Exploring the Phenomenon of Language in the Practice of Coaching

Transcripción

Supervised by Henrik Christensen
Exploring the
Phenomenon of
Language in the
Practice of Coaching
Business and Social Science, Aarhus University
Department of Business Communication
Authored by Adela Nicole de Pratto
Master of Arts in Corporate Communication
September 2013
Total Characters (excluding spaces):
159,922
Aarhus University – Business and Social Science
Master Thesis: “Exploring the Phenomenon of Language in the Practice of Coaching”
2013
ABSTRACT
The investigation of this Master’s thesis considers coaching a practice which enhances personal
development, which is known to be related to unraveling and comprehending the human being.
This paper uses an ontological approach to the matter, according to which individuals are not like
any other being in the world, but exist in a way unique to them. Humans create experiences as
they enter into relationships with everything that they come across. They relate to new situations
and phenomena and interact with them pre-reflexively, making the relation part of who they are.
In the first part of the paper a deeper insight is given on philosophical traditions around the
particular phenomenon of language. In particular, exponents within the field of philosophy of
language are introduced (as well as related notions), including continental philosophers belonging
to the hermeneutic movement, Heidegger and Gadamer, advocates for theories of use of
language, Wittgenstein and Searle, Habermas with his claims for an ethical discourse, the social
constructionist Gergen, followed by Lakoff and Johson dealing with the more figurative aspect of
language. The intent of this part of the paper is to bring forward the fact that although not all
studies agree on a common definition for language, there is still a vast shared opinion that
language exists in a given context and that through language one can understand and design his
own structure of interpretation.
The second part scrutinizes the underlying principles of coaching, including the origins and specific
purpose of the practice, its mindset and the relationship between the coach and client, which is
appointed to be one of the fundamental aspects for the success of coaching. This paper’s
approach aims to mainly use the term “coaching” as its methodology is defined by coaching
exponents like Whitmore, Flaherty, Whitworth, McDermott and Jago, and Rosinski; these authors
describe coaching through terms like performance, learning, development, self-realization and
potential.
In the analysis, the theoretical knowledge resulting from the two fields is brought together, to
ascertain how the practice of coaching is pervaded by the phenomenon of language. The analysis
introduces coaching tools and techniques (the GROW model, the coaching dialogue, non-verbal
communication) to provide the reader with a practical take on how coaching is applied, and,
1/93 Adela Nicole de Pratto
2013
successively, the philosophical perspectives of language are revealed in the coaching steps
presented. More specifically, an attempt is made to analyze how a coach can raise a client’s
awareness of a new language and help him embrace it, thereby opening possibilities for new
observations, new behaviors and new actions; giving a different meaning to situations,
relationships and experiences likely generates a mindset which is prone to change, to being more
competent and becoming better at performing. Thereby, this paper also discusses how
comprehending the phenomenon of language may open new opportunities for the practice of
coaching, as well as it may provide individuals with a structure of interpretation, enabling them to
consider what affects their behavior in a way that will bring out the wish to change and develop.
Further development to this study may regard applying what is dealt with individually in this paper
to a corporate level, reflecting upon how it might foster learning and emergent organizations.
Moreover, the topic can be tackled from alternative perspectives. Examples may pertain to
introducing substitute theories within the field of philosophy of language itself, or even presenting
psychological aspects, including social psychology or theories concerning an individual’s path
towards the primacy of whole.
Total Characters (excluding spaces): 3,186
2013
"Tell me and I'll forget. Show me and I may remember. Involve me and
I'll understand"
Chinese Proverb
2013
Contents
ABSTRACT .......................................................................................................................................................... 1
1.
Introduction ............................................................................................................................................... 6
1.1.
2.
1.1.1.
Academic Purpose ..................................................................................................................... 7
1.1.2.
Academic Relevance .................................................................................................................. 8
1.1.3.
Personal Objective ..................................................................................................................... 8
1.2.
Problem Statement and Research Questions.................................................................................... 9
1.3.
Methodology ................................................................................................................................... 10
1.4.
Theoretical Framework ................................................................................................................... 13
1.5.
Delimitations ................................................................................................................................... 15
Theoretical Perspectives.......................................................................................................................... 16
2.1.
Language.......................................................................................................................................... 16
2.1.1.
Introducing Philosophy of Language ....................................................................................... 16
2.1.2.
Continental Philosophy............................................................................................................ 17
2.1.3.
Theories of Language Use........................................................................................................ 23
2.1.4.
The Constructionist View......................................................................................................... 27
2.1.5.
The Reappraisal of Metaphors ................................................................................................ 29
2.2.
3.
Motivation ......................................................................................................................................... 6
Coaching .......................................................................................................................................... 30
2.2.1.
The Origin of Coaching ............................................................................................................ 30
2.2.2.
Defining Coaching .................................................................................................................... 31
2.2.3.
The purpose of Coaching ......................................................................................................... 33
2.2.4.
The Coaching Mindset ............................................................................................................. 39
2.2.5.
The Coaching Relationship ...................................................................................................... 41
2.2.6.
Emotional Intelligence ............................................................................................................. 45
Analysis – Coaching put into practice ...................................................................................................... 47
3.1.
GROWing with Coaching ................................................................................................................. 47
3.2.
The Coaching Dialogue .................................................................................................................... 53
3.2.1.
Opening up .............................................................................................................................. 56
3.2.2.
Levels of Listening.................................................................................................................... 58
3.2.3.
Appreciative Inquiry ................................................................................................................ 61
3.2.4.
Feedback .................................................................................................................................. 64
3.3.
Non-verbal Communication ............................................................................................................ 67
2013
3.3.1.
Listening to non-verbal communication.................................................................................. 67
3.3.2.
Coaching the Body ................................................................................................................... 68
4.
Discussion and Further Development ..................................................................................................... 70
5.
Conclusion ............................................................................................................................................... 79
Works Cited ..................................................................................................................................................... 82
Appendix A ...................................................................................................................................................... 88
Appendix B....................................................................................................................................................... 89
Appendix C ....................................................................................................................................................... 90
Appendix D ...................................................................................................................................................... 92
Appendix E ....................................................................................................................................................... 93
2013
1. Introduction
1.1.
Motivation
Socrates (c. 469 BC – 399 BC) once said: “Let him who would move the world first move himself”.
Current times suggest that the concept behind Socrates’ words is preeminent and necessary to
overcome daily challenges, to endorse change and to fulfill personal as well as corporate goals.
The concept of personal development takes account of a set of actions which aim to increase
awareness, enhance identity, foster progress and potential, and achieve a higher quality of life.
Self-development may be considered an important part of this notion, as it refers to a self-guided
improvement (VandenBos, 2007), often stemming from psychological theorizations, which follows
individuals in their pursuit of achievement. Yet, personal development also implies helping others
in their development. This may be accomplished by backing up practices with research arguing for
the importance of a framework of learning programs, tool and methods to plan, implement and
assess individuals’ improvement.
Coaching may be viewed as one of the practices which enhance personal development. It is
considered a relatively new discipline, despite the fact that it was established in the United States
over forty years ago. The reason it is still today perceived as a fresh approach lies in the fact that it
is continuously being applied within different areas. Rooted in the fields of sports, it was soon
carried out and investigated within neuroscience and business management. At present, coaching
is regarded as a project which targets growth with the establishment of specific objectives, and
which facilitates change through a self-corrective and self-generative process (Whitworth et al.,
1998).
Multiple past and contemporary studies reveal how coaching can be used to help people meet
their goals in their private or professional life, improve their relationships with themselves, with
others and with their environment. Many of these sources introduce techniques and models to
assist in the application of coaching, as well as presenting effective frameworks on how to
implement coaching principles and put these into practice. Despite the extensive literature, what
is often ignored by texts is how deeply connected coaching is to understanding what a person is
(Flaherty, 2005). It may be argued that studies on coaching have a comprehensive view on human
life through the reference of psychology (Whitmore, 2009). However, little attention is paid to
2013
how easily it is assumed that everyone shares a common understanding of what being human
means (Flaherty, 2005).
In this Master’s thesis, coaching is presented in a way that may introduce the relevance of
comprehending some vital constitutive particulars of human beings, namely the possibility of
relating to meaning and truth but most importantly to language. Topics from academic and
philosophical research are introduced with the intention of providing additional concepts that can
serve the practice of coaching. In particular, theory deriving from twentieth-century philosophy is
scrutinized; considerations of some of the bigger philosophical minds of the period are put forth,
including Heidegger, Gadamer, Wittgenstein and Habermas and are linked to more recent
exponents, who most of all examine the matter of language and its use.
1.1.1. Academic Purpose
In the light of the above mentioned, the overall academic purpose of this paper is to analyze
coaching through the lens of philosophy of language and related concepts. As sated previously,
coaching may be considered a contemporary and actual practice applied in business settings time
and again (Human Strategic Review, 2008). Furthermore, the tools it and techniques it provides
makes it a rather practical and tangible method. Diversely, philosophy of language has become of
less and less interest to the general public (De George, 2006), and may be rather difficult to relate
to in the business world especially, due to its deep theoretical roots and the existential questions
it poses. Therefore, the main goal is to combine the two fields, providing a new theoretical
framework to coaching, and conversely, also proving how a subject area like philosophy of
language, which generally appears abstract, can be revealed in real life through the practice of
coaching. Another reason for merging the two fields regards the intention of demonstrating how
concepts from the last century still have value today through activities and state-of-the-art
methods used within coaching. With the order reversed, coaching may assume alternative
perspectives and can be enriched, if concepts derived from philosophy of language are taken into
consideration. The ultimate objective, therefore, is to provide a source of inspiration for the
business environment, on both an individual and corporate level.
2013
1.1.2. Academic Relevance
As a thesis for a Master program in Corporate Communication, this paper aims to also bring
forward the communication perspective. In particular, coaching is chosen as a practice which is
known to enhance communicative skills, since the more an individual understands and is able to
apply coaching tools, the more impact his communication is prone to have (Whitmore, 2009).
Coaching may then be used to adapt communication so that it can make a concrete difference in
the business environment, by, for instance, affecting relationships, connecting an individual with
others’ thoughts and feelings, or even by forming a mutual understanding that enables effective
problem solving and creative thinking. In order to do so, coaching may be applied in terms of
guiding through skills (for instance, presentational skills), but most commonly it is known to
operate on a behavioral level; examples include intervening in balancing the exertion of power
and influence, practicing being truly present in a given situation, assuming confidence, displaying
empathy, and managing change and conflict.
Although not all of the above mentioned situations are brought up in this paper, it is intended to
indicate how coaching may change the way these situations can be handled. By scrutinizing theory
behind what role the philosophical tradition assigns to language, as well as to its use, this thesis
strives to provide the reader with a new way of perceiving situations. The analysis of this paper
applies this lens to coaching, with the aspiration that ultimately the study can be enforced to
enhance the performance of corporate settings.
1.1.3. Personal Objective
Personally, this paper gives me the possibility to explore the thinking behind coaching, a topic
which, over the last years, has triggered my interest significantly. The idea of self-development
through a process of acquiring awareness and taking responsibility for our choices reassures me.
Of course, responsibility may be experienced as a burden at times. Yet, the fact that coaching
assists us in acknowledging realities about ourselves and the circumstances we encounter, as well
as it aims to increase our responsiveness to them, generates more thought-through and less
troublesome choices. Moreover, by being more aware that often a happening presents me with a
choice to make, and that the responsibility which will follow is mine, allows me to feel more
independent and free to maneuver the happening in my desired direction. This viewpoint may also
2013
be applied to a business setting, in the creation of relationship with co-workers and the corporate
environment, and thus also stimulates my professional curiosity.
I realize that truly implementing a coaching mentality may be challenging at first glance
individually, and secondly corporately; modifying an already well-established mindset and
ingrained behavioral patterns requires time, effort and energy. For this reason, in this paper I
decide to draw upon knowledge acquired from my educational background within theory of
scientific methods, as well as communication and behavioral theory to support my approbation of
the practice coaching. Most importantly, by scrutinizing diverging perspectives within the field of
philosophy of language, I intend to provide a theoretical basis for how language can significantly
alter communication and interaction with others, and ultimately foster a compelling coachingoriented environment.
1.2.
Problem Statement and Research Questions
By taking into account the above introduction, including the academic purpose and my personal
objective, it can be concluded that the main intent of this thesis is:
To investigate how the practice of coaching exposes individuals to the phenomenon of language.
In order to address this problem statement more deeply, in this paper, an attempt is made to
answer the following key research questions:
 ”What is language?”
 “What is coaching, and what is its purpose?”
 “In what way is coaching pervaded by language?”
 “What role does language play in the practice of coaching?”
 “Does language affect individuals' structure of interpretation? How?”
The analysis of this thesis deals with the topics in a way that allows individuals to use distinctions
presented as a way to look at their own world, from a personal point of view. However, another
perspective is also presented, which consists in an explanation of how coaches approach the
people they are coaching, in this paper referred to as “clients”. With that in mind, an additional
research question arises:
2013
 “How may understanding the phenomenon of language open up more possibilities for
coaching?”
In order to answer these research questions, the following sections include a clarification of the
methodology and the angle from which the findings are put forward in this thesis. Subsequently
an overview of the theoretical framework is presented, specifying the theoretical areas chosen for
the analysis and the discussion regarding these choices. The theoretical framework is
accompanied by a deeper investigation, which serves to bring up all relevant theoretical principles
necessary for the analysis. In the latter, the theories from the main two subject areas are brought
together and examined in detail. Lastly, the conclusion and discussion argue for the findings,
attempting to answer the research questions stated in this section, with careful attention and
critical consideration.
1.3.
Methodology
The methodology applied in this paper draws inspiration from social constructionism. This
tradition may also be referred to as ‘constructivism’. However, it is argued by one of the major
exponents, K.J. Gergen (1985), that the latter term is often related to Piagetian theory and to a
type of perceptual theory, creating confusion about its meaning. Therefore, this paper adheres to
the former term. Among other social constructionists - who have contributed significantly to this
theoretical orientation - are M.M. Gergen, Shotter and Sarbin.
Social constructionism may be considered a movement which emerged and was influenced by
several different disciplines and intellectual customs. Today, it stands as a tradition that reinforces
“new” approaches (like ‘critical psychology’ and ‘discourse analysis’), which tend to offer radical
and critical alternatives within the fields of social sciences, humanities and social psychology (Burr,
2001).
Although there is no specific definition of ‘social constructionism’, a set of assumptions have been
established to outline the main features of the movement (from Gergen, 1985). These features
ought to be taken into consideration by the reader of this paper.
2013
The first assumption regards the importance for social constructionists to distance themselves
from what may be considered as taken-for-granted knowledge (Burr, 2001). In this paper, an
alternative viewpoint is introduced, in relation to how individuals may understand themselves, as
well as the immediate surrounding and, in general, the world they live in. The positivist outlook is
challenged, according to which conventional knowledge is objective and determined by unbiased
observation (Burr, 2001). The intent of the analysis presented in the following sections is to
provoke the reader to look beyond what appears in front of him, to question and reflect on it.
Another conjecture of this movement is related to how ways of thinking, concepts and ideas are
specific to the historical and cultural setting in which they take place; it is argued that, in order to
get a true understanding, one must approach knowledge by inspecting not only the individual, but
also the social, political and economic venue of the situation (Gergen, 1973). Given this specificity
of knowledge, the arguments put forward in this thesis are based on the assumption that one way
of thinking is not necessarily truer or superior to another.
Social processes play a fundamental role in social constructionism, and they are also reckoned as
central in the understanding of this paper. As a matter of fact, in the analysis, two distinguished
theoretical fields are brought together to form a shared version of what may be considered
constructed knowledge. Social processes and interactions of all kinds, with particular emphasis on
language, are believed by social constructionists to fabricate versions of knowledge (Burr, 2001).
Moreover, this interaction is accompanied by an amalgamation of knowledge and social action,
generating different forms and constructions which, in this thesis, include the two theoretical
areas coming together to form a negotiated understanding of the idea of language deriving from
the practice of coaching.
In Berger and Luckmann’s (1966) work the Social Construction of Reality, it is explained how social
practices give rise to social occurrences, by taking an anti-essentialist position and rejecting the
idea of pre-given content to an individual. This perspective is reflected in this paper, as the
argumentations made presume that people still have a discoverable nature, with a predisposition
for learning and developing. Thereby, the focus on process stands out too; key to social
constructionism is process, rather than structure, consisting of the creation of knowledge through
2013
something which is done when people come together (Burr, 2001). Process is a concept which
appears throughout this thesis and is highly relevant in the discussion of coaching.
The anti-realist nature of this paper also shines through in the assertion that the practice of
coaching may be viewed upon from the philosophical perspective, a lens which few studies within
this field have considered (Flaherty, 2005). In other word, the paper takes distance from the idea
of ‘objective truth’ and underlines the possibility of approaching the topic from a viewpoint which
might serve some interests rather than others.
As mentioned above, main contributors to the social constructionist movement are Gergen and
Gergen (1984, 1986) and Sarbin (1986), who argue for constructions, like stories and narratives, as
key to human beings and their understandings. Related to their debate is the interest in dynamic
and interpersonal relationships in the process of construction (Shotter, 1993a, 1993b). In all
works, the conception of language is predominant; in this theoretical orientation language is
perceived as a pre-condition of thought, as well as a form of social action (Burr, 2001). Scrutinizing
this assumption about language is fundamental in reading this paper, and it anticipates the
theoretical framework following this section. In fact, the theory backing up the analysis of this
thesis is chosen to support the social constructionist point of view, according to which language
serves to provide a framework of meaning to individuals. Further accentuated is how language
may be thought of as something more than a simple expression: a form of action which gives
structure and meaning. The philosophical mindsets selected to reinforce the theoretical analysis
also take an ontological standpoint and, in accordance with the social constructionist view,
maintain that language is unique to human beings and that “it is language which brings the person
into being in the first place” (Burr, 2001, p.33).
In accordance with Arbnor & Bjerke’s (1997) research in Methodology for Creating Business
Knowledge, it may be argued that this paper approaches the topic from a subjectivist and
relativistic understanding of reality. In fact, the ambitions for creating knowledge in this paper
pertain to understand how social reality is constructed, maintained and defined. Networks of
meanings arise as a result of how man sees the process of creation as a dominant part of his
everyday reality (Arbnor & Bjerke, 1997).
2013
Similar to many studies which argue for reality as a social construction, the technique used to
create knowledge in this paper is a hermeneutic diagnosis. Hermeneuticists (or interpreters) claim
that there is a fundamental difference between explaining nature and understanding and
interpreting culture, and that the latter may never appear as objective knowledge (Arbnor &
Bjerke, 1997). As a basis for this paper, an exploration and interpretation of literary texts from
philosophers and authors is conducted. In particular, in scrutinizing the phenomenon of language,
it is intended to observe the individual and subjective source (including text and author), as a
starting point in order to comprehend the underlying discourse. As common for hermeneutic
techniques, the process of understanding in this paper involves grasping facts as “life
manifestations” of the concerning individual, which may then be generalized, as constructed
forms for individual human actions (Arbnor & Bjerke, 1997).
1.4.
Theoretical Framework
The theoretical section of this thesis pertains to two main subject areas, namely language and
coaching.
Language is treated from a philosophical point of view and the research field of philosophy of
language is presented. In this paper, language is first dealt with by scrutinizing thoughts of
exponents belonging to continental philosophy, namely Heidegger (1889) and Gadamer (1900).
Although other philosophers are known to belong to this subject area, these two names appear as
significant supporters of the importance of language. Their approach is ontological and is known
as belonging to the field of hermeneutics, a paradigm consisting of theory of interpretation which
played a crucial role in the twentieth century. Due to the complexity of thoughts and the
multiplicity of studies behind Heidegger and Gadamer’s works, in this paper, additional space is
used, with the intent of providing clarification and a comprehensive overview of the topic.
There are several lines of thoughts, each of which offers a substantial body of literature in the
definition of linguistic meaning. However, due to the vastness of the topic, the most relevant and
striking for the analysis of this thesis are chosen. In particular, theories of language use are
brought up, through the delineation of the “late” Wittgenstein (1889), Searle (1932) and
Habermas (1929). These consider language as part of human behavior and observe the relation
between meaning and use, as well as the intention of the speaker.
2013
Thereafter, the first part of the theoretical section indicates the path of language towards a social
constructionist view, represented by Gergen (1935), who provides a gateway to a generative
discourse created in so-called relational processes (Gergen et al., 2008). Lastly, the paper
concludes this part with the progression of the concept of language towards considerations by
Lakoff and Johson (1980), who argue how language may provide what is possible to be, feel and
do (Flaherty, 2005), and offer an alternative and modern twist to how figurative language may be
used and understood.
The second part of the theory examines in depth what is meant by coaching and what are its
underlying principles. A coach may be considered a partner who, through a creative and thoughtprovoking process, inspires his client to maximize his personal and professional potential
(Whitmore, 1996). Coaching may seem a broad and sometimes even vague concept. This is due to
its numerous definitions, which are also often intertwined with ideas of mentoring, counseling,
therapy, training and various styles of management and training. Moreover, multiple structures,
models and methodologies can be applied to various areas of coaching. Some of these include life
coaching, business coaching, executive coaching, career coaching, personal coaching, health
coaching and sports coaching. Therefore, the theoretical indication of this paper serves to specify
the typology of coaching and tools which accompany it.
