P3:

What types of different L styles is more effective for different people/situations?

Is the leader to blame?
three key questions are:

1. Consistency. Does a leader consistently fail to provide necessary guidance and support to
subordinates, and is he or she therefore repeatedly ineffective over time?
2. Distinctiveness. Is a leader more effective in some situations than others, or does his or her
ineffectiveness extend across a wide variety of situations?
3. Consensus. Are other leaders in similar situations -for example, managers of sister tits -
effective or ineffective in the performance of their duties?

Several factors must be considered in evaluating the advantages and disadvantages of each
possible solution:

1. Durability. This refers to the length of time a remedy remains in effect. For replacement, of
course, this factor depends on the length of tenure of the new incumbent. Training often is
 not durable; substitutes can be very durable. For example, a clearly articulated set of
procedures (organizational formalization) or a challenging job (intrinsic satisfaction) can be
enduring sources of guidance and motivation.
2. Reversibility. The ability to undo a remedy once it has been implemented is also important.
Replacement and training are difficult to reverse, but substitutes tend to be easily reversible.
3. l Symptom specificity. Can the solution be directed toward only the undesirable attributes of
the leader and not spill over to the leaders desirable attributes? For example, if a leader is
deficient in giving subordinates guidance, can this be remedied without sacrificing other
things the leader does well-offering support, exercising upward influence, etc? Clearly,
replacement is not symptom-specific; the leader goes, taking with him or her not only the
bad but the good as well. Training and substitutes are symptom- specific because they can
be directed at only the undesirable attributes.
4. SingZe-source dependency. Does a given solution make the organization dependent on a
single source of guidance and support? Replacement and training create continuing
dependence on the hierarchical leader. Substitutes, however, can provide a diversified
portfolio of solutions to problems of leadership effectiveness.
5. Time to implement a particular solution. This factor often favors replacement, particularly if
someone is already identified. Certain training programs are very time-consuming. The
amount of time necessary to build substitutes into the environment depends on the nature
of the substitute.
6. Development of the leader. This is the major focus of leadership training. Replacement
typically fails to address this benefit. The effect of substitutes is uncertain because some
may negate or eliminate the need for certain types of leadership, and others may enhance
the leaders effectiveness.
7. Affordability. The cost of a solution will vary with the situation. Replacement of a leader
from outside can be expensive; promotion from within may be inexpensive. In-house
training may not be costly, whereas training consultants can be expensive. Implementation
of substitutes varies from rules and regulation changes (at little cost) to major job-design
efforts (at substantial cost).

How does physical distance affect performance outcomes?

Sidenote: LMX is both transactional (low quality LMX) as well as TFL (high quality LMX)
Benefits under Close Distance
o Active management-by-exception produced significantly lower follower performance
when followers were physically distant rather than close
o the path between transformational leadership and follower performance was positive
under physically close versus distant conditions
Benefits under Far Distance
o Contingent reward leadership produced significantly higher follower performance under
distant versus close conditions
Worsens under Close distance
o passive management-by-exception produced significantly lower follower performance
when physical distance was close rather than distant
Benefits either way
o The relationship between LMX and follower performance was not moderated by physical
distance
What are the different kinds of followers and how they relate to leadership
effectiveness?

TFL: High, and to a lesser extent low, promotion focused followers display a reduced turnover
intentions under high TFL leadership.

TL: High prevention focus followers display reduced turnover intentions with high TL, while low
prevention focus followers have an increased turnover intentions under higher TL leadership

P4:
What is shared leadership and how effective is it?
We define shared leadership as an emergent team property that results from the distribution of
leadership influence across multiple team members. It represents a condition of mutual influence
embedded in the interactions among team members that can significantly improve team and
organizational performance (Day et al., 2004). Shared leadership contrasts with the conventional
paradigm (referred to as vertical leadership by Pearce and Sims [2002]), which emphasizes the role
of the manager who is positioned hierarchically above and external to a team, has formal authority
over the team, and is responsible for the teams processes and outcomes

Gibb (1954) first suggested the idea of two forms of team leadership: distributed and focused.
Focused leadership occurs when leadership resides within a single individual, whereas distributed
leadership occurs when two or more individuals share the roles, responsibilities, and functions of
leadership.

