Exploring the use of coaching techniques in the writing process.

INTRODUCTION

In the previous post in this series (which you can read here) I looked at some of the common approaches playwrights encountered in the script development process. the role of the dramaturg (In the UK and also on the Continent and in the US). Also the process of receiving notes from dramaturgs/directors etc. and ways this could be clarified.

In this second post I want to look at whether there are different methods available which place the writer at the centre of the process, doesn't overwhelm them with notes, and supports them in the process to produce their best work.

After training as a coach, I began implementing some of these coaching techniques during script development sessions with writers and found them to be really useful. I think that coaching is the key to developing a model which properly places the writer at the centre of the script development process and makes the most of their deep knowledge of the story.

CONTRIBUTORS TO THE ARTICLE

I interviewed three different sets of participants, either in a written questionnaire or in an audio recording. Contributors have been kept anonymous so they can talk freely.

• Literary Managers and Dramaturgs. (Five in total. They have all worked in senior positions in this field in commissioning theatres in the UK.)
• Coaches (Two in total).
• Writers. (Five in total). They are all developing full length theatre scripts.

WHAT IS COACHING?

Coaching is e a non-directive questioning technique. The goal of coaching is to bring out the best in a person or a team. To "establish a firmer connection with an inner authority that can guide vision and urge excellence." (Downey, 2003). To open up a space for reflection, where the coachee discovers the answers themselves.

"Mentoring or coaching has one clear purpose... the learning and development of an individual, a process that involves change." (Brockban & McGill, 2006)

Interviews I made with coaches highlighted for me some key elements of the coaching process which could be brought to bear on the script development process.

"The key thing about coaching, as you know, is it's non-judgemental and that to me is what I'm, what I'm doing... I really love about it. I love it because it's non-judgemental. I love it because it's about the other person and helping the other person, you know, find the truth from within them, or the truth or, you know, whatever it is within them, and all you're doing as a coach is helping them do that. You providing the environment, you're providing, you know reflection, you're reflecting back what they've said. You, you're listening." (Contributor C2)

Contributor C1 summarised it as follows

"I think if more people learnt to listen, which is one of the key elements of coaching, and asked open questions, which is another key part of the process." (Contributor C1)

"Coaching... is really about self-empowerment, and it's a system for helping you work through things yourself, because it absolutely believes that all the answers lie within. And that's something I absolutely do believe. All the answers lie within." (Contributor C2)

THE OVERLAP BETWEEN COACHING AND DRAMATURGY

It is the key skills of listening, questioning and reflecting that seem to be present in both the approach of the dramaturg and that of the coach. A dramaturge I interviewed said:

 "Until I heard it mentioned in your questions, I've never heard of coaching techniques. Now that doesn't mean that instinctively one wasn't doing that. I just hadn't heard the terminology." (LMD2)

This was the starting point for an examination of the skills used in each of the two disciplines. A number of methods which are labelled in the discipline of coaching have not yet been labelled or are labelled differently in dramaturgy. Or, they are not stated explicitly. For example, there is often no 'contracting' stage, where the dramaturgy makes clear the parameters of the working relationship.

In this next part, Dramaturgs give me their own thoughts on the overlap between the two disciplines in key areas: listening skills, using open and closed questions and the relationship in regards to hierarchy.

 LISTENING SKILLS AND OPEN QUESTIONS

Examples of the deployment of listening skills and open questions were found in all the dramaturgs' responses.

"It's very complex because obviously a new script that has never been performed can come to you in different ways, some mainly through commissioning but it's the same with an unsolicited script actually that the most common approach is obviously in the first place reading, talking with the writer, asking them questions, giving them any feedback and that can be in person or it could be by email, I prefer in person but that is one of the most common approaches."(LM/D2)

 One dramaturg laid out how questions and reflection interplay in the process for them. 

 "In terms of me, I like to start, and I'm always trying to perfect the question that I open with, because I know it can really annoy people sometimes if you kind of go, 'so tell me what you think this project's about?' Essentially that's what I want the writer to talk about. And I want them to talk first. Because if you talk first and you say, 'Do you  know what, I just think there's something really problematic with this character, maybe you need to cut them for example. If you stopped and listened first you might realise that actually that's... that problematic character's actually what the play is really about for them. And actually the note is it might be the complete opposite to what you imagined without getting their opinion first. 

 So I mean I love to just let the writer kind of just talk about their work, talk about what they're feeling and it's, you know, you find ways maybe of teasing that out and kind of getting into the essence of what they want to write about and then kind of asking questions.

 My personal one is something I've built up and as I said, I break the rules all the time but I've built up a kind of process, whereby I do try and really get into the kind of mind, kind of really just try and facilitate the writer's ambitions for the project, really get to what they want to write about and try and serve that and ask kind of questions about that. So, you know, if that was something that was then a methodology that people could kind of subscribe to I think would be really helpful.

