Peer Coaching at Work: Principles and Practices [1 ed.] 9781503605060, 9780804797092

Citation preview

Peer Coaching at Work

This page intentionally left blank

Peer Coaching at Work Principles and Practices

Polly Parker, Douglas T. Hall, Kathy E. Kram, Ilene C. Wasserman

Stanford Business Books An Imprint of Stanford University Press  •  Stanford, California

Stanford University Press Stanford, California ©2018 by the Board of Trustees of the Leland Stanford Junior University. All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying and recording, or in any information storage or retrieval system without the prior written permission of Stanford University Press. Special discounts for bulk quantities of Stanford Business Books are available to corporations, professional associations, and other organizations. For details and discount information, contact the special sales department of Stanford University Press. Tel: (650) 725-0820, Fax: (650) 725-3457 Printed in the United States of America on acid-free, archival-quality paper Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Names: Parker, Polly, author. | Hall, Douglas T., 1940–author. | Kram, Kathy E., 1950–author. | Wasserman, Ilene C., author. Title: Peer coaching at work : principles and practices / Polly Parker, Douglas T. Hall, Kathy E. Kram, Ilene C. Wasserman. Description: Stanford, California : Stanford Business Books, an imprint of Stanford University Press, 2018. | Includes bibliographical references and index. Identifiers: LCCN 2017026655 | ISBN 9780804797092 (cloth : alk. paper) | ISBN 9781503605060 (epub) Subjects: LCSH: Employees—Coaching of. | Career development. | Personnel management. Classification: LCC HF5549.5.C53 P38 2018 | DDC 658.3/124—dc23 LC record available at https://lccn.loc.gov/2017026655 Typeset by Newgen in 11.75/16 Baskerville

We dedicate this book to Michael Powell, Marcy Crary, Peter Yeager, and Mark Taylor, who enriched our understanding and appreciation of mutual learning and peer coaching through their unwavering support and love.

This page intentionally left blank

Contents Preface and Acknowledgments

ix

Introduction 1 1. Learning in the VUCA Environment

9

2. Step 1: Build the Developmental Relationship

28

3. Step 2: Hone Relational Practices to Create Success

47

4. Step 3: Make Peer Coaching a Habit

65

5. Peer Coaching Groups

81

6. Peer Coaching for Deep Learning

103

7. Peer Coaching for Everyday Learning

129

8. Cautionary Tales in Peer Coaching

151

Conclusions and Going Forward

167

Notes 179 Index 191

This page intentionally left blank

Preface and Acknowledgments

We came to the creation of this book with a shared belief in the untapped potential that can be unleashed when people help each other learn. That belief fueled our interest in the deeper exploration of a process that can easily be taken for granted: peer coaching. As in all relationships, our similar interests and values provided the glue for our collaboration on peer coaching. At the same time, our differing perspectives enabled us to develop a new and complex understanding of this helping relationship. In our research, we discovered that to be most effective, learners engaging in peer coaching go through three important steps to truly solidify and integrate peer coaching into their learning practice. The purpose of this book is to present our 3-step model of peer coaching and to offer practical strategies and tactics that are relevant to individuals at every stage of life, from school age to working adults in early, middle, and late stages of their careers, and to organizations of all types. To illuminate the underlying theoretical perspectives, values, and personal biases that have shaped our work, we begin by briefly reviewing how the four of us became a collaborative team. In 1998 Tim Hall and Polly Parker met at a conference on careers. During this conference, they had the opportunity to work together as peer coaches to share and draw learnings from their personal career stories. The activity, led by Judi Marshall, was quick, involving five minutes to tell your story and two minutes to provide feedback to your partner (for a total of fifteen minutes). Polly and Tim were

x   Preface and Acknowledgments

amazed by how much they learned from each other in such a short time, and both were quite excited about their common interests. In retrospect, we are struck by the way our initial brief peer coaching experience led to an ongoing professional and social relationship. Following this initial meeting, Polly and Tim stayed in touch and began to introduce learning dyads in their MBA classrooms. It is here that the potential of peer coaching became quite evident. With Tim’s understanding of career theory and his own work on identity, career learning, and, most recently, the protean career, it became quite clear that mutual helping in dyadic relationships was an underutilized tool for task and personal learning. Meanwhile, down under (Australia), Polly brought her deep knowledge of coaching in international gymnastics, executive coaching, and telephone counseling, as well as her current work on career communities and career values, to her work with MBA students. The two stayed in touch, reporting on their classroom experiments, often at annual meetings of the Academy of Management. By 2005 Tim and Polly began collecting data in their MBA classrooms as they tried different ways to foster effective peer coaching. Before long, Tim saw the connection between their emerging work and Kathy Kram’s work on mentoring and relational learning. Tim and Kathy had already shared over twenty years of colleagueship and collaboration, and bringing the relational lens to this classroom work on peer coaching seemed like an excellent opportunity to deepen understanding of peer coaching and to explore Kathy’s interest in alternatives to hierarchical mentoring. During the next six years, this team of three collected data in their classrooms on the impact of peer coaching on students’ learning and their inclination to seek out opportunities for further learning in relationships with peers back at work. The results of our surveys surprised us. We had anticipated the positive outcomes of peer coaching, but we were much less aware of the potential downsides that some of our students experienced

Preface and Acknowledgments   xi

when they encountered unmet expectations, poor communication, or a lack of mutual commitment to learning through the relationship. We recognized at this point that peer coaching is more than “two people who help each other” (sometimes called “pair and share”). There were complexities in building successful learning partnerships that had to be managed proactively. We learned that it wasn’t just a matter of doing peer coaching in class, but rather a matter of doing peer coaching correctly. Thus, we began to document the necessary conditions for effective peer coaching to emerge in our classrooms. This led to an articulation of our 3-step model of peer coaching, in which expectations and ground rules are established in the first step and participants develop the relational skills and self-awareness to communicate effectively during the second step. In the third step of our model, participants are asked to practice their newfound understanding and skills related to peer coaching to other relationships back at work and elsewhere in their lives. We published three articles on the nature of peer coaching,1 the risks of peer coaching,2 and the untapped potential of peer coaching,3 and presented two conference papers that preceded the decision to consolidate our learning in this book. Shortly after Kathy joined Tim and Polly on their first peer coaching project, she met with Ilene Wasserman at the Academy of Management annual meeting. They had met a number of years earlier regarding mutual interests in the ways mentoring relationships are shaped by diversity. Early in their dialogue, they discovered many shared interests (including the fact that their children all attended the same university). Most relevant was that Ilene was ensconced in the world of practice as an OD practitioner and was pursuing scholarly work after completing her doctoral degree. Kathy, fully engaged in the academy as a tenured full professor, had kept her consulting work to a minimum for many years in order to be successful on the academic track. In getting to know Ilene, the

xii   Preface and Acknowledgments

two found that they could enrich their respective work on relational learning, diversity, and leadership development through their collaboration in research, writing, and consulting. Their partnership gave voice to Kathy’s practitioner interests in bringing relational learning to work settings and gave Ilene the opportunity to collaborate with Kathy as she was pursuing her scholarly interests. After publishing two studies on the challenges of the scholar-practitioner role and working together on a consulting project, they were enthusiastic about continuing to collaborate on other projects. Thus, the stage was set for the four of us to connect and to consolidate all that we have learned to date about peer coaching. We had our first face-to-face meeting in 2012 at the Academy of Management, where we began to explore our shared interests. Ilene brought new ideas to our group from the communications perspective in addition to her deep work on diversity and inclusion. Our first collaboration resulted in an article that highlighted how models grounded in relational theory add clarity to the process of peer coaching as a series of relational encounters.4 As we began to envision this book project, we realized the importance of examining peer coaching in a group context because many of the examples of peer coaching that we observed were occurring in small groups as part of leadership development programs or standalone employee resource groups in corporations, health care, and educational contexts. Since we began working on this book, we have affirmed our shared theoretical grounding in mentoring, developmental theory, relational theory, human development, and positive organizational scholarship. We draw on scholarly work in these arenas to deepen our understanding of what we have experienced, observed, and created in our work with individuals and organizations. Thus, you will see references to fellow scholars including Ed Schein, Bob Kegan, Lisa Lahey, Jennifer Garvey Berger, Ken Gergen, Dan Levinson, Barnett Pearce, Jane Dutton, Belle Ragins, Sheila

Preface and Acknowledgments   xiii

McNamee, Monica Higgins, Michael Arthur, and Urie Bronfenbrenner. This list is representative, rather than exhaustive, of those who have influenced our thinking and our work. We attribute our collective learning about peer coaching to the quality of peer coaching relationships that we developed with one another. We have each benefited from the mutual respect, deep listening, and encouragement, and the combination of challenge and support that we gave to one another since first beginning our work together. Regular reflection on our own process as a collaborative team furthered our understanding of the necessary conditions for both task and personal learning to occur in peer coaching relationships. This project has been a true peer coaching and learning process for all of us, and as we encountered and managed our own relational challenges along the way, we refined the model presented in this book. Over time we have come to realize that some people see peer coaching everywhere and that others don’t recognize it even when it is happening right before them. Thus, we see a critical need to “name it and frame it.” Our primary aim is to enable individuals, HR/OD practitioners, and organizations to see opportunities to foster peer coaching and then to take the necessary actions to bring this resource to life. We have drawn on our collective experiences in health care, education, the private sector, and the public sector to ensure that you can apply the practices we are advocating in a variety of settings. We invite you to apply the models and tools illustrated in the following pages to discover the great potential of effective peer coaching for you and for those you serve. Many individuals and organizations have contributed to our deep understanding of peer coaching and the necessary conditions for realizing its potential as a developmental tool. Though we cannot possibly mention them all, we want to call attention to those closest to this effort. First, we thank our editor, Margo Beth Fleming, who has encouraged and supported us throughout our journey

xiv   Preface and Acknowledgments

with this book. We also want to sincerely thank various scholars who have influenced our thinking about developmental relationships and engaged with us in our efforts to define strategies to foster relational learning at work: Dawn Chandland, Rick Cotton, Jane Dutton, Elana Feldman, Emily Heaphy, Belle Ragins, Monica Higgins, Bill Kahn, Yan Shen, Wendy Murphy, Andy Fleming, and Jeffrey Yip. In addition, we are most grateful for the many students (at Boston University Questrom School of Business, the University of Queensland Business School, and the Wharton School) and the many clients who made it possible for us to try out and refine our ideas about what makes peer coaching work. Thanks, also, to the organizations that through innovative practices have modeled effective peer coaching in their leading-edge efforts to foster employee development. Finally, we acknowledge and appreciate our many colleagues and friends who provide great support and continue to be critical sounding boards as we developed the principles and practices that led to the articulation of our 3-step Peer Coaching model. In particular, we extend our thanks to Teresa Amabile, Lotte Bailyn, Lloyd Baird, Stacy Blake-Beard, Richard Boyatzis, Elayne Brigham, Bernardo Ferdman, Placida Gallegos, Andrew Griffiths, Bill Hodgetts, Lisa Prior, Ellen Van Oosten, Carol Yamartino, and Iain Watson. From all of the friends and colleagues that we have mentioned in these pages, not only have we acquired much wisdom about the theory and practice of peer coaching, but we have been blessed to be on the receiving end of huge amounts of this powerful learning process as well. Polly Parker Tim Hall Kathy Kram Ilene Wasserman

Peer Coaching at Work

This page intentionally left blank

Introduction

Each year, a wide range of learners engage in a peer based program that supports school students in the greater Boston area to boost their academic learning outcomes. Breakthrough Greater Boston’s successful program inspires students from diverse backgrounds to learn more through building strong cross-­generational learning relationships. Many subsequently aspire to be America’s future educators. Peers act mutually as learners and teachers, connected by core values that build a robust community environment. Peer coaching processes are central to the success stories ­embodied

in the Breakthrough Greater Boston not-for-profit organization.1 These relationships are essential to the well-being, learning, growth, and success that students from traditionally underrepresented communities experience. Success of the program extends well beyond school graduation, with 95 percent of these peer learners progressing to study at college. The value and attention paid to collaborative peer relationships has been increasing in both scholarly and practitioner circles. Whether in not-for-profit entities such as Breakthrough Greater Boston, in learning circles to support CEO development, or in health care, business, or government sectors, people are forming collaborative relationships to support

2  Introduction

their personal and professional development, and in turn promote organizational learning and change more effectively. Scholars are observing these relationships in action and developing a body of knowledge now referred to as relational learning.2 Relational learning occurs in many familiar contexts, such as teacher-student relationships; leading transformational change in organizations; collegial relationships; a range of business relationships including those with direct reports, peers, and supervisors; mentoring; and developmental networks. This growing body of knowledge about how to build and sustain relationships that foster learning underpins peer coaching. This book is about the principles and practices of peer coaching, a unique type of relational learning. We define peer coaching as a focused relationship between individuals of equal status who support each other’s personal and professional development goals. Peer coaching is a helping relationship between individuals at similar life or career stages to accomplish specific tasks or achieve developmental goals. Helping is an attitude that indicates a readiness on the part of each peer to explore issues in depth in a safe environment. The term helping does not refer to being an expert or knowing the solution, but to a process model, a dynamic. It refers to an inquiring mind that promotes questions, which in turn lead one’s peer partner to develop insight. The primary purpose of peer coaching is to promote goal-directed mutual learning with clear boundaries. The process is most effective when participants are intentional and share a desire to provide and experience reciprocal support. Together peers strive to establish high-quality relationships characterized by trust and open communication. Rather than an expert/learner model, the peer coaching process creates an alliance between the partners so that both can continuously learn more quickly and efficiently. In practice, this involves sharing a vision for the relationship that involves supportive learning, active listening, and challenging each other. In es-

Introduction  3

sence, peers move from individual learning to relational learning, a change in focus from “you and me” to “we.” Both individuals and their organizations’ benefit. Let us begin with our 3-step Peer Coaching model:

STEP 1: BUILDING THE RELATIONSHIP: CREATING A POSITIVE HOLDING ENVIRONMENT    

Mutual, compatible selection Check-in Working agreement Critical friend

PURPOSE Goal-directed mutual learning with clear boundaries

STEP 3: MAKING PEER COACHING A HABIT    

Transference to other contexts Deepening connections Mutual learning Relational mindset

STEP 2: CREATING SUCCESS    

Building self-awareness Developing relational skills Reflecting on process Social skills

ORGANIZATIONAL CONTEXT   

Developmental culture Leaders who model the way Resources and rewards for relational learning

Figure I.1  The 3-Step Peer Coaching Model Source: Adapted from Parker et al., 2014, “Peer Coaching: An Untapped Resource for Development,” Organizational Dynamics (2014) 43, 122–129. Reprinted with permission.

Our model, first presented by Polly Parker, Tim Hall, and Kathy Kram in their article “Peer Coaching: A Relational Process for Accelerating Career Learning,” draws on our own practice and research, both of which are informed by theory and research on developmental relationships, developmental theory, helping relationships, and communication and relational perspectives. We will

4  Introduction

elaborate on our model to deepen its meaning and application and make it widely available to both scholars and practitioners. Our work builds on classic writings from Carl Rogers, Edgar Schein, and Kenneth Gergen and includes more recent work by these and other authors.3 Our purpose in writing the book is to highlight peer coaching as an effective, low-cost, and underutilized learning process that is available in abundance in most learning situations. We will define and discuss what peer coaching is and is not. We will provide a framework and guidelines for the effective use of peer coaching in work and educational settings. Our 3-step Peer Coaching model highlights the importance of relational influences and embeds them in the learning process. To harness the potential of peer coaching, individuals must move progressively through steps that create a strong foundation, adopt a relational mind-set that values mutual learning opportunities, practice the skills that promote learning, and develop the habit of regular application. The 3-step Peer Coaching model provides the actions to move peer coaches toward a deeper understanding of how learning occurs and how personal confidence and capability grow. The activities of Step 1 focus on building a safe environment in which peers will be able to reflect on their experiences, increase their self-awareness, and practice skills that enable continuous learning in the relationship. These activities build a holding environment that ensures safety, confirms each individual, and integrates challenge into the learning process.4 In Step 2 the behaviors focus on building success by applying and enhancing relational skills that boost personal and professional learning. These skills include critical reflection and social and emotional competencies that foster inquiry, experimentation, and practice.5 We introduce a relational communication approach to enhance interpersonal interactions in easy-to-use steps that can

Introduction  5

produce superior outcomes. Derived from the theory of coordinated management of meaning (CMM), these approaches describe how peers’ interpersonal interactions create meaning and learning as an ongoing and continuous process.6 Having honed their newly acquired reflection and relational skills, peer coaches often seek to apply them in a range of contexts. In Step 3, peer coaches realize the potential of peer coaching after learning from their own experience of establishing learning relationships and extend relational skills to other relationships. Peer coaching is a habit when it becomes part of everyday practice. In Chapter 1 of this book, we introduce peer coaching and the organizational or societal demands that make this relational learning process essential. In Chapters 2, 3, and 4, we present and discuss the fundamental practices of peer coaching, taking you through the 3-step Peer Coaching model in detail. Finally, in Chapters 5 through 8, we apply peer coaching in groups to inspire deep learning and to engage in everyday work life while minimizing the inherent risks. In Chapter 1, we introduce readers to the VUCA environment in which all work now takes place and work relationships exist; a world that is volatile, uncertain, complex, and ambiguous.7 In this increasingly complex and demanding environment, individuals are better equipped to cope and succeed when they develop vision, understanding, clarity, and agility as personal qualities. Continuous learning and development are essential to survival, effectiveness, and adaptation in most contemporary work contexts.8 Developmental relationships foster learning and provide effective ways to address these increasing demands. Peer coaching, in particular, enhances individuals’ learning and development while supporting similar growth for their peer partner. Learning to respond positively to uncertainty is easier when peers work together to seek understanding through reflection and clarifying possibilities rather than relying solely on their own personal experiences.

6  Introduction

In chapter 2, we shift our focus to Step 1 of our model—­ building the relationship—and emphasize the essential foundations that build effective peer coaching relationships.9 Characteristics including trust, empathy, mutuality, and reciprocity help establish and build an enduring peer coaching relationship.10 Several models from CMM theory illustrate how peer coaches develop meaning and learning from their joint actions within the relationship.11 Applying the models enhances their relational competence. Chapter 3 discusses Step 2 of our model—creating ­success—in which participants apply and develop skills that build self-awareness through self-disclosure and feedback, facilitate critical reflection, and together deepen confidence and competence in developing the peer coaching relationship. In practicing these newly acquired relational skills and actively applying CMM tools, participants can develop increasingly complex relational communication and coaching skills including self-regulation, deep listening, building empathy, and giving and receiving feedback. Finally, in Chapter 4, Step 3 of our model—making peer coaching a habit—positions peer coaching as routine intentional practice in which peers apply relational coaching and reflective skills to other settings and collaborations. Peer coaches consider existing relationships at work and beyond the work context for further opportunities to use newly acquired and honed skills to enhance relational quality. They are also encouraged to initiate new relationships as they deepen understanding of their personal learning and development goals and the relational skills that they can offer to others. When peer coaching becomes a habit, the skills are internalized and transferable to other contexts. Given the persistent high learning demands in a VUCA environment, peer coaching is essential to improving performance and enhancing well-being for as many people as possible. In the final chapters we apply our Peer Coaching model to increasingly common situations. For example, in Chapter 5 we dis-

Introduction  7

cuss learning groups among peers, which proliferate in many forms today and include mentoring circles, employee resource groups, leadership learning groups, and industry-based learning circles. Peer learning in group settings allows members to benefit from the multiple perspectives of others with similarly vested interests. However, group dynamics are more complex than in a dyad and require participants to adapt each step of the Peer Coaching model to the group context. We examine the added complexities of peer coaching groups and discuss ways to leverage the mutual learning potential of these contexts. In Chapter 6, we examine deep learning as an important potential benefit of relational learning. Differentiated from task learning, a deep learning process increases understanding about the self and prompts examining one’s existing mental models, attitudes, and patterns of behavior and their consequences.12 Outcomes of deep learning may be personally transformative in ways that enable an individual to have greater impact and experience in the world. We delineate the types of change that can occur and offer guidelines for how the reader can create conditions for deep learning in almost any context. In Chapter 7, we discuss our vision of peer coaching as an everyday practice so that regular applications contribute to a culture of learning, development, and growth. Such an outcome is important to both organizations and individuals. We outline specific suggestions that workers, managers, leaders, and organizational development and human resource professionals can implement to support a learning culture for individuals, groups, teams, and the overall organization. You can benefit from or foster opportunities for peer coaching in any organizational position by enlisting help from others, offering help to another, and being willing to provide support more broadly. Increasing the number of proactive individuals to reach a critical mass can change workplace culture.

8  Introduction

Finally, while peer coaching can be extremely beneficial to individuals and organizations, the process can break down and result in negative outcomes that undermine both individual well-being and organizational effectiveness. In Chapter 8 we offer some cautionary tales and explore them to raise your awareness of potential disruptions. Once aware, you can treat these cautions as a pivot point. We suggest strategies you can use to shift an undesirable pattern in the relationship or disengage from it altogether. This book is written to provide you with the tools to develop successful peer coaching programs in your own life or workplace and to identify potential stumbling blocks as you become more comfortable with the steps in our approach. Each chapter offers practical suggestions for how to implement aspects of our model. Enjoy!

Chapter 1

Learning in the VUCA Environment

on the information presented and discussed in the Introduction by examining the proximal and distal contexts in which peer coaching takes place and how peer coaching relationships are both embedded in and shaped by these environments. We examine peer coaching as a relatively new and low-cost resource to address the lifelong learning needs of individuals and organizations. Peer coaching is a powerful tool with remarkable properties: high impact, just-in-time, self-renewing, low cost, and easily learned. The U.S. Army and others describe the environment in which all work takes place and work relationships exist as a VUCA environment (see Figure 1.1). We all work in a turbulent world that is volatile, uncertain, complex, and ambiguous. Thomas Friedman describes the rate of change in this environment as “dizzying acceleration.”1 Consequently, there is an ever-increasing demand on individuals to grow continuously and pressure on organizations to adapt successfully. But wait, the situation is even worse than Friedman’s description would suggest. Robert Kegan and Lisa Lahey argue that we are losing the battle to adapt to VUCA: This chapter builds

10  Chapter 1

Elements of the VUCA environment

Peer relationships in diverse environments

Peer Coaching

Work

High Performance

Figure 1.1  Peer Coaching in the VUCA Environment

In . . . the VUCA world—a world of new challenges and opportunities—organizations naturally need to expect more, and not less, of themselves and the people who work for them. But our familiar organizational design fails to match that need. [The result is that] . . . in an ordinary organization, most people are doing a second job no one is paying them for. [M]ost people are spending time and energy covering up their weaknesses, managing other people’s impressions of them, sowing themselves to their best advantage, playing politics, hiding their inadequacies, hiding their uncertainties, hiding their limitations. Hiding.2

So, as Kegan and Lahey point out, not only are we losing the adaptability battle, we are also wasting precious resources in the process. Organizations are paying a full-time wage for people who are essentially working part time at their real job (while the rest of their time is wasted covering up their limitations), and employees are burning out at the same dizzying rate as the acceleration of change. This failure of organizations and individuals to learn on the job represents a highly inefficient work process.

Learning in the VUCA Environment   11

So, what is to be done? Friedman concludes that nations and individuals must develop the capacity to be fast (innovative and adaptable), fair (ready to help others who suffer in this environment), and slow (seizing everyday opportunities to shut out the noise, be mindful, and get in touch with their deepest values). Friedman provides a personal example of how relational influences can aid learning (unintentionally, in this case!). He meets routinely with various policy and thought leaders in Washington, D.C., for breakfast as part of his own strategy for learning. (This practice provides the dual advantages of helping him learn and avoiding eating alone.) Given the vagaries of rush-hour transportation in the busy U.S. capital, his sources are sometimes late. One time when his guest apologized for this, Friedman became aware of how useful that unexpected free time had been for his own personal reflection and he responded, “Oh, no apology necessary. Thank you for being late!”3 (And, voilà, there was the genesis of his latest book!) Learning relationships, especially when the other party is intentionally trying to help, can be an important means of developing the fast, fair, and slow capabilities required to deal with this dizzying acceleration. This is where peer coaching comes to bear. Robert Johansen agrees that surviving and thriving in this chaotic environment calls for fast and continuous learning.4 Individuals, teams, and organizations need to develop positive VUCA responses to the malevolent VUCA qualities in the accelerating environment. They need to have vision, understanding, clarity, and agility. Relationships are crucial for developing each of these adaptive qualities. Peer coaching can support people in developing the capacity to strengthen all four adaptive VUCA qualities. Let us consider each of these in turn. First, consider volatility. The adaptive response to volatility, vision, at its best, is a collaborative activity. As more people try to make sense of a complex environment, as more eyes look at it, the likelihood that the collective will perceive things accurately

12  Chapter 1

i­ncreases. Furthermore, engaging with volatility requires staying centered and being guided by personal vision, principles, and practices. The necessary learning in this VUCA environment requires the capacity to create personal vision that aligns with a greater purpose, clarity, understanding implications of macro/micro changes, and agility. The turbulence associated with volatility can disrupt one’s sense of direction and create a sense of imbalance. Peer coaches can support each other in staying oriented by helping the other person fully take in what might be causing disorientation, thus helping clarify and strengthen their peer’s center. In addition, creating a personal vision aligned with a greater purpose means that two visions are in play. One is the vision of what the environment of the future will be both inside and outside the organization: the external vision. The other is the individual’s personal vision of his or her own individual future: the internal vision. Aligning both the internal and the external vision is important, and a peer coach can be extremely helpful as a person thinks through how best to create this personal alignment. Understanding is the personal quality that provides an antidote for the uncertainty in VUCA, which entails making meaning out of many and diverse signals. This requires integrating numerous complex data points. Many heads improve the quality of the understanding by helping to discern patterns in complex inputs, see trends over time, and separate signal from noise. The parable of the blind people and the elephant comes to mind here. It takes time for six separate people to figure out that all of the different shapes—the hoselike trunk, the flat floppy ear, and the bristly hair—are all part of the same animal. Through raising effective questions about what each is experiencing, deep active listening, and combining separate inputs to brainstorm answers, the blind people can gradually converge on a more informed and accurate conclusion about what they have encountered. They gain clarity.

Learning in the VUCA Environment   13

The adaptive response for ambiguity, agility, for teams and organizations requires many entities to coordinate actions. The better the communication among these entities, the more agile will be the response. Learning to cope with uncertainty is easier when peers seek understanding by reflecting together and clarifying possibilities and options rather than by relying on one person’s experiences. Because there is a necessary trial-and-error aspect in trying out different responses and learning through experience, some responses will be wrong. In peer coaching, the coach can provide psychological safety and support while helping boost the person’s confidence to “hang in there” and keep trying. Getting help from others can be a quick and easy way to expand one’s repertoire for responding to new challenges.

Learning as a Lifelong Process One of the challenges that managers face is how to promote learning, growth, and development for themselves and others. Life span issues of adulthood mean that career learning has moved from a one-off education activity to an ongoing lifelong process that underpins a range of career education issues including preparing for the world of work, transitioning to a job, perhaps losing work, and adjusting to changed circumstances.5 Learning and work have traditionally not been well linked. Kegan and Lahey point out that learning and development activities at work are typically seen as “something extra—something beyond and outside the normal flow of work, an approach that raises the vexing problems of transfer and cost.”6 Now, they must integrate into a continuously supportive process so that people can learn in their everyday work the knowledge, values, skills, and understanding they will require throughout their lifetimes. Oral and written communication skills, motivating and managing others, and leadership skills contribute to improving workplace situations.7

14  Chapter 1

A key feature of lifelong learning activities, such as peer coaching, is to ensure that they are self-initiated and independently conducted. When someone is trying to make sense of a newly assigned project task, it is unlikely that a person in a position of power will say, “OK, now get together with a partner and work together as peer coaches to help each other solve this problem.” The two individuals will need to know what peer coaching is, know how to do it well, and be willing to initiate a peer coaching relationship. They also need to be able to increase their skills in peer coaching and “learn how to learn.” Indeed, learning ability is a key career competency in the contemporary business environment. Such skill development is inherent in professional and career education today, and degree programs are frequently seen as the foundation for acquiring and developing these skills. An increasing number of workers are returning to tertiary institutions at various stages of their lives to address dramatic changes in work roles.8 However, reviews of management education have been critical of business schools’ lack of responsiveness to employers’ needs and desires.9 The current attention that accreditation bodies pay to demonstrated links between the learning process and outcomes as measures of quality (e.g., AACSB and EQUIS) underscores renewed emphasis on the process of learning, rather than content knowledge. In the last decade, both scholars and practitioners have acknowledged that mentoring and other developmental relationships are essential to helping individuals strengthen their ability to learn at a pace and breadth that is required in today’s workplaces.10 These developmental relationships exist in a variety of forms, both inside and outside organizations,11 and are well documented as a key to successful learning in careers.12 The most well recognized is the traditional mentoring relationship in which a more experienced colleague supports a younger person through assignment alloca-

Learning in the VUCA Environment   15

tion, feedback, and sponsorship.13 Positive career outcomes and psychosocial support emerge in the process. While traditional mentoring continues to be an enduring learning process,14 confusion arises from the plethora of terms used to describe developmental relationships and the lack of clarity associated with them.15 Mentoring and coaching are the most widely recognized terms, and organizations use both forms frequently. These labels are sometimes used interchangeably and, although some argue that they denote the same thing, the meanings can be easily confused.16 In addition, many more forms of developmental constructs are identified by other names. Regardless of the terminology, the resource constraints of contemporary organizations include relational limitations. Therefore, fewer senior managers are able to act as mentors.17 And even those senior managers who are willing and able to act as mentors may not always be relevant sources of learning to younger employees since the experiences of these seniors took place in a world that is quite different from today. What is the upshot of all of these forces? There is an extremely high need for emotional and informational support for all workers as they strive for continuous learning to maintain their career adaptability and other key capabilities. This need is largely unmet, but one answer could be the increased use of assistance from peers through peer coaching. Thus, the process of peer coaching represents a new application of a developmental interaction that focuses specifically on accelerating career learning. Peer coaching builds on the fundamental premise of a helping relationship with the intent of promoting the other person’s growth, development, maturity, functioning, and coping with life.18 Whereas helping relationships have often been relegated to therapy, the lexicon of organizations and careers has broadened to include a wider scope of “helping” possibilities. Peer coaching is an example of this expansion.

16  Chapter 1

Embedding Peer Coaching in the VUCA Environment The VUCA environment demands peer coaching, as it is one of the best ways to adapt to the incredible demands of VUCA. In this book we demonstrate that peer coaching supports the development of the four adaptive responses of vision, understanding, clarity, and agility. VUCA highlights the potential for peer coaching in two ways. First, the environment moves so quickly (volatility) that the ability to adapt and solve problems quickly is indispensable; peer coaching, accessing others, is one of the fastest ways to learn and is much faster than figuring it out by yourself. Second, VUCA stimulates peer coaching through the sheer complexity and variety of demands and cues. This produces information overload for any one individual, and it takes more than one brain to process the information effectively. The VUCA environment contains the necessary ingredients for effective peer coaching in the contemporary business environment, as many people’s work comes equipped with necessary resources. These come in the form of people with whom you come into contact, such as customers, competitors, colleagues, bosses, subordinates, and family members. These people bring you challenging problems, opportunities to be seized, complaints, feedback, suggestions, and other varied stimuli. In addition, the people you encounter in many cases have more experience and more formal education or training. They may have experience in different disciplines, industries, sectors, or products and other various strengths. Since much of our learning comes through the complexity of multiple interactions with other people, the VUCA environment holds rich learning potential.

Case in Point: Breakthrough Greater Boston Consider the case of Breakthrough Greater Boston as an illustration of how to embed peer coaching in the complex everyday

Learning in the VUCA Environment   17

VUCA environment. Breakthrough Greater Boston is an educational nonprofit organization that serves a wide range of learners from elementary school through high school into college, and even beyond. Breakthrough’s website (www.breakthroughgreaterboston. org) describes its mission and purpose as follows: Learn. Teach. Inspire. Breakthrough Greater Boston (BTGB) is transforming urban education for students and teachers. Through six years of intensive, tuition-free, out of school time programming, Breakthrough changes students’ academic trajectories and supports them along the path to four-year college. Simultaneously, BTGB builds the next generation of teachers through competitive recruitment, research-based training, and coaching from master teachers. At BTGB, students and teachers are closing the achievement gap one breakthrough at a time.

More specifically, the organization builds strong cross-­ generational relational bonds that start when a student enrolls in the Middle School Program, which serves traditionally underserved and diverse urban communities. Programs are offered after school and during the summer vacation. Teachers and staff members also provide advocacy services in the public schools for their students. College and high school students in the Breakthrough program act as coaches for middle school students. Thus, the model, which BTGB calls “students teaching students,” is that each age group gives and receives peer coaching from students who are in different stages of their educational experiences. College students can serve as teachers in the summer programs, and many college graduates who are Breakthrough alumni come back to work as full-time teachers. The success rates for Breakthrough are phenomenal. The high school graduation rate is 98 percent, and the graduation rate for Breakthrough students who go on to college is over 95 percent.

18  Chapter 1

Much of the current curriculum is oriented toward STEAM fields, and the program has strong partnerships with local universities, such as Tufts and MIT. The faculty’s focus is on experiential discovery learning; students select their own projects and are encouraged to work in teams and to exercise maximum creativity. Observers describe the atmosphere as high-energy and fun—and often wacky!

How VUCA Environments Shape Peer Coaching Peer coaching is both embedded in and shaped by VUCA environments. For example, many work assignments demand peer coaching as major learning facilitators. You may receive an assignment to work on as part of a team of peers, with or without a designated leader, with the expectation that you will work collaboratively to generate the final product. You will be expected to help one another figure out what to do and how to do it. You will be evaluated as a team, both on the final product and on how you worked together as a team. Because organizations are increasingly recognizing peer coaching as important, your organization may offer training in peer coaching to help you learn how to learn. This training may be part of a more general program to help people better understand positive relationships at work, how to be a good mentor and protégé (including reverse mentoring, in which the less experienced member of a mentoring relationship teaches the more experienced member in certain areas, such as social media or other technology topics). In these domains, the junior member is more likely to be a “native” and the senior member a newcomer. Peer coaching is often framed as a generic form of helping that can kick in at any time in a helping relationship. The sheer rate of change (volatility) in the VUCA environment is another factor that drives peer coaching. Because we are thrust into new and challenging experiences with such great frequency,

Learning in the VUCA Environment   19

we often have no choice but to ask for help. As we know from the work of the Center for Creative Leadership, accessing others is a major, and natural, strategy that humans use to learn and to cope with novel experiences. Many people do this instinctively; others learn to reach out for help as an adaptive learning tactic. In similar ways, the stresses of the other VUCA elements (uncertainty, complexity, and ambiguity) also stimulate some people to seek help intuitively from their peers. For example, in learning to deal with uncertainty, the process of sensemaking is a social psychological process19 that requires interactions with others to find meaning. Gaining clarity in the midst of complexity requires testing and validating one’s perceptions and explanations for phenomena with others. Ambiguity often drives experimentation with different courses of action to test one’s understanding; this is often done best by consulting and brainstorming with trusted others to discover the most promising solution.

