Self-Development and Coaching Theories for Effective Management

Introduction

Oscar Wilde, the Irish poet and playwright, stated that "the ultimate aim and purpose of life is self-development" — that to realize one's own nature perfectly and ultimately is what we are all placed on earth for.

Self-development as a constant, ongoing process in life is described as the process of stripping away layer after layer of the facades and falsities that come with living. It is seen as an imperfect duty that imposes a restriction of some significance on its pursuits, simply because we all wonder whether we will be able to achieve our maximum potential. Self-development is therefore regarded as a universal law (Parsloe, 2009).

Self-development as an activity addresses many concerns that are evident to human nature, including human rights practices and justice, and it does not require the violation of other human duties (Mumford, 1997; Oh et al., 2011). It can be used to achieve success through goal-setting and the enrichment of the individual's mind and character, thereby enabling self-motivation. It is a deliberate focus that enables an individual to realize their set goals and targets.

Self-development is an essential exploration of the self, and it takes different forms: mental, spiritual, emotional, and physical. For self-development to begin, there must be a desire to transcend the negativities acquired over time, so as to realize and achieve the highest level of one's potential.

Moore (2009a) argues that good leadership in any sector or industry is not only a question of a manager aligning themselves with a model initiated by some guru. Self-development is not only the acquisition of the right skills; it is a prerequisite needed by a manager so that they may be able to respond and react to work-related challenges and demanding scenarios. Managers at every level of an organization constantly face leadership challenges, including downsizing personnel, managing mergers, and improving work processes. It is therefore necessary for any manager to possess a variety of techniques and skills to evaluate themselves in their response to several work scenarios (Pedler, 2007).

Coaching Theories and Self-Development

Self-development enables a manager to analyze their own skills, strengths, and weaknesses, and helps them identify their goals in the quest for continuous self-improvement. Some core self-development practices aim to strengthen a manager's leadership skills. Self-development is therefore important because it enables a manager to carry out best work practices effectively and efficiently — fostering motivation among workers, enhancing their commitment to work, and improving overall work ethic.

In addition, managers require self-development techniques to improve their performance, advance their careers, realize their full potential, cope with the demands of their role, mentor and coach the workers they are responsible for, and develop diverse communication skills and styles (Moore, 2009b).

Segers and Vloeberghs (2009) emphasize that self-development at work has a high social value for both personnel and managers, as it helps them align their intended goals with personal core values in order to enable the organization to generate income. The process of self-development does not require managers to be inflexible. On the contrary, it helps managers envision ways to contribute to the alignment of personal beliefs, create values by sharing what they love to do with their coworkers, and simultaneously work toward their own personal growth. Self-development as a process requires substantial investment of time in order to deliver social value at work (Smith and Fagelson, 2011).

Merriam (2007) defines coaching as an important tool and technique in the self-development quest. Coaching offers practical skills and theories applicable in work scenarios for professionals seeking to develop as managers. It enables managers to be sensitive to the people who work under them and to recognize and respond to their needs and demands (Mintzberg, 2004). Mentoring and coaching are seen to go hand in hand, as both encourage and foster self and personal development.

In relation to self-development, coaching is viewed as the best solution for guiding managers toward solving work-related issues. Coaching models and theories are frameworks that guide managers on the underlying structures they can use when dealing with their subordinates. High-level coaching strategies increase the manager's ability to respond adequately to whatever situation they face. Managers can learn from different coaching theories, and although no single theory has all the answers, coaching theories are most likely suitable in the ultimate quest for self-development and self-discovery.

Many fields of knowledge are integrated within coaching theories and models, offering managers a broader learning base. Coaching theories can be modified by managers to suit their work-related needs and interests (Stavenga de Jong, 2006). This tailoring of coaching theory is done by establishing rapport with coworkers, and it stems from trust, confidentiality, and honest, respectful communication. Coaching theories enable a manager to formulate realistic, client-based goals and expectations that are dynamic and responsive to the manager's self-development process.

