On August 1, 2024, the thirteenth session of the dialogue series "Coaching meets AI" took place.
For the first time, this session focused on the Triadic AI Coaching developed by Harald Geißler. Two main questions were at the forefront of this discussion.
The first question was: What needs to be done before the actual coaching begins to ensure that coachees are open to this approach? Regarding this question, it became clear that the coach must precisely explain the specifics of this particular approach, especially the roles played by the AI and by the coach themselves. It is important for the coachees to understand that the coach—and the coachees themselves—lead the conversation, not the AI. This means that the entire responsibility lies with them, not with the AI, and that the AI serves merely as a "third eye" that provides certain auxiliary functions. The outcomes generated must always be critically examined. Such clarification is crucial, not least because many coachees lack detailed knowledge about AI and are often influenced by public prejudices and fears.
The second question discussed in the 13th session was: For which target groups and coaching topics is Triadic AI Coaching not well suited? Two target groups were identified regarding this question. First, individuals who are currently emotionally very agitated or under significant emotional pressure (e.g., due to failures), who thus primarily need emotional support and perhaps calming. Once this has been achieved, meaning when emotional calm has set in, it should be evaluated whether the Triadic AI Coaching approach might be usefully applied. The second target group comprises individuals who, due to their personality, place particular value on intimate human contact and therefore find the additional help from a machine disruptive and reject it.
Against this backdrop, it became clear that it makes sense to use the flexibility potentials of Triadic AI Coaching in a situation-specific and needs-oriented manner. Two poles offer themselves here. On one side, it is to be clarified when it is useful to share the screen and work methodically with the coachees so that a protocol is created under their eyes, which is then handed over to the AI for processing along with a subsequent prompt. The opposite pole is to, in certain situations, not share the screen and conduct a highly personal conversation with the coachees. This does not exclude the coach from making written notes or creating a protocol in the background, which is not perceived by the coachees, and then subsequently showing and discussing it with the coachees, thus approaching the opposite pole again.