Improving your Peer Coaching Skills in the VUCA World Bob Johansen, whom we introduced earlier, was the first president and now Distinguished Fellow with the Institute for the Future and probably has written more and knows more about the VUCA world than anyone else. He has provided coaching to organizations including Procter & Gamble, Tesco, UPS, Disney, and United Cerebral Palsy, and has written seven books, including Get There Early and Leaders Make the Future: Ten New Leadership Skills for an Uncertain World. In the latter book, he provides many suggestions to help leaders see the future and deal with VUCA more effectively. These ideas can help build personal skills that help make a peer coaching engagement work more effectively for both members of the coaching pair. Let us examine some of them. Dilemma flipping. Johansen defines a dilemma as “a problem that cannot be solved and will not go away.”20 He notes that the

20  Chapter 1

t­ raditional definition of a dilemma is a choice between two equally bad options, but he feels that is too limited because dilemmas often contain some hope—even if that hope is not always evident. Examples of hope in the midst of a very bad situation could include the conflict in the Middle East and race relations in the United States. Johansen quotes F. Scott Fitzgerald on the issue of conflicting views: “The test of a first-rate intelligence is to hold two opposing ideas in mind at the same time and still retain the ability to function. One should . . . be able to see that things are hopeless yet be determined to make them otherwise.”21 Effective leadership, according to Johansen, is the ability to “flip” dilemmas to present them as opportunities or challenges. One must be careful to not oversimplify or pretend that dilemmas are solvable problems; dilemmas need to be managed. An effective peer coach needs to have this quality of hope and optimism to help reframe difficult recurring dilemmas in ways that make them manageable. Dilemma flipping is “reimagining an unsolvable challenge as an opportunity or perhaps as both a threat and an opportunity.”22 To illustrate that two people can look at the same situation differently, Johansen uses a classic image of a duck and a rabbit from Gestalt psychology. Some people look at this image and see a duck, while others see a rabbit. In fact, it is neither a rabbit nor a duck; it is a rabbit and a duck. What you see depends on how you look at it. Skilled coaches and leaders know how to look at a situation and quickly shift perspectives to see it in quite different, often opposing, ways. As Johansen observes, “The VUCA world is a world of ‘and’ not ‘or.’ Expect to see a duck and a rabbit in everything, as well as a tiger, a snake, and maybe something you don’t even recognize but know that it is there. As you look at this image and flip back and forth between the rabbit and the duck, notice how your brain feels.”23 This is a feeling of apprehension that we must learn to appreciate! We need to practice engaging the tension between opposing ideas

Learning in the VUCA Environment   21

constructively, to hold both ideas lightly and tentatively and not be forced into premature closure. This allows us to stretch our brains and increase our ability to deal with complexity.24 An example of flipping a dilemma into an opportunity is present in how Disney World managed long waiting lines for popular rides. No one likes to wait in line, but at the same time, Disney cannot add so much capacity that there is never a line— hence, the dilemma. Disney flipped the dilemma to a challenge: how to provide fun and entertainment while people waited for the ride. They came up with ideas such as video entertainment in the line area and “Pal Mickey,” a stuffed automated Mickey Mouse doll that could play with the kids and had a sensor that could tell them where lines were shorter. This, of course, was not a solution to the dilemma, but a first step toward managing it better. Constructive depolarizing. Constructive depolarizing is the ability to cool down “hot” situations. Where intergroup differences have become so great that communication has broken down, constructive depolarizing is the ability to create contained situations and bring together people from divergent groups in constructive dialogue. These situations arise frequently in a VUCA world, where people are attracted to those who speak with certainty: “In a VUCA World, many will be attracted to ‘absolute shalls’ and leaders will have to engage with these polarized and polarizing advocates who drive wedges between others.”25 Polarization is one of the most vexing problems in the VUCA world, as it appears to take away one of the most promising methods for resolving intergroup conflict: the ability to communicate. If two groups see the world in such fundamentally different ways that each denies the right of the other to exist, true communication becomes very difficult. Constructive depolarization is a process of bringing people from divergent cultures together for the purpose of positive engagement.

22  Chapter 1

A variety of methods have been devised, often with the aid of new technology, to bring groups together in this way. They all have certain core elements: • Creation of a “container” for conversation. There is an agreed-on setting where communication will happen and agreed-on rules for how the interaction will take place. One ancient method is a talking stick that is passed around the circle in which the participants talk; only the person holding the talking stick is allowed to talk. • Creation of a “boundary object.” A boundary object is some physical object that is accepted (and often produced) by both groups to which they can refer for guidance or to show progress. Examples include an agreed-on contract with guidelines governing how they will work together or a rough draft of what a framework for common ground might look like. This gives both groups something “out there” to which they can look together and that can act as a stepping-stone toward progress. The boundary provides a feeling of order and safety in their work together. • Putting something in the middle. Like a boundary object, something in the middle can be a visual image or any other vivid symbol of their agreement to work together. The Center for Creative Leadership uses a deck of cards called Visual Explorer, with pictures that can be used in various ways, such as to illustrate visions for the future or to capture problems or issues. Members of both groups can select cards that represent their view of the issue under discussion, and the conversation proceeds with everyone focusing on the cards. • Role reversal and reverse mentoring. It is well known in social psychology that role reversal helps change attitudes toward another group. Having each party assume the role of the other can be a powerful way to increase one’s understanding and

Learning in the VUCA Environment   23

acceptance of the other side’s viewpoints. For example, Hillary Clinton was a Republican in high school and one of the school’s top debaters. She supported Barry Goldwater in the 1964 presidential campaign (even wearing a hat with the logo AuH2O). In preparation for a debate about the election, her teacher insisted that she play the role of Lyndon Johnson. She prepared so intensively and played the role so compellingly in the debate that she convinced herself. By the time she graduated from college, she was a Democrat.26 • Focus on mutual goals, not methods. Focus on the dialogue as a way of sharing respective visions and common goals. This is an opportunity to help the other party understand how you see your vision. You are not expecting yourselves to agree on a course of action and solve problems, so do not put that pressure on yourself. The goal is to learn how both sides see the world. • Sacred commitments. Once you set an important goal, set aside the time needed to meet that goal, time that cannot be usurped by other things that arise. If the requisite time is not held sacred, the goal commitment may be seen as dispensable. The sacred commitment is essential for securing the safe container. All of these methods can be useful for effective peer coaches to have in their toolbox. Similarly, facilitators who are training peer coaches can benefit from adopting these methods. Creating a contained space and a process for encouraging dialogue is important to making it safe and physically possible for parties to think and to hear each other. Often when leaders are setting up environments for meetings and for communication, they do not give enough consideration to the physical setting or to setting psychological contracts and guidelines for how participants speak to one another. Similarly, we must consider how to maintain this container and how to respond when the rules are breached. Activities such as creating boundary objects, bringing in something “for the middle,” or

24  Chapter 1

devising opportunities for occasional role reversal are not difficult to do, but they are things that we, as facilitators or peer coaches, would probably not think about without some prompting. By being mindful of these as elements in our toolbox, we give ourselves access to powerful helping and problem-solving aids.

Tips for Helping in the VUCA Environment Even though we know that peer coaching can be a powerful way to promote learning in turbulent environments, good intentions are not sufficient. Some things that we do naturally may get in our way, and failing to act can be harmful. Thus, at this point we turn to one of the sages in the area of helping, Ed Schein. He has two books that we think make excellent companions to the book you are now reading: Helping and Humble Inquiry. The latter goes into deeper exploration of some of the principles found in Helping. Schein calls helping “an attitude, a set of behaviors, a skill, and an essential component of social life.”27 It is too easy for a helper to give the wrong kind of help, to overhelp, or—worst of all—to fail to recognize a situation in which a person we care about is in need of help. Helpers may feel guilty when they are unsuccessful, so he offers some tips for recognizing what is needed and knowing what to do. Perhaps the simplest and most important recommendation is to be aware of the importance of readiness. This applies to the readiness of both the giver and the receiver of help. Consider a situation where a parent, perhaps the father, approaches a child working on an activity, perhaps a puzzle. Intrigued, the father might get involved in the challenge himself and put some pieces into the completed part of the puzzle picture. In one scenario, the child gets frustrated and angry and sees what the father did as interference rather than assistance. In another scenario, the child is grateful and sees the father’s act as helpful. The difference between the

Learning in the VUCA Environment   25

scenarios depends on whether the child wanted help completing the puzzle. If she wanted to do it herself, she would be unhappy because the father’s placement of those pieces meant she could no longer claim the whole puzzle. If she was more interested in doing the puzzle as a collaborative family activity, her father’s assistance would have been seen as an act of caring and support. This leads to the first principle of helping: Principle 1: “Effective help occurs when both giver and receiver are ready.”28 The second principle involves the nature and amount of help: Principle 2: “Effective help occurs when the helping relationship is perceived to be equitable.”29 The person being helped may feel overwhelmed by the task and may feel that you are offering too much advice or suggesting actions that he or she is unable to take. The tip here is to check in with the receiver from time to ask what he or she thinks is the best way for you to help. If you are the receiver, look for opportunities to give feedback to the helper on what is or is not helpful. The third principle involves knowing what specific form of help is needed: Principle 3: “Effective help occurs when the helper is in the proper helping role.”30 Schein, in his earlier work on process consultation, identified three roles that a helper might take. First is the expert role, where the helper has specific knowledge or can provide a specific service that the client needs. Second is the doctor role, where the helper performs a diagnosis and prescribes the necessary treatment and services. Third is the process consultant role, where the helper and client work collaboratively to determine what is needed and together build an open and trusting relationship that allows them to work effectively. The process consultant approach requires explicit and frequent two-way communication and feedback. Another point is that little things matter:

26  Chapter 1

Principle 4: “Everything you say or do is an intervention that determines the future of the relationship.”31 Even if you avoid acting in a situation where a person needs something, that action (or more precisely, that inaction) has consequences. Taking action has its own risks; you might overact, underact, or act inappropriately, any of which could have negative consequences. Helping involves risk. Because of the need to be cautious in helping, being modest in what you think you know about the situation at hand is beneficial. Do not assume that you are an expert or know the right thing to do. This leads to the fifth principle: Principle 5: “Effective helping starts with pure inquiry.”32 Even if you are confident that you know what is right, consider the new request as something that is very new to you. Schein calls this “accessing your ignorance.”33 Ask pure inquiry questions; do not ask leading questions that suggest a particular cause of the problem or a particular solution. This point is especially important because of the sixth principle: Principle 6: “It is the client who owns the problem.”34 Do not be seduced into claiming the problem because of your prior experience with this kind of issue. This is especially risky if you happen to be an expert in the area—you have to be humble. Furthermore, consider the seventh principle: Principle 7: “You never have all the answers.”35 Even if you are a content expert in the area of the issue, do not trap yourself into assuming an expert role and providing the solution. The greater wisdom is in the combined brainpower of you and your peer. Remember that it is your peer’s problem and that you both work best when you work together to find a solution. The most important part of your work as a coach is developing and maintaining an open, trusting, collaborative, mutual-influence relationship. If these conditions are present, and if you both keep your focus on the problem, a solution will emerge. Remember to trust the process.

Learning in the VUCA Environment   27

Concluding Thoughts The VUCA environment puts great demands on everyone as we face the daily challenges of work and life. For example, at the time of writing, hundreds of thousands of people are trying to find safe havens and new homes as they escape the violence of the war in Syria. They have been forced by their extreme VUCA world to develop a vision for where they hope to land, create understanding of the situations in different European countries, obtain clarity for the best route to their destination, and develop agility and adaptability in the face of quickly closing borders in once-welcoming countries. Many have accomplished this, in families and in communities, through peer learning. Thus, peer coaches can support learning about complex, interconnected, and nonlinear thinking and solutions that emanate from it. Leaders working collaboratively can develop a curriculum to handle today’s complex world. When facing ambiguity, a peer coach can help another person consider alternatives and clarify the appropriate next steps. Peer coaches support each other’s learning by judicious questioning of perspectives, challenging personal patterns of thinking, and helping identify alternative courses of action for each other. Having a fresh set of eyes look at a problem to suggest “out of the box” responses can be a quick and easy way to expand one’s response repertoire. In this chapter, we have described how peer coaching can aid all of the adaptive VUCA responses. In the next three chapters, we introduce our 3-step Peer Coaching model. We discuss tools for honing relational practices in more detail in ­Chapter 3.

Chapter 2

Step 1: Build the Developmental Relationship

coaching process requires a strong relational foundation. The relationship itself operates as a respectful holding environment and incorporates both physical and psychological structural factors that support effective peer coaching and are critical to its success. We cannot overstate the importance and value of the holding environment to facilitate self-initiated and interdependent peer coaching interactions. Boundary objects such as working agreements, sharing mutual goals, and making sacred commitments to build trust contribute to building an effective holding environment as a secure container to manage anxieties. We introduce our 3-step Peer Coaching model in the next three chapters by focusing on one individual step in each chapter. This chapter introduces Step 1, building the relationship, and provides a comprehensive overview of how to establish the foundation for a successful peer coaching process. Although we introduce the step in a linear manner, the peer coaching process in practice is iterative and circular. As peers work together, they deepen their relationship and are likely to revisit earlier steps, either formally or informally, to refine earlier decisions and adjust parameters to reflect their mutual needs and experience. A climate of trust and support is esAn effective peer

Step 1: Build the Developmental Relationship   29

sential and, while it begins tentatively, establishing a strong base of trust in the earliest phases of peer collaboration, a commitment to act as if it already exists, will promote more growth throughout the process. We embed the peer coaching process within a relational approach to learning. We draw from the relational theory of CMM to show potential peer coaches how they generate meaning within their coaching dialogues through their interactions together. Furthermore, the patterns that emerge as peers coordinate their joint interactions reflect the relationship itself. The peer coaching relationship therefore offers an opportunity to exercise and develop capability for both peers to look at their relationships and explore in real time how they might improve their communication, coordination, and collaboration with others. The relational approach suggests a dual focus: on the one hand, being in the relationship, while on the other hand, simultaneously paying attention to it and noting how the mutual connection establishes positive regard for one another and the ability to accept and work flexibly with positive and negative affect. To illustrate the 3-step Peer Coaching model, we introduce three pairs of peer coaches whose progress we will follow throughout the book. First, we meet Marissa and Susanne, who met at an Emerging Leaders Forum, and observe their first experience of peer coaching as an integral aspect of their program. Second, we meet Paul and Amira, who are both members of an organizationally based diversity committee. Third, we meet Ricardo and Len, who initially met at a volunteer event in their community. The first step in creating an effective peer coaching process is building a strong and trusting relationship between the involved parties (see Figure 2.1). An explicit commitment to create a positive holding environment is a critical yet easily overlooked step as eager peers move directly to action. Carefully selecting partners, having relevant information to support each other during the process, and

30  Chapter 2

Mutual, compatible selection

Critical friend

Check-in

Working agreement Figure 2.1  Building the Relationship: Creating a Positive Holding Environment

taking time to develop a working agreement all reduce the likelihood of major emotional or cognitive burdens derailing effective relational support. The time and energy allocated to building a strong foundational relationship that is mutually respectful involves sharing expectations, concerns and resources. Let us consider this sharing in more detail. Sharing expectations allows peers to articulate their hopes for how they will work together. It is a constructive first step to establish their working relationship when each peer articulates personal expectations. Listening to each provides a gauge of how well aligned their outlook is. Confidentiality is a good example of an expectation that is important before committing fully to the process. Early impressions influence attitudes and belief in the potential of the process, particularly about how together they might build trust. Sharing concerns encourages partners to articulate any concerns they may have and thus acts as a reality check against what is achievable within allocated time. Hopes and fears suggest to each peer what might be required to create successful outcomes for each of them. One resource already present is themselves, and early in the process we suggest sharing some personal qualities that each

Step 1: Build the Developmental Relationship   31

peer brings to the relationship. Ironically, we find that peers are often unaware of their qualities. A request to share invites an early reflection on attributes and qualities they may not have previously articulated. The process of reflecting provides an opportunity to deepen self-awareness. Owning new qualities builds confidence in each peer’s potential to contribute to the coaching relationship. Increasing self-awareness can begin with writing thoughts and concerns down in personal journals and subsequently sharing any insights with peer partners. Listening actively and then asking probing questions can deepen awareness. In formal programs, other data such as 360-degree surveys, values or strengths inventories, and other self-assessment instruments may provide alternative and useful starting points because of the data they provide. In the early stage of their relationships, peers learn how they will incorporate and interpret new data as they work together and enhance their self-awareness. Holding environments.  Holding environments originally re-

ferred to the protective spaces in which babies’ physical needs were met and where they could learn to trust through the experience of being held securely by a parent.1 The concept then expanded to therapeutic situations that allowed clients to regress and explore unresolved issues. Today, a holding environment refers to a wide range of safe, helping contexts in which a conscious intervention allows people to feel sufficiently secure to work through issues that cause anxiety or distress. Surfacing and confronting these matters in a safe psychological environment supports individuals to explore difficult issues and then regain their equilibrium.2 Consciously and deliberately creating a holding environment prior to engaging in peer coaching increases the likelihood that the partners will feel safe to grapple with unresolved issues with peer support. Creating a holding environment means forming equal and trusting relationships among the participants. Power differences that exist between peers who hold dissimilar hierarchical positions

32  Chapter 2

may create a risk for both parties to be vulnerable in the relationship. Those who are more senior may feel anxious that they are responsible for managing the dynamic. The junior peer may also feel uncomfortable giving feedback to senior partners. Thus, each partner is likely to make tentative movements to observe the outcomes, weighing up both benefit and risk before fully committing to the relationship. In these situations, establishing the safety parameters may require more effort and take longer. Making a mutual commitment to peer coaching and clarifying boundaries are constructive steps that contribute to a safe holding environment. Intent, alone, is insufficient to create an effective holding environment. Specific behaviors and actions are required that collectively contribute to greater safety in the holding environment. These behaviors reflect how one partner figuratively moves toward the other by showing that they are accessible, attending to the other by actively listening, probing for thoughts and feelings, demonstrating compassion, and accepting without judging. A sense of curiosity demonstrates a genuine sense of interest in the peer’s story and expressed concerns. Demonstrating acceptance of the experiences shows positive regard and validates the peer. Empathizing with the reported experience and upholding confidentiality builds trust. Questioning in an open-ended manner invites further, deeper exploration that builds the relationship. Deep listening demonstrates an ability to hear beyond spoken words to identify values, feelings, passion, and energy. These are all enabling behaviors that help peers make sense of their experience, focus on controllable aspects of it, and provide support to develop realistic responses.3 These behaviors can be broken down into specific skills that underpin effective listening.4 Successful holding environments strike a balance between three interwoven threads. The safety aspect of holding confirms the partner and promotes feelings of being accepted and valued in the relationship. Supporting partners to let go of unproductive behav-

Step 1: Build the Developmental Relationship   33

iors may require contradicting them as a necessary step to stimulate dissonance and increase a desire to change. A steady relationship provides continuity that facilitates ongoing development and learning within a held environment.5 Peer coaches will draw on each of these three strands relative to the learning needs and developmental position of their partner. There are many forms of developmental relationships, and each can be a potential holding environment in which people can examine their experiences with peer support. Each connection is grounded in the underlying assumptions that learning is primarily a relational and social activity, and that multiple viewpoints are valuable when making sense of personal experiences. Peer coaching embedded in a relational approach to communication extends traditional educational practices and attitudes toward careers and leadership development. Recognizing and accepting the role of others as a critical resource for learning changes the approach one takes. Paying attention to the relational aspect as well as the coaching focus enables learning in both spheres. Building safe and trusting relationships.  The centrality of

relationships to learning is fundamental to the peer coaching process. Acceptance and confirmation increase feelings of self-worth while building the relational competence and confidence that develop a trusting foundation. The flow-on effects of that foundation include individual assuredness and sensitivity to cognitive, affective, and physical components of interactions. Relational competence reflects behaviors and skills that facilitate effective interpersonal interactions.6 Accepting that interdependence is more valuable than personal mastery allows people to reach out to others and, in return, receive from others, thus forming the basis of sound, mutually beneficial interactions. In peer coaching, interdependence is fluid and alternates between vulnerability on the one hand and asking the peer powerful questions on the other. Mutuality in the relationship reflects a belief in two-directional growth. In this sense,

34  Chapter 2

peer coaching differs markedly from other forms of coaching and mentoring in which one person is more experienced. Reciprocity between peers is a marker of relational competence and includes the expectation that both parties have the skills and will apply them to support the other.

Actions to Create Positive Peer Coaching Relationships Now that we accept the critical nature of a safe and trusting relationship, what are the actions that will create it? The first part involves four key elements: selecting a peer with whom to work, checking in (and out) of sessions, forming a working agreement in which expectations are made explicit, and acting as a critical friend to promote deep thinking by the peer about his or her concerns. Each element represents a structural factor that makes an essential contribution to establishing a peer coaching process that will result in successful outcomes. Selecting a peer partner.  Preferably, the selection process for

forming peer coaching dyads requires that peers be given some choice and receive relevant information to support their decision process. Indeed, our empirical research has identified participant choice as a critical feature in the selection of a peer coaching partner. Selecting partners may happen formally or informally, though personal choice is a key to success in the process. Peers can select their partner in many ways. Regular “pair and share” activities in which partners share an opinion, describe an experience, or design a creative response to a scenario can provide valuable insight into their readiness to share, alignment of perspectives, and first impressions. It is tempting to gauge each individual’s personal comfort zone and assign partnerships based on their comfort levels. However, experiencing initial discomfort with partners as they reveal a range of perspectives can provide deeper value over the long term. Therefore, it is important to provide peers with

Step 1: Build the Developmental Relationship   35

a range of opportunities to gather information on which to base their choices. A range of short, sharp interactions that allow individuals to meet a number of people is a positive step if conducting peer selection in a classroom situation. For example, Marissa and Susanne were the first people to whom each spoke while participating at a weekend Emerging Leaders Forum. The facilitator asked them to share their name and identify what they would have been doing on a normal day if they were not at the program. In a brief exchange, Susanne learned that Marissa had three children and would have been running after them. Susanne said that she would probably have been with friends having coffee. She then thought about the differences between their lives and wondered what it would be like to be responsible for little ones. Although they quickly moved on to speak to other participants about different topics, the initial interaction created a positive memory for Susanne. Any activity that allows participants to identify similarities and differences often works well. The activity highlights a range of perspectives in a group and suggests how initial thoughts might be limiting for long-term learning. Here is how it works so you can apply it when working with a group.

Similarity/Difference Exercise 1. Start by asking the group to do the following: “Please stand up. Look around the room and find someone who you think is similar to you in some way. When you find them, stand next to them and quickly identify three ways in which the two of you are similar.” Record participants’ responses on a whiteboard or screen. Common criteria include gender, height, class in school, and marital status; these are nearly always “safe” criteria. With a large group, repeat this step and stipulate that the participants

36  Chapter 2

must choose a different person each time. This allows the facilitator to increase the number of new encounters. Next, instruct the participants to find another partner and identify three differences between them and stipulate that they may not use any of the criteria already on the board. The additional requirement increases the challenge and requires participants to engage in deeper conversations about themselves.

Reflection and debrief: Use questions such as the following: Which was easier—identifying similarities or differences? Was it because of the restricted criteria of what was allowable for the second part? What surprised you? What are the implications for learning? What difference does it make to work with someone who is either similar to or different from you? At this point, it is helpful to raise the issue of mental models to stimulate self-awareness of unconscious attributions related to people similar to or different from the beholder. Awareness of personal mental models can further deepen self-awareness by identifying the implicit judgments that accompany such attributions.7 Furthermore, the attributions guide subsequent behaviors and can limit learning, influence language, and constrain interpersonal interactions.

2. Ask participants to look around the room and consider someone from whom they think they can learn a lot. It is useful to emphasize that, given the recent exercises, it is highly likely that the person they now think of may not have been the person they would have thought of when first arriving. 3. Finally, invite the participants to reflect on the entire process over the next break and consider whether they can pair up with someone to work with as a peer coach. After the break, introduce the group to peer coaching and explain that they may approach someone who has already paired with someone else, as it can feel disconcerting for some people to not pair with

Step 1: Build the Developmental Relationship   37

the person they want, or for someone not to be chosen. Refer back to the reflective debrief to reinforce that peers can learn from everyone in the room if open to that. Furthermore, individually held mental models can open or limit attitudes and subsequent behavior accordingly. Different groups require different kinds of expertise and experience according to the situation and the peers. Furthermore, the selection process is different in informal settings. Peer partners Ricardo and Len met at a Habitat for Humanity community meeting. Ricardo, a forty-three-year-old Hispanic man, was a middle manager for an IT company who was looking to start his own business. Len, a forty-three-year-old lawyer, ran his own business and indicated to Ricardo that he was struggling to manage teenage children on his own. The pair hit it off and Ricardo, who had had a previous positive experience with peer coaching, saw the possibility that Len might help him. Building on a sense of trust he felt, he asked Len directly. The sense of trust is an important quality that cannot be underestimated. While Len and Ricardo initiated their conversation informally, a peer coaching relationship moves away from a traditional discussion to focus on each peer respectively. A relational approach makes explicit the paradox of using silence to build rapport, conveying messages through body language and eye contact. An observant peer can gauge readiness to listen without speaking. Attending to one’s peer is valuable to develop the relationship broadly. Thus, open general-inquiry questions are especially important in the early stages of peer coaching to avoid setting up one peer as “expert” for the other’s problems, which has the effect of shutting down disclosure. Sometimes, a peer introduces an issue to the coaching process that is more to test the response than to explore the problem. If the response to the apparent “presenting” issue engenders confidence, trust will build in the relationship allowing for introduction of more sensitive issues.

38  Chapter 2

Checking in and out.  Partners are encouraged to use check-ins

to connect with each other through sharing relevant recent events and associated feelings when they come together. This preliminary engagement encourages each peer to be fully present in the moment and reduces the likelihood of major emotional or cognitive burdens getting in the way of effective work in the subsequent peer coaching interaction. The check-in has a threefold purpose: to mark the transition and minimize distractions, to set the scene for the working session, and to raise awareness of how the peer is engaging, which may be linked to factors underpinning the points raised during check-in. Setting the scene through a formal check-in process denotes a working space that the peers recognize as a relaxed, but serious, place in which to engage each other. In other words, the process that begins each meeting reinforces the holding environment and creates a psychological space in which to surface issues of concern. Symbolically, the check-in serves as a boundary object that symbolically separates the work inside it from the rest of life such as what might be happening on the job or at home in one’s family. Establishing the boundary conditions allows the peers to reinforce the climate of trust and empathy without requiring any additional comment. We strongly recommend that no one comment on any contribution during check-in, although making mental notes may later be useful. Rather than an invitation for dialogue, the check-in allows the peer to come into the space and offer thoughts, feelings, and/or hopes that indicate present situations. These may or may not relate specifically to the peer coaching session. Receiving and valuing the contribution in silence demonstrates support. Body language, eye contact, and facial expressions can indicate a readiness to listen. Edgar Schein reminds us that this is how genuine preliminary inquiry begins.8 Making mental notes of check-in contributions can be invaluable later in the peer coaching process. The relevance may relate

Step 1: Build the Developmental Relationship   39

to either the content or the style or tone in which the contribution is delivered. The check-in process is much more than an opportunity to speak; it provides material that can assist deep listening for both parties. For the contributor, articulating opinions or thoughts can reveal more than was intended, thus increasing openness and vulnerability. For the listener, the contribution may trigger thoughts that invite conclusions or giving advice. In either option, it is best to make notes but not to comment at this point, to reduce the likelihood of premature or inaccurate assumptions. In both cases, a safe holding environment is a valuable thinking space. Opportunities for feedback and suggestions will come as the dialogue continues. Amira and Paul, both members of an organizationally based diversity committee, began their check-in round. Amira commented that she liked being a champion of change and that she agreed with the committee’s aims but wondered how authentic it was to promote change in others if personal adjustments were too hard. Paul heard the alignment with the broad diversity initiative and understood that Amira might have been experiencing internal tension related to change or adaptability. He didn’t know whether he was right, but he added the possibility to his growing understanding of Amira. In a later peer coaching session, Paul was able to ask Amira how she felt about making changes in her life. In group contexts, the general principles can be discussed as a whole group and smaller dyads or triads can finalize the important behaviors that relate to them (see Chapter 5). Forming a working agreement.  After the introductory check-

in round, peer coaches should work together to develop an agreement that guides the coaching process. The working agreement comprises formal guidelines of behaviors that govern peers’ work together. The agreement acts as a boundary object within the holding environment to promote the safety to work together by specifying mutual expectations about behaviors that are acceptable and those that are not. The agreement influences what each party can

40  Chapter 2

contribute by identifying goals, relevant skills and experience, styles of working, and ways of monitoring the relationship and providing feedback, and addresses any other factor that affects the success of the venture. The following are some questions you might use to start developing an agreement: “What do you need to function effectively in a peer coaching dyad (or group)? Think of groups or people with whom you have previously worked. What worked well? If you can identify any aspects of the process that did not work well, how can you turn that into learning that will serve you better?” It is important that individuals reflect on these questions prior to sharing. Write the answers on individual cards and build them into a deck; peers can then place cards face up to initiate discussion. The process presents a visible montage of behaviors that can initiate further thought and discussion. Overlapping items enable pairs to see how their personal expectations of behaviors align with their peers’ and may be a point of immediate agreement. Behaviors that differ from their own can stimulate thoughts and discussion about whether agreement exists and whether the omission was due to forgetfulness or whether the peers have very different expectations. Discussing similar and different responses provides an opportunity for the peer partners to develop a shared understanding of which behaviors will enhance their interactions. Recalling previous experience increases peers’ awareness of which behaviors contribute to sharing and which do not. The process encourages reflection and self-awareness by inviting recall of personal behavior and consideration of how particular actions influence the outcomes of interpersonal interactions. Discussing and sharing previous experiences develops a shared sense of responsibility. Reducing the number of guidelines (to about five) allows the partners to avoid producing a list of rules while still working toward a shared understanding of acceptable behaviors. .

Step 1: Build the Developmental Relationship   41

Telling stories to illustrate the examples provides insight about themselves and the other for both peers. People choose which stories they tell and which stories bring coherence personally and within their relationships. Hearing others’ stories provides information on which behaviors may irritate and why, and which behaviors facilitate deeper engagement and thus contribute to the process. The listening strengthens rapport and trust before moving onto a focus on coaching. Furthermore, a relational lens on communication highlights the coherence that emerges from the act of telling and sharing that enables self and peers to make sense of life and to see more clearly how the past influences the present, and suggests possibilities for moving forward. Thus, developing a working agreement can be a satisfying process that instills a sense of purpose, underscores the value of the process, and builds trust that strengthens the relationship in the process and sets the parameters within which peer coaching can flourish. Written and well-developed agreements work best. When Amira and Paul identified previous behaviors, Paul wrote “respect” on one card. When Amira asked what prompted him to write that, Paul explained that when he first joined the bank, he commented on a process before he understood the reasons why it existed. Someone poked fun at his comment and subsequently called him “speedy,” suggesting his actions were quick but inaccurate. While he was working in that team, “speedy” stuck as his name and Paul responded by withdrawing and not committing himself until he had thought through the implications of any decision. The issue was important to him and he recognized that the incident still had an impact on his behavior. He and Amira also identified other behaviors that would validate respect and those that would not, which gave deeper insight into each other’s previous experiences and mental models. A lengthy discussion may result in a single word (“respect”) on the working agreement. Yet as it did for Paul, seeing

42  Chapter 2

the single word prompts a memory of the discussion he and Amira had. Thus, five or six words may appear as a list, yet each acts as a reminder of their shared understanding of meaning. Amira’s question to Paul and his expanded answer demonstrate how to develop a working agreement beyond a word that may seem obvious—particularly to these peers, who are members of a diversity committee. Amira’s probing questions allowed deeper development and a shared understanding that would serve the partnership well in the future. Appropriate self-disclosure established a foundation that included risk taking and set the tone for future sessions while building trust. Some issues in the working agreement are more instrumental (such as be on time) than others (such as a discussion on what respect means). Marissa and Susanne have decided to work together as peer coaches and are getting to know each other at the start of the process: Susanne: I would like expressions of empathy and support—that encourages me to contribute more and feel as though what I am saying is OK. Marissa: What does encouragement look like to you? Susanne: Oh, maybe listening carefully to me; affirming parts of what I say that seem valid and worth developing; I want to identify a goal for myself.

In their working agreement, they included “We will listen to each other; encourage, and provide support.” Marissa decided not to raise the point about the goal at this early stage of creating the agreement. She wondered about Susanne’s confidence levels and focused on encouraging and steering clear of advice giving. Advice giving or problem solving, particularly early in the engagement, can be detrimental to the process because it closes down the inquiry.9 Furthermore, it sets up an implicit expectation of a peer coach as an expert when the purpose is to engage in a joint inquiry

Step 1: Build the Developmental Relationship   43

in which the individuals design their own responses to an issue through systematic reflection. Our peer partners, Ricardo and Len, found that it was important to align expectations and intentions in their working agreement. The pair agreed to meet to share experiences with each other. Len thought they were becoming friends, but Ricardo contextualized it as a more formal arrangement in which they would meet to peer coach. A key element that surfaced when developing a working agreement was how often they would meet. Ricardo assumed that would be regularly, but Len, as a single parent, could not meet as often. Working agreements mark the relationship intent and provide an object (preferably written down) that is more effective when periodically reviewed; “How well did we live up to our agreements?” Revision need not happen after each meeting. Additions are more likely than deletions over time and enhance the integrity of the process. The document is active, and tweaking it with minor changes as the relationship develops may better reflect the changing dynamic. Positive mindsets.  A positive attitude toward learning and

engaging intentionally in peer coaching means that the relationship is about discovery, uncovering mystery, and developing awareness in self and others. Using peer coaching as a dumping ground to offload gripes and grumbles will herald failure. In addition to structuring the peer coaching arrangement in a propitious way, having the right mind-set for managing the relationship process is important. In a relational perspective, right means a positive attitude toward peer coaching’s potential to have affirmative effects through process and outcomes, a belief that connecting with one’s peer can be meaningful and promote growth. There is no requirement to be an expert in any field; knowing this brings relief to those who feel inadequate at the outset or believe they need to provide an answer. Dialogue that promotes and develops shared ­understanding

44  Chapter 2

enhances relational competence and augurs well for a range of applications (discussed in Chapter 4). A positive mind-set enhances two factors that are critical to the success of peer coaching. First, it embraces guidelines to support elements of the peer coaching process, particularly the structural elements such as checking in and developing the working agreement at the same time as deepening understanding in the relationship; second, a positive mind-set allows challenges and affirmation that support personal growth without collusion. Effective peer coaching can sometimes involve having difficult conversations and delivering critical feedback. Each party should adopt the stance of being a critical friend to the other while always demonstrating empathy and understanding. Acting as a critical friend.  The role of a critical friend is to

attend to the needs of the peer partner, supporting yet not colluding. An observer would see two people engaged in mutual learning rather than a traditional conversation. Acting as a critical friend requires peer coaches to have some social and psychological understanding of process dynamics, such as how questions and feedback affect their peer’s mental processes. Combining challenge and support is particularly important when it comes to delivering accurate feedback in a clear and sensitive way. Peers need to attend to their partner and speak the truth in a caring manner, setting the scene for shared thinking, a style of inquiry that provokes thought and internal reflection.10 Increasing emotional and relational competence fosters meaningful learning in peer coaching processes. The process also enables peers to develop these competencies within the process. When a peer coaching relationship is working well, characteristics of high-quality relationships are evident. We draw on studies of positive relationships and Positive Organizational Psychology11 to identify characteristics that include trust, empathy, mutuality, reciprocity, and resilience. In successful relationships, peers exhibit

Step 1: Build the Developmental Relationship   45

mutuality, positive regard for one another, vitality, and the ability to accept and work flexibly with positive and negative affect. Furthermore, these qualities enhance the trust and openness that builds safety into the holding environment. An unconditionally caring attitude for the other person supports the development of skills associated with being a critical friend. This highlights the “friend” part of being a critical friend and is a key to a good helping relationship. As Carl Rogers tells us, there should be genuineness in each party’s words and behaviors.12 Authenticity shows peers some evidence that they can trust the other, feel safe in the relationship, and have confidence in the quality of peer coaching provided. Because this is a peer-guided process with no external authority providing direction, the way the practice evolves depends on the two peers and their relationship. The relationship is a living entity with its own dynamic that evolves and changes over time. Together, peer coaches create and develop their relationship by agreeing that it is always open to examination, review, feedback, and negotiation of terms. Peers are responsible for what they say to each other, how they interact, and the patterns that emerge from their relationship. In relational terms, they manage and build meaning in relationship with each other.13 The peer coaching relationship offers an opportunity to observe themselves and their partner within their relationship and, at the same time, they can explore how they might improve their coordination and collaboration with others. Such is the essence of a relational approach to peer coaching, epitomized as Coordinated Management of Meaning (CMM) (see Chapter 3).

