As I have been mentor coaching coaches recently (observing their coaching and giving them competency-based feedback), we’ve realised that small changes in language make a big difference to the way a question or an observation is received by the thinker. It might only reach their sub-conscious, but even then, it will get in the way of them doing their best thinking.
Let’s look at some examples:
| Original wording | Better wording | Because… |
| What issue would you like to think about today? | What would you like to think about today? | It may not be an issue – it may be an opportunity |
| We only have 15 minutes | We have a full 15 minutes | We want them to feel the possibility of time rather than the limitation of it |
| How would you like me to be today, to be most useful to you? | How shall we do this together today, to be most useful to you? | We want to create a partnership where we both play a part in making this successful. This is not a service |
| Thank you | – | If we say thank you to their answers, it feels as though the thinker is providing answers in service of us rather than them |
| Could you describe to me… Could you tell me… Can you give me an example of… Can I ask what that means, sorry…? Can I make sure I am hearing you correctly…? | [Go straight to the question] | Again, it feels as though the thinker is providing answers in service of us rather than them |
| Why? | What is important to you about that? Or What led you to….? | Why creates a defence mechanism and is not conducive to good thinking |
| I’m trying to work out …. | [Go straight to the question] | Coaching is not about us working something out, it’s about them working it out |
| I think there is something behind that | What’s behind that? | Coaching is not about us thinking, it’s about them thinking |
| I want you to… | May I invite you to…. | We need to give them a feeling of choice about whether they decide to do what it is we are inviting them to do (eg, stand, move, draw, constellate etc) |
| And the second thing was, oh you’ll have to remind me | So in summary? | It’s better to get them to summarise what they have heard themselves say rather than saying what we think we heard them say (especially if we can’t remember!) |
| Let me just gauge that | How do you gauge that? | If we gauge it, we are judging them; if they judge themselves, they are more likely to take it from themselves |
| That’s interesting, so…. That sounds good, so… | [Go straight to the question] | This is a judgment |
| Are we going to where you want to go? Do you feel like we are making progress? Have you learned enough? Have you got what you wanted? | Where are we in comparison to your outcome for today? | Closed question vs open question that invites more thinking |
| Can you say back to me what you are going to do…? | What are you going to do? | We are a partner with them, not a parent |
What other words do you notice in your coaching that might seem small but make a big difference?
“What do you want to do about it?”
Better: “What might you do about it?”
Coachees may know what they want to do but be stuck. ‘Might’, opens the mind to other possibilities.
That’s a good one. Or “what could you do?” or “what are the possibilities?”
“What does that mean for you” – could be a question about the meaning of words, or an enquiry about consequences.
If the former I try to be explicit “what do you understand by [ambiguity]” is clearer.
If the latter, “What might happen as a result of that”
I’m also a fan of “That’s interesting, tell me more…”
That’s a useful insight William. Thank you. Those distinctions make sense to me about the two different meanings behind the meaning question. But I don’t like “that’s interesting, tell me more”, at least not in coaching because a)there’s a judgement that this thing is interesting but other things they have said are not and b) I want them to access deeper thinking not tell me the story/context. So I might say instead “what’s your freshest thinking about that?” (I think that’s a Nancy Kline question)
This is *so* useful Clare! I can recognise some of those superfluous words and phrases in my own practice. And what drives them are my underlying assumptions about the relationship I have with the thinker in that moment. Great stuff!
Thanks Stuart. Interesting to think about what drives us to use certain language. That reminds me of the post I wrote recently about whether we come at coaching from a service mentality or a partnership. Depending which one we believe in, our language will be affected.
It’s certainly that ‘in service of’ assumption that drives me to use some of that left-hand column language. So on those occasions I end up doing work that properly belongs to the client (trying to understand too much, trying to work things out, summarising for them etc)
It reminds me of some of the really excellent coaching sessions I’ve had as a thinker. I’ve always come out of those thinking “I worked really hard in that session!” Not once did I think “the coach worked really hard for me in that session!” 🙂