Employers sometimes complain that too many coaches adopt a one-size-fits-all approach. To what extent does coaching have to be tailored to .t for it to be effective? Can transformation truly occur if coaches fail to take into account differences in coachees’ personalities and the way they learn, for example?
In our previous issue, we asked what you thought about the extent to which personality and learning styles affect how coachees respond to coaching. Here are some of your replies.
Mike van Oudtshoorn
Founder of i-coach academy
Coaching and learning are not passive processes, so the learning styles of both coach and client have an influence. If they are too similar, sessions can develop into a mutual appreciation society, where the client is not stretched and little learning follows. Clients can benefit from understanding more about the learning process and the need for a variety of styles and activities in the coaching journey as a way of achieving sustained results. Success in coaching depends on venturing out of one’s comfort zone and experimenting with new behaviours and activities to encourage learning.
John O’Brien
Co-founder of the Association for Professional Executive Coaching and Supervision and managing director of John O’Brien & Associates
A lot – but so too do those of the coach, who needs to be aware not only of the client’s learning style defaults and how helpful and appropriate they are, but also of his/her own preferences. It is important for the coach to .ex the style of interventions and learning approaches and to be challenging in a way which can allow learning and growth to take place. The coach needs to continually be refreshed and not become set in his/her ways; to be able to adapt and to know when not to do so. This needs always to be in the service of the client and not self-serving.
Karen Blakeley
Assistant director, Centre for Leadership, Learning and Change, Cass Business School, City University
I was giving some positive feedback to a young American executive and he interrupted me: “Cut the crap, Karen. Just tell me what I need to do in order to perform better.” His hunger to learn reminded me of the different frames of mind that coachees have.
Visionary learners take on anything that helps them to achieve their goals. Adaptive learners are cautious and not sure about whether they can change or want to change. They are prepared to experiment as long as they do not have to venture too far outside their comfort zones.
Dissonant learners disagree with the changes happening around them and feel that their sense of identity and values are being undermined. They may have lost their self-confidence and often find it difficult to make sense of what is going on, who they are and what they want. They are often more prepared to question deeply held assumptions and introduce radical changes.
Anne Scoular
Managing director, Meyler Campbell
They have a dramatic effect. In 2002, we conducted an experiment with 40 management trainees from a well-known IT company and found that, in a controlled scientific environment, extroverts and introverts responded to coaching in different and statistically significant ways.
The industry is reacting. We are seeing the evolution from first generation “one-size-fits-all” coaching based on much-valued tools, such as the GROW model, to second generation coaching where it’s becoming a requirement for all good business coaches to be familiar with a range of psychometrics, such as MBTI, Firo-B and the Hogan instruments. We are also seeing positive psychology playing a greater role and the advent of individual strengths profiling.
David Lines
Executive director, Transition 2i
In my experience as an executive coach, the personality and learning styles of the coachee do influence the way they assume the sessions will be structured and how they will proceed. It forms part of the Gestalt that each of us brings to the coaching sessions. I consider that it is important that the coach and coachee contract in a transparent way about their expectations and assumptions. A learning style inventory can support this especially if the client is unfamiliar with the idea of different learning styles. In this way, the coach can develop a clear understanding of how the coachee’s perspective, attitudes and learning style may affect the way in which they will work together. A stereotypical example of coaching is that there are coachees who are pragmatic and activist in their learning style and come with the assumption that coaching and mentoring will provide them with an action plan and be in a hurry to get to the point of the session. The more reflective theorist may want to discuss and explore their issues and be less willing to develop an action plan or put their learning into practice. The former may hurry and the latter may take their time.
Aparna Uberoy
Chartered occupational psychologist and head of coaching, Blue Edge Consulting
Hugely. It is not so much that coaching is suited to certain people or the compatibility between coach and coachee. Where it really makes a difference is in how the coach uses this insight to get inside the coachee’s way of thinking, feeling and behaving to transform the coaching.
For instance, knowing someone is driven by external praise and feedback (motivation) can be a powerful way of reinforcing positive behaviours for a reflector (learning style) who is averse to change (personality). Structuring coaching with this in mind is more likely to engage the coachee’s enthusiasm and deliver lasting results.
Ernesto Spinelli
Senior fellow, British Psychological Society and the British Association for Counselling and Psychotherapy
For the moment, there does not seem to be sufficient research within the fields of coaching or coaching psychology to provide a good enough answer to this question. However, if we turn our attention to the research that has addressed such questions within the framework of psychotherapy and counselling, some possibly important clues begin to emerge.
If we extrapolate these clues to focus on coaching, I would suggest that, rather than personality and learning styles, it seems to be the totality of the ‘person’ who is the coach – who and how s/he is rather than what s/he does – that might be a critical factor
Martyn Sloman
CIPD adviser, learning, training and development
The short answer is that yes, of course, personality and learning styles define the process. Coaching is the ultimate personalised learning experience: it is a non-directive intervention that must be very carefully structured around the learner’s starting-point, needs and background.
However, learning styles have limitations as a practical tool: we simply don’t know as much as we would like about the underlying links between personality and learning.
Therefore the process will come down to the professionalism, or the craft skills, of the coach – which is good news for us.