Straight Talk: See the world differently

By Jane Caro

 

Throughout all the years that I was one of the few women working in creative departments in ad agencies, I often asked myself the question why so many managers seemed to prefer employing clones of themselves. To be fair, I did have one creative director who hired a variety of people for his department – women, people from other ethnic backgrounds, different ages and sexual orientations. It was the best creative department I ever worked in, but it was also highly unusual. Most creative departments were (and still are) staffed by white blokes in their thirties, many of whom (oddly) were English. He was also the only manager I ever had who hired his staff with care and then left them alone to do their job. That was also rare.

In the end, the only answer I came up with about why so many bosses seemed to prefer homogeneity was fear. They felt at home and at ease with people like them. Difference – be it of gender, race, class, sexuality or anything else – seems to present a challenge to many people. Perhaps that’s why we have turned hiring a variety of people into a buzzword and tamed it under the cloak of ‘diversity’.

Difference can be challenging but it can also be exciting and lead to much better results. There is now so much research indicating that the greater the variety of people you employ (particularly at decision-making tables) the healthier the business, it almost does not need commenting on. Yet the resistance remains.

 

GENDER AGENDA

Women, in particular, were lectured for years that we needed to make ‘the business case’ for our right to progress up the management ladder (aka diversity). And we have, yet that ubiquitous ladder still remains out of reach for most of us. While enduring that lecture, I confess I often wondered where the business case was for justifying having overwhelmingly white, privately educated, blokes at the top. To this day, no one has ever been able to find a copy of it for me.

As my enlightened boss from the late 90s showed, managing diversity does not need to be either difficult or frightening, especially if you see difference and new ways of looking at things as an opportunity. Perhaps it is hard for bosses who want to be the authority on everything and do not like their decisions to be queried or analysed from a different perspective. If you are genuinely open to new ideas; however, I can’t see how it is any harder than managing any other group of human beings.

Sure, women, people of colour, people of different faiths, ages, sexual identity or orientation and social class have different life experiences, which, of course, is a large part of the richness they bring to any table. However, they are all in essence just other human beings. They are not some kind of alien ‘other’ to be feared and distrusted. Every human on the planet, whatever their background, likes to be treated with courtesy and respect, to have their professional contribution fairly acknowledged and rewarded and to be taken seriously as a colleague. Do that and I doubt you will go far wrong.

After all, there is just as much diversity within groups as there is between them. Women are not a job lot, nor are people of colour or members of the LGBTQI community or those from a working-class background. Managing anyone is sometimes difficult. People have personality clashes. They can be needy, particularly when work gets stressful. And this applies to everyone – whatever their background.

In fact, once you try, you may find that managing diversity is no different from managing homogeneity. It won’t be easier, certainly, but I bet it isn’t harder.

Jane Caro runs her own communications consultancy. She worked in the advertising industry for 30 years and is now an author, journalist, lecturer and media commentator.

Bullying, harassment and abuse are workplace hazards too

By Karyl Estrella MIML

 

Genuine human concern and a duty of care means for most managers maintaining a safe workplace is a must. Hence offices are fitted with fire systems, first aid kits and evacuation plans are set out. We do everything in our power to eliminate safety hazards. However, if we think about what a workplace hazard is it’s really anything that could cause potential harm, injury and illness to your people. So, beyond trip, slip or electrical hazards, psychological and emotional risks should also be removed.

Compared to most common hazards, psychological and emotional threats, such as bullying, harassment and abuse result in more severe damage to the employee’s wellbeing. Even more of a concern is that it may not always be easy to detect.

Managers and leaders play a crucial role here. According to Safe Work Australia, one of the central reasons for the occurrence of bullying and harassment in workplaces is the lack of managerial regard for creating an emotionally and mentally safe work environment. Clearly, this is a significant concern for all managers and leaders.

 

A danger hidden in plain sight

This issue is magnified when we consider the impact of the workplace on an employee’s life. In the 12 months preceding March 2018, the figures reveal Australians spent 20 billion hours at work.

Creating a safe environment becomes even more critical given the current state of Australian workplaces. Alarmingly, the Australian Human Rights Commission reports that 23% of women and 16% of men have experienced sexual harassment at work.

