Transcript Relation shaping activities Delivering case specific information

The communication process in coaching
Coach
Coach
Coach
Communication contributions
Coachee
Coachee
The communication process in coaching
Coach
Coach
Communication
contributions
Coachee
Coach
Macro-Analysis
Meso-Analysis
Micro-Analysis
Coachee
The linguistic structure of communication
Communication
contributions
Micro-Analysis
illocutionary
component
propositional
component
The linguistic structure of the illocutionary component
of coaching communication
frame setting
communication activities
illocutionary component
of coaching
communication
problem solving
communication activities
The linguistic structure of the frame setting
commuication acitivies in coaching communication
frame setting
communication activities
Relation shaping activities
Delivering case specific information
illocutionary component
of coaching
communication
Delivering general information
Discussing a contribution
Mirroring
Giving feedback
Ask questions
Encourage to do something
Producing self disclosure
The four aspects of communication (Schulz von Thun)
Delivering case specific information
Delivering general information
Discussing a contribution
Mirroring
Giving feedback
Ask questions
appeal
Relation shaping
activities
relation shaping
content
self disclosure
Producing self disclosure
Encourage to do
something
Th frame setting activities
– the coach‘s side of communication
Relation shaping activities
Delivering case specific information
Delivering general information
Discussing a contribution
Mirroring
Giving feedback
Ask questions
Encourage to do something
Producing self disclosure
Coach
7%
1%
4%
4%
1%
5%
A1/A’1
A2.1/A’2.1
A2.2/A’2.2
A2.3/A’2.3
A2.4/A’2.4
23%
A2.5/A’2.5
A3.1/A’3.1
A3.2/A’3.2
A4/A’4
55%
0%
Th frame setting activities
– the coachee‘s side of communication
Relation shaping activities
Delivering case specific information
Delivering general information
Discussing a contribution
Mirroring
Giving feedback
Ask questions
Encourage to do something
Producing self disclosure
Klient
3%
31%
A1/A’1
A2.1/A’2.1
A2.2/A’2.2
A2.3/A’2.3
A2.4/A’2.4
54%
A2.5/A’2.5
A3.1/A’3.1
A3.2/A’3.2
0%
3%
0%
1%
7%
1%
A4/A’4
The linguistic structure of the illocutionary component
of coaching communication
frame setting
communication activities
illocutionary component
of coaching
communication
problem solving
communication activities
The logical structure of problem solving activites - I
drawing consequences for action
evaluating the analysed information
analysing information
focussing relevant information
motivation
The logical structure of problem solving activities - II
Instructional approach
Facilitating approach
drawing consequences for action
drawing consequences for action
evaluating the analysed information
analysing information
focussing relevant information
motivation
The linguistic structure of problem solving activities
in coaching – the instructional approach
presenting consequences drawn from reflection
evaluation activities with using a scale
evaluation activities without using a scale
reflecting sense and meaning
reflecting causalities
reflecting processes
making differences
focussing relevant information emotionaly
focussing relevant information more precisely
focussing relevant information cognitively
presenting the own problem solving motivation
The linguistic structure of problem solving activities
in coaching – the instructional approach
Coach (BA)
BA1/ BA’1
18%
BA2.1/ BA’2.1
9%
BA2.2/ BA’2.2
0%
18%
BA2.3/ BA’2.3
BA3.1/ BA’3.1
0%
37%
18%
0%
BA3.2/ BA’3.2
BA3.3/BA’3.3
BA3.4/BA’3.4
BA4.1/ BA’4.1
BA4.2/ BA’4.2
BA5/ BA’5
The linguistic structure of problem solving activities
in coaching – the instructional approach
Klient (BA)
8%
1%
2%
BA1/ BA’1
17%
BA2.1/ BA’2.1
13%
BA2.2/ BA’2.2
2%
BA2.3/ BA’2.3
BA3.1/ BA’3.1
7%
6%
BA3.2/ BA’3.2
BA3.3/ BA’3.3
8%
BA3.4/ BA’3.4
BA4.1/ BA’4.1
BA4.2/ BA’4.2
17%
BA5/ BA’5
19%
The linguistic structure of problem solving activities
in coaching – the facilitating approach
Giving an impuls to draw consequences from reflection
Giving an impuls to evaluate activities with using a scale
giving an imuls to evaluate activities without using a scale
