|
Develop a Coach and Consultant Profile
OLB 7007, Assignment 6 DuBose, Justin Z. Dr. Jaime Klein 17 March 2019 Introduction The complex nature of the ever-changing modern work environment causes organizations and organizational leaders to constantly evaluate and improve their products, people, and proficiency (Joo, Sushko, & McLean, 2012). One major consequence of this evaluative process is the explosive growth of professional coaches and consultants (Joo, Sushko, & McLean, 2012). Each of these fields are on the rise and show no signs of slowing down. Consulting is a 400+ billion-dollar global industry (Baaij, 2014) while coaching, while significantly smaller, is likewise a multi-billion-dollar global industry and continues to grow in nearly 250 countries across the globe (Segers, Vloeberghs, & Henderickx, 2011). With the increasing utilization of professional coaches and consultants in the workforce, it is important to understand what makes for an effective coach. This paper will examine recent research on coaching and consider what common characteristics are present in effective coaches. Furthermore, the author will self-identify a coaching profile based upon the findings of researchers and the conclusions or recent research. Coaching Commonalities Many researchers have studied the role of professional coaches in the workplace. Recent research has concluded that several important commonalities and characteristics are inherent within all successful coaching relationships. Most importantly, Espedal (2008) noted that trust between coach and client is the foundational building block of the relationship. Lee (2015) concurred with this foundation of trust between coaches and clients, noting that without a deeply connected, meaningful trusting relationship between coach and client, the entire relationship is unproductive and ineffective. All coaches, then, must ensure that a foundation of trust exists with clients. Built upon this foundation of trust is a pairing of values between coach and client. Boyce (2010) utilizes the nomenclature of “matching” to describe the proper alignment of coaching personality to client. Boyce notes that coaches and clients must be matched in both their values as well as relational goals. Darling and Heller (2012) also noted that when the values of coaches match the values of clients then the outcomes of the coaching relationship are maximized. When this value and personality alignment are in place, coaching has been found in studies to positively impact both desired organizational and individual outcomes as well as individual goal attainment of coaching clients (Theeboom, 2014). Even with these commonalities and aligning of values in place in relationships, however, the individual element of coaching cannot be removed from the uniqueness of each situation. Research has also addressed this important aspect of coaching. Lee (2015) importantly noted that no coaching style is suitable across all clients, and that ever situation is unique and requires a uniquely nuanced approach by the coach. Darling and Heller (2012) further noted that flexibility is the most important characteristics of coaches in working with different individuals and teams. Without the element of flexibility, the nuances inherent in coaching relationships are unable to be adjusted to properly by coaches. Thus even when the aforementioned common characteristics are in place, Darling and Heller (2012) conclude that flexibility by coaches is the single most important element for coaches to ensure success in their relationships. Muhlberger (2015) also addressed the individual nature of coaches when he noted that one importance difference in leaders and coaches is that leaders drive followers to attain organizational outcomes whereas coaches work alongside individuals to attain personal goals and outcomes. So potentially powerful is the individual dynamic of coaching that Espedal (2008) noted that coaches even help identify and define a leader’s own self-conception. The self-identity of leaders can be largely shaped by the input of coaches in the context of relationship. Coaches, then, must be ready to adjust to the unique individuals and situations they find themselves in. Furthermore, with these conclusions from recent research, it is imperative that coaches be aware of their own values, personality, and profile to maximize their effectiveness. Individual Coaching Profile In developing an individual profile, it is important to place a profile within a larger framework. For the purposes of this profile, the framework developed by Darling and Heller (2012) will be employed. Darling and Heller (2012) classified coaches as largely fitting into one of the following four profiles: Achiever, Analyzer, Creator, and Relater. These profiles are based upon the individual’s level of assertiveness and responsiveness. Within this framework, assertiveness is defined as the ability to speak up and take charge in group situations whereas responsiveness is defined as physically and emotionally responding to the needs and situations of others around you. Figure 1.1 below illustrates this framework with each profile occupying one quadrant. Figure 1.1 The profiles of Creator and Achiever are more assertive in their personality while those of Analyzer and Relater are classified as less assertive. Similarly, the profiles of Creator and Relater are more responsive while those of Analyzer and Achiever are