As a career and executive coach I am often asked what coaching is.


Coaching appears to have had an early application in sports performance (Gallway, 1974). Parsloe defines it as “a process that enables learning and development to occur and thus performance to improve. To be a successful a coach requires a knowledge and understanding of process as well as the variety of styles, skills and techniques that are appropriate to the context in which the coaching takes place" (Parsloe, 1999). Parsloe emphasises the combining of styles, skills and techniques that are contextually appropriate together with an understanding of the coaching process. Whitmore (1992) highlights the need for coaches to have understanding of “the performance related, psychological principles on which coaching is based” whilst Parsloe (1995) positions coaching as “a form of tutoring or instruction – an instructional approach”. This emphasis on the didactic was modified by Downing (1999) whose definition emphasises facilitation as the defining characteristic. Whitmore (1992) agrees, seeing coaching as “unlocking a person’s potential to maximise their own performance. It is helping them to learn rather than teaching them.” Perhaps the most comprehensive definition is provided by Grant (2000) who sees coaching as a “collaborative solution focused, results oriented and systematic process in which the coach facilitates the enhancement of work performance, life experience, self directed learning and personal growth of the coachee”.


More straightfowardly, we can differentiate coaching by reference to its goal. It is possible to distinguish at least the following types using this lens:

• Performance coaching. Aimed at enhancing an individual’s performance, increasing their effectiveness and productivity at work.


• Skills coaching. Focuses on the core skills an employee needs to perform in their role. In certain circumstances this might resemble mentoring, which does not require coaching skills.


• Career Coaching. Focused on the individual’s career concerns, with the coach eliciting and using feedback on the individual’s capabilities and interests as part of a discussion of career choice. The process should lead to increased clarity, personal change and forward action.
  Personal or life coaching. Providing support to individuals wishing to make some form of significant changes happen within their lives.


• Business coaching. Business coaching is conducted within the constraints placed on the individual or group by the organisational context.


• Executive coaching. A way for organisations and individuals to improve performance. By improving the performance of the most influential people within the organisation business results should improve.


• Specialist coaching. Focused on stress or health for example and drawing upon the coaches’ specialist knowledge in these areas.

Alternatively, we can differentiate coaching practice from clinical practice. Some elements of distinction include recognising that coaching is often present and future focused and has a behavioural emphasis whereas psychological coaching and counselling are more overtly therapeutic and are likely to deal with psychological blocks at a more fundamental level. Psychotherapy, with its emphasis on the past, as well as the present and the future, deals with pathological issues, more disturbed individuals and often employs a diagnostic medical model.

Strategy, engagement and performance

In a recent study conducted by Wharton, researchers found that one of the key obstacles to executing a strategy effectively was the lack of ownership of the strategy or execution plans among key employees. Numerous studies of staff engagement also indicate that creating a line of sight between employees and business strategy is a key driver of engagement. But what does it really mean for employees to have this line of sight?

Clearly we are talking about two different levels of connection when we refer to "ownership" of strategic plans and having "a line of sight" to those plans. There will be people within and, often, stakeholders outside the organisation, who will expect to have a clear understanding of the relationship between what they are expected to do and the way in which this contributes to the overall organisation's goals. Their motivation, engagement and ability to make sense of their own role will be enhanced if they have a clear line of sight from their objectives to the organisation's goals. In many organisations, there will be a cultural norm which implies that almost all employees (with very few exceptions) have this clear perspective. Performance planning, review and reward systems will be designed and operated to ensure that these connections are made and reinforced.

Ensuring that this line of sight exists is very valuable. "… a Watson Wyatt poll of 14,000 employees across Europe has suggested that those companies that provide their employees with a clear ‘line of sight’ when it comes to vision and direction tend to have a much more committed, engaged and productive workforce….. Organisations with superior financial performance measured by total shareholder return, market premium and employee productivity will, more often than not, have a more engaged workforce…. The most important driver for ensuring employee engagement was strategic direction, with other key drivers of engagement being employer communication, the attention given to customer focus within the organisation and performance management….. "

"Ownership" of strategic plans, I would argue, takes place when employees are involved with the planning process at an earlier stage, a deeper level of engagement and when there are more options "on the table". It is about understanding that you are "dipping your pen in the pot" and contributing to the raft of decisions that make up a strategic plan. Ownership of this kind can not be faked: stakeholders will invariably understand if they are being involved in a sham process and they are likely to feel exploited, demeaned and disenchanted with leaders and the organisation as a result.

For leaders the questions remain:

• Who should own our plan?


