[*] PepsiCo, Nortel, Steelcase, AT&T, Quest Diagnostics, U.S. Postal Service, General Motors, Whirlpool, Mercedes-Benz, Wal-Mart, BP Amoco, H.J. Heinz, Kellogg’s, Staples, Alaskan Airlines Group, Schering-Plough, Boeing, American Family Insurance, Michelin, Technical Data, Bank of America, Motorola, Cisco Systems, Deloitte & Touche, Ernst & Young, ComEd, H&R Block, American Express, Coca-Cola, Colgate-Palmolive, Vistana, Pharmacia & Upjohn, and many more!
New executives quickly learn that the support systems that once helped them deal with complex and difficult challenges are no longer there to protect them. As they step up to broader, more ambiguous roles, they find that there are simply fewer peers, or even higher-level executives, who have the perspective, skill sets, or time to advise them and act as a sounding board for their ideas.
Often Acceleration Pool members have spent time in competitive situations and know how coaches have helped them, whether it be on the sports field or in other goal-oriented endeavors (e.g., mountain climbing, debate club).
For many pool members, the expression “It’s lonely at the top” rings true. They are hungry for a neutral advisor dedicated to understanding their special challenges—someone who can offer wise advice that enables them to optimize both their performance and career growth.
From this set of dynamics, the concept of the executive coach has been born. As coaches can help athletes reach peak performance—refine their golf swing, improve their time, enhance their conditioning and technique, etc.—it certainly seems sensible that expert coaches should be able to do the same for executive performance. This chapter demystifies the use of coaches, both in the Acceleration Pool arena as well as in other key applications.
Note
denotes that information on this topic is available at the Grow Your Own Leaders web site (www.ddiworld.com/growyourownleaders).
The term executive coach often is thrown about loosely these days. Executive coaches have been compared not only to athletic coaches, but also to teachers, trainers, mentors, personal psychologists, sounding boards, friends, shadow consultants, trusted confidants, mirrors, consciences, healers, masters, village elders, and even fashion advisors.
In our view a coach is a catalyst or facilitator of individual development and performance. Effective executive coaches are seen as strategic business partners whose business experience, diagnostic insight, and proactive guidance offer tangible value to leaders. Perceived “value added” and “good chemistry” are keys to successful coaching relationships.
Strong coaches establish credibility and trust in a manner that invites executives to shed their egos long enough to benefit from diagnostic insights, ongoing (accurate) feedback, performance suggestions, and career advice. Sustaining a busy executive’s interest and participation in a process that requires ongoing time and emotional energy is no small achievement.
But exactly what do professional executive coaches do?
Executive coaches offer a complex array of services. The diverse range of an executive’s need for coaching (e.g., accelerated development or remedial) and his or her career stage (i.e., aspiring, transitional, mid-career, or mature) certainly suggest different coaching approaches. The conceptual model in Figure 13-1 shows the support offered by executive coaches.
Generally, when professional executive coaches are used as part of an Acceleration Pool strategy, the nature of support falls to the left and center on the continuum. The coach often plays a role in collecting diagnostic data that complement nomination and/or Acceleration Center data, and then in interpreting and communicating trends or themes in a feedback session. Coaches are particularly valuable in helping pool members better understand the unique derailers that might impede their performance and career progress. Coaches help pool members anticipate situations in which they are likely to fall prey to derailing behaviors; they also work with their clients in developing strategies to compensate for these behaviors.
In organizations where Acceleration Pool systems (i.e., assessment, feedback, and development planning) are not working well, professional executive coaches fill the void, particularly in development coaching after assessment feedback. The coach focuses on helping pool members construct concrete development plans and a means to measure and monitor progress. The number of acceleration coaching contacts varies but typically ranges from one to three focused interactions. Ideally, the coaching involves some degree of ongoing contact intended to help pool members stay on track with their development. In cases where organizations have well-run Acceleration Pools that incorporate accurate diagnosis and feedback and have (at least some) internal managers and mentors who are effectively doing their jobs, the most common form of coaching offered to Acceleration Pool members is accelerated coaching around one or more competencies or derailers. The coach might be solicited if the pool member or the Executive Resource Board feels a catalyst or a facilitator is needed to speed along development. The number of coaching sessions depends on the number and complexity of development targets. Commonly, the coach and pool member meet once a month for the first six months.
