Humanistic Existential
During sessions and in my daily living, I have learnt that the pure forcefulness of my argument would not penetrate deep enough to effect any change. “Only when one feels an insight in ones’ bones does one own it. Only then, can one act on it and change”. Through creation of my model, I have learnt how to be in the world, how to trust and respect that others can find their own path with limited input from me. This approach gets one to examine their life and work predicament at the deepest possible level and allow them to find their roots in their inner world, their picture of life, of the world, of themselves and of the values and ideals they want to live by. I stand well back once this process of transformation gathers strength and become a witness rather than an author to the discoveries that my client makes.
Existential model is dynamic with a focus on concerns that are rooted in the individual’s existence. The four ultimate existential concerns which constitute the corpus of existential model, are death, freedom, isolation, and meaninglessness. These have an enormous relevance in the process and play an extraordinarily important role at every level of individual psychic organization. One benefits from the powerful transformational potency of work with images, feelings and values during sessions. These three ways of working are direct and powerful ways to connecting.
When clients come for their sessions they already know that they are going to be facing up to a deeper reality beyond the surface problems they are facing, I therefore do not hold back and wait for my clients to delve into the depth of their emotional world, but I elicit or illustrate the client’s assumptions about the things that appear to matter so much in their way of life. Using the four worlds model, the I can systematically work with values at various levels of existence touching on the different areas of a person’s life world which are intertwined and interrelated. Bearing in mind the complexities of life can stop us from getting lost in just one problem or one layer. Image work can also bear a great deal of fruit when there is trust and a sense of non-judgement in the coaching relationship. I ensure that I do not impose my assumptions on the cryptic work of imagery by asking open questions in an even-handed manner, allowing the client to remain firmly in charge of the elaborations.
GENDER SENSITIVE APPROACH
Gender roles are consensual beliefs that ‘describe qualities or behavioural tendencies believed to be desirable for each sex’; Leadership on the other hand is a role available to men and women however according to some researchers, it is a role defined in agentic male terms of assertiveness, competition and self-promotion. Research shows the variety of ways women leaders can be penalised for contradicting these gendered leader expectations. Despite these dynamics, a gender-neutral approach to coaching women leaders is an accepted practice within leadership development programmes.
After reflection, I came to realization that gender mainstreaming even though not as widely implemented in executive coaching, would be a useful area to explore in my work with women. Gender mainstreaming in part emerged from a discontent with feminist strategies that aimed for women’s equality with men while holding in place existing gendered structures and in part from a realization that many aspects of the patriarchal state remained immune to feminist critique. Its purpose is to transform structures by integrating considerations of gender into all government projects, programs and policies. In this way, gender mainstreaming is seen to go beyond the ‘tinkering’ of the equal treatment approach and the ‘tailoring’ of positive actions, its purpose is transformation.
Instead of finding a women specific coaching model, how does mainstreaming fit into coaching practice and how can gender sensitive approach fit into the existing theories? Women coaching, in my view, need to remain part of the mainstream and should not be treated as a stand-alone model, it should be incorporated into the practice of all coaching models. Gender mainstreaming in coaching is about writing gender into one’s way of working where previously they have been absent or assumed. It is a sign that the acceptance of gender neutrality in framing how one works no longer holds firm. Mainstreaming challenges the very idea of gender neutrality in practice. Most organizations that have adopted gender mainstreaming typically have formulated policies, trained personnel, created guidelines to follow in the policy and programming process, integrated considerations of gender into evaluation exercises and sometimes changed their personnel practices.
According to Simone de Beauvoir 1947, all change is rooted in freedom, which is not an object or a possession and definitely not a commodity to be bought, sold, given or taken away. She says ‘To will oneself free is also to will others free’. It is human freedom that makes all creativity possible, whether in a formal art sense or an informal living sense. It is freedom that allows new things to arise out of old and for problems to be solved dialectically. Freedom is both existential and situational. Existential because it is a fundamentally human quality, and situational because there can be no equality between individuals if there is inequality in society. This is the meaning of the statement ‘the personal is political’.
