Recursive acronym, FOCUS, for starting off a coaching session:
Questions a coach can ask clients in order to help hold them accountable to their commitments during a coaching session:
Action steps are only as good as the likelihood they will be acted upon.
Successful leaders can and do adapt their leadership style to the situation and have strengths in self-awareness, self-regulation, motivation, empathy, and social skills.
Leadership Styles:
In order to be a successful coach, address the advice monster that tries to control other people. Stay curious longer by helping them find the real issue. Drill down to find out what else might be causing an issue. And then ask again what the real challenge is. And finally what do you want?
Takeaways from Richard C. Huseman (2008).
Much of what passes for leadership development is a waste of time, or at least not the best use of money.
It is important that everyone reflect on what they could be doing better - both the person trying to become a better leader and the trainers trying to help them improve.
But it is vital to have a clear way to measure the improvement of a developing leader.
Stretch assignments and honest, anonymous feedback are most likely to improve a developing leader.
A coach can facilitate improvement by gathering data from others, self-assessment of the leader, building self-awareness, creating an action plan, continuing to provide coaching feedback, and support in stretch assignments.
Shor & Freire in A Pedagogy for Liberation (1987):
On the one hand, I cannot manipulate. On the other hand, I cannot leave the students by themselves. The opposite of these two possibilities is being radically democratic. That means accepting the directive nature of education. There is a directiveness in education which never allows it to be neutral. My role is not to be silent.
I enjoy watching sporting events. When it comes to the major leagues, I prefer watching in person over the TV. The Super Bowl is about the only exception to that. Not that it wouldn't be fun to go to the Super Bowl in person, but that isn't likely to happen. That said, I prefer watching NCAA sports, because while they are often very, very good at what they do, there is a higher chance of something unexpected happening. You see more trick plays, fumbled balls, standout individuals, etc. I also enjoy watching my kids play on rec, competitive, and high school teams.
The competition drives higher and higher levels of performance for those who stick with it, while driving those out of the sport if they can't perform at the needed level. This is one of the negative aspects. What happens to those who enjoy playing for fun and fitness but don't like the extreme competitiveness?
I've been thinking a little about this recently and how music and art performances differ or are sometimes similar from a competition perspective. There are plenty of music competitions on TV - American Idol, The Voice, etc. And any tryout for a leading role in a musical or the solo at a concert is going to result in someone winning the exclusive part, leaving others to be an understudy, lower profile named part, or ensemble. The big difference, however, comes down to competition at performance time.
In sports, there is competition at tryout time and during performances. At each event, there is a winner and a loser; sometimes there is a ranked list of how well each person competed. In marathons and triathlons, even though there is a ranked list of times published afterwards, there is usually a good camaraderie among competitors, with positive words when crossing paths, which I have appreciated. Yet so often, the negative attitude towards competitors is part of the environment as an attempt to intimidate and break the concentration and confidence of the opponent.
While concerts and musicals do have to have tryouts, because we can't all be the lead, I appreciate how they become a community effort. Different theater companies share props, scenery pieces, and costumes and attend each other's performances. Individuals often perform with different companies. Everyone involved wants to perform at the highest level possible, but there are no losers. Even the actor portraying the villain gets an especially hardy applause if they did an excellent job making you hate them over the course of the show. Multiple bands can get together and have a combined concert.
In the gaming world, there are cooperative games, such as Pandemic, where the players work together to beat the board game. You win together or lose together, but there is no person or team on the other side. The better you work together, the better you perform.
I wish we had something like this for sports. Maybe that's what is missing currently from the sports world - a way to perform in a way that drives higher levels of performance without anyone having to lose in order to make that happen. That's the big question - how do we drive cooperative performance over competitive performance and still maintain the things that are good about sports?
Several years ago I was making a simple arrangement of a song, most of which was done using copy/paste and manually drawing things onto a photocopy of an existing piece of music. I found a free, open source software package called MuseScore, which was kind of difficult to get through the learning curve but seemed like a great tool in spite of my awkwardness with it. Over the years they have come out with several new versions of the software, and I have practiced with it quite a bit to where I'm much more efficient with it.
In addition to the software for writing and transposing music, it has a community which lets people share arrangements they have created with others. As the platform and community has gotten bigger, it has started gaining the attention of the music industry, and they have had to start charging to gain access to download the arrangements other users have made in order to have money to pay licensing fees to the original artists for making arrangements of their works. Some are upset with the system changing to charge for what used to be free. But the best part about it is still free - the software itself.
I think a lot of people were just using the community to download free sheet music, but taking it to the next level, using the software to create your own arrangements is the best part, because you learn to create something for yourself. I have learned a lot about music theory and about the instruments I have been arranging for by doing it myself.
Thanks MuseScore!