• Who needs to be involved in creating it?


• Who must review our plan?


• Who needs to be consulted?


• Who must feel they own it?


• How do we create a wider sense of ownership?


• How can I communicate about our plan in a way that builds understanding and commitment?

... but never "pretend" to involve stakeholders. That way leads to ruin and is tantamount to a lie.

Managing Specialists

The Challenge
In career and talent management practice the high potential employee who is a business critical, individual contributor represents one of the most valuable resources an organisation has. They are a sizeable investment and managing their careers can be challenging task - especially for the manager whose personal career plan looks very different. Getting the best out of them can be a critical factor in an organisation's shared success and is an important part of many manager’s roles. These associates come in a variety of guises and specialist functions, e.g., finance, marketing, IS or IT, legal. All add value to the organisation's services. Their knowledge and thought leadership is often critical to the business and may have taken years to obtain.The productivity, experience and creativity of this group are critical determinants of success - particularly in any organisation where knowledge is the stock in trade.Managing them to maximise their engagement can require specialist knowledge and practices.

What are their typical work and career preferences?
Finding this out can help, significantly, in developing the manager: employee career planning relationship. My experience suggests that exploring some of the following work and career preferences will often be helpful:

• Intrinsic job interest

The majority of these employees will look for intrinsic challenge in their work – challenge that leads to the development of their technical expertise and the satisfaction of solving real problems. Their motivation springs from interesting and varied problems to solve or roles to fulfil. This will often involve working with expert colleagues whom they respect. Whilst all of this may be true for many employees in the knowledge economy, it seems to be a particularly strong career driver for these employees and typically becomes more important in mid/late career.

• Respect for their expertise

High potential individual contributors like to be recognised for their expertise. This applies just as much to those who are doing a steady job that produces competent and reliable output as to those who are recognised as world class in their field. They may be sceptical about soft skills development but will often relish development activities that add to their expertise, such as first and foremost, challenging and stretching technical work, including projects and assignments. Coaching by peers (and managers whom they respect) will invariably be sought after, whilst coaching by anyone who fails to appreciate their expertise is likely to be a wasted investment. These individual contributors may well be part of the key to the overlap between personal and organisational development in some areas of business as they readily establish and support internal networks, corporate Wikis, conferences and innovation focused groups.These specialists like to be able to make a difference to clients, customers and within the organisation. Making a contribution, having some impact and ensuring that the investment in their education does not go to waste are all important to them. These are the intrinsic motivators that keep them engaged and reward arrangements need to recognise this. A single career track built around a team leader - managerial - senior mangerial - business leader pathway will typically exclude these people. Many organisations need to be able to describe a complementary career pathway that may not involve people management but which retains, rewards and nurtures this distinct pool of talent.

• Support

High potential individual contributors generally look for a supportive relationship with colleagues and their manager as an aid to their work.Particularly at senior level they will value the opportunity to contribute to major programmes and projects; to advise their peers and colleagues in operational areas about specific issues – including taking part in strategic planning; developing others within their own specialist area and ensuring a succession pipeline and being responsible for specialist know-how and its continuous development. Senior specialists often have a highly valuable advisory or mentoring role. This kind of contribution through others may not be measured effectively by a performance management system defined in terms of objectives so their manager will need to make allowances for this.

• Long term perspectives and freedom

Many high potential individual contributors are engaged on work where a long term perspective is important. They will not work effectively if the atmosphere is one of constant uncertainty. This undermines confidence and the ability to be creative, and also disrupts the kind of processes they engage in. At the same time, their commitment will often be more strongly connected to their type of work than to a particular employer. If the organisation can not deliver interesting work, there is a motivation to move on.Many high potential individual contributors have a great desire to be allowed to experiment and exercise their expert judgement without being fettered by what they will often see as "organisational bureaucracy". They are not alone in this but it is a particularly relevant consideration when you are managing these thought leaders and highly successful specialists.

• Managing the talent pipeline

Managing this part of a "talent pipeline" can be rather more complex than managing the pipeline of general management roles. It is important to invest time in keeping up to date with the relevant employment markets and to be deliberate about succession planning for experts in particular. The quality of career discussions is typically an area that needs careful attention. Good managers of high potential individual contributors are invariably able to discuss what is happening in the relevant job markets. This can be fed into intelligent and mature career discussions, particularly if “glass ceilings” are unavoidable.Talent pools for high potential individual contributors may need to be managed separately from any general management talent pool. However, this does not mean that development processes must also be entirely separate. Ultimately, high potential people in any organisation represent the future of the business and need to work collectively – and, in any case, the talent pipeline should be plumbed in such a way as to create frequent opportunities (but not requirements) to cross over from one pathway to another.

