Coaching as a sensemaking tool Carina Fourie Research assignment presented in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Philosophy at Stellenbosch University Supervisor: Dr. Carly Steyn Degree of confidentiality: A January 2016 Stellenbosch University https://scholar.sun.ac.za ii Declaration I, Carina Fourie, declare that the entire body of work contained in this research assignment is my own, original work; that I am the sole author thereof (save to the extent explicitly otherwise stated), that reproduction and publication thereof by Stellenbosch University will not infringe any third party rights and that I have not previously in its entirety or in part submitted it for obtaining any qualification. Carina Fourie 5 January 2016 14989514 Copyright © 2013 Stellenbosch University All rights reserved Stellenbosch University https://scholar.sun.ac.za iii Abstract Organisations and individuals in postmodern society are continuously confronted by change and complexity. In order to deal with the impact of change and disruption, people need to firstly make sense of what is happening around them and then take action to restore order in their environment. According to Weick (1995) sensemaking is a process of the construction of new meaning, which cannot happen in isolation. Coaching has become one of the preferred interventions in organisations to assist people in dealing with difficult situations. The aim of this research assignment is to gain insight on how coaching can contribute to the sensemaking processes of clients. The research process firstly focused on how and when sensemaking characteristics manifest during the coaching process. Based on the research findings, recommendations are put forward on how coaches could enhance the sensemaking activities of their clients. Since this study was based on the subjective experiences of coaching clients from live coaching conversations, an interpretive phenomenological approach was followed. The research study was qualitative with the unit of analysis being a single case study focusing on the experience of individual clients in the natural setting of face-to-face coaching engagements. Research data was gathered by means of semi-structured interviews with ten participants. The sample group consisted of four coaches and six coaching clients who have received coaching before. Sensemaking instances were found to manifest regularly throughout the coaching journey and was enhanced by the nature of social collaboration between coach and client. Narratives are a very powerful way to communicate meaning and coaching plays a role in working with clients in labelling stories and constructing new meaningful stories as part of the sensemaking process. Findings confirm that a major benefit of coaching to sensemaking is that it provides an intervention, which is particularly focused on an individual making sense of disruption and restoring order in their lives. The research concludes that coaching is indeed a powerful sensemaking tool. Stellenbosch University https://scholar.sun.ac.za iv Acknowledgements The road to a research assignment is a long and often lonely one. However it is also filled with exciting discoveries and culminates in an incomparable sense of accomplishment. I was blessed to have a number of special people who provided support and encouragement along the way. I gratefully acknowledge them here: My coaching triad of three years, Joan Peters and Dawn Lehmann. What a journey this was and I would have never even attempted this challenge without you. My parents, Georg and Hettie Marais, who instilled a passion for learning in me, and showered me love and support throughout my journey. My dear children, Hesté Stipp, Hanno van Wyk, Mariza van Wyk and Marco Fourie for all you love and patience, and for always cheering me on. My supervisor Dr Carly Steyn, who never failed to believe in my challenging topic, and who provided continuous encouragement, and challenged me to improve my thinking and writing. Isabella Verster, my editor extraordinaire, who pulled me through the last days and worked many hours during the Christmas period to enable me to submit in time. Dr Ruth Albertyn and Dr John Morrison for sharing your invaluable research knowledge and your support in formulating my research proposal. Dr Salome van Coller Peter for the opportunity to experience this amazing, life changing programme. Everyone who participated in my research interviews. My friends who never gave up on me despite my limited availability. Lastly, Meo, Dexi and Zinzi, who never left my side through all the hours of hard work.. Stellenbosch University https://scholar.sun.ac.za v Table of contents Declaration ii Acknowledgements iii Abstract iii List of tables viii List of figures ix List of acronyms and abbreviations x CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION 1 1.1 BACKGROUND ERROR! BOOKMARK NOT DEFINED. 1.2 RESEARCH PROBLEM, AIM AND OBJECTIVE 2 1.2.1 Aim 2 1.2.2 Research problem 2 1.2.3 Research objectives 2 1.3 SIGNIFICANCE OF THE RESEARCH 3 1.4 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY 3 1.4.1 Overall Design 3 1.4.2 Data Collection 4 1.4.3 Data Analysis 5 1.4.4 Ethical considerations 5 1.5 CLARIFICATION OF KEY TERMS 5 1.6 CHAPTER OUTLINE 6 CHAPTER 2 LITERATURE REVIEW 7 2.2 INTRODUCTION 7 2.2 UNDERSTANDING SENSEMAKING 7 2.2.1 An overview 7 2.2.2 The seven properties of sensemaking 8 2.2.21. Sensemaking is grounded in identity construction 9 2.2.2.2 Sensemaking is retrospective 10 2.2.2.3 Sensemaking is enactive of sensible environment 10 2.2.2.4 Sensemaking is social 11 2.2.2.5 Sensemaking is ongoing 12 2.2.2.6 Sensemaking is focused on and by, extracted cues 13 2.2.2.7 Sensemaking is driven by plausible rather than accuracy 14 2.2.3 14 Occasions / triggers of sensemaking Stellenbosch University https://scholar.sun.ac.za vi 2.3 THE BRIDGE BETWEEN COACHING AND SENSEMAKING 15 2.3.1 The origins of coaching 16 2.3.2 Defining coaching 18 2.3.3 Why coaching? The outcomes and benefits of coaching 19 2.3.4 Coaching philosophies and approaches 20 2.3.4.1 What does a postmodern approach mean to coaching? 21 2.3.4.2 What is the impact of social constructionism on a coaching approach 21 2.3.4.3 The narrative approach to coaching 22 2.3.5. 23 Coaching in the context of the seven properties of sensemaking 2.3.5.1 Coaching and retrospective sensemaking 23 2.3.5.2 The ongoing nature of sensemaking 24 2.3.5.3 Sensemaking through identity construction in coaching 25 2.3.5.4 Coaching as a support to sensemaking by enactment 26 2.3.5.5 Sensemaking is social, and so is coaching 26 2.3.5.6 What would the role of coaching be in noticing and extracting clues 27 2.3.5.7 Does coaching support plausible rather than accurate sensemaking 28 2.4 29 CONCLUSION CHAPTER 3 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY 30 3.1 INTRODUCTION 30 3.2 THE RESEARCH DESIGN 31 3.3 SAMPLING STRATEGY 31 3.4 RESEARCH INSTRUMENTS 33 3.4.1 Client interviews 34 3.4.2 Coach interviews 35 3.5 DATA COLLECTION 37 3.6 ETHICAL CONSIDERATIONS 38 3.7 ANALYSES AND INTERPRETATION OF DATA 39 3.8 CONCLUSION 39 CHAPTER 4 FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS 4.1 41 INTRODUCTION Error! Bookmark not defined.1 4.2 HOW DO THEORETICAL SENSEMAKING ASPECTS DESCRIBED BY KARL WEICK (1995) TYPICALLY MANIFEST DURING COACHING INTERVENTIONS? 4.3 42 WHICH SENSEMAKING PROPERTIES ARE PREVALENT DURING COACHING CONVERSATIONS? 49 4.3.1 Sensemaking is retrospective 49 4.3.2 Sensemaking is rooted in identity construction 53 4.3.2.1 Threats to identity 55 Stellenbosch University https://scholar.sun.ac.za vii 4.3.2.1 Restoration of identity 57 4.4.3 59 Sensemaking is enactive of sensible environments 4.4.3.1 Actions as output of insight 60 4.4.3.2 Behaviour change 60 4.4.3.3 The effect of action taken 61 4.4.4 62 Sensemaking is social 4.4.4.1 The coaching relationship 63 4.4.4.2 Coach abilities / techniques 64 4.4.5 Sensemaking focused on by extracted cues 66 4.4.6 Sensemaking is ongoing 68 4.4.7 Sensemaking is plausible 69 4.5 WHAT TRIGGERS SENSEMAKING ACTIVITIES DURING COACHING 71 4.5.1 Triggers for clients to seek coaching 71 4.5.2 Sensemaking triggers within coaching 72 4.6 HOW ARE SENSEMAKING INSTANCES EXPERIENCED DURING COACHING 74 4.7 HOW MEANINGFUL ARE THE SENSEMAKING INSTANCES THAT CLIENTS EXPERIENCE DURING COACHING 4.8 4.9 75 WHAT ARE THE POTENTIAL BENEFITS OF COACHING TO THE SENSEMAKING PROCESSES OF INDIVIDUALS 77 CONCLUSION 78 CHAPTER 5 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 80 5.1 INTRODUCTION 80 5.2 SUMMARY AND FINAL CONCLUSIONS 80 5.2.1 The interaction between the coach and client 81 5.2.2 The importance of narrative in coach 82 5.2.3 Reflection 83 5.2.4 Experimenting with action 83 5.2.5 Frame of reference 83 5.2.6 Postmodernist aspects 84 5.2.7 Identity work 84 5.3 FURTHER RESEARCH 85 5.4 LIMITATIONS OF THE METHODOLOGY AND DESIGN 86 5.5 CONCLUSION 87 REFERENCES 88 APPENDIX 1: INFORMED CONSENT LETTER 93 APPENDIX 2: ETHICAL CHECKLIST 96 Stellenbosch University https://scholar.sun.ac.za viii List of tables Table 2.1: Transitions from traditional coaching 18 Table 3.1: Interviewee profiles 32 Table 3.2: Research objectives and interview questions 35 Table 4.1: Evidence of some sensemaking sequence during coaching 46 Stellenbosch University https://scholar.sun.ac.za ix List of figures Figure 2.1: The original coach; a covered carriage 17 Figure 4.1: A holistic view of sensemaking patterns during coaching 44 Stellenbosch University https://scholar.sun.ac.za x List of acronyms and abbreviations USB University of Stellenbosch Business School USB-DESC USB Departmental Ethics Screening Committee Stellenbosch University https://scholar.sun.ac.za 1 CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION 1.1 BACKGROUND The term ‘sensemaking’ was first introduced in organisational science by Dr. Karl Weick. He defined it as literally the ‘making of sense’ (Fourie, 2009). The ‘making’ part of the term indicates that some action is involved in constructing ‘sense’. Sensemaking theory is widely used in the fields of organisational theory (Czarniawska, 2005) and knowledge management. Sensemaking is typically invoked by change or ambiguity in the environment that either disrupts the flow of life or poses a threat to identity. In order to carry on, order has to be restored so one is required to make sense of what is going on. In the process of making sense new knowledge is generated (Du Toit, 2003: 27). Weick (1995, 70) emphasises that sensemaking is a systemic concept and central activity in organisations on both the individual and collective levels. He quotes Wiley (1988), who argues that above the individual level of sensemaking, there are also levels of intersubjective, (we), generic subjective (social structure) and extra-subjective (cultural). As much as the individual needs to make sense of his/her world, teams in organisations have to make sense of organisational life in order to function optimally. Collectively the organisation needs to make sense of signals from the external environment to form shared meaning and develop their strategies and objectives (Choo, 1996: 329). Since coaching is a relatively new field of study having a multitude of nuances, areas of expertise and possible applications, there is not yet a single encompassing definition for the concept. Coaching means different things to different people. The International Coaching Federation (ICF) describes coaching as …an ongoing partnership that helps clients to produce fulfilling results in their personal and professional lives. Through the process of coaching, clients deepen their learning, improve their performance, and enhance their quality of life. From a coaching perspective, it seems that clients engage with a coach in order to make sense of their world. So the question arises as to whether coaching is, in fact, a sensemaking process. Du Toit (2007: 282) maintains that the processes used in coaching methodologies are particularly powerful in assisting individuals in their sensemaking activities. According to Du Toit (2007: 282) no or little empirical research is currently available on the role of coaching in the sensemaking activities of clients. From an organisational perspective, coaching is an increasingly favoured leadership intervention, not only for development, but also for assisting leaders in times of change. Stellenbosch University https://scholar.sun.ac.za 2 This study empirically explored the role that coaching plays in the sensemaking activities of individuals by analysing how a sample group of ten clients made sense during their individual coaching journeys. 1.2 RESEARCH PROBLEM, AIM AND OBJECTIVES 1.2.1 Aim The aim of this assignment was to gain insight in how sensemaking activities typically take place during coaching and the contribution coaching can make to people’s sensemaking processes. 1.2.2 Problem statement In reviewing the literature on sensemaking and coaching, a question emerged regarding the contribution that coaching could make to sensemaking processes of clients. Theoretically coaching offers great value in supporting sensemaking. The value of coaching to sensemaking has not been researched in practice yet (Du Toit, 2007: 282). This assignment was thus focused on addressing the gap between the theoretical and empirical evidence on the contribution of coaching interventions to sensemaking processes and in particular if coaching can actually be described as a sensemaking tool. In order to address the aim of the project the following research questions were posed: How do theoretical sensemaking aspects described by Karl Weick (1995) typically manifest during coaching interventions? How are sensemaking instances experienced during coaching? What triggers sensemaking activities during coaching? How meaningful are sensemaking instances experienced during coaching? What are the potential benefits of coaching to the sensemaking processes of individuals? 1.2.3 Research objectives The following research objectives were addressed by this study: Objective 1: Develop a framework of sensemaking aspects to be identified during coaching conversations. Objective 2: Develop a semi-structured coaching questionnaires based on the sensemaking framework as basis for interviews with coaches and clients. Objective 3: Identify and make recommendations for ways of enabling successful sensemaking outcomes in coaching. Stellenbosch University https://scholar.sun.ac.za 3 1.3 SIGNIFICANCE OF THE RESEARCH By analysing the coaching and sensemaking activities of individuals, this study made a unique interdisciplinary contribution to the coaching sensemaking domain. Sensemaking is an interpretative approach to organisational knowledge within the knowledge management discipline (Tuomi, 2002: 6). The role of coaching as a sensemaking activity has been explored by Du Toit (2007: 282) who mentions that to date no empirical study has been done to test the argument. This assignment aims to fill that gap by testing the theory in practice. The intended result of the study was firstly to contribute to the coaching body of knowledge by explaining the importance of sensemaking in dealing with change and ambiguity (Weick, 1995) and secondly by using findings from the study to highlight how coaching can practically enhance the sensemaking processes of clients. By providing guidelines on how to encourage sensemaking in coaching interventions the efficiency and efficacy of individual coaches as well as the coaching profession as a whole could be improved. Both coaching and sensemaking are reliant on social interaction and dialogue. In studying the link between them in practice, a positive contribution will also be made to the field of social construction. Analysis of data resulting from coaching interventions will deepen the understanding of the interaction between coach and client. 1.4 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY The preliminary literature review in this proposal highlights the nature of sensemaking and the potential role coaching can play in a client’s sensemaking activities. The aim of the research was to practically observe and understand how sensemaking instances occur and may be enhanced by coaching interventions. 1.4.1 Overall design Since this study was based on the subjective experiences of coaching clients within live coaching conversations, an interpretive phenomenological paradigm was adopted (Terre Blanche & Durrheim, 1999: 6). The interpretive paradigm is focused on how people continuously make sense of their lives by interpreting, creating and constructing meaning (Babbie, 2001: 28). In this case the research focused on how sensemaking happens during coaching as a social interaction (Terre Blanche & Durrheim, 1999: 6). The research study was qualitative with the unit of analysis being a single case study focusing on the experience of individual clients in the natural setting of face-toface coaching engagements. Data was gathered by the researcher by means of individual interviews (Babbie & Mouton, 2001: 270, 271). Stellenbosch University https://scholar.sun.ac.za 4 The assignment made use of qualitative data collection and analysis methods based on data from both participating coaches and the clients. Data was collected from participants by means of semistructured interviews. Questions were open-ended based on the aspects of sensemaking that were identified for observation upfront (Objective 1). Initially data collection was designed to elicit response of coaches and clients via an online questionnaire on www.surveymonkey.com. Unfortunately insufficient responses were received mainly due to the fact that the questionnaire required too much cognitive effort and had to be completed three times. A semi-structured interview was subsequently developed, based on the same questions as for the initial online questionnaire. Interviews served the purpose of gaining narratives and rich descriptions from clients themselves or by coaches giving information of how they perceived the journey of one client of theirs. 1.4.2 Data collection Morse (1994: 225) suggested that at least six participants are used for phenomenological studies. Ten participants were purposely selected: Firstly, six clients were selected who have been undergoing coaching during the last six months. Secondly, four coaches were selected who had been professionally trained, each with at least fifty hours of coaching experience. Participants were contracted by email and signed a letter of consent (Attachment 1) informing them of the details of the project and what was expected of them. Ten interviews were conducted and recorded: eight interviews were conducted and recorded during face-to-face meetings, one telephonically and one via the video chatting service Google Hangouts. Interviews were semi-structured and questions based on interpretations from the literature on sensemaking properties and triggers (Weick, 1995; Weick, Sutcliffe & Obstfeld, 2011). The motivation for the development of guiding questions was to provide structure to the clients’ thought processes to enable the researcher to identify sensemaking activities. Questions were open-ended to allow for descriptive, contemplative answers. The reflective set of questions was tested prior to data collection in order to refine, and make it ‘user-friendly’ and more credible (Terre Blanche & Durrheim, 1999). Once data collection was completed interviews were transcribed and validated. Transcriptions were then uploaded into the Atlas.ti software program (Computer-aided qualitative data analysis software) for storage, retrieval, categorising, analysis and comparing of data (Bloomberg & Volpe, 2012: 110). Stellenbosch University https://scholar.sun.ac.za 5 1.4.3 Data analysis It is common for qualitative studies to follow an inductive approach but in this exploratory study a combination of a deductive and inductive process was followed for the analysis of the interview data (Terre Blanche & Durrheim, 1999: 40; Frere, 2013). The triggers and seven sensemaking characteristics served as guiding principles in data collection and coding. A systematic coding strategy was followed to maintain order (Huberman & Miles, 2002: 246). For the consolidation of raw data the “three C’s’ (coding, categorising, concept) process suggested by Huberman & Miles (2002: 251) was followed. Finally key concepts were extracted, final conclusions drawn and verified (Creswell, 2007: 148; Miles & Huberman; 2002: 251-254; Creswell, 2007: 148). Findings were presented as discussions in response to the research questions (Creswell, 2007: 148), supported by verbatim quotes from interviews as evidence. 1.4.4 Ethical considerations The study was presented and approved by the University of Stellenbosch Business School Departmental Ethics Screening Committee (USB-DESC). Coach and client participants were personally invited to participate and the purpose of the study was explained to them. They were asked to sign an informed consent form, which clearly indicated what their rights were, what was expected of them and defining how confidentiality of identity as well as data would be maintained. Interviews were transcribed and the transcriber signed a non-disclosure agreement to ensure confidentiality of information. All interview files were securely stored in the cloud in a Dropbox folder, to which only the researcher and transcriber had access. All transcriptions were to be destroyed upon conclusion and approval of the research document. 1.5 i) CLARIFICATION OF KEY TERMS Coaching Coaching is an intervention where the coach engages with an individual resolving dilemmas they are dealing with. The coach encourages the client to tell their stories. The coach as an attentive listener, who applies open-ended questioning to encourage reflection, in order for the client to find their own solutions and therefore resolve the issues affecting them. ii) Sensemaking Sensemaking is a process whereby people pick up signals from the environment, which causes dissonance or uncertainty. They then have to make sense by interpreting the Stellenbosch University https://scholar.sun.ac.za 6 situation and finally construct new meaning and knowledge to enable them deal with the situation and move on. iii) Sensemaking properties Sensemaking properties in the context of this research are the fact that sensemaking is triggered by signals that people pick up from the environment, sense is always made in hindsight, is a social process, involves identity issues, is not accurate, is ongoing and take action to make circumstances more favourable. iv) Postmodernism At the core of post-modernism lies scepticism of general truths and philosophies in the world. Post-modernists argue for different versions of the truth and the fact that truth is always in the process of becoming. v) Social constructionism A post-modernist approach arguing that meaning is constructed by social interaction and collaboration. vi) Cognitive dissonance A feeling of internal disorder which calls for action to reduce the dissonance 1.6 CHAPTER OUTLINE Chapter 2 provides an in-depth literature review of the underlying theory that informed this assignment. Chapter 3 describes the research methodology of the study. Chapter 4 presents the findings, discussions and key conclusions based on the analysis of the data and the key themes and patterns which emerged. Chapter 5 summarises the lessons learned, positioning of the research, recommendations and limitations that were acknowledged in the research design. Stellenbosch University https://scholar.sun.ac.za 7 CHAPTER 2 LITERATURE REVIEW 2.1 INTRODUCTION The focus of this research assignment is to gain insight into the manifestation of sensemaking properties during coaching and how coaching can support clients in making sense of dilemmas or disruptive situations. Sensemaking, in the context of this study, is based on the theory of Dr. Karl Weick, Rensis Likert Distinguished University Professor of Organisational Behaviour and Psychology at the University of Michigan. Weick is well-known for his book, “Sensemaking in Organizations” (Weick, 1995). The first section of the chapter will focus on understanding Weick’s sensemaking theory and the properties of sensemaking in particular. Subsequent to the overview on sensemaking, the emphasis shifts to the link between sensemaking and coaching. Aspects of coaching that are relevant in the context of sensemaking are discussed as part of reviewing the theory on the link between the two disciplines. The availability of literature on the contribution of coaching to sensemaking, although fairly limited, was drawn upon as a theoretical base for the research of this project. The notion of sensemaking is novel within the coaching body of knowledge, and will be discussed in more detail in the next section. 2.2 UNDERSTANDING SENSEMAKING 2.2.1 An overview The term sensemaking was formally introduced by Dr. Karl Weick in 1979, as part of his work on ‘organising’ in the organisational context. Weick (1979) explains sensemaking as simply the “making of sense”. ‘Sense’ means to notice (or pick up a cue) of something disruptive, or a potential threat. Cues could be understood as signals that people pick up from the environment, which is then interpreted in a certain way according to their frame of reference. For example: someone may notice certain behaviour (cue) from people and interpret it as targeted at them personally. This may cause a dissonance within them, resulting in a need for making sense and seeking coaching as an intervention. The ‘making’ part of sensemaking refers to the action people take in an attempt to reduce the complexity of their situation. The action involves transforming the complexity into something understandable and meaningful (Weick, 1995: 4). It is important to emphasise that meaning does not arise by noticing discrepancies but is an output of the sensemaking process (Weick, 1995: 5). Stellenbosch University https://scholar.sun.ac.za 8 The activity of meaning-making results in the creation of new knowledge, which is a process that never happens in isolation but through social interaction (Du Toit, 2003: 27). Weick (1995) makes a clear distinction between the actions of interpretation and the creation of meaning. He explains that interpretation is about understanding knowledge that already exists, whereas sensemaking is about the creation of meaning that did not previously exist. The act of sensemaking does not only include interpretation but also discovery and the act of creation or construction (Weick, 1995: 7, 8). From an ontological perspective, sensemaking has its roots in the postmodernist theory of social constructionism. Weick (1995: 106-109) sees dialogue and language as the core part of the process. His famous recipe for sensemaking (which points to its social nature) is: “How can I know what I think until I see what I say” (Weick, 1995: 18). Sensemaking was originally described as a singular activity being part of an internal cognitive process (Maitlis & Christianson, 2014: 58). Weick’s (1995) initial point of view was that, although sensemaking is at its core social, it is also a personal activity and the two cannot be separated (Weick 1995, 6). The cognitivist view of sensemaking involves the development of shared mental maps, whereas a constructionist approach views the result of sensemaking to be actionable intersubjectivity constructed through language. Over time, there has been a shift from a purely cognitivist perspective to a social constructionist, interpretive phenomenological approach (Sandberg & Tsoukas, 2015: 86). The next section will give an overview of the seven properties and aspects of sensemaking that forms the core of the sensemaking theory of Weick (1995). 2.2.2. The seven properties of sensemaking In his influential work “Sensemaking in Organizations”, Weick (1995) articulates seven interdependent characteristics of the sensemaking process. These properties have become almost a de-facto standard in sensemaking studies. According to Weick (1995), the seven characteristics indicate the uniqueness of sensemaking and distinguishes it from other explanatory processes, such as understanding, interpretation and attribution. The properties may also be seen as stages in the process of making sense and are summarised as: Sensemaking unfolds as a sequence in which people concerned with identity in the social context of other actors engage ongoing circumstances from which they extract cues and make plausible sense retrospectively, while enacting more or less order into those ongoing circumstances. (Weick, Sutcliffe & Obstfeld, 2005: 409). Weick (1995: 18) warns that when mentioning the sensemaking properties in the context of a sequence, readers should be mindful that it is a crude sequence. It does not account for Stellenbosch University https://scholar.sun.ac.za 9 simultaneous processing, feedback loops or the fact that some stages (properties) may be omitted, depending on the circumstances. The list of sensemaking properties can serve as a manual for observation or a set of raw materials for disciplined imagination. Since his original work, several authors (including Weick himself) have suggested changes or additional aspects to be added to the properties. For the purpose of this study only the original 7 properties of sensemaking will be evaluated. 2.2.2.1. Sensemaking is grounded in identity construction Identity construction is seen as the root of sensemaking and impacts on the understanding of all the other sensemaking properties. The reason is that identity, which can also be described as the self, lies at the core of all human beings (Mills, 2003: 55). In order to understand identity construction, it is important to remember that no-one has a single identity but rather a parliament of selves [Mead, 1934 (cited by Weick, 1995: 22)]. The various identities (selves) do not exist at birth but are constructed and continuously modified throughout life by means of social interaction (Mead, 1934: 136,146). People base their identities on what they imagine others think of them, and they portray identities they deem most appropriate for specific situations (Weick, 2014, 22). Weick (1995: 24) argues that the more ‘selves’ people have access to, the less chances there are of them being taken aback by a situation. Thus, the more developed their collection of identities are, the more adaptable people can be. Identity construction is articulated in Weick’s sensemaking recipe as follows: “How can I know who I am until I see what they do” (Weick, 1995: 23). In developing their sense of selves, humans strive to satisfy three needs (Weick, 1995: 20): self-enhancement: a positive cognitive and affective sense of self; self-efficacy: the need for feeling competent and effective; self-consistency: the desire for a sense of coherence and continuity. When someone perceives a threat to a positive self-concept, or self-feeling, it causes a sense of cognitive dissonance. A need for sensemaking then arises, which possibly includes the adjustment of identity (Weick, 1995: 22). Another way in which sensemaking through identity construction is triggered, is when different identities come into conflict with each other. Sensemaking is an iterative process, during which people continually have to reinvent the image they have of themselves (Parry, 2003: 243). The underlying constructionist approach of sensemaking is clearly evident if one looks at how Gergen, 1961 (cited by du Toit, 2014: 82-83) widely acknowledged as the pioneer of social constructionism, writes that the construction and maintenance of identities takes place by means of social interaction. Organisational identity, which reflects the inherent character of an organisation, has a profound influence on the identity of employees. People’s perception of who they are individually (and Stellenbosch University https://scholar.sun.ac.za 10 collectively) dictates their actions and interpretations, which in turn has an influence on how others respond to them; those responses may confirm or threaten identity (Weick, Sutcliffe & Obstfeld, 2005, 416). During organisational change a major threat is often posed to an organisation’s identity and, therefore, to its members. At the heart of this change lies the redefining of identities, since change (such as a merger) may come as a shock to organisational members, which calls for sensemaking processes in order to transform identities (Thurlow & Helms Mills, 2007: 469). Sensemaking is activated when the three representations of self: self-efficacy, self-enhancement, and self-consistency are threatened and the reconstruction of identity is required. 