That is what learning is. You understand suddenly ...srdc.msstate.edu/fop/levelthree/trainarc/coaching/session1overview.pdf · That is what learning is. You understand suddenly something

Session 1

That is what learning is. You understand suddenly something you’ve understood all your life, but in a new way. Doris Lessing

Topics: What is a community coach? Why use a coach? Learning objectives:

• Identify characteristics of the coaching role compared to other roles we may plan. • Distinguish community coaching from other sorts of coaching. • Participate in a role play • Review MDSI case study materials

Session 1 activities Session 1 materials include the following:

• What is coaching and how Why Now? • The Case for Coaching for Community Change as an Innovative Practice: Four

Reasons • Community Coaching Project and the 6 Rs of Community Coaching • Rural Development Initiatives that used Coaching • What is the role and what do we need to do/learn to be successful? • Flow chart of coaching process • Logic model for coaching for community change • MSDI Case Study

Getting ready for Session 2

• Suggested reading for the next session: Brown et al, 1999. New Approaches to Technical Assistance: The Role of the Coach

• Review Session 2 and read the RCCI Case Study • Coaching skills assessment • Reflective Journaling:

How does coaching fit with other roles you play working with communities?

What coaching-related skills are you strong in; what areas would you like to enhance your skills?

• Community of Practice opportunity: visit http://communitycoaching.ning.com and share your thoughts about why intentional coaching more agencies and organizations are using coaching in community change initiatives and what you like best about being a community coach.

NCRCRD Foundations of Practice: Coaching for Community Change, 7/21/08 1

http://communitycoaching.ning.com/

Session I Activities 1. Welcome/Introductions (worksheet 1) 2. Objectives and course design 3. What is coaching? Definitions and discussion Distinguishing among roles (worksheet 2) Distinguishing among other coaching approaches 4. The case for coaching: presentation/discussion 5. Role Play: The problem saturated story and the downward spiral of problem solving

• Think of time when you heard the story (or told the story) about a particular person in the community who liked to do everything him/herself. We will call this person Ralph. What are some of the suggestions you made to the person telling the story about Ralph?

• What impact did do these suggestions have on the story teller and the listener?

• This can be a coachable moment – what would the coach do that is different from

what you and I have been doing when we hear this story. 6. Introduction to MDSI Case Study 7. Next session information

• Read the article by Brown et al, New Approaches to Technical Assistance: The Role of the Coach

• Reflective Journaling: How does coaching fit with other roles you play working with

communities? What coaching-related skills are you strong in; what areas would you

like to enhance your skills?


Worksheet 1.1: Introductions

Who am I? What do I do? What has been my experience with community coaching?

What skills, knowledge, interests and networks do I bring to this training?

What are my expectations? What do I hope to take away from this training? How can it make a difference in my work?


Worksheet 1.2: Exploring Various Roles that Individuals Play Supporting Groups and Teams in the

Community/Institutional Change Process Range of Possible Roles What are the tacit or unstated

assumptions normally attached to individuals engaged in this role?

What are some potential benefits to the group

What are some potential limitations, conflicts, creative tensions

Advising

Facilitating

Providing Technical Assistance

Teaching

Providing Therapy

Mentoring

Consulting

Directing/Managing

Coaching

Evaluating

© Ken Hubbell and Associates/MDC October 2004


What is Coaching and Why Now? As we move deeper into the Information Age society, our current roles as content experts, consultants, and brokers continue to change; we see the coaching role as one that will prove adaptable and useful in many areas of our current professional activities. With a plethora of information resources our desktops, we cannot be the experts for our teams on every topic, but we can be aware of additional resources, and most importantly, we can be the guide on the side to help them plan and implement a successful proactive community-based planning process. Coaches have utilized their skills and access to resources in many areas including: leadership, working with change, economic development strategies, rural revitalization approach, inclusive planning and program implementation, cultural competency, etc.

The Case for Coaching for Community Change as an Innovative Practice: Four Reasons

1. Our changing socio-economic structure requires new approaches: The

rise of the Information Age has required changes in the practice of community economic development and organizational development. No longer can we rely on the expertise of others to guide us and external resources to support us. Communities, organizations and their leaders must identify and build on existing assets and find ways to continually expand their ability to learn from one another and the world around them. These new challenges require new ways of thinking and doing leadership, collaboration, and resource development; ways that are place-based and address the unique challenges and opportunities of that place. Gone are the days of lock-step programs for planning and development and elevated role of the expert; here to stay is the need for strategies that communities and organizations can take to guide long-term system change. Coaching offers communities a way to make the best use of best practices and outside expertise by learning how to adapt them based on community assets and capacity and by using local wisdom.

2. The changing of the guard within leadership structures requires both

new people and a new structure. Foundations, corporate structures and agencies have poured millions of dollars into succession planning as boomers retire and the organizations restructure around new leadership strategies. Not only must we find ways to transfer valuable knowledge of the community and organization to new leaders, but also we must do so while reframing that role around values of collaboration and inclusion. Coaches aid people in recognizing the assets of traditional and non-traditional leaders while at the same time framing the work in ways that lead to the co-creation of a new leadership structures, that are more fluid, adaptable, and engaging.


3. Coaching as an approach to dealing with change has caught on at many levels as people see the value coaching brings to effecting long-term change. The fields of life coach, executive coach, and personal coach are growing as people struggle with ways to achieve their goals and adapt to our rapidly changing world. Similarly, communities and organizations look for ways to learn about change, apply what they have learned, and reflect on that process. The opportunity for reflection capacity for future success. Coaching offers a different approach, one that facilitates leaders’ ability to energize and mobilize people around a change agenda and help community institutions become learning organizations.

4. More foundations are supporting coaching as a way to increase long-

term benefits of community change initiatives. As more money is invested in coaching and more projects utilize this approach, there is a need to share the learning about this approach across programs, organizations, and communities. Coaching increases the return on investment in capacity building, leadership development, and economic development efforts for outside funders and local investors.


