Name: Rob ‘Kerry’ Packer

Number: 20059427

Course: PGC in Coaching & Mentoring (PCM M01)

Tutors: Helen Goodall, Alison Keyworth

Case StudyProvide a critical commentary of a coaching or mentoring relationship in which you are currently engaged as a coach or as a mentor. Analyse the effectiveness of the relationship and your own role within it in meeting its purpose, including processes and models, the relationship itself and your own skills.

1

Introduction

In this case study assignment I intend to provide some examples from my workplace to illustrate how I have attempted to embrace a coaching and mentoring approach in my leadership and management role. I will provide a contextual overview and details of my role before discussing the relevance of coaching to that role, the skills that are required and some specific situations to demonstrate these. Reference will be made to relevant literature to support my arguments.

The Royal Navy has a requirement to recruit and train new sailors continuously in order to counter the perpetual outflow from the Service due to retirement, redundancy and pre-voluntary release of those members who have become either dissatisfied with service, or have a chance to embark on a new career elsewhere. HMS RALEIGH, in Torpoint, Cornwall, fulfils this role.

Every 5 weeks, 60-70 new recruits, male and female arrive at HMS RALEIGH, from civilian life, varying in age from 16 up to 36 years old. They are drawn from school, college, university, B&Q, McDonalds, city businesses, broken homes, suburbia, in fact it is my view that a more diverse mix of the UK population, would be hard to find. On arrival they are taken into one of 5 Divisions. At any on time, we will have a Junior and a Senior class within Division, separated by 5 weeks of the curriculum. Rather than name the divisions individually I will simply refer to my division as Division Number 1.

On arrival in their respective Division, they are split into two sub-classes, Port and Starboard class, to make the numbers more manageable. The first week is very much process based, including entry medicals and the requirement for the recruits to swear allegiance to the crown, and sign their contract with the Royal Navy. During this first week, numbers decrease generally by 3-5 in each class, due to underlying and undiagnosed medical conditions or simply that trainees decide on arrival not to sign up.

In November 2013 I joined HMS RALEIGH, the Royal Navy New Entry Recruit Training School, as the Divisional Training Officer (DTO) for Division Number 1. This Division is one of 5 Divisions within HMS RALEIGH, charged with the Initial Naval Training of recruits who are drawn from civilian life. The exact nature of the role was not immediately evident to me, other than the fact that I would be taking charge of a team of 8 Naval Staff, varying from Warrant Officer to Leading Hand, in the training of new recruits to the Royal Navy. Exactly what that entailed and how it was achieved took me some time to understand, but eventually I managed to understand more fully the ten week curriculum, the warning system, the remedial training packages and such like. Appendix 2 details my terms of reference, with Appendix 3 showing the ten week curriculum.

My direct line manager is one of the HQ staff and is a rank above me; whilst I work for the most part autonomously, I am bound by parameters, such as those set by orders called Initial Naval Training Standing Orders; these give details on actions to be taken, in any given circumstance and the level of warning appropriate to that action. Additional to these are regulations set by OFSTED and the Flag Officer Sea Training (FOST) hierarchy, which, in turn, sit above the HQ giving direction and guidance.

My Team

My team within the Division comprises a Warrant Officer (WO) who, despite being my subordinate by rank, actually operates as my equal for his half of my Division. As the two

2

DTO’s we are supported by an administrative and coordinating Staff member, a Chief Petty Officer (CPO) known as the Assistant Divisional Training Officer (ADTO), his function being to oversee the maintenance and upkeep of the Divisional building, its infra-structure and day to day operation. Additional to these team members I have 4 Divisional Training Instructors (DTI), who are Petty Officers (PO) and are the actual day-to-day instructors for the recruits. In support of each pair of DTIs I have a Divisional Leading Hand (DLH), who assists with the instruction and supports the DTI in any number of ways. This may include collecting an injured recruit from sickbay, changing damaged items of uniform for the recruits whilst they are in instruction and so forth.

Within our Divisional team we have an eclectic mix of trades and experience; we have a Naval Nurse and a Royal Marine, both with Afghanistan experience, working alongside a Chef, a Stores Accountant, a Communications expert and a Mechanical Engineer. The years we have each served varies from 29 years to 10, and between us we have all served on various ships, submarines, Naval Air Squadrons or Commando Units.

