I was just typing things which impressed me while talking/listening to you Diderik, Jesper, Monika, Virginia, Pippa and George on skype--- hope somehow helpful these notes?
Jespers story on working with governmental people: how to deal with the double roles (person, representativ of a gorvernment) when different statements come:
Futur perfect: most exciting thing could happen for you personally—in your work.
Invite them to talk out of different angles, make it explicite.
Dideriks impressive idea: Give the book to a (potential corporate) client: http://www.sfwork.com/jsp/index.jsp?lnk=827
- so the client knows a concrete project how SF worked... I like the level of being concrete, the attractivity of the sample.
I liked Monikas vote: DO IT as much, as possible, do it more than talk about
Diderik tried out from the book 57 http://www.sfwork.com/jsp/index.jsp?lnk=82c More powerful than he expected*: giving a motto…
*what a nice category!!!
Being comfortable with the problem - wow, sounds really attractive
Problems are maybe needed to create a sense of urgency for change (Diderik)– being solution focussed doesn’t mean I’m problem phobic (Insoo).
George's report aboult Coaching PLUS in Basel
did you recognise his beautiful question: what do you want to hear --- a real coach! No work without an assignement :) and nice questions as well.
Changing the scale, “blind” coaching – I don’t know, what’s it about ---- forced to be in not knowing.
Georges case---- there was a BAD hearing quality so I missed a lot of the question of George and everything out of the answer of Monika.
Entrepeneurship setup, first jobs, married couple, fighting
I have done: work with them separately.
Adviser/coach – what if we wouldn’t know that there is a difference, a border between these 2 things, what would you like to achieve, dear George?
One other thought which went through my mind: their first job --- the perspective of a loooong life in front of them......... so take time to learn something? i don't know how helpful.
So, and now it's bedime. sleep well
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
Hi George
Your story - what I could hear of it because of the bad connection - gave me an idea:
AGREED RULES OF BEHAVIOUR
Can you have a conversation with them about games? Ask them if the like to play games? <- not gambling but games - either cards, with their kids or anything.
BACKGROUND THOUGHTS:
Have you ever noticed how it is to navigate in any kind of a game compared to how you navigate in your professional or private life?
In a game you have certain rules that has to be followed. Rules which are set to be equally valid for all who participates. It is agreed rules.
In both your professional and private life I'll bet there are some rules who are very clear and some rules who are esoteric/implicit.
IDEA:
What if - in your situation with these people - you had a talk about:
What if we had certain "game-rules" (agreed behaviour) in our co-working - that would have the same simple ground principles as in a game: Equally valid for all participants?
Which kind of rules would then make sense and make the most benefit for both parts?
If that is too difficult then maybe start with: Which rules will definitely be out of the question because they will stop either one or both of us at doing our job?
Rules in a game can always be changed! But only if all parts agree and it is equally valid = opens up for progress and development = OWNERSHIP for process.
SIDE STORY:
When I was younger I really didn't like to play games at all. As a matter of fact the only game I liked was a self made version of LUDO called killer-LUDO.
This alternative version one basic goal: To capture as many as possible of the enemy. Every time one had been captured and the piece had to start from beginning point the person who lost had to (every time) - CHANGE, REMOVE or ADD a new rule!
And it had to be out from the simple two rules:
1. It has to be and advantage for the player who changes, removes or adds the rule
2. It has to be equally valid to all participants
That's fun and it's not easy! You are forced to think of the EFFECT of your decision not only for you but for all participating.
Wow, that's sounds mega- what's LUDO? Could George play it with them?
There's an another game which could fit just to be played with a couple of entrepeneurs (spelling??): Marienbad. A simple game for acting with thinking ahead. for KILLER-Marienbad maybe not that suitable, cos there are only 2 rules... >> maybe a useful input for the client in the context Jesper suggests: how many rules we need and how many are we able to follow (keep in mind)
LUDO has in German the wonderful name: "Mensch-ärgere-dich-nicht"
In English something like: "Man - don't be so upset!"
A comment from Monika:
Hi Jesper
I really like the rule part you suggested to George. When George told about the situation I was wondering if it would be useful that a Mediator would join the meeting. My thoughts had two sides: Sometimes it is tough when the clients need more than we comfortably can offer - in particular if it might take longer than as a brief coaching. The other side goes with expectation management. The clients might need to realize that they face more severe changes than first thought – in this case as a couple and as business partners -. The consequences of the coaching might be huge.
It might be that the conflict SF coaching could be a starting point as well.
Post a Comment