Respond to at least two of your peers’ postings i
Respond to at least two of your peers' postings in one or more of the following ways: "See attachment for details
- APA citing
- No plagiarism
- 48 hours
Discussion: Understanding Coaching Models
Coaching models can be used to help guide a conversation. You will find that one coaching model may be more appropriate for you and/or your coachee. You may also find that one coaching model may be better for a particular situation than others. As you examine each of the coaching models, consider which one you feel is the best fit for you and your organization.
To prepare for this Discussion, review this week’s Learning Resources.
· Review this week’s Learning Resources, especially:
· Turning Ideas into reality – See Attachment
· Accountability is empowering- See Attachment
· Coaching Models Overview (coachcampus.com)
Respond to at least two of your peers' postings in one or more of the following ways:
· Comment on why you agree or disagree with your colleague’s choice of coaching model.
· Describe another model you feel might be appropriate based on your colleague’s discussion.
· APA citing
· No plagiarism
Natasha Mills
Understanding Coaching Models
Top of Form
The contemporary business environment is characterized by multicultural environments, constant reengineering and downsizing efforts, and the endless need for innovation (Flaherty, 2010). These factors give importance to the process coaching. Thus, as coaching continues to become fundamental to leadership and organizational success, it is necessary to adopt the right coaching model for effectiveness. The coaching models include the coaching manager model, the mineral rights model, the GENIUS model, and the flow model. The table below presents an analysis of the characteristics, main steps, and uses of each model.
Coaching Model |
Characteristics |
Main Steps |
Uses |
The Coaching Manager Model |
Uses a supportive tone even when there is a sense of urgency. Coach and coachee do not have to be necessarily close. Context is critical to the effectiveness of the model. The signal to coach is always implicit rather than explicit (Hunt & Weintraub, 2017). Made possible by the relationship between the coach and coachee. |
1. The opportunity 2. Reflection 3. Feedback 4. Follow through/action |
Is valuable in addressing day-to-day business challenges affecting team collaboration (Hunt & Weintraub, 2017). Helps in the achievement of clearly set goals. |
The Mineral Rights Model |
Engages people who are already in action. Involves enquiring about the emotions of the coachee (Scott, 2011). Focuses on what can be done to accomplish goals. |
1. Identify most pressing issue 2. Clarify the issue 3. Determine the current impact 4. Determine the future implications 5. Examine how you contribute to this issue 6. Identify the desired outcome 7. Commit to action. |
Effective in helping people develop personal accountability (Scott, 2011). Helps the coachee overcome the feeling of powerlessness in handling a situation. |
The GENIUS Model |
Works with the talent and ideas of the coachee. The coach plays the primary role of getting the best out of the coachee’s talent. |
1. Set the goals 2. Assess the energy of the coachee 3. Nurture a range of ideas and opportunities 4. Identify inhibitors 5. Utopia 6. Summary of steps to be taken by coachee
|
Works best in the world of creative people, such as television, music, games, theatre, arts, and film (McPhedran, 2009). |
The Flow Model |
Can be quite complicated because the boundaries between the stages of the flow model often merge. |
1. Establish relationship 2. Recognize opening 3. Observe/assess 4. Enroll client 5. Coaching conversations |
Used to design coaching action and diagnose the effectiveness of the coaching process (Flaherty, 2010). Provides a thinking and design framework for the coach. |
Each of the coaching models has best practices associated with it. The coaching manager model, for example, has the best practice of identifying the coaching opportunity, such as the emergence of day-to-day challenges concerning collaboration within teams (Hunt & Weintraub, 2017). It also has the characteristic of a supportive tone during the coaching process. From this perspective, the coaching manager model can be termed as one that is deployed at a critical moment to help the coachee navigate a specific difficult situation. The mineral rights model, on the other hand, has the best practice of turning the impossible into possible by allowing the coach and coachee to connect at a deeper level (McPhedran, 2009). The model strives to cultivate personal accountability, meaning that it nurtures coachees to become effective leaders.