Community Coaching Project and the 6 Rs of Community Coaching Making a case for building an international community of practice and developing useful resources to help people and organizations employ this approach to improve outcomes in community and to develop resilient organizations who serve communities. Today, coaches work with more than athletes. Personal life coaches work with individuals; executive coaches work with leaders in the private and public sector; and community coaches work with local leaders and social change organizations. Working with a coach is an approach set goals, take action, make better decisions and develop natural strengths. Successful coaching is not formulaic; successful coaches understand intuitively and concretely that there is no one size that fits all. Each community is unique, and each community must discover and nurture that uniqueness as they build capacity to get things done. Successful coaches focus on outcomes, but not at the expense of process. They are attuned to the need for balance. These coaches approach their task with an understanding of the potential of their work to ripple across the community; they strive for the time when the synergy of coaching and capacity building becomes set in the community’s way of learning together. Individual capacity gains are reflected in those of the team and subsequently in the community. The successful coach looks forward to new learning from each encounter with the community and the team. Thus, coaches focus on expanding their own understanding and reservoir of resources as they work with others to increase the capacity of participants and the overall community. A Basic Architecture for Community Coaching: 6 Rs We offer a simple concept as a framework for this kind of coaching: "The 6Rs of Community Coaching for Change." Coaching for community change helps groups move from any state of Readiness to strong states of Performance, and ultimately to a state of Resilience where they can sustain high performance through continual innovation. The coaching effort is highly collaborative and fits into four integrated categories: relationships, results, reflection, and reach. Our operating framework for the practice of community coaching is the dynamic interplay of four domains or disciplines that a coach fuses to the community work in collaboration with the groups s/he is coaching. There are seasons and cycles around of these domains when a coach is working with a group. Coaches and community participants have natural affinities for one or more of the "Rs," thus individuals bring both a predisposition and a mindset to the work of change. On any given team you will have some people who frame the work of change through a lens of relationships, and others who are results oriented. This is what makes the practice of coaching an art rather than a


technique, as the coach helps generate clarity, alignment and a sense of shared purpose or commitment within the change process. Coaching to Strengthen Teams and Relationships Helping communities create new and support lasting relationships is often at the core of coaching. A significant focus of community change coaching revolves around expanding who sits at the table and building new relationships with disenfranchised populations. Coaches help create places for safe dialog about divisive issues and develop consensus and commitment. They also assist teams in accessing opportunities to use, develop and respect the gifts and talents that are present in the community. Successful coaches build the capacity to trust, share leadership and partner. Coaching to Trigger Results Coaches ask thoughtful questions that help groups identify the barriers or thinking ruts that keep them from making progress and capitalizing on opportunities. Working with a coach, communities achieve significant break through on wicked problems. Coaches sometimes bridge the gap between the funders and the communities in ways that reinforce the communities' ability to make progress toward its goals. Coaches clarify goals, help identify critical action steps and milestones, access resource possibilities, and monitor the pace of the community's change efforts. Coaching to Frame Reflection Coaching for reflection plays a critical role in the ability of groups to move from 'being stuck in the rut' to seeing the possibilities on the horizon. Among the important inputs coaches can add to successful reflection include the ability to create an environment where people are comfortable with a variety of vocabularies. Coaches help level the playing field so all can participate in reflective activities. Coaches can create openings for understanding progress, developing the consensus for change, appreciating the expected and the unexpected, using evidence, weaving stories, and initiating new ways for group and individual learning. Coaching to Expand Reach and Reframe Possibilities Coaches provide a clear focus on where a group wants to go and to reach out into the community to engage more diverse and unheard voices. Coaches can help reveal the hidden dimensions of social problems and engage people in a search for what is not known. Coaches encourage groups to create capacity, sustain the passion and action while creating higher levels of individual self awareness that lead to transforming the mindset of the entire team. Coaches can help groups reframe their work and systems to spur innovation and revitalization.


How Coaching Adds Value to Community Building Strategies Coaching is a valuable nutrient and catalytic agent to any group efforts that require innovative ideas, shared leadership, and integrative approaches across boundaries and economic sectors. Effective coaching unlike other approaches provides the gestalt and enabling environment for collaboration, problem-solving, and shared learning. Coaching is an extremely effective tool for helping groups reframe their operating systems, unleash new ideas, transition to new leadership, and negotiate partnerships. Most of these are critical competencies for successful community building and creating positive futures. Coaching Creates These 7 Outcomes 1. Communities use new ways to live and work together. 2. Community teams uncovere new ideas that led to successful community

change. 3. People to see the reality of different perspectives, so they could work with

others more effectively, reduce conflict, and create the conditions for a learning community.

4. Leaders include the whole community rather than a select few or the traditional elite.

5. Groups successfully challenge the status quo. 6. Community groups are able to generate self-direction - to decide for

themselves what will work, how and why. 7. The group finds a way to get unstuck and connect or reconnect their strategic

work to their vision. We counted at least 31 communities in 26 states as well as one community in Australia that are involved in coaching according to respondents of the survey. Adding in the results of the 2005 Coaching Roundtable survey, coaching is taking place or has been provided in over 250 communities in at least 37 states, distributed equally across the country. The organizations involved in coaching include large foundations, government programs, and local groups such as community arts groups. The activities where these coaches are providing support range from board development, economic revitalization, civic engagement, helping low income women become financially independent, community planning, and encouraging organizational collaboration. The coaches have goals of helping groups generate improvement in the areas of employment, education, poverty-reduction, housing, environmental enhancement, business development, economic renewal and leadership development. Building the Resources to Support the Field The Community Coaching Project is designed to build and support the field of coaching for community change. It is in its second phase, and is being catalyzed


by a grant from the W. K. Kellogg Foundation. The lead agency for this phase of the effort is the North Central Rural Development Center at Iowa State University, one of seven national “centers” affiliated with the USDA Extension network. Design partners include Ken Hubbell & Associates and Jennifer Henderson/Strategic Interventions, independent consulting firms that use coaching in their work of community building. Guiding Principles and Values of the Project’s Coordinating Design Partnership. The community coaching project evolved as a collaborative and highly creative project among more than twenty experienced coaches who consider themselves stewards of the emerging art of community coaching. Thus, this continuation builds upon earlier work of many practitioners. We work with an “open source” paradigm, encouraging users and partners to add new value to the emerging resource guide. We are working on a “brand” of community coaching that committed practitioners and partner groups can use and adapt, with the understanding that all new content around community coaching be made broadly available wherever possible . The key steps for 2007-2009 will help build a supporting environment for community coaching. 1. Collect current knowledge from practitioners about practices, outcomes, critical resources and needs to build practitioner capacity; 2. Engage coach-practitioners and academic allies in shaping a learning curriculum for increasing mastery in basic and advanced coaching approaches; 3. Engage a diverse set of coach practitioners in creating a Guidebook to Community Coaching. This would be built around the six R’s of Coaching and through short case studies, reflections on best practices would describe how coaching generated some of the seven examples cited here. This Guide would be linked to a versatile online resource center; 4. Engage partner groups to design and implement a rigorous evaluation of coaching outcomes and learnings from a set of at least twenty communities and the principal organizations that used coaching in their change efforts since 2000; 5. Develop a network or learning exchange among current coaches and establish some “home bases” to support the network by providing learning and training events, conferences, convenings, libraries, searchable databases, “wiki” resources on the art and practice of coaching for community change, etc.


