Executive Coaching and/or SME-ness
Over in the Q&A section of LinkedIn, Trisha asked,
The seemingly obvious answer is "of course" – and being more of a Subject Matter Expert (SME) than your coachee definitely *does* help ... if the goal is to stimulate a coachee's learning through the transfer information alone.
But if the goal is to stimulate a coachee's learning through his/her own discovery and realizations, then a coach's subject matter expertise is far less important than the coach's ability to stimulate and facilitate a deeper conversation with the coachee about his/her beliefs, assumptions, sticking points, strengths, and possible Next Steps.
That said, "Time is (ALWAYS) of the essence" in the business world. So, in my opinions, a coach that can use his/her “SME-ness” to help jumpstart a coachee's learning and discovery is likely to find his/her coachee demonstrating greater confidence, savvy, poise, interpersonal influence, organizational impact, and executive presence, etc., far more readily … providing sufficient room is maintained for the coachee to connect the dots and discover his/her own insights and answers.
In my opinion, though, the *ultimate* answer has less to do with any particular coach’s subject matter expertise, or coaching acumen, as it does with the coachee’s *readiness* to be coached. As such, it’s essential that the coach be able to establish and maintain a deep, meaningful, relationship with a coachee quickly and effectively so to sustain and leverage that readiness.
Regrettably, many SMEs simply have no clue how to do this.
---
Related: http://www.ggci.com/Articles/focus.htm
(Note: Several other LinkedIn responses to Trisha's questions have been posted in the comments section, as well.)
"Must a Coach have more expert knowledge than a Coachee?"Here's how I answered:
The seemingly obvious answer is "of course" – and being more of a Subject Matter Expert (SME) than your coachee definitely *does* help ... if the goal is to stimulate a coachee's learning through the transfer information alone.
But if the goal is to stimulate a coachee's learning through his/her own discovery and realizations, then a coach's subject matter expertise is far less important than the coach's ability to stimulate and facilitate a deeper conversation with the coachee about his/her beliefs, assumptions, sticking points, strengths, and possible Next Steps.
That said, "Time is (ALWAYS) of the essence" in the business world. So, in my opinions, a coach that can use his/her “SME-ness” to help jumpstart a coachee's learning and discovery is likely to find his/her coachee demonstrating greater confidence, savvy, poise, interpersonal influence, organizational impact, and executive presence, etc., far more readily … providing sufficient room is maintained for the coachee to connect the dots and discover his/her own insights and answers.
In my opinion, though, the *ultimate* answer has less to do with any particular coach’s subject matter expertise, or coaching acumen, as it does with the coachee’s *readiness* to be coached. As such, it’s essential that the coach be able to establish and maintain a deep, meaningful, relationship with a coachee quickly and effectively so to sustain and leverage that readiness.
Regrettably, many SMEs simply have no clue how to do this.
---
Related: http://www.ggci.com/Articles/focus.htm
(Note: Several other LinkedIn responses to Trisha's questions have been posted in the comments section, as well.)
Labels: mentoring, Success at Work
posted by Barry Zweibel at 8:24 AM
15 Comments:
Yes.
But the coach is also not a perfectionist. He gets to learn new things from his day to day activities.
I suppose it depends on the subject matter / skills, but gebnerally, I dont think this is necessary. One approach I like is that coaches / trainers are there to teach professionals to acquire new knowledge on their own, as a result of their own practice. The link below has some interesting references on that.
Despite the technical aspects of the question, maybe in the end it's a matter of style.
gb
Coaching can be a trained process to help people achieve positive change or goals.
I think if the coach also has an area of expertise (mine is careers for example) then this also helps you and the coachee get to the end result more effectively.
Not necessarily. I've coached plenty of managers who knew a lot more about their role and their team than I did. What I did is help them to ask themselves questions which would unlock that knowledge and make use of it to solve their problems.
A good coach doesn't give the coachee the answers - he/she helps them to find answers for themselves. This means the coach needn't have the answers, but must be good at generating questions and thinking around a problem.
Hope that helps.
Rachel.
Hi.
If you are speaking about the subject of the training sure he should have, or why he is the coach, but in general not necessary , maybe the coachee is a senior manager tracking a new knowledge “training program” from a coach at mid-level but specialized in this training...who has more expert knowledge here?
Regards,
Not necessarily. I've seen good success rates achieved by a coach who specialises in sports psychology and has no specific knowledge of the sport that the coachee is involved in. This is because the coach should be able to help the coachee with generic guidelines...such as what improvements do you want to achieve, how best to achieve them, what's holding you back, plus looking at goal setting, performance management, etc. etc.
I believe the coach should be an expert at coaching and facilitation. It helps if the coach knows some points about the coachee's role and industry, but its not required. That can be gained quickly through effective dialogue. The coach should use the appropriate coaching style based on the coachee's needs and level of expertise. Creative Interchange approach - Mentor, Facilitator, Manager, Instructor. These styles are listed in order, and can be used for coachees ranging from executive to inexperienced. Many times, the coach can blend the coaching styles for the best fit, particularly if the coachee is not on either end of the spectrum and happens to be in the middle range where the coach might use a combination of Manager/Facilitator styles. If the coaching experience is longer term, the coach may use all of the styles end to end in the process of helping the client progress forward.
Being a coach is not just about delivering the subject matter to the coached. It is also about how the subject is delivered and the relationship the coach has with his students. However, it is imperative that a coach has expertise on the topic he/she covers. This not only brings in credibility for the coach, but also gives the coachee confidence of being in the right hands.
The primary objective of a coach is to ensure the students have adequate subject knowledge be it in any field. The coached is only going to look upto the coach if he gets a sense of direction and answers to his queries from him and this will not come if the coach is not up-to-date with his knowledge. (Knowledge which is not only enough for the subject but also important to answer queries which his already very knowledgeable students have). As a coach it's important that you tell them how to find answers, rather than giving them one, but that is also at times difficult if you don’t know it yourself.
Since coaching is not just about giving technical knowledge, it is also important the coach has certain managerial skills which can help him put forward the subject in the way best suitable for the coachee.
I agree with Rachel M. The coach helps the coachee to find his own answers and solutions by asking the right questions.The coach must be an expert in the art of questionning and be a good listener in order to ask the right questions.
You have identified one of the key differences between coaching and consulting.
Answer: Coaching, No. Consulting, Yes.
I think they have different, but intersecting areas of expertise, and common goals.
It depends upon the coaching task. Do you want to learn content and specific craftsmenship or is the goal to coach process skills. If it is the former, that is, to pass detail, content, rules, and concrete skills, then the coach should be a model. If it is to teach process skills; like communication, social IQ, expression, empathy, rapport, then the coach must be be an excellent participant observer with the skills to give non-threatening feedback as well as model these subtle, but complex skills
doc A
A coach must be credible in some way.
An executive secretary can be an excellent coach because of direct access to the source of positional power or critical information.
In some cases yes. But in others cases a coach need not be an expert but must be able to support the learning of the person being coached. The primary skill of the coach is the ability to look at the concept being taught with openness, and willingness to explore the topic with the person. Both the coach and the person coached grow in this process.
Regards
Raghu
Success coachesgive motivational speeches that change life and would probably make good change to the state of mind.
Post a Comment
<< Home