As a practitioner I am fascinated by the discipline of coaching. In training for my accreditation and in pursuing my own personal development I have experienced it to work for me. Does it work for others and does it work in a way that is measurable?
Interestingly Coaching has emerged from a synthesis of many fields including training, adult learning, consulting, change management, the human potential movement, and psychology and systems science. Each of these fields has their own models and approaches to coaching. The various schools of thought agree on little, except that “coaching works,” and that more of it should be done.
There is no widely accepted theoretical framework that explains why we need it, how it actually works and how to do it better. Much has been written but we are still in question.
I am a huge fan of Nancy Kline and her thinking environment approach. Her methodology is quizzically simple but provocative. She is adamant, although her language would not be so fierce, that if you set up the right environment and give people the space and attention to think for themselves uninterrupted ( a crucial element!) great ideas emerge. Nancy has identified 10 behaviours that comprise a system called the “thinking environment”.
It is a model that dramatically improves the way people think and thus how they live and work. The ten components or behaviours include; Attention, Incisive Questions, Equality, Appreciation, Ease, Encouragement, Feelings, Information, Place and Diversity. This to me is an example of a form of non-directive coaching that I espouse and chose to follow.
Some people question how I can coach in a non-directive fashion, am I not employed for my experience and ideas? Not so and more importantly I believe coaching is not about me but about the brilliance of another. I do what I can to support my clients to think creatively for themselves without judgement.
I was heartened then to stumble across an article that was exploring a brain-based approach to coaching using neuroscience. It seems like this approach could support or give answers to my very approach to executive coaching.
First, every event that occurs in coaching is tied to activities in someone’s head. Second, a brain-based approach to coaching looks attractive when you think about it being tangible and physical. It is interesting to be able to explain in scientific terms; why the brain needs coaches, but it is even more useful to know how coaching helps the brain improve its functioning.
This article was fascinating on so many levels! The author David Rock muses that change is hard but that the world needs change. He also opines that change requires more than just scant thought; it requires ongoing attention and a significant effort of will. There are several reasons why change is so hard, and they point to the need to provide additional resources to an individual who wants to successfully change in any way. Hence, brains need coaching.
According to the author there are many interesting and useful findings across neuroscience to help explain the value of coaching, but there are four main areas of scientific research that combine to form a central explanation of how coaching impacts the brain. These are the study of Attention, Reflection, Insight and Action, or ‘ARIA’ for short.
Attention, about which the author spends considerable time, for the brain means “where you focus your attention you make connections” Jeff Swartz, Neuro Scientist, or what you focus on expands!
In scientific terms this is called the Quantum Zeno Effect. Where we choose to put our attention changes our brain and changes how we see and interact with the world. A very coaching concept but it would appear to be a very scientific one too.
On my own website for Lime Trees Road I claim that I support clients to be conscious and in choice. It would appear that giving and paying attention to a concern allows us to be more mindful and attentive to choice, free will if you wish. Apparently, the brain allows us 0.2 seconds of free will to change our minds before we act on a thought already generated. Coaching can support being conscious of our thoughts and noticing more.
The other areas of the ARIA model include reflection, insight and action. David Rock explains that to solve competing dilemmas or issues on a personal or organisational level people need time to think, to reflect and to focus so that insights can percolate and swim to our levels of consciousness. Coaching supports these needs.
Nancy Kline has a methodology and David Rock has some scientific explanations to explain why “coaching works” both of which I love.