February 2011 | Vol. 32 no. 1 www.learningforward.org | JsD 57 g eoffrey Canada said in a recent presentation, “Education is the only business I know of where you can change anything you want, as long as you change nothing” (2010). After so much debate and so many policies, why is our education system still failing so many of our children? What are we either missing or pretending not to know? Reforms only work when people who implement them are on board, engaged, and valued. What gets talked about from the boardroom to the classroom, how it gets talked about, and who is invited to join the conversation determines what will happen or won’t. Are the driving conversations dividing or connecting stakeholders? Are they catalysts for change and accountability, or are they further entrenching people in fear and blame? Is mandating accountability preventing us from hearing and seeing the competing truths that exist about our students, classrooms, and schools? Amid the spinning wheels of education reform, an essential component seems to be missing: conversations that speak directly to the heart of the issue, engage people’s curiosity to uncover the truth, galvanize people, and create collective responsibility. Leadership that attempts to create accountability with top-down mandates, rather than by engaging and connecting people, leads to or exacerbates a culture of blame and excuses. Mandating accountability, while it may sound effective, simply doesn’t work. Why? Because most often in practice this approach is fueled by the same thing victimhood is fueled by — blame. And as long as that’s the case, there’s no time, energy, or vision left to create real solutions. A NeW VIeW OF AccOuNTABILITY The long-term benefits of accountability have enormous implications for the quality of our lives and of our education system. There is a direct correlation between any organization’s health and the degree of accountability displayed by its employees, top to bottom. Accountability is an attitude, a personal, private, and nonnegotiable choice about how to live one’s life. It’s a desire to take responsibility for results, and for that reason, it cannot be mandated. It requires a personal bias toward solutions, toward action. Rather than hold people accountable, hold them “able.” Rather than equate the word accountability with culpability, begin with yourself and model the kind of accountability that is empowering. Accountability has to come from within. Model it and show people how accountability benefits them. When it’s clear how accountability benefits someone, accountability becomes an internal drive. While we don’t always have a choice about the situation in which we find ourselves, we do have a choice about how we view or judge it. Consider shifting your perspective from ‘Since this is a tough situation, I can’t do it, I’m not willing to muster the courage, will, skill, energy, focus, needed to do or say what needs doing,’ to taking the stance that ...

1. February 2011 | Vol. 32 no. 1 www.learningforward.org | JsD 57
g
eoffrey Canada said in a recent
presentation, “Education is the
only business I know of where
you can change anything you want, as
long as you change nothing” (2010).
After so much debate and so many
policies, why is our education system
still failing so many of our children?
What are we either missing or
pretending not to know?
Reforms only work when people
who implement them are on board,
engaged, and valued. What gets talked
about from the boardroom to the
classroom, how it gets talked about, and
who is invited to join the conversation
determines what will happen or won’t.
Are the driving conversations
dividing or connecting stakeholders?
Are they catalysts for change and
accountability, or are they further
entrenching people in fear and blame?
Is mandating accountability preventing
us from hearing and seeing the
competing truths that exist about our

2. students, classrooms, and schools?
Amid the spinning wheels of
education reform, an essential
component seems to be missing:
conversations that speak directly to the
heart of the issue, engage people’s
curiosity to uncover the truth, galvanize
people, and create collective
responsibility.
Leadership that attempts to create
accountability with top-down
mandates, rather than by engaging and
connecting people, leads to or
exacerbates a culture of blame and
excuses. Mandating accountability,
while it may sound effective, simply
doesn’t work. Why? Because most often
in practice this approach is fueled by
the same thing victimhood is fueled by
— blame. And as long as that’s the case,
there’s no time, energy, or vision left to
create real solutions.
A NeW VIeW OF AccOuNTABILITY
The long-term benefits of
accountability have enormous
implications for the quality of our lives
and of our education system. There is a
direct correlation between any
organization’s health and the degree of
accountability displayed by its
employees, top to bottom.

