Today we’re sharing insight from guest blogger Jerry Scott. We hope you enjoy Jerry’s wisdom and perspective.
After 28 years of marriage, my wife Janet and I can nearly communicate telepathically. A look can speak volumes and a single gesture can have multiple meanings. One of the most versatile is the eyebrow raise. Close cousin to the eye roll, the eyebrow raise can ask a question. Everything ok? What did that mean? It can express an opinion. Oh please! Can’t believe you did that or said that!
Our duties at home have also evolved over the years into a finely crafted division of labor. One of the chores we share equally is checking the front porch for packages at the end of the day. That process generates its share of eyebrow raising. She’ll haul in another crate of 25-year shelf life survival food and raise the eyebrow - Really? More of this stuff? My response back is usually the plaintive eyebrow raise that subtly communicates I can’t help myself. Once a prepper always a prepper.
I’ll haul in a stack of boxes from Anthropologie and raise an eyebrow. More shoes? Her response, however, is usually the very slight, subtle, and devastatingly effective eyebrow raise that says, “You ain’t the boss of me.” Check!
Americans in general have a problem with authority. Our three year olds emphatically state “I do it.” From King George III to today, we don’t like to be told what to do or how to do it. And that attitude permeates our life and work in a myriad of ways, including our language. No one wants to be bossed or to work with bossy people. No one likes the idea of being supervised. We don’t even like to be managed. The concept brings to mind a great scene from West Wing where President Barlett reminds his staff not to even try to manage Mrs. Barlett.
The use of the term “Boss” is usually in fun. Boss-man as a term of endearment? Our discomfort with the terminology of authority can generate creativity. Like someone referring to their boss as their “direct report” at the same time as their boss referring to them as their “direct report.” Maybe it feels better to say someone reports to you or you report to them. Perhaps it implies a type of action and not a condition of subservience. More and more we seem to default to the term “leader.” But I’m not sure that is helpful in describing a one-on-one relationship compared to the essence of leading an organization and setting strategy.
We may not have the right word for it but we know whether it’s good or bad. Get a room full of employees together and ask them to share “Good Boss” experiences and “Bad Boss” experiences. I’ll wager that the bad stories outnumber the good stories by a wide margin.
In contrast, ask employees to share stories about the coaches in their life. I’ll wager the stories they share are about great coaches who inspired them and brought out their best. These people worked them hard, yelled at them, made them run until they nearly threw up and yet, they ended up loving them in the end. How many bosses have you loved?
Maybe the difference is we had coaches as kids and as kids we were more receptive to authority figures. Or maybe there is something inherent in coaching that feels different than what we’ve experienced from our bosses. Coaches were down in the dirt with you teaching, cajoling, and encouraging. They were with you as you worked and prepared in the heat and the cold. They looked into your soul, understood your potential, and did everything in their power to bring it out. They participated fully in the game experience and shared equally in the win or the loss. In fact, they often shouldered the responsibility for the loss upon themselves but praised the team’s effort and excellence in the win.
The concept of coaching has been largely associated with personal coaching and consulting and having a life coach can work wonders for some. But it may be time for organizational leadership to adopt the paradigm of coaching to describe the relationship with one’s direct reports and certainly its highest calling.
Coaching is a full contact sport requiring close in work. It’s not about judging people. It’s not about micro-managing their work. In fact, you have to let them do the work, make judgments and mistakes or they won’t learn and evolve. It’s about bringing out their best. Helping them to understand what it takes to win and how winning will be judged. Helping them to understand how their role contributes to the success of the entire team. It’s about ultimately helping them succeed by investing sweat equity in their development.
One of the most telling hallmarks of good coaching in today’s business environment is the existence or absence of clear, transparent performance objectives. Ask someone to show you their written goals for the year. If they don’t have any then you have to question the quality of the coaching they are receiving. Does their coach understand their role and what they have to accomplish to “win?” Does their coach care enough to do the hard work to help them figure it out? Does their coach spend the time necessary to help them chart a course of achievement?
Seems to me that we could use more business leaders like Duke’s Coach K. Now wouldn’t that be something?
What’s The Risk?
For companies to succeed long term, with today’s global competition and four generation workforce, the quality of coaching throughout all levels of an organization must be addressed and enhanced. The working and personal relationship between an employee and the person they report to makes all the difference in their effectiveness, satisfaction, and retention. Teaching how to coach and modeling effective coaching must become a core competency of every company’s executive level.
This content was written and shared by guest blogger, Jerry Scott. Connect with Jerry on LinkedIn and Twitter.
