What are the key differences between the STOKeRS model and the GROW model?

The GROW model's strength lies in its simplicity and structure, which fosters clear goal-setting and actionable steps. It's particularly useful for those new to coaching or those who need a straightforward framework for self-guided development. By focusing on current reality and exploring options, it encourages a solution-focused approach, which can be empowering for the coachee. Additionally, the 'Will' component ensures that there is a commitment to action, which is crucial for achieving any goal.

I have always view the GROW model as a simple way to support clients within a conversation. The Goal element of this can be seen as challenging at the beginning of a conversation so I tend to use that "What is your Goal for this session?" This may change as the client unpicks the reality and that is ok. Nothing is set in stone. The Options will explore the positive and negative aspects of any decision. The Will I find is the most interesting as it really puts the client into a position of viewing their motivation to complete a task.

GROW undoubtedly provides a structure designed to move a person towards an actionable goal but it's essential to adopt a flexible approach. In fact, the late Sir John Whitmore, shared with myself and my co-founder McKenzie Cerri his wish that people would adopt a less rigid approach! In schools where we work, goals are ofreb imposed externally. When staff and students bring imposed goals to coaching, they often lack motivation and clarity on how these goals align with their values. There has to be a step that comes before ‘G’ ! One that step helps a person clarify who they are and what they really want. Coaching isn't solely about pushing someone from point A to B; it enables people to understand themselves and what's important.

Firstly, it's important to note that this model was not developed by John Passmore but by Claire Pedrick. The letters in stokers stand for S is subject, T is for time, O is the outcome, K is how will we know that we have done the work, and is the role that we are asking each other to play, especially the coach. An S is where to start. The STOKeRS model is an incredibly versatile model of coaching that focuses on movement and the future. This is the most significant difference between it and GROW.

I learned about STOKeRS 6 months ago (wish it'd been sooner). It had an immediate, positive impact on my coaching and on me. I now do a lot less work in a session, ask briefer, future focused questions, speak less, listen and observe more and stay out of the client's story. I can see the difference it makes, by the looks on my client's face when they're thinking for themselves, what they come up with/out with, and how this in turn, mobilises forward knowledge, or action. This, plus Claire's spirit, pedagogy, and the empathic, support offered in the course, have been key contributions to my obtaining the required level of recordings deemed eligible for MCC application. Whether I 'pass' or not, Thank you Claire

STOKeRS emerged after a delegate on a course I was running many years ago wanted an acronym to be able to co-create the coaching container we were learning about. It's a useful way to engage fully in partnership, working out together - what are we doing today? - how shall we do this today? - how will we know we have done the work today? There are lots of podcasts about it at The Coaching Inn - and it is explored in detail in Simplifying Coaching.

Yes, I agree with @Nathan Whitbread on all fronts! The GROW model is challenging for those who need to gain clarity on where they are right now and then rightsize the work for today - this is where STOKeRS is helpful. G is for goal and many are unclear on what that might be at the start of the work or indeed what the focus within that goal might be for today.

What I noticed in being exposed to Stokers and Claire very recently is that the Stokers is all about the initial part of the conversation which is often the most challenging for me. All other models seem to be about the entire coaching conversation and not the start of it alone.

Yes they both look forwards. And STOKeRS enables the thinker to start thinking even in those first few minutes of the conversation. What's your question/ what would you like to thik about today (Subject) is a great way of the thinker getting in flow very quickly.

STOKeRS offers a formal, versatile model of coaching. It allows the thinker to move forward effectively within the framework and isn't too restrictive or focused on rudimentary goalsetting. Coaching is about supporting a thiker to move forward, and there was a considerable danger in setting arbitrary goals that may not enable them to do this and I think this is a danger within the GROW model.

While both models share the goal-setting and action-planning aspects, the STOKeRS model includes additional elements like reviewing knowledge and skills, executing the plan, and evaluating success. In contrast, the GROW model emphasises exploring reality and determining the will or commitment to move forward. Each model can be effective depending on the context and individual preferences, with the STOKeRS model providing a more comprehensive framework for action and evaluation.

I'd add that while GROW is a pretty straightforward, speedy and simplistic model available to anyone wanting to shift forward, STOKeRS is a much more powerful tool for starting a conversation - ensuring that both partners are clear on the work to be done. And whilst STOKeRS can actually do much of the heavy-lifting of an entire coaching session, it's role is to provide the starting point before the 'work' begins. So they actually do a different job, and are likely to achieve a different level of insight and impact.

STOKeRS digs deeper into motivations, resources, and potential obstacles, making it more effective for multi-faceted career goals. The more detailed framework is valuable for coachees who thrive with guidance and structured support.

STOKeRS will enable you to get to the heart of the work more quickly than GROW. GROW can become data transfer - the coach gains information about the situation. STOKeRS facilitates the thinker to process their data - in the company of a skilled coach.

I use the STOKeRS model with thinkers all the time. It keeps the conversation forward-facing. Whereas the R of GROW often causes the thinker to look back and start telling stories, relaying information the coach doesn't need. I also think that STOKeRS communicates something important to the thinker about where the responsibility lies for the direction and outcome of the conversation.

The STOKeRS model is particularly useful for structuring initial coaching conversations, it is effective when the focus is on building a comprehensive understanding of the coachee's context and identifying available resources and potential pathways forward. On the other hand, the GROW model is well-suited for goal-setting, problem-solving, and action planning in coaching. The GROW model is versatile and can be applied to various coaching scenarios, making it a valuable framework for guiding individuals through the process of achieving their objectives.

Most problems are either simple, complicated or complex. Simple problems have straightforward solutions. Complicated problems are slightly more challenging to unravel but once you know the solution, you can repeat the same process. However, most coaching topics are complex because humans are rarely simple. In the GROW model, there are two risks: coaching the problem rather than the person or focusing solely on the topic rather than what the coachee really wants. Ideally it would only be used once a person is 100% clear on what they want, with unwavering motivation to achieve it. As for Stokes, the acronym could easily have countless interpretations. In my opinion, the complexity of the model makes it disempowering and counterproductive.

Instead of using these models, my organisation, Graydin, developed a coaching model called Start with Heart. With just three steps —Heart, Head, and Step—it ‘s easy for coachees of all ages to understand and apply across various scenarios. And most importantly, it’s a profoundly human-centric approach. The model emphasises the individual and prioritises their holistic development rather than only addressing problems on the surface. By fostering a deep understanding of the coachee’s values, aspirations, and intrinsic motivations (i.e. starting with heart), it cultivates a partnership where the coachee feels deeply understood.