Critical Commentary

The effectiveness of the relationship:

From a team leadership and management perspective, it was immediately apparent when I moved into the role that my challenge was to achieve the required output (the training of the recruits to a requisite standard), with my desired output (the development of my team) by balancing my authority against the coaching and mentoring (direction and guidance), whilst also learning the nuances of the role and the process involved myself. I decided almost immediately that a coaching and mentoring style of leadership (Starr 2011; Garvey et al, 2014; Parsloe and Leedham, 2010; Whitmore, 2014; Megginson and Clutterbuck, 2005) would most likely reap the best results for my team and for the Division. This was quite a challenge in the first instance, and this I would put down to the fact that, in general, the style of leadership encountered by the team would most likely have been more dogmatic and authoritative. Initially, the staff were slightly taken aback when asked, in any given situation for which they sought guidance, “Well, what do you think we should do?”

The relationship is growing stronger as the team members come to understand my techniques and style of management and leadership and it is my view that Kolb’s Learning cycle (1984) (Figure 1.) seems to be in play within the team. In many cases I have experienced in the Royal Navy, initial resistance, mistrust and even suspicion can be the immediate reaction to a coaching style. I assess this to being a natural reaction owing to the very nature of what we do in the Royal Navy; we are trained to react to orders from our superiors and when offered an ‘input’ it sits uneasy with some individuals.

3

Figure 1. Kolbs Learning Cycle (Simply Psychology, d.u.)

My role is very much that of the catalyst which allows the process described above to occur and for the relationship to exist. The relationship is there for the benefit of the team primarily, to develop the decision making process within it, and to develop the individual team members’ confidence and self worth. When I initially met my team they experienced the process by which I gained their trust and how I carried out my management of them, as individuals and as a team. They have then, on my advice, taken time to reflect on decisions, exercises and lectures, to see if they can be altered or improved upon, giving me feedback as they see fit. Some of my team have told me that they are learning a great deal about themselves and different management styles. I find this really satisfying and rewarding. Currently my Division is seen as the lead Division, by that I mean we are displaying best practice in much of what we do within the 5 New Entry Divisions. In my view this is due to the team’s abilities along with the manner in which we operate.

Ultimately, the way in which we conduct ourselves as a team benefits the recruits as they have clearly defined boundaries within which they can learn and operate, and rules by which they must live their service lives, now and into the future. It also serves to inculcate Military Ethos and Core Values within the class by means of the same cycle described above, with a real focus on the ‘do & review’ phase, rather than simply because we say they have too.

The type of relationship:

Hill (2004), talks about the building of relationships, mutual trust, mutual respect and the freedom of expression. I believe that is what makes our team work so well; over my time in the post, I have managed to establish these four key pillars. More crucially, my team have ‘bought in’ to the way in which I have encouraged them to operate.

What this means is that whilst the nature of the relationship between my staff and myself is hierarchical, simply by virtue of the fact that we operate in a service environment, I can maintain a blame free, non-accusatory environment within my Division. Despite the fact that we are bound by rules and regulations, it is important to the HQ, to me, and more crucially to the recruits, that our team can exercise a degree of personal judgement in any given circumstance; the instructors are best placed to assess the effort levels, competence and mindset of each individual recruit. In any given situation that may result in disciplinary action against a recruit, such as a warning or recommendation for extension of training (EOT), or the utmost sanction of being discharged from the Royal Navy (Discharged shore Seemed Unsuitable During Training (DUDT)), the opinion of the team on that certain

4

recruit is vital in the decision making process. This allows us to ensure that the correct and most appropriate decision is made, both for the individual and for the Royal Navy. The means by which these recommendations are made is very much a team process; although ultimately it is myself, due to my position, that takes the recruit to the interview at which point the final decision will be made.

A secondary, but equally important part of the relationship, is that which exists between my superiors and myself. My direct superior, Officer Commanding Initial Naval Training (OCINT) is one rank above me. Despite his having authority over me, and my peers, the relationship between us is much more similar to equals than this might suggest. I believe this is down to the fact that through the vagaries of Service life, having served relatively equal amounts of time in the RN, and having both made our way up through the ranks, he finds himself my manager. My experience is drawn from different areas within the RN than his, with the result being that our collective knowledge is both wide ranging and deep.

