Posts from December 2011

Don’t be a Pawn on a Board

By Dena Arstall (BC11)

Last month, I made the difficult decision not to apply for a senior board position in the racing industry. It was a position I had aspired to and for which I was qualified. Moreover, someone, who I hugely respected in the selection process, had suggested I put my name forward. What was stopping me send in an application at the very least? I decided to examine my motives in a broader context.

Recently, I attended a ‘Women in Racing’ meeting. The topic of women on boards had been addressed, along with the failure of the industry to recognise the skills a woman can bring to the boardroom. Perversely, many of the best conversations between women take place in the sanctuary of the Ladies’ cloakrooms and many truths are expressed in these unofficial meeting rooms. A few of the incumbents were discussing the event and seemed demotivated by the boardroom discussion.

“Why do senior women assume that all women want to be on flipping boards?” Cubicle 1 exclaimed

“I agree. I just came to share ideas and meet other women in the industry”, Cubicle 2 rejoined

“I am not here to fill quotas”,  articulated Cubicle 3 over the drone of the hand dryer.

I now had reason to consider these sentiments. What did I really want? It is a question that coaching clients often ask and needs careful unpicking.I decided, on reflection, I was trying to serve the racing industry. Taking this position might achieve this but was it suited to my skillset? I re-read the executive description and decided not. I also formed the impression that the role was neither creative nor expansive and might not exist in two years time. Was this what I was aspiring to?

I reminded myself what made me interested in applying in the first place. One answer is that I was flattered to be considered a potential candidate… not a basis for a decision. More important, perhaps, was the fact that I had been asked. This gave me a certain obligation to consider the role. This obligation was intensified by my knowledge that the Davies Report would put an onus on this employer to hire a woman candidate if possible. I realised i was fulfilling a gender obligation: namely as a suitable candidate I had a duty to apply. This disturbed me. My ambitions, unconsciously, were being gender motivated. I felt, I should apply despite having logical and instinctive reasons for not doing so. Indeed, I would have to stand off existing committees that were important to me and which satisfied my wish to help the industry I cherish. Increasingly, I am finding with coaching clients, there are current gender expectations of women that push them into accepting roles they are unsuited to and do not want. I was now experiencing this first hand.

To be authentic and get the most out of a role, you must genuinely want it. Do not accept it because of a feeling of obligation that will be articulated by the words,” I should do it”. I sit on racing committees and boards because of a genuine desire to make a difference in an industry I care about. That same desire gives me license to relinquish roles I am not suited to in any other way than being a women. To follow a blind pursuit of the boardroom, not only demeans my aspirations, but those of women in general. We can all become pawns on boards, but self awareness will ensure that we play at a higher level.

Share

The FT Guide to Business Coaching

By Professor Mary Watts (BC09)

Many months ago when Anne’s Scoular’s book `The FT Guide to Business Coaching’ was first published I read it, enjoyed it and wrote an excellent review of it that I’m ashamed to say I never posted on the Amazon site. Time went by, my guilt increased, but I kept returning to the book, re-reading and seeing new in what I had already read. Today, as I sit enjoying the scenery in a very southern part of France and reflect on a very dry coaching psychology article I have just read, my thoughts have turned again to Anne’s book. The magic ingredient of course, isn’t just that it’s easy to read, enjoyable, useful and a whole host of other things, but that it is authentic and REAL. It relates to real things, real life, it isn’t stuffy and it isn’t trying to be academic (although it is as skilfully written and debated as any text I know). It creates with the reader everything that a good coaching relationship should create. It communicates.

Thank you Anne

Share

It’s All in the Mind – Neuroscience & Coaching

by Liz Gooster (MC11)
 
Neuroscience. The word carries an air of the unfathomable, a whiff of science fiction. Yet scientists are making bounding advances in peeping into the windows of, if not our souls, our brains. Piquantly described by Dr Geoff Bird as a ‘sloppy bag of disgustingness’, the adult human brain weighs in at 1.4 kg and has the consistency of set yoghurt. The make-up of the brain is a mass of headspinning statistics: it consists of 80-100 billion neurons connected by 100 trillion synapses in a forest of mental pathways; has 1 trillion ‘support’ cells; and contains 176,000 km of myelin (the fatty white matter which coats some of the neurons in the brain and allows them to transmit information more quickly than uncoated neurons – making them the fast lanes of the mind).
 
These jaw-dropping facts and figures launched the annual Meyler Campbell  lecture for 2011, given by Dr Geoff Bird of Birkbeck College and the Institute of Cognitive Neuroscience UCL and entitled ‘Neuroscience & Organisational Coaching’. Throughout Dr Bird’s captivating presentation you could have heard the metaphorical pin drop in the packed auditorium as our poor bags of disgustingness struggled to absorb the insights from the frontiers of this incredibly fast-moving science. If the knowledge that we are gaining of how the brain functions is staggering, the implications and applications of this knowledge are even more so. Scientific intervention, through the administration of drugs or electro-magnetic currents, can modify the working of the brain. This can be heralded as a massive leap forward in the treatment of diseases like Parkinson’s, where brain modulation has been shown to reverse the negative effects in up to 40% of cases. 
 