Self-development and coaching, when implemented together, result in a dynamic learning experience and a form of deep questioning in relation to people's goals and expectations (Mathis and Jackson, 2010). The only way a manager's work-related goals and expectations will be fulfilled is by learning some coaching methods, understanding the theories and their commonalities, and integrating them in the workplace successfully to create the approach desired.

Many managers face the challenging process of trying to formulate coaching theories that are well-fitting, workable, and practicable. A suitable coaching theory cannot be created entirely from scratch, as this is a daunting task, particularly given ever-changing work circumstances. To avoid feeling stuck, a manager should analyze what works best for their particular organization and evaluate the best approaches based on what they have learned from previous experiences, bringing these together into workable and planned responses.

Kolb's Learning Cycle

Self-development ultimately comes down to an ongoing process of how best to use one's personality as a manager to carry out activities that will ensure the best results and bring the organization repeat clients and profits. Incorporating multiple coaching theories — or elements of them — is therefore extremely helpful. Coaching theories enable managers to focus, set emotions aside at the workplace, and find effective solutions to work-related problems (Taylor, 2010).

Some forms of learning and coaching theories that enable managers to carry out different approaches at work include:

Some coaching theories and practices, such as Kolb's learning cycle, are among the techniques used by managers and aspiring managers to improve themselves and work on their self-development. Kolb's learning cycle relates to experiential learning — not as a separate concept, but as a vital learning cycle (Jerling, 1996).

According to Kolb's learning cycle, learning processes are reduced to two primary dimensions with opposing poles that embody both concrete experience and abstract conceptualization. The other dimension consists of active experimentation at one pole and reflective observation at the other. The four components of the cycle are:

The Kolb learning cycle can be used by managers in the learning process required at work. This learning consists of movement between these opposite modes. Kolb suggests that the choices individuals make at work will influence the kind of learning modes and strategies they emphasize, and this also encourages other employees to develop accordingly (Visser, 2010; Witzel, 2004).

When implemented successfully, the Kolb learning cycle combines several learning modes to produce the highest forms of learning and to show practical applications of ideas and problem-solving tactics. Managers who implement different learning styles and coaching theories enable their coworkers to find solutions to problems rather than simply deal with technical tasks, and they are best at finding practical uses for ideas and coaching theories.

Professional bodies and organizations are developing clear-cut standards for coaching that outline the importance and correlation of coaching and self-development. Coaching, organizational consultancy, and mentoring have all been important activities in the process of self-development (Kosmala-Anderson et al., 2011; Mackall, 1998).

Continual self-development and coaching have been used in many organizations to help all human personnel achieve their full potential. Honey (2000) observes that "self-development seems to be somewhat related to coaching and coaching theories. Self-development seems to be a self-evident component of coaching. All professionals — doctors, lawyers, teachers, and physicians — confer with mentors and peers in solving difficult cases; hence, this is no exception when it comes to coaching."

Kolb's cycle provides an example of how learning occurs between experience and the formation of new concepts (Hill, 2003). Managers and leaders are most likely to develop preferences for different stages of the learning cycle by determining several patterns of assumptions, aptitudes, and attitudes at work. Leaders and managers introduced to Kolb's learning theory experience transformation by sensing and grasping the emergence of ideas that may be tested through action (Kihl and Richardson, 2009). Kolb's theory of experiential learning focuses on individual needs and goals concerned with the experience sought at work and its ultimate utilization.

Honey and Mumford's Model

This is another coaching and learning model inspired by David Kolb's learning style. Peter Honey and Alan Mumford (1986) introduced a set of learning styles that can be incorporated by managers. They identified four individual learning styles, and learners often demonstrate a preference for one of these styles. In the United Kingdom, Honey and Mumford (1986) examined the implications of managerial learning styles for management development and training, basing their work on four styles that correlate with each other. The concept arose from the observation that individuals — particularly in the workplace — differ in their willingness and tendency to learn from different approaches (Jerling, 1996; Jing et al., 2010).

