0
0
I recently agreed to catch-up with an old friend with whom I completed my ICF Coach accreditation training. This course included 60 hours of coursework followed by 100 hours of practical experience. It’s been a few years since then, and it’s fascinating to reflect on how I’ve applied coaching, how the training has influenced me, and how my approach has evolved since.
I initially pursued coaching because of my background in project management and leading change within organizations. I’ve often felt that in periods of imposed change, there are winners and losers. I’ve always been concerned, sometimes even anxious, about those who are impacted by change, especially when they feel that the process is happening to them rather than with them. For some, this can lead to a kind of existential crisis, as they face new policies, procedures, colleagues, or technologies.
I’ve always been drawn to the concept of agency—the ability to act for oneself rather than relying on others. I recognize, however, that not everyone feels this way. Many people value belonging and collegiality, and change can be particularly challenging for them. My own self-reliance, perhaps due to my role as a consultant moving from client to client, has shaped my view of change. I’ve rarely formed deep ties with any one organization.
Coaching has broadened my perspective. It has moved me away from a purely mechanistic approach to organizational change and performance. It’s made me think more holistically—about the whole person, their context, their thoughts and feelings—rather than just the tasks at hand. It’s shifted my focus from simply doing to understanding how we are in the world.
After completing my coaching course, I went on to study mentoring, mediation, and therapeutic work, and I became a mental health first aider. These experiences have further developed the “right side” of my brain, balancing my naturally logical and systematic approach. My reading in psychology, philosophy, history, and culture has also influenced this journey.
Now, when I engage with people or organizations, I’m much more interested in the person and the circumstances of change than in the mechanics of how to execute it. I find myself asking “why” more often than “how.” After nearly 40 years of implementing change across individuals, teams, and organizations, the “how” is second nature to me. But the “why”—whether related to politics, policies, or circumstances—continues to intrigue me.
My approach to coaching aligns strongly with individual agency. I’ve found myself working with separated families, taking a serious interest in homelessness, volunteering for a cancer strategy, and doing significant pro bono work for organizations like MIND, Jersey Recovery College, and the Longevity Project. These are quite different from my previous work, such as incorporating public sector utilities or implementing technology for trust and company service providers, but they share common themes: the essence of humanity, belonging, and striving.
Perhaps my own journey has shifted from striving to thriving. Maybe that’s a function of age, or perhaps it’s the reflection that has led me on this coaching path, or maybe coaching has led me to be more reflective. Either way, I’m in the same place, but seeing the world through different eyes.
I approach my clients with flexibility. After many years of experience, few things unsettle me, and I can be genuinely curious, accepting, and supportive, even in unfamiliar situations. I recognize the power of simply being human, of listening, and allowing others to shape the dialogue and context. I see myself as a partner in thought and feeling, exploring ideas together rather than leading or directing.
I’ve truly benefited from my coaching experience, and clients have shared that they have benefited as well. But I also understand that different coaches have different styles, just as people have different needs. Not everyone is a perfect match, and that’s okay. Like any relationship, some people ignite a spark, while others may not. But even relationships that aren’t based on shared interests or commonalities can be provocative, enlightening, and rewarding.
