People who resist a change can themselves become invaluable resources in promoting and planning for the change. Many resistors, for example, point to past history when declaring that a planned change will never be successful: “We tried that ten years ago, and it didn’t work.” Rather than arguing with or ignoring this person, one asks him to help plan for the new change initiative so that some of the mistakes that occurred ten years ago can be avoided. The skeptic can also be made the historian of the new project or can assist in the design of its evaluation. Alternatively, those who are usually the innovators and proponents of new ideas—men and women like Ralph—can be placed in the role of program auditor or member of a panel that reviews new program proposals. This helps to shake up old roles and provides everyone with new perspectives on one another and the organization.
Coaches can help their clients reframe sources of resistance as assets in yet another way. Typically, policies and procedures are set up to thwart new enterprises. Yet these same policies and procedures that often make it difficult to start something new also make it difficult for anyone to stop the new venture once it is started. A large organization is often the perfect place to try a new idea. After all, it takes one to two months to find out that something new is being tried. It then takes another month or two to gain the attention of those in the bureaucracy who have the authority to do anything about this new venture—and another two to three months to work through the channels to block it. By this time, the new venture may have proven its worth and can make it on its own. As the popular adage from the 1960s goes: “It is easier to beg for forgiveness [after an action step has been taken] than to ask for permission [before the action step is taken].” This motto might be hung on the wall of any setting where a Contextual Interlude is being established.
Reframing: Potent and Problematic
These various reframing tools are not without their own problems and certainly should be used by coaches and their clients with discretion and ethical awareness. Interludes are not always successful and should be carefully constructed by the coach and client (macro-coaching). The reframing micro-coaching tactics significantly expand the repertoire of a coach and make significant change possible in difficult and resistant circumstances. The very forces that bind people and organizations to one way of doing things can be used as levers for change. With such powerful tools, we must be certain that these individuals and organizations actually desire the proposed change and trust the intentions and competencies of those aiding in the reframing process. Any Coaching Interlude must be mutually desired and designed by the coach and client.
One coaching client will find a solution-oriented reframing to be most helpful, while another may find it more beneficial to focus on the framing of a current or desired state. These are macro-coaching matters. In working with Susan, for instance, Alicia may think that the most important role she can play is to be reflective with Susan about her relationship with Ralph. Susan might decide that they should focus on Ralph’s problem. They might both decide instead (with Ralph’s concurrence) that Alicia should coach both Susan and Ralph—focusing on the relationship between them rather than on either Susan’s perceptions of Ralph’s problem or the solutions Susan will initiate to solve Ralph’s problem.
In many cases, reframing is most beneficial when directed toward a client’s blind spot. This is the spot where this client is absolutely certain there is no room for change in perspective. The purpose of this approach to coaching is not to show anyone “the right way” in which to relate to one another, solve problems, or make decisions. It is rather to establish an Interlude that provides both challenge and support. It is a Coaching Interlude that enables a client to reflect on her own thought processes, identify her own distinctive strengths and competencies, and take actions that are appropriate to her own value system and aspirations.
Download Article
