The August 2011 Leadership Development RoundTable Challenge: A Coaching Dilemma
August 16th, 2011 | 
Author:
Welcome to the August Round Table!
How it works: each month, a core member of The Roundtable will introduce a leadership challenge and solicit a 200 word maximum answer from the other core members plus one special guest. Readers can then contribute their own answers and/or vote for their favorite below. Voting results will be published here next week.
A special welcome to Sharlyn Lauby who is joining us as a regular member of the round table.
I’m pleased to introduce our roundtable hosts and this month’s guest:
1. Dan McCarthy, from Great Leadership
2. Art Petty, from Management Excellence
3. Sharlyn Lauby, from HRBartender
4. Jennifer Miller, from The People Equation
5. Scott Eblin, from The Next Level
6. Our guest, Gwyn Teatro, from You’re Not the Boss of Me
7. Mary Jo Asmus, from Mary Jo Asmus
The Challenge: Linda, a department head has contacted you. She would like you to consider coaching one of her direct reports; a long-time manager who for some reason, is not getting the results expected of his team. Linda “likes and respects” this manager but believes he needs to step up his game to be more effective.
You meet with the manager, Rob, who expresses enthusiasm for working with you as his coach. You ask Rob about his challenges at work. He indicates that he has a difficult time getting his team to move ahead on initiatives in the department. He’s anxious but willing to have you interview his team to hear their perspectives on his management and leadership styles.
The interviews with Rob’s team indicate that he is confident and knowledgeable with the credentials to understand problems and provide appropriate solutions quickly. However the feedback also indicates Rob doesn’t respect the ideas of his team or engage them in decisions. His impatience with the team is obvious to them, and they rarely hear a good word from Rob about the work they do.
You and Rob set about to design a development plan for Rob including some goals to increase his listening skills, decrease his impatience, engage the team in problem solving, and be more outwardly appreciative of their efforts. It takes an inordinate amount of time for him to draft his plan because, as he says, “he’s just very busy”. Once the plan is in semi-final form, you both meet with Linda, who feels the development plan is definitely on the right track. She agrees to support Rob with monthly 1:1 meetings throughout the coaching engagement to check in on his progress.
You begin coaching Rob. After a month, nothing much happens. He isn’t meeting his milestones and indicates that he isn’t meeting with his manager. You encourage his engagement, remind him that the behavioral changes will change the level of motivation his team has to complete initiatives on time, and make his life easier. He seems agreeable.
Another month goes by. Rob is still not progressing. He’s obviously not doing between-meeting assignments that he committed to, and hasn’t had a meeting with Linda yet. Your level of discomfort is increasing because as Rob’s coach, you are sworn to protect the confidentiality of your client, preventing you from speaking with Linda about his lack of progress.
As Rob’s coach, what would you do at this point?
From Dan McCarthy: At the risk of stating the obvious, it sounds like Rob’s not committed to:
- Improve
- the coaching plan
- the coaching process
- the coach,
- or all of the above!
Coaching and development can’t be jammed down someone’s throat. Well, I suppose it can, but there’s little likelihood of sustained behavioral change. You may as well throw your time and money away.
As for the coaching “oath of confidentiality”, sure, but that only applies to the specifics of conversations between the coach and coachee. The coach, Rob, and Linda should have set up monthly status updates (together) to report on progress against development goals. But they didn’t, so at this point, it’s time to circle back and establish that process.
This challenge asks for advice for the coach – but I’m more inclined to offer up a little advice for Rob’s manager, Linda:
Stop abdicating your job as a manager! It’s your job to establish performance expectations (which includes behavioral) for your employees, help them improve, and hold them accountable.
After you’ve done this, and you’re sure Rob is committed to improve but you both need help, then consider offering the services of a coach. Try this guy.
From Art Petty: This coach clearly missed a critical step in setting up the arrangement. He/she failed to establish clear accountabilities and consequences with BOTH the buyer and the client, setting the stage for the sticky situation. Nonetheless, lacking a time machine, we can only go forward.
