Cognitive Behavioral Therapy in Executive Management Training

A process for mind setting flexibility for executives

Being flexible to a complex, fast-paced and ever changing environment is paramount to successful leadership. Leader flexibility is the capacity to interpret and practice a range of thoughts and behaviors according to the unique needs of a situation (Zaccaro, et. al., 1991). Many executives are turning to coaches to help them develop flexibility in the way they lead. This article shows how an adaptation of Cognitive Behav­ioral Therapy (CBT) can be leveraged to effectively develop leader flexibility within an executive coaching context, by helping executives add thoughts and behaviors to their repertoires.

The Need for Leader Flexibility

Leader flexibility has been linked to effec­tive leadership (Mumford & Connelly, 1991). Yet, people tend to develop rigid routines to manage complex environments. Executives in particular face more com­plexity than most, as their role-demands and information loads increase. It can be argued that leader flexibility is more dif­ficult for high performing executives, par­tially because they attribute their success to existing interpretations and behaviors (Sztucinski, 2001). A common outcome goal in coaching is to increase one’s flex­ibility (Kilburg, 1996). Yet we still have a limited understanding of how to develop flexibility in our leaders.

The Need for CBT

In order to develop leader flexibility, one should highlight interventions that aim to establish ongoing thought and behavior variability. One of the primary aims of CBT is to oppose rigid cognitions with the purpose of creating increased flexibility through conscious intention (Beck, 1975; Ellis, 1962). CBT is driven largely by real life experiments that provide structured opportunities to test new thoughts and behaviors (Hayes et al., 1999).

By becoming aware of how thoughts create feelings, and eventually states of being, clients begin to learn the value of checking interpretations in context. As interpretations become less automatic or rigid, the client can exercise greater varia­tion in new thoughts and behaviors, grow­ing a more flexible repertoire of response. Through a strong collaborative relationship between practitioner and client, CBT pres­ents a suitable method to improve leader flexibility.

Though it is arguably the most effica­cious form of psychotherapy for helping individuals change (Butler et al., 2006), CBT is seldom specifically written about in executive coaching literature.¹ While exceptions exist (see Ducharme, 2004), the relative absence of CBT is surprising given the unique overlaps shared by CBT and the needs of modern executives.

Leaders who are clients in coaching programs are interested in performance and substantive change. CBT has a long track record of creating an actionable framework that facilitates the practice of desired thoughts and behaviors. Addition­ally, CBT has allowed us to scientifically measure and track performance. When executives see this tracked return on investment, it often leads to an increase in motivation (positive spirals of action). In addition CBT tends to be shorter in dura­tion, solution oriented, and focused on the here and now, which fits the action-focused context of executives. CBT takes a stance of collaborative empiricism, in that it is a shared data-driven process that empowers the client to understand and influence the phenomena of study with the helper. In CBT the client is educated in cognitive and behavioral models, so she can eventually become a leader in her own change initia­tives. Given the empowered role of execu­tives and demands for time, the structure of CBT is a fitting approach to foster leader flexibility Below we will illustrate how the strengths of this approach can be leveraged effectively in an executive coaching pro­cess. We have named this process cognitive behavioral executive coaching (CBEC) as it combines traditional cognitive behavioral techniques with those commonly found in existing executive coaching processes.² Other important factors in succeeding with this process include authenticity, active listening, empathy, and establishing trust. Regardless of the coaching process being used, the quality of relationship between client and coach is a vital factor for success.

Cognitive Behavioral Executive Coaching (CBEC)

While cognitive behavioral principals are applied in a variety of settings, this model is specifically designed for the benefit of organizational executives seeking develop ment through a coaching process.³ Figure 1 summarizes the CBEC process, which is explained in detail below through five sub-processes.

1. Orientation and Vision

Coaching starts with an orientation to the CBEC model and an explanation of its collaborative and empowering structure. Next the coach helps the executive define an ideal future state as a leader. This can be accomplished through the use of visioning exercises, values assessments, and dialogue. Such assessments and the visioning exercise are standard practices among many well regarded executive coaching processes (i.e. the Goal portion of the GROW model, Whitmore, 2003; Ideal Self portion of Intentional Change Theory; Boyatzis, 2006). This is often done in order to articulate the larger context within which the client can ground the coaching work. We join Boyatzis’s work on Coaching with Compassion to suggest that ideal visioning can also be used to generate positive emo­tion in order to induce greater cognitive flexibility (Isen, 2002). An example of this step in the process comes from our coach­ing experience working with a president of a manufacturing division within a publicly traded multinational corporation.

2. Current Thoughts & Behaviors

The next step in the coaching process is to determine the client’s current thoughts and behaviors. The coach and client work collaboratively to assess current belief systems, gain awareness of the connections between situations, feeling states, and auto­matic thoughts and behaviors. Automatic thoughts represent the discourse of unin­tentional self-talk we all have in response to ongoing life events. Automatic behaviors represent the unintentional correspond­ing actions. In other words an aim of this process is to increase the client’s awareness of his inner narrator, and the resulting behaviors. The client and coach generate an improvement list that grounds the work and allows for data gathering as well as eventual outcome evaluation.

