As readers will gather from considering this paper, this article represents a personal reflection following my participation in a Chartered Management Institute (CMI) Level 5 Coaching and Mentoring programme. It is not necessarily my intention to add academic rigour but to provoke and stimulate further discussion among colleagues in the paramedic profession. Personally, within UK ambulance Trusts, I feel the primary reason to firstly acquire, and then cultivate, coaching and mentoring skills is to develop good leaders who can fundamentally change the way in which organisations function. We need change, and while I understand that organisations will always need doers, developing good leaders will motivate, change culture, and ultimately produce sustainable results. According to Lee (2003: 7): ‘Coaching is arguably the most powerful method for developing a manager's capacity for leadership’ (Lee, 2003). This statement must not be lost on ambulance traditionalists who can often display a preference for autocracy. Interestingly, I have seen many traditional ambulance managers benefit considerably from those ‘modernists’ who are willing to offer the hand of support.
In researching this paper, I was particularly struck by the context in which coaching and mentoring skills are applied across various organisational sectors. For example, in addition to the rather conventional predictability of leadership development or talent management, authors emphasise the benefits of stress reduction, fostering independence, diversity, social integration, and retention strategies (Garvey et al, 2009). The list appears endless depending on which context they are being applied; however, the one common factor is change. Whether applied to behaviour, attitude, judgement, conviction, and perhaps most importantly, perspective, the same fundamental processes of coaching and mentoring can be applied, understood and used effectively, by mentors, coaches, or indeed, the recipients of such wisdom.
Much of what is the science of coaching and mentoring is, in my opinion, common sense. It is the subtleties in methodology employed that can be the difference between change and preservation. Heaven knows that preservation of organisational behaviour has been the order of the day until recently, when outside forces have forced us, grudgingly, from our stupor. Even so, the acceptance of change has remained sluggish in many areas.
So, in exploring the benefits of coaching and mentoring, I avidly set out to uncover the science in the context of change, and to offer some impression of clarity around the role of each, the purpose, the differences, and my experiences in adopting a new approach based on the learning and skills acquired.
The purposes of coaching and mentoring
In the 1960s, the use of the term ‘coaching’ by some experts was different to the perception we have today. Use of the term was perhaps more aligned to my own interpretation, which is, intuitively, to lead and persuade staff to adopt a previously agreed solution to a problem. So the need to understand the wider purposes of coaching is essential to both the coach and the coached.
Predictable though it is, it seems to be universally accepted that to maintain high standards, great sportsmen need great coaches. Why? Not because they lack the necessary mastery of the game, but because to maintain such high standards is reliant on the ability of a coach to manage the potential. The Inner Game of Tennis (Gallwey, 1974) similarly proposes a philosophy that performance = potential - interference. So perhaps, as coaches, it is our job to interfere in a positive way to ensure that existing potential is released. While I feel that release of potential is a key skill in the coach, I also find that the self-awareness of the individual being coached is often far removed from reality. This works both ways of course and it can be genuinely as frustrating and challenging to manage the expectations of those who do not possess the necessary raw materials, than it is to encourage confidence and self-awareness in individuals who are oblivious to the extent of their talent.
There is also a need to foster a wider range of skills in individuals who may not possess natural ability but who nevertheless, are required to perform at a high standard within the complex environment of healthcare clinical operations or management. These individuals may not naturally aspire to ‘greatness’, so to coach in such a way could be counterproductive in raising expectations above the capabilities of the individual. I have personal experience in choosing to develop a highly competent clinician into a challenging role, when, ultimately, the person in question was not naturally aspirational. If the talent lacks ambition, do we then relent and concede that we will be forced into coaching the unexceptional? I expect that the talent pool is deep and crying out for development.
Does mentoring really need definition? Attempting to define the concept of mentoring surely detracts from an inherent ability to simply act as a role model without conscious thought. While I feel that coaching can be defined in its context and purpose, mentoring seems open to interpretation by those who consciously engage in it.
Formal mentoring arrangements can fulfil many purposes. For example, provision of mentorship throughout an induction process can help to develop a more collegiate and reassuring approach to supportive mechanisms which can then propagate throughout an organisation culture. So in this context, it is important that the purpose is clearly defined before the period of mentoring commences. Peterson (2007) highlighted this as a concern within the teaching profession, as mentors seemed to transcend the concept of support, and simultaneously assumed the wider remit of new teacher certification.
