When is Provocative Coaching appropriate? My first concern about engaging in a provocative coaching session is how to determine this type of session is appropriate for my client. My observations here are limited to those of Kemp’s videos and Hollander’s description of PC demonstrations in his book. Both facilitators used students who were participating in their workshops or trainings and are most likely well aware of the type of coaching they would receive, should they volunteer to be the “client”. The issues they brought to the presentations were authentic, but I found myself wondering how clients in the ‘real world’ experience these techniques.
Hollander suggests that provocative coaching can be especially useful for clients who, despite the best support, appreciation, commitment, and well-meaning advice of their coaches, do not “get better”5. He believes certain clients who have a strong inner resistance, often are unable to take responsibility for their own change. Kemp applies his approach to clients who (among others) desire greater freedom and choice, and therefore, must shift from being “stuck” to a “more fluid state”4. Both facilitators also integrate techniques such as hypnosis, NLP, Gestalt therapy, and voice dialogue, within their coaching sessions.
My thoughts: The types of clients described by both Hollander and Kemp seem to represent the same types of clients that would benefit from traditional coaching as well. I am very much of the mindset that a client does not ‘get better’, which implies a client is not well in the first place; rather, clients are “stuck” or unable to go forward for some reason. Having said that, it seems entirely acceptable to offer provocative coaching as one of a variety of methods, in order to best serve a client’s process. If I have trained in the provocative coaching technique and it is a method I feel confident using, I would certainly consider offering this as one way of facilitating client change. I do, however, feel that I would have to know, with no uncertainty, that a client is ready for this type of work. In other words, I would not use this method with clients who have suffered a trauma or are particularly sensitive or vulnerable.
Also, what I have missed in the descriptions of Provocative Coach – Client relationship that I have researched, is the very important element of trust. I cannot imagine entering into this method without having built a trusted partnership with my client. Therefore, I would refrain from using this technique until I felt confident that a significant level of trust existed in the relationship.
Client Disclosure: During one of my Skype calls with Nick Kemp, I asked him specifically about client disclosure: “Do you tell your client that you are going to use the provocative coaching technique and get their consent first?” I was quite surprised that the answer was an emphatic “No!” Kemp explained that his clients come to him for results and provocative coaching is just one of tools he uses to help them achieve their goals. Since Kemp is rather wellknown as a provocative coach, I can imagine that Kemp’s clients are well aware of his techniques and, as such, do not need to be forewarned.
Jaap Hollander, however, offers a different approach, outlining a positive frame of reference for client disclosure, which he calls the “Six P’s”3:
- Propose a provocative session
- Point out the challenging
- Predict irritation and emotions
- Principle. Challenges make a person stronger.
- Partnership: I’m 100% behind you!
- Positive decision: So, what do you say?
Hollander’s specific script for disclosure is clear and client-protective:
Today I would like to work with you in a provocative manner, which means that at times I will challenge you. I will be saying things that you might not like to hear. And you might even feel irritated or angry or sad…but that’s all part of this method. The principle behind this is that people grow stronger when they stand up to a challenge. It’s like swimming against the current: it makes your muscles stronger and it increases your stamina. This is the principle we will be working with, except that we are using it in a psychological sense. And there is one other thing that is very important to remember. Even if you should feel that sometimes I’m not taking you seriously, or when you become irritated or whatever, I’m still 100% behind you. I’m offering you this as an opportunity to grow stronger. So, what do you say, do you want to work in this way? p148.
My thoughts: Client disclosure is, in my opinion, absolutely essential, especially considering the confrontational nature of provocative coaching. Clients know better than anyone else whether or not a method is appropriate for them. Consenting to this method affirms and reaffirms that the client is always in control. When a client is aware of what is happening or about to happen, she can relax and feel comfortable with participating fully. Knowing the coach is simply taking the role of devil’s advocate may even allow for deeper insights. As well, a better understanding of the technique used successfully may empower a client to increase her own repertoire of future self-coaching tools.
The “Entertainment” element of Provocative Coaching: When one observes a live provocative coaching session or even reads the ‘script’ of such a session, it is immediately apparent that the Provocative Coach dominates. It is not 80% client and 20% coach, as within ICF guidelines. It is quite the opposite. For the coach, focus shifts from active listening to engaging the client in a conversation designed to keep the client stimulated to respond. The coach must rely on an ability to provoke the client while maintaining warmth and humor. Hollander understands without warmth and humor, sarcasm and even cynicism may enter the process5. Comments may seem aggressive and insulting. A coach is required to improvise a great deal, as well, during the session. The coaching role is not to entertain but to engage. Therefore, it is clear that this method should not applied without a significant amount of training, practice, and courage.
My thoughts: Although I found the entertainment element of provocative coaching, at first, to be outrageous and lively in a positive way, I soon became uncomfortable with the coach-dominated arena. Even knowing and accepting the premise of provocative coaching, the atmosphere created by provocation seemed to cross the line from devil’s advocate to a comedic performance where the comic is picking on someone in the audience. Again, my observations have been limited to those sessions facilitated by Farrelly, Kemp, and Hollander, each an experienced and gifted coach, are clearly comfortable with the ‘entertainment’ aspect of live sessions. Their clients seem to adapt to the playful banter, but then again, they have each volunteered to be the “on-stage” client and, therefore, perhaps a bit more tolerant. I find myself wondering if a coach who does not have the type of natural personality that would adapt to the fast-paced, quick-witted manner of this improvisational coaching method would be able to replicate the experience with “real world” clients.
