Framing coaching to culture and context

In my blog ‘throw of your bowlines or cherish your harbour?’ I discussed setting up the coaching framework at We women foundation. It was about framing coaching - as a method - to a different culture and a very specific local context; working with female refugees from Burma living as migrants in Thailand. Some of you responded to Ursula or me, for which we are very grateful. To conclude and round things up - as part of my last day at the job - I’m happy to share findings and ideas with you. Mind you this is still work-in-progress - especially for the We women organisation - written from my own personal perspective as a coach. It’s also far too extensive to even call it a blog. Nevertheless I really wanted to get back to you. So if you’re interested, please have a read. I’ll leave you with the promise to “blog” again next time.

Expressing a coaching philosophy
We women foundation supports women whose passions, goals and motivation implicate them as future leaders of Burma. The long-term aim of the We women from Burma project is to assist unrecognized refugee women into obtaining higher positions within policy-making or influential organizations, so that they can empower women and their communities. Coaching is a very important part of the project, as was stressed by the students. Most of the participating women are under serious pressure to finish their education. At the same time, they have to manage their often very intense lives.

In order to meet their personal needs - and the goals of We women - we expressed a coaching philosophy:
 

• Coaching supports the women in gaining more control in their own lives, allowing them to chase dreams they hold for themselves and their communities, by acting on issues that they define as important.
• Coaching methods address and meet the needs of Burmese culture, while - at the same time - supporting the women with means to grow within their community.
• Coaching increases personal growth and leadership. Although we are not specifically training team skills, we feel very confident our women’s independence will allow them to achieve desired team positions.
• Coaching methods adapt to the various stages in the program, in order to help the women achieve the level of independence they need to make it through the in-university stage.
• Coaching is always based on equality, encouraging self-awareness and critical thinking. Authority and supervisor attitude do not fit We women.
• Vice versa, equality and mutuality - through coaching - helps We women to continuously learn and improve methods and projects.

Various elements make a coherent framework for support
We named a variety of development and coaching needs throughout the We women from Burma project. These needs or key competencies - 17 in total - break up into ‘work and study’, ‘personal’ and ‘leadership’. Some are more practical, others personal and in-depth. Some call for a professionally guided process, others do better when students help each other out. To shape the entire framework for support, we put four complementary elements into place:

1. Coaching: aiming at balance and focus through personal and leadership skills.
2. Mentoring: advising on and fixing practical problems by someone with senior skills.
3. Peer groups: meetings to share experiences focus on sharing underlying feelings.
4. Social network: a safe and designated online space for students to meet and connect.

Coaching differs from western style coaching

Compared to western style coaching, I find three differences shape a less western coaching approach:
 

(1) Stuck in the present versus stuck in the future or past

Stuck in the future or past could well be the most common starting point for coaching in the West; driven by lots of future thinking, big individual dreams and unresolved issues. In the West we often have difficulties understanding our present - feelings, anxieties, thoughts, life’s questions - to back up our dreams and future thinking. Therefore western style coaching regularly is about exploring today’s reality to get a better grip; for example on dreams and other future oriented behaviour. 

Stuck in the present might fit We women better. In this context it’s far more difficult to hold big dreams and goals in life, particularly as an individual. For one, because Buddhism focuses on today. But maybe even more so, for the students today’s reality is omnipresent, shaped by being a responsible representative of a larger community under difficult circumstances. Not to mention the refugee context, which means these people have fled experiences of poverty, sometimes violence and other significant life experiences. An illegal status in Thailand only adds to the insecurity and reality of a life in which there are less opportunities to chase dreams and aspirations. Digging out dreams within this reality can be ethically questionable.
 

(2) Different views on a life’s journey

A Buddhist quote on personal leadership states: “Like the captain of a ship, a leader must have a definite goal; only then can he chart his course and steer his ship in the right direction.” This ‘eastern’ journey is all about responsibility, about being a role model within your community who may lead the way. Mark Twain - a famous American writer - puts it differently. In lines well known to western travellers he states: "Twenty years from now you will be more disappointed by the things that you didn’t do than by the ones you did do. So throw off the bowlines. Sail away from the safe harbour. Catch the trade winds in your sails. Explore. Dream. Discover." This journey is about courage, experimenting and discovering new ways by being an individual. Two very different views on life holding values that shape our journey and influence a coaching approach.
 

