The Pros and Cons of the GROW Coaching Model

It is uncertain who originally developed the GROW model but it is thought by some that it was developed by Graham Alexander but made popular by Sir John Whitmore.

For those new to coaching the GROW model does provide a very useful framework. By helping the coachee really identify what they want from the conversation it does help prevent it from becoming an aimless chat. If the goal is ‘SMARTend’ up you have a Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Relevant goal with a Time Limit on it so both coach and coachee know exactly the direction the session should be going in.

This framework in also useful in a group coaching or even a business meeting context where the coach or facilitator at the outset can establish an overall common goal and for the session, then work through ‘where are now?’, options for the way forward and specific action.

But is this model always appropriate especially when working on a one to one basis helping your coachee make significant and sustainable change? Whilst of course it is good to have a sense of what the coachee wants from the conversation a good coach will often uncover other issues during the course of a coaching session and sticking rigidly to the initial goal may prevent the real issues to be tackled from surfacing.

Whilst the GROW model is intended to be flexible I have seen coaches focusing more on their ability to follow the model than just listen and follow the client. The Coactive coaching approach (see book Co-active Coaching by Laura Whitworth, Karen Kimsey-House, Henry Kimsey-House, Phillip Sandahl) is very different and it talks about ‘dancing in the moment’ with the client, listening carefully and using your intuition to just being with the client, following their energy and going where they want to go in the conversation.

The final stage of GROW is Way Forward in other words is the stage where the client identifies action to be taken. Whilst coaching is about taking a client forward not every session may result in specific action to be taken. If as coaches we are so intent on finding the action and focusing on the ‘doing’ we can overlook the importance of just raising a client’s awareness about who they are, what they are noticing, what they are feeling in other words ‘the being’.

I know of coaches who are so intent on getting their client to action that they fail to allow them to fully explore what is important to them and what their underlying issues are resulting in actions that their clients are not really committed to and rarely result in meaningful change. If the client spends sufficient time on ‘the being’ rather than ‘the doing’ then action will automatically fall out of the conversation and will be led by the client. And the way forward may simply be a commitment to go away and reflect further on some of the questions raised.

The advantage of the GROW coaching model in that …

Group Coaching Model That Is Super Simple To Implement

A group coaching program can be really difficult to implement, or really easy to implement. Some of the common things I hear when I recommend a client start a group coaching are:

1) I don't have time to talk with dozens of clients each week

2) I don't have time to spend 5-10 hours a week writing lesson plans

3) I can't be available 24-7 on email

4) It just takes too much time.

5) It's a lot of work technically to do it.

And the thing is, those are all valid – because in so many of the older models, that's how it might have worked.

In fact, maybe as you read that list, you are thinking, yeah, that's me – I want to start a coaching program, but it just seems like too much work.

So let me ask you this:

What if I were to show you a way you could coach 100 – 1000 clients in just 2 hours a week, and they get almost the same results as working with you 1-1?

If that would be cool, if that would feel like, "yeah, I could do that," then read on!

Because I'm going to show you a super-simple coaching model that really works.

Before I get into it, I want to go over one concept: and that is the idea that group coaching does not get the same results as 1-1 coaching.

The thing is, the coaching itself isn't what gets results.

Your clients' ACTION and implementation gets them results.

The biggest reason that 1-1 coaching generally gets better results than group coaching is because with 1-1 coaching, the client feels obligated to finish his work before your next scheduled call.

How many times has your client told you, "yesterday I remembered I hadn't finished the assignment you gave me, and I thought about cancelling today's session, but decided to work a late night to complete the work instead," or something similar?

The thing is, if that client had been in group coaching, he probably wouldn't have done the work.

But is it really the group coaching or the clients' motivation that gets the work done?

Your client needs to step up and do the work on his own. You are a coach, not a babysitter. You are a coach, not a high school teacher. It is your clients responsibility to do the work. He needs to learn how to manage his time, and learn to focus. You can teach him those things, but he has to do it.

You are a coach, not a personal assistant, personal planner, or daytimer.

Now, here's the thing, if you are willing to limit yourself to helping only 20 clients at a time, when you have inside of you the ability to change possibly millions of lives (I mean, how many people NEED what you help with?) , then you shouldn't probably do group coaching.

But what if you knew there were 1000 people RIGHT NOW in your …