The role of coaching in Vertical Leadership development has been underplayed in some of the recent writing on the subject.
Vertical versus Horizontal leadership development makes the distinction between horizontally improving leaders by giving them skills through training, making them efficient and developing resilience to cope with workloads and vertical development which is about increasing thinking and decision making capacity. Leaders with increased thinking capacity and maturity are more able to manage the complexity, volatility and needs of the world of tomorrow.
The ability to function on the vertical is described as later level maturity. In the theory of how to develop vertical leadership, a lot of attention is paid to putting the leader in a space where their world view is challenged. This opens insight and awareness that are more holistic and systemic. Some of the tools suggested are Heat Experiences, CollidingPerspectives and Elevated Sense Making (˝2015 Center for Creative Leadership). By disrupting a leader’s current thinking we can shift perspective and create new meanings which elevate the perspective to a higher level of operation.
Coaching is often used as a reflective tool to assist leaders as they are challenged and trying to make meaning of new experiences; and coaches are offered to leaders as a support on this journey. This requires a coach to have an in depth understanding of later stage development. It would also be valuable for a coach themselves to be operating from a latestage of development. This would enable them to offer up higher and more challenging frames for the leader.
I feel there is an undiscussed piece of vertical development though, where coaching can truly assist. A lot of the current thinking focuses on ways to “elevate” the individuals thinking. While I agree with this I believe that there can be hindrances or weights that hold a person back from maturing. It would be like trying to get someone to run while they are holding weights or having their feet tied together. In the same way there are thinking patterns, beliefs and mental maps that hold people in low levels of thinking. A coach who understands this and has the tools can help shift these hindrances thus freeing a person up to operate more regularly at a late stage.
For over 20 years I have been coaching leaders to transition to higher levels of functioning and these are some of the core mental interference patterns that hold back leaders as they strive for elevated thinking, functioning, and performing.
Balancing self and other.
Finding the tension between self and other is critical for mature thinking. Some might call this locus of control. Extreme self-orientation will pull a person back to opportunist. Me-first, self-centered leadership is highly destructive which often alienates people and then they move to the other extreme of other or external reference.
The externally referenced leader, whilst (initially) more pleasant to work with, will create a weak position due to people pleasing and poor boundary management. This would coincide with the diplomat stage of development.
A coach could explore either/or thinking, poor self-esteem, boundary management and the beliefs, both personal and cultural that drive either extreme. A leader would need the flexibility and maturity to hold the tension of balancing other’s needs, with the needs of self, to mature to later stages.
Self-esteem versus self-confidence.
A poorly developed self-esteem or an esteem that is linked to confidence (doing) will keep a person heavily invested in being safe, having low trust, comparing themselves with others and over valuing the validation that comes from work. These all tend to hold a person in expert mode. There is a sense of “safety’ that comes from being an expert; there is an ego boost from being the one who “knows most or knows best”. A coach would help a client separate their own worth from their delivery and expertise. This allows the client to move into the less delineated and grey areas of mature development. Unfortunately, very few coaches have an effective understanding and working model to develop unconditional healthy self-esteem.
Many organizations praise, promote and reward leaders for their expertise which reinforces the negative association of “I am my performance”.
Often the foundation for a successful career is built on being a great expert which helps us understand why this is where late level leaders’ often default or fallback to when stressed or under pressure.
Linear, logical thinking versus intuitive pattern detection and “not knowing.”
The thinking of logic is a pre-frontal, linear type of thinking. This is the type of thinking taught in schools and universities which require step by step “proof” for all comments and thinking. How do you know that? Why do you say that? These questions cause people to move away from trusting instinctual wisdom and pattern detection. Instinctual thinking relies on the midbrain to see patterns and bring together the emotional along with the logical. I see leaders overwhelmed with data-overload, trying to read so much just to keep up in order make decisions. The questions of what is truly relevant, what is correct and what is my “gut” telling me, are not asked. To truly function at late-stage development a leader needs to embrace the not-knowing of intuitive thinking. A coach would help a client with thebeliefs, fears and constraints that come from clinging to linear thinking. The inability to let go of linear logic and embrace intuition and pattern detection will keep leaders in expert or achiever level.