classified as less responsive. The character traits listed underneath each profile are the dominant personality strengths of each. In assessing my own personality strengths, weaknesses, and values, what is my coaching profile? My dominant profile is that of an Achiever, however, depending on the situation, I can also fit the profile of a Creator. The character strengths listed which fit that of an Achiever are most evident in being active, decisive, disciplined, independent, and strategic. In each of my professional roles (Army Reserve Chaplain, teacher, and pastor) these character strengths are evident. Darling and Heller (2012) also noted that the greatest weaknesses of each profile are the strengths of the profile on the opposite side of the figure. Following this, my greatest weaknesses as a coach are as a diplomat, empathizer, harmonizer, and being inclusive. Like the accuracy of the listed strengths, these identified weaknesses are equally applicable in my coaching profile. Individual Coaching Process Given the profile of an Achiever, what process should be established for communication and collaboration which would maximize the effectiveness of this coaching profile? Firstly, recognizing the research findings of Boyce (2010), potential clients should be matched to align with the personality type of the Achiever. In other words, individuals or groups seeking an assertive, decisive, strategic thinker as a potential coach would “match” my own strengths. This same philosophy would also hold true for individual or group values. Individuals or groups which value inclusivity, empathy, and harmony would be better suited to find a coach which fits the profile of a Relater. Once potential clients are aligned based upon values and matched to personality strengths of an Achiever, the next step is to establish a clear process for communication. Communication is one the most important aspects of coaching as it helps establish the nature of the relationship between coach and client (Lee, 2015). Thus, included in the coaching profile should be a clear plan for communication. As a strategic thinker, the initial stages of communication are gathering the “big picture” of the goals and desired outcomes of the client so that an overarching strategy can be developed to help achieve those goals and outcomes. Once this strategy is developed, one of the most important aspects of communication between coach and client will be personal accountability. This is where the strength of discipline enters into the equation of the Achiever’s coaching profile. As an Achiever, discipline is not only a personal strong suit, but it is also essential to closely adhering to strategy in order to achieve the desired goals and outcomes. Consequently, inherent in the communication between coach and client is the issue of accountability. The client can expect the coach to constantly inquire and demand accountability of the client to ensure that discipline is present in order to align behavior patterns to strategy. Conclusion Self-awareness by the coach is an essential characteristic to ensure effectiveness. Consequently, developing an accurate profile is necessary to ensure that coaches and clients are properly aligned and that the relationship is built upon honesty and trust. When organizational leadership and management understand what a coach has to offer – including both individual strengths and weaknesses – then a realistic action plan can be developed, communicated, and followed by both parties. When relationships between coaches and clients commence by following this pattern, then it makes the essential characteristic of flexibility easier to enact throughout the relationship because honesty and trust comprise the supportive foundation. When followed, each of these action steps maximize the potential benefits to both the coach and client for the duration of the relationship. References Baaij, Marc G. (2014). An Introduction to Management Consultancy. London: SAGE Publications. Boyce, L.A., Jackson, J., & Neal, L.J. (2010). Building successful leadership coaching relationships: Examining impact of matching criteria in a leadership coaching program. Journal of Management Development, 29(10), 914-931. doi: 10.1108/02621711011084231 Darling, J.R. & Heller, V.L. (2012). Effective organizational consulting across cultural boundaries: A case focusing on leadership styles and team-building. Organizational Development Journal, 30(4), 54-72. Espedal, B. (2008). Making sense of leadership in Norway: The view from management consultants. Leadership, 4(2), 181-200. doi: 10.1177/1742715008089637 Joo, B. K., Sushko, J. S., & McLean, G. N. (2012). Multiple faces of coaching: Manager-as-coach, executive coaching, and formal mentoring. Organizational Development Journal, 30(1), 19-38. Lee, R.J. & Frisch, M.H. (2015). Legacy reflections: Ten lessons about becoming an executive coach. Counsulting Psychology Journal, 67(1), 3-16. doi: 10.1037/cpb0000033 Muhlberger, M.D. & Traut-Mattausch, E. (2015). Leading to effectiveness: Comparing dyadic coaching and group coaching. The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 51(2), 198-230. doi: 10.1177/0021886315574331 Segers, J., Vloeberghs, D., & Henderickx, E. (2011). Structuring and understanding the coaching industry: The coaching cube. Academy of Management & Education, 10(2), 204-221. Theeboom, T., Beersma, B., & Van Vianen, A. (2014). Does coaching work? A meta-analysis on the effects of coaching on individual level outcomes in an organizational context. Journal of Positive Psychology, 9(1), 1-18. doi: 10.1080/17439760.2013.837499