3. Accountability is an attitude, a
personal, private, and nonnegotiable
choice about how to live one’s life. It’s a
desire to take responsibility for results,
and for that reason, it cannot be
mandated. It requires a personal bias
toward solutions, toward action.
Rather than hold people
accountable, hold them
“able.” Rather than equate
the word accountability
with culpability, begin with
yourself and model the kind
of accountability that is
empowering. Accountability
has to come from within.
Model it and show people how
accountability benefits them. When it’s
clear how accountability benefits
someone, accountability becomes an
internal drive.
While we don’t always have a choice
about the situation in which we find
ourselves, we do have a choice about
how we view or judge it. Consider
shifting your perspective from ‘Since
this is a tough situation, I can’t do it,
I’m not willing to muster the courage,
will, skill, energy, focus, needed to do
or say what needs doing,’ to taking the
stance that says, ‘Given my current
reality, let me explore my options,
clarify the results I want to produce,

4. and figure out at least one step to take
in that direction,’ and then take it.
Rather than bonding with others over
To encourage others, model the kind
of accountability that is empowering
•
In each issue of JSD, Susan Scott
([email protected]) explores
aspects of communication that
encourage meaningful collaboration.
Scott, author of Fierce Conversations:
Achieving Success At Work & In Life,
One Conversation at a Time (Penguin,
2002) and Fierce Leadership: A Bold
Alternative to the Worst “Best”
Practices of Business Today (Broadway
Business, 2009), leads Fierce Inc.
(www.fierceinc.com), which helps
companies around the world
transform the conversations that are
central to their success. Fierce in the
Schools carries this work into schools
and higher education. columns are
available at www.learningforward.org.
© copyright, Fierce inc., 2011.
collaborative culture sUsAN scOT T
JsD | www.learningforward.org February 2011 | Vol. 32 no. 158
collaborative culture sUsAN scOT T

5. mutual scars and wounds, find people
who are in action themselves and who
will support your success.
When we become entrenched in
feeling powerless, we put time and
energy into identifying all of the reasons
we can’t do something instead of
focusing on what we can do to
accomplish our goals. One shift in our
outlook on any situation can change
everything about the results we produce.
So beyond modeling accountability,
how do we motivate others to choose to
be accountable? First, please don’t do the
following: Tell them to get a grip, avoid
them, complain about them to others,
get angry, tell them what they need to
do and how to fix things, or tell them
that their context is false. Not only do
these actions not work, they’ll set you
back and make the situation worse.
An effective way to point anyone
toward personal accountability is to
engage him or her in a Mineral Rights
conversation (see box below). When
someone comes to you with a problem
or an issue, start with step 2 of the
Mineral Rights model. Use this
question-based model to help the other
person facilitate a conversation with
themselves — to think out loud in a far
richer way than they otherwise might
— and create self-generated insights,

6. the kind that stick and are mostly likely
to lead to behavior change. This model
is a powerful way to get anyone,
including yourself, out of a mind-set of
feeling powerless.
MINeRAL RIgHTs cONVeRsATION
There are seven steps in Mineral
Rights conversations. The key in taking
someone through a Mineral Rights
conversation is to remain empathetic
and genuinely curious during the
conversation. Questions only. No
advice. By engaging people in a Mineral
Rights conversation, they identify the
root of the issue, see the prices being
paid, what’s at stake to gain when the
issue is resolved, and come up with a
plan of action. They own the issue and
the solution. They are much more likely
to act.
While engaging someone in a
Mineral Rights conversation to help
them break out of feeling powerless,
avoid common traps that make the
situation worse:
• Discount their reasons for why they
can’t do this or that.
• Get caught up in their story,
sympathize, placate, or rescue.
• Give advice.

7. • Skip some steps and jump right to
“What are you going to do about
it.”
• Tell them how you handled a
similar situation.
• Become judgmental.
Remember to:
• Go into the conversation with the
motivation to help, not further a
hidden agenda.
• Dig deep. The two best words are
“What else?” or “Say more.”
• Inquire about their emotions.
Emotions give the lit match
something to ignite. “Given the
scenario you just described, what do
you feel?”
• Find the neutral place from which
you can remain empathetic without
judgment.
No matter what the reporting
structure may be, consider this a
conversation between equals.
An accountable perspective is that
the solution/problem/situation is mine:
Given the long list of terrible and very
real conditions that exist, what can I

8. do? What we focus on expands —
problems or solutions. It’s our choice. A
culture of fierce conversations inspires
and instills a desire to want to take
responsibility and ownership.
cONNecTIVITY, AccOuNTABILITY
How do you get collective
responsibility? Accountability and the
ability to connect on a deep level with
each other go hand in hand. When you
have a team of people internally driven,
people who feel they can make a
difference, the impossible becomes
possible. They connect at a deeper level.
Improving our schools, teachers,
students, and communities requires the
courage and ability to collectively
initiate and sustain conversations that
speak to the ground truths while
connecting with one another at a deep
level, one conversation at a time.
True accountability doesn’t happen
without human connection. True
accountability and human connectivity
go together. When we engineer
environments where true connectivity
and accountability are present, we
awaken the sense of collective
responsibility.
Despite our differences, it’s going to
take collective responsibility to get us

