Coaching is a powerful tool for helping leaders reach their peak performance. There are three main approaches to coaching: authoritarian, democratic, and laissez-faire. Instructional coaches who use the Impact Cycle take a dialogical approach to training. Each of these approaches has its own unique advantages and disadvantages, and understanding them can help you decide which one is best for your situation. Authoritarian coaching is the most traditional approach.
It involves the coach telling the client what to do and how to do it. This method works best when the client already has the knowledge they need to improve, but it can be less effective when they don't have the necessary information. It also deprofessionalizes teaching by minimizing the experience and autonomy of teachers, which can lead to resistance. Democratic coaching is a more collaborative approach. The coach and client work together to identify goals and strategies for achieving them.
This approach works best when the client is committed to learning a teaching strategy or program. It also allows for more flexibility in addressing issues that dialogical and managerial coaching cannot address. Laissez-faire coaching is a hands-off approach. The coach holds the client accountable as the “main owner of the process” and allows them to make their own decisions. This approach works best when the client has the necessary knowledge and skills to achieve their goals.
It also allows for more autonomy in decision-making. Soft emotional intelligence skills have become an important component of executive coaching approaches. There are several psychometrically validated assessment tools available to help coaches learn more about their own particular training styles. Taking the time to understand these approaches can help you decide which one is right for you. When selecting a coaching approach, it's important to consider your goals, your client's needs, and your own strengths and weaknesses as a coach. Authoritarian coaching may be best suited for clients who already have the knowledge they need to improve, while democratic coaching may be better for clients who are committed to learning a teaching strategy or program.
Laissez-faire coaching may be best for clients who have the necessary knowledge and skills to achieve their goals, but need more autonomy in decision-making. Soft emotional intelligence skills are also essential for successful executive coaching. Assessment tools can help coaches understand their own particular training styles and determine which approach is best suited for their clients' needs. By taking the time to understand these approaches, coaches can ensure that they are providing their clients with the most effective coaching experience possible.
Leave Reply