If employees are spending the majority of their time in an environment where they do not feel safe, it will no doubt affect their engagement, productivity and loyalty to an organisation. Even worse, is that the effects of bullying, harassment and abuse have far-reaching impacts on how they function within society.

 

A solution is imperative

There are some ways workplaces can respond to these severe hazards. These include:

  • Setting clear guidance. Implement a zero-tolerance approach when it comes to bullying, harassment and any form of gross disrespect in the workplace. Your policies should support this through clear guidelines and consequences for offenders.
  • Offering information and support. Supply all employees with clear information on what they should do if they observe any form of abuse in the workplace. Provide support services for employees who have experienced bullying, harassment and violence – regardless if it’s at home or work.
  • Walking the talk. Leaders in the workplace must be role models of respectful behaviour. By setting the tone from the top, you build an environment where people feel they are safe from abusive behaviour.

 

Embrace the right outlook

Empowering managers and leaders with the skills, knowledge and courage to create a positive influence on our workplaces – and society – is at the heart of what we do at IML ANZ. That’s why we’ve focused our Leadership Outlook 2019 series on creating safe and respectful workplaces. We’ve partnered with White Ribbon to deliver a national series of thought-provoking and practical workshops.

During each session, a panel of local leaders will share real-world experiences and discuss:

  • Best practice approaches to support employees who are experiencing domestic violence, bullying or harassment in or out of the workplace
  • Knowledge and skills in applying a strategic, evidence-based methodology drawn from White Ribbon’s work with organisations on the Workplace Accreditation Program
  • Strategies to support staff which minimises risk and promotes a supportive workplace culture
  • Resources and tools to assist in creating a safe and respectful workplace
  • Practical case studies to work through key learnings from the sessions

We all deserve to feel safe. Join us for an event that will help transform workplaces, leadership and society.

Visit managersandleaders.com.au/leadership-outlook-2019/ for locations, dates and to book.

Karyl is IML ANZ’s content producer. Contact her for queries regarding the IML ANZ blog and quarterly magazine, Leadership Matters.

Reflections on International Women’s Day 2019

By Bernadette Uzelac FIML

 

Last week I participated in IML ANZ’s Great Debate in Melbourne – one of many events held throughout Australia to mark International Women’s Day. The topic was “Her aspiration needs his cooperation.” I was on the affirmative team and our underlying position was that we need all people on the journey if we are to achieve equality.

 

Cooperation, not permission

But ‘cooperation’ doesn’t mean women need the ‘permission’ of men to be successful. Rather, our team’s message was that we need to empower, educate and support men and boys to become agents of change. To challenge gender stereotypes and societal norms that typecast people from a very young age to conform to roles and behaviours that ultimately set the scene for gender bias and discrimination – counter to the notion of equality.

Initiatives like Male Agents for Change and White Ribbon are great examples of men driving positive change and being part of the solution. The United Nations and the European Institute for Gender Equality both support and recommend education and awareness programs for men and boys to combat stereotypic attitudes relating to women’s and men’s roles and responsibilities within the family and society at large. They also agree that we can only succeed in achieving equality through the participation of both women and men.

 

There’s no ‘merit-based’ silver bullet

A central ideology in the conversation is around the issue of merit-based recruitment and career advancement. The proposition that decisions should be based on merit and the best person for the job, regardless of gender and other perceived barriers, sounds fair and reasonable. Indeed, many fair-minded people have pushed for merit-based approaches for decades as a means to counter nepotism, prejudice and bias. Surely, if all organisations based their decisions on merit alone, then barriers based around gender and other biases will simply cease to exist? On the surface, the merit concept seems to be a far more equitable philosophy.

The facts, however, tell a different story.

Meritocracy has not proven to be successful in creating a diverse and culturally rich workforce. Women hold less than 30% of company directorships and a staggering 35% of boards and governing bodies have no female directors. In Australia today the C-Suite is a very male dominated environment. A mere 17.1% of CEOs are female and only around 30% of key management positions are held by women. Full time average weekly earnings of women are 14.1% less than men, and women retire with around 42% less superannuation than men.

