• Invitation to the Teleforum

• Invitation to the IDM SUMMER INTENSIVES, August 05

• Two New Hands-On Courses in the IDM Fall Calendar

• IDM Fall Schedule

• What's New at IDM!

• Featured Article :: If Coaching is about Helping People to Get From A to B, How do We Get Them from Stage to Stage?  by Dr. Otto Laske

• Contributions by IDM Ambassadors ::  Developmental Coaching In Action Series

  • Mutual Growth through Developmental Coaching by Jon Ebersole

  • Why Use Scientifically Validated Assessments in Coaching  by Nancy Moynihan

Every Monday, 12 noon to 1PM ET

REGISTER HERE to secure your spot for this upcoming Monday!

Special Invitation to IDM Summer Intensives, August 2005

If you want to become immersed in developmental thinking, our Summer Intensives are for you! In the first half of August, IDM offers two Intensives for the purpose of small-group work and total immersion in coaching from a developmental perspective. Visit the the Interdevelopmental Institute on-line for registration and tuition.

For those who are not sure they seek certification, we offer:

Workshop Intensive, 4 2-hr teleclasses, August 1 to 4, 2005, 8 to 10 AM ET

An introduction to developmental thinking in life and business coaching. Transitioning to the Certificate Track is possible by consulting with the Director of Education.

For those who intend to continue with Program One in the Fall, we offer:

Gateway Intensive, 8 2-hr teleclasses, August 8 to 13,15-16, 2005, 11am to 1pm ET

A prerequisite course for entering IDM Program One, the program that leads to certification as a developmental coach.  

If you have questions about these courses, join the Monday Teleforum at 12 n ET, where you can get your questions answered by Dr. Laske.  Failing that, you can also email Dr. Laske.

Whether or not you choose the Certificate Track, having an assessment made of your developmental resources and behavioral profile will SPEED UP YOUR LEARNING! Undergoing such an assessment is itself a developmental experience.

Two New Hands-On Courses :: Begins September 15, 2005

To further the goal of professional coaches, to learn how to use validated empirical assessment tools, we are introducing two new 16 hr long teleclasses this Fall. See the accompanying pdf describing the courses in detail, and the Fall Schedule below for times and tuition.

The first course, entitled COACHING TO UNLEASH YOUR BUSINESS CLIENTS’ CAPABILITY, focuses on understanding the strengths and challenges of clients working in organizations. The course introduces participants to the Need/Press Analysis by Henry Murray and Morris Aderman, a validated assessment of workers in organizational environments. Through this assessment, coaches can give deep feedback to clients on their unconsciously held needs and pressures felt. Coaches can also craft coaching plans based on data, and determine coaching outcome with precision.

The second course, entitled UNDERSTANDING YOUR OWN COACHING BOTTLENECKS, focuses on the obstacles that may stand in the coach’s way to being optimally successful with clients. As all human beings, coaches have ingrained dispositions and inclinations that tend to get in the way of assisting others in achieving their best. It is these issues that the Need/Press Analysis brings to light, for the benefit of coaches. This course is the first one in which undergoing an assessment is mandatory for participants. In return, course participants receive individual feedback and mentoring in a personal session after the course proper.

Course Details (download)

Newly Released ** IDM Fall Schedule **

Click to download New IDM Fall Schedule

Class Registration and Tuition

IDM’s proposal called “There is more to what your client tells you than you think: How deeper answer to client questions surface” has been accepted for presentation at the ICF conference in San Jose. During 2 hours, O. Laske together with Antoinette Dawson, Director of the Ambassador Group, will demonstrate how to listen to clients from a developmental perspective, using audience participation. Also, in the August – November time span, we will present several Preview Sessions around the topic of “Do you hear what your clients are saying?” to prepare coaches interested in attending the San Jose demonstration.

Feature Article :: If Coaching is about Helping People to Get From A to B, How do We Get from Stage to Stage? 

by Dr. Otto Laske

Copyright © Interdevelopmental Institute 2005

The reader may remember that in the June 05 Newsletter, life and executive coach Lowellann Fuglsang designed a Table to distinguish the coaching supports and tools that might be required for clients at different developmental stages. Here I take up this idea, speaking more directly to the differences between people at different developmental stages. 

As before, we need to keep in mind that stages are not buckets into which people “fall,” but rather momentary ways of balancing or equilibrating contradictory tendencies in people’s striving to be independent, on one hand, and be included in a community, on the other. With Kegan, we can therefore call stages “temporary truces.” Nevertheless, for the sake of learning the differences in world view and ethical viewpoint, it is helpful to get down some basic distinctions first. Whether these distinctions can then be correlated with specific coaching supports and tools, as Lowellann suggested, is a matter of empirical research (rather than stipulation).

