Wednesday, May 30, 2012

Don't Sabotage Yourself


By Susan David also posted in Harvard Business Review Blog, May 29, 2012

We humans are funny. Often we create beliefs or engage in behaviors that seem to help us in the short term, only to discover they get in the way of the lives we really want to live, or the people we want to become.
Allow me to share the story of my friend, Erin. Over lunch one day, she told both her mentor and me about a division director job she had truly wanted. The role offered good challenges, the chance to develop her skills, fabulous travel, and unparalleled flexibility. It would have been "a dream come true".
But then Erin began to recite a litany of reasons why she hadn't gone after the job. She wasn't good in interviews, having never received the coaching that so many candidates are privy to these days. She was overweight, which would surely make a poor impression. On top of all this, due to the economic downturn, many people more qualified than she would apply. She thought she'd be great at the job if she could have made it beyond the interview, but all things considered, she "knew" she hadn't stood a chance.
"So I never applied," she told us. "Instead, I sent the advertisement to a peer and encouraged him to interview." She paused. "He got the job."
How was it that this bright, hardworking, lovely young woman also had such an aptitude for self-sabotage?
There are plenty of smart, even gifted, people like Erin. They are bonded by a common behavior psychologists call "self-handicapping," which involves anticipating a real or imagined obstacle that might get in the way of success, and using that obstacle as an excuse.
Self-handicapping allows us to protect ourselves from the pain of assuming responsibility for our failures, and people do it all the time. In a groundbreaking 1978 study, psychologists Berglas and Jones found that participants who "succeeded" at a test (that was really just luck-based) were more likely to choose to take a performance-inhibiting drug before taking a second test. In other words, they actively set themselves up for failure on the second try. By doing this, they could blame their subsequent poor performance on the drug, and also protect their earlier feeling of success.
In a more recent set of experiments conducted by psychologist Sean McCrea at the University of Konstanz in Germany, participants were asked to take several intelligence tests under a variety of conditions. The research showed that people who were encouraged to make excuses for their poor performance — blaming poor performance on loud noises, for example — maintained high self-esteem, but were also less motivated to improve.
This kind of behavior is often so subtle and habitual that we don't notice we're doing it. Think about the manager who has to give a big presentation and fails to practice ahead of the event, or people who procrastinate on work projects and wind up "not having enough time" to do a good job. In a2010 HBR article, Jeffrey Pfeffer identified self-handicapping as one of three major barriers to building professional power: people avoid the pain of failure by never trying to build power in the first place.
What can you do to overcome self-handicapping? Here are four steps:
  1. Watch for the warning signs. Drawing down your efforts, generating lists of excuses, or distracting yourself (music, alcohol, etc.) are signs that you're engaging in self-handicapping. Everyone needs to take breaks and manage energy during the work day, but these activities can be clues that you are veering onto the trail of self-sabotage. A mentor or colleague can often help steer you back on course.
  2. Use "what-ifs" and "if-onlys" to help you generate goals instead of excuses. Research shows that the thinking people engage in during self-handicapping can just as easily be flipped to be motivational. When you ponder what could have gone better, or recognize obstacles in your way, you generate valuable information. Identify factors within your control, and see what you can do about them. Erin, for example, could have responded to the thought "I'm not great in interviews" by researching the right skills, practicing them, and requesting support from her mentor.
  3. Recognize and manage your negative emotions. Research shows that when we use our "if-onlys" to motivate rather than excuse ourselves, we will also likely experience negative emotions, such as disappointment and self-directed anger . If you can notice these emotions and be kind to yourself in working through them, you're more likely to be able to move into positive, empowering behavior.
  4. Go for mastery. Self-handicapping is most likely to kick in when we are trying to perform well in order to avoid negative feedback from external sources, such as criticism from colleagues. When we focus instead on developing mastery in a domain we care about, we tap into our inherent motivation to learn and grow. Recognize what matters to you, and brainstorm ideas to get yourself moving in that direction.
Going for what you really want takes considerable courage. Let's face it, even when you put forth your best effort, things don't always turn out as you would like. But by taking a risk you open yourself not only to the possibility of failure, but also the possibility of learning, growth, and real attainment. It's up to you to decide which is more perilous: the risk of disappointment, or the risk of never reaching your potential.
More blog posts by Susan David

Tuesday, May 29, 2012

What most impacts coaching skills and expertise? The role of significant life events


Life’s thumbprint: the impact of significant life events on coaches and their coaching by Francine Campone and Deepa Awal Coaching: An International Journal of Theory, Research and Practice Vol. 5, No. 1, March 2012. (Read the full journal inside the ICPA online member library; www.instituteofcoaching.org.)                                 

As coaches we come to our practice drawing on a reservoir of varied life events, coaching field experiences, and coach training and education.  This research analyzed three clusters of experiences and their perceived impact on coaching practice.  Three questions were examined:
  1. What are the personal and professional experiences that influence coaches in their coaching practices?
  2.  What are the dimensions of coaching practice that are impacted by personal and professional experiences?
  3. What is the impact of specific life experiences on a coach’s values, mental models and coaching behaviors?


So what do coaches perceive to influence their coaching skills and expertise?
  • Life changing experiences were cited as the most frequent influence of a coach’s development.  It’s not just weathering tough life experiences such as a divorce, illness, or accident; it is the ability to integrate the learning from the experience into the next phase of life and one’s work with clients. By doing so, a deeper development of empathy and coaching expertise can occur.
  • Second, seeking opportunities for continuous learning and maintaining regular contact with other coaches and mentors were viewed as critical to coach development.
  • Last, formal skills training and education on theory were seen to provide a deeper framework for professional decision making skills and reasoning.  Mentoring or supervision in coaching was identified as a significant developmental experience in the group surveyed.


This approach parallels Warren Bennis’ work on the core role of crucibles and authenticity in leadership development. What about you? What stands out as pivotal in your development as a coach?  

Wednesday, May 2, 2012

Coaching Best Practice

Revisiting our historic roots in the Socratic method



In our desire to help our community be up to date on the latest thinking we will be sending you one article a month that helps BRIDGE theory and research to the practice of coaching. 

This month we would like to introduce you to an interesting article published inCoaching: An International Journal of Theory, Research, and Practice:  Life coach as midwife: reflections on a Socratic metaphor, by Joel Steinmet, 2012 March, 5(1) 43-54 

Why did we pick this article? 

Many of us are asked - where does coaching come from? 
Usually the answer is it emerged from the self-help movement, or psychology, or organizational consultation.  While all true, the kind of thinking and dialogue coaches engage in has much deeper intellectual roots. 

Did you know that much of what we do everyday has much in common with the Socratic method? Coaching has been described as a way to help people learn, a way for them to truly appreciate that each individual is an expert with valuable things to share.

Here is what our profession shares with the philosophical tradition. 

Philosophy and coaching have many commonalities, including: both highlighting the importance of leading a life that is full and satisfying; pursuit wisdom through questioning what a good life is; and asking questions as opposed to proving answers.

In Joel N. Steinmet article, he suggests four specific commonalities between Socrates' philosophy and coaching:
  • Like Socrates suggested, coaches do not hold the specific solution or the best path for their clients;
  • While we do not claim to have knowledge about others, we have an understanding of ourselves, even if that is simply the knowledge of ignorance;
  • While we do not hold the specific path for our clients, Socrates suggests we are sensitive to the lack of interest or outright resistance to change;
  • And lastly, a coach must understand whether a client has found their false or true self through means that are sometimes bold and overt and at other times merely a subtle suggestion. 

What do YOU think?
Please share your thoughts with us on one of social media channels.