We measured shared leadership following a social network approach (Mayo, Meindl, & Pastor, 2003)
by using density, which is a measure of the total amount of leadership displayed by team members
as perceived by others on a team
Figure2: internal team environment was significantly and positively related to shared leadership for
teams that had low coaching support and was not related to shared leadership for teams that had
high coaching support. Teams with an unsupportive internal team environment were still able to
develop high levels of shared leadership, so long as they received a high level of coaching.

Results : Internal team environment and external coaching had direct relationship
with shared leadership (=H1 & H2 confirmed).
The interactioneffect of coaching and internal team environment was significantly and
declared additional 5% of the variance. Internal team environment was significantly and
positively related to shared leadership for teams with low coaching and not related to
shared leadership for teams with high coaching. Teams with not supporting internal team
environment could still develop high levels of shared leadership, as long as they received
a high level of coaching (=H3 confirmed). Shared leadership is a strong positive
Predictor of team-performance (reviewed by end users) and provides more significant
variance in team performance than the control variables, internal team environment and
coaching (=H4 confirmed).
How can hierarchical and shared L be related?
H1 : The positive relationship between hierarchical leadership (TFL, LMX and
mentoring) and team performance is less if the team virtuality is increasing. =
CONFIRMED

H2 : The positive relationship between structural support (reward systems,

communication and information) and team performance is stronger if higher
team virtuality. = CONFIRMED

H3 : The positive relationship between shared team leadership (cognitive,

affective and behavior) and team performance increases as team virtuality is
increasing. = NOT CONFIRMED
H1 : Vertical leadership is an important predictor of team effectiveness.
= PARTIALLY CONFIRMED (only the ratings of team members themselves)
H2 : Shared leadership is an important predictor of team effectiveness. =
CONFIRMED (shared is better predictor than vertical leadership)
H3 : Aversive leadership is negatively related to team effectiveness.
= PARTIALLY CONFIRMED (both vertical and shared only with ratings of team
members themselves)
H4 : Directive leadership is negatively related to team effectiveness.
= PARTIALLY CONFIRMED (vertical at manager-ratings, shared: manager and
customer ratings)
H5 : Transactional leadership is positively related to team effectiveness.
= NOT CONFIRMED
H6 : Transformational leadership is positively related to team effectiveness. =
PARTIALLY CONFIRMED (vertical at manager and team ratings, shared at all
3 ratings)
H7 : Empowering leadership is positively related to team effectiveness.
= LITTLE BIT CONFIRMED (only shared and only with ratings of team members
themselves)

The interaction between leadership and virtuality is non significant. That

means that virtuality is no moderator and has no impact on this relationship.
So if shared leadership contributes to performance (which seems the case
since the beta is 1.94 and significant) you can state that shared leadership
fosters performance regardless of virtuality.
P5:
How does personality influence L?
Hypothesis 1: Extraversion will be positively related to (a) charisma, (b) intellectual stimulation, (c)
and transformational leadership overall. Confirmed

Hypothesis 2: Neuroticism will be negatively related to (a) charisma, (b) intellectual stimulation, and
(c) transformational leadership overall, and positively related to (d) passive leadership. Confirmed

Hypothesis 3: Openness to experience will be positively related to (a) charisma, (b) intellectual
stimulation, and (c) transformational leadership overall. NOT confirmed, sometimes positive,
sometimes negative

Hypothesis 4: Agreeableness will be positively related to (a) charisma, (b) individualized

consideration, and (c) contingent reward, and negatively related to (d) passive leadership. Only
passive leadership confirmed

Hypothesis 5: Conscientiousness will be positively related to (a) contingent reward, (b) management
by exceptionactive, and negatively related to (c) passive leadership. NOT confirmed

Results indicate that extraversion (.22) and neuroticism (.17) were linked to the charisma
dimension of transformational leadership
Our (weak) results suggest that extra version can be an important feature in
predicting and understanding TFL (. 24) and TAL (. 23).
Training can weaken the link between personality and leadership especially for
TAL.
Results indicated that charisma was the trait most related to personality (R2 .12) and
management by exception the least (R2 .01).
Overall, our results linking personality with ratings of transformational and transactional
leadership behaviors were weak

Can L styles be changed/improved by training?

