WAIT = Why Am I Talking?

Let me preface this entry by saying that there are many different styles of coaching, just as there are different schools of psychology and therapy. Some are more warm and flowing and friendly, while others are more pointed and direct and task focused. The best style in both coaching and counseling -- it seems to me -- prioritizes listening as the most basic skill and tool, regardless of the client's agenda or the coach's (counselor's) personality.


There's a reason for this in therapy that no doubt would also apply to coaching. Research shows that clients heal and change more due to the quality of the relationship that is built between counselor (and presumably coach) and client, than due to any other single technique, tool, strategy, or philosophy of change. But the key component of that relationship is that the client feels listened to in depth, uninterrupted by the professional, and truly heard and understood.


That quality of relationship can't happen if the professional talks too much -- whether the talking is about her own experience, or even in the set up of asking a powerful question. Perhaps that's why in our coaching training we learn the acronym WAIT to help us remember to talk less. WAIT stands for Why Am I Talking.


In both coaching and counseling I find it best to keep a 90/10 ratio of listening to talking. That is, listen 90% and talk only 10%. Neither counseling nor coaching are the appropriate venue for sharing my experience. The coaching alliance is not a friendship in which thoughts and feelings are mutually shared.


Treating the coaching or counseling relationship as if it were a friendship that allows the professional freedom to talk about her own experience like girlfriends or sisters do, takes the process away from the client, and worse, can make some clients feel as though they need to take care of our needs to be listened to and validated. Creating that kind of climate, most coaches and clients agree, is an abuse of the contractual relationship.


Self-disclosure (talking about your own life) is a big no-no in counseling, and I'm learning it's equally frowned on in coaching. This is not to say that I don't do it at all. But when I do, it is ALMOST ALWAYS as a last resort because I have failed to help the client gain awareness or shift perspective in any other way.


Conversely, I don't believe in withholding information about my experience when clients ask, like many therapists do. And I don't require clients to turn inside out to process how knowing my experience or having personal information about my life will serve their own thoughts and decisions. I personally find that kind of interrogation offensive and not at all a contribution to healing or empowerment.


Questions work best for the clients when those questions directly serve the purpose of getting them to think more deeply, which usually can't happen if we are filling the time with chatter about ourselves.


One of the most useful things I've learned is to ask a question and then shut up and wait. And wait. And wait. Giving the client the time and unintruded upon space to think and find her own answers is a high level coaching and counseling skill. For us, holding the silence is a huge part of what it is to coach.


Novice counselors and coaches both sometimes feel the impulse to give advice. In both professions, advice-giving is regarded as a bad idea. Doing so robs the client of the chance to form their own opinions and come to their own decisions about what will be best for them. It's the equivalent of giving a fish meal, rather than teaching how to fish.


You might even say that advice-giving is fishy, or that it's fishing to soothe your own ego rather than working to help the client find their own confidence. Again, research shows that changes in behavior last when people have ownership of the idea, process, decision and design of the change they make. Taking our advice denies them that crucial ownership, and instead gives them hand-me-down thinking that they may borrow but are unlikely to fully own.