The GENIUS model, while it widely applies to creatives, has the advantage of helping the coachee to understand the need to do things by breaking down the goals of the coaching process for purposes of consistency (Scott, 2011). Lastly, the flow model is a diagnostic tool that helps coaches and coachees diagnose the effectiveness of the coaching process, as well as design the actions involved in the process. My evaluation of these coaching models makes the GENIUS model the most effective for me and my organization. This is because it is easy to find oneself setting big goals at the onset of a coaching process, which can be difficult to achieve and cripple the effectiveness of the entire process. Therefore, breaking the goals down into three types, including aspirational goals, session goals, and action goals, improves the outcomes of the coaching process by encouraging consistency (McPhedran, 2009). This makes it easy to turn ideas into reality.
Flaherty, J. (2010). Coaching: Evoking excellence in others (3rd ed.). Burlington, MA: Elsevier Butterworth-Heinemann.
Hunt, J. M., & Weintraub, J. R. (2017). The coaching manager: Developing top talent in business (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
McPhedran, A. (2009). Turning ideas into reality. Training Journal, 63-66
Scott, S. (2011). To encourage others, model the kind of accountability that is empowering. Journal of Staff Development, 32 (1), 57-58.
2nd Colleague – Don Tizzano
Donna Tizzano
RE: Discussion – Week 2 Tizzano Initial Reply
Hello Class,
As we develop our skills in coaching, we must keep in the forefront that coaching is dependent on developing a relationship with the person you will be helping to develop. Because every person is different and every coaching situation is unique, it is necessary to be flexible and adapt to each situation using the tools from the most appropriate Coaching Model to ensure success. One of the most important things to remember when discussing coaching is that you must listen to the employee, assist the employee, support them, and help them develop problem solving skills. McPhedran (2009) uses the analogy of a conductor to describe the responsibilities of a coach. It is up to the conductor to extract the answers and talent from the employee. The coachee, not you, must own the process and identify their own solutions (McPhedran, 2009). To understand what model will be best for a coach to use in different situations, I will discuss the characteristics, use, and main steps of the following models:
Developmental Coaching
This model is effective for developing employees and helping them succeed in identifying and pursuing career goals. This model is my personal favorite because it employs some level of feedback and guidance from the coach when involved in the coaching experience and focuses on helping a caregiver develop in their role by promoting their autonomy (Hunt & Weintraub, 2017). There are Four Stages in this model, but they do not necessarily occur in a step-like fashion. A relationship based on trust must be established. Even though there is no need for an emotional component to this relationship, the coach must communicate with the coachee in a non-judgmental manner (Hunt & Weintraub, 2017). The first stage is the Opportunity. This stage is where the coach identifies an opportunity to expand the skills and abilities of the coachee. For example, providing a newer nurse the opportunity to be the Charge Nurse on the unit to coordinate workflow and manage admissions and discharges for the shift. The second stage is Reflection, where both the coach and coachee take time to reflect on the experience that has taken place and identify potential opportunities to improve upon the next time (Hunt & Weintraub, 2017). Here, the coach and the nurse would discuss how the nurse handled the Charge Nurse assignment, what went well and what did not. The third stage is Feedback which supports the coachee’s learning once they have had time to reflect on their experience. Here the coach provides objective feedback based on observation and discussion. The fourth and final stage is the Follow Through and Action Planning for the coachee. The Action Plan will outline and identify outcome oriented action steps to maintain the coachee’s success along with a plan for continued follow up from the coach.