Project implement-tation Project monitoring Increased capacity Expand frame of possibilities

OUTCOMES – IMPACT Short-Term Medium-Term Long-Term

DRAFT: LOGIC MODEL: Coaching for Community Change

Training for coaches, intermediaries, and communities Coaching for planning for the project Coaching for project implementation Coaching for reflection Learning communities Coaching for capacity building (individual, team and community)

Develop project team Completion of plan Expand frame of possibilities Increase capacity

How inclusive, how decisions are made. Participation rates. Increased capacity in working as a team, planning and reaching out to other community members. Inclusivity of participants Activities identified related to poverty reduction Anticipated impact on the community capitals described. Identification of indicators for measuring progress. New perspectives and possibilities used in discussion, engage new partners, new ways (frames) of explaining their situation and possibilities. Leaders and teams develop and use new skills at the advanced novice level (self coaching): facilitation, conflict management, meeting management, etc. Increased inclusion in community and attention to involving others.

Who is involved: youth, marginalized communities, people, people from a different culture, elders? How involved – actors vs recipients? Role of evaluation in project work. Role of reflection within team. Interaction among community capitals. Measurement of identified indicators. Reporting to funder Celebration of successes, reflection on what has been learned- attention to cycle of learning. Leaders develop competency in skills related to managing groups and projects. Teams increase capacity to work together and measure and celebrate their success. Community pulls together to implement plan – inclusion and participation. Leaders conceptualize possibilities differently, community sees new possibilities. Community change starts to become part of the community conversation.

Influential Factors: Limited community resources including financial and leadership to develop and implement a plan. Unanticipated events.

Project integration into existing systems Cycling around to new plan and recruitment of new leaders. Impact on system Increased capacity

Institutionalization of project in existing structures, new structures. Measurement of success indicators (jobs, poverty rates, home ownership, business start up etc.) Ongoing leadership recruitment and development from all sectors, reflection and evaluation of plan; planning for next cycle. Who are leaders, how decisions are made. Integration of marginalized people into community processes. Institutionalization of new partners. Impact on cultural capital – what is possible and what we can do, implementation of plan for sustainability. Leaders demonstrate expert capacity in self coaching, teams operate at peak efficiency. Community supports sustainable processes and participates strongly in them.

All project coaches and their intermediary partners Community leaders All community teams All coaches and teams All coaches and teams All coaches, intermediaries, evaluators, and funder rep. Coaches, community leaders, intermediaries, evaluations, funders Coaches, community leaders, and community members

OUTPUTS Activities Participation

PRIORITIES: reduce poverty, enhance inclusion, and develop local assets and wealth.

INPUTS: Community leaders: time, local resources, and mobilization of local agencies and resources. Funder provides funding, program design, evaluation inputs, and access to coaching. Intermediary hires and supervises coach, facilitates a learning community, bridges between community and funder, brokers additional resources, and follows up. Coaches work with communities to extend their reach in relation to inclusion and vision, to expand their social capital, to encourage action, and to provide opportunities for reflection and participation in a learning community.

SITUATION: Community leaders have committed to a change process with funder. Coaching assists with capacity building in facilitation, inclusion, planning, reflection and action


Rural Development Initiatives that used Coaching Important Features of the Initiative

Delta Workforce Alliance (Foundation for Mid South through Pew Trusts, Walton Fnd.)

Rural Community College (Ford)

Mid South Delta Initiative (Kellogg)

Arkansas Champion Communities Initiative (Kellogg, Levi, W. Rockefeller)

Conceptual Framework or Objectives

Two strategies: 1. Assemble/support broad

community coalitions to re-engineer education and economic systems in communities where there was some significant manufacturing activity.

2. Develop an enterprise fund to help existing firms expand

Initially funded 7 multi-county WF Alliances in 55-county region in 3 states

Main strategy: Focus on building

capacity of community colleges in most distressed communities to link education and training, with regional economic development agenda while enhancing institutional capacity.

Funded 24 mostly multi-county teams anchored by Community College

Four interlocking strategies:

1. Invest broadly in local communities’ capacity for economic impact

2. Strengthen regional intermediaries to expand

3. Leverage WKKF investment by bringing in other funder partners

4. Identify major policy issues and responses

15 community - based alliances in 55 county region

Main strategies: 1. Support and sustain 10

community based coalitions led by CDCs so they can find resources to carry on strategic development plans

2. Create peer network and build their capacity to solve community problems by using this network

3. Create a community and network “opportunity fund” through innovative bonds and foundation investments

Key Principles Building local capacity Working at community

level Focus on long-term

planning Partnerships are essential Inclusive participation in

new collaboratives

Rural communities matter

Community focus: assets Change begins with self-

assessment Change requires

collaboration Commitment to Equity &

high expectations

Shared leadership Collaboration and

community participation Moving from economic

development to Impact Creating learning

communities

Building local grassroots capacity and operations Community partnerships and collaboration Peer-peer learning networks Project success can


sustain commitment to long-term

Key Assumptions

Diverse coalitions formed across racial, geographic and economic lines would generate powerful civic and social capacity to affect complex p-16 systems (future WF) and to stimulate WF training tied to jobs (Current WF) and especially for people out of the workforce.

Links with Enterprise Corporation to create new economic activity in the base economic sectors in tandem with WF coalitions.

Community colleges are trusted, neutral institutions with stature and flexibility to lead new investments in building human capital and regional economies.

College Presidents will lend energy and credibility to change agenda.

Diverse pilot with Native, African American, Hispanic, and Anglo cultures can test concepts and create new networks and lasting relationships.

Extended practitioner networks, content, products could shape rural policy

Grassroots community coalitions can generate economic improvement that leads to new civic and social leadership networks and healthy community-controlled institutions

Traditional “leaders”, state agencies and veteran non-profits will be open to participating even if they are not controlling the strategy

Investing in a long-term capacity building campaign and wide practitioner network is a critical intervention for long-term change

Providing training to community-led coalitions in strategic planning, micro and small-business devel., and collaboration plus small project grants will sustain community change without intensive federal investments in distressed rural communities

CDCs can network if benefits are consistent and coordinating “hub” has funds to operate and share

Selected training in grantsmanship, technology, non-profit management makes an impact


Mid-South Delta Initiative Case Study

• Case Study on Coaching • Capacities and indicators • Coaching Agreement example • MSDI A Model for Community Level Technical Assistance

Overview Since 1997, the W. K. Kellogg Foundation has invested more than $65 million in the Mid South Delta Initiative (MSDI). Grants to nonprofit organizations expanded small businesses and the production and sale of affordable housing, and increased career and workforce opportunities and individual savings programs to strengthen the assets of youngsters and families with limited incomes. http://www.msdi.org/ Coaching has been an integral part of this community change work.


http://www.wkkf.org/

http://www.msdi.org/

MSDI

CASE STUDY ON COACHING Excerpted from: MSDI Annual Report 2002

For Cross-Site Meeting in Monroe, LA

October 2002

Authors:

Elvis Fraser, PhD, Vice-President and Co-Director

Laurine Thomas, PhD, Senior Research and Evaluation Officer

Center for Applied Behavioral and Evaluation Research ACADEMY FOR EDUCATIONAL DEVELOPMENT


V. CASE STUDY ON COACHING

From its inception, MSDI has linked funded communities to individuals serving as

community coaches. The following section of this report contains the first findings from an

ongoing study of the role and impact of coaches in the Initiative. This case study traces the

evolution of the MSDI coaching model and concludes with some thoughts about the future of

coaching. In subsequent reports, these ideas will be revisited to see whether or not the

predicted scenarios hold true and what other refinements can be made to the model.

