Introduction
My coaching style mirrors the transformational approach, but I am yet to work on some imperfections that minimize my potential. These flaws revolve around all three phases of transformational coaching.
Analysis
A transformational coach ought to undergo three phases; that is, foundation, learning loop and forwarding-the-action. My problem areas lie in all three sections. In the foundation stage, I have problems with setting rules concerning my coaching expectations.
A reluctance to set the wrong goals at the beginning of a coaching session leads to this problem. Furthermore, it is quite hard for me to set measurable and tangible goals for clients with amorphous needs, such as finding peace. I also have issues with relating a client’s assertions with coaching goals.
In order to solve these problems in the foundational phase of coaching, it is necessary to think about how clients will know when they have achieved their undefined goals. The process ought to shed some light on how to reach a tangible outcome.
For instance, if a person wishes to find peace, then I should think about real items that will indicate the presence of peace. For instance, one will not engage in verbal fights with one’s colleagues, or one will spend more time exercising.
These outcomes could be set as tangible goals. Additionally, I can work on aligning my clients’ goals with their words by determining whether a client’s assertions demonstrate their commitment to the goal (Crane 45).
For example, a client may be rationalizing unwanted behavior in one scenario and may be describing the behavior in another instance. We can work on making that realignment after establishing a missing link.
In the second phase of transformational coaching, one ought to go through a learning loop. This encompasses mutual learning between the coach and the client. My problem areas in this aspect relate to client judgments.
I have difficulties in distinguishing between what is right for my clients through my value judgments as well as through theirs. This means that my learning loop is not yet complete; my contribution is much higher than it ought to be (Orem et al. 90).
Cultural differences are also highly problematic for me because when assessing a situation, I have a tendency to focus on my worldview, yet a coach’s cultural inclinations can get in the way of real progress.
I can work on the problem of mutual learning by looking at the world through the client’s eyes. I must forget about how I would have reacted to the client’s situation if I were in his shoes. This is because I have not undergone the same experiences as the client.
I will also need to ask the client about how he perceives the problem. To handle the cultural aspect, I need to use the client’s expectations as the standard for transformation. I should trust that the client’s cultural values have provided him or her with adequate tools to manage his or her world.
Nonetheless, because transformational coaching is about empowering people to act and think differently, then I need to challenge the client to step outside his cultural confines.
This ought to be done tactfully in order to make the client feel that he or she is responsible for the decision. However, the person ought to be open to new possibilities in his or her life.
The last aspect of coaching is forward-the-action, where one must clarify changes that the coached person ought to take. Input should come from both sides on this matter (Whitmore et al. 55). I have many challenges in this area of transformational coaching.
First, I regularly give clients assignments, and most of them appear not to respond well to them. Additionally, I have issues with acceptance of failure among my clients. I constantly feel that my responsibility is to achieve tangible outcomes, yet not all clients are like that.
When individuals do not respond well to my coaching endeavors, I often experience discouragement and self doubt about my abilities as a professional. I also need to strike a balance between being zealous about what I do and being prescriptive about possible actions as I tend to focus on one or the other.
It will be more effective to reword my assignments to clients so that they can have an open mind to the sessions. I should convince them that they are merely strengthening themselves in accordance to the new things that they have learnt.
In order to minimize the feelings of self doubt and failure that stem from poor results, I should always be open to the possibility of failure (Whitmore et al. 102). Not all people respond well to transformational coaching; some may require psychotherapy or other interventions.
I need to have the humility to acknowledge that any of this can happen. Furthermore, I should refer clients to other professionals who may be more qualified to work with them.
I can solve the problem of balance by focusing on stage one and two more than stage three of transformational coaching, so as to minimize my prescriptive tendencies.
Conclusion
I can easily solve my problems areas in the three stages of transformational leadership by focusing on the main principles of this coaching style, which is to establish a relationship with the client. If a strong relationship already exists between us, then other matters will fall into place.
Works Cited
Crane, Thomas. The Heart of Coaching. NY: FTA 2007. Print.
Orem, Sara, Jacqueline Binkert & Ann Clancy. Appreciative Coaching: A Process for Change. Chicago: FTA 2007. Print.
Whitmore, John, Laura Whitworth, Henry Kimsey-House & Phil Sandahl. Co-active Coaching: New Skills for Coaching People Towards Success in Work and Life. NY: Davies-Black Publishing, 2008. Print.