The Honey and Mumford learning style was derived directly from Kolb's theory, possibly because Kolb's original theory had experienced some lack of face validity among managers. The main difference between the two theories is that, unlike Kolb's approach — which asks people directly how they learn — Honey and Mumford formulated a questionnaire that probes behavioral tendencies. Similar to Kolb's experiential learning model, the Honey and Mumford model also consists of four stages:

Each stage is considered to be an independent learning style. The corresponding learning styles are: Activist, Reflector, Theorist, and Pragmatist.

Activists learn best from short, immediate tasks such as managerial activities on the job or courses like business games and competitive team exercises. They learn less effectively from situations that involve passive roles such as reading or listening.

Reflectors learn best from activities that require them to stand back, observe, and listen. They like collecting information from different sources and enjoy being given the opportunity to think things through. They learn less effectively when rushed into situations without time to plan.

Theorists learn best when they are able to review things in terms of a system, model, concept, or theory. They are interested in absorbing ideas even when those ideas may seem distant from current reality. They learn less effectively from activities that are presented without any explicit or implicit conceptual framework (Jerling, 1996; Jing et al., 2010).

Pragmatists learn best where there are obvious links between the subject matter and a real opportunity or problem at work. They like exposure to techniques and processes that can be applied to their immediate circumstances, and they learn less effectively from learning events that seem distant from their own reality. They tend to ask themselves whether the issue applies directly to their situation at work.

Having accepted the basic ideas of a four-stage cycle, Honey and Mumford incorporated further styles and preferences. Their version gives more attention to the assessment of particular learning styles at each stage of the cycle and places greater emphasis on planning actions. Mumford (1997) formulated his own version of the Learning Styles Questionnaire (LSQ), which Honey and Mumford claim gives both managers and leaders the ability to make use of both theories when on development programmes and in the workplace. Therefore, managers and leaders can come to understand both their preferred and less preferred learning styles.

The Honey and Mumford training model, with its four classifications, is helpful in enabling trainers to recognize that they need to cater for all four learning styles, so as to deliver their materials effectively. For Honey and Mumford, what constitutes experience is considered objectively — in terms of what people do and their engagement in activities — as opposed to Kolb's more holistic interpretation, which counts subjective elements of thoughts, feelings, and perceptions as experience (Honey, 2000).

The Honey and Mumford learning cycle uses simplified terminology to describe and define each of the four learning stages and their functions. The learning style and training style models have been used to design management and leadership development events successfully (Hackman and Wageman, 2005; Hill, 2003; Hoffman et al., 2011). Learning cycles have been used to help participants gain benefit from experiences by drawing attention to each stage of the cycle. LSQ results may be used to indicate whether there is a preponderance of particular styles within a group, though they should be used only to indicate how managers might work together — not to make decisions about promotion or selection.

David Kolb's learning cycle has been identified as analogous to the skills required for managing problems at work. Alan Mumford's theory, on the other hand, shows a connection between learning and dealing with the realities of management work. Kolb suggested that problem development is a primary skill for managers in the quest for self-development — starting with finding and identifying problems, analyzing their causes, deciding on appropriate solutions, and working with others to plan and implement actions. Both theories give close attention to the process of reflection — whether through writing about experiences or reviewing them — as highly valued skills. These theories may be explored more carefully through an examination of personal meanings, feelings, and emotions. Managers use these theories following the need to be prepared for achieving self-efficacy, to recognize success, and — importantly — to devise ways of dealing with setbacks at work.

Conclusion

In conclusion, as a future business strategic consultant, one will require the aforementioned coaching and self-development techniques in order to be a better and more effective manager. The experiential learning techniques discussed throughout this paper are applicable in work-based scenarios. There is no single mode of learning or coaching theory that is comprehensively suitable for all working conditions, especially in the business consultancy field.