Performance Coaching &amp; Mentoring in Organisations

Angus I McLeod

Performance Coaching & Mentoring in Organisations

Abstract

Performance coaching and mentoring are both gaining wider appeal with more companies starting to develop these skills in their staff by seeking training programmes and procuring external provision of these services. Sometimes these are delivered together. There is still a lot of confusion in the organisations about what coaching and mentoring are with the words used interchangeably. So let’s begin with what have now evolved as definitions of coaching and mentoring and how both disciplines are now applied at the top level. Coaching & Mentoring Coaching is a facilitative process, stimulating and challenging a coachee to new perceptions about their current issues (and goals) with a clear target in focus. A facilitative process means that the coach does not provide answers and solutions, but stimulates the coachee to find new and motivated thinking to meet their goals. By contrast, classical mentoring is a process of ‘show and tell’ but still concerned with current issues and future aspirations. Mentors are often colleagues or retired colleagues with considerable knowledge of the sector and the internal politics.

Key takeaways

The coachee also learns how to stimulate their own motivation; coaching involves significant probing of internal resources and commitment to success, in establishing goals.
Most contracts are now only for 4-8 sessions (some of which may be telephone based) and so we and others now offer a flexible approach that is based on coaching but allows mentoring interventions during the sessions.
The status of coaches is likely to be enhanced by references and independent quotes concerning their coaching performance.
Novice NLP coaches often limit themselves because they have been trained to believe that rapport is not only a key foundation of NLP but that is should also be maintained in coaching.
Suppliers and coaches both need to understand the relative benefits of coaching and mentoring and where necessary to compromise by using a combination of both.

may reflect both the multiple applications of the approach, with multiple clients and multiple environments, and more importantly a lack of a single body to pull together diverse strands and establish a single overarching definition. Key early writers such as and provide definitions that have informed the course of the debate. One of the most frequently quoted defintions is Whitmore's. He suggests that: "Coaching is unlocking people's potential to maximise their own performance. It is helping them to learn rather than teaching them" (Whitmore, 1992 , p. 10). Here Whitmore draws on the work of Gallwey's Inner Game (1986). Gallwey notes in his own writing the critical nature of the self in enhancing personal performance; the "opponent within one's own head is more formindable that the one on the other side of the net." Whitmore's response to overcome the self, is to use the self as a tool for reflection, raising self-awareness and through this personal responsibility for success or failure. Whitworth places a stronger focus on the relational aspects of coaching, which are fostered by the coach. She notes coaching is, "a form of conversation with unspoken ground rules of certain qualities that must be present: respect, openness, compassion, and rigour, our committment to speaking the truth" . Both definitions are simple and widely drawn. In this sense it may be argued that they fail to deliniate coaching from many of the other interventions identified above, although their wide embracing nature makes them attractive. In short these may be considered "big tent" definitions of coaching. Other writers have attempted to be more specific in defining the nature of coaching, with the objective of more clearly establishing boundaries with other interventions. in their largely Australian edited textbook of evidenced based coaching offer a definition: "A collaborative and egalitarian relationship between a coach, who is not necessarily a domain-specific specialist, and Client, which involves a systematic process that focuses on collaborative goal setting to construct solutions and employ goal attainment process with the aim of fostering the on-going self-directed learning and personal growth of the Client" (Grant and Stober, 2006 , p. 2). This view of coaching can be contrasted with other definitions in edited texts. in his US edited textbook of executive coaching psychology suggested that those trying to define coaching often start by stating what coaching is not: " Coaching is specifically not therapy." After a review of systems and consulting psychology, Peltier offers his own definition of coaching: "Someone from outside an organisation uses psychological skills to help a person develop into a more effective leader. These skills are applied to specific present moment work problems in a way that enables this person to incorporate them into his or her permanent management or leadership repertoire" ( Peltier, 2001 , p. xx). Peltier's definition reflects his background in psychology, combined with a desire to encourage the development of a stronger evidenced-base approach. This contrasts with earlier writers, such as Whitworth, who highlighted the strong intuitive nature of coaching. As a comparison with another popular UK edited title Cox and her colleagues (Cox et al ., 2010 ) offer a "workman-like" definition: "Coaching can be seen as a human development process that involves structured, focused interaction and the use of appropriate strategies, tools, and techniques to promote desirable and sustained change for the benefit of the coachee and potentially other stakeholder" . However, in the following debate they acknowledge that coaching is difficult to define. They note that definitions often seek to define coaching through reference to its ultimate purpose (what's it for), the type of clients (who uses the service), or the process (how is it

Log In

Performance Coaching & Mentoring in Organisations

Sign up for access to the world's latest research

Abstract

Key takeaways

Related papers