Challenges With Using GROW Model Coaching For Performance
Transcript
Hi there, this is Blair from BravaTrak.
I've been thinking further about the GROW conversation. You'll know from an earlier post, I consider it an absolute waste of time, money, and opportunity if you're training your team leaders in this model. There are several reasons for this, but today let's examine one of them.
Challenge #1: GROW model coaching is more complex that it appears
The GROW sequence, which stands for Goals, Reality, Options, and Way forward is much more complex than it appears. As a result, most managers I've observed use it poorly - if at all. Thinking about the process as a four-part process is insufficient. Each of the four parts - Goals, Reality, Options, and Way forward - actually consists of three steps.
For example, Goal is about establishing the purpose of the conversation. The three steps of that are; 'defining the purpose', 'agreeing on the desired outcome', and 'establishing a time frame to achieve the goal'.
A process with a total of four parts and 12 separate steps is a beast of a thing. Firstly, who's going to recall all those steps? No-one I know. Perhaps that's why, despite training, most managers and team leaders don't use this approach.
Challenge #2: The GROW model is too linear
But there's a further problem. This insistence on four parts, each comprising three steps, forces a linear step-by-step approach to coaching. The focus then goes on asking questions, and proceeding through the steps, rather than listening to the answers and directing the conversation accordingly. It forces a process.
An outstanding coach I know well, tells me that when he provides executive coaching, it's normal for him to spend the first hour with his client, helping them to figure out their Goal. He listens to them, and asks appropriate questions to help them figure stuff out. Rather than put them on a meaningless, fast-track through 12 steps.
Simply put, I believe the GROW conversation is too complex, and too linear, to be of much use in most situations.
That's my take. What do you think?