Throughout my career I believe my working relationships have been built by utilising my abilities as a coach, which have developed over the 29 years of my time in the RN. Starr (2011) lists five skills fundamental to being a coach; building rapport and the relationship, listening, using intuition, questioning and giving supportive feedback. These are exactly the skills I have employed to get to the point at which I find myself now. That is to say I am now leading and managing a team of individuals who feel able and are comfortable, contributing to the decision making process.

My background in Physical Training has exposed me to the nuances of Naval General Training (NGT) for much of my career. OCINT has spent the majority of his time as a Submariner in various levels of management. Whilst he has had far less time than myself in the NGT field, his managerial experience exceeds mine. In the day to day running of a NGT Division, we spend much time discussing issues, which cross into both domains. When we discuss management within the NGT sphere, his managerial and my NGT deep specialist knowledge lends itself perfectly to an open, honest and sometimes heated conversation which, to date, has always brought about an improvement to procedure and process.

Processes and Models:

The nature of what we are tasked to achieve as a team lends itself very well to the Action Centred Leadership (ACL) model described by J. Adair (1983), which, incidentally the RN utilises as a framework in all its leadership and management training (Figure 2). Backed up with constant, but selective Positive Reinforcement as described by A. Daniels (1999), I find this is ideally suited and fit for purpose in my role.

5

Figure 2. Adairs Action Centred Leadership model, (Kaplan Finance, d.u.)

A brief look at the diagram above hopefully gives the reader a feel for daily, weekly, monthly and even annually required tasks by me, and functions which I am required to perform, in relation to the team, the recruits and the output required of my team and me. In my view, the functionality and appropriate nature of ACL is due to the fact that in any given circumstance, whether relating to a recruit, a staff member, an upcoming exercise, a lesson plan, ACL always fits. The thought process and means by which the situation or problem is dealt with, is very similar each time.

Due to the nature of my role and the dynamic nature of any given working day, my leadership style varies minute by minute. This correlates closely with the Blanchard Situational Leadership Model (Figure 3) (1989). I often move quickly from a didactic and directional leader to a coach and mentor, and then find myself delegating my authority to my staff, within any given conversation. I do this by listening, assimilating the information I am receiving and judging which element, in line with the ACL model, is the main focus of the situation. On occasion it will be that direction has been sent down from the INTHQ and the staff simply have to abide by that direction, or those orders. This often means switching focus from the individual or team to the task, in this case the training objectives.

6

Fig 3. The Blanchard Situational Leadership Model, (Blanchard International, d.u.)

My Skills

Occasionally I am required to employ Naval Discipline to ensure compliance with the orders laid down by management team that exists in the HQ. That said it is always my intention, wherever possible to allow the coaching and mentoring style to be to the fore.

The skills I endeavour to use are those of listening, analysing what I hear and observing, and acting upon the comments and actions of my team (Parsloe/Leedham, 2010). I am cognisant of the need to build rapport, asking appropriate questions and using my initiative as outlined by Starr (2011). Understanding my teams belief systems and values is crucial (Parsloe and Leedham, 2010; Starr, 2011) as also is empathy (Megginson and Clutterbuck, 2012) and so my basic understanding of Neuro Linguistic Programming undoubtedly adds value to my role. Rapport seems to come naturally to me. I take an active interest in what my team enjoy; sailing, dog walking, reading, football, fishing, golf, cooking etcetera. I have found that in most situations, taking an interest and expressing an interest myself in the activities that my team enjoy, assists in breaking down any barriers which rank can sometimes cause in a service environment.

This has been true in all of my roles and jobs within the RN, throughout my career. I also listen to the personal concerns of my staff. Most have children of varying ages. Whilst I am not a parent, I do understand that on occasions my staff may need to take impromptu time away from work to deal with an issue. I do my utmost to allow this, cognisant always of the required output, and the added strain this puts on the rest of the team. This is the same with personal health and welfare issues.