Mineral Rights Model– This model is a question-based model that helps people develop personal accountability and helps them eliminate feelings of powerlessness by creating self-generated insight and behavior changes. These changes are accomplished by the coach taking the client through a series of steps and engaging them in the Mineral Rights conversation (Scott, 2011, p. 58). The coach in this model engages the client in a conversation that identifies issues by demonstrating empathy and asking pertinent questions of the client. This model can be used in any organization and would benefit any employee needing to increase personal accountability (Scott, 2009). The coach helps the client develop a plan of action to resolve the issue by asking strategic questions. The initial step is to Identify the most Pressing Issue; then through questioning, the coach Clarifies the Issue. The third step is for the coach to Determine the Current Impact, and then step four Determines Future implications. The Fifth step is to Examine your Personal Contribution to the Issue. Once identified, the sixth step is to Describe the Ideal Outcome and lastly to Commit to Action. In this model, the conversation between coach and coachee is the relationship. What makes this model so attractive is because the coachee is responsible for developing the idea to resolve the issue and a plan of action to achieve resolution once they see what the issue is costing or how it is affecting them. The coachee is driven by the potential gain they will achieve with resolution and they will then become engaged and vested in the organization and begin to develop personal accountability (Scott, 2009). This model is beneficial when organizations struggle with employee engagement and lack of accountability because it helps identify specific issues that need to be brought forward and addressed by engaging the coachee in problem-solving.
GENIUS Model-This model focuses on three types of goals and is especially helpful when coaching talented and creative people. The first is the Aspirational Goal that establishes a goal the coachee will have achieved by the end of the coaching program. The second goal is the Session Goal which identifies what will be accomplished by the end of the coaching session. The last goal is Action Goals that describe the coachee’s steps to achieve the Aspirational Goals set in step one (McPhedran, 2009). To determine if the goals are attainable and appropriate, the coach must assess the energy levels of the coachee to see if they are sufficient to allow the coachee to achieve their aspirational goal (McPhedran, 2009). If it is determined there are sufficient energy levels, the next step is to nurture ideas and opportunities through strategic questioning and active listening. McPhedran (2009) suggests using Bono’s Six thinking hats in this stage to develop ideas and consider available options by looking at things from several different perspectives. The next stage, the Inhibitor Stage, forces you to look for obstacles or challenges that may prevent your idea from working. Once challenges are identified, you may need to revise your ideas from the nurturing phase so you can eventually reach the Utopia Stage of the Model (McPhedran, 2009). In the Utopia Stage, the coach helps you envision your end goal in the most realistic way possible. When you can “see” your goal then you can attain your goal. The final stage is the Steps Stage that outlines what the coachee needs to accomplish before his next session. It is the action plan that the coachee needs to complete on his journey to achieving their goal (McPhedran, 2009). This model is beneficial for someone who has a great idea, but needs assistance in figuring out how to implement the idea and put it into action.
Flow Model: There are five stages in the Flow Model; The Relationship, Recognizing an Opening, Observe/Assess, Enroll Client, and Coaching Conversations. Although described as a linear model, each stage is different, and when applying this model in real life you will find the stages are interconnected (Flaherty, 2010). The First Stage and the most essential stage is Establishing a Relationship. This relationship must be based on trust and respect and the ability to be open, and communicative with one another. The second stage is Recognizing the Opening for Coaching. This Opening Opportunity can occur through annual events such as providing performance evaluations, completing the budget process, etc. It can also happen when something goes wrong, a problem develops, or there is a complaint about a caregiver. Stage three begins the Assessment Stage, where the coach can assess the skills and competencies of the caregiver and the work that they are responsible for. This stage allows the coach to observe the client in their work environment and see what projects they are working on and how they interact with others to gain insight into the behaviors and performance of the client (Flaherty, 2010). The Fourth stage is the Enrollment phase where the coach and coachee’s intended relationship is identified and the proposed outcome of the program is shared with both the coach and coachee committing to the process (Flaherty, 2010). The final stage in this model outlines the Coaching Itself. Here, the coach outlines the coaching process, determines a potential timeline, how often they will meet, and whether that will be in-person or by phone or zoom. In this stage, the coach needs to maintain their role and ensure the client continues to have experiences that will enhance their competence (Flaherty, 2010). This model reflects similarities to the Developmental Model in the sense that a relationship is established and the coach has an opportunity to assist the coachee in developing a skillset, but in my opinion, I believe this process is more formal than the Developmental Model since the Flow Model outlines a formal process for coaching and how it will occur.