In explaining the purpose of coaching, the intent is to provide the reader with the key principles
which belong to this practice. In particular, literature is introduced, to support how coaching may
assist in presenting the client with new opportunities, as well as removing the obstacles which
hinder these, guiding the client in his discovery and clarification of the goals he wants to achieve,
and making sure that the solutions and strategies to follow emerge from the client himself.
Despite the choice in this paper of using the pronoun “he” for both coach and client, it is
important to acknowledge that many coaches and clients will, of course, be female. The
methodology behind coaching is presented in accordance with the way exponents like Whitmore
(2009), Flaherty (2005), Whitworth et al. (1998), Rosinski (2003) and McDermott & Jago (2006)
deal with the topic, who put major focus on terms including ‘performance’, ‘development’, ‘selfrealization’ and ‘potential’.
2013
The theoretical part on coaching reveals the underlying mindset, which consists in maintaining a
realistic but optimistic view on a situation, on the process or even on the individual himself. This
appreciative approach includes questions based on discovery, on proactivity in the management
of personal challenges and opportunities, and on constructive comments and feedback aimed at
obtaining positive reactions (Orem et al., 2007).
To conclude, the coaching relationship is defined, as it is often contended, by the connection
between coach and client remainings not only the beginning point of coaching, but also its
foundation (Flaherty, 2005); it is a crucial stage to emphasize, since it may often be neglected, and
when it is ignored, it most certainly may represent the cause for lack of success (Flaherty, 2005).
1.5.
Delimitations
In this paper, language is approached solely from a philosophical perspective, even though it is
acknowledged that this phenomenon has been and may still be scrutinized by linguistic and pure
sociological studies. Besides hints from Gergen’s psychological background (which may arise in the
theoretical section on the social constructionist view), the psychological aspect is not dealt with
either. Moreover, it may be argued that considering research within the field of social psychology
can contribute to the findings of this paper. However, it is believed that it may broaden the topic
extensively, and thereby mislead the reader; since it is studied by experiments, using statistics, its
intent of explaining and predicting is very different from the one put forward in these sections.
Therefore, similar to the linguistic, sociological and psychological perspectives, this approach does
not represent the main focus of this paper.
Secondly, the relevance of philosophy of language is supported in this paper. However, it is
important to note that not all theories belonging to this field are brought up in the analysis.
Examples include truth-conditional theories, verificationist theories and Chomsky’s syntactic
theory. The intent behind this choice is not to disregard the dismissed theories, but rather to
recognize the relevance towards the topic of the selected ones.
In regards to coaching, instead, it is intended to approach coaching from an individual perspective.
In detail, the methods and technique introduced are aimed at assisting the individual in his
personal development. It is also argued in the paper, that the practice may be applied to team and
group settings, as well as addressed to organizations and other business environments. However,
2013
what remains is the assumption that coaching is to firstly be applied as a way to accomplish selfmastery, and that coaching for group- or business settings may produce most effective results
when the individual level has already been tackled.
2. Theoretical Perspectives
2.1.
Language
Language is generally defined as “a human system of communication that uses arbitrary signals,
such as voice sounds, gestures, or written symbols” (Nordquist, 2013). However, studies within
several fields have been working on building on its definition as a tool for communication. The
study of language and linguistics started developing over two thousand years ago, since the birth
of the first grammatical descriptions. Today, not only does this science scrutinize several aspects
within language, but it is also conducted within a multitude of subdisciplines, all of which
contribute to its development by approaching it from different theoretical angles. Yet, the three
traditional levels, which most scholarly disciplines are known to refer to, are syntax, semantics and
phonetics. Respectively, these discuss the formal structure, the relation to meaning and the sound
of language (The Gale Group, 2010). Related is also the subfield of linguistic pragmatics, which
puts emphasis on the use of language and on how its context contributes to its meaning (MerriamWebster, 2013). Taking all these aspects into consideration is the subject field of philosophy of
language.
2.1.1. Introducing Philosophy of Language
Philosophy of language started gaining importance in the last century, and it developed as a form
of self-consciousness of language, a phenomenon which earlier had almost been taken for
granted. This stream line of thinking is known to go beyond a superficial attention towards words,
and rather focuses on existential issues. In fact, according to this line of philosophy, language
becomes fundamental to humanity, and to understanding human life. For instance, it is alleged
that language provides human beings with abstract thinking and that it shapes the way they relate
to the world (Boroditsky, 2009). It does so by allowing them to conceptualize and deal with
different aspects of reality (Boroditsky, 2009).
2013
There seems to be an inclination to consider words transparent and that these are simply applied
as they are. Yet, it is argued that forms of human experiences and social relations would not be
possible without the existence of language (HotWord, 2011). As a matter of fact, from an
ontological perspective, language is what differentiates human beings from any other form of life
(Human Coach, 2011). By way of explanation, words become part of human experiences, which
cannot occur without linguistic classifications.
Philosophy of language poses transcendental questions, which concern topics like the relationship
between words and reality, the nature of meaning, how language may be used socially, and how it
relates to truth and the world (Routledge, 2013).
2.1.2. Continental Philosophy
Continental philosophy generally adheres to streams of philosophy of the twentieth century,
including phenomenology, existentialism, Heideggerian ontology and hermeneutics. In these
disciplines, philosophy of language is considered crucial in the discovery of logic, in its Greek sense
as “Logos”, meaning discourse or dialectic (Routledge, 2013).
This paper firstly examines the hermeneutic movement, which, in the nineteen hundreds, went
through a restatement on both an existential and an ontological level. Early hermeneutics, in fact,
that considered a traditional discipline for a correct interpretation of texts, and has little to do
with the 'hermeneutic philosophy' that today is regarded as one of the most influential currents of
contemporary thought. Underlying the definition of 'hermeneutic philosophy' is what has
developed the legacy of a more mature reflection of some of the most important exponents of the
time, namely Martin Heidegger (1989) and Hans-Georg Gadamer (1990). As a matter of fact, it is
the latter philosopher, who, in the Preface of his Truth and Method (1960), a text which may be
considered the main reference of the contemporary hermeneutic philosophy, states that his work
is intended to represent a radical change of perspective from the traditional hermeneutics
(translation Bompiani, 1960/1983, p.XLIV), as it does not address issues related to the
interpretative methodology of science, nor does it contribute to the extraction of meaning of a
text. Rather, it intends to “raise a philosophical problem in regards to man’s whole life experience,
as well as to his practice of life "(translation Bompiani, 1960/1983, p.8). This breakthrough is much
more radical than the one experienced at the end of the eighteenth century by Schleiermacher
2013
(see Appendix A); not only does it investigate philosophical issues related to understanding and
communication, but it aims to grasp the concept of understanding and communication as key
dimensions to human existence. In this existential and ontological redefinition of hermeneutics,
the conception of language is crucial.
2.1.2.1.
Language and Being
Martin Heidegger’s (1889) hermeneutic approach has developed the renowned concept of Dasein
(literally “being-the-there”), according to which "language is the house of being”, characterized by
being and pervaded by being (Heidegger, 1982). This formula constitutes the sum of the
philosopher’s shift of focus known as “the turn” (die Kehre). By defining the language "house of
being", Heidegger does not intend to fall back into the metaphysical scheme, in which human
beings have no ability to act upon the phenomenon of language; instead, emphasis is put on how
language may be considered home to the individual, as a place in which he resides (Heidegger,
1982). The linguistic structuring of the idea of existence, previously admitted by the author in his
book Being and Time (1927), is now developed by identifying a decisive element in language,
namely a privileged expression of a universal truth of being. The linguistic dimension then
coincides with the structure of reality, a reality which is interpreted from a hermeneutic
perspective.
Heidegger considers language an ineffable and mysterious reality, which helps one to get a
glimpse of the Lichtung, or the illumination of an elusive truth of being. However, for the
philosopher, language does not refer to an “Absolute” (Heidegger, 1982). Rather, it represents a
mystery given by its enigmatic depth; language “is” not, but it “happens”, and thus it also becomes
a mystery that human beings encounter in their daily life and that they make use of in their
experiences. Moreover, he defines language as “the clearing-concealing advent of being itself”
(Heidegger, 1982, p.249) and argues that other beings, like animals, do not stand out in the
clearing of being like humans do. In fact, “because plants and animals are lodged in their
respective environments but are never placed freely into the clearing of being which alone is
‘world,’ they lack language” (Heidegger, 1982, p.248).
Language is generally considered to be a tool for expression, and its importance may often be
connected to the fact that human beings speak. For Heidegger, it is not the human being who
2013
makes use of language, but rather language uses the human being (cited in Kockelmans, 1972). In
describing what language is, he resorts to a screening tautology, but that ceases to be such, if
viewed upon from his particular perspective, and instead becomes a very eloquent definition:
“Language is language. Language speaks. If we allow ourselves to fall into the abyss evoked by this
statement, we will not fall into the void. We will fall into a height, the altitude of which opens a
depth. The two make up the space and substance of a place where we can make ourselves at ease
and find the home for the real essence of human kind” (translation Caracciolo & Perotti,
1971/1973, p. 27). It is the human being’s job to listen to the voice of speech, not as something
that has an end in itself, but as the voice of being which manifests itself in language. Also,
reflection on language is considered by Heidegger as a necessary way to achieve a genuine
relationship with the so-called Lichtung, the moment of “clearing” in which anything or any idea
and new knowledge can show itself and become unconcealed (Gonzales, 2009).
In the essay collection “On the Way to Language” (Unterwegs zur Sprache, 1971), a new
conception emerges that considers language an active force rather than a passive object of human
initiation, as a voice that speaks rather than a silent listener to other people's words. Language is
described as something that is at the source, which everything stems from (Lyon, 2006). The
original character of language is also linked to its ability to create ever new words and expressions.
However, it is important for Heidegger to mention that language is also much more than pure
expression; it may be regarded as a dimension which opens the doors to truth, to a multiplicity of
meanings, exposing a deep sense of being (cited in Kockelmans, 1972).
Heidegger often uses the term die Sage, in the sense of “the saying”, and he sustains that it does
not operate through meaning (bedeuten), but by pointing out (zeigen), or showing and (Heidegger,
1982). Only the meaning then lies within the words. “The saying”, instead, represents a
fundamental concept which opens discussions, and allows the infinite experience of language to
activate the truth of being; it embodies an epic song of being, which one must listen to and
understand. According to the philosopher, best at this are great poets and thinkers (see Appendix
B).
Listening is also brought up in “On the Way to Language” (1971), which presents Heidegger’s
concern on how in modern times language tends to decay; human beings then need to get away
2013
from a person’s metaphysics, and instead start embracing the ability to listen and absorb silence,
in order to truly embark on the road of a pure linguistic experience (Philipse, 1998). The
expression “on the way to language”, therefore, signifies a far from linear path to reach linguistic
resources, which are often considered to belong to everyone and somehow also inherent to the
specificity of human beings.
Actually, Heidegger does not regard language as a possession which is naturally acquired at birth;
instead, according to the philosopher, it does not belong to the human being, and it is up to the
individual to be open and start listening to it. Language thus implies a relationship of listening and
responding, as well as an open platform for dialogue (Gespräch), which by Heidegger signifies the
mode in which language happens authentically (translation Amoroso, 1993). In other words,
dialogue is not only one of the ways in which language takes place, but it is also the condition that
makes the linguistic dimension essential (Ibid.). Additionally, the Heideggerian philosophy asserts
that instead of thinking that individuals participate in a dialogue, human beings listen to one
another and become the dialogue (Heidegger, 1982). In other words, Heidegger seems to go
against the existing hermeneutic thinking, and proposes a different form of interpretation,
focusing on observing language not to specify or make terms explicit, but enable the unsaid of a
word to come to light and thus make it more powerful.
2.1.2.2.
Language as a Vehicle for Interpretation
The concept of dialogue and importance of listening to the unsaid behind everything which is
explicitly said is re-evoked in the philosophy of the Heidegger scholar Hans-Georg Gadamer (1900
– 2002). Yet, Gadamer brings up the notion of game as a prelinguistic dialogue, which regards the
learning of a language as a game of mutual engagement between an adult and child (Barthold,
2012). According to the philosopher, the game is to be played seriously to the point that the
individuals almost lose themselves in it, and every play becomes a “being-played” (Hogan, 2000).
The same goes for language: human beings do not play with language, it is the language, the
dialogue, which plays with them (Hogan, 2000). For Gadamer the game is structurally similar to
the dialogue. This game phenomenology applied to language resembles Wittgenstein’s thoughts,
which are brought up in more detail in the next section.
2013
Gadamer also speaks about language as a ritual game. The game represents the common thread
that guides the hermeneutics of Gadamer from art to festivals, to rituals and to language. On this
point, the difference between the concepts of Mitsamt and Miteinander; being “together-with”
and being “with-one-another” is also introduced (Di Cesare, 2013). These differ logically. However,
ontologically, one is interwoven with the other. The difference lies in the principle of reciprocity.
According to the philosopher, the ritual game, still being linguistic, is played by being “togetherwith” others in the community, whereas the language game, still being a ritual, is played by being
“with-one-another” (Di Cesare, 2013). Mitsamt thus means adherence to the community, and
Miteinander may be considered an invitation to speak in the mutual community of dialogue. In the
latter, the other person is more valued, and since language considers the others, language is more
present (Di Cesare, 2013).
According to Gadamer’s thinking, language should not only be seen as a verbal language. In a
broader sense, it should be understood as any form of communication, not only speech, but also
all the gestures that come into play in establishing linguistic relationships with others (Lawn,
2004). The intimate link between language and writing already indicates the limits of language,
since the fact that language may be transcribed and put into words denotes a self-limitation of
language. Among the limitations of language Gadamer also mentions the limit of the unspoken
and the unspeakable (Wierciński, 2011). To this end, the philosopher brings up the practice of
utterance and how this form of talk, which only represents one aspect within the rich variety of
linguistic expressions, entails preferring a particular abstraction used in the building of doctrinal
systems (Wierciński, 2011). It is then the game which allows an individual to build a bridge
between the form of communication, which is not yet semantically articulated, and verbal
communication; the game is a kind of pre-linguistic dialogue and provides human being with
freedom (Gadamer, 1997/2007).
In reflecting on the limitations, Gadamer puts forward what he considers a crucial problem
inherent to the edge of the language; even if a speaker tries to find the right word in each
moment, he may have still have the awareness that he might have not grasped the word
completely. The intention behind words and expressions may often go beyond what, in a
2013
language, reaches the other person. It may be then argued that the unfulfilled need of finding the
right word constitutes the true essence of language (Arthos, 2009).
A dialogue, from Gadamer’s perspective, may be considered an agreement between two people
about language. The limit of language, according to the philosopher, takes place in the
discursiveness of words, of what individuals say, think and communicate (Gadamer, 1997/2007).
Language does not completely exist in what is said, but in a dialogue, or a unity of meaning that is
built from words (Wort) and responses (Antwort); only in a dialogue does language acquire its full
roundness (Gadamer, 1997/2007).
According to Gadamer, the world is not as an object, the world exists as a horizon, and
understanding means understanding oneself in the world. The word horizon evokes the living
experience that most human beings are aware of: an infinite distance which may open up new
possibilities (Regan, 2012). In this sense, the world becomes an unlimited space in which human
beings can seek their direction. However, neither the world, nor human beings are thought of as
given entities by the philosopher. Yet, humans are granted a sense of freedom. This freedom,
according to Gadamer, underlines individuals’ own propensity to pursue knowledge, control and
use the world around us, entailing the fact that they have a choice and responsibility for their
decisions (Barthold, 2010).
Gadamer argues that understanding the world includes understanding each other, and
understanding each other means also understanding the other; it is the individual’s task to stop
believing that, just because he is given the ability to think he is also destined to place himself
above others (Regan, 2012). Employing the true effectiveness of language to understand each
other may thus help taking distance from the sense of self-centeredness. In other words, effort is
to be put so that the individual makes sure he is comprehensible to himself and to others, and
then others are able to give feedback and confirmation. According to Gadamer, this process is part
of an authentic dialogue (Dallmayr, 1993). Moreover, in listening to others, an individual increases
his sense of solidarity, a crucial element when differences in languages need to be minimized and
a mutual organization is desired.
According to Gadamer, the “one-with-another” relationship is cultivated in the true language, and
especially in the dialogue. Being “one-with-another” does not consist in one person talking and
2013
holding a monologue, and only later the second person may start talking too. Rather, in a dialogue,
each word is believed to seek an answer, as each word may be considered a question. Therefore,
each possible answer may represent a meeting or a convergence, and ultimately an effort to agree
(Di Cesare, 2013).
To conclude, in the game phenomenology Gadamer acts between two main points of view of
Heidegger and Wittegenstein; according to Wittgenstein the game is played by speakers who, by
having rules and working with words, know how to make grammatical moves within the game of
language (Biletzki & Matar, 2009). Gadamer, instead, believes the speakers’ outlook is always
exceeded by the games outlook, through the conversation which is taking place. A distance of
thought from Heidegger is also clear. Wittgenstein assigns the domain to the speaking subject,
whereas according to Heidegger, the domain goes to language (Heidegger, 1982). Gadamer
assumes an in-between stand, which reflects an intermediate role of the game that accentuates
the dialogue’s active process (Schihalejev, 2011).
2.1.3. Theories of Language Use
Theories of language use start arising with the later Wittgenstein, who works on developing
theories which can be applied to the perception of "meaning as use" in language, as well as of how
language assumes a more communitarian view. Another exponent prevalent within this stream of
thought is John Langshaw Austin (1911 – 1960), who, similarly to Wittgenstein, criticizes the
treatment of language as an abstract referential system (Potter, 2001). Indeed, both philosophers
focus on how language may be used actively. However, Austin’s main intention regards providing a
more systematic and methodical account of language (Potter, 2001), and introduces a theory on
so-called speech acts. This latter theory is put into practice by Searle, who synthesizes ideas from
Austin, and in his work provides what he considers a set of rules of language. In the following
sections of this paper, a more detailed account of Wittgenstein and Searle is made. Moreover, a
short explanation of contributions of Habermas and Apel is presented, which include a new
reflection on communicative ethics within the use of language.
2.1.3.1.
Language-Games
The fame and importance of Ludwig Wittgenstein's (1889–1951) thoughts are related to a
reflection that revolves around language. Scholars trace the reflection back to the linguistic turn of
2013
the twentieth century’s philosophy, carried out by two works, which have become some of the
most influential ones for the contemporary thinking, namely the Logical-Philosophical Treatise or
Tractatus (1921) and the Philosophical Investigations (1953).
Interesting for this paper’s purpose is the later Wittgenstein and his Philosophical Investigations;
in his work, the Austrian-British philosopher criticizes his early Tractatus and referential
philosophy, leading to a new philosophical stream of thoughts, which become crucial for later
research and studies (Bogen, 1972). According to his critique, language does not function as a
nomenclature, and words are not a set of labels that one can appoint to objects they refer to
(Anscombe, 1986). The language used by human beings is rather a heterogeneous interweaving of
activities which include a broad range of practices, named by Wittgenstein language-games, which
may be made of both linguistic and non-linguistic elements. Language-games include, for instance,
commanding and executing the order, reporting an event and speculating on it, coming up a story
and reading it, making a joke, asking, thanking, cursing, etc. (Anscombe, 1986). Meaning,
therefore, often corresponds to its use within a particular context (Blair, 2006).
As introduced briefly in the previous section, according to Wittgenstein, language-games have a
methodological function: they are primitive language activities that the philosopher has to
imagine, with the purpose of providing essential comparisons that shed light, through similarities
and dissimilarities, on the state of language (Anscombe, 1986). Concurrently, imagining a language
means imagining a form of life, in which the development of conventional linguistic practices,
governed by shared rules, is always conditioned by non-linguistic behaviors. These behaviors are
called by Wittgenstein primitive reactions and they are considered to be fundamental for the
evolution of complex linguistic concepts (Malcolm, 1993). If there were no bodily expressions of
emotions and affectivity, for example primitive reactions of pain, parents would not be able to
teach language-games to their children. According to the philosopher, language-games linked, in
this case, with the concept of pain, are necessary to the children so that they can substitute
primitive expressions like screaming and crying (Fogelin, 1995).
Even the notions within the psychological sphere are formed and develop in a collective and social
context, within primitive or complex practices (Blair, 2006). It is possible to follow their
development by imagining intermediate members, or ways of interactions which are more basic
2013
than language, but which also distinguish themselves from primitive animal concepts. In his
Philosophical Investigations (1953/1997), Wittgenstein asserts:
“One of the principal sources of our incomprehension is that we don’t embrace the use of our
words with our look. Our grammar lacks a panoramic quality. The panoramic representation gives
us this comprehension which consists, exactly, in the fact that we ‘see connections’. This gives us
the need for intermediate members.” (p.56).
It is important to understand why Wittgenstein introduces the concept of intermediate members
and mentally experiments to imagine alternative forms of life, which are linked to the human form
of life by a grid of similarities and differences: the objective is to obtain a “perspicuous
representation” (übersichtliche Darstellung), an “overview” (Übersicht) on the complex
interweaving of activities which make up language, in other words, a way to eliminate
misunderstandings and pitfalls to which language presents (Baker & hacker, 2005). Wittgenstein
writes:
A main source of our failure to understand is that we do not command a clear view of the use of
our words– Our grammar is lacking in this sort of perspicuity. A perspicuous representation
produces just that understanding which consists in 'seeing connexions'. Hence the importance of
finding and inventing intermediate cases. The concept of a perspicuous representation is of
fundamental significance for us. It earmarks the form of account we give, the way we look at
things. (Is this a “Weltanschauung”?).
