I love coaching those who are coachable. To learn, grow, and consistently show up in the best version of themselves.
The challenge for most professionals I coach is that they’re too close to whatever challenge or opportunity they’re trying to address. As such, I often ask questions to better understand what they’re really trying to accomplish. The aim is always to try to help.
In my approach, I use three distinct buckets to influence their thinking and call to action; the same approach may be of interest/value to you as you attempt to influence others to think and lead differently:
Here are the pros and cons of each…
Often directive in nature, quick and to the point, may be welcomed (or not), aimed at producing results in alignment with our agreed-upon goals/outcomes, yet not generally effective in changing long-term behaviors.
Directive and corrective in nature involves citing facts and evidence, generally not desired, aimed at re-aligning behavior to meet a set of expected standards or norms, may be effective in changing long-term behaviors/goals, often one-way conversations.
Socratic, collaborative in nature, involves asking questions and sharing perspectives, needs to be desired to be effective, aimed at helping the receiver see alternative actions that may lead to the desired outcomes, and must always be a two-way conversation.
If the nature of the challenge or the opportunity is not an urgent matter, coaching combined with some advice works in taking new ideas into account. Combine advice and counseling and you’ll get very directive, and quick information. Your challenge will be that it may not be welcomed! If the outcome/goal is very focused and immediate, you can combine counseling and coaching in changing long-term behaviors.
How do you engage and influence others? Thanks for sharing your ideas, David Nour