IX Coach

Developmental Coaching: What It Is and What Open Sources Support

What open sources support about coaching for adult development, and what they leave out

What is developmental coaching?

In the open sources read for this page, developmental coaching is coaching that Braks describes as “highly person-centric” and focused on asking open questions. She separates it from performance coaching, which is goal-focused, and from the transformative coaching her own program used, where a later-stage coach shares deeper frames for meaning. Her stage-shift results come from the transformative program, not from developmental coaching as she defines it, and the only outcome data is one uncontrolled case study run by its own coach.

Developmental coaching is coaching that draws on adult developmental theory, the body of ideas about how people’s ways of making sense of things change as adults. In these sources a stage is a level of that sense-making. Zeitler describes growth as coming to see as an object an assumption one used to be inside of. Two freely downloadable articles in Integral Review carry the material on this page: Antoinette Braks’s account of a coaching program she calls developmentally informed and transformative, aimed at later stages of development, and David Zeitler’s defense of Immunity to Change, a coaching method by Robert Kegan and Lisa Lahey that looks for the hidden assumptions behind the things a person says they want. The core texts on developmental coaching were not available to us. Berger and Atkins (2009), “Mapping complexity of mind: using the subject-object interview in coaching,” Bachkirova’s 2009 interview with Robert Kegan, and Berger and Fitzgerald (2018) on coaching in a complex world could be confirmed to exist but could not be read, so nothing here is drawn from them. What follows covers only what those open sources support.

Pratiques

Comment ces pratiques s'articulent

Zeitler describes the way through a stuck place as stepping back from the things a person says they want, until the assumption holding them can be seen rather than only lived. The three practices here are not tested as a set. Two come from Braks’s case study and one from Zeitler’s argument, and what they share is an aim, not a measured common mechanism.

How is developmental coaching different from performance coaching or transformative coaching?

Braks sorts executive coaching into three types. Performance coaching is “highly process-centric focused on achieving specific goals,” with the GROW process as her example. Developmental coaching is “highly person-centric” and focused on asking open questions, which she calls “the art and science of asking clean open questions.” Transformative coaching, which her own program used, is a more collaborative process in which a later-stage coach has “much greater discretion to share deeper and more expansive meaning-making frames.” She writes that transformative coaching “is able to expedite the quantum shift from Achievist to Synergist in ways that developmental coaching cannot.” Her three-way split is her own, and she calls for research into the types rather than testing them. Zeitler, writing about Immunity to Change, says that method is not trying to make people grow, but to help people already changing find the assumption holding them back.

Does developmental coaching move people to a later stage of development?

Braks reports stage shifts for her transformative program, not for developmental coaching as she defines it. In that program, 83% of 12 strategic executives shifted a full stage and 17% shifted two, after an average of eight 90-minute meetings over 12 months with her as their coach. Nine participants took Cook-Greuter’s Mature Adult Profile, a sentence-completion assessment; one took the Global Leadership Profile; and two took the STAGES Profile. The author ran and analysed the program, and there was no comparison group, so the result cannot be separated from the program as a whole, from the coach, or from the mentoring she describes. Nothing in the open sources read here tests whether developmental coaching, as Braks defines it, moves people to a later stage.

Why does being challenged sometimes feel like a fight and sometimes like losing something I believed?

Zeitler argues that the discomfort of a challenge can mean two different things. Disequilibrium, the feeling of being out of balance with a view you have lived inside, can be conflict for the old view and repudiation for the new self that is letting the old view go. He also argues that disequilibrium can open the way to wider perspectives. He is making this argument in defense of Immunity to Change, so it is a reading of the developmental dynamics rather than a measured result. The practical use is to ask which of the two you are feeling before deciding what to do with the challenge.

What do I do when I keep venting about the same kind of thing?

In one coachee’s account in Braks’s case study, the coachee was asked whether they wanted to keep being reactive to situations, and reports being told: “my reaction was as much about me as it was about her.” The source does not say who “her” refers to. The coachee says this changed their belief that they could change their own personality. The question moves attention from the event to the person reacting. It is one participant’s report, not a measured outcome, so treat it as a question to try rather than a result to expect.