(3) High context versus low context

A low context culture is one in which things are fully yet briefly spelled out. These cultures rely on making things explicit. They often refer to what is actually said or written. A high context culture is one in which people assume a great deal of common knowledge and views. A lot less is spelled out, issues remain implicit and are often transferred indirectly. Most Asian cultures are high context; as goes for Burma. Coaching will have to deal with less direct and more implicit ways.

These three differences - together with We women coaching experience - shapes our coaching style and methods. It differs from typical western coaching in the following characteristics:

• Invest time, don’t push forward: within the specific We women context, coaches should invest much more time in getting to know and understand the student; especially their ways of today. The coach has to accept that students are often driven by the present, without pushing perspectives ‘for the better’. This way she can help students to realistically open up to personal dreams and goals.
• Touch on but don’t follow on practical issues: at present practical issues are also taken on within coaching. These issues - although important - particularly add to the feeling of being stuck in the present. By adding mentoring for practical issues, we create as much coaching time as possible to focus on future goals and dreams and personal and leadership development.
• Less play, find focus first: different views on a life’s journey make We women coaching benefit most from no-nonsense methods. Western coaches often apply behavioural experiments to playfully find new ways. In our specific context the pressure of today’s reality calls for an approach in which we take firm hold of the bowlines and cherish the harbour. We want to find some clear and definitive focus points first, before we sail out. A less experimental approach starts with developing a clear vision; like the captain of a ship.
• Adapt to less direct ways; avoid being too liberal-minded: once the vision is clear, coaching addresses personal barriers similar to western style guidance. Nevertheless, We women has to accept that coaching on average will be less direct and more implicit, the amount of which depends on the needs and personality of the student. The coach has to adapt to less direct ways - show some cultural sensitivity - to actually connect with the student. Less direct also means we cannot focus on the individual too much. We don’t want to be too liberal-minded. In our context, connecting to the communities behind the individual is vital, even though we highly encourage critical thinking.
• Advice is no taboo: coaches in the West actually avoid giving any advice whatsoever; it’s all about individuality and ‘ownership’. But as our students try to balance individuality and community, they will at times have fundamental different views on ownership. We feel ownership - the student ultimately deciding on what to do - goes with personal leadership. Nevertheless, careful advice giving is no taboo for We women coaching; as long as equality and critical thinking are secured.
• Keep thinking (cultural) leadership: Within the context of We women from Burma, we want to be extra careful not to impose western concepts onto the students. Nevertheless, We women is about leadership, which means the students also need to face cultural challenges at some point. Therefore acknowledging cultural differences - challenging habits and ideas - can be an interesting part of coaching the more advanced students. The same goes for openly discussing leadership competencies, issues and ambitions.

Pre-university mentoring takes on practical issues
In addition to coaching, mentoring aims to develop work and study competencies and to solve practical problems. A mentor - which could well be a We women project coordinator - focuses on both advising and fixing issues. Mentoring is practical problem-solving on a demand-supply basis. In practice, we like the students to have a meeting with their mentor, immediately following on their coaching session. That way they’ll be able to get practicalities out of the way whereas necessary, while still being able to focus on the more personal aspects through coaching.

Besides 1-on-1 mentoring, we like to set up mentor groups in the pre-university stage. These groups of four to six students will meet with their mentor about four times a year, alternating individual meetings. Mentor groups provide the opportunity to learn from each other’s practical issues. On the other hand, it’s a good platform - and a time-saver - to train or explain activities every student has to deal with.

In-university peer groups support each other
To facilitate students in helping each other, we came up with the idea for We women to set up peer groups during the in-university stage. During this stage, mentoring hours are limited and students are often away from We women base, studying at universities in different cities or even countries. Peer groups focus on discussing issues in small groups of four to six fellow-students. Students help each other analyzing issues and present each other with advice. In the end - of course - it’s up to the students them selves whether they act on the advice given. Peer groups are catalysts, feeding out students with thoughts, ideas and feedback. Students will be trained on how to do peer supervision.