Self-Leadership

Three primary strategy dimensions, with more narrowly defined subfacets, constitutethe self-
leadership domain (Houghton & Neck, 2002):

(1)behaviour-focused strategies(self-goal setting, self-reward, self-punishment, self-

observation, self-cueing)
(2)natural reward strategies(i.e., generation and maintenance of intrinsic motivation), and
(3)constructive thought pattern strategies(visualizing successful performance, self-talk,
evaluating beliefs and assumptions). The first reflects a behavioural, the second a
motivational, and the third a cognitive domain.

Study 1 : Intra-individual associations in self-leadership and leadership. Study 1

is the basis for study 2 where we also going to look at the ratings of followers.
H1A : TFL positively associated with self-goal , self-observation , visualize
successful performance , evaluate beliefs and assumptions , and natural reward
strategies.
= CONFIRMED
H1B : PLENTY is positively associated with self-goal and self-observation . =
CONFIRMED
H1C : LFL is negatively associated with self leadership scales . =
CONFIRMED
H1D : Self leadership facets remain strongly associated with TFL and TAL,
even after controlling for leadership experience, age and gender. =
CONFIRMED

A consistent finding was that self-rated natural reward strategies of leaders a strong
predictor was or they were considered Active (TFL and numerous) or less passive
leaders. While leaders ' self-cueing was an indicator of more passive leaders. Our
hypothesis that leaders ' self-leadership influence on their leadership styles, was
confirmed

What followers' charac. can affect L?

The results indicate that the initial level of development of followers, as expressed by the
initial level of self-actualization needs, internalization of moral values of the Organization,
collectivist, critical orientation-independent approach, active involvement in the task and
SE, TFL predict positive at indirect followers, while these negative relationships were at
direct followers.

A leader is more effective if he shares the same values as the follower

TFL is a reciprocal process in which leaders and followers transform into each
other motivated people who want to achieve a shared vision and goals
LMX also reciprocal relationship between leaders and followers and focused on
relational variables such as, liking, similarity, and expectations

Problem 6: What is coaching, and what does coaching do, the effects, the differences and
similarities between the different types of coaching?

In essence the coaching process facilitates goal attainment by helping individuals to:

identify desired outcomes,

(ii) establish specific goals,
(iii) enhance motivation by identifying strengths and building self-efficacy,
(iv) identify resources and formulate specific action plans,
(v) monitor and evaluate progress towards goals,
(vi) modify action plans based on feedback.

Different types of coaching?

Performance coaching is concerned with improving performance over a specific timeframe;
ranging from just a few weeks to several years in workplace settings. Performance coaching
focuses on the processes by which the coachee sets goals, overcomes obstacles and
evaluates and monitors their performance over a period of time. Performance coaching is
somewhat more strategic than skills coaching, and in the workplace may take place following
a performance review or in relation to a specific workplace project.
Developmental coaching also takes a broader strategic approach and deals with the
individuals personal and professional development. Developmental coaching refers to
coaching aimed at enhancing the individuals ability to meet current and future challenges
more effectively via the development of increasingly complex understanding of the self,
others and the systems in which the person is involved. This kind of coaching may focus on
facilitating perspective taking and meaning making, enhancing emotional competencies, and
working more effectively with team members. Developmental coaching often involves the
creation of personal reflective spaces where coachees can explore issues and options and
 formulate action plans in a confidential, supportive environment. The majority of leadership
and executive coaching is primarily developmental in nature.
Skills coaching focuses on developing a specific, designated skill set. The coach often models
the required skills and behaviour, and coaching sessions then involve a rehearsal and
feedback process. For example. skills coaching may be used for improving skills in areas such
as: presentation, communication and sales skills, or preparation for negotiations.
Executive coaching: A helping relationship formed between a client who has managerial
authority and responsibility in an organization and a consultant who uses a wide variety of
behavioural techniques and methods to help the client achieve a mutually identified set of
goals to improve his or her professional performance and personal satisfaction and,
consequently, to improve the effectiveness of the clients organization within a formally
defined coaching agreement
o executive coaching is primarily developmental interwoven with skills and
performance coaching components, and is most often delivered by external coaching
providers, i.e., by professional coaches who are not part of the client organization.
Typically, external coaching providers tend to offer a combination of training,
consultancy and coaching, rather than just coaching services (Binstead & Grant,
2008; Clegg et al., 2005). These services include coaching for workplace safety
behaviours (Geller, Perdue, & French, 2004), life coaching for work-life balance
(Sparrow, 2007), leadership development and executive coaching (Kilburg, 1996).
Workplace coaching: Workplace coaching includes both executive coaching and coaching
that is delivered to non-executive employees in workplace settings. Workplace coaching may
be delivered by external coaching providers or may be an internal coaching intervention,
delivered by employees specially designated as occupying a coaching role (often Human
Resources or Learning and Development personnel). There is some debate as to whether the
manager as coach should be included within the category of formal workplace coaching.
We would hold that formal coaching should be distinguished from the intermittent use of
coaching skills by line managers in the normal execution of their managerial duties. Hence,
impromptu or corridor coaching by managers is an example of the use of coaching skills in
the workplace, rather than formal workplace coaching. Nevertheless the training of
managers in coaching skills and their use in the workplace represents a significant
contribution to rise coaching in the workplace. Organizations tend to use a combination of
both external and internal coaching approaches.

