CHAPTER 2

THE COACHES

So the market for coaching continues to expand, and we’ve seen something of the demand driving that. In this chapter, we consider supply – the coaches themselves, in all their many guises.

If I say ‘business coach’, you might think first of a full-time external coach. But, in fact, these are only a tiny minority among the ‘suppliers’: the vast amount of business coaching today is done by people within organisations – leaders, line managers, HR and Learning and Development (L&D) professionals, lawyers, accountants, headhunters, etc., etc. Sometimes it’s explicitly labelled coaching, but more often they’re using their coaching skills to do their ‘day job’ even better.

Millions of people are coaching every day. To look in more detail at the many ways they do it, imagine if you would, a spectrum. At one end, people wholly internal to an organisation – those still entirely ‘in captivity’; at the other end, the sole trader coach who operates entirely on her or his own – the ‘lone ranger’; and all the permutations in between. In this chapter, we journey from one end to the other of that spectrum – and along the way, to bring it to life, some real people have kindly shared their stories.

Specifically, we’ll consider the following:

1. 1Within organisations:
   • ●leader as coach;
   • ●HR/L&D director;
   • ●coaching in the ‘day job’;
   • ●the foot-in-both-camps transition.
2. 2Outside organisations:
   • ●the not-very-freelance;
   • ●associations:
     • –tight;
     • –loose;
     • –referral networks;
   • ●specialist;
   • ●portfolio career;
   • ●the ‘lone ranger’ professional freelance coach.

1. Within organisations

Leader as coach

In a classic Harvard Business Review article, Daniel Goleman (2000) said there were six core leadership styles – coercive, authoritative, affiliative, democratic, pace-setting and coaching – and the more of them a leader has mastered, the better. He continued:

. . . of the six styles, our research found that the coaching style is used least often. Many leaders told us they don’t have the time in this high-pressure economy for the slow and tedious work of teaching people and helping them grow. But after a first session, it takes little or no extra time. Leaders who ignore this style are passing up a powerful tool: its impact on climate and performance are markedly positive . . . coaching improves results.¹

That article made famous the leadership style now widely called ‘leader as coach’. As we saw in the rapacious arrogance of the events leading to the 2008 crash and since – and as Paul Babiak laid out in his chilling book Snakes in Suits² on psychopaths in the boardroom – this doesn’t mean the leader as shark has gone away.^* (Indeed, as coaching moves to centre stage as a leadership style, the risk increases that unscrupulous leaders will adopt its techniques to manipulate others.) But leaders who genuinely are decent human beings, and who are as strong on the sixth – coaching – style as on all the others, do seem to have exceptionally good results. Of course, this could just be correlation, not causation – it may be that the kind of person innovative enough to have learned to coach was going to have great results anyway.

^* I can’t recommend this book highly enough: uncomfortable reading, but the scales will fall from your eyes and you’ll realise, according to objective data by hard-nosed scientists in many fields including criminology and business, there are more of them around than you thought. Best be prepared.

But pour encourager les autres, see the following box for what some leaders have said about having an ability to coach in their leadership armoury.

HR/L&D director

Goleman’s leadership research obviously applies, in general, to HR/L&D directors as leaders in their business.^* But they often also have an explicit strategic coaching brief; typically it is HR or L&D who spearhead the thinking on ‘how coaching is done around here’. That is, they ensure it supports the organisation’s goals, and seek to drive quality up and costs down.

^* I am referring to L&D and HR together, although, of course, there are differences in their brief and expertise, because their areas can overlap, with some organisations seeing coaching falling primarily within the HR remit and others, especially where it is a separate function, seeing it as part of L&D.

But the job might start more prosaically. Over the years I’ve observed the pattern. An HR/L&DD who is newly arrived in an organisation, particularly if the business has deliberately recruited at a more strategic level than before, often starts by cleaning up a mess. Typically they find coaching all over the place, with even millions being spent but no one having central oversight or control over quality, provision or budget. A year or three later they have knocked it into shape: written a coaching strategy for the business; flushed most of it out into the open, brought the spending either under centralised control or, if devolved, ensured the centre is informed; campaigned to ensure the coaching delivers the strategic objectives of the organisation; and run an initial screening of external and internal coaches against agreed organisational standards.

Clean-up done, the day-to-day coaching-related work might, depending on the organisation, role and individual, then include:

• ●As an HR business partner working with line managers who say ‘X needs a coach’. The HR Director (HRD) tactfully explores what is actually needed – X might indeed genuinely need a coach, but they might instead need better managing, a mentor, disciplinary action, protection from concealed bullying or a thousand other things – the HRD’s first step is triage/diagnosis.
• ●If a coach is genuinely needed, they consult their ‘little black book’ to decide who would be best and ascertain who is available, with the right background and qualifications, yet affordable. Best practice is then to offer the line manager and/or X two or three names from which to choose, give the chosen coach a confidential background briefing and keep an eye on the coaching as it proceeds. Sometimes these coaches will be internal to the organisation, sometimes external, but either way the HR leader knows who is around and has a knack for suggesting the right match.
• ●They are also drowned in applications from would-be external coaches – many get 20–50 unsolicited approaches a day. Most are instantly deleted, unless something unusual catches their eye, or the prospective coach has been introduced by a trusted contact.
• ●If they have a global remit, the HRD is also seeking to ensure commonality of standards, quality service provision and budget compliance, across different sectors, national cultures and time zones.
• ●And then they have their own coaching portfolio. Informally, it’s a constant part of the job (‘Jo, could I just have a word?’). They’re often also formally coaching a few senior members of the organisation, which in turn requires them to contract, coach and maintain up-to-date records, supervision, accreditation and continuing professional development (CPD) hours, like any other coach (see Chapter 5).

