The Meta-Coaching Strategy Par Excellence 

大成教练策略 – 最优秀的策略

 

想到教练一个客户，你马上会想到的是什么策略？你将要教练某人，你会用什么形式？当你开始时，你想了解客户的什么，才能为他的生活带来蜕变？不管它是什么，策略将决定教练节将会发生什么。

最近在埃及，当我对几位大成教练进行观察和打分时，我很震惊有多少人实际上错误使用完善效果的问题。他们不是用这些问题来进行高质量的信息收集，而是用这些问题来寻找一个可以进行介入的主题。也就是说，他们把它们当作一组18扇门来敲，然后当有人应门暗示这是一个可以被教练的主题时，他们就跳进去开始动工。我还来不及反应，他们就开始介入了

那就是如何不使用WFO问题的方法。当然，有时你会偶然发现一些对客户有用的东西。事实上，只要有人聆听他们、支持他们、认真对待他们、问他们问题，对大多数人来说，就是一个治愈和再生的过程。他们会从中得到很多，也会很感激。但这是一种非常草率的「教练」方式，不是大成教练系统呈现教练的方式。

将这18个问题作为一个检查表来进行客户结果的质量控制。按顺序提出问题，并全部提出，除非有迹象表明某个问题是不需要提出的。然后想想如何在10到12分钟内完成这18个问题。为了补充你的思考，你可以从五种基本的教练对话角度来思考。这是关于清晰、决定、计划、体验还是改变？那会帮助你找到主题。

现在说到战略，从一开始就考虑到主题。将教练框定为一种独特的对话，它将对客户产生重要的影响。

「教练进程是被设计来改变生活的，当你离开教练椅子时，你想要达到什么样的目标使你的生活会有巨大的不同？你想体验什么样的改变？你会有什么不同?」

当你问这个问题并注意聆听时，以五种基本的教练对话角度思考。大成教练系统的基本策略是先诊断后介入。使用18个问题进行诊断 – 为了高质量的信息收集。对你收到的信息采取一种健康的怀疑态度，这样你就可以用细化问题来处理这些信息（探索和清晰检查来打开内容，然后测试和检查来关闭内容)。

清楚自己想要什么的客户从一开始就会很明确，在这种情况下，你可以在五分钟内问完18个问题。那些不清楚自己想要什么，或者有什么阻止他们体验更充实、更丰富生活的客户，你在进行18问的时候，他们必须被推动和被挑战。他们需要。他们确实想要。他们需要有人与他们角力以获得所需的清晰度。当这一点对你来说变得很明显时，而你又有点犹豫，你可以框定自己在对话中扮演的是「唱反调」的角色。

「为了我能更好服务到你，以及你能得到你真正想要和需要的东西，我将唱反调，并挑战你所说的话，这样我们就可以揭示你所说的背后真相。你现在是否处在进行这种对话的合适状态吗？」

现在你可以在与客户对话时进行一些现实测试和一些挑战。现在你也可以抓内容、进行猜测，并寻求反馈。你也可以提出建议。

「这听起来我们可以把焦点放在清晰标准上，然后看看你是否决要定换工作；听起来怎么样？如果我们把整个教练节都花在这上面，你花的时间、精力和金钱值得吗？

这样的方式，对于那些思维非常全局和抽象的人来说尤其重要。他们需要你的那种方向和具体性。信息收集使你能够从一个基本的诊断开始，然后你可以继续进行介入。在你清楚情况、目标、障碍等等之前进行介入，就像是没有诊断的情况下给药。这不是一个明智的选择，更不用说是符合生态的选择了。

介入通常是容易的部分。一个有效的大成教练在于排除杂音、干扰和错误诊断，从而识别和定义真正的问题。当你这样做的时候，工作已经完成了90%。记住：诊断第一，介入第二。完成了18个问题，你就会知道接下来该做什么了。

 

Think about coaching a client and what immediately comes to your mind regarding your strategy?  You are about to coach someone, what format will you use?  What do you want to know about your client as you begin so you can make a transformational difference in that person’s life?  Whatever it is, the strategy will determine so much about what will happen in the session.

 

Recently in Egypt, when I observed and benchmarked several Meta-Coaches, I was struck by how many were actually mis-using the Well-Formed Outcome Questions.  Instead of using them to do high quality information gathering, several used the questions to search for a topic for intervention.  That is, they used them as if they were a set of 18 doors to knock on, then when someone answered the door that suggesting a coachable subject, they jumped right in and began working it.  Then before I knew it, they were doing an intervention!

 

That’s how not to use the WFO questions.  Sure, there will be times when you hit upon something that will be useful to the client.  In fact, just having someone to listen to them, support them, take them seriously, and ask them quesiotns will be, for most, a healing and generative process.  They will get a lot from that and will be grateful.  But that’s a pretty sloppy way to do “Coaching“ and is not the way the Meta-Coaching System presents Coaching.

 

Think about the 18-questions as a checklist to quality control the person’s outcome.  Ask the questions sequentially and ask all of them unless something indicates that a question is not needed.  Think also about getting through the 18-questions in ten to twelve minutes.  To supplement your thinking, think in terms of the five basic kinds of coaching conversations.  Is this about clarity, decision, planning, experiencing, or change?  That will help you get the subject.

 

Now in terms of strategy, think about the subject right from the beginning.  Frame the coaching as a very unique conversation that’s going to have significant consequences for the person.

“As coaching is designed to be life-changing, what do you want to be achieve that will make a big difference in your life when you step out of the coaching chair?  What change do you want to experience?  How will you be different?”

 

As you ask this and listen, think in terms of the five basic coaching conversations.  The basic Meta-Coaching System strategy is diagnosis first, intervention afterwards.  Use the 18-questions for the diagnosis— for high quality information gathering.  Adopt a healthy skepticism about the information you receive so that you work that information over with the refining questions (exploration and clarity checks to open things up and then testing and checking to close things down).

 

Clients who are clear about what they want will be explicit and specific from the beginning and in that situation, you can get through the 18-questions in five minutes.  Clients who are not clear about what they want, or what’s stopping them from experiencing a fuller and richer life, have to be pushed and challenged as you go through the questions.  They need that.  They actually want that.  They need someone who will wrestle with them to gain the needed clarity.  When that becomes obvious to you, and you’re a bit hesitant, frame your side of the conversation as “playing devil’s advocate.”

“So that I can serve you well, and you can get what you really want and need, I’ll play devil’s advocate and challenge what you’re saying so that we can flush out what’s behind the things you’re saying.  Are you in the right state to have that kind of dialogue?”

 

Now you can do some reality testing and some challenging as you dialogue with your client.  Now also you can grab things and make guesses, ask for feedback.  You can also make proposals.

“Sounds like we could focus on getting your criteria clear and after that check out the decision to change jobs; how does that sound?  Would that be worth your time, effort, and money if we spent the session doing that?”

 

Doing this will be especially important with people who think in very global and abstract terms.  They need that kind of direction and specificity from you.  Information gathering enables you to start with a basic diagnosis and from there you can move on to intervention.  To intervene before you are clear about the situation, the goal, the blocks, etc.  It is to give medicine without a diagnosis.  That’s not a very wise, let alone ecological, choice.

 

The intervention part is typically the easy part.  The work of an effective Meta-Coach lies in cutting through the noise, distractions, and mis-diagnosis to identifying and defining the real issue.  When you do that, the work is 90% done.  Remember: Diagnosis first, intervention second.  Finish the 18-questions, then you will know what to do.