2.2.2.2. Sensemaking is retrospective Retrospective sensemaking is best described by the fact that: “people can know what they are doing only after doing it” (Weick, 1995: 24). What Weick means is that in looking back at a situation, thus in retrospect, we make sense of it because we think about it differently. People continuously look back at their experiences to make sense of what took place before, but that is influenced by the context of what they know and perceive in the present. Retrospection often implies 20:20 hindsight, where past events may assume a different meaning (Du Toit, 2003: 35). The retrospective nature of sensemaking is possibly the attribute most discussed in the literature. Weick (1995) derived the idea of retrospective sensemaking from Schutz’s (1967) work on “meaningful lived experience” (Weick, 1995: 24). The emphasis is on ‘lived,’ which refers to elapsed experience and captures the concept of retrospective sensemaking. Mead (1956) was one of the authors that Weick (1995) drew on in formulating his sensemaking theory, and Mead (1956: 126) articulated retrospect in this way: “We are conscious always of what we have done, never of doing it”. Everything people do or become aware of is already in the past; even if it was only a moment before, it is already part of memory. In explaining the retrospective nature of sensemaking, Weick (1995) argues that time exists both as a continuous flow of experience and distinctive episodes, extracted from that flow. In other words, by undertaking action, which is necessarily grounded in taken-for-granted beliefs, individuals enact their reality, which they then retrospectively try to make sense of. Then, on the basis of the provisional sense made, individuals act on it once again, retrospectively making sense of their new action, and so on. It is this unending dialogue between partly opaque action outcomes and deliberate probing that is at the heart of sensemaking (Sandberg & Tsoukas, 2014: 9). 2.2.2.3. Sensemaking is enactive of sensible environments The enactive property of sensemaking refers to the ‘making’ part of the concept, the action involved in constructing sense and meaning (Weick 1995, 30). Although people are impacted by the environment, they need not be victims of thereof; they can take action to make their environment more sensible to them. Stellenbosch University https://scholar.sun.ac.za 11 People or organisations construct and influence their environment (Weick, 1995: 31). Follet, 1924 (cited by Weick, 1995), adds that not only do people create the environment they find themselves in but that environment in turn also creates them (Weick, 1995: 34). People also often develop selffulfilling prophecies by creating and then experiencing their expectations in the process. There exists a process of reciprocal construction between humans and the environment they engage with. For example, when a person feels incompetent, they can easily interpret conflict with their manager as confirmation of this incompetence (what they expect it to be); however, it may be that the manager is behaving in exactly the same way towards other people. In believing they are inadequate, the employee may start behaving in an incompetent manner, resulting in their boss eventually (indeed) perceiving them as incompetent. In one of his early works, Francesco Varela (well-known for his studies on autopoiesis), wrote about the action part of sensemaking in the context of living: Order is order, relative to somebody or some being who takes such a stance towards it. In the world of the living, order is indeed inseparable from the ways in which living beings make sense, so that they can be said to have a world. (Varela, 1984: 122). What Varela refers to is the act of a living being performing activities and, in so doing, both constructs and inhabits its world (Thompson, 2011: 114). That is in line with Weick’s (1995, 2005) argument of how living beings go about their sensemaking activities and thereby constitute and reside in their worlds. When people need to make sense of new situations, they may be required to act and destroy some previous ‘sense’ made, they need ‘sensebreaking'. Like in sensemaking, sensebreaking also results in the fundamental question of “who am I?” The aim of sensebreaking is to “disrupt an individual’s sense of self to create a meaning void that must be filled” (Pratt 2000: 464). 2.2.2.4. Sensemaking is social Sensemaking is inherently social, which means that humans create meaning through interacting with others. Making something sensible is not a cognitive process that happens in one’s mind, but an intertwining of the cognitive and the social (Weick 1995: 38). Creating meaning through social interaction does not necessarily mean shared meaning but rather an experience of shared collaborative action, where sense is constructed and re-constructed within a social context [1992; Weick (cited by Czarniawska-Joerges, 1992)]. In describing sensemaking as social, Weick (1995) created a shift from the original cognitivist sources to a process of social construction. The sociologists Berger & Luckman (1966) had a significant influence on social constructionist thinking, and referred to the social nature of creating a shared reality and how that influences thinking and behaviour. The self only becomes known Stellenbosch University https://scholar.sun.ac.za 12 within the context of others; the intersubjective creates the subjective (Gergen, 2001, Du Toit, 2003: 31). Social constructionism places a large emphasis on discourse and views it as a product of communal interchange (Gergen, 1985: 266). Individual versions of what is ‘out there’ are constructed within human interchange (Du Toit, 2003: 34). Sensemaking unfolds in a discursive process between people, where meanings are co-constructed, negotiated and challenged (Maitlis, 2005: 21; Gephart, 1993: 1485; Weick, Sutcliffe & Obstfeld, 2005: 49). Language is the basis of intersubjective sensemaking and, for that reason, vocabulary and discursive competence have a large influence on the construction of sense during interaction (Sandberg & Tsoukas, 2015: 16). The content of people’s conversations are loaded with symbols, stories and metaphors, which act as vehicles for conveying their understanding of the world (Du Toit, 2014: 89). The construction of identity is to a great extent based on the dialogue and narratives within social interactions [Gergen, 1991 (cited by Du Toit, 2014: 89)]. “Narrative, discourse and conversation are the primary media of sensemaking” (Parry, 2003: 243). It is through the stories that people tell that they discover, and convey, the assumptions and sense they make of the world. 2.2.2.5. Sensemaking is ongoing “Flows are the constants of sensemaking” (Weick, 1995: 43). Sensemaking never formally starts, but deals with ‘chopped out moments’ in an ongoing flow of experience. Weick (1995: 45) writes that people are always “in the middle of things”, and when they become aware of an interruption of the flow of events it creates a trigger for sensemaking. If a leader is suddenly confronted with complaints of management style, it may cause a disruption in the ongoing flow of the management of the team. The leader then has to make sense of the situation in order to restore the flow. People make sense by selecting moments out of a pure duration of events, they then extract cues from those moments to make sense of what they are dealing with. If the flow of events is interrupted it activates arousal of the autonomic nervous system, which may signal a threat to one’s well-being. Appropriate action is then required to reinstate flow. When activity is interrupted, arousal may increase, which can induce an emotional response. Emotion has a significant impact on how people make sense of events. “…it is precisely because ongoing flows are subject to interruption that sensemaking is infused with feeling” (Weick, 1995: 45). Once people become aware of increased arousal, they try to make sense of the experience by creating a link between the present situation and a similar previous one. What they try to figure out is: “what’s up?” (Weick, 1995: 46). The key occasion for triggering emotion is when there is an interruption of expectations. Emotion builds from the point that order is interrupted until the interruption is removed, or a sequence is completed (Weick, 1995: 46). An example would be an Stellenbosch University https://scholar.sun.ac.za 13 interruption of projects affecting the expectation of delivery dates. This may lead to frustration and emotional behaviour amongst project members. Weick (1995) points out that people who have developed a range of substitute behaviours (to restore order after an interruption) are less prone to building up intense emotions (Weick, 1995: 46). Negative emotions that are experienced as a result of interruption or crisis typically include fear, desperation, anxiety, or panic. What happens is that people’s capacity for cognitive information processing and recognising significant cues is reduced. Emotions have the effect of limiting sensemaking efforts (Maitlis & Sonenshein, 2010: 566–567; Stein, 2004). 2.2.2.6. Sensemaking is focused on and by, extracted cues This property of sensemaking has to do with the individual noticing an equivocal cue (signal) indicating that something is wrong. Consequently a need for sensemaking and the construction of meaning arises. In order to make sense of something, people need to pay attention to (notice) cues signalling a disruptive situation in need of sensemaking. Noticing happens when people bracket some ‘problematic’ stimuli as cues out of streams of experience in their world. Noticed cues are experiential units and their meanings are ambiguous. A person’s frame of reference, or framework (Weick, 1995) signifies a belief about ‘what is’ (Starbuck & Milliken, 1988: 51). The noticed cue itself is meaningless until placed into a frame, and its way of being (what the cue is) emerges (Jeong & Brower, 2008: 228-231). For example: during a company merger an employee may have a frame of reference that mergers result in retrenchments. Subsequently the person may then interpret their own management’s involvement in merger meetings as an indication of imminent job loss. Weick (1995: 51) emphasises the importance of context in the noticing and processing of cues. He refers to the frame (of reference) as the structure of the context. Context does not only impact on which cues will be noticed and extracted to start with, but also on how those cues are subsequently interpreted (Weick, 1995: 51). What do people notice? What catches the attention of people is the unpleasant, defiant, extreme, intense, unusual, brightly lit, colourful, alone or sharply drawn [Kiesler & Sprout, (cited by Weick, 1995: 52)]. The long list of aspects that draw attention is a clear indication of how important context is in noticing what is foreign. When people are confronted with crisis situations and organisational change, negative emotions are often triggered (Dougherty & Drumheller, 2006: 223; Maitlis & Sonenshein, 2010: 567–568). Fear, desperation, anxiety, and panic can have a limiting effect on cognitive processing and subsequently inhibit sensemaking processes. When people experience negative emotions, their Stellenbosch University https://scholar.sun.ac.za 14 alertness to significant cues in the environment usually becomes dulled. The noticing of cues is essential to the construction of meaning; so, negative emotions can restrict the construction of meaning (Maitlis & Sonenshein, 2010: 566–567). 2.2.2.7. Sensemaking is driven by plausibility rather than accuracy To deal with ambiguity, interdependent people search for meaning, settle for plausibility and move on (Weick, Sutcliffe & Obstfeld, 2005: 419). When we make sense of an event it need not be accurate. What is important is that the ‘sense’ that is made provides a stable enough platform to initiate action. Weick (1995: 56) warns against a realist ontology for sensemaking, since the term ‘sense’ does not refer to accuracy. The environment is an ever-changing system and the speed of filtering cues and their enhancement into a frame takes precedence to accuracy. Once information is filtered it becomes more understandable (Starbuck & Milliken, 1988: 41). What makes sense to people need not be sensible in itself (Weick, 1995: 56). The ‘made-sense’ needs to be just plausible enough for a person to understand what is going on. Then a decision follows, in terms of what action is to be taken in order to get back in touch with the continuing flow of experience (Weick et al., 2005: 2). The meaning made need only be useful; an objective reality is not required (Swanson, 2015: 77). Another reason why accuracy is not important is that, once people have a plausible narrative, they may enact the world in a sensible way that fits their new narrative. The narrative is an emerging story which is re-drafted through an iterative process until it becomes comprehensive enough to sustain action. Stories are templates that represent patterns of meaning that was previously created. In addition to stories, Weick (1995: 61) talks about the symbolic trappings of sensemaking such as myths, metaphors, platitudes, fables, epics and paradigms, and argues that they are much more helpful than to strive for accuracy. This section provided an overview of sensemaking and its properties in preparation of understanding how sensemaking takes place within coaching. In the following sections the commonalities between coaching and sensemaking will be explored; a review of coaching will be given in the last section on this review of the literature. 2.2.3 Occasions / triggers of sensemaking Weick (1995: 87-88) identifies various occasion that could trigger sensemaking: An increasing information load concerning quantity, ambiguity and a mixture of information that individuals are forced to organise; Increased or high complexity of situations, which can result in uncertainty due to current beliefs and ways of doing that are no longer working; Stellenbosch University https://scholar.sun.ac.za 15 2.3 Turbulence, instability, unexpected events and shocks. THE BRIDGE BETWEEN COACHING AND SENSEMAKING Sensemaking, as found in the literature, sets the scene for practically exploring how meaningmaking aspects show up during coaching. In reviewing the literature on both sensemaking and coaching there seems to be a mutually supportive relation between the two disciplines. First, a general overview of coaching will be given which includes its origins, definitions and competencies (Du Toit, 2012: 1). Angelique du Toit is one author that has taken an interest in the role of coaching in sensemaking, and has published both an article and a book on the topic (Du Toit, 2003, 2012, 2014). She does warn that her arguments on the relationship between the two fields are theoretical and have not (up until 2012) been empirically investigated. Stelter (2014) has written about ‘meaning-making’ in the context of coaching, which also contributes to the understanding of the nature of the relationship between coaching and sensemaking. What the above authors share is the underlying theory of social constructionism which, at the same time, is also informing sensemaking theory. This research assignment will explore sensemaking during coaching from a wider perspective by focusing on more than one aspect of sensemaking. Coaching, in the context of this discussion, refers to individual coaching interventions and does not focus on any coaching model in particular; some particular models that may be relevant to sensemaking during coaching (based on the literature reviewed) will be discussed in the next section. People are constantly faced with change and, in order to deal with the change, they have to figure out what is going on or what the story is. It is by making sense of disruption that individuals integrate new experiences into their existing world-views and work through the change effectively (Du Toit: 2012: 283). Although there are many support structures available to equip leaders to deal with change, coaching has become a preferred intervention for leadership development. Coaching is exceptionally well suited to enhance the sensemaking activities of individuals. The theories and models underpinning coaching is particularly applicable with respect to assisting individuals in filtering and integrating a plethora of new cues from the environment, into their frames of reference (Du Toit: 2012: 283). The coach and client collaborate in a shared process of meaning-making. The client enters the coaching relationship bringing their self-perceived reality. The reality that the client holds was shaped outside the coaching space and constructed through the relationships in their family, professional and other life contexts (Stelter, 2014: 55). In reviewing the nature of sensemaking, the researcher is of the opinion that coaching can play a major role, by enhancing the sensemaking processes of individuals. When faced with change and equivocality, people’s assumptions and beliefs of realities are challenged. Their tried-and-tested beliefs and scripts are no longer sufficient in dealing with the situation of change. In order to make Stellenbosch University https://scholar.sun.ac.za 16 sense of a new situation (and integrate any differences with a current frame of reference), the situation has to be redefined. When there is a large scale change such as organisational restructures or mergers, current value and belief systems have to be re-evaluated and adjusted to ensure optimal functioning of all involved. Coaching very much focuses on working with values and beliefs, and is an ideal tool to assist clients in reintegrating change into existing value and meaning systems (Du Toit, 2012: 285). 2.3.1 The origins of coaching The Online Etymology Dictionary indicates that the word coaching originates from the word ‘koczi,’ a covered carriage or wagon that was originally invented in the village Kocs in northern Hungary. The wagon (as indicated in Figure 2.1) was designed to protect valued passengers from the elements on their journey through a rough terrain, from departure to their destination (Hendrickson, 1987, cited by Stern, 2004: 154) (Executive Coaching a working definition). The word coach in the context of a trainer or instructor is said to stem from the 1830’s, when the Oxford University used it as slang for a tutor who ‘carried’ a student through the exam (Bachkirova, T., Cox, E. & Clutterbuck, D. 2010: 2). Figure 2.1 The original coach; a covered carriage Source: http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/coach From a historic perspective, the Greek philosopher Socrates (469-399 BCE) is seen by some to be the first significant coach. He made a valuable contribution to coaching with the Socratic method, which is based on open-ended questioning to encourage reflection. This method is well integrated in the coaching philosophy and is focused on clients generating their own perspectives and actions for addressing challenges. The method encourages people to reach their own conclusions, as opposed to being advised by the questioner (Neenan, 2008: 250; Stout-Rostron, 2012: 16). Chapman et. al. (2003: 2) refers to the words of Kahlil Gibran’s timeless wisdom, which portrays the essence of what they see as coaching: No man can reveal aught but that which already lies half asleep in the dawning of your knowledge, The Teacher who walks in the shadow of the temple amongst his followers, give not of his wisdom, but rather of his faith and his lovingness, If he is indeed wise he Stellenbosch University https://scholar.sun.ac.za 17 does not bid you the enter the house of his wisdom, But rather leads you to the threshold of your own mind. In the twentieth century the focus in organisations was on executive coaching, with the purpose of rectifying unacceptable behaviour of executives that have become derailed. The next phase in the approach was more human centred, in that the purpose of coaching became the preparation of identified, talented employees towards career advancement [Bono, Purvanova, Towler, & Peterson, 2009; Giglio, Diamante, & Urban (cited by Carey, 2011 et al.: 52)]. Coaching then moved towards a psychoanalytical approach in that the psychologist became involved in employee development, and recruitment processes. At the same time, coaching became entrenched in sport, where a coach was labelled as someone who trained and directed the strategy of athletes and sport teams [Haas, 1992 (cited by Carey et al., 2011: 52)]. Sports coaching had a major influence on the emergence of goal-based coaching, and adapted a psychological approach towards the maximising of performance. Subsequently, Whitmore (1992) invented a very influential and adaptable coaching model, resulting in a most influential book in the coaching history, which he called the GROW model: Goal, Reality, Options, Will (Carey et al, 2011: 52). The following table indicates how coaching has transitioned since the early twentieth century, as described by Bachkirova et al (2010: 3): Table 2.1: Transitions from traditional coaching From To Coach requires expert knowledge of the task Coach requires expertise/knowledge of the coaching process Driven by the coach’s agenda or, at best, an agreed Driven by the Client’s agenda agenda Client performance (doing) Client self-actualisation (becoming) Skills acquisition (building knowledge of the task) Capability development, building insight and more substantive self-knowledge as stepping-stones to change Meeting standards set by others Meeting standards set by the client Source: Bachkirova. T, Cox, E. & Clutterbuck, D. 2010: 3 Next, an attempt is made to provide more clarity on the term ‘coaching’ by highlighting the various definitions that are available. Due to the dynamic nature of coaching, there is no one agreed standard definition within the discipline. Stellenbosch University https://scholar.sun.ac.za 18 2.3.2 Defining coaching Coaching is an emerging discipline, and still lacks clarity on a standard definition. According to Parsloe & Wray (2000), one reason for ambiguity around the definition of coaching may be that “…we are in the middle of an intellectual revolution” (Ives, 2008: 1000). Coaching is recognised as an applied practice with intellectual roots in various fields, such as social psychology, learning theory, human and organisational development, existential and phenomenological philosophy. Various definitions of coaching exist in the marketplace, which sometimes becomes quite confusing and impacts the image of coaching as a professional service. The international coaching federation (ICF), a non-profit representative of the coaching industry defines coaching as follows: …partnering with clients in a thought-provoking and creative process that inspires them to maximize their personal and professional potential (ICF) In The Complete Handbook of Coaching, Bachkirova, Cox and Clutterbuck (2010: 1) offer the following definition of coaching: Coaching is a human development process that involves structured, focused interaction and the use of appropriate strategies, tools and techniques to promote desirable and sustainable change for the benefit of the client and potentially other stakeholders. A coaching definition often quoted is that of Whitmore. He describes coaching to be: …unlocking people’s potential to maximise their own performance. It is helping them to learn rather than teaching them (Whitmore, 1992: 10). Grant (2003: 254) formulated a more goal focused definition of coaching. He defines coaching as a result-oriented, systematic process in which the coach facilitates the enhancement of life experience and goal-attainment in the personal and/or professional life of normal, non-clinical clients. The diversity of coaching also has its advantages, since it allows for the coach to maintain flexibility in application. In conclusion, it seems fair to accept the definition put forward by Passmore and Fillery-Travis (2011). They conducted a literature review on coaching definitions and suggested the following definition of coaching based on the work of Cox (Cox et al., 2010): A Socratic based future focused dialogue between a facilitator(coach) and a participant(coachee / client), where the facilitator uses open questions, summaries and reflections which are aimed at stimulating the self-awareness and personal responsibility of the participant. (Passmore, Petersen & Freire, 2013: 3). Stellenbosch University https://scholar.sun.ac.za 19 The authors argue that meaning and identity are foundational to all coaching practice, and that these topics become involved at some point in all coaching. Such issues arise for both individuals and groups at key times of change and transition: when there are endings and/or new beginnings, or when a person or team seems stuck or unable to move forward (Passmore, Petersen & Freire, 2013: 6). From the numerous definitions in the literature it becomes clear that the different definitions are underpinned by different coaching approaches and theories. The topic of approaches and models will be discussed in more detail in a separate section of this literature review. In the next section, an overview will be given on the benefits of coaching. 2.3.3 Why coaching? The outcomes and benefits of coaching. In this section covers a broad overview of the benefits of coaching as found in the literature. The discussion will exclude the details of empirical research or instruments for the measuring of coaching outcomes. The purpose of looking at the outcomes of coaching is to prepare for analysing data and findings of this study to determine how and if sensemaking has played a role in the outcome and insights derived through coaching. Coaching seems to be well acknowledged as beneficial to both individuals and organisations. From an empirical point of view the measurement of the efficacy of the discipline is still in its infancy. A study by Harvard Business Review (2009) concluded that coaching most certainly works, but they warn potential clients that there are challenges in the industry they should be aware of. HBR suggests that the coaching industry is: fraught with conflicts of interest, blurry lines between what is the province of coaches and what should be left to mental health professionals and sketchy mechanisms for monitoring the effectiveness of a coaching engagement (Cauto, D & Kauffman, C, 2009: 1). The ICF summarises the benefits of coaching in the following words: Professional coaching brings many wonderful benefits: fresh perspectives on personal challenges, enhanced decision-making skills, greater interpersonal effectiveness, and increased confidence. And, the list does not end there. Those who undertake coaching also can expect appreciable improvement in productivity, satisfaction with life and work, and the attainment of relevant goals. Coaching is not only beneficial to the individual but to the organisation as a whole. Chapman (2003: 14) writes that coaching enables a faster move into action than other leadership interventions. O’Shaughnessy (2001) and his organisation, conducted a survey which lead to a conclusion that coaching made a major contribution to the competitiveness of an organisation. In the survey, coaching was also seen as one of the most powerful strategic and tactical weapons Stellenbosch University https://scholar.sun.ac.za 20 available to business today (O’Shaughnessy, 2001: 195). In a qualitative study by Seamon (2006), executives referred to coaching as an immensely valuable experience (Larsen, 2009: 30). In a study by Passmore (2008), it was found that executives were very clear on what they think makes for effective coaching. They highlighted abilities a coach should possess to enable successful coaching, such as managing emotions, being flexible on when to challenge and when to support, encourage reflection and problem resolution, determining client tasks for in-between sessions (homework) and stimulating the client towards developing alternative perspectives (Grant et al., 2010: 27). In a study on executive coaching as a development tool, personal development coaching proved to be more successful in the development and sustainability of leadership competencies and performance than performance coaching based on work-related tasks [Barclay, (sited by Horner, 2002)]. If coaching makes a significant contribution to the sensemaking of individuals, it will also be of major advantage to the identity and collective sensemaking processes of organisations. 2.3.4 Coaching philosophies and approaches There are a multitude of professional coaching services available to clients today. Prefixes such as life, client or executive are added to coaching to indicate the focus or type of coaching interventions. Some authors argue that most approaches could be allocated to two broad categories, namely performance and development coaching [Du Toit, (sited by Ives, 2008: 103; Cope, 2004]. This division of approaches resonates with Summerfield's (2006: 24) suggestion that the two categories of coaching be acquisitional (acquiring of a new skill) as opposed to transformational (undergoing personal change). Peltier (2001) has a similar view, and he divides coaching approaches in to that of day-to-day management activity and executive coaching (Ives, 2008:103). In order to position certain coaching philosophies in the context of sensemaking theory the focus will be on social constructionism, which seems to link to sensemaking theory and meaning-making to coaching. Since social constructionism relates to post-modern thinking, post-modernism in the context of coaching will be covered first. 2.3.4.1 What does a postmodern approach mean to coaching? The father of postmodernism is thought to be the French philosopher Lyotard, who approaches truth from a scepticism point of view. He encourages scepticism towards the grand narratives and philosophies of the world and their representation of reality (truth) about society and its complexities. Du Toit (2014: 43) writes that postmodernism adds to “what is the truth?”, and argues for that question to have a significant effect on what founds coaching practices. Stellenbosch University https://scholar.sun.ac.za 21 The transformation of society over the last 30 to 40 years had a major impact on the creation of knowledge, the construction of self and identity and making sense of life (Stelter: 2003: 208). Society has undergone massive social changes towards the late modernist era. Coaching as a tool for self-reflection is ideally positioned to support individuals in the constant evaluation of identity, in the context of the complexity of modern times (Giddens, 1991; Stelter, 2003: 208). 