Dominant discourses of coaching: which one have you been recruited into?

Simon Western (2012) identified four dominant discourses of coaching in his book “Coaching and Mentoring: A Critical Text”: The soul guide discourse (p. 131-156), the Psy Expert discourse (p. 157-176), the managerial discourse (p. 177-192) and the Network Coach discourse (p. 192).

The soul guide discourse is centred on deep, personal transformation. It views coaching as a spiritual or existential journey, where the coach serves as a guide helping the client explore their inner world, find meaning, and connect with their true self. The Psy Expert discourse is grounded in psychological expertise. It views coaching as a form of psychological intervention, where the coach applies psychological theories and techniques to help clients understand and change their behaviour. The Managerial discourse is focused on performance and effectiveness within organizational contexts. It views coaching as a tool for improving managerial competence and achieving organizational goals. The Network Coach discourse reflects the complexity and interconnectedness of modern organizations. It views coaching as a way to navigate the dynamic and relational aspects of contemporary work environments.

While Western does not provide any research to corroborate these discourses, they seem sufficiently plausible. There may be many more discourses and sub-discourses and further qualitative research into coaches’ descriptions of their experiences and communities of discourse may be warranted to explore this. In every one of these discourses, the purpose of coaching is different (from connecting to one’s true self to improving performance). The role and “job” of a coach varies with the task at hand. In each of the discourses, coaching is situated within a distinct "form of life," a particular cultural, social, and practical context. Within these contexts, coaches must cultivate a diverse set of skills, knowledge, and abilities, far from the uniform “competencies” or “standards” that accreditation agency want us to adhere to. Obviously, you need a different set of skills to help someone talk about the deep longings of their soul from helping someone plan the communication after a strategy meeting. I mean, for me this is obvious.

Whether or not there are 4 dominant discourses or 15, I think that it is very worthwhile for coaches to examine what “form of life” or “language game” (Wittgenstein, 1958) they are currently part of. Whose agenda are they serving, and have they chosen to be part of this community, or have they inadvertently been recruited into it?

Reflecting on these discourses and language games open opportunities to see our practice in different lights: What makes complete sense in one language game, is non-sensical in the other. Just like throwing the ball with your hand is forbidden in soccer but very welcome in handball. A real life example may be: When acting as a soul guide, it may be very meaningful to inquire about “the who” of the client, for example by asking: “Suppose you were the version of yourself that was confident, how would you notice?” When acting within managerial discourse, the same question may be disturbing for the client. Suppose they came to coaching for you to help them develop a strategy for their offsite. Instead of talking about what the client wants, you continue to divert the conversation toward “the who”. No wonder clients get irritated when the coach is part of a different language game than they are.

This is not to say that these differences cannot be used productively in coaching sessions. You might use your awareness of the fact that what makes sense in some contexts, does less so in others and invite the client to reflect on it (if they want). This might open possibilities and access to otherwise hidden resources.

If you would like to reflect on “forms of life” of coaching or play language games with us, why not join one of our free meetups and exchanges?

References:

Western, Simon (2012): Coaching and Mentoring: A Critical Text. London, United Kingdom: SAGE Publications, Limited.

Wittgenstein, L. (1953). Philosophical investigations (G. E. M. Anscombe, Trans.). Blackwell. (Original work published 1953)

‍