9. where we want to be. While no single
conversation is guaranteed to change
the trajectory of a career, a school, a
relationship, or a life, any single
conversation can. It’s not a matter of
which program is under discussion,
which mandates are established, which
carrots are dangled, or which sticks are
shaken. The conversation is the
relationship. Nowhere is that more
important than education.
ReFeReNce
Canada, G. (2010, November 10).
Address to the Seattle Foundation’s
Annual Luncheon. �
steps in a mineral rights conversation
Step 1: identify your most pressing issue.
Step 2: clarify the issue.
Step 3: determine the current impact.
Step 4: determine the future implications.
Step 5: Examine your personal contribution
to this issue.
Step 6: describe the ideal outcome.
Step 7: commit to action.
For an in-depth understanding of how to use the
Mineral Rights model, read Practice #3 (“From
holding people accountable to modeling
accountability and holding people able”) of Fierce
Leadership: A Bold Alternative to the Worst Best
Practices of Business Today (Broadway Books, 2009).

10. Copyright of Journal of Staff Development is the property of
National Staff Development Council and its
content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted
to a listserv without the copyright holder's
express written permission. However, users may print,
download, or email articles for individual use.
Copyright © Patient Safety Coaches Academy, LLC 2018
1
The Flow of Coaching
James Flaherty in Evoking Excellence in Others describes a 7-
step Flow of
Coaching1 process from first establishing the relationship
between the coach and
individuals on the team to observation, assessment, providing
feedback and
reaching agreement on future steps. The following is a summary
and elaboration
of the Flow of Coaching model:
1. Establish the relationship – for coaching to work, the
relationship must be
genuine and based on mutual trust, mutual respect, and mutual
freedom of

11. expression. The coach must facilitate open communications
where
information is exchanged without defensiveness or
argumentation.
Freedom of expression is grounded in openness, listening, and
confidentiality.
2. Recognize the opening – an “opening” is an event or an
occasion that
makes the individual or team more approachable for coaching,
for example,
a process breakdown, a need for enhanced competency, or the
introduction of a new process or technique.
3. Observe and assess performance – in addition to observing
immediate
concerns, the coach should observe and assess how the team is
meeting its
commitments, working toward its identified future outcomes,
and
maintaining a constructive mood, while also assessing the level
of
competence in the group and individual behaviors.
4. Enroll the team for a coaching session – the coach and the
team should
make explicit what they aim to accomplish together, discuss
potential
barriers, identify desired outcomes, reach mutual commitment,
and
identify possible obstacles to success.
5. Conduct the coaching conversation – during the initial
session, the coach
should clarify the desired outcome of the coaching session,
observe the

12. team’s performance, set up communication expectations, and
plan a
follow-up session. During the next session, the coach reports on
observations, addresses breakdowns, discusses new behaviors,
and assigns
new practice. During the third session, the coach reports on the
observations of the new practice, results of the new behavior,
effects of
newly acquired competence, and suggests recommendations for
the future.
The coach should acknowledge positive results and progress and
ask the
1 Flaherty, J., Evoking Excellence in Others, Elsevier, 2010, p.
25
Copyright © Patient Safety Coaches Academy, LLC 2018
2
team to reflect on what they have learned from their own
observations of
their performance.
6. Provide feedback – the feedback should provide time for the
team to
reflect on the coach’s observations of their performance and on
their own
observations. By conducting a self-assessment, the team will
better
understand the corrections in behavior needed for sustained
improvement.

13. 7. Agree on future steps – the coach and team members should
agree on the
focus of future coaching conversations, practice sessions, and
new
behaviors to master.
Discussion: Understanding Coaching Models
Coaching models can be used to help guide a conversation. You
will find that one coaching model may be more appropriate for
you and/or your coachee. You may also find that one coaching
model may be better for a particular situation than others. As
you examine each of the coaching models, consider which one
you feel is the best fit for you and your organization.
To prepare for this Discussion, review this week’s Learning
Resources.
· Review this week’s Learning Resources, especially:
· Turning Ideas into reality – See Attachment
· Accountability is empowering- See Attachment
· Coaching Models Overview (coachcampus.com)
Respond to at least two of your peers' postings in one or more
of the following ways:
· Comment on why you agree or disagree with your colleague’s
choice of coaching model.
· Describe another model you feel might be appropriate based
on your colleague’s discussion.
· APA citing
· No plagiarism

14. 1st Colleague – Natasha Mills
Natasha Mills
Understanding Coaching Models
Top of Form
The contemporary business environment is characterized by
multicultural environments, constant reengineering and
downsizing efforts, and the endless need for innovation
(Flaherty, 2010). These factors give importance to the process
coaching. Thus, as coaching continues to become fundamental
to leadership and organizational success, it is necessary to adopt
the right coaching model for effectiveness. The coaching
models include the coaching manager model, the mineral rights
model, the GENIUS model, and the flow model. The table below
presents an analysis of the characteristics, main steps, and uses
of each model.
Coaching Model
Characteristics
Main Steps
Uses
The Coaching Manager Model
Uses a supportive tone even when there is a sense of urgency.
Coach and coachee do not have to be necessarily close.
Context is critical to the effectiveness of the model.
The signal to coach is always implicit rather than explicit (Hunt
& Weintraub, 2017).
Made possible by the relationship between the coach and
coachee.
1. The opportunity
2. Reflection
3. Feedback
4. Follow through/action
Is valuable in addressing day-to-day business challenges
affecting team collaboration (Hunt & Weintraub, 2017).
Helps in the achievement of clearly set goals.

15. The Mineral Rights Model
Engages people who are already in action.
Involves enquiring about the emotions of the coachee (Scott,
2011).
Focuses on what can be done to accomplish goals.
1. Identify most pressing issue
2. Clarify the issue
3. Determine the current impact
4. Determine the future implications
5. Examine how you contribute to this issue
6. Identify the desired outcome
7. Commit to action.
Effective in helping people develop personal accountability
(Scott, 2011).
Helps the coachee overcome the feeling of powerlessness in
handling a situation.
The GENIUS Model
Works with the talent and ideas of the coachee.
The coach plays the primary role of getting the best out of the
coachee’s talent.
1. Set the goals
2. Assess the energy of the coachee
3. Nurture a range of ideas and opportunities
4. Identify inhibitors
5. Utopia
6. Summary of steps to be taken by coachee
Works best in the world of creative people, such as television,
music, games, theatre, arts, and film (McPhedran, 2009).
The Flow Model
Can be quite complicated because the boundaries between the
stages of the flow model often merge.
1. Establish relationship
2. Recognize opening
3. Observe/assess
4. Enroll client

16. 5. Coaching conversations
Used to design coaching action and diagnose the effectiveness
of the coaching process (Flaherty, 2010).
Provides a thinking and design framework for the coach.
Each of the coaching models has best practices associated with
it. The coaching manager model, for example, has the best
practice of identifying the coaching opportunity, such as the
emergence of day-to-day challenges concerning collaboration
within teams (Hunt & Weintraub, 2017). It also has the
characteristic of a supportive tone during the coaching process.
From this perspective, the coaching manager model can be
termed as one that is deployed at a critical moment to help the
coachee navigate a specific difficult situation. The mineral
rights model, on the other hand, has the best practice of turning
the impossible into possible by allowing the coach and coachee
to connect at a deeper level (McPhedran, 2009). The model
strives to cultivate personal accountability, meaning that it
nurtures coachees to become effective leaders.
The GENIUS model, while it widely applies to creatives, has
the advantage of helping the coachee to understand the need to
do things by breaking down the goals of the coaching process
for purposes of consistency (Scott, 2011). Lastly, the flow
model is a diagnostic tool that helps coaches and coachees
diagnose the effectiveness of the coaching process, as well as
design the actions involved in the process. My evaluation of
these coaching models makes the GENIUS model the most
effective for me and my organization. This is because it is easy
to find oneself setting big goals at the onset of a coaching
process, which can be difficult to achieve and cripple the
effectiveness of the entire process. Therefore, breaking the
goals down into three types, including aspirational goals,
session goals, and action goals, improves the outcomes of the
coaching process by encouraging consistency (McPhedran,
2009). This makes it easy to turn ideas into reality.
Flaherty, J. (2010). Coaching: Evoking excellence in others (3rd

