- Email: [email protected]
Peer coaching
Organizational Dynamics (2014) 43, 122—129
Available online at www.sciencedirect.com
ScienceDirect journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/orgdyn
Peer coaching: An untapped resource for development Polly Parker, Kathy E. Kram, Douglas T. (Tim) Hall
INTRODUCTION ‘‘It’s always something. If it’s not one thing, it’s another.’’ That was a constant refrain of Gilda Radner’s character, Roseanne Rosanna Danna, in the early days of Saturday Night Live. And then she would go on to say something like, ‘‘If it’s not a hurricane, it’s a revolution across the world. If it’s not that, it’s a toe nail in your hamburger or toilet paper clinging to your shoe.’’ This is the world environment that the U.S. Army has called the VUCA world — meaning that it is Volatile, Uncertain, Complex, and Ambiguous. In this world the complexity and rate of change exceed our ability to comprehend what is going on around us. We are thus in over our heads. In such a complex, turbulent world we need to find better and faster ways to adapt and cope. And we cannot do it all by ourselves. We need to use relational resources to learn our way through these challenges. As Jack Welch has said, ‘‘No one of us is as smart as all of us.’’ Thus, learning through relationships is a foundation for career growth, and it must be a lifetime pursuit. The ability to accomplish career learning is what helps us make progress, get through work and life transitions, and adjust to changing circumstances. This learning is not just a cognitive activity, either. Since it means being in a place where we do not initially have the competence we need to deal effectively with a challenge, it creates anxiety and frustration. Thus, successful adaptation requires not only informational but also emotional support, which puts a heavy burden on the relational assistance that we receive from other people. We face a pretty daunting challenge — finding qualified, effective, motivated learning resources that can respond at very short notice and can be focused on specific tasks at the service of the learner. Even in this era of very constrained resources, such as slashed training and educational budgets, there is a ready source of highly qualified help available: peer coaching. We would argue that the ‘‘good news’’ here is that
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.orgdyn.2014.03.006 0090-2616/# 2014 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
in everyone’s network there exist people who are capable of helping a person learn his or her way through the most demanding problem. We just need to learn how to use it. Peer coaching is a low-cost resource. It has high impact. It can be just in time. It is easily learned. And it is self-renewing, sustainable. When peer coaching is applied specifically to life and career decisions, it can be especially useful for career and leadership development. A relational focus connects the two types of development. And the person’s network of relationships is quite varied inside and outside of one’s own organization. Recognition of peer coaching as a potentially invaluable resource for critical learning in today’s volatile context closely aligns with what Positive Organizational Scholarship has emphasized for over a decade now. Both theoretical and practical writing on the topics of mentoring, relational learning, and high quality connections demonstrate that relationships have the potential to heighten self-awareness, develop critical skills, sharpen relational skills, energize partners to the relationship, and create a desire for more connection. However, as we reflect upon our own experiences with using peer coaching in learning situations, peer coaching is not an effortless activity. You can’t just put two people together and tell them to help each other. (You can, but not much good will result.) We find in our practice that there are necessary conditions that must be in place for peer coaching (PC) to work effectively. In our earlier work we have identified a three step-process that helps create successful and sustainable peer coaching. In this paper we expand upon that work to present a practitioner-focused approach to PC (see Fig. 1)
NECESSARY STEPS IN APPLYING PC In this paper we will discuss how to apply our model in Fig. 1, with three steps, to successfully implement peer coaching.
Peer coaching
123
STEP 1 - BUILDING THE RELATIONSHIP: CREATING A POSITIVE HOLDING ENVIRONMENT • Mutual, compatible selection • Check-in • Working agreement • Critical friend PURPOSE Goaldirected mutual learning with clear boundaries
STEP 3 - INTERNALIZING THE SKILLS • Transference to other contexts • Deepening connections • Mutual learning
STEP 2 - CREATING SUCCESS • Building self-awareness • Developing relational skills • Reflecting on process 3 C’s • Social skills
ORGANIZATIONAL CONTEXT • Developmental culture • Leaders that model the way • Resources and rewards for relational learning
Figure 1
Three-Step Model of Peer Coaching.
We will further develop and expand on both the content and the processes that are involved in completing the three steps. We will proceed as if we were ourselves working alongside a colleague who is implementing peer coaching for the first time, elaborating on the mechanisms that are embedded in both the structure and the process. First, we discuss three aspects integral to selecting peers. Then we focus on the three steps of the model beginning in step 1, with a focus on building the relationship. This includes providing the primary structure for peer coaching, initial processes for engagement and establishing a respectful environment that builds a holding environment for peer coaching. Then in step 2 we focus on creating success, gaining momentum, by identifying the necessary conditions for success, including developing relational skills and capability aligned with high quality connections, visioning for possibilities, introducing narrative and storytelling to deepen trust. The third step involves helping peers internalize the skills so that they can engage in autonomous, self-regulating peer coaching that is sustainable and ongoing. We conclude by reiterating the value of peer coaching and the range of situations in which it is applicable. We also remind practitioners that the process is more complicated than we (and perhaps they) originally thought. However, its risks can be mitigated by appropriate preparation, planning and practice. Before we get into the details of how to make
these three steps, let us consider the equally important issue of the larger context in which PC takes place.
THE ORGANIZATIONAL CONTEXT A prerequisite for effective peer coaching is first establishing an enabling context in which peer coaching is recognized, valued and nurtured. While an organizational context may be characterized by power relations and hierarchy, pockets in which relational learning and support are valued can accelerate the acceptance of and magnify the outcomes of peer coaching. Individuals are shaped by and in turn shape the contexts in which they are embedded as they individually and collectively enact their careers. Peer coaching, either in dyads or in small groups, represents one of many potential configurations to support developmental growth and learning.
SETTING THE SCENE A climate of trust and support is critical. While trust deepens throughout the process, it has to be established in the earliest phase of the peers’ work together. We have found that the underlying premise is the need for what Carl Rogers over 40 years ago called, ‘‘a helping relationship that has the intent of promoting growth, development, maturity,
124 improved functioning, and improved coping with the life of the other.’’ Creating this helping relationship requires preparation to ensure that PC is successful. This is a step that is often omitted in the tight time pressure of many contemporary work activities, where key preparatory steps are seen as an impossible luxury. In doing this work, we need to distinguish between the content and the process aspects of the task. Again, a danger resides in the belief that we cannot afford the luxury of attending to the process, causing us to leap right into the task. We do that at our own peril.
SELECTING PEER PARTNERS The first issue — selecting the appropriate partners — is a key to the success of peer coaching. While in some cases people are paired by a third party, giving the participants some choice in the selection of a peer partner is related to the eventual success and satisfaction of outcomes. Different situations call for different kinds of expertise and experience in a helper. For example, Sally is looking for an instrumental solution to work challenges such as how to find the right editor for a writing project. Her expectation from PC is instrumental sourcing of possible editors and perhaps a plan of action to select the best one for her. In contrast, Annabelle is facing a personal adaptive challenge about how to be more vocal and to assert herself more effectively in group meetings. Her expectation is to work through some personal strategies that can empower her in recurring work activities and allow her to adapt her style in different situations. As Sally and Annabelle listen to the others’ situations, each is alerted to the differing requirements — which highlights the marked differences in aims they have, despite appearances that suggest they are apparently similar. The success of their pairing will require each to respond to the needs of the peer. A second aspect to the matching process is to consider the career stage and the developmental position of participants, as it is preferable to match peers at the same developmental position and career stage. Different themes emerge at different points in these parallel cycles of development. In any given situation, a facilitator may have information that would influence this aspect of the matching process. For example, Andrew shared his concerns about his anxiety in establishing himself in his new role and adjusting to the changes he had witnessed in the company. He disclosed his fear early in the getting acquainted process. His peer, Mary, was a mid-career accountant who had experienced two company mergers and had learned to roll with the punches. However, her concern was that she would be focusing on issues that she had dealt with and preferred to work with someone more senior who she felt would understand her particular situation. The extent to which it is possible to match peers according to career stage will depend on the information that is available. Those who have done a variety of assessment tools prior to the peer matching process — such as personality profiling or 360 feedback — are likely to have more data to consider. A third aspect is consideration of the level of relational skills that each individual brings to peer coaching. Ideally, those who are partnered together will have similar and adequate relational competence. However, in many
P. Parker et al. instances this will not be the case, and over time, skills in active listening, self-disclosure, empathy, self-awareness and other social skills will develop to a point that enables even deeper learning for each participant to occur.