giving an impuls to reflect sense and meaning
giving an impuls to reflect causalities
giving an imuls to reflect processes
giving an impuls to make differences
giving an impuls to focus relevant information emotionaly
giving an impuls to focus relevant information more precisely
giving an impuls to focus relevant information cognitively
Giving an impuls to improve the problem solving motivation
The linguistic structure of problem solving activities
in coaching – the facilitating approach
Coach (BB)
BB1/ BB’1
4%
BB2.1/ BB’2.1
8% 1%
BB2.2/ BB’2.2
6%
2%
BB2.3/ BB’2.3
39%
BB3.1/ BB’3.1
BB3.2/ BB’3.2
12%
BB3.3/BB’3.3
BB3.4/BB’3.4
9%
5%
6%
8%
BB4.1/ BB’4.1
BB4.2/ BB’4.2
BB5/ BB’5
The linguistic structure of problem solving activities
in coaching – the facilitating approach
Klient (BB)
BB1/ BB’1
8%
BB2.1/ BB’2.1
19%
BB2.2/ BB’2.2
BB2.3/ BB’2.3
BB3.1/ BB’3.1
BB3.2/ BB’3.2
49%
BB3.3/ BB’3.3
8%
0%
4%
0%
0%4%
8%
BB3.4/ BB’3.4
BB4.1/ BB’4.1
BB4.2/ BB’4.2
BB5/ BB’5
B
BA A1 /
2 . BA
1
B A / B ’1
2 . A ’2
BA 2 / B .1
2 . A ’2
3
BA / B .2
3 . A ’2
1
BA / B .3
3 . A ’3
2
BA / B .1
3 . A ’3
3
.
BA /B 2
A
3
’3
BA .4 /B .3
4 . A’3
1
BA / B .4
4 . A ’4
2/
.
BA 1
BA ’4.
5/ 2
B BA
BB B1 ’5
2 . / BB
1
B B / B ’1
2 . B ’2
BB 2 / B .1
2 . B ’2
3
BB / B .2
3 . B ’2
1
BB / B .3
3 . B ’3
2
BB / B .1
3 . B ’3
3
BB /B .2
3 . B’3
BB 4 /B .3
4 . B’3
1
BB / B .4
4 . B ’4
2/
.
BB 1
BB ’4.
5/ 2
BB
’5
The linguistic structure of problem solving activities
in coaching
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
N/C
N/K
Combinations of frame setting and problem solving
activities
Relation shaping activities
Delivering case specific information
Giving an impuls to draw consequences from reflection
Delivering general information
Giving an impuls to evaluate activities with using a scale
Discussing a contribution
giving an imuls to evaluate activities without using a scale
Mirroring
giving an impuls to reflect sense and meaning
giving an impuls to reflect causalities
Giving feedback
giving an imuls to reflect processes
Ask questions
giving an impuls to make differences
Encourage to do something
giving an impuls to focus relevant information
emotionaly self
Producing
giving an impuls to focus relevant information more precisely
giving an impuls to focus relevant information cognitively
Giving an impuls to improve the problem solving motivation
disclosure
Combinations of frame setting and problem solving
activities
Relation shaping activities
Delivering case specific information
presenting consequences drawn from reflection
Delivering general information
evaluation activities with using a scale
Discussing a contribution
evaluation activities without using a scale
reflecting sense and meaning
Mirroring
reflecting causalities
Giving feedback
reflecting processes
Ask questions
making differences
Encourage to do something
focussing relevant information emotionaly
Producing self disclosure
focussing relevant information more precisely
focussing relevant information cognitively
presenting the own problem solving motivation
Combinations of frame setting and problem solving
activities – the coach‘s side of communication
giving an impuls to draw consequences from reflection
giving an impuls to evaluate activities with using a scale
giving an imuls to evaluate activities without using a scale
giving an impuls to reflect sense and meaning
giving an impuls to reflect causalities
Ask
questions
giving an imuls to reflect processes
giving an impuls to make differences
giving an impuls to focus relevant information emotionaly
giving an impuls to focus relevant information more precisely
giving an impuls to focus relevant information cognitively
giving an impuls to improve the problem solving motivation
Combinations of frame setting and problem solving
activities – the coach‘s side of communication
giving an impuls to draw consequences from reflection
giving an impuls to evaluate activities with using a scale
giving an imuls to evaluate activities without using a scale
giving an impuls to reflect sense and meaning
giving an impuls to reflect causalities
Mirroring
giving an imuls to reflect processes
giving an impuls to make differences