Beyond the straightforward context of speeding pool member development, executive coaches also can be deployed to address more complex or deeply entrenched executive performance challenges. We would classify these more broadly focused relationships (described at the right end of the continuum) as classic executive coaching. These relationships often are more enduring and allow support of a “whole-life” development game plan. Support is tailored to clients’ unique needs and motivations. As a result, coaching might target a wide spectrum of challenges, including professional and personal stress, strategic thinking, personal wellness, financial management, or avoiding political land mines within the organization. Executive coaches who are engaged in these types of long-term relationships make themselves accessible both on an as-needed and regularly scheduled basis (e.g., monthly, quarterly).
Executive coaches might also be employed for intense, short-term interventions over two or three sessions. For example, a coach might be brought in to help an executive prepare for and adapt to an upcoming international assignment or to overcome a relationship barrier with a key partner. As the nature of support becomes increasingly tailored at the right end of the continuum, interventions often require significantly more sophistication and skill from coaches.
Unquestionably, executive coaching is very trendy right now. The benefit of such coaching has been heralded in the Wall Street Journal, New York Times, Washington Post, Business Week, Fortune, Inc., Harvard Business Review, and popular HR journals such as Training. A plethora of consulting firms and independent consultants are marketing executive coaching services.
Growth of this executive coaching “industry” has led to hard questions about many aspects of coaching practices, including training and ethical standards, effectiveness research, and best practices. Many concerns about the impact of coaching remain unanswered, as popularity of executive coaching has grown largely through anecdotal legend, word of mouth, and the trumpeting of success stories in the business media. Although the jury is still out, it is hard to refute executives who report transformational experiences because of the support of wise, objective coaches whose judgment they trust.
Besides the direct benefits to the individuals involved, there are other reasons for using coaches. In some organizations receiving a coach connotes status and a visible statement of the company’s willingness to assume an individualized stake in an executive’s future success. In other companies executive coaches have become a new rite of passage and, like high-profile university or in-house programs, an envied message about perceived value. As a result, some organizations view investment in coaching as a key facet of a retention strategy for highly valued executives.
Although we believe that the coaching trend is more than a fad, we also know that paybacks are not assured. If, in fact, coaching was a panacea for all executive development challenges, there would be a run on coaching, and other options, such as learning events, networking, and developmental assessments and feedback, would have less appeal. The increasing popularity of all these options reflects the view of most organizations—that coaching is only one development alternative, but one that must be applied for the right reasons. Coaching is an expensive, time- and labor-intensive process—it is judicious to employ coaches when they offer an optimal acceleration alternative for a specific individual.
A few organizations make a blanket decision to offer all Acceleration Pool members an executive coach. Most organizations use coaches on a selective basis, when they feel the return on investment from a coach will make most sense. There are three key situations in which a coach will add significant value:
Coaching for career or role transitions.
Coaching to address a specific challenge or problem.
Coaching to avoid problem areas.
Key career transitions. In our view supporting executives through their career crossroads is an area in which coaches have significant value. Key transition targets, such as the executive making an important mid-career move or the seasoned executive wanting to leave a legacy of knowledge, are fertile areas for coaching. The major benefit a coach offers during these transitional phases is in helping executives pause, take stock of the bridge they are attempting to cross, and figure out how to proceed, given their skills, interests, and available time.
A professional coach also can pull the mid-career executive out of “autopilot” by helping the person revisit professional goals, regain focus, shed bad habits, and rededicate efforts. Such “back-on-track,” remedial coaching can rejuvenate floundering executives who need to regain perspective and establish priorities.