But what of drugs that make people smarter? Drugs such as Ritalin, commonly prescribed for children suffering from attention deficit disorder, really can improve how people learn. Some research has indicated that up to one in five US students take drugs like Ritalin to maximise their learning capabilities. So if it’s scientifically possible to rev up our brainpower, is it right to do so? Given that coaching involves helping clients change their patterns of thought and behaviour to enable them to reach their goals, should we as coaches be recommending that our clients take drugs to allow them to enact and embed change more quickly? Should we be taking drugs to allow us to accelerate our own learning and to coach more effectively? Weighty questions indeed – and the ethical debate around such matters may be closer than we think.
 
For the moment, the current ‘breaking news’ of neuroscientific discoveries can deepen our understanding of how coaching relates to what goes on in our brains. Our front brain is our conscious mind, processing one thing at a time, relatively slowly. Unconscious, fast, automatic thinking occurs in our back brain. Using the unconscious mind through activities like eye contact, mirroring of body language and imitation of language raises the level of trust and social interaction between client and coach. For instance, eye contact has been proved to actually cause fluent, frequent speech – so it can help clients articulate their issues. The only problem is that thinking deliberately about such things means that the conscious mind has taken over, when the best way to harness the benefits is to surrender control to the unconscious brain. This may not be the metaphysically insoluble problem it appears, because recent experiments have revealed that the unconscious mind knows much earlier than the conscious mind what our intentions will be – sometimes up to 10 seconds sooner. So maybe it doesn’t matter what we ‘think’, as the unconscious is in the driving seat anyway?
 
Geoff outlined two different types of learning and developing new patterns of behaviour: habit-based and goal-directed learning. Habit-based learning occurs in the unconscious mind as a result of neurons repeatedly being activated together when a particular action occurs, strengthening the synaptic connections between them and eventually making the action a habit. This requires a lot of repetitions so habit-based learning takes a relatively long time to occur (around 3 months), but once we’ve got it, we can retrieve the learning quickly and are unlikely to forget it. The ability to ride a bike is the outcome of habit-based learning. In contrast, goal-based learning can occur very quickly but because it happens in the conscious mind, it’s slower to retrieve and is forgotten more quickly. When both attention and emotion are focused on a goal, the ‘routing’ of our neural networks changes on a millisecond-by-millisecond basis. This goal-based learning occurs in coaching with tools like the GROW model, which achieve fast results. For coaching to bring about long-term, ‘hard-coded’ change, we need to combine both habit-based and goal-directed learning, within and between coaching sessions.
 
The human brain is truly amazing, and, as Geoff pointed out ‘just ridiculously complex’. Despite this complexity – and I find the idea that our minds will always keep some secrets from us strangely comforting – recent progress in neuroscience means we have more understanding than ever before about what goes on in our heads. The application of the findings of pioneering neuroscientists like Geoff in helping us reach our potential are, well, quite mindblowing.
 
Originally published on www.lizgooster.com.
Share

A new focus for coaches

by Dr Gillian Hyde, PCL

Back in October 2010 Dr Gillian Hyde, a consultant psychologist and Director of PCL ran a fascinating Meyler Campbell Fishbowl, demonstrating the use of the Hogan Dark Side (HDS) in executive coaching. The following is a piece about Managing risk: the human factor developed from a piece of PCL’s research and featured in the Sunday Times.

Success and survival rely on identifying opportunities and potential threats that stem from the risk characteristics of both individuals and teams, and their influence on organisational culture. On November 1, at RSA House, Geoff Trickey from PCL presented ground breaking research into Risk Type illustrating effective alternative routes through these increasingly pressing challenges by linking individual psychology to risk behaviour. He was joined by ex accountant turned organisational psychologist and executive coach David Cooper.

PCL’s research report introduces the Risk-Type Compass and illustrates the differences in risk-type profile found between generations, between public and private sector employees, and between specific professions. The report also focuses on practical solutions for coaches, executives, managers, and individuals who need to get a grip on the risk issues faced by their organisation.

The presentation received excellent media coverage including a Sunday Times feature article, see link below.

Links
PCL’s research report: http://issuu.com/pclonline/docs/final_pcl_the_human_risk_report?mode=embed&layout=http%3A%2F%2Fskin.issuu.com%2Fv%2Fdark%2Flayout.xml&showFlipBtn=true
Sunday Times feature article: http://www.thesundaytimes.co.uk/sto/public/Appointments/article819471.ece

Share