Concluding Thoughts In this chapter, we have introduced and elaborated on how to build a successful relationship as the first step in a positive peer coaching process. We focused on the value of a relational approach to communication, the use of the coordinated management of

46  Chapter 2

­ eaning (CMM) perspective, and a strengths-based approach to m identify the processes and practices essential to high-quality relating, all of which combine to provide a strong foundation for peer coaching. Integrating structural features, such as checking in with each other and designing a working agreement, with qualities such as a positive mind-set and a genuine curiosity, fosters effective interactions. In practice, the relationship continues to develop as the process progresses. In the next chapter, we focus on Step 2, creating success, which shows how to create success by honing these critical relational practices.

Chapter 3

Step 2: Hone Relational Practices to Create Success

In the previous chapter,

we focused on Step 1, building the relationship, of our 3-step Peer Coaching model. We learned about some of the challenges and goals of three peer coaching pairs. We continue to follow their progress in this chapter as we attend to Step 2, creating success, through honing relational practices. Step 2 involves two primary developmental tasks: enhancing self-awareness through self-disclosure and feedback and deepening the relationship. Both are essential to building an effective peer coaching process. As we focus on building self-awareness, you will notice how a central tenet is to see one’s self and understand one’s self in a relationship. The relational perspective highlights the agility required to be aware of one’s self engaging in relationships. Two additional important aspects to understanding one’s self in relationships with others are deep listening and self-regulation. Throughout this chapter, we apply tools and frameworks that help strengthen relationships and increase the capacity to learn and grow together.

Enhancing Self-Awareness Through Disclosure and Feedback Self-awareness is the ability to look at one’s self and to assess the quality of interactions with others and the environment. A high

48  Chapter 3

level of self-awareness increases your ability to identify and contribute meaningful learning goals to the peer coaching relationship. Self-awareness deepens in various ways. People can reflect on personal experiences and behaviors, undertake assessment inventories and surveys, and solicit feedback from people including family members, friends, work colleagues, and a peer coach. The process of reflecting on multiple sources of data and sharing insights with a peer coach allows practice and development of critical relational skills and capabilities that include self-disclosure, deep listening, empathy, giving and receiving feedback, managing conflict, selfregulating, and taking responsibility for yourself and your actions in relationships. One framework that supports self-reflection is the widely used Johari’s window (Figure 3.1), which was created over sixty years ago.1 According to this simple model, increasing self-disclosure and being open to receiving feedback are the keys to increasing selfawareness. The Johari’s four panes are as follows: • Open area: what is personally known by the individual and is also known by others • Blind area: what is unknown by the individual but known by others • Hidden area, avoided area, or façade: what is known by the individual but not known by others • Unknown area or unknown self: what is unknown by the individual and also unknown by others The combination of increased self-disclosure and openness to feedback provides insight through the eyes of others; self-­disclosure provides context to others for what they see. Feedback offers perspectives from the observer, which may be information that is known, hidden, or unknown. For example, Susanne shared with Marissa that before their initial conversation, she considered her

Step 2: Hone Relational Practices to Create Success   49

known by self

unknown by self

ask

2

known by others

open/free area

feedback solicitation

1 blind area

tell

unknown by others

hidden area 3

shared discovery

self-discovery

self-disclosure/exposure

others’ observation

unknown area 4

Figure 3.1  Johari Window Source: Luft, Joseph, Of Human Interaction, © McGraw-Hill Education. Reprinted with permission.

aloof and snobby. Marissa paused on hearing this feedback and then shared that she was very shy and introverted. She had not considered that others would see her own insecurity in that way. Marissa’s self-disclosure combined with Susanne’s feedback was a catalyst for them to deepen their understanding of each other within their new relationship. Other processes, such as guided storytelling, lifelines, and reciprocal peer coaching help people build on the iterative cycle of selfdisclosure and feedback to expand self-awareness. We begin with prompting self-disclosure through guided storytelling. One example is the lifeline activity in which each person draws a timeline of his or her life. Along the timeline, the person identifies key events that have shaped their development. When drawing these events, ask people to identify the following:

50  Chapter 3

• What is the event? • What is significant to you about the event? • How do you tell the story now and how is that different from how you would have told it at the time? • What did you learn from that event? • Looking over the events noted, what pattern do you observe? • Choose one event to explore more deeply. What knowledge, skills, attributes, and attitudes have you developed because of this event? Sharing stories triggered from a lifeline with a trusted other deepens understanding of your own story. The mere presence of a peer coach as a listener and witness has an impact. For example, the listening peer may probe or offer feedback based on aspects of the lifeline story. Those prompts, in turn, expand the story told. In her peer coaching session, Marissa noticed a pattern of Susanne not recognizing the value that others have for her. Susanne gained more insight into her story after she shared it with Marissa and received feedback. Robert Kegan and his colleagues propose a design for fostering organizational cultures that are deliberately developmental.2 Referring to these cultures as deliberately developmental organizations (DDOs), they describe the design as follows: A DDO is organized around the deceptively simple but radical conviction that organizations will best prosper when they are deeply aligned with people’s strongest motive, which is to grow. . . . Deep alignment with people’s motive to grow means fashioning an organizational culture in which support to people’s ongoing development is woven into the daily fabric of working life visible in the company’s regular operations, day-to-day routines, and conversations.”3

Reciprocal peer coaching offers a context for people to grow together intentionally at the intersection of self-disclosure and feed-

Step 2: Hone Relational Practices to Create Success   51

back. When the peers consciously attend to the relational dynamic between them, they learn to see themselves through the eyes of the other; thus, they gain new insights that expand and deepen their self-awareness. As mentioned in Chapter 1, Edgar Schein’s work on helping and humble inquiry highlights his recommended approach to helping another by asking the person whether they want any feedback. When another confirms that they do want feedback, then the feedback provided relates to an invitation from the recipient and is more likely to be received as being constructive. Requested feedback contrasts with earlier feedback models that involved “telling” another person, which relied on the initiative of the person giving the feedback and was less likely to be accepted. When Susanne and Marissa began working together, Susanne said that her development goal was to be more assertive about expanding her networks and establishing herself as a leader. Taking the initiative to develop relationships with others was one of those goals to which Susanne would commit each year and then harshly judge herself for failing to reach. Marissa wanted to define her roles at work and home more clearly to strengthen how she coordinated both with her husband and with her co-workers. Susanne’s feedback about appearing aloof helped Marissa articulate her goal, as she now understood that others might misread her behavioral cues. She then included taking more initiative to articulate her intentions and needs in her goal. Paul and Amira also used a process of goal setting and exploration through self-disclosure and feedback as a way of structuring their work together. Paul identified opening up to his team more as a goal. He disclosed to Amira that he was gay and that keeping his sexual orientation private had affected how much of himself he shared with his team. Consequently, others saw him as difficult to work with. Amira told Paul that his sharing of his vulnerability made her feel more trusting of and connected to him. Amira identified her goal as sorting out her career aspirations in relation to her

52  Chapter 3

commitments to her parents. While she took her work seriously, she often felt torn between her responsibilities to her team and those to her elderly parents, who relied solely on her. In the next section we introduce the relational communication perspective and consider how it can be used to support peer coaches’ work, their ability to jointly examine and explore their actions in their relationship, and how their interaction creates its own dynamic. In other words, peer coaches can learn how to learn from observing themselves.

Adopting a Relational Communication Lens Coordinated management of meaning (CMM)4 is a practical theory that suggests that meaning continuously emerges in the ongoing processes of relating with others and coordinated action between and among people. CMM offers models that help us look at our relational processes and hone relational skills to create success. To some extent, people anticipate how they may work together before they even meet. They anticipate an “episode” or “interaction” together. In a coaching context, peers might anticipate impressions of their partner, how they will work together, or their hopes and fears about the interaction. Specifically, peers may anticipate the episode of “getting to know each other” or the episode of “negotiating agreements.” Barnett Pearce describes three core principles that explain how people coordinate meaning: (1) coherence, or telling stories that help them make sense of their lives and helps them know how to continue; (2) coordinating with others through a sequence of actions that seem logical and appropriate; and (3) mystery, which refers to how they manage the unknown, the ineffable.5 While Pearce’s allusions to mystery mostly originate from a positive frame, mystery in relationships can be unpredictable. From one moment to the next, peers might shift from the resonance of

Step 2: Hone Relational Practices to Create Success   53

being in harmony or sync with another person to dissonance, that feeling of being out of sync with them, and then return to feeling in sync. Self-Disclosure.  During their first meeting, Marissa and Su-

sanne engaged in a process of getting to know each other using the Daisy model (Figure 3.2) to create a picture of themselves. Each petal of the daisy depicts influences that have been critical in their careers, including family members, where they grew up, prominent role models, education and schooling, their socioeconomic status, and their race, ethnicity, and gender. In addition, examples of patterns that individuals might explore include the following: • When I work on a team, I am likely to be the person who . . . • When there is conflict within my work team, I . . . • When it comes to collaborating on teams, I tend to . . . • When it comes to making decisions, I tend to . . . • When I am feeling under stress/pressure, I . . .

ov

eg

ro u

ps

6. Being patient

6. Conflict

3. W wit ork w ho the ell rs

t ou

ass

ign

tas

ks

quickly

5

k or .W

le eop lp p h it e h 2. I hroug t

3. I

4. Decide

it

t ou

k long 4. Thin rd and ha

k

al .T

5

; d it voi nflict A . o 2 te c I ha

1. Organiz es the task

Il

Marissa o rt fe ne re lo Ip a 7. ork w

7.

1. Makes sure everyone participates

Susanne

Figure 3.2  Susanne and Marissa Sharing their Daisies Source: Adapted from Pearce, W. B. (2007). Making Social Worlds: A Communication Perspective. Oxford: Blackwell, p. 179.

54  Chapter 3

• Something I hope to get better at is . . . • In addition, I would like to share . . .

Marissa

Stories about the rules of engagement

t bou sa rie oup Sto e’s gr on

St or wi grou ies th p r ab an el ou oth ati t o er ons ne’s ’s hi gr p ou p

Stories about the culture

Sto

St o di rie ffe s a re bo nc u es t

rie the s ab se out lf

The Daisy model (Figure 3.3) places the focus (in this example, the name of the person) in the center surrounded by petals emanating from it. This graphic approach enables people to stand back and observe the patterns they create in relationships, depicting both meaning and action.6 The Daisy model is particularly helpful when considering the influences that people bring to a current situation, a particular moment, or a relationship. The daisy’s center represents the person, and each petal represents various factors that influence the sensemaking and interpretation of events in that person’s life. Examples might include past career experiences, personal experiences with organizations, disciplinary functions, and both past and present developmental relationships. The model can also facilitate deeper understanding

Figure 3.3  The Daisy Model—Exploring a Particular Challenge Source: Adapted from Pearce, W. B. (2007). Making Social Worlds: A Communication Perspective. Oxford: Blackwell, p. 179.

Step 2: Hone Relational Practices to Create Success   55

of the influences at play in a challenge, in which case the challenge would sit in the center of the daisy and the factors that influence the challenge become the petals. Marissa and Susanne each chose a particular situation with which they wanted help. Marissa told Susanne about her frustration with a pattern of feeling disregarded in meetings, and they chose the Serpentine model (Figure 3.4) to visualize the issue for their coaching session. The model helps illuminate patterns as they emerge and unfold by creating a graphic so Marissa and Susanne could adopt a third-person perspective for an additional viewpoint. Three perspectives deepen their reflective process by highlighting what preceded the episode, how they define the episode, and what is emerging from it. Peers are encouraged to see how the way they frame the episode shapes the interpretation of meaning and shows how the nature of that meaning continues to emerge. As Susanne and Marissa reflected on a recent meeting, Susanne asked Marissa to draw each turn of that unfolding episode. Looking at the diagram helped them reconsider how each contextualized the episode. For example, they might reconsider the episode as they integrate the influences that preceded it, which might lead to reframing previous turns and possibly subsequent turns. This reframing underscores how the next moment opens up possibilities for consequential changes. Susanne and Marissa together create a storyboard of one example of the pattern that manifests in meetings for Marissa. Specifying the elements of storyboarding7 deepens the emerging story and allows her to articulate what would improve or shift her story in a more desirable direction. Marissa can see the possibilities of ways to act the next time the pattern emerges to create a different and more beneficial pattern. She realized that she needed to take responsibility to speak up in meetings whether she felt shy or not. The Daisy and Serpentine models both facilitate deeper reflection by supporting self-disclosure, self-regulation, deep listening, build-

56  Chapter 3

Past

Episode C

Episode B

Episode A

My turn 1 My turn 2 My turn 3 My turn 4 My turn 5 My turn 6 My turn 7 My turn 8

Future Figure 3.4  The Serpentine Model: Exploring Emerging Patterns Source: Adapted from Wasserman, I. C. (2005). Discursive Processes That Foster Dialogic Moments: Transformation in the Engagement of Social Identity Group Differences in Dialogue (Doctoral Dissertation, Fielding Graduate University, 2005). Dissertation Abstracts International, 66(3), 1790B (UMI No. 3168530).

ing empathy, and giving and receiving feedback. New insights support peers to assume responsibility and be accountable for personal behaviors. Two additional models, the Hierarchy of Meanings model and the LUUUUTT model, help peer coaches increase perspective and understanding of relational dynamics. The Hierarchy of Meanings model depicts the multiple contexts present in a particular utter-

Step 2: Hone Relational Practices to Create Success   57

ance, speech, act, or episode in relation to one another. Marissa’s story about feeling invisible in team meetings is a story about her as the storyteller and her feelings. It is also a story about an event, a turn in the life of the team. Furthermore, it is a story about relationship dynamics and group process that specifically involves the team members who ignored her input. It may also be a story about gender dynamics and the typical force with which they play out. Marissa is the only woman on her team, and the men interact as though they are competing in a sports arena. One story may incorporate all of these options. The meaning takes on a different nuance according to how it is told and which contexts are embedded in particular ­others. A listener can ask questions such as these: “Which aspect of the story is most important? Is that coming across as you heard yourself telling it? How would you rank the alternative options of the purpose of the story? How does that shape the meaning you convey?” The meaning made at any single level is incomplete without considering it in relation to meanings made at the other levels. Meaning changes as different contexts move into the foreground. The coherency of an interaction will vary, as those involved emphasize different levels. The contexts may include the following: • What is said (the content); • The episode or the frame in which the interaction occurred, such as team meetings; • The relationship(s) or the scripts that inform what is expected and the latitude within which one might act; for example, is this a personal pattern, a group level pattern, and so on; • The story told about the self in relationship with others and the script; and • The culture and the larger system. As meaning emerges from any social interaction, these multiple levels interact and influence each other simultaneously. Marissa

58  Chapter 3

may feel that she is ignored often in her life. As she and Susanne explore that feeling, they may find that it relates to her family dynamics, connected to having grown up on the margins economically or ethnically. Other women in her organization may share a similar pattern. Marissa’s feelings may also relate to the impact of living in a culture where the dynamics of marginalization are a part of an experience of implicit bias. While this lived experience may not be intentional, the impact she feels is very real. The LUUUUTT model highlights different aspects of the stories told and the form they take. LUUUUTT stands for stories lived, untold, unknown, unheard, untellable, told, and the storytelling process (see Figure 3.5). Considering all of these possibilities reminds peers to inquire about what the untold stories might be. Peers sharing stories enrich the coherence and coordination of jointly made meaning. Considering stories told draws attention to their form; for example, is the tone is boastful, humble, uncertain, or confused? Furthermore, peer coaches can prompt each other to think about the stories that may be untellable in that particular moment because of shame, privacy, or a political context. Untold stories

Unknown stories Stories lived

Storytelling

Stories told

Unheard stories

Untellable stories

Figure 3.5  The LUUUUTT Model Source: Adapted from Pearce, W. B. (2007). Making Social Worlds: A Communication Perspective. Oxford: Blackwell, p. 212.

Step 2: Hone Relational Practices to Create Success   59

Peers may hesitate initially to share stories that have otherwise been untellable in the workplace or even their personal life. Paul paid special attention to guarding knowledge of his sexual orientation given the strong religious and family forces in his life that view being gay as unacceptable. When Amira and Paul first started working together, Amira sensed that Paul was not engaging fully and somehow holding back. Sensing an unknown story, Amira imagined some possibilities. Was there something about her that was not creating the necessary level of comfort in their relationship? Was it something about Paul? The LUUUUTT model focuses coaches on the storytelling process and helps to unravel the way meaning shifts when exploring what stories might have been unheard, untold, or even not allowed because of contextual factors. Finally, contextual factors are always moving and shifting. Sometimes the episode is the primary context, while at other times the relationship or the story of the culture may be more central to the story. These models help peer coaches deepen their relationship and focus on the dynamic they create within it. Through the process, people enhance their relational skills including appropriate selfdisclosure, deep and active listening to their partner, expressing empathy, giving and receiving feedback, managing conflict, and regulating themselves to focus attention on their partner. As Amira and Paul began working together, Paul shared a story about how it was difficult for him when people at work asked him what he did during his free time. Paul’s self-disclosure created the opportunity for Amira to explore why he found the question so difficult. She used the LUUUUTT model to invite Paul to share more at a deeper level, hoping he might feel he could speak to her and disclose the burden of holding what he believes is an unallowable story of his personal relationship. Feedback is a delicate process that involves some intentionality and develops skills that can lead to mutual growth. The same

60  Chapter 3

models described earlier that support self-disclosure can also assist the feedback process. When using any of those models presented, the listener can deepen the reflection process by linking back to an earlier scenario and use the technique of circular questioning in which peers explore a situation with inquiry, deepening the process with each question. For example: • Tell me more about . . . • What was that about for you? Critical Reflective Practice.  Feedback processes build

self-awareness by creating a continuous loop of self-disclosure. These elements make a critical reflective practice: the first explores the mind-sets that foster patterns that allow an individual to ­identify and enact new patterns. The second enables each person to challenge assumptions underlying their input or their peer’s ­contribution. A critically reflective process helps people think about thinking: to ­notice what they notice, for example, during a ­check-in, while ­developing the working agreement, and in the stories told.

Developing the Relationship Self-­disclosure within peer coaching processes using the Daisy, Serpentine, LUUUUTT, and Hierarchy of Meanings models supports active and deep listening on the part of the listener, and, for the storyteller, assuming accountability for their own story. Relational skills underpin high-quality relationships.8 A range of relational skills, conditions, and stances serve as “prerequisites” for relational coaching and mentoring, including a willingness to be vulnerable, demonstrate empathy, apply social and emotional competence, be authentic, and think holistically. Furthermore, there are skills and behaviors that support peers as they identify and build develop-

Step 2: Hone Relational Practices to Create Success   61

mental networks.9 Some people in those networks may be resources who share similar challenges. Increasing curiosity about their own stories and their peer coach’s stories can lead to two important outcomes: peers streng­ then their relational practice and deepen their sense of self. Feminists recognize the power of storytelling whereby women who live on the margins are more challenged to speak than others are. A prominent feminist theorist, bell hooks,10 ties transformation to the capacity to move toward being an observer of one’s story. She explains that “speaking becomes both a way to engage in active selftransformation and a rite of passage.”11 Telling stories is a way to move from being silent to having a voice. Peer coaches hear that voice and can validate the speaker. The product is the story; the process is the storytelling. Peers having a sacred commitment to each other enhances deep listening as they listen fully for what might be emerging, what is new, and what is transformative. They can then encourage and support new patterns of action. Table 3.1 summarizes the CMM models presented in this chapter and highlights possibilities for peer coaches to apply each one to their relational practice to create success. Each section contains starter questions to spark inquiry about how the particular model invokes relational practice. We encourage you to add your own additional questions.

Concluding Thoughts In this chapter, the focus on Step 2, creating success, offers specific examples of CMM approaches that peer coaches can use to create effective developmental relationships. The Daisy, ­Serpentine, LUUUUTT, and Hierarchy of Meanings models all enable peers to hone threshold relational skills such as self-disclosure,

Table 3.1  Relational Practices: A Summary of Models

Relational Practice

Johari’s Window

Building SelfAwareness and Feedback

How might self-disclosure What do the influences I choose and seeking feedback to amplify tell me open up new insights about what I value that are currently and attend to? out of my scope of awareness?

Critical Reflective What do I do with Practice feedback?

Daisy

Serpentine

LUUUUTT

Hierarchy of Meanings

When I consider the way I name and frame identitydefining episodes, what patterns am I making? How might I explore those episodes in a more expansive way?

What patterns emerge What contexts shape the way I define from the stories myself ? Do I I tell? Are they emphasize task hopeful, shameful, at the expense of prideful, wishful, relationships? What humble, validating? might I learn about What are the stories myself if I shift the I don’t tell that, if order of contexts I I did, would help foreground? me learn more about myself in relationships?

How does the shifting How am I integrating How do I understand What are the unof contexts and the known and perhaps the past in a fuller the influences from expanding of my even untellable way and be more the feedback I am possibilities influstories that I am exgetting and how am imaginative about ence my awareness? ploring and how are the next moments I expanding the way can create given the they enriching my I know myself ? self-awareness and deepening of my my relationships? awareness?

Developing the Relationship

What can I learn from disclosing more about myself ? How might I listen more closely to the feedback?

What contexts am I What are the stories How might I deepen How am I defining emphasizing as I I tell myself and the boundaries of my understanding create the meaning my peer coach? this episode? What of the situation of my story, this What are the untold has happened and myself by encounter, this stories, what are the before and what identifying the episode, and so on? unheard stories, the is the future I am various influences I How might our unknown stories anticipating? How bring? shared meaning that, if I did know, does that create the shift and/or expand would enhance my meaning with my by foregrounding understanding and peer coach? other contexts? empathy? What are the untellable stories, stories that. if told, would break some rule or commitment?

64  Chapter 3

s­ elf-­regulation, and deep listening. Each highlights both the spoken content in the interaction and the patterns of meaning created in the relationship. The outcomes increase the likelihood of success and generate more vitality in the peer coaching relationship. In the following chapter, our attention turns to Step 3, making peer coaching a habit, to apply the practical applications in everyday settings.

Chapter 4

Step 3: Make Peer Coaching a Habit

our 3-step Peer Coaching model prepare individuals to create and sustain high quality helping relationships in their personal and professional journeys. In Step 1, building the relationship, peers learn and experience the infrastructure necessary to create a relationship in which mutual learning and growth can occur. At the outset, they may not appreciate the importance of checkins, working agreements, a careful selection process, or becoming a critical friend that provides confirmation, consistency, and contradiction along the way. Yet as participants progress to Step 2, creating success, they are supported by the scaffolding developed in Step 1 and begin to experience the benefits of asking good questions, reflecting on their own experiences from multiple perspectives, and seeing, perhaps for the first time, patterns in their behavior and in the systems in which they work and live. By the end of Step 2, peers often experience enhanced selfawareness, a deepening rapport and relationship with their peer coach, and sharpened relational skills that give them confidence in building other high quality connections. For example, by the end of Step 2, Marissa and Susanne had learned quite a bit about their core values, how their life histories have shaped their career Steps 1 and 2 in

66  Chapter 4

a­ spirations, and the value of challenging each other in their discussions. For the first time, Susanne is quite aware of how her privileged upbringing and her MBA training shaped her achievement orientation and her tendency to prioritize advancement over learning and personal development. Marissa, on the other hand, gained a better appreciation of how much she has accomplished and her resiliency in balancing the complex demands of working full time and parenting a toddler. With encouragement from her peer coach, she now sees that her life experiences have provided critical time management and problem-solving skills that serve her well at work. Having practiced critical reflection and honed essential communication skills, Marissa and Susanne were each able to foster personal learning in the other. For example, each asked the other to identify and explain their daisy petals (see Chapter 3) and thus became more aware of how different aspects of their identities influenced their decisions and priorities. Marissa better understood how her Caribbean upbringing had instilled certain work-related values and raising a family. She could see how being a first-generation immigrant posed substantial challenges when adapting to mainstream expectations at work. Susanne came to appreciate how her achievement orientation had narrowed her field of vision in terms of moving forward. Step 3 of the model, making peer coaching a habit, invites individuals to consider whether to continue peer coaching relationships beyond what was accomplished in the two preceding steps (see Figure 4.1). In all likelihood, peers will modify the working agreement created in Step 1, building the relationship, to accommodate where each individual is now, how often they want to meet, whether they will meet face to face or through electronic/social media, and the range of topics they will discuss. Peer coaches will check whether they agree or wish to negotiate new terms now that they are no longer in a classroom setting and may be geographically distant.

Step 3: Make Peer Coaching a Habit   67

Transference to other contexts

Deepening connections

Relational mindset

Mutual learning

Figure 4.1  Step 3: Making Peer Coaching a Habit

The opportunity to continue practicing the newly acquired relational skills and to make use of them in other relationships is equally important. Step 3 assumes that peers have adopted a relational mind-set, a belief that much can be learned in relationships with others, and are eager to apply what they have learned to existing relationships and to new relationships with people who may be effective learning partners. Existing and new relationships may be with co-workers or individuals outside of work. In making peer coaching a habit, peers develop new habits of mind that will create mental routines and thus foster continuous learning as they move forward on their journeys.1 The underlying assumption of Step 3 is that the primary purpose of peer coaching relationships is to support continuous learning and growth through high-quality relationships. Ultimately, we suggest that you consider mindfully how to enlist individuals who care about you, and are happy to engage in reciprocal learning partnerships, into a small developmental network.2 You should decide whether it makes sense to continue the relationship and actively consider reaching out to others who might enhance your

68  Chapter 4

learning. Over time, continual practice will enable you to internalize the essential skills that sustain high-quality relationships. As learning theory suggests, these skills will become part of your repertoire and you will move from being in a stage of “unconscious incompetence” to a stage of “unconscious competence.”3 Making peer coaching a habit means that you are likely to feel more comfortable reaching out to potential learning partners than you did when you first engaged in the process.

Continuing the Peer Coaching Relationship In our experience, many participants intend to continue the relationship they began with their peer coach in the initial learning session. Having experienced a sense of trust, a level of deep dialogue after practicing the communication approaches introduced in Step 2, creating success, they are enthusiastic about continuing that mutual support and learning. What they often don’t realize (because they haven’t yet experienced it) is that returning to their regular workplaces requires a new working contract to accommodate the daily realities of their lives. Immediately after their leadership development program ended, Susanne and Marissa decided to check in with each other weekly via Skype. Each had developed an action plan to help them progress toward their personal and professional goals, and they wanted to hold each other accountable for moving forward on these plans and act as a sounding board for each other. Each time they checked in, Susanne would reflect on her communication patterns at work and note whether she had taken action to create new connections with others, such as her MBA alumni and others in professional settings, to widen her social and developmental networks. Marissa would review how she was managing the dual stressors of work and family life and whether she was regularly af-

Step 3: Make Peer Coaching a Habit   69

firming small wins that would ultimately strengthen her capacity to manage both effectively. She had also become aware of the value of strategically reaching out to others to invest in relationships with learning potential. Though this regular pattern of weekly contact continued for a while, it soon became cumbersome and more frequent than either felt was necessary. After six weeks of check-ins, both agreed that they had experienced some success and wanted to update their action plans. Susanne wanted to try new social activities outside of work to expand her life structure beyond work activities. Marissa hoped to focus on reaching out to working mothers with whom she might build new peer coaching alliances. They agreed that they could hold themselves accountable for their new intentions with fewer check-ins, particularly if they each committed to keeping a journal on a regular basis. The renewed working agreement worked well; they reduced their Skype contact to less than once per month and sometimes replaced Skype with phone calls. Interestingly, as each enhanced her developmental network, they found it less necessary to check in on a regular basis. Susanne began to find their regular meetings burdensome. Because of the trust and mutual positive regard they had developed, she was able to share this with Marissa about eight months after the formal program had ended. Marissa held a similar view and both acknowledged that they had received invaluable support and would continue to stay in touch as needed but not regularly scheduled check-ins. Adjusting the formal processes to meet the needs of both peers does not always progress smoothly. While Paul and Amira, whose original connection was grounded in their work on the diversity committee at the bank, experienced heightened self-awareness through their reciprocal peer coaching, they soon found that their needs and expectations diverged and what worked early on would

70  Chapter 4

no longer move them forward. It took time for them to realize that their needs had changed and that they needed to renegotiate their working agreement. After Paul was able to disclose to Amira that he was gay he began to come out more generally with a wider range of trusted others. Amira was in the midst of a major career and life transition where responsibility for her elderly parents was becoming more important than climbing the corporate ladder in international banking. Three months after they began their peer coaching relationship, each had nurtured other developmental relationships using the relational skills they learned in Step 2, creating success, and had less to share with each other. Paul finally had the courage to share with Amira that he did not feel that continuing regular meetings was right for him. Amira, on the other hand, enjoyed her friendship with Paul and found his disclosure disturbing. It is at junctures like this that the CMM tools presented in Chapter 3 can be so helpful and make a critical difference in the peer coaching process. Tools such as the Daisy and Serpentine models can guide the challenging shift from being hurt to being curious, and the exploration process has the potential to be growth-enhancing for both individuals. Circular questioning focuses on relationships rather than individuals. For example, Amira might ask Paul what he hoped to learn from the new relationships at work and with his other colleagues. Her question might help Paul identify hidden assumptions, hopes, and expectations he might not have noticed otherwise. Listening deeply and asking good questions to create greater meaning and purpose in their relationship is essential to effective peer coaching. As Paul shared more in response to Amira’s questions, they in turn explored similar questions for Amira. She then became more aware of her interest in connecting with others who had primary care for elderly parents; when she found someone who offered this experience, she was able to accept that this first peer coaching alliance would recede into the background.

Step 3: Make Peer Coaching a Habit   71

Relationships at Work When you reach Step 3, making peer coaching a habit, in our coaching model and are applying the skills of peer coaching in your everyday life, you are likely to be experiencing the benefits of high-quality connections with your peer coach. Jean BakerMiller pointed out “the five good things” that are major benefits of growth-enhancing relationships.4 These include zest, empowered action, new knowledge and skills, enhanced sense of worth, and a desire for more connection. As you begin to internalize the skills that you learned and practiced in Steps 1 and 2, you are likely to note a stark contrast between relationships that are average and those that are high quality. It is not surprising that you want to apply your newly acquired skills and make them a habit in your interpersonal relationships. To create effective growth-enhancing connections with others, it is best to be intentional when deciding with whom to connect and why. The best place to start is with your current developmental network, as illustrated in Figure 4.2.5

ME

Figure 4.2  My Developmental Network Source: Murphy, W. & Kram, K. E. Strategic Relationships at Work: Creating Your Circle of Mentors, Sponsors, and Peers for Success in Business and Life, New York, N.Y.: © McGraw-Hill Education, p. 80. Reprinted with permission.

72  Chapter 4

We know from research on developmental networks that relationships with peers, seniors, and juniors at work are important sources of career and psychosocial support.6 In recent years, researchers have identified the six types of developers found most often in developmental networks. These are personal guides who provide limited psychosocial support, personal advisors who provide frequent psychosocial support, full-service mentors who provide frequent and active career and psychosocial support, career advisors who provide frequent career support, career guides who provide limited career support, and role models who provide inspiration at a distance.7 Making use of the curiosity, listening, feedback, and empathy skills from Step 2, creating success, your peer coach can help you identify who is already part of your developmental network. Judicious questions include the following: “Who takes an active interest in your well-being and your personal success? What is missing in terms of support and guidance?” Then you can consider others whom you would like to enlist in your network. These may include individuals in different social domains such as work, family, community, professional associations, and religious organizations. These different social domains are called career communities and contain multiple potential developers (peers and others) within them.8 In addition to a clear picture of your current developmental network map, it is important to consider your current personal and professional aspirations. Your unique story, shared and explored with your peer coach, is a source of insight about who you want to connect with in a more meaningful and growth-enhancing manner. For example, both Marissa and Susanne identified relationships in their work environment to enhance using new relational skills developed through their reciprocal coaching. They prompted each other to consider the following questions: 1. What is the story I have been telling myself about this relationship?

Step 3: Make Peer Coaching a Habit   73

2. What would I like to create going forward? 3. How can I use the Daisy, Serpentine, and LUUUUTT models to guide my active listening, self-disclosure, empathy, and curiosity in a manner that will build trust, rapport, and mutual learning?9 Marissa and Susanne each named one peer and one senior colleague with whom they had fairly routine and distant connections and whom they considered potential learning partners. Susanne wanted to deepen her relationship with her boss so she could convey her professional aspirations meaningfully and enlist his help to move toward those goals. Working with Marissa, she learned that she tended to approach such relationships in a self-protective manner. Because she revealed more of herself and the complexity of her personal needs and core values during their coaching, she learned that allowing herself to be vulnerable and open to feedback could be beneficial. Her new learning goal became to approach her boss with the intent of sharing her personal insights so that he might become a more effective developer in her network. Marissa agreed to help her with this as needed. Marissa was enthusiastic about deepening a relationship with a peer she did not know well in her extended work group. She chose a young mother who was apparently quite ambitious. What Marissa had learned about herself and the potential of peer coaching made her want to deepen her relationship with the colleague, who likely faced similar challenges managing work/family dilemmas. Paul, on reflecting with Amira on his career and his identity as a gay man, came to see how much distance he had maintained in his relationships with colleagues in his immediate work group. He wanted to build a more personal connection with several colleagues and had new relational skills for doing so. While he thought it might be helpful to let colleagues know he was gay, he was clear that there were other ways to deepen these relationships based on

74  Chapter 4

what he had learned about deep listening, self-disclosure, and empathy, using the CMM models available to him. Most importantly, he realized that relationships evolve over time and that each conversation can be a step toward greater trust and mutuality. Amira immediately reached out to a colleague who she knew had primary responsibility for caring for elderly parents. She invited Tessa to have coffee, and they soon found themselves sharing the challenges they faced with eldercare. Consequently, they decided to stay in touch and share resources that might be mutually beneficial. Amira also wanted to connect with colleagues who might be less career-oriented than she was, to support her desire to downshift her pursuits gently. After discussing this with Paul and thinking about it further, she decided that it would be safer to engage with someone outside her department. After participating in the 3-step peer coaching process, it is common to deepen particular relationships with immediate colleagues back at work. However, this is neither necessarily straightforward nor easy because existing relationships have established patterns. Changing familiar patterns requires actions that may feel uncomfortable yet necessary to develop mutual sharing and deeper dialogue than normally experienced in routine work discussions. The best way to sharpen relational skills is through ongoing reflection on the actions taken to further a relationship. During Step 2 of the model, creating success, individuals generate positive outcomes as they practice critical reflection and journal writing to record their thoughts and observations. A peer coach can encourage an individual to take time to record or explore a prior interaction in an intentionally evolving relationship. Journaling can range from an unstructured stream of consciousness to a structured reflection that occurs at a regular time periodically. The best use of journaling depends on each person’s approach to learning; we suggest that you experiment with the options. A simple way to proceed is to answer the following questions:

Step 3: Make Peer Coaching a Habit   75

1. What happened? Write a brief paragraph describing the events that occurred. 2. How did you feel? What did you think? 3. What did you learn from the experience? What questions do you now have? 4. What actions will this lead you to take in the future? Simply answering these questions may prompt you to imagine steps that you had not yet considered. This is even more likely if you share these observations with a peer coach who uses a circular questioning process by posing questions such as “What else did you notice?” or “Can you say more?” Several resources on structured approaches to reflection are available.10 Keep in mind that Step 3 is about making peer coaching a habit, which means internalizing the skills that were introduced and practiced in Steps 1 and 2. Reflecting on interactions designed to deepen a current or new relationship ensures continuous learning. In particular, reflection deepens discovery about how to ask better questions, self-disclose, express empathy, and encourage your peer to do the same.11 As you internalize these skills, it will be less necessary to stop and reflect after each interaction to develop your relational skill set. Alternating between the dual focus on interacting with a peer or colleague to deepen the quality of the relationship while also reflecting on what occurred to prepare for the next interaction provides continual opportunities to hone the self-awareness and relational skills developed in Steps 1 and 2 of the Peer Coaching model. Without that intentional reflection, you risk falling back into old routines and losing the potential to deepen work relationships as the immediate demands of work and life override your development. Asking better questions, considering multiple perspectives, and seeing patterns in your behavior as well as in the context in which you work and live will eventually develop new habits that ensure transformational learning going forward.

