Systemic Coaching is a process-oriented, solution- and resource-focused approach for supporting individuals, teams, and organizations. It is grounded in systems theory, constructivism, and second-order cybernetics: reality is understood as socially constructed; the coach does not act as an expert who provides answers but as a facilitator of dialogue and reflection in which clients develop their own solutions.
Practical Relevance
- Effective in complex contexts: Focuses on interrelations (individual–team–organization) instead of linear cause-effect chains.
- Self-organization & ownership: Coachees increase agency, teams improve collaboration and decision-making.
- Clarity & focus: Contracting and goal-setting reduce misunderstandings and create priorities.
- Culture & communication: Strengthens feedback culture, psychological safety, and relationships.
- Professionalization: Recognized standards (e.g., ICF, DBVC) ensure methodological quality and ethics.
- Scientific foundation: Impact monitoring (e.g., DBVC Wirkungsmonitoring) provides evidence of improved reflection, conflict resolution, and decision quality.
Real-World Examples
- Leadership in transition: A division head is torn between cost pressure and innovation demands. Using circular questioning, perspectives from stakeholders are surfaced, leading to a stakeholder map and communication agreements.
Impact: Conflicts de-escalate, decision-making speeds up, trust increases.
- Team with interface conflicts: Silo structures block end-to-end flow. Using exception-focused exploration, the team develops a new working agreement with pull-principles.
Impact: Reduced handover frictions, shorter cycle times.
- Product Owner role: A PO caught between business and IT struggles with conflicting expectations. Through role clarification and the contracting triangle, a shared prioritization logic emerges.
Impact: Better expectation management, more consistent value stream decisions.
Implementation in Practice
- Contracting & framing: Clarify goals, benefits, sponsor, confidentiality, success criteria. Stance: neutral, co-creative, respectful.
- Hypothesis work: Develop working hypotheses about systemic patterns instead of diagnosing individuals.
- Methods:
- Questioning techniques: circular, scaling, exception, miracle questions
- Stakeholder mapping & decision architecture
- Role and mandate clarification
- Interventions at multiple levels: individual, team, organization
- Process: Intake → Contract → Hypothesis-building → Series of sessions (3–8) → Interim evaluations → Closing & transfer.
- Ethics & quality: Regular supervision, clear distinction from psychotherapy, adherence to professional codes.
Characteristics
- Second-order perspective: Coaches reflect on their own involvement in the system.
- Constructivism: Focus on meaning-making instead of “objective truth.”
- Solution-focus: Emphasis on resources and exceptions instead of problem-deepening.
- Experimental: Small interventions, fast feedback loops, direct transfer into practice.
Impacts in OrganizationS
- Improved decision quality: Multi-perspective reflection reduces blind spots.
Contrast: Classic business coaching often focuses mainly on the individual.
- Sustainable change: Addresses systemic patterns instead of surface symptoms.
Contrast: Mentoring/training provide solutions; systemic coaching develops the system’s own capacity.
- Strengthened self-organization: Teams learn to take responsibility collectively.
Contrast: Person-centered coaching strengthens individual contributions, but not systemic ownership.
- Enhanced innovation & learning culture: Circular questions and experiments trigger new thinking.
Contrast: Training provides tools; systemic coaching shifts mindsets and patterns.
- Resilience in uncertain environments: Pattern recognition and rule adjustment strengthen adaptability.
Contrast: Classic consulting often prescribes best practices.
- Improved collaboration & culture: Communication becomes constructive, psychological safety increases.
Contrast: Traditional coaching focuses on individual communication skills; systemic coaching works on interactional patterns.
Anti-Patterns
- Advice-giving mode: Coach provides solutions instead of facilitating process – responsibility remains external.
- Blurring with psychotherapy: Addressing clinical issues without qualification or setting is unethical. Systemic coaching explicitly distinguishes itself from therapy and refers out when needed.
- Tool-magic: Using methods without contract or purpose.
- Esotericism: Use of vague buzzwords or unproven practices.
- Lack of quality assurance: No supervision, no adherence to standards (e.g., DBVC, ICF).
CALADE Perspective
At CALADE, systemic coaching is not seen as a toolbox, but as a professional stance. We combine solution-focused micro-methods (e.g., circular questions, exception work) with organizational levers (e.g., decision architecture, interface design). Change thus occurs not only at the individual level but across the entire social system.
Related Terms
- Solution-Focused Brief Therapy (SFBT)
- Process Consulting
- Organizational Development
- Supervision/Intervision
- Coaching standards (ICF, DBVC)
← back to list