Here is my Table:  

 Table 1. Changing orientations across adult stages

Table 1 presents a brief summary of salient differences between successive stages. As you can see, views of others, level of self insight, values, needs, need to control, and communication all change, as does the way people live and work in organizations. Admittedly, the verbal distinctions made in the table are somewhat cryptic. They are meant only to facilitate to begin getting an inkling of the patterns of adult development. 

You will rightfully ask what is the process that holds all of these different orientations together? This is a very good question. The answer is: the process underlying the change of orientations is one of MEANING MAKING, -- the way people make meaning of their life and work at different points of their adult journey. As R. Kegan says, being a person and being a meaning maker is really the same thing. Whether you know it or not, whatever you do is based on an underlying process of meaning making. It is virtually impossible to stop making meaning of yourself, others, and situations that you move through, except by falling dead. In short, meaning making is the life blood of human development.

To begin reading the table, let’s look at the first two entries: views of others and self insight. They are salient indicators of social-emotional maturity.  

As you see, the way people view and use each other largely depends on their level of self insight. So does the ethics of relating to others. Level of self insight is not simply low or very high. It also has physiological limits depending on the development of the brain. Before age 25, the human brain is not in full possession of formal logical thinking, nor has it “learned” (mostly the hard way) that if you use others as instruments for fulfilling your desires you’ll be punished for it, possibly publicly, or even ostracized. However, acting from S-2 is not just a physiological but also an “epistemological” matter, where “epistemology” translates into ways of knowing. People at S-2 can only hold a single perspective – their own – and this cognitive limitation necessarily leads them to act as they do. Consult your resident teenager.

As seen, in late adolescence, people start with a low level of self insight, and therefore tend to use others as instruments of their own need fulfillment. (Some people, and corporations guided by them, never get beyond this mental stage, see Enron). The only way to get out of this frame of mind is to become able – both in terms of consciousness and behavior -- to hold other people’s perspective, This motion simultaneously raises one’s level of self insight and changes one’s view of others. Others are now seen as having their own mind and feelings, and as requiring the respect of people living their own lives in their own way. Others also become “hand holders,” models, examples. They are now needed to facilitate one’s own decision making and life style since they define conventions one feels it is important to follow. (Ask you resident community buff or advertiser.) In this sense, people at S-3 are internally dependent on others, or “other-dependent.” However, as the remaining orientations under Stage 3 in Table 1 show, other-dependent people are the core of community. They are able to function as a member of a team, with only moderate needs to be in control. They are typically fair and “good citizens.”

You will realize at this point that I am drawing up some caricatures here. They are not meant to be funny as much as giving you a first, raw impression of the differences between stages. So, keep in mind that I am dealing with a typology here, nothing more. People “are” not their stages, they just live there without knowing it. There are millions of people living at the same stage, all of them very different in behavior and culture. Still, knowing their stage tells a lot about what they strive for and what they need.

What kind of a person lives at Stage 4? What is needed to go beyond defining yourself according to others’ expectations? You guessed it: develop your own, very unique way of seeing and doing things, and being prepared to defend it if need be, marching to your own drummer. You might say: isn’t that Stage 2? No. Because while at S-2 it is your needs and desires that are in focus, at S-4 it is your integrity and values that are. Although they are intimately linked to your needs and desires, you are holding yourself to a higher standard. Not only do you respect others who are different, you also acknowledging them as peers, colleagues. You are open to dialogue with them and, given that you can manage yourself reasonably well, you can also manage others, at least at work. You are also aware of your own uniqueness in relation to others (perhaps a little much so), and you are willing to pay the price of going it alone. In this sense, your self insight is “high.”

So what’s missing in you to act in a thoroughly self-aware way (Stage 5)? As I said before, people are subject to their present stage, and being at S-4 is no different. You literally don’t see your cage of high integrity you are in from the outside. You are over-defined by yourself, your accomplishments, successes, merits, and what not. Thus, you come to grief, either in life or at work, and have to learn the hard way that you have extensive limitations, often pointed out by others, and that you actually need others to safeguard your own integrity and balance.

As a self-authorer, you are just not humble enough and you often don’t see the bigger picture (although this depends also on your cognitive resources). You are also not supportive enough of others, especially those who don’t see things your way. You can manage them, but cannot lead them, motivate them, foster their own development (generativity), especially if that should be against your own best interest.

As you see from this narration, life isn’t getting any easier or “better” as you rise through the stages. It’s just that your joys and sorrows are different, and you have an increasingly clear perception of being just a speck in the universe which will outlast you. The world is becoming an ever larger object for you, with you just hanging on as a worthy individual among others. So, if you are lucky you are going to die knowing all this: the tragedy, comedy, struggles of life, and their great beauty, including your own.