 

Why meritocracy can’t stand alone

The reason that merit-based approaches haven’t worked is because underlying barriers like bias, prejudice and discrimination still exist – they’re just not necessarily talked about openly. If you’re not from the right socio-economic background, race, religion, gender, sexual orientation, age group, you have disability or have needs that challenge an organisation’s cultural ‘fit’ you may struggle. And whilst merit-based appointments continue to equate merit with experience, the end goal of achieving gender balance and diversity will remain elusive. People who are capable to do the job, but who may not have the preferred experience, may not always get to first base to even be considered due to barriers such as disadvantage or unconscious bias and prejudice.

The notion of the ‘best person for the job’ will continue to be a myth whilst we have highly capable people on the margin who may not have had the same opportunity, luck or favourable networks of support as others may have had. Consideration needs to be given to building more equity into the process and encouraging greater self-awareness of deep-seated personal biases and prejudices that may be unconsciously influencing decision making.

 

Education, awareness and support

A local expert in diversity and inclusion recently said, “Change is grounded in education and awareness. The issues of equality between genders are deep and complex. We don’t know what we don’t know… it doesn’t matter which gender you are. We need to encourage curiosity so that people… seek further understanding, increasing awareness so that we know why we need to continue to drive change!”

Women are successfully raising the bar and driving change, however, change won’t come quick enough unless everyone is on board and actively contributing. Whilst there is a strong argument for quotas in some circumstances to fast track change and bring greater balance to workplaces, we do still have a long way to go. When the term ‘gender equality’ is no longer a part of our daily lexicon we will know that we have arrived. The force for change is in us all.

Bernadette Uzelac is a former CEO, is a fellow of IML ANZ, company director and small business advocate. Follow her on twitter @Bern_Uzelac

Leading ladies weigh in on gender balance

By Karyl Estrella MIML

 

While the day dedicated to all things women’s equality might be over, it takes more than 24 hours to transform and shape the social order. In fact, International Women’s Day’s (IWD) #BalanceForBetter campaign will continue to run all year long.

Building a gender-balanced society requires courageous leaders. So IML ANZ spoke to three fearless, leading women – all of whom spoke at our IWD Great Debate events.

We get a glimpse of their views on the current state of gender equality, the role of professional development in moving the needle and what practical steps leaders can take to achieve true balance.

 

Gender balance: current state of play

For Privcore’s Managing Director and data privacy thought-leader Annelies Moens CMgr FIML, the current state of gender balance is a precarious dance. “I am reminded of a quote about Ginger Rogers and Fred Astaire attributed to Bob Thaves. While Fred was great, let’s remember Ginger Rogers did everything he did backwards and in high heels,” said Moens.

That women usually have to perform better than men is a sentiment shared by Clariti Group’s CEO, Belinda-Jane Dolan CMgr FIML. Herself having to battle through disadvantages including being rejected for top leadership roles due to her gender, Dolan reflects, “As women, we have to work incredibly hard. Now, should we? The reality is no, we shouldn’t have to work any harder than anybody else. But how can we now change the conversation to ensure this doesn’t have to happen for generations to come?”

A crucial area where gender balance is obviously lacking is on the boards of the largest Australian companies. According to Maroondah City Council’s Director of Corporate Services, Marianne Di Giallonardo CMgr MIML, the problem could be rooted in change aversion – for both men and women. “The reason why women on the boards of ASX corporations is only 30% is that for the men, the other 70%, it’s hard to give up the benefits of those roles,” she said.

Di Giallonardo adds, “To get to 50-50, 20% of the male groups that are currently participating have to not participate, and then an extra 20% of females need to participate. So the big question is how do we gear all of the systems, processes and unconscious biases for that to happen.”

A poignant question which isn’t resolved with just one answer.

 

Visibility is key

One possible response seems to rest on role models. Dolan emphasises that the visibility of women in leadership plays a crucial role in helping younger women attain for it. “I do believe that you definitely can’t be what you can’t see. If you are not able to see women leaders then how do you know that’s a role you can achieve?” Dolan added.