Specifically, coaches train clients to catch automatic thoughts and behaviors using various monitoring methods, such as a thought record form (Figure 2). The client can then begin assignments, which include periodically listing the thoughts, emo­tions, and behaviors accompanying specific leadership events. Additionally, clients are trained to classify unhelpful thoughts according to cognitive distortion types (Table 1. Cognitive Distortion List). Finally, clients try to assess the general outcomes that are associated by the use of their cur­rent thoughts and behaviors.

This understanding of current thoughts and behaviors is ultimately com­pared to where the client stated he wanted to be in the vision. This is essentially a side-by-side comparison between the stated future ideal and current reality, again similar to other change models (e.g. Reality in the GROW model, Whitmore, 2003; Real Self in Intentional Change Theory, Boyatzis, 2006). Unlike other change mod­els that focus on skills needed to bridge this gap however, CBEC is more directly focused on the client’s understanding of current thoughts and behaviors.

The coach and client work collaboratively to assess current belief systems, gain awareness of the connections between situations, feeling states, and automatic thoughts and behaviors. Automatic thoughts represent the discourse of unintentional self-talk we all have in response to ongoing life events. Automatic behaviors represent the unintentional corresponding actions. In other words an aim of this process is to increase the client’s awareness of his inner narrator, and the resulting behaviors. The client and coach generate an improvement list that grounds the work and allows for data gathering as well as eventual outcome evaluation.

3. Vision Oriented Thoughts and Behaviors

This sub-process encourages executives to revisit the vision and collaboratively craft what they deem to be cognitions and behaviors that could accompany how they would think and act as if the ideal vision were achieved. From this, a set of vision oriented cognitions and behaviors are established to provide guidelines for a more flexible way of thinking and behav-ing.⁴ Next, working hypotheses are collab­oratively generated regarding the desired vision oriented behaviors.

Once the future oriented cognitions and behaviors have been identified, the executive has built up enough of a forward-looking orientation to effectively begin experimenting in the present. The main purpose here is to identify and experiment with more flexible thoughts and behaviors. Such experiments and their outcomes may require the development of additional skills in order to further practice the methods of cognitive behavioral based change.

4. Experiment

Once the future oriented cognitions and behaviors have been identified, the executive has built up enough of a forward-looking orientation to effectively begin experimenting in the present. The main purpose here is to identify and experiment with more flexible thoughts and behaviors. Such experiments and their outcomes may require the development of addi­tional skills in order to further practice the methods of cognitive behavioral based change.

This phase extends the work that is started in the 2nd portion of the model (Current Thoughts and Behaviors). At this point the client has become adept at catching automatic thoughts and labeling common cognitive distortions in a thought record form. The client now begins to challenge cognitive distortions with more flexible thoughts and behaviors.

5. Transition

During the transition stage, clients move to independence when it is determined that the coaching intervention has had an impact or the duration of the contract is over. Impact assessment is accomplished through examination of the data from the initial assessment, the data gathered throughout the working relationship, and the end assessment related to the initial goals. This phase of the intervention mir­rors treatment termination in CBT. Goals include reviewing feelings about the rela­tionship, learning that took place, review of skills/education, and defining a self check-in schedule in order to maintain work gains. Here it is important to establish any follow up plans in order to revisit areas that need continued work. An indicator that it is time for transition is when the client is leading the CBEC process.

Conclusion

CBEC is a way to create a structured and empowering approach to developing leader flexibility. We hope this will be helpful to others as it has been helpful to us in use with our clients. While this is in no way an exhaustive overview of how to integrate CBT with coaching, it provides some tools so that readers can begin to incorporate aspects of this methodology into their coaching practices. We look forward to collaborating with others in order to learn together and further test the efficacy of this methodology.

References

Beck, A.T. (1972). Depression: Causes and treatment. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.

Beck, A.T. (1975). Cognitive Therapy and the emotional disorders. Madison, CT: Inter­national Universities Press.

Boyatzis, R., & McKee, A. (2006). Inten­tional change. Journal of Organizational Excellence, 25, 49–60.

Briscoe, J. P., & Hall, D. T. (1999, autumn). Grooming and picking leaders using competency frameworks: Do they work? Organizational Dynamics, 37–52.

Ducharme, M. J. (2004). The cognitive-behavioral approach to executive coach­ing. Consulting Psychology Journal, 56, 214–224.

Ellis, A. (1962). Reason and emotion in psy­chotherapy. New York: Lyle Stuart.

Hayes, S.C., Barlow, D.H., & Nelson-Gray, R. O. (1999). The scientist practitioner research and accountability in the age of managed care (2nd ed.) Boston: Allyn & Bacon.

Kilburg, R. (1996). Executive coaching as an emerging competency in the prac­tice of consulting. Consulting Psychol­ogy Journal: Practice and Research, 48, 59–60.

Mumford, M.D., & Connelly, M.S. (1991). Leaders as creators: Leader perfor­mance and problem solving in ill-defined domains. Leadership Quarterly, 2, 289–315.

Sztucinski, K. (2001). The nature of execu­tive coaching: An exploration of the executive’s experience. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, George Washing­ton University, Washington, DC.

Whitmore, J. (2003). Coaching for perfor-mance. London: Nicholas Brealey. 42.

Zaccaro, S. J., Foti, R. J., & Kenny, D. A. (1991). Self-monitoring and trait-based variance in leadership: An investiga­tion of leader flexibility across multiple group situations. Journal of Applied Psychology, 76, 308–315.