Peer supervision helps students solve both practical and more strategic or personal issues. In general, the longer a group sticks together, the more reflective it gets. The beauty of peer reflection is how it often cuts both ways. While reflecting on others issues, students will learn for them selves. They get acquainted with their own wisdom by overhearing them selves giving it to someone else.

The diagram below represents the way different elements adapt to the various stages in the We women from Burma project. The entire framework - including a format for personal development plans and elaboration of the various elements - is laid out in concept notes. 

Connect via We women Social Network
To facilitate contacts amongst students in a safe and discrete way, We women will start an online forum designed to provide an designated space for students to share concerns, experiences and advice. With minor input from We women staff, this forum will primarily be sustained through peer participation. The content discussed in this online forum could vary from topics useful to university life and studies as well as general peer support when personal needs arise. The forum is not only a place to voice concerns, but will allow students to share resources and ideas relevant to their studies. This can include for example online resources, as well as direct feedback from fellow-students. The network serves as a place to share any news or post topics that are of interest. It is a space for friendly and open communication.

The We women student network is getting bigger and bigger. Some are preparing for university, others are already busy doing their masters and soon enough this network will hold experienced and successful alumni-students. In time, the online social network will become a searchable bookshelf of knowledge and contacts.

Coaching, mentoring, mentor groups, peer groups, social networking; together they make a coherent framework that fits We women practise. Starting from this summer, We women will continue to shape and develop all of these elements. We women will look for an additional professional coach, preferably rooted in Burmese culture. The first mentor and peer groups will be set up this summer, and piloting the online social network has already started.
I’ll be gone, but I can’t wait to get back in touch for a first half years evaluation. 

For more information on We women foundation, link to their website or Facebook page.

What makes you commit? ‘Believer, calculator or supporter?’

After two months on our volunteer job, we’re already calling it a day. It’s not because we don’t like the job or they want us out a.s.a.p. In all fairness we can say it’s because we’re moving on. Nevertheless it does feel a bit like quitting. Not like it did when we left our jobs last summer, but still. We try to make the best of it before we leave and then we say our goodbyes. Off we go, stuffed with memories and afterthoughts. As a coach, I often meet people contemplating on their job and career choices. I find it interesting always, to see how strongly committed people actually are to their jobs. If only their organizations could see half of it. Today - quitting jobs for the second time in a year and juggling (and struggling) with commitment myself - I wonder how people get so committed? And what about commitment across cultures?

Just imagine your company spirals downward. Or continuously having fights with your manager? What if ethics changed? What if your stress-level keeps getting tested? What if you’re salary lags your responsibility and efforts? Or what if you’re developing a serious dislike for your job? Across cultures, people tend to respond differently. Yes, there are strong economical and personal influences, but research filtered out some interesting cultural aspects. We all know the world famous example of Japanese workers. Their loyalty and obedience by far exceeds what we’re used to in Western societies. As well as thoughts about quitting an organization based on costs and benefits are rare in Japan. Such decisions were often made a long time ago; sometimes even based on family heritage.

But what is commitment? The best description I found is ‘persistence with a purpose’. An inner force or action, that feels like attachment, identification or loyalty. If it comes to being committed to our jobs, we can distinct three types:

• Affective commitment is ‘a strong belief in and acceptance of the goals and values of an organization’ (Porter). I’d like to talk about believers. 
• Continuance commitment is a more calculative for of commitment; the result of ‘side-bets’ or investments that increase the costs you would accrue if you leave the organization (Meyer). Let’s call these calculators. 
• Normative commitment is a sense of obligation, feeling you ought to remain with the organization (Meyer & Allen). I’ll call these supporters.
  

I’m guessing you might already feel a certain response - familiarity, allergy, itch - when going over one or two of these different types of commitment. Am I right? Why do we respond like that? What makes you commit? Culturally, this is mainly related to dimensions such as individualism versus collectivism and power distance. Individualism feeds both believing and calculating. When you identify less with groups, you’re more likely to stay committed because of inner values or individual benefits. Collectivism on the other hand, is positively associated with supporting. If you identify with groups, you’re more likely to feel obliged to stick with those. Power distance - the extent to which people accept differences in power - is higher in places like Japan, South-East Asia, Argentina or Spain in comparison to Northern Europe and the US. Power distance feeds supporting. The greater the power distance the greater the emphasis on obedience and loyalty. If power distance is low, it’s a lot easier to evaluate authority and assess personal benefits. Not to mention it’ll be a lot easier to confront your boss.