STEP 1: BUILDING THE RELATIONSHIP Building the relationship between or among peers incorporates aspects of the peer coaching process that create a positive learning environment. The purpose is to build rapport based on deep trust and psychological support, so that either or both can present challenges to be examined without the defensiveness or anxiety that compromises outcomes. These aspects include structures and processes that act synergistically to form an overall holding environment for peer coaching. A holding environment is a place of psychological safety and support for personal learning and experimentation with new behaviors. Another term that has been used to describe a holding environment is a ‘‘container,’’ a place that is bounded in time and space and is explicitly dedicated to the personal learning of the inhabitants. Elements that contribute to building the relationship include the check-in, developing a working agreement, and the checkout. Within each of these structural elements are processes embedded in a relational mindset that support the growth and development of others through deep listening, questioning for clarity, asking questions to surface underlying assumptions and mental models, individual and shared reflection, sense-making and inquiry. Each aspect allows peers to explore issues with authenticity and deepen interpersonal trust. The elements will be expanded upon below.
The Check-in The first structural element of effective peer coaching is to ‘‘check-in’’ with each other. The check-in is a round in which each participant shares with peer(s) that has a two-fold purpose. First, it ‘‘brings’’ each participant into the room by acknowledging any difficulties encountered getting there. Others may express feelings about the forthcoming coaching session. In early stages the check-in is likely to include expression of expectations participants have for peer coaching. Individual contributions may lead to the emergence of themes that can highlight the topics/issues for coaching sessions. The second purpose is to raise awareness of others and their situations. The sharing provides insight into the needs and goals of participants and makes explicit any emergent themes that may focus the attention for future peer coaching sessions. In the first session, the process of checking-in is followed by the joint development of a working agreement that will guide the processes and interactions among peers in all subsequent sessions.
A Working Agreement A working agreement is a structural element developed to provide a boundary for the holding environment, and establish shared guidelines for the coaching process. The first step in its development is for participants to reflect on their previous experiences in learning environments with others. In a large group of participants, in which smaller peer
Peer coaching coaching dyads, or triads may form, general principles can be discussed together so a shared understanding emerges among the whole group of appropriate behaviors. First, participants identify positive characteristics that they would wish to replicate. For example, ‘‘I was in a group that monitored the air time of participants — which I really appreciated, as I could attend to listening without thinking about fighting to have my say.’’ The comment may invite a response about respect for others and lead to further examples of courteous behavior that enhances relational competence. Conversely, the consideration of negative aspects of interpersonal learning also provides clues of issues to raise for discussion and agreement prior to commencement of peer coaching. A good example is that of confidentiality. A useful trigger question is, ‘‘What do you understand by confidentiality in relation to this group?’’ Discussion may focus on whether peers can discuss issues outside of the peer coaching session, or with another person. Advice giving is another example, revealed in comments such as ‘‘I didn’t think I could be an effective peer coach with Sam because her field is so different from mine, and I don’t understand it, let alone have any experience in it.’’ Peers who assume that giving advice is expected and helpful in the relationship, are often surprised to hear that an underlying premise of peer coaching is that the coach is there to support the growth and development of his or her partner by finding his or her own answer through systematic reflection. Posing questions to stimulate reflection and thought is much more empowering than giving advice. It can also be a relief to peers to understand that they do not need to have answers or come up with solutions. The quality of the discussion about differing perceptions of what constitutes PC or what behaviors hinder progress, promotes shared understanding and ownership of the guidelines. A discussion of several aspects of participants’ prior experiences may lead to a single point on the working agreement. For example, a dialog of several aspects such as being on time to meetings, giving undivided attention to one person at a time, etc. may be reduced to a single word such as ‘‘respect’’ — which holds deeper meaning for the participants than it would if established by pre-set guidelines provided by a facilitator. Fewer guidelines are preferable as the agreement is easier to use. The output is a working agreement that reflects the dialog rather than presents a list of rule-like behaviors. Once established, the agreement provides a benchmark that can be revisited in future sessions to address a process issue, or to check on the integrity of the process. It is a dynamic document and therefore benefits from revisiting and revising as the relationship develops to ensure its relevance. It is useful to ask (and answer) periodically, ‘‘How well are we tracking against our initial agreement?’’ to maintain the integrity of the process. In essence the agreement provides a boundary object that symbolizes participants’ commitment to psychological safety, an important underlying premise for peer coaching.
The Checkout Checking-out is a mirror process of the check-in. As a closing activity, peers share with their partner or group members an insight or a commitment to action that they will take from the session. If time is short, a one-word checkout effectively
125 provides a gauge of individuals’ feelings while collectively providing an overall sense of the group mood. The checkout is the final word and not an invitation for additional dialog or ongoing discussion. The formal closure that signals an end to the current session contributes to the safety of the holding environment.
Attitudes Make a Difference A positive mindset frames peer coaching as a supportive process that facilitates career and leadership development. Individual attitudes and positive approaches provide a positive intention to connect with their partner(s), which piques early motivation. Peers who come with such an attitude are more likely to assume responsibility for their own careers and engage in reflection upon their personal career goals to identify a personal learning agenda, goals to be shared and/or dilemmas to be explored and addressed. Attention to such individually focused activity ensures that peers are better prepared to identify a relevant and personally meaningful focus for coaching aligned with their particular direction. In turn, that focus increases the chances of a positive early experience. Furthermore, individual preparation and clarity reduces ambiguity in getting started, and promotes both reciprocity and mutuality, which are characteristics of high quality connections. Our research has shown that once peers recognized that ‘‘peer coaching contributed to their professional development’’ they were motivated to engage in future episodes at later points. The nature of the relationship between peers is critical to success — which suggests that the time put into building the relationship pays dividends. Establishing boundaries the purpose of the formal processes such as the checking in and out, and the working agreement described above enables peers to provide the assessment, challenge and support required to support the personal and professional development of peers. Effective peer coaches need to trust the safety of the process so they can engage in the process, assess and agree without colluding, challenge without destroying. These capabilities are integral aspects of being a ‘‘critical friend’’.
Becoming a Critical Friend Learning to attend to others is one of the skills that can be further developed as the relationship builds to frame expectations of coaching. Firstly, adequate and appropriate selfdisclosure sets the scene for trust building and risk taking. Modeling such behavior establishes the tone of the coaching sessions. Facilitated groups may benefit from modeling and leading by example, particularly to demonstrate timing, selecting examples of appropriate issues to bring to the dialog and the required depth of disclosure for effective relationship building. Critical friends speak less and listen more and engage in mutual reflection on their process. They pose thoughtful questions rather than give advice. They inquire together. Questions provoke new ideas from peer partners or surface unarticulated assumptions that may be blocking self-discovery. Engaging in dialog, described by Issacs as a ‘‘shared inquiry, a way of thinking and reflecting together,’’ rather
126 than the more natural conversation in which peers are likely to share equal amounts of air time, creates a focused dynamic of mutual learning within the relationship. The shift in focus can be challenging for both parties initially. Shared reflection builds the relationship and enhances peers’ selfawareness. One consequence is often a raised awareness of their role as a coach, which sharpens motivation to enhance relational skills to ensure greater coaching success. Reciprocal giving and receiving of feedback as a part of this shared reflection process may sharpen motivation to build relational skills for greater coaching success, and encourage action to address the challenge or opportunity of immediate concern.
Developing Authenticity Equally important is the value placed on encouraging peers to be authentic in the relationship. This means being willing to be open and honest about one’s goals, preferences, values and needs. Such disclosure may feel difficult at first, as it relies on a level of trust that often takes time to develop. Ironically, the process of genuine disclosure builds trust. We believe that it is essential for peers to create high quality connections characterized by mutuality, positive regard for one another, vitality, emotional carrying capacity (ability to accept and work with positive and negative affect), and flexibility. By making these attributes part of educational process and the working agreement, individuals can regularly assess the degree to which these are being realized. In describing the structure and processes foundational to effective peer coaching, there is an important caveat to mention. Our underlying assumption is that peers engage in the process with goodwill and positive intention. Furthermore, that the coaching process is aligned with a cultural context that values mutual learning. Implicit issues of power and hierarchy can undermine the necessary conditions of trust and openness for effective peer coaching such as trust, authenticity, and open communication.