Reflecting on these different coaching Models, I believe the most effective one for me to use in the hospital where I work is the Developmental Coaching Model. This model focuses on helping the coachee develop problem-solving and critical thinking skills to do their job in addition to assisting them to identify opportunities for growth in their role. The coach guides them in using their knowledge and applying it to specific situations. It is also a model where the coach and coachee continue to develop and become proficient in their skills (Hunt & Weintraub, 2017). The coach could be helping to develop a new nurse in various components of their job responsibilities or helping people develop their interpersonal skills or Customer Service and Service Recovery Skills. It can apply to any situation where an employee needs to develop or enhance their skills. I have several managers reporting to me with various levels of leadership experience, so I often find myself coaching them through situations they encounter. Over time, it is very fulfilling to observe the growth in caregivers after you have helped them grow and expand their comfort zone and competence through coaching.
Have a good week,
Donna
References,
Flaherty, J. (2010). Coaching: Evoking excellence in others (3rd ed.). Burlington, MA: Elsevier Butterworth-Heinemann.
Hunt, J. M., & Weintraub, J. R. (2017). The coaching manager: Developing top talent in business (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
McPhedran, A. (2009). Turning ideas into reality. Training Journal, 63-66
Scott, S. (2011). To encourage others, model the kind of accountability that is empowering. Journal of Staff Development, 32 (1), 57-58.
Bottom of Form
,
Copyright © Patient Safety Coaches Academy, LLC 2018
1
The Flow of Coaching James Flaherty in Evoking Excellence in Others describes a 7-step Flow of Coaching1 process from first establishing the relationship between the coach and individuals on the team to observation, assessment, providing feedback and reaching agreement on future steps. The following is a summary and elaboration of the Flow of Coaching model:
1. Establish the relationship – for coaching to work, the relationship must be genuine and based on mutual trust, mutual respect, and mutual freedom of expression. The coach must facilitate open communications where information is exchanged without defensiveness or argumentation. Freedom of expression is grounded in openness, listening, and confidentiality.
2. Recognize the opening – an “opening” is an event or an occasion that makes the individual or team more approachable for coaching, for example, a process breakdown, a need for enhanced competency, or the introduction of a new process or technique.
3. Observe and assess performance – in addition to observing immediate concerns, the coach should observe and assess how the team is meeting its commitments, working toward its identified future outcomes, and maintaining a constructive mood, while also assessing the level of competence in the group and individual behaviors.
4. Enroll the team for a coaching session – the coach and the team should make explicit what they aim to accomplish together, discuss potential barriers, identify desired outcomes, reach mutual commitment, and identify possible obstacles to success.
5. Conduct the coaching conversation – during the initial session, the coach should clarify the desired outcome of the coaching session, observe the team’s performance, set up communication expectations, and plan a follow-up session. During the next session, the coach reports on observations, addresses breakdowns, discusses new behaviors, and assigns new practice. During the third session, the coach reports on the observations of the new practice, results of the new behavior, effects of newly acquired competence, and suggests recommendations for the future. The coach should acknowledge positive results and progress and ask the
1 Flaherty, J., Evoking Excellence in Others, Elsevier, 2010, p. 25
Copyright © Patient Safety Coaches Academy, LLC 2018
2
team to reflect on what they have learned from their own observations of their performance.
6. Provide feedback – the feedback should provide time for the team to reflect on the coach’s observations of their performance and on their own observations. By conducting a self-assessment, the team will better understand the corrections in behavior needed for sustained improvement.
7. Agree on future steps – the coach and team members should agree on the focus of future coaching conversations, practice sessions, and new behaviors to master.
,
February 2011 | Vol. 32 no. 1 www.learningforward.org | JsD 57
g eoffrey Canada said in a recent presentation, “Education is the only business I know of where
you can change anything you want, as long as you change nothing” (2010).