2.3.4.2. What is the impact of social constructionism on a coaching approach One of the outcomes of postmodern thinking is the notion of constructionism, which Gergen (1985) describes as follows: “Social constructionism views discourse about the world not as a reflection or map of the world but as an artefact of communal interchange” (Gergen, 1985: 266). Social constructionism as a postmodern concept is also underpinned by a fundamental scepticism of the taken-for-granted world, and discards the belief that common truths and understandings are acquired through observations (Gergen, 1985: 267). ‘Truths’ are individual and constructed during reciprocal interactions between people [Du Toit (cited by Gergen, 1994; Rohmann]. In the context of social constructionism, coaching provides the opportunity for communal interchange which enables the sensemaking of both the coach and client (Gergen, 1994: 6; Du Toit, 2012: 284). Within the coaching relationship, the client’s own truth and reality is supported by the coach. The coaching discipline supports a constructionist perspective, stating that people are faced with multiple constructed realities that they need to make sense of. Du Toit (2012: 284) points out that the coaching discipline does not support any attempts at establishing “universal first principles”. From a sensemaking point of view, the construction of new knowledge by social interaction is what is needed to make sense of the world (Du Toit, 2014: 169). Stories are key to both sensemaking and coaching within the post-modern era and in the next section a narrative approach to coaching will be discussed. 2.3.4.3 The narrative approach to coaching Due to the importance of narratives in both coaching and sensemaking processes, this section will explore the nature of a narrative coaching approach. Stelter (2009: 214) identifies the link between narrative work and post-modernism by arguing that the concept of narrativity can be understood as a further development of the social constructionist theory (Stelter, 2009: 214). Stories play a significant role in sensemaking, and people make sense of the world through narratives (Taylor, 1999: 527). Sensemaking theory emphasises that stories are plausible and not accurate (Weick 1995: 56). One of the most important ways that things become meaningful during coaching are when people understand how they feel, think and behave by telling their stories (Stelter, 2014: 54). The stories that clients bring to coaching are representations of the meaning they attach to situations rather than the truth (Du Toit, 2014: 98). Coaching provides powerful techniques in support of sensemaking through stories and metaphors (Du Toit, 2007: 286). Stellenbosch University https://scholar.sun.ac.za 22 The narrative approach originated in counselling and therapy and was documented by Michael White and David Epston more than 30 years ago (Swart, 2013: 1). The underlying approach to narrative coaching is of a mindful, holistic and experiential nature, with the purpose of helping clients to shift their stories to generate new possibilities and new results (Drake: 2014: 17 in Cox, Bachkirova, Clutterbuck). The stories people tell are of significance in coaching, since the way in which they narrate their identities is intimately connected to how they live their lives (Drake 2014: 119 in Cox, Bachkirova, Clutterbuck). In the narrative work, every conversation is an opportunity for transformation in both the storyteller and the listener (Swart, 2013: 52). Key to narrative practice is firstly the definition of problem stories, which mostly present themselves as fixed in limiting ideas and beliefs (Swart, 2013: 113). A core feature of narrative coaching is for the coach to identify elements in the client’s story that are susceptible to challenge, reinterpretation and redefinition (Coulehan, Friedlander & Heathering, 1998: 18). Listening is crucial during the narrative process and the coach has to listen with a third ear to what is said or not said, whilst at the same time pay attention to non-verbal expressions. It is for that reason that listening should proceed any talking by the coach (Drake, 2014: 120 in Cox, Bachkirova, Clutterbuck). The main role of the coach is to explore the stories with the client to enable them to see their interpretations from a different perspective, and realise how they are influenced by the stories they live (Drake, 2014: 120 in Cox, Bachkirova, Clutterbuck). The purpose of narrative coaching is for the client to develop an alternative or new story that frees them from the limitations of the saturated problem story. The alternative story is formed by the coach asking transformational questions which challenges beliefs embedded in the problem-story. A new narrative with new possibilities is created which supports the client’s transformation to a new level of ‘becoming’ rather than one of ‘being’. In the process identities are transformed (Swart, 2013: 74). Narrative work takes into account the diversity of human existence and the multiplicity of stories that construct people’s identities (Swart, 2013: 5). Narrative coaches collaborate with their clients to transform and become authors of their own stories and, in the process, impact the environment that they are part of. In the next section, coaching will be discussed in the context of the seven properties of sensemaking. 2.3.5. Coaching in the context of the seven properties of sensemaking The theoretical alignment of how coaching supports sensemaking is presented in the context of seven properties of sensemaking, as defined by Weick (1995). Stellenbosch University https://scholar.sun.ac.za 23 2.3.5.1. Coaching and retrospective sensemaking According to Weick (1995, 2005), we can only make sense of an experience or situation once it has already occurred. During the coaching journey the coach supports the client in exploring past events to obtain clarity and assign new meanings to those events (Du Toit, 2012: 284). The retrospective nature of sensemaking is supported by a core component of coaching, namely reflection. It is only once a lived experience has been reflected on, that it can be named and labelled. The coach stimulates the client to reflect by giving them the time and space to contemplate and think things over either within sessions, or by journaling or meditating in-between sessions. Reflection is one way for clients to understand, or think differently about a specific situation or experience; in the process, learning occurs. Reflection is at the same time also seen as a key component of sensemaking as indicated by Parry (2003: 252), in a study he conducted on how senior executives make sense of their professional life. This clearly indicates that reflection, as part of coaching, enables the making of sense. What is prevalent in coaching is the influence of present thinking on how people remember the past (Du Toit, 2012: 285; 2014: 86): We continually look back at our experience to make sense of what took place then, in the context of what we know and perceive now. Retrospection often implies 20:20 hindsight. Starbuck and Milliken (1988: 37) The fact that a coach is objective and inquisitive creates a safe space for the coaching client. When feeling safe the client is able to explore and reflect upon bad habits and limiting assumptions acquired during their life journey. At the same time, the coach will also elicit hidden strengths and abilities that the client might not be aware of (Du Toit 2012: 285; 2015: 86). Du Toit (2012) quotes Weick (1979) on stating that many of the activities that take place in the organisation involve reconstructing situations after the fact. Weick (1993: 350) writes that events are set in motion, but the orderliness they will create remains to be discovered. Organisations typically display an illusion of orderliness, control and predictability, while being permeated by ambiguity, equivocality and subjectivity. The role of the coach is to act as a mirror which reflects back to the client what the illusions are that are influencing their behaviour and sensemaking. As part of the coaching journey, the client might require a change in meaning systems (and sense they make) in order to pursue and achieve certain goals (Du Toit: 2012: 285). The sensemaking recipe that was put forward by Weick (1995: 18): “How can I know what I think until I see what I say” seems to be particularly relevant in the world of coaching, when only after the clients have said or written (journaling) something, they can look back and make sense of what is really going on. Stellenbosch University https://scholar.sun.ac.za 24 2.3.5.2 The ongoing nature of sensemaking The ongoing property of sensemaking is inherent to a constructionist view in that intelligibility is always in a state of becoming and is never complete. Knowledge and truth is constantly redefined and interpreted and future events will have an influence on the interpretation of current events when reviewed retrospectively (Du Toit, 2003: 35). It never starts because it never stops. You are always in the middle of sensemaking and your map is constantly updating (Parry, 2003: 244). When the continuous flow of one’s individual or organisational life is disrupted, it triggers the sensemaking process; much of this happens unconsciously and has a great influence on what someone comes to experience. People are not so much victims of their environment, but more of their sensemaking processes. In surfacing those sensemaking processes, coaching enables the client to make informed, conscious decisions, which would benefit future sensemaking processes as well (Du Toit, 2012: 209). Coaching can assist the individual in dealing proactively with the potential interruption of ongoing events and changes in organisational life. Coaches use techniques to help clients explore the various options, and thereafter their consequences. By assisting the client through a process of sensemaking (and making meaning of changes) new alternatives of dealing with the potential interruptions surface for the individual (Du Toit, 2012: 285). Weick (1995: 43-45) refers to the ongoing nature of sensemaking and the fact that we only become aware of it when it is interrupted. Invariably, the interruption of the ongoing flow of events causes some discomfort, as a result of evokes emotion. When people experience interruption and ambiguity in their lives it signals the possibility of change and complexity that has to be made sense of (Weick, 1995: 45). Coaching is particularly powerful in working with emotions that may be triggered as part of the sensemaking process, when dealing with disruption. The client is led to become conscious of their emotions and how to deal with emotion in such a way that they control their emotions instead of emotion controlling them (Du Toit, 2012: 286). 2.3.5.3 Sensemaking through identity construction in coaching People’s identities are constructs, formed and continuously updated through interactions and communication with others. It comes into being and is influenced by what humans imagine others think of them (Weick 1995: Du Toit, 2015: 82; Bush, Ozkan, Passmore, 2013: 58). In a study by Butcher (2012) on the link between identity and coaching practice, coaches reported that they recognised multiple identities in their clients. Identities were shifting between various roles such as professional and personal identities (Butcher, 2012: 119). Stellenbosch University https://scholar.sun.ac.za 25 Threats to identity creates a powerful occasion for sensemaking, as Weick (1995: 23) indicated, because when one fails to confirm oneself it leads to dissonance, which triggers sensemaking. People will enter into sensemaking driven by the sources of threat in an attempt to reinstate identity (Maitlis & Christianson, 2014: 73). Identity challenges can surface in various ways, such as when there are questions around an executive’s organisational fit or when someone transitions to a new position or role (Bush, Ozkan, Passmore, 2012: 61). When organisations go through radical change and people are faced with the possibility of redundancy, identities are seriously challenged. This scenario is particularly true when personal identities are constructed around work identities. Threatened identities could be fundamental within the coaching context and requires the conversations to be directed towards the reframing of clients’ identities (Butcher, 2012: 121, 125). By exploring identity and meaning in the context of organisations, companies are able to take additional steps to increase the efficiency of executives (Bush, Ozkan, Passmore, 2012: 62). Various authors argue that certain coaching approaches such as narrative, ontological and gestalt coaching are particularly focused on the building of identity and meaning (Bluckett, 2011; Drake, 2011; Bush Ozkan (cited by Sieler & Drake, 2010), Passmore: 2013: 59). Butcher (2012) quotes van Deurzen & Adams, (2010) who argue that existential coaching has a tradition of exploring meaning and purpose, which is central to their personal identity. Butcher (2012: 119) concludes that it may very well be that the identities of clients are much deeper embedded in coaching practice that implied in the coaching literature. 2.3.5.4 Coaching as support to sensemaking by enactment One of the criteria for sensemaking put forward by Weick is that people have an impact on, as well as construct, the environment they inhabit. They act, and in doing so create the materials that become the constraints and opportunities they face (Weick, 1995: 31). Sensemaking is thus set in motion through action [Boland, 1984; Du Toit (cited by Smircich & Stubbart, 1985)]. The concept of enactment underlies the view that the individual and joint actions of people ‘make’ an organisation and its environment (Smirch & Stubbart, 1985: 731). The interaction people have with the environment is reciprocal, and takes place in a relationship of co-creation (Du Toit, 2014: 87). People do not always realise that the reality they are faced with results from previous actions they took. Coaches are aware that by encouraging clients to experiment with new actions, new behaviour patterns can be developed, establishing revised beliefs and assumptions (Du Toit, 2012: 289). Humans are not victims of their environment. The role of the coach is to act as a mirror, challenging the client to become aware of the impact of their own actions on the environment they experience. In the process, a client becomes empowered and steps out of a victim role to take control of their life by making conscious choices (Du Toit, 2012: 289; 2014: 87). Stellenbosch University https://scholar.sun.ac.za 26 2.3.5.5 Sensemaking is social, and so is coaching The process of sensemaking creates the reality that people experience, and is viewed by Gergen (1985: 266) as a result of communal interchange. The client is part of a construction process within the coaching relationship which provides a supportive space for their own truth and reality (Du Toit, 2012: 284). Gergen (1994: 6) views coaching as a social constructionist relationship. He explains that social constructionism takes issue with the view that observation is the way in which knowledge is acquired. Social constructionists challenge the taken-for-granted narratives and beliefs about the world and argue that sense is made through active interchange between parties within a reciprocal relationship. The coaching relationship is one of ‘communal interdependence’, and in the process not only is the sensemaking of the client supported, but that of the coach as well (Gergen, 1994: 96). Du Toit (2012: 284) agrees with a constructionist perspective and suggests that coaching supports the constructionist perspective, advocating that there are multitude of ways in which the world can be constructed and made sense of. Social constructionists reject any endeavour towards instituting universal first principles (Du Toit, 2012: 284). Shelter (2014: 13) supports the social nature of sensemaking by arguing that collaboration is the foundation of shared meaning-making. Sensemaking processes involve rhetoric, and the sense that people make is a mere representation of their reality and is not objective (Du Toit (cited by Colville et al., 1999). Conversations, narration, language and words are the primary ingredients of sensemaking, and words feature in every step (Weick, 1995: 106; Parry, 2003: 243). Coaching is particularly enabling of sensemaking processes through working with words, stories and metaphors. By having ongoing conversations, and working with narratives, the coach and client jointly makes sense of the unknown and work towards the reality the client wishes to achieve (Du Toit, 2012: 286). The foundation of conversations is language and words are used to convey experiences. Words are the way in which meanings are generated; this is a fundamental element of sensemaking. This points to what Weick (1995) suggests, in that people need to make sense of what they are thinking before they can make sense of experiences. Coaching provides the client with a safe space and opportunity for reflection and ‘seeing’ what they think by hearing what they are saying. The way people create meaning and come to make sense of what they feel, think and act is by telling stories about themselves, as well as the world around them (Stelter, 2014: 54). Narratives are a way that people organise ambiguous cues into a more coherent interpretation of what is going on and what they need to do about it (Boudes & Laroche 2009: 337; Sandberg & Tsoukas, 2014: 16). Coaches are particularly observant of the words clients use and apply, or of what is not said. The coach will question and explore words used by the client; meaning is expressed not only through words but also by the silences between the words (Du Toit, 2012: 288). During coaching Stellenbosch University https://scholar.sun.ac.za 27 interventions the coach may support the client in transforming words as a pathway to the transformation of limiting thoughts and behaviour. In the context of sensemaking, the coaching conversation enables the client to become aware of the impact of words on their thoughts and behaviour (Du Toit, 2014: 97). Coaching allows for the individual to experiment with novel ideas in a safe space without risk of failure or ridicule (Du Toit, 2012: 287). 2.3.5.6 What would the role of coaching be in noticing and extracting cues? This property of sensemaking has to do with the process by which people extract specific cues on which they can base their sensemaking (Thurlow, Helms Mills, 2009: 463). Individuals’ can only make sense of complexity or events by first noticing certain signals, in their environment. A specific cue is noticed and is then embellished, combined and linked within a frame of reference in support of making sense (Starbuck and Milliken, 1988: 51). People tend to recognise cues that are supported by their beliefs and rules that fit their frames of reference. They create their own realities and often find what they expect to find and in the process, create self-fulfilling prophecies. What the coach sets out to do is to challenge the cues that clients focus on, and support them in becoming aware of the paradigms they create for themselves. Beliefs and assumptions tend to drive the actions individuals take and that reinforces those beliefs and assumptions. During coaching the coach questions and surfaces the assumptions that the client unconsciously holds onto and acts upon (Du Toit, 2012: 288). Coaches also support clients in recognising different cues in order to explore the possibility of alternative realities, rather than just recognising cues that maintains their current reality (Du Toit, 2014: 91). Sensemaking is mostly swift and unconscious and Weick (1995: 49) writes that it is normally the result, rather than the process, that is noticeable. He suggests that in order to become aware of the process of sensemaking, people need to be observed in dealing with prolonged ambiguity that limits sensemaking, such as “paradoxes, dilemmas and inconceivable events”. Weick (1995) continues that sensemaking is visible in the way that individuals recognise and extract cues from their environment, and how they then enlarge those cues (Weick, 1995: 49). The sensemaking process is often observable in a coaching situation when clients wrestle with making sense of disruptions and dilemmas in their lives. Individuals seek coaching because they might be unable to construct meaning on their own, and need the coach to support them in making sense of what they are dealing with (Du Toit, 2014: 90). 2.3.5.7 Does coaching support plausible rather than accurate sensemaking? In sensemaking accuracy is not a necessity, because the world is not accurate (Weick, 1995: 56; Parry, 2003: 244). So, all that is necessary is a good story; good enough to hold diverse elements together to direct and stimulate action (Weick, 1995: 61; Du Toit, 2014: 98). Stories are representations of the truth and do not just represent a chronology of events as they occurred. Stellenbosch University https://scholar.sun.ac.za 28 These stories are rather poetic elaborations with the purpose of conveying “facts as experience, not facts as information” (Gabriel, 2004: 64). Narratives are vehicles of meaning rather than truth (Du Toit, 2014: 98). During coaching, clients are encouraged to re-write the narratives they hold to be the only truth and, in that way, shift their future (Swart, 2013: 1). Stories provide tools for diagnosis (Weick 1995, 130) and add understanding in the coaching process. Through the telling of stories the coach and client engage in making sense of a particular situation that the client is challenged with. Emotions are significant elements contained within stories. Emotions are indictors to the coach on aspects to explore with the client in order to access a deeper sense of self (Du Toit, 2014: 101). Another way in which narratives are of value in coaching is that it allows clients to rehearse various scenarios that can be applied to a situation they wish to change or influence. In telling stories, clients are able to surface hidden personal conflicts and come to terms with change (Du Toit, 2014: 103). When clients tell their stories, the coach engages in intense listening to pick up not to only what is included in the story, but also what is left out (Du Toit, 2014: 105). Drake (2007: 287) suggests that, in many ways, we cannot see that which we cannot narrate. In working with narratives, coaches focus on enabling clients to become aware of their dominant narratives and how those may limit them to explore alternative narratives. Coaches assist clients in identifying and naming problem narratives. The coach and client collaboratively explore the history of the story and how the client influences and is being influenced, by the story. The story is also examined to uncover taken-for-granted ideas and beliefs that sustain the problem narrative. Eventually, the client is supported in exploring an alternative narrative and defining the ideas, beliefs, and skills supporting that narrative (Swart, 2013: 1). Narratives play a central role in postmodernist thinking. Postmodernism encourages the creation of novel ideas through little narratives, which is also true for coaching (Du Toit, 2014: 114). Gabriel (2000: 19) concludes that discourses in postmodernism have favoured stories, and storytelling, as sensemaking mechanisms. 2.4 CONCLUSION This literature review had as its purpose to firstly explain the notion of sensemaking and then position it within the context of how coaching may impact on sensemaking. Both sensemaking and coaching has their roots within the social constructionist movement, which points to the nature of a relationship between the two disciplines. Not much was found in the literature on the value of coaching to the sensemaking processes for people, but parallels were drawn from the limited information that is available. The aim of this research is therefore to empirically examine the extent to which coaching facilitates the sensemaking processes of clients. The methodology used in executing this research assignment will be discussed in Chapter 3. Chapter 3 will furthermore Stellenbosch University https://scholar.sun.ac.za 29 explain why a phenomenological design and interpretive, qualitative approach was chosen. Finally, the methods of sampling, data collection and data analysis will be explained. Stellenbosch University https://scholar.sun.ac.za 30 CHAPTER 3 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY 3.1 INTRODUCTION The main purpose of this research project was to practically understand which sensemaking activities coaching clients typically experience during the coaching process. To obtain insights on the manifestation and prevalence of sensemaking during the coaching process the following research questions were posed: How do theoretical sensemaking aspects described by Karl Weick (1995) typically manifest during coaching interventions? Which sensemaking properties are most prevalent during coaching conversations; What triggers sensemaking activities during coaching? How are sensemaking instances experienced during coaching? How meaningful are the sensemaking instances that clients experience during coaching? What are the potential benefits of coaching to the sensemaking processes of individuals? The purpose of collecting data on the manifestation of sensemaking activities in coaching was done in order to gain insights into the impact of coaching on clients’ sensemaking processes. The main research objectives set out for the assignment were as follows: Objective 1: Develop a framework of sensemaking aspects to be identified during coaching conversations. Objective 2: Develop a semi-structured coaching questionnaires based on the sensemaking framework as basis for interviews with coaches and clients. Objective 3: Identify and make recommendations for ways of enabling successful sensemaking outcomes in coaching. The aim of this chapter is to give an overview of the research methodology applied in order to address the research questions. The following aspects of the research methodology are discussed: The rationale for the research design that was followed; A discussion of the research sample; The research instruments that were applied and the motivation for choosing the instruments; The collection of the data; Ethical considerations that were taken into account; The analysis and interpretation of the data; Potential limitations of the study. Stellenbosch University https://scholar.sun.ac.za 31 3.2. THE RESEARCH DESIGN The aim of this assignment was to gain insight in how sensemaking activities typically take place during coaching and the contribution coaching can make to peoples sensemaking processes. Since this study is based on the subjective experiences of coaching clients within live coaching conversations, an interpretive phenomenological approach was followed. The interpretive approach aims to understand the reasons and meanings that social action is based on. In this case, the research focused on how sensemaking happens during coaching as a social interaction (Terre Blanche & Durrheim, 1999: 6). An interpretive paradigm is well suited for this study since it focuses on how people continuously make sense of their lives by interpreting, creating and constructing meaning (Babbie & Mouton 2001: 28). The research study was qualitative with the unit of analysis being a single case study focusing on the experience of individual client coaching in the natural setting of face-to-face coaching engagements. Data was gathered by the researcher by means of individual interviews (Babbie & Mouton, 2001: 270, 271). 3.3. SAMPLING STRATEGY The focus of this study was to identify how sensemaking activities take place during coaching. In conducting this qualitative study the selection of the sample was purposeful. The logic behind this approach was to use information-rich participants that will allow for an in-depth understanding and analysis of the phenomena under discussion (Bloomberg & Volpe, 2012: 104). Samples for qualitative studies are normally unique in their own combination of participants and contextual aspects (Bloomberg & Volpe, 2012: 104; Babbie & Mouton, 2001: 167; Miles & Huberman, 1994: 27). To elicit the best quality of information on the phenomena being explored the concept of theoretical saturation was considered. According to Morse (1994: 147) saturation is a key component in realising excellent qualitative research. She pointed out though that no published guidelines or adequacy measures were available to assist in estimating the sample size required for saturation. Morse (1994: 225) further suggested that at least six participants be used for phenomenological studies. Creswell (2007: 121) recommends that between five and 25 interviews be done for phenomenological research. Terre Blanche & Durrheim (1999: 381) suggested that six to eight sampling units should suffice for a homogenous sample and if interviews are fairly short a larger sample of 10-20 units may be required. Taking the suggestions of Morse (1994), Creswell (2003), Terre Blanche & Durrheim (1999) into account, the researcher settled for a sample of ten units. Four independent coaches and six clients were invited to participate. The coaches that participated were invited to be interviewed on the coaching journey of one of their clients. The identities of their clients in review remained anonymous. The following selection criteria were applied when purposefully selecting the coaches: Stellenbosch University https://scholar.sun.ac.za 32 Professionally trained coaches who have a passion and understanding for research in order to commit to the study and be prepared to do in-depth reflection and reporting on the behaviour and actions of a client; Coaches had to have at least fifty hours of coaching experience since the assumption was that more experience will allow for richer information on clients’ sensemaking processes; The following selection criteria that were applied when the six client participants were selected was ‘current involvement’. Current involvement is when the client had to either be undergoing coaching at the time of the interviewing process or have had a coaching session within the previous six months. The coaches who were interviewed included three MPhil 2013 class coaches and one independent professional coach known to the researcher. With regard to the clients, the researcher interviewed two of her own clients, one fellow MPhil student, two clients of one of the coach participants, and two client coaching referred by word-of-mouth and who were coached by professional coaches not acquainted to the researcher. (The four coaches each had to reflect on the coaching journey of a client of theirs. No personal details were revealed other than some general demographic information, such as role, age, male/female and nature of employment). The sample of coaches included two males and two females. The client sample contained three males and three females Table 3.1 shows the participant profiles as well as the way that data was collected from them. The research instrument and data collection is discussed in more detail in the next sections. Of the six clients interviewed two were clients coached by the researcher herself. Each of the coaches were interviewed on the coaching journey of one of their clients who remained anonymous to the researcher. Each of the coaches was interviewed by one of their clients who remained anonymous to the researcher. Eight interviews were conducted and recorded face-to-face, one telephonically and one via the video chatting service Google Hangouts. Table 3.1 Interviewee profiles Participant code Participant role: Coach Role of the client in focus Client age Interview Method Demographic N Client Executive 51 Telephonic London D Client Executive 48 Face-to-face Cape Town M Client Professor 55 Face-to-face Durbanville E Client Senior Manager 33 Face-to-face Durbanville W Client Senior Manager 41 Face-to-face Bellville R Client Industrial Engineer 26 Face-to-face Cape Town L Coach Senior Manager 40+ Face-to-face Bellville J Coach Middle Manager 35 Google Hangouts Port Elizabeth Stellenbosch University https://scholar.sun.ac.za 33 T Coach Senior Manager 32+ Face-to-face Cape Town JP Coach Executive 35+ Face-to-face Cape Town Source: Author, 2015 Interviewees were approached both by email, which included a standard letter. The letter stated the purpose of the study and the requirements of the participants. All interviewees had to sign the letter as informed consent to participate and it was submitted to the researcher either prior or at the interview. Weick (1995) emphasises that one of the properties of sensemaking is that it is ongoing. The study of sensemaking could not be limited to individual coaching conversations only. So, in order to get a rich and reliable set of results, the focus in interviews was on the coaching journey as a whole and not only one coaching conversation. 