Study Questions

Given the ongoing nature of the present study, this section lists only those research

questions that are relevant to the component of the study featured in this report. These are as

follows:

• Why was coaching a part of the MSDI model?

• How did the present coaches become involved in their current positions?

• What is the role of a coach and to what extent and in what ways has it evolved?

• What are the advantages and disadvantages of the MSDI coaching model?

Study Propositions

This present research is descriptive in nature, therefore no propositions or hypotheses are

advanced. The study constitutes a revelatory case that will provide descriptive information for a

model that is still evolving. In subsequent chapters of the study, an attempt will be made to

test the validity of hypotheses about the future of coaching that are raised by the study

participants. The units of analysis in the present study are the 13 coaches who participate in the

Initiative. The findings are based on the integration of interview data from 6 coaches, notes

from critical reflection sessions involving all 13 coaches, and a report on coaching prepared by

Becky Williams, a WKKF consultant.

Study Findings

• Why was coaching a part of the MSDI model?


According to WKKF, coaching became a part of the MSDI model in response to a request

from the original 5 community teams for in-depth technical assistance. The Initiative’s

architects hoped that the coaches would be a direct and continuous resource to the community

groups and would:

• communicate and translate of WKKF/MSDI principles, goals and objectives;

• serve as links to activities in other communities and throughout the Initiative;

• provide technical assistance (information, knowledge, skill building, facilitation,

conflict resolution);

• serve as links to other sources of technical assistance;

• communicate to WKKF/MSDI progress/problems in the communities; and

• become a new resource network themselves within the region for future

community development efforts, whether supported by WKKF or not.

A coach is assigned to each funded MSDI community team. The personality of the team,

the potential coach, and the geographical location of both parties were taken into consideration

when making the assignments. The coaches credit the MSDI regional coordinator’s intimate

knowledge of the region and its people with the success of the majority of the assignments.

The success is particularly noteworthy since the qualifications for a coaching position may be

broadly summed up as “experience in the rural communities and in the areas of community

development, economic development, and team building”.

• Who are the coaches?

The coaches that constitute the current cadre come from a variety of backgrounds. Some

had prior experience coaching but note that the MSDI approach differs markedly from other

coaching models. One coach characterized the difference as follows “MSDI stresses a

pragmatic approach. Other programs where I have coached wanted a more academic style.”

Coaches were quick to point out that they do not operate as consultants to the communities.

From its inception, MSDI has sought to develop coaches so that they function as a team and

model the values of the Initiative. In contrast, other coaching models have not invested time

in teambuilding or periodic reflection on performance. As a result, coaches in these models

have limited time to retool their ideas, test hypotheses, and change their practice in response to

changing environments.


Regardless of their backgrounds, all of the coaches have a shared interest in non-traditional

approaches to community development and grassroots community work. Given their extensive background

in community development and intimate knowledge of the Delta, many of the coaches had

been witnesses to, if not participants in, numerous community development efforts in the

region. As a result, many have formed strong opinions about the effectiveness of particular

development strategies and have become interested in exploring other approaches that depart

from “business as usual.” MSDI offered them the prospect of doing things differently. As one

coach explained:

“ MSDI was another way, another perspective of doing community economic development in

the Delta. I had worked with state and federal economic development initiatives including the

Empowerment zones. The opportunity to work with a foundation that would not be bound by

political constraints I thought would be an interesting counterpoint.”

For some individuals who had worked in community development for years, MSDI

generated excitement because of the innovative nature of the model. One coach described the

process as “an experiment” and acknowledged that her interest in being an MSDI coach

stemmed from a belief “that community level work is the place that change really happens. It’s

also very rewarding to see people realize their own power. Seeing a large foundation trying to

make that change to coaching was very interesting to me.”

Another reason coaches commonly gave for accepting their assignments was the

participatory approach employed by MSDI. Many coaches were enthusiastic about the level of

community control that the Initiative encouraged. Of particular interest was community

control over funding. One coach observed: “The thing that interested me was that the

investment was going directly to the community not necessarily to an organization and that was

unusual because most funders go directly to an organization.”

• What are a coach’s responsibilities?

From the inception of the Initiative, a coach’s responsibilities vis-a-vis a community team has

been a function of the needs of the team. These needs, in turn, may be affected by the team’s

position in the project cycle. Since the community teams entered the Initiative with varying

capacities, coaches have had to maintain a flexible approach to their responsibilities. Thus the


question arises “How did the coaches know what to do?” Describing the early days, one coach

admitted that he relied on common sense and his knowledge of the community. However,

coaches also received guidance and support from WKKF regional coordinator. Coaches attend

annual retreats where they received professional development and reflected on their work.

Recently the coaches decided to start keeping journals to document their handling of issues

such as turfism and racism. Selected readings from the published literature on coaching have

also been instrumental in shaping coaches’ approach to their duties. The coaches also

participate in monthly conference calls to discuss their work. These monthly meetings

represent an attempt to provide support to those who need it.

Over time, the role of the coaches has become clearer and the respondents were increasingly

able to outline key responsibilities to the community. They are as follows.

• Asking tough questions

One coach observed “I once asked my team what I did that was most important to them

and they said that I ask questions that make them think.” Another explained:

“Most teams I have worked with don’t display or remember well the logic of what they are

doing, so when I am coaching I help them remember what they set out to do and … suggest

that they stop and consider how this (what the team is doing) relates to their original intentions

or how this kind of decision making drifts away from their commitments or the values they said

they were going to live by.”

This type of inquiry is particularly helpful when teams are in the planning phase because it

helps them to “frame the logic of their strategies and goals.”

• Providing recommendations

Coaches can provide suggestions and recommendations but are careful not to be dogmatic

or overly directive. “Coaching is giving your recommendations and being able to say when they

(the teams) are off the mark in a way that they can hear it. [Coaching is] realizing that you are

an outsider because most of the coaches don’t live in the Delta yet you want them to be able to

hear what you say and not be offended.”


• Providing the big picture

Because teams are focusing intently on implementing their projects, they lose sight of the big

picture, which can affect their self-perception. When this happens coaches are there to “help

teams understand that they are not the only team that are struggling with something.” They

offer teams a larger mirror in which to see themselves while putting their efforts, successes, and

failures in context of the overall Initiative. It is also helpful for teams to hear their coaches say:

“ More than one team has had trouble with this. Many teams have done x when they were in

your place.”

• Identifying resources

As originally intended by WKKF, coaches are often the link between the teams and

networks, resources and sources of information. Coaches serve as “idea connectors,” linking

the teams to outside networks of ideas, tools and knowledge. The coaches also connect the

teams to other efforts within the Initiative because often teams are too busy to share

information or are not necessarily aware of the instructional value in doing so.

• Active Listening

According to one coach “sometimes the coach just plays the role of a good listener. You

just watch the process because when a group is engaged sometimes they miss small things that

will trip you up later if no one is watching. So the coach watches and listens and can call time

out and make sure everyone understands how the direction changes.” Active listening may be

one of the more difficult demands of the coaches’ job. One coach talked at length about the

difficulty of “staying out the way.” In order to do this effectively, coaches have to judge when

to intervene in the teams’ process and when to adopt a more hands-off approach.

• Linking the teams and Kellogg

One of the roles mentioned by the coaches was that of the translator and go-between for the

teams. Coaches bring the reality of the Delta to the Foundation and the reality of the

Foundation to the Delta. The coaches help the teams understand what the Foundation and the

Initiative are about and keep the Foundation abreast of what is happening at the grassroots level

of the Initiative. These efforts require that the coach “walk a very narrow tight rope because


(we) have one foot in assisting the teams and the other in working for the Kellogg foundation

and keeping them informed about what’s going on in the communities the good and the bad.

So we are in the middle between the grantee and the funder.”

• What makes a good coach?

The definitive answer to this question is that there is not a single answer. In the words of

one of the coach coordinators, “you can get some broad strokes about what makes an effective

coach but to be effective you have to be a generalist and you can’t know everything.” Thus

effective coaching requires many different qualities. Because of team differences, flexibility is

required. Says one coach:

“every team is different you can make broad generalizations about what makes a team effective

but there is no cookiecutter, formula, silver bullet.” Good coaching requires both a wide focus

and “a strong interest in learning about their communities and about themselves.”

Other descriptions of effective coaches include “people that communicate in a variety of

settings and manners, …whose first inclination is to listen and not to speak.” Good coaching

also requires balancing objectivity with active engagement in team efforts. The role of a good

coach is to show teams how to do their work, not do the work for them.

What is the relationship between the coaches and WKKF regional?

The coaches freely acknowledge the support that the WKKF regional office offers. They

report that Freddye Webb-Pettet, the MSDI Regional Coordinator grants them a lot of

autonomy. One coach described her as “a coach to the coaches, setting out the game plan of

what needs to be done.” Freddye is seen as the voice of the Foundation, responsible for

articulating what WKKF Battle Creek would like to see. However, she has consistently

supported the coaches’ creativity by allowing them to devise their own approaches to

implementing the gameplan. Some of the coaches have had to grow accustomed to this

operational style. According to one of the coach coordinators:

“[T]his project is different from what most consultants in the Delta are used to. We have a lot

of latitude to do what we think best and some are not accustomed to being not micromanaged.


Some therefore are suspicious thinking that at anytime that there could be sudden

accountability. Some think that Freddye holds coaches personally responsible but she tends to

look at things in terms collectively. Freddye thinks that the coaches’ job is to get the

communities past where they always have been and achieve different results.”

In turn, many of the coaches see themselves as “her eyes and ears in the communities”, but

they are also aware that WKKF wants to know about problems so that they can be resolved

promptly.

Describe the relationship amongst the coaches.

Over time, coaches have come to see the importance of modeling the collaborative behavior

that the Initiative encourages communities to adopt. According to one coach this has created a

learning community among the coaches. As they learn more about each other’s skills and

strengths, they are beginning to look within their circle for assistance. Some of the coaches

knew each other prior to becoming involved with MSDI, and in these cases, a bond already

existed. For meetings resulting from the Initiative, bonding has taken time. One coach

observed “some of us are working collectively. The thing is that some of us meet and don’t

meet again until the next meeting.”

The annual retreats are credited with bringing the group closer together and providing a

forum in which the coaches can learn about the strengths and skills of their peers. As a result,

according to one coach:

there now exists a group of 15 to 18 people who have strengths in their own rights and

who have formed a network that spans three states. This is a good way to keep abreast

of trends in development in the region. This may be an unintended consequence of the

Initiative. It’s almost like joining a 3 state network. I feel as if I have access to anything

in the three states without even going into the communities but just through the three

state network of coaches.

• How has the coaching role evolved?

The general consensus was that coaching used to be more intense in terms of the number of

days spent with the teams. However, as teams mature the amount of time and intensity coaches


need to lend wanes. Coaches report that over time their role becomes less hands-on and more

supportive. As teams become more comfortable working with their coach they are better able

to articulate their needs and seek assistance proactively. Coaches also observed that their work

has become more formal. The coaches who have held their positions the longest recalled that

in the beginning there was more flexibility and less reporting. They note that given the current

number of communities served in Strategy 1, the development of bureaucracy is inevitable.

• What lies ahead for the role of coaching in the Initiative?

Several of the coaches, including the coach coordinators, predicted that coaches would

switch from referring to “my team” and speak instead of “our team.” Although, by all accounts,

this switch is already taking place, some of the coaches would like to accelerate progress

towards this objective. Part of the urgency stems from the fact that under the current model

where a single coach is assigned to a team, that coach may not possess all of the skills that the

team in question needs. One attempt to resolve this problem has been to create a system of

pool days in which every coach has roughly six days that (s)he can use to work with teams to

which they are not assigned. To illustrate how this arrangement works, one coach, an expert

meeting facilitator, used pool days to assist teams other than the one to which he was directly

assigned.

The perceived advantages of this approach are that:

• It teaches the teams how to access resources for themselves, a skill crucial to

ensuring sustainability.

• It limits the teams to assistance provided by a pool of consultants vetted by pool

members themselves thereby reducing the possibility that teams would be fleeced

with unscrupulous contractors.

• It ensures that more assistance is provided to teams by substantive experts.

However, despite these advantages there are obstacles to this approach. First of all, coaches

have to change their perception of their role. According to one long-time coach, this switch in

thinking is “ the biggest adjustment that has to be made.” The coaches have to perceive a


difference and open themselves up to realize that they can’t be all things to all people. They

can’t be everything that their team needs.” Secondly, some coaches’ strengths were evident

whereas others’ were not. Nevertheless, as a group, coaches have committed to the pool days

approach and will continue with this arrangement in the coming year. Possible future scenarios

include having a pool of coaches with which the teams would contract for different services.

For example, a team needing assistance formulating bylaws would contract a coach in the pool

with expertise in this area.

Another future coaching scenario might involve dividing the budget for the coaches equally

among the teams and allowing the teams to decide which coaches they wanted. Such an effort

would require the foundation to relinquish control over the allocation of coaching dollars.

Some of the teams are savvy enough to use those dollars in ways that are best for the team.

However, other teams base the financial decisions on the personality of the team coordinator

and the potential coach rather than what is in the best interest of the team itself.

