I really loathe the term "coach". I've been calling myself a coach for more than a decade but I've never liked the term. It is inaccurate (I don't run up and down the sidelines shouting "You've got a left leg, why don't you use it?") and has negative baggage. I also don't much like the term "facilitator".
I've tried all kinds of terms to describe my job - creative thinking partner, business muse, catalyst...they are all, frankly, naff.
Recently, at a session with the Executive Foundation, the speaker referred to the value of conversation, particularly quality conversation, in passing. Frequently, when I am working with companies, I am told about the lack of quality conversation. This is put down to lack of time, or the fact that people don't have the information to have powerful conversations that drive the business forward. The deeper concern is that the real reason those conversations don't take place is that people simply aren't bright enough.
And yet, in the sessions we run (whether that's one to one or in a group) the conversations are fascinating. They are creative, fresh, articulate, honest, inspiring, insightful and, often, highly amusing. More importantly, business problems are solved as a result of these conversations. Delegates will often complain at the start of the day that they don't really have time to be there but, by the end of the day, they are saying they got more done than they would have done at their desks.
So why don't these conversations happen every day? (And what has this got to do with what I call my job?)
Lack of time is an issue. But making the time pays dividends IF the conversation is held well. Lack of information is also a problem - you can't add meaningfully to a discussion if you don't know the facts...unless the contribution you make is to challenge conventional thinking, ask provocative questions or give support. And it is true that some people in your company might not be a super-brain but often intelligent conversation comes from unexpected quarters.
None of these are the real reason. The real reason is that conversation is under-valued. Talking is not seen as a valid alternative to "doing". If I am asked what I've done all day it adds up to about 2 hours work UNLESS I include all the conversations. Perhaps it sounds like I've hardly done anything!
Conversations which benefit a business require skill. They must have ground rules. And they need time. But the right kind of conversations -
- Produce ideas
- Generate solutions
- Educate
- Build relationships
- Galvanise people
- Anticipate and avoid problems
In the end, the talk must turn in to action. But troubleshooter, Sir John Harvey-Jones, wrote that the recipe for making good decisions and delivering a quality solution was that 80% of time should be put in to the thinking (of which conversation is a part), and only 20% on taking action. So, my two hours a day is about right.
Which leads me to wonder whether I should call myself a Conversationalist. I go around companies provoking quality conversations. And that produces great results.
Are you an under-cover Conversationalist too? What great conversations could you start today that drive your business forward?
Buy What's Wrong with Work? at Amazon
Join That People Thing on Facebook