IDM Gateway Version2

(Inter-) Developmental Coaching
An Evidence Based Approach

to Social-Emotional Coaching
The Interdevelopmental Institute (IDM)

Gateway/Program One Part A
Version 2
Copyright © Laske and Associates 2005

Preamble
2
Pre-History of IDM
• 1970: W. Perry investigates the relationship between two
lines of human development: intellectual and social-
emotional, in the college years (adolescents).
• 1969-1984: L. Kohlberg studies the levels (stages) of
ethical development from childhood to adulthood.
• 1976: J. Loevinger presents a theory of stages of ‘ego-
development.’
• 1982: R. Kegan presents a theory of the ‘evolving self.’
• 1994: E. Jaques presents a theory of ‘human capability.’
• 1999: O. Laske studies the relationship between the two
lines of adult development in executives.
• 2000: K. Wilber publishes a comprehensive summary of
developmental theories in world cultures. 3
IDM Training Objectives
• Start to move coaching from a service to a profession by way
of using social science evidence.
• Ground the inter-developmental perspective in participants’
own life and coaching experience.
• Recruit a cadre of pioneer coaches.
• Distinguish “development,” “change,” and “learning.”
• Make coaches experts in their clients’ social-emotional
development.
4
Assumptions of
Interdevelopmental Coaching
• Individuals act from lavish abundance of their inner self
whose form and experience is shaped by their needs and
relationships to others.
• How individuals’ use the abundance of self is regulated by
developmental conditions and opportunities that shape
their answer to the question WHAT SHOULD I DO AND
FOR WHOM?
• By using social science evidence about indivuals’
developmental path through adulthood, coaches can
strengthen clients’ self awareness in the service of
satisfying their needs and enhancing their relationships.
5
Pedagogical Assumptions
• People construct their ‘world’ both social-emotionally and
cognitively.
• People are largely subject to, rather than in control of, their
own emotional and thinking processes.
• Coach education is intended to move coaches to higher
coaching levels where clients can be supported more
optimally.
• Interdevelopmental coach education is itself an intervention,
thus a developmental experience, not simply an acquisition
of a new ‘expertises.’
6
IDM Experiential Model
An Interactive Laboratory For Exploring Issues of Coaching
Review your
experience and
approach to coaching
Apply the new

insights and Absorb new ideas
intuitions to ‘real about coaching
world’ applications
Participant-directed Share your reactions

Share your focused learning to developmental
discoveries about theory
yourself and the
process of coaching
Step into
developmental
Actively practice the territory to challenge
new concepts your concepts
7
Short Overview of Gateway
• Section 1: Introduction to the developmental paradigm (9-20)
• Section 2: Evidence of developmental path and potential (21-36)
• Section 3: Three Coaching Levels (37-52)
• Section 4: Determining developmental ranges and levels (53-86)
• Section 5: Elementary principles of developmental interviewing
(87-102)
• Section 6: First steps toward developmental intake (103-111)
• Section 7: Rehearsing developmental interviewing to a point of
minimal expertise (112-117)
• Wrap Up (118-119)
• Appendix: The IDM Program in detail (120-132).
8
Section One
Introduction to the Interdevelopmental Paradigm
Coaching Competencies Strengthened:
1: Understanding coaching ethics and standards and apply them

appropriately.
2: Understanding what is required in the specific coaching

interaction, and coming to agreement with the prospective and new
client about the coaching process and relationship.
3: Creating a safe, supportive environment that produces ongoing

mutual respect and trust.
11: Holding attention on what is important for the client, and leaving
responsibility with the client to take action.
9
Practice Reflection
• Reflect on your own coaching practice in terms of these issues:
– Have you encountered clients that you felt were
developmentally ‘beyond your ken’? What did you do?
– Have you felt you were ‘one step ahead’ developmentally
with regard to a client? How did you manage that?
– Have you failed to understand why your coaching just “did
not work” with a particular client? In what way?
– Have you wondered whether you really understood a
particular client’s “frame of reference”? In what way?
10
Coaching from an IDM Perspective
• All coaching competencies or proficiencies are research
topics; they require research as to the extent to which
coaches at different coaching levels actually attain them.
• Coaching competencies (and proficiencies) stipulated by
ICF and IAC presently lack research foundations.
• The theoretical foundations of the IDM Program suggests
that all coaching competencies are based upon three (and
only three) generic coaching processes practiced by every
coach:
– supporting and guiding attention
– interpretation (of what is said by clients)
– enacting novel experiences and behaviors.
11
Existing Types of Evidence
Adult Learning
Theory Cultural Studies
COACHING Developmental
Cognitive Psychology
Psychology
Organization
Development
Research
Evidence Based Capability Framework (ECF) 12

Evidence About What?
• The coach
• The client
• The coach-client relationship (coach-client
compatibility)
• The coach-client environment
• Coaching outcomes
• Coach training effectiveness
• Coaching program effectiveness
13
What Counts as ‘Evidence’
• Evidence used in IDM training is of two kinds:

developmental and behavioral
• Developmental evidence utilized is twofold; it
comprises two lines of adult development:
– evidence about a client’s cognitive development
– evidence about a client’s social-emotional development
• Behavioral evidence utilized is threefold:
– evidence about self conduct
– evidence about task approach
– evidence about emotional intelligence
14
Language as Mirror
• In early adulthood, development goes ‘underground’:
physical markers of mental growth are no longer available.
• Therefore, in order to collect adult developmental
evidence, we need to resort to special interview methods
targeting clients’ use of language.
• Use of language is the mirror by which we discern
evidence of clients’ applied and potential capability.
• The way we listen to our own and clients’ language
determines how well we can discern forms of
developmental potential.
• This course aims to sensitize you as to how you ‘hear’ and
‘understand’ adults’ language.
15
Learning is ‘Horizontal,’
Growth is ‘Vertical’
CD Mental Growth;
Capability
Discontinuous, in stages
(across time)
Learning;
Competence
Linear (in-time)
CD = cognitive development
ED
ED = social-emotional development
16
Two Lines of Adult Development
• Research has established consensus (Wilber, 2000) that there
are two MAIN lines of adult development:
– line of cognitive development (expressed in ‘strata’)
– line of social-emotional development (expressed in ‘stages’).
• Together, these lines establish a client’s Frame of Reference.
• Research has also established that discrepancies between
these two lines of development, in whatever direction, are an
important indicator of less than optimal performance in life
and work.
• Finally, research has shown that training, therapy, coaching,
and other interventions can remedy such discrepancies, by
promoting ‘developmental shifts.’
17
Clients’ Frame of Reference (FOR)
Cognitive
Development
Perception & Knowledge

Learning Development
FOR
Social-Emotional Behavioral
Development Patterns
(Actions)
COACHING
1. Supporting and guiding attention

2. Interpretation
18
3. Enacting novel experiences and behaviors
THE TWO DIMENSIONS OF ‘VERTICAL’
DEVELOPMENT
CONCEPTUAL SOCIAL-EMOTIONAL
DEVELOPMENT (CD) DEVELOPMENT (ED)
5 ‘We’ - Humankind
P
E 4 ‘Me’ & Others
R
C
E 3 ‘We’ – My Group
P
T
I 2 ‘I’ – My Desires
O &Achievements
N
Blue = Strategic Leader Cognitive Complexity & Knowledge Requirements - Strata VI & VII
Green = Senior/Organizational Leader Cognitive Complexity & Knowledge Requirements – Strata IV & V
Red = Direct Leader Cognitive Complexity & Knowledge Requirements – Strata I, II, & III
19
Homework #1
1.1 Think back in your life a decade, and reflect upon how you then saw the world,
compared to now, and what you couldn’t do that you can do now.
1.2 What, would you say, has changed in your ability to think abstractly?
1.3 What, would you say, has changed in your way of approaching relationships?
1.4 Has your world (‘object’) become ‘larger,’ or has it shrunk?
1.5 What about your observations and emotional reactions to them?
1.6 What has changed in the way you set goals for yourself?
1.7 Thinking of your developmental potential, what ‘strand’ of your being seems to
be stretching and expanding most at this time (cognitive, emotional, logical, social)?
1.8 Does this ‘strand’ get any help from other ‘strands’ in you that are equally
‘you’?
1.9 Do you think it would be helpful for you to learn from a developmental intake
‘where you are developmentally,’ according to structural evidence?
20
Section Two
Evidence of Developmental Path and Potential
4: Ability of being fully conscious and create a spontaneous

relationship with the client that is open, flexible, confident.
5: Ability of focusing on what the client is saying and NOT saying,

to understand the MEANING of what is said in the context of the
client’s desires, and to support client self expression.
6: Ability to ask questions that reveal the information needed for

maximum benefit to the coaching relationship and the client.
21
Practice Reflection
– how do you assess the way in which clients make sense of what you are
saying?
– in what ways might you collude with clients’ way of meaning making,
rather than looking at it objectively (“other-dependent coaching”)?
– how aware are you that you are INTERPRETING what clients say
within your own frame of reference?
– do you have a conceptual framework for assessing what clients are
NOT saying, either because they are NOT AWARE, or DO NOT
KNOW?
– how can you become more aware of your own FRAME OF
REFERENCE, in terms of which you construct the coach-client
relationship and your tasks within it?
22
Capability is Multilayered
New concepts make possible new ways of practicing coaching
Applied Capability
Cognitive Potential
Potential Spiritual Potential
Capability
Social-Emotional Potential
* Capability presently applied differs from Capability that exists but is not presently used, thus
“potential.” We distinguish two kinds of potential: cognitive (CD) and social emotional (ED).
23
How Capability Impacts ‘Behavior’
Adapted from E. Schein, 1987
Observations Reactions
Behavioral
Coaching
Judgments Goals Actions
Available Emergent Potential: Developmental

Potential: Level of Development Coaching
Cognitive Grasp
FRAME OF REFERENCE
How people observe, react emotionally, judge things, set goals,
and act is a function of their personal developmental culture.
This equally applies to the quality of their learning, and their
experience of coaching
24
Four Aspects of Cognitive Potential
• Capacity to think ‘dialectically’ (beyond formal logic):
exploring contradictions to grasp complexities
• Capacity to employ practical logic: thinking contextually
in a deep and critical way
• Capacity to know how we know what we know: learning to
learn, becoming conscious of one’s own learning ‘style’
(self referential logic)
• Capacity for critical reflection: judging the fit between the
‘rules of life’ learned in childhood and the realities of
adulthood.
Steven Brookfield, “Adult Cognition as a Dimension of Lifelong Learning,” 2004

25
Four Aspects of Social-Emotional Potential
• Ability to diminish ego-centrism, resulting in a reduction

of subjectivity and an increase in what can be reflected
upon as OBJECT (becoming “more objective”)
• Ability to make developmental shifts in which one Frame
of Reference is transcended in favor of another
• Ability to regress to lower levels, due to conflict or being
part of a toxic environment.
• Ability to use crises, catastrophes, illnesses, setbacks, and
skillful interventions (coaching, therapy, etc.) to ‘stretch’
toward the subsequent level of social-emotional maturity.
26
Levels of Social-Emotional Potential*
© 2003 John Spencer, Laske and Associates LLC
Level is NOT strictly