76  Chapter 4

Initiating New Relationships at Work Transferring the relational skills and self-insights attained during Step 2, creating success, allows individuals to move beyond existing relationships and initiate new ones with people at work. This is most relevant to those with new clarity about their developmental needs and the critical role that high-quality relationships play in addressing them. For example, after experiencing the assessment tools introduced in Step 1, building the relationship, and Step 2, creating success, some individuals are eager to solicit feedback from peers or superiors on particular strengths and weaknesses they may have developed. Inviting conversation about what they learned can deepen a relationship to the point where further conversation is growth-enhancing for both parties. Alternatively, an assessment tool may highlight how an individual’s self-reliance may result in having few relationships that nurture a sense of well-being and job enjoyment beyond those with immediate colleagues. A successful peer coaching alliance may lead to identifying one or more individuals outside the immediate work group whom getting to know would be beneficial. Some ­individuals are better at initiating new relationships than others.12 However, ­developing this relational skill through practicing Step 3, making peer coaching a habit, better equips individuals to take the n ­ ecessary actions to do so. A good place to begin is with self-inquiry: 1. What is it about this particular person that intrigues me? What would I like to know about him or her? What would I like to learn from this person? What else? Is there more to consider? 2. What can I offer to this individual? Can I model curiosity, deep listening, empathy, and self-disclosure to lay the groundwork for mutual learning? 3. What is the best way to begin? What might I share from my own experience with a peer to begin building a connection?

Step 3: Make Peer Coaching a Habit   77

Considering these questions prepares you for a first meeting. If the individual is in a role to which you aspire, you might convey an interest in learning about their career path and critical experiences along the way. Applying newly acquired listening skills and using the Daisy or Serpentine model to guide your questions will uncover the potential for further dialogue of mutual interest. After a first encounter of this kind, journaling and critical reflection reinforces what went well and may guide a decision to initiate another conversation. At a minimum, acknowledging the value of the first encounter and considering a constructive next step will bring you closer to the goal of establishing new growth-enhancing relationships at work. It is particularly exciting to acknowledge the possibility that these actions will enhance current work relationships, initiate new connections, and positively influence the workplace culture. Over time, others may come to value the mutual learning and the associated relational skills modeled by an experienced peer coach. Relationships with weak ties may become stronger, and newly formed weak ties may deepen over time. When learning in relationships with trusted others becomes commonplace, you will know that the culture supports continuous learning and enables everyone to fare better in the VUCA environment.

Relationships Beyond the Workplace High-quality relationships beyond the workplace significantly contribute to effectiveness and well-being at work.13 Individuals who identify positive relationships with family members as part of their developmental networks experience greater satisfaction at work than those who do not. Members of church groups, community organizations, and school or university alumni are often significant sources of support. Outside of work, it can be substantially more challenging to create high-quality relationships with individuals who are unaware

78  Chapter 4

of the potential of peer learning. Recall Ricardo, the Hispanic forty-three-year-old middle manager who learned of the potential of peer coaching in a work-related training session. He was seriously contemplating a major career change. One way to expand his possible options was to seek out people who had followed different paths from his. Furthermore, seeing more options might motivate him to actively consider other opportunities. During this time, he met Len on a project for Habitat for Humanity. The two hit it off immediately and noted that they had followed very different career paths. In contrast to Ricardo, who had spent twenty years with the same company, Len was a small-business owner and computer consultant with a law degree. Both had children, but Len was a widower with three children still at home. Ricardo practiced what he had learned at work. He asked Len questions to encourage him to tell his story and shared much of his own experience to build trust and rapport and to discover common values and common interests. He used the Daisy, Serpentine, and LUUUUTT models to ask questions that would deepen their communication. Ricardo thought their conversations were evolving into a peer coaching relationship. He envisioned that the two would meet periodically to support each other’s current challenges at work and in family life. Len’s experience was both similar and different. While he also enjoyed their conversations and was coming to view Ricardo as a good friend, he did not assume that the two of them would meet regularly to provide feedback and hold each other accountable as suggested in Step 2 of our coaching model. From Len’s point of view, he was too busy to commit to regular meetings and he was unaware of the potential value that might bring. Each held quite different assumptions about the nature of their relationship, which influenced their view of how it might evolve. The lack of shared assumptions is a challenge for anyone who understands the potential of peer coaching and wants to create an

Step 3: Make Peer Coaching a Habit   79

alliance with someone inside or outside of work who may know nothing about it. Here, the burden is on the more knowledgeable person to model and educate the other. Individuals with relational savvy (Table 4.1) are more likely to experience high-quality helping relationships and have larger and more diverse developmental networks than those who do not.14 Regularly reviewing this checklist of characteristics and behaviors is helpful to assess and monitor your progress. You can ask yourself which behaviors you are practicing in your interactions with people at work, family members, and people in your community so that you can assess whether you are maximizing opportunities to build mutually supportive helping relationships. At any point, you can choose to practice any aspect of your repertoire of relational skills that may be underutilized.

Table 4.1  Characteristics and Behaviors of People with Relational Savvy

Characteristics

Behaviors

Developmentally proactive

Seek to create learning episodes with others often Make use of communication models to prepare good questions, practice self-­ disclosure, listen deeply, are genuinely curious, practice self-management, ­express appreciation, keep in touch Actively create opportunities for mutual learning by posing reflective questions and sharing insights and resources Assume potential for learning in every interaction, recognize that relationships unfold over time through regular, ­supportive exchanges Continual practice of relational skills outlined in Steps 1 and 2 of the coaching model

Prepared for meetings with potential ­learning partners

Interested in mutuality

Hold positive relational attitudes

Develop strong social and reflective skills

80  Chapter 4

Concluding Thoughts In our 3-step Peer Coaching model, Step 3, making peer coaching a habit, is designed to ensure sustainable peer coaching beyond the initial formal learning experience. Practicing reflective and relational skills introduced in Step 2, creating success, and replicating elements of the infrastructure for creating a safe learning environment presented in Step 1, building the relationship, increases the potential of relational learning. The possibilities are endless once you are competent in the critical relational skills outlined and practiced in Step 2. You can invite others into learning partnerships that benefit both parties and develop partnerships of mutual learning, which can become a mainstay at every stage of life and career. Over time, practices and new skills will become habitual and lead to a natural desire to engage others in shared learning on a regular basis. Workplaces, families, and communities will all benefit. As the authors of this book, we have experienced the value of peer coaching firsthand working with our clients and students and, equally important, in our family and personal relationships, including with each other. We can ardently confirm that over the last two decades, we have each internalized the relational skills introduced in Step 2 of our 3-step Peer Coaching model and now practice them in daily interactions. This can be true for you too, if you consider the suggestions outlined in Step 3, making peer coaching a habit.

Chapter 5

Peer Coaching Groups

exist in many forms: for example, project managers in an engineering firm who meet monthly to address common challenges in their roles and coach each other, a group of female leaders who come together to help each other develop strategies to address gender challenges in the workplace, or CEOs who provide reciprocal peer support as they enact their roles at the top of organizations. Peer coaching groups support learning in each of these situations. While career learning and support have been traditionally associated with one-on-one relationships, peer coaching in groups is a relational process with the potential to address intellectual, emotional, and social career issues in a focused manner. In peer coaching groups, leaders can develop capacities to lead and work in the volatile, uncertain, complex, and ambiguous (VUCA) environment that characterizes most work places today (see Chapter 1). In these learning partnerships, individuals can learn to see the larger picture and to act compassionately toward others as they face challenging situations. Group settings provide a critical mass, which accentuates the social and relational focus in learning and highlights interpersonal

Peer coaching groups

82  Chapter 5

relationships. Additional sources of connection, support, attachment, and influence become available and offer a broader range of potential benefits for each group member. More opportunities exist to notice how people in the group offer different perspectives that shape their inputs, decisions, and behavior. Learning occurs through observation and interaction as participants build and develop relational competence and, in turn, enhance their confidence and sensitivity to others’ situations. Larger collective systems such as communities of practice, career communities, and occupational communities all recognize the importance of relational learning in groups.1 Work settings provide natural relational environments to develop a sense of connectedness with others, experience partnership in learning relationships, and to nurture that partnership in others.2 Relational maturity develops through participating actively in processes that help people move from independence to interdependence. Peer coaching groups are small collectives of individuals who come together for the primary purpose of supporting members’ learning and development through a mutually encouraging process. The range and type of groups that engage in peer coaching can be extremely diverse. Some groups, such as investment clubs, come together explicitly to share knowledge among members. Similar groups may focus on organizational-level learning that comes from working together on a project to produce a specific product or outcome. Others, such as leadership development and CEO support groups, focus on individual-level learning aimed explicitly at supporting people’s development through sharing experiences and asking questions to trigger deep reflection and learning; individuals support their peers’ learning even though an individual’s goal may not be relevant personally to other group members. Although deep learning (see Chapter 6) can happen as an unintended consequence of peer coaching when the group has some other purpose such as sharing knowledge or brainstorming, it is a more likely out-

Peer Coaching Groups   83

come when specifically identified as a formal purpose and group members mindfully focus on goals that transform people. In this chapter, we apply our 3-step Peer Coaching model to group settings. We introduce examples showing the strengths and pitfalls of peer coaching groups to illustrate each step. Simply putting people into a group is not sufficient for peer coaching to be successful in a group setting; it requires care and intention. While peer coaching groups amplify the process and its benefits, they also increase the dynamics and associated complexity. A paradox of structure becomes apparent: the larger the group and the fewer skills among the participants, the greater the need for explicit structures to provide an adequate holding environment and boundary conditions that promote effective outcomes and minimize any risk participants may feel as they engage with their peers.

Types of Peer Coaching Groups Peer coaching is effective in several types of groups. First, and perhaps most familiar, are those in educational settings where class groups are abundant. Second, groups that meet to support one another socially and psychologically to promote growth and deep personal learning can use peer coaching to further their aims. These groups may or may not be leaderless. Third, facilitated groups drawing on the strengths of peer coaching processes are widely recognized and practiced in educational and work settings. Such groups operate under a variety of names such as career progression programs, learning circles, employee resource groups, and retiree groups. The facilitator’s presence and expertise enhances the group’s process dynamics and allows members to better focus on content. Finally, formal groups are established based on a shared interest in a broader field, such as industry-wide groups, in which formal group learning structures are created. Let us consider each in turn.

84  Chapter 5

Small groups in the classroom.  An MBA class may require

students to demonstrate individual competence in specific curriculum areas, such as participation, which motivates students to speak up and to speak out. When peer coaching groups are introduced, participants’ focus moves from speaking out (for grades) to attending to others. Success in groups requires speaking less, listening more, and asking questions to stimulate insight and learning in others rather than demonstrating individual expertise. Groups may develop a working agreement together as a class and then apply those guidelines to smaller groups of three to six people operating as a subset of the class. Smaller peer coaching groups work particularly well when MBA students reflect on their careers prior to coaching others about theirs, to identify aspects of satisfaction, motivation, and future direction from their current situation. Support groups focused on deep learning and personal change.  When personal change is a learning goal, groups provide

a powerful context in which to focus on and gain support for work. Examples include groups like Weight Watchers, Alcoholics Anonymous, and other recovery and support groups such as grieving, crisis management, and newcomer orientation programs. What can we expect from peer coaching in these types of group settings? The peer coaching that occurs in these groups can lead to deep learning and personal change. Peer coaching groups whose members aim to instigate deep learning will generally have less permeable boundaries than those of peer coaching groups formed for other purposes. That is, the participants hold each other explicitly to the task at hand. Deep learning requires higher levels of trust, openness, and psychological safety than task learning. Therefore, selecting, admitting, and incorporating a new member becomes a major and timeconsuming task in deep learning peer coaching groups. One of the authors (Tim) is in a men’s support group that uses peer coaching and has taken in new members just once in its thirty-year history. Two of the people invited to join the group attended several meet-

Peer Coaching Groups   85

ings but did not remain. The group has considered inviting other new members on occasion but, based on the previous experience, decided not to pursue the idea. For the newly accepted long-term members who did remain, the entry and re-forming process was lengthy. Facilitated groups.  Peer coaching groups are effective when

an internal or external facilitator guides the process. A professional facilitator increases effectiveness, particularly for deep learning outcomes. Early work on sensitivity training groups and therapy groups supports this idea.3 A consultant/facilitator guides the group members as they organize and manage the unfolding process together. The facilitators need not be experts in the content area, though they are likely to have considerable experience and a proven record of success in facilitating group dynamics. A good example of the power of peer coaching groups comes from educational leadership learning circles, which operate as trustworthy sounding boards for principals in a geographical area. These groups meet regularly and share experiences and challenges faced in their roles. While there is a balance between identifying organizational goals and personal goals, the purpose is to learn from each other through peer coaching in a confidential setting. The groups agree on the standards they will abide by to work effectively together and gain maximum benefit for each participant. Typically, the groups set a collegial atmosphere prior to the “work” of the meeting by sharing a meal. Members informally catch up and mentally bring themselves into the psychological space for the interaction. An opening typically comprises a welcome from one principal and a round of check-in contributions to update peers. A guest speaker then focuses attention to a particular area, which in turn stimulates individual thoughts, feelings, and questions for subsequent processing after the speaker concludes. Group members may each pose their challenge to the group to initiate peer coaching.

86  Chapter 5

An alternative structure exists in a program called Career Progression for Academic Women run by the University of Queensland in Australia. Approximately twenty-five selected women attend an annual seven-day program comprising three discrete modules over a calendar year. A senior academic and an organizational development specialist co-facilitate the program. Each participant focuses on the requirements for promotion to senior levels, which provides a shared purpose for the group. As leadership is a key criterion for promotion to this level, leadership development provides the context for the peer coaching groups. As there are no quotas or targets for promotion, the individuals within the group are not competing against each other and so can provide support without fear of disadvantaging themselves. In one aspect of the program, the larger group divides into smaller paired peer coaching sessions. A second aspect occurs when the peer coaching involves all participants in larger groups (see the example later in this chapter). A third and complementary aspect involves embedded group mentoring by a senior academic, outside the modules. The third aspect usually focuses on clarifying the university’s processes, procedures, and requirements rather than coaching for individual leadership capability. Similar programs for academic women operate in other geographical locations worldwide. Formally established peer coaching groups.  Formal groups

usually engage an external facilitator explicitly to guide the group toward achieving personal work goals and supporting other members to reach personal and career goals. One example is Aurora Health, a group of Australian health professionals who worked in different fields within the same industry. They had first met during an executive directors’ leadership development program the previous year. The learning experience was so positive that they were motivated to develop further and continue to provide the support they had enjoyed. Their experience meant that participants came to the new group with a level of trust on which future interactions

Peer Coaching Groups   87

could build. Members had a sense of a loosely connected community based on their common interest in improving public health and a sense of shared understanding of the context in which issues arose. Many issues put forward for discussion were political, which highlighted the value of their insider knowledge to support each other navigate the terrain. A large variety of groups practice peer coaching effectively, which indicates the versatility of the approach. Irrespective of the style and specific intention of each group, success is more likely when members are mindful of how groups form and develop. Intentionally applying our 3-step Peer Coaching model and focusing on the steps that align with the group’s maturity can be very rewarding, and the multiple perspectives enable a range of models from which others can learn. However, peer coaching groups have a different dynamic than do pairs. We return to the 3-step model to illustrate the differences.

Step 1: Building the Relationship—Creating a Positive Holding Environment Perhaps the most obvious difference in building relationships in a group setting is the scaling up from a pair of peers to a group involving several people. Every aspect of the process takes longer to set up and progress. Among a group of peers, Step 1, building the relationship, requires compatible composition to create the necessary holding environment. Groups like Aurora Health come together with an already identified shared goal that unifies them through a joint focus from the outset. Others may have a vague goal of ongoing professional development yet lack any previous shared experience of either working together in this way or of prior programs. Attending closely to the process and scheduling time to establish a strong foundation may make the difference between the sustainability of the group or its demise.

88  Chapter 5

The first step in building the relationship requires paying attention to how the group forms, establishing conditions under which members will engage with one another and developing and applying guidelines to ensure that the processes within the group promote positive co-learning interactions. To build the relationship, the group observes the initial relational dynamic, forms itself into a group, sets basic ground rules, and orients to the task. Other conditions that are critical to successful outcomes include voluntary participation, building trust, and promoting a group culture that recognizes the importance of a holding environment for psychological safety. Selecting the group members, developing a joint working agreement, and sharing processes such as checking in and checking out as integral aspects of each meeting strengthen the foundation. We will discuss each in turn and illustrate with examples from our experience. Voluntary participation.  Individuals are more likely to benefit

from participating in peer coaching groups if members attend with a genuine desire to learn about themselves and to develop their personal capabilities. Thus, if the purpose of the group is to foster individual learning and development, participants must join voluntarily. No one should be told to join by someone else or sent to “be fixed.” Classical theories of human motivation, Positive Organizational Scholarship4 and Appreciative Inquiry,5 support the inherent drive that individuals bring to opportunities for self-inquiry and self-improvement. However, they will likely resist active engagement without freedom of choice to self-disclose, a willingness to be vulnerable, and listening actively to support others’ learning. These behaviors all characterize relational learning at its best. While resistance to change is normal and expected to some degree, a genuine desire to learn enables individuals to surmount this personal obstacle through self-inquiry and relational support. As is the case in effective work teams and learning groups, a shared goal becomes the driving reason for building an effective peer coaching process.

Peer Coaching Groups   89

In this example, the goal is members’ personal and professional development. Creating a positive holding environment: promoting a group culture of psychological safety.  Successful outcomes from peer

coaching in groups require conditions so that members feel safe in the group as a whole. Feeling vulnerable and potentially exposed limits the willingness to learn from a variety of peers who come together in peer coaching groups. Without adequate psychological safety, members are less likely to risk the self-disclosure and the reflective work and active experimentation required to develop self-awareness and new capabilities that will serve them personally and professionally.6 The group and any facilitator present must together create a trusting climate in which each member knows that the other group members are there to support personal learning and that any disclosure will not be used to hurt any member. The paradox is that trustworthiness begets trust. When people act individually and collectively with integrity by demonstrating ethical behavior that upholds the principles established within the group, they maintain and assure trust. Specific behaviors include, but are not restricted to, maintaining confidentiality, acting respectfully of other members in the process of giving feedback, and demonstrating compassion.7 Developing a safe environment is referred to frequently as creating a container or holding environment,8 which defines boundaries that protect people as they explore their feelings, beliefs, and experiences and to experiment with new ways of behaving. It is important that each person knows that all members are equally valued, have equal status, and will reward experimentation regardless of the outcomes. Psychological safety in the group provides confidence that stems from mutual respect and trust among members. How are such levels of trust created? We know from the team and group literatures that an explicit norm of confidentiality (e.g., “what is said in the core group stays in the core group”), mutual ­respect,

90  Chapter 5

and consistently valuing each individual’s statements guides behaviors that lead to a positive environment for personal learning and development.9 Groups can also develop explicit norms related to handling conflict and disagreements or defensive behavior to enhance the psychological safety necessary to develop awareness of individual behavior patterns.10 As working in groups involves several peers, the processes of mutual, compatible selection takes longer than for pairs. However, creating a positive holding environment and building the group relationship is an important foundation and well worth spending the time it takes. Developing and applying a working agreement adds to conditions such as voluntary participation and building trust to promote a holding environment that maximizes psychological safety for group members. Furthermore, a check-in round at the beginning of each meeting is a process that signals a holding environment, and the personal disclosures often immediately exemplify its value. Checking in.  In peer coaching groups, it is essential to design

the session to allow adequate time for all participants to express themselves. This may seem to be an unnecessary distraction from the task. However, the purpose of the check-in is to allow each person to transition physically and mentally into the room and to let go of any distracting thoughts or feelings that may be top of mind. The contribution enables the person to express those thoughts and simultaneously signals information that may be contextually relevant to other participants; while the content may have no bearing on the group’s work, the emotional elements may provide deeper insight into what is happening for the person, which may have an impact on subsequent work. New groups may use an initial round of sharing to both individually check in to the group and to reinforce the overall group purpose to which participants contribute and mutually share. Once groups have formed, a routine check-in to start each meeting builds a habit that sustains the positive holding environment.

Peer Coaching Groups   91

It is challenging for a group if one member declines to participate in the check-in. Not only does the omission give rise to speculation about the reason for it, but also the person signals withdrawal or disengagement from the process. Either reason detracts from the group. Motivation for others to engage may decline along with a wish to withdraw psychologically. Implicit speculation about reasons for nonparticipation distracts focus and attention away from the group’s work and influences the dynamic negatively. Similar to peer coaching in pairs, we strongly recommend that people resist commenting during a check-in on anyone else’s contribution. Withholding comment can be difficult for those who wish to empathize, acknowledge what others say, or build on the input. However, the opportunity in the check-in round is to focus on supporting someone else in a respectful, albeit different way. The purpose is not to have a discussion of each person’s issue or to solve problems. Simply encouraging the speaker through facial expressions, eye contact, and body language is sufficient to demonstrate a readiness to engage genuinely with the peers. Let us now consider an example of how the Aurora Health group used their initial check-in as a developmental informal leader of the group outlined the purpose as she saw it and introduced the facilitator she had invited. The facilitator highlighted key elements of peer coaching in groups and invited participants to share their expectations and concerns. So began a check-in round that provided each participant the opportunity to reconnect with or meet people and to articulate their hopes and expected short- and longterm outcomes. The sharing confirmed past exchanges, gave a sense of continuity, and contributed to a positive environment for the initial meeting. Successful signaling of a worthwhile process was important, as many had traveled considerable distances to attend and all were optimistic of a productive meeting with concrete outcomes. Esme said her key hope was to strengthen existing connections and to learn from other members of the group. Sarah wanted to

92  Chapter 5

keep the core of the group together, as they already had positive relationships, and acknowledged that although they could call one another, doing so was not an automatic response. Cassie reflected on how much she had gained from their previous interactions and wanted to be proactive in taking that further. Pierre expressed his desire to learn more, to practice, and particularly to develop more skill in coaching others. His wish was for the group to experience confidence in sharing with each other and to develop their individual and collective capabilities. He saw this as beneficial to individuals as well as contributing positively more broadly to an industry that had significant influence on people’s lives. Manuel expressed a desire for a clear purpose for the group because previous learning sets had dissipated because of a lack of clarity. He was also keen to learn more about peer coaching as he recognized its potential to support others in their hopes and goals. He thought that an immediate requirement was for everyone to commit to the process. Shaun focused on the connectedness that the group already had. He expressed his view that collaboration was more important than competition in the public health system, which meant sharing could lead to learning and progress in a way that exceeded individual possibilities. The Aurora group began from an existing base of trust, and beginning the first meeting with a check-in round effectively reinforced that trust. Each member worked for a different organization within the same broad industry. The political decisions made by government had a major impact on their ability to achieve their goals. As senior professionals in their organizations, they expressed a wish to learn from and with one another and to build capability across the sector. The group members were able to support one another this well because the Aurora group provided an effective holding environment for its members. First, the group worked to confirm members and ensure that each felt accepted and psychologically safe to be vulnerable in the group. Second, they allowed and explicitly encouraged

Peer Coaching Groups   93

members to challenge themselves and contradict each other, thereby increasing opportunities to stretch and grow. Third, the cohesion and continuity of the group enabled each member to feel grounded and stable in the group as a community. Robert Kegan identified the qualities of confirmation, contradiction, and continuity as essential components to provide stability and opportunities to grow in times of turmoil and change.11 This is why peer coaching groups have more potential to stimulate deep learning than does one-on-one coaching. The need for a working agreement.  Let us return to the ex-

ample of smaller peer coaching groups within a larger cohort of twenty-five women enrolled in the University of Queensland’s Career Progression for Women program. The first day of the first module focused on developing a positive dynamic in the group. On the second-day check-in round, women recalled observations of some behaviors that could be examples to include in their working agreement. Following the check-in, the facilitator invited the group to consider behaviors in the context of other groups in which they have worked. She invited the group to do the following: 1. Think of your last experience working in a small group. Reflect on the aim of the group—its fundamental purpose. 2. Write down one item on a Post-it note to express something that worked well for you to support your learning. 3. Post your notes on the whiteboard. The group gathered around the whiteboard to read all contributions. The facilitator continued: 4. Can two or three people step up and begin to group similar items together? 5. Then, can two or three different people step up? Replace your predecessors and continue the groupings until a clear map emerges.

94  Chapter 5

As with working agreements between two peers, a group’s agreement is most effective when members discuss in depth each item raised to develop a shared understanding of what each issue means to the individuals in the group. The physical reminder may reduce to only a few items, yet later in the peer coaching sessions each item may activate memory of the full discussion (see Figure 5.1). There is no magic here, just sharing commonsense ideas about what has worked well in the group. Any hint of magic resides in the process of reflecting on recent experience, sharing positive experiences, capturing them, and forming consensus on what is most important. Notice that the agreement points shown in Figure 5.1 seem straightforward.

Figure 5.1  Photo Board

Peer Coaching Groups   95

Reviewing working agreements periodically maximizes their effectiveness. At the end of a session one participant could ask, “How well did we live up to our agreement?” Alternatively, if a new question comes up, the group can ask, “Do we have something on our agreement that covers this (new) issue?” It is likely that a discussion in the group may lead to either a clarification of an existing issue or the addition of a new one. Additions enhance the integrity of the process and reflect the dynamic nature of the working agreement as a guide for the group process. Group-level dynamics are much more complex than between pairs. Adding people complicates interactions and interdependencies more than aggregating individual inputs. However, reciprocity multiplies across the group, which promotes learning and identity adjustments from the interplay among people. Deeper understanding of self and others comes from mindfulness and paying attention to the ever-present subtleties that may not be explicitly evident. Questions to consider for reflection and review include the following: • Are particular individuals assuming set roles in the group that may undermine the learning of others? • How does the group handle conflict and disagreement? • How are we assuming responsibility as a group for the process dynamics and holding others accountable for their behavior and adherence to the working agreement? In the school principals’ peer coaching group that operates as a learning circle, the external facilitator structures the check-in by asking for three key statements. First, he asks for a feeling statement that reflects the current mood; second, a thinking statement that reflects the work issue that is top of mind; and third, a brief report from each member on what has occurred since the previous month’s meeting. The group’s purpose is to support actions of members to set and attain achievable and realistic goals within their

96  Chapter 5

school context. Thus, the check-in round that starts each meeting incorporates an action review that sets the stage for progress in the current meeting. The components of selecting the group members, building trust, and developing guidelines and processes to promote psychological safety just described all contribute to building a positive learning environment, part of Step 1, building the relationship, of the 3-step Peer Coaching model. As members develop and deepen connections, their willingness to share challenges and concerns openly and to invite feedback from trusted others increases. The group’s focus moves from fostering the critical conditions to creating success. This brings us to Step 2 of our model.

Step 2: Creating Success Through Honing Relational Practices Creating success in peer coaching groups requires building selfawareness, developing relational and social skills, and providing the conditions for a strong holding environment. Together, these components comprise the “meat” of the group meetings, often described as the storming stage, in which conflict within the group manifests. Challenges may appear as a form of hostility to the leader or peer conflict, perhaps in the form of struggles over leadership and control. Disagreements about direction or emphasis may surface. The basic issue at this stage is the members’ emotional responses to the group’s primary task. The way a group engages in peer coaching depends on each group’s overall purpose and the goals. The Aurora group wanted to build individual and collective capability across a sector that was often constrained by political decisions. The Career Progression for Women’s group wanted to understand the policies and practices associated with academic progression and to build individual leadership capability supported by evidence meaningful in the university

Peer Coaching Groups   97

environment. The principals’ leadership circle members were looking to hone individual leadership and, in the process, deepen the group’s understanding of issues in the education sector to increase the options available to any member. In each of these groups, members identified their unique personal learning goal and subsequently received coaching from the group to achieve it. Building self-awareness.  Peer coaching in a group fosters

personal learning as individuals reflect on beliefs, attitudes, and behaviors and experiment with new actions in a safe environment. Feedback and support from trusted others make this kind of learning possible. Interpersonal trust between individuals is a first step toward trusting the group process as a whole. As members develop and deepen connections with each other, they increase willingness to share challenges and concerns openly and to invite feedback. This process of inquiry, reflection, and feedback develops valuable personal learning and increases the potential of transformative learning. Two important clusters of emotional competencies are selfawareness and self-regulation. Self-awareness includes understanding personal emotional responses, triggers for one’s self and the effects on others, knowing one’s individual strengths and limitations, and having a strong sense of one’s self-worth and capabilities. In peer coaching relationships, self-aware individuals bring clarity about what they need to develop within themselves and what they offer peers in their efforts to support learning and development. They understand their own reactions as they form and engage new relationships, including peer coaching, and are clear about their personal goals as a result. Self-regulation builds on self-awareness and includes the capacity to manage one’s internal states, impulses, and resources.12 Individuals who self-regulate can control difficult and potentially disruptive emotions such as frustration, anger, or anxiety; maintain optimism in challenging circumstances; demonstrate persistence in

98  Chapter 5

personal learning and transformation; and adapt when situations change and demand novel responses. In peer coaching groups, such competence enables individuals to be present during the difficult period of building a culture of psychological safety. They offer optimism and calm as members work toward a trustworthy group identity where all members can be vulnerable and begin the work of developing greater personal and professional capabilities. A powerful way to enhance self-awareness and self-regulation is to offer feedback to others in the peer coaching groups. Feedback also contributes powerfully to creating success in Step 2, particularly in terms of recognizing and utilizing strengths and letting go of dysfunctional behaviors that compromise development and effectiveness. Group members have the opportunity to acquire or hone inquiry skills and engage other participants in dialogue that facilitates learning in others. Deep learning processes challenge individuals to check assumptions that have unknowingly shaped their behavior. Increasing awareness subsequently provides more freedom to choose and practice alternative behaviors that are more effective. As the theories of positive relationships at work and developmental relationships suggest, social and emotional competencies, also known as relational competencies, are critical to setting this important learning process in motion and sustaining it thereafter. Developing relational skills.  Social facility refers to sophis-

ticated social skills that are particularly important when moving from a focus on the peer coaching dyad to peer coaching in groups. In peer coaching dyads, individuals certainly benefit from empathy, the basic skills associated with deep listening, constructive feedback, and providing social support as individuals try out new behaviors.13 In peer coaching groups, these competencies become more critical as members are simultaneously relating to the individual seeking feedback or guidance while also attending to and maintaining the psychological safety and effective ground rules for the whole group.

Peer Coaching Groups   99

This focus on the health and effectiveness of the group as a whole reflects group emotional competence.14 In the following section, we provide examples of formats that some of our groups have used to help members achieve their goals. One example, called the council model and described here, is a regular component of our women’s leadership development programs. It is the age-old model prevalent throughout human history and cultures used to address thorny issues of the time. Councils are successful because of the diverse range of perspectives they offer to the peer and the integration of subject matter and process expertise. Furthermore, this format produces very different outcomes from a traditional conversation where the experiences and perspectives of the whole group may not emerge. The council model:  We frame the session and define the

council as an assembly of people summoned for consultation, deliberation, and wisdom to share with others. Depending on size, the structure may see the whole group stay together or divide into smaller subgroups of four or five people to allow adequate time for each person to articulate their concern and follow the process guidelines outlined here. The essence of the council model lies in the following set of operating rules and process: 1. Each council nominates a timekeeper. When the timekeeper is before the council, another member fills the role. 2. Each person in a group will have the opportunity to bring an issue or set of issues to the council. The council remains available until all members have had an opportunity to approach the council. 3. Each person facing the council will have a maximum of three minutes to present her issues to the council. Once she has presented her issue, she may speak only when answering a question directed to her by the council.

100  Chapter 5

4. At the conclusion of the presentation, the council will have no more than three minutes to ask yes/no or short-answer questions of the presenter. Presenters should limit any response to a question to no more than fifteen seconds. 5. After completing questioning, the council has ten minutes to share its advice with the presenter. This is not a conversation! Each council member shares his thoughts with the presenter, and the presenter will take notes on the feedback. (One option is for another person to take notes so the presenter can focus on listening to the feedback.) The timekeeper manages the division of the advice time across the council members. 6. After each person has presented her case, council members who have presented take turns briefly thanking the council for a single piece of advice. An alternative structure that provides the benefit of a singleperson focus with multiple peers asking questions and stimulating thoughts is the forum model.15 In this format, a group meets for two hours once per month, with one person being the focal point of each meeting.

Step 3: Making Peer Coaching a Habit Successful peer coaching groups enable participants to transfer skills and engage in mutual learning beyond the group context. Practice hones competence! Peer coaching groups multiply the opportunities for giving feedback and honing questioning skills. Since learning itself is less tangible than visible outcomes or products produced by work groups, it can be harder to determine when peer coaching groups have developed or are performing at a high level. Peer coaching as a habit extends the learning and essential peer coaching principles into participants’ everyday practice of working and learning together. Peer coaching groups show that they are

Peer Coaching Groups   101

cohesive and the participants accept other members’ unique qualities. Harmony is at an optimal level and conflict is constructive. Well-performing groups focus on functional roles and on solving problems. In this stage, solutions emerge.16 Being mindful about applying peer coaching to daily group work benefits both work teams and organizational leaders. Communicating examples of successful peer coaching groups will help members recognize the potential and personal benefit for them. The overarching goal is to promote peer coaching groups as an everyday practice and integral to the organizational culture (see Chapter 7).

Concluding Thoughts The paradox of peer coaching groups is that while they amplify the benefits of peer coaching dyads, they also increase the ­complexity

Table 5.1  Steps in Model of Peer Coaching Groups

Step 1: Building the Relationship: Creating a Positive Holding Environment

Step 2: Creating Success Through Honing Relational Practices

Deepening Establish the right understanding of conditions to create emotional responses a positive holding of self and others environment Select members who are Applying strengths compatible and focused on the shared goal Agree on norms of Developing relational engagement together and social skills Check in and out regularly and consistently to build trust

Step 3: Making Peer Coaching a Habit

Extending peer coaching skills into everyday interactions and engagements Promoting the value of peer coaching groups to others Modeling behaviors that support mutual and interdependent learning

102  Chapter 5

of managing the associated dynamics. Power and peril coexist, and the importance of recognizing and tapping into your own experience, whether as a group member or as a facilitator, is extremely important. Peer coaching groups are more complex than dyads. Peer coaching in a dyad does not require experience if our 3-step Peer Coaching model is followed. In groups, however, there is no substitute to having experience in groups and group dynamics when success is the goal. Success is more likely when peer coaching groups approach learning and development as a holistic entity and mind-set rather than a set of skills. Table 5.1 summarizes key indicators within each of the steps in our 3-Step Peer Coaching Model as it applies to peer coaching in groups.

Chapter 6

Peer Coaching for Deep Learning

Imagine that you are Victoria,

suddenly confronted with a serious personal crisis unlike anything that you have ever faced. Stefan, a partner in a troubled business venture, has accused you of failing to live up to your end of the agreement, calling you a liar and a cheat. Although he has not said so directly, he insinuates that you might have done something illegal. Stefan is known to be volatile and overly personal in attacking people; his recent outbreaks are beginning to affect your self-confidence and behavior. You realize that you cannot just ignore Stefan and “take the high road,” but you don’t like conflict and have had little experience with such tactics. Victoria took this issue to her peer coach in the hope of assistance to work through it. Peer coach Betty asked questions to encourage her to consider several possible issues: Betty: How are you feeling about the situation? Victoria: I feel pretty bad, really—and really angry! Stefan is so out of line and he keeps on making untrue accusations. Betty: It sounds quite confronting. Is this the first time you have had such an exchange with Stefan? Victoria: Oh no, not the first. He is often volatile, but this time

104  Chapter 6

it seems he has really gone overboard and is trying to make me a scapegoat. Betty: A scapegoat? Victoria: Yes! You know, he’s blaming me! Betty: Hmm. Can you tell me about your relationship with Stefan? Victoria outlines the most recent attacks but avoids speaking about the relationship. Betty: So how would you tell me your story? Victoria: I am glad someone is asking me about my story! It is always about him! The problem is that no one will believe me! This is all about him! What am I going to do?