Contributions by IDM Ambassadors

For this Newsletter, we have invited two Ambassadors, one who went through Gateway, and one who went through Program One, Modules A and B, to share with us their perception of the impact of thinking developmentally in coaching. The two coaches are: Jon Ebersole and Nancy Moynihan, introduced below.

1.      Jon Ebersole started IDM education with Gateway and continued to Program One Part C. He is a coach and mediator working in Switzerland, mainly with international organizations. Together with four other coaches, he will embark on a client case study this September, to obtain one of the first IDM Certificates in Developmental Coaching. See his website  www.dialogueservices.com

2.      Nancy Moynihan started IDM education in 2003, with the equivalent of Gateway. She returned to IDM in 2005, and has just completed module B of Program One. She is both a business and a life coach. See her website www.builtsmart.net.

I AM SURE THESE CONTRIBUTORS WILL BE HAPPY TO SPEAK WITH READERS OF THE NEWSLETTER ABOUT IDM EDUCATION AND MENTORING!

Mutual Growth through Developmental Coaching, by Jon Ebersole, IDM Ambassador

I have worked in international organizations for a long time, in training, operational and policy roles. I have found that what is missing in their HR departments is the use of stringent, especially developmental, assessments for learning about the resources in people that could be further developed, and then following through with cultivating their human resources. I have been very lucky to chance upon IDM, and have taken Program One to the point where I can now write a case study of an individual client of my choice, to get certified as a developmental coach. IDM education in developmental coaching has given me new tools to uncover and nurture talent and potential capacity to cultivate organizational futures. An example of my work with Pat will best illustrate what I mean.

Pat is a senior professional at a large international organization stationed in Switzerland, responsible for managing a large international policymaking committee. He called me as a newcomer to a major UN agency after learning by chance that a senior donor government official doubted his competence.  Pat also had to cope with Betty, a highly arrogant professional from a different department who tried to dictate his moves. In addition, Pat’s boss who seemed very detached and several others holding positions of influence were causing Pat concern.  The perceived judgments of others seemed to pull Pat apart, dissipating his energies. 

While Pat had all the technical knowledge he needed to perform the job for which he was hired, his social-emotional level – the way he framed experiences in his social environment -- left him feeling conflicted in many situations.  Further, the way he thought about and understood his professional environment lacked a systemic view of the organization as a whole.  His cognitive profile, or habitual patterns of perception and thinking, limited the degree to which he understood his specific role in a wider systems context.  In short, his internal frame of reference was not sufficiently developed to enable astute and mature responses to the demands of a highly complex and politically charged organization. 

In weekly phone calls, Pat and I worked through his professional relationships one by one, maintaining focus on his role and key functions in the organization.  He began working smarter and in better coordination with his team, discussing ambiguous issues more consistently with others to gain clarity.  Given his newness to the organizational context, I placed priority on helping Pat to learn the ropes of a position similar to several I had held myself in inter-governmental organizations.  

After several weeks of coaching that consolidated his understanding of his particular role in the organization, Pat expressed surprise at how helpful his boss had become.  “Remember when I suggested you ask your boss for assistance regarding division of labor with Betty” I asked.  “Yes, he was very helpful on that”.  “Had you ever entrusted him with one of these concerns before?”  With my prompting, Pat began to imagine the perspectives of his colleagues one by one to build multiple perspectives on the organization’s tasks and relations among roles and responsibilities.  His anxieties slowly gave way to self-confidence and trust building as he took measured risks in substantive interactions with his colleagues.  Pat’s morale, productivity and team relations improved as he increased his understanding of others’ perspectives. 

Coaching helped Pat to solidify his role in the organization, and helped me to relive some successes and failures in my own career.  From my own experience, I know that if Pat is to develop his effectiveness further, this stage of realistically balancing his work within the context of other’s expectations must be superseded by a self-authored stage where he engages his tasks and working relationships out of his own internal point of reference. Only in this way could he consistently meet others in a more creative middle ground.  Growing into a true capacity for leadership would require further steps beyond these and good coaching could increase his momentum along this path. 

Most organizations use a human capital assessment model as part of their hiring process.  Previous levels of responsibility, complexity and length of projects, level of budgetary discretion and other measures inform the selection.  Still, perfect matches are rare.  Enter performance management – “is this person productive in this position?”  Answers are usually sought by comparing job description with execution through an excruciating internal evaluation process.  Occasionally, coaching will be used to patch over a rough spot.  More often rèal politique takes over and decisions are taken to simply fire, transfer or restructure roles and responsibilities. 