• Managing performance

In managing the performance of individual contributors, managers need to be especially thoughtful.Some high potential individual contributors may feel that those managing them can assess what they have achieved, but may not fully recognise issues of quality of achievement and scale of innovation for example. It is important, therefore, to be clear what good performance really means for the various specialists that work for you.Managers play a key and a challenging role in ensuring that the organisation maintains clear links between its overall goals and employee needs. In some cases non-specialist managers may benefit from the insights of senior specialists and thought leaders who may play an important role – through performance objective setting - in connecting specialist team and individual objectives with those of the company.Managers who are not familiar with the background of a specialist may have difficulty in providing the feedback that they need. This is an area where networking can help in getting the manager up to speed on the feedback expectations of particular groups of specialists.

Perhaps the key questions for managers are: Would I recognise excellent or bad technical performance? How can I develop this understanding?

The Challenge: Increasing Productivity

With the exchange rates no longer offering us much assistance, competition increasing and the UK's output and productivity woeful, the big question has to be:

"What business practices actually do drive increased productivity?"

Which of the following practices have been shown, over a 22 year period and across 308 (UK) businesses, to be the most important drivers of increased productivity? Is it:

A) TQM?

B) Just In Time management?

C) Information Technology?

D) Supply Chain Partnerships?

E) Teamwork?

F) Empowerment?

G) Staff development?

Perhaps surprisingly, people practices are the most important – and by a considerable margin. Empowering people produced a 7% increase in productivity and staff development a 6% increase. The first four have no statistically significant, enduring impact on productivity.

Read more: “The impact of human resource and operational management practices on company productivity …” by K Birdi et al, Personnel Psychology, Autumn 2008

Managing Redundancy Day

More and more managers are today having to manage redundancy programmes. One of the most difficult communication challenges they face takes place on the very day employees leave. Perhaps this is because the formal announcements can be scripted and prepared for, perhaps it is because "leaving day" combines informality, challenge, emotion and real, physical change in a very poignant way. (It is difficult not to be impacted by the sight of valued colleagues literally "packing up their bags" and leaving for the last time.) Perhaps it is because, as people walk out the door, decision doubts surface ("Did we really select the right ones?").

Here are some guidelines for the manager who has never been through this process before.

• Be visible and meet with your employees to reassure them. Don't disappear after separation interviews.
• Prepare an encouraging message which combines the “heart and the mind” aspects of what is happening, emphasises the local targets and positive actions in the market and business but don't give pep talks that ignore issues or feelings.
• Do “sell the problem” which caused the action, i.e., costs, infrastructure, economic climate, requirement for a new skills mix and don't adopt a harsh or distant "business as usual" attitude.
• Do expect emotional comments and don't make things more difficult by meeting or communicating only with favourite employees.
• Think very carefully about anything you might delegate today. What implied messages could you be conveying? If in doubt, postpone the delegation.
• Be specific about work tasks, expectations and priorities but don't load people up with work on the day separations are happening.
• Do provide consistent information and don't make careless comments and use inappropriate corporate metaphors (e.g., “we are lean and mean”).
• Do seek out rumours and concerns and address them but don't get defensive.
• Do try to be clear about what is ending and what is not ending and don't be drawn into guesswork about unresolved issues.
• Show empathy for all employees but never make promises you (or the company/organisation) cannot keep.
• Involve employees in adjusting their work priorities and picking up on handovers and don't assume everything is okay simply because employees are not openly talking about it.
• Do provide information, support and structure and don't speak negatively about associates who have left the organisation.

Providing 360 Degree Feedback as a Mentor

When Mentors have agreed to providing participants in a development programme with the results of their 360 degree feedback their role "takes on new clothing".

What are the processes that Mentors should be familiar with?
What is good practice when the Mentor is giving 360 degree feedback?

These are key questions and this article provides some initial answers.

The Mentor role is extremely important to the 360 degree process, and needs to be carried out well to ensure that the participant gets the maximum out of the feedback. Effective facilitation of the feedback session will enable individuals to get the most out of this development opportunity.

Before you begin to provide the participant with their consolidated feedback, we recommend that you have a twenty minute or so ‘contracting’ conversation about the 360 degree tool and what the participant hopes to gain from using it. Areas to discuss could include the following:

 What are your expectations of this process?
 How have you prepared for receiving this feedback?
 How did you chose and then communicate with your raters?
 How might you take the feedback and turn it into development goals?
 What help do you expect from me as your Mentor?