STEP 2: CREATING SUCCESS Once the foundational structures and initial processes have been introduced and agreed upon participants are ready to practice, reflect, and hone their relational skills. We have observed a dual process occurring as peers prepare for a successful engagement: individuals are mindful of enhanced self-awareness and greater clarity regarding challenges and opportunities that they bring to the relationship for consideration; they are also ready to take the opportunity to draw on their relational skills to enhance the development of their peer. It is our experience that success comes from deepening the learning beyond the safe and surface disclosure often characteristic of a ‘‘getting to know you’’ conversation. Deeper engagement may require an explicit request for partners to take risks rather than playing safe for a superficial interaction. This means that the working agreement introduced initially as part of building the relationship must not only be used and reinforced, but trusted by the participants so that they are confident that they will not be judged, nor discounted, and that confidentiality within the relationships
P. Parker et al. will be maintained. Then, and only then, will each relationship function as a holding environment for peers’ individual learning and growth.
Understanding the Value of the Holding Environment Success requires that participants deepen their understanding of the functions of a holding environment, and also have the relational skills to create it. As Robert Kegan has noted, in order for individuals to deepen their learning about self, and about self in relation to others, they must experience confirmation, contradiction, and continuity. In practice, confirmation is experienced when positive feedback from a peer coach is heard, and in turn contributes to building selfesteem and self-confidence. A further example is evidenced when a peer encourages consideration of signature strengths in other contexts that can fruitfully be transferred to the current situation. When a peer coach asks his learning partner to articulate the competencies he has demonstrated in his current job so that he might consider how these would make him an attractive candidate for a position with greater responsibility, he is providing a supportive and safe environment in which his client peer is empowered to articulate his strengths and their transferability to other contexts. Contradiction is experienced when a peer challenges unarticulated assumptions about particular aspects of one’s story or current issue. For example, Tyler’s story related the unfairness of his boss’ behavior at work, when his boss gave Tyler’s colleague an assignment with considerable challenge and visibility that Tyler really wanted to be given. He made the assumption that his boss thought less of him, and was discounting his potential to handle this particular assignment. His peer coach asked, ‘‘What led you to believe that your boss thought that you couldn’t handle this particular assignment?’’ And, after Tyler responded by saying that he really had no concrete information to support this belief, his peer coach asked, ‘‘have you considered other reasons why he may have chosen to give the assignment to your colleague instead?’’ In reflecting on this question, Tyler realized that he assumed the negative (that his boss thought he was less capable than his colleague), when it was quite possible that his boss saw him as more capable and was saving Tyler for a more difficult project that would be announced very soon. As a result of challenging his unarticulated assumptions, Tyler made a decision to initiate a conversation with his boss in which he would express interest in taking on more challenging work. Another example of contradiction is shown in the following example from Raj, who described how he usually got what he wanted so long as he joked about with his boss and presented his case informally in the first instance. His peer coach’s questioning focused on confronting the pattern and challenging Raj to consider how well the joking behavior was serving him in the current situation. She asked Raj to consider, ‘‘What might be the unintended consequences of your jovial style?’’ And, ‘‘How might your approach undermine your credibility as a candidate for more senior roles in the organization?’’ She encouraged Raj to seek alternative explanations that might raise his awareness and broaden his perspective. By the end of this coaching dialog, Raj made
Peer coaching a commitment to his peer coach to experiment with a more professional approach when making proposals to his boss. He promised to report back to his peer coach on how he fared. Continuity is experienced when the peer coaching unfolds beyond the current episode. While PC can be effective in a single session, patterns may become evident over a series of sessions, which provide additional data for reflection and sense making. As peers gain assurance that psychological safety is maintained over time, both commit to further building the relationship and creating further success through their mutual commitment to appropriate next steps. In all of the above examples, follow up sessions held each peer accountable for their own intentions, as well as the opportunity to continue the reflection and personal learning that had been set in motion at the first meeting.
127 to the practical skills that enable them to build growthenhancing relationships with others. Confidence in essential relational skills — including empathy, giving and receiving feedback, self-disclosure, active listening — make it possible to look for other opportunities to engage in successful dialog in the future. Reflections on their early PC experience encourages participants to develop a relational frame, that is, an appreciation for the potential to enhance understanding of self and others in reciprocal learning processes. Momentum builds as participants hone their relational skills, and experience the self-esteem, zest, new skills and competencies, and mutual positive regard that characterize high quality relationships. With the working agreement ever present, and the encouragement to continue the dialog that has been created, alternating between each peer’s challenge or opportunity of interest, the learning deepens.
Deepening Understanding of the PC Process Shadow Side Alert Stepping back to reflect on the peer coaching process itself is a meta-skill or capability that develops with experience of the process. The distance and reflection-on-action promotes the ability to read the situation and recognize when a change of course is required or a different line of questioning would be more fruitful. Such reflexive learning enables each participant in the peer coaching relationship to maintain and reproduce the quality dialog, reciprocal respect and mutual learning that they have experienced. As this learning continues and the relationship develops, participants will move from conscious competence to unconscious competence and both parties develop the necessary self-awareness and relational skills. For example, a young manager, James, is wondering how to secure an overseas assignment with his company after several years at headquarters. He has not yet explored the reasons why this is his preference at this point in his life, nor the skills that he might bring to the assignment and the skills and competencies he might develop abroad. In addition, he has no idea how to go about paving the way with his manager and others who would be able to open doors to such an assignment. As his peer coach poses questions, this young manager begins to appreciate and articulate his own motivations, what he might bring to such an assignment, as well as what he might learn. He is also invited to imagine alternatives to an overseas posting that could be equally enriching, perhaps for different reasons. As the peer coaching conversation unfolds, James not only understands himself better, but he also begins to map out a strategy for engaging in further exploration with potential sponsors and mentors who could provide assistance. It is noteworthy that his peer coach, Sarah, has learned much about her own preferences and goals as she helps James by noting her own reactions to James’s story. Equally important is that her listening and feedback skills improve with practice.
Building Momentum Over Time We have noted that over time, peer coaching partners continue to experience a range of benefits from this developmental relationship. These range from insights about personal goals and aspirations, values, and career interests
Of course there is always the possibility that two individuals do not build a fruitful connection. When peers do not experience the positive energy that emerges from interpersonal emotional connections as a result of self-disclosure, active listening, and empathy, dissatisfaction and/or boredom may result. There are several reasons that this may occur. One is that the two individuals may have very different learning styles, personalities, and ways of communicating such that points of common interest and connection are not discovered. Or, one or both parties may lack the relational skills to move beyond introductory comments to meaningful dialog. One common example is found in a peer coaching relationship between an unaware extravert and an introvert. While the extravert may be very willing to share his or her experiences and thus readily jump into the peer coaching process, the introvert may want to take time to prepare his or her thoughts (sometimes in writing) before sharing ideas with a coach. The former may prematurely conclude that his/her partner is shy and unengaged, and the latter may experience the former as taking up too much space in the relationship. While there is no straightforward solution to this problem, we have found two possibilities. The first is that seeking and reflecting on feedback contributes to raising self -awareness. The second is that using a third party facilitator can provide the necessary psychological safety and pose diagnostic questions which make it possible for the pair to get unstuck, and to come to appreciate one another as partners in learning. Often, this problem arises from a lack of wisdom within the pair about how to deepen the dialog and/or how to learn from the differences between them. The facilitator, in filling this gap, changes the dynamic, enabling the pair to build the capability to become more engaged with each other.
