To set goals, or not to set goals? Who gets to decide whether and what?

This article is a reprint of a Coaching Research in Practice (March, 2014).

Many would argue that goals are a core component of coaching, particularly if these goals are client initiated. Therefore, when an organization assigns goals to staff involved in multi-stake holder coaching, it can pose quite a significant challenge to the coaches involved. While this topic is dealt with repeatedly in coaching supervision groups, Katherine Cowan’s (2013) research sheds some valuable light on the issue.

COACHING RESEARCH:

Cowan’s literature review points out three ways in which goals may be set:

Self-set goals are those set by the client. They are likely to provide an alignment between clients’ needs and values, which self-determination theory suggests results in an increase in wellbeing.
Assigned goals are those set by an organization. These are likely to focus on an increase in performance, but this may be at the expense of a learning goal, which the literature suggests is more appropriate when someone lacks ability i.e. “when someone lacks ability, they need to focus on how they will achieve (a learning goal), rather than what they will achieve (a performance goal)” (p. 15). Assigned goals may also disturb the delicate balance between challenge and ability i.e. “the harder the goal, the greater the increase in performance” (p. 15), yet the goal must remain within the actual ability of the person.
Three-way goals are those set in multi-stakeholder contracting, where the organization, coach and client participate in the goal-setting process. Such goal-setting should meet the needs of all parties, thereby taking into account goal-setting theory (this guidance would come from the coach), as well as the needs and values of both the organization and the client. Among Cowan’s study participants, three-way goal-setting usually occurred via a group meeting between the line manager/HR rep, client and coach.

Interestingly, Cowan noted that not all coaches in the study agreed that goals necessarily needed to be a part of the coaching. Those who did, identified the following reasons for working with goals:

Goals create a necessary tool in the evaluation of the coaching itself.
Goals enable organizations to measure value for money.
Goals help clients to evaluate their own progress.

While some coaches considered goals to be the starting point, others considered goals to be emergent during the process. Indeed, one participant suggested that identification of a meaningful goal can be the coaching outcome itself. These attitudes are reflective of a move towards “liberation from coaching goals” (p. 19) as described in recent literature. Not surprisingly, some coach participants in this study felt frustrated by assigned goals and saw them as superficial, yet importantly, another coach pointed out that she typically recognised a synergy between assigned goals and self-set goals, even though they may be expressed differently. One study participant referred to this as the coach’s role of “deciphering the agendas” (p. 20).

As expected, Cowan’s study highlighted the conflict that can arise in the coaching relationship when goals are assigned. It raised the question of the coach’s responsibility to the client and to the organization and whether ‘the real work’ of coaching was the assigned goal or what emerged from the assigned goal.

IN PRACTICE:

Not only does Cowan’s paper trigger readers’ reflection on their own viewpoints around goals in coaching, but it also provides three clear pointers for our practice development:

Your knowledge of goal-related theory may help you to set goals with your clients that result in improved coaching outcomes. Similarly, your lack of understanding of goal-related theory may contribute to negative coaching outcomes.
Consider whether your client needs a learning or performance goal, and once developed, determine whether it aligns with their needs and values and balances the degree of challenge, within their range of ability.
If you are working with assigned goals in an organizational context, then your role may be to bridge the gap between assigned goals and self-set goals. This may be through the facilitation of a three-way meeting as described earlier, or it may be by helping any client with assigned goals to see the synergy between the assigned goals and their own needs and values, remembering that they may be one and the same thing but expressed differently.

Cowan’s paper sheds such light on the nature and impact of goals and their origins, that it’s a strong reminder to dig a bit deeper into the literature that abounds, especially if your knowledge of goals begins and ends with the popularized SMART paradigm.

Access more than 100 issues of Coaching Research in Practice, and stay informed about new coaching research, here.

Reference:

Cowan, K. (2013). What are the experiences of external executive coaches working with coachees’ assigned goals? International Journal of Evidence Based Coaching and Mentoring, Special Issue, No. 7, pp. 14-25.

Translating coaching research into a coaching practice,

Kerryn Griffiths, PhD (The Process of Learning in Coaching)
ReciproCoach Founder and Global Coordinator

Not yet a member?

Already a member?