The level of trust established between the participant and Mentor will influence the effectiveness of the process. The principle objective of the Mentor should be to create an atmosphere in which the individual feels that they can hear, explore and respond to the feedback they gain from the 360 degree process.

As part of the contract with the participant Mentors will:

• Not disclose the specific content of feedback meetings to a third party without the participant’s explicit consent.
• Not allow access by any third party to the participant’s report without having first obtained the participant’s explicit consent.
• Not take specific action on any issue raised in the feedback meeting without the participant’s consent.
• Not use the feedback data to judge the participant.
• Not prescribe actions for the participant.

Mentors must explain all of these points to the participant at the beginning of the feedback interpretation meeting.

The Structure of the Feedback Interpretation Meeting

The purpose of the feedback interpretation meeting is to:
• Enable the participant to understand their feedback report.
• Enable the participant to summarise the strengths and development themes that emerge from discussion of the report.
• To assist the participant in identifying areas to be taken forward in a personal development plan.

To achieve this, the Mentor and participant should work in partnership to reach understanding of:
• what the participant wants from their feedback report
• the format and data in the 360 report
• the participants perceptions of their strengths and needs against the framework and in the context of their current role as well as career and life aspirations
• gaps between self/others perception
• possible reasons for different perceptions
• qualities and behaviours in context using examples
• development themes

The length of the feedback meeting

Where feasible schedule an initial 20-30 minute contracting meeting with the participant to explore what they want to get out of the process, show them their report and outline how it is structured. Ask them to look at their report and identify the key areas that they wish to concentrate on. Leave their report with them and follow this initial meeting with the full feedback session the following day. This allows the participant some time to think about what they wish to get out of the session and will prepare them for the full feedback session.

We recommend that you allow at least one hour for the full feedback session.

Additional development planning meeting

Be prepared to offer a development planning session with the participant after the feedback session. This may take place a few days after the feedback interpretation meeting and will focus on how the participant will focus their approach to further development in the light of the feedback they have heard and accepted.

Remember the feedback session may be quite intense, particularly if this is the first 360 assessment the participant has completed. It may surface some personal issues and is therefore not always the appropriate time to look at further development planning.

Confidentiality

The feedback integration session is confidential and the Mentor should not provide any information to a third party without the written consent from the participant.

The participant is the owner of their report.

The Mentor is best advised not to keep any records of their feedback meeting with the participant.

Executive On-Boarding

With President Obama's first 100 days fresh in the mind, I have been reflecting on "executive on-boarding programmes" and my recent experiences evaluating their effectiveness. Do they really make a difference and enable senior executives - new to the complexities of our corporate environment - to be effective as soon as possible? Have we got the balance of activities right? Is an accent on building a network really helping? Could we, perhaps, boil the whole thing down to five simple questions that incoming business leaders should ask their colleagues:

“What do you want to keep?”
“What do you want to change?”
“What do you want me to do?”
“What are you afraid I’ll do?”
“What else do you want to ask me?”

(as Kevin Sharer had suggested he used after becoming the CEO at Amgen)?

The Case Study

Quickly, I rejected the idea of a "control group" to balance the experience of those who had, we hoped, benefited from the "on-boarding programme". That would be unethical, potentially a complete waste of recruitment and selection £££s - as well as downright mean! So, we carefully selected a small group of leaders who had been through the on-boarding programme and began investigating their experiences. We found that there are five essentials:

1. Company knowledge. The important aspects appear to be the intangibles, i.e., understanding how things really get done within the firm and, secondly, negotiating a way into the appropriate leadership teams so that they can sit in on a meeting, if at all possible, to understand what leaders see as "the burning issues" in their business.

2. Support of the boss. This is vital. In many cases we are likely to be looking at both a direct and dotted line relationship implying accountability and responsibility. If this is the case the newly appointed leader needs to know how the relationship between the two "bosses" actually works. This can, and should be explained, but it needs to be experienced as well.

3. Good coalitions and connections. Every executive induction pack must include the appropriate organisational chart as, without it, newly appointed people find it next to impossible to find their way around. Similarly, a sensible internal telephone directory with up to date groupings of staff, clear job titles and relationships is a real boon for newcomers.

4. Personal agenda for change. Clearly, new executives will, in many cases, have been recruited to lead change. They need help in navigating the current organisational realities, establishing who is important in their world and in finding out to whom they are accountable, responsible and from whom they may seek support, advice, services, etc.

