Business Coaching Articles & Coaching Case Studies

Introduction

Developing performance or executive coaching is a difficult challenge.

Much has been written about coaching in the work place, little has been written about the work of external coaches and their methods.

In this series of articles, Mike Morrison Performance Coach, has documented a number of real life coaching case studies.  They are put here to create an awareness of the challenges facing a performance coach working as an external agent of change.

While the methods used may seem unusual, they were used to get the change required in the client.  The breadth of approaches demonstrates the challenges facing coaches today and the risk of following a set methodology.  Remember the coachee is a learner – it is important to put the learner at the centre not the process. Using solid principles of psychology provides the coach with additional underpinning knowledge and tools as opposed to methodology alone.

Article 1 – Real Coaching

Article 2 – Business Coaching

Article 3 – Life Coaching

Article 4 – Coaching Motivational Speakers

Life Coaching Article

Director & CEO Coaching

Business Coaching

Motivational Speaking

Coaching Sports performers

Coaching Models

There are many models available to coaches including GROW, CLEAR, CIGAR, 7 C’s, OSCAR, POWER, GAINS, STEER, Stop Start Continue Change, TGROW etc… It does not matter which one you use as long as it is appropriate for the client, their approach and their need at the time. Sticking to one model may develop mastery in that model but in our view one size does not fit all. Mike and the team at RapidBI listen to the client and then use the model or models appropriate to the needs of the client. When looking at the interventions below see if you can spot what model is being used and when…

Come back soon – more in development. If you would like to use these articles on your e-zine or website, please contact us.

Back to main coaching page

Reality Coaching – Real Coaching –  A Case Study

By Mike Morrison

Introduction

Have you noticed that over the past 5 years the use of the word ‘coaching’ has been increasing within the business environment?  What started this trend? Was it that coaching really works or was it that companies started to outsource their training departments and as a consequence it was more cost effective to ‘train’ one on one?

What ever the reason the reality is that coaching is here and it is here to stay.

So what makes a good (or great) coach – well that is the easy one – results.  How you determine success however is not always as straight forward as it should be.

In this series of short articles I will outline my unique approach and talk you through some of the methods and approaches I use for success.

So who is Mike Morrison?  I started out as an engineer and ‘fell ‘into people development almost by accident some 20 years ago, and has never looked back since.  I have undertaken a wide range of coaching training with several ‘schools’ and found them all to add valuable ingredients.  Like cooking, the success of coaching is adaptability rather than a fixed formula.

Over the years I have worked with Olympic athletes, sports people, TV & media personalities as well as a wide range of successful leaders, managers and entrepreneurs from the public and private sectors.

Methods and tools used:

Unlike many coaches, I do not use just one methodology or ‘school of thinking’, I adapt my approach to the client, their needs and expectations. Often mixing methods from different disciplines provides the blend required for success.   Let’s explore one particular ‘client’

Introduction

I received a phone call asking for a coach for a Racing Driver.  At the time he was described as being very good in his class but overall always second and just missing the top slot.  The driver recognised the need for some assistance to change.  It was half way through the season and the team were hoping for enough changes to impact the season’s scores.  Personality and relationship between coach and client is critical for success at this level, so after a brief telephone discussion an introductory meeting was set up to see if the chemistry would or would not work.  Let’s call him ‘Jerry’.

The first meeting

We met with the purpose of each other starting to learn and understand each others motivation. The discussion was loose and fluid, exploring likes and dislikes, turn-on’s and offs as well as a range of common ground discussions.  After about 1 hour, I turned the discussion to Jerry and his aspirations in driving for the short and long term.  I asked lots of probing questions testing for depth of thought and included the “five why” technique.  Just what was it that Jerry Really wanted?  How much did he want it and how much (emotionally) was Jerry prepared to invest.  I checked and rechecked Jerry’s goals from different perspectives.

During this conversation I calibrated the relationship in terms of NLP based Meta programmes and modalities**, as well as started to understand Jerry’s motives for success.

At this point I believed that Jerry wants to achieve the stated goals, is prepared to invest time and effort.  And critically I believed that I could work with Jerry.  This is an important decision and from experience of colleagues, I believe that coaching often fails because the coaching relationship is ‘too professional’ or ‘too causal’.  It must be based upon trust and respect.  It is not in my experience about working with any client – well not at this level.