Focus on Focus on
SELF OTHERS bound to age!
Toward Stage 5
Stage 4 (ca. 40 years)

* R. Kegan, 1982 27
Social-Emotional Center of Gravity
Clare Graves, developmental researcher, writes:
Briefly, what I am proposing is that the psychology of the mature human
being is an unfolding, emergent, oscillating spiraling process marked by
progressive subordination of older, lower-order behavior systems to
newer, higher-order systems as man’s existential problems change. Each
successive stage, wave, or level of existence is a state through which
people pass on their way to other states of being. When the human is
centralized in one state of existence (center of gravity), he or she has a
psychology which is particular to that state. His or her feelings,
motivations, ethics and values, biochemistry, degree of neurological
activation, learning system, belief systems, conception of mental health,
ideas as to what mental illness is and how it should be treated, conceptions
of and preferences for management, education, economics, and political
theory and practice are all appropriate to that state. (Summay Statement,
“The Emergent, Cyclical, Double-Helix Model of the Adult Human
Biopsychosocial System,” Boston, May 20, 1981; Wilber, 2000, 40; 227).
28
Zone of Proximal Development
[Vygotsky]
Applied Potential
Capability Capability:
(Present COACHING Cognitive and
Performance) Social-
Emotional
Resources
Coaching = harnessing potential capability to increase applied

capability 29
Statistics of Adult Developmental Attainment
in Evolved Societies
Developmental To the left are 4 main levels,
Ceiling each comprising 4 inter-
mediate levels. These
self aware Leader 5 8% sublevels indicate degrees of
advancing toward the next
following level. As the
self authoring Manager percentages on the right
4 25% indicate, most individuals
remain on level 3, while
Group 25% of individuals reach
other-dependent
Contributor 3 55% level 4, and 8% reach level
5. The names of the levels
are meant to indicate a
instrumental Individualist crucial feature of each of the
2 10% levels of social-emotional
potential.
30
Levels of Social-Emotional Potential
-Individuality
As we move up the stages of consciousness, the stuff Stage 5 -Interpenetrability
in the green boxes gets updated, and the prior stage Stage 4 of systems
is ‘included’ as well as ‘transcended,’ to speak with
< 7%
Ken Wilber. For instance, instead of “being” one’s
impulses and perceptions, as at stage 1, at stage 2, -Authorship
one “has” impulses and perceptions. -Identity 25%
Stage 3 -Ideology
-Interpersonal Most coaches

55% and clients
-Mutuality
Stage 2
-Needs
As a result of these
-Interests 10% shifts, one’s relation-ship to
Stage 1 -Wishes
others, and to what is “not
me,”changes dramatically.
-Impulses
-Perceptions
31
Ranges versus Levels
Nobody can discern his/her own social-emotional level!
• Levels can be discerned • Thinking ‘developmentally’

only with practice. means thinking in terms of
• We begin by discerning levels.
‘ranges,’ which are • Levels are either ‘main’ or
‘intermediate.’
delimited by main levels.
• Levels follow the pattern: x x(y)
• Within a range, you want x/y y/x y(x) and y, where ‘x’ is
to become more and more the lower, and ‘y’ is the higher,
precise as to level. level.
• Counting intermediate • x(y) is one step beyond x, while
y(x) is one step below y
levels, adults pass through
• x/y and y/x are conflictual
up to 15 levels, from L-2 levels.
to L-5.
32
Intermediate Levels are Recursive
• Social-emotional potential develops in a recursive pattern
of steps between the 5 main Levels, indicated by: x x(y)
x/y y/x y(x) and y, where ‘x’ is the lower, ‘y’ the higher,
level (e.g., 3-- 3(4)– 3/4 -- 4/3-- 4(3)-- 4).
• Of these, the middle steps (x/y y/x) are “conflictual,” since
two frames of reference are simultaneously in effect. (The
higher level succumbs in x/y, and succeeds y/x.)
• The first and last intermediate levels indicate either “a first
step out of,” or “a prolonged hanging on to,” the lower
level.
• People typically operate on three levels simultaenously, the
middle of which is their CENTER OF GRAVITY.
33
Intermediate Social-Emotional Levels:
Risk-Clarity-Potential Index (RCP)
Main Level 2*
Score Example*
Step toward 3 2(3) R C P
3/2 {3 :7: 4}
2/3
Conflictual
3/2
Residual of 2 3(2)
Main Level 3
* In this ‘RCP,’ P=potential
outweighs R=risk, the main
* ‘recursive,’ level being strongly articulated
recurring on all levels
34
You Are Never Just Living
on a Single Social-Emotional Level!
Assumption: Your social-emotional level is interacting with the cognitive ‘stratum’
in terms of which you understand the world intellectually.
Progression
Lower Higher between levels (e.g.):
End End
4
4(3)
[ L- , L , L+] 4/3
3/4
Under Center of Ideal 3(4)
Stress Conditions
Gravity 3
35
© 2003 John Spencer, Laske and Associates
Meaning of the ‘RCP’ Index (Laske, 1999)
The ‘risk-clarity-potential index’ expresses the
stability with which an individual presently lives
at a particular social-emotional level, and the
individual’s potential to move to a higher level.
• Example:
An individual with RCP {3:6:4} is solidly embedded in the
main level (L), with a moderate risk of ‘regressing’ to a lower
level (L-1), which is, however, compensated for by a higher
potential to proceed to the next higher level (L+1). This
individual is in a position of ‘high developmental stress,’
reaching for a higher level of self awareness than s(he)
presently holds (and thus in need of scaffolding & support).
36
Section Three
Coaching Levels
Since individuals by necessity act, and coach, from their present

developmental level, we can say that there exist as many coaching
levels as there are developmental levels. In what follows, we speak
only of the “main” coaching levels.
37
A Stratified Universe
• “Where you presently are developmentally,” in terms of
potential capability, determines the model you build of your
client!
• As a result, the coaching community can be partitioned into
different developmental levels, independent of applied
capability (‘expertise,’ ‘experience,’ ‘professional
background,’ and ‘credentials).
• The higher the coaching level, the more highly developed
clients can you responsibly take on and support.
• Coach education is about enhancing coaching level, not just
addition of “skills” or “expertise.”
38
Three Distinct Coaching Levels
Self-aware Coaching:
Model III of Client (<10%)
Self-authoring Coaching:
Model II of Client (25%)
Other-dependent Coaching:
Model I of Client (55%)
39
Three ‘Coaching Levels’
• Coaches execute the three generic processes as a function
of their own cognitive and social-emotional development:
– “other-dependent” level (55-60 % of coaches): the coach defines him-/herself
by dependence on the external or internalized social environment, such as the
coaching community, client goals, corporate culture, best practices. Low level of
coaching presence [ACCs?]
– “self-authoring” level (20-25% of coaches): the coach defines him-/herself by
a consistent system of values and principles, ‘marching to her own drummer,’ and
is able to deviate from best practices and expectations of others if needed to
safeguard integrity. Medium level of coaching presence. [PCCs?]
– “self-aware” level (< 10% of coaches): the coach is no longer defined by any
part of him-/herself (such as ‘expertises’) but is ‘in the flow,’ able to risk self
exposure, open to whatever ‘otherness’ and contrariness the client may present.
Highest level of coaching presence. [MCCs?]
The three coaching levels determine how much coaches can help clients
make developmental shifts regarding their Frame of Reference (FOR).
40
Levels of Coaching
[dependent on coaches’ developmental level]
• Other-dependent: Client model based on
identification with client, client goals, and client
environment (“best practices;” lack of “persona.”
• Self-authoring: Client model based on managing
one’s own idiosyncratic system of values and
principles (beyond “best practices”).
• Self-aware: Client model based on “being in the
flow,” open to risk taking and multiple perspective
taking (far beyond “best practices”).
41
Vignette of the Other-Dependent Coach
• The coach defines him-/herself by the community s(he) is part of, and
loss of community (consensus, etc.) is therefore experienced as loss of
self, and much feared.
• The community in question, may be an external or internal one, or
both, and is not differentiated from the self.
• The coach’s model of the client is therefore one of identification (and
collusion), rather than differentiation.
• The coach’s procedures are typically ‘best practices’ which fit any
client; they are not based on his/her own principles, not do they do
justice to the individuality of the client.
• This coach’s development is in the direction of becoming a self-
authoring individual with his/her own values, principles, commitments,
and kinds of risk taking.
42
Vignette of the Self-Authoring Coach
• The coach defines him-/herself by a fully developed value system that
grounds his/her self identity and integrity.
• The value system is one that can be clearly articulated, but is difficult
for the coach to step away from in a critical fashion; it defines the
coach’s integrity (which is the coach’s highest value).
• As a result, the coach IS his/her values and principles, rather than
HAVING values and principles.
• The coach’s model of the client is typically one of differentiation of
‘my’ and ‘his/her’ values and principles.
• The coach’s procedures are critical of best practices that under- or mis-
represent his/her own principles and values.
• This coach’s development is in the direction of taking multiple
perspectives on his/her own value system and principles.
43
Vignette of the Self-Aware Coach
• The coach no longer defines him-/herself by reference to any fixed part
or ability of the self, and fully steps into the flow of life.
• The flow in question is one which is shared with others who are
essential to the self as critical equals.
• The coach’s model of the client is therefore one of openness to
whatever ‘otherness’ or contrariness the client may present.
• The coach’s procedures are typically critical of his/her own ‘best
practices’ since they may blind him toward the client’s needs.
• This coach’s development is in the direction of becoming an individual
who is able to sustain his/her own fragility and openness without
regression to adopting a predefined value system, vantage point, or
course of action.
44
A 7-Step Model of Leveraging Developmental Differences
D E A L IN G W IT H D E V E L O P M E N T A L D IF F E R E N C E S IN C O A C H IN G
E g o - c e n t r ic P it f a l l s M a t u r e P r o f e s s io n a l A p p r o a c h e s
1 . C o a c h e s i g n o r e o r d e n y d e v e lo p m e n t a l 4 . C o aches reco g n ize a n d a ccep t
d i f f e r e n c e s ( “ W e a r e w h a t w e a r e ; it ’ s d e v e lo p m e n t a l d i f f e r e n c e s ( “ I t h i n k m y
in b o r n .” ) c l i e n t m u s t b e i n a d e v e lo p m e n t a l
t r a n s it io n w h i c h I d o n ’ t f u l l y u n d e r s t a n d
y e t.” )
2 . C o a c h e s r e c o g n i z e d e v e lo p m e n t a l 5 . C o a c h e s a n a l y z e d e v e lo p m e n t a l
d if f e r e n c e s , b u t e v a lu a t e t h e m n e g a t iv e ly d i f f e r e n c e s , t h e r e b y m o v i n g o u t o f t h e ir
( “ S ( h e ) i s n o t a s d e v e lo p e d a s I a m ” ) d e v e lo p m e n t a l b l i n d n e s s o r c o m f o r t z o n e
( “ L i k e it o r n o t , m y c l i e n t i s n o t a t t h e
d e v e lo p m e n t a l l e v e l I t h o u g h t s ( h e ) w a s ; ”
“ I t h i n k t h i s c l i e n t is . d e v e lo p m e n t a l l y
b e y o n d m y h e a d .” )
3 . C o a c h e s re c o g n ize d e v e lo p m e n ta l 6 . C o a c h e s b e g in t o t h in k a n d lis t e n
d iffe re n c e s b u t m in im ize th e ir im p o rta n c e d e v e lo p m e n t a l l y t h r o u g h t r a i n i n g a n d c a s e
( “ W e m a y b e a t d if f e r e n t p o in t s in o u r s t u d ie s . ( “ I a m m u c h h e l p e d i n m y
d e v e lo p m e n t , b u t w e s h a r e a c o m m o n c o a c h i n g b y d o i n g a d e v e lo p m e n t a l i n t a k e
p e r s o n a l c u lt u r e ” ) t h a t s h o w s m e h o w t h e w o r ld s h o w s u p
fo r m y c lie n t .” )
7 . C o a c h e s a c tiv e ly le v e ra g e
d e v e lo p m e n t a l d i f f e r e n c e s b e t w e e n
c lie n t s , to m a k e t h e m o s t o f e x is t in g
p o t e n t ia l, a n d t o m i n i m i z e it s o b s c u r a t io n
( “ M y i n t e r v i e w s s h o w t h a t t h is c l i e n t i s
p r e s e n t l y d e v e lo p m e n t a l l y o v e r s t r e t c h e d ,
a n d m y t a s k is t o l i g h t e n t h a t b u r d e n b y
e m b e d d in g h im / h e r m o r e d e e p ly in t h e ir
p r e s e n t d e v e lo p m e n t a l l e v e l, u s i n g t h e ir
v e r y g o o d c o g n it i v e r e s o u r c e s ” )
45
Typology of Coaching Relationships
C o a c h * C l i e n t P r e d i c t e d C o a c h i n g R O I
L - 3 L - 3 D e v e l o p m e n t a l l y m i n i m a l b u t
m u t u a l ; b e h a v i o r a l l y p o s i t i v e
d e p e n d i n g o n m e a s u r e d c l i e n t
p o t e n t i a l
L - 3 L - 4 D e v e l o p m e n t a l l y c o u n t e r - p r o d u c t i v e ;
b e h a v i o r a l l y e p h e m e r a l
b e h a v i o r a l l y n e g a t i v e ( h a r m f u l )
L - 4 L - 3 D e v e l o p m e n t a l l y p o s i t i v e ;
b e h a v i o r a l l y p o s i t i v e d e p e n d i n g o n
m e a s u r e d c l i e n t p o t e n t i a l
L - 4 L - 4 D e v e l o p m e n t a l l y m i n i m a l t h o u g h
m u t u a l ; b e h a v i o r a l l y p o s i t i v e
d e p e n d i n g o n m e a s u r e d c l i e n t
p o t e n t i a l
b e h a v i o r a l l y h a r m f u l
L - 5 L - 3 D e v e l o p m e n t a l l y b o o s t i n g , b u t
b e h a v i o r a l e f f e c t s m a y b e t r a n s i t o r y
d u e to o v e r s t r e t c h i n g
L - 5 L - 4 D e v e l o p m e n t a l l y m u t u a l ;
b e h a v i o r a l l y l a s t i n g d e p e n d in g o n
m e a s u r e d c l i e n t p o t e n t i a l
L - 5 L - 5 D e v e l o p m e n t a l l y m u t u a l , b u t f r a u g h t
w i t h d e v e l o p m e n t a l r i s k f o r b o t h ;
b e h a v i o r a l l y u n p r e d i c t a b l e .
* A p p r o x i m a t e l y 5 5 % o f c o a c h e s a r e a t L - 3 , 2 5 % a t L - 4 ,
a n d < 9 % a t L - 5 . L - 2 ( i n s t r u m e n t a l l e v e l ; 1 0 % ) n o t
c o n s i d e r e d .
Legend: L-3=other-dependent; L-4=self authoring; L-5=self aware