When I have interaction with my staff I employ body-mirroring, eye contact and positive reinforcement in the form of nodding and affirming I have heard them by offering a précis of my understanding. This has encouraged my staff to come to me with an open mind in so far as they know I will listen and then offer no advice, as such, but will look to them to offer a solution, or series of options by which we can solve the problem or approach the issue in question.

A typical example of the kind of issue that we are faced with and a team member taking the initiative in finding a resolution came in the last week of the Summer Term, in week 8 of the Class curriculum. A recruit who was already on a Tier 2 warning for poor Personal Organisation, had again been identified as showing a shortfall in this area. It is always within my remit to take into account the recruit’s previous behaviour and attitude by means of mitigation, but it is also incumbent on me to ensure that the recruit understands the error of their ways and is focussed on correcting the errant behaviour. In this instance, my mind was very firmly made that the message was not getting through and thus an escalation was required. The instructor and I discussed the nature of the offence in private, and he outlined his thought process. I sat in silence whilst my PO thought through our options, and he then made the statement that “I don’t think he’s getting the message Boss. I know he’s a good lad, but we need to make sure the focus remains on this behaviour and he corrects it. I recommend he goes to the next level of warning.” We agreed on the requisite course of action but he owned the decision as the recruits direct line manager.

My experience in the sporting world has also brought much to my ability to manage my team. Over the years I have experienced hardship, elation, dismay, disillusionment, ecstasy and a whole host of emotions and feelings. I have, on occasion, endured physical,

7

mental and emotional stress to a level that is, I suggest, beyond that experienced by an average member of UK society. This has led to me developing strong coping mechanisms when confronted by adversity, challenges or setbacks. In my mind, there are very few things which can shake me. So what relevance has this on how I manage a team? It is crucially important that I understand that not all amongst my team are equipped as I am to cope with these developments. My staff have belief systems and management styles different to mine, which I have to respect and consider in all that I do.

I am ever watchful for signs amongst my team of stress or worry. I would suggest that it would be poor management practice to simply enforce my style of leadership and management, and expect the staff to cope. In order for me to have my staff change their behaviours and perform to a template I require, and therefore alter the way in which they function, I must constantly positively reinforce those behaviours I want to encourage as described by Daniels (1999). It is also incumbent on me to reward those results and outcomes which benefit the Division and the output we are required to produce, again in line with that process described by Daniels (1999).

As far as the development of these and other skills, the fact that I have enrolled on the Post Graduate Course in Coaching and Mentoring has, without doubt, aided me in my attempts to build this team and establish the way in which we operate. Prior to this course, I was not fully aware of the power of silence in a conversation; likewise I have become much more focussed on my team and how I interact with them. I find myself having key phrases written on my boards and in my notebooks, such as ‘look, see, listen, hear, assimilate, ask, silence’. This helps me focus on allowing the team to contribute and it actually stimulates conversation amongst the staff, about why it is written on the board, and the coaching which is taking place. This in itself reinforces the methods I employ. The more I continue to engage in the practice, the more refined I shall become. I have no doubt that I will make errors but in my view, this adds to my experience and widens my knowledge base.

Summary

In this assignment I have tried to provide some examples from my workplace to illustrate how I am embracing a coaching style in my leadership and management. The relationship is now 10 months into its development and I believe it to be effective, whilst acknowledging that it will continue to develop until we, as a team disperse owing to the nature of the drafting cycle within the Royal Navy.

I genuinely believe that all of the team have benefitted, and will continue to benefit from our time together and be able to take those intra and inter personal skills which we have developed, into the next role we are required to fulfil. The way in which the team interact with each other does, in my view, seem to have become far more open and honest with a no blame culture underlying all that we do. Discussion between the two sets of staff, seniors and juniors, has increased noticeably and this affords better quality guidance to the recruits as ambiguity and indecisiveness is all but eradicated. The staff are noticeably more confident in their own environment, and also amongst their peers from other Divisions, and superiors from INTHQ. I see this in the interactions at staff meetings, and in the manner in which they engage with Senior Command within HMS RALEIGH.

During the process of this relationship developing it is my view that my team and I have been undergoing change in line with Maslow’s 4 stage learning cycle (Figure 4.).