giving an impuls to focus relevant information emotionaly
giving an impuls to focus relevant information more precisely
giving an impuls to focus relevant information cognitively
giving an impuls to improve the problem solving motivation
Combinations of frame setting and problem solving
activities – the coachee‘s side of communication
presenting consequences drawn from reflection
evaluation activities with using a scale
evaluation activities without using a scale
reflecting sense and meaning
Producing
self
disclosure
reflecting causalities
reflecting processes
making differences
focussing relevant information emotionaly
focussing relevant information more precisely
focussing relevant information cognitively
presenting the own problem solving motivation
Combinations of frame setting and problem solving
activities – the coachee‘s side of communication
presenting consequences drawn from reflection
evaluation activities with using a scale
evaluation activities without using a scale
reflecting sense and meaning
Delivering
case specific
information
reflecting causalities
reflecting processes
making differences
focussing relevant information emotionaly
focussing relevant information more precisely
focussing relevant information cognitively
presenting the own problem solving motivation
The linguistic structure of communication
Communication
contributions
Micro-Analysis
illocutionary
component
propositional
component
The linguistic structure of the propositional component
of coaching communication
Content of communication
Reference actor
Reference actor‘s action aspect
Reference actor‘s context
propositional component
of coaching
communication
Position in time the speaker refers to
Mode of reality the speaker refers to
The temporal point of view
The social point of view
Content evaluation
The linguistic structure of the propositional component of
coaching communication – the actor the speaker refers to
Speaker
Communication partner
Speaker and his/her partner
Content of communication
Reference actor
Reference actor‘s
action aspect
Rererence actor‘s
context
Third party people
Speaker together with third party
people
Partner together with third party
people
Actor can‘t be realised precisely
Who is the actor the speaker refers to? –
The coach‘s side of communication
Speaker
Communication partner
Speaker and his/her partner
Content of communication
Reference actor
Reference actor‘s
action aspect
Rererence actor‘s
context
Third party people
Speaker together with third party
people
Partner together with third party
people
Actor can‘t be realised precisely
Who is the actor the speaker refers to? –
The coach‘s side of communication
Coach (CA)
5%
1% 7%
5%0%
CA1/ CA’1
CA2/ CA’2
CA3/ CA’3
CA4/ CA’4
CA5/ CA’5
CA6/ CA’6
CA7/ CA’7
82%
Who is the actor the speaker refers to? –
The coachee‘s side of communication
Speaker
Communication partner
Speaker and his/her partner
Content of communication
Reference actor
Reference actor‘s
action aspect
Rererence actor‘s
context
Third party people
Speaker together with third party
people
Partner together with third party
people
Actor can‘t be realised precisely
Who is the actor the speaker refers to? –
The coachee‘s side of communication
Klient
2%
4%0%
CA1/ CA’1
18%
CA2/ CA’2
CA3/ CA’3
CA4/ CA’4
3%
CA5/ CA’5
9%
64%
CA6/ CA’6
CA7/ CA’7
What is the action aspect the speaker refers to?
Unspecified situation
Content of communication
Reference actor
Reference actor‘s
action aspect
Rererence actor‘s
context
Reference actor‘s intention
Reference actor‘s outer context
Reference actor‘s inner context
Reference actor‘s action/decision
Consequence of (no) action
What is the action aspect the speaker refers to?
– The coach‘s side of communication
Unspecified situation
Content of communication
Reference actor
Reference actor‘s
action aspect
Rererence actor‘s
context
Reference actor‘s intention
Reference actor‘s outer context
Reference actor‘s inner context
Reference actor‘s action/decision
Consequence of (no) action
What is the action aspect the speaker refers to?
– The coach‘s side of communication
Coach (CB)
13%
12%
12%
CB’1
CB’2
CB’3.1
6%
CB’3.2
CB’4
37%
CB’5
20%
What is the action aspect the speaker refers to?
