The Simplest Coaching Pattern Imaginable
Coaching closes gaps between current and desired states by tapping strengths.
Six leadership styles*:
- Visionary leaders move people toward shared dreams. They are most useful when organizations need change or clear direction.
- Affiliative leaders create harmony by connecting people to each other. They heal rifts and provide motivation to face stress.
- Democratic leaders get commitment through participation. They create buy-in and build consensus.
- Pacesetting leaders move organizations toward challenging and exciting goals. They succeed best with highly motivated competent teams.
- Commanding leaders soothe fear by giving clear direction in crises. They are most effective with problem employees, in a crisis, or igniting a turnaround.
- Coaching leaders connect team member’s wants with organizational goals. They forge high performance by developing people.
All six leadership styles have their place. Research shows visionary, affiliative, democratic, and coaching styles are most likely to create positive environments. Because of abuse or misuse, pacesetting and commanding are most often negative.
*Adapted from Primal Leadership by Daniel Goleman.
The simplest coaching pattern imaginable:
#1. Explore problems or issues. (Current state.)
- Glance backward to understand how you got here. Glance, never loiter in the past.
- Avoid circling the black hole.
- Explore problems long enough for coachees to feel heard.
- Avoid creating dependency by solving people’s problems/challenges for them.
#2. Imagine the preferred future. (Desired state.)
- Coaching is always forward-facing. We change – the past can’t.
- Don’t wait for others to create your desired state.
- Image what you’re doing – in behavioral terms – if things are going perfectly. Descriptions like, “Everyone is getting along,” are gibberish.
#3. Identify near-term behaviors that ignite forward movement.
- Identify four or five behaviors, before choosing next steps.
- Choose how and when to take next steps.
- Prepare for what might go wrong.
- Set your follow-up meeting.
What leadership styles do you prefer?
What steps might be added or subtracted from the simplest coaching pattern imaginable?
Dan,
Wow, I like all the leadership styles shown, as stated they all fit in someplace in an organization.
Visionary- “leaders move people toward shared dreams. They are most useful when organizations need change or clear direction”. To me the visions are our future as a company or a group once clearly stated and understood resonates for me. I do see the other styles all meshing together for a complete platform with various stages on the journey they can all fit in.
Affiliative -“leaders create harmony by connecting people to each other. They heal rifts and provide motivation to face stress”. The harmony is important for a positive group performance, as well as life, marriage, partnerships etc. Probably the most difficult is joining all the egos to harmonize, although the leaders step in up to clear the path in a concise manner for all to see!
Thanks Tim. You’re right. All six styles are useful. We’re well served when we adjust our style to match the situation. (Even as we acknowledge our preferred most natural style.)
I hadn’t thought of ego as a challenge to the affiliative style. It makes perfect sense.
I believe there are three basic styles of leading—directing, discussing, and delegating. The most effective leaders use a style that is appropriate for the situation which includes people’s knowledge and skills, the nature of the required change, time constraints, and other factors. They know what to do when using each style.
In essence, the three leadership styles boil down to this.
• Direct—Tell employees what to do
• Discuss—Ask questions and listen
• Delegate—Empower employees
The best leaders diagnose the situation and use a leadership style that helps people perform at their best. The appropriate style provides the right amount of direction, involvement, and empowerment to motivate people. When dealing with an inexperienced people you need to start by directing them. As employees gain experience and know-how, it’s best to engage them through discussion and delegation. Using the appropriate leadership style engages employees as they learn, contribute and take ownership for their work.
Thanks Paul. Brilliant. Love how you distilled six style into three. I’m a fan of brevity without losing clarity.
The idea that the situation includes the people is powerful. If we aren’t careful, we get sucked into the circumstances and forget to think about the unique people on the team.
I don’t comment often enough, Dan, but your posts are so inspiring and clarify many things, such as today’s post on coaching styles. Thank you for the rich posts and your generosity of spirit in sharing your thoughts!
Dan,
Thank you for the insightful blog once again. I think the best leadership style is democratic, but that is somewhat tempered by circumstance. Some decisions are passed down from above and not the will of the group.
With that said, I wanted to highlight a part you included that is often missed by busy leaders.
“Choose how and when to take next steps.
Prepare for what might go wrong.
Set your follow-up meeting. ”
Following up is so important, and I would think that many of us can become better at this. I certainly could.
Kind regards,
Joe Croarkin
Thanks Joe. Your emphasis on execution is important. It’s surprising how often meetings end without clear action steps and timelines. It’s impossible to have responsibility and accountability when next steps are fuzzy.
Being fuzzy on how and when next steps might be taken leads to disappointment and frustration.
Thanks Ursula. You sure know how to encourage people!
Thanks Dan. Try to follow Shepherd Leadership – Observe all, ignore most, challenge some, encourage a lot.
So, over this past week of reading your blogs, and being in charge of teams before, I thought I was pretty good at pulling teams together. Just recently, I received a team that is totally dysfunctional–not that they don’t get the job completed–but they cut each other’s throats in the process. So in an attempt to show them, and exhibit team work, I took upon some of my two top people’s work. In the process, and during a meeting, a couple of of my new people needed some help, and I suggested (since it was small and insignificant) that the two people I helped out, to give one of the newest members some help. I was totally surprised by their reaction of “No, we have our own, they can do their own!”
And as a leader this is where I failed: I felt that I just gave two of my people my plate of food, and them seeing someone else starving, they refused a morsel of food. I immediately at that point gave them all of their work load back, and told them I was highly disappointed in them, and I told them why they were getting their work load back…I failed because I allowed them to anger me, and ultimately we failed as a team. I was then called on this by my supervisor’s supervisor, as those I was helping out complained about me unfairly dumping work on them, after I had taken it. So, it appears I will be eating crow, instead of that plate of food I crushed!
Thank you for posting your recent experience and reflections. It is constructively helpful, but also good to know we are not alone!
Quick and to the point Dan – very insightful! Different leaders at different times with different strengths. All 6 seem to have their moments, so it is hard to always choose one over the other but I like to coach and grow my team so they gain confidence and push themselves further each day. It is always exciting to see someone develop and break out in areas they may never have thought they could by having new opportunities to grow as much as they want and however they want. It takes effort on both sides but it is so worth it in the end. Thanks!
When coaching you can
1. Direct- tell the person what to do and how to do it. Demonstrate etc.
2. Discuss- ask questions- what are the options? What did you Lear? What would you do differently next time etc.
3. Delegate- I want you to think about your performance on that project. Identify 3 things you did well and 2 things you could do better. And what actions you will take.
Paul b. Thornton