There are interesting paradoxes though. Research proved that turnover - and turnover intentions - were a lot lower in Japan compared to the US. Nevertheless, self-reported levels of commitment in the US are generally higher than in any other culture. Wouldn’t you expect a lower turnover then? It turned out that in the US, a sense of obligation to the organization - supporting - hardly influences the intention of staying; unlike any other country. In the US, I’m sure, this is related to job security; the level of commitment of organizations and governments towards individuals.

Yet how strong are these cultural influences? Not particularly strong. We universally recognize each of these commitment types. Our tendency to be committed - either as a believer, a calculator or a supporter - varies within cultures, from person to person and time to time. For just as much reason, someone could blog about commitment and gender. Nevertheless I’ve learned there are a few universal reasons for sticking to our jobs. In random order this is because (1) we feel we are fairly compensated, (2) we feel we want to make a contribution (to either the organization or its goals), (3) we feel we are still able to learn something, and (4) we feel we can fit the job on a daily life that meets with our other needs.

Leaving We women foundation I’m genuinely happy to have felt strongly committed to an organization, without any interference of calculative commitment. I find believing and supporting are the more likable forces within. My own heroes are not as such because of their skills, talents or intelligence. What I admire is their ability to be human: not knowing, making mistakes, going different ways, losing temper or patience and then - because of commitment to a cause, a person or a group - reflect, learn and get back on track. If that happens to you: stay! That’s when you know for sure how much you really care.

Commitment to a cause - www.coachcultures.org

For some reflection on our volunteering at We women, see our We women blog: “Looking back over a tealeaf salad”.
For more background on commitment across cultures, see: “Commitment across cultures: A meta-analytical approach”, Fischer and Mansell (2008).

Throw off your bowlines or cherish your harbour?

When discussing the coaching framework with Ursula at We women foundation, we dwelled upon how women from Burma point at their heart when talking about both their heart and mind. If you’re into Buddhism, you’ll know more about this. It’s very different from a Western upbringing, in which we clearly see the mind in one place and the heart in another. I often state that coaching is all about being you; both connecting our inside to what we show on the outside and connecting our hearts and minds. It feels like we can easily spend a lifetime ‘unconfusing’ ourselves. But what if a Burmese upbringing - or maybe a Buddhist upbringing in general - causes a different sort of confusion? What would it be like? And how does it influence a coaching approach?

I’m only starting to dig in, so obviously I’m far from having the answers. Plus I’m not what you might call an expert on Buddhism. Nevertheless, I feel like I am slowly waking up to a different coaching approach, to actually fit the local context. We women works within a very specific local context. They support female refugees from Burma - illegal migrants in Thailand - whose passions, goals and motivation implicate them as future leaders of Burma. Most women that take part in the project - talented and motivated as they are - are under a lot of pressure to finish their education. At the same time, these women have to manage their very intense lives. Therefore, coaching is already a vital part of their project.

So what changes a coaching approach compared to western style coaching? This is what I’m thinking:

• “Stuck in our future or past, trying to work out the present” could well be the most common starting point for coaching in the West. I feel we Westerners are mind racers - disconnected from our feelings or heritage - often far from knowing what it is that actually drives us. Western people do lots of future thinking; having big individual dreams. Not to mention we often have unresolved issues in our past. All together we seem to have lots of difficulties sensing and understanding our present - feelings, anxieties, thoughts, life’s questions - to back up our dreams and future thinking. Coaching is often about exploring today’s reality to get a better grip on our future oriented behaviour. 

