Throughout the Coaching Skills for Managers specialization, we’ve discussed many topics for improving coaching conversations with our employees. It is now time to put all of that theory and discussion into practice and examine great examples of common coaching conversations! Note: This course builds on all previous courses in the Coaching Skills for Managers specialization. It is highly recommended that students complete or be familiar with the topics covered in those courses before taking this course. In particular, you should be familiar with the coaching strategies and tools discussed in previous courses (such as the 5 whys technique, resisting what is, among others), and should have a full understanding of the Thought model and the various components of it: circumstances, thoughts, feelings, actions, and results. By the end of this course, you will be able to demonstrate appropriate and effective strategies when engaging in coaching conversations with those that you lead. By exploring and analyzing common coaching scenarios that are acted out in this course, you will have a great sense of what works well and not so well during such a conversation. Specifically, you'll be able to better differentiate between a developmental coaching approach and a directive management style, discuss new strategies and techniques for dealing with both mind set and skill set gaps, describe how to use the feedback loop effectively in a conversation, and demonstrate the use of good questioning techniques and the thought model to not only help an employee identify issues, but help the employee really change their thinking. The final assignment is all about actually having a coaching conversation with another person where you can apply everything you've learned in this course and throughout the Coaching Skills for Managers specialization. Again, it is highly recommended students complete the other courses in the specialization before taking this one. This peer review assignment, in particular, will be difficult to complete without knowledge of the topics covered in these courses. After going through the course materials and completing the assessments, you will be able to have more effective one-on one-coaching meetings with those you manage and deepen your understanding of the essential practice of coaching conversations.
Consistently Missing Deadlines Review & Analysis
Loading...
来自 University of California, Davis 的课程
Coaching Conversations
87 个评分
从本节课中
Missing Deadlines and Dealing with Change
Welcome to Coaching for Managers Specialization Course 4: Coaching Conversations. In this first module we're going to focus on two common coaching conversations - an employee who consistently misses predetermined deadlines, and an employee dealing with a process change. By the end of this module, you should be able to differentiate between a developmental coaching approach and a directive management conversation, suggest strategies for both mindset and skill set coaching, and identify mindset and skill set gaps in employees. After a short introductory video, you will watch both an ineffective example, and effective, model example of how each type of conversation should be handled; we will wrap up each lesson with an in depth review and analysis of both the ineffective example and the effective example before you have the opportunity to check your understanding of the material.
与讲师见面
Kris PlachyCEO and Founder & Instructor
Leadership Coach, LLC & UC Davis Extension
[MUSIC]
Let's start by looking at the bad example and
see what we can learn from this conversation.
First, it's obvious who's doing all the talking, right, the manager.
In fact if I were going to label it, it feels like a lecture.
It's not coaching by any stretch.
But the problem is this manager probably thinks she's doing a good job
because she's addressed the issue and told the employee about it.
And the employee has said, I'll try to do better, right.
This is typical of many managers.
They just tell the employee what they want without
actually engaging the employee in the exercise.
Therefore, the conversation does not call the employee to
any kind of accountability.
True, the employee said I'll try.
But, that's not even a real commitment.
The manager doesn't ask any questions.
They don't try to understand why there's a performance gap, nor
do they try to help the employee understand why there's a performance gap.
So, there's very little awareness happening here, other than
the manager just wanting to feel better because they've addressed the problem.
As a result, the manager is going to have a false sense that somehow the performance
will change because they've talked to the employee about it.
But as you know and I know,
that's very rarely the outcome of such one-sided conversations.
In these conversations, an employee just has to sit, listen, and then be done.
Then it's over until the next time, right?
I think this is a perfect example of how many managers fall short simply
because they think they don't have the time or they don't know how to coach.
By comparing the two coaching examples,
I hope you can see that the good example didn't take that much longer.
The time was just spent differently.
In the bad example time was spent just telling.
Time was better spent in the good example by asking reflective questions,
listening to the employee's perceptions.
Looking for thoughts surrounding the circumstances,
inviting the employee to own their own thought choices.
Asking them to notice what they're thinking, and how it's leading
to the results they are getting, and to the way that they're feeling.
So let's move on and look more closely at the good example to see what we can learn.
The first thing I want you to notice is that the manager spends a moment
investing in the employee, telling her she's doing a great job and
that she's really happy overall with the work that she's doing.
This indicates that the employee is someone we want to keep developing.
This employee is a strong performer.
So this is a developmental coaching conversation.
Remember, on the employee continuum, we have coaching conversations with high
performers, those whose performance is consistently good.
But if we are dealing with employees who are not performing well,
the appropriate response is a very directive management conversation.
However, this scenario shows an employee who is doing well so
we want to have a coaching conversation.
In that initial introduction, the manager said, you're doing a good job.
I'm really happy with a lot of the things you're working on.
But she also stated the problem, you have missed some deadlines recently.
And I'd like to talk to you about those missed deadlines.
The manager clearly states the specific issue she wants to talk about and
also enlists the employee's input.
She asks, would you like to talk about why that's happening?
Of course, the employee says yes.
So the manager asked, why do you think you've been missing deadlines?
Pay close attention to the coaching path the manager follows.
If we're using a thought model, we're not looking for
the employee's evidence, for all the excuses of why she missed deadlines.
We're looking for the thoughts behind them.
The employee presents several reasons.
So and so was out of the office.
I had ad hoc requests from clients and so on.