Philosophical Investigations, sect. 122
2.1.3.2.
Speech Acts
American philosopher John Searle (1932) has been, and still is today, among the major
representatives of analytical philosophy. Searle is best known for his pragmatic approach to the
issue of meaning, characterized by linguistic communication and the theory of illocutionary or
speech acts (Searle, 1971). According to this theory, important verbal expressions constitute
behaviors and, as such, are never separated from aspects which are closely linked to relationship
between individuals (Searle, 1971). Particular emphasis is put on so-called “speech acts'', or
assertions used to express and simultaneously engage in actions like promising, commanding,
2013
requesting, etc. (Searle, 1971). With this type of analysis, which may be considered a
systematization of Wittgenstein’s indications, Searle establishes a deep connection between
theory of meaning and theory of human action, on which he also bases the communicative and
pragmatic resources belonging to language (Vanderveken, 2002). Indeed, in his philosophy, the
shift from object to subject is evident; focus is put on the person speaking, as it is believed that
words do not exist autonomously, but instead they are generated by human beings in actual
situations for a specific purpose (Searle, 1969). Meaning may then be justly comprehended, if the
intentions of the language user are also understood (Searle, 1969).
Moreover, Searle’s interest extends to identifying what type of behavior can be regarded as true
linguistic behavior, and to how it may be related to language in the world (Nuyts, 2003).
Identifying how people relate to each other, while communicating and performing acts, becomes
key to understanding how language relates to the world (Nuyts, 2003). This viewpoint displays
Searle’s strong relation to the later Wittgenstein, who was the first to give this direction to
philosophy of language, which considers language a form of human behavior and life. Yet, Searle
builds his work on the general theorizing in the matter that Wittgenstein resisted in making.
More recently, by expanding his interest in mental aspects (such as intentions, beliefs, desires,
expectations, etc.), Searle devotes his research to the notion of intentionality (Searle, 1983). The
philosopher places this concept at the center of his semantic and epistemological reflections; he
confirms the unifying character of mental phenomena, including perception, and admits their
biological origin, as he reckons mental phenomena are considered to be caused by brain processes
and actualized within the brain structure (Searle, 1983).
2.1.3.3.
Ethics Discourse
Jürgen Habermas (1929) is known to have constructed a comprehensive framework of social
theory drawing on the linguistic philosophy of Wittgenstein and speech act theories of Austin and
Searle. In his studies, the philosopher focuses on the issue of communication among human
beings, mainly under the influence of the linguistic turn and the hermeneutic theory of language.
With this new interest, the author abandons the previous studies on the individual as a solitary
and self-sufficient entity, which interacts with the environment. Habermas’ "new" reflection puts
forward a public sphere, that is linguistically structured in a linguistic community, in which each
2013
individual’s consciousness is shaped (Calhoun, 1992). This "breakthrough" occurs most evidently
during the writing of the Theory of Communicative Action (1985), which gives birth to a pragmatic
theory of language, interested in the relationship between language and those who use it.
Habermas is notorious for having established a fruitful dialogue with Karl-Otto Apel (1922); the
two authors are convinced that anyone who participates in a rational discussion implicitly
ascertains the following universal claims of validity: justice (Richtigkeit), truth (Wahrheit),
authenticity (Wahrhaftigkeit) and understanding (Verständlichkeit). The former entails a respect
which each person dialoguing must have towards the rules of argumentative situation (Habermas,
1985). For example, one must listen to others’ argumentations or even withdraw his own
argumentations, if these have been proven to be incorrect. “Truth” regards conducting a dialogue
which formulates appropriate existential statements (Habermas, 1985). According to the third
criterion, “authenticity”, each person in dialogue must be sincere and convinced of his assertions
(Habermas, 1985). Finally, the latter regards speaking while adhering to meaning and grammatical
rules (Habermas, 1985). If even one of these four claims is not met, it is impossible to reach
agreement between the parties involved (Steuerman, 2000). Of course, these claims imply that
the communication takes place between free individuals, without any restrictions or particular
interest, and solely based on the best reasoning skills. All of these claims give birth to a real
"ethical discourse" (Diskursethik), and when all claims are satisfied, Habermas argues that an ideal
speech situation is created, in which all individuals dialoguing are considered equal (Rehg, 1997).
2.1.4. The Constructionist View
Kenneth J. Gergen (1935) is considered one of the main representatives of the social
constructionist movement. Despite his psychological background, Gergen’s viewpoint stands out
as highly interesting for the analysis of this paper, as he introduces social constructionism as a
movement that gathers reflections and contributions already discussed by phenomenological
hermeneutics (mentioned above in this paper) and by the overall philosophy of language, with the
intent of integrating them into a new paradigm of knowledge (Robbins et al., 2012). This paradigm
is then carried out by those scholars who wish to be bold, break the barriers of common sense by
coming up with new forms of theories of interpretation and intelligibility (Gergen, 1999). Social
constructionism emphasizes how meanings are generated by people in the circumstances they
find themselves in, negotiating and continuously building new definitions of reality (Gergen, 1999).
2013
Many of the characteristics belonging to the social constructionist paradigm have been mentioned
in the “methodology” section of this paper. Therefore, following are the main thoughts, to provide
the reader with a more complete overview of what Gergen sustained in relation to this
movement.
According to Gergen, individuals live through narrative identities which are reproduced while
having conversations, creating thus a social interdependence (Gergen, 1995). Therefore, language
and social relationships become clue in anticipating experiences; knowledge and meanings
associated with knowledge are conceived as scatterings, as neither do they reside in people nor in
their cultural setting, but in the coming together of individuals who engage in a shared action
(Gergen, 1995). As a matter of fact, Gergen puts major focus on describing how human beings
“live in worlds of meaning” and that they understand and appreciate the world and themselves in
ways that emerge from their personal history and the culture they share (Gergen in Dole, 2011).
The worlds of meaning are considered intimately related to action; actions most often depend on
what individuals interpret as real, reasonable and satisfactory (Watkins et al., 2011). Therefore, it
may be argued that without meaning, very little would be worth doing (Gergen in Dole, 2011).
According to Gergen, language and social relationships then become clues in the construction of
constantly new worlds of meaning. In fact, he argues that human beings are not owned or
determined by the past, and that they are able to abandon or dissolve the dysfunctional ways of
living by coming together and cooperatively creating alternative ones (cited in Watkins et al.,
2011). When the worlds of meaning meet, it is possible to generate creative solutions; new ways
of relating, new realities and new opportunities may surface (cited in Watkins et al., 2011).
Moreover, when the worlds of meaning come in conflict, they may lead to individual
estrangement and hostility, thus discouraging the relationships and their inspired potential.
Therefore, taking care of those creative relationships as well as of language stands out as crucial to
minimize the potential for destruction or damage (Gergen in Dole, 2011).
To conclude, the focus on language in Gergen’s work is due to the fact that it is believed to be
conceived in a social discourse, not as an investigative tool but as a powerful manufacturer of
reality (Gergen, 1999). Language takes form through actions; it reflects intentions, choices and
values, as well as it occurs in social contexts (Gergen, 1995). These contexts are determined by
2013
time and place, and they organize symbolic acts, which serve to convey a sense of credibility to the
discourse. To conclude, Gergen asserts that language primarily serves a communal function and
that it is utilized in community settings, in order to satisfy the needs of that community. When
language is used in this way, knowledge is produced in the form of a social consensus (Gergen,
1995).
2.1.5. The Reappraisal of Metaphors
In "Metaphors We Live By" (1980), linguist George Lakoff (1941) and philosopher Mark Johnson
(1949) come together to single out those blank spaces in everyday language that are unknowingly
‘soaked’ by metaphors. The authors are considered the main contributors to research within the
subject topic of metaphors; they argue that many of the concepts are used to express emotions
are either abstract or unclear (Knowles & Moon, 2006). Therefore, to understand them,
metaphors are needed. The authors define the essence of a metaphor as understanding and
experiencing one thing in terms of another, and support the idea that metaphors may be not only
more basic than abstract concepts, but also more genuine in their definition of experiences (Stern,
2000). The experiences mentioned can be linked to body perceptions as well as individuals’
interaction with the surrounding physical environment (Marks, 2003).
For the two American scholars, the metaphor is not a mere phenomenon for poetic
embellishment and, therefore, neither is it a prerogative of literature; it is the mechanism which
pervades communication in a massive way (Klein, 2012). According to Lakoff and Johnson, the
meaning of something is based on the kinds of experiences people have lived, or even may not
have lived. Therefore, it is argued that true meaning may not always be communicated properly.
Nevertheless, by accessing genuine experiences, and conceptualizing them, through the use of
metaphors, it is made easier to communicate non-shared experiences (Knowles & Moon, 2006).
The metaphor is a moment for everyday language, but in particular, it represents the mode
through which human beings give structure to their concepts, and thus also to reality (Lakoff &
Johnson, 1980). Also, it may be considered the cognitive event occurring before language (Lakoff &
Johnson, 1980). For Lakoff and Johnson, metaphors are more than just a question of language and
words; daily life is impregnated by metaphors, not only in language but also in thought and action
(Lakoff & Johnson, 1980). The two authors argue that human thought processes are largely
2013
metaphorically structured, and that by studying metaphors, it is possible to gain knowledge of
how they affect and are affected by actions (Lakoff & Johnson, 1980). This idea seems to recap
Wittgenstein’s thought, which emphasized the importance of how language may frame the
possibility of truly understanding a phenomenon (Wittgenstein, 1997).
Therefore, Lakoff and Johnson put forward how the metaphor, instead, is recognized as something
which enlivens and invigorates language, as well as thoughts, and actions; using multiple
metaphors, and replacing new metaphors with outdated ones, allows one to capture new aspects
of reality yet to be noticed (Lakoff & Johnson, 1980). The metaphor then is viewed by the authors
like a sense, such as sight or touch, which allows individuals to perceive the world (Lakoff &
Johnson, 1980). New metaphors have the power to create a new reality, enabling human beings to
discover things they previously were unaware of (Lakoff & Johnson, 1980). When a new metaphor
penetrates into the conceptual system upon which actions are based, it ultimately alters the
beliefs and actions belonging to that system (Lakoff & Johnson, 1980).
2.2.
Coaching
2.2.1. The Origin of Coaching
Despite its ancient essence in Western traditions, the practice of coaching as it is understood
today developed in the 1970s, a period in which trainers for athletes started applying coaching
principles outside the sports’ arena. Timothy Gallwey was one of these; he presented a drastic reevaluation of what really could achieve enhanced performance. In training his athletes, he
emphasized the concept that a person’s worst enemy is his mind (Gallwey, 1997). Today, Gallwey
is known as the “father” of coaching, suggesting that the best way for an individual to succeed
consists in going beyond his fear of being judged and evaluated, and mentally picturing himself as
a champion; Gallwey then advocates that the rest will unravel by itself (Gallwey, 1997).
Gallwey’s work, mostly recognized by his first book The Inner Game of Tennis, has been a major
inspiration for current coaching authors, like John Whitmore (2009) and Myles Downey (1999).
Moreover, financial consultant Thomas J. Leonard picked up the term “coach” in the 1980s,
putting it to use to establish financial planning, and, in general also a way of planning life. The
concept was later developed further and in 1992 became the foundation for the establishment of
2013
the Coach University. Since then, several coaching schools have been inaugurated, with the intent
of fostering leadership- , career- and life coaching, as well as personal development.
Since the late 1980s, there seems to have been an ever-increasing interest for the practice of
coaching. However, with the development of numerable schools with high academic recognition,
some cultural variations may appear in coaching. An example includes a North American trend of
integrating the practice with a training of Neuro-Linguistic Programming (see Appendix C), which
gives major attention to staying focused, the value of change and understanding the structure of
individuals’ subjective experiences. The interrelation between the two practices gave birth to The
European NLP Coaching Programme in 1999.
Despite the many contributions and exponents within the field of coaching, whether applied as
sports performance (as by Gallwey), financial planning (as by Leonard) or accounting (as by
Whitworth), coaching stands out as a practice which has a shared focus on results, the devotion
for performance enhancement, along with spiritual aspirations (McDermott & Jago, 2006).
2.2.2. Defining Coaching
Today the term “coaching” may be used in a rather broad and sometimes even blurred way.
Therefore, the International Coach Federation (or ICF) puts effort in supporting and maintaining its
ethical, as well as professional standards (International Coach Federation, 2013). The organization
evaluates and rates coaching schools around the world and establishes coaching conferences
aimed at diffusing and progressing in the development of new related knowledge (International
Coach Federation, 2013).
Since many working within coaching are consultants and therapists, this practice is often brought
up in relation to subject areas including behavioral therapy and organizational psychology (The
Coaching & Mentoring Network, 2013). These fields are known to put focus on issues like taking
responsibility, actively seeking meaning, communication and collaboration and the application of
tools and techniques which enhance personal development. Therapy, in particular, takes into
consideration the importance of healing emotional wounds from the past (Rosinski, 2003).
Coaching rather aims at removing barriers, but still covers and brings together the other features.
2013
Further arguments are made on coaching’s close affiliation with mentoring and consulting
(Whitmore, 2009). Nevertheless, in these approaches, clients are often given advice and expert
recommendations; coaching, instead, is known to guide individuals through their personal
experience and discover their own solutions which are most right for them (McDermott & Jago,
2006). This aspect of coaching will be dealt with in more detail in the upcoming sections.
As mentioned in the introduction, coaching is applied as a form of helping within different fields,
including the professional, sport, social, family, political and spiritual dimension. However, in this
paper, most references are assumed to be associated with life- and executive coaching. Some
examples of what the former of the two may comprise are maintaining a stable progress towards
personal objectives and develop a deeper level of trust in relationships, whereas the latter may
concern assisting managers in achieving clearness in their thinking or bringing out talent of their
teams (McDermott & Jago, 2006).
This paper aims to scrutinize the term “coaching” as its methodology is defined by Whitmore,
Flaherty, Whitworth, McDermott & Jago, Rosinski and Downey. These authors describe coaching
through terms like performance, learning, development, self-realization and potential. Following
are some of their definitions:
Coaching is unlocking a person’s potential to maximize their own performance (Whitmore, 2009).
Coaching is the art of facilitating the performance, learning and development of another (Downey,
1999).
Coaching is a pragmatic humanism. […] Coaching is also a method to enhance performance and a
leadership style that gets results (Rosinski, 2003).
Flaherty (2005) also underlines how this type of coaching is crucial in a contemporary society,
where the environment is constantly confronted with change and there is a growing need for
innovation; the necessity for cooperation in multicultural settings and the requirement for
businesses to reinvent themselves call for a more effective communication and a less strict
“command-for-control structure in organizations” (p.2). Thereby, Flaherty regards coaching as a
practice, the products of which are long-term excellent performance, self-correction and selfgeneration (Flaherty, 2005)
2013
A separate, yet relevant, approach towards coaching is represented by authors like Kinlaw et al.
(2008) and Schein (1999), according to whom coaching represents an integrated term for all ways
an individual’s potential can be released, as a grouping of guidance, tutoring, consultation and
counseling. In fact, in these regards, the latter introduces the concept of process consultation,
which he defines as “the establishment of an effective helping relationship […], which serves to
help individuals help themselves” (Schein, 1999, p. 1).
2.2.3. The purpose of Coaching
According to Whitmore, coaching is not just a simple practice, it is “a way of being” (2009, p. 19).
In other words, tools and techniques deriving from coaching may serve to help an individual
change his way of relating to others, of comprehending himself, of treating others and of
managing in general (Whitmore, 2009). The true ambition underlying coaching regards enabling
the individual to not only apply the practices, but also, in the long-run, assure that he makes these
his own (Whitmore, 2009). The real benefits of coaching thus shine through when the individual
feels empowered and aware of his influence, as well as freed from the idea that he always needs
to have the answer to everything (McDermott & Jago, 2006). Moreover, his self-reliance becomes
evident as his curiosity increases and the process of discovery is seen as a way to unleash the
power of change (McDermott & Jago, 2006). Therefore, it may be argued that self-correction and
self-generation are ultimate goals of coaching, as they illustrate the moment in which all skills
learnt throughout the process are made personal by the client and integrated into his daily routine
(Flaherty, 2005). The coach’s presence serves to makes sure that the client has consolidated all his
achievements attained during the coaching period and turned them into a new normative pattern
of behavior (Flaherty, 2005). Moreover, the individual’s ability of self-monitoring and need for
inquiring may ensure his constant personal development. In the long-run, once the individual has
become self-sufficient, he may start applying the acquired coaching skills to his business setting or
organization (Whitmore, 2009).
The above mentioned benefits are made possible due to some key elements, which characterize
and give rise to the purpose of coaching. These features are scrutinized in the following
paragraphs.
2.2.3.1.
2013
Create Opportunities
Crucial to the practice of coaching is its ability of releasing the individual’s potential (Whitmore,
2009). In order to do so, however, the individual needs to be brought to an awareness of his
opportunities. These opportunities may become more visible once the client is lifted above the
problem, rather than getting absorbed in its details, and assumes the role of someone who has a
clear overview of the situation, including the possible directions he might be able to divert the
problem in (Gjerde, 2003). The overseeing observation serves to convey clarity in his thoughts,
thus, also enabling him to come up with solutions, which would normally not belong to his
mindset. Thinking “outside the box” and stimulating creativity is often argued for among coaching
literature (Downey, 1999), especially when it is the client who generates new ideas, since he
consequently might find himself more engaged in the solution and, more motivated to work to
fulfill it (Flaherty, 2005).
Studies have proven that optimism helps us bring out more of our potential (Goleman, 1996).
Coaching plays a key role in terms of building the individual’s self-belief and developing confidence
that he can find the will and possibilities of achieving his goals within himself. In the process, the
coach then serves as a partner, who supports and believes in the client, providing positive
thoughts and clarity when needed (Whitmore, 2009). Furthermore, in assisting the client in
breaking down and elucidating his thoughts, the coach may also facilitate him in putting words
and expressions on his actions and decisions, thus enforcing his consciousness and awareness of
his importance in the process (Rogers, 2008).
Through the process of coaching, the client has the chance of taking distance from well-ingrained
mental models and behavioral patterns; the fact that he is presented with a ‘fresh’ reality of new
options and directions enables him to recognize that he always faces a choice (McDermott & Jago,
2006). The freedom of having a choice, which comes along with responsibility, induces the
individual to go beyond his feelings and acting spontaneously. This is what authors like Whitworth
reckon as coaching’s “power of conscious choice, awareness and responsibility” (Laura Whitworth
Prison Project, 2013). This does not mean that the client is to put aside his feelings; in fact, studies
assert that, by listening to our feelings, we give our rational thoughts an important correction
(Goleman, 1996). Therefore, in coaching, feelings are often used as a way of finding useful
information which can guide the client in his intentions. Subsequently, by combining what
2013
emotions dictate with the reasoning which arises from the situation, the individual may be
introduced to a wider range of choices, that might not have been acknowledged otherwise
(Gjerde, 2003).
2.2.3.2.
Stimulate Own Answers
Once the client is able to find proper words and expressions to his thoughts and combine these
with his feelings, he is believed to become the key, and only one for coaching, source of
information (McDermott & Jago, 2006). Indeed, this approach relies on the fact that the client is
the only person who can overcome barriers, take actions and make a change (Flaherty, 2005);
coaching ensures that the client himself is responsible for his own life and the path he chooses to
reach his goals. Therefore, the client’s responsibility is strongly argued for as a crucial principle for
coaching, which is also significant throughout the whole process (Flaherty, 2005).
However, that does not exclude the fact that the coach is an important presence in the process
too, as it is his duty to enable the client to find an inner motivation and meaning, as well as a
positive attitude towards reaching the wished goals (Kinlaw et al., 2008). Among the
characteristics depicted by Flaherty (2005) a coach has a strong commitment and energizing force,
thus almost become a source of inspiration to the client. Yet, being considered resourceful, the
client is encouraged to find the answers within himself, along with solutions to his problems and
intention of learning and developing. The main reason for this is the idea underlying the practice
of coaching that the client knows best what is good for him and what he wants to achieve
(Flaherty, 2005), thereby coaching harnesses the unconscious knowledge within the client,
boosting his resourcefulness (McDermott & Jago, 2006).
According to Schein (1999), “it is the client who owns the problem and the solution” (p. 22). In
identifying the problem, and especially in owning it, the individual might be faced with existential
questions which denote a quest for truth and meaning. Flaherty (2005) pinpoints the element of
humanity, which often arise when the client is deeply involved in the coaching process. The coach
then helps the client address these questions, also proving that the client may not only enjoy
having to take responsibility, but also understands his own contribution towards himself, others
and the surrounding environment, thus perceiving his true meaning (Gjerde, 2003).
2013
A common topic which is frequently affiliated to coaching is change; Whitmore (2009) speaks
about the fear of change and of the unknown. The practice of coaching is accompanied by a
process of change, which may not always occur spontaneously and without hurdles. The coach,
thus, has the role to make sure that the client is focused on his inner motivation, rather than
projecting his securities on the outer environment and others. The individual motivation to
accomplish desired goals may be considered as personal choices the client makes himself; he may
be able to draw upon his values and inner source of energy, without feeling that burdened by
others’ choices for him. Whitmore (2009) refers to this as a chosen responsibility, as opposed to an
imposed one.