On-boarding. Assimilating executives into new assignments (internal promotions or external hires) is one of the most powerful applications of coaching. Individuals at different points on their executive career paths face very different issues—they also present unique coaching challenges. For example, coaches will offer special value to, and perhaps even “save” the credibility of, novice executives immersed in environments that require quick assimilation or perceived sure-footedness. Newcomers might well learn the ropes in their own good time; however, without the help of a coach, they might be too late to gain the respect of an organization that is closely watching their early performance. This is particularly true if the executive’s predecessor was highly respected. Coaches can also play a significant role in addressing culture assimilation for more-seasoned executives.
Coaches reduce a person’s ramp-up time. Support might include collecting data about the new environment (including key business and relationship dynamics) through interviews, team observations, and targeted diagnosis of the individual relative to the new team’s needs and expectations.
Figure 13-2 outlines examples of common career transitions and development challenges experienced by executives at each juncture.
Overcoming interpersonal/relationship issues. This is the classic coaching scenario—reshape an otherwise promising executive who is perceived as abrasive, lacking social polish, or politically incorrect. Professional coaches often must wield a “velvet hammer” to get through to executives who will dramatically enhance their likelihood of success if they can improve specific relationship skills. Coaches often do this by observing or shadowing executives to identify problems and then offering alternative behavioral strategies. This task is especially challenging with executives who are poor listeners, argumentative, or socially obtuse (i.e., they don’t recognize how their actions affect others).
Building a specific skill or competency. Many coaching interventions have one objective: facilitate the development of a targeted skill or competency. This is a very common application of coaching for Acceleration Pool members, particularly when there is a dearth of internal models. For example, for a pool member who has a development need in strategic thinking and financial acumen, a coach might bolster the person through his or her first business-planning cycle. A coach might also be employed to address professional impact or presentation skills with individuals who need more polish and presence.
Diversity issues. In organizations having significant obstacles to the progress of target populations (i.e., women, minorities), coaches can serve as advisors or even role models for members of these groups who might feel isolated in a homogeneous executive culture (i.e., white male). Coaches provide a haven for open expression and offer a balanced perspective on real versus perceived obstacles. Consider this case study:
“Jennifer” always questioned why she hadn’t yet been asked to sit on F&M’s global HR council. Was the general feedback about her need to build stronger business acumen and executive demeanor fair, or had she simply hit the classic female “glass ceiling”? No one had offered specific ideas for her to make progress in her so-called deficit areas. Looking just at the predominantly male HR council, Jennifer began to believe her gender was a significant obstacle to advancement. In fact, her frustration was building to the point where she considered leaving the organization.
F&M’s operating committee knew that their organization was not an easy place for women and minorities to work, and they were committed to change. Jennifer, along with other targeted players, was assigned an executive coach. As Jennifer shared her perceptions, her coach acknowledged the real challenge that women faced in establishing credibility at F&M and cited several specific anecdotes as examples of unfair treatment. Nevertheless, the coach also encouraged Jennifer to get specific feedback from her colleagues. With her coach’s help Jennifer fashioned a set of interview questions. She then asked her coach to interview several colleagues about targeted areas of concern.
The interviews confirmed previous feedback and also offered Jennifer specific behavioral examples of her development needs. Her coach helped Jennifer accept the feedback as relevant and made some simple suggestions as to how she might be seen as more credible in key strategic discussions. For example, feedback suggested that Jennifer’s expression of concerns would offer more value if she coupled her “issues” with recommended alternative courses of action. Jennifer worked hard to act on her feedback and the more balanced perspective she gained on her development areas. As a result, she was pleased, although not surprised, when she was finally invited to join the global council.
Executives facing team issues. Targeted interventions might partner a coach with an executive to address challenges that are significantly diminishing his or her team’s effectiveness. A coach can help the executive to recognize the root cause of rifts or conflicts, respond appropriately to a crisis in leadership confidence, or better empower the team to address its own challenges.