3.4 RESEARCH INSTRUMENTS Initially two online data collection instruments were developed to collect data from coaches and their clients on three specific coaching sessions each. Questions were formulated to simulate an interview and elicit thick descriptions. Thick descriptions contribute to the transferability of a qualitative study (Babbie & Mouton, 2001: 277). By just completing the questionnaire the client would have remained anonymous. The rationale behind the method was to have triangulation and in having information on the coaching session from two perspectives. At the same time information would have been electronically captured. This method proved not to be feasible since too much time and effort was being expected from the participants. To collect sufficiently-rich data the questions were open-ended and the participants had to apply mental effort and then verbalise their thoughts in writing. Completing the questionnaire would have taken up to 45 minutes. Participants had to go through this effort after each of three coaching sessions and it seemed just too much to expect. The research instrument was implemented, but subsequently the questionnaire was only completed by one coach and his one client. Unfortunately no further responses were received. Part of the problem was that the researcher did not do the contracting with client participants herself and that decreased the motivation for them to complete the questionnaire. Furthermore, coaches were reluctant to contract clients for the process due to potential pressure on client coaching. However, a full set of data (three coaching sessions) for one coach and client was gathered in the process via Surveymonkey (an online survey tool). The answers of coach and client corresponded very well. This data also proved to have similar themes and sensemaking instances than the data collected via interviews. The alternative research instrument that was subsequently chosen was a qualitative openinterview, based on a set of semi-structured open-ended questions. The approach for qualitative interviews differs largely due to the nature of the relationship between the researcher and Stellenbosch University https://scholar.sun.ac.za 34 interviewee being a key factor. An important factor the researcher had to become aware of is keeping her own presuppositions at bay (Cassel & Symon, 2004: 11, 12). Qualitative interviews allow for a great amount of flexibility and participants tend to more readily accept the invitation to participate due to the fact that interviews are a familiar concept to them (Cassel & Symon, 2004: 21). Because different levels of meanings were explored the qualitative interview was ideally suited to being used as a research instrument. A disadvantage was the factor of time since the researcher was personally involved in collecting all the data and having it transcribed. All interviews that were conducted focused on different clients and there was not the triangulation factor of having a client and coach being interviewed on the same coaching intervention, which one may argue was more of a realist that phenomenological, interpretive approach - the realist approach being that data is being correctly verified rather than just gaining some understanding of a phenomenon through the data (Cassel & Symon, 2004: 11-21). The original questionnaires used for the online collection process were adjusted to be suitable as a guide for interviewing. The number of questions was reduced and questions that were even more open-ended were added to elicit longer descriptions in the form of narratives. This was possible because an interview allows the interviewer to adjust questions according to what the interviewee says in order to obtain more clarity. The reason for choosing this method is that it is deemed as ‘probably the best way’ for data collection in an interpretative phenomenological study. Interpretive research requires the flexibility to elicit rich descriptive answers in order to create a sense of the phenomena being studied (Smith & Osborne, 2008: 56; Terre Blanche & Durrheim, 1999: 124, 127). The interviews were conducted by the researcher, which enabled a rapport between the researcher and interviewees. Guiding questions for interviews were carefully worded to eliminate bias and not put the interviewee under pressure to look good, make their coach look good or please the researcher. Questions were designed to be open-ended to encourage the participant to speak as much as possible (Babbie & Mouton, 2012: 288, 289). The design of interviews and questions were of such nature as to enable the researcher to understand the clients ‘lived experience’ in the context of the phenomenon being studied. (Smith & Osborne, 2008: 56). 3.4.1 Client interviews Questions for coaches and clients were similar, the difference being that in the case of coaches the focus was on the client, not on themselves. Questions were underpinned by a framework, which identified sensemaking aspects to be identified in coaching conversations. The framework was developed by extracting relevant indications for sensemaking instances from literature and then developing a set of questions to identify the manifestations of sensemaking instances from interviewees’ descriptions of coaching sessions. Stellenbosch University https://scholar.sun.ac.za 35 3.4.2 Coach interviews The questions that were prepared for coaches were similar to those of clients. Adjustments were made to make it applicable to interviews with coaches. The focus remained on their clients sensemaking instances during coaching. The difference was that the data was collected from coaches on the coaching journey of one of their clients. The clients they reported on were independent from the clients, who were directly interviewed by the researcher. Refer to Table 3.2 for the following: Column 1: The specific sensemaking aspects identified from the literature, and included in the framework as basis for developing interview questions (Objective 1). Column 2: Questions formulated for both coaches and clients. The last column indicates which interview questions relate to which research questions. For ease of reference the research questions are: How do theoretical sensemaking aspects described by Karl Weick (1995) typically manifest during coaching interventions? Which sensemaking properties are most prevalent during coaching conversations What triggers sensemaking activities during coaching? How are sensemaking instances experienced during coaching? How meaningful are the sensemaking instances that clients experience during coaching? What are the potential benefits of coaching to the sensemaking processes of individuals? Table 3.2 Research objectives and interview questions Objective 1 sensemaking aspects identified Triggers of sensemaking Objective 2: Client questions Objective 2: Coach questions Research questions link to interview questions What caused you to seek coaching in the first place? What caused your client to seek coaching in the first place? 1, 3 Describe in detail what you think coaching meant to you? Describe what you think the coaching meant to your client? 1, 2, 4, 5, 6 What aspects of the Open ended coaching session assisted questions to elicit thick you in gaining clarity? descriptions Describe anything else that stood out for you from your coaching journey? What aspects of the coaching session may have 5, 6 assisted your client in gaining clarity? What would you imagine stood out for your client from their coaching journey 1, 4, 5 Stellenbosch University https://scholar.sun.ac.za 36 Bracketing Retrospective sensemaking If your initial coaching purpose was refined into specific goals, how was that done? If your client’s initial coaching purpose was refined into specific goals, how was that 1,2 done? Describe any insights or clarity you gained during the coaching process? How did that come about? What was the impact? Describe any insights or clarity your client gained during the coaching process? 1, 2, 4, 5, 6 How did that come about? What was the impact? What was the role of reflection in you gaining insights or clarity? What was the role of reflection in you gaining insights or clarity? Has anything become clear to you in giving feedback during this interview sensemaking is social 1, 2, 4, 5, 6 1 What was the effect of discussing the dilemma you are dealing with, with someone (the coach)? What do think the effect was of your client discussing their dilemmas with you as coach Explain whether coaching had an impact at any stage on how you see yourself? Explain whether coaching had an impact at how your client sees him/her self? 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 Did you at any stage get a different view of e.g. new insights on what become clear previously? How come? Did your client at any stage get a different view of e.g. new insights on what became clear previously? How come? 1, 2. 3, 4, 5, 6 Did you gain any insights or clarity in between coaching sessions? How? Did your client refer to any insights or clarity they became aware of in between sessions? 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 What actions did you take as a result of… This question was asked at any stage that the client spoke about insights/clarity What actions did your client take as a result of… What were the results / impact of those actions? What were the results / impact of those actions? Emotion / Dissonance Describe any emotions you became aware of during coaching. How did it come about? What was the impact? Describe any emotions your client may have experienced during coaching 1, 3, 6 How did it come about? What was the impact? Values, beliefs, assumptions What assumptions, values and biases did you become aware of during coaching? What assumptions, values and biases did you become aware of during coaching? Identity construction Plausible Ongoing Enactment 3, 5, 6 1, 2, 4, 5, 6 1, 3, 5, 6 Stellenbosch University https://scholar.sun.ac.za 37 3.5 DATA COLLECTION Although a schedule of questions (Table 3.2) was prepared in advance it served as a guideline to ensure that all relevant aspects of sensemaking within coaching were covered. Answers to questions were often followed by prompts from the researcher, such as ‘how come?’, ‘what was the impact?’ and ‘explain?’ Interviews did remain iterative and flexible though (Babbie & Mouton, 2012: 289). The question framework and questionnaires were reviewed and tested by firstly the researcher’s supervisor, which resulted in some changes. Subsequently it was piloted with a fellow coach and some questions were reformulated and some eliminated. Tweaking of questions continued during the data collection process and certain questions that seemed superfluous were removed and others refined. The conversational approach of a qualitative interview is very different from that of quantitative studies where interviews are structured and the only purpose is to collect accurate data that is not influenced by relationship aspects (Cassel & Symon, 2004: 11). Terre Blance & Durrheim (1999: 396) stresses that a good interpretive researcher is dependent on well-developed interpersonal skills in order to engage creatively with participants and ensuring that they are relaxed. Since the researcher is a qualified coach herself the experience in building rapport, applying listening skills and asking open ended questions were of great benefit. The interviews where aimed to be a social interaction between the researcher and interviewee (Babbie & Mouton, 2012: 249). Context is of major importance and interviews were conducted in a natural setting since the assignment in no way interfered with the coaching sessions or how the coaching was done (Terre Blanche & Durrheim, 1999: 127, 128). Data was only collected after the sessions and all participants were contracted independently. Since the interview process was open and conducted as a conversation, the researcher probed or asked additional questions to clarify and encourage elaboration. This was essential since each interviewee’s expression and experience of coaching was different and it called for probing from the researcher to surface common themes relating to the sensemaking properties formulated in the interview questions (Babbie & Mouton, 2012: 289). What proved to be the most valuable was eliciting narratives by the general question about the meaning of coaching to the client. The more the interviewee talked the less direction was necessary from the interviewer. “It seems to me that narrative accounts are the closest we are likely to get to the cognitive processes described as sensemaking”. (Parry, 2003; citing Musson, 1999, p. 16) Interviews were conducted where most convenient for interviewees with the only requirement that recording of the conversation should be possible. Some interviews were held in coffee shops, others in the offices of participants and two interviews were telephonic. Interviewees were put at Stellenbosch University https://scholar.sun.ac.za 38 ease and it as iterated that they were not required to behave or provide answers in a specific way to assist the researcher. All that was required were for them to talk from the ‘heart’ in sharing their experiences and opinions on the coaching journey. It was also explained to them that the questions had nothing to do with the quality of coaching they received or how good a coach they had. They were also told that they do not have to ‘help’ the researcher, since what required are their perspectives. Interviews were based on open-ended questions, which made it important to record them (with permission) to give the researcher access to the interviewees exact answers. Interviews lasted between forty-five and ninety minutes, mostly an hour. The sequence of questions was not strictly adhered to, since by asking open-ended questions and eliciting narratives, the researcher engaged in active listening. Interviewees were prompted with more questions related to their answers in order to obtain the richest possible answers (Babbie & Mouton, 2012: 272; Bailey, 2007: 103). Interviews were recorded on an Apple iPad by means of an Apple application ‘Recorder’. The interview audio files were directly uploaded into a secure Dropbox folder. A professional company was contracted to transcribe the interviews and the transcriber were given rights to extract the voice files from the relevant Dropbox folder. Files were transcribed into PDF. The researcher compared the transcriptions with the audio files to ensure they were accurately transcribed. To ensure the trustworthiness of collected data, transcribed PDF files were sent to interviewees to review and approve via an email message. Transcribed files were then uploaded into the Atlas.ti software program (Computer-aided qualitative data analysis software) for storage, retrieving, categorising, analysis and comparing of data (Bloomberg & Volpe, 2012: 110). Saturation of data (Morse, 1994: 147) was already achieved after seven of the ten interviews. 3.6 ETHICAL CONSIDERATIONS The study was presented and approved by the ethical committee of the University of Stellenbosch Business School. Coach and client participants were personally invited to participate and the purpose of the study was explained to them. They were asked to sign an informed consent form, which clearly indicated what their rights were, what was expected of them and defining how confidentiality of identity and data would be maintained. The transcriber of the interviews signed a non-disclosure agreement to ensure confidentiality of information. Al information interview files were securely stored in the cloud in a Dropbox folder to which only the researcher and transcriber had access. Stellenbosch University https://scholar.sun.ac.za 39 3.7 ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION OF DATA All interviews were transcribed into MS Word documents for review by the researcher for accurateness. Documents then had to be converted into a .pdf format and finally uploaded into Atlas.ti for coding. It is common for qualitative studies to follow an inductive approach, but in this exploratory study a combination of a deductive and inductive process was followed for the analysis of the interview data (Terre Blanche & Durrheim, 1999: 40; Frere, 2013). Babbie & Mouton (2001: 282) indicates that it is not uncommon for qualitative researchers to define theoretical expectations upfront. In this study sensemaking aspects to be evaluated were defined upfront after reviewing the literature. The sensemaking aspects served as guiding principles in data collection and coding. A systematic coding strategy was followed to maintain order (Huberman & Miles, 2002: 246). For the consolidation of raw data, the ‘three C’s (coding, categorising, concept) process, suggested by Huberman & Miles (2002: 251), was followed. The coding phase commenced by creating the ten codes from sensemaking aspects defined in the questions framework (objective 1). A deductive approach requires sub-codes to be developed and new codes were inductively added as coding continued. This was an iterative process and eventually there were a total of 27 codes. Next, all code redundancies were removed, codes collapsed and renamed (Huberman & Miles, 2002: 252-253; Frere, 2003, Atlas.ti training, uTube; Braun & Clark, 2006: 17). The following step was to categorise codes and classify them into groups with sub-codes. There were eight major code categories which corresponded to the original list of codes reflecting sensemaking aspects to be observed and which was defined before coding commenced. Finally key concepts were extracted, final conclusions drawn and verified (Creswell, 2007: 148; Miles & Huberman; 2002: 251-254; Creswell, 2007: 148). Findings were presented in the form of discussions (Creswell, 2007: 148) of each of the main categories and were accompanied by verbatim quotes from interviews. Triangulation of findings entails that data is not collected from one source only, which results in the benefit of data being more trustworthy (Terre Blanche & Durrheim, 1999: 128; Babbie & Mouton, 2001: 277). Limited triangulation was applied by the researcher’s supervisor reviewing the coding system and consolidation of codes into themes and concepts as well as the reporting of findings. 3.8 CONCLUSION In this chapter the qualitative research methodology and interpretative phenomenological research design followed in this study was discussed. Firstly the research questions and objectives were confirmed and then the sample strategy, collection methods, ethical considerations and data analysis were covered. Finally the limitations of the study as well as mitigation strategies of the limitations were explained. Stellenbosch University https://scholar.sun.ac.za 40 The following chapter (Chapter 4) will outline and discuss the findings and conclusions of the research. Stellenbosch University https://scholar.sun.ac.za 41 CHAPTER 4 FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS 4.1 INTRODUCTION This study was conducted with the purpose of gaining some practical insight on how sensemaking processes may typically show up during coaching. The focus of the research was not on a singular coaching conversation only but rather on the coaching journey as a whole. This chapter will deal with the findings, conclusions and supportive data structured as responses to the research questions. Since this data analysis was done deductively and given that the main themes were defined in the beginning of the research assignment, findings and conclusions are consolidated within Chapter 4. This chapter will thus provide the details of the findings paired with the subsequent interpretations and conclusions of those findings. In order to guide the research, the following research questions were formulated in Chapter 1: How do theoretical sensemaking aspects described by Karl Weick (1995) typically manifest during coaching interventions? Which sensemaking properties are prevalent during coaching conversations? What triggers sensemaking activities during coaching? How are sensemaking instances experienced during coaching? How meaningful are the sensemaking instances that clients experience during coaching? What are the potential benefits of coaching to the sensemaking processes of individuals? Chapter 1 also presented three objectives for the research. The purpose of the objectives was to provide a structure to base the research on, with the ultimate goal of answering the research questions: Objective 1: Develop a framework of sensemaking aspects to be identified during coaching conversations. Objective 2: Develop a semi-structured coaching questionnaires based on the sensemaking framework as basis for interviews with coaches and clients. Objective 3: Identify and make recommendations for ways of enabling successful sensemaking outcomes in coaching. Objectives 1 and 2 were completed as part of the design of the research methodology in preparation for research execution. Objective 3 will be dealt with once the research questions have been answered. Chapter 5 includes a section on recommendations based on the outcomes and conclusions of the research. Stellenbosch University https://scholar.sun.ac.za 42 In Chapter 3 the research methodology of this study was discussed in detail. The various elements of the methodology explained included the sampling strategy, research instrument, data collection and analysis. The questions underlying the semi-structured interviews for data collection were based on the question framework developed to study the sensemaking aspects defined in Chapter 3. Data was collected through interviews with six clients and four coaches. Coaches gave input on the coaching journey of a client of theirs. During data collection interviewees were encouraged and given the space to answer in narratives as far as possible. Conclusions, results and supportive theory thereof are covered in the following sections in the form of answers to the research questions. The research questions are in support of the aim of the project, which is to understand how sensemaking instances appear during coaching and ultimately the contribution coaching could make to the sensemaking processes of clients. 4.2 HOW DO THEORETICAL SENSEMAKING ASPECTS DESCRIBED BY KARL WEICK (1995) TYPICALLY MANIFEST DURING COACHING INTERVENTIONS? The purpose of this research question is to uncover the holistic or general view of how sensemaking properties manifested practically in the research. It does not address detail of how each individual sensemaking characteristic appeared - that will be covered in the next section. The seven interdependent sensemaking characteristics are at the core of Weick’s (1995, 17) theory. He defined seven sensemaking properties to indicate the uniqueness of sensemaking and serve as a manual for observation (Weick, 1995: 18). Sensemaking is: Grounded in identity construction; Retrospective; Enactive of sensible environments; Social; Ongoing; Focused on and by extracted cues; Driven by plausibility rather than accuracy. These properties may also be seen as stages in the sensemaking process although Weick (1995, 18) highlighted that the sequence is a crude one, which does not account for feedback loops: People concerned with identity in the context of others engage ongoing events from which the extract cues and make plausible sense retrospectively, all while enacting more or less order into those ongoing events. (Weick, 1995: 18). The way sensemaking takes place in coaching should be understood from an integrated systemic perspective. Sensemaking characteristics cannot not be limited to coaching conversations only but are iterative (ongoing) and span the whole of the coaching journey. In order to understand the Stellenbosch University https://scholar.sun.ac.za 43 pattern of occurrence of sensemaking properties that emerged from the research, the researcher developed the diagram in Figure 4.1. The model shows a rough pattern of the iterative and concurrent occurrences of sensemaking properties within coaching conversations and beyond. Sensemaking continues through reflection, action, social interaction and recognising more cues to be made sense of. Figure 4.1 clearly indicates the systemic nature of the coaching-sensemaking process. Coaches who implement techniques to support sensemaking activities beyond the coaching conversation are paving the way for transformation. Techniques that were mentioned in interviews were meditation, journaling, the coach emailing a summary of sessions and actions plans. In some instances clients were encouraged to confirm their learnings from sessions via email. Another technique for stimulating reflection was for clients to complete assessments (e.g. Enneagram) inbetween sessions. The coaching space is ideally set up for sensemaking and the experimentation of thoughts and ideas. What is important though is that clients take their insights in the form of action into their world and see if it makes sense for them. The effects of their behaviour is either supportive of the meaning they created in previous sessions or can result in a new trigger that has to be taken through the coaching sensemaking process. Sensemaking properties did not show up independently during coaching but rather in a kind of sequence. Properties were often presented concurrently rather than linear. While telling their stories clients interact with their coaches, they engaged socially and just by telling a story made sense of some aspects. It is important to understand that client’s stories were already constructed plausibly. A narrative is never an exact version of how things occur. Stellenbosch University https://scholar.sun.ac.za 44 Figure 4.1 A holistic view of sensemaking patterns during coaching Source, Author: 2016 As indicated in Figure 4.1, a client is exposed to a disruption in their life and notices signals that support their way of making sense of a situation. When the meaning they constructed from the situation still causes dissonance for them, they seek coaching. Clients enter the coaching space (big circle), and while the coach provides a containing space, he/she at the same time also triggers sensemaking through challenging clients. One may argue that the coach breaks down the client’s preceding sensemaking process as it was not regarded as functional. This is done in order to construct with them a new meaning and sense to their benefit and which they can take back into their life and restore equilibrium as far as possible. The small green circles vaguely represent a process that occurs within the coaching conversation. During the coaching session clients tell their stories and just by verbalising their thoughts they tend to make retrospective sense. This sense is plausible and may change when the client is challenged or questioned, or even just by a joint exploration of narratives with the coach. During narration and the rest of the conversation the coach may uncover and work on limiting beliefs and identity construction. Stellenbosch University https://scholar.sun.ac.za 45 During coaching conversations clients constructed meaning and findings also revealed that there was always some insight contributing to the overall goal or purpose of the coaching intervention. Sensemaking triggers action and towards the end of the session action plans are formulated. This leads to the enactment property of sensemaking, where the client will go out into the world with their new insight and take certain actions. Acting on the environment may enhance their sensemaking and at the same time cause new triggers or cues to be taken back into the next coaching session. Coaching conversations elicit reflection (retrospect) between sessions, which provides more input into the next coaching session. The other properties that were uncovered and also have an effect successive sessions is, social interaction. Social interaction is thought to especially impact identity construction. Following this, the whole process more or less repeats itself in the next session. The purpose of the discussion of the diagram was to provide the reader insight as to how the coaching properties show up holistically in the coaching journey and how integrated all the aspects are. What is unique about sensemaking processes within the coaching context is that coaching provides a specific structure (the coaching intervention) aimed at developing insight and growth, which is arguably sensemaking. The so-called structure enabling sensemaking is a process facilitated by a trained individual (coach), using techniques and methodologies to collaborate with the client in constructing meaning and fulfilling a specific purpose. As was noted previously, findings indicated that no aspect of making sense happens in isolation. Actual sensemaking instances were highly visible for all clients that participated in the research. In some instances the actual word ‘sense’ was used where in other instances words like ‘insight’, ‘realise’ and ‘became clear’ were prevalent. These words that the clients used may have been guided by the following question: “Tell me more about insights that came up for you / your client during the coaching journey?” The word sensemaking was deliberately not used in the research since it showed up to be ambiguous during piloting of the questionnaire. Even so, M spontaneously expresses it in the following way: M: “Yes, I definitely made sense of something. And I’ve also made work of something”. D: “I think the biggest epiphany was the second-last session that we had, and I am going to continue to see him, because I think it’s just really started to unlock something for me...that there was a fundamental shift in my attitude about certain things, and it all emerged from thinking about what my actual locus of control was”. The evidence of how sensemaking typically occurred during sensemaking conversations is presented in table 4.1. Data is presented in a linear way but should be understood as a circular process as indicated in the figure 4.1. Stellenbosch University https://scholar.sun.ac.za 46 Table 4.1 Evidence of some sensemaking sequence during coaching Sensemaking characteristics Noticing cues Participant N Participant R “feedback from the Chief Executive “So, in the first session I was Officer, that there were strained more concerned about how relationships between myself and people were acting towards my team” me” “Well, I don’t think you knew it was right or wrong; it was the only way you knew to conduct yourself until someone highlighted it to you, that the impact that you have is less effective. Social - seeking coaching (ongoing) (the social aspect of coaching is continuous) “I think the one thing was the “The growing relationship with the coach. coaching, I think what started as, not done, is you've just listened defensive, but sort of a cautious and relationship became a very conversation to flow freely, valuable, very rich relationship, so which that was very important, to see how difference and it was good it grows. That was tremendously sometimes to just feel like beneficial, and I certainly wouldn’t you being heard” have had the feedback...there’s no way you could have that type of feedback on your own, and then suddenly remedial action was incredibly valuable in terms of...once you knew what had to be done. So yes, very rich; it had a significant impact”. best part what you of you allowed makes the have that a very big Stellenbosch University https://scholar.sun.ac.za 47 Sensemaking characteristics Retrospective & plausible (explore narratives) & reflection Participant N Participant R “So the first stage was a discovery “I thought it made sense in phase to determine to what the beginning that people extent...not if they were true, but to were treating me like a young the extent that....what was said, person in the office, because and what people felt” I was young.” “Well, I think a good coach force, “…because I've learnt how to you know, that’s what they have to be me and I've also learnt not force, is for a person to look very to be taken advantage of in deep within themselves.” certain situations, and we need to get things going. Sometimes we shouldn't let things go. But that only came out when I allowed myself to talk about i.t” Identity Construction “the difficult one is to deal with “And being my age in that simple politics where you were role is something to be proud absolutely in the right, but it was of so I'm not hiding the fact changed and twisted in a way that that I'm young, but now I'm made it look...you just a young professional. It's know…unprofessional”. not a negative thing, it's actually an achievement if “I think there were times where you you look at it.” doubted your own capabilities, you really felt miserable about it” “You may have been seen as a tough manager, but actually a really, really nice guy, and a very understanding person.” Action plans and enactment on the environment “We developed a strategy person “What changed, and I actually by person, in terms of what needed noticed it yesterday for the to happen, and forcing me to deal first time, what has changed with stressful relationship” I’m no longer being micromanaged, I'm no longer being “Sounds very simple, but it’s just super effective change in behavior”. checked in on” Stellenbosch University https://scholar.sun.ac.za 48 Sensemaking characteristics Feedback from environment Retrospective - reflection Participant N Participant R “So, the relationships have “And that completely changed changed dramatically with my the way they spoke to me peers, and so overall it’s been a and now they're fantastic experience.” encouraging.” “I think the other was a greater “So, in the first session I was sense of reflection, to have it done more concerned about how to reflect...there were times when people were acting towards you thought it was just not worth it” me when if I look at the last session, I realised everyone is different and how they act towards me isn't a reflection on who I am.” “But it was a big shift if I look back on it now. So I no longer feel, I no longer worry, or I no longer take it upon myself about how someone else treats me, and it's not my baggage to carry.” Ongoing in-between sessions and beyond coaching “Painful and hard, and not always in “And that's quite challenging the coaching sessions; it’s a because I'm not at a point question of stimulating your brain to where I feel confident enough think when you’re out of the to go sit someone down and coaching sessions, where do you go “ok, I'm not ok with this “ want to take this?” but I think I'm getting closer to the point “ Source: Author: 2015 The sequence of sensemaking characteristics during coaching seemed to follow a different pattern than that suggested by Weick (1995, 18). Although the manifestation of sensemaking properties often occurred concurrently in a rough sequence, findings from this research could be described in the following way: People extracting cues and experiencing dissonance or shock seeking objective social collaboration and making plausible sense by retrospectively exploring narratives, taking Stellenbosch University https://scholar.sun.ac.za 49 action to influence their environment, which can result in new cues, meaning and triggers calling for a repeat of the process.(Author, 2015). The various properties put forward by Weick, were discernible in coaching and did indeed provide a manual for observation (Weick, 1995: 18). All seven properties could be identified in some way or another and in the following section, more detail on their prevalence, will be discussed. 4.3 WHICH SENSEMAKING CONVERSATIONS? PROPERTIES ARE PREVALENT DURING COACHING As noted in Section 4.2 all the sensemaking properties were distinguishable during coaching with some being more frequent and impactful than others. During coaching the various sensemaking properties often surfaced in parallel and cannot be completely separated from each other. The role of storytelling and working with narratives is critical to retrospective, ongoing and plausible sensemaking. The manifestation of the various properties as well as the triggers of sensemaking in coaching is discussed in detail here. Data was collected by encouraging storytelling and rich descriptions. Narratives underlie retrospective sensemaking but are also the foundation of plausible sensemaking. Narratives are also the foundation of plausible sensemaking and that is why retrospective sensemaking and plausibility could not be separated from each other in the coaching situation. Within the collaborative exploration of stories the social aspect of sensemaking is also at play. So it is fair to say that narratives are very powerful in the sensemaking process playing a concurrent role in the social, retrospective and plausibility aspects of sensemaking. Plausibility and social sensemaking properties will continue in re-authoring the client’s story. Constructing a new story also involves the identity construction element of sensemaking. 4.3.1 Sensemaking is retrospective Retrospective sensemaking happens by people looking back on a situation that has already occurred and only in hindsight make sense thereof (Weick, 1995: 24). Weick’s (1995) description of retrospective sensemaking applies to the coaching situation as well; through the coach supporting clients in telling their stories and reviewing past events, clarity is obtained revealing new insights (Du Toit, 2012: 284). What is important for retrospective sensemaking is to understand that a person chooses what they pay attention to when looking back on an event (Weick 1995: 27). The sense a client makes of a situation is infinite and open to redefinition and modification, which aligns to postmodernists arguing that knowledge and truth are never complete (Du Toit, 2003: 34, 44). Retrospective sensemaking is encouraged by the process of the coach and client working together in uncovering and synthesising various truths (Weick, 1995: 27). The client makes provisional sense during coaching, then acts on it, retrospectively makes sense of the new action and so on (Sandberg & Tsoukas, 2014: 9). Stellenbosch University https://scholar.sun.ac.za 50 A key component in both coaching and retrospective sensemaking is reflection (Parry, 2003: 252). What coaching offers the client is a safe space to reflect on past events in order to clarify and label those events in a new and meaningful way in collaboration with their coach (Du Toit, 2012: 284). Weick’s (1995: 18) sensemaking recipe “how can I know what I think until I see what I say” could be seen as a summary of how retrospective sensemaking manifests in coaching. Based on the findings from this research, retrospective sensemaking was found to be easily distinguishable during coaching conversations. Clients enter the coaching conversation with a dilemma expressed through a narrative, reflecting their sense of ‘what the story is’. By relating their narrative to the coach, clients often gain some new insights, which indicates retrospective sensemaking. The coach encourages the sensemaking process by further exploring the clients’ narratives with them and making them aware of limiting assumptions and new ways of looking at situations. Storytelling plays a powerful role as a sensemaking vehicle during coaching and supplies the raw material for the coach and client to socially construct new meaning. Important to retrospective sensemaking is for the coach not to overwhelm the client with questions and challenges, until such time that a client has exhausted each instance of storytelling. It is not only about the coach listening critically to the themes and patterns surfacing, while the client is telling their story but realising that the client is already making sense, while producing a narrative. One has to keep in mind that the meaning and insight created is plausible and has to grow to a point where new narratives and insights serve to be functional to the client in refining or reaching the goal they wish to achieve. Clients enter coaching with a narrative that they have already made sense of but it may not be serving them well. In working with the coach their ‘sense’ is retrospectively explored and challenged and since sensemaking is plausible, new meanings emerge. The newly constructed meaning is not necessarily accurate but true enough to remove the dissonance in order for the client to function optimally. Data on how newly constructed meaning was accurate enough to enable a client cope better at work is provided as part of the evidence on retrospective sensemaking in this section. Retrospective sensemaking in coaching does not only occur through talking but also by the client being supported in reflecting. In providing the client with enough silence and space to talk and think, the coach encourages sensemaking through hindsight. Reflection emerged to be facilitative of sensemaking as indicated in quotes relating to reflection below. The researcher is of the opinion that part of the role the coach as a thinking partner should play, is to force clients to think and reflect. Findings revealed that coaches encouraged reflection by questioning and challenging clients as well as assigning tasks to be completed in between sessions. What showed up to have a positive effect on reflection through execution of tasks was that clients had to be held accountable Stellenbosch University https://scholar.sun.ac.za 51 for the tasks allocated to them. The effect of these techniques are presented in quotes related to reflection in the evidence part of this section. For coaches striving to take retrospective sensemaking to a transformational level, it is worthwhile exploring the principles of narrative coaching. Narrative principles encourage the telling and enrichment of stories. None of the clients in the study have been exposed to narrative coaching per se but if taken into account how powerful it was for them to just verbalise their thoughts, narrative coaching techniques are worthwhile exploring.The role of narratives in other sensemaking properties will be referred to in the specific sections on plausibility and extracting of cues from the environment. The plausibility of a client’s retrospective sensemaking is illustrated in the following case. The client of participant coach J, presented the sense that he made of a situation, through his story, arguing that certain behaviours of his senior was a sign that he is incompetent. During coaching the client’s ‘sense’ of the situation changed and the client came to understand that his senior behaves that in the same way towards others. Whether that is really true is not essential. What is important is that the client was able to change his perception and deal with the situation in a new meaningful way: Coach J: No, so he was talking and telling me the stories he was building up the scenario of this guy is the most awful boss in the world and he is trying to break my confidence. So it was only when the questions started around you know - what do you think his motives are, how can you benefit from this and it was only those questions that changed the thing around. Later in the coaching process, the client’s sensemaking was changed radically: Client of coach J: The question was - ok what else, what other interpretations. And I think that shifted it away from a personal thing to a “we just solve work problems. He’s robust and he is loud, but we’re actually just solving work problems. He is not trying to undermine me or break me down. The new sense that coach J’s client made, was sufficient restore his sense of self and meaningful functioning: Client of coach J: So he said your’e right, so it’s not personal so therefore it isn’t about me but about getting things right” and when he decided it was no longer a personal thing, he suddenly felt very free of .. kind of being judged or condemned or whatever. There was clear evidence that in telling their coaches about an issue at hand and shedding light on the issue, clients were able to look back and make retrospective sense of the situation. Weick’s Stellenbosch University https://scholar.sun.ac.za 52 (1995: 18) sensemaking recipe “how can I know what I think until I see what I say” manifested spontaneously in interviews indicating that retrospective sensemaking took place when coaching clients talked about their challenges. As some of the respondents reported: E: I could just be completely honest, open-up, put it out there. I think you don't realise what you think until you say it. W: if you actually verbally express it, it's sometimes you figure out I haven't got the answer for that things. M: I think, is discussing this entire problem with somebody else, mentioning it, I just suddenly realised the severity of failure, what would it have been if this thing failed. R: The thing I saw from the session is that it's not bad to sometimes talk about it and reflect on what has happened and giving yourself that time to look back and see what has changed in your life. It was clear that coaches supported clients in exploring different versions of the truth and developing new ways of dealing with their dilemmas: M: Then he set me thinking on a different path, so I was thinking about the possible solutions; and he was talking to me about it, making me think more and more about solutions, different kinds of solutions, and really without me ever thinking about certain things and he actually got me to...on that same day...solve one of my big problems. The importance of reflection and subsequent insights featured both within conversations and between sessions. Reflection was more powerful when consciously enforced by the coach. N: if you don’t reflect, how would you know where you want to go, and how your actions have affected others, so yes, I do think each of these sessions forced you to reflect. You know, reflection is like meditation, it’s a pretty powerful thinking. D: I think the coaching always helps with reflection, it does; it forces you to think about things that otherwise you just kind of relegate to a lower priority. Coach L: And then we do, when we start the next session, we usually just check where she's at and what's come up, and we work with that it, and you intend to do something differently, so certainly increased awareness about. W: Coaching sessions forces you to take time out and go and sit and reflect and think about things. So, it actually creates a time and space to do an assessment on yourself. One technique that coaches applied successfully to ‘force’ reflection was developing action plans for tasks to be executed in-between sessions. It proves successful if the coach then holds the Stellenbosch University https://scholar.sun.ac.za 53 clients accountable for the tasks. Only in three of the ten participants the allocation of tasks appeared: E: I think the nice thing was, we agreed at the end of action steps and the next time we met, we followed up on those kind of actions steps. You agreed last time you were going to do this, did you do that? The impact of doing that was that I felt I have to do it, because I was held accountable for that. I did not always do everything but at least the major ones I think I did. N: So what your strategy...how you’re going to bring him along, how you’re going to motivate him. So there were hundreds of separate sub- strategies that were taken to achieve what you wanted to do. W: It’s just again confirming some of those things in the session and that I really need to do something about it. Topics and things like that – it's also what I got out of it. I'm not sure that the assessment you did on me upfront, if it was part of the coaching. Researcher: It was... W: That also just confirmed some of the potential problems that I could have that I must be attentive to and see of ways that I can improve on that and just make sure that I don't sort of, those negative or bad behaviours for that type of person / personality. During coaching people looked back on their experiences by telling the coach stories, which resulted in some sensemaking. Clients also described the role of reflection during coaching. The prevalence of the retrospective nature of sensemaking as described by Weick (1995, 2005) was thus clear during coaching interventions. Findings supported the crucial role of the coach in enabling retrospective sensemaking as was suggested by Du Toit (2003, 2014). In the next section another important characteristic, namely: identity construction as subtext in coaching, is contextualised from the research findings. 4.3.2. Sensemaking is rooted in identity construction People enter into sensemaking in an attempt to restore identities under threat (Maitlis & Christianson, 2014: 73). Clients may appear to be caught up in a perception of self, which is built on what they perceive other people to think of them (Weick 1995: 21; Du Toit, 2015: 82; Bush, Ozkan & Passmore, 2013: 58). Identity construction did not feature in coaching conversation explicitly but was uncovered in analysis as a major factor underlying client’s dilemmas and subsequent sensemaking actions. Coaches should take a holistic integral approach coaching in order to surface underlying identities, which are essential for sensemaking. What needs be taken into account is the personal, social and professional selves to enable transformational sensemaking. Stellenbosch University https://scholar.sun.ac.za 54 The dilemmas people seek coaching for mostly have an effect on their identity. This seems to particularly powerful when the issue is work-related. During coaching there has to be a focus on restoring, transitioning or creating new identities thus enabling the client to deal with problematic situations. Evidence in support of this finding is presented at the end of this section. Coaches may not always be conscious or focused on identities at play; however, identity construction is core to sensemaking and awareness of the client’s sense of self is essential. It is important to keep in mind that identities are formed by social interaction with other people. The coach is ideally positioned to collaborate with the client in constructing healthy, functional identities in support of new meaningful frames of mind. It is interesting to note that some clients appeared to be stuck in a certain perception of themselves influenced by the image that they perceive other people to hold of them. In two interviews participants referred to identity issues calling for reconstruction. Some of the negative behaviour clients experienced was attributed to the others viewing them as being incompetent. As awareness grew through the coaching process, clients were able to renew or construct a new identity to sufficiently deal with the situation. They gained insight and discovered the negative behaviour of others was not a true reflection of incompetence in themselves. For example participant N, who had a positive identity, experienced a serious threat to his professional identity after receiving negative feedback on his management style. The negative feedback forced him to adapt a new identity and adjust his behaviour to support his value of being a caring and non-aggressive leader. The extraction of cues as a property of sensemaking featured in close connection with identity construction. Clients extracted specific cues from the environment that fitted into their frame of reference relating to how they believe other people perceived them. Then they focussed on these cues to explain specific situations or dilemmas. Coaches challenged clients on the cues they recognised and helped them to notice alternative ones, or interpret the ones they mentioned differently. One practical example of this was a participant whose identity and self-image was affected by his relationship with his senior. The senior person behaved in a rude way towards the coaching client and his perception was that his manager thought he was incompetent. In coaching he explained all behaviour in context of him not feeling valued. The coach prompted the client for alternative explanations for the negative behaviour he was experiencing. The client concluded that his manager tends to behave in a rude way towards most people. The client was able to reconstruct his competent, confident self and reframe the situation to interpret the signs of negative behaviour differently and not letting it affect his sense of self. Below are quotes supporting the finding that dilemmas clients bring to coaching most often have an identity component or impact: Stellenbosch University https://scholar.sun.ac.za 55 The trigger for N’s coaching was negative feedback on his leadership style: N: Well, I think, you know, all of us have a sense of wanting to be popular or effective or looked up; and you know if you have the ideal as a manager is to be a great strategic leader, and the feedback is that you’re a...you know...you’re an awful manager, that takes huge introspection, so that requires most of the change. M was struggling with the fact that she is doing other people’s work, which caused her major stress. A new assertive identity was called for: M: Yes, yes, but...with other projects, similar projects like this, to handle it differently, to actually be more firm, be more assertive, in certain situations, and really be a better incharge role-model person. Coach L’s client entered coaching with a low self-image due to her experience that she was not heard in meetings. The outcome of coaching supports a new identity: Coach L: And it's interesting because she's even said things like, she feels like they're listening to her now. So previously she probably felt like this small voice that was saying something and no one was listening. That was the big shift. They were listening to her, which means that she had come that far. As a result of the coding and analysis of data, two subcategories of identity construction emerged.The two subcategories include threats to identity and restoration of identity. 4.3.2.1. Threats to identity People have different identities depending on the roles they fulfil and who they are with. Various identities featured during the interviews for example, leader, employee, friend, parent and/or spouse. If there is any threat to these identities and a person fails to confirm their sense of self, it creates a dissonance, which results in a powerful quest for sensemaking. The reasons for participants’ identities being under threat were all related to work situations but personal identities were also impacted in the process. Identity threat was a theme in more than one of the clients’ reasons for seeking coaching in the first place. According to Weick (1995: 20) people have to fulfill three needs in order to maintain a sense of self: The need for self-enhancement - a positive mental and affective state of self; The motive of self-efficacy - feeling competent and efficient; The drive for self-consistency - a sense of coherence and continuity. Stellenbosch University https://scholar.sun.ac.za 56 All threats to identity were prevalent in reviewing the coaching journeys of the ten clients interviewed. In the case of client N, all three the needs of identity construction were affected: self-enhancement, self-efficacy and self-consistency. He was under the impression that he was a good manager until he received some harsh feedback that indicated exactly the opposite. This came as a huge shock to him and posed a serious threat to who he thought he was; so he subsequently entered into coaching. He was as seen to be as competent as he perceived himself to be and realised that he was being inconsistent in his behaviour, therefore his positive sense of self was compromised: N: I think there were times where you doubted your own capabilities, you really felt miserable about it. The identity issues of M, L, J and R below are similar in the sense that they have not developed a sense of self, which served them to deal with a professional environment in such a way as to maintain their sense of self-efficacy. The evidence all supports the finding that triggers to coaching often affects identity: M: but...with other projects, similar projects like this, to handle it differently, to actually be more firm, be more assertive, in certain situations, and really be a better in-charge, role-model person. Coach L: And she also specifically, her requirement was to be more present and able to cope with...she works in an environment that is male dominated. And she does find herself disappearing, and her voice is not heard kind of thing. It's raises a lot of anger and anxiety in her. Coach J: a year ago he had actually been treated for depression because he felt so undermined at work and so lacking in confidence. Participant R entered coaching complaining that people don’t take her seriously because she is young. So for her it was a matter of satisfying the need for self-enhancement and self-efficacy. R: So, in the first session I was more concerned about how people were acting towards me when if I look at the last session, I realised everyone is different and how they act towards me isn't a reflection on who I am. It's a reflection on who they are and something that they're doing, and all that. During the interview it became clear that she has constructed a new identity (as an adult) that made her feel competent and positive about herself: R: again the meeting had a lot more order with senior people, but it was, they went ok, but it's your process so what have you decided to do?” We worked around that. And I Stellenbosch University https://scholar.sun.ac.za 57 think that was quite a defining moment for me yesterday because that meant that they now see my role in this. Clients who made sense of their identities being under threat had to work on restoring those identities during coaching. Coach L: I can see that what's happening is that as we go along she does seem to be, it's almost as if she's making sense of her life and she's making sense of who she is and how she is and where she is. Another interesting version of identity construction that showed up in coaching involved a client who made sense of her identity not aligning to that of the organisation she work for: Coach JP: The coaching just, kind of, contextualised that or she came to the selfawareness that: if this is who she is, and that’s where the company is, there is a disconnect, and there isn’t necessarily a future for her. The next section provides evidence on how identities under threat were renewed or restored through coaching. 