And visibility must stretch beyond the workplace, as Moens explains, “Advertising for airlines’ premium products, such as business class, often shows images of men sitting in business class seats served by female cabin crew. I would love to see more images of women in those business class seats being served by male cabin crew.”

Indeed, seeing women in powerful or influential positions can help shift perceptions and alter mindsets about what leadership really looks like.

 

Not a numbers game

“Often the notion of quotas come through,” Di Giallonardo points out. But she adds that it’s much more than a numbers game. “You don’t want to set a number and then just get people into the roles because you’re trying to meet the quotas,” she says.

Dolan agrees, “From what I’ve seen at high-performing organisations, they’re not hiring in leadership roles based purely on gender. It’s imperative that the correct person is hired for the right role. As a female leader and a board director, I want to be in that role because I’m the best candidate and not based solely upon my gender.”

 

Development matters

Moens is quick to point out that the skills and competencies that leaders need to respond to a society seeking balance, is changing fast. She explains, “You need a broad range of interdisciplinary skills, including people leadership skills, communications, technical or competency areas depending on your industry. Constant learning is required, regardless of your role, but especially as a leader.”

Additionally, there’s a real danger when the thinking and mindset of a leader stands still. Dolan confirms, “Neurologically, our brains need to be stimulated. We need to be stretched and challenged in order to grow, if not we become stagnant or worse still our skills are not relevant. As leaders, we need to take accountability for our growth to actively seek out development opportunities and challenge ourselves to always be better leaders.” Dolan adds, “Being a leader means we should be learning alongside our teams too, establishing connections and growing with them.”

Hence, there’s merit in ensuring leaders are measuring up to the best. Di Giallonardo agrees, “With the Chartered Manager designation, I think it’s a fantastic opportunity to get yourself benchmarked with an international standard.”

She adds, “I’m always encouraging everyone to think about growth and development – so that people can shine and at the end of the day, that’s what all companies want. We want all our staff to shine. Not only for themselves but for the whole team.”

 

Practical steps to fuel change

 

  • Rethink recruitment. Moens challenges leaders to step outside of their comfort zones when it comes to hiring. She concludes, “The less we hire people that look like us or think like us the better for a diverse and inclusive workplace.”
  • Improve work-life balance. Di Giallonardo believes in creating as many opportunities that promote equality in the roles of men and women. “Depending on where you work, men are given a few days of paternity leave whereas women can take much longer. That could be seen as being unequal. It’s worth looking at it with fresh eyes to see what you can do to try and swing that around,” she says.
  • Professional support. Having a strong network is vital. And this must not stop at the occasional networking event or time-bound coaching sessions. “Managers and leaders need to encourage and train sponsors, so they can be confident with people who are different to them or who may ultimately challenge them. Inevitably, when sponsors become comfortable with people not like them, outdated attitudes will fall to the wayside,” Moens points out.

 

Change and ultimately balance, can be achieved with sustained effort by both men and women. Dolan is hopeful in what she’s seen happen so far. She reflected, “If I go back 10–15 years, there were substantially less women leading. In 2018, 15 of 146 world leaders are women, eight of whom served as their country’s first female leaders. Whilst we have more women in leadership than ever before there is much more we need to do.”

For Di Giallonardo, the strive for balance requires the efforts of both men and women – but women especially should take heart. “There’s strength on the male side and there’s strength on the female side. But there’s nothing women can’t do if they’re given the opportunity to do it.”

Karyl is IML ANZ’s content producer. Contact her for queries regarding the IML ANZ blog and quarterly magazine, Leadership Matters.

Career Doctor: How can I build a high performance team?

By Peter Cullen FIML

I was extremely fortunate and very grateful to have been a member of a really great team on one occasion in my career. There were seven of us with a very close bond that was forged over time. People from outside the company wanted to join our team. They could not, because no-one left. Our team exemplified five fundamental foundations that most great teams share: leadership, purpose, values alignment, accountability and communication. Here are some ideas to help embed these five foundations in your own team.

1. LEADERSHIP

As a leader remember: it is not about you, it is about what you do. You need to consistently role model the behaviours you seek in the team because your attitudes and behaviours are contagious.