Coaching in the ‘day job’

An even greater amount of coaching is done where it is not even called coaching – it is just people applying the skills to good effect. Many successful executive search consultants, for example, have undergone coach training, as making sales, drawing information and capability out of candidates, coaching them for job interviews and helping them build and sustain motivation are all part of the job. Neither is this confined to the private sector: many managers and leaders in government, academia, the third sector and the military have trained to coach. Even the Church – see the following box.

Foot-in-both-camps transition

When people ask me for advice on transitioning to a ‘portfolio career’ including coaching, I always advise with all the force I can muster, against going ‘cold turkey’. Being a full-time employee working hard, often long hours, but with all the support and fun that organisational life provides until one Friday night, then waking up the following Monday morning with it suddenly all gone, and a completely empty life, is to be avoided if at all possible. Far better psychologically, and for the mortgage payments, to transition in some way. Some do it by going down to four days a week with their current employer, using the remaining time to undertake coach training, then building up their private practice, reducing their employed days as their coaching practice grows.

The role model for me in this is a friend who, when coming up to her last years as global head of HR at a leading global investment house, negotiated with her employer to transition down over three years. In year one she worked four days a week; then three days; then finally two. In her increasing amount of non-corporate time, she built up her new life as an independent coach, mentor and consultant, and also established a thriving new network of relationships in her neighbourhood where, for most of the previous 20 years, she had been virtually only to catch some sleep. By the time she eventually left, she had established both a portfolio career and a strong local network, which stood her in good stead in subsequent years.

Not everyone is able to pull it off this seamlessly, but I encourage those who are the masters of their own fate to try: the rewards, both in terms of new business life and peace of mind, are considerable.

2. Outside organisations

How can I invoice Thee? Let me count the ways . . .

If the thought of any organisation, no matter how congenial the place and/or coaching-focused your role, no longer appeals, then there are many alternatives. People tend to see the options in black and white – either one ‘has a job’ or is a ‘freelance’ – but there are in fact almost infinite permutations.

The not-very-freelance

Some leave their firms, but with a contractual relationship to deliver services including coaching back to their former employer. The best deal I know of saw an individual leave his organisation but with a firm contract from them to supply 80 days of consultancy and coaching over the next year – not a bad way to launch a business! (Though it may in some jurisdictions have tax implications if you are seen as remaining a de facto employee.)

Associations, from tight to loose

In 25 years of working with coaches, watching and supporting them as they grow their businesses, I have observed that, while most adore the freedom of being their own boss yet still doing the challenging, rewarding work they love, there are two aspects of freelance life many dislike: the marketing and the loneliness. People who were completely unfazed issuing an invoice for millions when it had the brand name of their global organisation on it, freeze like a rabbit in the headlights when it comes to selling themselves. And many miss the buzz and intellectual stimulation of working with capable colleagues. Which is why many coaches gravitate to a ‘best of both worlds’ situation, where they have the flexibility and freedom of officially working for themselves but the companionship, cover for illness and holidays, and greater marketing muscle of working in association with others.

Every association is different, but overall I see them as ranging from ‘tight’ to ‘loose’.

‘Tight’ association

(a) The Alliance

One successful coaching business is The Alliance (www.thealliance.partners). As the name suggests, the members are all, formally, independent coaches. But they work together very closely indeed, so that to their clients it feels like a solid business that can and does take on major coaching projects. Unusually, Alliance members invested almost a year (part-time, while most had commitments elsewhere) when they were setting up, in working together to thrash out not just their unique selling points (USPs), business principles and practice, but also the detail of their values and interpersonal working methods. I thought they were mad and urged them (I knew many of them well) to get out and start finding some business, but they knew what they were doing, quite rightly ignored me and I have since eaten my words: the time they spent ‘taking their own medicine’ as coaches, i.e. speaking frankly, deeply understanding each other’s strengths and forging a strong professional way of working, has paid off. They have grown apace, but no matter how busy, they continue to meet for a full day a month to review their work and their process and to update their learning together. For how they view it, see the box below.

Interestingly, another quite different group of coaches, in a different context (Germany), started the same way: see the following box.

(b) The German Chapter

‘Loose’ association: freelance coaches with several links

The Alliance and the Chapter are unusual: a more frequent model is a group of business people who form a company with coaching as either its main offering or as part of a suite of offerings. They make the sales, and deliver on them through a large group of ‘associates’ – freelancers who work under the brand of the firm that won the business. Typically there might be from dozens to several hundred associates, with the ‘front’ business as small as one or two entrepreneurial people, often working from home, or sharing office space. The ‘front’ business that wins the work and organises its delivery then takes 40–70 per cent of the fee^* and the freelance coaches who actually deliver the work are paid the balance.