Lack of trust/scepticism/scarcity.
There are deep beliefs that drive and hold in place the way you trust (or mistrust) and how much you trust others. A need for complete safety, to control, or an unwillingness to delegate all speak to trust challenges. A better way of managing the tension of trust versus scepticism is needed to move into achiever, redefining, and transformer levels. A scarcity frame would also make a leader seek self-interest or put competition as a priority over bigger more sustainable business practices. Many of the beliefs we carry on these subjects come from formative years, and clients are oftenshocked when they explore these. I have had clients say things like “I remember my parents saying that but didn’t realize I still believe it.” A coach can help a client though the cognitive dissonance of thinking that they are maturewhile unearthing less mature beliefs.
Action bias.
A high action bias or the need to get things done, fix things, be quick etc. keeps leaders in the doing of achiever. A link can be made to identity where a leader over-identifies with being a fixer, solutionist, the one with all the ideas, the go-to etc. It is hard for leaders like this to be content with just observing, or just asking questions. Often there is a drive toprove value by speaking up, being the first with a solution, or over-riding another’s solution for the leader’s inferior solution. A coach can help a client though the change from teller to asker, or driver to observer. I find many leaders battle to transition from lower levels where results are short term, measurable and tangible to high levels where results are long term and more intangible. When coaching I am also listening for an over responsibility pattern.
High maturity leaders are ok with letting people “battle” and work though issues without the need to save or fix.
These are just a few of the patterns I look for when helping clients who are transitioning to higher levels. When quality coaching is used along with other vertical development tools, they can aid in releasing the weights or blocks which stop some from progressing.
Michael Cooper (2023)
The role of coaching in Vertical Leadership development has been underplayed in some of the recent writing on the subject.
Vertical versus Horizontal leadership development makes the distinction between horizontally improving leaders by giving them skills through training, making them efficient and developing resilience to cope with workloads and vertical development which is about increasing thinking and decision making capacity. Leaders with increased thinking capacity and maturity are more able to manage the complexity, volatility and needs of the world of tomorrow.
The ability to function on the vertical is described as later level maturity. In the theory of how to develop vertical leadership, a lot of attention is paid to putting the leader in a space where their world view is challenged. This opens insight and awareness that are more holistic and systemic. Some of the tools suggested are Heat Experiences, CollidingPerspectives and Elevated Sense Making (˝2015 Center for Creative Leadership). By disrupting a leader’s current thinking we can shift perspective and create new meanings which elevate the perspective to a higher level of operation.
Coaching is often used as a reflective tool to assist leaders as they are challenged and trying to make meaning of new experiences; and coaches are offered to leaders as a support on this journey. This requires a coach to have an in depth understanding of later stage development. It would also be valuable for a coach themselves to be operating from a latestage of development. This would enable them to offer up higher and more challenging frames for the leader.
I feel there is an undiscussed piece of vertical development though, where coaching can truly assist. A lot of the current thinking focuses on ways to “elevate” the individuals thinking. While I agree with this I believe that there can be hindrances or weights that hold a person back from maturing. It would be like trying to get someone to run while they are holding weights or having their feet tied together. In the same way there are thinking patterns, beliefs and mental maps that hold people in low levels of thinking. A coach who understands this and has the tools can help shift these hindrances thus freeing a person up to operate more regularly at a late stage.
For over 20 years I have been coaching leaders to transition to higher levels of functioning and these are some of the core mental interference patterns that hold back leaders as they strive for elevated thinking, functioning, and performing.
Balancing self and other.
Finding the tension between self and other is critical for mature thinking. Some might call this locus of control. Extreme self-orientation will pull a person back to opportunist. Me-first, self-centered leadership is highly destructive which often alienates people and then they move to the other extreme of other or external reference.
The externally referenced leader, whilst (initially) more pleasant to work with, will create a weak position due to people pleasing and poor boundary management. This would coincide with the diplomat stage of development.
A coach could explore either/or thinking, poor self-esteem, boundary management and the beliefs, both personal and cultural that drive either extreme. A leader would need the flexibility and maturity to hold the tension of balancing other’s needs, with the needs of self, to mature to later stages.