Then comes the crunch question “Jerry on a scale of 1-10, where 10 is very comfortable and 1 is really not sure about this, how do you feel about working with me?”  After some consideration and a lot of head nodding “7 … I think this will be tough”.  This is the answer I need needs to continue.

The next day I called the manager and agreed to take Jerry on.  The structure for the initial agreement is set and agreed.   In an ideal situation the first session would be to clarify desired results, time scales, preferred frequency and duration of sessions.  In this case the need was urgent and reactionary so this pre planning and diagnosis phase would have to happen after the first coaching session – not an ideal place to start from.  I also prefer a lot more face to face time than was going to be possible with this assignment.

The first coaching meeting

Time was short before Jerry’s next race, so I proposed a telephone session.  It’s the evening before the next race.  After checking that Jerry was in a quiet place away from distractions I knew I could begin:

Mike	“Ok Jerry what is it that you would like to get out of this session this evening”
Jerry	I’m not really sure
Mike	Ok what would make our time today seem like its been worth spending g the time
Jerry	Me winning tomorrow
Mike	Let’s start with that, Can you imagine yourself winning tomorrow?
Jerry	In the qualifying laps yes
Mike	What about the races themselves (there would be 2)
Jerry	No – something always goes wrong in the race
Mike	In what way?
Jerry	Well the car does not perform, mechanical problems
Mike	What is interesting to me is that you can see yourself doing well in qualifiers but not in the races
Jerry	Yes! – I generally do well in the qualifying but do not seem to be able to carry it through to the races themselves
Mike	Can you imagine a time in the near future when you can see yourself winning?
Jerry	No not really…

The above dialogue is an example only not a true record of the session.

The discussion went on, I kept using encouraging language with Jerry to find the reasons why he saw barriers to his success, reflected back to times in the past when Jerry had been successful during races.

This was a slow and difficult process, as Jerry was tending to focus on the performance of the vehicle and his competitors – he did not appear to realise that he was creating excuses why he was not performing consistently.  But this was not the time to raise these issues.

Some goals were set to take each part of the race day as it come with jerry being asked to focus on what could go right.  The following day I spoke to Jerry in between races, to check how he was reacting to what he was experiencing.

Meeting Number 2

Now we had some common experiences to work with.  The next race was 2 weeks away, and on a track that Jerry was not very familiar with.  I asked Jerry what sort of preparation he did for each race, his reply was – “well I prepare the car, go to the gym, look after my diet and fitness”

But no mental preparation.  We started with agreeing for Jerry to have the goal of getting hold of a copy of the track layout and imagining that he was driving around the circuit.  Jerry said he would do this.  I also did some visioning work around his attitude to the race day itself, and to start setting goals for the day, and ‘rehearsing’ how the races would go and how he would feel.

The night before the next day of racing.

We agreed a telephone session and I called at the allotted time.  After checking that Jerry was in a ‘comfortable and private place I did a recap of the goal setting and discussed how the ‘mental preparation’ has gone.  Jerry said that he was feeling good and positive.  The remainder of the 2 hour telephone session focused on expecting success and focusing on what Jerry can control and influence.

A phone call from Jerry’s manager in the evening following the racing asks “what did you do? He won both races; he appears much more relaxed and confident.

I thought that was the easy part – sustaining the performance now that was going to be the challenge.

The subsequent sessions focused on what Jerry could control and on practicing mentally rehearsing the race.  Race results were mixed with Jerry either winning or going out because of significant technical malfunctions.

As time went on I noted that Jerry was not putting the effort into the mental preparation before racing, it was easier for Jerry to concentrate on the ‘faults or actions of others’ or on the fact that his competitors were better than him.

Jerry really could not get into the habit of believing his abilities.

At the end of the season I decided that the relationship had gone as far as practicable.  The manager was disappointed as she was happy that significant progress had been made and wanted to continue.  A new coach was found.

Key gains for the client (as stated by his manager)

• More confident attitude to racing
• More confident in his self belief
• Less focused upon events outside his control
• Less likely to blame others

Further learning opportunities (as proposed by the coach)

• To practice visualising success more often – building the habit
• Taking mental development and preparation as seriously as physical

** NLP methods

This article is © Mike Morrison 2006-2007 All rights reserved. If you wish to circulate this article please contact the author via this site – no reasonable request refused.

