In a few days, the Spanish Coaching Federation AECOP-EMCC holds its first International Congress in Madrid. The organization has asked me to moderate the table “What is coaching” ?, and although the moderator should not be the protagonist and, if possible, not express his own opinions, I take advantage of this Tribune to present my latest research and reflections.
Among many others possible, I take the definition of Palmer and Grant: "Coaching aims to improve well-being and performance both in personal life and at work, based on models based on adult learning and psychological approaches." In the case of executive coaching we can dispense with personal well-being and performance as the main focus of our work, although in no way act as if that personal part did not exist or was irrelevant.
Therefore, from that definition, and many others very similar, the executive professional coach, from my point of view, has to work from the clients' psychological, behavioral, attitudes, beliefs, personality, mental models, etc. approaches; and also with extensive knowledge of organizations, their operation and, from my approach, their strategies, since we work with managers and one of their most important tasks, if not the most, is to develop and deepen strategic thinking.
Neuroscience has very relevant contributions both to understand human behavior and to develop innovative forms of strategic thinking.
There are many coaching trends that, with respect to the psychological foundation, maintain that only the future matters; that reviewing the past is irrelevant; that it is only about changing behaviors and that this is achieved with different stimuli (Pavlov's dog) or by changing habits; that there is no unconscious life, an outdated invention of certain psychologists of the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. That, as myself, professional coaches who thought that the past, history, early experiences, either did not exist or were not useful for the purpose of coaching, we were "psychologizing" the profession.
Neuroscience is discovering that we do have an unconscious life, which decisively influences the conscious and, therefore, our attitudes, behaviors and reactions. With the limitations imposed by the length of an article, I will only refer to the four basic instincts that are always present in our lives and that have their origin in the night of the times: that is, in our evolution.
The instinct to acquire (i A) that leads us to look for food, room, sex; and, at the present time, in addition, to desire the prestige, the recognition, material or intellectual goods that distinguish us from others. And being universal, the i A is held by managers and all subordinates, employees of any organization; Many of the misunderstandings, relationship difficulties and even conflicts in companies have their deep cause in that those who manage them may have highly developed their (i A) but do not take into account that of others.
The instinct to defend (i D). Once we have acquired it, we have the need to defend it because it will facilitate our survival and reproduction, therefore the perpetuation of our genes; in modern life it is also about defending the acquisitions that give us prestige, power, recognition, resources, etc.
The bonding instinct (i V). Humans are social animals and we do not understand our life if it is not in relation to that of others. Hence, when in companies and all kinds of organizations, actions aimed at not uniting, linking, separating ourselves from the rest are lived with suffering. And when the company encourages this bonding instinct, the results are spectacular and the performances extraordinary.
The instinct to learn (i A). We have the need to seek meaning, to understand, to know more. "This is done because I say so," the phrase of some responsible to their subordinates, triggers in our brain the same or similar reactions as situations of risk or danger. A part of our brain, the amygdala, is activated and paralyzes the rest of the brain activities until the perception of danger disappears. Imagine the reader the loss of productivity-not to mention motivation-that implies not attending to this (i A).
I could go much further on the relationship between brain and behavior but I want to dedicate the rest of this article to briefly comment on the influence of the brain on strategic thinking.
It is not necessary to gloss the need of every organization to have its strategic plans, to review them continuously to also continuously adapt to changes in the environment. The strategic intention needs to think about the new, about nothing or little known; therefore, the strategist, among other attributes, is characterized by his resistance (we could use the term resilience), not being afraid of failure, training to work with states of fluidity (Cziskentmihalyi), seeking variety in opinions, knows how to work with diverse equipment; All this requires knowing how to properly combine your four instincts.
A very common phenomenon is what is called “groupthink” in English, which is that the members of a group sometimes give up showing their different points of view for fear of losing their connection (i A). From Neuroscience it is known how to act.
Finally, let's say that Management is not something natural like trees or rocks; It is a technology that has given us excellent results but, at present, surely needs important changes. Neuroscience gives us absolutely scientific and proven guidelines for creating organizations that are more effective and more consistent with our human needs.
