulcan Chess, though, we have to integrate logic and emotion to empathize with others so as to quickly recognize when we can help and what type of help (coaching) is needed.

We want to help others succeed, as that is the critical goal of coaching, so when we recognize coaching opportunities, we need to consider whether coaching is needed on a performance, developmental, or behavioral level. The daily interactions we encounter help guide our coaching approaches along these levels, and choosing the correct level helps develop and sustain relationships. Listening to employees is crucial in guiding our decisions in choosing between these three types of coaching, as these choices impact how employees' leadership development is applied at the line level. Choosing the wrong level is not only illogical but could lead to a quick checkmate.

Performance coaching is used when someone is performing below an expected level, whereas developmental coaching is used to improve and develop those who are performing at least satisfactorily. Behavioral coaching involves changing behavioral patterns that sabotage- or significantly hinder- success; it is potentially more transformational than the other two approaches. So, as you can see, knowledge, skills and behaviors are important criterion that factor into how we analyze coaching opportunities, as taking a psychological approach to deal with an issue that is knowledge or skills based could backfire. Furthermore, solely focusing on negative feedback without encouraging positive behaviors or acknowledging accomplishments deflates morale and could signal that we aren’t listening effectively.

Coaching conversations really start when we look at the frequent exchanges we encounter daily, whether they are in person or online. You don’t see people walking around with “Help me” signs, but you can pick up cues that help you make decisions and make mental notes that help you relate with what they need. This really is where logic and emotion come together to help us analyze, relate to and engage those who need coaching.

So, effective business coaching involves listening and collaborating with someone as opposed to coaching at them by directing solutions. What cues can we use to help guide which coaching approach to take? The following short PowerPoint presentation provides cues I have used to help guide my coaching approaches.

In the end, determining the most appropriate business coaching approach is a lot like choosing the most appropriate move in Vulcan Chess: we need to observe, listen and analyze the opportunity. As Spock would say, “That is only logical”.

What are your thoughts?