Swetanshu_BLP052_Consulting_03Jan’12

During the last session of self leadership , I learnt that one should ask his/her client what he/she feel about the situation by doing this its becomes easier for the consultant to understand about the his client ideas about the situation. The basic strategy is to help the resistance blow itself out, like a storm, and not to fight it head-on. This way of dealing with resistance by not fighting it head –on-has a ZEN quality to it. Getting the client to talk more about their concerns is helping the storm to pass. Defending methodology is keeping the storm alive. That is what happen when you push back against the resistance. You get stuck, the tension goes up, and the energy is drained.

The three steps for handling resistance are:

·         Pick up the clues – first step is simple to notice what is happening, trust what you see more than what you hear.

·         Name the resistance-the next step is to encourage the client to make direct statement of the reservation he/she is experiencing

·         Be quiet, let the client responds-Once the resistance has been identified and highlighted, further conversation should be started from client side rather than from consultant side.

Chapter 10 deals with moving from diagnosis to discovery. When the contract is clear and you are ready to deal with resistance, attention turns to the discovery phase. Develop an independent and fresh way to looking at what is going on and to create a process that’s leads to client commitment, ownership, and action.

There are two quit distinct ways of thinking about this part of the work. One that focuses more on possibilities than problems. This is variously called an asset- based approach or strength –based approach. One methodology that is future and asset based is called Positive Deviance.

Regardless of whether you choose a problem –based discovery process or a future – and strength –based discovery, the focus on relationship that was emphasized in contracting. If we give the clients what they ask for, we run the risk of not having served them well. However, we tell them that the solution will take awhile, will cost more time and involvement will be required of them than they want to give, we run the risk of alienating them. A better approach is to define our task as a process of discovery and dialogue more than as an act of diagnosis and prescription, independent of whether we are looking at problems or gifts and possibilities.