46
Generic Coaching Processes
Despite of the fact that coaching schools advertize many

different approaches and skills, there are only three main
generic coaching processes used by all coaches, and taught
at all schools, including IDM.
47
What are the Three Generic Processes?
• Attentional support: the coach attends to the client’s
way of presenting issues, problems, goals, and desired
outcomes, focusing on what the client can and cannot
take responsibility for.
• Interpretation: the coach introduces “alternative ways
of representing, organizing, and construing the client’s
experience, based on his/her own frame of reference.”
The coach thereby potentially breaks through habitual
forms in which the client organizes life and work.
• Enactment: both parties collaborate “in the creation of
novel experiences (and behaviors) in the client’s life”
that are novel, and may be antithetical to the client’s
prior experiences.
48
M. Basseches et al., 2004, Harborlight Paper
Examples of Coaching Processes
M. Basseches et al. (unpublished), 2000; M. Basseches et al., Harborlight Paper, 2004
• Attentional Support:
– attention directing questions, probing, feedback, reminding
– acknowledgement (of client experience)
– establishing/developing coaching alliance
• Interpretation (with client using, qualifying, rejecting, or giving feedback)
– coach offering his/her own thoughts and interpretations (that go beyond
client’s thinking)
– envisioning outcomes
– (re-)interpreting experiences
• Enactment:
– acting as a relational partner prompting novel experiences
– ongoing production of novelty, both parties commenting upon it
– role playing
– “home work”
49
Some Pertinent Questions About the Client
• How do the client’s developmental risks (procrastinations) manifest in
his/her present environment?
• Where is the point at which the client would feel developmentally
over-stretched?
• What constructions of the world must the client abandon (transcend) to
advance to a subsequent developmental level (and become more
effective)?
• What role plays will support the client’s mental growth?
• How can I guide the client’s observations about him- or herself toward
existing developmental potential?
• What discomforts and anxieties is it save to provoke, in order to stretch
the client developmentally?
• Where am I developmentally colluding with the client, rather than
acting (at least) from a position of self-authoring?
50
Homework #3
1. For your next coaching session with a chosen client, prepare in your mind some
“developmental” questions answers to which can elucidate what the client’s Frame
of Reference is. (Take as concise notes as possible of what the client says.)
2. Get together with you buddy, and discuss what you heard from your client,
answering the following questions: a) what developmental range was your client
speaking from?, b) what are your reasons for selecting this range?, c) what
consequences does your insight into the client’s developmental range have for your
future coaching of this client; d) where within the range you hypothesize might the
client presently make meaning of your coaching?
3. Prepare a short summary of your discussion with your buddy for Session 3.
51
Conclusions for Coaching Competencies
• #4: the ability to be “fully aware” includes being aware of clients’ Frame
of Reference, as well as one’s own in comparison to that of clients.
• #4: it is out of this developmental awareness that a spontaneous and
open/flexible relationship has to be created.
• #5: there is no better way of understanding “what the client is NOT
saying” than decoding the client’s developmental Frame of Reference.
• #5: what matters is not primarily the meaning in the context of the
client’s “desires,” but an understanding of why these desires are what
they are.
• #6: the ability to ask “powerful questions” hinges on the degree of the
coach’s understanding of clients’ Frame of Reference that make it clear
“where the client is coming from developmentally.”
• #6: powerful questions are those that make the client UNDERSTAND
and OWN his/her present developmental Frame of Reference.
52
Session Four
Determining Developmental Range and Level

1: Understanding coaching ethics and standards, and ability to apply
them appropriately in all coaching situations.
6: Ability to ask questions that reveal the information needed for

8: Ability to integrate and accurately evaluate multiple sources of

information, and to make interpretations that help the client gain
awareness and thereby achieve agree-upon results.
53
Practice Reflection
– What has so far been ‘out of reach’ for you in your coaching practice,
in terms of understanding your client at great (developmental) depth?
– How do you think what you have learned about the lifespan
developmental perspective so far will potentiate the effectiveness and
“fun” of your practice?
– What parts of the theoretical background you have absorbed do you
presently find hard to translate into your practice?
– How could you best use coaching sessions with your present clients to
practice and absorb the lifespan developmental perspective?
– What clients other than those you have coached up to now would you
like to attract, given the new empowerment you feel derives from a
lifespan developmental perspective?
54
The Hidden Dimension of Coaching
• We have learned that the ‘hidden dimension’ in coaching is the
VERTICAL dimension of Conceptual Development (CD), on one
hand, and of Social-Emotional Development (ED), on the other.
• The dimension of vertical development determines clients’ FRAME
OF REFERENCE, -- the way they construct the world for themselves.
• This dimension is hidden since it is buried in language, and nowhere
else to be found.
• To reveal this dimension, coaches need to ‘sharpen their ears’ in a kind
of listening called DEVELOPMENTAL LISTENING, to discern
developmental ranges and levels within them.
• Developmental listening is an art, but can be taught to a high degree, as
we will show.
55
What is Developmental Listening?
• Developmental listening is the ability to abstract from observable
features of a client except for the language used by him or her, for the
sake of gauging FRAME OF REFERENCE.
• Developmental Listening is involves:
– focusing client attention
– probing client utterances
– interpreting client utterances
– ‘stepping into clients shoes’
– formulating hypotheses and following them up (testing them)
– playing devil’s advocate as to being perhaps mistaken
– asking client forgiveness for insisting on fully understanding what the
client “means” and what it “feels like” to think like the client does.
56
Stage Descriptions
Social-Emotional Development is measured in levels

