Inside a Coaching Session
7 December 2010
Read by 1714 persons
Patricia is meeting her coach for the first time. This session is about getting to know each other and possibly "choosing" each other. Here are some commented excerpts from their conversation.
The Coachee: A manager at a large communications agency, Patricia(2) has been given responsibility for a new product. Happy with this new assignment, she can’t explain the resistance she’s encountering while working on it. She decides to hire a coach with the approval of her senior management.
The Coach: Director of the Absylone firm, François Enius comes from the consulting and training world. In recent years, he has focused his research on adapting individual behavior to company constraints. In his advice, he favors "everyday, practical approaches and solution-oriented thinking."
François Enius: We’ll spend roughly six to eight months together (one meeting and at least one phone call per month). It’s important that we get to know each other. This first session is for explanations, setting goals, and getting to know each other to see if we want to continue working together. First, I spoke with your manager, who gave me their objectives. Today, the goal is to define your objectives for this coaching, to see if they align. If so, great, we continue. During the first session, we talk a lot; we mainly get to know each other; from the second session, we start working. I won’t speak with your manager again before the end of the first three months. […]
Comment: "I’ve decided to end coaching at the end of the first session, but there’s rarely such a mismatch that we have to stop," says François Enius. "If it happens, it’s because the person isn’t "honest" about this process. There’s no point in continuing. It’s also possible they don’t trust the coach, that they suspect the company gave them "the dirty work," perhaps concluding that the coaching isn't "good." Except I obviously never say that. The idea isn’t to judge whether someone is good or not. For me, coaching that lasts more than a year isn’t desirable. The person needs to be able to move forward alone after a while; otherwise, it means I’m doing things for them."
F.E.: Now, tell me what your objectives are?
Patricia: I want to gain confidence, change how I work with certain people, have my role recognized, build my team independently, and be relieved of some tasks to take on my new responsibilities. Here’s some context about my current position: we’re launching a new product, and I’m in charge. […]
F.E.: When you say you want to change how you work with certain people…
Patricia: In my opinion, there are ways of working, methods that don’t work, things aren’t flowing, some people systematically say "no." I’ll need to work with many departments regularly to develop this high-tech product. We’ll need to find new ways to promote it, especially online. But when I go to the marketing department with an idea, the manager immediately says, "no, it’s not possible." […]
F.E.: When you say, "my role needs to be recognized," what does that mean?
Patricia: I’ve been a manager for a long time, but people don’t listen if I say something isn’t working.
F.E.: Do you think there’s a problem with your authority?
Patricia: I don’t really have official decision-making power with these people. However, we’re clearly in a matrix organization. We need to work in a project-based way, but roles aren’t clearly defined. For me, the marketing department should work for and with others; they shouldn’t have the final say.
F.E.: So your problem is a leadership problem, not really a function management problem. You’d like to have leadership over this product and choose the people you want to work with. […] You want to be more charismatic and influence the system even without hierarchical responsibility. Do we agree?
Patricia: Yes.
F.E.: We’ll come back to that. When you say "new role"… If we quickly review your resume, what seems important?
Patricia: [Description of a career path focused on frequent changes in roles to work on new and innovative products…] When I arrived at this agency, they mainly worked on existing products; there hadn’t been any real "creations" for a long time, except for a few isolated instances. And never for multimedia. When I proposed this new product, innovative in form and content, which was accepted by management, I wasn’t exactly well-received.
Comment: The coach understands the candidate’s challenges. He knows Patricia is "telling the truth." The work can begin. He previously sent her a personality test by email, and he will now discuss the results.
F.E.: I think we’re on the same page. I’m going to go over the test with you. The idea is to discuss the test, use its content to trigger reactions, and learn to work together. This test was developed by General Electric’s HR department to analyze behaviors—not opinions, actions, or ideas, but reactions to actions. […] Then we’ll work on behaviors. [Description of the different profiles revealed by the test, focusing on Patricia’s profile and the practically opposite profile of someone she has difficulty with.]
This person, unlike you, doesn’t like revolution; they proceed "step by step" and only operate in the present, in a favorable environment. You represent the troublemaker, the fly in the ointment, to whom they prefer to say no immediately. You’re focused on the future, and they [it’s a man] are afraid you’ll get carried away… I’m not saying one is better than the other. But that’s how it is; we have to work with it. We won’t change the people you have to work with. However, you’ll need to adapt to their style to stop being seen as "revolutionary" and allow for an evolution they feel better about. When you arrive in the department saying "everything needs to change," they stop listening, they shut down. However, if you start by saying, "the work you’ve done is excellent, everything is good," they may be more receptive to what follows… And then you say, "There are two or three improvements to make"… even if, in fact, everything needs changing.
Comment: "The goal of coaching isn’t to change the behavior of the people you work with, but to adapt your own behavior to these people," reminds François Enius. "It’s self-work that can be enormous. For Patricia, anything static, permanently established, isn’t good. Without making her fundamentally change—because that’s neither possible nor desirable—coaching should enable her to adapt to unlock the situation. This will be one of the objectives of our work together."
(1) These excerpts are a partial representation of a coaching session. Because this first session lasts several hours, and because it included a witness, the journalist, which isn’t completely neutral. We know that after the session, Patricia started working on her communication with the person she was having problems with, and the situation has already improved significantly.