5. Determination and confidence. Both are vital. In reality, we can set very experienced people up to fail, if we do not tailor-make their on boarding.

Probing deeper, I concluded that incoming leaders faced five big challenges:

1. Gaining knowledge of the business - most especially gaining knowledge about the gap between the stated strategies and the de facto strategies of the business. The organisational reality of this particular company was that business planning appeared to be carried out on an annual basis and, to some (if not many) new executives, can therefore appear to be very tactical and not at all strategic. It may be, more challengingly, that what we believe is strategy does not appear to be strategic to some experienced executives from other industries that plan on longer horizons and make strategic investments expecting pay back in the medium term. Newcomers needed to get to grips with both their initial perceptions and the underlying reality - both more complex than they might first imagine.

2. Accepting and dealing with the real capabilities of the organisation and the people. Like all organisations, key people's capabilities do, indeed, vary. Creating and enjoying change is a patchy virtue amongst leaders. In-comers with an agenda for change may find this difficult. They may perceive that the platform for change is on fire: others may need to feel the heat.

3. Discovering and prioritising multiple expectations. The impression given in this particular organisation is that it wears out its key resources (not just people) because the difficult choices have not been made. Newcomers see this very clearly and perceptively. It can negatively impact their morale if they are not prepared for this. This is an area where a competent mentor can make a real difference to the newcomer's experience.

4. Navigating political waters and establishing alliances with the right people. This is seen as the most difficult challenge. Newcomers would welcome more help with, for example, signalling to colleagues that you are about to ask them for a decision, setting expectations and managing these effectively. Any pretence that the company is not an organisation where power matters is not helpful. An experienced mentor can help the new business leader to make sense of the subtle power plays that really are at work, just under the surface.

5. Setting an agenda for action that has buy in and generates a sense of urgency. The evaluation suggested that this needed to be addressed more effectively.

Enhancing the On Boarding of Executives

I concluded that a really effective executive induction process would provide the in-coming leaders with essentially three types of knowledge over and above what every other new employee should receive through the standard employee induction process. These three things are:

1. Knowledge of the business

a) Goals of the business and any gap between stated and de facto strategies
What are the long and the short term goals, plan and budgets?
What are the actual sales levels and projections?
Why are the timeframes for achievement set in the way they are?
What are our relationships with clients like? How do you know?
How are strategies and individual manager's goals aligned?

b) Process capabilities and landmines
What are the key success factors for all operations?
How much time will I need to understand xxxxx before I make change plans? (Where xxxxx is the critical process, situation, relationship or organisation).
What are the stated and un-stated processes, accountabilities and systems?
What landmines were built into prior decisions and why?
What is the true depth of difficulty in (any underperforming) group?

2. Knowledge of the people

a) Reporting structures, power and politics
What individuals hold the real power in the organisation?
What are the real lines of authority?
What is the actual role of (high profile leadership teams)?

b) Capabilities of the People
What is the actual experience and professionalism of my people?
What are the strengths and weaknesses of the management team? Are both acknowledged by the members?
Do formal job responsibilities exist? Why? Why not?

c) Management Responsibilities
What are the management philosophies here?
Is there real or imagined alignment between these philosophies and the way that managers are rewarded?
How much emphasis is placed on managerial consensus? Why? Why not?

It is particularly here that a mentor adds value. Mentors need to be well chosen, well briefed and to have a periodic check in with their client - the appointing manager. They need to be politically astute and organisationally savvy. They should be released from their mentoring role when the newcomer is fully absorbed into the normal performance management process. Mentors need to avoid being passive. The value they bring can be better assured if the appointing manager is both requiring and supportive. Mentees (i.e., the newly appointed executive) need to be rather demanding of their mentors - in order to realise the value of the relationship!

3. Knowledge of “Self”

a) Expectations of the Executive's Role by Others
What is the actual definition of my responsibilities?
What expectations do various factions have of me?
How do I sort our my boss's different agendas?
What expectations do my subordinates have of me?

b) Perceptions of Others of the Incoming Executive
What forces will line up for or against my key goals?
Is there a clearly recognised need for my new function or what I have been brought in to do?
What relationships did my predecessor have with the peer group?
Was there a peer who wanted my job?

It is helpful if the newcomer is moved into the performance management process as rapidly as possible as this should provide structure and feedback.

Conclusion

Somehow, through executive induction, we need to ensure that newly appointed executives are oriented to the life events of the organisation, come to an appreciation of the consequences of those events (which may include their own appointment!) and begin to untangle the "shoulds", "oughts" and "musts" that the organisation lives by.