An "Honest Abe's NLP Emporium" Book Review - Reproduced with permission.
Written and Produced by Andy Bradbury; author of "Develop Your NLP Skills", "NLP for Business Success", etc.

"Harsh words", you may think.  Or even, "how can he say that about someone who is Director of the Oxford School of Coaching and Mentoring and was responsible for setting up the Epic Group, 'still the largest multimedia bespoke learning production company in the UK', according to Mr Parsloe's biography on the OSCM website."
Well, let me see.

Firstly there's the staggeringly awful quality of the business analysis, as evidenced by the example from the chapter on mentoring. At the end of Example 3 we are told in no uncertain terms that:

"So in the 'corporate' world, at least, 'coach-mentor' is the most appropriate model, but the quality of the relationships are the key."
page 99.

Which may sound fair enough, except that Example 3 refers to just one department of a single organisation - Sandwell Metropolitan Borough Council IT Division - which is, as its name makes plain, in the 'public sector' and not part of the "'corporate' world" at all.  And just for good measure, the project in question had been going for barely 18 months when the book was passed to the publisher in December 1999.
Hardly what is known in the trade as "a representative sample", and certainly no basis for making sweeping assertions about what is "most appropriate" in any sector.

I was also struck by the thoroughly "user-unfriendly" arrangement of the book's contents.  The main text is 183 pages long, yet it is divided into only 9 (nine) chapters, with chapter lengths as follows:

• 11 pages - Chapter 5
• 13 pages - Chapters 6, 7 and 9
• 15 pages - Chapters 1 and 8
• 23 pages - Chapter 2
• 33 pages - Chapters 3 and 4

In other words, the contents are so unevenly dealt with that the two longest chapters are - with no visible justification - THREE TIMES as long as the shortest chapter.
On the basis of many years experience as a writer, trainer and teacher it is my considered opinion that an author who writes like this is either not able, or can't be bothered, to organise their material into manageable size chunks suitable for learning.  For such a person to claim to be describing "practical methods to improve learning" (my italics) simply beggars belief.

It should come as no surprise, then, to find that the authors spend Chapter 1 demonstrating that "there is no consensus yet on terminology in the field of coaching and mentoring" (page 75).
Fascinating.
"But why", you might reasonably ask, "does it take 15 pages for the authors to explain that they apparently have no idea what a genuine coach or mentor is?"  And even more intriguingly, if they don't know what a coach or mentor is, how do they plan to write a whole book on the subject of "coaching and mentoring"?

How?  By the use of large fonts, plenty of white space and lots of waffle.  That's how.
Here are a few examples.  Firstly, some "definitions":

"The Institute of Chartered Accountants (ICA) has used the concept of mentoring for many years as part of the process of qualifying candidates to full membership of the Institute.  They use the word 'counsellor' rather than mentor but the roles are very similar..."
page 87.

Excuse me, we don't have a firm definition of "mentor", but the role the ICA label as counsellor is "very similar"?  Very similar to what?

"Every authorized training organization ... has to appoint a 'counsellor' and a 'supervisor' (in ICA terms, the counsellor is the mentor and the supervisor, the line manager, is the coach in effect)."
page 87.

The mind boggles at such blatant fudging.  Especially as it only serves to further confuse the issues under discussion.
In "ICA terms" a 'counsellor' is a 'counsellor', not a mentor.  Witness the fact that in the ICA's description of the roles and responsibilities of a counsellor (as quoted on pages 87-88), the term mentor is neither mentioned nor implied.
Likewise the wholly unsupportable claim that, "the supervisor, the line manager, is the coach in effect".
In what "effect"?  The ICA description of a supervisor (quoted on pages 88-89) very clearly does expect that the person filling this role will be "in the line management chain to whom the student reports", but there is not mention, explicit or implicit, of coaching.