8

Figure 4. Maslow’s 4 Stage Learning Cycle (The Peak Performance Centre, d.u.)

When I first took up post I recognised that the team all had a level of competence in managerial process and instructional capability. I would therefore suggest that what I initiated was a learning process based in coaching rather than instructing in the traditional sense of the word. The staff are now better equipped, in my opinion, to move into their next assignments or roles, to provide leadership and management through a very much more coaching style rather than a didactic, military one; the positive results which ensue will, I am confident, be reward for their hard work.

I have found the writing of this particular assignment a very valuable learning tool, in that it has allowed me to reflect on, analyse and review exactly how I am operating within my role and the relationship, and to identify areas for improvement and future development.

I would do very little differently in the future, other than focus further on my cognisance of other peoples belief systems and coping mechanisms; in an attempt to identify their behavioural drivers. I have constantly made it a priority to engage silence and listening and the assimilation of the information being shared, rather than offering solutions. This has reaped the rewards outlined above.

9

References:

Adair, J. (1983) Effective Leadership. Cavaye Place, London: Pan Books.

Adair, J. (1997) The Action Centred Leader. (2nd ed.) Bryanstone Square, London: The Industrial Society.

Blanchard International. (Date unknown) Situational Leadership Model. [Online] Available from: www.blanchard-bg.com [accessed 31 August 2014]

Blanchard, K. (1989) Leadership & the One Minute Manager. (4th ed.) Glasgow: William Collins Sons & Co. Ltd..

Daniels, A. (1999) Bringing out the best in people; How to apply the astonishing power of positive reinforcement. (2nd ed.) New York: McGraw-Hill.

Garvey, B., Stokes, P. and Megginson, D. (2014) Coaching and Mentoring; Theory & Practice. (2nd ed.) Olivers Yard, London: SAGE Publications Ltd.

Kaplan Finance. (Date unknown) Action Centred Leadership Model. [Online] Available from: www.kfknowledgebank.co.uk [accessed 31 August 2014]

Megginson, D. and Clutterbuck, D. (2012) Techniques for Coaching & Mentoring. (2nd ed.) Milton Park, Abingdon: Routledge.

Parsloe, E. and Leedham, M. (2010) Coaching & Mentoring; Practical Conversations to Improve Learning. (2nd ed.) Daryaganj, New Delhi: Kogan Page.

The Peak Performance Centre. (Date unknown) 4 Stages of Learning Model. [Online] Available from: www.thepeakperformancecentre.com [accessed 31 August 2014]

Starr , J. (2011) The Coaching Manual. (3rd ed.) Edinburgh Gate, Harlow: Pearson Education Ltd..

Whitmore, J. (2014) Coaching for Performance; Growing Human Potential & Purpose. (4th ed.) Clerkenwell, London: Nicholas Brealey Publishing.

Simply Psychology. (Date unknown) Kolb's Learning Cycle Model. [Online] Available from: www.simplypsychology.org [accessed 31 August 2014]

10

Appendix 1

Naval Ranks, Terminology and Abbreviations.

Flag Officer Sea Training (FOST)

Rear Admiral RN who is the ‘owner’ of all training that takes place in the Royal Navy.

Captain – Commanding Officer (Capt/CO)

The ‘Managing Director’ of HMS RALEIGH. Charged by FOST to run all training within HMS RALEIGH effectively and efficiently, in accordance with extant orders and procedures.

Training Commander (CDR T)

Commander who heads up the Initial Naval Training (INT) School within HMS RALEIGH. Charged by the CO to ensure training takes place in accordance with INTSO’s and FOST directives.

OIC INT

The second in command (2i/c) to CDR T, OIC INT is the Departmental Manager of Headquarters INT.

Lieutenant (LT)

A Commissioned Officer. My rank, and that of all other Divisional Training Officers who lead their respective Divisions.

Warrant Officer (WO)

The highest rank a non-Commissioned Officer can attain within the Royal Navy. Vastly experienced individuals who sit as 2i/c within each Division.

Chief Petty Officer (CPO)

The rank below WO

Petty Officer (PO)

The rank below CPO

LH

The rate below PO

AB

The rate below LH. The most junior of the non-Commissioned ranks and rates.