In the future, coaches anticipate that they will increasingly emphasize getting teams reflect

on what they are learning and how the Initiative is enhancing their community’s development

capacity. This new emphasis results from where teams’ position in the project cycle and is

designed to reflect their increased capacity. Whereas early coaching efforts might have stressed

identifying resources or funding opportunities as planning aids as one coach observed: “the

playing field is level. … now we have the knowledge of what’s out there and we have to help

people imagine how to bring their plans/dreams to fruition.” Respondents believed that this

type of reflection would enable communities to apply the lessons learned from the Initiative in

other contexts. Such lessons could also be shared with other Delta communities as part of an

effort to transform the region into a learning community focused on the issues of sustainable,

grassroots development.

What are the advantages of the MSDI coaching model?

The general consensus is that the MSDI coaching model has benefited all concerned.

Coaches are coming to understand what it takes to promote and support community-driven

change. They coaches have become a major new resource in the region, benefiting MSDI and

other communities and helping WKKF itself in achieving its goals. They constitute a group

that will contribute to the sustainability of the MSDI effort.


Coaches’ involvement has benefited WKKF by forging closer relations between the

Foundation and its grantees. Thanks, in part, to coaches, WKKF obtains better information

about the grantees than would otherwise be available. Presumably, this should increase the

Foundation’s comfort level with such an enormous place-based investment. It should ensure

that skilled people who are committed to the process and knowledgeable about the region are

working in the MSDI communities. Such relations also ensure that problems that might go

otherwise go undetected and/or unresolved are quickly identified. Valuable lessons learned are

being documented and, at the same time, the integrity of the Initiative’s processes safeguarded,

whether in planning, implementation or evaluation.

Communities benefit from coaching because coaches provide assistance throughout all

phases of MSDI. The teams are thus able to remain focused and build their capacity in areas

with wide applicability such as project management. Coaches also provide a source of

mentoring and tailored support beyond what Freddye operating alone would have been able to

provide to individual communities. They have helped communities take advantage of future

opportunities and acquire needed resources. Coaches have also embodied the core principles as

examples for their teams. According to one coach:

Helping the teams learn how to collaborate and share leadership and not come unglued

as they try to live out their proposal. That navigating a new way of doing work in

partnership is not easy and that was a big value of coaching to help people create a safe

place to do that and to learn and not lose sight of themselves and their projects.

What are the disadvantages of coaching, if any?

One possible downside of coaching respondents identified is the high cost of the model.

The coaches and teams acknowledged the tremendous amount of resources Kellogg has

invested to provide communities with coaches’ services and develop the coaches’ professional

network that exists today. Several coaches worried that the cost of using a similar coaching

model would be prohibitively high for projects not as well funded as MSDI. Coaching also

adds an additional layer of bureaucracy to an already complex initiative.

• What pointers can MSDI offer to other efforts that might want to use

coaching?


Begin with a shared understanding of coaching. Respondents stressed that since the meaning of the

term “coaching” can vary by context, it is important that all involved share the same

understanding of the proposed coaching role. This shared understanding will lay an

indispensable foundation for future practice. In the words of one coach “When you getting

started you have to be careful that everyone understands and shares the same vision of the

coach’s role. That getting started is key. If they don’t get started right it can be difficult so you

have to spend time in getting started right.”

Go with the community/programmatic flow. The MSDI coaching model is grounded in a respect for

participatory approaches. Thus, another important lesson that the coaches should share is the

importance flexibility. Programs should be allowed to evolve naturally, rather than be forced

into a preconceived mold. While coaches themselves may approach the task at hand with this

philosophy, the funder may not. However, as stated earlier, if funder and coaches are not on

the same page, problems will ensue. The message to funders who might be interested in

employing the MSDI coaching model is: “ You have to have a sense of how to strategically

support the development of a project and you also need to understand the life cycle of an

organization.”


MSDI CORE COMPETENCIES AND INDICATORS

CORE COMPETENCY INDICATORS Capacity Building- A process by which people are empowered with education and skills to enhance their quality of life and sustainability, and to develop a sense of commitment and shared vision within their communities.

• People who haven’t been involved are present, active and their voices are heard.

• Communities, institutions and organizations identify their needs for knowledge and skills related to civic participation and economic development.

• Organizations strengthen their capacity to sustain community development and growth.

• Communities develop their capacity to articulate and present their needs.

• Community teams tap and make use of all existing and available resources, inside and outside the community to make life better for all people.

• Community teams develop a widely shard vision they proudly promote to others.

Civic Participation- The collective action of those whose commitment motivates them to engage and involve others in collaborative work that addresses shared concerns around social and economic well-being of their community, ultimately empowering them in defining, building and transforming that community.

• More people accept responsibility for their quality of life in their communities.

• More people run for elected office and serve on volunteer boards.

• Increased meeting attendance and active participation in activities.

• More people are involved in defining goals for defined community.

• Individuals and groups’ resources are used for defined community goals.

• Leadership of the community teams is representative o f he diversity of the community (race, class, gender, age, sector, etc.)

• People are engaged in addressing challenges and improving their quality of life.

Collaboration- An ongoing process of organizations and individual exchanging information, sharing resources and ideas around a common or shared vision, and enhancing their collective capacity to achieve mutual benefits.

• Representatives from different organizations become part of the community team leadership.

• People previously not involved are asked to be included and actively engaged in the work of the collaborative.

• Public, private and nonprofit sectors are represented together with community-based groups in community team efforts.

• The collaborative has a clear, agreed upon governance structure in writing that addresses conflicts of interest, decision-making structure and conflict resolution.

• Each organization has made an investment of resources in the work of the collaborative and


these commitments are documented in writing. • The collaborative has clearly defined agenda

that is explicit and mutually agreed upon. • A process of negotiation has been undertaken

to establish the relationships among the collaborating organizations.

• Financial management processes are agreed upon by the members of the collaborative and are in writing.

• Notes or summaries of activities and meetings are easily available to each member of the collaborative.

• A process is in place that will enable each organization to have a role in making decisions if the organization’s representatives are unable to participate in a particular activity.

Community Strategic Planning- The articulation of a vision into mission, goals, objectives and activities that are agreed upon and committed to by stakeholders in a region or community. This strategic plan enables the community to dream, think and do.

• Written mission statement for the collaborative. • Written action plan with specific goals,

objectives and activities. • There is an agreed upon set of indicators of

progress and benchmarks for short, medium and long term accomplishments.

• Community wide participation in developing the plan.

• Written report of a stakeholder analysis. • Stakeholders are present and actively involved

in developing the plan. • Opportunities provided for broad-based input. • Process of priority setting at public meetings. • Stakeholders take an active role in

implementing the plan. • Elected officials, public agencies, and private

sectors support the implementation of the plan with resources/money.

• Elected officials, public agencies and private sectors understand and are actively involved in developing the plan.

Shared Leadership- A shared reliance among persons working as a team toward a common purpose and progress within a community.

• A diversity of people are involved in project design, carrying out the work and assessing progress.