Reluctance to accept feedback. Coaches offer neutrality and the opportunity for candid, direct feedback to executives who otherwise might not want to hear the message. For example, a coach respected at senior levels might offer “outsider” insights that would carry more perceived credibility than the same message delivered by an insider. This is particularly true when there is a lack of trust within the management ranks, when there are no dependable observers who can provide specific behavior examples, or when an individual’s history of personal resistance has limited meaningful feedback.
Avoiding derailment. Using a coach to chaperone executives around interpersonal blind spots (as we just described) can help Acceleration Pool members steer clear of derailers that might otherwise interrupt a successful executive career. Navigational assistance is often needed because, as previously mentioned, most executive derailers represent too much of a good thing: Confidence turns to arrogance, conscientiousness and dependability evolve into rigidity/risk aversion, and assertiveness manifests itself as defensiveness or being argumentative (see Chapter 6). Thus, executives often are derailed by the same behaviors that drove them to success in lower leadership roles (e.g., operational excellence turns into operational focus when it should be strategic focus).
Coaching to avoid problem areas also includes helping executives to get “unstuck” or to break seemingly incorrigible bad habits. Coaches often are brought in to offer a mirror to talented executives to help them recognize when their overreliance on familiar behavior patterns is affecting performance and perceived organizational credibility. For example:
“Scott,” a popular plant manager, was known for running a very tight ship on the manufacturing floor. His personal warmth softened the results-oriented, command-and-control style he had learned in the Navy. Somehow, this mix resulted in a style that was highly effective with plant associates. However, Scott’s directive, albeit friendly, approach became a liability after he was promoted to director of quality assurance. Success in his new job depended on the power of persuasion and influence rather than formal authority, and Scott didn’t recognize the changes he needed to make in his managerial style. His executive coach offered Scott candid feedback on internal stakeholders’ perceptions that he operated with too much “tell” and not enough listening. The coach also laid out specific examples of alternative approaches that he could use to sell his ideas. After reflecting on the coach’s feedback, Scott recognized himself in the coach’s observations. With continued coaching and ongoing feedback, Scott made behavioral changes that dramatically improved his effectiveness.
Highly political, competitive, or high-pressure cultures. The more intricate the organizational culture, the more likely individuals will yearn for help to navigate it. Seasoned coaches offer their charges objective suggestions for dealing with competing agendas and bolster the confidence of executives who must overcome tendencies toward learned helplessness. Professional coaches also can provide a “mirror” to help executives understand how their actions are being perceived, thereby helping them avoid potentially fatal career mistakes.
We have seen executive coaches assigned to individuals who have no interest or intention of developing themselves. Individuals who do not feel the need or see the value of personal development will obviously be far less likely to show improvement. However, personal resistance to coaching should not be considered the “kiss of death” because this resistance can be overcome in many cases (see Sponsorship, Accurate Diagnosis of Development Needs, Clear Plan with Objectives, and Business [Strategic] Linkages in this section).
This issue also speaks to a common question: Should coaches be assigned to or chosen by the Acceleration Pool member? To answer this question, we must consider the purpose of the coaching engagement. Pool members who need to build specific skills (e.g., presentation skills) might be more willing to accept an assigned coach who has a proven track record in other parts of the organization; however, broader objectives, such as managing a major job transition or restoring a reputation after a failure, might require a closer look at the personality match between coach and pool member. In these cases the pool member’s involvement in choosing the coach increases the likelihood of long-term success.
The desire to develop a pool member might become irrelevant if there is no sponsorship of the changes to be made. We have seen many coaching engagements fail because they were conducted “in a vacuum.” Executive coaches are sometimes deployed as surrogate managers who are expected to turn around performance problems that managers themselves have been unable to correct. These approaches rarely work because most development strategies require the involvement and input from the individual’s manager. A triumvirate, consisting of the individual, coach, and manager all working together to support a development strategy, is required if performance turnarounds are expected.
