By Marlon Gindes, Ph.D.
Thirty years ago, corporations might have sent executives for sensitivity training to help them attain better workplace skills and greater success on the job. Since the 1980’s, coaching has become a key approach to executive development. Psychologists have played influential roles in both the sensitivity training and the coaching movements. While coaching clearly shares some features with other psychological processes, such as counseling and psychotherapy, it also has distinctive features. In this article, I provide an overview of the coaching process and a specialized variant, that I term Topic-Centered Coaching. A specific employment concern, sexual harassment, is used to illustrate the implementation of the Topic-Centered Coaching process. I also indicate the various skills that psychologists have that make them uniquely suited for coaching.
Coaching is a process in which personal or work-related goals are identified, issues and behaviors that interfere with those goals are explored, and techniques for achieving the goals are generated and put into action. (See Perrott, 1998a and Kilburg, 1996 for additional discussions.) The goals of the coaching process are to provide individuals with the skills and knowledge they need to become more effective. These goals are most often achieved through the relationship and interactions between the coach and the participant. (The terms “client” and “participant” are used to refer to the individual engaging in the coaching process.) Coaching may work toward making good people better (Sheras, 1997), it may serve a corrective function (Perrott, 1998a), or it may serve both goals for the same person. While individuals may seek a coach to improve the quality of their lives, the focus here is on people who are coached for work-related reasons. Companies may enlist a coach for an executive who is technically competent but interpersonally ineffective. An engineering executive, for example, may be able to design an excellent bridge, but he or she may lack the interpersonal or managerial skills to supervise others who are designing a bridge. Coaching may also be directed toward broader company-based issues, such as culture change (Katz & Miller, 1996).
Distinction from Psychotherapy
Thomas Leonard, who was an accountant and financial planner in Salt Lake City, before he founded Coach University, said that a coach is “Part consultant, part motivational speaker, part therapist and part rent-a-friend, …” (Newsweek, 1996).
Contrary to his statement, coaching is not psychotherapy, although the two share the goals of change and enhanced functioning. In coaching, an agreement between the coach and the participant is usually established at the beginning. The coaching time span may range from a few sessions to a year, but it is not left open-ended. In most coaching situations, the goals are identified early on and the process is directed toward achieving those particular goals. While the primary aim of coaching is to bring about change in behavior, some degree of understanding and insight are essential as well. Clients often relate their work problems to their personal histories, as therapy patients do. The difference resides in how the coach responds to it. In the coaching situation, you keep the focus on the work issue rather than follow the path to unconscious influences or family/childhood memories. If a coaching client said that his wife says the same thing about him as his employees do, a coach might explore the similarities with him, however, the emphasis would be its impact in the work situation.
Coaches are also generally more active and interactive than therapists, particularly psychodynamically-oriented therapists. While not a “rent-a-friend,” as Thomas Leonard states, a coach may reveal more personal information and usually offers more direct suggestions than a therapist. The client, however, remains an active participant in the learning and exploration process. Role play or other interactive exercises and paper and pencil assessments are often used in coaching. One of the most significant differences between coaching and therapy is in the area of confidentiality. In therapy, confidentiality is sacrosanct, except under very limited or extraordinary conditions or when the client provides a written release. When a coach is hired by the participant’s company, the coach has a responsibility to the company as well as to the participant. Some type of feedback to the company is required, although it may be limited and restricted.
Another crucial difference between coaching and therapy is that anyone can be a coach. One does not have to be a trained mental health professional to be a coach. Coaches come from many occupations and backgrounds, including mental health, finance, human resources, and accounting. The challenge to psychologists is to demonstrate to the business community that psychologists, who have been trained in therapeutic interventions and who understand and have experience with the world of business, are uniquely qualified to be successful coaches. This issue will be discussed more fully at the end of the article.
Who Gets Coached?
Although company-supported coaching is generally reserved for those in management positions, almost anyone with nontechnical, work-related concerns can benefit from coaching. This approach is not appropriate, however, for people with psychological problems that should be addressed by psychotherapy. A description of some of the types of people for whom coaching is appropriate follows:
Executives/Managers Senior executives and middle-level managers comprise the group most frequently associated with coaching and “executive coaching” is the term most frequently used when working with this group. Some consultants reserve the term for long-term or open-ended consulting to top-level executives, focusing more on broader business challenges and less on skills or specific issues. According to Peterson (1996), coaches can “serve as advisors and objective sounding boards...” In general use, however, the term executive coaching is applied to most situations where the company sends an executive for sessions with a coach in order to address a work-related issue. Members within the company may be interviewed about the person and both the company and the participant receive feedback. The coaching process may be directed at increasing an already good level of effectiveness or remedying some difficulty in interpersonal or management skills. The focus may be relatively narrow or broad, depending upon the individual, the issues, and the company’s goals.