In my best mixed metaphor, you can lead a horse to water, but you can’t force Rob to participate in the coaching arrangement. My next discussion with Rob would include professional and robust dialogue about his lack of participation to date and his interest in the personal, professional development that comes with coaching. It’s possible he felt like he had to support the idea in front of his manager, while truly not believing that he was the one requiring coaching. It’s also possible that he feels threatened or offended by being told he needs a coach.
I’m coaching the coach to make one more solid attempt at establishing trust with Rob. Our dialogue should focus on understanding Rob’s perspective and concerns and on his ideas to salvage the opportunity. If Rob fails to respond or fails to live up to his new commitments, the coach must resign the assignment out of respect for all parties.
From Sharlyn Lauby: It sounds like something has changed. Rob initially expressed enthusiasm about coaching but now says “he’s very busy.” And Linda, who says she likes and respects Rob, committed to monthly meetings and isn’t keeping her end of the bargain.
The question is what happened. It could be as simple as the company is slammed with business and the coaching priority has changed. I’m not condoning the decision…just facing real business realities. Or this could be an indication of a deterioration in the relationship between Linda and Rob. Or maybe something completely different.
I’d contact Linda to get a status report from her on meetings with Rob. This isn’t breaching any confidence with Rob – Linda is a vested part of Rob’s development plan. And I would keep an open mind. It’s possible Linda will also admit she’s been too busy to meet with Rob. Or it’s possible she might tell you about her meetings – and then you have a whole new situation to deal with.
It’s not unusual to have a curve ball thrown during a coaching assignment. Before deciding that Rob’s lack of progress is all Rob’s fault, I’d ask a few questions.
From Jennifer Miller: Something about the coaching process just isn’t “clicking” for Rob, so he’s finding ways to avoid doing the work. Maybe he’s discouraged. Perhaps he thinks the support from his boss isn’t genuine. Whatever it is, a coach needs to ferret out: what’s the underlying reason for Rob’s inaction?
If I were the coach: at the next check-in meeting, I would ask Rob to evaluate his progress. If Rob thinks he’s progressing on pace, then we could compare his perceptions to the actual work output. If Rob acknowledges that progress is lacking, then together we would uncover the barriers to progress and develop an action plan.
My recommendation: give the current coaching process one more month. If there still isn’t progress, then I would invite Rob into the following conversation: “We seem stuck. How do you recommend we move forward with our coaching agreement?”
If Rob continues to stonewall, I don’t think it’s a breach of confidentiality to engage Linda in a conversation about how she perceives Rob’s progress. If she’s satisfied with the “slow but steady” approach, keep at it. If not, then it’s time to work with Rob and Linda on exiting the coaching agreement.
From Scott Eblin: In coaching, as in life, less is usually more. If I was Rob’s coach, I’d start by simplifying the plan. If Rob was capable of writing up and executing his own multi point plan he would have already done so. My job as a coach is to make it easier for him to succeed.
He needs to start with his listening skills and put everything else on the back burner. If he builds his skills there, he’ll likely get a lot of indirect lift on the other opportunities.
The coaching plan needs to get his team engaged with helping him identify action steps that he could take that are easy to do and likely to make a difference in his listening skills. The goal is to get some quick wins that will build momentum.
Another next step is to set up a three way meeting with Rob and Linda to tell her of the tighter focus and recruit her as an onsite coach along with members of Rob’s team. They’re all going to help him get better at listening. After 30 to 45 days of coaching Rob on listening, we’d identify the gains made and then determine which aspect of the original plan to take on next.
From Gwyn Teatro: It seems to me that what started out as an objective to help a manager “step up his game” and achieve expected results has morphed into a program called “fix Rob“.
When things are not going well for a team it seems reasonable that the first place to start is with its leader. To me, that means exploring with him not only his behaviour but also the team dynamic and other relationships that can affect its operation.
