The Ever-Audacious Seth Godin has had a bit to say recently about a term tossed around coaching circles with serious abandon. Along with what Coaching Is/Isn't, the topic of "Coachability" can either send you screaming from the conference room or have you deeply involved in the debate.
I personally believe a debate about coachability shows coaches up as being a wee bit too PRECIOUS! (Oh Oh I'll be off a few invitation lists now!)
Pink Apple is about the people I spend time with in my office or on the other end of a phone. For me, it's not about whether someone is coachable. Instead, it's about whether we can walk productively together down a path to a particular place my client wants to reach.
Often in my office that's a path to a better relationship or a DIFFERENT relationship (either apart or together). It's NOT MY PLACE TO JUDGE their paths or decisions. I'll sure as hell question them. My job is to make THEM confident that they're right about their decisions. But, which path they take ends up being their problem!
Michael Vanderdonk over at Tales of A Corporate Hypnotist has also had a bit to say on Seth's comments.
As someone who regularly coaches professionally I read with interest Seth Godin’s discussion on coaching the uncoachable. While I agree with his point, one of the main presuppositions in the post is just plain wrong.
He describes some of the symptoms of uncoachability and almost all of them imply that coaching is about the coach, when in facts it’s really about the person being coached. These symptoms also point to failures within the relationship between the coach and coachee. [more]
I don't think my clients want to be considered coachable or not! I think they want to be seen as a person with a problem and both potential clients and Pink Apple need to be focusing on our preparedness to solve the client's problem.