Betty continued by exploring the source of Victoria’s feelings in reaction to Stefan’s attacks and probed to see if Victoria could identify ways that she presents herself in the relationship about which she was unaware. She focused on Victoria’s feelings of threat and anxiety that might be clouding her perceptions. However, Victoria repeatedly denied any contribution to or responsibility for the situation. When she held firmly to her opinion that this was all about Stefan, Betty moved on to exploring the reality as Victoria saw it. Together they explored options for Victoria to respond and act, including enlisting the support of others, building confidence to act, and reducing her anxiety. Victoria responded well to the direction. Betty asked Victoria to summarize her plan, including how to maximize the support she might need. Together they agreed to meet again. To this point in the book, our focus has been encouraging people to engage in peer coaching and the intentional coordination of meaning using our 3-step Peer Coaching model as a guide. In this chapter, we change that focus to shift our attention to how peer coaching can be a powerful tool to facilitate deep learning, a process that is difficult to create yet offers potentially powerful

Peer Coaching for Deep Learning   105

outcomes. However, not all peer coaching interactions result in deep learning. Furthermore, while we advocate for peers to work together to build their relationship, we also acknowledge that personal transformation is more likely to occur when peers have enough experience to structure the process to inquire at the level of underlying assumptions. Moreover, deep personal learning relies on a state of readiness, as Victoria’s example shows. This chapter is a call to action, a call to develop the potential to structure peer coaching to facilitate deep learning outcomes. In the example briefly outlined here, Betty encourages Victoria to engage in some serious soul searching, to look deep inside herself to gain insight and increase both her self-awareness and resilience to respond effectively to Stefan’s accusations. Victoria was facing a serious challenge, yet she does not show any readiness to consider her own possible contribution to a situation that Stefan highlighted. Instead, Victoria projected all responsibility onto Stefan and continued to blame him. Betty recognized that her own assumptions could land her in deep water so, after initially testing them, she backed away despite her hunch that Victoria’s behavior played a role in the interaction with Stefan. She coached Victoria to develop a plan of action and a strategy to manage the situation in a way that worked for her. Victoria left the coaching session with a strategy to respond to Stefan. She felt supported, more energized, and resourced. However, she held fast to a defensive position and seemed unwilling to step outside her comfort zone to explore how her own behavior may have contributed to the conflict. Betty respected Victoria’s position while noticing how fervently she protected herself from exacerbating her distress and exploring her own contribution to the problematic relational dynamics. Betty’s experience suggested to her that Victoria’s resistance to her line of questioning signaled a lack of readiness to consider responsibility for any part in the situation created immediately by Stefan’s accusations. Therefore,

106  Chapter 6

Betty worked within the realms of apparent possibility while recognizing that Victoria did not engage in deep learning, a process that required her to take a risk and confront her vulnerability. This was not a deep learning outcome. What would a deep learning outcome look like? Let us consider Matt’s response to the scenario when Betty initiates the same line of inquiry as she did for Victoria. Betty works with Matt’s reactions to the accusation until the point where she asked: “So how would you tell me your story?” Matt responds: Well, I guess I played some part—for example, I was a bit late for some of my deliverables that Stefan was waiting on, which meant he had difficulty with his part. But I explained why and he seemed to be OK about that.

Matt’s response to Betty crucially affects the direction of the peer coaching episode. Betty: What thoughts come to you when you reflect on these attacks? Matt: First, and foremost, I do not want to look stupid—you know—incompetent and that I let the team down. I don’t want to fight with him, and it is all so public!

Betty’s questions help Matt gain insight into how his behavior and reactions stem from his personal need to appear competent at all times. She is mindful to stay open to Matt’s responses and not “direct” him into responses that confirm her hunches. Betty’s approach of asking her peers, “How would you tell me your story?” rather than “Tell me the story” immediately suggests there is more than one version of the story. Not only does this allow Matt to choose which elements to include, it also enables Betty to ask for a different version of his story later. Over time, Betty’s approach supports Matt to consider his response to Stefan as an ex-

Peer Coaching for Deep Learning   107

ample of a pattern in how he responds to events in his social world. Subsequently, Betty supports Matt in exploring his assumptions, beliefs, and implicit norms such as his need to be accepted and reassured, his pattern of avoiding conflict, and his desire to save face. Matt subsequently changes his behavior. These scenarios demonstrate two very different outcomes from peer coaching episodes. Each results in a positive outcome from an effective and satisfying interaction. In the first scenario, Victoria feels heard and validated and explores options for an action plan that she feels are realistic. Her learning is personal, albeit task focused. She resists Betty’s invitation to consider her relationship with Stefan and does not explore her emotional response or her communication patterns. In the second scenario, Matt responds to Betty’s pivotal questions differently: he reflects and accepts the risks and challenges associated with owning his contribution. Betty’s support in exploring deeply held assumptions and beliefs moves him beyond his comfort zone as he reflects on his actions, then subsequently changes his behavior. Thus, together with Betty’s support, the peer coaching process develops in a different direction and results in a deep learning outcome. It is difficult to reach such outcomes alone. The relational process of peer coaching provides a context in which trust between peers allows openness to emergence of insights that constitute deep personal learning. By deep we mean whole-person learning—learning that goes to the core of who the person is. Whole-person learning incorporates thoughts, feelings, observations, values, and inherent assumptions. Deep learning involves reflecting on those deeply held attitudes and values, self-image, self-esteem, and self-identity that influence ways people behave to preserve a sense of self. A deep learning process can feel risky and difficult and is likely to extend beyond a usual comfort zone. Importantly, it also has the potential to lead to significant personal change. Personal learning is a ubiquitous goal for professionals today. Learning associated with professional development falls into two

108  Chapter 6

categories: task learning and deep personal learning.1 Deep learning is personal learning that goes beyond consideration of observable behavior and emerges from a meaningful process of reflection and dialogue by examining profound assumptions and beliefs that form narratives and underpin behavior. The whole person is involved through social, cognitive, emotional, and intrapsychic elements to notice relationships among elements including interconnections, uncovering assumptions, and deriving meaning that deepens understanding of a bigger picture. The disciplines of psychology, education, and management distinguish deep learning, as a process that results in exploration, discovery, and ultimately growth, from surface learning, in which the process is one of knowledge transfer. Chris Argyris contrasts double-loop learning, which requires reframing and meaningful reflection on underlying assumptions, with single-loop learning.2 Learning opportunities arise when a person becomes aware of a discrepancy between a belief and actions that belie such a belief. Jack Mezirow aptly describes these moments as disorienting dilemmas.3 Roger, who considers himself unhindered by gender biases, provides another example. He believes that he has had good relationships with his female co-workers. Thus, he found it disorienting when he learned of several accusations as well as formal complaints with evidence that he has been discriminating against women in his promotion decisions and promoting less-qualified men. By recognizing his disorienting dilemma, Roger creates the opportunity to challenge his habits of mind and action and to behave subsequently more congruently with his internal beliefs and narrative. A peer coaching process can assist with noticing and naming disorienting dilemmas, support critical reflection on personal beliefs, and potentially lead to significant behavioral and attitudinal changes. Roger’s peer coach, Alex, chose to frame the coaching session using the LUUUUTT model (see Chapter 4), which supports Roger in

Peer Coaching for Deep Learning   109

examining a range of stories about this issue of gender discrimination. Alex could choose to ask about many of Roger’s stories. For example, together they may consider stories lived to focus on tensions Roger experiences in gender relationships. When ready, Roger may consider the stories told to consider the accusations that have shocked him. Alex may invite storytelling through which Roger gains insight into his own self-talk. Alternatively, Alex may challenge him to consider the stories untold to raise his awareness of the discrimination raised by his colleagues. Another option for Alex is to inquire about stories unknown and invite Roger to reflect and comment on any insight he may now have on stories of which he was previously unaware. Peer coaching can enhance learning and development in today’s VUCA world (as we described in Chapter 1) through episodes of deep personal learning. The relational peer coaching process allows both peers to increase self-awareness by inviting partners to reflect through a process of inquiry. Peers can scaffold inquiry to support whole-person learning by tapping into cognition, ­emotions, and personal presence through awareness and mindfulness, thus encouraging the alertness that is a precursor to deep learning. A simple act of noticing whether it is observing one’s self, one’s reactions, one’s environment, or one’s interactions can create new categories for experience. Ellen Langer calls this “mindfulness” and, in her significant research and writing on the topic, describes it as a state of being that involves active information processing and alertness. Mindfulness and presence are fluid states that fluctuate according to contexts, limiting beliefs, capability, and competence socially, emotionally, and interpersonally. Fluctuations in presence are more likely to occur during transitions, development, and shifts in identity, all potentially providing opportunities for deep learning and times when mindfulness is particularly pertinent as a learning tool.4

110  Chapter 6

Elements of Deep Learning Self-awareness, social and emotional competence, developmental transitions, and identity development comprise rich contexts in which peer coaching can facilitate deep learning outcomes. Coaching through relationships steeped in trust enables peers to share feedback and then consider it in a very open and honest manner, providing a base for deep learning. Peer coaching relationships provide a crucible for people to be vulnerable and experience support to remain outside a comfort zone long enough to gain deep personal insight. Peer coaches can scaffold an inquiring approach that guides behavior and creates meaning through reflection and dialogue to increase mindfulness and presence. Self-awareness.  Self-awareness is perhaps the most important

deep learning element, as it provides the foundation for all other aspects of sustained behavioral change. Increasing awareness may occur only at a surface level or lead to reflection and dialogue that stimulate and facilitate deep learning. When Roger notices a discrepancy between his intentions and his behaviors, he can clarify values and needs, then shift his focus to enable new actions and ways of thinking to increase his effectiveness in all domains. Often self-awareness is assessed by alignment between an individual’s perceptions of their personal qualities and other people’s perceptions. However, when Roger notices the discrepancy and increases his self-awareness without any translation into ways to apply his new knowledge, his discovery stops short of deep learning. Emotional and social competence.  These important indica-

tors of and supports for deep learning and personal development influence the ability to form growth-enhancing relationships with a range of other people. Like peer coaching, mentoring and developmental networks provide relational learning opportunities to obtain valid feedback on job behavior and performance. As well described by Daniel Goleman,5 social competence builds on self-awareness

Peer Coaching for Deep Learning   111

and addresses social awareness, self-management, and relationship management, which together enable effective responses to demands at work and in life. Emotional competence similarly builds on self-management skills and includes self-regulation and motivation. Emotional competence may manifest in and develop from displaying empathy and socially skilled interpersonal interactions. Social awareness involves empathy, awareness of organizational networks and political alliances, and service orientation that recognizes the value and importance of working respectfully with others, self-management that includes emotional self-control and adaptability, and relationship management that encompasses competencies such as influence, teamwork, and conflict management. Developmental transitions.  Times in people’s lives and ca-

reer when they transition from one situation to another provide rich and fertile grounds for deep learning. Transitions are often unsettling and take people outside comfort zones as the familiar gives way to the unknown. Amanda welcomed her promotion to COO yet quickly found that her new team operated differently from her previous one. She searched for the support and collegial relationships she had previously enjoyed. Whereas her previous colleagues had encouraged her to implement her ideas, the new, less resourced team focused on their own outputs, to her detriment. She took the issue to her peer coach, Shams, who encouraged Amanda by using the LUUUUTT model to look at the stories she is telling herself about her relationships with her peers. Through the process of inquiry, Shams asked Amanda, “Let’s consider the stories being told here. What is unknown? Untellable? How might a story of confidence and collaboration with this new team unfold? How would you like to work with them? What might you feel uncomfortable about exploring that, if you did explore it, might move the team forward?” Shams supported a process through which Amanda clarified and owned her assumptions, opinions, and perspective independently of others. He questioned Amanda about how her core

112  Chapter 6

a­ ssumptions were influencing how she was working without being able to rely on her previous relationships and resources. Discussing the underlying assumptions led Amanda to realize the resources she had within herself to act confidently and independently of relationships with others, a belief that changed her perspective and presented new possibilities to act more effectively. Peer coaching enabled Amanda to engage in a meaning-making process that resulted in deep learning. Robert Kegan6 would describe Amanda’s developmental position as “self-authoring,” which means that Amanda is beginning to demonstrate the capacity to know her own voice and perspectives—her story—and becoming less reliant on significant others to define her points of view. In this developmental position, an individual creates a sense of self internally rather than relying primarily on feedback from frequent interaction and dependence on others (which is true of the earlier “socialized” developmental position). Shams’s questions encourage and assist Amanda to look within herself for answers about how to best approach her new position of COO. Through the coaching process, Amanda came to understand her core assumptions and values, enabling her to choose consciously to follow them or revise them as she moves forward. The developmental transition also invites a renewed sense of identity for Amanda. Identity development.  Transition points present developmen-

tal opportunities to recalibrate identity through a process of deep personal learning that can occur in peer coaching. Amanda and Shams’s peer coaching relationship evolved over time, allowing for further inquiry into the congruence between espoused values and values in action (talking the talk versus walking the walk) and inviting reflection on and insight into any discordance. Amanda examined her capability to relate to and act on her new environment competently and with renewed confidence. She found her new position initially challenging, yet as she internalized her learning

Peer Coaching for Deep Learning   113

Et

hn

ic

ity

pre Role vio in us firm

and behaved with more confidence, she experienced psychological success. Her self-esteem also increased as part of a new virtuous cycle, which in turn strengthened her new sense of herself and her identity story. Amanda’s deep learning goes beyond self-awareness in that she not only sees herself more accurately, she demonstrates more competent and confident actions. An overall sense of identity comprises a collection of sub-­ identities. Each sub-identity represents the portion of the overall identity that is evident when the person is functioning in a particular role. Peer coaches can use the Daisy model (Figure 6.1): a petal on the daisy may represent each sub-identity, with the most salient sub-identities moving into the fore and those less salient in the background. One of Amanda’s sub-identities is her social identity: the aspect of Amanda that relates to her particular social group, such as the one in her previous firm.

Ag

r

nde

Ge

e

Amanda

Figure 6.1  The Daisy Model Depicting Amanda’s Sub-identities Source: Adapted from Pearce, W. B. (2007). Making Social Worlds: A Communication Perspective. Oxford: Blackwell, p. 179

114  Chapter 6

As her new identity develops through her promotion to a new firm, she develops new relationships, which enable her to develop new competencies and create new sub-identities. She retains contact and connection with her former colleagues, and so her identity becomes more differentiated, more complex, and “larger.” Through her peer coaching, Amanda became more aware of how social identity groups (e.g., gender, age, and ethnicity) influence her beliefs and responses; therefore, she can choose more consciously how to behave.7 Sub-identities have a reciprocal impact on overall identity, and peer coaching relationships provide opportunities to integrate those multiple parts into a coherent whole. Amanda’s internal belief deepened her insight so that she recognized that she is now a capable leader in her field. This is identity development. Taken together, the elements of deep learning we have discussed—self-awareness, social and emotional competence, developmental transitions, and identity development—all emerge from questioning basic assumptions that challenge existing mental models, create meaning, and guide behavior. Connecting what may initially seem disparate examples and examining others’ views of herself allowed Amanda to self-assess more accurately, leading to her willingness to practice new behaviors grounded in revised basic assumptions about how her world works. Peer coaching remains one of the great untapped resources for promoting self-awareness, social and emotional competence, developmental transitions, and identity development. Changes in any or all of these elements reflect deep learning. Barbara’s work on self-awareness and her leadership practices.  Let us consider another example in which we apply some

of these ideas to personal learning and illustrate the importance of self-awareness as a critical starting point. Barbara is a high-­ potential scientist working in pharmaceuticals. She has successfully built her career in product development and is currently at an organizational level just below the C-suite. Although she sees herself as a leader, she is having difficulty advancing her career. Her issue

Peer Coaching for Deep Learning   115

is not an immediate performance problem but a longer-term, less dramatic ability to make a strategic contribution. Her organization does not have a leadership development function, so she goes to her external peer coach, Kate, for assistance. Through peer coaching, Barbara’s reflections deepen her self-awareness, leading to deep learning outcomes. Kate shares with Barbara some observations from a recent program in which they both participated. Kate observed that Barbara talks too quickly and competes to be the first person to provide an answer. Barbara’s style is very directive; she asks questions in quick succession. Kate, her peer coach, shares with Barbara how she herself feels intimidated in their interactions. Previously, Kate felt unable to give feedback because she is conflict avoidant and has been unable to label her experience. Kate invites Barbara to reflect on her style and connect her behaviors to patterns in style. She asks her, “What is the key to your success in her organization?” and “What does this new feedback suggest that might assist you to reach the next level?” Barbara goes to others and asks for feedback about how they experience her behavior. To her surprise, she hears how the directive style that Kate raised also created a barrier for others and even stopped her team members from contributing. Barbara learned that unintended negative consequences arose from “smart” behaviors. The key to Barbara’s deep learning was challenging the assumption that she needed to appear authoritative to be a leader. She realized from her reflections that her role models have all been dominant male leaders and that their assertive and directive style did not serve her well. She recalled a discussion about how a potential double bind for women was modeling their leadership style on men’s examples. Barbara began to adopt a more inquiring and participative approach to discussing organizational issues and decisions. Much to her delight, her new approach was energizing and engaging. Together she and her team developed wonderfully

116  Chapter 6

c­ reative ideas about how to move forward. Barbara felt liberated knowing she could lead authentically without knowing all of the answers. Her team perceived a wise and trusted process expert developing from her new approach, adding to her reputation as a strong subject-matter expert. In effect, she had learned to practice what Edgar Schein calls “humble inquiry,”8 the skill of helping people develop their own solutions through a process of mutual exploration. Barbara’s deep learning experience changed her behaviors, extending beyond task skills of problem solving and decision making to those aligned to the core of her identity. Her defining qualities gave her satisfaction and esteem that became apparent to others. Professionally, she was an expert and one of the wisest people in the room. Barbara began receiving positive feedback from others about her new mutual inquiry skills. Through her commitment to Kate and their peer coaching work together, Barbara learned how to listen deeply and fully. Barbara claimed a new facet of her identity as both facilitator and helper. She was literally expanding her story of herself. Using the language of CMM, she added a new petal to her daisy that afforded her a new way of seeing and valuing herself. How was the peer coaching process different in this deep learning experience from other types of learning goals or outcomes? In this process, Kate recognized a deeper issue of Barbara’s professional self-image and self-respect. Consequently, she considered that focusing on the presenting issue of speaking too quickly could compromise the deep learning process. Thus, Kate was mindful of the holding environment so Barbara would feel safe to reflect on her own examples and to elicit and share feedback from others. Hearing negative feedback about her dominating style could have been very threatening to her, inviting defensiveness. Her responses may have intimidated her colleagues. Barbara shared some surprising and disturbing revelations she learned from her own colleagues.

Peer Coaching for Deep Learning   117

Together through peer coaching, Kate and Barbara could process the feedback and consider ideas for change. Kate promoted the safe holding environment by ensuring a quiet, private place where they could meet without interruptions. Specifically, Kate organized a picnic lunch in Barbara’s favorite park on a beautiful spring day, where they could stretch out on the grass under the shade of a big oak tree. They both worked to keep the dialogue relaxed and positive, with occasional reminders of Barbara’s vision for the kind of organizational future she wanted to create with her colleagues. Kate and Barbara were mindful of the kinds of peer coaching conditions that had worked well for them in the past and were excited to experiment with a more ambitious personal change process.

How Peer Coaching Can Facilitate Deep Learning Having discussed the nature of deep learning, let us summarize how peer coaching can facilitate deep learning. As our earlier research indicates, one of the major outcomes of dyadic peer coaching is personal and professional development.9 While our study did not go into detail on the nature of professional development as measured in the survey, it uncovered the following outcomes in the qualitative analysis: 1. Success in dealing with change 2. Support for personal and professional goals 3. Increased confidence 4. Improved accuracy of self-image 5. Development of social competence 6. Development of a relational approach to learning 7. Sense of empowerment 8. Improved delivery of feedback

118  Chapter 6

Each of these aspects of development, with the exception of the skill of delivering feedback, is an example of a deep learning category (e.g., self-awareness, social and emotional competence, developmental transitions, and identity development). We know from early research at Honeywell and the Center for Creative Leadership that much of the personal development of leaders comes from three sources: relationships, task assignments, and formal learning or training activities.10 The most powerful single source is learning from job assignments and experiences. How do stretch job assignments produce deep learning? Sanjita was a management consultant tasked with a project to achieve outcomes from the project with a much tighter budget and a smaller team than any previous experience. Realizing how challenging her assignment was, she sought support from her peer coach, Keith. They had worked together before and, although it was a while ago, she had high levels of trust in him and was confident that together they could build on previous coaching. Sanjita explained that she had immediately felt that she was operating beyond her comfort zone and needed to develop her capabilities to attain her targets. Keith inquired about her purpose in accepting the assignment, r­ eminding her that she was working toward a larger strategic career goal. Sanjita set up a process at the completion of each project milestone whereby all members of the team gave and received feedback on both their personal leadership effectiveness and contributions to task accomplishment. Sanjita also, with Keith’s support, designed a clear and structured behavioral rubric to measure the person’s work. The rubric made the measures clear to everyone and emphasized her commitment to the goal. Furthermore, similar feedback from the client about her strengths, weaknesses, and progress toward her new goal reinforced Sanjita’s deep learning as she recalibrated her self-perception and belief in her new capabilities.

Peer Coaching for Deep Learning   119

Tim Hall and Mareia Las Heras would describe Sanjita’s opportunity as a “smart job.”11 That is, Sanjita’s challenge contains elements that require her to grow and learn throughout the process of accomplishing the work required. As Sanjita achieves her challenging goals, she experiences psychological success, a powerful intrinsic motivator that leads her to experience increased self-esteem, become more actively engaged in her role, and feel more competent.12 Her greater involvement feeds back and encourages her to set higher future goals, thus creating a virtuous success cycle.

Using the Peer Coaching Model to Achieve Deep Learning Each condition outlined in the Peer Coaching model in Chapter 1 is essential to ensure a strong foundation. Deep personal learning goals, such as those associated with leadership development, transitions, and adaptations, require even more important high quality conditions than task learning goals. Peers need to be particularly mindful and deliberate when they engage in the Peer Coaching model’s three basic steps: Step 1, building the relationship; Step 2, creating success; and Step 3, making peer coaching a habit. Step 1 of our 3-step model, building the relationship, may be easily glossed over in practice by randomly assigning people to work together. Stimulating deep learning takes more time to establish a strong foundational process that explores learning about similarities and differences, giving people ample opportunity to make informed choices about with whom to partner, and building trust between peers to create a crucible of psychological safety necessary for peers to challenge each other. Building a strong effective holding environment is well worth the time and effort it takes. Throughout this book, we have focused on our model and encouraged you to follow closely through each step for effective practice. However, it is possible for peers to follow these steps and

120  Chapter 6

still not engender deep learning outcomes, as shown in our opening example with Victoria and her peer coach Betty. What, then, makes the difference? First, while it is critical that the peer coaching partners establish a clear working agreement as a foundation for their work together, when deep learning is the goal, additional time might be allocated to identify relevant goals and the skills and experience that each brings to their work and to take into account each person’s preferred style of working. Experience is a factor here, and it is helpful for peers to understand how much previous experience each brings to the coaching relationship. For example, experience will allow partners to specify in greater depth how they will monitor the relationship and provide periodic feedback and assessments of progress. Peers may discuss needed support to move beyond comfort zones, in which case discussing boundaries with respect to challenging each other may become very explicit. In our opening example, if Victoria had given her peer coach Betty permission to challenge her on perceived defensive behaviors and responses, Betty would have challenged Victoria on her unwillingness to discuss her relational interactions with Stefan. When the terrain of the coaching work is deeply personal, it can be threatening and cause one or both partners to develop anxiety. Experience allows peers to anticipate feelings of discomfort, so they are likely to see the benefits of not skimping on establishing a firm foundation in Step 1. Paying careful attention to the relationship-building process very consciously, step by step, can slow down the pace and enable peers to build sufficient trust together to mindfully focus on their learning goals, confident that the required support will be available. As a rule of thumb for a deep learning situation, we suggest that people take twice as much time for the formation process (Step 1) as they would for task learning activities. Again, as peers experience coaching in personal and confronting situations, they learn how additional time spent building the foundation allows for

Peer Coaching for Deep Learning   121

actions that are more considered and decisions that provide the strongest possible base on which to build the relationship. We encourage peer coaches to be especially mindful about creating successes and celebrating the small wins along the way in deep learning situations. Small wins engender large gains! As discussed in Chapter 3, the Johari window can be extremely useful to identify aspects of the person’s self-identity that they are trying to change that may be an unknown or hidden area of development. The peer coach’s challenge is how best to stimulate reflection so that the peer gains their own personal insights into barriers preventing development. If a stated goal is to increase self-awareness and thus reduce the blind area, the peer coach can suggest soliciting feedback from others. Additionally, the peer can provide feedback within the peer coaching process. Perhaps the goal is to increase self-awareness through reducing the unknown area. Here, in perhaps the deepest form of learning, the peer coach can support a deeply reflective process, share discovery outcomes, and integrate relevant feedback from others. Whatever the chosen development goal, peers should produce the optimal conditions for success and then maintain a tight focus on one clear, specific, personal learning goal. We have presented powerful CMM tools in Chapter 3 to help peer coaches slowly and systematically peel back the layers of the onion and look at core issues and processes. Peer coaches can use the Daisy model to explore influences that are shaping the emerging meaning of the situation, such as when Shams invited Amanda to write her name at the center of her daisy and reveal the aspects of her identity on petals emanating from the center. An alternative is for coaches to put the situation or relationship in the center as a focal point and draw the petals that influence those. We have illustrated how the LUUUUTT model enabled coach Alex to support Roger to reach deep learning outcomes related to his unconscious gender discrimination. Shams also used the LUUUUTT model to help Amanda look at the stories that she was telling about her new position, her

122  Chapter 6

relationship with her colleagues, which stories she needed to explore further, and which new stories she was creating. In Step 3 of our model, the focus shifts to making peer coaching a habit by regularly practicing the skills and perspectives acquired in Steps 1 and 2. When peer coaching becomes a habit, the personal skills that facilitate the coaching process are particularly critical. Working on a deep learning goal might become a learning edge for an individual peer coach so that he focuses on process skills and on increasing competence in scaffolding inquiry to support peers to generate effective outcomes and manifest in behavioral change. When peer coaching becomes a habit, the potential for opportunities is more widely seen in a range of deep learning situations. However, we caution against rushing in. Peer coaches new to the process often benefit by soliciting some professional support to supervise early work on the deep learning issue.13 Professional guidance on facilitation and scaffolding includes emotional and process support while providing useful feedback and challenges. Overall, working on deep learning requires high levels of quality and competence in a peer coaching relationship. The relational practice steps outlined in Chapter 3 are especially critical to generate effective outcomes. Building self-awareness, action skills, and reflective feedback develop in the context of the peer coaching relationship, particularly when increasing competence is a goal. Peer coaches can provide feedback to one another based on their immediate personal experience and further by asking effective questions and engaging in mutual inquiry and dialogue over the feedback. Deep learning outcomes are more likely when peer coaching includes and integrates proven process initiatives including regular check-ins, after-action reviews, and positive psychology practices including expressions of gratitude. Each practice, on its own, does not necessarily result in deep learning, but they can be very helpful additions to a process that integrates disparate pieces into a holistic whole. Cognitive, affective, and observational data are valuable

Peer Coaching for Deep Learning   123

input measures that increase the quality of dialogue when mutually assessing and discussing the quality of the peer coaching relationship. This important step is easy to overlook!

Relational Deep Learning Outcomes Peer coaching relationships engender deep learning outcomes in a variety of contexts. The focal element is the relationship, recognized in early work on the importance of challenging assignments as the key to fostering deep learning. Relationships promote a person’s learning in multiple ways, each drawing on and in turn developing relational competence. The social and emotional competencies, together known as relational competence, affect the extent to which individuals can benefit from the opportunities to learn within ­relationships and engender deep learning outcomes.14 First, other people can assist you by modeling, sharing, and supporting ways to master the challenges of stretch job assignments. Such assistance can take many forms, yet common to them all are processes of reflection and dialogue, which are essential to creating and maintaining high quality connections. Amanda’s example shows how the deep learning that enabled her to reframe her selfbelief and confidence allowed her to take a step up and lead a new team. Second, many challenges involve working effectively with other people. Dealing with difficult co-workers, bosses, or subordinates is easier with stronger social and emotional competence. Barbara’s feedback about her interpersonal style enabled her to examine and change her approach, which led to smoother interactions and greater cooperation and support. Her example illustrates how strengthening her social and emotional competencies enabled her to leverage them and create relational success. Third, peer coaching is an example of a learning relationship that may be integral to a broader developmental network

124  Chapter 6

that ­promotes individual development. Seminal work by Monica Higgins and Kathy Kram showed that a person’s developmental network is the constellation of relationships with individuals who promote development and take an active interest in the person’s development.15 Developmental relationships extend beyond the realm of traditional dyadic mentoring and provide what can be a much larger and more diverse source of developmental assistance in relationships with multiple developers. One such example is that of peer coaching groups.

Using Peer Coaching in Groups to Promote Deep Learning Clearly, dyadic peer coaching can facilitate deep learning. Often, however, people achieve learning goals of personal change in group contexts. Weight Watchers, Alcoholics Anonymous, and other recovery groups, and support groups for various purposes such as grieving, crisis management, and newcomer orientation programs, provide pertinent examples. What can we expect from peer coaching in group settings? We discussed peer coaching in groups in detail in Chapter 5, but let us focus now on peer coaching in groups for the explicit purpose of stimulating deep learning. Integrating what we know about effective learning groups and effective peer coaching suggests that the effects on deep learning will be stronger when a skilled facilitator aids the peer coaching process. Early work on sensitivity training groups and therapy groups repeatedly supports this claim.16 The person may or may not be a professional coach/facilitator but can have a strong impact on the group’s ability to function. A key role of such a facilitator is to enable group members to develop the social and emotional competences to contribute effectively to their own and others’ learning. Konstantin Korotov works with groups of executive, MBA, and executive MBA students at the European School of Management and Technology in Berlin, Germany, where he developed group

Peer Coaching for Deep Learning   125

structures and formats that make essential questioning and reflecting activities central to the work of peer coaching groups. His catalog of questions and formats provides the necessary scaffolding for deep learning in peer coaching groups to evolve.17 Peer coaching groups with a goal of deep learning are more likely to have an explicit goal of member and group development than are groups with other purposes. Ongoing groups can differ in terms of both their objectives and their processes; they can be explicit or implicit about either one. A group devoted to its members’ learning could set an objective of task learning for the members, such as presenting a college seminar or contributing to a book club. Alternatively, the focus may be on personal learning for its members, such as engagement in a twelve-step recovery group or a therapy group meeting. Perhaps it is a combination of the two. A self-study seminar on group dynamics would cover both theoretical readings on groups and self-reflection on the group’s own interpersonal processes. A group with a deep learning focus might create an explicit agreement that dictates the process by which they will engage in peer coaching to help one another learn. Conversely, members might prefer to not create an explicit agreement on their process and instead just allow a process to evolve naturally. Because groups  with an explicit goal of personal learning tend to have members who are growing and developing themselves and are mindful of the importance of development, it follows that they would also be more aware of the group’s development as an entity. The men’s support group described earlier has gone through clear stages that mirror the life stages of its members. The group moved from focusing on career achievement issues at the beginning of its existence to concerns for phasing out of employment, caring for ailing parents, and figuring out the meaning of life during its thirtyyear history. In its early days, when the group focused on career achievement, the group considered working on task goals, such as

126  Chapter 6

joint p ­ ublications. Later, as most of the members were in midlife, the group discussed adding new, younger members, to help sustain the life of the group. Later again, as many members moved into retirement, the members began to accept the group’s status and the idea that the group would probably fade away as members do. A task-focused group, such as a book club, on the other hand, would likely be less concerned with its process; the members’ feelings about the group are unlikely to link to the book-related topics under discussion. Peer coaching groups with mixed purposes of deep learning and task learning will be relatively rare. When they do exist, they resemble deep learning rather than task groups because the demands on the personal learning and group process skills for deep learning group members is greater than those in task groups. Thus, even if deep learning contributes to only part of the group’s purpose, the group would need to have the full set of deep learning capabilities to address issues effectively when they arise. For peer coaching groups with a mixed purpose, it is important that all members be very aware of and very clear on the importance of the deep learning goal. Where the group is primarily a task group, with occasional “accidental” personal learning episodes, a lack of deep learning skills among members can lead to conflict and may threaten the group’s existence.

Concluding Thoughts and Some Criteria to Consider This chapter reflects the idea that people develop over time. Ongoing learning underpins work and careers today, yet the specific processes through which learning occurs are neither well explained nor well understood. We conclude this chapter with some criteria to keep in mind when aiming to develop deep learning outcomes from peer coaching: • Enter the personal change process with the conscious intention of reciprocity. Personal change can be particularly challenging, and a

Peer Coaching for Deep Learning   127

focus on mutual learning is critical to success in any effective helping relationship. Each peer both gives and receives. • Adopt a positive mind-set. Assume the best. A mind-set creates a self-fulfilling prophecy. Be patient! Engendering deep learning outcomes may surface resistance and defensive behaviors and responses. Peer coaches may recognize the resistance and assist by supporting the peer to explore issues within and beyond comfort zones. Working within learning zones requires patience and perseverance. Emotional components rise and may need more time and attention prior to approaching what may appear to be substantive changes. Peers may need focused support, reinforcement, and affirmation while being challenged to face realities that their experiences have highlighted. Assuming the best (capability, motivation to help, judgment, etc.) in the other person and in the relationship is more likely to produce good outcomes. • Focus on good questions, not answers or solutions. Peer coaching is largely a nondirective process in which the focus is to help the other person achieve personal clarity and assume ownership subsequently of any resultant action plan. On some occasions your partner may want specific answers or ideas for action, and it is easy to err in the direction of providing too many of your own ideas. Probing questions stimulate your partner’s own exploratory powers, which in turn can lead to heightened self-confidence and personal commitment. Suggesting great ideas is likely to get in the way! Achieving deep learning outcomes requires your peer to identify and own realistic solutions that are actionable. • Be unconditionally supportive. Generously encourage, affirm, and give positive feedback on your partner’s efforts and accomplishments. He may feel vulnerable, as most people do when in learning mode (which means being not yet fully competent

128  Chapter 6

in the area), and encouragement is particularly important and powerful. • Challenge. Do not let your support stop you from offering challenges that will stretch your partner in new directions. Aim to provide a balance of challenge and support in your coaching. A strong foundation to your peer coaching relationship facilitates such a balance. Work on including a discussion about limits and boundaries as you establish the relationship in Step 1. • Allocate time regularly to reflect on your process. Reflect on how you are working together. Whether you call it an after-action review, a debrief, a check-in, or a check-out, investing time in shared self-reflection can yield enormous dividends in future effectiveness: small wins, large gains! Reflections may occur on a time basis such as monthly or an activity basis such as concluding a major activity. Agree on the schedule and engage together in your process of self-reflection; failing to do so means it will not happen. How can you purposely tweak your questions to expand the possibilities of inquiry and deep learning?