STEP 3: INTERNALIZING THE SKILLS In the final step of our model of the peer coaching process, individuals have moved from different levels of awareness and skill, to a position of conscious (or even unconscious) competence. When individuals internalize competent relational skills and an ability to read the process they can readily engage in and model effective reflective learning with others. We have found that at this point in the process
128 individuals not only continue the current application, but also are more willing and motivated to engage in peer coaching in other settings. For example, when participants acquire and hone peercoaching skills and experience a range of positive outcomes within workshop settings, they are likely to transfer their capability to other professional contexts. For some, the result is that they will deepen existing relationships at work, moving from weak to strong ties, and thus shift from superficial to deep connections with coworkers. Others may be motivated to establish a broader range of new relationships characterized by weak ties that have potential for mutual learning. Furthermore, once PC skills and experience is internalized, individuals are more likely to shift from formal to informal interactions. In a recent example from a women’s leadership development program, participants were introduced to formal peer coaching and worked with one peer throughout. Subsequently, the trust and shared experience encouraged women from one workplace to connect with others informally, adopting the processes they had learned. Several of them reported how very successful they were, which encouraged them and provided further modeling within the company. Thus, this new capability enables individuals to manage their own development by engaging in growth enhancing relationships with others. An empowering outcome once these relational and process skills are internalized into their existing repertoire, is increased initiative to manage their leadership and career development. In so doing, they also model the value of peer coaching to others. Over time, this wider influence has the potential to benefit more people and in turn the culture of the work setting. The broader applications of peer coaching described above reveal a mindset shift that privileges the value of learning in relationship with others, over individual learning and achievement. Such collaborative mindsets enhance individuals’ capability to respond effectively in a VUCA environment. Thus, in the face of very challenging situations, individuals are more inclined to seek support that will enable adaptive responses to volatility, uncertainty, complexity and ambiguity.
CONCLUSION In sum, we have elaborated on our three-step model of peer coaching, to demonstrate the structure and processes necessary to effectively use this under-utilized developmental tool. Establishing the relationship is an essential pre-requisite so that an adequate holding environment is in place for meaningful learning to occur. The importance of taking adequate time to create the necessary conditions cannot be over-estimated. Once a peer coaching relationship is established, individuals are able to develop and hone the relational skills which are integral aspects of effective dialog that leads to deep learning in self and others. Greater awareness of the process of peer coaching requires the ability to metaphorically step outside of the relationship — which entails getting ‘‘up on the balcony’’ to observe oneself and one’s peer partner in the process of working together. The ability to reflect on the process and to monitor the
P. Parker et al. interactions as they unfold is a sophisticated skill that must be mastered if the potential of peer coaching is to be realized. For this reason, ongoing practice in a range of settings is desirable to develop and maintain the capability underpinning successful peer coaching. To internalize the mindset and capability of peer coaching means making regular use of it as an everyday relational resource. Peer coaching is a key item in one’s toolbox, and it takes time and focus to develop awareness and to embed it within one’s professional repertoire. A person has to learn that peer coaching can enable individuals to address core challenges inherent in both career and leadership development. In reconsidering the model in Fig. 1 of how the peer coaching process works, our experience has shown that it pays to be patient and take the time to make sure that each step is done well. The first step, building the relationship, is often glossed over in practice, as practitioners simply put people in pairs or say, ‘‘Work with the person next to you and work on this task.’’ The result is often pairings with two quite different and incompatible sets of challenges and resources. In preference, in these cases, a high quality relationship needs to be created between participants who are well suited to providing real help to each other. The time taken to engage in explicit psychological contracting will yield good rewards. Respecting the value of the structures and processes we have outlined, such as check-ins and checkouts in each working session, will similarly yield rich rewards. Maintaining self-awareness of the peer coaching unit (dyad or group) will aid the other two steps — creating success and internalizing the skills — and will pay dividends, as well. It is not enough for the pair to have frequent meetings with a good relational process. Those meetings have to have a clear task focus and lead to solid results and important successes. There has to be a strong goal orientation and a discipline to focus on making progress toward task achievements for both parties. As the two people get to know each other better, it is tempting to allow the relationship and meetings to become ends in themselves. However if this happens, without the reinforcing benefits of mutual success, the relationship moves away from PC, and eventually transforms into an explicitly social relationship, or it will end. The ultimate mark of success with peer coaching is for the process to become so internalized that it becomes a natural way of working and a way of being with others. When this internalization happens, giving and receiving peer coaching become part of the work identity of the participants, much like active listening, research, and communicating. When this step is reached, each person has achieved a new level of those two key leadership meta-competencies — self-awareness and a higher level of adaptability — that provide new ways of accessing and leveraging the resources of others. And thus, when the next ‘‘something’’ happens, the two peer coaches will have an advantage that was not available to Roseanne.
Peer coaching
129
SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY Kegan, R. (1994). In Over Our Heads. The Mental Demands of Modern Life. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. For more discussion of the helping processes involved in peer coaching, see the authors’ paper, P. Parker, D. T. Hall, and K. E. Kram, ‘‘Peer Coaching: A Relational Process for Accelerating Career Learning,’’ Academy of Management Learning and Education, 2008, 7(4), 487—503. This paper discusses the research that led to the three-step model of effective peer coaching that is used in the present paper. Very useful guides to the basic process of helping can be found in Carl Rogers, On Becoming a Person (New York: Houghton-Mifflin, 1995), particularly Chapter 3, ‘‘The Characteristics of a Helping Relationship.’’ Also, two recent books by Edgar Schein have extremely useful ideas on the specifics of coaching: Helping: How to Offer, Give, and Receive Help (San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler Publishers, 2011), and Humble Inquiry: the Gentle Art of Asking Instead of Telling (San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler Publishers, 2013). A useful collection of readings reflecting the current state of the art and practice on mentoring is provided in B. R. Ragins and K. E. Kram, The Handbook of Mentoring at Work: Theory, Research and Practice (Sage: Two Thousand Oaks, CA, 2007). A good description and discussion of the theory and research associated with developmental networks can be found in M. C. Higgins and K. E. Kram, ‘‘Reconceptualizing
Mentoring at Work: A Developmental Network Perspective,’’ Academy of Management Review, 2001, 26(2) 264—288. A more practical discussion of how proteges can make use of mentoring and other developmental relationships is presented in ‘‘Developmental Initiation and Developmental Networks’’ by M. C. Higgins, D. Chandler, and Kram, in B. R. Ragins and K. E. Kram, eds., Handbook of Mentoring at Work: Theory, Research and Practice (Thousand Oaks, Sage Publications, 2007) 349—372. There is a rich resource of writings on the role of helpful relationships in the Positive Organizational Scholarship (POS) literature. Useful examples are J. P. Stephens, E. Heaphy, and J. E. Dutton, ‘‘High Quality Connections,’’ in Gretchen Spreitzer and Kim Cameron, eds., Oxford Handbook of Positive Organizational Scholarship (NY, NY: Oxford University Press, 2012), and J. E. Dutton and E. Heaphy, ‘‘The Power of High Quality Connections,’’ in K. Cameron, J.E. Dutton, and R. E. Quinn, eds., Positive Organizational Scholarship: Foundations of a New Discipline (San Francisco, Berrett-Koehler, 2003), 263—278. See also Ragins, ‘‘Relational Menoring: A Positive Approach to Mentoring at Work,’’ Oxford Handbook of POS. And for those seeking more wisdom from our friend Gilda Radner, see G. Radner, It’s Always Something: Twentieth Anniversary Edition (New York: Simon & Schuster, 2009).
Polly Parker is an associate professor in leadership at the University of Queensland Business School. She has a background and life-long interest in teaching and adult learning, applied in both academic and corporate settings, which has informed her research and consulting. Polly received her Ph.D. from the University of Auckland. (The University of Queensland, UQ Business School, Queensland 4072, Australia. Tel.: +61 7 3346 8059; e-mail: [email protected]).
Kathy E. Kram is Shipley Professor in Management and a professor of organizational behavior in the School of Management at Boston University. Kathy received her Ph.D. from Yale University. Her primary interests are in the areas of adult development, mentoring, diversity issues in executive development, leadership, and organizational change processes. (Boston University School of Management, Boston, MA 02215, USA. Tel.: +1 617 353 4269; e-mail: [email protected]).
Douglas T. (Tim) Hall is the Morton H. and Charlotte Friedman Professor of Management in the School of Management at Boston University, and founding director for the Executive Development Roundtable. Hall received his Ph.D. from the Sloan School of Management at M.I.T. He has authored and co-authored several books and research articles on career theory, management, and leadership development. (Boston University School of Management, Boston, MA 02215, USA. Tel.: +1 617 353 4166; e-mail: [email protected]).