Competencies of coaches
The BPS SGCP model divides coaching competencies into four broad clusters:

Professional autonomy and accountability of the coaching psychologist

The application of coaching psychology practice in enhancing well being and performance
The knowledge, understanding and skills that underpin the education and training of
coaching psychologists
Effectiveness of the coach-client relationship
See Table 2 for details

Self-efficacy
Design/methodology/approach The paper reports on a pretest-posttest study of a
leadership development program using three training methods: classroom seminars, action
learning groups, and executive coaching. Data are collected in a large international
 manufacturing company from 73 firstand second-level managers over an eight-month
period.
Findings Results indicate that, after controlling for pre-training self-efficacy and other
training methods, the number of coaching sessions has a positive and significant relationship
with post-training self-efficacy. Results also show that utility judgment, affective
organizational commitment, and work-environment support have each a positive and
significant relationship with post-training self-efficacy.
Practical implications The paper first suggests that an organization that wishes to improve
its return on investment with regard to coaching should implement a program with multiple
sessions spread over a period of several months. This paper also suggests that organizations
should consider coaching from a systemic point of view, that is, taking into account not only
the design but also individual and situational variables.
The type of executive coaching studied in this paper refer to skill-focused coaching and is
well described by the definition of Douglas and Morley (2000) for which coaching is: The
process of equipping people with the tools, knowledge, and opportunities they need to
develop themselves and become more effective (Peterson, 1996). Executive coaching
involves the teaching of skills in the context of a personal relationship with the learner, and
providing feedback on the executives interpersonal relations and skills (Sperry, 1993). An
ongoing series of activities tailored to the individuals current issues or relevant problem is
designed by the coach to assist the executive in maintaining a consistent, confident focus as
he or she tunes strengths and manages shortcomings (Tobias, 1996).
six stages for an effective coaching process:
o (1) establishing a relationship of trust between the coach and the coachee;
o (2) evaluating the coachee and the professional setting in which he or she works;
o (3) providing feedback on this evaluation to the coachee
o (4) establishing a development plan and setting goals;
o (5) implementing the behaviors to be developed or improved;
o (6) evaluating the progress achieved.
four contexts in which executive coaching is most commonly used. These contexts are:
o (1) major organizational changes requiring new skills;
o (2) a skill-development need stemming from a promotion;
o (3) a specific skill-development need for the managers in question; and
o (4) the resolution of individual performance problems.
o In the first three contexts, coaching is proposed in order to achieve development
goals, whereas in the fourth context, the objective is corrective.
Self-efficacy is defined as the belief that a person has of being capable of accomplishing a
given task

P7: What is good and bad coaching and how is it associated with empowerment?
What characteristics are predictive of good and bad coaching?