 I think open questions can be good. I think, yeah, where a writer feels ownership of the direction that they're going. Yeah, I like to ask the question for example, you know, what was the, you know, what was the genesis of this idea, why did you want to write this play? And usually you'll get to something, you know, whether it be a moment or a relationship or something, that you kind of feel like, that's the kernel of the idea." (LM/D4)

 This is reflected in how one of the coaches I interviewed talked about their process.

"For me the one thing that is essential is the writer and their work has got to build a relationship with the deliverer and ultimately the audience of that work. And finding a way of creating that connection is about building relationships. Basic coaching tools are really helpful because actually for the writer to know the goal that they're trying to achieve, and for the dramaturg to understand that goal and share it. Or come back with a different goal from their reading of the piece. Starting there, what is it, the Steven Covey 'start with the end in mind'." (C1)

 LEADING QUESTIONS

The script development process is interesting because there are of course leading questions all the time from, say, directors involved in the process. Often it can be much more directive than that. This means the writer has to sift through the notes all the time to classify them as either optional, strongly recommended they implement, or a note they really disagree with and will argue strongly against.

"So, I think I generally advise people to be very careful about leading questions because most people, even if they don't mean to, often I do I'm sure at times, you ask a leading question. And if you can not do that, you particularly in a dialogue with a writer I think, you get much more interesting stuff. Because you're leaving space rather than suggesting a route. 

 So, although I didn't know the terminology I'm very interested in you talking about the coaching techniques and I think some people might be better able to implement it than others. But I think it's, I don't know what you'd call it, a skill or a tool, that a lot of people won't yet know about. So it maybe needs a bit of explanation, or communication, for people to understand that might be a possibiity. (LMD2)"

 THE EQUALISING OF HIERARCHICAL RELATIONSHIPS

The hierarchical nature of the process can be equalised in the writer/dramaturg relationship when it works at its best. This is a something that the relationship also shares with coaching.

"Over time... the relationship between writer and dramaturg may/should develop into one of mutual trust and respect - a non-hierarchical interaction in support of the most valuable and productive outcome for both the writer and the developing/ producing theatre. and/or ultimate production." (LM/D1) 

COACHING MODELS AND CONCEPTS WE CAN USE

There are a number of models and techniques that coaches use to try to bring this state about. Some of these are mentioned in the book "Facilitating Reflective Learning through Mentoring & Coaching" by Brockbank & McGill. The main one I will be utilising is the GROW model (Goal – Reality – Options – Will.)

THE GROW MODEL IN COACHING

Goal - what does the coacheee wish to achieve in the session?

Reality - what is the current landscape? What are things like at the moment?

Options - What could the coachee do to achieve thir goal?

Will - How likely are they to do it?

A key feature of this kind of conversation is its non-directive nature. Rather than offering solutions or telling the writer what to do, the coaching dramaturg creates space for the writer to explore their own thinking. Through open-ended questions, careful listening, and gentle prompts, the conversation supports the writer in clarifying their intentions and uncovering possibilities they may not have considered.

The power lies not in giving advice, but in helping the writer arrive at their own answers — answers that are more likely to align with their voice, their vision, and their goals for their script.

At the Goal stage, the conversation might focus on the writer’s vision: What do you want this play to say? Who is it for? Why write it now? What kind of experience should the audience have? Or they could have a zoomed-in goal, for example, to look at the journey of the main character.

In the Reality phase, the coach helps the writer examine the current state of the script — what’s on the page, what’s missing, what’s working structurally or emotionally, and what’s not landing yet. This invites honest reflection without judgement. It is again non-directive. It gives the writer space to arrive at the answers themselves, without having to try and incorporate (sometimes disparate) story notes into their mental map of the story.

Moving to Options, the dialogue might explore different ways to deepen character, restructure scenes, introduce conflict, or experiment with tone or staging. The goal here isn’t to prescribe solutions, but to open space for fresh thinking and creative possibilities, which the writer originates themselves.

Finally, in the Will stage, the writer chooses a concrete next step — perhaps rewriting a scene from a new perspective, cutting a character, or testing the piece in a read-through. It creates momentum and ownership.

Used in this way, GROW can help writers navigate uncertainty, reconnect with their intent, and make meaningful progress.

Importantly, their sense of ownership of the work is intact. After a number of rounds of notes, it can start to obscure the reason one wanted to write the play in the first place. Sometimes very large changes are requested, and in some cases, you can start feeling as if you are working on someone else's play.