This last point leads directly into another crucial topic which the authors fail to address - can a manager function effectively as a coach for their own subordinates?  Not to mention the wider point of whether managers can function effectively as coaches at all:

"European mentors [as distinct from US mentors] are almost always off-line, not least because it is difficult to be very open to someone who has the power to influence your pay, status and general well-being."
page 79.

"Mentors, in the workplace, are rarely a learner's direct line manager whereas a coach usually is."
page 83.

So if I've got that right, the authors think it would be "difficult" to open up to your direct line manager if s/he were wearing a mentor's hat, because they have so much power over your situation.  But it should be perfectly okay to be "very open" with that same manager when they are wearing their coaching hat, because ... no, it makes damn all sense to me, either.

But hold on a mo', maybe I've just got the wrong end of the stick?  Apparently not.  Just a few pages later the authors write:

• A key role for the mentor is to help learners to deal with mistakes and setbacks which in some line management relationships may result in blame, guilt and feelings of inadequacy.  The mentoring relationship should be non-judgemental and 'risk free'.  This allows the mentor to help the learner to treat mistakes and setbacks as real learning opportunities.  Properly handled, these situations are often rich learning experiences.
  page 86.

Fine - but why are these issues only referred to in relation to mentoring?  Exactly which of those factors do the authors think DO NOT apply in a coaching situation?

To me this is a typical "made for the worst kind of manager" style of writing.  It sucks up to the sort of manager who lacks adequate interpersonal skills but is either unaware of his/her shortcomings or who knows all about them, but has no intention (for whatever reason) of doing anything about it.  Far from being a vehicle for progress, whilst apparently making all (most of) the right noises it actually stands stolidly in favour of keeping things just the way they are.
For all the hype and "brave new day" fantasies, much of British business remains mired in autocracy.  This book is unlikely to do anything at all to change that situation.

Definitely a book to be avoided at all costs.

An "Honest Abe's NLP Emporium" Book Review - Reproduced with permission.
Written and Produced by Andy Bradbury; author of "Develop Your NLP Skills", "NLP for Business Success", etc.

An "Honest Abe's NLP Emporium" Book Review - Reproduced with permission.
Written and Produced by Andy Bradbury; author of "Develop Your NLP Skills", "NLP for Business Success", etc.

I'd like to say that the book warrants all of the attention paid to it, but to be honest, I can't.
That isn't to say that it is a 'bad' book in any way, it just doesn't - despite the backcover description of it as "a new, expanded and fully revised third edition" really amount to much.  Indeed, not having seen the earlier editions it is hard to imagine how this edition is in any way an advance on the original, 1992 edition.

On the plus side, it strikes me that Whitmore strikes me as having considerable integrity as a writer.
Although his book is clearly aimed at managers he makes no concessions in pointing out just how bad things are at the current time.  In no way does Whitmore offer his reader an easy ride, and at times the passion in his writing over injustices and bad practices due to poor management skills and training is quite palpable.

Having said that, Whitmore's sporting background is clearly evident, especially in the on-going coaching "demo" which is used to illustrate points made in the main text.  It is a positively trivial example, involving fictional characters Mike (the coach) and Joe (the coachee) and their work on getting Joe's weight down by a mere 15 lbs in seven months.  Not exactly rocket science, and not even a very demanding goal.  On a sensible diet Joe could probably achieve that result in half the time and without taking any extra exercise at all!
Whitmore himself acknowledges that:

"Not all coaching sessions are as straightforward as this one, and coachees can offer more resistence and complications, but this is fairly typical and it serves to illustrate the majority of the coaching principles."
p.96

In practice I suggest that it is a grossly oversimplified example and doesn't even begin to hint at the many complications that are a more or less standard element of the coaching process.