• Decision-making is a shared process. • People are honest in expressing their

perspectives and open about their agendas. • All participants are accountable to each other

and the team, and fulfill their commitments. • MSDI participants endorse and do what works

for the betterment of all (i.e., community, county, region, etc.)

• New stakeholders participate and are involved.


• Community teams co-sponsor local events and programs.

• Community groups track the number of organizations that actively participate in their collaborative.

• Information is available on the goals and objectives of each of the collaborative organizations.

• Community teams practice rotation of leadership and meeting facilitators.

• Participants set bi-annual goals to increase the number of organizations that work together on locally sponsored events.

• MSDI participants learn how to make a comparison of the diversity of the organization’s participation to the community overall diversity.

• Core team members participate in a variety of leadership development programs.

Learning Community- A group or alliance of groups who support one another through relationships and networking by sharing knowledge and capabilities to fulfill common goals and needs, and by practicing inquiry and confrontation.

• The flow of communication and ideas exchange increases among communities.

• Increasing numbers of people and groups participate in networking and peer learning activities, as communities look to each other for advice and expertise.

• Demonstrated commitment to reflective review of programs, processes, and lessons learned.

• Groups discover and create new opportunities for meaningful and effective collaboration.

• Programs and processes for community development reflect the lessons learned and have demonstrable impact.

Economic Development- The process by which a community creates, retains and reinvests wealth to raise the standard of living and expand economic opportunities for all people especially low-income citizens.

• An increasing proportion of resources generated within a community are reinvested in that community.

• Increased number and variety of employment opportunities that provide living wages.

• Creation of opportunities to build and sustain assets that leads to economic security.

• Community teams are educated on how to collect demographic information about their area.

• Community teams understand the necessity to conduct, review, and analyze studies of the local economy.

• Teams have a clearly defined economic development strategy with the proper stakeholders at the table.

• Community teams understand the structure of


their local economy and opportunities to enhance it.

• Community teams know how to analyze the economic and demographic trends.

Sustainability- A process, incorporating capacity tools, skills and resources that maintains momentum in the midst of opposition as well as success. It is keyed to economic viability and long-term development.

• Community teams demonstrate appropriate skills and abilities to continuously participate in shaping decisions that create their own economic and social development.

• Community organizations and business develop vehicles and forums for communication, which enable sustained relationships and coordinated, collaborative endeavors.

• Public, private and nonprofit sectors undertake their respective work with a unified interest in the social, economic and ecological well being of their community.

• The number of funding resources available to community teams increases.

• Community teams develop a documented resource directory that is widely distributed.

• Community teams have a process in place for prioritizing community needs and opportunities.

Economic Impact- Measurable change in the human and economic vitality of a community as it relates to and affects the quality of life, institutions, governments, organizations, etc., to create sustainable community development.

• Growth of new businesses and employment opportunities in existing business.

• An increased number and proportion of jobs pay a living wage and offer benefits.

• Evidence of increased engagement of institutions and organizations in the economic life of the community, i.e., corporate contributions, contract opportunities and scholarships.

• New sectors are added to the local economy that contributes to long-term health and vitality of the communities.


Coaching Agreement Example from the Kellogg Mid-South Delta Initiative: After several discussions about the types of coaching assistance the MSDI team is most interested in as they move into the project implementation phase and the specific ways the Coach might serve the community team, we generated this list: • Help the group stay on task with their proposal concepts, strategies, action

plans; • Help the group master project management when there are several inter-related

activities involving multiple stakeholders that must be managed by a small staff and a busy, volunteer board;

• Help build the team’s capacity in facilitation, team collaboration and leadership for change;

• Help the team identify, locate resources; • Provide a “mirror” to the team that reflects insightful observations and

challenges about their collaboration, shared leadership, and capacity building; and

• Assist the incoming Director in understanding the history of the Initiative--the expectations of the Kellogg-MSDI systems, principles and related strategies—and organizing and managing an effective work plan to steer the project activities, and developing a set of working relationships with the broader community team.

This list represents an informal “Coaching Plan” for 2002-3, which we all agree will be a guide for the Coach’s service to the team during this time.


Draft 9/28/04

MSDI COACHES—A MODEL FOR COMMUNITY-LEVEL TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE

People and organizations involved in MSDI, and particularly the Strategy 1 community teams,

benefited from a depth and breadth of technical assistance uncommon in most foundation-funded

initiatives. In addition to grant support, each community team received training and technical

assistance on a variety of topics and in a variety of venues. Training sessions were held at semi-

annual cross site meetings and at mini-conferences throughout the region. Topics ranged from

technology, evaluation, marketing and communication, program planning, writing grant

proposals, financial accountability, anti-racist organizing, digital storytelling, and the list goes

on. Technical assistance was available to the teams through economic development, marketing,

and evaluation experts. Information on a wide variety of topics and opportunities for learning

were available through the MSDI web site and printed newsletter.

Each of these tools in the MSDI training and technical assistance toolbox was mentioned in team

reports, coaches’ reports, presentations, interviews or focus groups as important to the successes

the teams had as part of MSDI Strategy 1. However, the most effective tool, as evidenced in all

data collection done by the MSDI evaluation team, has been coaching at the community team

level.

As part of their MSDI involvement, each community team was assigned a “coach.” As a model

of technical assistance, MSDI coaches plowed new ground by testing strategies for facilitating

team capacity building, developing a peer coaching group for support and professional

development, expanding their networks as well as those of the teams and, as stated by a team

member, “helping [us] focus—see the whole picture and what steps to take to get results.”


Started at the request of the first five MSDI community teams, the goal of coaching was to

provide intense technical assistance in timely, flexible ways that respected the traditions,

cultures, and experiences of the community teams. Coaching proved effective for several

reasons:

• The relationship between the coach and team was one on one and intense, especially in the beginning when teams were forming or responding to MSDI opportunities. Annually, each MSDI coach spent approximately 15 days of planning and 35-50 days of site work with a team. (Other initiatives reviewed for this evaluation included as few as 24 days of coach time annually.)

• The coaches provided encouragement when teams were struggling or unclear about how

to proceed. They did not operate as consultants to the teams but provided recommendations for action, asked “tough” questions, reminded teams of the “big picture,” identified resources, listened actively, and linked the teams and WKKF. The coaches were challenged to maintain a flexible approach to working with their teams in order to respond to the teams’ needs as they evolved.

• The coach network included practitioners with a variety of skills and experiences that

were made available to all of the teams. Regardless of their backgrounds, all of the coaches shared an interest in and commitment to non-traditional approaches to community development and grassroots community work. The network was strengthened though annual retreats focused on professional development, monthly conference calls, and support from the MSDI regional coordinator and the coach mentors.

• The coaches were liaisons between the teams and MSDI and WKKF, communicating

foundation or initiative requirements and being the “eyes and ears” for MSDI in the region.

• The coaches modeled the core principles of shared leadership, learning community and

collaboration, as well as working in diverse groups, for the teams, helping them to visually experience the impact of principle-centered development.