4.3.2.2. Restoration of identity Constructionists argue that identities are constructed in the interaction with others (Weick, 1995: 82). Coaching helped the clients that formed part of the research, to gain insight into problematic situations. In the process they were able to develop strategies to restore their sense of identity, or constructing a new one. The role that coaching played in constructing new identities was evident during interviews as indicated in the following cases: Participant N had to work hard during coaching to develop a new identity suitable for his professional role as a leader. In making sense of the feedback he received from peers and the CEO he realised that treating people the way he did, was a violation of his values. In realising that his behaviour was incompatible with his belief that people should be treated with respect and compassion, he made sense of what he needed to work on. The role of the coach was very clear in him reconstructing his identity: N: I think, in terms of self-image, there was greater conviction, I mean she’s a great coach, and as we went through it she was very sympathetic to what I tried to do, and she said: “you know what, you’re an amazing leader in a very difficult situation, and I am going to help you but you need to adjust your techniques”. So there was validation that, one, I actually cared a tremendous amount about my people, and actually had great strategies in place. Stellenbosch University https://scholar.sun.ac.za 58 For others the coaching also resulted in a positive outcome, putting them in a better position to maintain their identity needs: Coach L: And it's interesting because she's even said things like, she feels like they're listening to her now. So previously she probably felt like this small voice that was saying something and no one was listening. That was the big shift. They were listening to her, which means that she had come that far. M: I realise now that I need to do certain things and put my foot down, in certain situations, ja. But if I will be able to do it one-on-one, I don’t really know but at least I know now, that I have been too soft, in certain situations. Coach J: it was actually just wonderful to see. Because his whole... he kind of lightened up totally you know. His confidence grew, his whole stature sort of came back again. Coach J assisted her client in reframing his situation, which resulted in him restoring a positive sense of self and a feeling of competence. The findings highlighted above are representative of the findings in general for other participants and it was clear that coaching played a substantive role in reframing identities and is particularly suited for identity challenges. In all of the clients that were interviewed their professional identities were involved in their dilemmas. The mentioned identities were successfully reframed with positive outcomes within their environments. Evidence from the data on coaching conversations clearly aligned with the sensemaking theory on identity construction, as put forward by Weick (1995). The following aspects were particularly prevalent in findings from the research: The characteristic of sensemaking being rooted in identity construction was recognisable; A collection of different selves were prevalent during coaching, in particular the professional and personal selves; The different drivers for maintaining healthy selves showed up in all three categories as described by Weick; The dialogical nature of coaching situation clearly showed how identity is socially constructed during social interaction. Coaches assisted clients in working on maintaining and constructing healthy identities to cope with complex situations that they had to deal with; Findings indicated that clients do indeed adapt identities related to what they deem others think of them; The actions that were taken as a result of sensemaking and the way it impacted on the environment are explained in the next section. Stellenbosch University https://scholar.sun.ac.za 59 4.4.3. Sensemaking is enactive of sensible environments In line with postmodernist thought Varela et. al. (1991, 144) argues that the world is not pre-given and static but continuously re-constructed by the types of actions people engage in. An integral part of coaching is to make people aware of the impact they have on their environment and encourage them to experiment with new patterns of behaviour. Coaches challenge and mirror clients to assist them in gaining insight into the effect of their own behaviour on their environment (Du Toit, 2012: 289; 2014: 87). Weick (1995: 30) refers to enactment in the context of organisations, saying that people partly produce the environment they are faced with. It is this unending dialogue between partly vague action outcomes and deliberate probing that is at the heart of sensemaking (Sandberg & Tsoukas, 2014: S9). Enactment on the environment presented itself as experimentation with behaviour resulting from insights clients’ achieved. Clients gained insight into aspects of their dilemmas and since sensemaking serves as a springboard into action, they were ready to take action that manifested most often in the form of behavioural changes. During coaching conversations, coaches and clients work together in deciding what action to take based on the insights that surfaced. In taking responsibility for their actions clients’ experience of being stuck changed and the ongoing flow of life was restored. Once individuals become aware of the impact of their own thoughts and actions on their world, coaching helps them to adjust that behaviour, experiment with new ways of acting and then take control of their lives. Behaving differently in this context, means that clients deal with the environment in such a way that they experience less or no disruption. Coaches should encourage enactment by agreeing on action plans during the conversation and holding the client accountable. By understanding the importance of sensemaking as enactment on the environment and encouraging clients to do so, coaching can facilitate transformative sensemaking. True sensemaking is followed by action, also during coaching. In all of the cases interviewed, the action taken as result of sensemaking during coaching resulted in a positive change in the environment of employees (evidence on the effect of actions are included in this section). The prevalence of insights, subsequent actions taken and the positive effects of such actions, supports the researcher’s argument that coaching makes a major contribution to sensemaking of individuals. Findings on enactment of the environment during coaching was divided into three categories. The first category shows evidence on how insight motivates clients to take action. The second category provides evidence on how prevalent behavioural change was for clients in the sample group. Lastly data is provided on the effects of clients’ modified behaviour as a result of coaching. Stellenbosch University https://scholar.sun.ac.za 60 4.4.3.1 Actions as output of insight In all of the cases discussed during interviews, the clients firstly came to some insight (making sense of what was going on) and then constructed a course of action in collaboration with their coach. Some examples are quoted below: In making sense of the feedback from his CEO, peers and direct reports. N realised that he had to take serious action. N: We developed a strategy person by person, in terms of what needed to happen and forcing me to deal with stressful relationships. M gained insight in why she was experiencing the M gained insight in why she was experiencing the problem she was having at work. By her coach summarising what she was saying, she created the meaning that it was due to the fact that she felt (identity) and behaved in a certain way. Appropriate action was the next step: M: …in my coaching session, that I realised: rubbish, you need to go and get this assistance, you really need to go...and that person has the means to assist you. Coach J: …he also realised because he was down in the dumps, he was working later and later and longer and longer and he was getting home later. He wasn’t seeing his kids and he’s actually now decided to put a time limit on work and also just try and cut mentally from it. And kind of, sort of draw a line in the sand. Doesn’t sort of experience the situation the same way, makes that whole , a whole lot easier. W: think it's coaching that set the whole thing rolling. And like I said earlier, created that focus so that I'm aware of things, and then the action is still up to you to do something about it. And I made effort to do something about some of the things because I wanted to improve on my personal development. 4.4.3.2 Behaviour change Behaviour change as a result of sensemaking was a general theme for clients. It was clear that change of behaviour was one of the major outputs of coaching: N: here two responses: the one was, you know what, I have to change my behaviour, absolutely, I buy it. And you have regret for whatever the conduct was. and ja, I mean, it changed the entire way that I...I started conducting my behaviour in...and decide on my future within the firm. D: Ja, I think my behaviour had been shifting over the sessions, I started to focus more on the things that, as I said I could control, but also the things that were more Stellenbosch University https://scholar.sun.ac.za 61 nourishing and... kind of...not avoiding, but certainly not wasting energy on the things that were just depleting. Coach L: She was this eager beaver that works with words, perfectionist all that. Now you see her, her shoulders have dropped. Cause one of the things we do to our bodies is the tension we hold in the joint shoulders. And she's a totally more open person – you can see it. Coach J: I think the big thing he decided to do was to stop taking it personally. 4.4.3.3 The effect of action taken The impact of clients’ changed behaviour on the environment (due to coaching) is illustrated in the data here: N: and it also helped in changing behaviour in board meetings, for example, rather than making it a statement you can ask a question; you can make a statement say “the following is just nonsense”, but it’s just making a statement “don’t we think the following is not working”. Sounds very simple, but it’s just super effective change in behaviour. M: I actually realised it wasn’t that big a deal, and I started doing something about it, and since then my life is actually in a much better space because of that. Coach L: …given her a lot of confidence, it has. And the feedback on how she's responded to situations where she's explained how she's done it...you can see there's been a shift, a huge shift. W: …set the ball rolling in terms of me being more aware of my potential areas that I need to work on, so, already had comment and things from one or two people at work that noticed slight behavioural changes in terms of one or two or the areas I've wanted to work on and that they feel it's, they can see a change. R: What changed, and I actually noticed it yesterday for the first time, what has changed I’m no longer being micro-managed, I'm no longer being checked in on. Because now my work's trusted, they realise that I've taken complete ownership of this. I sat in a meeting yesterday with the developers and the architects and I was the person they said “ok, what are we supposed to do?” So they went to me for the knowledge then, which is the exact role that I am supposed to play. But for the first time it felt as if everyone now knows that that's my role, and it's because I have taken ownership of it and I'm fully involved in it. Evidence highlighted the important role that enactment plays as part of sensemaking during coaching. This characteristic that is described by Weick (1995: 30), the “activity of making” was one of the most prevalent characteristics affecting the outcomes of coaching. Weick (1995: 30) Stellenbosch University https://scholar.sun.ac.za 62 also referred to the fact that people are partly responsible for the environment they have to deal with, and this was also proven true during coaching. The reciprocal interaction between the client and the environment was also expressed by Du Toit (2014: 87). She referred to the role of the coach in making clients aware of their impact on the environment and encouraging them to step out of the victim role and take control. The research for this study shows that coaches were particularly supportive of working with employees on the dynamics between themselves and the environment. The transition and growth of clients that was achieved through their coaches supporting enactment as part of sensemaking proved to be truly meaningful. The social nature of coaching supporting the social characteristic of sensemaking is another important aspect to understand the context of the value of coaching to sensemaking. 4.4.4. Sensemaking is social This section focusses on the aspects of the relationship between coach and client that encourages sensemaking. Sensemaking never happens in isolation and happen even by the imagined presence of others (Weick, 1995: 40). Coaching is in its essence socially grounded and a process of communal interchange (Gergen, 1985: 266). The social aspect of sensemaking was most prevalent in coaching through narration, language and words, which are the main ingredients of sensemaking (Weick: 106; Parry, 2003: 243). By having ongoing conversations the coach and client make sense of the unknown and construct plausible meaning to assist the client to achieve their goals (Du Toit, 2014: 286). Coaches use conversations to challenge clients on their use of words and the impact of their thoughts on their behaviour (Du Toit, 2014: 97). Social support for sensemaking during coaching conversations is also supported by what is not said as well as through the silences between talking. Narratives play an important role during coaching in the context of the social characteristic of sensemaking. Stelter (2014: 54) points out that people make sense by telling their stories. The coach and client work through the narratives and jointly make sense of the unknown (Du Toit, 2012). The coaching relationship is seen to be one of social constructionism and interdependence in addressing of taken-for-granted beliefs (Gergen, 1994: 6). In light of the fact that people make sense through social interaction, the researcher argues for a human-centric approach to coaching. When people feel safe, valued and experience warmth during coaching, they are more open to being honest. Only in a safe space will clients be able to deal with the possible cognitive dissonance of being challenged by the coach. Challenging clients during coaching is an important technique to encourage sensemaking but it has to happen in a relationship of trust. When clients speak to a coach as an objective non-judgmental person, their sensemaking is encouraged. Active listening by summarising and paraphrasing are the most basic social aspects of coaching, which is the first step towards sensemaking. Stellenbosch University https://scholar.sun.ac.za 63 The essence of coaching lies in the power of verbal and nonverbal conversation: words, language, pictures and body language. The dynamics between coach and client are crucial for sensemaking. The more the coach understands about the coaching dialogue the better the elicitation and support for all aspects of sensemaking. The relative new field of conversation intelligence (Glaser, 2014) could play a large role in the sensemaking processes of clients. Conversation intelligence focuses on co-creation and the energy dynamics between individuals. It delves into the neuroscience of conversations and also incorporates epigenetics, which argues that people are not fixed and predetermined by their genes but are changeable. Co-creation and changeability is in line with postmodern and social-constructionism thinking which underlies the sensemaking processes of people. Conversational intelligence is a field worthwhile exploring to in the enhancement of the sensemaking by social interaction The physical presence of the coach during sessions or imagined presence in-between sessions, played a major role in clients’ attempt to create order in response to a sensemaking trigger. Findings showed that coaches implemented techniques such as questioning, effective listening, and the elicitation of narratives to stimulate the client’s understanding of what they are thinking, by saying it. In the process limiting beliefs and assumptions were challenged and frames of reference shifted. Data analysis revealed two major categories of the coaching process that is linked to the social property of sensemaking. 4.4.4.1. The coaching relationship During interviews it became quite clear how important the coach was in providing a safe environment for clients to tell their story and make sense of the dilemmas they are struggling with. A general theme was that in talking to someone who is objective and not affected by what they say, clients can figure out what they think. M: so that makes it easy, it’s somebody totally different, somebody totally new, objective and not involved...he’s not going to feel bad if I say that and that person is, like, uh...he’s not involved. And that’s what makes it really good, is you can really open up, because it’s somebody that you don’t know and that’s not connected to your workplace or your environment at all. R: because I've learnt how to be me and I've also learnt not to be taken advantage of in certain situations and we need to get things going. Sometimes we shouldn't let things go but that only came out when I allowed myself to talk about it. When participant N was asked what stood out for him from the coaching he replied as follows: I think the one thing was the growing relationship with the coach. I think what started as, not defensive but sort of a cautious relationship became a very valuable, very rich relationship. So that was very important, to see how it grows. That was tremendously Stellenbosch University https://scholar.sun.ac.za 64 beneficial and I certainly wouldn’t have had the feedback...there’s no way you could have that type of feedback on your own and then suddenly remedial action was incredibly valuable in terms of...once you knew what had to be done. So yes, very rich; it had a significant impact. The quote below clearly indicates the social nature of sensemaking, where collaboration was the foundation of shared meaning-making D: Well, I think those insights really did change your behaviour; he was very helpful in not just leaving me with the insight, but helping me make meaning of it. E: So that is definitely....I would not have been able to come to the same insights if I was just on my own. W: So the fact that I was with a physical person, it helps just to create and so on, the focus, plus when you say out things out loud sometimes and have to think about the way you describe it in detail. It brings other thoughts and perspectives into play. Coaching as a social construct relationship is illustrated in the feedback from coach participant JP: We came to the conclusion that maybe she didn't necessarily change but the company has changed, and maybe there's a disconnect between the current regime and the way she is. As noted earlier sensemaking properties did not occur independent of each other and narratives was core to social, retrospective and plausible sensemaking. In addition to the social relationship between coach and client, specific techniques and abilities of a coaches work, also showed to play a role in sensemaking of clients. 4.4.4.2. Coach abilities / techniques It is important to understand that coaching abilities in the social context of sensemaking, are not specifically focused on tools and methodologies but more on the essence of coaching as a social intervention. Coaching supports the constructionist perspective of there being a multitude of ways in which the world can be made sense of (Du Toit, 2012: 284): M: So he got me to verbalise things, and then think about things and whilst I was talking about it (or not whilst I was talking about it)...as soon as I said certain things he summarised it what I’ve just said to him in a way that that was: “and what would you do to get out of this, and what would you like to change in the things that you told me now. Then he set me thinking on a different path, so I was thinking about the possible solutions; and he was talking to me about it, making me think more and more about solutions, different kinds of solutions, and really without me ever thinking about certain things and he actually got me to...on that same day...solve one of my big problems. Stellenbosch University https://scholar.sun.ac.za 65 Coach L: I actually look at what she said, and from there we pick up pieces when you see the thread. Ask questions… Coach JP: I think that the coaching, by the level of questions you ask and particularly in the beginning: what about it is, what about the situation, what about the company, what about yourself? That's one where the values surfaced as an area where there is a disconnect. So she never volunteered to say “I don't have the same values”, I think it was a conclusion that she came to at the end with the help of coaching in terms of particularly summarising what she said, that it is the value that is the fundamental issue for her. General themes that emerged from the data were first and foremost the listening skills of the coach: W: The other is just allowing me to think and actually come to my own conclusions. I think easily the coach could possibly talk too much and take over a session and actually try to give too much advice that you almost inhibit or prevent the person from coming to those conclusions, or whatever. R: The best part of the coaching, what you have done, is you've just listened and you allowed that conversation to flow freely, which makes a very big difference and it was good sometimes to just feel like you being heard, which you don't often feel and sometimes feeling that you've just being heard is enough – it builds up your confidence. And that in itself is coaching, I felt. At the same time sensemaking was enabled by coaches challenging their clients: M: So, he didn’t just sit there, he probably pushed the right buttons to get me to start thinking about solutions, that’s definitely what he did. N: Well I think, you know, the conduct of people, the personal conduct, where I always thought I was a correct manager, it didn’t turn out to not always be the case, and I think one almost shocking statement she made, she said: “how do people feel once they’ve dealt with you? …Because, you know, you can take someone and destroy them by being too...too brutal, too hard or too...and that was something that was a turning point for me. T: I don’t think he could have done this thinking without an independent thinking partner, not me necessarily, but without a coach or a mentor or whatever it is to be able to explore and challenge his thinking; he is bright, driven, successful. In being challenged clients were pushed into a state of discomfort, which called for sensemaking followed by constructing new meaning to enable them to explore various opportunities to restore order (Weick. 1995: 45). Coaching provides a space for individuals to experiment with new ideas in Stellenbosch University https://scholar.sun.ac.za 66 a safe space without being judged or feeling a failure (Du Toit, 2012: 287). Findings also support the concept of communal interchange as a basis of sensemaking (Gergen, 1985: 266). Data that was collected on the relationship between coach and client, supported the social constructionist approach. Taken-for-granted narratives were challenged and sense was made through an active interchange (dialogue) between parties within a reciprocal relationship (Gergen, 1995: 4). 4.4.5. Sensemaking is focused on and by extracted cues What is necessary for sensemaking is a “frame, a cue and a connection” (Weick, 1995: 110). So the way in which clients make sense is by noticing and extracting certain cues or signals from the environment, which they then use to make sense of complexity (Thurlow, Helms Mills, 2009: 463). Once something in the environment draws their attention they combine, amplify and then link it with their frame of reference in an attempt of making sense of a dilemma (Starbuck & Milliken, 1988: 51). Clients use their frames of reference to detect, understand, identify and describe events they are dealing with (Weick, 1995: 109). Coaches support clients in recognising alternative cues in order to explore different realities (Du Toit: 2014: 91). Findings from this research assignment clearly show how important it is to understand how clients pick specific signals from the environment and then try to make sense of them by creating a story. Cues were extracted in such a way as to fit their current frames of reference. If the disruption or dissonance caused by the dilemma is not removed, it may trigger the need for coaching. The task of the coach is to support clients in making the shift to interpret cues in a more meaningful way or to take notice of other signals pointing to an alternative sense of the situation. Taking a different perspective contributes to increased awareness, which is an important goal of coaching. Clients’ frames of reference may more than often be in support of a limiting belief or assumption. This could be clearly seen in the example where someone misinterprets a colleague’s behaviour and perceived it a personal attack or sign of their own incompetency. There was one capable and well-qualified young participant, who believed that everyone was treating her differently because she is young and therefore cannot be competent. She constructed this narrative from selected cues that she picked up from comments in the workplace. In addition she felt that she was not acknowledged in meetings either. During coaching it became apparent that the incompetent narrative was one that she constructed in her own mind and then behaved accordingly. Coaches are generally alert to recognise signs of limiting beliefs and assumptions having an influence on clients’ thoughts and behaviour. Specific attention should be paid to signals that clients pick up since these cues seem to be the raw data culminating into limiting views of a situation. What proved successful in the research was a coach who specifically questioned the client on what an alternative interpretation could be of behaviour he was dealing with in the Stellenbosch University https://scholar.sun.ac.za 67 workplace. Working with cues, signals and signs and how selectively people notice them, should form a continuous part of the coaching process. Working with cues reveals the underlying frame of reference that the client draws on to make sense of complexity. Only by challenging and expanding their frames of reference can they construct new meanings. By removing the limitations of being controlled by a frame of reference the client can grow and deal with a dilemma in a healthy way. They can then restore order in their lives by removing the disruptive effect of the problem they are confronted with. What is interesting is that people pick up signals from the environment and then interpret it to be representative of the whole context it came from. This can be likened to pulling out a yarn from a piece of colourful material and thinking that the yarn represents the whole piece. In addition to that belief, people tend to notice the cues that fits their frame of reference. To illustrate this point the case described by coach J is of relevance and which was already mentioned in context of identity construction. The client believed that his boss was personally attacking him and thought him to be incompetent and he took every difficult interaction personally. Through coaching he became aware of his perceived incompetence being a limiting assumption and realised that was the way his boss treated everyone. Coach J: came out with all this interpretations of “he thinks I;m stupid, he’s undermining me and he doesn’t like me”. The question was: ok what else, what other interpretations. And I think that shifted it away from a personal thing to a “we just solve work problems.” He is robust and he is loud, but we’re actually just solve work problems. He is not trying to undermine me or break me down. Another participant, client R was assisted by her coach in challenging the cues she paid attention to, as well. She had to become aware of alternative cues as well. Initially she picked up on cues of how people behaved towards her and placed it in her frame of reference, being that it is because she is young. She blamed people for treating her like a baby. During coaching she actually realised that the maturity issues was in her own mind. She had to change her perception of the situation and take responsibility for her role in how people treat her. R: Some people were treating me like babies, some weren't. But it was also an assumption I made, and I was assuming people were treating me in a certain way because I was young. It's not, I was acting young. Participant D expressed a similar trend in talking about facts (cues) did not represent what she thought it did and she explicitly says she had to reframe. D: …reframe it for myself: well, actually the facts don’t stack up to... where my...what’s caused me to be so blocked, at all. It’s my reality, my facts, not his perception of how capable I am, or, any projection onto me, just… Stellenbosch University https://scholar.sun.ac.za 68 So the role that coaching played was to question and surface the assumptions underpinning the cues or ‘facts’ that clients were unconsciously holding onto and that was limiting their sensemaking (Du Toit, 2012: 288). In the process the client’s frame of mind was challenged and expanded, which resulted in new meaning being developed. When a coach and client work together to review cues and make a different kind of sense it points to a social constructionist view. Social constructionists believe that there is more than one meaning that could be derived from a situation and that different meanings could be constructed socially (Du Toit, 2003: 33). 4.4.6 Sensemaking is ongoing The ongoing nature of sensemaking can be distinguished by the fact that people never stop making sense of things and their maps are constantly being updated (Parry, 2003: 244). What Weick (1995: 43-45) suggests is that most of sensemaking is subconscious and the normal flow of life is not disrupted. When the continuous flow of a person’s life is disrupted by ambiguous or unexpected events, it creates a situation where clients may benefit from coaching in order to deal with the situation. The ongoing characteristic of sensemaking is an intrinsic aspect of constructionist thinking in arguing that intelligibility is always in a state of becoming and never complete (Du Toit, 2003: 35). When flow is interrupted it often causes emotion to flare up (Weick, 1995: 45). Coaches focus on surfacing emotions and this enables clients to develop ways to deal with the emotions in a constructive way and to not be controlled by their emotions (Du Toit, 2012: 286). Sensemaking continues throughout the coaching journey and new insights show up continuously. By stimulating reflection in clients the coach can ensure and support clients’ sensemaking processes both within and between coaching sessions. By experimenting with ideas and behaviour, clients also makes new sense of what they are dealing with. The researcher suggests that in keeping sensemaking going and working towards new insights, fundamental shifts could be facilitated for the client. When clients enter coaching they have already made some kind of sense of a situation, be it to their advantage or not. To keep sensemaking going is to ensure growth, an important purpose of coaching. Coaches should also trust and encourage the ongoing internal sensemaking processes of the client. The prevalence of the ongoing nature of coaching became prevalent by clients realising that their sensemaking of a situation and their renewed insights are never complete: M: I still have a couple of issues, but that’s, I can always come back. Coach L: and so that's fascinating for me to witness how it changes. It changes because it becomes...starts with one thing and sometimes, it's totally different in the end. And sometimes it stays the same but more or less, less is more Stellenbosch University https://scholar.sun.ac.za 69 E: So ja, it's a process that starts, it's not completed in the coaching . Since participants were not interviewed directly after coaching conversations they were mostly not able to recall emotions they experienced during sessions. One of the reasons for not remembering emotions is that the emotions were not explicitly named. In telling their stories of the coaching journeys, some emotions and its role were uncovered: N: I think there were times where you doubted your own capabilities, you really felt miserable about it, but there were also times when you felt much more convinced that you were on the right track, and that what you’re trying to achieve is absolutely noble, and you just have to persevere. So, I think it ranged from feeling that you want to give up, to feeling that you really, really understand where to take it, how to fix it. Coach J: I think he felt quite depressed and quite anxious, he felt frustrated, I think those were the main emotions. And I think there was relief and optimism coming forward as he started seeing different interpretations and different ways of dealing with the situation. W: where I said it out loud again that I feel I'm letting my team down because I'm never available to them – always in meetings and workshops and stuff – I'm never available to help them, to coach them. I think that sort of, in terms of emotions, not sure what's the right emotion...almost make you feel sad you that you're not achieving what you want to achieve. That's one emotion, and then, I'm not sure if relief is an emotion? But some relief when you now know there is, this is the things that I can work on and it's something that can be achieved. It's not impossible to improve. 