Is it valid for coaches to communicate with clients using methods other than asking questions?
Occasionally I come out of a coaching session with a sense that the client has really “moved on”, but at the same time I am haunted by a feeling that I didn’t ask enough questions.
When I explore this, I end up berating myself that “if only I had been more masterful/professional/intelligent/skilled, I could have achieved a much better result by asking more questions”.
This prompts perhaps the most heretical question of all – when is it okay not to ask questions? What follows are my thoughts – offered as a trigger for debate rather than a statement of fact.
It is difficult to use non-directive coaching to help a client develop complex technical constructs. You cannot use non-directive coaching to understand the role of the amygdala in defensiveness, for example, because most clients will not have the necessary pre-existing constructs.
This is also the case when introducing a new paradigm on the world. Senior executives often find the chaos/complexity paradigms helpful in understanding and managing change. It would be time-consuming to try to coach an understanding of complexity theory relying solely on questions. Moreover, clients can sometimes see this as manipulative, as you clearly have a “right answer” in your mind as you do this.
A more controversial point is based on Reva Berman Brown’s work, which holds that we have different “knowledge strategies” based on the value we attribute to different sources of knowledge. Some people value knowledge gained from discussions with colleagues; others value knowledge derived by reflecting on their personal experience; still others value knowledge only when it is derived from research and theory.
Coaching often gives preference to the experiential knowledge strategy over the others. However, some clients learn best when you offer new theories, while others learn best when you offer opinions for them to reflect on. I have found, for example, that in a discussion on organisational politics I may simply say that: “I see politics as building trusting relationships in order to get things done.” Offering a different perspective often helps to unlock how clients construct in this area and can provoke a radical shift in understanding.
Sometimes a coaching session might consist of a partnership of equals sharing views. I coach a politician who I see on a regular basis for just over an hour. Politicians are used to quick-.re, “tell, consider, decide” conversations. In the hour squeezed between select committee meetings and meetings with ministers, I often find my style switches between questions that stimulate reflections, and opinions that help the client to see a situation from another perspective.
The key is that the client is in a highly receptive, “learning” frame of mind. He is eager for new ideas and perspectives and is used to absorbing and considering them in detail. It’s not that I don’t ask questions, just that he responds well to statements and opinions, particularly when in a hurry!
I would be interested to hear other points of view and experiences on when it might be valid to use other styles of communication, such as informing or sharing opinions.
I am hoping in time to feel a little more comfortable about a coaching session that appeared to go well but in which I did a bit more informing and sharing than perhaps the theory says we should.
Karen Blakeley is assistant director of the Centre for Leadership, Learning and Change at City University’s Cass Business School. She is also a director of Waverley Learning, a consultancy that specialises in leadership development. karen.blakeley@waverleylearning.co.uk