Trust sits at the heart of any high performing team. Displaying genuine vulnerability is an essential ingredient in establishing trust and it must start with you. This should be encouraged within the team as people flourish in an environment where they feel safe. You need to be open and honest about your mistakes as well as your achievements.

Give your time to your team and people. And have courage! Be the advocate of your team and their protector.

2. PURPOSE

Do you and your team members know their purpose and that of the team? It is a great idea to develop this with the team so everyone has clarity, buy-in, ownership and responsibility for their purpose.

Provide time for team members to consider the who, what, when, where and how of their work. Plan a team meeting to brainstorm and consolidate all this information into a concise paragraph that is relevant and easily relatable.

3. VALUES ALIGNMENT

Knowing, understanding and living your personal values provides personal satisfaction, contentment and a sense of quiet confidence. Values form the basis for your attitudes, beliefs and perception of the world and how you fit in it.

People whose personal values are aligned with team and company values usually perform at a higher level because they are generally happier and want to contribute. They want to support each other and the team. Help yourself and your colleagues by providing a personal values assessment then ask the team to create some jointly agreed team member behaviours.

4. ACCOUNTABILITY

Knowing what team members need to be accountable for – and then consistently following up – has a big influence on how a team performs. KPIs are normally front of mind when we think about accountability. Remember that these need to be realistic, achievable and agreed by both you and the person who reports to you. It is beneficial for a team to create and develop some targets collectively and they should feel comfortable to hold each other accountable for them. When working in an environment of trust, team members will appropriately and respectfully call each other on it.

5. COMMUNICATION

It is essential to be open, honest and transparent with the team and your people while being appropriately respectful. Two important motivators for people are recognition and acknowledgement. These can be delivered by providing regular feedback which should always be affirmative and supporting, never blaming, criticising or judgmental.

Depending on how many direct reports you have, consider weekly 20-minute catch-ups and weekly structured team meetings. To ensure you all get the most from every meeting, ask what worked well and why and what can be improved and how.

Be present! Ensure you ‘walk the floor’ and chat with people to see how they are going and whether they have any concerns you can help them with.

Keep people informed on the progress and developments of the company. Remember, we are all human and as such we will make mistakes and we will have wins. Use each mistake or win as an opportunity to build self-awareness through self-reflection.

If you can establish these five foundations with your team then you will be a formidable force together. And you will be the leader your team needs you to be.

Peter Cullen is an education and training facilitator. Each of his three-day programs engages participants in developing and implementing their capabilities as managers and leaders.

The real battleground for gender equality

By David Pich CMgr FIML

(Warning: This is not an article about the ins and outs of Brexit!)

As a dual citizen of Australia and the UK, I tend to keep a foot in both camps, so to speak. Whilst primarily focusing my attention on local leadership issues, I do keep a keen eye on leadership matters in the land of my birth. This inevitably brings me to the absolute shambles that has commonly become known as ‘Brexit’.

Before your eyes glaze over, before your finger twitches towards the minimise button, let me restate that this isn’t another article about Brexit! It’s about something arguably more significant. It’s about institutional gender inequality. It’s about the fact that – typically – our institutions remain male-dominated domains. And it’s about the fact that this needs to change.

A reality check is needed

On 14th January there was (yet another) crucial vote on Brexit in the House of Commons. (It was a vote so crucial that most people, including me, have long since forgotten what was being voted on). My interest was piqued not by the vote itself but by the reports and images of Tulip Saddiq, the MP for Kilburn being wheeled into the voting chamber in a wheelchair.

The issue was – and still is – that Westminster doesn’t have a proxy voting system that allows absent MPs to vote in debates when they are away from Parliament. In fact, the British Parliament almost has a proxy system. About 12-months ago all political parties agreed that a modern political system needed this facility. And then nothing happened.

Back in 2018, Harriet Harman MP arguing in favour of the introduction of proxy voting pointed out that there 200 women MPs in Parliament and that an increasing number were young. She went on to say that ‘there are two babies in the offing and it’s time we just got on with it’.

Indeed. I find it almost unbelievable that the institution that arguably holds a good many of the keys to political power in one of the most advanced democracies in the world doesn’t have processes in place that accommodate the realities of modern life. And that promote one of the very basic principles of gender equality.

