A university marketing admissions team have conflicting issues and goals. A coaching intervention has been offered. Can they make it work?
The issue
You’ve been invited to coach a team of six responsible for all marketing and admissions into a well-established university summer school programme. Team members have been in their roles from between 10 years to having just joined, and they have plenty of experience between them.
From interviewing each of the team members in advance of a two-hour group session, you learn that:
- their targets are too challenging
- some don’t respect Jean, their boss, who is part of the session
- more than one has said ‘the team dynamics are poor’
- they have different ideas on how to improve the system
- they have different ideas on how to attract more students into the programme
- while sceptical of any beneficial outcome, they broadly welcome having a team coaching session.
It feels like a tricky situation, which, if not handled carefully could end in disaster. There are many different issues and areas that need to be addressed for a positive team coaching outcome. So where do you start?
The interventions
Paul Z Jackson, Director Solutions Focus
Building on the pre-session interviews, I’d get the group to articulate who wants what from coaching. Listening for common ground is a useful starting point.
I’d ask pertinent questions early on, to get a sense of the resources they’d deploy to tackle their task, such as, “Of all the things you’re doing at work currently, what are you most pleased with?” or, “What do you each enjoy about your work?” Also, “Supposing this goes surprisingly well, what would be different as a result?” We’d get the bonus of small groups working together as a productive way to harness collective resources.
With a seemingly troubled present, past successes may be the key to create momentum into a better future. While appreciating and acknowledging that the boss and members of the team may feel stretched beyond their comfort zone, we also know that they’re operating a well-established programme, so they must know some things about what works. What still works well for them and what can be easily improved?
What would an ideal new system look like? I’d get them to describe it in detail, sharing iteratively between groups to further articulate examples and salient aspects. Building this ‘Future Perfect’ together would allow them to take ownership of their vision and grow their commitment. The detailed discussion would serve as a mental rehearsal for success!
It’s also important for each to state what they need from each other, expressed in concrete ways that can be quickly served (or not). These small new steps would then add to past successes. I’d encourage them to notice whatever may be working that’s in line with their vision, not underestimating the value of small steps or of any signs of progress.
That progress would be something to check in on during follow-up sessions.
Ian Day, Executive coach
This sounds an all-too-common problem in these challenging times: tighter budgets, cost reductions, time-poor leaders and the need to deliver more, whether products, services or students recruited to university courses.
There’s a lot going on in this situation – a two-hour group session would only scratch the surface and may make things worse. Issues would be highlighted without time for a sustainable resolution. ‘Papering over the cracks’ is not sufficient: an organisational development intervention is needed.
Jean needs to take a coaching style of leadership, becoming ready to ask open questions, and listening to understand, rather than being defensive, or restating organisational rhetoric. Why do the team consider their targets too challenging? More often it is a lack of skill, knowledge and resources. Or it may be a product of the past. This will be uncovered by a curiosity to explore and understand.
In advance of the session, Jean could be coached to develop awareness around her approach to the meeting. Jean should demonstrate vulnerability, in that she doesn’t know all the answers and genuinely wants the team’s input so there is a collective resolution.
A team coaching approach should be taken to the group session. Patrick Lencioni’s The Five Dysfunctions of a Team (2002) is always a good framework, focusing on trust, conflict, commitment, accountability and results. Absence of these leads to team dysfunctionality.
There’s the need for openness so the conversation enters the ‘ZOUD’ – Zone of Uncomfortable Debate, where each person’s truth is spoken. Jean must work hard to create an environment of trust.
I remember working with one leadership team who developed a team mantra: “Debate vigorously, then unite.”
- Ian Day is co-author of Challenging Coaching, and head of coaching qualifications at the University of Warwick