How do I get ready for a hard conversation at work I keep putting off?

Braks describes coaching sessions in which coachees were helped to script a conversation she calls Truth-Implications-Point, to hold at work when a situation was difficult. She reports that this driver was the most common across her case studies. She names the three parts but does not define them, so the steps on this page are its own reading of them. Her description of the aim is speaking truthfully “while holding the other person’s self-esteem and feelings in mind.” The report is her own account, with no measured outcome for this driver alone.

Is there good evidence that developmental coaching works?

Not strong evidence in the open sources read here. The main outcome data is Braks’s (2020) uncontrolled case study of her transformative program, and its author ran the coaching and wrote up the results. Zeitler (2010) defends Immunity to Change but reports no outcome data of his own. The core texts on developmental coaching were not available to read for this page, so this answer is limited to what the open sources contain.

Comment choisir entre elles ?

Choose by the situation in front of you, not by who you think you are. If you keep returning to the same reaction after the same kind of event, start with the question about the reaction. If a challenge to a view leaves you unsure whether you are losing something or only in an argument, start with the distinction between the two. If a hard conversation at work is one you keep putting off, start with writing it out.

Ce que ces approches ne tranchent pas

The core texts on developmental coaching were not available to us: Berger and Atkins (2009), “Mapping complexity of mind: using the subject-object interview in coaching” (DOI 10.1080/17521880902780989), Bachkirova’s 2009 interview with Robert Kegan (DOI 10.1080/17521880802645951), and Berger and Fitzgerald (2018) on coaching in a complex world (DOI 10.1891/9780826180094.0024). We could confirm that each exists, but not read them, so nothing on this page is drawn from them. Everything here comes from two open articles in Integral Review. The page has three practices because only three could be drawn from these two open sources without stretching them. Braks is the coach who ran her program and wrote up its results, and half of her eight drivers are about strategy and organisations. Of her four personal drivers, this page uses one (driver 6, the hard-conversation script) and leaves out three. Braks names the Truth-Implications-Point parts but does not define them, so the steps for that practice are this page’s own. Driver 1, the declaration, is left out because Braks calls it “a strong guiding affirmation,” and this page does not use affirmation-based approaches. Driver 2, a kind and open mind, is left out because it is built on positive-language practice, which falls under the same exclusion. Driver 5, working through emotional triggers and their roots, is left out because it is shadow work, covered elsewhere on this site. Zeitler defends a method against a critic. He reports that Kjellström suggests development can occur without disequilibrium, and he argues against that view. He quotes a 2004 study by Manners and colleagues that this page did not read, so it makes no claim about it.

Pratiquez cela avec IX Coach

Pratiquez ceci avec IX Coach

Questions fréquentes

What is developmental coaching?

In the open sources read for this page, developmental coaching is coaching that Braks describes as “highly person-centric” and focused on asking open questions. She separates it from performance coaching, which is goal-focused, and from the transformative coaching her own program used, where a later-stage coach shares deeper frames for meaning. Her stage-shift results come from the transformative program, not from developmental coaching as she defines it, and the only outcome data is one uncontrolled case study run by its own coach.

Comment fonctionne « Ask what a reaction is about before you vent it » ?

In an account Braks quotes from one coachee, the coachee came to a session to vent about an irritating dental cleaning, and was asked whether they wanted to stay reactive to situations. The coachee reports being told: “my reaction was as much about me as it was about her.” The source does not say who “her” refers to. The coachee says this changed their belief that they could change their own personality. On this page’s reading, the question moves attention from the event to the person reacting. The source offers one coachee’s report and gives no measure of whether the change lasted.

Comment fonctionne « Tell a challenge to a belief apart from a fight » ?