As we outlined in Chapter 7, Diagnosing Strengths and Development Needs, knowing what to develop is essential before trying to develop it. A solid coaching relationship begins with reliable data about the individual’s development needs. It also bears mentioning that the individual’s acceptance of that diagnosis is critical to success. Coaching relationships often begin with both parties reaching agreement on development priorities. Once these priorities are established and agreed upon, execution of the development strategy can begin. The usual high rate of acceptance of feedback based on Acceleration Center findings is one of the main arguments for coupling Acceleration Centers and professional coaching.
Chapter 8 outlined a developmental strategy based on the importance of crafting a specific development plan with clear measures of progress and success. No coaching engagement should be launched without a clear notion of the expected outcomes.
Helping individuals appreciate the business impact of their personal development often requires an experienced coach and the input of key internal stakeholders (e.g., the individual’s manager). Linking personal development to business strategies also can help persuade “standpat” executives to rethink the value of development. Again, collaboration between the executive coach and the individual’s manager is essential to achieve maximum impact.
In our experience there is no single ideal profile for an effective executive coach. Instead, it depends on the desired outcome of the coaching assignment and the personal characteristics of the person being coached. Chemistry with target executives will be driven by the coach’s total package, namely the skills, business experience, and personality mix he or she has to offer.
More seasoned executives and executives with complex needs, such as imminent derailment, have a greater need for perceived compatibility with coaches whose experience, sophistication of skills, and style are seen as credible. Acceleration Pool members tend to be more open-minded about who the coach is, as long as he or she helps to jump-start development through value-added support in feedback and development planning.
From a practical standpoint someone in the organization needs to play the role of “matchmaker” as well as financial sponsor for executive coaching relationships. Generally, the Human Resource department will assume responsibility for researching and recommending various coaching options to internal clients. However, depending on the reason for using the executive coach, the pool member’s manager or mentor might be involved in defining the “specifications” for the coach, if not actually selecting the person. Because interpersonal chemistry often is difficult to predict, corporate matchmakers need to make the best possible recommendation, given what they know about the pool member’s development needs, experience, and personal style.
Some consulting organizations strongly believe that all coaches should be licensed psychologists. Our experience is just the opposite; we believe that—as with too much of many good things—using too many psychologists can have a downside. (Note that all three authors of this book are psychologists!) We have found that diversity in background across coaches brings richer matches to client engagements. DDI has had coaches who arrived at their calling with an amazing array of backgrounds: former CEOs and other senior executives (banking industry, high tech), psychologists (industrial/organizational, clinical, and social), social workers, former university professors, elementary school teachers, grant development officers, former plant managers, retired naval officers, and ex-police chiefs.
There is also debate over whether coaches should come from within or outside the organization. This should really be a secondary consideration—the quality of the relationship and the coach’s skills need to be the primary concerns. Organizations often choose external coaches because of perceived confidentiality or trust issues, time constraints, limitations on internal coach’s skills, or questions regarding the executives’ need to receive an external perspective. In some organizations external advisors might enjoy more credibility than their internal counterparts, simply by virtue of being outsiders. This is a source of frustration to many capable, internal HR professionals, but it is a reality. Fairly or unfairly, external coaches might be viewed as untainted by bias and armed with a broader real-world perspective than insiders. As with any assumption, this view needs to be tested. Notions of superior perspective are dependent on the external coach’s skills, depth of insight, and experience.
There are upsides to using internal coaches. Some organizations view internal coaches as a more cost-effective model, as fees charged by external coaches often range between $1,500 to $5,000 per day. Obviously, internal coaches are not free, but neither are they an out-of-pocket expense. Internal coaches also know more about the organization, industry, and the people with whom the executive will be interacting.
As you can see, deciding on whether to use internal or external executive coaches often requires a series of trade-off decisions. It is not necessary for an organization to use either all of one or the other—a mixed model is very workable.
On one point there is consensus—an effective executive coach is seen as a “strategic value creator.” In other words, the coach instills in clients a feeling that they have improved because of their relationship with the coach.