or ‘stages,’ -- Frames of Reference that determine
what is REAL and MATTERS for an individual.
57
The Vertical, ‘Hidden’ Dimension
Social – Emotional Developmenti (ED), like Cognitive Development (CD) a Vertical
(across-time) growth process, is all about how comprehensively the individual has a
grasp on himself or herself, and, therefore, of others as well. It reflects a person’s
‘Center-of-Gravity,’ii or the center of their emotions, actions, and decisions at some point
in time. Whereas CD will determine the scale and scope of problems and operations an
individual can effectively take on, ED determines, in large part, the why – people’s
motivation – of what they do. Put simply, it is all about ‘WHAT SHOULD I DO AND
FOR WHOM?’ Successively higher achievement on this dimension determines how
objective the individual can be about their strengths and limitations, which also reflects
how open they are to learning and discovery about themselves and others. According to
ED logic, people’s self-identity, and feelings of self-worth, are defined by two distinct
perceptions: their own, and what they believe others think of them, especially the views
held by significant others. Our social identity springs from these two sources.
Laske & Stewart, Re-inventing the Army from the Inside Out, 2004
58
Caricature of Stage 2
Stage 2 is an ‘I’ stage, characteristic of late teenage and early adulthood, although in
our own culture, private sector profit concerns often drive many adults to revert to
this stage, at least in their ‘world of work.’ Persons on this stage are highly, if not
totally, steeped in their own wants or needs. They are impulsive, seek immediate
gratification for those needs and wants, pay little attention to what others say about
them, but will vehemently deny feedback that is not concordant with their own rigid
self-perception. Above all else, they are interested in preserving the image they have
established for themselves, regardless of how accurate it might be. When challenged,
they can be very emotionally explosive and abusive to the feedback’s source(s).
S(he) readily understands others’ perspectives, not out of empathy, but for the sake of
knowing how to manipulate them to satisfy their own needs and ends. They will
follow socially established (Stage 3) community rules and conventions when
beneficial to them, or as long as they believe they will not be caught or punished.
Thus, cheating, lying, deception, and falsification will be used, as necessary, to
achieve self-set goals. They can work effectively and productively, if working alone
and if their objectives happen to be aligned with those of the organization. In a
Leader role, they will tend to micro-manage, exploit others, create ill will and
mistrust, and misunderstandings will abound within the team or work group.
Unbridled ‘careerism’ typifies this stage, for those individuals who manage to work
their way into positions where they are given any degree of social authority.
59
Hallmarks of Stage 2
• Distribution: about 10% of adults
• Advance over Stage 1: A distinction can be made between what
something seems and what it is. This requires the ability to separate
oneself from one’s perception (stage 1), of taking one’s perceptions as
object (stage 2).
• Essence of this stage: As a self subject to my needs, wishes, and
interests, I relate to another person in terms of possible consequences
for my world view. I “know” you in terms of how helpful you can be to
me, and am thus unable to consider your independent view at the same
time that I am taking my own into account.
• Instrumentalism: The ultimate concern is with whether the person will
lose a source of support or help for herself. The person’s own interest
constitutes the ground from which (s)he attends to others’ perspective.
• Pervasive limitation: a ‘split universe,’ where each person’s knowing
is separate from the other’s knowing.
60
Journey to Stage 3
• Journey toward stage 3: is about bringing inside the self others’ perspective.
My new perspective now includes my ability to imagine your taking a
perspective on me, and to bring inside myself the mediation of these separate
perspectives, -- which previously were negotiated only as a matter of social
consequence in the external world.
• Developmental risk: loss of imagined self containment
• Meaning of ‘internalizing another’s perspective’: ability to hold more than a
single view:
– First, a bringing inside the self another’s or others’ perspectives which
were before considered only from the viewpoint of my own independent
enterprises.
– Second, an ability to derive my own thoughts and feelings as a direct
consequence of how the other is thinking and feeling, and not solely as a
consequence of what the other will DO in response to my actions
61
Coaching Stage 2 Individuals
• Coaching Presence: the coach must model bringing others’
perspective inside the self
• Active Listening: the coach must discover signs of instrumentalism
and the inability of internalizing others’ perspectives, as well as elicit
statements of self questioning regarding the client’s focus of attention
• Attentional support: the coach must probe and make explicit to the
client the extent to which s(he) does not have a good ‘theory’ of others
and the environment around him or her
• Interpretation: the coach must introduce interpretations of what is not
said, feared, and kept hidden, to provoke self inquiry into the present
limits of holding more than a single perspective
• Enactment: the coach must invent role modeling scenarios putting the
client in a stage 3 role, and playing a stage 2 role him- or herself, as
well as vice versa
62
Limitations of a Stage 2 Coach
• In general: a stage 2 person probably should not be coaching, period! Such a
coach views money as his/her real supply, not the inner certitude of self,
despite the “espoused theory” of coaching he or she may profess. A stage 2
coach is focused on preserving an unquestionable self image.
• Coaching Presence: the coach has no presence other than that of a solicitor,
thus no ‘persona’ and no ‘coaching presence’
• Active Listening: the coach is focused on being ‘rewarded’ for his or her
‘expertise,’ and on being boosted in his or her self
• Attentional support: the coach’s attention is limited to immediate perceptions
of clients and self
• Interpretation: the coach has no ‘model’ or ‘theory’ of the client, and
therefore cannot interpret the client’s statements except for mimicking or
contradicting them (in favor of own “coaching successes”)
• Enactment: the coach slavishly (and perhaps cynically) follows ‘best
practices’ that happen to coincide with his or her need and advantage at the
time.
63
This is a ‘We,’ or a sense of community, stage. Self-image is determined entirely by
what others think, whether these others are internalized or external others. Thus,
people at this stage are highly, if not completely, identified with an external socially
established norm or standard that has been internalized. If rank, position, power, etc.,
are viewed as being important by the system that defines them, then they are
important to this individual, as are appearances – social correctness. Obtaining status,
in whatever terms the external reference is based upon, makes them highly
competitive, but they will not stoop to the stratagems Stage 2 persons will to achieve
their ends. They ‘follow the rules,’ and are ‘above board’ about winning and losing.
It is very unlikely that they will ‘see’ or think beyond the established operational
principles and values of ‘their’ organization. Because their image is so caught up in
the status quo, they will be unwilling to take the risks necessary to change it, even if
they can stand apart from their unit, group, or organization far enough to objectively
assess what could make it operate more effectively. Hence, they do not make good
change agents, either in the sense of seeing what needs to be done or in actually doing
it. Any change they believe might be beneficial will be whatever is being echoed by
the majority. In a leader position, this person will follow what they believe the norms
are and will try to establish a climate accordingly. Yet, they may have a very tough
time doing so, unless those norms lead them to simultaneously gain recognition, or
credits, within the broader social structure. What contributes to the climate first is
how it will affect their stature. Hence, the climate will be focused as much on
individual achievement as it is on the group’s collective effectiveness. 64
• Distribution: between 50 and 60% of adults live (and remain) at this
stage.
• Advance over Stage 2: theory of self now includes others’ perspective
• Essence of this stage: My self is made up by the expectations of
physical or internalized others (family, religious or peer group), and I
lose myself when losing membership in, and the support of, the group.
• Conventionalism: The ultimate concern is with whether I am adhering
to what is expected of me. Being ‘good’ means following the rules of
an institution larger than myself I have strongly internalized, and
without which I will be “at a loss”
• Pervasive limitation: I cannot distinguish my internalized points of
view from those of physical, and especially internalized, others;
consequently, I have no ‘theory of self’ independent of what I have
absorbed from the social surround, whether by adherence to, or strict
negation of, existing conventions. My guilt is about not being
sanctioned by others, not about failing my own standards.
65
Journey to Stage 4
While there is a social ‘forcing function’ for moving people from Stage 2 to
3, there is no such function beyond Stage 3, so that movement upwards is,
from there on, entirely ‘from the inside out.’
• Journey toward stage 3: starting with the distinction between physical others,
internalized others, and ‘myself,’ individuals inch toward a sense of what is
“other than me;” they don’t get social help in this, and are thus on their own.
• Developmental risk: loss of imagined safety as member of a physical and/or
internalized group, thus loss of the communal or shared self
• Meaning of ‘forming a theory of self:’
– First, people must internally distance themselves from their need of being
acknowledged and accepted by the community; they must be able to ‘go it
alone’ if their own inner voice tells them to do so
– Second, people must develop a better and better notion of their
uniqueness, of what makes them different from others, and find the
courage to make that difference known to others while respecting others’
otherness
– Third, people must develop an ethical theory of integrity of self
66
• Coaching Presence: the coach must have enough of an independent
set of values and principles (thus a ‘theory of self’) to model ‘going it
alone’ if inner principles and integrity demand it
• Active Listening: the coach must discover signs of fuzzy self definition
associated with a hankering for unmitigated approval or “success,”
and inability to work without, or even against, consensus
• Attentional support: the coach must probe and make explicit to the
client the extent to which s(he) does not have a good ‘theory of self’
Interpretation: the coach must introduce interpretations of what is not
said, feared, and kept hidden, to provoke self inquiry into the client’s
present propensity to be primarily concerned with their own
acceptance by others
• Enactment: the coach must invent role modeling scenarios putting the
well vice versa
67
• In general: a stage 3 person makes a good coach to the extent that s(he) can
follow the rules defined by the coaching community, and respect the client for
what s(he) is. This, however, requires insight into the clients (developmentall)
Frame of Reference, and where that insight is lacking, the danger of
‘colluding with the client’ under the guise of being ‘helpful’ is great
• Coaching Presence: the coach has no presence other than that bestowed by
community acknowledgement (certificates, license) and identification
• Active Listening: the coach is focused on being “in sink with” the client, but
unable to challenge the client’s values, principles, and self construction based
on the coach’s own integrity (due to lack of his/her own theory of self)
• Attentional support: the coach’s attention is limited to keeping the client in
the community s(he) herself is identified with
• Interpretation: the coach has no ‘model’ or ‘theory’ of the client, and
therefore cannot interpret the client’s statements except for ‘supporting’ and
colluding; client statements therefore cannot become transparent of self
• Enactment: the coach unconciously follows those “best practices” that
safeguard his/her own membership in the coaching or other community
68
This is an ‘I” stage, but one much different from Stage 2. These individuals, rather than
trying to become someone, have found themselves or ‘come of age.’ They have been
successful while pursuing Stage 3 goals and have, in their eyes, earned the ‘right’ to stand
above the crowd and be noticed. Consequently, they are highly, if not completely,
identified with the value system that they have authored for themselves, yet they are very
respectful of others for their competence and different values and beliefs. They find great
difficulty in standing away from themselves to discover their own voids, but they will
accept them when they are discovered. In this sense, they can be more self-accepting,
relative to those less well developed. They can stand back, however, from the institution
that previously defined them far enough to be objective about what they ‘see.’ Since they
are far more objective, they can be good at apprehending what could be done to change
the system of which they are a part and, once doing so, will have enough strength in their
own center-of-gravity to weather the storms that may come about in actually instigating a
change or transformation process. The changes they author, however, will, more likely
than not, be directed towards making the organization more responsive to themselves,
authoring and moving it in directions approximating their own personal ‘institution,’
rather than one more universally self-sustaining. The climate they create will be one that
follows the status quo, but taking on their own idiosyncratic values and operational
principles as time passes. Since they are caught in their own FOR, they fail to appreciate
the value of other FORs just as much, if not more, developed. This, by definition, limits
the extent to which ‘their’ organization can learn-to-learn, grow, and further develop.
FOR = Frame of Reference 69