4.4.7 Sensemaking is plausible Weick (1995: 56) made it clear that in sensemaking accuracy is not important, it is the story that is of essence and stories are plausible. Narratives play a significant role in both sensemaking and coaching as was pointed out in previous sections. The plausibility of stories is a vehicle of meaning rather than the truth (Du Toit, 2014: 98). What the coach is interested in is to uncover the deeper conflicts and taken-for-granted beliefs limiting clients in making constructive sense of what they are dealing with. The stories that clients bring to coaching are representations of the meaning they attach to situations rather than the truth (Du Toit, 2014: 98). Stories during coaching provide the coach with tools for diagnosis (Weick, 1995: 130). Coaches can help clients surface problem narratives and then look for new ideas to rewrite their narrative and in that way shift their future (Swart, 2013: 1). So the story that was created as part of sensemaking is plausible it is not the only truth, another reference to social constructionism and post modernism. The reader is reminded of the argument that truths are individual and constructed during reciprocal interactions between people (Gergen, 1994; Du Toit, 2003: 34). In this research the ‘people’ were the coach and client. Stellenbosch University https://scholar.sun.ac.za 70 What was clear from this research is how clients enter coaching with a dilemma which they relate in the form of a story that they constructed. Their stories revealed their sense of the situation and mostly the sense was not working for them. Stories are never a representation of the truth, since narratives are plausible and as seen in the discussion on the retrospective aspect of sensemaking, filtered by current thinking, frames of reference and so forth. Because sensemaking is plausible (and so are stories) the coach is able to ‘change’ the sense that the client makes of the dilemma and situation. The coach can help the client to construct a new story, again a plausible outcome but good enough to enable the client to grow and become and function in a more meaningful way. Often it is not the person changing, it is their story and stories are plausible depending on the situation. Three of the coaches participating in the research directly referred to narrative and story but there was no explicit reference to reconstructing stories. Stories were referred to in the retrospective sense and not necessary in the context of constructing and naming new stories. The researcher suggests that the implementing of narrative techniques and naming both the limiting and newly constructed stories should be considered by coaching aiming at enabling transformation in clients. By working with, and labelling narratives during coaching, sensemaking can be advanced to be even broader than the specific dilemma at hand Coach T mentioned narratives in his feedback but there was no clear evidence on the plausibility of the story and how it might have changed. Most of the shifts seem to have happened before the first coaching session: “Ja, I mean I do listen to language, largely; the narrative is very important to me.” From this evidence from Coach L below appears that the coach worked with the person’s past story and then paused to prompt the client on what the future should look like. The focus of the coach on the present and future of the client as well as putting new strategies in place, suggests the authoring of a new story: Coach L: Then she spoke a lot, she did go into a lot of story about it. And told me lots of stories. And I tried to distill from there back to present day. Because for me it's also about where we are now. I know that the past informs you but, what is it now? Is it a change in behaviour? So we did, in that conversation, we did put a few strategies in place to the eating. And I'm very hungry, overeat, this whole story that came out. And so, that has helped her. Coach J did work with the story of the client and mentioned a new version of the story, which was the most explicit evidence of stories being utilised and how plausible they are. The creation of the new version of the story had a major impact on client’s sensemaking and the way he viewed the situation: Stellenbosch University https://scholar.sun.ac.za 71 It took a long time for him to tell the story but as he was telling it .. well I was asking him for information, for how he was feeling and how it was affecting him. And I think, kind of the more he talked, the more angry he became and the more frustrated he got. When the version of the story changed the emotional state kind of changed with it. Evidence and findings on the plausibility of sensemaking during coaching supported the theory of Weick (1995: 57) that what is needed is not an accurate map but rather some map that restores order in the world and induces action. Weick (1995: 61) said that a good story that integrates various elements, is all that is needed. Stories provide coaches with raw material to work with, since they describe experiences not facts (Gabriel, 2004: 64) 4.5 WHAT TRIGGERS SENSEMAKING ACTIVITIES DURING COACHING? Sensemaking is triggered once someone is faced with something unexpected, a surprise and has to make sense of it in order to continue with their lives (Weick, 1995: 87,88). Weick (1995: 86-88) suggests three environmental triggers for sensemaking: information load, complexity and turbulence. During coaching the coach will provide more triggers by deliberately challenging the sense that clients make in order to enrich the meaning they construct (Du Toit, 2007: 288). Sensemaking is an ongoing process and therefore new triggers may arise calling for more sensemaking. Figure 4.1 indicates how sensemaking triggers typically occurred throughout the coaching process, both during conversations and between sessions. The ways in which new triggers surfaced during coaching was by coaches challenging the sense clients made and by clients picking up new cues from the environment. What triggers people to enter into coaching is when they are confronted by a situation or event that causes them discomfort or dissonance, and which they cannot make sense of. In order to make new sense there also need to be triggers within the coaching process itself. It has already been mentioned that often by telling their story, clients develop new insights. In other cases the coach needs to create triggers by challenging people’s world views and frames of reference. Triggers for sensemaking can also be created in stimulating reflection by giving clients tasks to do between coaching sessions. What proves to be powerful is for the client to experiment with new types of behavior and the impact and feedback from the environment may create another trigger for making sense. Sensemaking is plausible and ongoing and coaching is ideally positioned to create triggers to help clients improve their sensemaking in a way that is beneficial and even transformational for them. Triggers of sensemaking will be discussed in both the context of client seeking coaching to make sense of something as well as triggers that appeared within coaching, resulting in further sensemaking. Stellenbosch University https://scholar.sun.ac.za 72 4.5.1 Triggers for clients to seek coaching During interviews participants were explicitly asked about the reasons for them seeking coaching. In the findings the following external triggers were extracted from interviews and is presented according to three occasions for sensemaking as identified by Weick (1995: 87-88). An increasing information load concerning quantity, ambiguity and a mixture of information that individuals are forced to organise: D: Well, the amount of pressure and chaotic change, that our entire team is going through, and just trying to, I think, expand my thinking about how I cope better on a personal level; but, also how I lead better in the circumstances. Coach JP: So she was at a crossroads in her life, not exactly sure whether she had the energy to continue in…uncertainty, continuous changes, job satisfaction wasn’t there any more. Increased or high complexity of situations, which can result in uncertainty due to current beliefs and ways of doing are no longer working: E: So, basically a year ago I moved from a technical position into a management position and at that time, I told G, which was my boss at the time, I just need somebody to transition me through this process from technical to management. Although I thought I had the natural inclination, after a month or so I realised the shift is quite a big shift. So that is why I decided to go for coaching at the time. Coach L: And she does find herself disappearing, and her voice is not heard kind of thing. It raises a lot of anger and anxiety in her. Turbulence, instability, unexpected events and shock N: I think the reason was based on feedback from the Chief Executive Officer, that there were strained relationships between myself and my team, and between me and other senior managers in the firm. As is the nature of qualitative research and subjective feedback, it is important to note that the triggers above were not all clear-cut if compared with Weick’s categories. Triggers were rather grouped into the categories they seem to relate best to. It is nevertheless fair to assume that the triggers uncovered for coaching during the interviews do correspond to what is seen by Weick (1995) as triggers for sensemaking. 4.5.2 Sensemaking triggers within coaching As noted before, the nature of sensemaking is ongoing and in coaching it was clear that there was not only one upfront trigger for sensemaking. In most of the cases triggers have occurred more Stellenbosch University https://scholar.sun.ac.za 73 than once during the coaching journey. The data revealed that triggers either emanated from the environment or was induced by the coach in challenging the clients. The case of N below is an example of how questions by the coach resulted in new experiences of shock or realisation. N: I think one almost shocking statement she made, she said: “how do people feel once they’ve dealt with you? When they go home, are they motivated, happy and excited, or are they destroyed and stressed-out?” and that was a real shock to me, an absolute shock. For participant N, his first trigger was the external one of receiving negative feedback and then the coach took that further by presenting a scenario to him, which he experienced as a shock. His frame of reference was disrupted and he was forced to engage in sensemaking processes. Being confronted with the impact of his behaviour, N experience dissonance and a need for sensemaking. The following feedback provides more evidence on how coaches triggered renewed sensemaking during coaching conversations: M: Ja, I think he pushed buttons, but without saying definite things or without giving me different answers, or pushing me in a direction, he definitely...in the way that he structured his summary, maybe, of me, or challenged me, made me feel different… Coach J: The mood only changed when I (inaudible) asked what is your interpretation of what’s going on and then the mood shifted to a more kind of “maybe I can do something about this. There was more optimism and more kind of, a more positive approach, more positive feeling, more hopeful I think. a) maybe it wasn’t what he thought it was and b) he could turn this around. E: Sometimes you get annoyed, cause you don't understand, you don't understand why he's going down this path. But eventually it kind of, you know, opens up and makes sense. The initial reason for the client seeking coaching was a dysfunctional relationship with a superior, which seriously affected him both in his private and professional life. It was only when the coach prompted him on his interpretation of the situation that it triggered different thoughts for him. In analysing the various reasons for people seeking coaching, there was an alignment between triggers for coaching and the occasions for sensemaking as described by Weick (1995: 86-88). For all the cases interviewed, coaching resulted in a positive outcome for the client, which indicates that coaching serves as a powerful tool for people making sense of triggers in their environment. Since most of the triggers that became prevalent during the research were of an organisational nature, coaching as a sensemaking intervention in organisations should be recognised and promoted. Stellenbosch University https://scholar.sun.ac.za 74 The next section will review the way in which clients typically experienced sensemaking during coaching. 4.6. HOW ARE SENSEMAKING INSTANCES EXPERIENCED DURING COACHING? Actual sensemaking instances were discernible for all clients during interviews but as Weick (1995: 49) indicated, sensemaking is swift and unconscious and it is normally the result that is noticeable. He argues that to become aware of sensemaking, people need to be observed in dealing with prolonged dilemmas. The seven sensemaking characteristics (retrospect, ongoing, social, plausible, identity construction, enactment on the environment and the extraction of cues), are ways for distinguishing sensemaking instances. He continues to say that each of the properties contains action and context (Weick, 1995: 17-18 ). Sensemaking is the key to transformation because true sensemaking is not only about interpreting situations differently but it triggers action that is linked to the insight that clients gained. Knowledge is generated that encourages development and grow of clients. The experience of sensemaking during coaching could be described as an ‘aha’ moment when the client suddenly realises what is actually going on. Transformative sensemaking came about when action was taken based on the insight gained. Clients suddenly became aware of the role of their own behaviour and views. From analysing data and keeping theory in mind, the researcher came to conclude that coaching is a sensemaking incubator where sensemaking is observable in the context of clients wrestling with making sense of the problematic situations in their lives. The underlying reason for them seeking coaching is because they are unable to construct meaning on their own and need the coach to help the make sense of what they are dealing with. The value of sensemaking instances is discussed in section 4.7. In some instances during interviews the actual word ‘sense’ was used to refer to sensemaking, where in other cases words like insight, realise or ‘became clear’ were prevalent. The actual words used may be related to the question posed at them, mentioning the term insight : “Tell me more about insights that came up for you / your client during the coaching journey?”. The word ‘sensemaking’ was deliberately not used during interviews, since in testing the questionnaire it seem to be ambiguous in the coaching context. Even so, M did express it in the following way. M: Yes, I definitely made sense of something and I’ve also made work of something. D: I think the biggest epiphany was the second-last session that we had and I am going to continue to see him, because I think it’s just really started to unlock something for me...that there was a fundamental shift in my attitude about certain things and it all emerged from thinking about what my actual locus of control was. 75 Participant E was appointed in a management position which create major discomfort for him. Coaching helped him with some transformational insights, which really transformed him. From being overwhelmed and making sense of his new position he made sense and took brave action: E: In certain situations I'm very passive and I've realised that being in a leadership position, so one realisation that I had was that being in a leadership position, especially when it comes to stakeholder relationship management, I cannot be passive. I need to go out and in my role there are certain key individuals that you need to convince that you are on their side, if I can say it like that. And what...if I didn't have the coaching session I would have just kind of tried to prove through actions, and that's kind of the person that I am, I want to show you through my actions but rather to have an aggressive or active approach, not passive, and go to the persons upfront and say, OK, I'm now new in this role. The impact and meaningfulness of E’s sensemaking will be discussed in section 4.7 which focuses how meaningful his sensemaking proved to be. It will shed more light on the transformation he went through. The prevalence of the seven sensemaking properties was discussed at length in section 4.5. In summary it should suffice to say that the experiences of sensemaking during coaching is definitely in line with the seven sensemaking properties as described by Weick (1995: 17-18). It is important to understand how meaningful sensemaking instance were to clients. The meaningfulness of sensemaking instances will be explored in the following section. 4.7. HOW MEANINGFUL ARE THE SENSEMAKING INSTANCES THAT CLIENTS EXPERIENCE DURING COACHING? Sensemaking of elapsed reality during coaching facilitates future realities of clients (Du Toit, 2007: 286). In experimenting with different actions, new behavioural patterns are developed to assist the client in dealing with similar future dilemmas (Du Toit, 2007: 289). The meaningfulness of sensemaking instances are impacted by the quality of coaching conversation as is argued by Du Toit (2007: 286). Sensemaking is the key to transformation of clients because true sensemaking is not only about interpreting situations differently but also taking action linked to the new insight. When clients make sense of a situation they generate new knowledge, which helps them develop and grow. Once clients made sense of what they are dealing with, they construct a different view of the situation. They then become unstuck, which results in new behaviour and they exit the coaching process with a sense of achievement. The essence of the coaching process is growth and ideally the transformation of the client. This research study has shown that sensemaking takes place during 76 coaching no matter which methodology is used. What does play a role is the quality of the conversation, the client’s thought processes and their ability to reflect. What is essential are the basic techniques applied by the coach, such as empathy, objectivity, a safe environment, active listening and inquisitiveness. From the literature review, subsequent data analysis and insight on the role of stories, the researcher believes that a narrative coaching approach may be more supportive to sensemaking but more research is required to evaluate that. The quotes below are examples of how meaningful sensemaking in coaching can be: Coach JP: think the coaching certainly helped to raise some awareness of what she wanted, and what she doesn’t want and as a result of that I think it became evident that she needed to make a career change. N: it changed the entire way that I...I started conducting my behaviour in...and decide on my future within the firm. D: think those insights really did change your behaviour; he was very helpful in not just leaving me with the insight, but helping me make meaning of it. Coaching was meaningful to M even after only one session: M: he actually got me to...on that same day...solve one of my big problems. L: She’s definitely done things differently. In fact, she's got feedback from her manager, her immediate line manager, that she was different in a situation. Well, she got that feedback. So clearly something shifted. Even the conflicts that she thought she had, kind of changed into something else. It's quite interesting, because she changed. W: I think just the coaching discussion in terms of things we started off with. Time and feeling that I'm not spending enough time with some of my team members and all of those things, and then that sort of brought the focus back to well, part of the reason of why I don't have time is because I'm doing everything myself. R: So back then it made sense that they treated me like a young person because I was young. But now I'm standing and I'm like “yes, I'm young, but I'm still in a position of authority and this is still my position. ‘So yes, you are older than me and I'll always respect that but don't treat me like the young person.’ So that now made sense to me. Coach JP gave feedback on a client who made some sense of her working environment and subsequently resigned from her job.. The following three quotes are evident of how meaningful coaching was to her: Ya, because certainly when we met for the first session she wasn’t... resigning wasn’t necessarily an option. So based on that I can assume that some insight surfaced that 77 forced her to say “well, clearly this things have changed around here. There's no fit for me anymore, so as a consequence of that, maybe it's better to get out I think the insights where the coaching maybe helped her, is that she realised where she shouldn’t…not necessarily where she should be, but I think the reflection made it very clear that where she was at the time was not where she wanted to be. When I set up the following meeting she said: “by the way…I’ve resigned Sensemaking during coaching was meaningful to clients in forming new meanings and identities, evaluating their own behaviours and adopting new behaviours (Passmore, 2013: 64-65). As a final discussion on the research and its value to coaching it is important to understand what benefits of coaching was to client’s sensemaking instances. That is what will be summarised in the next section. 4.8 WHAT ARE THE POTENTIAL BENEFITS OF COACHING TO THE SENSEMAKING PROCESSES OF INDIVIDUALS? The kind of interaction and dialogue that forms part of the coaching relationship is the process that enables a client to make sense of their world (Du Toit, 2014: 81) The major benefit of sensemaking to coaching is that it provides an intervention, which is particularly focused on an individual making sense of disruption in their lives and in the process grow and develop new skills. Coaching supports sensemaking also through a process of breaking down a client’s sense, helping them to make a different sense of what they believe is true. Not ‘the’ truth, but ‘a’ truth that makes sense and helps them to continue in a way that they can function in a new meaningful way. Meaningful functioning is not a static process and sensemaking will continue, with or without the need for more coaching. Ultimately the coach should strive to bring the client to a point of selfcoaching. Not all clients have that ability though. During coaching the coach could enhance sensemaking by ‘sensebreaking,’ by applying Socratic questioning, which forces the client to reconsider their interpretations and views. Being challenged often causes clients to experience some cognitive dissonance needed for making new sense. Sensemaking is social but the coaching conversation is far more supportive of sensemaking than normal interaction between people. That is because the conversation as a whole is exploratory. The way in which that conversation is leveraged is the most important tool in the hands of the coach. 78 Another benefit of coaching is that it not only helps clients to restore identities but also supports the creation of numerous identities, which can enable the client to be more adaptable. As mentioned earlier the researcher views coaching as an incubator for sense and meaning making. All seven the properties of sensemaking are supported in coaching as discussed before. According to the characteristics of making sense in hindsight, coaching also places a major focus on reviewing experiences. Coaching supports the individual to construct new meaning in collaboration with the coach, who is socially dedicated to the sensemaking processes of their client. One of the most important aspects of coaching highlighted by participating clients in this research assignment was that the coach provided them with the space to open up and be heard. They were able to grapple with their thoughts in participation with the coach questioning and challenging them and subsequently viewed their dilemmas differently. Eventually all of them did make sense and in the process took action, which had an impact on their environment, restored order and enabled great improvement in their lives. Apart from all the sensemaking properties being supported and occurring during coaching, the other major aspects of sensemaking such as emotions, values and beliefs are part and partial of the coaching approach. These aspects are dealt with in a way that moves the individual forward in learning and making sense. Coaching encourages sensemaking in such a way that it enables the person to grow and develop healthy behavioural patterns. The sensemaking of clients does not influence only themselves but their personal and organisational life as well. It is for that reason that coaching has become such an important part of leadership development, it enables leaders (or others) to make sense of events in a healthy way and that sense is fed back into the organisational system. The researcher argues that sensemaking is the ultimate purpose of coaching. Sensemaking in coaching results in the creation of knowledge, new skills, new insights, paradigm shifts, adjustment of behaviour and a systemic impact; in other words, not only transforming the client only but potentially also their organisation as a whole. 4.9. CONCLUSION Chapter 4 presented the findings and conclusions of this research assignment on the role of coaching in sensemaking. Data from interviews was collated and trends and aspects of sensemaking that occurred during coaching presented in response to the research questions. The trends and aspects of sensemaking that manifested during interviews proved to be fairly consistent across all participants . In addition all seven of the properties of sensemaking were prevalent during coaching. Evidence in support of the occurrence of the seven sensemaking characteristics were presented extensively to indicate the manifestation of the specific sensemaking property under discussion. 79 Findings indicated that all seven sensemaking properties were distinctly present during coaching. What was notable is that the characteristics of sensemaking were not only limited to coaching conversations but extended across the coaching journey as a whole. Although the seven properties were all identifiable they occurred in a consolidated way. Coaching supported retrospective sensemaking through storytelling and reflection and provided the raw material for the coach and client to work with in constructing new meaning. In all cases the clients’ dilemmas affected their sense of self. During coaching, coaches and clients were able to build new meaningful identities enabling the clients to feel more confident and be functional in their environment. Coaching is in its essence a social process and it came as no surprise that the social interaction with a coach created a contained environment for clients in which all other aspects of sensemaking were enabled. The ability of coaches to listen attentively, question Socratically, surface and challenge assumptions enabled clients to come to their own conclusions. Holding clients accountable for tasks in between sessions were also perceived as powerful by at least three of the six clients interviewed. Social constructionism was evident in the fact that clients referred to collaboration with the coach in constructing new meaning and knowledge. Postmodernism featured in the fact that when clients were challenged on their ‘truths’ alternative truths emerged. The noticing of specific cues from the environment and interpreting them according to a limiting frame-of-reference happened for most of the clients and was generally linked to threats to their identity. Coaches made clients aware of alternative cues and different interpretations of those cues. The change of behaviour and subsequent experimenting with new behaviour in the environment made a major contribution to clients making sense of situations. Plausibility featured by new sensemaking coming into being not only when clients were challenged by the coach but also through them reflecting and enacting on the environment. Sensemaking was ongoing during coaching and clients had to make sense continuously by being exposed to challenges and receiving feedback from the environment. Triggers to seeking coaching were in all cases work related and were linked to shocks, ambiguity and an escalation of complexity in the environment. Coaching proved to be successful to all clients in enabling them to make sense of their dilemmas and restore order back into their lives. Coaching for all participants in the research assignment was developmental rather than goal-driven. In reflecting and making sense of the research findings, it is fair to argue that the ultimate purpose of coaching is to enable people to make sense of events in order to resolve dilemmas and grow. Coaching proves to be a powerful sensemaking tool. 80 In the next and final chapter, recommendations, limitations and suggestions for further research are presented. CHAPTER 5 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 5.1 INTRODUCTION This chapter provides a summary and final conclusions on the contribution of coaching to the sensemaking activities of clients. In addition, recommendations, emanating from research findings are made on how sensemaking can be enhanced during coaching. Lastly limitations of the research methodology are highlighted and some recommendations for future research are presented. 5.2 SUMMARY AND FINAL CONCLUSIONS Chapter 1 provided a summary of the planning phase for the research, indicating the aim of the research assignment as well as research questions, objectives and a short description of the intended methodology. The aim of the research was firstly to practically understand how clients engage in sensemaking activities during the coaching process. Secondly, insights gathered from the research findings informed advice to the coaching community on how coaching can improve individual sensemaking. In Chapter 2 an extensive literature review was conducted in order to gain an understanding of both the domains of sensemaking and coaching. Most important were the theoretical links discovered between the two concepts. The role of coaching in sensemaking was not extensively covered in the literature but it seemed clear that there is a valuable contribution coaching can make to sensemaking of clients. The challenge was to prove this in practice through empirical research. Chapter 3 set out the detail of the research methodology, which was based on a phenomenological interpretive design. The first step in the research was to define the aspects of sensemaking to be 81 studied during coaching. The decision was made to review how the triggers as well as the seven properties of sensemaking as defined by Weick (1995) show up during coaching. A sample of six clients and four coaches were contracted and data was collected from them by means of semistructured interviews. Data analysis was approached deductively underpinned by the theory on sensemaking properties and inductively to uncover subcategories to the main themes. Coding was done in an online qualitative analysis tool, Atlas.ti. An integrated discussion of the research findings and subsequent conclusions and responses to research questions were presented in Chapter 4. Findings indicated that the seven characteristics of sensemaking (Weick, 1995) clearly showed up in the data. The prevalence of sensemaking aspects in the research data practically supported theories that coaching provides a significant contribution to sensemaking during the sensemaking processes of clients. The role of coaching as an enabler of sensemaking has been explored and proposed by Du Toit (2007, 2012, 2014) but she mentions that to date no empirical study has been done to test the relationship. This research assignment has contributed towards filling that gap. The final conclusion that was made by the researcher is that coaching is indeed a sensemaking tool and could in fact be seen as a sensemaking incubator. It seems fair to argue that the very relationship, techniques and tools involved in coaching, with the coach as facilitator, is implicitly directed at sensemaking by means of social construction. Objective 3 of this study was to suggest guidelines to the coaching community on what to take cognisance of to enhance sensemaking during individual coaching. Many of these recommendations are already part of the essence of coaching but it is important to emphasise coaching aspects that are particularly useful to sensemaking: Findings suggest that sensemaking of clients during coaching can be enhanced in the following ways: 5.2.1 The interaction between the coach and client: The most important factor influencing a client’s sensemaking during coaching is the reciprocal social interaction with the coach. Important to keep in mind is: i) It is important for coaches to be mindful of their own narratives and frames of reference as well as their sensemaking processes throughout the coaching journey. By being aware of their own meaning-creation, coaches can ensure that their meaning systems do not limit that of the coaching client. ii) By applying Socratic techniques to inquire, question and challenge the client a coach in paves the way for ongoing sensemaking in support of transformation of the client. 