IDM methodologies can do more.  IDM is pioneering the use of developmental psychology data in corporate contexts to uncover the underlying capabilities in individuals and teams.  IDM coach education equips HR professionals and independent coaches to assess social-emotional and cognitive development levels, and to identify behavioral patterns that match or deviate from the normative scores of successful managers.  Comparing these scores with the complexity and responsibility levels of a given job description provides a reliable predictive measure of job performance. It also provides empirical data from which a well-grounded and detailed coaching agenda can be generated. 

In Pat’s case, it is possible that a more mature candidate could have been identified through use of IDM assessment techniques during the hiring process.  If, due to his specific qualifications and lack of a better candidate, Pat was hired, coaching could have been initiated earlier with a strategy targeted plan to address identified shortcomings. 

By supporting holistic social/emotional and cognitive personal growth, coaches educated at IDM are able to help their clients achieve sustained growth and success in their professional and leadership roles.  The opportunity to see and measure crucial social-emotional and cognitive factors has implications for leadership development, motivation, productivity and competitiveness.  IDM coach education is the cutting edge of the coaching profession.  I can say from own experience that it is an investment that pays solid personal and professional dividends, -- an opportunity you should not miss.

Jon Ebersole, JME@dialogueservices.com

Why Use Scientifically Validated Assessments in Coaching? by Nancy Moynihan, IDM Ambassador

Much is usually made of the difference between “therapy” and “coaching.” The difference holds. While therapy is about mental health, coaching is about mental growth. These are different, though related aspects of life. However, this difference does not make it legitimate to use assessments in coaching that are dubious at best and harmful at worst.

My ongoing discussion of the benefits of pursuing a course of study in evidence based developmental coaching continues this month with a consideration of assessment methodology, specifically the methods employed by coaches in deciding what is most relevant when beginning work with a new client.

In my previous article I stated that as a result of my IDM education, I had begun to examine my own flawed approach to learning about my clients. I used the terms flawed and hit or miss to describe what seemed to me to be a drastic decline in my use of assessments. I realized that I had moved from clinical practice utilizing a rigorous and thorough diagnostic interview (often lasting several sessions), to coaching practice utilizing a “welcome pak” of forms, questionnaires and inventories which I had been exposed to in my initial coach training program. The curious thing about this is that I did so without question. I simply took it as standard practice generally employed by most coaches and assumed it was sufficient. IDM education has helped me to see beyond my early acceptance, and to question the effectiveness of many of the assessment methods currently in use.

In order to clearly illustrate the benefits of the developmental assessment methodology taught by IDM perhaps it would be useful to engage in a brief comparison, starting with the coaching environment. Even a cursory review of coaching textbooks, training programs and active, successful coaches reveals an amazing array of methods. These include but are not limited to: the ubiquitous free consultation (where the coach tries to both sell the coaching as well as successfully step into the client’s current reality); an amazing and seemingly endless array of forms, questionnaires, inventories and wheels (lots of wheels) made up or modified by each coach; a variety of “canned” assessments some standardized some not, such as the DISC; 360 feedback (with potential for hair raising results if not done with a high degree of skill and sensitivity), and literally hundreds of career assessments. Taken together the results of these methods fall into three categories, including client report (which may or may not be accurate), behavioral information and competency information. What seems to be missing is the client. Specifically the details of clients’ internal evolutionary process and progress, the meaning the client makes of incoming information and experience, and perhaps most important of all, the clients’ cognitive capacity.

In clinical practice there are also many instruments available to assist the clinician in learning about the client, none of which stand alone without a rigorous, thorough diagnostic interview which elicits enough detail to make a diagnosis possible. This is matched with the specific diagnostic parameters clearly enunciated in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual, the universal accountability standard by which all mental health issues are diagnosed. Using the DSM effectively requires a high degree of skill, both in interviewing as well as in categorizing the information obtained in the interview. The uppermost criterion of professionalism is TO DO NO HARM, which is also an ethical issue.

Essentially, then, using assessments is the mark of a helping professional. It is also a matter of professional ethics. Not to understand assessments, or to misrepresent their findings, can do harm. Such harm is mostly done unwittingly, which does not excuse the helper.

At the present time, coaching services are very lax in regard to assessments, if such are used at all. I have therefore found that learning developmental assessments is a needed step for me as a coaching professional who cares to re-align her coaching work with her background in clinical analysis. It is highly important to me to be of help on other grounds than “personality” or “the right chemistry,” or even “organizational knowledge,” and that is exactly what IDM courses provide. I also feel myself to be on firmer ethical ground when I can use actual data from validated assessments to negotiate coaching plans. What is more, IDM assessments provide me with a conceptual framework within which I can develop customized strategies for helping clients succeed in life and work. It takes some effort to learn that framework, but, believe me, it makes you a true professional to do so!