Available online at www.sciencedirect.com
ScienceDirect journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/orgdyn
Peer coaching: An untapped resource for development Polly Parker, Kathy E. Kram, Douglas T. (Tim) Hall
INTRODUCTION ‘‘It’s always something. If it’s not one thing, it’s another.’’ That was a constant refrain of Gilda Radner’s character, Roseanne Rosanna Danna, in the early days of Saturday Night Live. And then she would go on to say something like, ‘‘If it’s not a hurricane, it’s a revolution across the world. If it’s not that, it’s a toe nail in your hamburger or toilet paper clinging to your shoe.’’ This is the world environment that the U.S. Army has called the VUCA world — meaning that it is Volatile, Uncertain, Complex, and Ambiguous. In this world the complexity and rate of change exceed our ability to comprehend what is going on around us. We are thus in over our heads. In such a complex, turbulent world we need to find better and faster ways to adapt and cope. And we cannot do it all by ourselves. We need to use relational resources to learn our way through these challenges. As Jack Welch has said, ‘‘No one of us is as smart as all of us.’’ Thus, learning through relationships is a foundation for career growth, and it must be a lifetime pursuit. The ability to accomplish career learning is what helps us make progress, get through work and life transitions, and adjust to changing circumstances. This learning is not just a cognitive activity, either. Since it means being in a place where we do not initially have the competence we need to deal effectively with a challenge, it creates anxiety and frustration. Thus, successful adaptation requires not only informational but also emotional support, which puts a heavy burden on the relational assistance that we receive from other people. We face a pretty daunting challenge — finding qualified, effective, motivated learning resources that can respond at very short notice and can be focused on specific tasks at the service of the learner. Even in this era of very constrained resources, such as slashed training and educational budgets, there is a ready source of highly qualified help available: peer coaching. We would argue that the ‘‘good news’’ here is that
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.orgdyn.2014.03.006 0090-2616/# 2014 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
in everyone’s network there exist people who are capable of helping a person learn his or her way through the most demanding problem. We just need to learn how to use it. Peer coaching is a low-cost resource. It has high impact. It can be just in time. It is easily learned. And it is self-renewing, sustainable. When peer coaching is applied specifically to life and career decisions, it can be especially useful for career and leadership development. A relational focus connects the two types of development. And the person’s network of relationships is quite varied inside and outside of one’s own organization. Recognition of peer coaching as a potentially invaluable resource for critical learning in today’s volatile context closely aligns with what Positive Organizational Scholarship has emphasized for over a decade now. Both theoretical and practical writing on the topics of mentoring, relational learning, and high quality connections demonstrate that relationships have the potential to heighten self-awareness, develop critical skills, sharpen relational skills, energize partners to the relationship, and create a desire for more connection. However, as we reflect upon our own experiences with using peer coaching in learning situations, peer coaching is not an effortless activity. You can’t just put two people together and tell them to help each other. (You can, but not much good will result.) We find in our practice that there are necessary conditions that must be in place for peer coaching (PC) to work effectively. In our earlier work we have identified a three step-process that helps create successful and sustainable peer coaching. In this paper we expand upon that work to present a practitioner-focused approach to PC (see Fig. 1)
NECESSARY STEPS IN APPLYING PC In this paper we will discuss how to apply our model in Fig. 1, with three steps, to successfully implement peer coaching.
Peer coaching
123
STEP 1 - BUILDING THE RELATIONSHIP: CREATING A POSITIVE HOLDING ENVIRONMENT • Mutual, compatible selection • Check-in • Working agreement • Critical friend PURPOSE Goaldirected mutual learning with clear boundaries
STEP 3 - INTERNALIZING THE SKILLS • Transference to other contexts • Deepening connections • Mutual learning
STEP 2 - CREATING SUCCESS • Building self-awareness • Developing relational skills • Reflecting on process 3 C’s • Social skills
ORGANIZATIONAL CONTEXT • Developmental culture • Leaders that model the way • Resources and rewards for relational learning
Figure 1
Three-Step Model of Peer Coaching.
We will further develop and expand on both the content and the processes that are involved in completing the three steps. We will proceed as if we were ourselves working alongside a colleague who is implementing peer coaching for the first time, elaborating on the mechanisms that are embedded in both the structure and the process. First, we discuss three aspects integral to selecting peers. Then we focus on the three steps of the model beginning in step 1, with a focus on building the relationship. This includes providing the primary structure for peer coaching, initial processes for engagement and establishing a respectful environment that builds a holding environment for peer coaching. Then in step 2 we focus on creating success, gaining momentum, by identifying the necessary conditions for success, including developing relational skills and capability aligned with high quality connections, visioning for possibilities, introducing narrative and storytelling to deepen trust. The third step involves helping peers internalize the skills so that they can engage in autonomous, self-regulating peer coaching that is sustainable and ongoing. We conclude by reiterating the value of peer coaching and the range of situations in which it is applicable. We also remind practitioners that the process is more complicated than we (and perhaps they) originally thought. However, its risks can be mitigated by appropriate preparation, planning and practice. Before we get into the details of how to make
these three steps, let us consider the equally important issue of the larger context in which PC takes place.
THE ORGANIZATIONAL CONTEXT A prerequisite for effective peer coaching is first establishing an enabling context in which peer coaching is recognized, valued and nurtured. While an organizational context may be characterized by power relations and hierarchy, pockets in which relational learning and support are valued can accelerate the acceptance of and magnify the outcomes of peer coaching. Individuals are shaped by and in turn shape the contexts in which they are embedded as they individually and collectively enact their careers. Peer coaching, either in dyads or in small groups, represents one of many potential configurations to support developmental growth and learning.
SETTING THE SCENE A climate of trust and support is critical. While trust deepens throughout the process, it has to be established in the earliest phase of the peers’ work together. We have found that the underlying premise is the need for what Carl Rogers over 40 years ago called, ‘‘a helping relationship that has the intent of promoting growth, development, maturity,
124 improved functioning, and improved coping with the life of the other.’’ Creating this helping relationship requires preparation to ensure that PC is successful. This is a step that is often omitted in the tight time pressure of many contemporary work activities, where key preparatory steps are seen as an impossible luxury. In doing this work, we need to distinguish between the content and the process aspects of the task. Again, a danger resides in the belief that we cannot afford the luxury of attending to the process, causing us to leap right into the task. We do that at our own peril.
SELECTING PEER PARTNERS The first issue — selecting the appropriate partners — is a key to the success of peer coaching. While in some cases people are paired by a third party, giving the participants some choice in the selection of a peer partner is related to the eventual success and satisfaction of outcomes. Different situations call for different kinds of expertise and experience in a helper. For example, Sally is looking for an instrumental solution to work challenges such as how to find the right editor for a writing project. Her expectation from PC is instrumental sourcing of possible editors and perhaps a plan of action to select the best one for her. In contrast, Annabelle is facing a personal adaptive challenge about how to be more vocal and to assert herself more effectively in group meetings. Her expectation is to work through some personal strategies that can empower her in recurring work activities and allow her to adapt her style in different situations. As Sally and Annabelle listen to the others’ situations, each is alerted to the differing requirements — which highlights the marked differences in aims they have, despite appearances that suggest they are apparently similar. The success of their pairing will require each to respond to the needs of the peer. A second aspect to the matching process is to consider the career stage and the developmental position of participants, as it is preferable to match peers at the same developmental position and career stage. Different themes emerge at different points in these parallel cycles of development. In any given situation, a facilitator may have information that would influence this aspect of the matching process. For example, Andrew shared his concerns about his anxiety in establishing himself in his new role and adjusting to the changes he had witnessed in the company. He disclosed his fear early in the getting acquainted process. His peer, Mary, was a mid-career accountant who had experienced two company mergers and had learned to roll with the punches. However, her concern was that she would be focusing on issues that she had dealt with and preferred to work with someone more senior who she felt would understand her particular situation. The extent to which it is possible to match peers according to career stage will depend on the information that is available. Those who have done a variety of assessment tools prior to the peer matching process — such as personality profiling or 360 feedback — are likely to have more data to consider. A third aspect is consideration of the level of relational skills that each individual brings to peer coaching. Ideally, those who are partnered together will have similar and adequate relational competence. However, in many
P. Parker et al. instances this will not be the case, and over time, skills in active listening, self-disclosure, empathy, self-awareness and other social skills will develop to a point that enables even deeper learning for each participant to occur.
