Natalie: Sounds like a good idea. I look forward to hearing about how your meeting with Kurt goes.
John and Natalie are obviously addressing one of the key organizational challenges facing John at the present time. While these organizational issues impact on john’s personal life, they must be addressed at an organizational rather than personal level
NEUTRAL VS. NORMATIVE
There is a second dilemma faced by contemporary coaches. It is one that John and Natalie now face. We can witness this dilemma by picking up a piece of Natalie’s and John’s coaching conversation. This interaction occurred at the start of their third session (on Friday morning):
Natalie: So, catch me up on what you have done since the last time we met. You were going to talk with Kurt.
John: I did talk with Kurt about my workload last week. He said he would get back to me.
Natalie: And did he?
John: I prepared a new job description that outlines all of the projects I have been assigned. I sent it to Kurt on Monday. His only response by email was . . . it is really frustrating … his only response was: “we need to get you more training in project management.” And “maybe your coach can help you with this.” … Then he finished the email by writing ”. And remember you are not alone. We all have to do some work at home.” . . . That was it. No understanding of what I am going through. I was about to go into his office and throw a copy of my new job description and my letter of resignation at his big, grinning face!
What does Natalie do at this point? Where does the problem reside? Is she being at all helpful to John or is she nothing more than providing an excuse for Kurt to dismiss John’s legitimate complaints? Furthermore, John was going to address the issue of being in the “can’t do” role, yet he apparently shifted the focus of his interaction with Kurt. He decided to talk about workload – which might be less personally loaded for him than a conversation about Kurt’s visionary orientation – and the impact of this orientation on John’s more grounded (“can’t do”) role in the organization.
There is a tension between pain-reduction and problem-solving in the contemporary field of professional coaching. This tension plays out through something called “cooling-the-mark” in the professional of coaching (and in many other human service fields as well). Goffman (1952) introduced this concept in describing the manipulative ways in which legitimate grievances are often stifled and painful conflict is avoided. At a carnival, the customer (called the “mark”) is encouraged to play rigged arcade games (such as knocking over the milk bottles). If a “mark” becomes upset because the milk bottles he is hitting with the baseballs don’t tip over, then a second customer will come up to the booth, also attempting to hit and tip over the bottles. After appearing to be equally as “frustrated” with the failure to tip the bottles (and win the prize) the second customer invites the first (the “mark”) to go off and join him for a beer or cup of coffee. This second customer is actually hired by the carnival to “cool oft” the mark, thereby helping the carnival owners avoid any confrontation with the local police.
Download Article 1K Club