Of course, I’m actually not that surprised at all. The ‘Tulip Saddiq incident’ is just one example of the way that women in leadership roles are viewed and treated.

What often surprises me the most about this, and other examples is the reaction of men (and yes, I’m one of those!). One notorious Parliamentarian at the time of the discussion around proxy voting in the British Parliament proudly pointed out to a newspaper that he was no ‘modern man’ and that he hadn’t changed a nappy in his life (or in the life of his kids!). That he said this proudly says it all really. That he said it at all should surely disqualify him from voting on issues such as this!

Systemic change is needed

As leaders, we are always accountable for the decisions we make. Taking personal responsibility for the way we view, decide and act on matters is part and parcel of the job description. The equal treatment of women should be no different. ­

Unfortunately, the fact remains that men continue to dominate many of the positions of responsibility in society. Until there is parity in positions of power men must play both a leading and a supporting role in the fight for gender equality.

This is a real battle and better leaders need to lead the charge. Better leaders are key. The mark of a great leader rests on decision making based on the highest standards. The highest standards of our society demand that decision-makers show the respect and consideration that women deserve. Our actions, great or small, as leaders is what will shape the society we desire. Indeed, we need to rethink how to create a gender equal future. This cannot be done in isolation, it needs the cooperation of all regardless of gender.

Cooperation is needed

Right thinking men need to be there to support women in the push for gender equality. That struggle isn’t a one-sided battle; we are stronger fighting inequality together.

My view is that cooperation is always desirable. This isn’t a fight of us and them, of men v women. It’s a battle between equality and inequality. The battlegrounds are everywhere – in the workplace, in our political institutions, in religion, families and throughout society.

The only way to fight inequality of any sort is through collaborative action.

David Pich is the Chief Executive of IML ANZ.

Avoiding ethical issues in mentoring relationships

Our time is marked not just by advancements in technology but also by societal expectations in the way we show respect, acceptance and dignity to others. It’s now so important that we display the highest level of ethics, especially when it comes to mentoring relationships.

Mentoring is a vital part of development. That’s because it allows participants to apply their learning into the workplace, change their behaviours and have a sounding board for organisational changes. In fact, this is why IML ANZ includes mentoring as a core element in leadership programs.

To aid the trustworthiness of any mentoring program, leaders and organisations must ensure that reliable structures are in place. This includes the following three components:

 

Robust screening process

Do your program participants undergo an application and screening process before they are matched with a mentor or mentee?

It’s also important to screen for the motivators of both parties. Are they genuinely seeking professional development? Of course, if the mentoring program is kept restricted to members of a professional body, such as IML ANZ’s program, it reduces the risk that ill-motivated people will join.

 

Clear parameters and expectations

Do you provide guidance around acceptable subject matters and realistic timeframes for the formal mentoring relationship? A well-structured program leaves little room for discussing inappropriate topics or showing disrespect for each participant’s time and resources.

Again, all of this has to come from a genuine desire to benefit both in the mentoring relationship

 

Third-party available for feedback or complaints

While no one wishes to hear of any incidents where inappropriate or unethical behaviour is displayed, it’s important to be ready to respond should it arise. An impartial party should be available to receive feedback and complaints. It’s never good if any participant feels they are helpless or won’t be heard if they complain.

Merits of reverse mentoring

When someone says mentoring we immediately picture the experienced and mature mentor alongside the eager and younger mentee. However, some companies have found that reverse mentoring, or putting the younger member of the pair in charge, has merits including fresh insights, better collaboration and breaking age-based barriers.

Traditional mentoring definitely has its benefits. It is a proven way to strengthen professional development and drive leadership success. For both the mentor an mentee, they gain a valuable contact within their professional network because the mentoring relationship, more often than not, continues well beyond the conclusion of the formal program.

Today, more of the younger generation move about from job to job and organisation to organisation. As they seek their next step up, if they see no personal connection between their aspirations and the goals of the organisation, they’ll move on. What that means is possibly valuable insights may be walking out the door, never truly fulfilling their potential within the context of your organisation.