The area of flourishing is located in the upper right area of Figure 1, where individuals
experience elevated mental health and high levels of engagement. For many this area is likely
to represent the ideal (or target) state. One would expect individuals in this area to be highly
involved with and absorbed in their work, have a well developed sense of work-related
meaning and purpose, and enjoy positive relations with work colleagues. The concept of goal
self-concordance is particularly relevant in this quadrant.
Self-concordance refers to degree to which individuals goals are aligned with
their developing interests and core values (Sheldon & Elliot, 1999). When people set goals
that are self-concordant, they feel a greater sense of ownership over these goals. Not
surprisingly, this sense of ownership is associated with higher levels of goal striving and
greater levels of well-being upon goal attainment (Sheldon & Elliot, 1998). We could
therefore expect that, for individuals in this quadrant, work-related goals will be more self-
concordant than for individuals in other quadrants, and such self-concordance will be related
to commitment to the organization (see Bono & Judge, 2003).
Area of acquiescence The upper left area of Figure 1 reflects the experience of individuals
who have good mental health but relatively low levels of workplace engagement. The notion
that individuals can have good levels of mental health and not be intentionally engaged with
their workplace may sound somewhat incongruous. In the workplace, employees who
acquiesce can be described as happy but disengaged, in the sense that they might be
physically and emotionally present but not actively engaged with the goals and day to day
work of the organization. Although some individuals may well seek out work that does not
demand such engagement, it may also happen that individuals in this quadrant may become
increasingly cynical about their work over time, and thereby drift into a state of languishing.
Area of languishing The area of languishing represents individuals who have low levels of
well-being without elevated levels of depression, anxiety, and/or stress and with moderate
levels of workplace engagement. Whilst individuals who are languishing may be trying to
become more engaged and involved with their work (possibly with the assistance of a coach),
in general their working lives are devoid of the energy, vigour, and resilience usually
 associated with high levels of workplace engagement and flourishing (Maslach & Leiter,
2008).
Area of the distressed but functional The lower right area is the area of distressed but
functional individuals who have relatively high levels of workplace engagement. This means
that while these individuals may be highly functional in terms of work performance, they
may also be dysthymic (a chronic form of depression which is less severe than major
depression), highly anxious, or chronically stressed. Issues of mental health or mental illness
here can range from moderately dysthymic or distressed to quite high levels of distress. This
area represents an area of significant challenge for coaches who do not have clinical or
counselling training (Cavanagh, 2005) because, contrary to popular belief, it is not always
easy to identity depression or anxiety disorders particularly for those who are untrained in
psychopathological diagnostics. In fact coachees in this area may not even be aware that
they have such mental health problems and are unlikely to request or seek out treatment.
Rather, the coachee is more likely to present with issues related to motivation, time
management, staff retention, or interpersonal communication difficulties; in other words,
issues that appear on the surface to be appropriate to the coaching context.

P8: When is a coach effective? (return of investment, measurements, situation specific, executive-
coach fit)

Return on Investment (ROI) is often presented as the most important indicator of success in
organizational coaching. Return on investment data, calculated using metrics such as growth
in market share, profitability or sales, is frequently used by coaching and consulting
organizations as a marketing tool in order to promote their coaching services. In essence,
return on investment is calculated by subtracting the costs of coaching from the estimated
value of the outcomes of coaching and then expressing this as a percentage (estimated
coaching benefits costs of coaching / costs of coaching x 100%). . Return on investment
calculations tend to ignore the impact of other variables such as market context and team
input. Furthermore, while organizations often seek to improve financial performance via
coaching, such measures are typically not the direct focus of coaching interventions, and the
estimated benefits often represent highly spurious and contextually-bound variables.
Moreover, while there can be reasonable certainty about the direct costs of coaching,
indirect costs (e.g. opportunity costs) tend not to be included.

Leadership coaching presents a different approach to leadership development than

traditional leadership training or education, in four ways:
o (a) leadership coaching focuses on the needs of the individual client as well as the
clients organization and the unique characteristics each bring,
o (b) leadership coaching requires unique skills on the part of the coach,
o (c) leadership coaching places a premium on the client-coach relationship
o (d) leadership coaching demands process flexibility to achieve desired results
Requisite coaching competencies include communication skills, analytical skills, assessment
and feedback skills, planning, goal setting, organization skills, creativity and resourcefulness,
ability to motivate and encourage, ability to challenge and confront others, results-
orientation and accountability, integrity, skills in being empathetic, caring, personable,
approachable, flexible, empowering, and trustworthy. In addition coaches should have
credibility and expertise through graduate behavioral science training, business awareness,
and knowledge of or experience in the clients industry.
 In planning coaching evaluation efforts, it is important to consider the stakeholders that are
likely interested in coaching evaluation efforts: coaches, clients, client organizations, and
coaching organizations. Each of these stakeholders is interested in different evaluation
outcomes for different reasons.
4 Level Kirkpatricks taxonomy
o Reaction (reaction of client to the training)
o Learning (what has the client learned)
o Behavior (how much did the clients behavior change)
o Results (personalized goals like organizational objectives
Summative evaluation
o whether or not the coaching process worked
Formative evaluation
o How its achieved, measured throughout coaching period. And not just in the end like
summative evaluation.