STEP 1: BUILDING THE RELATIONSHIP Building the relationship between or among peers incorporates aspects of the peer coaching process that create a positive learning environment. The purpose is to build rapport based on deep trust and psychological support, so that either or both can present challenges to be examined without the defensiveness or anxiety that compromises outcomes. These aspects include structures and processes that act synergistically to form an overall holding environment for peer coaching. A holding environment is a place of psychological safety and support for personal learning and experimentation with new behaviors. Another term that has been used to describe a holding environment is a ‘‘container,’’ a place that is bounded in time and space and is explicitly dedicated to the personal learning of the inhabitants. Elements that contribute to building the relationship include the check-in, developing a working agreement, and the checkout. Within each of these structural elements are processes embedded in a relational mindset that support the growth and development of others through deep listening, questioning for clarity, asking questions to surface underlying assumptions and mental models, individual and shared reflection, sense-making and inquiry. Each aspect allows peers to explore issues with authenticity and deepen interpersonal trust. The elements will be expanded upon below.
The Check-in The first structural element of effective peer coaching is to ‘‘check-in’’ with each other. The check-in is a round in which each participant shares with peer(s) that has a two-fold purpose. First, it ‘‘brings’’ each participant into the room by acknowledging any difficulties encountered getting there. Others may express feelings about the forthcoming coaching session. In early stages the check-in is likely to include expression of expectations participants have for peer coaching. Individual contributions may lead to the emergence of themes that can highlight the topics/issues for coaching sessions. The second purpose is to raise awareness of others and their situations. The sharing provides insight into the needs and goals of participants and makes explicit any emergent themes that may focus the attention for future peer coaching sessions. In the first session, the process of checking-in is followed by the joint development of a working agreement that will guide the processes and interactions among peers in all subsequent sessions.
A Working Agreement A working agreement is a structural element developed to provide a boundary for the holding environment, and establish shared guidelines for the coaching process. The first step in its development is for participants to reflect on their previous experiences in learning environments with others. In a large group of participants, in which smaller peer
Peer coaching coaching dyads, or triads may form, general principles can be discussed together so a shared understanding emerges among the whole group of appropriate behaviors. First, participants identify positive characteristics that they would wish to replicate. For example, ‘‘I was in a group that monitored the air time of participants — which I really appreciated, as I could attend to listening without thinking about fighting to have my say.’’ The comment may invite a response about respect for others and lead to further examples of courteous behavior that enhances relational competence. Conversely, the consideration of negative aspects of interpersonal learning also provides clues of issues to raise for discussion and agreement prior to commencement of peer coaching. A good example is that of confidentiality. A useful trigger question is, ‘‘What do you understand by confidentiality in relation to this group?’’ Discussion may focus on whether peers can discuss issues outside of the peer coaching session, or with another person. Advice giving is another example, revealed in comments such as ‘‘I didn’t think I could be an effective peer coach with Sam because her field is so different from mine, and I don’t understand it, let alone have any experience in it.’’ Peers who assume that giving advice is expected and helpful in the relationship, are often surprised to hear that an underlying premise of peer coaching is that the coach is there to support the growth and development of his or her partner by finding his or her own answer through systematic reflection. Posing questions to stimulate reflection and thought is much more empowering than giving advice. It can also be a relief to peers to understand that they do not need to have answers or come up with solutions. The quality of the discussion about differing perceptions of what constitutes PC or what behaviors hinder progress, promotes shared understanding and ownership of the guidelines. A discussion of several aspects of participants’ prior experiences may lead to a single point on the working agreement. For example, a dialog of several aspects such as being on time to meetings, giving undivided attention to one person at a time, etc. may be reduced to a single word such as ‘‘respect’’ — which holds deeper meaning for the participants than it would if established by pre-set guidelines provided by a facilitator. Fewer guidelines are preferable as the agreement is easier to use. The output is a working agreement that reflects the dialog rather than presents a list of rule-like behaviors. Once established, the agreement provides a benchmark that can be revisited in future sessions to address a process issue, or to check on the integrity of the process. It is a dynamic document and therefore benefits from revisiting and revising as the relationship develops to ensure its relevance. It is useful to ask (and answer) periodically, ‘‘How well are we tracking against our initial agreement?’’ to maintain the integrity of the process. In essence the agreement provides a boundary object that symbolizes participants’ commitment to psychological safety, an important underlying premise for peer coaching.
The Checkout Checking-out is a mirror process of the check-in. As a closing activity, peers share with their partner or group members an insight or a commitment to action that they will take from the session. If time is short, a one-word checkout effectively
125 provides a gauge of individuals’ feelings while collectively providing an overall sense of the group mood. The checkout is the final word and not an invitation for additional dialog or ongoing discussion. The formal closure that signals an end to the current session contributes to the safety of the holding environment.
Attitudes Make a Difference A positive mindset frames peer coaching as a supportive process that facilitates career and leadership development. Individual attitudes and positive approaches provide a positive intention to connect with their partner(s), which piques early motivation. Peers who come with such an attitude are more likely to assume responsibility for their own careers and engage in reflection upon their personal career goals to identify a personal learning agenda, goals to be shared and/or dilemmas to be explored and addressed. Attention to such individually focused activity ensures that peers are better prepared to identify a relevant and personally meaningful focus for coaching aligned with their particular direction. In turn, that focus increases the chances of a positive early experience. Furthermore, individual preparation and clarity reduces ambiguity in getting started, and promotes both reciprocity and mutuality, which are characteristics of high quality connections. Our research has shown that once peers recognized that ‘‘peer coaching contributed to their professional development’’ they were motivated to engage in future episodes at later points. The nature of the relationship between peers is critical to success — which suggests that the time put into building the relationship pays dividends. Establishing boundaries the purpose of the formal processes such as the checking in and out, and the working agreement described above enables peers to provide the assessment, challenge and support required to support the personal and professional development of peers. Effective peer coaches need to trust the safety of the process so they can engage in the process, assess and agree without colluding, challenge without destroying. These capabilities are integral aspects of being a ‘‘critical friend’’.
Becoming a Critical Friend Learning to attend to others is one of the skills that can be further developed as the relationship builds to frame expectations of coaching. Firstly, adequate and appropriate selfdisclosure sets the scene for trust building and risk taking. Modeling such behavior establishes the tone of the coaching sessions. Facilitated groups may benefit from modeling and leading by example, particularly to demonstrate timing, selecting examples of appropriate issues to bring to the dialog and the required depth of disclosure for effective relationship building. Critical friends speak less and listen more and engage in mutual reflection on their process. They pose thoughtful questions rather than give advice. They inquire together. Questions provoke new ideas from peer partners or surface unarticulated assumptions that may be blocking self-discovery. Engaging in dialog, described by Issacs as a ‘‘shared inquiry, a way of thinking and reflecting together,’’ rather
126 than the more natural conversation in which peers are likely to share equal amounts of air time, creates a focused dynamic of mutual learning within the relationship. The shift in focus can be challenging for both parties initially. Shared reflection builds the relationship and enhances peers’ selfawareness. One consequence is often a raised awareness of their role as a coach, which sharpens motivation to enhance relational skills to ensure greater coaching success. Reciprocal giving and receiving of feedback as a part of this shared reflection process may sharpen motivation to build relational skills for greater coaching success, and encourage action to address the challenge or opportunity of immediate concern.
Developing Authenticity Equally important is the value placed on encouraging peers to be authentic in the relationship. This means being willing to be open and honest about one’s goals, preferences, values and needs. Such disclosure may feel difficult at first, as it relies on a level of trust that often takes time to develop. Ironically, the process of genuine disclosure builds trust. We believe that it is essential for peers to create high quality connections characterized by mutuality, positive regard for one another, vitality, emotional carrying capacity (ability to accept and work with positive and negative affect), and flexibility. By making these attributes part of educational process and the working agreement, individuals can regularly assess the degree to which these are being realized. In describing the structure and processes foundational to effective peer coaching, there is an important caveat to mention. Our underlying assumption is that peers engage in the process with goodwill and positive intention. Furthermore, that the coaching process is aligned with a cultural context that values mutual learning. Implicit issues of power and hierarchy can undermine the necessary conditions of trust and openness for effective peer coaching such as trust, authenticity, and open communication.