2.2.3.3.
Eliminate Obstacles
The dynamic relationship between the coach and the client, gives the latter not only the possibility
to be listened to, but also the chance of working with someone to whom he can present an idea
and receive a reaction. The interchange may increase the client’s awareness and, once, again,
clarify his thoughts and intentions. This clarity encompasses grasping challenges, and the coaching
aims to convert them to major areas for learning, addressing alternatives for the client’s course of
action (McDermott & Jago, 2006).
Among Schein’s principles for creating a helping relationship, the professor mentions “always
staying in touch with the current reality” (1999, p.6), taking into consideration all factors that
influence the situation, the surrounding environment and people, as well as the individual himself
(Schein, 1999). Staying grounded may then be regarded as fundamental when identifying barriers.
Schein does not exclude the client’s expectations, perceptions and psychological needs. This
perception is also supported by Gallwey’s (1997) thought, mentioned in the beginning of this
chapter, referencing to a person’s mind being the worst enemy. Therefore, since barriers may
include unconscious thoughts, coaching serves to makes sure that the negative considerations do
not hinder the client’s decision-making process. Often, this is accomplished by working together
with the client to create alternatives and broaden his perspectives (McDermott & Jago, 2006).
Although coaching does not aim to dig into a person’s unconsciousness as much as therapy tends
to do, unconscious thoughts are taken into consideration and are used to test the individual’s
attitude and ability to challenge himself. By doing so, the client may learn to identify with his
2013
thoughts, rather than be ‘commanded’ by them (Whitmore, 2009). This claim might be supported
by McDermott and Jago (2006), who bring up the concept and importance of dealing with
interference. According to the two authors, frequently, there may be interpersonal, intra-psychic
or organizational interference (see Appendix D); these can take different behavioral forms, ranging
from being very evident and clear-cut, to subtly and implicit. However, regardless of their form,
they often implicate the presence of emotions like hostility, self-doubt and anxiety, which
translate into patterns of limiting beliefs, perfectionism and manipulation (McDermott & Jago,
2006). The coach is then to battle this type of barrier through his relationship with his client and
the creation of “a self-reinforcing system” (McDermott & Jago, 2006, p.156). Flaherty (2005) also
touches upon related topics, and in particular investigates the coach’s role when the client is stuck
and the importance of his commitment to guide the latter through “a developmental
breakthrough” (p. 170).
2.2.3.4.
Give Support and Attention
During periods of stress, interruption and disturbance very likely bring up a range of feelings, from
neglected and abandoned, to irritated and inferior or even worthless. In coaching, it is aimed to
gain the opposite effect; the coach agrees to fully commit and pay complete attention to the client
during the coaching sessions. Whitmore (2009) argues that stressful situations “are a good reason
for increasing responsibility, [since they often lead to] a lack of personal control” (p.31). The
coach’s presence, then, may often reduce the level of stress and enhance the trust between
himself and the client’s perspectives (McDermott & Jago, 2006). In moments of stress, studies
have brought up the concept of social support. Particularly, in House’s Work stress and Social
Support (1981) four main functions of social support are introduced: emotional support (which
consists in displaying affection, concern and love towards one another), informational support (a
psychological help which convey the information a person needs to help him solve his problem),
instrumental support (an aid, which includes active interventions) and appraisal support
(displaying admiration, consideration and appreciation). These functions are closely related to the
support a coach provides; his engaged and active presence communicates acknowledgement of
how the client really is and of his advancement towards the established goals (McDermott & Jago,
2006).
2013
Moreover, the client’s progression may be facilitated by the coach’s attention and belief in the
coaching process. However, championing the client may not simply entail encouragement, but
also reminding him of the steps needed to be taken in reaching a specific goal (McDermott & Jago,
2006). It is important that steps relate to the client’s own agenda, with short-term and long-term
objectives, since owning each step serves to increase the client’s motivation (Whitmore, 2009).
For situations in which the client feels demotivated, the coach is to step in to keep him on track,
remind him that he is not living up to his full potential, and illustrating setbacks as challenges
which can open the doors to new possibilities for action (McDermott & Jago, 2006). In assessing
the progress, the coach remains mindful of how far and fast he is helping his client move forward
(McDermott & Jago, 2006), making sure that the latter does not fall into old habits, and maintains
focus on details until “he starts wandering to more interesting things” (Whitmore, 2009, p.47).
2.2.3.5.
Generate Results
Texts reveal how a coach challenges his client to stay centered and focused on his agenda and
ultimate purpose, with the intent of boosting results, which may include spiritual awakenings,
increased flexibility in life, improved performance, and, on a professional level, enhanced
leadership and collaboration skills (Hudson, 1999). Through coaching, the client becomes more
capable of performing and more aware of his opportunities, since the barriers are recognized and
minimized with the coach’s assistance (McDermott & Jago, 2006). Coaching binds the client to his
motivation and inner strengths (McDermott & Jago, 2006), which assist him in the learning process
of setting goals, assessing the reality , taking responsibility and inducing action (Whitmore, 2009).
Indeed, the process of generating results is tightly related to the creation of awareness, which is
also key to coaching (Whitmore, 2009); by integrating and evaluating the multiple sources of
information, which are mostly discovered within himself, the client may invoke inquiry for greater
understanding and gain the necessary insight to achieve the agreed-upon outcomes (McDermott
& Jago, 2006). Furthermore, by helping the client design and plan action, the coach brings up
perspectives and development goals, enabling not only a recognition of early successes, but also a
more accountable management of the client’s progress (McDermott & Jago, 2006).
2013
Once again, creativity becomes an important element in this process, as it is used by coaching to
combat fear, negative judgment and confusion and to establish fresh outlooks and shifts in the
client’s viewpoints, so that he may find new possibilities for action (McDermott & Jago, 2006).
2.2.4. The Coaching Mindset
In the previous sections, the term process has appeared several times. In the practice of coaching,
this concept is frequently used to denote the individual’s path towards his desired goals and
accomplishments. Whitworth et al. (1998) compares coaching to dancing, an activity in which two
people engage and move together graciously, adapting to each other’s moves. Similarly, coach and
client follow each other’s steps and movements, maintaining focus and dancing towards the set of
objectives they have set (Whitworth et al., 1998).
Edgar Schein (1999) puts emphasis on the concept of process and defines it as “how things are
done [between people], rather than what is done” (p.146). This definition is also supported by
McDermott and Jago (2006), who explain how coaching distances itself from content, and rather
operates on logical levels, which most often involve some form of change. Coaching can be applied
correspondingly; in the communication between the coach and his client, for instance, the process
may consist in setting boundaries or developing patterns in relationships (Schein, 1999). The
presence of both parties then becomes necessary to the relationship, since the former of the two
has the role to master the communication, whereas the latter serves as the main source of
information to the process (Gjerde, 2003).
Coaching is a process that coach and client create together (Gjerde, 2003); coaching sessions are
thus never planned completely and the content of the conversations may vary from time to time,
depending on what the client has his thoughts on in that specific moment. Therefore, if the coach
were to come up with a scrupulous plan, he might risk losing contact with the client, and may
eventually end up not staying true to the client’s wishes (Gjerde, 2003).
The client’s desires and intentions always stay in the foreground of coaching; it is crucial that in
the process of coaching, the coach does not become an overbearing influence, or a form of power
structure that the client needs to adhere to. The coach’s main role is solely to inspire the client to
find his own standpoint and understanding (Whitmore, 2009). By standing up for his own view, the
client slowly starts embracing the feeling of freedom and taking the needed space for his
2013
contemplation, until he enhances self-master disciplines and practices (Whitworth et al., 1998).
The individual’s self-discipline is crucial in the process, as it entails the fact the he is taking
responsibility for his choices and thereby can truly comprehend that he is working to reach his
own goal. As a matter of fact, studies argue that all actions are preceded by thoughts (Corporate
Coach Group, 2012); beliefs affect the way individuals experience things and situation, and thus
their expectations of themselves define how they deal with different situations. This
understanding is known as the self-fulfilling prophecy, according to which, “for every action,
nature will return [as] a reaction, either positive or negative” (Corporate Coach Group, 2012).
Coaching embraces this mindset and aims to use it positively, in regards to how the client thinks of
himself, as well as how the coach looks at him.
Coaching has a main interest in defining what reality is, and, more specifically, how the client’s
perception of reality affects his goals and his chances of fulfilling them (Flaherty, 2005). Closely
related, is the quest for truth, which is challenged by the practice of coaching; for a coach, what is
“true” is usually a vague notion, as it is believed that, in a bigger scale, no formula, procedure or
authority can truly solve human concerns or ensure positive outcomes (Flaherty, 2005). Therefore,
observation and gaining insight to the client’s mindset becomes the only way to identify the reality
specific to the coaching process. Yet, during the sessions, the client is presented with new
perspectives, with the hope of challenging him to acknowledge new realities; the ultimate goal is
then to convey a feeling of freedom to the client, enabling him to accept the power in his choices
and the responsibilities that come along with these (Gjerde, 2003).
Flaherty (2005) pinpoints how, in coaching, human beings are seen as a whole, “and no part is
dispensable without changing the whole” (p.24). The ontological perspective dealt with in this
paper brings up the existential and humanistic philosophy behind coaching, and how the client is
guided towards his potentiality and solutions. Flaherty (2005) scrutinizes humanity in coaching by
correlating human beings with the possibility of relating and raising an optimistic view which
concerns the individual’s capability of progressing and simultaneously influence his surrounding,
including his relationships (Flaherty, 2005). The emphasis on the client’s free will and his creativity
are set free with the coach’s guidance, making it possible for him to discover concealed resources
and answers. This optimistic view is key in coaching, and it is put into practice in the following
2013
analysis of this paper, which recognizes the importance of providing productive clarifications
(when the client finds himself in challenging situations), of bringing forward the positive attitude
and pride of what he is accomplishing, of increasing his ability to find solutions, and finally
acknowledging and celebrating his accomplishments.
2.2.5. The Coaching Relationship
According to Bohart and Greenberg (1997), a good alliance between a therapist and client is an
important prerequisite for success. Flaherty (2005) builds on this conception, and asserts that
coaching will never occur unless a partnership exists. A partnership entails a cooperation in which
work is considered a positive effort by both sides to obtain results and reach the established goals
(Flaherty, 2005). Therefore, often coaches invest all time and work needed from the very
beginning, in order to build a successful relationship.
Building on Bohart and Greenberg’s recognition of a working alliance, it is possible to assert that in
the coaching relationship both parties need to clarify the expectations they have for one another,
they are to be aware of their roles in the relationship, feel engaged and genuinely interested in
achieving results (Gjerde, 2003).
As a consequence to this reasoning, the very first session is key to the whole coaching process.
During this particular session, the client is asked a set of questions and the coach engages in
authentic listening, indicating an unconditional acceptance of the client (Rogers, 2008). In this
way, not only is the client offered the opportunity of learning that he can be valued as a whole,
but a relationship of mutual trust and respect is established between the two, enabling the client
to speak freely about the issue and the coach to uncover the client’s agenda and make it explicit
(Rogers, 2008).
In this phase, emphasis is often put on making sure that the client fully understands coaching
ethics, standards and ability, including ICF Ethical Guidelines and the distinction between the
practice of coaching and other disciplines like psychotherapy, consulting etc. (McDermott & Jago,
2006). Expectations are also clarified through the establishment of a coaching agreement, which
entails a clear understanding and acceptance of what is appropriate or inappropriate in the
coaching relationship, as well as the specific parameters concerning scheduling, fees and logistics.
The agreement may thus serve to introduce and decide upon the coaching method which is to be
2013
applied in the given case, and the needs of the prospective client (McDermott & Jago, 2006). A
final step in the meeting entails setting a clear agenda for the client, including short-term, as well
as long-term objectives.
In defining what a helping relationship is, Schein (1999) also analyses its psychodynamics, and
“what psychological conditions must be met for the exchange [of giving and receiving] to occur
successfully” (p. 30). According to the professor, expectations are clarified through an explicit and
implicit psychological contract (see Appendix E), which, among other things, serves to identify
what psychological forces operate at the moment the client asks for the coach’s help (Schein,
1999). Therefore, early attention must be given to a possible initial imbalance of the relationship,
as there may be a form of dependency and subordination, and to the establishment of an implicit
status negotiation and role definition between the coach and his client (Schein, 1999).
A coaching relationship can be formal, through a contract including a set schedule of the sessions
in a given period of time (McDermott & Jago, 2006). Its durability may be unlimited or simply used
during meetings related to a specific project. In formal agreements, particular attention is given to
psychological contracts and ethical standards, as the ones mentioned above. This usually occurs in
executive and business coaching. Alternatively, the coaching process is decided informally, where
the coach exploits his coaching abilities, without formally expressing it during a meeting. In these
cases, coaching skills are used without the process taking place necessarily being labeled as
coaching (McDermott & Jago, 2006). Nevertheless, in both of these cases, expectations are still to
be defined in the building of the coaching relationship (Schein, 1999).
Another important condition, which needs to be presented in the very beginning, is that
throughout the process, confidentiality is maintained, and that the conversation taking place
during the coaching sessions is not to be discussed elsewhere (Gjerde, 2003). Confidentiality is
crucial to build a relationship which feels both safe and challenging for the client; the client feels
that he is being treated fairly and with respect, yet challenged and pushed to “give” more of
himself and manage by himself, without the constant support of the coach (Gjerde, 2003).
Flaherty (2005), Downey (1999), Whitworth et al. (1998) and other advocates exhaustively support
the importance of specific characteristics in the establishment of the coaching relationship.
2013
Trust is the one attribute which is mostly argued for in the literature of coaching. Flaherty (2005)
expresses how the trust must be mutual, so that the client feels that he is interacting with
someone who is trustworthy, whereas the coach must believe that the client is creative,
resourceful and whole, as well as that he has the ability to find his own answers. Moreover, the
coach also must trust the fact that the client will provide him with constant and honest feedback.
However, a true level of honesty may only be achieved where there is a safe supportive
environment (McDermott & Jago, 2006). Confidentiality, thus, plays an important role, as well as a
continuous demonstration of personal integrity (McDermott & Jago, 2006).
McDermott and Jago (2006) combine the element of trust with intimacy, which is accompanied by
a genuine concern for the other parties’ welfare and a willingness to approach sensitive and ‘new
areas’. This standpoint is encouraged by Whitmore (2009), who among the qualities of a coach
lists the ability of being perceptive. Since feelings are not always displayed by words, being
perceptive and attentive is key in coaching (Whitmore, 2009). Flaherty (2005) strongly suggests
not neglecting body language as a mean to express emotions. Therefore, it is the coach’s role to
also pick up nonverbal communication, and try to create the right ambience for the client to feel
comfortable enough and start trusting him (Flaherty, 2005).
In the practice of coaching, co-creating the relationship also relates to assuring that the client
believes in the coach’s intention and the only purpose of the process is to generate and actualize
his potential; providing ongoing support and guidance throughout his progression is known to
build a strong amount of trust (McDermott & Jago, 2006). Of course, this may develop over a
longer period of time. However, through constant feedback and honest communication, it is
believed that the level of trust matures rapidly (Gjerde, 2003). Conclusively, when both parties feel
that they are being true to one another, progress occurs with fewer difficulties and challenges that
can boost the client’s results are brought in naturally (Gjerde, 2003).
“Like trust, many people say that respect has to be earned” (Flaherty, 2005). Indeed, respect is a
second feature which characterizes the coaching relationship. Among others, Downey (1999),
expresses how respect too needs to be mutual. The concept entails the acceptance of the other
person for what he is and what he presents himself to be (Flaherty, 2005). In co-creating the
relationship, respect for perceptions, learning styles and personal beings are fundamental for both
2013
coach and client (McDermott & Jago, 2006); examples of actions to be taken to achieve this
include the coach’s aim to show his curiosity about the client and his problem, and the client’s
recognition of the coach’s professional expertise.
There is no customary type of coaching relationship, since the people involved may vary, as may
their needs. In establishing an authentic relationship, it can be argued that a high level of courage
is needed (Life Coach Academy, 2004); experimenting new thoughts, behavioral patterns and
learning techniques requires audacity from both the client and the coach. Additionally, tapping
into emotion and maintaining honesty throughout the conversations can be challenging, as it may
consist in going outside the individual comfort zone (Life Coach Academy, 2004). Although going
beyond one’s own habitual patterns is highly relevant for coaching, this should only occur when
the client feels ready for it. Therefore, if the coach is skilled, he may choose the best way to reach
out to his client in the moment that he believes can become the most effective one (McDermott &
Jago, 2006). The coach’s courage comes out when he is open to not knowing and willing to take
risks, as he may then rely on his determination and belief in himself to work on reassuring the
client and boost his confidence (McDermott & Jago, 2006). In different circumstances, bravery is
needed by the client especially in between the coaching sessions. In moments where the coach is
not present, extra effort is to be put by the client, so that the true value of coaching can surface
(Gjerde, 2003); thoughts are put into actions and the individual can start finding ways on his own,
thereby embracing the self-generative purpose of coaching (Flaherty, 2005).
A final important element, which may be considered the conclusive one in building up the
coaching relationship, concerns mutual acceptance. In regards to mutual acceptance, Schein
(1999) expresses the importance of “going with the flow” and attempting to maintain stability
through the maintenance of the relationship (p.9). However, this may be possible only once
mutual helping between the coach and client has been established. Reaching a point in the
relationship where most layers of consciousness are shared with trust is achieved in time, after a
series of mutual tests and assessments (Schein, 1999). Moreover, a true commitment from both
parties is needed. In fact, client and coach need to be prepared, committed and mentally present
during the coaching sessions. In cases of skepticism and caution of the client, the coach engages in
maintaining focus and oversees the agenda (McDermott & Jago, 2006). The client may then
2013
respond by staying true to himself and to the process (Gjerde, 2003). This cooperation serves to
facilitate learning and to keep the two “dancing” towards the client’s goals.
2.2.6. Emotional Intelligence
The concept of emotional Intelligence (EI) often appears in relation to transpersonal coaching, or
coaching dealing with states or areas of consciousness beyond the limits of personal identity
(Whitmore, 2009). However, in this paper, it is argued that Emotional Intelligence is perceived to
be one of the foundation stones for good coaching, and is therefore introduced as a key general
characteristic for the practice. Emotional intelligence has been defined as the ability to understand
and manage one’s emotions as well as those of others, and use these emotions to make important
decisions in life (Goleman, 2012). It is believed that owning this "sensitivity" allows individuals to
face the daily routine in the most effective way, without being caught in the grip of emotional
seizures, which may sometimes cause them to lose grasp of reality (Ryback, 2012). Being
emotionally intelligent, therefore, may help to better manage relations with oneself and with
others.
Emotional intelligence can be of great help in personal as well as professional settings. It is not
considered a substitute for traditional intelligence, as it does not replace specific technical skills.
However, it can provide a set of skills that, when learned, support people in their understanding
and managing emotions (Goleman, 2012); by being aware of his emotions, an individual can
integrate these with his rational thoughts, thereby increasing his overall knowledge of himself and
his skills (Ryback, 2012). Furthermore, by managing emotions like anxiety and stress, he may
eventually turn them into positive energy for himself and others (Stough et al., 2009).
Despite limited penetration in the business world in the 1970s, and its general influence of the
trend toward personal development, it was not until Daniel Goleman’s book Emotional
Intelligence (1995) that EI truly became desirable to the point of necessity in business (Whitmore,
2009). Goleman’s research asserts that EI is twice as important as mental activity (IQ) for success,
since the emotional attitude is a meta-skill which determines how well people use their abilities,
including intellectual ones, and thereby facilitates the expression of all other types of intelligence
(Goleman, 2012). Goleman distinguishes five domains to define EI’s structure: self-awareness, selfregulation, internal motivation, empathy and social skills.
These are also fundamental
2013
characteristics a coach needs to embrace, and, within the coaching process, may also convey to his
client (cited in Whitmore, 2009). Within each domain are subsets of emotional skills, which are not
innate talents, but rather capabilities which are acquired if trained and developed (Goleman,
2012).
In detail, self-awareness refers to an individual’s ability to recognize his own emotions and use
them to guide him in his decisions (Goleman, 2012). It is subdivided into emotional awareness (the
ability to recognize one’s own emotions and their effect), accurate self-assessment (the ability to
recognize their limitations and their strengths) and self-confidence (care for one’s skills and values,
and ability to remain true to one’s decisions, despite of outside pressures and uncertainties).
Self-regulation, instead, consists in managing one’s own emotions, and includes skills like selfcontrol (ability to control negative emotions, displaying positive ones in difficult situations),
reliability (ability to be reliable and honest), conscientiousness (ability to be responsible and to
fulfill one’s obligations), adaptability (ability to adapt to the circumstances) and innovation, or the
ability to be open to new ideas and information (Goleman, 2012).
Internal motivation includes being able to seek to achieve one’s goals. More specifically, it entails
striving towards realization (tendency to increase one’s potential and performance), effort (ability
to integrate a group’s values and goals), taking initiative (the ability to take advantage of
opportunities and overcome obstacles) and optimism, or the ability to not become discouraged in
challenging situations (Goleman, 2012).
