Solutions in Action (New Zealand)
The following interpretation and application of each approach to performance coaching is influenced by my experience of managing teams in financial services and from working as an external executive coach. I believe that while both similarities and differences exist between these two coaching approaches, they are easily integrated and are complimentary. In a nutshell, I believe the SF approach adds significant value to GROW by encouraging coach's to think in a solutions oriented way and to ask insightful and forward moving questions to achieve positive change (rather than encouraging explanations or focusing on cause).
To use either model well requires questioning and listening skills; the coach is interested in collaborating and co-operating to co-construct a solution that meets the individual's and organisation's needs (so the coach does not argue or dispute the coachee's words). For the SF way there is no set order or phase- we have flexibility in how we move towards an outcome bearing in mind a set of guiding principles and utilizing "tools" which are made up of subtle language that focuses and facilitates the coachee towards an outcome. I imagine a similar approach applies for skilled GROW practitioners. The SF approach can be a stand alone approach or viewed as complementing and enhancing the language and implementation of GROW.
GROW as a framework is typically used in Performance Coaching. As with any approach how the coach implements GROW has an affect on the usefulness of it. When organisational coaches use this approach the risk is that it presupposes to some extent there is a business "agenda". This may encourage the coach to listen less and direct or lead based on their own perception of reality, rather than facilitate and elicit the coachee's reality to find a useful platform to build upon. However, this can be true of any approach.
The Solutions Focus (SF) approach to coaching conversations steers the coachee away from un-useful explanations and towards what they can and will do. A key to the success of a SF conversation is in the subtle use of language to elicit positive exceptions and resources (see "Counters" below) which may be used to build a solution. The guiding principles of SF (the acronym for these is SIMPLE) encourages coaches to take a step back to look at the "bigger picture" or the system of interactions to identify other entry points to achieve positive change (eg. we look for positive opportunities in what goes on "between the noses rather than between the ears"). SF is particularly useful as an approach for "tricky "situations eg. where person is unclear on what they want or what the goal is.
Note: It is not possible to do a direct comparison between features and "tools" however an attempt to compare typical questions and show complimentary steps between SF & GROW features below. The blue words/phrases highlighted in the GROW column give examples of language that can direct the coachee to focus on unnecessary explanations or to post blame.
SOLUTIONS FOCUS COACHING (SF)
Elicit Future perfect (FP)
Surface a detailed sensory representation1 of success to establish a direction
The FP isn't the goal. Check is there something coachee wants to be different? If this isn't clear, help them get clearer by asking the FP question. Eliciting the FP provides a sense of direction and sets the context for the following discussion re counters, scale, actions etc. As positive change is generated, we then find out more about 'what works' in this case, which in turn helps find more small actions. To find the coachee's FP we ask questions along these lines...
Note: Why questions are less useful than using How and What questions, the latter are used to facilitate a strong sensory specific representation to"pull" coachee towards the future.
1 Sensory representation- what the coachee can imagine they will see, hear, feel (even taste, smell) to experience the sensation of what success would be like.
Risk: Can crush creativity and assume the coach's reality rather than the individual's.
The SF approach removes constraints brought about by "Reality", reduces tension and helps shift focus to what could be possible- works within the individual's perceived reality meantime- can bring in a reality check later if person doesn't get there themselves through the coaching session.
This approach also encourages coach to step back and not "lead" person to specific actions that may be more about what the coach wants than the individual.
SF not concerned with " Why haven't..." - more concerned with what personal resources, skills, know -how etc will get them forward (see Counters, Affirm and Small Actions) and how a solution can be developed that they will own and implement.
Risk: Can stifle eliciting all the possibilities by getting too detailed too soon plus lower energy through getting into a pros and cons discussion when one may not be needed if solution is already clear.
Counters (resources, which includes attitudes and qualities, plus skills, know-how, expertise),
A feature of this step is we focus on finding positive exceptions which provide information and strategies that may form part of the solution and serve to expand both the coach's and the coachee's horizons. Focusing on this creates a positive environment and engenders hope and enthusiasm for a solution.
Wrap Up or Will
Small "do-able" steps make an outcome more possible and the "ask" (of the performance goal) less overwhelming. By identifying bite size pieces to do now energy can more easily be directed to implementation creating enthusiasm for action. Taking small steps creates large ripples across organisations.
We guide coachee with goal setting criteria (eg. SMART criteria) to get clear on the actions they are committing to (it's important for person to own the outcome and implementation approach).
Review and environmental check
124 days ago
132 days ago