82 iii) The construction of meaning through collaboration between coach and client is dependent on linguistic factors. Coaches should therefore pay close attention to the language (verbal and non-verbal) that clients use. In the process opportunities for the triggering of sensemaking can be identified. iv) Sensemaking is encouraged by techniques such as questioning, active listening and the elicitation of narratives stimulate clients’ understanding of what they are thinking by saying it. In the process, limiting beliefs and assumptions are challenged and frames of reference shifted. vii) The essence of coaching lies in the power of conversation. The dynamics between coach and client are crucial for sensemaking. The more the coach understands about the coaching dialogue, the better the elicitation and support for all aspects of sensemaking. The relatively new field of conversation intelligence (C-IQ) (Glaser, 2014) is about deepening the understanding and conducting of conversations. Shifting the focus of conversations from ‘I’ to ‘we’ has a significant impact on stimulating sensemaking. vi) The coaching space is ideally set up for sensemaking and the experimentation with novel thoughts and ideas. It is also important that clients are encouraged to experiment with behaviour in their environment and use the feedback from the environment to determine what makes sense in context of the dilemma they are trying to resolve. vii) Coaches who implement techniques to support sensemaking activities beyond the coaching conversation are paving the way for transformation. Techniques mentioned in interviews were meditation, journaling, the coach emailing a summary of the session, actions plans, working on small pieces of narratives at a time and clients sending emails summarising what they have learned from a session. 5.2.2 i) The importance of narratives in coaching For coaches striving to take retrospective sensemaking to a transformational level it is worthwhile exploring the principles of narrative coaching. Narrative principles encourage the telling and enrichment of stories and building alternative stories that reveals new possibilities. ii) Within the collaborative exploration of stories the social aspect of sensemaking is also at play. So it is fair to say that narratives are very powerful in the sensemaking process, playing a concurrent role in social, retrospective and plausibility aspects of sensemaking. Plausibility and social sensemaking properties will continue in re-authoring the client’s story. Constructing a new story also involves the identity element of sensemaking. 83 iii) Narratives are the raw materials of sensemaking. Understanding and re-authoring narratives emerged as a powerful option for coaches to enhance sensemaking. At the time of research, training in narrative coaching in South Africa seemed to be limited. Although power of stories are widely acknowledged in various disciplines, coaching programmes should invest in including training on narrative coaching techniques in particular. An internationally renowned narrative coach in South Africa is Chenè Swart, author of the book “Re-authoring the world” (2014).Swart provides explicit techniques and training in the practice of narrative coaching. Other international authors acknowledged in the field of narrative coaching are David Drake and Richard Stelter. Both have published various articles and books on narrative coaching. 5.2.3 Reflection One way that clients make sense of situations and experiences is in hindsight. This retrospective way of making sense is enhanced not only by clients telling their stories but by encouraging clients to reflect in any possible way. A technique already applied by many coaches is to give their clients tasks as ‘homework. The purpose of homework is to enforcing reflection between sessions. Research findings from this assignment indicated that it is important to hold clients accountable for completing the tasks. Reflection during coaching sessions is enhanced by asking questions and through the use of silence, which encourages retrospective sensemaking of the client. 5.2.4 i) Experimenting with action One way in which people make sense is to take action, see what the effect is and then make sense of the feedback on the action. This happens according to their worldview and frames of reference. What proved to be helpful in coaching is to encourage clients to experiment with new behaviour (often based on new insight) in their environment and bring their experience of the effect back to coaching to make sense of. ii) Coaches challenge and mirror clients to assist them in gaining insight into the effect of their own behaviour on their environment (Du Toit, 2012: 289; 2014: 87). 5.2.5 i) Frames of reference The coach should act as a ‘sensebreaker,’ breaking the sense of the client based on limiting assumptions and restriction of the frames of reference. Coaches should inquire, question and challenge to break the client’s initial sense to open possibilities for new sensemaking. This process is ongoing should strive towards client transformation. 84 ii) The task of the coach is to support clients in making the shift to interpret cues in a more meaningful way or take notice of other signals pointing to an alternative sense of the situation. Taking a different perspective contributes to increased awareness, which is an important goal of coaching. The client’s frame of reference is at the core of limiting beliefs and assumptions. iii) Working with cues, signals and signs and how selectively people notice them should form a continuous part of the coaching process, since it reveals the underlying frame of reference that the client draws on. Frames of reference filter the cues that people notice in their environment. 5.2.6 i) Postmodernist aspects The advantage of a postmodernist approach as a philosophy of coaching is supportive of sensemaking and became clear in this research assignment. What is particularly useful from the theory and findings is how important it is to challenge the client on the small narratives of the world they subscribe to. Coach and client need to be aware of the plausibility of truth and that truth is subjective and plausible. Socratic questioning is essential as a postmodernist technique. ii) In keeping with postmodernism, it is of the essence that the coach should not be locked into a specific methodology of coaching but rather apply different techniques suitable to the specific client as a person and the dilemma he/she has to dealing with. iii) Coaching in the context of sensemaking should take care to not be too goal driven but rather be driven by purpose or intent presented by the client. Clients enter coaching with some kind of problem that needs to be made sense of. Being overly focused on achieving goals in the beginning, rather than resolving a dilemma. In the process a client’s transformation may be limited. Once the process of identifying problem narratives and how they impact the client, an alternative story can be constructed with the purpose of resolving the client’s problem. Meanings and purposes are flexible and maybe change or deepen during the coaching process. iv) Coaching and sensemaking in the postmodern world means that there exists not only version of the truth; knowledge and truth are always in the process of becoming. What proved successful in the research was when a client was questioned on what an alternative interpretation could be of behaviour he was dealing with in the workplace. In exploring different possibilities with the coach, a different perspective enabled him to make sense of the situation in a way that he could make a meaningful adjustment to his frame of reference and become fully functional again. 5.2.7 Identity work 85 i) Identity work in sensemaking and this coaching as a sensemaking tool, deals with threats to identity, organisational changes or clients shifting to new leadership roles. The coach has to challenge clients in a way that creates some discomfort necessary to enable sensemaking on a level of ‘being’ rather than one of functioning. Challenging should however be done in a humanistic way, ensuring that the client continues to experience the coaching space as safe. ii) It is also important to remember that identities are formed by social interaction with other people. That gives the coach a powerful opportunity to collaborate with the client in constructing healthy, functional identities in support of new meaningful frames of mind. iii) A person’s sense of self and identity play a core part in their perception of the world and their quest to make things sensible. Essential during coaching is to surface the different identities at play and how they are impacted by the challenges the client is dealing with. As a result of the outcome of this assignment, the researcher argues that the restoration or construction of new identities pertaining to the situation at hand could enhance quality of sensemaking activities. The construction of the new or revised identities is dependent on the roles required of the client from their world. iv) If the coach does not take a holistic integral approach to a client’s intervention, underlying identities which are essential for sensemaking, cannot be uncovered. Not take care of identities at play may limit sensemaking and the reaching of the client reaching achieving the purpose of their coaching. Identities that have be taken into account are the personal, social and professional selves in order to enable transformational sensemaking. v) The more selves the client is able to develop, the more flexible he/she can become in coping with different situations. 5.3 FURTHER RESEARCH Studies linking the fields of coaching and sensemaking are limited, which gives researchers a multitude of opportunities for further study. Below are suggestions for further research, which could potentially provide a major contribution to both the domains of coaching and sensemaking: i) First hand data collection for understanding sensemaking during coaching will add a more in depth understanding of the finer nuances of client’s sensemaking during coaching. As mentioned in the limitations of the study, in collecting the information retrospectively, data has already been contaminated by hindsight, memory, current views, changed frames of reference and current circumstances. First hand methods of data collection could include observation and recordings of coaching sessions in combination with reflective notes 86 ii) In this study the participant coaches had no connection to the coaching clients that participated. Qualitative studies comparing the coach their own client’s perspectives of sensemaking for the same sessions will add depth to the understanding of sensemaking during coaching. This could either be done by post-coaching interviews similar to this research study, comparing reflective notes or ideally by recording sessions. iii) The understanding and impact of the coach’s own sensemaking processes on that of clients would provide valuable insight into the body of knowledge integrating sensemaking and coaching. Insight on coaches’ sensemaking activities can be obtained by collecting data from coaches on their sensemaking during a session and comparing it with the client’s sensemaking of the same session. Once again data can be collected by reflective notes or interviews. iv) In reviewing the research and findings of this study a valuable research question would be what an ‘ideal’ coaching model would be to enhance the sensemaking activities of clients. Recommendations have been made pertaining to narrative techniques, conversational intelligence, integral approach, social constructionism and a human centric approach. A model in support of sensemaking in coaching should be based on a constructionist view and make provision for each coaching relationship to be a unique journey of construction between the coach and client. v) It would be valuable to consider whether sensemaking based on theory of Weick (1995) and adult learning theory (Mezirow (1997; Kolb, 1984) are two sides of the same coin or can they compliment each other in coaching? Coaching has been intimately connected to adult learning. Sensemaking and adult learning are both based on social constructionism and seem to have much in common. Both concepts place emphasis on aspects such as frames of reference, assessment of assumptions and exploration of actions. Experiential learning is about the coaching client becoming aware of everyday experiences and their possible application in future (Kolb, 1984; cited in Reissner & Du Toit, 2011: 249). Transformational learning is about challenging and altering the client’s frame of reference (Mezirow, 1997; cited in Reissner & Du Toit, 2011: 249). In a qualitative study, data could potentially be collected using interviews and be interpreted from both a sensemaking and adult learning approach. The researcher should determine if integrating sensemaking and adult learning principles could strengthen the sensemaking and transformation of the coaching client. What could each field contribute to the quality of coaching? vi) The role of values, beliefs and emotion in sensemaking during coaching was not explored in this research assignment (see limitations of the study in section 5.6). In evaluating the role of these concepts during the clients’ sensemaking processes during coaching, more ways of 87 deepening sensemaking could be added to the coaching field. Once again the same or similar qualitative interpretive methodology as in this research assignment could be considered. 5.4 LIMITATIONS OF THE METHODOLOGY AND DESIGN The following limitations are acknowledged for this study: i) One of the major limitations of the research was that it was focused on exploring the experience of the coaches and clients through a single data collection method of data. Ideally, the way in which coaching can contribute to sensemaking can be evaluated in more depth by multiple data collection instrument such as observations, diary inputs, reflective notes and live recordings of sessions. Insights as to what really happens between the coach and client were limited by the method used. Butcher (2012: 127) used exactly the same method and listed the same limitation as discussed in this point. ii) The temporal characteristic of sensemaking was focused on retrospective sensemaking only and new research on prospective sensemaking (looking at events in the future perfect tense) was not included in the scope of the study. Prospective sensemaking may have a significant role in coaching since it focused on reaching future goals. iii) Data collection was done retrospectively (second-hand) rather than first-hand during live coaching sessions. Recordings were done on participants describing past experiences. In collecting data retrospectively, the data has already been altered through hindsight. One aspect that would have impacted participants’ recall of coaching sessions was the fact that the outcome was already apparent. Information is also filtered by the memory, current state or circumstances of the participant. During one of the interviews the participant was so exhausted and although valuable data emerged, it was clear that he was unable to engage in too much mental effort. 5.5 CONCLUSION The aim of this research assignment was to gain some insight on how the properties of sensemaking typically manifest during coaching. At the same time it was also important to understand the value that coaching can add to sensemaking and if coaching can indeed be described as a sensemaking tool. An overview of the literature indicated potential links between coaching and sensemaking and the role coaches would typically play to enhance clients’ construction of meaning. The role of coaching in sensemaking was expressed in the context of the seven characteristics and triggers of sensemaking. In the collection and analysis of data, the theory on the role of coaching in assisting an individual to make sense to deal with challenges was empirically proven. All the properties of 88 sensemaking could be distinguished in coaching journeys as described by research participants during interviews. Results from the study emphasised he power of coaching interventions in the transformation of individuals. The study revealed more about the integrative role between coach and client and collaborative construction of a new reality for clients. REFERENCES Armstrong, H. & Coaching, E., 2012. Coaching as dialogue: Creating spaces for (mis) understandings. International Journal of Evidence Based Coaching and Mentoring, 10(1), 33-47. Bailey, C.A. 2007. A guide to qualitative field research. 2nd edition. USA: Fine Forge Press. Bachkirova, T, Cox, E. & Clutterbuck, D. 2010. Introduction. In E. Cox, T. Bachkirova & D. Clutterbuck (eds.). The complete handbook of coaching. SAGE, 1-20. Barclay, M.A. 2015. Contribution of coaching, as part of the blended leadership programme, towards a leader's development and leadership development. Dissertation submitted in partial fulfilment for the degree Master of Philosophy in Management Coaching at Stellenbosch University. Stellenbosch, South Africa. Barner, R. & Higgins , J., 2007. Understanding implicit models that guide the coaching process. Journal of Management Development, 26(2), 148-158. Bloomberg, L.D. & Volpe, M. 2012. Completing your qualitative dissertation: A roadmap from beginning to end. 2nd edition. California: Sage. Boudes, T, Laroche, H. 2009. “Taking off the heat: Narrative sensemaking in post-crisis inquiry reports." Organization Studies 30(4), 377-396. Braun, V. & Clarke, V. 2006. Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2). 77-101. Carey, W., Philippon, D.J. & Cummings, G.G., 2011. Coaching models for leadership development: An integrative review. Journal of Leadership Studies, 5(1), 51-69. Cassell, C. & Symon, G., 2004. Essential guide to qualitative methods in organizational research. Athenaeum Studi Periodici Di Letteratura E Storia Dell Antichita. 89 Cavanagh, M. J., & Spence, G. B. 2013. Mindfulness in coaching: philosophy, psychology, or just a useful skill? The Psychology of Coaching and Mentoring, 112-134. Cecez-Kecmanovic, D., 2004. A sensemaking model of knowledge in organisations: A way of understanding knowledge management and the role of information technologies. Knowledge Management Research & Practice, 2(3), 155-168. Chapman, T., Best, B., & Van Casteren, P. 2003. Executive coaching: Exploding the myths. Chicago: Palgrave Macmillan. Clutterbuck, D & John Wiley & Sons, Inc., from The Handbook of Knowledge-Based Coaching: From theory to practice, edited by Leni Wildflower and Diane Brennan to be published in June 2011. Clutterbuck, D. & Megginson, D. 2010 ‘Coach maturity: an emerging concept’, International Journal of Mentoring and Coaching, 8(1)(December), 1-11 (www.emccouncil.org). Choo, C.W., 1996. The knowing organization: How organizations use information to construct meaning, create knowledge and make decisions. International Journal of Information Management, 16(5), 329-340. Cilliers, F., 2011. Positive psychology leadership coaching experiences in a financial organisation. SA Journal of Industrial Psychology, 37(1). Coulehan, R., Friedlander, M.L. & Heatherington, L., 1998. Transforming narratives: A change event in constructivist family therapy. Family Process, 37(1), 17-33. Coutu, D. & Kauffman, C. 2009. What can coaches do for you? Harvard Business Review, January, 91-97. Cox, E. 2006. An adult learning approach to coaching. The Evidence Coaching Handbook, 77. John Wiley & Sons, Inc., Hoboken, New Jersey. Cox, E., Bachkirova, T. & Clutterbuck, D.A. eds., 2014. The complete handbook of coaching. Sage. Creswell, J.W. 2007. Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among the five traditions. 2nd edition. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Czarniawska, B. 2005. Karl Weick: Concepts, style and reflection. The Sociological Review, 53(s1), 267-278. Dougherty, D. S., & Drumheller, K. 2006. Sensemaking and emotions in organizations: Accounting for emotions in a rational (ized) context. Communication Studies, 57(2), 215-238. Drake, D.B. 2007. The art of thinking narratively: implications for coaching psychology and practice. Australian Psychologist, 42(4), 283-94. Du Toit, A. 2003. Knowledge: a sensemaking process shared through narrative. Journal of Knowledge Management, 7(3), 27-37. 90 Du Toit, A.D., 2007. Making sense through coaching. Journal of Management Development, 26(3), 282-291. European Mentoring and Coaching Council. Competence Framework. https://emccuk.org/wpcontent/uploads/2014/03/EMCC-Competence-Framework.pdf Accessed: 8 September 2015. Fourie, CM. 2009. Sensemaking in communities of practice. Thesis presented in fulfilment of the requirements for the degree Master of Philosophy. University of Stellenbosch, Stellenbosch, South Africa. Frese, S. 2013. Approaches to coaching with Atlas.ti. Atlas.ti training centre. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EvcQLhEZP-A Accessed: 2 October 2015 Gabriel, Y. 2000. Storytelling in organizations: Facts, fictions, and fantasies. Oxford University Press. Gabriel, Y. 2004. Narratives, stories and texts. The Sage handbook of organizational discourse, 61-77. Gephart, R. P. 1993. The textual approach: Risk and blame in disaster sensemaking. Academy of Management Journal, 36(6), 1465-1514. Gergen, KJ. 1985. The social constructionist movement in modern psychology. American Psychologist, 40(3)(March), 266-275 Gergen, K.J. & Thatchenkery, T.J., 2004. Organization science as social construction. The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 40(2), 228-249. [Online] Available: http://jab.sagepub.com/content/40/2/228.abstract. Glaser, J. E. 2013. Conversational intelligence: How great leaders build trust & get extraordinary results. Bibliomotion, Inc. Grant, A. et al. 2010. ’The state of play in coaching today: a comprehensive review of the field’ International Review of Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 25, 125-167. Grant, A.M., 2012. An integrated model of goal-focused coaching: An evidence-based framework for teaching and practice. International Coaching Psychology Review, 7(2), 146-165. Jeong, H. S., & Brower, R. S. 2008. Extending the present understanding of organizational sensemaking three stages and three contexts. Administration & Society, 40(3), 223-252. Haan, E.D. et al. 2010. Critical moments of clients and coaches: A direct-comparison study. International Coaching Psychology Review, 5(2), 109-128. Hamlin, R.G., Ellinger, A.D. & Beattie, R.S., 2009. Toward a profession of coaching? A definitional examination of “coaching,”organization development,” & human resource development. International Journal of Evidence Based Coaching and Mentoring, 7(1), 13-38. 91 International Coaching Federation (ICF). The definition of coaching. http://www.coachfederation.org/need/landing.cfm?ItemNumber=978&navItemNumber=567 Accessed: 5 July 2015. International Coach Federation (ICF). 2015. How is coaching distinct from other service professions? [Online] Available: http://coachfederation.org/about/landing.cfm?ItemNumber=844&navItemNumber=617 Accessed: 25 August 2015. Jacques, E. & Clement, SD. 1991. Effective leadership: A practical guide to managing complexity. Oxford: Blackwell. Larsen, SL. 2009. Social construction on the road to transformation: Applying rites, rituals and play to executive coaching. Dissertation submitted in partial fulfilment for the degree Doctor of Education: The University of St. Thomas St Paul, Minnesota. Linley, P.A., 2006. Coaching Research: who? what? where? when? why? International Journal of Evidence Based Coaching and Mentoring, 4(2), 7. Lubin, M.M. 2013. Coaching the adult learner: A framework for engaging the principles and processes of andragogy for best practices in coaching. Dissertation submitted in partial fulfilment of Doctor of Philosophy. Virginia: Polytechnic Institute and State University. Maitlis, S., & Sonenshein, S. 2010. Sensemaking in crisis and change: Inspiration and insights from Weick (1988). Journal of Management Studies, 47(3), 551-580. Maitlis, S. & Christianson, M., 2014. Sensemaking in organizations: Taking stock and moving forward. The Academy of Management Annuals, 8(1), 57-125. [Online] Available: http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/19416520.2014.873177. Mills, J. H. 2003. Making Sense of Organizational Change. Routledge, London, UK. [Online] Available: http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/coach. Morse, J. 1994. Designing funded qualitative research. In N. Denzin & Y. Lincoln (eds), Handbook of qualitative research, 220-35. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Neenan, M., 2009. Using Socratic questioning in coaching. Journal of Rational - Emotive and Cognitive - Behavior Therapy, 27(4), 249-264. O'Shaughnessy, S. 2001. Executive coaching: the route to business stardom. Industrial and Commercial Training, 33(6), 194-197. Passmore, J., Peterson, D.B. & Freire, T. (eds) 2013. The Wiley-Blackwell Handbook of the Psychology of Coaching and Mentoring, John Wiley and Sons. Parry, J., 2003. Making sense of executive sensemaking: A phenomenological case study with methodological criticism. Journal of Health Organization and Management, 17(4), 240-263. 92 Pratt, M.G., 2000. The good, the bad, and the ambivalent: Managing Identification among Amway Distributors. Administrative Science Quarterly, 45(3), 456-493. Reissner, S.C. and Du Toit, A., 2011. Power and the tale: coaching as storyselling. Journal of Management Development, 30(3), 247-259. Sandberg, J. & Tsoukas, H., 2014. Making sense of the sensemaking perspective: Its constituents, limitations, and opportunities for further development. Journal of Organizational Behavior. Smircich, L., & Stubbart, C. 1985. Strategic management in an enacted world. Academy of management Review, 10(4), 724-736. Chicago. Smith, J. A., & Osborne, M. 2008. Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis in Smith, JA (ed.) Qualitative psychology: A practical guide to research methods, 53-79. Starbuck, W. H., & Milliken, F. J. 1988. Executives’ perceptual filters: What they notice and how they make sense. The executive effect: Concepts and methods for studying top managers, 35, 65. Stelter, R., 2007. Coaching: A process of personal and social meaning making. International Coaching Psychology Review, 2(2), 191-201. Stober, D R.,,Grant, A.M. 2006. eds. Evidence based coaching handbook: Putting best practices to work for your clients. John Wiley & Sons. Summerfield, J. (2006). Do we coach or do we counsel? Thoughts on the ‘emotional life’of a coaching session. The Coaching Psychologist, 2(1), 24-27. Swanson, K. 2015. The stories we tell ourselves. A dissertation presented to the Faculty of Saybrook University in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy (Ph.D.) in Organizational Systems Swart. C. 2013. Re-authoring the world. Knowres, Randburg, South Africa. Taylor, S.S. 1999. “Making sense of revolutionary change: differences in members’ stories”, Journal of Organizational Change Management, 12(6), 524-39. Terre Blance, M. & Durrheim K. 1999. Research in Practice. University of Cape Town Press, Cape Town. Thompson, E. 2011. Living ways of sensemaking. Philosophy Today, SPEP Supplement, 114-123. Thurlow, A. & Mills, J.H., 2009. Change, talk and sensemaking. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 22(5), 459-479. Varela, F.J. 1984. Living ways of sense-making: A middle path for neuroscience. Paisely Livingston, ed., Disorder and Order: Proceedings of the Stanford International Symposium (September 14-16, 1981) (Anmi Library). 93 Weick, K.E., Sutcliffe, K.M. & Obstfeld, D. 2011. Organizing and the process of sensemaking. Organization Science, 16(4), 409-421. Weick, K.E. 1995. Sensemaking in Organizations. Sage Publications, Ltd. Thousand Oaks, California. Appendix 1: Informed Consent Letter Dear Participant I am a MPhil (Management Coaching) student at the University of Stellenbosch Business School. I am currently embarking on the research component of the degree and my research topic is: “Coaching as a Sensemaking Tool”. The purpose if this letter is to invite you to participate in the project as a volunteer. The aim of the study is to practically gain some insight on how sensemaking (gaining clarity) typically happens during the coaching process. The objective of the project is to consolidate findings and provide some insight on how sensemaking can be enhanced during coaching. Findings from the research are expected to contribute to the efficiency and efficacy of the coaching profession as a whole. I intend to do semi-structured interviews with 6 coaches and 6 coaching clients to collect data on their experience of certain aspects of coaching. I have developed a specific set of open ended questions based on a sensemaking framework. Each interview session may take an hour to an hour-and-a-half. As the researcher I understand that your participation in this project is completely voluntary and you may choose to withdraw from this project at any point during the interview or skip any question you prefer not to answer. Any information you provide during the interview is strictly confidential and no reference to your identity will be revealed. There are no right or wrong answers to questions, only your opinions and insights from the coaching conversations with your coach. The interview will be recorded and once transcription is completed the electronic version of the interview will be destroyed. All data will be stored securely and findings will be reported in an integrated way, highlighting collective insights and trends. Data collected will be analysed to determine instances and patterns of sensemaking based on a specific sensemaking theory by Dr Karl Weick (1995). 94 In the case of an assistant helping me with the transcription of the data, that person will be educated and contracted to maintain confidentiality. Once transcriptions are completed I will provide you with a copy to review. Once the research is completed, findings will be made available to you. If you have any questions about this project or your participation, you may contact me directly: 082 445 7619 or [email protected]. My supervisor for this project is Dr Carly Steyn (0835435794). Thank you for considering my request and I am looking forward to a positive response. Kind regards Carina Fourie MPhil in Management Coaching Programme 2014 University of Stellenbosch Business School Bellville Campus Bellville. 95 Appendix 2: Ethical Checklist NON-DISCLOSURE 96 97 98 99 100 101 AGREEMENT 102
© Copyright 2026 Paperzz