Workplace-Disadvantaged Groups This category includes those people who face disadvantages and obstacles in the workplace because they are members of a particular group, such as women, minorities, or people with disabilities. Both external and internal barriers converge to make success in the workplace more difficult. The same informal networks and mentoring situations, available to members of more dominant groups, are often not available to these workers. Although change has occurred in the workplace, corporate cultures still often reflect norms most consistent with white males, who still occupy the majority of positions of power. Many companies have established mentoring or coaching programs specifically for workers from these groups.
Individuals in Transition or at a Plateau Some people in this category may have had a good climb up the corporate ladder but may be considering a career change. Some are concerned about finding a new position, while others may be unable to advance beyond their current level. Others who seek coaching may be experiencing new difficulties at work because of changes in the work situation, such as a merger, company downsizing, a new supervisor, or even a promotion. They may be or feel they are unprepared to handle the new circumstances. Frequently, women and men who are in this group seek coaches on their own, outside of the work environment. Companies are less likely to invest in coaching for some of the people in this group, such as those who may want to change their career focus.
Individuals with Particular Work-Related Problems Individuals, within an organization, who manifest inappropriate behavior that may violate a legal standard, such as the prohibition against discrimination on the basis of gender or race, or formal or informal norms within the company are increasingly being referred for one-on-one help. As a consultant and expert witness dealing with employment issues, such as discrimination and sexual harassment, I am often asked to provide one-on-one “counseling” or “sensitivity training” to those high-level corporate executives or partners in professional firms who fall into this group.
For the most part, referrals involve issues concerning sexual harassment and the individuals referred are men. The circumstances leading to the referral frequently center around behavior that falls into the grey area of appropriateness. The company or firm may be concerned that a legal complaint will be filed against this person. The coaching may be part of the company’s efforts to protect the individual as well as the company. Courts tend to look more favorably on those companies who take restorative or corrective action when there is a problem. Companies also refer defendants in law suits, with coaching sometimes being a condition of the settlement of the suit.
While this type of coaching does incorporate some aspects of counseling and of sensitivity training, I prefer to designate it Topic-Centered Coaching and view it, within the coaching framework, as a specialized variant of executive coaching.
Topic-Centered Coaching
This type of coaching can be used when an individual generally performs well at work but has a specific problem behavior. For example, in one company, a senior executive would shout down the hall when he wanted to talk with someone, rather than calling them on the telephone. Others in the company, ranging from members of the support staff to other senior executives were angered by this behavior. The behavior continued despite repeated requests to stop.
The goals of Topic-Centered Coaching are to focus on the issues involved and the particular problem behavior, determine the person’s level of understanding of the behavior and issue, and to bring about a modification in the behavior as well as in the level of understanding. For example, when an alleged sexual harasser is referred, the coaching focuses on the nature of the alleged sexual harassment, his understanding of sexual harassment, his attitude toward the complainant and others in that group, e.g., women, the presence of similar past behavior, his perception of his own status within the company and his attitude toward the company. It is important to emphasize that the goal of the intervention is to bring about change in the client, not to determine whether or not the client has sexually harassed anyone or discriminated against anyone.
In contrast to executive coaching, which the client may see as a benefit or opportunity that will facilitate advancement, the client may see Topic-Centered Coaching as a disciplinary action. Since the client has been sent for coaching, he or she is essentially a captive participant. Attitudes toward the coaching situation range from cooperative to resistant. Those who are cooperative may acknowledge that the reported incident(s) occurred but usually minimize it or say that they did not intend to offend anyone. Sometimes, an alleged harasser will say that he was framed, it never happened, or the other person is lying. The coach’s approach to dealing with the issues, of course, is tailored to the individual’s interpretation of the reasons for the coaching. When a person denies any inappropriate behavior, indirect approaches to exploring the behavior need to be employed. For instance, one might ask the client if he can think of any reason why others might lie about him.
The coaching arrangement is initially established between the coach and a representative of the referring company or firm, who may be participant, or a senior partner. The contact person from the company is interviewed for information about the company, the parties involved, the circumstances that precipitated the request for services, what the company wants to accomplish, what their expectations are, and their motivation for the referral. Information about the corporate culture is also obtained during this interview. I also describe the conditions under which I conduct these sessions. I require a minimum commitment of five to ten one-hour sessions with the client, and explain what can and cannot be accomplished within that limited time frame. I also tell them that there are restrictions to the feedback the company will receive. For instance, no personal or substantive details will be reported. I do provide an oral report limited to the following: the fact that we have met, the number and duration of the meetings, the degree of cooperation or investment in the process, my conclusions regarding progress toward the goals, any indications of danger to self or others, and/or the need for additional sessions, psychotherapy, or other intervention. The fee and payment arrangements are also set. Sometimes the company contact person also schedules the initial appointment for the client.