The biggest surprise in the book, as far as I was cincerned, was how little time Whitmore takes over describing the book's best-known feature, the GROW model.  In fact it seemed to me that the author spends more time discussing Maslow's hierarchy of motivation than he does on GROW.  It was interesting, however, to note that the author finds it necessary to defend the ordering of the first two elements of the GROW model (which, by the way, originated with Graham Alexander, in the mid-1980's, NOT, as many people seem to think, in this book).
At the start of Chapter 8 (p.67), Whitmore argues that:

"Even if goals can be only loosely defined before the situation is looked at in some detail, this needs to be done first."

As I commented in my review of Miles Downey's book, Effective Coaching, if you haven't first checked the current state of affairs, how do you know what, if anything, needs to changed?  How do you shape a goal if you don't know what you've already achieved?

I can't see this being a book that will offer much to anyone with any significant experience of the coaching process, but it may be useful - in conjunction with other texts - for absolute beginners.
Very qualified recommendation -   *   *   *

An "Honest Abe's NLP Emporium" Book Review - Reproduced with permission.
Written and Produced by Andy Bradbury; author of "Develop Your NLP Skills", "NLP for Business Success", etc.

For example,we never do find out what the authors mean by "coaching".  They tell us that "coaching all aspects of someone's life" is life coaching, and "Coaching of senior people is referred to as 'executive coaching'."  They tell us that "The coach is a guiding-hand facilitator in the process [of coaching]."  And they even tell us what coaching is not - it isn't:

• Counselling
• Mentoring
• Punishing
• Teaching
• Telling
• Therapy, or
• Training

Yet somehow or other they never actually get round to telling us what coaching is.  This, in turn, makes it impossible to know what they're actually trying to achieve with their "ABC Technique" approach to coaching.
This so-called "technique", actually a set of questions ( 15 questions in the short version - 27 questions in the long version), which appear in one form or another no less than 5 times, can be summed up by the three headings:

• What's the situation?
• What would be better?
• What could you do differently to make things better?

Despite the back cover claim that the ABC Technique has been "developed over a number of years within a variety of organisational settings", this is, of course, no more and no less than a cut down version of the regular NLP problem-solving model (see review of The Skilled Helper, above).  Perhaps we are expected to obey that asinine but oh so popular business dictum of the moment: "Do more with less."  I hope not, because, as businesses are already beginning to discover, the only thing you can really do with "less" is "less".

The trouble is that Joe Public will only find out that they've wasted their time, and money by buying this quite appalling mish mash of half-baked ideas and pure nonsense "after the fact", as they say in legal circles.  Moreover the totally misleading message will have gone out: "Skill, training and aptitude are for wimps.  Just scan through this book and anyone can be a coach!"

"Mish mash", "half-baked ideas" and "pure nonsense", Andrew?  Isn't that a bit strong?
Is it?  Then how about this little gem in the section on Nature/Nurture:

"The genetic side to how we are is hard-wired and carried in the blood"

Our genes are carried in our blood?  I don't think so.
Anyway, this piece of antiquated physiology is quickly followed by a story that digs yet another hole in the book's credibility:

"A client's boss tended to shout orders at people. ... What [the client] had not realized was that the boss had a two part strategy. Part one was to shout.  Part two was to apologise in private to the person they had shouted at, and then discuss matters quietly over a drink or a meal.
Everyone except our client knew about part two ... But no one had had told our client who, having a new baby, had declined the part two invitations"

Uh, 'scuse me?  If the boss FIRST apologised and THEN issued the invitation, the fact your client has declined one or more invitations means that s/he MUST know that the boss (a) apologises, and then (b) issues an invitation to go for a drink or a meal.  This client may not know the boss' favourite drink or dish, but they can hardly be unaware of the nature of the boss' strategy, even in the unlikely event that the boss' behaviour has never been the object of office gossip (surely an all-time first?).
Another example of this daftness can be found in the section headed Motivation Direction:

"Some people have very strong likes and dislikes (strong 'away from' and strong 'towards'). You know where you are with them. even though they might change their mind dramatically from moment to moment."