While Rob may have been initially enthusiastic about working with a coach, there appears to be a discrepancy between what he expected and what he is experiencing.
Here’s what I’d do:
- Have a frank talk with Rob to clarify and/or restate the purpose of the coaching relationship. Come to agreement about what will have been achieved when the purpose is fulfilled.
- Re-design the development plan accordingly including Rob’s goals for self-development and those that involve his team.
- Volunteer to play a more active role in supporting him as he works with his team.
While Linda is not my client, I would remind her of her commitment to meet with Rob regularly and to provide him with her promised support.
From Mary Jo Asmus (composed before I read the other comments): This is a real scenario (names and other identifying information have been changed). Since I dealt with it in real life, I’m excusing my response from the voting.
The problem described is a fairly common issue, but in this case, the foot dragging was severe.
I follow an ethical code more strictly than most, and will not speak to a client’s manager unless the client is present.
I had a serious conversation with this client after the events described and respectfully requested him to show visible and specific progress on his development plan over the next month. He again committed to it but none of the promised actions had taken place at the agreed upon date.
We discussed the lack of progress again and I simply asked him, “How can I help you prepare to tell your manager that you don’t have time to work with a coach and you won’t be working with me any longer?”. I was prepared to fire him.
He suddenly kicked into gear. I reminded his manager of her responsibility to meet regularly with my client, which she did. The coaching engagement wasn’t a roaring success, but good progress was made.
Posted in Uncategorized
13 Responses to “The August 2011 Leadership Development RoundTable Challenge: A Coaching Dilemma”
Leave a Reply
View my complete profile
Love these roundtables!
I also wrote up a perspective prior to reading the experts’ opinions, thought I’d share:
Summary: Linda should have been more integrated into the change process from the start. However, given the current constraints of the situation, I believe Rob’s development plan and efforts need more focus.
I would have approached the situation differently from the start:
1. I don’t agree with the notion that the coach should be sworn to confidentiality to the coachee (some things, perhaps, but certainly not everything!). The real “customer” in this situation is Linda, and she should not only be kept in the loop regarding progress, but should be part of the change process.
2. From the get-go, Linda should have been part of the plan – there should have been regular check-in times between her and Rob, to discuss progress and exchange feedback. If those weren’t happening, Linda should have let Rob know that this is important, and needs to be made a priority. If Linda is not willing to do this, I would questions whether she really wants to see a change, or is checking the boxes that will enable her to safely terminate Rob.
However, assuming that Linda is truly invested in seeing positive change in Rob, and that we are restricted to the confines of complete confidentiality (i.e. no information shared with Linda about Rob’s progress), I would start by reducing the number of development goals. Perhaps one reason that he’s not making progress is that there are so many development goals – there’s no focus!
Rob needs to identify the one single area that will have the most significant positive impact on his performance (listening? patience? etc.), and we’ll start there. Then, we’ll work on developing in that area slowly, piece by piece, focusing on specific behaviors. We’ll give him something small to master at each interval (e.g. “at the end of each day, estimate the percentage of listening you did vs. talking – try for 70% listening – and we’ll discuss that next week”).
Only after he’s mastered each small behavior – and integrated it into his routine habits – will we move on.
Linda, the manager seems to be conflicted and confused. I’m assuming that this scenario is in a (federal) government setting because where else would you find a “long time Manager” who is obviously a lousy one but still his manager “likes and respects” him! And because money is no object in government, this manager also would hire a coach to turn him into something he himself refuses to become. If this is in a business setting and I were her boss, I would fire her and tell Rob to either shape up or ship out. I would fault Linda for letting a substandard and ineffective manager stick around for too long and for wasting company resources on coaching a manager who is set in his ineffective ways. I know how hard business is nowadays so I would still retain one of you (most likely Scott Eblin because of his article “3 signs you are losing your integrity”) to coach some leadership skills onto Linda’s and Rob’s replacements, most likely from within the organization – to minimize the chance of hiring someone from the government. Hey, I have a business to run!
