I can still remember the first coaching session I observed in my new role as a Coaching and Customer Service Manager. What I thought was “effective” coaching then, and what I know now, has evolved significantly.
I had recently attended a 2-day course where I’d learned about various coaching models and processes which focused on setting a goal, listening without interrupting, asking powerful questions, and encouraging the person to develop their own solutions – all key principles of coaching. I also learned about the neuroscience of coaching, which explains how the various parts of the brain function and influence your thinking and decision making. I found it fascinating, was inspired, and could not wait to start working with the leaders in our business, to support and develop their coaching capability.
The coaching session played out very similar to most sessions I observed at the beginning. The Team Leader had completed the standardized coaching document with data and feedback on the team members’ performance against their KPIs. They celebrated achievements and suggested areas of opportunity. They would discuss and record examples of how the team member demonstrated the company values and behaviours, followed by an opportunity for the team member to discuss any additional items. The session would conclude by setting a smart goal and completing a GROW plan.
The coaching observation form I had to complete, included a 15 item checklist that assessed the effectiveness of the session, evaluating things such as the ratio of talking versus listening, the ability to develop rapport and encourage participation, the use and effectiveness of questions, and how well the GROW plan was used. The effectiveness of coaching was solely focused on the observed session and the leaders’ demonstrable coaching skills. Their development plan, like for team members, was focused on setting a goal to close an identified skill gap.
The model we had was a classic example of what Anthony Grant (2017) describes as second generation coaching where standardised coaching conversations focus on ‘enhancing performance’ by guiding/manipulating people towards a rigid view of effective performance. An approach that reinforced single loop learning and minimized opportunity for true development and growth.
Single and double loop learning
The Single and Double Loop Learning models were developed by Chris Argyris with Donald Schön in the 1970’s to explain contrasting ways individuals and organisations learn. Argyris and Schön explain that learning involves the detection and correction of an error (Smith, 2001, 2013), how people and organisations respond to correct the error is differentiated by single and double loop learning.
Single loop learning assumes current processes, policies and procedures are flawless, and aims to improve efficiencies through skill development, and incremental improvement towards improved adherence to rules and procedures. It focuses on perfecting existing processes by controlling and managing activities through the use of scripts, productivity targets, standard operating procedures, and rigid quality checklists.
The concern with single loop learning, is, if it becomes entrenched in the organisation, it creates a vicious cycle of imposing corrective actions to drive performance, making workers work harder within highly controlled conditions and managers are unable to identify and question the consequences of, and assumptions beneath, these actions.
Double loop learning occurs when current governing variables are questioned, and the organisations underlying norms, policies and objectives are modified as a result. It focuses on looking at issues in new ways, finding more effective ways of working, and improving rules and procedures by encouraging curiosity, flexibility and choice. Double loop learning is also necessary for organisational learning to take place and a learning culture to form. This is when members are agile learners who’re able to think flexibly, learn from mistakes, challenge outdated assumptions, and most importantly, adopt a growth mindset (HBR, 2017). It is through organisational learning that organisational innovation and growth occurs.
Fortunately, our leader wanted to see change, and created an environment that enabled and encouraged all members to challenge the way we did things and find better ways of working (double loop learning). As a result, our coaching model evolved and shifted away from being a process to follow, to one that empowered leaders to adapt coaching to the needs of each team member. There was less concern about perfecting coaching skills, and greater emphasis on creating an environment and relationships where all members felt safe, encouraged and compelled to challenge rules and procedures, take risks, make mistakes and share ideas and experiences. Coaching became the way of leading and interacting, rather than a task to complete. I witnessed leaders experiment with different ways and methods of coaching, our coaching model developed as a result of active contribution of feedback and ideas, and through learnings from trial and error. Our leaders and people were invested in coaching, and the benefits of this was experienced through engaged members and continual high performance. It was the business people sought to be part of.
Reflecting on our journey, there are 3 key lessons I took about coaching:
1. Coaching is not about control. If you are “coaching” with the purpose of enhancing and perfecting a persons’ current ways of working, I challenge you to question whether you are actually coaching. To achieve true growth, change and performance, it is time to relinquish control and see what brilliant ideas and solutions can be formed.
2. Coaching skills mean very little if the environment is not conducive to change. For coaching to have the right impact, it is important to consider how business decisions, policies and communication influences leaders’ and team members’ thinking processes. Do your targets and KPIs require leaders to take control and manage task, or do they enable leaders to encourage flexibility, experimentation and freedom of choice? Are learning programs designed to perfect current ways of working, or are they focused on developing capabilities such as problem solving, collaboration and decision making?
3. Coaching is not a process to be perfected. Yes, there are coaching models, tools and techniques that are brilliant to guide and enhance coaching conversations, however, with too much emphasis on these, there is the risk that leaders’ will be more focused ticking a checklist, rather than engaging in the conversation. When implementing a coaching supervision/Coach the Coach model, it is vital that it is for the purpose of supporting the development of leaders’ coaching confidence and capability, rather than used to measure and rank performance.
Citations
Grant, A.M. (2017) The third ‘generation’ of workplace coaching: creating a culture of quality conversations, Coaching: An International Journal of Theory, Research and Practice, 10:1, 37-53, DOI: 10.1080/17521882.2016.1266005
Smith, M.K. (2001, 2013) 'Chris Agyris: theories of action, double loop learning and organizational', The encyclopedia of pedagogy and informal education. [https://infed.org/mobi/chris-argyris-theories-of-action-double-loop-learning-and-organisational-learning/. retrieved 16/10/2020]
Comments