 

• “Stuck in the present” might fit Buddhist cultures better. Over here, it is far more difficult to hold big dreams and goals in life, particularly as an individual. If only because Buddhism focuses on today. But for the women from Burma the reality of today is omnipresent, often shaped by being a responsible representative of a larger community. Then there’s the refugee context. These people have fled experiences of poverty, sometimes violence and other significant life experiences. On top of this, living as illegal migrants in Thailand adds to the insecurity and reality of a life in which there are less opportunities to chase dreams and aspirations. You could question the ethics of digging out dreams within this reality, right? On the other hand, people are much more aware of their feelings, anxieties, primary thoughts and life’s questions.

In addition, Asian cultures are often high context cultures; which means a lot less is spelled out and experiences and ideas are often much more implicit, So how to discuss matters as a coach? (Click here for more information on high versus low context). You might start to feel that a Western style of personal coaching is a total misfit for female refugees from Burma. But for now, I disagree.

Why? Let’s just simplify by saying that coaching is about personal leadership. I would argue that it’s all about opening up to your own journey. If that is the case, I feel Eastern and Western cultures have an interestingly different view on the concept of a life’s journey. A Buddhist quote on personal leadership states: “Like the captain of a ship, a leader must have a definite goal; only then can he chart his course and steer his ship in the right direction.” This journey - on the one hand - is all about responsibility and about being a role model within your community who may lead the way. Mark Twain - a famous American writer - puts it differently. In lines well known to Western travellers he states: "Twenty years from now you will be more disappointed by the things that you didn’t do than by the ones you did do. So throw off the bowlines. Sail away from the safe harbour. Catch the trade winds in your sails. Explore. Dream. Discover." This journey is about courage, experimenting and discovering new ways by being an individual. Different values shape our journey.

I feel these different concepts of a life’s journey - plus being stuck in the present versus future or past - shape a non-Western coaching approach. Not entirely different, but different for sure in terms of pace, focus, methods and behaviour. Feel free the comment. I’m happy to get back to you later with more specific ideas. But for now, I’m trying to withhold myself from jumping into conclusions; happy to learn from these more time-plentiful cultures.

The heart & the mind - www.coachcultures.org

Crisis? What Crisis?

No, this blog is not about Supertramp’s Fourth Album. But it would be a lousy title for my blog if there wasn’t any parallel. Supertramp released their Album during the mid-seventies oil-crisis, ironically denying the crisis. Well, I would love to add some question marks to today’s crisis. A few weeks ago, my colleague Ron got me started, by saying a crisis is nothing more than our world evolving very - very - fast. A very interesting thought. Yes, if we don’t want change, we - our government, financial ‘authorities’, whoever - may speak of crisis. But I feel this time of change holds lots of long-awaited good, which just might make our European or global crisis a most interesting and enjoyable time to discover new ways.

Three weeks ago, in my blog ‘so many ways’, I talked about inspiring Asian entrepreneurs, opening up to a diversity of ideas and solutions. So how about inspiration today? Even better, as I am now surrounded by social entrepreneurs. A funny combination of words ‘social-entrepreneurs’, which is used since the eighties (post-crisis) to label people who use business principles to solve social issues. Instead of focusing on profit and return, social entrepreneurs like to focus on creating social capital. That’s why social entrepreneurs are often associated with voluntary and non-profit sectors. Although there are even more ways. What is most appealing to me is how social entrepreneurs are always most active in times of so-called crisis, no matter the shape, size or geographic location. Social entrepreneurs want to contribute, highly motivated by making positive changes. They see all sorts of opportunities and - most important of all - seize opportunities where others freeze or get frustrated.

Today I myself got the opportunity to contribute to a very interesting, driven social ventures called We women foundation. Volunteering for now, as a coach, which of course in my case is something of a luxury thing. But you’d have to understand that no one makes big bucks in social ventures like these. That’s not how you create social capital. We women is about supporting strong unrecognized refugee women from Burma to build capacity within their community. About increasing their abilities to make and influence policy decisions in Burma, which today are too often made by outsiders. About supporting these women to make it to and through University, to promote their chances of achieving their dreams and goals. All of which is social capital. I can tell you, seeing these things work out is seriously good pay.

Many things happen in Burma today, many of which are very problematic. Problematic and complex in ways that make our European crisis seem very - very - shallow. But no matter the shape or size of crisis, these specifically are times to create positive and lasting change in fast-evolving communities.