The Names of people times and places have been changed to protect my clients.

go to top

Reality Coaching – Business Coaching
By Mike Morrison

In the second part of this mini series Mike explores coaching in the business environment.

Introduction
There are as many flavours of coaching are there are types of ice-cream. Each has its time and place. And like eating ice-cream it is easy to fall into our comfort zone and repeatedly have the same flavour – just because we like it. I am sure you also like many other flavours; it is just easier to have the same favourite.

In coaching we often learn from one school or another. Many of us learn from peers who have had different training, some of us stick with the one flavour we were first introduced to. While this will work for us for a while, with certain types of clients it is not a universal tool. A hammer is very useful – but there are things it is not very good at working with!

The case study
A national charity has appointed a new Executive Director, let’s call her Cherie. The organisation requires change to survive, and was relying on public funding for approx 80% of its income. With budgets cuts looming and changes to the funding partners, the organisation was heading for interesting times.

The organisation had a declared strategic goal and an operational budget. The new director, while she was an effective communicator & politician had never developed a strategic business plan before. Cherie had a naturally co-operative style and was intending to use this style to develop the plan, gain commitment and move everyone forward.

The Coaching role – to help support Cherie and when appropriate, facilitate the management team to function as a team and to contribute to the development and deployment of the business plan. The team did not know that Cherie was undergoing a coaching programme at that time.

The plan that was agreed was in the following sessions:

Session 1 – Getting to know each other
The first session was to start the process of rapport building and to set the agenda for change. This was done on a one-on one basis. It was clear to me that Cherie needed a bit more than process and performance coaching – she needed training and skills development in some areas. This meant the coaching relationship would need to be very adaptive.

Change was going to be a big part of this work – Cherie had little understanding of the psychological impacts of change so I went through a number of tools that I felt would be of value to her. These included The Change Curve, Habit theory and a variant of Beckhart’s change model. We explored how and when Cherie could use these, her eyes lit up as she had realised what had been happening between her an another director “now I understand” she said “you mean all I need to do is….” I just looked at her and smiled.

Session 2 – Develop the plan

We reflected on the previous meeting and Cherie was delighted to say that relations with one individual had changed significantly. “all this time and it was that easy”.

Moving on to developing the plan, we discussed the personalities involved. Then recognising the strengths and weaknesses of each individual (SWOT analysis), we formulated a plan for change which had the greatest chance of success and minimised the opportunities for failure.

Session 3 – Facilitate the team
This session was with the whole management team, with the purpose of producing a business plan that met the requirements of the strategic plan. To develop ownership of the plan.

The session was run as an off-site away. The team were reminded of the strategic need for change by Cherie and I took over the process of group facilitation, working through an agreed process to produce a first draft of a functionally based business plan.

Throughout the day it became increasingly obvious that most of the managers were very protectionist of their own areas, and would not buy-in to the overall picture or goal – the words were there but not the actions. Using a range of tools, SWOT, SSCC, PESTLE etc I encouraged the group to see things from the perspective of others. We did this by swapping SWOTS etc and presenting the case of other departments. This did help some of the members of the management team.

It was useful to get to meet the people concerned as it enabled me to understand why Cherie was saying some of the things she did.

Session 4 – The Review
We (Cherie & I) agreed that there were still problems with the functioning of the team. I offered Cherie various collaboration techniques she could use in her weekly meeting. We explored ways of using the approaches and encouraging collaboration with others. Cherie pointed out that we were dealing with very strong personalities and that any effort to impact one would see the balance of power and influence move to another, having the potential to cause more difficulty.

Using a pro’s and con’s approach we sort options to achieve the primary goal – to implement the strategic plan. The outcome was to use general ideas from the team and encourage them to develop departmental plans and then for Cherie to ratify them into one strategic document.

Cherie agreed to delegate tasks to the team with the view that the material would be ready to collate at our next session. Delegated tasks had never been documented before – this was a new experience for all concerned.

Session 5 – Making progress
Feedback from Cherie showed slow progress from the managers. Some of the managers were using divisive tactics to undermine the process. Making commitments and not delivering, or using the inactions of others as their excuse. We explored ways of handling this behaviour, it was politically a difficult position for Cherie. Using scenario’s such as if you do this …. Will happen.. and the consequences are …

We took a number of approaches through the process. The result was a different solution for each individual.