Empathy relates to the individual’s ability to understand the emotions of others and to establish a
good emotional connection with them (Goleman, 2012). Empathy is known to be associated with
the understanding of others (ability to understand the emotions of others), being supportive
(ability to meet the needs of others), encouraging the development of others (the ability to
identify developmental needs of others and to enhance their skills), promotion of diversity
(considering diversity an opportunity, rather than an obstacle), political awareness, or the ability
to understand power relations, social networks and emotional currents inside and outside the
group the individual belongs to (Goleman, 2012).
2013
Lastly, social skills are crucial to establish positive interpersonal relationships, by managing one’s
emotions (Goleman, 2012). They include social influence (the ability to use proper persuasion
strategies), communication (ability to communicate in a simple and clear manner), leadership
(ability to lead the group, through the involvement of others, towards common goals and ideals),
change advocacy (being a change agent), conflict management (the ability to negotiate and
resolve conflicts, through liberal and fair discussion), relationship development (establishing and
maintaining satisfactory interpersonal relationships), collaboration (ability to cooperate for a
common goal, by establishing a fine balance between the concentration required for the task and
attention towards relationships), teamwork or participating with enthusiasm and team spirit, in
the work towards a common goal (Goleman, 2012).
3. Analysis – Coaching put into practice
In this analysis section, coaching tools and techniques are introduced, with the attempt of
providing practical indication of how notions of language discussed in the theoretical perspective
shine through in coaching. In this paper, the choice has been made of introducing these
techniques and models only in the analysis, to prevent the reader from having to reiterate the
theoretical perspective and thereby bring clarity in the discussion.
3.1.
GROWing with Coaching
In the theoretical section of this paper, emphasis has been put on identifying coaching’s focus on
results, its devotion for performance enhancement as well as spiritual aspirations. In relation to
these areas, techniques and methods within coaching are identified. One of the most common
coaching tool is named by studies as the GROW model (Whitmore, 2009; Downey, 1999). Thoughts
behind the model include the importance of wording and how it may relate to meaning and give
purpose. This strong correlation is also a key topic brought up by philosophers and thinkers
introduced in the theoretical section of this paper, the studies of whom have scrutinize the
prominence of language this last century.
GROW is an acronym that outlines the main steps involved in the coaching process. Different
coaching authors have different conceptions of what each letter exactly stands for. Yet, it can be
argued, that generally the model entails the developing and learning process, which, as mentioned
2013
previously, are known to be one of the end goals within coaching. In the following paragraph,
Whitmore’s (2009) explication of the GROW model is represented.
According to Whitmore, the steps to be taken are:
G: Setting the Goal (of the session, for example), considering the short- and long-term perspective
R: Verifying the Reality, i.e. facts and all data needed to analyze the situation
O: Checking out the Options and alternative strategies of action
W: Deciding What to do, When to do it, Who should do it, and the Will to do it
This sequence presumes that dealing with all four points respectively, which usually occurs when
an individual faces a new problem for the very first time. Often, however, coaching is also adopted
when an activity needs to be refined, and when a situation has been discussed and is already
taking place. In this case, the session may begin and end with any of the points indicated above
(Whitmore, 2009).
One might think that setting goals before even analyzing the situation can seem bizarre. However,
Whitmore argues that targets only based on existing facts may be negative, as they tend to be
limited in providing a single answer to a determined situation and thus the individual may risk
obtaining much less than what is actually possible (Whitmore, 2009). Therefore, it is believed
within coaching that, setting objectives, before ascertaining what the circumstances of reality are,
may increase the inspirations and contribute to genuine inner motivation (Whitmore, 2009;
Downey, 1999).
In establishing the end goal to achieve in the coaching process, performance objectives are
identified. These serve to monitor individual’s progress in achieving the final aspiration
(Whitmore, 2009). Through coaching, the individual is assisted in setting goals which are SMART
(Specific, Measurable, Agreed, Realistic, Time phased), PURE (Positively stated, Understood,
Relevant, Ethical) and CLEAR (Challenging, Legal, Environmentally sound, Appropriate, Recorded)
(Whitmore, 2009, p.62). By having to apply these characteristics to his goals, the individual may be
brought to ponder upon his attitude towards to them. In a similar way, it may be argued that
Habermas’ pragmatic theory of language shines through, which, as previously stated in this paper,
2013
describes how the individual’s consciousness is shaped in a linguistically structured community.
According to this mindset, in setting the goals, a close relationship is established between them
and the individual himself, who is encouraged to make moral and ethical considerations, in order
to then be able to create a valid discourse.
When assessing reality, the individual strives to be objective, still aware, though, that an absolute
objectivity does not exist, as human beings are known to have their filters, prejudices and visions
of the world (Whitmore, 2009). As mentioned earlier in this paper, what is “true” is usually a
vague notion. Therefore, in the process, the coach tries to gain insight to the client’s mindset, in
order to truly identify the reality. In the long-run, this is also to be done by the client, through a
process of self-discovery and self-awareness. Assessing reality, thus, entails actively seeking
meaning in coaching, as much as it does in philosophy of language.
Emotional intelligence plays a crucial role in coaching, since, in order to raise self-awareness, the
individual needs to tap into his emotions. The presence of a coach, in fact, serves to assist the
client in identifying his underlying concerns, fixed ways of perceiving himself and the world, as
well as how interrelated factors like thoughts, emotions, body and background may affect his
behavioral patterns (McDermott & Jago, 2006). It may be argued that, in the same way,
Wittgenstein’s language-games come into play; the linguistic and non-linguistic elements, which
form language-games, make it possible for the individual to access language through the
interweaving of activities and broad range of practices. According to this line of thinking, meaning
corresponds to its use within the particular context, and the individual’s background and all his
circumstances thus become key for the individual to reach meaning.
Recalling Goleman’s (1996) statement, coaching helps the individual listen to his feelings, and
gives his rational thoughts an important correction; by reflecting, exploring, pausing, being silent,
wondering and allowing himself to ‘not know’, the client is lead towards a wider range of choices
and, in these choices, may discover new strengths and major areas for growth (McDermott & Jago,
2006). Self-awareness then becomes crucial for the individual’s ability to accurately evaluate the
multiple sources of information and in his inquiry for greater understanding of his issue.
It has until now been argued that it is the individual himself who is the major source of
information in the practice of coaching, and that his perception is crucial to identifying reality.
2013
However, in order to get as close as possible to the objectivity mentioned earlier, the individual
(coach as well as client) recurs to a selection of descriptive terms without connotations of
judgments, which have the potential of distorting reality or perception. The terminology used in
normal conversations and in many business interactions generally lean towards the left end of the
figure below, while in the practice of coaching dialogue is aimed to lean towards the right and
descriptive axis (Whitmore, 2009).
(from Whitmore, 2009, “Communication Envelope”, Nicholas Brealey, p. 68)
In the theoretical perspective of this paper, Gadamer is introduced in relation to the edge of
language. In fact, the philosopher asserts that, even if an individual puts effort in trying to find the
right word for each moment, he may still acknowledge that he might not have expressed himself
completely, and that the intention behind his words may go beyond what, in a language, reaches
others. In coaching this thought is recalled, and the coach’s presence then serves to help the client
articulate what is going on as much as possible. Especially in cases of discursive or confused
dialogues, this may be helpful to distinguish between trivial and significant issues, or situational
and recurring behaviors (McDermott & Jago, 2006).
At times, it may even occur that the client gets too close to the content of his issue, and the coach
gets sucked in with him too. In other moments, an individual may wish to avoid difficult topics and
‘strong’ feelings, or become resistant in dealing with issues of belief and identity (McDermott &
Jago, 2006). In these situations, Wittgenstein may argue that his so-called language-games may
2013
come to be useful, if not necessary, to substitute those primitive expressions which accompany
these difficulties.
Similarly, coaching serves to nail the issue, by articulating it, while inviting a positive and
thoughtful response from the client. By using and providing the client with a definite means of
expression, the coach is able to bottom-line and bring forward what is ‘real’ and contains the
essential, providing clarity to the client and enabling him to stay grounded (McDermott & Jago,
2006). The need for clarity is repeatedly expressed by Searle, who, as mentioned previously, does
not believe words exists autonomously, and thereby puts major focus on the individual who
generates them in an actual situation, for a specific purpose. Furthermore, Searle’s conception of
intentionality may be brought up in this regard; intentionality entails a person’s intentions, beliefs,
desires and expectations, and, just like what is assumed behind coaching, according to the
philosopher, meaning is only comprehended when intentions of the language user are clear.
To sum up, in this phase, the coach stays loyal to the truth of the client’s experience, in order to
provide a challenging yet secure environment, defined as fundamental earlier in this paper.
Coaching then helps the individual find proper words and expressions to his thoughts and
combines these with his feelings, so that he can start exploring his alternative paths. Heidegger’s
philosophy strongly resembles this passage. In fact, in his ontological reasoning, Heidegger
emphasizes that the individual’s job is to listen to the voice of speech as a voice of being, which
manifests itself in language. As mentioned in the theoretical section, according to the philosopher,
this reflection of language is crucial to reach a moment of ‘clearing’ (so-called Lichtung) in which
any new knowledge can reveal itself.
As a matter of fact, the next step in the GROW process entails scrutinizing the options for action.
Once again, the link to Searle’s line of thinking is evident, when, in describing speech acts, he puts
forward the importance and correlations of assertions to express a thought properly with an
immediate engagement in action.
In this phase coaching serves not to select the one and only right option, but rather to display the
vast range of options the individual is present with; as argued in the theory of this paper, limiting
negative assumptions which may restrict creative solutions are avoided. Again, if observed from
the hermeneutic philosophy, coaching’s revealing a multitude of alternatives may be regarded as a
2013
dimension which opens doors to a multiplicity of meanings and expose a deep sense of truth and
being (Heidegger, 1982). From a slightly altered perspective, Gadamer demonstartes how this
process evokes the attribute of the world as “horizon”, the infinite distance which opens up new
possibilities to the individual. At this point, the philosopher may also pinpoint the individual’s
freedom to pursue knowledge.
Finding patterns and structures is part of this process, as a coaching’s matter of experimenting and
of working with the way the individual naturally thinks and behaves (McDermott & Jago, 2006).
From Lakoff and Johnson’s perspective, it is possible to contend that this represents the moment
in which the individual appeals to the metaphors of his everyday language, as the mode to
structure his concepts and thus also reality. As mentioned earlier, in coaching, structuring lifts the
individual above his issue, providing him with an overview, and enabling him to access his sense of
creativity and stimulating an inventive mindset (Gjerde, 2003).
Once options have been sorted, the individual may move towards the phase which aims to
transform a discussion to a decision and a proper transition to action (Whitmore, 2009). Action
embodies an essential element in the constructionist view, represented by Gergen in this paper,
supporting the close interrelation between worlds of meaning an action. In fact, according to
Gergen’s standpoint, the individual living in different worlds of meaning takes action depending on
what he interprets as being real and appropriate. Even in coaching, the action plan set up for the
client relies on the individual’s maintenance of choice and ownership of each step. The client is
held accountable and responsible (Rosinski, 2003). Moreover, it is made sure that the individual is
able to find strength and inner willingness to engage himself in the process (Whitmore, 2009).
At this final stage, examples of questions which may be posed to ensure the individual’s
motivation are:
What will you do?
When will you do it?
What obstacles may you encounter?
Who is to be aware of your action?
2013
Which help will you need?
These questions build on bringing clarity to the individual, as they define the issue by assigning it
an action- and time frame. Moreover, in trying to answer the questions, the individual is induced
to consider his surrounding environment and reality, including the resources and creative positive
alliances he may need to establish (Whitmore, 2009). Moreover, commitment to action is
confirmed and the individual is encouraged to manage his progress and accountability (Whitmore,
2009).
To conclude, in his book The 7 Habits of Highly Effective People (2004), Stephen R. Covey asserts:
“Each part of your life- today’s behavior, tomorrow’s behavior, next week’s behavior – can be
examined in the context of the whole, of what really matters most to you. By keeping that end in
mind, you can make certain that whatever you do in a particular day does not violate the criteria
you have defined as supremely important, and that each day of your life contributes in a
meaningful way to the vision you have of your life as a whole” (p. 98)
The intent of coaching to acknowledge realities, increase the client’s responsiveness to them, and
generate a creative mindset which encourages him to take action, encourages the individual to
deal with transcendental issues regarding his identity, his values, aspiration and motivations.
Throughout the coaching process described in the GROW model, language may be considered a
key element for the individual to identify his reality, put his thoughts and feeling into words and
relate these to ‘his truth’, which will drive him in accomplishing his goals.
3.2.
The Coaching Dialogue
Edgar Schein is one of the exponents who put most emphasis on the distinction of a dialogue. The
dialogue which is strived to be achieved within the practice of coaching often refers to a type of
conversation based on the assumption that each individual comes with tacit assumptions and
different semantic definitions, that derive from their respective cultural learning, language, and
psychological makeup (Schein, 1999). Thereby, it is also assumed that mutual understanding may
in most cases be an illusion (Schein, 1999).
In coaching, the dialogue represents one of the moments in which one is brought to explore the
complexities of thinking and language (Schein, 1999). This underlying thought is closely related to
2013
contemplations within philosophy of language. For instance, Heidegger pinpoints the importance
of an individual’s effort in listening and responding to language, since this latter, according to the
philosopher, is not acquired to at birth. The open platform of the dialogue (or Gespräch), as
mentioned previously in this paper, for Heidegger becomes the true mode in which language
occurs authentically.
The authentic activity of language within the dialogue is valued in the practice of coaching, which
underlines how the dialogue may be considered a prerequisite for any type of helping relationship.
In fact, Schein (1999) insists on specifying that “real help can only be delivered when both [coach]
and client are using a common set of assumptions and have developed some common language”
p. 203. When the coach and client are involved in the process of building their relationship, it may
be claimed they are simultaneously engaged in achieving a conversational level that both
individuals experience as a dialogue, rather than a discussion or a debate (Whitworth et al., 1998).
Within coaching, dialogue is thought of as “good communication” (Schein, 1999), and a
conversation during which the individuals have understood each other and exchanged their
respective opinions in a meaningful way. In other words, coaches argue that through a dialogue, it
is possible to build a common understanding and see the hidden meanings of words in the
communication taking place (Schein, 1999). By observing this reflection from Searle’s viewpoint
and his argumentation for speech acts, one may conclude that dialogue becomes key to
understanding how language relates to the world, as, within its coaching process, it helps identify
how coach and client relate to each other (while communicating and performing acts).
In order to understand others, studies on coaching express the importance of self-analysis and
self-awareness. This process includes understanding and listening to one’s own assumptions, as
well as fragmenting one’s world into categories in order to reach a higher consciousness and grasp
the individual through process (McDermott & Jago, 2006). It has been argued that these categories
are taught in early life, through the language human beings learn (Schein, 1999). By going through
a self-analysis, the individual is thus placed in the center of attention. As mentioned in the
theoretical section of this paper, the individual’s resourcefulness and chosen responsibility (as
Whitmore defines it) is accentuated, as he becomes aware of his contribution to his own process,
to others and the surrounding environment. Similarly, in his philosophy, Gadamer emphasizes
2013
how, in a dialogue and in being, the individual is highly valued by being “with-one-another”, and
thereby language is also most present.
By becoming more conscious of how his thought process works, the individual is believed to
acknowledge more the inherently complexity of communication and mutual understanding
(Schein, 1999). Consequently, through the establishment of the coaching relationship, the
individual is intended to build enough common understanding of himself as well as to the other,
until the collective thought process (for instance between coach and client) prevails over the
individual thought process. As a result, coaching assists in reaching a general higher level of
consciousness and shared set of meaning (Schein, 1999). Once more, recalling Gadamer’s
thoughts, creating the “one-with-another” relationship cultivated in the true language, and
especially in the dialogue, means allowing words to seek their answers and thereby posing
meetings (named by the philosopher convergence), which represent individuals’ ultimate effort to
agree. In this regard, Gadamer’s standpoint may be considered interesting, when it is asserted that
it is the dialogue that takes over and plays with human beings.
Previously specified is how, according to the practice of coaching, one of the ultimate goals entails
creating a natural flow of conversation, which enables the individuals involved to come together
and think generatively and creatively. In the long-run, the coaching dialogue is considered a way of
reaching a high level of communication, which facilitates elements like progress, learning and
change. Building a common experience that allows individuals to learn collectively, accelerates
decision making and assists in the process of implementing the decisions the way the individuals
plan through coaching (Schein, 1999). Furthermore, when dialogue persists, and the coaching
relationship exists as described in the theoretical background, both coach and client (as well as
others involved) become objects of learning, and the collective excitement of developing may give
rise to ideas and perspectives which would not have been thought of individually.
Many characteristics assigned to the dialogue by coaching theories can be claimed to be
comparable to the constructionist view; Gergen states the possibility of generating new solutions,
ways of thinking and opportunities when worlds of meaning meet. The importance of taking care
of creative relationships and the deriving language is also put forward, as estrangement and
hostility may discourage their inspired potential to arise. Moreover, the focus on learning and
2013
development in coaching transpires in Gergen’s thoughts, when the psychologist and professor
claims that individuals are involved in negotiation, and thereby continuously create meaning and
build new definitions of reality. In building these realities through the coaching dialogue, it may be
argued that coach and client engage in an interaction based on Habermas’ claims of validity; they
engage in mutual respect, put forward sincere and convinced assertions, while adhering to
meaning, with the main intent of reaching a shared understanding and agreement.
The following sections deal with methods and fundamental concepts, which a big part of the
coaching literature argues, contribute to the coaching dialogue (Whitmore, 2009; McDermott &
Jago, 2006; Flaherty, 2005; Gjerde, 2003; Schein 1999).
3.2.1. Opening up
One pre-requisite to achieving what is considered a real dialogue from a coaching perspective, is
the individual’s ability to open up to the process, to himself and to the coach. As discussed earlier,
however, opening up most often occurs neither immediately nor automatically. Coaching
literature explores the influence of habits, defined as “conditions present in every human being
that can account for the consistency in [their] response to life” (Flaherty, 2005, p.62). Coaching
then involves a process which may stimulate that self-analysis which enables the individual’s
ability to observe and select appropriate action.
Nevertheless, problems may persist when an attempt is made continuously to undo habits and
introduce new ones (Whitmore, 2009). Moreover, social identity and the expectations of others,
which tend to become accustomed through repetitive behavior, may induce individuals to respond
to situations in anticipated ways; problems may arise, as the social environment may question or
display negative judgment towards change, when expected behaviors are not lived up to (Flaherty,
2005). A private component is also invoked, which includes what an individual tells himself, and
which may give meaning to his situation within the boundaries of his narratives (Flaherty, 2005).
These difficulties met at times in the process of a dialogue are also emphasized by the
hermeneutic philosophy. According to Heidegger, in fact, even though linguistic resources are
considered to belong to everyone, the path to reach these is always far from linear and may take
place over a longer period of time.
2013
From a coaching perspective, breaking habits is seen as reeducation of the nervous system, and of
changing behaviors, responses and reactions, to occur in real time and not during the individual’s
reflection (Flaherty, 2005). In order to do so, the individual is brought through a stage of
experimentation, which consists in identifying a process which has revealed a positive outcome
and repeating it until it has habituated the individual both mentally and physically (Flaherty, 2005).
This habituation, almost as naturalization, may be associated with Gadamer’s perception on how a
game of dialogue is to be played so fervently, that in the end individuals almost seem to lose
themselves in it, and every play becomes a “being-played”.
From a different perspective, it may be argued that, in illustrating their understanding, Lakoff and
Johnson also bring up the need to break old habits; by asserting how language (and life in general)
is permeated with metaphors, and that by using metaphors and replacing outdated with new
ones, an individual is persuaded to capture new aspects of reality, he might not have been aware
of. As a matter of fact, the authors sustain how metaphors may include senses and behaviors
which enable human beings to perceive the world.
Dialogue may only be created when the individual is ready to receive coaching and when coaching
is built on a coaching relationship, with the true partnership and characteristics presented in the
theoretical section. Once the individual is ready, he may start to let go of old symbols of his
security and start the learning process and adoption of the new behaviors (Whitmore, 2009).
Studies sustain that coaching is actually a natural skill, and if the opening is present within the
individual, he might not even have to be taught too many coaching tools and techniques
(Whitmore, 2009). Nevertheless, since this is often not the case, work is put in by the coach on
removing blocks, until potential emerges. In going through this part of coaching, an individual
learns that from the moment he lets go of his need to control, he will gain control. Once again,
recalling Gadamer, one might claim that this represents the moments a kind of pre-linguistic
dialogue is created and the individual is finally provided with freedom.
As described earlier in this paper, within coaching it is believed that human beings are creative,
resourceful and whole. Curiosity is key to the experimentation phase in coaching and contributes
to these attributes in taking action, including wondering what the individual is capable of
achieving, how he can develop and how far he can go (Gjerde, 2003). This type of curiosity also
2013
entails never taking anything for granted and staying open to the unknown, with the hope of
discovering new opportunities. Along with maintaining a curious attitude, and in forming an
effective dialogue, other coaching tools and techniques are introduced in the following
paragraphs, namely active listening, powerful questions, feedback, and understanding body
language.