0 Comments
Assess Personal Skills for Leading as a Coach/Consultant
OLB 7007, Assignment 5 DuBose, Justin Z. Dr. Jaime Klein 10 March 2019 Introduction to Skills Assessment Many researchers have studied the importance of self-assessments by organizational leaders, with many researchers noting that self-aware leaders are more successful (Passmore, Holloway, and Rawle-Cope; 2010). Furthermore, researchers have concluded that regularly conducted behavioral skills assessments translate to increased effectiveness (Sperry, 2013). Given that personality factors also greatly impact leadership performance (Furnham and Stringfield, 1993), it is even more imperative that organizational leaders practice intentional self-awareness to better understand their own hard-wiring and how they interact with employees. The conclusions of multiple researchers support this theory. For example, managers and organizational leaders who utilize their personality and communication strengths to develop trusting relationships with their employees are viewed more favorably (Hunt and Weintraub, 2002). This conclusion is corroborated by Eikenberry (2014) who concluded that strong relationships between leaders and employees results in more honest feedback and assessment. From these researchers, and others, it is concluded that self-assessment of leadership personalities, traits, and skills are necessities for leaders. The importance of leader self-assessments and peer evaluations are not limited to personal knowledge and relational success. Habermacher, Ghadiri, and Peters (2014) noted that behavioral skills assessments play an important role in shaping the culture of an organization by aligning an effective communication strategy to meet the emotional needs of employees and, ultimately, improve performance and effectiveness. The impact of such assessments is particularly felt when coaches and/or consultants are brought along to facilitate this process. In this sense, self-assessments by the organizational leader and 360-degree feedback from peers and subordinates positively impact the culture of an organization and the satisfaction and performance of individual employees. This conclusion was also reached by Landis (2014) who noted that trust between leader and employee will generate the greatest level of motivation in followers to excel as members of the organization. Due to the building of trust between leader and employee, this style of leadership also creates open and honest lines of communication. As employees are encouraged to communicate and provide input to and about the leader and organization, their input then becomes incorporated into the decision-making processes of the organization. Leaders seeking the benefits of such assessments will also relationally invest in their employees as a result of their genuine care for their well-being which, as Eikenberry (2014) noted, makes the tough and often personal executive decisions required by leadership easier to communicate in the context of relationship. Leader evaluation While many tools for leader evaluation exist, Showry (2014) provides a “Style Questionnaire” designed to offer one type of assessment tool for leadership evaluation. This evaluative tool can be utilized for self-evaluation, peer-evaluation, or a combination of both types. I utilized the Style Questionnaire for both self-evaluation as well as peer-evaluation for this assignment. Firstly, this Style Questionnaire was given to subordinates for input as part of a 360-degree evaluation. To help increase awareness of personal leadership traits and characteristics, three style questionnaires were completed independently by subordinates and the three assessments were all within 2-3 points of one another. Each questionnaire categorized responses as either “task” or “relationship” and delineated leadership styles as either primarily task-oriented or relationship-oriented. Each category was scored on a scale from very low to very high, with categories including very low, low, moderately low, moderately high, high, and very high. These categories provided a baseline for the leader to understand their leadership style within the larger spectrum of leadership styles. This style questionnaire served as an assessment tool for the leader as a means of increasing self-awareness which could be compared and contrasted with the scores from the self-assessment using the same criteria. The three scores from subordinate assessments were as follows: Table 1. Subordinate Style Questionnaire Scores QUESTIONNAIRE NUMBER CATEGORY SCORE RANGE 1 Task 34 Moderately Low 1 Relationship 43 High 2 Task 30 Moderately Low 2 Relationship 44 High 3 Task 32 Moderately Low 3 Relationship 46 Very High The self-assessment was taken at the same time as the peer-evaluations. The results of the self-assessment were noticeably similar to the scores from the three peer-evaluations completed by subordinates. The scores from the self-assessment of the Style Questionnaire were as follows: Table 2. Self-Assessment Style Questionnaire Scores QUESTIONNAIRE NUMBER CATEGORY SCORE RANGE 1 Task 33 Moderately Low 1 Relationship 41 High The three scores from these assessments did not yield any unexpected results. The leadership strength of the author has always been