Chapter 7

Peer Coaching for Everyday Learning

practice at work, peer coaching is a resource to increase people’s awareness of the impact of their actions. When Tim seriously began to consider retiring, he called Kathy to say, “I need a meeting with my peer coach!” Kathy had her recent experience negotiating with the university and was now implementing her newly created retirement contract. Tim sought Kathy out as his peer coach for her listening and coaching skills as well as her experience. Kathy and Tim have been each other’s peer coach for many years, starting when the organizational behavior department created a peer coaching process to develop senior faculty. The department abandoned the process after a few years but, because it was working well for them, Kathy and Tim continued their arrangement. Peer coaching was part of their everyday practice at work. Over time, they have had many coaching meetings, typically initiated by one of them when an important issue involving job, career, personal, or interpersonal dilemmas arose. Their meetings became a part of their regular toolkit for making work decisions. Most recently, in the preceding example, Kathy’s coaching played a major role in helping Tim with his retirement planning. This was a

As an everyday

130  Chapter 7

­ articularly important issue for their peer coaching conversations, p as Tim had once asserted that the only way he would leave the university would be feet first! Building on learning gained from their peer coaching, Tim designed a phased exit process that he is very happily implementing now. Peer coaching relationships at work like Kathy and Tim’s are becoming more explicitly valued in today’s work world. Therefore, people are intentionally seeking them out more frequently. In the first part of the book we focused on the processes, mindset, and skills to create an effective peer coaching relationship: building the relationship, creating success through honing relational skills, and making peer coaching a habit. For peer coaching and developmental relationships to thrive, it is critical that the coaching become an everyday practice and a regular part of learning at work. Making peer coaching a habit means applying peer coaching as an everyday practice. Peer coaching, when embedded in an organization, provides the scaffolding for personal and professional development. Habits of mind, such as asking different questions, taking multiple perspectives, and considering the bigger picture, are inherently developmental practices,1 and these can be developed through the practice of peer coaching. In this chapter, we look at the conditions and processes that support peer coaching as a regular, ongoing source of learning at work. Specifically, we explore how managers and leaders and organizational development/human resource professionals can build peer coaching into team structures and the fabric of the organization’s culture. For example, they could design jobs to incorporate peer coaching and take action to foster a culture of learning, development, and growth to encourage developmental relationships to flourish. They can spark learning and development through peer coaching at all organizational levels from any position. We begin by describing the landscape of a culture of learning, development,

Peer Coaching for Everyday Learning   131

and growth. We then explore concrete examples of how to incorporate peer coaching into everyday relationships at work.

Establishing a Coaching Culture That Supports Learning, Development, and Growth The complexity and velocity of today’s work environments discussed in Chapter 1 makes it difficult to know how to respond in a given situation. The capacity to connect with others and address complex issues requires critical competencies of responding with agility and creating high-quality relationships. Consider the challenges of first responders, such as firefighters who need to assess complex situations together and coordinate their next moves with everyone involved in the situation. They need to anticipate what they can respond to together and be agile in situations that they cannot anticipate. Each challenge requires the first responders to coordinate assessment, ask different questions, explore multiple perspectives, and choose appropriate courses of action. Coaching should be a developmental process used to support learning and development rather than applied as a remedial process for executives in need. With such growth comes new recognition of the value of learning organizations2 and learning as a lifelong process. Embedding coaching within the culture supports learning and development by combining challenging, meaningful work with support and care for employees. Learning opportunities are integral to everyday work and align with reward systems that value efforts and initiatives to coach and develop others. Opportunities abound in all organizations for individuals to form collaborative relationships with others.3 When peer coaching becomes an everyday practice, the conditions that support learning underpin all work relationships. These conditions include the following:

132  Chapter 7

• accepting imperfection and vulnerability • valuing exploration and openness to learning • taking the time to listen and to be present to another • honoring behaviors to create a safe container for oneself and others • taking risks and experimenting • being concerned about things larger than oneself, including providing support and challenge to others • supporting an organizational culture and senior leadership that values, supports, and practices these conditions When peer coaching exists as part of regular learning practice, leaders, managers, human resource professionals, and members seek opportunities to build it into the organizational fabric and honor the dynamic or emergent qualities that support learning, growth, and development. Organizational culture is the nesting of artifacts of the organization such as structure, processes, and programs.4 The espoused values are the standards, expressed values, and rules of conduct. Underlying assumptions are at the core of the expression of culture and are the implicit rules by which the organization functions. A coaching culture, as described by Peter Hawkins, builds on this model and includes behaviors, mind-sets, emotional ground, and motivational roots that support what a coaching culture could be.5 Figure 7.1 depicts how peer coaching, as an everyday practice at work, would be demonstrated in the artifacts of strategy and mission statements, behaviors in meetings and supervisory relationships, formal and informal engagements, and more emotional aspects of culture as expressed by mood and inspiration. The conditions that support learning, growth, and development are sometimes seen to contrast with expectations of accurate or perfect performance or with “getting it right.” However, a learning

Peer Coaching for Everyday Learning   133

Artifacts

Patterns of behavior

Mindset Motivational roots

Emotional ground

Figure 7.1  Elements of Culture Source: Peter Hawkins, Creating a Coaching Culture, © 2012. Reproduced with the kind permission of Open International Publishing Ltd. All rights reserved.

culture does not necessarily conflict with a performance culture. Rather, learning cultures distinguish the moments of learning and training from the critical moments requiring performance and perfection. For example, in the surgical suite, it is essential to meet expectations of sterilized equipment and trained staff to ensure that the procedure goes smoothly and safely. Technical skill is always essential, and coordination in relationships supports the process. When it is time to perform the surgery, and collaborative relationships characterized by mutual helping, active listening, and an openness to feedback exist, individuals will act in alignment with each other to achieve desired results.

134  Chapter 7

Using peer coaching as a process for creating, developing, and sustaining a learning culture requires initiatives at the interpersonal level between roles and within roles such as those of management or leader, organizational development, or human resource professionals. In the following sections, we offer questions you might explore at any position or with any role, and identify examples to show how peer coaching supports regular learning at work.

Individual and Interpersonal-Level Support for Learning with Peer Coaching Peer coaching as a habit embeds inquiry, reflection, and reassessment into everyday practice. You might ask yourself, “Given my responsibilities, what are my development needs? How can I improve the way I contribute to my team, function, and organization? Who can I work with that will help stretch and challenge me? How can I support others’ growth and development?” Peer coaching can be episodic when the focus is on a specific purpose and project, as it was with Tim and Kathy in the example earlier in the chapter, and/or strategic and developmental when the focus is on growth and change. Episodic examples might require a peer coach to explore a technical solution to a computer problem or, at a more meta level, an information processing challenge. Different episodes would need the help of one or more other people, each bringing a different perspective or way of knowing to address the challenge. Providing technical support still requires you to have the relational skills and relationship history to enlist the help of relevant others to solve the problem. Peer coaching is more often, however, an ongoing process to support performance and developmental goals at work. National Semiconductor in California’s Silicon Valley, where more than four hundred people engage in peer coaching throughout the organization, provides an example of peer coaching that is both person-

Peer Coaching for Everyday Learning   135

ally developmental and performance-based. Peer coaches formed performance partnerships to introduce new behavior, increase organizational effectiveness, and enhance personal productivity.6 Instituting a peer coaching process is one of the many moves an organization might make to support a culture of learning and development. Aligning the culture to the conditions that support learning for the programmatic initiative is also required. In particular, the culture needs to support taking risks, exploring, being comfortable with not knowing all the answers, not being perfect, and being vulnerable. Specifically, National Semiconductor employees valued peers’ abilities to focus on a particular case and to listen to others’ reflections on their situations without the inclination to interrupt with a comment. One benefit of peer coaching as a regular practice is the paired process through which people who work together and act as resources to support each other’s growth and development. People at the same workplace partner with another person based on complementary learning and development needs. The organization’s human resources or organization development specialists often take the initiative to introduce the coaching process to a group of voluntary participants. The peer coaching model also applies in leadership develop­ ment processes.7 As people learn about leadership and self-­ development  and pursue opportunities to use different develop­ mental approaches in their work, peer coaches provide support, act as a sounding board, and monitor accountability when assessing progress and opportunities for further learning. For example, many leadership development and executive education programs, such as those at Boston University’s Questrom School of Business Executive MBA program, Center for Creative Leadership, The McNulty School of Leadership at the Wharton School at the University of Pennsylvania, and the University of Queensland Business School, all incorporate peer coaching into the classroom infrastructure.

136  Chapter 7

Every participant selects a peer, and each pair establishes their expectations for how they will support each other’s development during and after the program.

Management and Leadership Roles That Support Learning with Peer Coaching Incorporating existing peer coaching relationships in any organization is the key to success. As a manager or leader, you can identify opportunities within your areas of responsibility to foster learning and development through peer coaching. You gain maximum benefit from modeling coaching yourself and setting personal-growth goals that support your development in your role. Seek out other managers who may have experience with similar challenges and opportunities and create alliances for mutual learning. Partner with the organization’s development and human resource professionals to design and implement policies and practices that support peer coaching as a learning initiative. Human resource professionals, for example, can ensure that an organization’s reward and performance appraisal systems recognize the time required for regular peer coaching work and encourage individuals to take it. They may also help you implement supportive practices within your own area of responsibility so that your direct reports understand that developmental relationships become a vital part of everyday practice at work. In Chapter 5, we introduced specific examples of peer coaching groups. As a manager or leader, you could incorporate learning into everyday group practices through peer coaching. One specific example could be instituting a process of reviewing specific tasks, projects, or events and reflecting on them for what the team can learn for the future such as the after-action review (AAR) process documented by the U.S. Army.8

Peer Coaching for Everyday Learning   137

The AAR process brings together a team to discuss a task, event, activity, or project in an open and honest fashion. According to the U.S. Army, it should do the following: • take place during or immediately after an event • focus on objectives that can be worked on in training • include everyone who was involved in the incident • use open-ended questions • focus on strengths and weaknesses and not try to assess blame Another review process practiced by some organizations is known as a retrospective,9 which is a variation on the AAR. It follows a similar format, but involves asking generative questions such as these: • What did you set out to achieve? • What was your plan to achieve this? • How did this change as you progressed? • What went well and why? • What could have gone better? • What advice would you give yourself if you were to go back to where you were at the start of the project? • What were the two or three key lessons you would share with others? • What’s next for you in terms of this project? • Can you think of a story that summarizes your experience of work on this project? • What should we have learned from this project a year from now? • Are there any lessons for you personally?

138  Chapter 7

Both the AAR and the retrospective focus on participants learning what they can do in the future to achieve a more successful outcome, as opposed to dwelling on mistakes or attributing blame. Considerations are given to different outcomes had things gone differently. However, the questions posed in the retrospective focus attention on what “doing it better in the future” might look like. The University College London Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust (UCLH) adopted the AAR process in 2009 to explore what people and teams learn from specific events.10 The UCLH uses AARs in a variety of situations from planned formal meetings to spontaneous and informal events to review such things as functional tasks to operational processes. Regardless of the situation or review, the focus is on four key questions: 1. What was expected to happen? 2. What occurred? 3. What went well and why? 4. What can be improved and how? This review process supports an ongoing learning culture by promoting open and honest discussion among the team members, identifying what was well done and ways to improve.

Organizational Development and Human Resources Initiatives As discussed in Chapter 3, deliberately developmental organizations (DDOs) use peer relationships to foster a culture of learning and growth. Robert Kegan, Lisa Lahey, and Andy Fleming sought out organizations that were prioritizing people development to build strong business practices that support deliberately developmental cultures. In each company studied, they report “a seamless integration of two pursuits as if they were a single goal: business

Peer Coaching for Everyday Learning   139

excellence and the growth of people into more capable versions of themselves through the work of the business.”11 The organizations addressed highly demanding and complex conditions and showed a commitment to fostering developmental capacities in peer coaching relationships and supporting the conditions under which peer coaching did flourish. Supporting the deliberately developmental culture helps people work together to identify their respective growth goals, consider which competing commitments inhibit change, and develop an understanding of why change can be so challenging. Peer coaching groups expand on the one-on-one learning relationship by providing opportunities to observe and engage in coaching conversations with multiple others. Vodafone established a successful initiative in which peer coaching groups formed at each level of the organization to accelerate culture change. Building a coaching ethos from the top down and linking it with elements such as personal development reviews, briefings, team building, and leadership courses contributed to a change from day-to-day processes being the highest priority to people development becoming increasingly important.12 As discussed in Chapter 5, many organizations are experimenting with peer coaching groups and learning circles, with noticeable benefits in task-related learning and in personal and relational competencies. Some of these organizations have a facilitator, while others lead the group through an orientation process so they can self-manage. Again, we highlight the role of human resource and organization development professionals to realize the potential of peer coaching in groups. Their role is to structure, convene, and orient people who will lead and participate in these groups. As a human resource/organization development professional, you may seek out your own peer coaches within or outside the organization. By creating your own experiences, you strengthen your ability to support others and model effective peer coaching.

140  Chapter 7

From a communication perspective, each person brings a richness of experiences, influences, and perspectives to the peer coaching relationship, though they may not recognize this until they share their stories. Peer coaching encounters may stimulate each person to realize new aspects of self in relationship to others. Sharing your story with another and hearing your peer’s story allows you to take a new perspective on your own story. The relational communication models presented in Chapter 3—the Daisy, Serpentine, Hierarchy of Meanings, and LUUUUTT models—are all effective tools that peer coaches can practice in groups to encourage meaningful self-disclosure, shared reflection, and relationship building. Initiatives to foster a peer coaching culture often need to reframe the challenges of competing time commitments and virtual teams in new ways to create opportunities. Embedding peer coaching in the team’s tasks, such as taking regular time-outs for reflection, a ritual, or considering the Hierarchy of Meanings model (see Figure 7.2), can help reframe the challenge of time as an opportunity to enhance the quality of performance. The challenge of virtual teams becomes an opportunity when different modes of meeting, such as via videoconferencing, sharpen the members’ presence and focus. There are several ways to leverage peer coaching to support team development and a learning culture. Many organizations introduce a case or situation review as part of regular staff meetings. One participant said of this process: As I listen to other people talk about my situation, I noticed something I hadn’t noticed before: the possibilities of a choice. And then, as another person talked about her situation, I learned things about my own situation in a different way. That was when I realized, even though one person may be the focus of the coaching meeting, everyone is benefiting from being engaged.

Peer Coaching for Everyday Learning   141

The Hierarchy of Meanings model describes the layers of contexts that foreground or background stories told and interpreted.

Culture Context or episode Relationship Group Individual (self) Content

Figure 7.2  The Hierarchy of Meanings Model: Elevating Time as an Opportunity Source: Wasserman, I. C. (2005). Discursive Processes That Foster Dialogic Moments: Transformation in the Engagement of Social Identity Group Differences in Dialogue (Doctoral Dissertation, Fielding Graduate University, 2005). Dissertation Abstracts International, 66(3), 1790B (UMI No. 3168530).

People learn from hearing themselves speak, from listening to feedback, from hearing people share their challenges, and from offering feedback to others (see Figure 7.3). Peer review and coaching processes in work systems allow people to learn to observe themselves and others and promotes commitment to a larger system of interactions. Together these actions enable a learning culture. A learning culture that supports development as an everyday practice is a critical component to making peer coaching sustainable in a work context. Supporting peer coaching as an everyday practice today looks different from the picture twenty years ago. Today, people may work with others who do not sit together or even in the same building or work for the same organization. Work colleagues come from different cultural backgrounds, hold dissimilar personal values, and/or have differing disciplinary backgrounds. There are many opportunities to think broadly about

My

fee dba ck

142  Chapter 7

My inquiry

Self-disclosure

Me

ri

u Yo

rs he k Ot bac d fee

iry

u nq

Figure 7.3  Sources of Learning from Self and Other Source: Adapted from Pearce, W. B. (2007). Making Social Worlds: A Communication Perspective. Oxford: Blackwell, p. 179.

peer ­coaching as part of an everyday practice of regular learning at work to support the work of the enterprise yet not necessarily be bound by the organizational chart. In today’s VUCA environment, building the capability to develop and sustain relationships that foster mutual learning among colleagues is not only nice to have but also increasingly necessary. Table 7.1 summarizes what you can do as an individual in your role as manager, leader, and/or human resource/organizational

Peer Coaching for Everyday Learning   143

development practitioner to support peer coaching and learning and development as a regular process at work. Employee resource groups (ERGs) provide another opportunity to integrate peer coaching processes as an everyday practice in work life. ERGs, also referred to as affinity groups, comprise people in the same workplace who join the group based on shared characteristics or life experiences. Originally organized as part of a diversity and inclusion initiative, ERGs have now expanded to include people organized around interests and resources for professional development. Members of these resource groups are people who might otherwise feel like outsiders, who share common stories or experiences, and who provide support for each other. The groups foster opportunities from which learning and development arise, often in the form of peer support and broader networks with individuals who share the same experiences or interests. Employees involved in workplace peer coaching relationships consistently note that the relational skills and personal insights developed in these experiences extend beyond their professional life and into their personal life. Recently, Ilene, in collaboration with some of her colleagues, invited grant winners from a particular foundation to pair up and act as peer coaches to each other. The participants met face to face when the grants were awarded and each person presented their project. The projects extended over a twelve-month period. During this time, peer coaches met one or two times per month and focused on how they were addressing the conditions of the grant, what they were learning in their project, unanticipated challenges, and unanticipated opportunities. They took turns addressing each other’s projects and, inevitably, learned something, both from listening and from being heard. The program is now in its second year, and the peer coaches from the first year act as resources to the current peer coaches. The granting foundation is considering

Table 7.1  Supporting a Coaching Culture from Multiple Levels

Level Individual

Self

Ask yourself: What am I responsible for? What are my developmental needs? Create a support system grid to determine what you need to grow continuously, to determine current relationships that support that, and to identify other relationships that you need to develop. Manager/Leader Continuously set growth goals that support your own growth as a manager and as one who, in your role, supports others. Model effective peer coaching for others.

Group

Team

Organization

Ask yourself: What is our team Ask yourself: How can Ask yourself: Whom do I I contribute to a committed to? How might need to work with to spark developmental culture I improve my contribution? creative approaches? Seek through my own actions to Whom might I seek out as out others and situations ask for help and offer help? peer coaches to help me that can support your continually challenge myself development and growth. to grow, develop, and learn? Group settings provide the opportunity to learn from observing and listening to others as well as eliciting diverse views. Identify incentives and rewards Identify opportunities within Seek out other managers to encourage more attention your area of responsibility who may have experience to structure opportunities for to learning and helping in in the kinds of challenges relationships with colleagues. peer coaching to occur and and opportunities you have. Work with OD/HR Actively develop alliances for to thrive. practitioners to design and mutual learning. implement such policies and practices.

OD/HR Practitioner

Seek out other practitioners Ask yourself: How can I (inside and outside your best support individuals in organization) who are in building self-awareness and similar positions. Create a the necessary relational skills to engage in mutual learning structure for sharing your challenges with each other with others? What are my and holding each other challenges? Who do I need accountable for growth and to be in ongoing relationship development. to grow?

Commit to exploring and Identify groups inside and identifying ways of creating outside your organization a learning culture—a culture where members face similar challenges related to creating where peer coaching is a part of everyday practice and enhancing a DDO. and vulnerability and Commit to each other to identify experiments you can risk taking is welcomed. Work with senior leaders do to ignite your growth and to develop strategies and development. action plans for creating appropriate learning opportunities, incentives and rewards, and values that privilege peer coaching as a critical developmental tool for the organization.

Source: I. C. Wasserman, “Discursive Processes That Foster Dialogic Moments: Transformation in the Engagement of Social Identity Group Differences in Dialogue,” doctoral diss., Fielding Graduate University. Dissertation Abstracts International 66, no. 3 (2005), 1790B. UMI No. 3168530.

146  Chapter 7

a publication, authored by the grantees, that encapsulates both overall project results and lessons learned from the peer coaching process. The approach to creating a DDO13 described by Kegan and Lahey is successful for intact teams. People, often with the support of a trained facilitator, identify a stretch goal that has repeatedly eluded them, yet moving toward achieving that goal would lead to tremendous, perhaps even breakthrough, strides in their personal growth. Each person then works with a peer coach on their stretch goal and explores some issues that have been inhibiting change. As many organizations have people working with more than one intact team, each person chooses the team that would best support their focus on their stretch goal. Regular meetings include a checkin to see how members are progressing with their stretch goal, in the same way they would regularly report on progress of their task assignments. Peer coaches also help each other identify experiments or design deliberate actions to enact new behaviors to assist the other to achieve their desired goals. This process design enacts a culture of learning and development by enabling people to be vulnerable, to explore their fears and concerns, and to take risks that support exploration and change. It is critical to ensure that the level of vulnerability aligns with the job function and the organization’s culture. A nuance to emphasize is that everyone supporting a learning and development culture must also truly support the messiness of learning. Brené Brown commented, “If we can share our story with someone who responds with empathy and understanding, shame can’t survive.”14 The same applies to other forms of vulnerability. Some positions have both unique and shared conditions and challenges that are particular to the specific position. Peer coaching for senior leaders, senior managers, new managers, or product development team leaders, for instance, presents opportunities for people to meet with others who share their unique position and to

Peer Coaching for Everyday Learning   147

address issues with the help and support of others who can relate to them and to their contexts. Peer coaching groups support senior managers and leaders by providing a structured environment within which to engage peers and learn from other the examples of others. As indicated previously, peer coaching works best when there is a regular commitment to meet and to be accountable for addressing goals and objectives. Although some instances may be less formal and more free flowing, being able to count on a consistent core group better supports the conditions for learning and development. While HR/OD practitioners often initiate these groups as part of a larger organizational change process, increasingly numbers of people in organizations are taking the initiative themselves to create peer coaching circles as a grassroots process.

Peer Coaching and Job Design An organization’s goals and objectives typically define job descriptions. When peer coaching becomes an intentional everyday practice at work, shifts may occur in job design. The focus may shift to foster helping relationships among peers in regularly scheduled staff meetings and in project teams that explicitly incorporate learning into their primary vision and objectives. A common model for learning and development is the 70-20-10 rule: 70 percent of development happens through on-the-job experiences, 20 percent through learning from others, and 10 percent from formal courses or other educational events. Intentionally designing opportunities so that peer coaching complements people’s work constitutes 90 percent of the development process. Intentional job designs that offer and emphasize interpersonal as well as technical skills underpin effective peer coaching.15 The Center for Creative Leadership has identified three characteristics of challenging job assignments. First, the situation is new

148  Chapter 7

and the responsibilities are unfamiliar. Second, the tasks require building new relationships or driving change. Third, individuals assume a high level of responsibility, the power to make decisions, and a chance to experiment.16 Opportunities for development and challenge are terrific; yet we would not walk across a high wire without appropriate training, support, coaching, and, of course, a safety net. Having support structures in place is a key component to successfully designing growth-supporting jobs. This is where peer coaching comes in. It is a critical element in this system of challenge, support, and growth.

Leadership Development Coaching is based on a mind-set for learning organizations that is fundamental to the development of effective leadership. Coaching works by leveraging relationships and conversations to elicit a variety of mental processes in those who are coached, such as exploring alternatives, persisting with problem solving, initiating solution seeking, and collaborating across boundaries.17 Many leadership development programs incorporate peer coaching directly to link models and ideas to participants’ working lives. The Center for Creative Leadership, INSEAD Business School, and the Wharton Leadership Programs (among others) build peer coaching into the leadership development learning design. The experience of coaching peers during the program strengthens group members’ capacity to coach others when they return to work. Recently, one participant explained how she unexpectedly gained insight about herself through giving feedback to another: I gave Alexis feedback that she was taking it personally when it was more critically and structural intervention. And after we finished Alexis’s case, I realized that I was personalizing something

Peer Coaching for Everyday Learning   149

and could benefit from the group helping me expand the possible perspectives gained from shifting the context.

As the example illustrates, reciprocal peer coaching raises awareness of personal behavior for all peers and not only the one being coached. Participants returning to regular workplaces after leadership development programs are often more attentive to their own behavior (and others’) and can make changes in their everyday practice. Creating a culture where peer coaching becomes an everyday practice at work requires building it into the organizational fabric and honoring the dynamic or emergent qualities that support learning, growth, and development. Achieving this can be difficult, however. The Hierarchy of Meanings model introduced earlier places learning, growth, and development at the highest and defining context, but not necessarily always. This is a paradox. A true learning culture frames all experiences as learning situations, even when performance and perfection take a higher priority than learning. For example, in a surgical suite, essential expectations include sterile instruments and staff trained to coordinate and work very closely with each other so the procedure goes smoothly. Even though it is rare for one expectation not to be met, there is always an after-action review so that those involved can continue to improve on the processes and required coordination.

Concluding Thoughts Supporting and enacting a learning and development culture is everyone’s responsibility, whether they be workers, colleagues, managers, or leaders. Indeed, it is critical that senior leaders show their support for this everyday practice. Each person needs to be intentional about how they respond in the next moment to support safety and trust so that learning and growth can evolve. ­Support

150  Chapter 7

r­equires managers and leaders to build peer coaching into the structure of teams and as part of the fabric of the organization’s culture. Jobs need to be designed so they encourage and incorporate peer coaching. Aim to integrate relationships into the everyday structure and processes. Promote senior leaders, human resources, and organization development professionals as models of learning, development, and growth to ensure peer coaching relationships flourish.

Chapter 8

Cautionary Tales in Peer Coaching

always successful? Does it always produce value for both individuals and the settings in which they are employed? Unfortunately, no! Even by adhering to the three steps outlined in the first half of the book—building the relationship, creating success, and making peer coaching a habit—there will be instances where the peer coaching process breaks down. Rather than positive outcomes related to achieving personal goals, greater self-esteem and well-being, and increased performance and effectiveness, you may instead experience negative outcomes that undermine both individual well-being and organizational effectiveness. We have seen peer coaching relationships go awry in a variety of business, educational, and health care settings. While this does not happen often, it is costly when it does. Frustration, lowered job satisfaction, anxiety, stress, poor performance, lowered levels of trust and loyalty, and even turnover often result. In the most dramatic relationship failures, individuals may feel mistreated and abused in what was to be a supportive relationship. The promised, positive outcomes of improved self-esteem and well-being, goal accomplishment, and greater performance and satisfaction become illusory or unattainable.

Is peer coaching

152  Chapter 8

In this chapter, we share some cautionary tales to highlight the most common sources of problems that can prevent or disrupt an effective peer coaching experience. Our intent is to be realistic rather than discouraging with these cases. Awareness of these risk factors in advance enables you to take action to ensure that important developmental relationships thrive. By presenting these cautionary tales, we intend to equip you with strategies that you can use to interrupt a brewing dysfunction or undesirable pattern in the relationship or to prevent it altogether. First, let us look at how every peer coaching relationship is embedded in a larger context: the multiple factors that influence its beginning, middle, and end.

Peer Coaching as an Embedded Relationship All relationships, including peer coaching, are embedded in a social system that influences how the relationship starts, unfolds, and ultimately ends. Urie Bronfenbrenner, in his studies of human development, demonstrated that interconnected systems, including the family, schools, communities, and other groups with whom the individual interacts all shape individual development over time.1 This interrelated perspective applies equally well to understanding the evolution of peer coaching relationships.2 (See Figure 8.1.) When a particular peer coaching relationship is not flourishing, we need to examine what each individual brings to the relationship. Personal style preferences, mind-sets, values, and skills all contribute to shaping relational dynamics. We also have to consider how the larger social context, such as the organization’s culture and practices, surrounding societal norms, and cultural differences, influence the structure, process, and outcomes of the peer coaching relationship.3 A systematic diagnosis of possible factors undermining the relationship can point to the relevant influences and can determine the best interventions to minimize dysfunction.

Cautionary Tales in Peer Coaching   153

Personality Mindsets Values Skills Relational Competence

C ultu r al

zational pra ctic Organi es

THE INDIVIDUAL

s rm no

THE RELATIONAL MICROSYSTEM

Pee rc oa ch

So cia l

ess Relationa l roc gp in Characteristics

Organiz atio nal Co nte xt s a o c Peer C hing r t S ucture

THE CONTEXTUAL MACRO SYSTEM

Diff er e n c e s

Figure 8.1  Risk Factors in Peer Coaching Source: Parker et al., 2012. “Exploring Risk Factors in Peer Coaching: A Multilevel Approach,” The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 49(3). 361–387. Reprinted with permission.

Let us examine three peer coaching relationships that began with mutual optimism about the potential for the relationship. Tracing each relationship as it unfolded over time reveals the multiple influences that shaped its evolution and suggests possible alternative steps that may have led to a higher-quality relationship and outcomes.

Marissa and Susanne: From Disconnection to Reconnection Marissa and Susanne first met in an Emerging Leaders Forum during which they were exposed to the potential value of peer

154  Chapter 8

c­ oaching. In Chapter 2, we saw how Marissa and Susanne selected each other through a mutual selection process based on identifying similarities and differences between them. Through active listening and self-disclosure, they discovered that they were both professional women with high aspirations, demanding jobs, and a desire to be more effective in their current roles. This was the beginning of a mutual identification process and a desire to be helpful to each other. Consistent with the 3-step Peer Coaching model, the women established meaningful goals for the alliance: Marissa wanted to improve her ability to manage work and family commitments and to clarify boundaries and reduce her stress as she moved between the roles. She also wanted to be heard at business meetings, rather than being ignored or silenced by others who seemed more outspoken and confident. Susanne was seeking support from her peer coach to establish stretch goals for herself; with Marissa’s help, she came to see that it was important to set a goal that would increase her support network. Marissa and Susanne learned more about their differences by using the Daisy model to explore their social identities, mind-sets, and personal preferences that shape their contributions to the relationship (see Chapter 3). Marissa was thirty-five, married, with one child and a second on the way, and was born into a family that had immigrated to the United States. In contrast, Susanne was twenty-eight and single, graduated from an Ivy League college, and earned an MBA from a well-known business school. They were encouraged to continue looking further into their similarities and differences as their relationship developed to deepen their understanding of each other. By the end of Step 2, creating success (see Chapter 3), they appreciated the ways in which their different life experiences had shaped them, the unique challenges that each faced because of their background, and what they would contribute to this helping relationship.

Cautionary Tales in Peer Coaching   155

The Serpentine and LUUUUTT models, which both encourage continuous questioning and critical reflection, prompted each of them to tell and then to examine their stories. Their deepening dialogue led to an increased self-awareness that poised them to continue their personal learning relationship after the Emerging Leadership Forum concluded. Going forward, their interactions would include regular check-ins, serving as a critical friend, and regularly encouraging further self-awareness and taking action that would move them closer to their personal goals. The relationship was serving its primary purpose. An immigrant’s daughter working in a white-male-dominated industry, Marissa was learning how to manage boundaries at work and at home. She was developing greater appreciation for the time-management and problem-solving skills that had served her well to this point and led to success. Susanne came to understand how her background had limited her; her highly ambitious instrumental goals had left no time to build new relationships that could energize and inspire her to achieve more than she had. She began to seek out activities and relationships beyond her immediate comfort zone and found great satisfaction in doing so. For six weeks, Marissa and Susanne met on Skype and listened to and encouraged each other. Both recorded in their journals the actions they were taking to achieve their newly established personal goals. Marissa began building new relationships, one of which was with another working mother in her business unit with whom she had much in common. Susanne initiated social activities to discover what she enjoyed doing and to expand her social network. The periodic check-ins worked well for them both for a time. However, Susanne began to view the weekly meetings as a burden and a waste of her time. She raised this concern with Marissa and the two altered their agreement to meet monthly instead of weekly. Eight months later, Susanne raised the concern again. Fortunately, both had enough trust in the relationship to raise their

156  Chapter 8

­ iscomforts. They both acknowledged that they had expanded d their developmental networks to the point that regular check-ins were no longer beneficial. Subsequently, one or the other occasionally makes contact, recognizing that the regular peer coaching relationship had evolved into a friendship. The working agreement that Marissa and Susanne established early in their peer coaching relationship needed updating as their relationship grew. As they met their respective goals, one of the pair recognized that their needs had changed. Thus, renegotiating how they would work together going forward became necessary at several points in their shared history. In the eleven months that they actively worked together, they redefined their working agreement three times. Sometimes the renegotiation was simply about how often they would meet; other times it was to define a new set of personal goals to supersede their original goals. Fortunately, Susanne was willing to raise her discomfort and Marissa was responsive to her concerns, which allowed them to change and coordinate new relationship dynamics. These minor adjustments to an ongoing peer coaching relationship can lead to frustration, dissatisfaction, and, ultimately, a unilateral decision to end the relationship. Disruptions can include original goals becoming outdated, an individual being unable or unwilling to adapt to their partner’s changing needs and expectations, blind spots preventing further learning, or a sense that this particular learning relationship is no longer a good fit. The critical point here is the importance of acting on the discomfort, rather than letting it fester. Too often, peer coaching relationships become dysfunctional or perfunctory because these predictable challenges go unnoticed and/or become undiscussable (see Table 8.1). By discussing the immediate dissatisfaction, Marissa and Susanne were able to redefine their goals and their working agreement several times. Eventually, both succeeded in

Cautionary Tales in Peer Coaching   157

building other mutually supportive relationships and applying what they had learned about high-quality connections garnered through their mutual peer coaching experiences.

Kate and Barbara: When Relational Dynamics Go Awry Barbara and Kate first met at a national networking meeting for marketing professionals. They gravitated toward one another as two professional women in a large group composed mostly of men. They immediately found much in common, as both were trying to succeed in a male-dominated profession with prolific gender stereotypes. During one of the panel sessions, they heard a presentation about the untapped potential of peer coaching. While neither had experienced the 3-step Peer Coaching model before, they decided to connect with each other on a regular basis to help each other overcome challenges. After the networking meeting, Barbara told Kate that she wanted to demonstrate more leadership behavior in her current role as a scientist in product development. She sought promotion to a vice president position that would have responsibility for managing a team of marketing professionals. In turn, Kate, a marketing professional in a large advertising agency, told Barbara how she often felt invisible in staff meetings. She would hesitate to speak and then feel frustrated when others articulated what she was about to say. At other times, she would speak up and not be noticed. She felt invisible and silenced by this dynamic. The two decided to meet regularly to actively listen and coach one another on these articulated challenges. Within a short time, their dialogue began to feel uncomfortably familiar to Kate. For example, when Kate described a meeting where she did not speak up and was later frustrated because a male colleague repeated and claimed her idea, Barbara responded as follows:

158  Chapter 8

Barbara: You should speak up sooner! Don’t allow yourself to sit on your hands and listen. Come prepared with an idea or two and commit to speaking early in the meeting. Kate: I know that . . . but predictably, I become frozen in my tracks. I start telling myself that my ideas are not good enough. I silence myself. Barbara: If you are going to make it in that agency, you have to fight those feelings and just speak up. It is the only way to succeed. Kate thought to herself: I am not finding Barbara’s lecturing helpful. She is intimidating and I’d rather she listen and help me explore my thinking and mind-set, and what holds me back from speaking. Barbara thought to herself: I need to keep hammering this point with Kate. She has to speak up more quickly. I have learned to do that and now I see myself as a leader ready for the C-suite.

The lack of coordination in Barbara and Kate’s exchange led to a growing gap in mutual understanding. Barbara thought her enthusiastic and directive advice would spur Kate on to act more effectively; she was naturally assertive and thought her directive behavior with her peers and subordinates demonstrated her leadership qualities to others in her company. However, her consistent focus on what Kate “should” do was disquieting, causing Kate to mention her challenge less and less frequently. Rather than feeling that Barbara’s directive style was supportive and helpful, she felt intimidated, just as she did in some of the staff meetings she attended. Barbara was entirely unaware of how Kate experienced her coaching style and felt frustrated by Kate’s quiet ways. There was a lack of coherence because each had different and uncoordinated ways of creating an episode of help and support. The distance between them grew. Their initial enthusiasm for connecting regularly was decreasing, as each felt increasingly frustrated with the other. Barbara did not realize the impact of her

Cautionary Tales in Peer Coaching   159

directive style on Kate and was increasingly doubtful that their ongoing interaction would enhance her own leadership journey. Kate was not getting the kind of help she wanted and felt stuck in an alltoo-familiar negative dynamic. Their deteriorating connection was likely to end the relationship unless they could discuss the current dynamic and shift this undesirable repetitive pattern. This kind of disruption is all too frequent in peer coaching relationships. One or both individuals begin to react negatively to the other’s words but refrain from raising this as a problem to explore. The increasingly negative feelings and distance overrun a lack of empathy for the other. Failing to raise these reactions for discussion leads to increasing distance and, ultimately, an end to what had been a mutually enhancing relationship. Furthermore, Barbara and Kate lacked formal training in peer coaching practices and did not have regular check-ins during which they could raise concerns about how each regarded their work together. As we saw with Marissa and Susanne, regular check-ins enable midcourse corrections to how they work together. The check-ins need to extend beyond the content of the meetings to consider the interacting patterns they co-create. A shared understanding of the dynamic allows them to generate better coordination and coherence in their future interactions. Fortunately, Kate found the courage to raise her discomfort with Barbara, realizing that she could change the relationship by raising it directly (using the Serpentine model). While it was not easy for her, she knew that she had set it as a goal for herself, and achieving it meant she needed to be courageous and honest with Barbara. She was practicing her ability to speak up when she had a point she wanted to convey. She also suspected that the feedback might prompt Barbara to see some of the unintended consequences of being so directive and consider a more facilitative and effective leadership style. Barbara’s initial reaction was shock. In her mind, she was practicing leadership behaviors that she needed to exhibit more often back at work while also helping Kate.

