Coaching techniques

I just signed up to the eurocoach list and a question arrived this evening about coaches posting questions to the list along the lines of "I'm at this stage with a client and I don't know what to do next, what do you suggest?" The questioner suggests that coaches should always know what to do next, because they are managing a process, therefore a coach should never be 'stuck'. I thought you might be interested in my reply to the post:


Maybe the request for advice demonstrates that coaches are human after all?

I hear and see a lot of coaches rant on about what is the right training school or the right model. Usually, it's people selling coach training that have an axe to grind. I think there's an implication that coaching is about the techniques, approach, model etc - the technical stuff.

I think that the more important factors are intent, perspective and relationship.

e.g. a best friend has intent and relationship, but maybe not perspective. A manager might have perspective and relationship but perhaps not an intent that is truly in the client's best interest. A consultant or 'man in the pub' might have good intent and perspective, but with no relationship their feedback is rejected by the client.

If the coaching technique was all there was to it, then perhaps we would never see "what should I do?" questions, because the answer would always be "what's the next letter in your coaching model's acronym?"

If coaching requires us to be human, then that has to surface somewhere!!