Following are additional observations on characteristics of executive coaches who make an impact. Obviously, a coach who has the full repertoire listed below would be suited for the most sophisticated of coaching engagements; many coaches can be effective with a relevant subset of these characteristics.
Credibility. Credibility is earned through demonstration of extensive business or life experience. The coach projects credibility and can be seen as offering a strategic, high-level perspective as well as being able to directly and personally (i.e., not theoretically) relate to the client’s world. Being able to “walk in the shoes” of the client is key. Confidence builds as the coach shows the ability to go “toe to toe” with clients, sharing personal stories and anecdotes.
Business acumen. Coaches who clearly understand the business challenges, priorities, and market drivers that affect their clients make good strategic partners. They also must recognize their limitations in this area.
Political savvy. Shrewd coaches offer a degree of protective “radar” to busy executives, offering observations, insight, and guidance on navigating political terrain. Their impact in this domain is directly related to their own natural acumen for recognizing political land mines and their skillful ability to offer survival advice.
Contemporary point of view. Seasoned executives fear becoming obsolete—yesterday’s style leader. To avoid their own obsolescence, coaches who stay ahead of current leadership paradigms—almost offering a futurist perspective on tomorrow’s challenges—are highly valued. Reliance on a tried-and-true bag of tricks can quickly render coaches obsolete.
Emotional intelligence. Strong coaches tend to be personally introspective, which enables them to accurately read individual motivation and organizational dynamics, even from a distance. They also model their interpersonal perception through thinking out loud. Their approach helps clients build better “lenses” for interpreting behavior around them.
Tough love. Coaches often are asked to deliver tough messages and to ensure ongoing focus on addressing remedial issues. This role requires a delicate balance of extreme candor with an understanding of how to work with different individuals and their tender egos. Remember that most executives are accustomed to hearing primarily positive feedback about their achievements. Effective coaches understand the best way to get their developmental feedback across without the client shutting down.
Chemistry and challenge. Executives will return to coaches with whom they feel a personal connection on an emotional, intellectual, or social level. Obviously, few formulas adequately predict chemistry; coaches build bonds in many different ways. Executives tend to sustain attention to coaches they find personally stimulating, challenging, or otherwise attractive. These are likely to be individuals with a broad range of interests (or at least similar interests to their own) and a clear abundance of rich life experience. Other traits that might lead to long-term matches include respected intellect, complementary skills (i.e., the coach fills the executive’s “gaps”), or technical prowess.
Creativity. Executives rarely apply the same creativity to fulfilling personal development needs as they do with their business. Creative coaches can spark thinking outside typical executive self-development paradigms. Such coaches might offer a different “angle” on professional or personal growth, particularly relative to integrating self-development directly into meeting business objectives, work-life balance strategies, and future career directions.
Executive coaches use a range of process models to support interventions. At the simplest level of analysis, most coaches employ some form of diagnosis-prescription model. Also popular are coach-driven “tryout assignments” around events that naturally occur in the executive’s work life. These assignments give executives a chance to “try on” new behaviors.
Coaches might work closely with their clients’ managers, both to maintain an ongoing dialog about progress and to collaboratively identify development opportunities and internal support resources. Obviously, coach and client need to establish a mutual understanding about what can be shared and what needs to remain confidential.
Some coaching practices include:
Journalizing/Diaries. Used for both self-insights and coach’s insights regarding behavioral patterns and trends.
Shadowing. Coaches might spend time at various points observing executives in their own environment, across a variety of situations and challenges.
Brokering other development options. Coaches might research best-fit educational programs or seminars or facilitate networking opportunities and other strategies tailored to their clients’ needs.
Regularly scheduled (e.g., quarterly, monthly) progress checks. Coaches help executives stay focused on their goals through mutually agreed-upon follow-up calls and discussions. Coaches also are typically on call for real-time coaching, as the need arises.
Progress measurement. Follow-up assessments (e.g., multirater [360°] surveys), objective results, and interviews with peers, superiors, or partners are common milestone measurement strategies.