OTHER SKILLS COACHES CALL ON

There are a large number of skills, which coaches call on. From the same book (Brockbank & McGill), some practice skill names are:

CONGRUENCE – "a way of being genuine, being real, sharing feelings and attitudes as well as opinions and beliefs or judgements." (p155)

SELF-DISCLOSURE – "this means you will tend to make "I" statements, owning your statements, rather than using "you", "they", "one"..." (p161)

RECEIVING FEEDBACK "As a client you will receive feedback in a way that will enable you to achieve connected and constructive learning." (p167)

Looking at the coaching process as regards Practice Skills laid out in  "Facilitating Reflective Learning Through Mentoring & Coaching" by Brockbank & McGill (p173) we can examine how these following skills sit beside that of the writing process : contracting and ground rules, listening, restatement, empathy, questioning, summarizing, managing emotion and giving feedback. (p174)

Contracting and Ground Rules

There is an element of this in the play development process – from the actual contract which stipulates what and when will be delivered, to conversations about the expectations of the production company. 

Where the script development process could benefit is from a stronger contracting process at the beginning, where all the participants in the room make explicit what their approaches are, how they will be judging the work and what method they favour. If someone is giving you notes on your script, what's their intention? That you must implement them? Or that you can just add them into your thinking?

Listening

 There is a certain degree of listening on both sides, although the process of note giving as it is, means the writer is doing more listening than those giving notes. This therefore impinges on the space the writer has to put their own thoughts into words, and present them in a non-judgemental space. 

 Restatement & empathy

 Again, there is a certain degree of restatement and clarification of thoughts and ideas, although due to the large number of views that can sometimes be present, there is not enough clarity to enable restatement.

There is often a good deal of empathy on all sides, although again, members of the team also have their own agendas as to how they wish the piece to proceed.

Empathy can also be overtaken by the simple fact that people are being paid to have views, and therefore they must have them, rather than placing the emphasis on listening. 

 Questioning & summarising.

 There is a high level of questioning in both disciplines.

Again, in script development, there may be more than one suggested direction in the room, making it difficult to summarise. Instead, the writer is often expected to take all the views and try and implement what they feel will help the play along the most. Sometimes one just tries to get through the notes process, implementing them enough to keep the project on track, while trying to keep what you want out of the story.

I did an interview with the writer Stephen Greenhorn (River City, Doctor Who, Sunshine in Leith) where he talks about this in more detail. You can read/listen to it here.

 Giving feedback

 There is significantly more feedback given in the script development process than in coaching, and often it is from the note giver's/speaker's point of view. Coaches generally try not to let their own views colour the conversation. This is actually quite a hard skill to learn!

Hierarchies

There is also the political aspect of the process. Each artist is working in a hierarchical structure. Coaching, by upsetting the status quo, is by it's nature political. It therefore introduces an interesting dynamic into the script development process by flattening out hierarchies and placing the coachee at the centre of things. One coach talks about it as follow:

"I think it's interesting in terms of coaching, because it's... and using coaching in art at all because of the whole thing of the auteur and the director and all of that. And how artists, performance in particular, or real content generators of any sort are usually in a very hierarchical structured situation. If it's about performance in paticular and of course, writing, whereas if you're visual arts you've possibly got visual artists with a bit more control. But the hierarchy is such that actors, performers and so on are used to being, expect to some extent to be told what to do. Coaching is brilliant for unlocking that fixedness and that imbededness and you're also getting paradigm shift... So...coaching techniques...can definitely help with breaking down embedded structures and hierarchies. " (C2)

 However, there was an acceptance from writers I talked to that there needs to be some kind of hierarchy in the artistic process in order to give the work order and shape. But an examination of this can be very helpful in understanding the context of flows and undercurrents the artistic work exist in.

 "In the end you need to have someone who edits and who produces it and you know, puts into the products that the public engage with and I think that's, I think that's quite helpful way in my mind of differentiating between ... making the boundaries of where the power is." (C2)

 In a writer-led process, one would expect this 'editor' to be the writer, but that is not the case.

 At the same time, it would appear that the flattening out of hierarchies that coaching encourages can also be the basis for a more collaborative approach.

 "I would say, incredible collaborations can come when directors and writers work that closely, but that relationship has to be evenly matched. If the writer is lower status in that, and a director is brought on earlier, that can be quite dangerous, but if the're evenly matched, then extraordinary collaborations could come from bringing those two brains to the development of the play." (LM/D5)

 So I think it, it is political to do anything using anything, techniques that are listening and opening up like that as opposed to just imposing, which is our tradition. And I think it's, I think it's interesting. (C2)

 There are two sides, therefore to the use of coaching, it may empower the writer, but it can upset other established dynamics and hierarchies.

This is one of the key reasons that coaching might not be used as an approach. Other arguments against using it in the writing process were also presented by interviewees and I'll present them in the next post in the series.

I'll also talk about using coaching techniques in the dramaturgical process in practice - and how it worked when I used this approach when working with different writers on their scripts.

Thanks for reading.