After so much debate and so many policies, why is our education system still failing so many of our children? What are we either missing or pretending not to know?
Reforms only work when people who implement them are on board, engaged, and valued. What gets talked about from the boardroom to the classroom, how it gets talked about, and who is invited to join the conversation determines what will happen or won’t.
Are the driving conversations dividing or connecting stakeholders? Are they catalysts for change and accountability, or are they further entrenching people in fear and blame? Is mandating accountability preventing us from hearing and seeing the competing truths that exist about our students, classrooms, and schools?
Amid the spinning wheels of education reform, an essential component seems to be missing: conversations that speak directly to the heart of the issue, engage people’s curiosity to uncover the truth, galvanize people, and create collective responsibility.
Leadership that attempts to create accountability with top-down mandates, rather than by engaging and connecting people, leads to or exacerbates a culture of blame and excuses. Mandating accountability, while it may sound effective, simply doesn’t work. Why? Because most often in practice this approach is fueled by the same thing victimhood is fueled by — blame. And as long as that’s the case, there’s no time, energy, or vision left to create real solutions.
A NeW VIeW OF AccOuNTABILITY The long-term benefits of
accountability have enormous implications for the quality of our lives and of our education system. There is a direct correlation between any organization’s health and the degree of
accountability displayed by its employees, top to bottom.
Accountability is an attitude, a personal, private, and nonnegotiable choice about how to live one’s life. It’s a desire to take responsibility for results, and for that reason, it cannot be mandated. It requires a personal bias toward solutions, toward action.
Rather than hold people accountable, hold them “able.” Rather than equate the word accountability with culpability, begin with yourself and model the kind of accountability that is empowering. Accountability has to come from within. Model it and show people how accountability benefits them. When it’s clear how accountability benefits someone, accountability becomes an internal drive.
While we don’t always have a choice about the situation in which we find ourselves, we do have a choice about how we view or judge it. Consider shifting your perspective from ‘Since this is a tough situation, I can’t do it, I’m not willing to muster the courage, will, skill, energy, focus, needed to do or say what needs doing,’ to taking the stance that says, ‘Given my current reality, let me explore my options, clarify the results I want to produce, and figure out at least one step to take in that direction,’ and then take it. Rather than bonding with others over
To encourage others, model the kind of accountability that is empowering
• In each issue of JSD, Susan Scott ([email protected]) explores aspects of communication that encourage meaningful collaboration. Scott, author of Fierce Conversations: Achieving Success At Work & In Life, One Conversation at a Time (Penguin, 2002) and Fierce Leadership: A Bold Alternative to the Worst “Best” Practices of Business Today (Broadway Business, 2009), leads Fierce Inc. (www.fierceinc.com), which helps companies around the world transform the conversations that are central to their success. Fierce in the Schools carries this work into schools and higher education. columns are available at www.learningforward.org. © copyright, Fierce inc., 2011.
collaborative culture sUsAN scOT T
JsD | www.learningforward.org February 2011 | Vol. 32 no. 158
collaborative culture sUsAN scOT T
mutual scars and wounds, find people who are in action themselves and who will support your success.
When we become entrenched in feeling powerless, we put time and energy into identifying all of the reasons we can’t do something instead of focusing on what we can do to accomplish our goals. One shift in our outlook on any situation can change everything about the results we produce.
So beyond modeling accountability, how do we motivate others to choose to be accountable? First, please don’t do the following: Tell them to get a grip, avoid them, complain about them to others, get angry, tell them what they need to do and how to fix things, or tell them that their context is false. Not only do these actions not work, they’ll set you back and make the situation worse.
An effective way to point anyone toward personal accountability is to engage him or her in a Mineral Rights conversation (see box below). When someone comes to you with a problem or an issue, start with step 2 of the Mineral Rights model. Use this question-based model to help the other person facilitate a conversation with themselves — to think out loud in a far richer way than they otherwise might — and create self-generated insights, the kind that stick and are mostly likely to lead to behavior change. This model
is a powerful way to get anyone, including yourself, out of a mind-set of feeling powerless.