Most of the remainder of the session was focused on the protection of the ‘mental sanity’ of Cherie. This was a tough time for her, feeling that there was little support from within the organisation. For her at this time the coaching process was as much a psychological support as it was a sounding board and provider of solutions.

Session 6 through 11 – Putting it into action
The whole situation was difficult, with individuals wanting Cherie to hold their hands yet not being proactive. The argument “we don’t know what we need to do” was used repeatedly, so training and coaching was offered to managers – none took it.

The format of this and the subsequent sessions followed a similar format, review on what had happened to date, set goals for that session, both reflective and skills provision approach was used.

Summary of style
While frustrating for Cherie at times, the style I adopted was balanced between a reflective style with giving advice and solutions appropriately. Only giving advice when Cherie was cornered and felt she had no safe route out. The environment was based upon trust and safety.

The agreed purpose of the coaching programme was to increase Cherie’s capability as well as provide support for Cherie through this significant change programme.

Outcomes
Some 2 years after the sessions stopped Cherie still calls me occasionally to talk through issues and challenges.

The change programme was implemented with some long term success in enabling the managers to think and act more strategically.

Some of the more problematic members of the management team have since left. On reflection these individuals were bullying Cherie, and having realised that Cherie was standing up for herself (and respecting values she felt important) and that their previous behaviours were no longer working.

The organisation is making steady progress towards it strategic goals. Most of the ‘difficult’ managers have since left the organisation.

This article is © Mike Morrison 2006-2007 All rights reserved. If you wish to circulate this article please contact the author via this site – no reasonable request refused.

The Names of people times and places have been changed to protect my clients.

go to top

Reality Coaching – Life Coaching
By Mike Morrison

Ok so you have done your training and in so doing bought your coaching toolbox, now how do you use these things?

Before we get into the meaning of life (coaching) lets go back in time a little.

One day while sitting in the office you suddenly notice that the world is talking about coaching. Over the coming days, weeks and months your interest grows, you start searching the web for training, information and ideas. You may even post a request for help on an industry based networking forum.

WOW then it hits you. This thing is huge. You hear conflicting comments from all around you. I went to xyz school of coaching and it has changed my life! No abc are much more practical. NLP is the approach all coaching is based upon, don’t waste your time and money on the coaching schools learn NLP. Jo Bloggs is a fantastic coach she taught me all I know give her a call.

And just to make matters worse, if you want a qualification to help others recognise your new skills, well there are no agreed standards, although as the years go on they are beginning to align (a little!).

Well who is right? – they all are! Who is wrong? Unfortunately all of them. Most providers programmes are based upon one methodology or model for development. Many are based upon the therapy models or from the basis of Solution Centred Counselling. Other providers rename their existing training provision to xxx coaching and re-brand their previous offer often without updating the content.

Interestingly many companies that have profiling tools are now re-focusing their marketing material towards the coaching arena. I am sure each tool, instrument and psychometric has its value and its place. None of them however is the Swiss Army Knife of the coaching diagnostics world. Each has its strengths and weaknesses. Appropriate uses and inappropriate uses. You would not use a fruit knife to cut bread would you…? Every tool is designed for a particular purpose – if that is the tool you need great.

The very best
Ok so what are the strategies, methods and techniques used by the very best coaches? To understand how they work we need to explore where and how they operate. Many coaches work exclusively in one arena, be it a sport, management performance etc. others work with anyone who wants to improve their performance. Some work with individuals in companies as the organisations last attempt at performance change before they start the disciplinary procedure for non-performance.

Additionally many coaches have appropriate diagnostic tools to their area of specialism. For those of us that operate across many sectors we have a range of tools to select from based upon the needs and preferences of the client. My father who was a cabinet maker, always used to say always pick the right tool for the job, use the wrong one and expect a poor finish. This is as true for personality tools as it is woodworking tools.

Now if you are working with athletes or individuals from the media, then you may get away with one approach to coaching. If you operate within one of the coaching franchises (most are Australian based) then you will coach to a set of procedures and follow a protocol. Many of the coaching schools have a system of model and you are taught to use it very effectively, Few use a broad range of approaches to identify where the client is now and where they want to get to.

It is easy to use one set of tools and their importance is reinforced by success after success, however it is easy in these situations to build up habits. Habits of practice. Habits of OUR behaviour, not related to the needs of the client. The ability and willingness to be flexible and adaptable is paramount to success. We need to react to our clients, their needs and the environment. It’s not about change for change sake – but change to give our client and ourselves the very best shot at achieving their stated goals.