• Distribution: between 20 and 25% of adults live (and remain) at this
stage.
• Advance over Stage 3: I can articulate a coherent theory of self in
terms of my values & principles potentially different from consensus
• Essence of this stage: I am identified with my own value system as the root
of my ‘integrity’ (my highest value, and the grounding of my ‘being in control’)
• Self Authoring: The ultimate concern is whether I safeguard my
integrity by following my own values and principles
• Pervasive limitation: I do not have an objective, ‘outside’ view of my
own ways of acting on my principles. Therefore, I can only do “single
loop learning,” examining outcomes but not assumptions lying beyond
my own value perspective. Also, I can ‘respect’ others for their
differences, but cannot truly enter into their universe of discourse
beyond what is ‘understandable’ to me on the grounds of my own
values and principles. Therefore, as a change agent I act according to
norms excluding multiple perspectives, intent on shaping my group and
organization in harmony with my own principles. 70
Journey to Stage 5
While there is a social ‘forcing function’ for moving people from Stage 2 to
3, there is no such function beyond Stage 3, so that movement upwards is,
from there on, entirely ‘from the inside out.’
• Journey toward stage 5: starting with the distinction between my own identity
and that of others, and feeling a keen need to work with others as ‘midwives’ of
my own development, I gradually begin to see the limits of my own character,
history, assumptions, certitudes, and self-constructed identity, and therefore the
limits up to which I can impose my values and perspectives on others.
• Developmental risk: loss of the self-authoring self, by risking exposure of my
own limitations to others’ intimate participation in my self development
• Meaning of ‘abandoning my self-authored self’ [‘being in the flow’]:
– First, people must be shaken out of their unconscious identity with their life
history and “successes,” to grasp the limitedness of their own universe
– Second, people must embrace knowledge sources other than intellect, such
as ‘heart’ and ‘spirit,’ thereby bringing a sacrifice of mere rationality; but
they can give up only as much rationality as they have previously acquired
– Third, people must extend what is ‘real’ for them to a multi-perspectival
view in which many certainties can be balanced in search for the authentic
71
action required at a particular moment
• Coaching Presence: the coach must have left behind his/her own ‘self-
authoring self’ far enough to steer clients to a world view beyond their
ken, challenging their previous ‘successes’ and ‘control’ posture
• Active Listening: the coach must discover signs of rigid, self righteous
self definition associated with a hankering for control, and the
propensity to ‘call the shots,’ and a fixation on one part of the self
(e.g., intellectual, emotional, or social), as against another
• Attentional support: the coach must probe and make explicit to clients
the extent to which the client cannot take a perspective on their own
uniqueness, limitations, charisma, education, etc.
• Interpretation: the coach must introduce interpretations of what is not
said, feared, and kept hidden, to provoke self inquiry into the client’s
present propensity to be primarily concerned with their own self
Enactment: the coach must invent role modeling scenarios putting the
well vice versa 72
• In general: while a self authoring coach stands his or her own ground, working
from a clearly articulated ‘persona’ beyond ‘best practices,’ s(he) cannot easily,
or at all, step back from his/her own value system, and thus is not open to
potentials or propensities in the client that challenge that system
• Coaching Presence: the coach’s presence is that bestowed on the relationship by
his/her own (limited) theory of integrity (with no perspective taken on it)
• Active Listening: the coach is focused on being successful in modeling integrity
grounded in his/her own values, without a comprehensive grasp of the client’s
potential for questioning his or her own purview and assumptions
• Attentional support: the coach’s attention is limited to his or her own
unquestioned “theory of helpfulness” that determines “what is good for the
client”
• Interpretation: similarly, the coach has a theory of the client that remains
uncritical toward what the coach thinks of as ‘helpful to the client’
• Enactment: the coach unconciously follows his/her own values and principles,
and cannot stand back from them, to make room for substantial ‘otherness’
(contrariness) or self-transcending potential of the client.
73
At this stage, people are no longer strongly identified with any particular aspect or
asset of their own FOR. They know that no matter what they do it will be limited.
Consequently, they have come to realize that learning-to-learn, life long learning, is
not just a platitude, but becomes their life. Collaboration and collegiality become the
means for exchanging FORs openly, where exposure of self-limitations is routinely
accepted as the only means to learn increasingly more about the self and others. This
makes them potential unifiers – consensus builders at their level – and an invaluable
resource for rethinking corporate goals, operational principles, and values that
combine to create culture. Such a person is best positioned where visionary risk
taking and development of others, their organization, and the broader social context
are called for. Such a person is often highly self-critical, even humble, seeing clearly
the limits to which s(he) can impose their perceptions and convictions on others, as
suggested. The climate they will create will be one that is open to exploration, risk
taking within reasonable limits, and the emphasis, above all else, will be on
promoting and sustaining growth and continued development of others and the
organization as a whole.
FOR = Frame of Reference 74

• Distribution: less then 10% of adults ever reach this stage
• Advance over Stage 4: individuals no longer identify with a particular
part of their self, history, expertise, thus ‘being in the flow of life’
• Essence of this stage: I am transparently linked to others that I trust
enough to ask for help in questioning my perspective, thus being open
to unchartered pathways and unforeseen discoveries (about myself)
• (My Own) Learning Organization: The ultimate concern is with
expanding my purview to potentials in me I have so far not grasped, or
have defended against; I am motivated to support others in their
development even where it may impinge on my own immediate
advantage
• Pervasive limitation: I am not fully aware of the extent to which my
‘languaging’ of reality gives me the illusion of ‘knowing what is going
on’ inside and outside of me; while I can represent ‘objective reality’
with increasing accuracy, I remain blind to much that escapes
categorization and formulation, -- the constant flux of life.
75
Journey beyond Stage 5
Susan Cook-Greuter, “Postautonomous Ego Development, 1999 (pp.80-81)
• Journey toward higher stages: as far we know today, developmental stages

extend further to “post-autonomous” stages where maximal subject-object
separation is replaced by universal embeddednes
• Developmental risk: journey into spirituality beyond existing developmental
grounding is fraught with risk of overextending existing resources
• Meaning of ‘universal embeddedness’
– First, keen ‘construct awareness,’ meaning pervasive awareness of the
limitation of language in capturing what is real
– Second, insight into one’s own languaging as a way of limiting awareness
for oneself and others
– Third, loss of the permanent object world by further de-centering from self
(subject)
– Fourth, cyclical rather than linear experience of causality
– Fifth, immersion in the phenomenal flux, and access to layers and layers
of symbolic abstraction
76
These are largely untested hypotheses.
• Coaching Presence: the coach must have made one or more steps beyond self-
authoring, in order to be ‘believable’ to a stage-5 individual
• Active Listening: the coach must discover signs of ‘hanging on to’ a self
authoring (or ‘control’) stance that obstructs the client’s ability to lead from
the humility of self insight and intense exploration of own limitations (without
thereby losing self confidence as a leader)
• Attentional support: the coach must probe and make explicit to the client the
extent to which s(he) fails to be transparent to others, and able to take multiple
perspectives on persons, events, situations, and organizational systems
• Interpretation: the coach must introduce interpretations of what is not said,
feared, and kept hidden, that provoke self inquiry into the client’s present
propensity to be less then humble and transparent in relation to others
• Enactment: the coach must invent role modeling scenarios putting the client
in a stage 5 role, and playing a stage 4 role him- or herself, as well vice versa
77
• In general: a stage 5 person makes a good coach to the extent that s(he) is
open to the intrinsic need of clients, to experiment with ‘letting go’ of narrow
self definitions or theories of self that suppress a part of the client’s potential
• Coaching Presence: the coach may be unable to distinguish between his or
her own‘image’ of the client, on one hand, and the client’s reality as a person,
including the client’s spiritual potential, on the other
• Active Listening: the coach may be engaged in his/her own journey in a way
that precludes total openness to that of the client (limited ‘use of self’)
• Attentional support: the coach’s attention may be limited in the scope of
his/her systemic perception, cognition, and emotion needed for a full
interchange of his/her own Frame of Reference with that of he client
• Interpretation: the coach may lack the degree of mental growth that sets
him/her free for an undefended exchange of Frames of Reference with clients
challenging the coach’s basic assumptions and values
• Enactment: the coach may unconsciously continue to follow strictures of self
authoring that hamper a free unfolding of the flow in which alone coach and
client can meet to mutual benefit of their leadership capacity.
78
Here, we are encountering pre-requisites of professional psychotherapy.
Ranges and Levels
79
Determining Developmental Range
• Ranges extend between ‘main levels’ 2, 3, 4, and 5
• The best way to determine overall range is to ask “what
can this individual NOT take responsibility for?”
– level-2 individuals cannot take responsibility for other people’s
mind, feelings, perspectives, expectations, integrity, etc.
– level-3 individuals cannot take responsibility for their own
integrity, defined independently of the social surround
(internalized by them) in which they find themselves
– level-4 individuals cannot take responsibility for the limitations of
their own value system, principles, ideology, life history,
“successes,” “charisma,” “mission,” etc.
– only level-5 individuals begin to take responsibility for the full
complexity of the flow in which they are embedded together with
all of humanity, but may fail to do so consistently 80
Determining Developmental Levels
• Levels mark steps within ranges, as explained above, but
also include the ‘main’ levels 2, 3, 4, 5 themselves
• To determine level, first hypothesize and test range
(through appropriate probes), then probe/analyze further
for indications of:
– conflict between (simultaneous impact of) two different main
levels [x/y; y/x, e.g. 2/3, or 4/3]
– ‘espousal’ of a higher level than actually attained (substantiated)
[x(y); y(x)]
• Remember that people typically are making sense of things
over at least three different levels, with the central level
defining their present “center of gravity” [L-1, L, L+1].
81
L e v e l C h a r a c te r is tic
2 R u le d b y n e e d s , d e s ir e s , w is h e s ;
‘ t w o w o r ld h y p o t h e s is ’
OVERVIEW 2 (3 ) B e g in n in g t o b e in flu e n c e d b y
p h y s ic a l a n d im a g in e d o t h e r s
2 /3 C o n flic t e d o v e r r is k in g e x p o s u r e to
OF LEVELS o th e r s ’ fe e lin g s a n d t h o u g h t s ;
r e s o lu t io n t o le v e l 2
3 /2 C o n f l ic t e d , b u t w it h m o r e
d e ta c h m e n t fro m o w n n e e d s a n d
d e s ir e s , r e s o lu t io n t o le v e l 3
3 (2 ) A b le t o b e in flu e n c e d b y im a g in e d
o t h e r s a n d t h e ir e x p e c t a t io n s
See also the 3 M a d e u p o f o t h e r s ’ e x p e c t a t io n s ;
‘ o u r w o r ld ’ h y p o t h e s is
Gateway 3 (4 ) I n n e e d o f ‘ h a n d h o ld in g ’ b y
p h y s ic a l o th e r to a c t o n o w n b e h a lf
Handouts 3 /4 C o n flic t e d o v e r , a n d u n s u r e a b o u t
o w n v a lu e s , d ir e c t io n , w o r t h ,
c a p a b il it y
4 /3 C o n f l ic t e d , b u t w it h m o r e
d e t a c h m e n t fr o m in t e r n a liz e d
v ie w p o in t s , r e s o lv in g t o le v e l4
4 (3 ) N e a r in g s e lf- a u th o r in g , b u t
r e m a in in g a t r is k f o r r e g r e s s io n t o
o t h e r s ’ e x p e c t a t io n s
4 F u l l y s e lf - a u t h o r in g d e c is io n m a k e r
r e s p e c t in g o t h e r s ; ‘ m y w o r ld ’
h y p o th e s is
4 (5 ) B e g in s t o q u e s t io n s c o p e a n d
in f a l lib i l it y o f o w n v a lu e s y s t e m ;
a w a r e o f o w n h is t o r y
4 /5 C o n flic t e d o v e r r e lin q u is h in g
c o n t r o l a n d t a k in g r is k o f c r it ic a l
e x p o s u r e o f o w n v ie w
5 /4 C o n flic t e d , b u t in c r e a s in g ly
s u c c e e d in g in ‘d e c o n s t r u c t in g ’ s e lf;
c o m m it t e d t o f lo w
5 (4 ) F u l l y c o m m it t e d t o d e c o n s t r u c t in g
o w n v a lu e s , b e n e f it t in g f r o m
d iv e r g e n t o th e r s
5 N o lo n g e r a t t a c h e d t o a n y p a r t ic u la r
a s p e c t o f t h e s e lf, fo c u s e d o n
u n c e a s in g f lo w
82
Homework #4, Role Plays
1. Working with your buddy, take the role of a stage-2 client
4. Working with you buddy, take the role of a stage-3 coach, and ask him to
impersonate a stage-4 client
5. Working with you buddy, take the role of a stage-4 coach, and ask him/her to
impersonate a stage-3 client
6. Working with your buddy, take the role of a stage-3 coach, and ask him/her to
impersonate a stage-5 client.
In all cases, interact for 15 minutes;