17. ed.). Burlington, MA: Elsevier Butterworth-Heinemann.
Hunt, J. M., & Weintraub, J. R. (2017). The coaching manager:
Developing top talent in business (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks,
CA: Sage Publications.
McPhedran, A. (2009). Turning ideas into reality. Training
Journal, 63-66
Scott, S. (2011). To encourage others, model the kind of
accountability that is empowering. Journal of Staff
Development, 32 (1), 57-58.
2nd Colleague – Don Tizzano
Donna Tizzano
RE: Discussion - Week 2 Tizzano Initial Reply
Hello Class,
As we develop our skills in coaching, we must keep in the
forefront that coaching is dependent on developing a
relationship with the person you will be helping to develop.
Because every person is different and every coaching situation
is unique, it is necessary to be flexible and adapt to each
situation using the tools from the most appropriate Coaching
Model to ensure success. One of the most important things to
remember when discussing coaching is that you must listen to
the employee, assist the employee, support them, and help them
develop problem solving skills. McPhedran (2009) uses the
analogy of a conductor to describe the responsibilities of a
coach. It is up to the conductor to extract the answers and talent
from the employee. The coachee, not you, must own the
process and identify their own solutions (McPhedran, 2009). To
understand what model will be best for a coach to use in
different situations, I will discuss the characteristics, use, and
main steps of the following models:

18. Developmental Coaching
This model is effective for developing employees and helping
them succeed in identifying and pursuing career goals. This
model is my personal favorite because it employs some level of
feedback and guidance from the coach when involved in the
coaching experience and focuses on helping a caregiver develop
in their role by promoting their autonomy (Hunt & Weintraub,
2017). There are Four Stages in this model, but they do not
necessarily occur in a step-like fashion. A relationship based on
trust must be established. Even though there is no need for an
emotional component to this relationship, the coach must
communicate with the coachee in a non-judgmental manner
(Hunt & Weintraub, 2017). The first stage is the Opportunity.
This stage is where the coach identifies an opportunity to
expand the skills and abilities of the coachee. For example,
providing a newer nurse the opportunity to be the Charge Nurse
on the unit to coordinate workflow and manage admissions and
discharges for the shift. The second stage is Reflection, where
both the coach and coachee take time to reflect on the
experience that has taken place and identify potential
opportunities to improve upon the next time (Hunt & Weintraub,
2017). Here, the coach and the nurse would discuss how the
nurse handled the Charge Nurse assignment, what went well and
what did not. The third stage is Feedback which supports the
coachee’s learning once they have had time to reflect on their
experience. Here the coach provides objective feedback bas ed
on observation and discussion. The fourth and final stage is the
Follow Through and Action Planning for the coachee. The
Action Plan will outline and identify outcome oriented action
steps to maintain the coachee’s success along with a plan for
continued follow up from the coach.
Mineral Rights Model- This model is a question-based model
that helps people develop personal accountability and helps

19. them eliminate feelings of powerlessness by creating self-
generated insight and behavior changes. These changes are
accomplished by the coach taking the client through a series of
steps and engaging them in the Mineral Rights conversation
(Scott, 2011, p. 58). The coach in this model engages the client
in a conversation that identifies issues by demonstrating
empathy and asking pertinent questions of the client. This
model can be used in any organization and would benefit any
employee needing to increase personal accountability (Scott,
2009). The coach helps the client develop a plan of action to
resolve the issue by asking strategic questions. The initial step
is to Identify the most Pressing Issue; then through questioning,
the coach Clarifies the Issue. The third step is for the coach to
Determine the Current Impact, and then step four Determines
Future implications. The Fifth step is to Examine your Personal
Contribution to the Issue. Once identified, the sixth step is to
Describe the Ideal Outcome and lastly to Commit to Action. In
this model, the conversation between coach and coachee is the
relationship. What makes this model so attractive is because the
coachee is responsible for developing the idea to resolve the
issue and a plan of action to achieve resolution once they see
what the issue is costing or how it is affecting them. The
coachee is driven by the potential gain they will achieve with
resolution and they will then become engaged and vested in the
organization and begin to develop personal accountability
(Scott, 2009). This model is beneficial when organizations
struggle with employee engagement and lack of accountability
because it helps identify specific issues that need to be brought
forward and addressed by engaging the coachee in problem-
solving.
GENIUS Model-This model focuses on three types of goals and
is especially helpful when coaching talented and creative
people. The first is the Aspirational Goal that establishes a goal
the coachee will have achieved by the end of the coaching
program. The second goal is the Session Goal which identifies