There is one other common factor that all great coaches have… passion. Bucket loads of it. It’s about emotion, success, action and belief, total belief. The desire to help others is paramount in their words and actions. It’s about helping people be the best they can be, with the resources they have and the amount of effort they are prepared to put in.

The universal solution?
There is one coaching tool that most if not all successful coaches’ use: Goal setting. The very best use this on two levels:
What to I (the coach) want to get out of this relationship – how do I want to feel at the end of the programme? How will I know?
What does the client expect to achieve out of this relationship? How do they want to feel at the end of the programme? How will we know?
In addition both the coach and individual need goals and objectives for EACH session as well as the overall goal. The coach should check for validity of each sessional goal in the context of the overall goal of the programme.

It is important to keep focussed on these at all times.

The second universal tool – the reflective question
Many schools of coaching teach this method. Some teach this as the exclusive tool to use in a coaching relationship. The premise here is that the individual has all the resources they need to solve the problem, and the coach’s role is to tease this out of them.

NO! while this is a very powerful technique and for some things it is very effective. However it fails to work when the individual is working out of their understanding or knowledge base. For example, if an individual needs help with a behavioural issue within the workplace, one reason for them not adapting and changing is that they simply cannot see how they are behaving inappropriately OR they have no reference to base their learning upon. In these cases the individual needs specific help.
A solution. How we support them in the implementation of that solution may be through reflective questioning, or indeed role plays or many other approaches.

The third universal tool – a programme of 6 sessions (or a year long programme)
Ok now this one I cannot understand. How without meeting the client, understanding their needs and what it may take to deliver success can anyone ‘prescribe x sessions? Worse how can you contract to help the person meet their goal if you are setting the time table up front? Is this really for the benefit of the client or for provider cash flow and timetabling?

If your purpose is to act as segregate therapist then I can understand why you might want to meet once a month, but for improving an individual’s performance in a specific area?

The fourth universal tool – the one hour session
Whose goal are we trying to meet here? If the needs of the client are more work with them for as long as they need – if they need less fine. I generally set expectations with clients for each session to last approximately 2 hours. In my diary I allow at least 4.

If you are working to a strict process coaching model where you have semi-fixed questions, then I can see how this works. But is this really taking the client towards their goals or through the motions of a coaching process, to fulfil a contract?

Conclusions
Some coaches in some situations can operate very effectively with a limited tool kit. For the majority of us we need a range of:
Diagnostic tools, Coaching methodologies, underpinning knowledge in human psychology and rapport skills.

We need to constantly adapt for the client, remembering that our goal is to help them achieve their goal – not to use method x because it worked for the last client.

Qualifications and standards in coaching at the moment are at best fragmented. While this causes annoyance to many I see this as a positive point. Each flavour of coaching has its place. As soon as one standard is seen as the standard to have kudos over others we have a problem as people new to coaching will believe the approach espoused is THE approach. This in my opinion will never be the case.

As a psychology tutor of mine once said: the most important 3 rules in people development are:
1) People are different
2) People are different
3) People are different

This article is © Mike Morrison 2006-2007 All rights reserved. If you wish to circulate this article please contact the author via this site – no reasonable request refused.

The Names of people times and places have been changed to protect my clients.

go to top

Reality Coaching – Coaching Motivational Presenters

By Mike Morrison

Introduction

I received a phone call asking if I was available to coach a pair of TV personalities preparing to deliver a high profile motivational seminar.

The pair had been asked to run an event together and the rehearsals were not being as successful as they had hoped.

Let’s get to know the clients:

• He had been a presenter on terrestrial TV for some time and a motivational speaker, he was very successful. Let’s call him Joe.
• She was a sports coach and motivational trainer who had recently moved into mainstream TV work, let’s call her Anna.

Anna & I had worked together in the past when I had been asked to model her presentation style and train others to her level.  I had seen Joe but never met him.

The Situation:

Joe had a slick presentation prepared with all the visuals and VT (videotape) you would expect of a world class presenter.  He had the script, could present it with passion and enthuse people to take steps towards their own success

Anna on the other hand preferred to work with no script – and to ‘wing it’.  She is a pragmatist, she likes to play and dislikes too much structure.  I had worked with Anna a year or so earlier when I was asked to ‘model’ her style and workshop content and design a programme to train others to run this high energy and motivational day long seminar.  So I know how Anna likes to work.

