|
This edited book is a comprehensive study of the worker/coach interpersonal relationship from the perspective of the workers themselves.
The role of a work team coach is described as “to serve as a liaison between the institutional element of management and the human element of production in a business entity.” Coaching is seen as the process of developing and nurturing trust, which begins by believing in and trusting the workers.
As with earlier books, coaching qualities or characteristics are identified.
In this case, the three qualities that must be possessed are competence, personality and empathy.
The process of building trust hinges on what the coach must ‘do’ and what they must not do (or don’ts). The list of dos read like rudimentary communication and relationship skills:
- Be cordial
- Keep your ego in check
- Be ‘on the job’ off the job
- Be sociable
- Maintain a positive sense of humor
- Ask for and follow up on advice
- Clarify information
- Verify assumptions
- Give the benefit of the doubt
- Give recognition
- Keep your promises
- Follow through
- Say what you mean and mean what you say
- Be accessible
This book continues to identify the dos and don’ts of building teamwork, which also seem like rudimentary team building skills. The focus here is more on team dynamics and personal responsibility than on coaching.
What do you think?
Vikki G. Brock, Ph.D., MCC
Director, History and Archive Division
Tweet This
Email to a friend
There is 1 Response so far...
There will always be different ‘interpretations’ of how coaching should or should not be, whether in one-to-one, group or team coaching.
Take for example of an evaluation of a coach ‘competence’.
One evaluator seeked out whether the coach is following a linear approach i.e. line of question must strictly follow a set sequence – G.R.O.W (mapping the coaching conversation); while another is seeking out the ‘energy flow’ i.e. the dance of the coaching conversation though ultimately following the sequence -G.R.O.W (not necessarily mapping the coaching conversation – hence difficult to capture the conversation flow).
There is disagreement on the evaluation of the coach performance rating.
Which evaluator in your opinion is correct in his/her evaluation?
Billy C H Teoh
Malaysia.