'Run that by me again, Cedric' (as the saying goes).  I'm dealing with someone who "might change their mind dramatically from moment to moment" BUT that's okay, because at least I know where I am with them?
Excuse me if this seems a mite pedantic, but HOW, exactly, do I know where I am with this person, "from moment to moment"?

A particularly crucial point which the book simply ignores over is whether a manager is in a good position to function as a coach at all.  Instead of offering any discussion or insights we get this facile and totally unrealistic instruction:

"Of course you may want [the employee] to 'work harder' as your managerial outcome, but the coaching process is firmly based on their outcomes for themselves.  You have to take off your manager's hat, and leave it outside the coaching space."
(Italics as in the original)

"Manager's hat"?  "Coaching space"?  These are metaphors, guys - they don't actually exist.
To be blunt, I suspect that there are very few companies where employees are likely to "open up" to the person who controls their job and salary prospects.  Just imagine how a real life conversation might go:
Employee: "Hey, coach, I don't much like my job, and my manager is a self-opinionated tyrant who is always breathing down my neck - but I need a regular income!"
Boss: "As your coach, thank you for sharing that with me.  And as your self-opinionated, tyrannical, heavy-breathing manager - clear your desk, you're fired!"
Hmmm.

Not surprisingly the book also fails the "neurological levels" test.
As soon as I get a new book on NLP, I check the Table of Contents, and the Index (if there is one), for any entries under Logical Levels or Neurological Levels - and if I find either, or both, I check out that part of the book first.

Why?
Because, in my opinion, this is as good a guide as any to whether the author(s) actually understand NLP, or they're just churning out descriptions of the various techniques for the sake of producing a book.

Sure enough, this book does include a section on Neurological Levels, starting with the usual old tosh about the model (which isn't illustrated) being "developed ... from work by Gregory Bateson.  The discussion of the model allegedly goes on for another 30+ pages (well, that's what the Index entry shows - I think it's probably a typing error), yet in all that time there isn't a single mention of any feature which distinguishes the neurological levels model (which is never discussed) from the simpler logical levels model (which is discussed, though only briefly).  Which leaves me wondering whether the authors actually know what the "neurologicals levels" model looks like, or whether they're just repeating other people's mistakes.

Indeed, the more I read, the more I wondered how much the authors actually understand of NLP in general.  Quite apart from the "neurological levels" nonsense, there's the statement that "The examples in this book have an 'away from' bias" - no explanation, and a distinctly unusual take on pacing.
In the first few references to pacing, the term is used in its conventional sense (conventional for NLP, that is).  But then the authors give it their own special twist and come up with:

"If someone is second positioning you too much ... you might need to pace them gently into first or third position"

and this isn't a momentary lapse, because on the next page we are told:

"It might be hard for someone in first position to be objective, and so you might need to pace them gently into third position"

Speaking of pacing, the way this topic is handled gives an excellent illustration of the lack of coherent structure in the book as a whole.  Thus "pacing" is mentioned on pages 71, 83, 109 and 110 - but guess where the term is actually explained?  On pages 115-117 (leading, as you might suspect by now, isn't mentioned at all)!
An unusual approach, and not exactly helpful even if the reader is already familiar with NLP.

And what about the coaching relationship?
Having told us that "Coaching focuses on the client's agenda and outcomes" (page 9, italics as in the original), we find this example of Feeding observations to your client on page 129:

"1. I notice when you were angry you ignored how other people were affected by your anger.
 
2. This made me feel sad and frustrated.
 
3. Because I need to feel our work together has a value to you and others.
 
4. So my request is for you to ..."

The client's behaviour "made me feel ..." - meaning your client has more control over your emotions than you do?
And "because I need to feel ..." - meaning this relationship is about making the coach feel okay?
And "so my request is for you to ..." do whatever I say?

This is bad NLP, bad psychology, and bad coaching.  Which is unfortunately true of most of the rest of the book.
Most definitely a book to avoid like the plague.