Zeitler argues that Kjellström fuses conflict with disequilibrium, the feeling of being out of balance with a view you have been living inside. He argues that disequilibrium can open the way to wider perspectives, and that the same disequilibrium is conflict for the old self being let go but repudiation for the new self doing the letting go. He places this distinction within Subject/Object theory, which describes what you are identified with, as opposed to what you can see and hold at a distance. On this page’s reading, the source supports the distinction itself: two kinds of discomfort can feel alike and mean different things.

Comment fonctionne « Write a hard conversation out before you have it » ?

Braks says her coaching sessions helped coachees script a conversation she names Truth-Implications-Point (TIP), to hold at work when a situation was difficult. She reports that this driver was the most common across her case studies, and that the coachees had been intimidated, threatened and/or distressed by corporate politics or others’ abusive behaviour during the program. She describes the capacity to speak truthfully “while holding the other person’s self-esteem and feelings in mind” as relatively rare. The source names the three parts but does not define them, so the steps below are this page’s reading of the three words.

How is developmental coaching different from performance coaching or transformative coaching?

Braks sorts executive coaching into three types. Performance coaching is “highly process-centric focused on achieving specific goals,” with the GROW process as her example. Developmental coaching is “highly person-centric” and focused on asking open questions, which she calls “the art and science of asking clean open questions.” Transformative coaching, which her own program used, is a more collaborative process in which a later-stage coach has “much greater discretion to share deeper and more expansive meaning-making frames.” She writes that transformative coaching “is able to expedite the quantum shift from Achievist to Synergist in ways that developmental coaching cannot.” Her three-way split is her own, and she calls for research into the types rather than testing them. Zeitler, writing about Immunity to Change, says that method is not trying to make people grow, but to help people already changing find the assumption holding them back.

Does developmental coaching move people to a later stage of development?

Braks reports stage shifts for her transformative program, not for developmental coaching as she defines it. In that program, 83% of 12 strategic executives shifted a full stage and 17% shifted two, after an average of eight 90-minute meetings over 12 months with her as their coach. Nine participants took Cook-Greuter’s Mature Adult Profile, a sentence-completion assessment; one took the Global Leadership Profile; and two took the STAGES Profile. The author ran and analysed the program, and there was no comparison group, so the result cannot be separated from the program as a whole, from the coach, or from the mentoring she describes. Nothing in the open sources read here tests whether developmental coaching, as Braks defines it, moves people to a later stage.

Why does being challenged sometimes feel like a fight and sometimes like losing something I believed?

Zeitler argues that the discomfort of a challenge can mean two different things. Disequilibrium, the feeling of being out of balance with a view you have lived inside, can be conflict for the old view and repudiation for the new self that is letting the old view go. He also argues that disequilibrium can open the way to wider perspectives. He is making this argument in defense of Immunity to Change, so it is a reading of the developmental dynamics rather than a measured result. The practical use is to ask which of the two you are feeling before deciding what to do with the challenge.

What do I do when I keep venting about the same kind of thing?

In one coachee’s account in Braks’s case study, the coachee was asked whether they wanted to keep being reactive to situations, and reports being told: “my reaction was as much about me as it was about her.” The source does not say who “her” refers to. The coachee says this changed their belief that they could change their own personality. The question moves attention from the event to the person reacting. It is one participant’s report, not a measured outcome, so treat it as a question to try rather than a result to expect.

How do I get ready for a hard conversation at work I keep putting off?

Braks describes coaching sessions in which coachees were helped to script a conversation she calls Truth-Implications-Point, to hold at work when a situation was difficult. She reports that this driver was the most common across her case studies. She names the three parts but does not define them, so the steps on this page are its own reading of them. Her description of the aim is speaking truthfully “while holding the other person’s self-esteem and feelings in mind.” The report is her own account, with no measured outcome for this driver alone.

Is there good evidence that developmental coaching works?

Not strong evidence in the open sources read here. The main outcome data is Braks’s (2020) uncontrolled case study of her transformative program, and its author ran the coaching and wrote up the results. Zeitler (2010) defends Immunity to Change but reports no outcome data of his own. The core texts on developmental coaching were not available to read for this page, so this answer is limited to what the open sources contain.

Recherche

Concepts associés