So if you ever feel locked in by our European and global crisis, stuck on a train towards change that is not you. Change trains at the next stop and seize your crisis-opportunity to join or become a social entrepreneur. It’s a ‘crisis’, so you’ll find them around. Yes of course, you’ll make less of a buck. But hey, it’s crisis anyway! Maybe you’ll have to adjust your standards a bit. But a few days or weeks down the line you’ll know you’re investing, focused on positive change. And some time later you’ll feel it too. Soon, very - very - soon, you’ll find out how little the word crisis actually means. I’d highly recommend this change of perspective.

Do we look up or down across cultures?

Last week I got started on my new volunteer job, setting up a coaching framework for We women foundation in Chiang Mai (Thailand). We women supports unrecognized refugee women whose passions, goals and motivation implicate them as future leaders of Burma. Coaching is on of more important aspects in We womens’ programs, which makes this job a double inspiration for me.

We womens’ staff and volunteers are a happy mix of Dutch, Shan from Burma, Burmese, US, US-Korean-Thai, British and Thai. What struck me immediately is how all staff and volunteer members - culture to culture - almost seem to look up to one another. Better put: everyone is valuing and admiring different qualities and styles and there’s a high level of mutual respect. Which reminded me of an article I once read (and forgot about), explaining how - across cultures - people tend to look down upon themselves. Others - or other cultures - seem so naturally skilled sometimes, while some skills never seem to come easy for you and me. I’m sure you recognize the feeling, right? Looking up across cultures feels good, as it fills you with positive emotions such as interest and admiration.

But, unfortunately, that would be all too easy. This week at lunch, one of the staff members mentioned how Thai people often tend to look down upon people from Burma in Thailand. My mind raced back to the Netherlands, where some not very interesting right winged political party opened a website to encourage complaints about Eastern European migrants. Encouraging people to look down for sure. As we all know, looking down unfortunately is common. So, here’s my question: Do we look up or down towards other cultures? I’ll try a rational approach for a change.

Why do we look down? Although luckily many treasure tolerance and equality, simultaneously discrimination, suppression and racism is happening. Some people look down on others because of occupation, appearance, religion, gender, culture, sexual orientation or even car brand. Most of this is based on prejudice: not knowing. Prejudice tends to make people unsure and less confident, or sometimes even scared or hostile. It’s a cliché, but when I meet arrogance or violence, 90% of the time I see a big whack of insecurity and prejudice. So that’s one. Secondly, people subconsciously look down because of different cultural habits and conceptions. Chileans for example, have very little tolerance for failure. That’s why there are so few entrepreneurs in Chile. It also explains why Chileans look down upon small Asian businesses; not racial but rather based on the way Chileans - and you and me - think and act. Thirdly - and not in the least - people tend to look down because of trends in media and politics. Looking down has become a global sport. Every day papers, social media and television thrive on the latest fails of celebrities and politicians. Looking down can be very easy and subconscious.

So why then do we look up? First of all, as people move around and meet with different cultures, they often feel clumsy and not very well adjusted. I know I did sometimes. If you don’t walk the walk or talk the talk, you’re bound to feel insecure at some point. In these situations, many people tend see themselves as less competent which makes them look up against others. Secondly, many people are curious and want to pick up new ideas or skills. This is a firm ground for looking up at different qualities. And if it turns out we still don’t understand, people are often very much willing to admire. As said, admiration makes us feel happy and good; that's why we all have our heroes. And have you noticed how our heroes are often very much unlike ours selves? For good reasons, as differences appeal and challenge us. The same goes for admiring other cultures. Thirdly - to wrap things up - there’s self-awareness and self-confidence. If you feel these apply to you, you are more likely to look up and learn from other people. At least it won’t put you down.
 
Back to We women. The mutual admiration struck me, so I’m afraid this is still the lesser common. But looking down is just so not satisfactory, don’t you agree? We’d want to make sure we look up instead of down, or at least make some eye contact with other cultures. Ask yourself this: How do you expect to enjoy your lifetime with 7 billion others in this world - different people, different skills, different ideas and different values - if you’re not willing to appreciate differences? I for one am sure cross-cultural coaching would be out of the question without admiration and some serious sense of our diverse reality.