3.2.2. Levels of Listening
The theme of listening is a red thread in the development of civilizations; there is no part of the
world, where no philosophical texts strongly emphasize the importance of listening. In particular,
philosophy of language is known to specify how, over time, the dialogue has characterized the
development of human beings. The theoretical perspective of this paper intends to demonstrate
how Heidegger and Gadamer are two of the philosophers who have mostly contributed to the
study of this particular field in its strong relation to language.
It is interesting to note that Heidegger especially is referred to in literature within coaching, in
regards to how he alleged that human beings participate in a dialogue, and as soon as they start
listening to one another, they become the dialogue.
Several coaching exponents have similarly brought up the necessity of listening in the
establishment of relationships and development of a dialogue (Schein, 1999; Whitmore, 2009,
McDermott & Jago, 2006). In times where individuals are overwhelmed by noise and disturbances,
coaching approaches the activity of listening as taking a calm moment for reflection, discovery and
self-analysis, with the intent of substituting the need for socializing with taking the time and space
for the individual to reach clarity and open up to new opportunities .
In establishing the coaching relationship, daily exercising and major effort is put in to developing
the ability of listening, until it becomes habitual and almost automatic. The underlying reason for
this regards the fact that within coaching, authentic listening is considered the basis of effective
communication, and the best way to decipher emotions, as well as understanding one’s
relationship to others. As a matter of fact, through listening, individuals may increase their
chances of success; being listened to and engaging in listening enables them to better explore a
greater number of possibilities, and thereby also creating a greater number of possible solutions
(Flaherty, 2005).
2013
It may be argued that active listening presupposes a voluntary effort of the coach to listen not only
with the ears but with his whole being, where the whole individual is involved; in this regard,
Whitworth et al. (1998) defines three forms of listening and describes them in three levels, to
illustrate the importance of the active listening occurring in coaching.
The first level regards internal listening and it encompasses the process of self-awareness already
explained previously in this paper. By getting to know himself and increasing his ability to listen to
his needs, the individual increases his understanding of his difficulties, with the premise that he
takes responsibility for these too. Taking responsibility then includes accepting what is happening,
in order to eventually be able to overcome it. This type of listening may thus help the individual
filter the information and resources available to him and focus on his primary needs and goals
(Whitworth et al., 1998). Recalling Heidegger’s determination of “the saying”, and how it operates
by showing, it is possible to argue that the display this type of listening offers may serve to open
discussions, enabling the infinite experience of language to activate the truth of being. By learning
to listen to what is shown, thus, the individual embodies “the epic song of being” and starts to
reach a higher understanding of what is in front of him.
The second level is referred to as focused listening, which entails a deep attention towards the
other; the individual engages his whole self in listening to what the other person is saying,
allowing him to express himself at his own pace, without interfering with repetitive or interrupting
questions. Moreover, this listening is characterized by a genuine interest to enrich one’s
knowledge and learning potential, as it is believed that only when the other person feels
unconditionally accepted (a conditioned argued for in the theoretical part of this paper),
expression is freed and a coaching dialogue is created. Heidegger’s thoughts behind language build
on this idea, in arguing for the power of listening and the importance of absorbing its silence, in
order to embark the road of a pure linguistic experience and eventually open the doors to truth.
This level includes a true perception, through words and gestures, of the other’s experience and
feelings (Whitworth et al., 1998). In his philosophy, Gadamer raises the similar issue of listening
and the importance of the unspoken as a moment for the individual to remove himself from his
self-centeredness and start the process of understanding the other. Emotional intelligence,
described in previous sections, plays a crucial role in coaching, as it enables the individual to
2013
become completely available to the other, by trying to look at the situation from his perspective
and abstaining from judgment (Whitworth et al., 1998). The evasion from judgment is previously
displayed by Whitmore’s Communication Envelope Model in the section on GROWing in coaching.
Gadamer supports this idea in stating that there would be an ideal coexistence among human
beings, if everyone were to remove their own interests and prejudices. Moreover, by applying this
type of listening, the individual learns to become careful, to be present, to respond and pay
attention to the entire communication of the speaker. In other words, it may be asserted that he
learns to listen with his heart, opening the way to understanding and empathy. Once again,
recalling Gadamer, one can claim that this type of listening represents a necessary art to dispose
oneself to true understanding, as it is regarded the route in which the word has reached the other
person in his comprehension. Also, the philosopher could argue that the speech taking place may
become a dialogue, as it is brought forward through many silent answers; even in this case, the
involved individuals get closer to one another through a sense of reciprocity. This link between
listening and understanding, according to Gadamer, denotes one’s true opening towards another
person’s dimension.
Lastly, global listening, takes the activity to another level, by including an attention of the
individual towards not only words, but also body language and senses. At this level of listening,
coach and client ‘dance together in the moment’, with a higher awareness and intuition, as well as
a focus on what is happening in the current situation (Whitworth et al., 1998). The individual is
able to assume a non-defensive and accepting role of everything that is being said, and welcomes
the unexpected by viewing it as a chance for development. In a dialogue, therefore, a relationship
is considered to be created, in which individuals are brought together to truly understand each
other’s viewpoint. From a hermeneutical perspective, this may signify the moment in which a real
agreement has been reached and thus the dialogue may come to an end. This sense of agreement
may also be viewed upon from a social constructionist viewpoint, according to which, instead, new
worlds of meaning would be created.
To conclude, from a coaching perspective, within the activity of listening, meaning is given to
language by filtering words, beliefs, knowledge and experience. As a matter of fact, it is assumed
2013
that the individuals involved in the dialogue may not give the same meaning to a word or
expression, and that meaning, instead, is to be found within the individuals, not within words
(Flaherty, 2005). This conception may be, one more time, brought back to the hermeneutic
philosophers’ interest in the language of metaphysics. Gadamer’s particular interest is noticeable,
in stressing that language is always only the language that individuals speak with one another in
their daily life; the philosophy concerning the nature of being then lies not within the language,
but within what is thought in a language.
3.2.3. Appreciative Inquiry
The traditional problem-solution approach assumes that a counseling or training begins with an
analysis of the situation, which often includes a series of interviews with the individual(s) involved.
The purpose of this interview is to bring forth the essential problems of the situation to be
considered, which most often provides the individual with a list of things which are in error or
simply not working as wished. In this case, on top of the list, the results entail the creation of a
climate of skepticism and sometimes even frustration; the focus on the problems exacerbates the
level of discomfort and, in many cases, the reaction of the client may be defiant and opposed to
the person supposed to help provide new solutions (Schein, 1999).
The practice of coaching encourages the individual to take distance from this mindset, and
introduces methods, which within the literature of coaching are often referred to as Appreciative
Inquiry (AI). According to the process behind AI, developed by Cooperrider and Srivastva in 1986,
the client already owns the resources and knowledge necessary to come up with a solution. The
individual’s resourcefulness within coaching has been emphasized throughout this paper. In the
application of these methods, the coach is addressed towards activation and the facilitation of
communication mechanisms. Only if the latter of these persists, a climate of trust and synergy is
created and solutions may be found. Appreciative Inquiry is presented as one of the coaching
tools, as it embraces the power of questions in coaching, as well as the appreciative and positive
language used to frame the situation (Orem et al., 2007) and champion the client (McDermott &
Jago, 2006).
Through AI, an individual is thus not only brought to focus on the solution, rather than on the
problem, but also on paying attention to his own vision, his resources, and the tasks and
2013
objectives which may lead to the accomplishment of his vision. The underlying reason for this is
that it is believed within coaching that better results are achieved if the individual gets involved in
thinking about what he wants, instead of what binds him: it may be asserted that desire and
envisioning of best-case scenarios are not totally abstract entities separated from reality (Rosinski,
2003). A similar concept was expressed earlier in this paper, in regards to the so-called selffulfilling prophecy. Moreover, often the individual is aware of this by reminiscing past experiences,
and he may achieve more effective solutions if he decides to use the positive past events fruitfully
and suppress the negative ones which have led to disruptive behaviors (Orem et al., 2007). This
idea may be regarded as comparable to the social constructionist argument on how human beings
view the world, discussed earlier in this paper; the moment of interaction created by following AI
methods enables individuals to come together, interact and construct new meanings. Also,
according to this stream of thinking, as the social and psychic worlds present in this process are
considered subjective, the interaction creates reality solely from the human communication and
language taking place. Through coaching and its AI, therefore, once the individual has understood
that his language creates his reality, he can start using it as a promoter for his personal (as well as
professional) change. It may be claimed that, bottom-line assumptions to this principle, therefore,
are that what the individual concentrates on becomes his reality, and that the language he uses
builds his reality (Orem et al., 2007).
In practice, by adopting these methods, the individual goes through four main phases. Within each
of these a subset of tools and methods may be applied, with the main intent of overcoming the
limitations of traditional behavioral patterns, raising curiosity through effective questions and
boosting the learning environment necessary to coaching. It can be argued that questioning, thus,
becomes a key speech act in this process; in this regard, in fact, Searle may pinpoint how focus is
put on the individuals, who, by answering the questions, reproduce words and through them,
generate meaning.
The first phase, discovery, begins with investigating moments and stories of success (Cooperrider
et al., 2003). Questions involved in this phase may be: “What gives life to you now?” (from a
transcendental perspective), “What works well when...?” or “In all this, what do you consider to be
the best thing?”.
2013
The second phase is defined as dream, and it induces the individual to base himself on the positive
aspects discovered in the first phase to envision ‘what might be’ (Cooperrider et al., 2003). In this
phase the individual considers questions like “what could be accomplished, if I am to build on
what works well?” and “in what way can I develop what works well?”.
Next is the third phase, called design, during which the individual starts creating the ideal, or ‘what
should be’ (Cooperrider et al., 2003). The new vision then starts to take concrete forms and
objectives are defined to determine positive and attainable goals (similar to the ones described
earlier in this paper for the GROW model). In this phase, an example of guiding questions may be
“what are the efforts needed in order to fulfill my dream?”
Finally, the fourth phase, destiny, induces the individual to ponder on the implementation of the
project, by answering “what exactly has to be done in order to implement my dream?”, and thus
identifying with whom, what, when, how, and how soon the process is to take place.
It is important to state that AI is often applied in group settings, with the intent of generative a
wider range of ideas and perspectives. In organizational environments, four-day AI summits may
take place, aimed to cover one phase each day. Nevertheless, this method may very well be
applied interpersonally between coach and client, who are still able to create the generative and
learning process necessary to coaching.
By observing the activity taking place in the four AI phases, and recalling the theoretical
perspective of this paper, it is possible to conclude that Wittgenstein’s standpoint may support
Searle’s focus on the speaker in the use of language. Yet, the philosopher may build on this view
with his theory of language-games and emphasize the individual’s engagement in working with
words and moves within the game of language. As mentioned previously, Gadamer’s philosophy
can sometimes be correlated to Wittgenstein’s. In this case, in fact, he may argue that the stance
of the game tends to take over the speaker, despite the latter’s prominence in the process. This
perspective may be considerable challenged by Heidegger who, instead, is known to claim that the
domain goes to language.
2013
3.2.4. Feedback
In the creation of a coaching dialogue, feedback is a fundamental element to support the growth
and process of change in the individual (Whitmore, 2009; Rosinski, 2003; Schein, 1999). Feedback
may be given both at an individual and organizational level, and can thus involve anyone, from
coworkers to management, from parents to teachers. In coaching, feedback mainly represents the
very important stage in which coach and client agree on an appropriate action plan, to reach the
end goal and achieve success (Whitmore, 2009).
As mentioned in the theoretical section of this paper, Gadamer is one of the philosophers who
emphasizes the role of feedback in the confirmation of language and the creation of a pure
authentic dialogue. Closely correlated to feedback, according to Gadamer, is listening, as together,
these activities serve to build the “one-with-another” relationship and thereby foster true
language.
In coaching, feedback is used to improve the individual’s level of motivation, including working on
his sense of self-efficacy (i.e. the inner conviction of being able to do something) and reinforcing
positive behaviors, and rewarding the client for his efforts and progression. Therefore, positive
feedback improves the individual’s belief in his capabilities, as it enhances his personal success
(Whitmore, 2009).
Through feedback the coach also helps to increase the individual’s level of awareness (Flaherty,
2005). Working with his awareness is crucial, because it allows the client to understand what
actions are needed to reach his target most effectively. Moreover, the individual is encouraged to
make decisions and is supported in his process to become self-generative, which, as argued by this
paper, is considered to be the ultimate goal in coaching.
Feedback is one of the main elements of coaching which helps the individual address and
overcome issues and obstacles (Whitmore, 2009). The process of feedback is an open two-way
communication between coach and client that involves the active listening and the aptitude to
open up mentioned above in this paper. The main intention for this is to set forth a constant
exchange of useful information, which may serve to correct or adjust the action plan, as well as
improve the individual’s use of his potential. In scrutinizing the role of language, Wittgenstein
speaks about how a similar exchange of information may include “seeing connexions”, enabling
2013
individuals to get a better grip of the situation. Indeed, the philosopher mentions how all complex
activities, which make up language, need to be seen with an “overview”, that an individual is able
to get by eliminating misunderstandings though the use of so-called “intermediate members”.
Therefore, seeing connexions may help the individual overcome the complexity of language,
remove pitfalls language tends to present, and start shaping his “worldview”, or the way he looks
and makes sense of the world.
Feedback may also be used to correct errors in the coaching process. Adopting the individual’s
potential, establishing his objectives, structuring his plan, assessing obstacles are all activities
promoted by the relationship between coach and client as part of the co-creation of their coaching
process. Therefore, paying attention to feedback is considered fundamental, in order to ensure
the maintenance of a productive cooperation, based on a supporting and helping relationship
(Schein, 1999). In this regard, Lakoff and Johnson’s metaphors may turn out to be useful to give
structure and co-create the process. As a matter of fact, the scholars may argue that metaphors
are used as a mean to understand and experience one thing in terms of another. The underlying
reason for this is that it is believed that the individual is not always able to identify seemingly
unclear concepts or express abstract emotions. Therefore, through metaphors, both client and
coach may succeed in accessing genuine experiences and conceptualizing them; in the long-run,
this process can serve to clarify non-shared experiences and thereby facilitate their
communication.
In more practical terms, one of the main tools used within coaching for fostering feedback may be
seen in the image below:
(from Rosinski, 2003, adapted by Luft, “The Johari Window”, Hum. Rel. Tr. News 5, 1961, p. 6-7)
2013
The matrix defined as Johari Window takes its name from the researchers Joseph Luft and Harry
Ingham, who structured the model in the 1960s to study the social interactions. In particular, the
matrix is used within coaching as a tool to detect how an individual’s personality is expressed, and
secondly to observe the relationship between him and others (Rosinski, 2003; Schein, 1999).
In detail, Rosinski’s (2003) adaptation of the window covers the following four areas: arena, blind
spot, mask and potential. The former area (arena) contains the facts and emotions that the
individual deliberately shows, and which he is able to speak about casually; it may express both
strengths and weaknesses, and represents the topics and ideas he chooses to share with others.
The blind spot, represents things that others observe of him, but that are unknown to the
individual himself. Again, it might contain both positive and negative feedback, and it tends to
affect the way others relate to him, as well as how much at ease he is able to find himself in
certain situations.
The third area, mask, represents the private aspects that the individual is aware of, but keeps
hidden from others.
Lastly, the area named potential, contains aspects which are totally unknown to both the
individual and others, as they are believed to be buried in the subconscious and are revealed on
occasions which are particularly emotional.
The model can be applied to also represent the non-verbal communication (which is discussed in
the upcoming section); the public arena, in this case, may be shown through voluntary gestures,
clothing, or with socialization. The hidden and unconscious spheres, instead, may be revealed
through posture, tone of voice and involuntary movements.
The Johari Window is utilized to understand and change the dynamics of the groups, the
relationship of coach and client or even in the process of self-analysis. The interactions between
the four boxes determine the types of relationships that can be created among individuals, or
even as part of an inner conflict (Schein, 1999). Examples include shifting to open socialization and
free exchange of information, confiding or venting, as well as displaying empathy.
2013
As synergy grows in the relationship, most topics move to the public arena, and interpersonal
communication becomes smoother. Automatically, the other areas of the matrix decrease in size.
The coach may intervene by assessing the graphical difference of the matrix before and after a
coaching session or period.
To sum up, the Johari Window is used by coaching to identify and work on relationships and the
communication taking place between the people involved. From a social constructionist point of
view, it may be argued that this tool is crucial, as it scrutinizes how language and the social
relationships get in on the act of anticipating experiences, as well as creating new knowledge.
Moreover, new worlds and meaning are formed constantly in the endurance of feedback, which
brings individuals together in what Gergen and other social constructionists would call “shared
action”.
3.3.
Non-verbal Communication
The topic of non-verbal communication is a vast one and worthy of many volumes on its own.
However, in this paper, the main intent is to lay out a few principles in this regard, to support its
prevalence in the practice of coaching as well as in the philosophical considerations of language,
and suggest some methods through which it is introduced within coaching.
3.3.1. Listening to non-verbal communication
As mentioned earlier in this paper, many messages are communicated without being verbalized.
Therefore, in coaching an important skill is to be able to listen to non-verbal signals. Careful
observation will reveal how much information can be conveyed through facial expression, for
instance. Listening to the individual’s emotional tone is another ability that allows recognizing
feelings which are not expressed verbally; the tone of voice may provide clues in how to deal with
the individual in difficult situations, in which he might not spontaneously express his feelings and
thoughts (Flaherty, 2005). In the communication process, non-verbal aspects are largely
unconscious and less susceptible to being manipulated or masked by the individual.
In coaching, both coach and client engage in the listening introduced previously. Yet, a good
listener is also believed to listen to more than simply words; this includes listening to the intensity,
the rhythm and tone of the voice, as well as to the subtle variations the other is transmitting.
Often, it may be easy to forget about the importance of non-verbal behavior and the influence this
2013
may have on others; in a dynamic communication, in fact, it is possible to influence others and
establish a positive or negative climate without even uttering a word (Flaherty, 2005). As
mentioned earlier, in imagining a language, among others, Wittgenstein also imagines forms of
life, including non-linguistic behaviors which the philosopher calls primitive reactions. Primitive
reactions become clues in the definition of language, since he claims that these are expressed by
bodily expressions of emotions, and translated by so-called language-games.
Nonverbal signals make it more difficult for the individual to hide what he is feeling; he may be
able to carefully select his terms and expressions in order to create a façade, thinking of having
covered his emotions, while, instead, they are being expressed unconsciously through his voice or
gestures (Schein, 1999). Therefore, aspects behind this type of communication serve to better
understand the interaction and the quality of interaction taking place between coach and client
(Whitmore, 2009). In Searle’s studies, the philosopher and professor builds on this concept, by
identifying how important verbal expressions constitute behaviors and, as such, are never
separated from aspects which are closely linked to relationship between individuals. Moreover, it
is important to keep in mind that individuals tend to interpret and filter what they hear through
their own background and experience.
Therefore, by applying the empathic listening and
emotional intelligence suggested by the practice of coaching, coach and client are able to access
better quality information (Gjerde, 2003).
3.3.2. Coaching the Body
One of the major exponents who emphasizes the centrality of the body in the process of coaching
is Flaherty. Since it is believed that the body is a container and expresser of personal habits,
reactions and knowledge, it plays a crucial role in determining how individuals act, what they
perceive is possible to achieve and how they relate to others (Flaherty, 2005). Moreover, it is
argued that habits are embedded in the body (more particularly, in the neuromuscular system),
and that, thereby, subconscious behavioral patterns, based on the individuals’ background and
history, navigate in it, making it also interwoven with language and all its forms (Flaherty, 2005).
Gadamer’s considerations on language may be considered closely related to these assumptions, as
he recognizes the phenomenon as something which should not be seen solely as a verbal
language; rather, he argues that it should be understood as any form of communication, including
all those gestures that come into play in establishing linguistic relationships with others. In
2013
particular, the philosopher keenly argues for this point in his discussion on semantic structure and
the limits of language.
In these regards, a pragmatic approach used within coaching is training the individual on becoming
a keen observer of his own body. Once the individual becomes aware of how his body reacts, the
coach may be able to start working with him to shift his spontaneous responses and open a new
horizon of possible ones (Flaherty, 2005). This procedure is, however, not always automatic, nor
often accomplished in the short-term; the individual will need to enter a process of discovery of
the body, which includes exploring how open it feels, how the energy is moving around, what
intuitions emerge and the overall state of the body, and replace this with his world of ideas and
emotions (Flaherty, 2005). It may occur that the individual is resilient to the process in the
beginning, and wants to retreat to his body numbness. However, once he starts building
competence to stay present and settle in his body, his racing mind may diminish, and he may be
able to absorb more input from his everyday world. Among the methods suggested within
coaching are body scans and controlling the breathing. These methods are used to positively affect
the nervous system and stay in touch with the current moment, rather than getting lost in past
memories or future expectations (Flaherty, 2005). Being fully immersed and living the moment is
brought up in Lakoff and Johnson’s contemplations of metaphors. Indeed, he defines these as
moments for everyday language, and, in particular, as representations of the mode through which
human beings give structure to their concepts, and thus also to reality.
Part of this process also entails teaching the client to respect his body’s promptings, in order to
reach the right body-mind state, which will enable him to think clearly and react and engage
appropriately in all types of situations (McDermott & Jago, 2006). Once the individual starts acting
on his impulses and perhaps even change his physical state to refresh his mind, it becomes easier
for him to monitor and respond to his own signals and needs. Consequently, in the long-run, the
coach helps the client manage his state appropriately and thereby get the most out of the
coaching process, as well as of life (McDermott & Jago, 2006).
