The alliance between coach and client is, by linguistic definition, asymmetrical. While coach and client have a mutual interest in solving a problem at hand, their interactional roles, their knowledge, their perspectives on, their affectedness by, and their competencies in solving the problem differ. Unlike other helping professions, coaching is intended to be non-hierarchical and 'communication at eye level' is often theoretically postulated. The coach is thereby considered the expert for the process, the client for the content. However, the concept is hardly ever defined, and only little empirical research exists (Jautz 2017). Prior linguistic findings document that coach and client locally negotiate whether their interaction is indeed realized in a non-hierarchical or in a hierarchical way (Graf/ Jautz 2022).
We pursue three goals with our contribution: (1) linguistically refine the concept of 'communication at eye level', (2) illustrate how it locally features in talk-in-interaction of coaches and clients and contrast it with hierarchical realizations, and (3) showcase the practical relevance of such analysis.
To this end, we compare the first sessions of one coach with two different clients from the executive coaching protocol Emotional Intelligentes Coaching via an integrative discourse analytic framework. We locate the communicative practices associated with 'communication at eye level' in the Basic Activities Model of coaching (Graf 2019) and especially focus on the activities 'Defining the situation' and 'Building the relationship' and related communicative practices.
To establish and foster the working alliance, the coach displays an individually tailored 'client design' (Graf/ Jautz 2022) in each process. Her endeavour to communicate non-hierarchically at the clients' eye level is, however, taken differently by the two clients. One of the clients strives to present herself as co-expert and seeks to communicate at the coach's eye level, but nonetheless accepts the coach's expert interventions. The other client stresses the existing asymmetry by opting for a hierarchical communication. While he expects the coach to orient towards his needs and level, he talks "down" to her, emphasizing that he considers her a service provider who offers solutions and answers to his questions. Rejecting a communication at eye level attests to his implicit wish for a different kind of helping interaction.
Given that 'communication at eye level' presents a cornerstone of coaching theory and practice literature, analysing its concrete local (non-)realization in authentic talk-in-interaction generates valuable insights for learning and practicing coaches how to put this theoretical concept into practice.
References
Graf, Eva-Maria. 2019. The Pragmatics of Executive Coaching. Amsterdam/ Philadelphia: Benjamins.
Graf, Eva-Maria/ Jautz, Sabine. 2022/forthcoming. Working alliance and client design as discursive achievements in first sessions of executive coaching. In: Scarvaglieri, Claudio/ Graf, Eva-Maria/ Spranz-Fogasy, Thomas (eds.). Relationships in Organized Helping. Analyzing Interaction in Psychotherapy, Medical Encounters, Coaching and in Social Media. Amsterdam/ Philadelphia: Benjamins. 171-193.
Jautz, Sabine. 2017. Immer auf Augenhöhe? Ein Blick in den sprachlichen Werkzeugkoffer im Coaching. In: Dräger, Marcel/ Kuhnhenn, Martha (eds.). Sprache in Rede, Gespräch und Kommunikation. Linguistisches Wissen in der Kommunikationsberatung. Frankfurt/Main: Lang. 47-64.
