The pros and cons of the GROW coaching model
It is not certain who originally developed the GROW model, but some believe it was developed by Graham Alexander, but popularized by Sir John Whitmore.
For those new to coaching, the GROW model provides a very useful framework. By helping the learner really identify what they want from the conversation, it helps prevent it from turning into pointless chat. If the goal is “SMARTend”, you have a specific, measurable, attainable, relevant goal with a time limit so that both coachee and coachee know exactly what direction the session needs to go.
This framework is also useful in a group coaching or even business meeting context, where the coach or facilitator can initially establish a common overall goal and for the session, then work on “where are you now?”, options for the way forward, and concrete action .
But is this model always appropriate, especially when working one-on-one, helping your coachee make significant and sustainable change? While it is of course good to have a sense of what the coachee wants from the conversation, a good coach will often uncover other issues during the coaching session, and sticking firmly to the original goal can prevent the real issues that need to surface from surfacing. are resolved.
Although the GROW model is meant to be flexible, I have seen coaches focus more on their ability to follow the model than simply listening and following the client. The Coactive Coaching approach (see the book Coactive Coaching by Laura Whitworth, Karen Kimsey-House, Henry Kimsey-House, Philip Sandall) is very different and talks about “dancing in the moment” with the client, listening carefully and using your intuition to just be with the client, to follow their energy and go where they want in the conversation.
The last stage of GROW is Way Forward, in other words, it is the stage where the customer identifies the action to be taken. Although coaching is about guiding the client forward, not every session can lead to specific actions that need to be taken. If we as coaches are so enthusiastic about finding the action and focusing on the ‘doing’, we can overlook the importance of simply raising the client’s awareness of who they are, what they notice, what they feel, in other words ‘the being’.
I know of coaches who are so enthusiastic about getting their client to act that they fail to allow them to fully explore what is important to them and what their core issues are, resulting in actions that their clients are not really committed to and rarely lead to significant change. If the client spends enough time on ‘being’ rather than ‘doing’, then the action will automatically drop out of the conversation and be led by the client. And the way forward may simply be a commitment to step back and think further about some of the issues raised.
The advantage of the GROW coaching model in that it is a structure that guides the coach is also its disadvantage… while the coach uses structure to guide the conversation and sustain it, it will not allow the client to direct the conversation.
So if you are a coach, ask yourself how do you use the GROW model? Does it guide you or limit you? Do you spend more time thinking about where you are in the model or are you 100% focused on listening and following your customer? And who initiates the action… You or the customer?
#pros #cons #GROW #coaching #model