The styles just collided.

My Role

I was asked to attend one of the rehearsals and then provide feedback about their performance.  This was designed as a one off coaching session.

I remember sitting through the first run and making copious notes – they wanted me to see the whole thing in its current form before making any comments or providing any feedback. When coaching people it is vital to know ‘where they are now’ so many coaches focus on where they want to get to that knowing the starting position help me to understand their strengths.

At the end of the first run they both left the room for a while, this left three of us. Divina (Joe’s manager) Joe’s agent and Anna’s Father.  The lady to my right (Divina) said “well what do you think?”  I paused for a moment and gave my view of the presentation and what would in my opinion make the whole thing more powerful.  I also made some comments about Joe’s and Anna’s style.  Divina said “no one has said that about him before – that’s very interesting”.  We chatted about style, impact and the purpose of the presentation and what they thought I could offer.  Joe& Anna returned some time later – Joe introduced himself and said I see you have met my wife – Divina. Whoops I thought.  Divina replied “yes we have been introduced – I think Mike can help us… a lot”.

Had I have known that Divina was Joe’s husband I would have said what I said in a much more guarded fashion – that taught me an important lesson that afternoon – say it like you see it.  I am not sure that at up until that time Joe had bought in to me being there – Anna said I was there for her (I found that out later too!)

The first interaction

Mike	Joe when you are working like this what makes you comfortable?
Joe	I need to know what is happening, I am not very creative and know that the script I have is well written and interesting.
Mike	So you believe that people are engaged by the script you have developed?
Joe	Yes – it has worked for me so far
Mike	Why do you need to change? Why work with Anna?
Joe	This client wants someone who will allow the messages in the presentation to be taken to the next level, I can’t do that – Anna can.
Mike	So you need Anna to interject in the presentation with “how you can use this ‘skill’”
Joe	Yes – she can do that so much better than I can, Plus I think the contrast of styles is refreshing.
Mike	For who?
Joe	For me certainly and I think the client will love it – I know they will – we just need to get the formula to work well.
Mike	What one think will help you?
Joe	Anna sticking to the script…

The above dialogue is an example only not a true record of the session

The discussion with Anna was very similar – but opposite!

I spoke to Joe for a while and discovered that he was really uncomfortable with Anna not running to a given script, it made it difficult for him to know when his cue was to progress with the next section

Anna likes to be spontaneous; she detests being ‘constrained’ by a script.  I spent some time with Anna and pointed out that to some extent she always worked of a script – all be it in her head as opposed to a written one.

Creating the Goal or Vision

Joe, Anna & I sat for a while and explored what success looked like for this presentation – both have very highly tuned visualisation abilities and this was the fastest visioning session I have ever experienced.

We ran a few parts of the presentation with Joe working ‘free wheeling’ and Anna to script – both were uncomfortable.  Joe was more engaging than he had been, the presentation was wrapped in a real passion, yet he was uncomfortable, too uncomfortable to do such a high profile event this way.

Then I changed track – I asked them both to start using the start and finish paragraph of each section, this provided Joe with the structure he needed and Anna with the permission to ‘do her thing’.  It worked very well.

By this time several hours had passed and we were all very tired.  We had a short debrief and agreed that Joe & Anna would have another day of rehearsals later in the week; the main presentation was not for 3 week so we all had time.  They were going to see how it went and then if necessary I would be called for another session the following week.

The following week I had a call from Joe; he thanks me for the input and structure – he said the rehearsals went very well – he thought her performance had improved and that they were ready for the ‘big day’.

Key gains for the clients (as stated by both at the time and Anna in later discussions)

• Being prepared to go out of their comfort zone
• More confident attitude to flexibility & change (for Joe)
• More confident attitude to structure and predictability (for Anna)
• The ability to focus on here & now and using emotions to engage people in a powerful way

Further learning opportunities

• To practice the fluid changes from one presenter to another
• To learn how to ‘be in the room’

Results

The first delivery of the new format motivational presentation for a major international blue chip company went very well.  They had been invited back to run the session again for others in the organisation and have since run the presentation for other organisations.

This article is © Mike Morrison 2006-2007 All rights reserved. If you wish to circulate this article please contact the author via this site – no reasonable request refused.

The Names of people, times and places have been changed to protect my clients.

go to top