P9: What is toxic leadership and how do you coach toxic leaders? Diagnosis of toxicity? Different
types of toxic leadership?

Narcissist

We all possess narcissistic characteristics to a degree, but too much can be dangerous
A good way to spot a narcissist is to look at how his subordinates respond to him, e.g if they
feel like items
Binary approach, either for or against someone
the first rule when dealing with narcissists is to avoid anything that might upset their delicate
sense of self
grandiosity is a childhood coping mechanism compensating for a sense of inadequacyof
never being able to please a parent. The coachs first goal, then, must be to place the
narcissists self-esteem on firm foundations, not destroy it.You must convey respect and
acknowledge his or her need to be recognized. Though you shouldnt reinforce grandiose self-
perceptions (which would constitute a denial that anything was wrong with the executives
way of dealing with others), neither should you accentuate weaknesses (which could frighten
the narcissist). Show empathy initially to gain trust, so you can begin to try minor
confrontations of individual dysfunctional behaviors. transferring their childhood desire to
please their parents onto other authority figures, and a coach is very likely to be one of them
Narcissists ambitions can be used to motivate them. Unfortunately, narcissists all too
commonly regress into their old ways, especially once theyve achieved their ambition. For
this reason, its important to follow up with more engagement

Manic Depressed

Serious mood disorders like manic depression are usually treated with a combination of
psychotherapy and medication. The problem is, manic-depressives are rarely receptive to
receiving treatment. Their reality testing is impaired: Whether manic or depressed, they have
poor insight into how they are perceived by and act toward others. Getting them to admit that
they have a problem is a main challenge. Here, the best approach is the opposite of what you
would do with narcissists: Make manic-depressives confront the reality of their relationships
with others and work with the people they affect to create a new structure in which they can
operate safely. In this kind of situation a coach would do well to draw on the help of others
(such as family and colleagues)
The passive-aggressive
 a person who expresses negative feelings indirectly and shies away from confrontation. The
behavior originates in families where the honest, direct expression of desires is forbidden;
children quickly learn to repress their feelings and are very reluctant to be assertive. They go
through life being outwardly accommodating but obstructive in an underhanded way. Whats
more, their feelings may be so repressed that they dont consciously realize that theyre being
uncooperative. So when others get upset by their behavior, they take offense, because in their
minds whatever caused the irritation was someone elses fault.
Though passive-aggressive executives overtly agree to requests, they covertly express their
resentment of them by missing deadlines, showing up late for meetings, making excuses, or
even undermining goals. They tend to use procrastination, inefficiency, and forgetfulness to
avoid fulfilling obligations
Passive-aggressives need to resolve their hostility toward authority figures. To help them do
that, the coach has to encourage transference. By getting Mary to see me as an authority
figure, I would attract her anger, which would allow me to work on helping her express it in a
healthier, direct manner.
Consistent confrontation
Passive-aggressives have low self-esteem, and the coach has to help them build it up. This is
best done by getting them to practice directness and asking them to explain how they would
resolve or improve situations they find themselves in.
Exploring the family to understand the root cause of the problem
Coaching passive-aggressives is exhausting. Theyre irritating because they subtly show that
they feel a sense of accomplishment when theyve managed to frustrate you.
The emotionally disconnected

Alexithymics are literal-minded, display little imagination, and typically are unable to describe
or even recognize their feelings. This inability makes it difficult for them to interpret the many
and often complex emotional signals they receive from others, which they perceive as
dangerous, potentially uncontrollable forces.
Despite their physical complaints, you should resist any temptation to recommend medical
interventions to alexithymics. Because alexithymics are not the most engaging clients, theres
a risk that their coaches will get bored, which may undermine their effectiveness.
find solutions to their immediate interpersonal problems, e.g day-to-day work interactions
Describing the pain - Once Id built up Roberts confidence in the coaching process, I started
getting him to describe more-difficult encounters at work, pushing him to say which part of
the experiences had caused him pain. When distress had manifested itself physically, we
developed a story about these symptomswhy they happened, what they represented, and
how they fit within the chain of events described. After many sessions, Robert began to
recognize the link between his symptoms and emotionally disturbing events in his life. As we
progressed, he displayed an increasing depth of feeling, and it dawned on him that sharing it
with others would be beneficial in his work