That’s why reverse mentoring could be an effective tool in making your younger workforce feel a closer connection between their career and your organisation’s goals. Beyond retention, here are three additional merits of reverse mentoring:

 

Fresh insights

A different perspective can be invaluable for senior leaders. In a similar way to rotating a puzzle and seeing a different possible solution, so too can reversing mentoring roles provide a fresh look at existing challenges.

Sometimes leaders can get used to arguing up the food chain. With reverse mentoring, they are required to think of things differently, use different tactics in completing tasks and understand how to address a different audience.

 

Better collaboration

A new way of looking at things can prove to be useful when it comes to gaining a sense of cooperation too.

This generation of workers appreciate opportunities to participate beyond their role’s scope. What’s more, this generation of workers is all about gaining the opinions and ideas of their colleagues. So, access to the thoughts of one usually means gaining an idea of what those in that age-group think and feel.

 

Breaking barriers

Companies, such as PwC, have used reverse mentoring programs to support diversity and inclusion. This, in turn, promoted an environment where all employees feel their ideas are valued, not just those of the senior-level executives.

The result is a truly inclusive culture, where age isn’t a barrier for ideas to be heard and acknowledged.

It’s true, no matter what stage of your career you’re in, mentoring can support your development. Don’t shy away from reverse mentoring because everyone – no matter your age, experience or expertise, has something valuable to give and has room to improve.

Is coaching different from counselling?

The merits of effective coaching as part of a leader’s key skill set is undeniable. The ability to guide team members to achieve a higher-level whether that’s in their performance, productivity, knowledge or expertise takes deep understanding and lots of practice. But is the coach also expected to be a counsellor? Should a line be drawn between what constitutes coaching and counselling and if so, how can you tell if you’ve crossed it?

This isn’t a new debate, with some therapists claiming there is no difference between coaching and counselling, it’s just another label to describe the same activity. On the other hand, given the more involved nature of counselling, coaches may be hesitant to claim that they are performing the same practice. After all, counselling as a profession is more formally and heavily regulated.

To be effective in either, knowing what sets each apart is vital. Let’s unpack the similarities, differences and the importance of understanding what each practice entails.

 

Key similarities

Both practices are motivated from a place of care and concern. The goal is the same – improvement or development in some area of the coachee’s life.

Each practice also uses similar approaches and skills. In both forms the following activities feature heavily:

  • Personal communication (whether face-to-face or via phone)
  • Listening
  • Questioning
  • Creating a non-judgemental relationship
  • Uncovering deeper self-awareness

When it comes to workplace coaching the lines may not be as blurred. A coach may simply decide that they are only involved in matters within the context of the workplace. However,  the challenge for coaches is that no one is really capable of separating their ‘work-self’ from their ‘personal-self’.

 

Identified differences

Some of the common differentiators between coaching and counselling have been enumerated in the past. These include coaching’s concern with making future opportunities possible while counselling is limited to developing awareness of how past experiences impact current and future decisions.

Another key difference identified is that often, people who seek counselling do so with the aim of remedying an illness, dysfunction or pathological challenge whereas coachees are not necessarily characterised by these attributes.

There is also the distinction between coaching conversations being more structured versus the free-flowing and undefined counselling style.

 

When knowing the difference matters

When healing is required. In one study, the process of coaching helped participants identify the need for additional help in the form of counselling. If a coach identifies that there is a need to remedy or heal emotional challenges, it is worth considering whether counselling is required.

When a crossover is necessary. As part of effective coaching, it may be necessary for the coach to visit the coachees’ past experiences. Normally this is mainly for the purposes of helping the coachee to move forward with agreed goals. If unresolved past experiences hold a person back from progressing, the coach may need to crossover temporarily into the counsellor space – but only briefly.

When it is healthy to hold the coachee accountable. When a counsellor is required, it is often because the client is not in a state to reach goals and overcome hurdles on their own. This is when getting the difference right between coaching and counselling matters the most. In a coaching arrangement, the coachee is usually responsible for achieving the desired outcome, the coach is simply there to guide – not to provide the answers. There will inevitably be situations where a clinically-trained counsellor must take-over.

Reference: Semantics or substance?  Preliminary evidence in the debate between life coaching and counselling