20. what will be accomplished by the end of the coaching session.
The last goal is Action Goals that describe the coachee’s steps
to achieve the Aspirational Goals set in step one (McPhedran,
2009). To determine if the goals are attainable and appropriate,
the coach must assess the energy levels of the coachee to see if
they are sufficient to allow the coachee to achieve their
aspirational goal (McPhedran, 2009). If it is determined there
are sufficient energy levels, the next step is to nurture ideas and
opportunities through strategic questioning and active listening.
McPhedran (2009) suggests using Bono’s Six thinking hats in
this stage to develop ideas and consider available options by
looking at things from several different perspectives. The next
stage, the Inhibitor Stage, forces you to look for obstacles or
challenges that may prevent your idea from working. Once
challenges are identified, you may need to revise your ideas
from the nurturing phase so you can eventually reach the Utopia
Stage of the Model (McPhedran, 2009). In the Utopia Stage, the
coach helps you envision your end goal in the most realistic
way possible. When you can “see” your goal then you can attain
your goal. The final stage is the Steps Stage that outlines what
the coachee needs to accomplish before his next session. It is
the action plan that the coachee needs to complete on his
journey to achieving their goal (McPhedran, 2009). This model
is beneficial for someone who has a great idea, but needs
assistance in figuring out how to implement the idea and put it
into action.
Flow Model: There are five stages in the Flow Model; The
Relationship, Recognizing an Opening, Observe/Assess, Enroll
Client, and Coaching Conversations. Although described as a
linear model, each stage is different, and when applying this
model in real life you will find the stages are interconnected
(Flaherty, 2010). The First Stage and the most essential stage is
Establishing a Relationship. This relationship must be based on
trust and respect and the ability to be open, and communicative

21. with one another. The second stage is Recognizing the Opening
for Coaching. This Opening Opportunity can occur through
annual events such as providing performance evaluations,
completing the budget process, etc. It can also happen when
something goes wrong, a problem develops, or there is a
complaint about a caregiver. Stage three begins the Assessment
Stage, where the coach can assess the skills and competencies
of the caregiver and the work that they are responsible for. This
stage allows the coach to observe the client in their work
environment and see what projects they are working on and how
they interact with others to gain insight into the behaviors and
performance of the client (Flaherty, 2010). The Fourth stage is
the Enrollment phase where the coach and coachee’s intended
relationship is identified and the proposed outcome of the
program is shared with both the coach and coachee committing
to the process (Flaherty, 2010). The final stage in this model
outlines the Coaching Itself. Here, the coach outlines the
coaching process, determines a potential timeline, how often
they will meet, and whether that will be in-person or by phone
or zoom. In this stage, the coach needs to maintain their role
and ensure the client continues to have experiences that will
enhance their competence (Flaherty, 2010). This model reflects
similarities to the Developmental Model in the sense that a
relationship is established and the coach has an opportunity to
assist the coachee in developing a skillset, but in my opinion, I
believe this process is more formal than the Developmental
Model since the Flow Model outlines a formal process for
coaching and how it will occur.
Reflecting on these different coaching Models, I believe the
most effective one for me to use in the hospital where I work is
the Developmental Coaching Model. This model focuses on
helping the coachee develop problem-solving and critical
thinking skills to do their job in addition to assisting them to
identify opportunities for growth in their role. The coach guides

22. them in using their knowledge and applying it to specific
situations. It is also a model where the coach and coachee
continue to develop and become proficient in their skills (Hunt
& Weintraub, 2017). The coach could be helping to develop a
new nurse in various components of their job responsibilities or
helping people develop their interpersonal skills or Customer
Service and Service Recovery Skills. It can apply to any
situation where an employee needs to develop or enhance their
skills. I have several managers reporting to me with various
levels of leadership experience, so I often find myself coaching
them through situations they encounter. Over time, it is very
fulfilling to observe the growth in caregivers after you have
helped them grow and expand their comfort zone and
competence through coaching.
Have a good week,
Donna
References,
Flaherty, J. (2010). Coaching: Evoking excellence in others (3rd
ed.). Burlington, MA: Elsevier Butterworth-Heinemann.
Hunt, J. M., & Weintraub, J. R. (2017). The coaching manager:
Developing top talent in business (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks,
CA: Sage Publications.
McPhedran, A. (2009). Turning ideas into reality. Training
Journal, 63-66
Scott, S. (2011). To encourage others, model the kind of
accountability that is empowering. Journal of Staff
Development, 32 (1), 57-58.
Bottom of Form