Posted on December 7, 2010
pourseformer.fr
The Coachee: A manager at a large communications agency, Patricia(2) has been given responsibility for a new product. Happy with this new assignment, she can’t explain the resistance she’s encountering while working on it. She decides to hire a coach with the approval of her senior management.
The Coach: Director of the Absylone firm, François Enius comes from the consulting and training world. In recent years, he has focused his research on adapting individual behavior to company constraints. In his advice, he favors "everyday, practical approaches and solution-oriented thinking."
François Enius: We’ll spend roughly six to eight months together (one meeting and at least one phone call per month). It’s important that we get to know each other. This first session is for explanations, setting goals, and getting to know each other to see if we want to continue working together. First, I spoke with your manager, who gave me their objectives. Today, the goal is to define your objectives for this coaching, to see if they align. If so, great, we continue. During the first session, we talk a lot; we mainly get to know each other; from the second session, we start working. I won’t speak with your manager again before the end of the first three months. […]
Comment: "I’ve decided to end coaching at the end of the first session, but there’s rarely such a mismatch that we have to stop," says François Enius. "If it happens, it’s because the person isn’t "honest" about this process. There’s no point in continuing. It’s also possible they don’t trust the coach, that they suspect the company gave them "the dirty work," perhaps concluding that the coaching isn't "good." Except I obviously never say that. The idea isn’t to judge whether someone is good or not. For me, coaching that lasts more than a year isn’t desirable. The person needs to be able to move forward alone after a while; otherwise, it means I’m doing things for them."
F.E.: Now, tell me what your objectives are?
Patricia: I want to gain confidence, change how I work with certain people, have my role recognized, build my team independently, and be relieved of some tasks to take on my new responsibilities. Here’s some context about my current position: we’re launching a new product, and I’m in charge. […]
F.E.: When you say you want to change how you work with certain people…
Patricia: In my opinion, there are ways of working, methods that don’t work, things aren’t flowing, some people systematically say "no." I’ll need to work with many departments regularly to develop this high-tech product. We’ll need to find new ways to promote it, especially online. But when I go to the marketing department with an idea, the manager immediately says, "no, it’s not possible." […]
F.E.: When you say, "my role needs to be recognized," what does that mean?
Patricia: I’ve been a manager for a long time, but people don’t listen if I say something isn’t working.
F.E.: Do you think there’s a problem with your authority?
Patricia: I don’t really have official decision-making power with these people. However, we’re clearly in a matrix organization. We need to work in a project-based way, but roles aren’t clearly defined. For me, the marketing department should work for and with others; they shouldn’t have the final say.
F.E.: So your problem is a leadership problem, not really a function management problem. You’d like to have leadership over this product and choose the people you want to work with. […] You want to be more charismatic and influence the system even without hierarchical responsibility. Do we agree?
Patricia: Yes.
F.E.: We’ll come back to that. When you say "new role"… If we quickly review your resume, what seems important?
Patricia: [Description of a career path focused on frequent changes in roles to work on new and innovative products…] When I arrived at this agency, they mainly worked on existing products; there hadn’t been any real "creations" for a long time, except for a few isolated instances. And never for multimedia. When I proposed this new product, innovative in form and content, which was accepted by management, I wasn’t exactly well-received.
Comment: The coach understands the candidate’s challenges. He knows Patricia is "telling the truth." The work can begin. He previously sent her a personality test by email, and he will now discuss the results.
F.E.: I think we’re on the same page. I’m going to go over the test with you. The idea is to discuss the test, use its content to trigger reactions, and learn to work together. This test was developed by General Electric’s HR department to analyze behaviors—not opinions, actions, or ideas, but reactions to actions. […] Then we’ll work on behaviors. [Description of the different profiles revealed by the test, focusing on Patricia’s profile and the practically opposite profile of someone she has difficulty with.]
This person, unlike you, doesn’t like revolution; they proceed "step by step" and only operate in the present, in a favorable environment. You represent the troublemaker, the fly in the ointment, to whom they prefer to say no immediately. You’re focused on the future, and they [it’s a man] are afraid you’ll get carried away… I’m not saying one is better than the other. But that’s how it is; we have to work with it. We won’t change the people you have to work with. However, you’ll need to adapt to their style to stop being seen as "revolutionary" and allow for an evolution they feel better about. When you arrive in the department saying "everything needs to change," they stop listening, they shut down. However, if you start by saying, "the work you’ve done is excellent, everything is good," they may be more receptive to what follows… And then you say, "There are two or three improvements to make"… even if, in fact, everything needs changing.
Comment: "The goal of coaching isn’t to change the behavior of the people you work with, but to adapt your own behavior to these people," reminds François Enius. "It’s self-work that can be enormous. For Patricia, anything static, permanently established, isn’t good. Without making her fundamentally change—because that’s neither possible nor desirable—coaching should enable her to adapt to unlock the situation. This will be one of the objectives of our work together."
(1) These excerpts are a partial representation of a coaching session. Because this first session lasts several hours, and because it included a witness, the journalist, which isn’t completely neutral. We know that after the session, Patricia started working on her communication with the person she was having problems with, and the situation has already improved significantly.
Posted on December 7, 2010
pourseformer.fr