I can, however, imagine adding certain elements of these lively sessions, with the intention of stimulating client response in a novel fashion. In a trusted coach-client partnership, humor, laughter, and creating a space that allows a client to take a perspective that is less heavy, less intense, less serious can shift a client towards insights and change. In traditional coaching I find that creating lightness can be achieved without the necessity of comedic skills and timing.
The Conversational Style, Use of Metaphors, and Stances in Provocative Coaching: There is no doubt that there are certain key ingredients to Provocative Coaching that make it rebelliously unique. The first is the conversational style between coach and client, or as Nick Kemp describes “interacting as if chatting with an old friend”2. The intention of this style is to create as quickly as possible a real rapport with the client. It is also thought that a conversational style allows a client to discuss the true reality of an issue, rather than responding in a way she thinks her coach would like her to respond. Within this freedom of communicating, warmth and care is nurtured between coach and client, thereby enabling a client to arrive at her own solutions from a different perspective.
Another key ingredient is the use of metaphors during a provocative coaching session. With the emphasis on provoking a client in order to stimulate a response, which in turn, may then elicit new ways of thinking and feeling about a certain issue, metaphors are used in an elegant and engaging fashion. A client is encouraged to describe a situation “at this point in time” and not in specific detail; rather, in a way that paints a broader picture. The purpose of this line of questioning is to get more useful information about the way in which a client thinks and feels. Kemp offers the following example:
Nick: As you think about this problem now, what’s the whole thing like?
Client: It’s like being stuck in a rut.
Nick: What kind of rut?
Client: It’s like being in the desert when your car gets stuck and can’t move.
Nick: What’s in front of you?
Client: I can see that there is a stretch of road up ahead where there is no traffic.4
Last, but certainly not least of key ingredients in Provocative Coaching, is that of Provocative Stances 4. Kemp’s frame of reference with his Provocative Stances is that of exploring the client’s internal map – how a client creates their “stuck” state and how to identify the ways in which a client generalizes about this state. Equipped with a broad repertoire of stances, a coach is able to explore where a client is most resistant, then focus on provoking the client into affirming their need to resolve the stuck state. As the client defends her position, or is stimulated to create new perspectives or possibilities, she is “shaken” out of her stuck state, as with Amanda and her smoking issue. The stances vary from interrupting the client, confusing the client, to suggesting the client does more of the same, to name but a few – all of which have the intention of seeing how strongly a client is willing to embrace or discard her present “stuck” state and, in the process, finds movement in her thinking.
My thoughts: Of all the elements of Provocative Coaching, these are the ones I find resonate positively with me most. The conversational style appeals to my desire to connect with a client in a less clinical manner, indeed, in a way in which we can speak freely as two friends at my kitchen table. The creative use of language in a way that accesses a client’s way of thinking or feeling is a valuable and useful tool in any coaching session. Finally, the provocative stances as developed by Nick Kemp are quite innovative and I believe – when administered in the way in which Kemp intends – these stances can be a wonderful tool to engage a client in a way that may elicit unexpected and welcome responses.
In Conclusion
The Thought Leadership article I present here is exactly that: my thoughts on a journey I recently embarked upon, essentially with the main purpose of figuring out 1) whether or not I am truly prepared to embrace traditional coaching, to coach within ICF guidelines, and if not, 2) to assess Provocative Coaching as an alternative coaching method. The knowledge and insights I have gained throughout my quest for answers have shifted my perspective on so many levels. I have discovered that I am absolutely prepared to embrace the traditional coaching model, as I have been guided by ICA, and according to ICF guidelines. In fact, I am more confident than ever that coaching within a respectful, client-oriented manner is very closely congruent with my values and beliefs. More specifically, I have learned to especially appreciate ICF guidelines on co-creating the relationship (establishing trust and intimacy with the client and a safe, supportive environment that produces ongoing mutual respect and trust in), coaching presence (being fully conscious, spontaneous, open, flexible, and confident), communicating effectively (especially supporting client self expression) and direct communication (using language that has the greatest positive impact on the client). Ironically, the experience of re-visiting each of these elements in another coaching model “provoked” my shift back to the traditional one, with a deeper understanding of why these guidelines are in place.
While Provocative Coaching proved not to completely seduce me as an alternative coaching model*, the positive elements I offered my thoughts on above are ones that I will consider applying – with care and further training – in my own coaching. My most important “takeaway” from this journey is that I will always be the kind of coach I wish to be, as long as I stay true to my own values and beliefs. I simply have to trust that the client always has the answer, one that may reveal itself after gentle reflection, or – with client consent – after playful, provocative banter. Finally, I have learned that I can trust that my intentions, my coaching skills, my intuition, my life experience, and all that I have learned at ICA, have positioned me to coach with integrity, ease, and lightness.
I wish to express my great respect and admiration for Frank Farrelly, Nick Kemp, and Jaap Hollander for their passion and dedication in the creation and development of Provocative Therapy and Coaching, as well as their rich talents and skills as facilitators and trainers. My thoughts here are in no way intended to underestimate the benefits and wonderful merits of Provocative Coaching. I encourage all who are curious about this lively, engaging, fun, and useful coaching method to consider their own Provocative adventure. Kathi Vellinga-Suprata
References
Farrelly, F. and Brandsma, J. Provocative Therapy, Meta Publications, USA, 1974.
Kemp, N. Provocative Change Works, http://www.provocativetherapy.com
Hollander, J. Provocative Coaching: Making things better by making them worse, Crown House Publishing, UK/USA, 2012.
Kemp, N. http://www.nickkemptraining.com, UK
Hollander, J. Provocative Coaching – The Interview – Jaap Hollander, http://www.provocativecoachingandtherapy.com, NL