Measuring and evaluation of coaching
In the context of development relationships, there are three perspectives or levels at which it is helpful to establish the habit of measurement.
In the context of development relationships, there are three perspectives or levels at which it is helpful to establish the habit of measurement.
In all the major models of human maturity, two qualities recur constantly: wisdom and connectedness. Wisdom, as exemplified by the original mentor, Athene, relates to the process of reflection upon and learning from experience. The scope of wisdom is therefore associated with and to some extent limited by the range of experiences, to which a person is exposed, either directly or vicariously, intendedly or unintendedly.
Since I first got ensnared by the world of coaching and mentoring, part of my learning has been to focus less on what is assumed and taken for granted and more on the question “What do we have evidence for and how valid is that evidence?”
Systemic Talent Management views talent management, performance management and succession planning as complex, adaptive systems -- unlike traditional HR approaches, which broadly treat these activities as if they were simple, linear systems.
Just as happened with coaching individuals, as team coaching becomes more mainstream, the assumption emerges that it is some kind of cure-all for team problems. Of course it’s not, but team coaches increasingly bring to supervision issues relating to how they manage client team and sponsor expectations about what can and can’t be delivered.
One of the exercises I frequently conduct with audiences is to ask them to define what they mean by success. It’s something few have thought about. Almost invariably, the responses fall into two categories: