SF Coaching

Add a Comment

Comment by Hannes Couvreur on December 17, 2009 at 8:12

Hi Philip, just joining in on the discussion. One question: have you ever voiced your worries towards the pro's? Maybe you can do a short SF-track on this particular challenge (How they've dealt with old habits dieing hard (I believe they never die)). I'd love to hear their views on that as well (since they are pro's and your 'partners-in-crime' :).

Comment by Janine Waldman on December 17, 2009 at 7:51

Hi Phil, perhaps you could use your SF skills and techniques to facilitate the process of developing the coaching programme with your colleagues, giving them a useful SF experience. When you have agreed on the desired outcomes for the training it’s highly likely that there will be room for some SF in the programme. I would imagine that the programme will change and develop over time. As people see the results of your SF coaching and experience the benefits of any SF activities in the programme there may well be an opportunity to expand this…You may not even want to label it SF to begin with…let them get curious about what your doing and how come it works so well…..

Comment by Mark Mitchell on December 17, 2009 at 1:53

Resistance may be dead but we certainly aren;t!:) Not us sf folks!:)

Comment by Phillip Ziegler on December 16, 2009 at 22:26

Well Jenny I get your point. And yes resistance is dead. But unfortunately olds ways die hard.

Comment by Jenny Clarke on December 16, 2009 at 22:15

....and it was the pros' resistance I was talking about!

Comment by Phillip Ziegler on December 16, 2009 at 21:33

Jenny its not the union folks I am worried about--the people I am coaching are very happy with what we are doing. I have the task of shaping a coaching model with the current team of professional coaches which we will then teach to the union leaders so that they can bring a coaching process in house. I have always loved taking "professional" processes and skills and putting them in a form that can be taught to non-professionals so they can use them and not have to depend on professionals. So its the pros that will be the real challenge, not the union folks.
And H-P you are still a youngster. Much quicker on the uptake than I am but I am still standing.

Comment by Hans-Peter Korn on December 16, 2009 at 21:29

Dear Philip - don't worry about the age .... I am 62 .... a difference of 5 years only between us ....
Good luck "old man"!
Hans-Peter

Comment by Jenny Clarke on December 16, 2009 at 21:27

Take heart from the fact that the training is for union leaders, not people already familiar with (and fond of) a very different model. Let them experience SF with a lot of practice exercises and experiential stuff. If the "expert" coaches insist on some of their stuff, include it as "Background information", fairly secure in the belief that it won't be read, especially since your stuff will be so effective! I remember Steve de Shazer saying it's easier to teach SF to engineers that psychologists (or words to that effect). And remember that Resistance is not just futile - it's dead! Jenny

Comment by Phillip Ziegler on December 16, 2009 at 21:11

H-P this is so helpful. Here I am at 67 years of age having to learn new things--I know how I work, I have trained therapists interested in learning my approach, but this is the first time I will be showing and teaching my approach to people who work in a very different way. And your suggestions are very useful. Tomorrow night we are having a meeting to talk about beginning to frame a model that we can then teach to the union leaders (managers) so it will be a first introduction to the various ways we think about and practice coaching and I feel I have a handle on how I can introduce my approach that raises curiosity and not resistance.

Comment by Hans-Peter Korn on December 16, 2009 at 20:33

Hi Philip, your starting question was: "When it comes to designing the training for the union leaders I suspect I will encounter lots of resistance from the other coaches who will want the training to favour their approach. Any thoughts? Suggestions? Reminders?"
I experienced, that "explaining" and "arguing" doesn't work good enough to change used approaches. But DEMONSTRATING is the best argument. I do it in two steps.

1st: I do a SF-coaching with one of the trainees in front of the whole class. The result is, that it works (in the minimum for the coachee) - and sometimes questions from the spectators arises like: "You didn't address xxx and yyy - but this is essential for a long lasting solution!"
Then I ask the coachee how he sees this ... and he/she responses things like: "Maybe in a second step I will have a closer look on xxx and yyy .... but in the moment I am very happy having found a first step to try it our."
This is the point, when the trainees are very motivated to learn more about this "SF-stuff".... So:

2nd: I ask an other trainee to become a coachee and I invite two other trainees to act as my "assistant coaches". They are placed left and right from me. The rule is: I will do the conversation, but I will discuss first with my assistant coaches what we have heard / understood and waht we will ask as a next question. Of course: The coachee hears our discussion ... and hearing this also for the coachee is a very powerful and useful coaching on a "meta level".

After this two steps all trainees are convinced, that
=== SF is very powerful
=== simple - but not easy....

And they are motivated to learn more about this "SF-stuff"

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• 3
• 4
• 5
• Next ›
• Page