relationship development over task fulfillment. When people are treated as the greatest and most valuable resource, relationships will be valued over tasks. This has always been the leadership philosophy of the author and, thus, the results did not provide any surprises. Furthermore, similar assessments and evaluations have previously been submitted to the author by other followers and subordinates which yielded results similar to this questionnaire. Nevertheless, while relationships receive priority from the author as a leader, organizational progress will not be achieved without the accomplishment and fulfillment of individual and organizational tasks. To become a more effective and efficient leader, an equilibrium must be achieved in balancing the development of relationships and the accomplishment of tasks. In the future, steps need to be taken to bring up the consistently “moderately low” score of task-oriented leadership. These steps could and should include intentionally and strategically developing a leadership team with task-oriented individuals as well as relationship-oriented individuals. On a personal level, cultivating an openness with subordinates and followers to communicate honestly about specific times and instances when task-oriented leadership is needed or lacking will prove to serve as a positive development to overall leadership. This assessment is useful in that it positively contributes to awareness on the part of the leader and how his/her actions are perceived by those around them. As with all feedback from human subjects, one must keep in mind that no feedback is completely objective. However, the leader can use discernment and judgment to receive feedback from those around them to become self-aware of “blind spots” and, thus, increase in effectiveness. Showry (2014) notes that awareness is not learned in isolation but in dynamic relationships with others and with an accompanying openness on the part of the leaders to receive feedback from those with whom he/she has a relationship. Concluding Self-Evaluation Each leader is unique and must recognize and acknowledge their own strengths and weaknesses. Leaders come in a variety of personalities and styles, but impactful leaders will exercise their own style with confidence and seek to minimize and develop their weaknesses. In my case, relational leadership suits my personality and leadership style. It is a leadership style that research has proven to be effective as it often excels at developing relationships with employees and other stakeholders, which is a personal strength of mine. This strength should be utilized and developed to continue to improve the organization and the individuals serving in its ranks. Knowing weaknesses is equally important as knowing strengths for organizational leaders. My self-awareness, combined with the style assessment completed by multiple subordinates, allows me to acknowledge my shortcomings in task-oriented relationships and cultures. To address and correct this weakness, I must be intentional in surrounding myself with others who possess strengths in these areas where I am weak. Due to the inherently relational elements involved in communication, I do excel in direct communication with employees and stakeholders. This is an area which I can lean on as a strength, but also leverage to continually develop my task-oriented weaknesses. As I invite others to provide input into my personal life and professional leadership, this feedback will provide continual and meaningful input about strengths and weaknesses which I can use to continually develop into a more effective organizational leader. As these assessments are received, the goal is to improve weaknesses and build upon and develop personal strengths. These assessments can be combined with personality assessments to composite a more complete picture of personal leadership style, strengths, and weaknesses. As these assessments become a regular facet of the author’s personal and professional life, relationships will be strengthened and organizational communication and culture will continue to improve. References Eikenberry, K. (2014). What’s love got to do with it? Professional Safety, August 2014, 22-23. Furnham, A. & Stringfield, P. (1993). Personality and work performance: Myers-Briggs type indicator correlates of managerial performance in two cultures. Personality and Work Performance, 14(1), 145-153. Hunt, J.M. & Weintraub, J. (2002). How coaching can enhance your brand as a manager. Journal of Organizational Excellence, Spring 2002, 39-44. doi: 10.1002/npr.10018 Landis, E. A., Hill, D., & Harvey, M. R. (2014). A synthesis of leadership theories and styles. Journal of Management Policy and Practice, 15(2), 45-56. Passmore, J., Holloway, M., & Rawle-Cope, M. (2010). Using MBTI type to explore differences and the implications for practice for therapists and coaches: Are executive coaches really like counsellors? Counseling Psychology Quarterly 23(1), 1-16. Showry, M. & Manasa, K. (2014). Self-awareness – Key to effective leadership. The IUP Journal of Soft Skills, 3(1), 15-26. Sperry, L. (2013). Executive coaching and leadership assessment: Past, present, and future. Consulting Psychology Journal: Practice and Research, 65(4), 284-288. |
NG, LR, & NCUMy collection of personal papers written over the years Archives
March 2020
Categories |
RSS Feed
© Justin DuBose | 2013-2022
All Rights Reserved
All Rights Reserved