STEP 2: CREATING SUCCESS Once the foundational structures and initial processes have been introduced and agreed upon participants are ready to practice, reflect, and hone their relational skills. We have observed a dual process occurring as peers prepare for a successful engagement: individuals are mindful of enhanced self-awareness and greater clarity regarding challenges and opportunities that they bring to the relationship for consideration; they are also ready to take the opportunity to draw on their relational skills to enhance the development of their peer. It is our experience that success comes from deepening the learning beyond the safe and surface disclosure often characteristic of a ‘‘getting to know you’’ conversation. Deeper engagement may require an explicit request for partners to take risks rather than playing safe for a superficial interaction. This means that the working agreement introduced initially as part of building the relationship must not only be used and reinforced, but trusted by the participants so that they are confident that they will not be judged, nor discounted, and that confidentiality within the relationships
P. Parker et al. will be maintained. Then, and only then, will each relationship function as a holding environment for peers’ individual learning and growth.
Understanding the Value of the Holding Environment Success requires that participants deepen their understanding of the functions of a holding environment, and also have the relational skills to create it. As Robert Kegan has noted, in order for individuals to deepen their learning about self, and about self in relation to others, they must experience confirmation, contradiction, and continuity. In practice, confirmation is experienced when positive feedback from a peer coach is heard, and in turn contributes to building selfesteem and self-confidence. A further example is evidenced when a peer encourages consideration of signature strengths in other contexts that can fruitfully be transferred to the current situation. When a peer coach asks his learning partner to articulate the competencies he has demonstrated in his current job so that he might consider how these would make him an attractive candidate for a position with greater responsibility, he is providing a supportive and safe environment in which his client peer is empowered to articulate his strengths and their transferability to other contexts. Contradiction is experienced when a peer challenges unarticulated assumptions about particular aspects of one’s story or current issue. For example, Tyler’s story related the unfairness of his boss’ behavior at work, when his boss gave Tyler’s colleague an assignment with considerable challenge and visibility that Tyler really wanted to be given. He made the assumption that his boss thought less of him, and was discounting his potential to handle this particular assignment. His peer coach asked, ‘‘What led you to believe that your boss thought that you couldn’t handle this particular assignment?’’ And, after Tyler responded by saying that he really had no concrete information to support this belief, his peer coach asked, ‘‘have you considered other reasons why he may have chosen to give the assignment to your colleague instead?’’ In reflecting on this question, Tyler realized that he assumed the negative (that his boss thought he was less capable than his colleague), when it was quite possible that his boss saw him as more capable and was saving Tyler for a more difficult project that would be announced very soon. As a result of challenging his unarticulated assumptions, Tyler made a decision to initiate a conversation with his boss in which he would express interest in taking on more challenging work. Another example of contradiction is shown in the following example from Raj, who described how he usually got what he wanted so long as he joked about with his boss and presented his case informally in the first instance. His peer coach’s questioning focused on confronting the pattern and challenging Raj to consider how well the joking behavior was serving him in the current situation. She asked Raj to consider, ‘‘What might be the unintended consequences of your jovial style?’’ And, ‘‘How might your approach undermine your credibility as a candidate for more senior roles in the organization?’’ She encouraged Raj to seek alternative explanations that might raise his awareness and broaden his perspective. By the end of this coaching dialog, Raj made
Peer coaching a commitment to his peer coach to experiment with a more professional approach when making proposals to his boss. He promised to report back to his peer coach on how he fared. Continuity is experienced when the peer coaching unfolds beyond the current episode. While PC can be effective in a single session, patterns may become evident over a series of sessions, which provide additional data for reflection and sense making. As peers gain assurance that psychological safety is maintained over time, both commit to further building the relationship and creating further success through their mutual commitment to appropriate next steps. In all of the above examples, follow up sessions held each peer accountable for their own intentions, as well as the opportunity to continue the reflection and personal learning that had been set in motion at the first meeting.
127 to the practical skills that enable them to build growthenhancing relationships with others. Confidence in essential relational skills — including empathy, giving and receiving feedback, self-disclosure, active listening — make it possible to look for other opportunities to engage in successful dialog in the future. Reflections on their early PC experience encourages participants to develop a relational frame, that is, an appreciation for the potential to enhance understanding of self and others in reciprocal learning processes. Momentum builds as participants hone their relational skills, and experience the self-esteem, zest, new skills and competencies, and mutual positive regard that characterize high quality relationships. With the working agreement ever present, and the encouragement to continue the dialog that has been created, alternating between each peer’s challenge or opportunity of interest, the learning deepens.
Deepening Understanding of the PC Process Shadow Side Alert Stepping back to reflect on the peer coaching process itself is a meta-skill or capability that develops with experience of the process. The distance and reflection-on-action promotes the ability to read the situation and recognize when a change of course is required or a different line of questioning would be more fruitful. Such reflexive learning enables each participant in the peer coaching relationship to maintain and reproduce the quality dialog, reciprocal respect and mutual learning that they have experienced. As this learning continues and the relationship develops, participants will move from conscious competence to unconscious competence and both parties develop the necessary self-awareness and relational skills. For example, a young manager, James, is wondering how to secure an overseas assignment with his company after several years at headquarters. He has not yet explored the reasons why this is his preference at this point in his life, nor the skills that he might bring to the assignment and the skills and competencies he might develop abroad. In addition, he has no idea how to go about paving the way with his manager and others who would be able to open doors to such an assignment. As his peer coach poses questions, this young manager begins to appreciate and articulate his own motivations, what he might bring to such an assignment, as well as what he might learn. He is also invited to imagine alternatives to an overseas posting that could be equally enriching, perhaps for different reasons. As the peer coaching conversation unfolds, James not only understands himself better, but he also begins to map out a strategy for engaging in further exploration with potential sponsors and mentors who could provide assistance. It is noteworthy that his peer coach, Sarah, has learned much about her own preferences and goals as she helps James by noting her own reactions to James’s story. Equally important is that her listening and feedback skills improve with practice.
Building Momentum Over Time We have noted that over time, peer coaching partners continue to experience a range of benefits from this developmental relationship. These range from insights about personal goals and aspirations, values, and career interests
Of course there is always the possibility that two individuals do not build a fruitful connection. When peers do not experience the positive energy that emerges from interpersonal emotional connections as a result of self-disclosure, active listening, and empathy, dissatisfaction and/or boredom may result. There are several reasons that this may occur. One is that the two individuals may have very different learning styles, personalities, and ways of communicating such that points of common interest and connection are not discovered. Or, one or both parties may lack the relational skills to move beyond introductory comments to meaningful dialog. One common example is found in a peer coaching relationship between an unaware extravert and an introvert. While the extravert may be very willing to share his or her experiences and thus readily jump into the peer coaching process, the introvert may want to take time to prepare his or her thoughts (sometimes in writing) before sharing ideas with a coach. The former may prematurely conclude that his/her partner is shy and unengaged, and the latter may experience the former as taking up too much space in the relationship. While there is no straightforward solution to this problem, we have found two possibilities. The first is that seeking and reflecting on feedback contributes to raising self -awareness. The second is that using a third party facilitator can provide the necessary psychological safety and pose diagnostic questions which make it possible for the pair to get unstuck, and to come to appreciate one another as partners in learning. Often, this problem arises from a lack of wisdom within the pair about how to deepen the dialog and/or how to learn from the differences between them. The facilitator, in filling this gap, changes the dynamic, enabling the pair to build the capability to become more engaged with each other.