160  Chapter 8

They listened to each other with respect and openness. Barbara realized that in some instances her directive, authoritative style is not helpful or effective leadership. Kate experienced how speaking up and being heard on a matter that was important to her was valuable. Both expanded their understanding of each other and themselves and became more willing to explore such learning opportunities as they continued their work together. Kate spoke up more often and Barbara asked more questions in an effort to help Kate learn from her own experiences and reflections. Their relationship dynamic shifted dramatically. This case illustrates the importance of regular check-ins and that raising concerns about how peer coaches are working together is legitimate and encouraged. It also illustrates how relational dynamics can go awry in the absence of effective communication. The value of peer coaching diminishes without ongoing regular use of active listening, critical reflection, and shared decision making to monitor the dynamics of a relationship.4 (See Table 8.1.)

Robert and Tamara: When the Organizational Context Is Problematic Robert and Tamara worked together on the same trading desk at a major financial services firm based in New York. Periodically, they would attend the same technical training program designed to enhance traders’ skills. The training sessions generally lasted only sixty to ninety minutes because time away from the desk was costly to the bottom line. Traders were allowed to attend such programs only a few times each year, and it was considered a perk for high performers. At the last session they attended, they decided that they would meet periodically to help each other implement the practices they learned at prior training sessions. Because the training was infrequent, they agreed to meet weekly to compare notes and to coach each other on their investment strategies.

Cautionary Tales in Peer Coaching   161

Robert and Tamara thought it best to hold their peer coaching sessions after hours, given that the firm’s competitive culture was oriented to achieving bottom-line results. Regularly taking time out from their daily work to meet, however infrequently, would be frowned on. The arrangement worked well for a while. Both Tamara and Robert felt that they could implement their new skills and knowledge better together than when they had tried on their own. They found that listening to the challenging situations that the other faced and offering possible next steps helped them internalize the new approaches that made them more effective on the trading desk. For example, Robert found that he was taking more calculated risks with some of his clients and that it was working out well. Similarly, Tamara found that she had more confidence to act; prior to their coaching conversations, she would hesitate before making a call. Both felt more self-assured and supported in a persistently stressful environment. Four months into their peer coaching efforts, Robert raised the following concern with Tamara: Robert: My wife is complaining that I am working so hard that I never see the kids before bedtime anymore. I really need to contain my work hours better, in order to meet the needs of my family. One way to do this is to let go of our weekly meetings. Tamara: Oh wow . . . too bad! But I understand completely. I wish that the firm encouraged us to take an hour a week for this kind of learning on the job. We are both more effective because of our mutual coaching for just a few short months!

They decided to suspend their weekly coaching sessions and replace them with brief phone calls. This was far less satisfying to both. Two months later, Tamara realized that she really didn’t like working in this particular results-oriented trading culture. She reached a tipping point and determined that she really wanted to be in an organization that valued learning on the job and ­learning

162  Chapter 8

in relationships with colleagues. In essence, Tamara aspired to work in a deliberately developmental organization, much as we discuss in Chapter 7.5 Not long thereafter, a firm with a more collaborative culture in which individuals routinely help one another achieve their key performance indicators invited Tamara to join. She jumped at the opportunity to work in a new firm that did support and value professional development. She saw a positive future in a firm that values, supports, and rewards employees’ efforts. This example illustrates how an organization’s culture and practices can undermine a peer coaching relationship. Not only were Robert and Tamara discouraged from helping each other while at work, but the long working hours expected of those on the trading floor also made it costly for them to meet after hours. Eventually, Tamara and Robert ended their regular meetings and Tamara left the firm. We can only speculate how often the potential for effective peer coaching is unintentionally extinguished by a strictly performance-oriented culture. Some companies have learned to minimize the unintended consequences of practices that make learning and professional development a difficult and isolated activity. Creating norms and practices that encourage learning and shared reflection produces an organizational atmosphere in which employees come to enjoy learning in partnership with peers and colleagues. For example, product development teams in a high-tech firm became a source of peer coaching when the teams’ primary goals expanded to include developing team members’ skills in addition to introducing new product in a timely manner. Inviting team members to attend learning sessions on key subject areas including collaboration, communication, and managing differences helped individuals develop habits and skills as part of their cultural toolkit. That, in turn, enabled them to build collaborative learning relationships.

Table 8.1  Risk Factors and Their Consequences

Risk Factors

Costs if Not Addressed

Benefits if Addressed

Marissa/Susanne Lack of self-awareness Unrealistic expectations Inadequate skills Failure to renegotiate when change occurs

Disillusionment/frustration Increasing mistrust Relationship failure Lowered self-esteem Negative performance indicators

Increased self-awareness Growth in the relationship Increased competence/ performance Relational learning

Kate/Barbara

Lack of empathy Behavior triggers negativity Lack of relational competence Overdependence or submissiveness Bad intentions

Disillusionment/frustration Increasing mistrust Lowered self-esteem Relationship failure Negative performance indicators

Increased self-awareness Growth in the relationship Increased competence/ performance Relational learning

Robert/Tamara

Competitive culture Low level of teamwork and collaboration Inappropriate incentives and rewards Limited cultural toolkit

Lack of trust Lack of time for reflective learning Individual performance valued over collaborative effort Minimal relational competence/ practice Lower commitment/turnover

Enhanced trust Enhanced opportunities for relational learning Collaboration encouraged and rewarded Increased performance, commitment, learning

164  Chapter 8

This example raises the possibility that certain cultures simply do not contain the prerequisite conditions to render peer coaching effective. When a diagnosis of the organization leads the practitioner to this conclusion, it may be wiser not to start peer coaching in the first place. Or, if it is already under way but floundering, the parties should confront the question of whether the process should continue or be phased out and perhaps replaced by some other learning method, such as training or traditional mentoring.

How to Diagnose Problems and Take Action We see in each of our cautionary tales how it is possible to nurture the potential of peer coaching and minimize potential risk factors. Marissa and Susanne successfully renegotiated their expectations and practices several times during the course of their relationship to minimize frustration and disillusionment. In addition, their developing relational competence enabled them to initiate new connections as they moved forward in their careers. Similarly, Kate eliminated several risk factors by having the courage to speak up and inform Barbara that her directive style was not helpful. Fortunately, Barbara’s willingness to accept the feedback enabled both women to develop more empathy for the other, transform their relationship, enhance their self-awareness, and build new skills that would contribute positively to their future performance and relationships. Tamara and Robert’s financial services firm failed to eliminate a number of obstacles that undermined their peer coaching relationship. Not only did the culture of working long hours prevent opportunities for shared, reflective learning, but the organizational practices and norms also discouraged engaging in helping relationships on the job. Individual and organizational learning were sacrificed, as was a once highly motivated and productive employee. These negative consequences could have been avoided by proac-

Cautionary Tales in Peer Coaching   165

tively rewarding collaborative behavior on the job and by creating opportunities for individuals to develop self-awareness and the relational competence to leverage these opportunities. However, given the high-pressure reward system of this organization and, indeed, this whole industry, senior management would need to lead these proactive measures to have an impact on the overall culture. John Mack’s work as CEO of Morgan Stanley provides a pertinent example of such a proactive intervention. He revised the corporate compensation system to reward team and collaborative behavior.6

Concluding Thoughts Drawing on self-awareness and relational skills to ensure that problems are discussible will address many of the problems encountered in peer coaching relationships. We are not saying that you should not use peer coaching just because some of these challenges exist. What we are saying is that the core relational principles of coordinating meaning and coherence in peer dynamics can guide individuals to take action that will lead to mutual support and learning. At the first sign of discomfort in a relationship, take the following steps to determine an action that will either enhance the relationship or clarify that it may be time to let it go. 1. Reflect on your experiences in the relationship to enhance your self-awareness. 2. Consider your contributions to the relationship. 3. Consider your partner’s situation with compassion and empathy. 4. Enlist a trusted third party to help you develop insight about what your peer coaching relationship may need and to build intentions for how to move forward. 5. Consider how the tools you developed in Step 2 of the 3-step Peer Coaching model can be helpful. In the Daisy model, are

166  Chapter 8

there petals on your daisy or your peer coach’s daisy that need exploration? If you use the LUUUUTT model to explore stories, are there untold stories that are influencing your relational dynamics? What questions can you ask to bring those into your shared story? What is dominating your interaction, and how does the hierarchical model shed light on what is going on? 6. Before speaking up because things are not going well, keep track of what is happening, create a structure for checking in, and be mindful of discomfort and what it may be telling you. 7. If you can influence the culture and practices of your organization, consider how changes in incentives and rewards, learning programs, leadership models, and practices that encourage collaboration might enable peer coaching to flourish. Enlist learning and process experts in this important work. In most instances, there are actions you can take to enhance a relationship or end it with care and compassion to create space for new alliances in your developmental network. Do not tolerate the most serious relational problems: those characterized by bad intentions, bullying, or negative stereotyping. While it is unlikely that these will occur in relationships that begin explicitly to provide mutual support and help, without the necessary skills and/or training, such destructive elements may occur. Enlisting third-party help may be necessary to end a destructive relationship with grace and integrity intact.

Conclusions and Going Forward

One summer,

Peter Karoff, a poet and friend of the authors, was worried about the course he was going to be teaching in the fall semester. Normally, he would have a small group of students, perhaps a dozen, but this time thirty students were enrolled and he wondered how he could teach such a large group; he contemplated not offering the course. Then he remembered the ways that he uses peer coaching for various class exercises and realized: “We can design the entire course as a peer coaching experience.” For the first assignment, he asked each student to bring a copy of their favorite poem to class and to be prepared to share what they liked about it. This exercise was about not only the poems but also how the interests and styles that emerged during the students’ sharing allowed them to get to know one another. The exercise ignited the first step in the creation of four-person peer coaching learning groups, which became the foundation of the course. Peter incorporated peer coaching into his teaching toolkit after learning about the three steps of peer coaching: (1) how to build effective relationships in peer dyads or groups, (2) how to use peer

168  Conclusions

coaching to create success experiences for the students by honing their relational skills, and (3) how to make peer coaching a habit. He had incorporated peer coaching into his everyday work practice. Peter’s application and experience is the kind we hope that other people may have after mastering the three steps of our peer coaching model. In the last decade, we have observed many other examples of peer coaching in practice. From these examples and from related research and theory, we have discerned the individual, group, and organizational factors that enable positive peer coaching experiences to thrive in a variety of industries and at different levels of responsibility within organizations. A desire to learn and initiative to follow the steps of our model will enable individuals at all career and life stages to benefit from the success factors we have shared in this book. We now know that relational skills, including self-awareness, reflective practice, and a range of emotional competencies, are essential for making this kind of helping relationship effective. Throughout this book we have illustrated that peer coaching is a relational process intended to support a peer, not to solve a problem they may have. As Carl Rogers and Ed Schein have articulated in their seminal works, effective helping is an attitude, a set of behaviors, and a set of skills that are essential to relational life and learning. Through our three-step process, individuals acquire and practice the attitudes and behaviors that will foster mutual learning in relationships with their peers into the future. To date, peer coaching is an underutilized and low-cost resource to facilitate objective and subjective career success that can be effective in personal and professional relationships both inside and outside work. The value of this developmental tool is enhanced significantly when the organization’s reward system and culture align with the vision to foster continuous and transformational learning.

Conclusions  169

What We Hope You Will Take Away from This Book What you, the reader, take away from this book is critical. The 3-step Peer Coaching model should guide your development and practice efforts. The straightforward steps—building the relationship, creating success, and making peer coaching a habit—will lead you to success! The more you use the model, the more your helping ability will increase, and you can be confident that you have a framework to seek support for your own development and growth. We adopt and embed a relational approach, coordinated management of meaning (CMM), which draws attention to the dynamic that occurs in everyday interactions. Peer coaching provides a crucible for learning, within which peers engage in a dialogue and, at the same time, can adopt a helicopter view to look at what is occurring in and around the partnership and what is emerging from their interactions. The dual perspectives develop awareness and allow peers to improve their mutual coordination and collaboration with others by creating continuous feedback not only from others but also by viewing themselves as both participant and subject. Familiarity with our 3-step Peer Coaching model also reveals the iterative processes involved in establishing firm foundations and clear boundary conditions to enhance safety and deep learning. Subsequently, skills and mind-sets conducive to creating success reinforce the basic relational abilities and expand capabilities and interpersonal competence. Increased confidence in newly acquired and honed capabilities leads to potential applications in a range of settings and in a variety of peer coaching relationships. The implication is clear: learn the model and use it so often that it becomes second nature. Once you have made peer coaching a habit, the 3-step model will form part of your own toolkit that you can apply in everyday practice. Consider peer coaching as an underutilized developmental tool that is widely available to people at every career stage. Supporting

170  Conclusions

others’ efforts to respond effectively to a volatile, uncertain environment will become an increasing necessity to survive and thrive as the rate of change accelerates. Coaching assists leaders facing the VUCA environment to be agile in disruptive contexts. All relationships are sources of learning and coaching and should be acknowledged as such. As most human activity, even in specialized jobs, involves interactions with other people in some way, the potential of peer coaching for personal and professional development is infinite. Anybody in a related activity can act as a peer coach, in one way or another, to another interested party. Once you see the potential, you just need to make a contract with your peer(s) to engage in peer coaching for mutual improvement. While peer coaching takes some time and effort to set up, doing so is easy and the results are well worth the effort. There are similarities that extend across peer coaching relationships, but their execution is unique to individual experiences. For example, we recommend developing a working agreement, but the specifics within it will vary depending on the individuals involved. In Chapter 2, Ricardo and Len found that it was important to align their expectations when they discussed their agreement, so meeting frequency was a focus for them. Paul and Amira focused on the meaning of respect, a word that held deep meaning for them following their dialogue. Peer coaching is effective when it is underpinned by a fundamental relational foundation, and success reflects application of relational and interpersonal skills. There is no requirement to be an expert in any field, and it is often advantageous not to be, as it allows for genuine curiosity and open questions without a preconceived or socially desirable answer. Ownership sits firmly with the person who presents the issue. Dialogue that promotes and develops shared understanding enhances relational competence and augurs well for effective outcomes. We hope this book has shown that anyone can develop the necessary skills to engage in peer coaching

Conclusions  171

relationships. What is most important is intentionality and focus: the decision and the will to do it. One example that shows the importance of focus and consistency and the mutual benefits of peer coaching is the Harvard University Ed Portal, an educational setting in Allston, Massachusetts. The Ed Portal is a learning community that Harvard created as part of a plan submitted to the Boston Redevelopment Authority. The program involved planned outreach to the Allston community and was designed as part of its expansion into that area of Boston.1 The program design incorporated a range of learning opportunities for all members of the community, such as continuing education classes, wellness and professional development, and community arts-related activities and exhibits, among others. For some students, such as Kevin Yang, it can provide a path to Harvard. Eight years after the program started, Kevin was the first student in the outreach program to be accepted into Harvard. In addition to courses, intensive peer support is a key component of the program. More than one hundred Harvard undergraduates have served as peer mentors since the program began. Regardless of whether individuals are described as coaches or mentors, having mutual learning as the primary focus and providing opportunities for both parties to practice the necessary relational skills is critically important. Peer coaching hinges on defining the underlying assumptions, using relational skills, and drafting working agreements at the outset. There are currently nearly three hundred students from Allston-Brighton, a working- and middle-class neighborhood of the City of Boston. Kevin talked about the ways the program expanded his skill set: “We got some homework help, but we also worked on public speaking and writing.”2 According to Rob Lue, a Harvard faculty member who is the director of Ed Portal, the goal—even more than improving study habits—is to help students from the neighborhood develop their own self-awareness.

172  Conclusions

Describing Kevin, Professor Lue said, “He speaks to exactly what we are trying to achieve—the process of self-discovery.”3 One of Kevin’s mentors, Tri Huynh, who earned a master’s degree at Harvard and now teaches at a middle school in San Francisco, recalled his talks with Kevin where he passed along his own passion for science. As Huynh talked about the rewards of the program for him as a peer mentor, he said, “I might not be the person who finds the cure for cancer, but I hope maybe someone I teach will.”4 Kevin is already coaching his new freshman friends by assuming the role of “concierge” and guiding them to places like Boda Borg—a real-life gaming experience in Malden—or helping them find the best places to get a haircut or buy clothes. Peer coaching is easy to create and provides mutual benefits. It can also be contagious. Being helped often induces a desire to “pay it forward” by helping others. Furthermore, these mutually beneficial peer coaching relationships can be created explicitly to support deep learning. Although there was considerable research and writing on peerassisted personal learning in groups, such as T-groups in the 1960s and 1970s, we have lost sight of the idea that formal peer relationships can promote deep learning. We can revisit earlier work in humanistic psychology and current work on positive organizational scholarship (POS) to aid us in using relational technology to promote human development. Much of what we need is already there. We just need to look and apply. One place to look is at the Wildlife Conservation Society (WCS). Their 2016 annual report opens with the phrase Passion, Perseverance, and Partners. Passion exemplifies the society’s commitment to conserving the world’s largest wild places; perseverance describes their implementation of an ambitious plan to engage with a rapidly changing world.5 Partners are the third important strand, and the term indicates the strength of relationships they seek: impact through “touching hearts” of millions of people worldwide

Conclusions  173

to engage their support to save endangered wildlife and internally through peer-to-peer helping. In a conversation with Michelle Turchin, executive director of learning and capacity-building, we learned how central relationships are to implement its strategy and how peer coaching, in particular, is the fundamental learning vehicle underlying their development initiatives. The wildlife challenges are so great that in 2016, WCS initiated an innovative WCS U to foster continuous learning among its employees. WCS U consists of a variety of classes, experiences, and information available online to all employees. This initiative, which came directly from WCS’s organization-wide strategic planning process, fosters continuous learning and improvement for greater conservation impact. A cross-functional core team of seven peers began its work in 2013, and by 2016 it had expanded to the WCS U Learning Community with seventy employees from every division of the organization and every level of responsibility. Anyone can join the WCS U Learning Community by committing to distribute news and updates to colleagues, answer questions about WCS U, and share colleague feedback with the community. Members agree to test new courses and give feedback to improve programming prior to launch. They have been instrumental to the growth of WCS U by shaping communication tools, programming, measurement approaches, and more. According to Turchin, the mutual learning among members of the community is thriving, and they continue to add new educational components that make learning through relationships a core competence of WCS employees all over the world. There is also an unwelcome reality to helping peers: It is very easy not to do it! When people feel constrained by time, tasks may take precedence over relationships. It can be easier to engage in activities that may look helpful, but in reality are not. Slipping into telling mode is easy; it saves time, it is directive, and it solves the problem for the other person, which some people may even

174  Conclusions

think is the best way to help. However, telling rather than coaching deprives partners, and the world, of creative ideas and solutions that they themselves might develop or actions that might go far beyond the quick suggested solutions. Be it a time issue, a pull toward problem solving, or a misguided view of what helping entails, some forces can derail the best of peer coaching intentions. These dynamics compromise the quality of our collaborations and can encourage dependency that weakens accountability and creates an ongoing burden in the future. Peer coaching is flexible. It can occur in dyads or groups and in almost any context, whether social, psychological, work, career, or something else entirely. As with most things, scale is a critical factor for peer coaching; it is easier and more straightforward to implement in dyads than in larger collectivities. Expanding the concept of peer coaching to organizations enables scholars and practitioners to design interventions that stimulate deep learning. Observation and assessment before, during, and after the intervention illuminates the essential conditions to foster deep learning through peer coaching. In larger contexts, expect to invest more time and energy in building the relationship and creating conditions conducive to effective outcomes. Difficulties encountered in larger settings can be overcome by a single phrase: follow the 3-step model! The larger the collectivity in which you are using peer coaching, the more critical it is to follow the steps in the model closely. For example, when you are working with groups, the simple practice of starting each meeting with a check-in is invaluable in ensuring that each member of the group is fully present and fully functioning in the room as you start the day’s work together. Without the check-in you could have a key person hamstrung by strong emotions related to some major event that just took place in her or his life earlier in the day. The closer you follow the 3-step process in your overall peer coaching initiative, the more natural and easy it will become.

Conclusions  175

Contexts that favor supporting and encouraging development result in a higher likelihood of success with peer coaching. Peer coaching in cultures that value and provide support for learning and experimentation, have a reasonable trust level, and have managers who promote learning in self and others leads to better outcomes. Southwest Airlines advises: “The attitude is more important than the skill, at least at first.” Skills can be developed; attitudes that provide support, caring, empathy, and self-awareness are difficult, if not impossible, to impose. In the case of unusually high levels of support, peer coaching is easier to enact in organizations that are intentionally committed to a learning and development culture. These organizations tend to set out to develop their people and focus on how each member communicates with others. The explicitly relational approach incorporates aspects of CMM that underpin our approach to peer coaching. For example, in the early stages of their peer coaching relationship, Marissa and Susanne used the Daisy model to consider influences on the current behavior and used self-disclosure to deepen their relationship. Later they used the Serpentine model to identify patterns in their own stories, which allowed them to recognize how taking a third-party perspective gave greater insight into their behavioral drivers. Multiple levels interact and influence each other simultaneously through social interactions. That is, the individuals learn more and behave in a way that influences the organizational culture. We have discussed the prerequisites for peer coaching to work well. It takes time and energy to get the fundamentals right, particularly when peers are keen to get into the action! Step 1, building the relationship, involves establishing a container that is safe, is enabling, and stimulates a mutual sense of curiosity. Within such a container, deep listening and effective questioning in an open-ended manner invites deeper exploration of peers’ issues. Step 2, creating success, involves two primary developmental tasks:

176  Conclusions

self- (and other-) awareness, adaptability, and relational skills are keys; strong motivation and positive intentions are also essential. Effective peer coaches need to confront difficult issues that inevitably arise in the relationship. When both parties approach the relationship with a positive mind-set, they feel more comfortable initiating these difficult conversations. Confronting and dealing with problematic issues creates psychological success for both parties and further strengthens the relationship. Step 3, making peer coaching a habit, is a leadership capability. If handled well, challenging times can create a virtuous cycle of risk taking, openness, successful inquiry, and mutual success, which creates a stronger base for dealing with future issues. Failing to confront problematic issues, as was initially the case for Barbara and Kate, can lead to a negative spiral in which the avoidance gradually leads to greater emotional distance and exacerbates negative feelings. Fortunately for Kate and Barbara, they were able to be more open with each other as they each became more aware of their distance and negative feelings. Their use of the Serpentine model was helpful, as it gave them a way of visualizing the twists and turns in their relational process together. Using the model in this way provided a sort of boundary object that they could both look at together. It acted as something external to each of them that they could share, analyze, and problem-solve about together. Finally, there are risk factors to accommodate, the cautionary tales that you ignore at your peril. The apparent simplicity of peer coaching belies the potential obstacles to successful outcomes. In a high-pressure, task-oriented culture, such as in many financial services companies, there may be insufficient time at work allowed for people to meet and help each other. Robert and Tamara found this (in chapter 8) and, after several attempts to make the time for peer coaching, they finally decided that it simply was not practical. However, Tamara later moved to a team-oriented and collaborative firm where peer coaching was much more available and

Conclusions  177

practicable. The lesson is that it is useful to do a quick scan of the environment in which you are operating before making a big investment in a peer coaching initiative. If you are in an environment like Tamara’s first workplace and still want to use peer coaching to help you develop, seeking a peer coaching relationship outside the firm, such as in a professional organization or with some friends in your developmental network, may lead to a greater benefit. As you engage in peer coaching, in addition to focusing on your current work, be open to the possibility that your learning could go well beyond your present skills and knowledge. The experience could be transformative, facilitating your personal growth and expanding your self-identity. You may experience greater selfconfidence, and you may discover new interests and career and life goals. This kind of deep learning can be one of the outcomes (either intended or unintended) of a good peer coaching experience.

Concluding Thoughts: Our Hopes for You Going forward, we hope that you and the people that you help—as a consultant, counselor, teacher, coach, manager, or professional specialist, or in some other developmental role—will integrate the concepts and practices of peer coaching into your professional toolkit and your professional practice. We invite you to experiment and share your experiences of peer coaching so it becomes more visible and well recognized as an everyday relational practice. Through your work, and the work of others like you, organizations will begin to bring this into their developmental resources. In summary, our message about peer coaching is this: Go ahead and try it! If you’ve already tried it, find new ways to deepen and widen your mastery of the practice. If you already have a rich base of experience with this relational learning technology, find ways to share what you have learned and attract ever more people to the peer coaching community of practice!

This page intentionally left blank

notes

Preface and Acknowledgments 1.  P. Parker, D. T. Hall, and K. E. Kram, “Peer Coaching: A Relational Process for Accelerating Career Learning,” Academy of Management Learning and Education 7, no. 4 (2008): 487–503. 2.  P. Parker, K. E. Kram, and D. T. Hall, “Exploring Risk Factors in Peer Coaching: A Multilevel Approach,” Journal of Applied Behavioral Science 49, no. 3 (2012): 361–387. 3.  P. Parker, D. T. Hall, and K. E. Kram, “Peer Coaching: An Untapped Resource for Development,” Organizational Dynamics 43, no. 2 (2014): 122–129. 4.  P. Parker, I. Wasserman, K. E. Kram, and D. T. Hall, “A Relational Communication Approach to Peer Coaching,” Journal of Applied Behavioral Science 51, no. 2 (2015): 231–252. Introduction 1.  Breakthrough Greater Boston, http://www.breakthroughgreaterboston .org, accessed December 7, 2015. 2.  J. E. Dutton and B. Ragins, Exploring Positive Relationships at Work: Building a Theoretical and Research Foundation (Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum, 2007). See also W. Murphy and K. Kram, Strategic Relationships at Work: Creating Your Circle of Mentors, Sponsors, and Peers for Success in Business and Life (New York: McGraw-Hill Education, 2007). 3.  C. Rogers, “Characteristics of a Helping Relationship,” in W. G. Bennis, E. H. Schein, D. E. Berlew, and F. I. Steele (eds.), Interpersonal Dynamics: Essays and Readings on Human Interaction, 3rd ed. (Homewood, IL: Dorsey Press, 1973), 223–236; E. H. Schein, Career Dynamics: Matching Individual and Organizational Needs (Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley, 1978); K. J. Gergen, Relational Being Beyond Self and Community (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2009). 4.  R. Kegan, In over Our Heads: The Mental Demands of Modern Life (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1994). See also R. Kegan, L. Lahey, A. Fleming, and M. Miller, “Making Business Personal,” Harvard Business Review (2014, April): 45–52.

180  Notes to Introduction and Chapter 1

5.  P. Parker, K. E. Kram, and D. T. Hall, “Peer Coaching: An Untapped Resource for Development,” Organizational Dynamics 43, no. 2 (2014): 122–129. 6.  W. B. Pearce, “The Coordinated Management of Meaning (CMM),” in W. Gudykunst (ed.), Theorizing About Communication and Culture (Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 2014), 35–54. 7.  B. Johansen, Leaders Make the Future (San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler, 2012). 8.  J. Garvey-Berger, Changing on the Job: Developing Leaders in a Complex World (Stanford, CA: Stanford Business Books, 2013). See also J. Garvey-Berger and K. Johnston, Simple Habits for Complex Times (Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 2015). 9.  E. H. Schein, Helping: How to Offer, Give, and Receive Help (San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler, 2009). 10.  J. E. Dutton and E. D. Heaphy, “The Power of High-Quality Connections,” in K. S. Cameron, J. E. Dutton, and R. E. Quinn (eds.), Positive Organizational Scholarship (San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler, 2003), 263–278. See also Dutton and Ragins, Exploring Positive Relationships at Work. 11.  Pearce, “The Coordinated Management of Meaning (CMM).” 12.  R. Kegan, “What ‘Form’ Transforms? A Constructive-Developmental Approach to Transformative Learning,” in J. Mezirow (ed.), Learning as Transformation (San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 2000), 35–69.

Chapter 1 1.  T. Friedman, Thank You for Being Late (New York: Farrar, Straus & Giroux, 2016). See http://www.thomaslfriedman.com/thank-you-for-being-late/ for a brief summary by the author. 2.  R. Kegan and L. L. Lahey, with M. L. Miller, A. Fleming, and D. Helsing, An Everyone Culture: Becoming a Deliberately Developmental Organization (Boston: Harvard Business Review Press, 2016). 3. Friedman, Thank You for Being Late. 4.  B. Johansen, Leaders Make the Future (San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler, 2012). 5.  R. E. Boyatzis, M. L. Smith, and N. Blaize, “Developing Sustainable Leaders Through Coaching and Compassion,” Academy of Management Learning and Education 5, no. 1 (2006): 8–24; M. H. Guindon and L. J. Richmond, “Practice and Research in Career Counseling and Development—2004,” Career Development Quarterly 54, no. 2 (2005): 90–137. 6.  Kegan and Lahey, An Everyone Culture, 4. 7.  A. A. Zekeri, “College Curriculum Competencies and Skills Former Students Found Essential to Their Careers,” College Student Journal 38 (2004): 412–422. 8.  I. Watson, J. Buchanan, I. Campbell, and C. Briggs, Fragmented Futures: New Challenges to Working Life (Sydney: Federation Press, 2003).

Notes to Chapter 1   181

9.  R. E. Boyatzis and D. A. Kolb, “Performance, Learning, and Development as Modes of Growth and Adaptation Throughout Our Lives and Careers,” in M. A. Peiperl, M. B. Arthur, R. Goffee, and T. Morris (eds.), Career Frontiers: New Conceptions of Working Lives (Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press), 76–98; H. Mintzberg, Managers, Not MBAs: A Hard Look at the Soft Practice of Managing and Management Development (San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler, 2004). 10.  K. E. Kram and D. T. Hall, “Mentoring as an Antidote to Stress During Corporate Trauma,” Human Resource Management 28 (1989): 493–510. 11.  S. E. Murphy and K. E. Kram, Strategic Relationships at Work (New York: McGraw-Hill, 2014). 12.  M. Higgins and K. E. Kram, “Reconceptualizing Mentoring at Work: A Developmental Network Perspective,” Academy of Management Review 26, no. 2 (2001): 264–288. 13.  K. E. Kram, “A Relational Approach to Career Development,” in D. T. Hall and Associates (eds.), The Career Is Dead, Long Live the Career: A Relational Approach to Careers (San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1996). 14. M. A. Mavrinac, “Transformational Leadership: Peer Mentoring as a Values-Based Learning Process,” Libraries and the Academy 5, no. 3 (2005): 391–404. 15.  C. P. D’Abate, E. R. Eddy, and S. I. Tannenbaum, “What’s in a Name? A Literature-Based Approach to Understanding Mentoring, Coaching, and Other Constructs That Describe Developmental Interactions,” Human Resource Development Review 2, no. 4 (2003): 360–384; E. A. Ensher, C. Thomas, and S. E. Murphy, “Comparison of Traditional, Step-Ahead, and Peer Mentoring on Proteges’ Support, Satisfaction, and Perceptions of Career Success: A Social Exchange Perspective,” Journal of Business and Psychology 15, no. 3 (2001): 419–438. 16.  L. Watt, “Mentoring and Coaching in the Workplace,” Canadian Manager 29, no. 3 (2004): 14–17. 17.  L. T. Eby, “Alternative Forms of Mentoring in Changing Organizational Environments: A Conceptual Extension of the Mentoring Literature,” Journal of Vocational Behavior 51, no. 1 (1997): 125–144; T. D. Allen, M. L. Poteet, and S. M. Burroughs, “The Mentor’s Perspective: A Qualitative Inquiry and Future Research Agenda,” Journal of Vocational Behavior 51, no. 1 (1997): 70–89. 18.  C. Rogers, “Characteristics of a Helping Relationship,” in W. G. Bennis, E. H. Schein, D. E. Berlew, and F. I. Steele (eds.), Interpersonal Dynamics: Essays and Readings on Human Interaction, 3rd ed. (Homewood, IL: Dorsey Press, 1973), 223–236. 19.  K. E. Weick, Sensemaking in Organizations (Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 1995). 20. Johansen, Leaders Make the Future, 57.

182  Notes to Chapters 1 and 2

21.  F. Scott Fitzgerald, quoted in E. Wilson (ed.), The Crack-Up (New York: New Directions, 1945), 69. Reprinted in Johansen, Leaders Make the Future, 56. 22. Johansen, Leaders Make the Future, 59. 23.  Ibid., 60. 24.  R. Kegan, The Evolving Self: Problem and Process in Human Development (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1982). 25. Johansen, Leaders Make the Future, 111. 26.  New York Times, October 9, 2015, http://www.nytimes.com/2015/10/ 11/us/politics/in-debate-hillary-clinton-will-display-skills-honed-over-a-lifetime .html. 27.  E. H. Schein, Organizational Culture and Leadership, 4th ed. (San Francisco: Wiley, 2010), 144. 28.  Ibid., 147. 29.  Ibid., 148. 30.  Ibid., 149. 31.  Ibid., 151. 32.  Ibid., 153. 33.  Ibid., 154. 34.  Ibid., 155. 35.  Ibid., 156.

Chapter 2 1.  D. W. Winnicott, The Maturational Processes and the Facilitating Environment (New York: International University Press, 1965); see also R. Kegan, The Evolving Self: Problem and Process in Human Development (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1982). 2.  P. Culmsee and K. Awati, “Towards a Holding Environment: Building Shared Understanding and Commitment in Projects,” International Journal of  Managing Projects in Business 5, no. 3 (2012): 528–548; see also Kegan, The Evolving Self. 3.  W. A. Kahn, “Holding Environments at Work,” Journal of Applied Behavioral Science 37, no. 3 (2001): 260–279. 4.  S. E. Murphy and K. E. Kram, Strategic Relationships at Work: Creating Your Circle of Mentors, Sponsors, and Peers for Success in Business and Life (New York: ­McGraw-Hill Education, 2014). 5.  R. Kegan, The Evolving Self; E. M. McGowan, E. M. Stone, and R. Kegan, “A Constructive-Developmental Approach to Mentoring Relationships,” in B. Ragins and K. E. Kram (eds.), The Handbook of Mentoring at Work: Theory, Research and Practice (Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 2007), 401–425.