My approach is gender sensitive, eclectic approach to coaching Women in senior leadership who themselves are varied and diverse in their way of thinking. Some women leaders appreciate their uniqueness and are comfortable being defined by their gender where as some would rather they were part of the mainstream and were treated as such. So my model aims to work with diversity and complexity of gender. In the wider women’s movement there are men too who are gender sensitised. My core underpinning theoretical framework is Humanistic – Existential, informed by feminist pedagogy. I use Kolb’s Experiential Learning model as the paradigm.
Eclectic approach to coaching is thoughtful, integrated and systemic in nature. Studies show that the major indicator of therapeutic effectiveness is not how smart the coach is or their fancy set of tools and techniques. The relationship of mutual respect, unconditional regard and commitment to bringing out the best in the other is what makes the biggest difference. The Coaches knowledge of theory and techniques are relegated to a secondary position in the Rogerian approach, behind non-judgmental acceptance of the client. Rogers maintained there are three characteristics for a growth-promoting climate in which people can realize their inherent potential: Congruence or genuineness, Unconditional positive regard and Accurate Empathic Understanding.
Browns theory of feminist therapy have roots in Rogers’ core conditions. Her primary consideration is to create an egalitarian relationship as the foundation for coaching. Such a relationship requires genuineness on the part of the coach, as well as a deep respect for and valuing of the personhood of those individuals who seek coaching. Feminist theories also point to the importance of being a focused and emotionally present witness to the pain and experiences of disempowerment undergone by the people we work with. These constructs of witness and empowerment owe a great deal to Rogers’ concepts of empathy and congruence; Brown see them as variations on the themes set by Rogers half a century ago.
MY LEADERSHIP MODEL
Mainstreaming challenges the idea of gender neutrality in Leadership programmes. It is about writing gender into one’s way of working where previously they have been assumed or absent. According to Gillian’s theory, when one is at the highest stage of moral development, two voices in each person become integrated so that there is a paradoxical union of masculine and feminine. Therefore, both boys and girls develop through the same stages of moral development but with a different voice, using different logic.
The four stages of moral development are; Preconventional or egocentric; Conventional or ethnocentric; Post conventional or world-centric and Stage 4 integrated. Masculine and feminine voices in each of us become integrated at this highest stage. The individual might act predominantly from one or the other but will be able to befriend both the masculine and feminine modes in themselves. They become two equivalent types at integrated level.
In leadership development, it is important that whenever one uses Integral Operating System (IOS) they are automatically checking any situation in themselves, in others, in an organisation, in a culture and making sure that they include both masculine and feminine types so as to be as comprehensive and inclusive as possible.
I am pragmatic in my way of being which informs my approach. To achieve authenticity, we explore human issues such as ambiguity, uncertainty, finitude, responsibility, freedom, values and beliefs. Such matters of profound personal significant would enable development of authentic leadership that fully understands themselves and have arrived at a personal philosophy for their life and their leadership.
Due to life complexities, problems tend to be multi-layered. The existential four worlds model shows the different areas of a person’s life are interrelate and intertwine. In both the Four quadrants and the Four world models, the coach can use a diagram or map to enable clarity, seeing their AQAL constellation gives the client the efficacy of moving forward and also enables long term sustainability of the gains made in coaching. The four worlds advocate the importance of making a distinction between the map and the real world focusing on the paradox and tensions at each level of existence.
Both models can either be used to educated the leader directly or in none explicit manner, were the coach keeps a mental note of where the client orients from peoples who are focused in the physical (Behavioural) world tend to have a practical way of looking at life. In the social (cultural) realm these people tend to be people orientated. Self (intentional), tend to be concern with their own thoughts, memories and identity, more inwardly turned and reflective. Spiritual(systems/strategic) encompasses, ideological and philosophical issues. When a leader changes from which dimension they tackle a problem, how they approach the same situation shifts.
Whether a leader is able to create a wisdom culture in an organisation is dependent on their leadership development, emergence of their new way of being, transcending and including, a more systemic way of doing and seeing things though existential view advocates for self-determination, in reality within community and organisations some recoil from responsibility and identity more with communal sense of being. Subject of purpose and meaning are of great significant in existential authentic leadership coaching.
By operationalising one’s philosophies, values, principles and ideals, one can achieve a strategic sense of authenticity, meaning and purpose. When one understands and reconcile this domain they build on the two previous domains, self and social dimensions which leaders to pondering ultimate higher purpose.