record, transcribe, and analyze the interaction
for discussion in class.
83
See Handouts, 17
Homework #4, Coaching Exercise

W h a t a re som e d evelop m en ta l h yp oth eses you c an form u la te
rega rd in g this Life B a la n c e Su m m a ry of a c lient?
1 . W h a t is th e m ost lik ely d ev elop m en ta l ran ge?
2 . W h at is to b e m a d e of “spiritu al d evelop m en t” ?
3 . W h a t inc rea sed ‘w h olen ess’ w ou ld a level b e yon d you r
h yp oth esized m ain leve l su pp ort in th e c lien t?
L ife A rea R ating L ife A rea R ating

S piritu al 9 H e a lth 7
D e velop m en t
S e rv ice 4 F un 3
R e la tion sh ip 3 F riend s 5
P e rsona l D e v. 4 F a m ily 6
M on ey 4 C a re e r 2
H ome 8 A pp ea rance 8
84
Conclusions for Coaching Competencies
• #1: Except for conventional requirements of “doing no
harm,” coaching ethics” vary developmentally, depending on
what the coach him- or herself can take responsibility for.
• #6: Ability to ask pertinent and “powerful” questions varies
developmentally according to what the coach him- or herself
is able to put into question regarding his/her own approach
and model of the client.
• #8: Ability to synthesize multiple sources of information and
making appropriate interpretations depends on the
developmental level at which the coach supports clients’
attention, and is able to interpret their statements, silences,
and mental or emotional “absences”
85
More Conclusions
• #1: “Knowing ethics and standards” is too generic to do
justice to the developmental demands and implications of a
client’s unique behavioral profile; the ethical demand of
clients derives from their present developmental profile,
including potential: coaches need to safeguard clients’
developmental potential
• #6: “Powerful questions” are those that link the horizontal
(behavioral) to the hidden vertical (developmental) axis of
capability
• #8: Ability to synthesize multiple sources of information is
foremost that of linking horizontal and vertical dimensions
of coaching in a way that “works for the client”
86
Section Five
Elementary Principles of Developmental Interviewing.

3: Establishing trust and intimacy with the client through the ability to create a safe,
supporting environment producing ongoing mutual respect and trust.
5. Active listening: ability to focus completely on what the client is saying and
NOTsaying, to understand the MEANING of what is said in the context of the client’s
desires, and to support client self-expression.
6. Powerful questioning: ability to ask questions that reveal the information needed for
7: Direct communication: ability to communicate effectively during coaching sessions, and

to use language that has the greatest positive impact on the client.
87
Practice Reflection
– Given what you know, and know how to do, regarding interviewing,
what skills do you need to acquire in order to focus simply on the
client’s use of language?
– How experienced are you in formulating hypotheses about your client?
Give an example of the hypotheses your ordinarily formulate for
yourself.
– Are you aware that you have and use a specific “model” of your client
that covers only a fraction of the “real person”?
– Making a developmental intake amounts to refining your initial
“model” of the client; it may also amount to refining your self image as
a coach. Are you prepared to risk giving up your preconceptions about
the client, and yourself?
88
Flow of Interdevelopmental Coaching
1. Establish a relationship with
the client
Business Contract of
Deliverables/Logistics
2. Observe, assess
(interview), and analyze
Client’s ECF
Frame of
Reference
3. Give developmental
feedback, and co-
create a coaching plan
Input of a third party
(coaching sponsor)
4. Enroll and contract

(engage client behaviorally)
5. Coaching conversations
(geared to developmental level)
Assess entire coaching program

6. Assess developmental-
behavioral outcome (determine
dev. advance if any)
89
Task of the Coach as Interviewer
The task of the interviewer is to understand HOW the client
makes meaning of his/her experiences in life and work.
To do this expertly requires the coach:
to distinguish ‘structure’ (level) and ‘content’ in client
speech
to stand in the client’s shoes adopting his/her agenda
to formulate hypotheses regarding the client’s
developmental level
to be sensitive to issues the client chooses not to
discuss, or is unable to “see,” or cannot “say”
90
Active = Developmental Listening
• The relevance of developmental interviewing lies in the fact that it
schools your developmental listening
• ‘Developmental listening’ means listening for, and above, the level of
development at which the client presently makes meaning
• Developmental listening is based on understanding clients’ language at
the level of their unconscious, spontaneous meaning making
• Developmental listening is about ‘structure’ (= level), not content; any
content can be spoken from any level
• Developmental listening comprises range recognition, level
hypothesizing, level identification, level testing (probing), and
determining level through inference and playing devil’s advocate.
91
Requirements of Dev. Intake
• Make sure the client has signed an interview agreement
• Make sure you have conveyed that the interview is an
‘intake,’ not a test, for you to work optimally
• Leave behind any pre-defined agenda, and adopt the
principle of non-interference with clients’ discourse
• Become a recepticle for what the client shares with you
• Fully stand in the client’s “shoes”
• Do not ask “Why?” questions since they derail the client’s
associative thinking, and avoid anything deviating from the
client’s present “train of thought”
• START WITH A REASONABLE HYPOTHESIS AS TO
RANGE IF NOT LEVEL
92
Elementary Principles
of Developmental Interviewing
• As soon as possible, develop a hypothesis as to the client’s
developmental level, as a guide to interviewing*
• Never interrupt the client’s flow of thought
• Probe based on what you just heard; start with your “main level,”
which implies the lower and higher levels
• Stop probing only when sure that you are standing firmly in the
client’s “shoes,” seeing the world as does s(he)
• When probing yields a result discordant with your intial hypothesis,
REVISE your hypothesis and start over
• When the client has trouble focusing attention because of discomfort
or pain, stop probing and turn entirely empathic
* Doing a behavioral assessment first helps to gather material for such an hypothesis 93
The Three Processes in Interviewing
Intake: An Exercise in Directing and Supporting Attention
• Developmental Intake is free of ‘enactment’ and

‘interpretation’; you are not modeling anything, nor are
you bringing in your interpretations of what is said
• Rather, developmental intake is based on ‘focusing and
supporting attention’ in all of its forms:
– attention directing questions
– probing
– rephrasing
– reminding
– summarizing
– (empathic) acknowledgment
– asking permission (to insist, to repeat, to keep probing)
94
What are Verbal Prompts?
• ‘Prompts’ are attention guiding and focusing verbal fragments that help clients
control attention and remember relevant experiences
• Prompts initiate a kind of ‘Rohrschach’ test, since the client “projects him-
/herself” into the prompt adopted
• Based on a prompt, the client builds a scenario that lends itself to self
inspection and self awareness -- just what you need to determine level
• It’s up to the client to select the prompt; it’s not your responsibility.
• Your only responsibility is to make sure the client includes at least one prompt
that can highlight “negative” experiences (the lower level, or developmental
risk), to achieve a balanced intake

95
Developmental Interview Prompts
• Success: can you think of a time in your recent work where you felt somewhat jubilant,
feeling you had achieved something that was difficult for you, or that you had overcome
something?
• Changed: if you think of how you have changed over the last year or two, or even
months, regarding how you conduct your life, what comes to mind?
• Control: can you think of a moment where you became highly aware that you were
losing control, or felt the opportunity of seizing control, what occurs to you?
• Limits: if you think of where you are aware of limits, either in your life and/or work,
something you wish you could do but feel excluded from, what comes up for you?
• Outside of: as you look around in the workplace or the family, where do you see
yourself as not fitting in, being an outsider, and how does that make you feel?
• Frustration: if you think of a time where you were in a situation not of your choosing,
where you felt totally frustrated, but unable to do something about it, what emerges?
• Important to me: if I were to ask you ‘what do you care about most deeply,’ ‘what
matters most,’ are there one or two things that come to mind?
• Sharing: if you think about your need of sharing your thoughts and feelings with others,
either at work or at home, how, would you say, that plays out?
• Strong stand/conviction: if you were to think of times where you had to take a stand,
and be true to your convictions, what comes to mind?
• Taking risks: when thinking of recent situations where you felt you were taking, or had
to take, risks, either to accomplish or fend off something, what comes to mind?
96
Adapted from R. Kegan’s “Subject-Object Interview”
Reflecting on Your Intake Experience
• What was hardest to do in the intake?
• How did you go about formulating a range hypothesis?
• How did you go about formulating a level hypothesis?
• How did you try to validate your hypothesis?
• How did you recover from interrupting the client’s train of thought?
• How did you handle the feeling of ‘being lost’ when you had no idea
as to the client’s developmental level?
• How does the intake experience influence your grasp of your own
personal developmental culture?
• Were you able to determine, even roughly, how your own way of
making meaning of the world compared to that of your client?
• In what way did you think you were developmentally compatible with
your client?
97
What Did You Learn?
• What did you learn about yourself from making a
developmental intake:
– in terms of how you relate to clients
– in terms of how you build a model of your client
– in terms of your depth of listening to a client
– in terms of your reactions to your own observations about the
client
– in terms of reflecting about your client’s goals in terms of his or
her personal developmental culture at the present time
– in terms of whether you trust yourself to be able to ‘hold’ your
client developmentally
– in terms of where your interviewing and listening presently falls
short of your own developmental intuitions
98
Small Group Exercises: Ranges
Optional
• Form a group with two other people, and decide who starts being an
interviewing coach, a client, and an observer
• Pick a central question for a 15 minute interview, such as:
– if you were to think of a recent accomplishment that you did not expect so that it
really surprised you, how did that feel, and what came up for you?
– if you were to think of a recent, highly frustrating situation that was not under your
control, what comes to mind, and what was your experience?
• Get ready for the intake, by giving the client a moment to reflect
• After the client chooses the topic, give the agenda over to him or her,
except for well paced probing questions directly linked to what you are
hearing from the client
• Formulate a range hypothesis (e.g., 2-3, 3-4, 4-5) regarding the client
• Stay “with” the client at all times
• Let the observer debrief both coach and client, then make your own
observations. 99
Small Group Exercises: Levels
Optional
• Repeat the exercise, with the goal of intensifying and refining your
listening and probing
• This is done by making mental distinctions between levels within a
range (e.g., 2--2(3)--2/3--3/2--3(2), for an ‘adolescent’ range)
• Use the previous prompts (accomplishment, frustration)
• As you listen, ask yourself how your client is constructing the world as
s(he) speaks:
– how does your client position him-/herself toward the world?
– what can your client take responsibility for, and what not?
– what is the client’s ‘lower edge’ (risk)
– what is the client’s ‘higher edge’ (potential)
– where does the client seem to need most support?
– what probing question do you need to ask next, given what you have
ascertained about the client up to now?
100
Conclusions for Coaching
Competencies
• #3: Establishing trust and intimacy: these are based on
understanding the client’s Frame of Reference, thus
understanding developmental information
• #5: Active listening: developmental intake is a prime
example
• #6: “Powerful questions” are those that link the horizontal
(behavioral) to the hidden vertical (developmental) axis of
capability; in the intake, they are correct probes that further
your insight into the client’s developmental level
• #7: Direct communication: ‘direct’ in and by itself is not the
point. The point is: are you communicating at the client’s
developmental level so as to be able to be “direct”?
101
Homework #5
1. Working with your buddy, assume the role of the client
in Session 4, Exercise #1, using a prompt of your choice
In all cases, interact for 15 minutes;