Through coaching, the individual is then able to get into conditions of alert and speculative
attentiveness, which enables him to focus his mind on his self-awareness and state of inquiry,
discussed by this paper as key points to stimulate a dialogue and what has been argued for as true
2013
language. In order to reach this, the individual may be induced to ask himself the question: “what
state do I need to be in to be at my most resourceful?”. Often, the answer is found in the
combination of maintaining the logical and strategic left-brain processing available, and
integrating it with the right-brain capacity to feel, imagine and create (McDermott & Jago, 2006).
By entering the coaching “body-mind” state, the individual is believed to pick up all connections
and implications (McDermott & Jago, 2006) that philosophers of language have articulated as
being key to the understanding of meaning. Moreover, he may take the overview needed in order
to shift from an awareness of how he is to an awareness of how this connects to other people, his
past or future (McDermott & Jago, 2006). Again, the importance of gaining an overview of
interweaving activities and happenings has been brought up by philosophers like Wittgenstein, in
his explanation of worldviews. Finally, coaching the body may help the individual step outside
himself and consider how he might be perceived by others, examining the effects of different
possible courses of actions, from their perspective as well as his own (McDermott & Jago, 2006).
This takes into consideration the interpersonal- and intra-psychic dimension, brought up in the
theoretical section of this paper, as the individual is encouraged to react not just to the outside
world, but also to his inner world (McDermott & Jago, 2006). As social constructionists would
argue, the coming together of these worlds may represent a captivating occasion to build new
definitions of reality and meaning.
4. Discussion and Further Development
In what way is coaching pervaded by language?
As a practice which promotes self-development and the unlocking of personal potential, coaching
has a focus which is based on the method of setting goals and designing the path to pursue, in
order to reach maximum performance. By adopting the GROW model, an individual is brought
through a process of self-analysis; he is encouraged to discover and become aware of habits and
rooted behavioral patterns which have determined his choices and actions. Moreover, he is
induced to tap into his emotions and reflect upon what values shape his perception of life and
thereby how these affect the way he relates to it. Increasing the awareness of emotions, and
combining them with thoughts and intentions, is believed to enhance the individual’s quest for
2013
meaning, which within coaching is an ongoing and active process. Subsequently, by assessing
himself and his reality, the individual can set his goals more easily.
In these phases of coaching, the phenomenon of language seems to appear in different ways. In
order to reach meaning, in his self-analysis, the individual draws from his personal background and
accesses language through language-games, based on intertwined activities and practices put
forward in the coaching. In the process, as he comprehends the importance of emotional
intelligence, the individual is also provided with the language of emotions, and is therefore
confronted with a new horizon, which may serve as a fundamental source of information for him
when he establishes steps to take and makes choices. Defining his reality stimulates his
exploration of meaning and, as he sets goals he is induced to make ethical and moral
considerations which tie him to the plan and single steps; the close relationship between his
values and the goals then may give birth to what philosophers of language call a valid discourse.
It may be argued that the phenomenon of language emerges when the individual sets his specific
goals, and more specifically, in the acknowledgement of wording and how it relates to meaning
and purpose. By avoiding judgments, and rather focusing on precise and descriptive language,
intentionality is made clear in the individual’s goals, which articulate what is going on and what
will happen. Language-games are used to substitute primitive expressions in the different
situations the individual is presented with, and the articulation of his intentions becomes a key
speech act in the coaching process.
The ontology on language prevails when the client is induced to define his reality and in it listen to
his own voice of speech as a voice of being, which, according to the philosophy, manifests itself in
language; by accessing language in this way, the individual becomes exposed to a moment of
clearing which enables new knowledge to arise. This knowledge may be related to all the
individual’s alternatives for action, which are revealed in the moment the coach helps the client
specify his options (the third step in the GROW model). Following this line of thinking, language
then prevails in the multiplicity of meanings exposed in this stage, providing the individual with a
deep sense of truth and being. From a similar perspective, this stage may represent the moment in
which a new horizon is uncovered, with the many new opportunities and a freedom of pursuing
the knowledge needed to grow and progress.
2013
It can be argued that, in going through the GROW process, and in answering the “w”-questions
especially, the individual may access metaphors to structure all the concepts which make up his
reality and to provide an overview of his plan. The phenomenon of language arises from the
metaphors when these enable the individual to get in touch with his inventive mindset and inner
sense of creativity, which are key to success in coaching.
When goals have been set and a plan has been clarified, language then appears as a construction
of the close interrelation between the worlds of meaning that have arisen and the action that the
individual is to take; by assessing what is appropriate and real in the coming together of the
different worlds of meaning he is living in, as a last moment of the coaching process, the client is
induced to own his choices and maintain his steps until he reaches his end goals.
The coaching dialogue is considered fundamental to the coaching relationship between coach and
client as well as to the development of the individual from one coaching session to another. The
creation of the dialogue also represents the moment in which the individuals are brought to the
explore the complexities of thinking and language; in fact, it is believed that language occurs
authentically in the open platform of dialogue, and that hidden meanings are brought to surface,
enabling true communication to emerge. In developing the coaching dialogue, coach and client cocreate a situation of one-with-another, in which both individuals are highly valued and language is
most present. This co-creation is made possible as both coach and client enter the process with
self-awareness and understanding of their own assumptions, along with willingness to opening up
and listening to what arises from the situation and other person. As a first step, therefore, the
individual thought process is grasped, as a consequence of one’s own fragmentation and
comprehension of his world. Yet, in the coaching dialogue, it may be observed how the thought
process becomes collective, through the individual’s ultimate efforts to agree (on goals or
objectives, for instance). Moreover, in this collective thought, coach and client’s worlds of
meaning meet, constructing new definitions of reality and generating new opportunities and
solutions wished for in the coaching sessions.
As stated above, linguistic resources are considered to belong to everyone. However, the path to
reach these is always far from linear and may take long. Therefore, when the individual is coached
to open up, it may be argued that he, through coaching, accesses his linguistic resources. Being
2013
truly open is perceived in the coaching process as a result of letting go of habitual patterns and
being ready to take in new ones, mentally as well as physically. This moment is argued for in
philosophy of language as playing the game of the dialogue so fervently, that the individuals
almost lose themselves in it and become “being-played”. Letting go of control accompanies this
stage in coaching, and it is considered a pre-linguistic dialogue, in which the individuals involved
are finally provided with freedom. From a different perspective, the opening up in the coaching
dialogue serves to replace outdated metaphors with new ones, so that the individuals are able to
capture new aspects of reality they would not have encountered otherwise.
Listening is an activity in coaching that takes account of listening to oneself as well as to others.
Active listening includes consideration of words, silence and body language. Individuals access
language and participate in dialogue when they start listening to one another. In fact, it is argued
that through attentive listening they become the dialogue itself. Generally, coaching supports the
activity of listening as the basis for effective communication, as it enables the deciphering of
emotions and provides a clearer understanding of the situation and the established relationships
in that situation. This type of listening is internal and it makes up a big part of the process of selfawareness, as it includes being emotionally intelligent and becoming open and available to the
other. The importance of removing oneself from prejudices and paying attention to the other is a
fundamental characteristic brought up much in the practice of coaching. This characteristic is
considered the power of listening, through which the individual is able to absorb the silence, and
thereby embark on the road to pure linguistic experience, a moment that has been claimed to
open the doors to the “truth of being”.
By listening to the unspoken, both client and coach distance themselves from their selfcenteredness and start the process of understanding each other, including capturing the language
lying underneath the many silent answers. As a matter of fact, according to philosophers of
language, meaning is given to language by filtering words, beliefs, knowledge and experience
which originate from the individuals engaged in the dialogue, and it is therefore found within the
individuals, rather than in words. The engagement arising in the dialogue may be embodied by
saying and showing, and it is believed to enable a higher understanding of reality and the infinite
experience of language to activate the truth of being. Listening may also represent an opportunity
2013
for new worlds of meaning to be constructed and for an agreement to be reached, thereby
fulfilling the purpose of the dialogue. In the practice of coaching this type of engagement is viewed
as the process where coach and client dance together towards the client’s achievements.
Being a self-development discipline, coaching supports the importance of the individual. In
particular, as sustained by the self-fulfilling prophecy, the client may realize that he is the key to
change; in particular, through coaching, he may understand that his language creates his reality
and that he can start using it as a promoter for his personal development. Since his social and
psychic worlds are subjective, his interaction with the coach may foster the human
communication needed for him to concentrate on what he wants to achieve, until this becomes
his reality. Therefore, the appreciative language and inquiry serve to encourage and strengthen
the client’s pursuit of goals. Theory of use of language may argue that the coach’s questioning is a
fundamental speech act, as it induces the client to reproduce words by answering, and through
these generate meaning to himself. Appreciative inquiry thus stimulates the individual’s curiosity
and starts his thinking process, which coaching approaches as the key motivator for the client’s
success. The emphasis of the individual remains a constant factor throughout the coaching
process, whereas, in the use of language, despite the prominence of the speaker, the real domain
may shift between the individual and language itself.
The Johari window is one of the tools used by coaching to guide through and graphically show the
process of feedback. The language deriving from this process serves to create a pure authentic
dialogue between coach and client, and others who might be involved in group settings.
Philosophy of language, in fact, accentuates the role of feedback in the confirmation of language,
and the listening which comes along with it contributes to the creation of the coaching
relationship, giving birth to what is argued for as true language. The exchange of information
deriving from feedback (which might be go under any of the four areas of the Johari window)
helps the individual see connections of thoughts and get a better grip of the situation. It has been
argued that connexions and an overview are crucial to eliminate misunderstandings and overcome
the complexity of language. Moreover, once the individual has removed the pitfalls language may
present him with, it is believed that he may start shaping his worldview and reality. The
connections may also be viewed as new worlds of meaning, constantly being constructed in the
2013
process of feedback and which foster shared action. The language and social relationships arising
from feedback, therefore, anticipate experiences and create new knowledge. It may be argued
that this new knowledge, as well as all genuine experiences, are then conceptualized through
metaphors, which assist client and coach in clarifying non-shared experiences and facilitating the
communication.
Non-verbal communication plays a crucial role in coaching, as it is believed that a lot may be read
and understood from gestures, postures, the tonality of the voice and behaviors. This is supported
by the philosophical perspective, according to which primitive reactions (or forms of life, including
non-linguistic behaviors) are conveyed by bodily expressions and translated by language-games,
thereby also defining language. Furthermore, it is argued that gestures may establish linguistic
relationships with others. Coaching then helps the individual (coach and client) develop and apply
empathic listening and use his emotional intelligence to access profound and indirect information,
which may turn out to be useful in constructing new definitions of reality and meaning.
Just like verbal communication, non-verbal communication requires the individual to access not
only his outside, but also his inner world; in going through a self-analysis of his behaviors, he is
induced to be fully immersed and living the moment. It is suggested that everyday language
transpires in these moments, and the individual uses metaphors as a mode to give structure to his
reality.
Once again, the self-awareness and the state of inquiry of one’s behavior and non-verbal
communication may become useful to stimulate dialogue and give birth to true language. In the
creation of a dialogue, which can thus also be non-verbal, the individual is able to reach the right
coaching body-mind state and pick up all connexions and overview needed to shift his awareness
of how he is to understanding how he connects to others, to his past and his future.
Does language affect individuals’ structure of interpretation?
And how may understanding language open up more possibilities for coaching?
The analysis reveals how coaching includes an uncoiling and a reconstruction of the individual’s
notions about being human, thereby expressing the existential issues which arise from the
practice. As mentioned above, the individual is the focus and center of coaching. Therefore,
2013
understanding the essential constitutive particulars of human beings becomes crucial; it may be
argued that, apart from providing techniques for doing, by displaying a way of viewing oneself and
others, coaching then also displays skills of being. The ontological take of this paper, according to
which humans exist in a different way from other phenomena, opens up possibilities for coaching;
it digs into how individuals enter into relationships with what they encounter and, in particular,
how they pre-reflexively interact with phenomena, as a constitutive part to their being. Language
is then considered the vital phenomenon which accompanies human beings in how they relate to
themselves and others, as well as in how they decide what is important and how to act. Therefore,
it may be argued that even thoughts and cognitive experiences become part of the opportunities
that language provides to the individual. An example includes, how, in the process of self-analysis,
language allows the individual to assess previous behavior and move from what has taken place in
the past to an opening of time, by taking action in the present to bring about an outcome in the
future.
In accordance to some views within philosophy of language, one may claim that it is language that
uses human beings, in the sense that it provides them with the horizon of possible actions,
experience, relationships and meanings. In other words, throughout the practice of coaching,
language may be viewed as the phenomenon which guides the individual towards a specific
orientation of the world. In living the spirit of coaching, the individual is induced to cultivate an
ongoing awareness and sensitivity which enable him to undergo a conversation within himself and,
ultimately, reach a sense of self-mastery. As described in the stages of the GROW model, this
process includes facing reality by letting go of control and surrendering to the situation as it is; the
individual is encouraged to reveal his uncertainties and accept frustrations and other obstacles
which might be presented, in order to be able to welcome change and commit to his own
involvement and acknowledge the power of his resourcefulness and creativity. The active nature of
language then shines through in the individual’s assimilation of this reasoning, which may occur
both consciously and unconsciously, until it reaches a level where it changes behavior. As the
above analysis displays, the self-development process, in fact, suggests that the individual’s
cultivation of this way of thinking leads him gradually to it. Eventually, the individual is believed to
develop a deep confidence within himself and an attentiveness to what is going on around him,
which produce a sustained energy and enthusiasm, resulting in more tangible outcomes and
2013
lasting success. Also, the horizon of opportunities may consist in greater latitude to shape the
individual’s future than what he would otherwise have believed.
From a different perspective, arguing that language is present as a type of game that exists in the
context of the world created by the speaker of the language, coaching may be approached as a
practice that continuously shapes and re-shapes the narratives in which the individual makes sense
of his world (or worlds). The prominence of the language in which he interprets himself thus grows
as the individual develops his ability to understand and direct himself, when he is invited to
explore and reflect with curiosity and without judgments. The coaching dialogue serves as one of
the main moments for this to occur; it breaks a new ground by establishing and sustaining a field
for collective inquiry of coach and client and creates a setting where the two (and any other
individual who may be involved) can become more aware of the context around their experiences,
as well as the thought processes and feelings which accompany these experiences.
Alternatively, it may be argued that the language arising from the dialogue stimulates speech acts
and metaphors that create new meaning and motivates internal search, encouraging the
individuals to ask powerful questions and stay engaged and focused (which are key assumptions
coaching rests on).
If the domain is given to the speaker, as the coaching dialogue is practiced, it may be claimed that,
in bringing about a different set of activities and outcomes, the individuals learn to skillfully deal
with language; attention is paid to words and spaces between words, to timing and silence, to the
tone of the voice and gestures, creating the conditions to access all resources and experience the
situation as a whole.
Furthermore, by comprehending the phenomenon of language, both coach and client are also
reminded of the systemic thinking underlying the practice of coaching, of how they are made up of
interconnecting systems (examples include mind and body, intellect and emotion, reflection and
action) and may thereby experience the primacy of the whole (Senge et al., 1994). This systemic
approach is not dealt with in detail in this paper, but may be a topic for further research and
development of studies pertaining to coaching.
2013
This paper aims to display the necessity of coaching of bringing up existential issues when assisting
the client in his pursuit of performance and success. Mentioned earlier in this section is the
significance of comprehending and accessing the language of emotions, which takes into account
entering the realm of emotions and tapping into a deep and ethical well of aspiration to develop a
personal vision. The coaching relationship and the ongoing interaction between coach and client is
crucial to this process, as its openness and intimacy serve to care for the vulnerability which may
arise. By exploring the language deriving from his mental models and values, the individual is
believed to become mentally, socially and emotionally exposed, yet remaining assertive and selfassured.
Moreover, the analysis of this paper discusses how the individual’s body interacts with the
phenomenon of language. It is argued, in fact, that the individual carries and expresses what he
cares about and how he understands the world in his body; the language behind non-verbal
communication expresses the level of openness to change, since the ability to progress, connect
with others and persist in challenging situations may in big part be determined by the state of the
body. Therefore, through coaching the individual is persuaded to also assess his language by
including the body and by paying attention to how he attends to it.
As a coach, comprehending the pertinence of the phenomenon of language may ultimately
provide him with new notions on how the client perceives himself, and more specifically what
particularities makes his client the kind of human being he is. As the above analysis reveals, it may
be contended that through the coaching dialogue, the coach is able to access the language world
that he constructs and shares with his client. In this process, he may be able to explore what the
client exposes and what he keeps obscured in the language he speaks. Also, in analyzing the
client’s worlds of meanings, the coach may easier identify opportunities and experiences which
are inaccessible to the client. Consequently, by observing the way the client observes his structure
of interpretation, the coach may intervene in articulating it and making it explicit to the client. This
increase of awareness may then serve to alter the client’s structure of interpretation, as new
distinctions and practices are provided, until, in the long-run, these become ingrained and the
client is believed to be freed to take action.
2013
As stated in the introduction, the approach of this paper is mainly focused at coaching at an
individual level. However, in other forms of coaching, especially in organizational or executive
coaching, principles brought up in the analysis may be applied to build learning organizations;
coaching sessions may serve to create business environments where employees continuously
expand their capacity to create results individually, while still nurturing expansive patterns of
thinking and setting free collective aspirations (Senge, 1997). Further research in this regard may
include how the phenomenon of language can transpire in this case too, in particular in the
coming together of more people who engage in a continuous process of learning and creating new
knowledge and meaning together. Processes like self-analysis expand and become a genuine
“thinking together”, with a suspension of assumptions and a generation of shared visions (Senge,
1997). The active presence of language may be argued for especially in the integrated discipline of
the coaching dialogue, which, in an organizational setting, may foster many feedback loops as part
of the emergent and learning process. Furthermore, as awareness of the presence of the
organizational spirit increases, more often decisions are believed to be taken as teams, in light of
the shared vision and common sense of purpose (Senge et al., 1994), once again opening up a
horizon of new opportunities which would not have been visible if the sense of being, and thereby
deeper purpose, were obscure.
5. Conclusion
This Master’s thesis views coaching as a practice which enhances personal development. Coaching
is revealed through definitions by coaching exponents like Whitmore, Downey, Flaherty and
McDermott and Jago, as a process that helps individuals meet their goals in their private as well as
professional life, improve their relationships with themselves, others and with their environment.
Despite its close affiliation with other practices, like mentoring and consulting, coaching bases its
idiosyncratic approach on the trusting relationship between coach and client that serves to guide
the latter through his personal experience and discover his own solution, which is most right for
him. In this paper, it is argued that through dynamics, like the engaging partnership of coach and
client, coaching delves into existential issues, which are often underrated in the pertinent
literature. In fact, the practice may assist individuals in comprehending vital constitutive
particulars of human beings, including how they relate to meaning, truth and language.
2013
Language is the phenomenon which has the main focus in this paper. In fact, it is attempted to
analyze coaching through the lens of philosophy of language and related notions, in order to
suggest how language strikingly transpires through the practice. According to the ontological
approach of this thesis, language is what differentiates human beings from any other form of life
and, in line with the thinking behind philosophy of language, it becomes fundamental to humanity
and understanding human life.
One continental philosopher belonging to the hermeneutic movement is Heidegger, who wishes to
remove the common comprehension of language as a means of communication, and makes
language the basic event of man’s “being”. His take is greatly ontological, phenomenological and
existential; language is considered an active phenomenon which uses human beings. It is then the
individual’s job to listen to the voice of speech, leading him to the moment of “clearing” during
which new knowledge may become unconcealed. Heidegger’s assigning the domain to language
differs strongly with Wittgenstein’s game phenomenology, according to which it is the subject
speaking who engages in a communitarian process of using language. In fact, the philosopher
describes language as a game that is played in a context for a specific purpose. Assuming an inbetween position, instead, is Gadamer, who reflects an intermediate role of the game of language
that accentuates the dialogue’s activity in the process, but is still exceeded by the speaker’s
outlook. Moreover, Searle’s pragmatic approach to the issue of meaning draws upon the theory of
“speech acts”, delineating the pertinence of language in how verbal expressions constitute
behaviors and are closely linked to relationships between individuals. This theory serves as a
source of inspiration for Habermas and Apel’s dialogue, which puts forward a public sphere and
universal claims of validity to the linguistic community. The social constructionist view is presented
through Gergen’s orientation on language perceived as a pre-condition of thought, as well as a
form of social action; language is believed to provide a framework of meaning to individuals, who
come together and construct new worlds of meaning and definitions of realities. The last approach
brought up in this paper pertains to Lakoff and Johnson’s contribution to figurative language,
arguing for how metaphors are used to understand and experience one thing in terms of another.
The analysis puts forward a set of tools and methods used in the practice of coaching: the GROW
model, the coaching dialogue (including opening up, listening, appreciative inquiry and feedback),
2013
and observing non-verbal communication. By explaining these tools, the analysis of this paper
suggests how language perceived from the above mentioned lines of thinking pervades the
process involved in coaching. However, it is important to take into consideration that the paper
does not favor one approach over another. Rather, the intent is to provide the reader with a new
angle with which to view coaching, namely the existential issues related to defining human beings,
which often arise from the practice.