‘Attempting to define the concept of mentoring surely detracts from an inherent ability to simply act as a role model without conscious thought’
In addition to offering support in a new post, a mentor can assist someone who has added a new aspect to their existing role. This can be achieved, not by directing or acting in an advisory capacity, but by listening and then empowering the mentee and enabling them to find their own way through the complexities of any particular situation. This encourages reflective practice on the part of the mentee, which coupled with access to knowledge, can allow the mentee to develop their own skills, strategies and capabilities. While the importance of developing good mentoring skills within the clinical leadership structure of an organisation should not be underestimated, these leaders must also be empowered in such a way that encourages innovation and not convention to the norm. I have been lucky enough to develop extremely beneficial relationships with my ‘mentors’ and cannot think of anything more valuable than the benefit, exposure to the wider system has afforded me.
Differences between mentoring and coaching
Previously, I believed that the differences between mentoring and coaching were relatively subtle. However, it has become clear that there are a number of key differences that are important in the workplace. I was recently formally coached through the North West Leadership Academy and it was apparent from the outset that the Academy encouraged me to focus on specific issues or areas. Mentoring, however, is not so specific in that it is dependent on the relationship between the mentor and mentee. They may discuss specific topics that impact on career development, work balance or confidence, but in the main the focus will not be specific or task orientated. My experience was that the coach would seek to address these issues if raised, but the real concentration was on specific hurdles or challenges. The provision of the coach was also within defined sessions, three in this case, whereas my relationship with my own mentors, whether they were cognisant of it or not, has been developed over seven or eight years.
As previously mentioned, the priority of a coaching relationship is to improve performance, normally relating to a specific task. Whether this involves acquisition of new skills or teasing out improvements in existing mastery, once the need for the coach has finished, the relationship will end. In contrast, mentorship is focused on the individual and not a specific job or task. Therefore, it can be beneficial from a future as well as current perspective. This emphasis on the ‘person’ can also help to reduce the potential for conflict or disconnect between the mentor, the mentee, and traditional target- or task-driven managers.
The benefits of building a culture of coaching within ambulance Trusts
Reflecting on the past 18 years or so I would reach the conclusion that more ambulance managers should adopt a coaching philosophy. Custom practice has often been to train employees, send them over the ‘white line’ and hope for the best! This is perhaps a little unkind, but in mastering the production of protocol-driven doers, we are only just beginning to create a nurtured and well-developed workforce.
‘We need to change our view of coaching from a short-term fix, to a way of fundamentally challenging our traditional custom and practice’
We have now started to address these issues and develop coaches who will be able to focus on performance and quality by providing leadership based on their experience and knowledge. This will allow us to focus on specific tasks and objectives and in turn will foster a culture where we are able to not only drill down on performance issues, but also develop the full potential of the clinician by identifying strengths, weaknesses, and solutions for development. We must not forget that the ability to create an employee who knows what is expected of them and who is both confident and competent—and therefore by assumption will raise their performance levels—will generate a return on investment that far exceeds the managerial energy spent. I stumbled across the term ‘performance coaching’ in a performance management model used by Standard Chartered Bank that encourages regular open dialogue and integration of performance, learning, development, reward and individual engagement. Coaching is, of course, only one of the cogs within performance management, but as well as the formal need to set objectives, it works well when coaching, guiding, motivating colleagues, and reward is built on excellent leadership and quality coaching relationships between managers and employees (Armstrong and Baron, 2005).
Conclusions
The introduction of coaching and mentoring techniques are crucial to our future sustainability. However, having mentioned sports coaching earlier in my assignment as a basis on which a ‘definition’ could have originated, I feel that the challenge within our own organisations is greater than just to eke out extra levels of performance from individuals or the wider workforce. We need to change our view of coaching from a short-term fix, to a way of fundamentally challenging our traditional custom and practice. Therefore, these techniques should run through the fabric of the organisation. Do I want to be an outstanding coach or mentor? Of course, but I also need to reflect on my own self-awareness and how I can develop the necessary restraint and equanimity to develop outstanding individuals while delivering performance and quality.