Coaching really seems to have taken off in the past few years and there are now many people offering their services as personal life and business coaches. However, as the profession remains unregulated there is equally a degree of confusion about what coaching is. By examining an understanding of coaching it may be possible to identify the extent to which it is underpinned by psychological models and theories. Like many, you might also be interested to discover the psychological background of coaching and particularly that which is based on a powerful approach to facilitating change, neural linguistic programming (NLP). Additionally, from exploring the psychological roots of coaching you will be able to recognise some of the congruence’s and disparities between post war psychology and the core concepts of NLP itself. Unfortunately, a fuller picture of NLP is beyond this journey of discovery and many areas of NLP and coaching may be something you will want to explore later yourself.
A search for coaching on the internet reveals coaching is now commonly associated with life and corporate coaching and seems to have surpassed the traditional views perhaps once held by many, those being that coaching was something performed on a sports field or in a gymnasium. The dictionary defines coaching as “to instruct, direct or prompt as a coach” (www.dictionary.com), which might be congruent with the use of the word coach in the later context. However, in terms of life or business coaching many would argue that it conflicts with the very concepts and ethos that professional coaches base the foundation of their skills on. This is because many professional coaches recognise the benefits and importance of being able to facilitate change work in a non-directive approach.
This is one of the most fundamental concepts of coaching, because it ensures that the client retains as much ownership as possible over the outcomes of the coaching and the solutions they find. Consequently, the real or perceived extent of ownership increases the extent in which they believe in what they need to do and increases the likelihood of permanency.
Coaching is essentially seen as a means of developing people so they perform more effectively and achieve their full potential. Wikipedia.com offers a very good explanation of the contemporary understanding of it;
“A coach is a person who supports and directs another person via encouragement and asking questions. It differs from a mentor in that a coach rarely offers advice. Instead, they help the client to find their own solutions, by asking questions that give them insight into their problem(s). The major benefit of a personal coach is that they hold their client accountable. So if the client has agreed to a plan of action, their obligation to the coach will help motivate them to complete their plan.”
However, just exactly how new is this concept and to what extent is it dependent on scientific approaches and understandings?
Psychologist or homo psychologicus?
It is claimed that coaching has been around since the days of our early ancestors, in one form or another, when we evolved to become much more technically advanced and social adept, requiring us to be able to learn and develop. This has an inherent survival value and from the perspective of Darwinism it may be argued that such abilities enable us to evolve and survive for the purpose of gene transmission. This perspective may be extended by studies that suggest we have an innate desire to learn and develop. Mythological studies by Joseph Campbell (1949) postulated that, “we are all predisposed across cultures to overcome obstacles, learn and discover new things about ourselves that seems a common inclination to pursue self discovery”.
Not only does it seem that we have a desire to learn and develop, but we are also motivated to support others in their own development and to act in a manner indicative of coaching. This innate predisposition is also echoed in research by Whitening & Whitening’s Six Cultures Project (1975) who identified that there are cultural similarities amongst mothers who share a common goal of, ‘caring, socializing and transmitting cultural knowledge to their children’. This highlights supportive behaviour that is reminiscent of a rudimentary concept of parental coaching to ensure off springs learn and develop the necessary tools for survival within their own society; communication and independence in technically advanced western societies and hunting and farming in the non technical agricultural societies.
These studies seem to imply that we are all coaches from birth and have innate abilities to seek self discovery and development, to support and coach others in personal development and learning. Nicholas Humphrey (1984) described us as ‘nature’s psychologists’ or homo psychologicus , meaning that, as intelligent social beings, we have the ability to feel, think and understand our own behaviour. Consequently, this assists us to understand the behaviour of others in a process known as ‘Theory of Mind’, which is a subjective ability to mind read and gain insights in to what others may be thinking or experiencing based on our own thoughts, feelings and knowledge. Together with this and an understanding of our own behaviour we are able to guide our own and others development. However, there are drawbacks to this in that it does not always serve us accurately and it can lead to us making inaccurate assumptions. Nevertheless, our own schematic knowledge and experiences, combined with the concept of ‘theory of mind’ are more often than not, useful in enabling us to gain subjective insights in to a person’s world. However, to what extent can insights in to behaviour be obtained and used to coach people from the perspective of a homo psychologicus with little understanding of the psychological causal relationship between their facilitation as a coach and the behavioural change brought about in the client. Many may argue that human behaviour can not be simplified and understood at a level of knowledge possessed as homo psychologicus and that it requires a deeper and broader psychological understanding.
