Modern Day GROW model

I discovered coaching 15 years ago when I was running leadership programs for Hudson Global Resources. The programs were good but I always felt like something was missing, until a consultant introduced me to some basic coaching techniques. Like many people who discover coaching for the first time, I was amazed at the impact a few good questions could have on someone. Sometimes it was just being listened to, but mostly it was the process of helping them think deeply.

I started my learning journey with John Whitmore's GROW, and this approach has given me a firm basis for coaching over many years, and still does. GROW starts by focusing on the future, so where you need to be (goal). You then move to where are you now in terms of situation, challenges, strengths and resources (reality). This is followed by a brainstorm on ways to close the gap between goal and reality (options), and finally a commitment to action (way forward). Sometimes, though, GROW doesn't seem to work, or it doesn't work deeply enough. I'm trying to figure out why this is.

Some of my thinking is that GROW is a "linear" coaching process (some also use the word "horizontal") in that it focuses on techniques to solve problems in the here and now, and developing the skills and competencies required to do this. In an interview I heard recently with Reinhard Stelter, he describes this as "first generation" coaching, so coaching as it first evolved from sport into a work-based form of learning. "Second-generation" coaching (or "vertical" development) seeks to go deeper into how the participant is dealing with complex change at a thinking and identity level.

My experience with coaching is that the first goal a participant comes up with is almost never the goal they end up with. The first version of the goal deals with a current frustration or problem, i.e. the symptom of a problem ("I need to improve my time management") whereas the final version of the goal sits at the level of meaning, purpose or identity ("I'm an adaptive leader with a fully empowered, high performing team"), so the second version is more about purpose or vocation. It's when the participant gets to the second version that real change takes place for her, so perhaps what is called "vertical" development. This doesn't mean she shouldn't also improve her time management, but that real development deals with both the symptoms ("I'm overwhelmed and not managing my time well") to something deeper (the role of a leader)- and the confidence to deal with complex, rapid and unpredictable change which need not necessarily be expressed as a goal at all.

Another shift from purely GROW (horizontal) development is that that change often occurs within the coaching session itself - a shift or realignment of how the individual sees herself (or her role) rather than just a focus on actions (actions will naturally arise from the shift). This is where coaching also goes from the surface ("I need to be better at managing my team") to the deeper level of purpose or identity ("I am a leader of an empowered and engaged team"). My insight that change can occur within the coaching session itself was pretty radical for me and mainly came to me via learning about narrative coaching (David Drake). This relieves the coach from worrying about getting a "perfect" set of actions from a session to trusting that the right actions will emerge from the participant's shift in thinking as an outcome from the session. I reckon I've come a long way since 2005!

Written by:

Gavin Pilz

Head of Learning

Objective Leader