MINeRAL RIgHTs cONVeRsATION There are seven steps in Mineral
Rights conversations. The key in taking someone through a Mineral Rights conversation is to remain empathetic and genuinely curious during the conversation. Questions only. No advice. By engaging people in a Mineral Rights conversation, they identify the root of the issue, see the prices being paid, what’s at stake to gain when the issue is resolved, and come up with a plan of action. They own the issue and the solution. They are much more likely to act.
While engaging someone in a Mineral Rights conversation to help them break out of feeling powerless, avoid common traps that make the situation worse: • Discount their reasons for why they
can’t do this or that. • Get caught up in their story,
sympathize, placate, or rescue. • Give advice. • Skip some steps and jump right to
“What are you going to do about it.”
• Tell them how you handled a similar situation.
• Become judgmental. Remember to:
• Go into the conversation with the motivation to help, not further a hidden agenda.
• Dig deep. The two best words are “What else?” or “Say more.”
• Inquire about their emotions. Emotions give the lit match something to ignite. “Given the scenario you just described, what do you feel?”
• Find the neutral place from which you can remain empathetic without judgment. No matter what the reporting
structure may be, consider this a conversation between equals.
An accountable perspective is that the solution/problem/situation is mine: Given the long list of terrible and very real conditions that exist, what can I do? What we focus on expands — problems or solutions. It’s our choice. A culture of fierce conversations inspires and instills a desire to want to take responsibility and ownership.
cONNecTIVITY, AccOuNTABILITY How do you get collective
responsibility? Accountability and the ability to connect on a deep level with each other go hand in hand. When you have a team of people internally driven, people who feel they can make a difference, the impossible becomes possible. They connect at a deeper level.
Improving our schools, teachers, students, and communities requires the courage and ability to collectively initiate and sustain conversations that speak to the ground truths while connecting with one another at a deep level, one conversation at a time.
True accountability doesn’t happen without human connection. True accountability and human connectivity go together. When we engineer environments where true connectivity and accountability are present, we awaken the sense of collective responsibility.
Despite our differences, it’s going to take collective responsibility to get us where we want to be. While no single conversation is guaranteed to change the trajectory of a career, a school, a relationship, or a life, any single conversation can. It’s not a matter of which program is under discussion, which mandates are established, which carrots are dangled, or which sticks are shaken. The conversation is the relationship. Nowhere is that more important than education.
ReFeReNce Canada, G. (2010, November 10).
Address to the Seattle Foundation’s Annual Luncheon. �
steps in a mineral rights conversation
Step 1: identify your most pressing issue. Step 2: clarify the issue. Step 3: determine the current impact. Step 4: determine the future implications. Step 5: Examine your personal contribution
to this issue. Step 6: describe the ideal outcome. Step 7: commit to action.
For an in-depth understanding of how to use the Mineral Rights model, read Practice #3 (“From holding people accountable to modeling accountability and holding people able”) of Fierce Leadership: A Bold Alternative to the Worst Best Practices of Business Today (Broadway Books, 2009).
Copyright of Journal of Staff Development is the property of National Staff Development Council and its
content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's
express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use.
Collepals.com Plagiarism Free Papers
Are you looking for custom essay writing service or even dissertation writing services? Just request for our write my paper service, and we'll match you with the best essay writer in your subject! With an exceptional team of professional academic experts in a wide range of subjects, we can guarantee you an unrivaled quality of custom-written papers.
Get ZERO PLAGIARISM, HUMAN WRITTEN ESSAYS
Why Hire Collepals.com writers to do your paper?
Quality- We are experienced and have access to ample research materials.
We write plagiarism Free Content
Confidential- We never share or sell your personal information to third parties.
Support-Chat with us today! We are always waiting to answer all your questions.