To conclude, this new perspective serves to propose how, by having a thorough understanding of
language, a coach may be presented with more opportunities. In particular, it is suggested that, in
scrutinizing this phenomenon, an individual is also encouraged to investigate how he relates to
himself and others; his process of self-analysis and inner conversation assist him in sustaining
creativity and a sense of inquiry, evoking him to observe and listen to himself as a whole
(considering thoughts, emotions and body). Furthermore, this increase in awareness may
challenge him to further explore his client, including how the client perceives himself, as well as
what the client exposes and keeps concealed in the language he speaks.
Final observations are that, once applied individually, this view of coaching may be considered on
a corporate level, for those business environments where organizations assume emergent
approaches, with the hope of embracing change and introducing new opportunities for learning
and develop.
2013
Works Cited
Adapted from Schein, E. H. (1985). Organizational Culture and Leadership. Jossey-Bass.
Amoroso, L. (1993). Lichtung. Leggere Heidegger. Torino: Rosenberg & Sellier.
Arbnor, I., & Bjerke, B. (1997). Methodology for Creating Business Knowledge. Thousand Oaks: Sage.
Arthos, J. (2009). The Inner Word in Gadamer's Hermeneutics. U of Notre Dame Press.
Baker, G., & Hacker, P. (2005). Wittgenstein: Understanding and Meaning: Volume 1 of an Analytical
Commentary on the Philosophical Investigations. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing.
Barthold, L. S. (2010). Gadamer's Dialectical Hermeneutics. Plymouth: Lexington Books.
Barthold, L. S. (2012). Hans-Georg Gadamer. Retrieved 2013, from Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy:
http://www.iep.utm.edu/gadamer/
Berger, P., & Luckmann, T. (1966). The Social Construction of Reality: A Treatise in the Sociology of
Knowledge. New York: Doubleday and Co.
Biletzki, A., & Matar, A. (2009). Ludwig Wittgenstein. Retrieved 2013, from Stanford Encyclopedia of
Philosophy: http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/wittgenstein/
Blair, D. (2006). Wittgenstein, Language and Information: 'back to the Rough Ground!'. Dordrecht: Springer.
Bogen, J. (1972). Wittgenstein's Philosophy of Language. (T. Honderich, Ed.) London: Routledge & Kegan
Paul.
Bohart, A., & Greenberg, L. (1997). Empathy Reconsidered: New Directions in Psychotherapy. Washington
D.C.: American psychology Association.
Boroditsky, L. (2009). How does language shape the way we think? . Retrieved July 2013, from Edge:
http://edge.org/conversation/how-does-our-language-shape-the-way-we-think
Burr, V. (2001). Introduction: What is Social Constructionism? In V. Burr, An Introduction to Social
Constructionism (pp. 1-38). Routledge.
Calhoun, C. J. (1992). Habermas and the Public Sphere. MIT Press.
Cooperrider, D. L., Whitney, D. K., & Stavros, J. M. (2003). Appreciative Inquiry Handbook. San Francisco:
Berrett-Koehler Publishers.
Corporate Coach Group. (2012). The self-fulfilling prophecy. Retrieved June 2013, from Corporate Coach
Group: http://www.corporatecoachgroup.co.uk/blogDetail.asp?blogid=354
Covey, S. R. (2004). The 7 Habits of Highly Effective People: Powerful Lessons in Personal Change. New York:
Free Press.
2013
Dallmayr, F. (1993). Self and Other: Gadamer and the Hermeneutics of Difference. Yale Journal of Law & the
Humanities, 1-24.
De George, R. T. (2006). The Relevance of Philosophy to Business Ethics: A Response to Rorty's "Is
Philosophy Relevant to Applied Ethics? Business Ethics Quarterly, 381-389.
Di Cesare, D. (2013). Gadamer: A Philosophical Portrait. (N. Keane, Trans.) Bloomington: Indiana University
Press.
Dole, D. (Director). (2011). Ken Gergen talks about Social Constructionist Ideas, Theory and Practice [Motion
Picture].
Downey, M. (1999). Effective Coaching. Orion Business Books.
Flaherty, J. (2005). Coaching. Evoking Excellence in Others. Oxford: Elsevier.
Fogelin, R. J. (1995). Wittgenstein: The Aurguments of the Philosopher. (T. Honderich, Ed.) London:
Routledge.
Gadamer, H.-G. (1983). Verità e metodo (Truth and Method). (V. G. Bompiani, Trans.) Milano .
Gadamer, H.-G. (2007). The Gadamer Reader: A Bouquet of the Later Writings. (R. E. Palmer, Ed.)
Northwestern University Press.
Gallwey, T. (1997). The Inner Game of Tennis. New York: Random House.
Gergen, K. (1973). Social Psychology as History. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 26, 309-320.
Gergen, K. (1985). The Social Constructionist Movement in Modern Psychology. American Psychologist 40,
266-275.
Gergen, K. J. (1995). Social Construction and the Educational Process. In Constructivism in Education (pp.
17-39). New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Gergen, K. J. (1999). An Invitation to Social Construction. London: Sage.
Gergen, K. J., & Gergen, M. M. (1984). The Social Construction of Narrative Accounts. In K. J. Gergen, & M.
M. Gergen, Historical Social Psychology. NJ: Hillsdale.
Gergen, K. J., & Gergen, M. M. (1986). Narrative Form and the Construction of Psychological Science. In T.
R. Sarbin, Narrative Psychology: The Storied Nature of Human Conduct. New York: Praeger.
Gergen, K. J., Schrader, S. M., & Gergen, M. (2008). Constructing Worlds Together: Interpersonal
Communication as Relational Process. Pearson.
Gjerde, S. (2003). Coaching: vad, varför, hur. (G. Johansson, Trans.) Lund: Studentlitteratur.
Goleman, D. (1996). Emotional Intelligence. London: Bloomsbury Publishing PLC.
Goleman, D. (2012). Emotional Intelligence: 10th Anniversary Edition. New York: Random House Digital.
2013
Gonzalez, F. J. (2009). Plato and Heidegger: A Question of Dialogue. Pennsylvania State University: The
Pennsylvania State University Press.
Habermas, J. (1985). Theory of Communicative Action: Reason and the rationalization of society. (T.
McCarthy, Trans.) Beacon: Beacon Press.
Heidegger, M. (1971). Poetry, Language, Thought. (A. Hofstadter, Trans.) New York: Harper Collins.
Heidegger, M. (1973). On the Way to Language. (A. Caracciolo, & M. Perotti, Trans.) Milano: Mursia.
Heidegger, M. (1982). On the Way to Language. New York: Harper Collins.
Heidegger, M. (1998). Letter on 'Humanism'. In F. A. Capuzzi, Pathmarks. New York: Cambridge University
Press.
Heidegger, M. (2001). Poetry, Language, Thought. HarperCollins.
Hogan, P. (2000). Gadamer and the Philosophy of Education. Retrieved 2013, from The Encyclopaedia of
Educational Philosophy and Theory:
http://www.ffst.hr/ENCYCLOPAEDIA/doku.php?id=gadamer_and_philosophy_of_education
HotWord. (2011). How does language influence how we think? Retrieved July 2013, from The HotWord
Dictionary: http://hotword.dictionary.com/lingusticrelativity/
House, J. S. (1981). Work Stress and Social Support. Addison-Wesley Longman.
HR Strategic Review. (2008). Business Coaching : Achieving Practical Results through Effective Engagement.
Bingley: Emerald Group Publishing.
Hudson, F. (1999). The Handbook of Coaching. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Human Coach. (2011). Ontological Coaching. Retrieved July 2013, from Human Coach:
http://humancoach.com/ontological-coaching
Internation Coach Federation. (2013). About . Retrieved June 2013, from Internation Coach Federation:
http://www.coachfederation.org/about/?navItemNumber=557
Kinlaw, D. C., Coe, C., & Zehnder, A. (2008). Coaching for Commitment: Interpersonal Strategies for
Obtaining Superior Performance from Individuals and Teams. San Francisco: Pfeiffer.
Klein, M. (2012). Other Banalities: Melanie Klein Revisited. (J. Mills, Ed.) New York: Routledge.
Knowles, M., & Moon, R. (2006 ). Introducing Metaphor. New York: Routledge.
Kockelmans, J. J. (1972). On Heidegger and Language. Northwestern University Press.
Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. (1980). Metaphors we live by. Metaphors we live by: The University of Chicago
Press.
2013
Laura Whitworth Prison Project. (2013). Welcome to the Laura Whitworth Prison Project. Retrieved June
2013, from Laura Whitworth Prison Project: http://www.prisonproject.org/
Lawn, C. (2004). Wittgenstein and Gadamer. London: Continuum.
Life Coach Academy. (2004). Life coaching and personal coaching. Retrieved June 2013, from
Businessballs.com: http://www.businessballs.com/lifecoaching.htm
Luft, J. (1961). The Johari Window. In Human Relations Training News 5 (pp. 6-7).
Lyon, J. K. (2006). Paul Celan and Martin Heidegger: an unresolved conversation 1951-1970. Baltimore: The
Johns Hopkins University Press.
Malcolm, N. (1993). Wittgenstein: A Religious Point of View? Padstow: Routledge.
Marina, J. (2005 ). The Cambridge Companion to Friedrich Schleiermacher. Cambridge : Cambridge
University Press.
Marks, M. P. (2003). The Prison As Metaphor: Re-Imagining International Relations. Baarn: Peter Lang.
McDermott, I., & Jago, W. (2006). The Coaching BIble. London: Piatkus.
Merriam-Webster. (2013). Pragmatics. Retrieved 2013, from Merriam-Webster: http://www.merriamwebster.com/dictionary/pragmatics
Nordquist, R. (2013). Language. Retrieved July 2013, from About.com Grammar & Composition:
http://grammar.about.com/od/il/g/languageterm.htm
Nuyts, J. (2003). Reflections on the Intentionality of Linguistic Behavior. Concepts of Meaning: Philosophical
Studies, 39-59.
Orem, S. L., Binkert, J., & Clancy, A. L. (2007). Appreciative Coaching: A Positive Process for Change. San
Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Philipse, H. (1998). Heidegger's Philosophy of Being. New Jersey: Princeton University Press .
Potter, J. (2001). Wittgenstein and Austin. In M. Wetherell, S. Taylor, & S. Yates, Discourse Theory and
Practice: A Reader (pp. 39-46 ). London: Sage Publications.
Regan, P. (2012). Hans-Georg Gadamer’s philosophical hermeneutics: . Meta: A Research in Hermeneutics,
Phenomenology and Practical Philosophy, 286-303.
Rehg, W. (1997 ). Insight and Solidarity: A Study in the Discourse Ethics of Jürgen Habermas. Berkeley and
Los Angeles: University of California Press.
(2012). Phenomenology, Social Constructionism, and Hermeneutics. In S. P. Robbins, P. Chatterjee, & E. R.
Canda, Contemporary Human Behavior Theory (pp. 322-344). NJ: Peachpit Press.
Rogers, J. (2008). Coaching Skills: a Handbook. Maidenhead: Open University Press.
2013
Rosinski, P. (2003). Coaching across Cultures. Nicholas Brealey.
Routledge . (2013). Philosophy of Language. Retrieved July 2013, from Routledge Encyclopedia of
Philosophy: http://www.rep.routledge.com/article/U017
Routledge . (2013). Philosophy of Logic. Retrieved 2013, from Routledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy:
http://www.rep.routledge.com/article/X046
Ryback, D. (2012). Putting Emotional Intelligence To Work. New York: Routledge.
Sarbin, T. R. (1986). The Narrative a Root Metaphor for Psychology. In T. R. Sarbin, Narrative Psychology:
The Storied Nature of Human Conduct. New York: Praeger.
Schein, E. H. (1999). Process Consultation Revisited. Massachusetts: Addison Wesley Longman.
Schihalejev, O. (2011). From Indifference to Dialogue? New York: Waxmann.
Searle, J. (1971). The Philosophy of Language (Vol. Oxford Readings in Philosophy). (G. Warnock, Ed.)
Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Searle, J. R. (1969). Speech Acts. London and New York: Cambridge University Press.
Searle, J. R. (1983). Intentionality: An Essay in the Philosophy of Mind. Cambridge : Cambridge University
Press.
Senge, P. M. (1997). The Fifth Discipline: the Art and Practice of the Learning Organization. London: London
Century Business.
Senge, P., Ross, R., Smith, B., & Roberts, C. K. (1994). The Fifth Discipline: Fieldbook. London: Nicholas
Brealey Publishing.
Shotter, J. (1993a). Converstaional Realities. London: Sage.
Shotter, J. (1993b). Cultural Politics of Everyday Life. Buckingham: Open University Press.
Speaks, J. (2007). Wittgenstein on logical form and the nature of. Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame.
Stern, J. J. (2000 ). Metaphor in Context. MIT Press.
Steuerman, E. (2000 ). The Bounds of Reason: Habermas, Lyotard, and Melanie Klein on Rationality. London:
Routledge.
Stough, C., Saklofske, D. H., & Parker, J. D. (2009 ). Assessing Emotional Intelligence: Theory, Research, and
Applications. New York: Springer.
The Coaching & Mentoring Network. (2013). Coach and Mentor Definitions. Retrieved June 2013, from The
Coaching & Mentoring Network: http://www.coachingnetwork.org.uk/
The Gale Group. (2010). Linguistics. Retrieved 2013, from Your Dictionary:
http://www.yourdictionary.com/linguistics
2013
VandenBos, G. R. (2007). APA Dictionary of Psychology . Washington: American Psychological Association.
Vanderveken, D. (2002). Searle on Meaning and Action. In G. Grewendorf, & G. Meggle, Speech Acts, Mind
and Social Reality Discussion with Searle (pp. 141-161). Dordrecht: Kluwer.
Vickers, A. (2010). Essential NLP: Teach Yourself. Abingdon: Hachette UK.
Watkins, J. M., Mohr, B. J., & Kelly, R. (2011 ). Social Construction Orienting Principles: Thoughts from
Kenneth J. Gergen. In J. M. Watkins, B. J. Mohr, & R. Kelly, Appreciative Inquiry: Change at the
Speed of Imagination. San Francisco: John Wiley & Sons.
Whitmore, J. (2009). Coaching for Performance. Nicholas Brealey.
Whitworth, L., Kimsey-House, H., & Sandahl, P. (1998). Co-Active Coaching. New Skills for Coaching People
towards Sucess and in Work and Life. Palo Alto: Davies-Black Publishing.
Wierciński, A. (2011). Gadamer's Hermeneutics and the Art of Conversation. Berlin: Deutsche
Nationalbibliothek.
Wittgenstein, L. (1986). Philosophical Investigations. (G. E. Anscombe, Trans.) Oxford: Basil Blackwell.
Wittgenstein, L. (1997). Philosophical Investigations. (J. M. Terricabras, Ed., & J. M. Terricabras, Trans.)
Barcelona.
2013
Appendix A
Schleiermacher’s Breakthrough in the 1700s
Adapted from Marina, J. (2005). The Cambridge Companion to Friedrich Schleiermacher.
Cambridge University Press
By many has Schleiermacher been indicated as “the father of modern theology” due to his
profound influence through the reformulation and rethinking of theological propositions. As a
matter of fact, the philosopher goes against the mainstream thought of the time; he suggests that
religion cannot be considered the intuition of the universe, in the sense that through religion,
human beings are able gain a complete knowledge of the infinite. Also, without its sense of
mystery and ineffability, the infinite would not be the same.
Therefore, Schleiermacher, argues that wanting to penetrate more deeply into the nature and
substance of the whole is no longer to be considered religion. The intuition of the universe simply
implies the feeling of dependence of the finite on the infinite, and that of human beings on God; it
is in intuition of the universe, then, that one can find the authentically religious attitude.
Nevertheless, this feeling is not something temporary or contingent, neither is it an emotional
state that varies as its conditions change. Rather, Schleiermacher believes it is inherent in the very
constitution of human beings. The philosopher brings up the concept of language previously
discussed by Kant, and calls it a “transcendental language”.
Although the religious experience is then based on a transcendental language, it manifests itself in
a unique way to each individual. In fact, it is argued that each person experiences his intuition of
the universe differently. The philosopher thus asserts that this is the underlying reason for how
religion has taken different forms historically, and how it has been institutionalized in a multitude
of positive faiths.
2013
Appendix B
Poets and Thinkers according to Heidegger
Adapted from Heidegger, M. (2001). Poetry, Language, Thought. HarperCollins.
Heidegger assigns poets and thinkers the role of guardians of “the house of being”, as these are
able to put the being into practice, lead it to language and keep it protected within language.
Moreover, poets and thinkers affect the truth of being with the power of the word, leading it to its
fulfillment. Poetic language should thus not be thought of as a separate thing from reason, but
reasoning and composing poetry refer to the same linguistic reality; they are different forms of
“Sage”, which safeguards the truth of being in its multiplicity of senses and meanings.
2013
Appendix C
Neuro-Linguistic Programming
Adapted from Vickers, A. (2010). Essential NLP: Teach Yourself. Abingdon: Hachette UK.
The central idea of Neuro-Linguistic Programming (NLP) is that the language of the body, as well as
the individual’s thoughts and words, interact with each other and create their perception of the
world. By changing his vision, named by NLP as “map”, the individual may enhance his
perceptions, and improve his actions and performance. The perception of the world, as well as the
individual’s response to it, may be broadened by applying appropriate communication techniques.
NLP then serves to develop successful actions and habits, by amplifying facilitative and effective
behaviors, and diminishing, instead, the unwanted ones, which tend to limit the individual. The
change occurs by reproducing and repeating beliefs that have proven to be successful (a technique
called modeling).
NLP was originally promoted by the founders Bandler and Grinder in the seventies, as a rapid form
of psychological therapy aimed at treatments of phobias and learning disabilities. Moreover, it is
believed to be an effective way of communicating and understanding each other; as a matter of
fact, NLP is known to prove that it is possible for an individual to adapt his language filters to those
of others, in order to create a common language and thereby facilitate communication.
The name chosen by the founders of the discipline summarizes three components of NLP:

Neuro, or neurological processes of human behavior, based on how the nervous system
receives stimuli from the sense organs and transforms these into perceptions and
representations;

Linguistic, which defines the system by which human mental processes are encoded,
organized and processed through language;

Programming, the ability to influence patterns of behavior variables and based on
individual perception and experience. Through NLP one may intervene on a predefined
range of behaviors, which operate unconsciously and automatically.
2013
From Rosinski, P. (2003). Coaching Across Cultures.
Nicholas Brealey. P. 267
2013
Appendix D
Interpersonal, Intra-psychic and Organizational Interference
Adapted from McDermott & Jago. (2006). The Coaching Bible. London: Piatkus.
According to McDermott & Jago (2006) interference can take various behavioral forms, and it is
thereby possible to encounter three types, namely interpersonal, intra-psychic and organizational
interference.
Interpersonal interference usually arises from conflicts between two people. An example includes
when the coach takes a new initiative and receives a negative response from the client. It is then
argued that the coach may need to reflect on himself and on how he is viewing his client. Since
every relationship is believed to be a self-reinforcing system, when the coach changes his
perception of the client, he may cause the whole system to adjust, regardless of whether it is
intending or not.
Intra-psychic interference often occurs within the complex interrelating system of the mental- and
physical. The two authors discuss how this type of interference can be internal or be exposed how
the individual inhibits himself interpersonally. Therefore, the practice of coaching is believed to
explore the degree of fit between what is expected and what is experienced. Intra-psychic
interference may arise when the individual is in conflict with himself as he wants different things,
when his drive towards change is in conflict with his need for safety, or when his body enacts a
doubt or fear that he had not consciously recognized.
Organizational interference is brought up by McDermott and Jago, as they describe organizations
as structures that govern daily interaction of individuals, and thereby create patterned habits of
interpersonal behaviors. This type of interference operates mostly at an intra-psychic level.
Situations in which the coach may intervene include when an organization needs to find new
creative ways to work within unseen but given structures of an industry, or when, at a micro-level,
people wish to learn and develop more individual inspired strategies. Moreover, since
organizations are particularly skilled at generating interference by instituting change on a shortterm, attention by the coach is needed in order to make sure that solving short-term problems like
this does not result in interference with long-term systemic implications.
2013
Appendix E
Schein’s definition of Psychological Contract
Adapted from Schein, E. H. (1985). Organizational Culture and Leadership. Jossey-Bass.
American social psychologist and professor of management at the Sloan School of Management at
the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Edgar Schein (1928) created the term "psychological
contract" to express the unspoken and unwritten rules that bind people within an organization.
In particular, according to Schein, the psychological contract defines what an employee may
expect from his employer, not only in economic terms (in regards to wages, working conditions,
hours, security, for instance), but also i "psychological" conditions; these include the way the
employee is valued in his activities and how he is encouraged to develop his skills and
responsibilities within the organization. Schein believes that many strikes and conflicts in the
industry derive from a breach of this contract, even though the apparent cause seems to regard an
economic protest.
Schein argues that the psychological contract does not work only one way: it includes the hopes
that the company puts on those who work for it. Examples of these hopes are loyalty and
consistency, Thereby, there needs to be an agreement and correspondence between the two
parties, if the contract is to be applied in the long-run.

Exploring the Phenomenon of Language in the Practice of Coaching

Transcripción

Documentos relacionados

raw food coach - Karen Knowler

Schwartz - Wellcoaches

Tottenham Football Academy