Leader as Coach: what can we learn from approaches to therapy?
We are all aware that one of the key functions of leaders and managers is coaching their team members. In this article we draw from the broad theme of ‘Can you think yourself well?’ to focus on what leaders might be able to learn from an understanding of the therapeutic process. A key to the success of any coaching relationship is the quality of the working relationship itself. We focus how ideas linked to attachment theory, discussed in our first piece in this series, can provide a helpful model to guide and shape the overall approach to coaching work.
Therapeutic Alliance
For any professional providing help, whether they are a GP, a teacher, a squad coach, a therapist or a team leader in business, it is important that there be a solid working relationship between the parties involved. Each must have a good sense of each other’s roles and its boundaries, each must broadly be aligned on the purpose or goals and broadly in agreement as to the plan of action. Throw into the mix some trust, some connectedness and some mutual respect and now you’ve got the prospect of good work getting done. In therapeutic terms what’s described here is the ‘therapeutic alliance’. The research literature is very clear that this alliance is a major success multiplier; without it, engagement, commitment and candour all suffer, and meaningful, good work just doesn’t take place. In both the coaching and the therapeutic context, the work is best undertaken when the relationship and the situation feel psychologically safe. Granted the depth and intensity of topics explored in therapy are likely to be quite different from those explored in workplace coaching, but the notion of feeling psychologically safe is no less true of the relationship between leader/coach and coachee in their work together on challenging performance topics and personal change.
Attachment
Having recently written a longer article on the topic of supporting the development of mental health and resilience in children (Can we think ourselves well?), much of the literature came back to the notion of attachment and the early work of Bowlby and Ainsworth. We made links with some more recent neurological insights which appear to confirm what Bowlby et al were observing on the outside, now observed structurally within the developing brain. In its simplest form, the developing infant relies upon its primary caregiver to provide safe haven to which they can return and be soothed when anxious, fearful and/or uncertain. Structurally the infant is in a triggered deep limbic stress-fuelled response mode initially and relies upon their caregiver to act as a proxy pre-frontal cortex, bringing calm, perspective, good judgement, proportionality etc. The more threatened they feel, the more primitive is their style of thinking and behaving. Over time the developing child develops their own pre-frontal cortex and the connectivity between the two parts in their brain strengthens and thickens, allowing for quicker and more effective independent decisions and stress responses. Assuming primary carer availability, attunement and skill, over time the developing infant builds their own self-soothing toolkit and is increasingly able to explore the world independently, psychologically secure. Curiosity, intellectual engagement and self-belief are all developed through this process.
Therapeutic Alliance = Secure Attachment
Although attachment narratives are most definitely more evident in children given their underdeveloped defences, adults continue to play out their attachment stories, particularly during times of stress and distress. Granted this may seem like a rather large leap of reasoning, but it strikes us that if we consider the therapeutic alliance to be a proxy for an attachment dynamic it leads us to an interesting structure to work with. For example, the leader-coach with an avoidant attachment personal story will often and understandably have difficulty asking emotionally evocative questions, driven by a concern that they will be unable to adequately handle the imagined (emotional) responses. Emotional deactivation is their default, primed state and, as a result, they will often unconsciously steer their coaching conversations away from difficult or sensitive topics that may threaten their comfort zone. It would be helpful for this leader-coach to further develop their comfort and confidence with emotionality in their role as coach, in order that they can take the conversation where it needs to go. Equally, an understanding of the coaches attachment narrative may guide the coaching conversation towards some powerful insights and potential change and development.
It seems likely that many coaches will already be working intuitively in this way; slowly and carefully transitioning from a more soothing and benevolent initial coaching tone, focusing on building the alliance, moving towards greater challenge and encouraging independent thought once the alliance is solid.However, a deeper understanding of attachment dynamics offers the opportunity to be even more systematic in approach, in an effort to support the development of a secure sense of attachment, a worthy aim in and of itself.Research tells us that those with a secure sense of attachment:
have a higher tolerance for ambiguity and are more intellectually curious
tend to be less rigid in their thinking and communication style, and with this, are mindful and mature enough to repair relationship ruptures
are able to view and reappraise situations flexibly and in so doing, maintain a healthy sense of self-determination
show a greater capacity for empathy and are more attuned to and better able to respond to the needs of others
What can the leader-coach do?
Understanding the primary attachment styles and one’s own stories and style is a clear and recommended starting point, en route to helping their coachee do the same. Coaching supervision for the leader-coach could well be the context within which such themes could be usefully explored. Thereafter, some suggested points to emphasise:
Carefully take time to explore what is needed for the coaching conversations to feel ‘safe’ and be open to exploring less defended positions and new ideas and stories. Be open to disclosing what you would need were you the coachee, but also what you need as leader-coach in order to feel safe yourself (to be creative, to make intuitive leaps, to share feelings etc.). Be patient with this. Return to it intentionally both to deepen insight buy also to help openly calibrate on progress
Be open to sharing your own experiences of meeting and working with the coachee as a window into their attachment style (a mirror), exploring when, where and with whom this is same or different, with a view to exploring the hidden assumptions, the old wounds and the entrenched narratives.
The gentle art of eliciting ‘attachment talk’ is the aim here. For example, gently and compassionately inviting chat about relationships generally, those that have worked and those which have been more challenging, ideas, hopes and wishes the coachee might have for future relationships. Being open and transparent about the performance goals and/or personal change topics and the pace of the drum that is beating expecting some visible progress is something for both parties to jointly own. There is a healthy tension between the two (the organisation’s need for performance and the individual’s need to flourish) and it is this tension which serves as a powerful source of fuel for change. If the topic is a genuine coaching topic (rather than merely a performance management topic) then it’s a discussion to be let unfold rather than an instruction to be given. ‘Focussed patience’ is a key skill to develop here.