– The coachee‘s side of communication
Unspecified situation
Content of communication
Reference actor
Reference actor‘s
action aspect
Rererence actor‘s
context
Reference actor‘s intention
Reference actor‘s outer context
Reference actor‘s inner context
Reference actor‘s action/decision
Consequence of (no) action
What is the action aspect the speaker refers to?
– The coachee‘s side of communication
Klient (CB)
8%
3%
12%
CB1/ CB’1
9%
CB2 / CB’2
CB3.1/ CB’3.1
CB3.2 / CB’3.2
41%
CB4 / CB’4
CB5 / CB’5
27%
What is the context the speaker refers to?
Content of communication
Reference actor
Interaction between speaker and
his/her partner
Reference actor‘s
action aspect
Interaction between speaker and
third party people
Reference actor‘s
context
Interaction between partner and
third party people
Interaction between third party
people
Context is unclear
What is the context the speaker refers to? –
The coach‘s side of communication
Content of communication
Reference actor
Interaction between speaker and
his/her partner
Reference actor‘s
action aspect
Interaction between speaker and
third party people
Reference actor‘s
context
Interaction between partner and
third party people
Interaction between third party
people
Context is unclear
What is the context the speaker refers to? –
The coach‘s side of communication
C oa c h ( C C )
1%
1%
35%
CC1/ CC’ 1
CC2/ CC’ 2
CC3/ CC’ 3
CC4/ CC’ 4
58%
CC5/ CC’ 5
5%
What is the context the speaker refers to? –
The coachee‘s side of communication
Content of communication
Reference actor
Interaction between speaker and
his/her partner
Reference actor‘s
action aspect
Interaction between speaker and
third party people
Reference actor‘s
context
Interaction between partner and
third party people
Interaction between third party
people
Context is unclear
What is the context the speaker refers to? –
The coachee‘s side of communication
Klient ( C C )
3%
4% 1%
26%
CC1/ CC’ 1
CC2/ CC’ 2
CC3/ CC’ 3
CC4/ CC’ 4
CC5/ CC’ 5
66%
The linguistic structure of the propositional component
of coaching communication
Content of communication
Reference actor
Reference actor‘s action aspect
Reference actor‘s context
propositional component
of coaching
communication
Position in time the speaker refers to
Mode of reality the speaker refers to
Temporal point of view
Social point of view
Content evaluation
What is the time the speaker refers to?
Presence
Past
Position in time
the speaker
refers to
Future
Past an presence
Presence and future
Past, presence and future
What is the time the speaker refers to?
C oa c h ( D D )
3%0%
9%
32%
D1/ D’ 1
D2/ D’ 2
D3/ D’ 3
D4/ D’ 4
D5/ D’ 5
39%
D6/ D’ 6
17%
What is the time the speaker refers to?
Klient ( D D )
4%
4%
29%
D1/ D’ 1
19%
D2/ D’ 2
D3/ D’ 3
D4/ D’ 4
D5/ D’ 5
D6/ D’ 6
14%
30%
The linguistic structure of the propositional component
of coaching communication
Content of communication
Reference actor
Reference actor‘s action aspect
Reference actor‘s context
propositional component
of coaching
communication
Content – position in time
Mode of reality the speaker refers to
Temporal point of view
Social point of view
Content evaluation
What is the mode of reality the speaker refers to?
Mode of reality
the speaker
refers to
Facts
Contingencies
What is the mode of reality the speaker refers to? –
The coach‘s side of communication
Mode of reality
the speaker
refers to
Facts
Contingencies
What is the mode of reality the speaker refers to? –
The coach‘s side of communication
C oa c h ( E E )
13%
E 1/ E ’ 1
E 2/ E ’ 2
87%
What is the mode of reality the speaker refers to? –
The coachee‘s side of communication
Mode of reality
the speaker
refers to
Facts
Contingencies
What is the mode of reality the speaker refers to? –
The coachee‘s side of communication
K l i e nt ( D D )
17%
E 1/ E ’ 1
E 2/ E ’ 2
83%
The linguistic structure of the propositional component
of coaching communication
Content of communication
Reference actor
Reference actor‘s action aspect
Reference actor‘s context
propositional component
of coaching
communication
Position in time the speaker refers to
Mode of reality the speaker refers to
Temporal point of view
Social point of view
Content evaluation
What is the temporal point of view?