record, transcribe, and analyze the interaction
for discussion in class.
102
Section Six
First Steps Toward Developmental Intake

1: Meeting ethical guidelines and professional standards, with an
ability to apply them in all coaching situations.
5: Active listening: focusing completely on what the client is saying

and NOT saying to understand the meaning of what is said in the
context of the client’s desires, and to support client self expression.
6: Powerful questioning: ability to ask questions that reveal the

information needed for maximum benefit to the coaching
relationship and the client.
Copyright © Interdevelopmental Institute 2004 103

Practice Reflection
– In light of the conventional, “intuition” based and “goal” focused
coaching model, developmental coaching seems to require integrating
“coaching” in the conventional sense with being a “developmental
observer/inquirer/analyst”; is that your experience?
– How does your coaching practice change if, from the beginning, you
are mindful of your own developmental profile and its impact on the
client?
– In your experience, how does the coaching relationship change if the
coach is aware of the client’s developmental movements and their
manifestation?
– Does taking a developmental perspective enhance your compassion and
empathy for the client, and if so, in what way?
104
Intake ‘Within Range’
• In the intake exercises that follow, the
emphasis is on discerning the lowest as well
as highest possible developmental level,
thus the ‘range,’ the client may be
articulating, -- without an attempt to assess
the center of gravity (main and neighboring
levels) precisely
105
Intake Strategy
• There are two intake strategies:
– doing an explicit intake independent of the client’s immediate
concerns and goals, setting aside extra time for it (and justifying
taking time for it)
– ‘spreading out’ the intake over the first two or three meetings with
the client, by asking questions related to the verbal prompts
whenever an occasion for probing arises in the conversation
• Strategy I is the ‘classical’ way to do intake; it is the only
method that works if you are still learning the method
• Strategy II is a short-cut that you can use when you are
already quite expert in developmental interviewing
• Strategy II diminishes the client’s option to choose the
prompts, in return for independent probing by the coach
106
In this class, we use only the ‘classical’ method
Practice Template for Intake
• The class divides itself into a coach, client, and observers
• The volunteer client decides on a role to play, either actual
or invented
• The client is asked by the coach to choose a starting
prompt from among the five prompts on the following slide
• Fifteen minutes intake ...
• The client reports his/her experiences during the coaching
• The coach reports his/her experiences during the coaching
• The observers share their observations about:
– the coach
– the client
• The class summarizes what has been learned
107
Within Range Prompts
• Success: can you think of a time in your recent work where you felt
somewhat jubilant, feeling you had achieved something that was
difficult for you, or that you had overcome something?
• Changed: if you think of how you have changed over the last year or
two, or even months, regarding how you conduct your life, what comes
to mind?
• Control: can you think of a moment where you became highly aware
that you were losing control, or felt the opportunity of seizing control,
what occurs to you?
• Limits: if you think of where you are aware of limits, either in your
life and/or work, something you wish you could do but feel excluded
from, what comes up for you?
• Outside of: as you look around in the workplace or the family, where
do you see yourself as not fitting in, being an outsider, and how does
that make you feel?
108
Helpful Hints
• Focus on the client’s verbal language, being conscious also
of ‘body language’
• Keep very close to the client’s train of thought
• In probing for the client’s meaning making, use
paraphrasing
• Never ask a “why” question; it leads NOWHERE
• Interpret what you hear in terms of what the client does not
own, and does not, or cannot, take responsibility for
• Ask yourself “what minimally can the client articulate
regarding his/her relationship to others, and what for him
or her is “other then me”
109
Synthesis: What Was Learned?
• What felt ‘inauthentic’?

• What did you do when ‘feeling lost’?
• How did you refocus?
• How did the relationship develop?
• What ‘did not occur’ to you?
• What in the client did you misread?
• What was most successful?
• What would you do better next time?
• What advice do you have to share?
110
Questions About Coaching Competencies
• #1: How does ‘meeting ethical guidelines’ change in

meaning when you consider intake? What is the ethics of
intake?
• #5: What is enrichment of ‘active listening’ happens in
developmental intake?
• #6: How does ‘powerful questioning’ relate to ‘probing for
level’ for the sake of developmental intake?
111
Section Seven
Rehearsing Developmental Interviewing to a Point of Minimal Expertise

1: Meeting ethical guidelines and professional standards, with an ability to
apply them in all coaching situations.
3: Establishing trust and intimacy with the client, the ability to create a safe,
supportive environment that producesongoing mutual respect and trust.
5: Active listening: focusing completely on what the client is saying and NOT
saying to understand the meaning of what is said in the context of the client’s
desires, and to support client self expression.
6: Powerful questioning: ability to ask questions that reveal the information

needed for maximum benefit to the coaching relationship and the client.
10: Planning and goal setting: ability to develop and maintain an effective
coaching plan with the client.
112
Intake Focused on Intermediate Levels
• In the intake exercises that follow, the

emphasis is on discerning a ‘main’ level
(L), which implicitly makes visible a
corresponding ‘lower’ (L-1) and ‘higher’
(L+1) level, or levels
• Such a center of gravity is introduced by the
coach’s hypothesis, and then tested through
probing (focusing & guiding attention)
113
Intermediate Levels Prompts
• Frustration: if you think of a time where you were in a situation not
of your choosing, where you felt totally frustrated, but unable to do
something about it, what emerges?
• Important to me: if I were to ask you ‘what do you care about most
deeply,’ ‘what matters most,’ are there one or two things that come to
mind?
• Sharing: if you think about your need of sharing your thoughts and
feelings with others, either at work or at home, how, would you say,
that plays out?
• Strong stand/conviction: if you were to think of times where you had
to take a stand, and be true to your convictions, what comes to mind?
• Taking risks: when thinking of recent situations where you felt you
were taking, or had to take, risks, either to accomplish or fend off
something, what comes to mind?
114
What about the RCP?
• As soon as you are able to focus on a center of gravity (L), you are also able to
determine, even if at first only approximately, the relative proportion of ‘risk’
(L-1) to ‘potential’ (L+1)
• To do so, you need to make sure that your client is using both ‘self-boosting’
and ‘self-critical’ prompts
• Once your notion for center of gravity is more secure, you will acquire a
feeling for ‘risk versus potential’ in a client’s profile
• As an example, how would these findings influence your coaching, regardless
of level?
– {3:7:5}
– {5:7:3}
– {5:5:5}, and what follows for your coaching plan?
115
Practice Reflection: Synthesis
– Developmental coaching moves away from an unquestioned focus on
‘enactment’ (dominant focus on ‘goals’), introducing equal emphasis
on ‘supporting and guiding attention’ and ‘interpretation.’ What has
been your way of integrating these two generic coaching processes into
your coaching?
– What, for you, does it mean to achieve in your coaching a balance and
integration of all three generic coaching processes?
– What, for you, is the meaning of ‘enactment’ --modeling new
experiences and behaviors -- in a strictly developmental sense?
– How, based on clients’ use of language, would you track the extent to
which they achieve a developmental shift, rather than merely a
behavioral change?
116
Questions About Coaching Competencies
• #1: What, for you, is the ethics of ‘developmental feedback’?
• #3: How do you use assessment findings to create trust and a
safe environment?
• #5: Is your ‘active listening’ further refined by determining
precise levels, rather than merely a range?
• #6: In developmental intake, in what way is the ‘power’ of
questions asked related to the nature and correctness of the
hypothesis pursued?
• #10: How can you best channel assessment findings into a
collaborative negotation of a data-based coaching plan for
your client?
117
Gateway Wrap-Up
118
How Has Gateway Changed You?
• In what way has the meaning of the coaching competencies
changed for you over the course of Gateway?
• Which coaching competencies have been particularly
deepened, and how?
• What ‘cherished assumptions’ regarding coaching have been
weakened, or fallen by the wayside?
• Which cherished assumptions have been strengthened?
• What do you expect further deepening of the Gateway
experience to accomplish regarding your coaching
competencies?
119
Appendix
Deepening the Experience
of Developmental Coaching
A Short Overview of the IDM