11

Warning System

An incremental 3 stage process from 1 (lowest) to 3 (highest) which places the recruit on ‘Warning for Discharge Shore, Deemed Unsuitable During Training’ (DUDT). This process culminates in an final (4th) warning from CDR T, which will result in a termination of the recruits contract. He/She will be discharged from the RN within 24hrs of the 4 th warning. Warnings exist for Naval General Training, Discipline, Values & Standards.

Initial Naval Training Headquarters (INTHQ)

The organisation which sits directly above the 5 Training Divisions. The INTHQ drives the policy, protocols and procedures which form the framework, within which we in the Divisions operate.

12

Appendix 2

Terms of Reference for an INT Divisional Training Officer (DTO)

1. PURPOSE. To assume responsibility for training Division as directed by OCINT and in accordance with the HMS RALEIGH Initial Naval Training Standing Orders.

2. SUPERIORS. The DTO is accountable to OCINT for the management of:

a. High standards of trainee training.

b. Development and oversight of Divisional Instructors.

c. Effective regulation, administration and material state of the Division.

d. Trainee Care and Welfare.

3. AUTHORITY. The DTO is:

a. Authorised to:

i. Deliver all aspects of training support required for the successful delivery of the 10-week INT course.

ii. Carry out Staff Risk Assessments on New Joiners as required by the Command.

iii. Demand and expend Naval Stores in support of the training task within HMS RALEIGH.

iv. Liaise with outside agencies for matters affecting Training.

v. Liaise with Rcts’ families, Next of Kin or legal guardians.

b. Given Authority over:

i. All Divisional Phase One Instructors.

ii. All Divisional Phase One Rcts.

13

Cdr T

OCINT

DTO

SO2(T)

INTWO

ADTO, 4 x DIs, 2 x DLH120 x Rcts

SO3 Trg Spt SO3 CAST

Stonehouse Wing

Nelson Division

4. ORGANISATION

5. PRINCIPAL DUTIES. The principal duties and high level tasks for DTOs are as follows:

a. Divisional Officer:

i. Responsible for management of Divisional Training Staff iaw BR3.

ii. Responsible for management of Rcts iaw BR3 and INTSOs.

b. Training Officer:

i. Perform Instructional duties as required within the INT(R) trg programme iaw INTSOs and DTTT.

ii. Carry out Divisional Training Management tasks to ensure compliance and local audit iaw DSAT.

iii. Carry out Module Responsible Officer duties iaw INTTMs and INTSOs.

iv. Provide and promote Coaching and Mentoring to Rcts and associated reports iaw INTSOs and CAST requirements.

c. Divisional Command, Leadership and Management:

i. Ensure INTSO and ESO compliance within Division.

ii. Promote and uphold Service Ethos and Core Values among Staff and Rcts.

iii. Ensure maintenance of Discipline and Standards amongst Staff and Rcts.

iv. Responsible for Divisional administrative processes and outputs.

d. Other Duties:

14

i. Act as the Training Support Officer for INT(R) as directed by Com’d, with Divisional Officer responsibility for Stonehouse Wing and Nelson Division.

ii. Act as the CAST Supervisor for INT(R) as directed by Com’d, responsible for provision, delivery and management of all CAST services.

iii. Perform Guard Officer routines.

iv. Act as SME advisor to OCINT and Com’d.

v. Ensure Divisional H&S and D&I compliance.

vi. Carry out Phase One Duty Officer Routines and Establishment OOD during Leave Periods.

vii. Carry out additional taskings as directed by Com’d.

6. PRE APPOINTMENT TRG.

a. Essential:

i. DTTT (DCTS).

ii. Divisional Officer’s Course (RNLA (E)).

iii. JOLC 1 and 2 (RNLA (W)) (for SO3).

iv. WOSC (RNLA (W)) (for WO1).

v. INT(R) Induction trg.

b. Desirable:

i. DIAD (DCTS) (particularly for SO3 CAST and SO3 Trg Spt roles).

ii. First Aid Cse.

iii. Summer Foundation Cse.

iv. FMT 600 (ADP).

15