Presence
Temporal point
of view
Past
Future
What is the temporal point of view? –
The coach‘s side of communication
Presence
Temporal point
of view
Past
Future
What is the temporal point of view? –
The coach‘s side of communication
C oa c h ( FF)
17 %
0%
F1/ F’ 1
F2 / F’ 2
F3 / F’ 3
83%
What is the temporal point of view? –
The coachee‘s side of communication
Presence
Temporal point
of view
Past
Future
What is the temporal point of view? –
The coachee‘s side of communication
K l i e nt ( FF)
1%
8%
F1/ F’ 1
F2/ F’ 2
F3/ F’ 3
91%
The linguistic structure of the propositional component
of coaching communication
Content of communication
Reference actor
Reference actor‘s action aspect
Reference actor‘s context
propositional component
of coaching
communication
Position in time the speaker refers to
Mode of reality the speaker refers to
Temporal point of view
Social point of view
Content evaluation
What is the social point of view?
Speakers position
His/her partners position
Social point
of view
Position of third party people
Position of an expert community
What is the social point of view? –
The coach‘s side of communication
Speakers position
His/her partners position
Social point
of view
Position of third party people
Position of an expert community
What is the social point of view? –
The coach‘s side of communication
C oa c h ( GG)
2%1%
36%
G1/ G’ 1
G2/ G’ 2
G3/ G’ 3
G4/ G’ 4
61%
What is the social point of view? –
The coachee‘s side of communication
Speakers position
His/her partners position
Social point
of view
Position of third party people
Position of an expert community
What is the social point of view? –
The coachee‘s side of communication
K l i e nt ( GG)
2%
10%
6%
G1/ G’ 1
G2/ G’ 2
G3/ G’ 3
G4/ G’ 4
82%
The linguistic structure of the propositional component
of coaching communication
Content of communication
Reference actor
Reference actor‘s action aspect
Reference actor‘s context
propositional component
of coaching
communication
Position in time the speaker refers to
Mode of reality the speaker refers to
Temporal point of view
Social point of view
Content evaluation
How is the content beeing evaluated?
Indifferent
Content
evaluation
Positive
Negative
How is the content beeing evaluated? –
The coach‘s side of communication
Indifferent
Content
evaluation
Positive
Negative
How is the content beeing evaluated? –
The coach‘s side of communication
C oa c h ( H )
10%
H’ 1
49%
H’ ’ 2
H’ 3
41%
How is the content beeing evaluated? –
The coachee‘s side of communication
Indifferent
Content
evaluation
Positive
Negative
How is the content beeing evaluated? –
The coachee‘s side of communication
K l i e nt ( H )
21%
35%
H1 / H’ 1
H2 / H’ ’ 2
H3 / H’ 3
44%
Media support
No media support
Producing traditionaly written
material
Using traditionaly written material
Media support
Producing traditionaly non written
material
Using traditionaly non written
material
Producing written material in
modern media
Using written material in modern
media
Producing non written material in
modern media
Using non written material in
modern media
Media support
C o ach ( I)
7%
0%
9%
I’ 1
I ’ 2. 1
I ’ 2. 2
12%
I ’ 3. 1
48%
I ’ 3. 2
I ’ 4. 1
I ’ 2. 2
I ’ 5. 1
24%
I ’ 5. 2
Media support
Klient (I)
8% 0%
I1/ I’1
7%
I2.1/ I’2.1
I2.2 / I’2.2
46%
I3.1/ I’3.1
I3.2 / I’3.2
24%
I4.1/ I’4.1
I2.2 / I’2.2
I5.1/ I’5.1
15%
I5.2 / I’5.2
Micro-Categories for analysing coaching processes Summary
Content
- actor
- action aspect
- contect
Problem solving activities
Frame setting activities
Media support
Content evaluation
Content – Position in time
Content – Mode of reality
Content –
Temporal point of view
Content –
Social point of view
The communication process in coaching
Coach
Coach
Communication
contributions
Coachee
Coach
Meso-Analysis
Coachee
Meso-Categories for analysing coaching processes
Goal reflection
Context reflection
Action reflection
Reflecting possible conditions and action consequences
Fostering relations and metacommunication
Using media
Using practical exercises
Meso-Categories for analysing coaching processes –
Goal reflection
Coach gives coachee an impuls to reflect and evaluate his/her own
(past/present/future, de facto/possible) intentions from different social
and temporal points of view (indifferently, positively or negatively) –
with support of media or not
Coach reflects and evaluates the coachee‘s (past/present/future, de
facto/possible) intentions from different social and temporal points of
view (indifferently, positively or negatively) – with support of media or
not
Coachee reflects and evaluates his/her own (past/present/future, de
