310 ■ III: ROLE FUNCTIONS OF DOCTORAL ADVANCED NURSING PRACTICE
unfamiliar to her, she was making decisions that affected large numbers of fac-
ulty and staff. Managing these changes meant learning to contain her own anx-
ious emotions, discerning with whom it was safe to share high emotions while
consciously working to maintain her self-confidence. Another newly appointed
department chair came with a whole department that had been independent of
the nursing department, but who would now report to the associate dean. She
was faced with no choice but to integrate her department into a faculty group
that felt more like a distant relative than immediate family. Thus, although each
new department chair’s story had unique elements, as a new leadership group,
they faced the full range of challenges that go with leadership transitions.■ CASE STUDY I (continued)
■ CASE STUDY II
COACHING METHODOLOGY
As stated earlier in the description of executive coaching, there are many dif-
ferent approaches to coaching that vary in how they collect and analyze data,
involve other key players in the institution (or not), and establish the specified
number of sessions, and time frame, in which the coaching process takes place.
In this academic setting, assessing the new leaders’ needs and identifying their
coaching goals were done with a combination of approaches. A few new leaders
were given a “360-degree”-feedback survey. All were administered the MBTI.
There was also a team meeting of all the new department chairs where they
shared their leadership style differences that were identified using the MBTI.
All the department chairs moved through the following sequence of meet-
ings to establish their individual coaching goals.- The coach met alone with the associate dean to hear his or her assess-
ment of the department chair’s strengths and challenges. - The coach met alone with the department chair to hear what he or she
perceived about the primary challenges to his or her development. - The coach, department chair, and associate dean met to share their
perceptions and identify coaching goals.
Structuring these first three meetings in this way created the time and
space for the department chair to identify his or her challenges separately from
the associate dean’s analysis of his or her strengths and challenges. If there were
any discrepancies, these became important discussion points in identifying the
development needs and agreeing upon goals. This process created a three-way
buy-in to the coaching goals, and left no room for differing perspectives to fall
between the cracks.
Four to six to 10 coaching sessions followed, lasting about an hour to an
hour and a half. They were designed as individual face-to-face sessions, except
(continued)