Path of Interdevelopmental Coaching

Three Points of Emphasis at IDM
#2 CD Mental Growth;
Capability
Discontinuous, in stages
(across time)
#3
Learning;
Competence
Linear (in time)
#1
CD = cognitive development
ED
ED = social-emotional development
121
Nature of the IDM Curriculum
• In coaching itself as well as in coach education, IDM teachings take
into account both the “horizontal” (behavioral) and the “vertical”
(developmental) dimensions of clients’ and coaches’ meaning making.
• As a result, we teach three perspectives on clients (and coaches):
• ED (Gateway, Program One Part A: social-emotional coaching)
• CD (Program One Part B: cognitive coaching)
• Behavioral (Program One Part C: behavioral coaching).
• These three perspectives are methodically brought together in
Program One Part D.
• As a result, the IDM program requires of coaches the capacity to
think systemically, fusing these three perspectives in their work,
depending on clients’ needs.
122
Unlearning Before Learning
• IDM experience shows that the three generic coaching processes –
focusing attention, interpretation, and enactment of new behaviors –
carry a different emphasis in “conventional” and “developmental”
coaching.
• In terms of IDM education, conventional coaching neglects focusing
clients’ attention through structured interviewing, and therefore ends
up not knowing enough about clients.
• As a consequence, the preference for immediate interpretation and
enactment of new behaviors has to be UNLEARNED in developmental
coaching, and the capacity for Focusing Attention through semi-
structured interviewing has to be strengthened.
• This is exactly what happens in IDM education. PREMATURE
interpretation and enactment are discouraged; they lead to powerful
questioning that is not powerful enough.
123
Overview of IDM Programs
• The Path of IDM comprises:
– The ‘Hidden Dimension of Coaching’ Workshop: Elementary introduction to
developmental coaching in the context of your present practice
– Gateway Class: First step required for becoming certified as a developmental coach
through Program One, with a focus on levels of social-emotional maturity
– Program One
• Part A: Deepening your knowledge and use of social-emotional levels
• Part B: Understanding your clients’ cognitive profile through a second interview
• Part C: Understanding your clients’ behavioral profile
• Part D: Synthesis of all aspects involved in carrying out an independent case study,
leading to “Certified Developmental Coach”
– Program Two: Carrying out three independent case studies; their detailed discussion in
a Master Class, and further coaching by IDM (= Master Certified Developmental
Coach; eligibility for teaching IDM classes and workshops)
– Program Three: Designing a project in coaching research (defining research questions,
subject selection, and doing data collection) to obtain a doctoral or Masters degree.
124
‘Hidden Dimension of Coaching’
Workshop for Experienced Coaches
• Brief introduction to the developmental model focused on
developmental ranges; distinguishing between two kinds of change
• Discussion of participants’ present coaching procedures from a
developmental point of view, based on case studies brought in by
participants
• Short, elementary intake exercises meant to reinforce the understanding
of “where the client is developmentally” in terms of dev. ranges
• Demonstration of benefits of “thinking developmentally” in coaching
• Broadening of coaching competencies, especially ICF competencies #4-
8, and 9-10
• Expansion of coaching ethics to encompass facilitating developmental
shifts
8 CECs 125
Gateway Class
The First Step Toward Certification as a Developmental Coach
• Optimal preparation for entering Program One
• Theoretical and practical introduction to ‘evidence based coaching’
• Extensive introduction to the developmental model of coaching, with emphasis
on the ‘vertical’ levels of social-emotional maturity
• Introduction to the human journey across the full range of levels
• Introduction to coaching levels and their characteristics
• Application of the developmental model to sets of ‘behavioral’ data (life
balance wheel, behavioral questionnaire outcomes)
• Elementary principles of developmental listening and interviewing
(introduction and practice of verbal prompts, and of probing for levels)
• Extensive in-class and homework exercises done within a buddy system
• ‘Within-range’ and ‘intermediate level’ intake and feedback to clients
• Broadening of coaching competencies to include the facilitation of
developmental shifts.
126
16 CECs
Program One, Part A
• Initially staying with social-emotional levels, we use actual interview
fragments and entire interviews (rather than illustrations) to determine main
and intermediate levels, and learn to determine the proportion of
developmental risk to potential in a client
• We extend intake exercises from 15 to 30 minutes or longer
• We sharpen our ability to justify hypotheses and scoring levels by reference
to actual conversations
• We also strengthen the ability to ‘play devil’s advocate’ in deciding levels, to
become less dependent on buddy system consensus (and internalize scoring
standards)
• We begin to learn to feed developmental findings back to clients in a way
clients can “understand” (on their respective level)
• We begin to learn how to formulate coaching plans influenced by
developmental findings (with inclusion of behavioral data)
• We begin to learn to negotiate coaching plans with clients based on
developmental and behavioral findings about them
127
Copyright © Laske and Associates 2005 16 CECs
Program One, Part B
• We practice “cognitive intake” using the Professional Agenda Interview
through class and homework exercises within a buddy system
• We get introduced to the “Three Houses” as a context for determining clients’
cognitive profile (self house, task house, organizational house)
• We learn to distinguish Type of thinking from Systems Thinking Index (STI)
• We exercise how to determine 4 Types of surface logic in a discourse
• We distinguish four dimensions of Systems Thinking, and how to score each of
them using ”thought forms” that focus attention
• We learn to relate cognitive findings to social-emotional ones, and how to
think about discrepancies between them in coaching terms
• We learn how to see vertical discrepancies between cognitive and social-
emotional development as causes of what clients cannot do, or cannot do
effectively (their behavioral issues that make up their coaching agenda)
• We exercise giving feedback regarding the cognitive profile of clients,
combined with feedback on social-emotional levels
128
Program One, Part C
• We learn how to assess the ‘self conduct,’ ‘approach to tasks,’ and
‘interpersonal perspective’ (emotional intelligence) of clients based on a
questionnaire that probes:
– psychological needs of the client
– clients’ personal values and principles of professional work
– clients’ actual (but largely unconscious) experiences in an organizational
environment
– the meaning of discrepancies and conflicts between clients’ needs and
values (‘energy sinks’)
– the meaning of discrepancies between clients’ personal values and their
actual organizational experiences (‘frustration index’)
• AS A RESULT, we can now link behavioral issues, conflicts, and need/value
discrepancies to clients’ effectiveness profile overall, and are ready to
integrate social-emotional, cognitive, and behavioral data in coaching
feedback, conversations, and the formulation of coaching plans.
129
Program One, Part D
• We get coached on all aspects of doing a case study, supported by the buddy
system
• We practice the ability to draw together and synthesize all three assessments
--social-emotional, cognitive, and behavioral-- for writing up the case study
• We write up a case study, linking all findings in a synthetic report (5-7 pages)
• We submit the case study to IDM in the form of interview and questionnaire
materials, including analyses and interpretations of the materials
• Based on IDM feedback, we prepare for an interview with IDM staff, meant
to ascertain the success of the case study in terms of the student’s competence
as a developmental coach
• In the positive case, we graduate as a Certified Developmental Coach
• In the negative case, further coaching toward a successful case study
experience is made available.
130
Copyright © Laske and Associates 2005 16 CECs, Total of 80 CECs
Program Two
• We do three case studies, either in life, executive or
another kind of coaching, to strengthen our mastery as a
developmental coach
• We discuss these case studies in a Master Class of peers,
and become eligible as teachers of IDM workshops and
classes
• We may come together to do a larger research project,
focused on a specific client population, under IDM
supervision
• We may begin entertaining ideas regarding a doctoral
thesis, to be completed through Program Three
131
Program Three
• Based on experience with several (minimally two) pilot

case studies, we design a project in coaching research, by:
– defining the context (“literature review”) of the study
– formulating the research questions
– specifying the method
– describing and carrying out data collection
– discussing outcomes
• We secure the collaboration of a University Department or
College allied (or not) with IDM, to bring the research
project to completion, to obtain a doctoral degree (PhD,
PsyD, EdD)
132
Further Information
• For further information on curriculum, and for discussing

special requests about study sequence and duration, contact
the IDM Director of Coach Education, Dr. Otto E. Laske,
at otto@interdevelopmentals.org, or call 781.391.2361
• For further logistic information regarding scheduling,
payment, registration, and certification, contact the
Administrative Director, Stephanie Taranto, at
stephanie@interdevelopmentals.org, or call 919.845.4444
133
Interdevelopmental Institute
The Evidence Based Approach to Developmental
Coaching, Coach Education, and Coaching Research
Otto E. Laske Ph.D. Psy.D.

51 Mystic Street
Medford, MA 02155 USA
781.391.2361
www.interdevelopmentals.org
otto@interdevelopmentals.org, stephanie@interdevelopmentals.org
AA Branch 134
Branch of
of Laske
Laske and
and Associates
Associates LLC
LLC
© 2003 Laske and Associates

IDM Gateway Version2

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

IDM Gateway Version2

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

(Inter-) Developmental Coaching

An Evidence Based Approach

The Interdevelopmental Institute (IDM)

Copyright © Laske and Associates 2005

Apply the new

Participant-directed Share your reactions

Coaching Competencies Strengthened:

1: Understanding coaching ethics and standards and apply them

2: Understanding what is required in the specific coaching

3: Creating a safe, supportive environment that produces ongoing

Evidence Based Capability Framework (ECF) 12

• Evidence used in IDM training is of two kinds:

Perception & Knowledge

1. Supporting and guiding attention

Coaching Competencies Strengthened:

4: Ability of being fully conscious and create a spontaneous

5: Ability of focusing on what the client is saying and NOT saying,

6: Ability to ask questions that reveal the information needed for

Potential Spiritual Potential

Available Emergent Potential: Developmental

Steven Brookfield, “Adult Cognition as a Dimension of Lifelong Learning,” 2004

• Ability to diminish ego-centrism, resulting in a reduction

Level is NOT strictly

Stage 4 (ca. 40 years)

Stage 3 (ca. 25 years)

Stage 2 (ca. 15 years)

Coaching = harnessing potential capability to increase applied

-Interpersonal Most coaches

• Levels can be discerned • Thinking ‘developmentally’

Since individuals by necessity act, and coach, from their present

Legend: L-3=other-dependent; L-4=self authoring; L-5=self aware

Despite of the fact that coaching schools advertize many

Coaching Competencies Strengthened:

6: Ability to ask questions that reveal the information needed for

8: Ability to integrate and accurately evaluate multiple sources of

Social-Emotional Development is measured in levels

FOR = Frame of Reference 69

FOR = Frame of Reference 74

• Journey toward higher stages: as far we know today, developmental stages

In all cases, interact for 15 minutes;

Homework #4, Coaching Exercise

L ife A rea R ating L ife A rea R ating

Coaching Competencies Strengthened:

7: Direct communication: ability to communicate effectively during coaching sessions, and

4. Enroll and contract

Assess entire coaching program

• Developmental Intake is free of ‘enactment’ and

control attention and remember relevant experiences

/herself” into the prompt adopted

that can highlight “negative” experiences (the lower level, or developmental

risk), to achieve a balanced intake

In all cases, interact for 15 minutes;

Coaching Competencies Strengthened:

5: Active listening: focusing completely on what the client is saying

6: Powerful questioning: ability to ask questions that reveal the

Copyright © Interdevelopmental Institute 2004 103

• What felt ‘inauthentic’?

• #1: How does ‘meeting ethical guidelines’ change in

Coaching Competencies Strengthened:

6: Powerful questioning: ability to ask questions that reveal the information

• In the intake exercises that follow, the

A Short Overview of the IDM

Copyright © Laske and Associates 2005