Self-esteem versus self-confidence.
A poorly developed self-esteem or an esteem that is linked to confidence (doing) will keep a person heavily invested in being safe, having low trust, comparing themselves with others and over valuing the validation that comes from work. These all tend to hold a person in expert mode. There is a sense of “safety’ that comes from being an expert; there is an ego boost from being the one who “knows most or knows best”. A coach would help a client separate their own worth from their delivery and expertise. This allows the client to move into the less delineated and grey areas of mature development. Unfortunately, very few coaches have an effective understanding and working model to develop unconditional healthy self-esteem.
Many organizations praise, promote and reward leaders for their expertise which reinforces the negative association of “I am my performance”.
Often the foundation for a successful career is built on being a great expert which helps us understand why this is where late level leaders’ often default or fallback to when stressed or under pressure.
Linear, logical thinking versus intuitive pattern detection and “not knowing.”
The thinking of logic is a pre-frontal, linear type of thinking. This is the type of thinking taught in schools and universities which require step by step “proof” for all comments and thinking. How do you know that? Why do you say that? These questions cause people to move away from trusting instinctual wisdom and pattern detection. Instinctual thinking relies on the midbrain to see patterns and bring together the emotional along with the logical. I see leaders overwhelmed with data-overload, trying to read so much just to keep up in order make decisions. The questions of what is truly relevant, what is correct and what is my “gut” telling me, are not asked. To truly function at late-stage development a leader needs to embrace the not-knowing of intuitive thinking. A coach would help a client with thebeliefs, fears and constraints that come from clinging to linear thinking. The inability to let go of linear logic and embrace intuition and pattern detection will keep leaders in expert or achiever level.
Lack of trust/scepticism/scarcity.
There are deep beliefs that drive and hold in place the way you trust (or mistrust) and how much you trust others. A need for complete safety, to control, or an unwillingness to delegate all speak to trust challenges. A better way of managing the tension of trust versus scepticism is needed to move into achiever, redefining, and transformer levels. A scarcity frame would also make a leader seek self-interest or put competition as a priority over bigger more sustainable business practices. Many of the beliefs we carry on these subjects come from formative years, and clients are oftenshocked when they explore these. I have had clients say things like “I remember my parents saying that but didn’t realize I still believe it.” A coach can help a client though the cognitive dissonance of thinking that they are maturewhile unearthing less mature beliefs.
Action bias.
A high action bias or the need to get things done, fix things, be quick etc. keeps leaders in the doing of achiever. A link can be made to identity where a leader over-identifies with being a fixer, solutionist, the one with all the ideas, the go-to etc. It is hard for leaders like this to be content with just observing, or just asking questions. Often there is a drive toprove value by speaking up, being the first with a solution, or over-riding another’s solution for the leader’s inferior solution. A coach can help a client though the change from teller to asker, or driver to observer. I find many leaders battle to transition from lower levels where results are short term, measurable and tangible to high levels where results are long term and more intangible. When coaching I am also listening for an over responsibility pattern.
High maturity leaders are ok with letting people “battle” and work though issues without the need to save or fix.
These are just a few of the patterns I look for when helping clients who are transitioning to higher levels. When quality coaching is used along with other vertical development tools, they can aid in releasing the weights or blocks which stop some from progressing.
Michael Cooper (2023)
| COACHING PATTERNS THAT SUPPORT OR UNDERMINE DIFFERENT LEVELS | ||
| LEVEL | PATTERNS THAT SUPPORT | PATTERNS THAT HOLD YOU AT THIS LEVEL |
| REDEFINING | More intuition than linearContinuum versus didactic | Fear of failure (lack of experimentation) |
| ACHIEVER | CompetitionComparisonShort term vs long termTangible versus intangible Action biasNeed to fixOver responsible | |
| EXPERT | Need for control.External validationSelf-esteem linked to doingBeing right Linear thinking | |
| DIPLOMAT | High external referencePeople pleasing Not wanting to appear selfish.Inability to confront. | |
| OPPORTUNIST | Very high level of internal locus with no external referenceScarcityLow levels of trust. |
Recent Comments