Wrong
‘You’re wrong, pal.’ (Simon)
It was a different way to end a coaching conversation. Many leaders and managers would dance and wriggle around it, trying to find a less direct way of signalling disagreement, if at all. At least in UK culture, that is. Simon was coaching a colleague and decided to dispense with the niceties. After all, why waste time and beat around the bush if the answer is obvious? As far as Simon was concerned, the bloke was talking a load of nonsense and that was it. Enough. ‘You’re wrong, pal.’
In fact, the issue his colleague was presenting could have had some fairly significant consequences for a group of vulnerable young people. Simon felt accountable. He saw it as his job to put the bloke straight. The difficulty was how to do this in a coaching conversation. How to present a forceful-enough challenge whilst yet, at the same time, to retain his colleague’s responsibility to own and resolve it himself. This was confronting-coaching on steroids. Simple. ‘You’re wrong, pal.’
So, here’s the thing. What do you do as a leader, manager or coach if a person’s beliefs, values, behaviours, intentions or actions clash fundamentally with your own? What if you foresee serious consequences that they don’t see, or that don’t matter to them? What if it only becomes apparent in the midst of a coaching conversation? Do you stay silent, pose a question, offer an opinion, snatch the reins from them, or do something else? Would you ever assert: ‘You’re wrong, pal’?
chicken whisperer?voice-in-the-wilderness?the thinking man's circular knitting machine mechanic
4 年Well, I would add, "I think" to the "you're wrong", but yeah, I would state my honest opinion.
Clinical Lead, EMDRAA Accredited Consultant, Trauma Psychotherapist, AOD Clinician, Prof Doc Psychotherapy (c),
4 年Im confused who said the statement.....If it was the coach saying you're wrong pal, that's quite a closed statement and doesn't allow for any meaningful discussion. Its also quite inflammatory and a shut down, and I would expect anger to follow. If it was the coachee saying you're wrong to the coach, that's totally okay as we are dealing with humans who have responses to our words. I am challenged daily, weekly and I invite it in a respectful way. I get things wrong, doesn't everybody? Im not a coach but do have some coaching skills. Also it might just be the stage in the relationship where you are both finding your place. If I knew I was right, I would be happy that I had got a reply and then would curious about the defence system the person is using and move forward. I don't want to be right all the time as that's how I learn. Good question! Im interested Nick, just out of curiosity have I commented in a coaching way, or is my answer too therapeutic/clinical?
Helping Leaders and their teams successfully navigate familiar, unfamiliar and uncharted waters.
4 年Love the article. I have no issues with people telling me they think I am wrong on the proviso that this is a considered comment. I was once asked by a well known aid organisation who I would recommend as a guest speaker for a leadership conference. I said ‘ someone of substance that you disagree with’. With some astonishment they said why? I responded by asking them what was the point getting someone whose views they knew and agreed with where the likelihood of change was pretty remote. At least a principled and content rich view that was not theirs would at least start some conversations..... and then who knows what might emerge....
Professor: en Talento-EPHOS (Jubilado)
4 年The problem is probably the client's confirmation bias based on their perception of their world. If you confront it directly with logical arguments you often get "blowback" where the person becomes even more entrenched in their position and can often become aggressive in their defence of their ideas. I would not confront them directly. I would ask them to help me understand their way of thinking. I would listen to what dangers they forsee for them personally and then focus on the "emotional" benefits that they could receive from other options. I would use a linguistic "Double bind" structure in talking to them: first the problems followed by the positive benefits for them. Last into working memory, first out!