Hi Tim, Thanks for taking the time to provide your comments in detail. It seems that you and Scott are aligned with reducing the number of goals – great idea, and something I hadn’t thought of at the time. I’ve learned my lesson and my clients only work on 2 goals at a time. In Rob’s case, listening would have been the perfect place to start.
Hi A.: My post this week on “There is an “I” in conflict” explains at least part of the reason for long time managers in the area I live in (not federal government, by the way). You are one tough manager! Thanks for stopping by with your thoughts.
I agree with Dan inasmuch as it’s Linda’s job as a manger to coach Rob to a performance. In my experience, outside coaches are very effective when engaged to take a strong performer to the next level. The problem here is that if I’m Rob, I don’t see the correlation between meeting the coache’s requests and what will happen to me if I don’t. If Linda had required these same goals and benchmarks, Rob would likely realize quickly that failure to complete the requests will have direct consequences to his job. My advice would be to have the coach start working with Linda and teach her how to be a more effective manager with her lower performing folks.
Here’s the thing. Situations like this, if the momentum was going in the right direction to start with, little or no guidance or change would be needed. If the change won’t happen on its own I find it is prudent to assume the parties involved a) do not know what it will look like after the change and b) have road blocks to executing the change.
To overcome (a) it may be helpful to clearly define the end results desired, and to structure them in small parts each easily doable in a single week, four to six a month, and then aggregate those into larger components that are in turn grouped and formed into the desired end results.
To overcome (b) the most certain course of action that I know of is to be a hands on coach. In sports, this means handling the ball, doing the actions, showing how it can be done. In business this may mean executing the small part on which the trainee is currently stuck. You want a response like “Gosh you made that look easy.” You want to respond with “You should do it better than I did, with practice. It should be easy for you, over time.”
So many elements of work that give rise to coaching needs are fundamentally based on issues involving confidence and attitude. As the coach you can set the tone, set the example, show the attitude in action and create confidence in those you coach. Accepting inaction, or a poor attitude, as a coach, is a problem in my view. Be energized, be positive, be an expert on the material at hand, and get results.
Please note that your own style and communications methods need to factor into the above. Personally, I am very action oriented, results oriented, and usually take a just get it done view. If the parties really want a game playing session with political outcomes rather than a coaching relationship with tangible business benefits, I determine that at the outset, and walk away. This means I accept some opinions of my non-engagement in game playing as evidence of a negative attitude on my part. This is a valid opinion, as I am rejecting game playing. If you are primarily engaged in a political situation, this is probably not the way you want to go.
Cindy, thank you. I always wonder what keeps managers from being responsible for their employee’s growth? Linda did eventually get on board, thank goodness.
Larry, thank you for your extensive comments. While I agree with some of them, I must admit that I don’t agree that the coach should execute for the client. I believe that if a client is unable to execute, they can be coached to do so. If they are resistant – and continue to be so, (as this person was) that’s a matter that requires firing the client.
I liked Scott’s approach mostly because I thought as I read the problem that the list of goals was too ambitious. I like the comments that indicate something must be going on in an office that allows managers and managers of managers to miss their goals and assignments. But regardless of Linda’s abilities and the office culture, if Rob is really interested in professional development but not committing to it, then he might be avoiding some pain here, and the coach should try to figure out what that is. Does he feel that actually listening to his team will undermine his position? Is there an underlying emotional need that mitigates against any kind of change? All kinds of things could be going on. Starting with listening skills seems reasonable, but should the first step at this point be finding out why he doesn’t want to?
Hi C., great suggestions. I find the variety of responses as to how to deal with this situation fascinating – thanks for adding your comments too.
After capturing what has happened on paper and digesting it, I’m going to first admit to myself, and soon to my customer, Linda, that I’ve let her down. I would capture all this on paper, and reflect upon it, because after screwing up once, I want to do everything possible not to do so again with this client or future ones. I also want to develop processes and norms that will help achieve immediate progress and success for the organization and for all three team members in this process: Linda, Rob, and myself. I would prefer to have a proactive, action-oriented process where the parties are dealing with real organizational issues.