It is difficult to ignore the hugely influential effect that science and psychology has had on coaching. Therefore, it might be interesting to explore some of these approaches and the extent to which they can effectively bring about change through a coaching relationship, in terms of professional psychological coaching rather than as a homo psycologicus coach. One particular psychological approach is neural linguistic programming (NLP), which has seen increasing popularity as a practical applied approach to coaching.
Many of the theories and models of coaching are underpinned by the various psychological approaches that have developed during the post war years; one of which is the use of neuro linguistic programming. Developed by Richard Bandler and John Grinder, it stands to represent a very scientific and practical application of psychological concepts and techniques that enable a subjective understanding to be gained from people’s experiences. NLP is reminiscent of many post war psychological approaches, which depart from pre war traditional methods of psychological investigation known as ‘introspection’. This is the idea that we can gain useful insights in to human behaviour by looking in to our own minds.
Behaviourism is considered the first alternative approach to this and emerged during the 1950’s. It adopts a very methodical and scientific approach by studying only observable behaviour, placing little or no reliance on subjective conclusions (mind reads). The idea was that behaviour could be understood by observing connections between stimulus and behaviour alone and without any reference to the mind or consciousness. Behaviourism sees behaviour resulting from internal neurological responses to stimulus, placing a significant amount of acknowledgement on environmental influence and innate capacities. However, it also regards individuals as having very little agency over their behaviour and that all behaviour was either innate or a learnt response through operant or classical conditioning (area of behaviour explored in much more detail by Burrhus Frederic Skinner, who himself was influenced by Ivan Petrovich Pavlov) where consciousness is simply regarded as a by-product of the brain with no causal effect.
The 1960’s brought about further changes with a move towards cognitive psychology and cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT), which permeates throughout many coaching models. Cognitive psychology argues that complex human behaviour could not be simplified or explained in terms of stimulus response processes and advocated that not only do we have greater agency over our behaviour, but that it is dependent on the way in which information is processed and previous knowledge integrated in to our own behaviour. Interestingly, cognitive psychology also sees there being higher levels of cognitive processing and describes the brain in a metaphoric computer like way. Information is received via the senses, processed in various ways that result in outputs that enable us to make sense of our social world, which in turn guides our behaviour. In this respect some degree of concord can be drawn between cognitive psychology and neuro-linguistic programming, which also regards behaviour being determined by conscious and sub-conscious processes, operating at different levels and that is influenced by the integration of our own knowledge and experiences in a process called ‘filtering’. NLP also advocates that individuals, to a large extent, have a significant amount of control over their behaviour and that everyone has the resources or access to the resources to change or achieve desired outcomes.
Clearly, coaching can be approached from a very scientific and psychological perspective, which affords insights to be gained in to the subjective experiences behind a person’s behaviour that enable the client to recognise the solutions for themselves. Whilst coaching has evidently formed part of our lives for centuries and seems to be an inherent and innate adaptive skill, it is also evident that homo psychologicus approaches do not yield the greatest in sights for professional coaching.
References
1. Burton. K and Ready. R (2004). Neuro Linguistic Programming for Dummies. J. Wiley & Son Ltd, England.
2. Campbell. J (1949) www.workplacecoaching.com/pdf/HistoryofCoaching.pdf
3. Datta.S, Lyon. I, Mackintosh. B, McLannahan. H, Murphy. K, Naish. P, Nettle. D, Romero. I, Toates. F, Whatson. T (2006). SD226 Book 6. Emotions and Mind. Milton Keynes, The Open University, England
4. Datta.S, Lyon. I, Mackintosh. B, McLannahan. H, Murphy. K, Naish. P, Nettle. D, Romero. I, Toates. F, Whatson. T (2006). SD226 Book 1. From Cells To Consciousness. Milton Keynes, The Open University, England.
5. Dilts. R (1990). Changing Belief Systems with NLP. Meta Publications, Calafornia, United States of America.
6. Hobhouse (1993) cited in Oates. J. (2004) page 260 – 261.
7. Humphries. N (1984) – www.blackwellpublishing.com
8. Oates. J. (2004). ED209 Book 1. The Foundations of Child Development. Milton Keynes, the Open University, England.
9. www.wikipedia.com
Facebook
LinkedIn
Twitter