I am often asked about the future of executive coaching both by coaches and coachees. In this whitepaper I will look to answer the question, “Is the future bright, commercially viable and capable of delivering the results to the clients and the commercial return to the coaches?”
I am aghast at the level of incompetence I see in some coaches. Now, don’t get me wrong, there are some brilliant people doing some amazing things in both the art and science of behaviour change that simply blow my mind. However, there are a bunch of coaches whose interventions may have some value at the surface level with their clients but whose inability to affect real change leaves us all exposed to labels that are not always complimentary.
The question for the future is whether the good or bad are the tip of the iceberg and whether we will either sink or soar by their respective impact.
There are numerous definitions of what coaching is and, for the purpose of this article, let’s say, ‘coaching is helping and facilitating executives with learning transformational solutions that positively impact personal performance and achieve development needs to meet business results’.
I am not a solitary voice in the wilderness on the topic that there is something rotten in the world of executive coaching. Even other experts of coaching feel there are problems to be solved before they can declare that executive coaching is performed by experts, is transparent and is in the business of delivering real and sustainable client solutions.
I have heard many times that coaching is in adolescence’I simply disregard these statements. Coaches purport to be professional fixers who have the maturity, experiences and knowledge that allow them to complement the clients’ needs with solutions, research and a capability that will deliver a desired and agreed outcome.
My major concern is that a lack of entry barriers leaves the profession vulnerable to being discredited by charlatans and mimics that do more damage by their inability to decipher signals thereby leaving a vulnerability underpinning their interventions. I also feel that surgical action is needed to weed out bad or ineffective coaches. These are individuals who have either failed in executive life, or having gathered some coaching accreditations, stick a plaque outside their door and call themselves coaches.
In the new global environment, leaders must operate at speed, with great agility, having immediate access to knowledge, with a supporting infrastructure that’s in tune with their needs. Leaders should demand proven solutions, strategies and change models. Leaders must be clear in their desire for a systemised multi channel approach that is enabled by a strong technology platform.....
Stimulating Article on Executive Coaching
Response
Nial good point and well made. Yes, I was suggesting that the role of the coach is to bring order to chaos, and let me try and put this in some context. It is often articulated about the need to be at the "edge of chaos," where things are just about to fall apart but don't. This really is the zone of highest adaptability and creativity. But helping leaders understand what it looks like and how to bring it about is sadly neglected. Few coaches have the intuitive understanding of this zone. Leaders are told how important it is to find this edge of chaos, but little is provided in the way of useful information about the methods or approaches. A deep inhibitor of creative and adaptive responses is a serious misunderstanding of the nature of paradox, particularly dealing with chaotic conditions. Let's consider the nature of this paradox, this contradiction of things being chaotic and stable at the same time. The simultaneous presence of apparent opposites is disturbing for many managers who see paradox as something to be avoided and, in the end, to be "resolved" or eliminated. Resolution means accepting one side of the paradox and discarding the other, as in "we're either team-oriented or individual-oriented". But paradoxes don't simply arise; they are created by us through our framing of issues or problems. In fact, what appear to be irreconcilable opposites are in fact very often two critical aspects of the same underlying truth or picture. Order and Chaos.
The role of coach, leader and manger are, in my opinion, different. Let us first look at the crucial difference between managers and good leaders. The difference lies in the mindsets they adopt to chaos and order. Leaders tolerate / look for chaos and a lack of structure. They are prepared to use this ambiguity to keep matters fluid with a certain rhythmic flow whilst managers usually seek control and closure instinctively. I often use the analogy that leadership is like being the leader within a jazz band. If you compare this to orchestras you will note that concert orchestras put on a concert in a structured and predetermined manner and ask the customers to buy that performance. They sell a product which they persuade the customer to buy. Each part of the orchestra is responsible for one part of the production and the conductor brings all that energy together at the appropriate moment. The jazz band may start with a few numbers but then improvise and shift depending on audience participation and innovative synchronisation. They improvise and develop a flow which they are very happy to flex as the environment evolves. In a nutshell, a jazz band is customer focused, not product focused. The jazz band plays from the soul. The members are all committed to the best, and no one tries to be the star. They are bound by a common theme (values) – jazz. Several times during the course of an evening, different members will lead the music and come forward to play a solo, but always to a common theme. A jazz band is an expression of servant leadership. Few coaches get this. Few coaches have ever lived this.
My point is that the coach must learn how to operate at the edge to work with the great leaders, and at the centre to build great managers into great leaders. Too often coaches have a toolkit of approaches but lack the instinctive understanding of business rhythms and are too liner in their approach. When I made the point that coaches should bring order to chaos, I meant that they need to adapt to when to help leaders make the right interventions in the ambiguity cycle so that at some moments they actually lead rather than follow the cycle and at other moments they allow the cycle to evolve. That is the silver bullet moment. Great coaches need to be able to understand the signal amongst all the noise. I see the top coaches as being more responsible for the order side of chaos whereas the leader is responsible for the chaos side of order. Hope this helps explain my thinking.