facto) intentions from different social and temporal points of view
(indifferently, positively or negatively) – with support of media or not
Meso-Categories for analysing coaching processes –
Context reflection
Coach gives coachee an impuls to reflect and evaluate his/her
(past/present/future) de facto conditions for action from different social
and temporal points of view (indifferently, positivly or negatively) –
with support of media or not
Coach reflects and evaluates the coachee‘s (past/present/future) de
facto conditions for action from different social and temporal points of
view (indifferently, positively or negatively) – with support of media or
not
Coachee reflects and evaluates his/her own (past/present/future) de
facto conditions for action from different social and temporal points of
view (indifferently, positively or negatively) – with support of media or
not
Meso-Categories for analysing coaching processes –
Action reflection
Coach gives coachee an impuls to reflect and evaluate his/her
(past/present/future, de facto/possible) actions from different social and
temporal points of view (indifferently, positively or negatively) – with
support of media or not
Coach reflects and evaluates the coachee‘s (past/present/future, de
facto/possible) actions from different social and temporal points of view
(indifferently, positively or negatively) – with support of media or not
Coachee reflects and evaluates his/her own (past/present/future, de
facto/possible) actions from different social and temporal points of view
(indifferently, positively or negatively) – with support of media or not
Meso-Categories for analysing coaching processes –
Reflection of possible conditions and action consequences
Coach gives coachee an impuls to reflect and evaluate his/her
(past/present/future) possible conditions and action consequences from
different social and temporal points of view (indifferently, positively or
negatively) –with support of media or not
Coach reflects and evaluates the coachee‘s (past/present/future)
possible conditions and action consequences from different social and
temporal points of view (indifferently, positively or negatively) – with
support of media or not
Coachee reflects and evaluates his/her own (past/present/future)
possible conditions and action consequences from different social and
temporal points of view (indifferently, positively or negatively) – with
support of media or not
Meso-Categories for analysing coaching processes –
relation fostering and metacommunication
Coach gives coachee an impuls to reflect and evaluate his/her
(past/present/future, de facto/possible) communication with the coach
from different social and temporal points of view (indifferently,
positively or negatively) – with support of media or not. Or coach
fosters his/her relation to the coachee.
Coach reflects and evaluates the his/her (past/present/future, de
facto/possible) communication with the coachee from different social
and temporal points of view (indifferently, positively or negatively) –
with support of media or not
Coach fosters his/her relation to the coachee.
Coachee reflects and evaluates his/her (past/present/future, de
facto/possible) communication with the coach from different social and
temporal points of view (indifferently, positively or negatively) – with
support of media or not
Coachee fosters his/her relation to the coach by doing small talk.
Macro-Categories for analysing coaching processes
NonDirectivity
Bringing
insights
into
practice
Directivity
Self
reflection
Context
reflection
Producing insights
Macro-Categories for analysing coaching processes
NonDirectivity
Bringing
insights
into
practice
Directivity
Self
reflection
Context
reflection
Producing insights
Macro-Categories for analysing coaching processes
NonDirectivity
Directivity
Amount of
facilitating
coach
acktivities
Amount of
instructional
coach
acktivities
Macro-Categories for analysing coaching processes
Self
reflection
Amount of
activities the
coach and the
coachee refer to
the coachee‘s
inner context
Context
reflection
Amount of
activities the coach
and the coachee
refer to the
coachee‘s outer
context
Macro-Categories for analysing coaching processes
Producing
insights
Amount of coach
and coachee
activities to help
the coachee to
understand himself
and his situation
better
Bringing
insights into
practice
Amount of
activities the coach
and the coachee
refer to the
coachee‘s actions
for improving
his/her situation
Macro-Categories for analysing coaching processes
NonDirectivity
Bringing
insights
into
practice
Directivity
Self
reflection
Context
reflection
Producing insights