After deciding upon a strategy to get their two-person team rolling in a positive direction (from a task and process perspective), I would e-mail Linda some recommendations on new strategies and approaches that are required for success. Among them are her active, regular involvement in this performance management process. We would meet weekly as a three-member team for four-to-six weeks, and their weekly meetings would continue as needed. I would continue to work with Rob in the interim.(I think notifying Linda in writing about what has happened and the game plan for righting the ship is needed, so that folks have time to absorb and digest the content, the processes. I think this advanced, written notification would be a must if dealing with an introverted manager/client.)
One of the early success-based processes that I would recommend would be a meeting with the three principals present. The goal of the first meeting would be to determine how Linda could help Rob achieve his critical goals. (After all, day-to-day coaching to help team members succeed is a responsibility of every manager, even though goal setting and performance review are the two parts of performance management that are regularly practiced in organizations. Day-to-day coaching gets lip service.) In the meeting, I would ask Rob to list the goals upon which he will be evaluated at the end of the year. Then, I would ask to Rob to identify the most critical goal(s) presently and to list specifically what he needs from Linda to ensure progress and success. I would have Linda and Bob talk directly to each other, so that by the end of the session there are agreements on what each party will do, by what date, etc. They will set up their next meeting date/time, so that they can celebrate progress made, discuss what needs be done next, agree on role assignments, and schedule their next meeting. These meetings I suggest would be done weekly. Initially, I would attend every meeting. If I could not, then I would ask the team members to agree to some other form of feedback to me that would keep me apprised of their progress.
During the discussion, I would be mindful of the behavioral tendencies of each party and make notes on them. I would support the process by serving as a communications facilitator as best I could, conflict manager/preventer, and I would champion the cause of Rob initially. Minimal resources and frequent dialogue to mutually problem solve and seek Linda’s input/advice are not too much to ask. If Linda were not open to follow-up meetings, then I have another challenge.
In order not to make similar mistakes with future clients, I would have certain entry requirements of the individual before getting started. One requirement would be that the parties take, or have evidence of having taken, the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator.
I could go on, but my pre-frontal cortex is yelling for a break. I ask forgiveness for not covering all bases. I also thank David Dotlich and Peter Cairo for providing very helpful insights in their book, Action Coaching.
Bill Parker
Bill Parker Associates
We are dying to find out: who won the votes this month?
You just need go to this link. Thanks for asking!
Bill thanks for your extensive and thoughtful response!
Many coaches can relate themselves with this situation. It is always a coach’s nightmare. In majority of cases the solution hides beneath the surface of a problem. Scratching a problem a bit shall in majority of cases reveal the truth pointing out an existence of different set of facts. In the present case, the island that needs to be filled up is triangular. HOD (Linda), Manager (Rob) and Manager’s Team. The first suspect to my mind is apparent problem identified as inadequate effectiveness of manager viz a viz his team. Coach must probe this with HOD since it may not be the exact problem. Identify what are the deliverables by
Rob to the management and how the problem identified by HOD affect the deliverables. Maintain contra opinion on the whole situation and gauge the reason behind hiring of coach and its ROI in terms of value addition expected out of this exercise.
The the other aspect is to Talk to Rob and find out his impression of his HOD and his views about his team (individuals). This is of prime importance and unless postulated rationally will not make the coaching really effective.
The next thing is to bear in the mind that it is not a delivery issue but more of an attitudinal and behavioural issue and has to be tackled as a process. As a preliminary evaluation, an exercise involving HOD, Manager & the Team needs to be conducted to identify mental maps of all the individuals. This exercise will certainly bring out the crux
of the problem. Coach equipped with multi dimensional perspective will work with Coachee not only on weaknesses of
his/her pupil but will train him to relate it with the weakness and the strengths of the whole department and the individuals.