Because of the unique circumstances in which the coaching arrangement is established, the issue of rapport with the client is a critical one. One of the first orders of business during the initial session is to discuss the limits of confidentiality and review with the client the information that has already been discussed with the company contact person. A written release form, providing the details, is signed by the client, who is also given a copy. Although the coach is technically working for the company (i.e., they are paying), once the individual enters your office, his interests need to take precedence. In order for the coaching to be successful, the coach must secure the client’s investment in the process and trust in the coach as an objective and competent professional.
In situations where sexual harassment may have occurred, many people do not understand what sexual harassment is or what impact the sexual harassment itself and the subsequent events (investigation, legal claims, etc.) have on the victim, co-workers, and the alleged harasser. An important part of the coaching process is to explore the repercussions that the precipitating event has had on the person’s life and assist the person not only in changing his behavior but also in moving past this crisis. Toward this end, I always determine early in the process whether other people in the company or firm and his own family are aware of what has happened.
The kinds of psychological issues that are generally addressed in psychodynamically-oriented psychotherapy often emerge in the course of coaching. Given the agreed upon goals as well as the time-limited and focused nature of this coaching process, these issues cannot and should not be addressed as they would be in a therapy context. It is, however, appropriate to help the client understand the presence of these issues and how they relate to the current work situation. If necessary, a recommendation for psychotherapy and referral to another psychologist is made.
This description provides a limited presentation of Topic-Centered Coaching. Many important areas have either been omitted or briefly described, such as the development of the relationship between the coach and the client within the limited time frame. In addition, techniques that may not be used ordinarily in the therapeutic setting are used in the coaching situation. For instance, I provide the client with materials from my corporate training workshops on sexual harassment, which are then discussed in the context of the client’s situation and workplace environment.
Psychologists as Coaches
As psychologists, we are uniquely qualified to be effective coaches because of their training and experience. The goals of both clinical intervention and coaching are to help people change. In achieving these goals, psychologists can draw from clinical and social psychological research as well as from our own clinical experience regarding personality development, the change process, resistance to change, stereotyping, and other pertinent topics. Clinical skills and knowledge serve us well, especially because issues of discrimination and sexual harassment are so emotionally volatile. The clinical base can be readily adapted to working with business-oriented issues. As Louis Perrott (1998b) states, clinical skills can be repackaged as mentoring-coaching.
To succeed in what is essentially a non-psychological arena, the business world, psychologists must be able to translate psychological information into plain language and avoid using jargon. In addition, psychologists must learn about these new areas. To operate in the area of sexual harassment in the workplace, it is necessary to understand the legal, psychological, and economic aspects of sexual harassment as well as the structure and functioning of the business world. For example, corporations operate differently from partnerships. Working with an executive in a large corporation requires a different set of sensitivities from working with a senior partner in a law firm or investment bank.
Conclusions
Because of psychologists’ unique combination of skills, experience, and education, we have much to offer the world of business and the field of coaching. Businesses of all kinds are constantly seeking ways to increase productivity of their workers, especially high level executives and managers; law firms need to have their partners and associates functioning at their most optimum level. Many individuals need assistance in mastering problems that interfere with their work performance. Psychologists who have the requisite skills and who appreciate the complexities of the business world can address successfully the problems manifested by individuals in the work setting. Coaching and Topic-Centered Coaching, in the case of specific inappropriate behaviors, represent opportunities for psychologists to provide services that benefit individuals and their companies. They also offer psychologists the chance to work with a greater diversity of clients and in a wider range of venues.
References
Katz, Judith H., & Miller, Frederick A. (1996). Coaching leaders through culture change, Consulting Psychology Journal: Practice and Research, 48, 104-114.
Kilburg, Richard R. (1996). Toward a conceptual understanding and definition of executive coaching. Consulting Psychology Journal: Practice and Research, 48, 134-144.
Newsweek, (1996, February 5). “Need a life? Get a coach,” 48.
Perrott, Louis A. (1998a). Business psychology: A new specialty. The Independent Practitioner, 18, (1), 30-33.
Perrott, Louis A. (1998b). When will it be coming to the large discount chain stores? Psychotherapy as commodity. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 29, 168-173.
Peterson, David B. (1996). Executive coaching at work: The art of one-on-one change. Consulting Psychology Journal: Practice and Research, 48, 78-86,
Sheras, Peter L. (1997). Is it coaching or psychotherapy? The Independent Practitioner, 17, (3), 157-159.
Marion Gindes, PhD is a forensic and business psychologist in New York City and Larchmont, NY. She is the Past President of Division 46, Media Psychology, and CE Chair for the Division of Independent Practice. She can be reached at: 16 North Chatsworth Avenue, Larchmont, NY 10538; phone 914-833-1944.