STEP 3: INTERNALIZING THE SKILLS In the final step of our model of the peer coaching process, individuals have moved from different levels of awareness and skill, to a position of conscious (or even unconscious) competence. When individuals internalize competent relational skills and an ability to read the process they can readily engage in and model effective reflective learning with others. We have found that at this point in the process
128 individuals not only continue the current application, but also are more willing and motivated to engage in peer coaching in other settings. For example, when participants acquire and hone peercoaching skills and experience a range of positive outcomes within workshop settings, they are likely to transfer their capability to other professional contexts. For some, the result is that they will deepen existing relationships at work, moving from weak to strong ties, and thus shift from superficial to deep connections with coworkers. Others may be motivated to establish a broader range of new relationships characterized by weak ties that have potential for mutual learning. Furthermore, once PC skills and experience is internalized, individuals are more likely to shift from formal to informal interactions. In a recent example from a women’s leadership development program, participants were introduced to formal peer coaching and worked with one peer throughout. Subsequently, the trust and shared experience encouraged women from one workplace to connect with others informally, adopting the processes they had learned. Several of them reported how very successful they were, which encouraged them and provided further modeling within the company. Thus, this new capability enables individuals to manage their own development by engaging in growth enhancing relationships with others. An empowering outcome once these relational and process skills are internalized into their existing repertoire, is increased initiative to manage their leadership and career development. In so doing, they also model the value of peer coaching to others. Over time, this wider influence has the potential to benefit more people and in turn the culture of the work setting. The broader applications of peer coaching described above reveal a mindset shift that privileges the value of learning in relationship with others, over individual learning and achievement. Such collaborative mindsets enhance individuals’ capability to respond effectively in a VUCA environment. Thus, in the face of very challenging situations, individuals are more inclined to seek support that will enable adaptive responses to volatility, uncertainty, complexity and ambiguity.
CONCLUSION In sum, we have elaborated on our three-step model of peer coaching, to demonstrate the structure and processes necessary to effectively use this under-utilized developmental tool. Establishing the relationship is an essential pre-requisite so that an adequate holding environment is in place for meaningful learning to occur. The importance of taking adequate time to create the necessary conditions cannot be over-estimated. Once a peer coaching relationship is established, individuals are able to develop and hone the relational skills which are integral aspects of effective dialog that leads to deep learning in self and others. Greater awareness of the process of peer coaching requires the ability to metaphorically step outside of the relationship — which entails getting ‘‘up on the balcony’’ to observe oneself and one’s peer partner in the process of working together. The ability to reflect on the process and to monitor the
P. Parker et al. interactions as they unfold is a sophisticated skill that must be mastered if the potential of peer coaching is to be realized. For this reason, ongoing practice in a range of settings is desirable to develop and maintain the capability underpinning successful peer coaching. To internalize the mindset and capability of peer coaching means making regular use of it as an everyday relational resource. Peer coaching is a key item in one’s toolbox, and it takes time and focus to develop awareness and to embed it within one’s professional repertoire. A person has to learn that peer coaching can enable individuals to address core challenges inherent in both career and leadership development. In reconsidering the model in Fig. 1 of how the peer coaching process works, our experience has shown that it pays to be patient and take the time to make sure that each step is done well. The first step, building the relationship, is often glossed over in practice, as practitioners simply put people in pairs or say, ‘‘Work with the person next to you and work on this task.’’ The result is often pairings with two quite different and incompatible sets of challenges and resources. In preference, in these cases, a high quality relationship needs to be created between participants who are well suited to providing real help to each other. The time taken to engage in explicit psychological contracting will yield good rewards. Respecting the value of the structures and processes we have outlined, such as check-ins and checkouts in each working session, will similarly yield rich rewards. Maintaining self-awareness of the peer coaching unit (dyad or group) will aid the other two steps — creating success and internalizing the skills — and will pay dividends, as well. It is not enough for the pair to have frequent meetings with a good relational process. Those meetings have to have a clear task focus and lead to solid results and important successes. There has to be a strong goal orientation and a discipline to focus on making progress toward task achievements for both parties. As the two people get to know each other better, it is tempting to allow the relationship and meetings to become ends in themselves. However if this happens, without the reinforcing benefits of mutual success, the relationship moves away from PC, and eventually transforms into an explicitly social relationship, or it will end. The ultimate mark of success with peer coaching is for the process to become so internalized that it becomes a natural way of working and a way of being with others. When this internalization happens, giving and receiving peer coaching become part of the work identity of the participants, much like active listening, research, and communicating. When this step is reached, each person has achieved a new level of those two key leadership meta-competencies — self-awareness and a higher level of adaptability — that provide new ways of accessing and leveraging the resources of others. And thus, when the next ‘‘something’’ happens, the two peer coaches will have an advantage that was not available to Roseanne.
Peer coaching
129
SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY Kegan, R. (1994). In Over Our Heads. The Mental Demands of Modern Life. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. For more discussion of the helping processes involved in peer coaching, see the authors’ paper, P. Parker, D. T. Hall, and K. E. Kram, ‘‘Peer Coaching: A Relational Process for Accelerating Career Learning,’’ Academy of Management Learning and Education, 2008, 7(4), 487—503. This paper discusses the research that led to the three-step model of effective peer coaching that is used in the present paper. Very useful guides to the basic process of helping can be found in Carl Rogers, On Becoming a Person (New York: Houghton-Mifflin, 1995), particularly Chapter 3, ‘‘The Characteristics of a Helping Relationship.’’ Also, two recent books by Edgar Schein have extremely useful ideas on the specifics of coaching: Helping: How to Offer, Give, and Receive Help (San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler Publishers, 2011), and Humble Inquiry: the Gentle Art of Asking Instead of Telling (San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler Publishers, 2013). A useful collection of readings reflecting the current state of the art and practice on mentoring is provided in B. R. Ragins and K. E. Kram, The Handbook of Mentoring at Work: Theory, Research and Practice (Sage: Two Thousand Oaks, CA, 2007). A good description and discussion of the theory and research associated with developmental networks can be found in M. C. Higgins and K. E. Kram, ‘‘Reconceptualizing
Mentoring at Work: A Developmental Network Perspective,’’ Academy of Management Review, 2001, 26(2) 264—288. A more practical discussion of how proteges can make use of mentoring and other developmental relationships is presented in ‘‘Developmental Initiation and Developmental Networks’’ by M. C. Higgins, D. Chandler, and Kram, in B. R. Ragins and K. E. Kram, eds., Handbook of Mentoring at Work: Theory, Research and Practice (Thousand Oaks, Sage Publications, 2007) 349—372. There is a rich resource of writings on the role of helpful relationships in the Positive Organizational Scholarship (POS) literature. Useful examples are J. P. Stephens, E. Heaphy, and J. E. Dutton, ‘‘High Quality Connections,’’ in Gretchen Spreitzer and Kim Cameron, eds., Oxford Handbook of Positive Organizational Scholarship (NY, NY: Oxford University Press, 2012), and J. E. Dutton and E. Heaphy, ‘‘The Power of High Quality Connections,’’ in K. Cameron, J.E. Dutton, and R. E. Quinn, eds., Positive Organizational Scholarship: Foundations of a New Discipline (San Francisco, Berrett-Koehler, 2003), 263—278. See also Ragins, ‘‘Relational Menoring: A Positive Approach to Mentoring at Work,’’ Oxford Handbook of POS. And for those seeking more wisdom from our friend Gilda Radner, see G. Radner, It’s Always Something: Twentieth Anniversary Edition (New York: Simon & Schuster, 2009).
Polly Parker is an associate professor in leadership at the University of Queensland Business School. She has a background and life-long interest in teaching and adult learning, applied in both academic and corporate settings, which has informed her research and consulting. Polly received her Ph.D. from the University of Auckland. (The University of Queensland, UQ Business School, Queensland 4072, Australia. Tel.: +61 7 3346 8059; e-mail: [email protected]).
Kathy E. Kram is Shipley Professor in Management and a professor of organizational behavior in the School of Management at Boston University. Kathy received her Ph.D. from Yale University. Her primary interests are in the areas of adult development, mentoring, diversity issues in executive development, leadership, and organizational change processes. (Boston University School of Management, Boston, MA 02215, USA. Tel.: +1 617 353 4269; e-mail: [email protected]).
Douglas T. (Tim) Hall is the Morton H. and Charlotte Friedman Professor of Management in the School of Management at Boston University, and founding director for the Executive Development Roundtable. Hall received his Ph.D. from the Sloan School of Management at M.I.T. He has authored and co-authored several books and research articles on career theory, management, and leadership development. (Boston University School of Management, Boston, MA 02215, USA. Tel.: +1 617 353 4166; e-mail: [email protected]).