Notes to Chapters 2 and 3   183

6.  J. Fletcher, “A Relational Approach to the Protean Worker,” in D. T. Hall and Associates (ed.), The Career Is Dead, Long Live the Career: A Relational Approach to Careers (San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1996), 105–131; J. Fletcher, “Leadership as Relational Practice,” in K. Bunker, D. T. Hall, and K. E. Kram (eds.), Extraordinary Leadership: Addressing the Gaps in Senior Executive Development (San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 2010), 121–136; J. Fletcher and B. Ragins, “Stone Center Relational Cultural Theory,” in B. Ragins and K. E. Kram (eds.), The Handbook of Mentoring at Work: Theory, Research and Practice (Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 2007), 373–399. 7.  G. T. Fairhurst, The Power of Framing: Creating the Language of Leadership (San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 2011). 8.  E. H. Schein, Helping: How to Offer, Give, and Receive Help (San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler, 2009); E. H. Schein, Humble Inquiry: The Gentle Art of Asking Instead of Telling (San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler, 2013). 9.  W. Isaacs, Dialogue and the Art of Thinking (New York: Currency, 1999). 10. Ibid. 11.  K. S. Cameron and G. M. Spreitzer, “Introduction to the Handbook,” in K. S. Cameron and G. M. Spreitzer (eds.), Handbook of Positive Organizational Scholarship (New York: Oxford University Press, 2011), 1–16; J. E. Dutton and B. Ragins (eds.), Exploring Positive Relationships at Work: Building a Theoretical and Research Foundation (Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum, 2007); J. P. Stephens, E. Heaphy, and J. Dutton, “High-Quality Connections,” in G. Spreitzer and K. Cameron (eds.), Handbook of Positive Organizational Scholarship (New York: Oxford University Press, 2011), 385–399. 12.  C. Rogers, “Characteristics of a Helping Relationship,” in W. G. Bennis, E. H. Schein, D. E. Berlew, and F. I. Steele (eds.), Interpersonal Dynamics: Essays and Readings on Human Interaction, 3rd ed. (Homewood, IL: Dorsey Press, 1973), 223–236. 13.  W. B. Pearce, Making Social Worlds: A Communication Perspective (Oxford, UK: Blackwell, 2007).

Chapter 3 1.  J. Luft and H. Ingham, “The Johari Window: A Graphic Model of Interpersonal Awareness,” Proceedings of the Western Training Laboratory in Group Development, University of California, Los Angeles, 1955. 2.  R. Kegan, L. L. Lahey, A. Fleming, M. L. Miller, and I. Marcus, The Deliberately Developmental Organization, extended white paper, Way to Grow (2014), 1. 3.  Ibid. (italics in original). 4. W. B. Pearce, Communication and the Human Condition (Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press, 1989); W. B. Pearce, “Evolution and

184  Notes to Chapters 3 and 4

­ ransformation: A Brief History of CMM and a Meditation on What Using T It Does to Us,” in C. Creede, B. Fisher-Yoshida, and P. V. Gallegos (eds.), The Reflective, Facilitative, and Interpretive Practices of Coordinated Management of Meaning: Making Lives, Making Meaning (Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield, 2012), 1–21; I. C. Wasserman and P. V. Gallegos, “Enacting Integral Diversity: A Relational Communication Approach,” in M. Forman and M. Raffanti (eds.), Integral Approaches to Diversity Dynamics: Exploring the Maturation of Diversity Theory and Practice, in press. 5.  W. B. Pearce, Making Social Worlds: A Communication Perspective (Oxford, UK: Blackwell, 2007); W. B. Pearce, “The Coordinated Management of Meaning (CMM),” in W. Gudykunst (ed.), Theorizing About Communication and Culture (Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 2004), 35–54. 6.  Pearce, “Evolution and Transformation”; I. Wasserman and B. FisherYoshida, Communicating Possibilities: A Brief Introduction to the Coordinated Management of Meaning (Chagrin Falls, OH: Taos Institute Press, 2017). 7.  J. Sostrin, W. B. Pearce, and K. Pearce, CMM Solutions—Field Guide (Raleigh, NC: Lulu Press, 2012). 8.  J. E. Dutton and B. Ragins (eds.), Exploring Positive Relationships at Work: Building a Theoretical and Research Foundation (Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum, 2007). 9.  S. R. Dobrow, D. E. Chandler, W. M. Murphy, and K. E. Kram, “A Review of Developmental Networks: Incorporating a Mutuality Perspective,” Journal of Management 38, no. 1 (2012): 210–242. 10.  bell hooks, an American author, feminist, and social activist, adopted the names from her maternal great-grandmother. According to her, the name’s unconventional lowercasing signifies what is most important in her works: the “substance of books, not who I am.” http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bell_hooks#cite _note-2, accessed July 17, 2017. 11.  bell hooks, Talking Back: Thinking Feminist, Thinking Black (Boston: South End Press, 1989), 12.

Chapter 4 1.  J. Garvey-Berger and K. Johnston, Simple Habits for Complex Times (Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 2015). See also Chapter 6 in this volume. 2.  K. E. Kram and M. A. Higgins, “A New Mindset on Mentoring: Creating Developmental Networks at Work,” Sloan Management Review, Reprint 50431 (2009, April 15); see also M. Higgins and K. E. Kram, “Reconceptualizing Mentoring at Work: A Developmental Network Perspective,” Academy of Management Review 26, no. 2 (2001): 264–288. 3.  N. Burch, The Conscious Competence Learning Model, Gordon Training International, 1970, http://www.managetrainlearn.com/page/conscious-com

Notes to Chapters 4 and 5   185

petence-ladder ; see also J. Flower, “In the Mush,” Physician Executive 25, no. 1 (1999): 64–66. 4.  J. Baker-Miller, “Preface,” in J. Jordan, L. Hartling, and M. Walker (eds.), The Complexity of Connection (New York: Guilford Press, 2004), i–iv. 5.  W. Murphy and K. E. Kram, Strategic Relationships at Work (New York: McGraw-Hill, 2014). 6.  Kram and Higgins, “A New Mindset on Mentoring”; see also Higgins and Kram, “Reconceptualizing Mentoring at Work.” 7.  S. Yan, R. Cotton, and K. E. Kram, “Assembling Your Personal Board of Directors,” Sloan Management Review, Reprint 50431 56, no. 3 (2015): 81–90. 8.  P. Parker and M. B. Arthur, “Coaching for Career Development and Leadership Development: An Intelligent Career Approach,” Australian Journal of Career Development 13, no. 3 (2004): 56–60. 9.  W. B. Pearce, Making Social Worlds: A Communication Perspective (Oxford, UK: Blackwell, 2007); see also I. Wasserman and B. Fisher-Yoshida, Communicating Possibilities: A Brief Introduction to the Coordinated Management of Meaning (Chagrin Falls, OH: Taos Institute Press, 2017). 10.  M. B. Stanier, The Coaching Habit: Say Less, Ask More, and Change the Way You Lead Forever (Toronto: Box of Crayons Press, 2016); see also A. Sigetich and C. Leavitt, Play to Your Strengths (Franklin Lakes, NJ: Career Press, 2008). 11.  K. Seibert and M. Daudelin, The Role of Reflection in Managerial Learning (Westport, CT: Quorum Books, 1999). 12. M. Higgins, D. A. Chandler, and K. E. Kram, “Developmental ­Initiation and Developmental Networks,” in B. R. Ragins and K. E. Kram (eds.), ­Handbook of Mentoring at Work: Theory, Research and Practice (Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 2007), 349–372; see also Murphy and Kram, Strategic Relationships at Work. 13.  Murphy and Kram, Strategic Relationships at Work; see also Yan, Cotton, and Kram, “Assembling Your Personal Board of Directors.” 14.  D. E. Chandler, D. T. Hall, and K. E. Kram, “A Developmental Network and Relational Savvy Approach to Talent Development: A Low Cost Alternative,” Organizational Dynamics 39, no. 1 (2010): 48–56; see also D. A. Chandler and K. E. Kram, “Enlisting Others in Your Development as a Leader,” in M. G. Rothstein and R. J. Burke (eds.), Self-Management and Leadership Development (New York: Edward Elgar, 2010), 336–360.

Chapter 5 1.  P. Parker, M. B. Arthur, and K. Inkson, “Career Communities: A Preliminary Exploration of Member-Defined Career Support Structures,” Journal of Organizational Behavior 25 (2004): 489–514.

186  Notes to Chapter 5

2.  M. J. Gelfand, V. Smith Major, J. L. Raver, L. H. Nishii, and K. O’Brien, “Negotiating Relationally: The Dynamics of the Relational Self in Negotiations,” Academy of Management Review 31, no. 2 (2006): 427–451. 3.  Sensitivity training includes T-groups, encounter groups, and others similarly focused on raising awareness of self and others to increase empathy and behavioral flexibility. 4.  K. S. Cameron and G. M. Spreitzer, “Introduction to the Handbook,” in K. S. Cameron and G. M. Spreitzer (eds.), Handbook of Positive Organizational Scholarship (New York: Oxford University Press, 2011), 1–16; J. E. Dutton and B. Ragins (eds.), Exploring Positive Relationships at Work: Building a Theoretical and Research Foundation (Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum, 2007); J. P. Stephens, E. Heaphy, and J. Dutton, “High-Quality Connections,” in K. S. Cameron and G. M. Spreitzer (eds.), Handbook of Positive Organizational Scholarship (New York: Oxford University Press, 2011), 385–399. 5.  F. J. Barrett and R. E. Fry, Appreciative Inquiry: A Positive Approach to Building Cooperative Capacity (Chagrin Falls, OH: Taos Institute Press, 2005); J. M. Watkins and B. J. Mohr, Appreciative Inquiry: Change at the Speed of Imagination (San Francisco: Wiley, 2001). 6.  A. Edmondson, “Psychological Safety and Learning Behavior in Work Teams,” Administrative Science Quarterly 44, no. 2 (1999): 350–383. 7.  P. Parker, K. E. Kram, and D. T. Hall, “Peer Coaching: An Untapped Resource for Development,” Organizational Dynamics 43, no. 2 (2014): 122–129. 8.  D. W. Winnicott, The Maturational Processes and the Facilitating Environment (New York: International University Press, 1965); W. A. Kahn, “Holding Environments at Work,” Journal of Applied Behavioral Science 37, no. 3 (2001): 260–279; R. Kegan, The Evolving Self: Problem and Process in Human Development (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1982). 9.  C. McCauley and E. Van Velsor, The Handbook of Leadership Development, 2nd ed. (San Francisco: Wiley, 2004). 10.  C. Argyris, “Teaching Smart People How to Learn,” Harvard Business Review May–June (1991): 99–109. 11.  R. Kegan, The Evolving Self; E. M. McGowan, E. M. Stone, and R. Kegan, “A Constructive-Developmental Approach to Mentoring Relationships,” in B. Ragins and K. E. Kram (eds.), The Handbook of Mentoring at Work: Theory, Research and Practice (Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 2007), 401–425. 12.  D. Goleman, Working with Emotional Intelligence (New York: Bantam Books, 1998). 13.  P. Parker, D. T. Hall, and K. E. Kram, “Peer Coaching: A Relational Process for Accelerating Career Learning,” Academy of Management Learning and Education 7, no. 4 (2008): 487–503.

Notes to Chapters 5 and 6   187

14.  V. Druskat and S. Wolff, “Building the Emotional Intelligence of Groups,” Harvard Business Review Reprint R0103E (2001). 15.  See the forum model illustrated in C. Cherniss, “Helping Leaders to Become Emotionally Intelligent,” in K. Bunker, D. T. Hall, and K. E. Kram (eds.), Extraordinary Leadership: Addressing the Gaps in Senior Executive Development (San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 2010), 97–120. 16.  B. W. Tuckman, “Developmental Sequence in Small Groups,” Psychological Bulletin 63, no. 6 (1965): 384–399.

Chapter 6 1.  D. T. Hall, Careers in and out of Organizations, ed. David Whetten (Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 2002). 2.  C. Argyris, On Organizational Learning (Oxford, UK: Blackwell Business, 1992). 3.  J. Mezirow, “A Critical Theory of Adult Learning and Education,” in M. Tight (ed.), Adult Learning and Education (London: Croom Helm, 1983); J. Mezirow and Associates, Fostering Critical Reflection in Adulthood. A Guide to Transformative and Emancipatory Learning (San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1990). 4.  A. Ie, C. T. Ngnoumen, and E. J. Langer (eds.), The Wiley Blackwell Handbook of Mindfulness (Chichester, UK: Wiley, 2014); E. J. Langer, Mindfulness (Reading, MA: Addison Wesley Longman, 1989); E. J. Langer and M. Moldoveanu, “The Construct of Mindfulness,” Journal of Social Issues 56, no. 1 (2000): 1–9. 5. D. Goleman, Emotional Intelligence (New York: Bantam Books, 1995); D. Goleman, Social Intelligence: The New Science of Human Relationships (New York: Bantam-Dell, 2006). 6.  R. Kegan, The Evolving Self: Problem and Process in Human Development (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1982); R. Kegan, “What ‘Form’ Transforms? A Constructive-Developmental Approach to Transformative Learning,” in J. Mezirow (ed.), Learning as Transformation (San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 2000), 35–69. 7.  H. Tajfel, “Social Psychology of Intergroup Relations,” Annual Review of Psychology 33 (1978): 1–39. 8.  E. H. Schein, Helping: How to Offer, Give, and Receive Help (San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler, 2009); E. H. Schein, Humble Inquiry: The Gentle Art of Asking Instead of Telling (San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler, 2013). 9.  P. Parker, D. T. Hall, and K. E. Kram, “Peer Coaching: A Relational Process for Accelerating Career Learning,” Academy of Management Learning and Education 7, no. 4 (2008): 487–503. 10.  M. W. McCall, Jr., High Flyers: Developing the Next Generation of Leaders (Boston: Harvard Business School Press, 1998); M. W. McCall, Jr., M. Lombardo,

188  Notes to Chapters 6 and 7

and A. Morrison, The Lessons of Experience: How Successful Executives Develop on the Job (New York: Free Press, 1988). 11.  D. T. Hall and M. Las Heras, “Reintegrating Job Design and Career Theory: Creating Not Just Jobs but Smart Jobs,” Journal of Organizational Behavior 31 (2010): 448–462. 12.  D. T. Hall, Careers in and out of Organizations. 13.  See T. Bachkirova and P. Jackson, “Peer Supervision for Coaching and Mentoring,” in T. Bachkirova, P. Jackson, and P. Clutterbuck (eds.), Coaching and Mentoring Supervision: Theory and Practice (Maidenhead, UK: Open University Press, 2011), 230–238. 14.  J. E. Dutton, Energize Your Workplace: How to Create and Sustain High-Quality Connections at Work (San Francisco: Wiley, 2003); J. E. Dutton and E. D. Heaphy, “The Power of High-Quality Connections,” in K. S. Cameron, J. E. Dutton, and R. E. Quinn (eds.), Positive Organizational Scholarship (San Francisco: BerrettKoehler, 2003), 263–278; J. E. Dutton and B. Ragins (eds.), Exploring Positive Relationships at Work: Building a Theoretical and Research Foundation (Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum, 2007); J. Fletcher, “Leadership as Relational Practice,” in K. Bunker, D. T. Hall, and K. E. Kram, Extraordinary Leadership: Addressing the Gaps in Senior Executive Development (San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 2010), 121–136. 15.  M. Higgins and K. E. Kram, “Reconceptualizing Mentoring at Work: A Developmental Network Perspective,” Academy of Management Review 26, no. 2 (2001): 264–288. 16.  W. G. Bennis, Managing People Is Like Herding Cats (Provo, UT: Executive Excellence, 1996). 17.  K. Korotov, “Peer Coaching in Executive-Education Programmes,” Training and Management Development Methods 22, no. 2 (2008): 315–324; M. Kets de Vries, L. Guillen, K. Korotov, and E. Florent-Treacy (eds.), The Coaching Kaleidoscope: Insights from the Inside (London: Palgrave Macmillan, 2010).

Chapter 7 1.  J. Garvey-Berger, Changing on the Job: Developing Leaders in a Complex World (Stanford, CA: Stanford Business Books, 2013). 2.  P. M. Senge, The Fifth Discipline: The Art and Practice of the Learning Organization (New York: Doubleday/Currency, 1990). 3.  These ideas are summarized from D. T. Hall and P. H. Mirvis, “Twenty Questions: A Career Development Culture Index,” Exhibit 1.2 in D. T. Hall and Associates (eds.), The Career Is Dead, Long Live the Career: A Relational Approach to Careers (San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1996), 39–40. This concept of an organizational culture for development is also discussed in S. E. Murphy and K. E. Kram, Strate-

Notes to Chapters 7 and 8   189

gic Relationships at Work: Creating Your Circle of Mentors, Sponsors, and Peers for Success in Business and Life (New York: McGraw-Hill Education, 2014), 131–132. 4.  E. H. Schein, Organizational Culture and Leadership, 3rd ed. (San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 2004). 5.  P. Hawkins, Creating a Coaching Culture (New York: McGraw-Hill, 2012), 22. 6. Schein, Organizational Culture and Leadership. 7. Hawkins, Creating a Coaching Culture. 8.  C.-A. Hofmann and L. Hudson, “Military Responses to Natural Disasters: Last Resort or Inevitable Trend?” Humanitarian Practice Network, October 2009, http://odihpn.org/magazine/military-responses-to-natural-disasters-last -resort-or-inevitable-trend/; J. H. Zenger and K. Stinnett, “Leadership Coaching: Developing Effective Executives,” Chief Learning Officer 5, no. 7 (2006): 44–47. 9.  G. Cronin and S. Andrews, “After Action Reviews: A New Model for Learning,” Emergency Nurse 17, no. 3 (2009): 32–35. 10.  B. Ramalingam, Tools for Knowledge and Learning: A Guide for Development and Humanitarian Organisations (London: Overseas Development Institute, 2006). 11.  R. Kegan and L. L. Lahey, with M. L. Miller, A. Fleming, and D. Helsing, An Everyone Culture: Becoming a Deliberately Developmental Organization (Boston: Harvard Business Review Press, 2016), 55. 12. Ibid. 13. Ibid. 14.  B. Brown, Daring Greatly: How the Courage to Be Vulnerable Transforms the Way We Live, Love, Parent, and Lead (New York: Penguin, 2012). 15.  Murphy and Kram, Strategic Relationships at Work; P. Parker, K. E. Kram, and D. T. Hall, “Peer Coaching: An Untapped Resource for Development,” Organizational Dynamics 43, no. 2 (2014): 122–129. 16.  E. Van Velsor, C. McCauley, and M. Ruderman, Handbook of Leadership Development, 3rd ed. (San Francisco: Wiley, 2010). 17.  D. D. Riddle, E. R. Hoole, and E. C. D. Gullette (eds.), “Creating an Integrated Coaching System,” in The Center for Creative Leadership Handbook of Coaching in Organizations (San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 2015), 49–80.

Chapter 8 1.  U. Bronfenbrenner, “The Bioecological Model of Human Development,” in W. Damon and R. M. Lerner (eds.), Handbook of Child Psychology (Hoboken, NJ: Wiley, 2006), 793–828; U. Bronfenbrenner, Ecological Models of Human Development, Vol. 3, International Encyclopedia of Education, 2nd ed. (Oxford: Elsevier Sciences, 1994); U. Bronfenbrenner, The Ecology of Human Development: Experiments by Nature and Design (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1979).

190  Notes to Chapter 8 and Conclusions

2.  P. Parker, K. E. Kram, and D. T. Hall, “Exploring Risk Factors in Peer Coaching: A Multilevel Approach,” Journal of Applied Behavioral Science 49, no. 3 (2012): 361–387. 3.  I. Wasserman and B. Fisher-Yoshida, Communicating Possibilities: A Brief Introduction to the Coordinated Management of Meaning (Chagrin Falls, OH: Taos Institute Press, 2017). The four models of relational communication presented in Chapters 2 and 3 can effectively address the challenges we present here. These include the Daisy, Serpentine, LUUUUTT, and Hierarchy of Meanings models. 4.  W. B. Pearce, Making Social Worlds: A Communication Perspective (Oxford, UK: Blackwell, 2007). 5.  R. Kegan and L. L. Lahey, with M. L. Miller, A. Fleming, and D. Helsing, An Everyone Culture: Becoming a Deliberately Developmental Organization (Boston: Harvard Business Review Press, 2016). 6.  See “Rob Parson at Morgan Stanley,” Harvard Business Publishing Case #9-498-054, revised July 29, 1998, https://hbr.org/product/rob-parson-at -morgan-stanley-a/498054-PDF-ENG.

Conclusions 1.  “Portal Offers Path to Harvard,” Boston Globe, September 19, 2016, B1, B4. All quotes related to the Ed Portal example were from p. B4 of this article. 2.  Ibid., B4. 3. Ibid. 4.  Ibid., p. B4. 5.  “About Us,” WCS, https://www.wcs.org/about-us, accessed July 19, 2017.

Index

Page numbers followed by f or t indicate material in figures or tables. AAR (after-action review), 122, 128, 136–138, 149 action reviews, 96 affective data, 33, 122 agility, 5, 11–13, 16, 27 Alcoholics Anonymous, 84, 124 Alex and Roger, 108–109, 121 Alexis, 148–149 Allston-Brighton, Massachusetts, 171 Amanda and Shams: Amanda reacting to promotion, 111–112; Amanda identity development, 112–114 (113f  ), 121; Shams’ use of LUUUUTT model, 121; Amanda gaining confidence, 123 Amira and Paul, 29; check-in round, 39; identifying previous behaviors, 41–42; self-disclosure and feedback, 51–52, 59–60, 70, 170; reciprocal peer coaching, 69–70; need for CMM tools, 70, 73–74; meaning of respect, 41–42, 170 Appreciative Inquiry, 88 Argyris, Chris, 108 assessment tools, 76. See also Step 1 attitude: deep learning and, 107; early impressions influencing, 30; helping as an, 2, 24, 168; mental models and, 37; more important than skill,

175; positive mindsets, 43, 45, 79t; role reversal altering, 22; selfawareness of, 97 Aurora Health, 86–87, 91–92, 96 Baker-Miller, Jean, 71 Barbara and Kate, 114–115, 163t; Kate observational feedback, 115, 123, 157, 164; Barbara’s deep learning, 115–116; using CMM language, 116; using holding environment, 116–117; relational dynamics problem, 157–159; lack of check-ins, 159; use of Serpentine model, 159, 176; improved relational dynamics, 160 Betty, Stefan, and Victoria, 103–107, 120; Stefan accusing Victoria, 103; Betty hearing Victoria’s story, 103–104; developing plan for Victoria, 104; Betty encouraging deep learning, 104–105; Victoria resisting deep learning, 106, 107, 120 Betty and Matt, 106–107 book clubs, 125–126 Boston Redevelopment Authority, 171 Boston University, 135 boundary conditions, 83, 169

192  Index

boundary objects, 22–23, 28, 38–39, 176 breakdowns in peer coaching process, 8, 151–153 (153f  ) Breakthrough Greater Boston, 1, 16–18 Bronfenbrenner, Urie, 152 Brown, Brené, 146 career achievement goals, 125–126 career advisors, guides, and communities, 72 career progression programs, 83, 86, 93, 96 case reviews, 140 Cassie, 92 cautionary tales. See risk factors in peer coaching process Center for Creative Leadership, 19, 22, 118, 135, 147–148 checking in and out, 25, 34; aiding DDO, 146; aiding deep learning, 122; aiding self-reflection, 128; Amira and Paul’s, 39; at Aurora Health, 91–92; Barbara and Kate’s, 159–160; at Career Progression for Women program, 93; in facilitated groups, 85, 88, 90–91, 174; formal process of, 38–39; proper mindset for, 44, 60; Susanne and Marissa’s, 68–69, 155–156; using key statements for, 95–96 clarity, 5, 11–12, 16, 27. See also VUCA Clinton, Hillary, 23 CMM (coordinated management of meaning), 5; Amira and Paul, 70, 74; Barbara and Kate, 116; Marissa and Susanne, 175; models of, 62t–63t; relational theory of, 29,

45, 52, 169. See also Daisy model; Serpentine model; Step 2 coaching culture, supporting from multiple levels, 144t–145f cognitive component, 33, 38, 108, 122 coherence, 41, 52, 58, 158–159, 165 comfort zone, 34, 105, 107, 110–111, 118, 120, 155 conditions that support learning, 131–132 confirmation, 33, 65, 92–93 constructive depolarizing, 21–24 container, 22–23, 28, 89, 175 continuity, 33, 93 contradiction, 65, 93 coordination, 29, 45, 58, 133, 158–159 council model, 99–100 culture of learning, development, growth, 131–134 (133f  ), 141 Daisy model, 54 (54f  ), 62t; Amanda and Shams, 113 (113f  ), 121; Barbara and Kate, 116; Learning from Self, 142f; Marissa and Susanne, 53 (53f  ), 55, 66, 73, 154, 175; Ricardo and Len, 78; and subidentities, 113 (113f  ), 116 DDOs (deliberately developmental organizations), 50, 138, 146 debriefs, 36–37, 128 deep learning, 82; Alex and Roger, 121; Amanda, 113–114, 123; Barbara and Kate, 114–117, 123; elements of, 110–117; groups focused on, 84–85, 93, 98, 124– 126; Matt, Betty, Victoria, 106–107, 120; peer coaching facilitating, 104–105, 117–119, 122, 125–128, 174; Peer Coaching model to

Index  193

achieve, 109, 119–123; relational outcomes to, 123; Roger, 110; small wins in, 121; Sunjita and Keith, 118–119; taking more time for, 120–122; as whole-person learning, 107–108 deep listening, 32, 116 deep personal learning, 108 desire for more connection, 71 developmental network(s), 67, 71 (71f  ), 124; beyond the workplace, 77–79; making your own, 71–72 (71f  ), 124, 166, 177; Susanne and Marissa, 68–69, 156 developmental transitions, 110–112, 114 dilemma flipping, 19–21 Disney World, 21 disorienting dilemmas, 108 doctor role, 25 double-loop learning, 108 Ed Portal, Harvard University, 171 elements of culture, 133f embedding peer coaching, 16, 18, 130–131, 140, 152–153 Emerging Leaders Forum, 29, 35, 153, 155 emotional competencies, 97–99, 110–111, 114, 123 employee resource groups (ERGs), 83, 143 empowered action, 71 enhanced sense of worth, 71 episodic peer coaching, 134 ERGs (employee resource groups), 83, 143 Esme, 91 European School of Management and Technology, 124–125

expert role, 25 external vision, 12 facilitated groups, 83–86, 124 feedback, 51, 121; accepting and offering, 141, 142f, 148–149; Amanda and Barbara and Shams, 112, 123; building selfawareness through, 47–51, 56, 59–60, 62t–63t, 97–98; Kate and Barbara, 115–117, 159, 164; Sanjita and Keith, 118; self-learning from giving, 148– 149; WCS Learning Community, 173 feeling statements, 95 financial traders, 160–162 firefighters, 131 first responders, 131 Fitzgerald, F. Scott, 20 Fleming, Andy, 138 four-person peer coaching learning groups, 167 Friedman, Thomas, 9, 11 friendships growing from peer coaching, 156–157 full-service mentors, 72 gender bias, 108 Gergen, Kenneth, 4 “getting it right” expectations, 132 Goleman, Daniel, 110–111 Hawkins, Peter, 132 Helping (Schein), 24 helping attitude/relationship, 2–3, 18, 24–26, 45 Hierarchy of Meanings model, 56, 60, 140, 141f, 149 Higgins, Monica, 124

194  Index

holding environment, 31–33, 87–90, 92, 116–117 Honeywell, 118 honing relational practices, 96–100 hooks, bell, 61 human resources organizational development, 138–147 Humble Inquiry (Schein), 24, 51, 116 Huynh, Tri, 172 identity development, 112–114 INSEAD Business School, 148 interdependence, 33 internalizing skills, 68; continuing/ deepening relationships, 68–74 (71f  ); initiating new work relationships, 76–77; intentional reflection, 74–75; relationships beyond workplace, 77–79 internal vision, 12 job assignments, challenging, 147–148 Johansen, Robert, 11, 19–20 Johari window, 48, 49f, 62t, 121 Karoff, Peter, 167–168 Kate. See Barbara and Kate Kathy, 129–130, 134 Kegan, Robert, 9–10, 13, 50, 93, 112, 138, 146 Keith, 118 Korotov, Konstantin, 124–125 Lahey, Lisa, 9–10, 13, 138, 146 Langer, Ellen, 109 large-group settings, 157, 167, 174 Las Heras, Mareia, 119 leadership development processes, 114, 135, 148–149 learning: conditions that support,

131–132; learning circles, 83, 95, 139; Learning from Self, 142f; relationships of, 123–124 Len and Ricardo, 29, 37, 43, 78, 170 lived stories, 58f, 109 Lue, Rob, 171–172 LUUUUTT model, 58–61 (58f  ), 62t–63t, 73, 140, 166; Alex and Roger, 108, 121; Amanda and Shams, 111, 121; Amira and Paul, 59; Ricardo, 78; Susanne and Marissa, 155 Mack, John, 165 making coaching a habit. See Step 3 management/leader roles, 136–138 Manuel, 92 Marissa. See Susanne and Marissa Marshall, Judi, ix Matt, 106–107 Matt and Betty: deep learning, 106–107 McNulty School of Leadership, 135 men’s support group, 84, 125 mentoring, 15, 18, 22, 72, 171 Mezirow, Jack, 108 mindfulness, 109 mind-set, relational, 4, 67 modeling, 123 Morgan Stanley, 165 mutuality, 23, 79 (79t), 116 mystery, 52 National Semiconductor, 134–135 new knowledge and skills, 71 nondirective process, 127 observational data, 122 one-on-one and group learning, 139 organizational culture, 132

Index  195

“pair and share” activities, 34–35 paired process, 135–136 Passion, Perseverance, and Partners, 172 Paul. See Amira and Paul “paying it forward,” 172 Pearce, Barnett, 52 peer coaching, 50; as an underutilized resource, 168, 169; defined, 2; from outside workplace, 177 peer coaching groups, 81–83, 124– 126; model of, 101t; pairs, 91; types of, 83–87 Peer Coaching model, 101t, 119–123; Step 1, building the relationship: Peer Coaching model, 119–120; Step 2, creating success: Peer Coaching model, 47, 119; Step 3, internalizing skills for: Peer Coaching model, 65–68, 75 peer mentoring, 15, 18, 22, 72, 171–172 permission to challenge, 120 personal advisors, 72 personal growth/business excellence as dual goals, 138–139 Pierre, 92 poetry assignment, 167 Polly, ix–xi POS (Positive Organizational Scholarship), 88, 172 positive holding environment, 30f, 87–90, 101t positive mind-set, 43, 127 Positive Organizational Psychology, 44 principles of helping, 25–26 process consultant role, 25 professional development outcomes, 117–118 professional guidance, 122

psychological success, 119 questioning, 32, 127 Questrom School of Business, 135 readiness, 24 reciprocal peer coaching, 49–51, 69, 72, 126–127, 148–149 reframing self-beliefs, 123 relationships: beyond workplace, 77–79; developing skills, 98–99; relational dynamics, 157–160; relational learning, 2, 3, 123–124; relational maturity, 82; relational savvy, 79 (79t); taking time for, 120; at work, 76–77 resilience, 44, 66, 105 retiree groups, 83 reverse mentoring, 18, 22–23 Ricardo and Len, 29, 37, 43, 78, 170 risk factors in peer coaching process, 153f, 165–166; balancing with support, 128; breakdowns in peer coaching process, 151–152; embedded relationships, 152–153 (153f  ); hostility indicating, 96; how to diagnose and address, 164–166; problematic organizational context, 160–162; in relational dynamics, 123, 157–160; time constraints, 173–175 Robert and Tamara, 160–164 (163t), 176–177 Roger and Alex, 108–110, 121 Rogers, Carl, 4, 45, 168 role models, 72, 115 role reversal, 22–23 sacred commitments, 23 Sanjita and Keith, 118–119

196  Index

Sarah, 91–92 saving face, 107 scaffolding, 65, 109, 110, 122, 125, 130 scale in peer coaching, 174 Schein, Edgar, 4, 24, 38, 51, 116, 168 “self-authoring,” 112 self-awareness, 31, 47–51, 97–98, 105, 110, 114, 121 self-disclosure, 47–51, 53–60, 88, 89 self-identity, 121 self-inquiry, 76–77 self-observation, 141 self-reflection, 48, 128 self-regulation, 97–98 sense of curiosity, 32 sensitivity training, 186n3 Serpentine model, 55 (56f  ), 62t, 73, 77–78, 155, 159, 175–176 70-20-10 rule, 147 shame, 59, 146 Shams (peer coaching), 111–112, 121. See also Amanda and Shams sharing, 53–61, 123, 154 Shaun, 92 similarity/difference exercise, 35–37 single-loop learning, 108 situation reviews, 140 small groups in classroom, 84 “smart” behaviors, 115 “smart jobs,” 119 social awareness, 111 social competencies, 110–111, 123 social facility, 98–99 social identity groups, 114 “socialized” developmental position, 112 Southwest Airlines, 175 Stefan, Betty, and Victoria, 103–107

Step 1 (building the relationship), 4, 28, 30f, 65, 175; holding environments, 31–33, 89–90; safe and trusting relationships, 33–34; selecting a peer partner, 34–37; checking in and out, 38–39, 90–93; forming a working agreement, 39–43, 93–96; positive mindsets, 43–44; acting as a critical friend, 44–45 Step 2 (creating success), 80, 119; building self-awareness, 47–52, 65–66, 175–176; adopting a relational communication lens, 52–60; self-disclosure and sharing, 53–61, 154; continuing/deepening relationships, 68–74 (71f  ); honing relational practices, 78, 96–100; initiating new relationships, 76; inquiry, reflection, and feedback/ reassessment, 97, 134; journaling, 74–75. See also CMM Step 3 (making peer coaching a habit), 67f, 100–101 (101t), 130; continuing/deepening relationships, 68–70, 73–74, 134, 156; developing new relationships, 76–77; establishing a coaching culture, 131–134; having a leadership capability, 96, 176; having a relational mindset, 43–44, 67; internalizing skills, 65–68, 71–75, 80, 112–114, 122, 161; practicing self-inquiry, 76. See also deep learning stories, versions of, 106 stories lived, told, untold, unknown, 58–59 (58f  ), 62t–63t, 109, 111, 166

Index  197

storyboarding, 55 stretch goals/assignments, 118, 146–148 sub-identities, 113–114 (113f  ) success cycle, 119 support groups, 125 support not problem-solving as goal, 168 surgical suite expectations, 133, 149 Susanne and Marissa, 163t; initial meeting, 29, 35, 153–154; checking in and out, 68–69, 155–156, 159; CMM (coordinated management of meaning), 175; core values, 65; developmental goals, 51; developmental network(s), 68–69, 156; disconnecting and reconnecting, 153–156, 164; feedback, 48–51; reciprocal coaching, 42, 72–73, 154, 164; relationship goals, 73; selfdisclosure, 48–49, 53, 66; use of Daisy model, 53 (53f  ), 55, 66, 73, 154, 175; use of hierarchy of meanings model, 56–58; use of LUUUUTT model, 58, 155; use of Serpentine model, 55, 66, 73, 154–155, 175; working agreement, 42, 156 Tamara and Robert, 160–164 (163t), 176–177 task-focused groups, 126 task learning, 107, 108, 119–120, 125–126, 139 Tessa, 74 T-groups, 172 therapy groups, 125 thinking statements, 95

3-step model, 3 (3f  ), 154, 167–168, 174 Tim, ix–xi, 84, 129–130, 134 told stories, 109 Turchin, Michelle, 173 unconditional support, 127–128 understanding, 5, 11–12, 16 University College London Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust (UCLH), 138 University of Queensland, Australia, 86, 93 University of Queensland Business School, 135 unknown/untold stories, 109, 111 U.S. Army after-action review (AAR) process, 136–138 Victoria. See Betty, Stefan, and Victoria videoconferencing, 140 virtual teams, 140 vision, 5, 11–12, 16, 27 Visual Explorer, 22 Vodafone, 139 voluntary participation, 88–89 VUCA environment, 9; deep personal learning in, 109; developing positive responses, 11–12; developing/ sustaining relationships in, 142; helping principles in the, 24–26; improving your skills in, 19–24; peer coaching groups in, 81; peer coaching in, 10 (10f  ), 16–19; requiring agility, 170; understanding and clarity in, 12; war refugees in, 27

198  Index

WCS (Wildlife Conservation Society), 172–173 Weight Watchers, 84, 124 Wharton Leadership Programs, 135, 148 women’s leadership styles, 115–116 working agreements, 30f, 156; as boundary objects, 28; forming of,

34, 39–44, 46, 69; for groups, 84, 88, 90; modifying, 66, 69–70, 156; need for, 93–95, 170 Yang, Kevin, 171–172 zest, 71