• Access to the coaches’ networks enhanced the teams’ networks and, thus, increased

access to resources and potential partners.

Challenges to the coaching model became apparent as the work evolved.

• Using the coaches’ skills effectively and efficiently proved challenging. Several attempts were made to make these skills available to all of the teams, including pool days for


teams to request the help of a specific coach based on a skills chart, visiting coaches to create relationships with more than one team, and team coaching. Team coaching was the most successful, although it was tried so late in Phase II that few teams were able to take advantage of this opportunity.

• Matching the coach and the team for the most impact. For the most part, the team/coach

relationships were productive and rewarding. In one instance, team members felt the coach was too inexperienced to address a specific challenge, and in another, the team/coach relationship never developed to the point that either felt it was very effective.

• The community teams have to be receptive to coaching. At least two team and coach

relationships never “gelled” even with repeated attempts at mediating the relationships and bringing in other coaches to assist in the teams’ development.

• Coaching is resource and time intense. The MSDI coaching model is expensive. The

coaches and teams acknowledge the tremendous amount of resources the Foundation invested to provide communities with coaches’ services and to develop the coaches’ professional network.

• Coaching adds an additional layer of bureaucracy to an already complex initiative.

Effectively managing the coaches’ diverse personalities and coaching styles, while providing support for their work in the communities, necessitated a network “bureaucracy.” The coaches were divided into three groups, with each group having a coach coordinator/mentor to facilitate communication and strategy development when a coach was facing a particular challenge.

• Teams that had a succession of coaches (at least two teams had three coaches in as many

years) had to adapt to the differences in coaching styles. A member of one of these teams related that each coach had a different style and when a change was made, the team had to use time and energy to learn to work with the new coach. She felt this took time and energy away from the team’s project work.

The general consensus is that the MSDI coaching model has benefited all concerned. The

coaches’ involvement benefited WKKF by forging closer relations between the Foundation and

its grantees. Communities benefited from mentoring and tailored support that helped them take

advantage of opportunities for learning and networking and for acquiring resources. The coaches

benefited from being part of a learning community that challenged them to grow professionally

and personally. Their collective experience in principle-centered development yielded a


committed group of community and economic development practitioners that will serve the

Delta for years to come.

Although from a program perspective, coaching is expensive and time consuming, from the

community team perspective, coaching made the difference in helping the teams accomplish

what they did. In the words of one team member, “I would not try this without a coach. I do not

believe any of the groups would have survived without a coach. They played a major part.”

Recommendation: The MSDI coaching model is a hybrid, drawing from several different

models of coaching and including aspects of management, community development, and

communications. The model will doubtless be of interest to a wide audience because of its

uniqueness. Since developing this model has been a primary technical assistance vehicle for

MSDI and required a large investment of time and money, documenting and sharing this model

beyond WKKF is recommended and would be considered a welcomed addition to the sparse

literature on community coaching.


Worksheet 1.3: Community Coaching 1. In what ways are the Kellogg coaches’ issues similar to your coaching issues? 2. In what ways are their issues different? 3. What was most interesting to you and why? 4. What insights might you take from this to improve your own coaching work? 4. What capacities and indicators impact your work the most?

5. What do you like about the sample coaching agreement?

6. What are your concerns?

7. What items would you like to negotiate with your team?

8. What challenges do you see in developing a coaching plan with them?


Worksheet 1.4: Coaching Assessment Worksheet The purpose of this assessment tool is to provide you and the project with a way we can evaluate our efforts to develop successful coaching training and models within in community development. As we evolve this curriculum and practice, your input will be important to us in creating an effective program and materials. This assessment tool has three parts. Part one allows you to assess your level of comfort with various behaviors and skills associated with coaching. Part two asks you to map your existing networks, and part three looks at how you currently use coaching skills and related behaviors and how you see yourself using them in the future. Part I: Assessing coaching-related skills and behaviors Please rate your expertise and comfort with each of the following skills using the following rating scale: 1: NO EXPERIENCE: Not comfortable and have no experience with this skill. 2: NOVICE - Have a beginning awareness of the subject area but mostly at the level of abstract concepts and ideas. Apply their skills by following a clear set of rules but can’t yet adapt practices to their context. 3: ADVANCED BEGINNER - Gaining deeper appreciation of the subject area but acknowledge their lack of knowledge about the discipline as a whole. Reliant on well-defined case studies and technical tools as they follow prescribed steps. 4: COMPETENT - Have familiarity and working experience of full array of “knowledge” about the subject. Apply tools and principles by adapting practices through careful study and selection among viable alternatives. 5: PROFICIENT - Have internalized all the key tools and concepts of the field and can reliably apply them in a flexible and fluid manner. Intuitively grasp the “whole” situation. Skill/ability 1 2 3 4 5 Generating collaborative conversations Applying active listening skills Giving constructive feedback Uncovering key assumptions in conversation Assessing situations to determine appropriate action Identifying openings for interventions Identifying and accessing resources Brokering resources appropriately Advocating for inclusive planning processes Working with community-based planning processes Reflective learning Team building skills Understanding and applying the ladder of inference (RH 251, 78) Observing and understanding group behavior Supporting people’s ability to work together successfully


Skill/ability 1 2 3 4 5 Supporting personal transformations Adding value to group interactions Perceiving what is of value to others and supporting efforts to support that value

Facilitating empowering situations Getting things done Assisting others in setting compelling, urgent goals Taking calculated risks Acting as a change agent Respecting others in relationships Understanding process over technique Building trust within relationships Facilitating opportunities for free and informed choice Providing stewardship for groups and projects Striving for transformational learning Organizing incremental learning Offering others the opportunity for reflection Honoring confidentiality Asking for help Willingness (openness) to learn Willingness to try new things Balancing advocacy with inquiry to reduce defensiveness Transforming unproductive discussion into quality dialogue Assessing project outcomes Uncovering unwritten rules Listening to discern root causes Assessing people’s understanding of the current reality Helping people be ‘self-assisting’ Exercising patience in conversation Thinking creatively Being flexible in working with others Conversing from a point of neutrality Accessing a network of support Observing behavior in individuals and groups Resolving break downs in communication by remaining unemotional Resolving break downs in communication by generating possibilities ‘Calling forth” a commitment to work with others ‘Calling forth” key questions and underlying issues Crafting teachable moments Acting with cultural competency Are there any skills or behaviors related to coaching we have missed? Please enter those in the spaces below and rate them accordingly.


Please review the list and put three stars next to those skills you feel are essential for coaches to succeed in community coaching. Place two stars next to those skills that may not be essential, but that are very useful to coaches, and one star next to those skills that are not essential, but would be nice to have. Comments?


Documents

That is what learning is. You understand suddenly ...srdc.msstate.edu/fop/levelthree/trainarc/coaching/session1overview.pdf · That is what learning is. You understand suddenly something