Does Strengths Based Coaching Really Work? It’s All About Behavior.
Don Clifton created the strengths-based development movement and empowered millions to be their best self. Clifton started his research at the University of Nebraska-Lincoln library. But he was struck that all of the psychology books he could find were about what is wrong with people — he couldn’t find a single one about what might be right with people.
According to Gallup the Clifton Strengths assessment coaching process has been completed by 27,539,106 people. Shortly before his death in 2003, he was honored by the American Psychological Association with a Presidential Commendation as the Father of Strengths-Based Psychology. Markus Buckingham added to this legacy with his 2011 book StandOut.
There has been a recent push in the executive coaching literature to focus on strengths in coaching as opposed to weaknesses. The literature claims that one cannot change one’s default position effectively and, therefore, strengths ought to be used to compensate for one’s weaknesses. A number of organizations, including Gallup are strong proponents of this approach. We disagree. How many coaches does it take to change a lightbulb? Only one, as long as the lightbulb is willing to be changed!
While there is a rationale for a Strengths based approach, much of the literature shows that one’s weaknesses are a result of the overuse of one’s strengths. Having one compensate by simply using one’s strengths doesn‘t really make much sense.
Back to the lighbulb….The psychological literature abounds with research showing that there are a variety of systematic approaches to helping individuals effectively change behavior. There have been hundreds of studies showing the effectiveness of behavior change interventions.
While controlled studies of coaching are difficult to conduct in corporate settings, a review of research shows that 75% of individuals who have assistance in changing behavior show not just statistical but meaningful change (Lambert & Ogles, 2004). Coaching increases scores in a variety of leadership behavioral dimensions (Ratu, Oana, & Baban, 2016). There is clear evidence that coaching can be a very effective human change methodology (Grant, A., 2013).
To be clear, we are not talking about changes in personality here, we are talking about changes in behavior. There is ample evidence that shows that individuals, with the motivation to change and who receive assistance to do so, can modify their behavior.
One good example of that is the NFL football coach, Tom Coughlin, formerly head coach of the NY Giants football team(2004 to 2015), who, while not exactly turning into a warm fuzzy, learned to have a better connection with his players which helped to improve his team’s performance going on to win a superbowl. The players were much more likely to willingly follow his lead rather than being commanded to do it, ofttimes grudgingly.
Conclusions
Why do professional coaching organizations tout the strengths approach? Could it be that they simply don’t know and/or have not been trained in the “technology” of behavior change?
It always starts with the executive being developed as a higher performing leader. Are they genuinely, willingly, and capable of change? Some are and some simply aren’t. An executive coach using a systematic, repeatable approach that includes immediate structured and informal 360 feedback can facilitate behavioral change. Of course, as long as the lightbulb is willing to change.
These market insights from Carpe Diem Global Partners are gathered from the firm’s extensive client work leading Board, CEO, CXO, and CHRO executive search engagements for public and private multinational companies. For deeper, custom insights, contact Art Resnikoff at aresnikoff@carpediempartners.com