Those are all what we'd call circumstances.
Remember, circumstances happen all the time, but
that's not what prevents us from achieving a goal or meeting a deadline.
It's the thoughts that we have about the circumstances that prevent
us from achieving a goal or meeting a deadline.
The employee, Janet, explains the reasons why she didn't hit her deadline.
Because Tad was out of the office and a couple of clients asked for work.
The employee presented some legitimate circumstances that others could
theoretically hear and say, I know.
It's so hard when people are out of the office and we get all these clients.
I understand, no big deal.
Next time, let's just do better.
That would avoid dealing with it.
However, notice that the coach didn't indulge the employee's validating
evidence, but rather asks a question to redirect her toward her thought process.
She asked, why do you think you didn't do your projects,
in light of the requests from the clients and Tad being out?
What's important here is that the coach helps the employee identify
her thinking by asking the next question.
Why did you opt not to do your own work because
Tad was out of the office and you had requests from clients?
This line of questioning reveals some excellent information about the employee.
When Janet says, well, I don't want to say no.
I don't know how to say no.
If I say no, I'm not a team player, and I want the team to be successful.
This allows the coach to recognize the thought process.
Notice that the coach is focused on her thinking, okay?
And it's her thinking that is actually driving her results or
her lack of results.
The coach has detached the lack of results from the circumstance,
and attached Janet's missed deadlines to her own thinking, right?
This is how we help employees stay connected to their own performance.
This is where ownership lies.
As the coach continued, she unfolded this understanding for the employee.
She said, okay, we want to hit the deadlines.
So if both agree that we're going to hit the deadline,
how do we go back through the way you're thinking about this to create
a positive result instead of missed deadlines?
Notice that the coach nudged her to change her thinking by asking,
what else can you believe that will help you get the result you're seeking?
Given that, Janet said well,
I believe my work is just as important to the team as everybody else's work.
You can see how that became obvious to her.
That thought wasn't occurring to her before
because she was entertaining conflicting thoughts.
She didn't want to say no.
She didn't know how to say no.
And saying no meant she was a poor team player.
Then, notice how the coach attached that new thought to
a new feeling, which is feeling empowered.
I feel empowered when I think that.
Then, we would ask the employee what kind of action comes from feeling empowered,
or we could draw the contrast, right?
So what kind of action comes from that new feeling versus the way you were
feeling before?
What new kind of behavior comes from your new thinking,
as compared to when you were believing that you didn't know how to say no?
Or you thought that to say no meant you weren't a team player.
Drawing this kind of contrast helps your employee get a sense of how thinking
differently and feeling differently will drive a different behavior.
We identify that the new behavior is prioritizing.
And then we connect that to the new thought process.
Then we contrast the result that comes from the new thought process and
new behavior, prioritizing your work, with the old thought process and
the old behavior, saying yes to everyone.
What I hope this example gets across is a demonstration of the thought model and
how it works in regular conversation.
I also want you to realize that the majority of the work that's happening in
this conversation is taking place with Janet's thought process, right?
It's Janet's reflection.
It's Janet sense of herself.
It's Janet's self-awareness to recognize that her results are her responsibility.
The coaching process helps.
The employee comes to realize that the best way to improve results is to
evaluate her own actions, her own feelings, and her own thinking.
The employee's thoughts and ownership are driving it all.
In the last piece the coach said, you've identified that what you do matters.
It contributes to the team.
Okay, so we've identified that we're going to stay focused on believing this, right?
How can I help you?
This is a powerful question for coaches.
Bear in mind that the thought process Janet has developed here belongs to
Janet, right?
It's not up to the coach to manage.
But the coach can help remind her employee of the way she's decided to think and
practice so that she gets the result she's seeking.
Because ultimately our aim is to help this employee develop a skill,
develop awareness of her thinking so that she improves over time,
so that she accepts meeting her deadlines as her responsibility.
It's not dependent on what's going on around her.
The coach then concludes by summarizing everything, so she and
the employee come to a clear agreement.
If we're going to follow through with this,
it would all be on the coaching agenda.
It would all be something that both Janet and the coach agree to and write down.
It would be something that the coach would then follow up with in the future.
As we wrap up, let's review what we've learned from comparing and
contrasting these two examples.
These illustrate a correct application of the thought model,
contrasted with an example where the thought model was not even used.
When dealing with an employee who is missing deadlines, these coaching and
non-coaching conversations have shown us several things.
Before starting a conversation with an employee,
we should determine if this should be a developmental coaching conversation or
a directive management conversation.
If it's a developmental coaching conversation, as in this case,
start by affirming your overall approval of the employee's work.
Also, clearly state that the problem needs to be addressed.
Then, ask the employee why they think this is an issue.
And listen carefully for the thought process behind the circumstances.
But don't indulge the employee's validating evidence as excuses.
Rather, ask further questions to help the employee reflect on their thought
process that's driving their behavior.
Encourage the employee to accept ownership of their thoughts and
the choices and behaviors that result from their thought process.
Recount what you're hearing and
draw a contrast between the old thoughts, beliefs,
and resulting actions with the new way of thinking, believing, and acting.
Invite the employee to verbalize and agree on a new thought process to bring about
new behaviors and positive new results.
Then, ask how can you help the employee
practice to achieve the results you are both seeking.
Lastly, put this agreement into writing in the coaching agenda and
follow up to reinforce the new way of thinking, behaving, and feeling.