Most professionals engaged in coaching are careful to differentiate the consulting support they offer from clinically focused “therapy.” Executive coaches generally focus their support toward reasonably well adjusted individuals facing key leadership challenges in a business setting. Conversely, clinical interventions often address deeper underlying issues that result in emotional or behavioral dysfunction across many aspects of life.
Although this distinction is well endorsed, navigating the difference between potentially derailing interpersonal dysfunction and more deep-rooted pathologies can be tricky. Coaches must be diligent in recognizing when an executive’s coping or relationship issues are severe enough to indicate therapeutic referral. Two emergent trends point to a need for diligence in this area. First, there is an increasing attraction for executives who are juggling work-life balance issues to coaches and/or “epiphany experiences” that offer “whole-life” development. Executives who have vague boundaries between their personal and work lives want, and deserve, experiences that add holistic value to their roles across professional, family, and friendship realms. Even so, it is important that the Executive Resource Board’s interventions remain focused on “functional” behavior versus any issues associated with deeply rooted psychopathology.
Second, some executive coaches use a more clinical style than we might recommend. This means that coaches spend an inordinate amount of time discussing feelings, motivation, personality, or values. While these discussions can spark “ah-ha” reactions in their clients, they add little enduring value until clear linkages are articulated to behavior and business strategy. Some coaches are outstanding at such behavioral integration; they have powerful impact because their observations are seen as uncanny and their behavioral suggestions highly relevant. Other coaches are not as sophisticated; they might suffer from poor business acumen or poor agility in interpreting data. As a result, they miss opportunities to integrate insights with strategic business contexts.
The slide toward therapy and away from coaching has been amplified by the impact of managed health care, which has led some mental health providers (including clinical psychologists and social workers) to reinvent themselves as executive coaches. As educated consumers, organizations should be wary of coaches who might be tempted to take an overly therapeutic approach. Before starting their executive coaching relationship, Acceleration Pool members should be oriented (likely by the HR group). Orientation should reinforce the important distinctions between coaching and therapy and remind pool members that the most successful, business-relevant strategy is to focus on their behavior.
Finding the right coach is only half of the equation. Obviously, the caliber of the coaching relationship will be directly proportional to the effort that recipients put into it. Early in the relationship, most coaches will facilitate development of a coaching “contract” that clarifies mutual expectations, desired outcomes, and accountabilities for each party. Advice to executives entering a coaching relationship is fairly basic but deceptively important. Here are some tips for getting the most out of an executive coach:
Be willing to maintain openness and vulnerability—trust the coach.
Tell your coach what you need. Coaches are not mind readers. Are you looking for a catharsis? Candor? Positive feedback? Keep this dialog open—your needs will shift as you grow and change.
Help your coach understand your motivational hot buttons—how you learn best, when you need a kick-start, your bad habits, and any chronic personal challenges.
Think about professional goals and challenges in relation to a whole-life approach or patterns that have created issues. Extrapolate your learning to all elements of your life.
Share ongoing perceptions about how the overall process is going and where adjustments need to be made. Your coach wants performance coaching as well.
In the last five chapters, we have discussed four sets of tools available to organizations in the development of Acceleration Pool members (assignments, short-term experiences, training, and professional coaching). Reliance on any one set of tools, such as assignments, or one tool, such as an action learning program, will not in itself bring about the accelerated development needed.
The major challenge facing pool members and their organization is how to use these tools creatively and in effective combinations. We have seen thousands of development plans created by individuals for themselves or by senior management for them. Overall, these plans have been extremely uncreative. In our experience this lack of creativity is the reason that most development plans are never implemented and, if they are, that few lead to the expected level of development. In Chapter 8 we discussed how pool members can construct creative development plans using the Development Action Form. In the next two chapters, we’ll cover the roles and responsibilities of the pool members’ manager and mentor and the Executive Resource Board, which has control of some key development tools, such as attendance at special training/development events, professional coaches, and most assignments.