^* You may think that’s highway robbery, and so did I when I was first handing it over, but, over the years, I’ve realised the overheads, and cost of marketing, in even a small proper business are far higher than people realise, so 40 per cent-ish seems fair. Many people agree, with thousands of business coaches signing on for some such arrangement – to get started. Then they leave.

This can be an ideal arrangement for recently trained coaches just starting out: for a few years, the headache of winning the business is someone else’s, and they just turn up and coach. It’s a win–win: the freelance can build their crucial coaching hours faster than if they had to win all the new business on their own; the coaching company avoids the heavy overheads of having the coaches on their books as employees; and the buying client has the benefit of access to a wide variety of coaches, with a range of different specialisms, but organised into a single point of contact.

Usually a freelance will start with contracted relationships with several different such businesses. Over time, as they build up their own cadre of clients, they resign first one associate relationship, then another, until they realise one day they have their own coaching practice, with both the marketing and business headaches, but also the freedom to retain 100 per cent of the fees earned – before tax and expenses . . .

Balancing this greater freedom, there are also drawbacks of the looser association for all parties. Not meeting their coaches regularly, or seeing their work on a regular basis, the providing company is constantly anxious – crossing their fingers behind their backs that Maria got the message that the venue has changed for Thursday, or John’s work hasn’t ‘gone off’ since they last worked with him three years ago. The buyer has a wider range of choice – but knows the price of that is no guaranteed consistency of approach or standard. And the coach gets part of what they want – the marketing done and clients handed to them on a plate (but no idea of when or how many) – but their other great desire, for collegiality, remains unmet. You might think the whole set-up is so fragile it’s doomed, but in fact it generally works very well indeed, because most people in coaching are there from vocational choice, love their work and are highly professional about it – even sometimes going to great lengths, getting up absurdly early, scrambling to reschedule, driving halfway across the country or whatever it takes to cover up or fix the occasional administrative glitch. The client comes first.

Referral networks

Other coaches don’t have formal contractual relationships, but are instead in a group of friends or colleagues who have known each other sometimes for years, and plan to refer work to each other informally when something crops up that they can’t handle. In stark contrast to the loose network of associates, which shouldn’t work in theory but often does in practice, many people think informal referrals will work, but they seldom do. Friendships and mutual support may well continue, and be very congenial, but little business is handed over, and over time the EWOK (‘eat what you kill’) approach predominates.

The specialists

In the above sections, I talk as if all coaches do general business/leadership coaching, and indeed many do, but mixed up in all these sections – people coaching ‘in the day job’, the various types of coaching businesses, and indeed the sole traders below – there is a sub-category: the specialists. These are people who do normal business coaching but also when required deploy specialist expertise. For example, I know a business coach with a PhD in Pharmacology, 20 years as a strategy director and trained homeopath, who unsurprisingly specialises in helping high-potential executives deal with stress; another who is an expert on coaching business high-achievers with Asperger’s syndrome; many who speak the jargon of, and specialise in, particular sectors such as the law, investment banking, private equity, finance, advertising, the military; one who has expertise working with gay FTSE 100 directors or other public figures who are ‘outed’; and of course all those who are first-language speakers of, and can hence coach in, in-demand languages. Others specialise in coaching where diversity is an issue, or in charities, or with trade unions, or on returning to work following maternity leave. And I mention psychologist-coaches in Chapter 6. Each develops a unique mix: some work primarily as specialist coaches, others do more general coaching and draw upon their specialism less often.

The portfolio career

Then there is the ‘portfolio career’, combining different elements, of which business coaching is just one part.

For many people, the portfolio career is about gaining a significantly better quality of life, typically in the later stages of a demanding career, or earlier on to fit with a young family. And many do live the dream: living in clean air, commuting in a suit to the city some days, on others barefoot on the beach with the kids. They’re paid well when they do work, yet still have time for the other things in life. And most importantly, they’re their own master. It’s important not to have rose-tinted glasses about the economics of this; it has got tougher to make money in the last 10 years (see Chapter 13) and even the freedom doesn’t always work – many strike long summer holidays out of their diary, but then find themselves hunting in the wardrobe for shoes, and struggling into work clothes, for a client meeting that just can’t be missed, right bang in the middle – but it mostly does, and the rate of satisfaction in this group is very high. Those still in captivity earn more, but those who manage a successful transition to portfolio life often don’t care. In the wider economy, satisfaction with work rates has been declining sharply since the 1970s, with only 49 per cent of US workers now ‘completely or very satisfied’.⁶ But, in stark contrast, a high proportion of coaches with a portfolio life report considerable satisfaction with their work.

The key to portfolio working is getting the mix right. Coaching can be highly paid on a per-hour basis, but it is totally unleveraged: to earn, you need to be there, either in person or remotely, working with an individual or team client, so it isn’t possible (apart from the rare exceptions mentioned below – and they are making a different life–balance choice) to earn City-type returns from it. But many want to coach because they find it fulfilling – so they mix it up: some coaching, but some other work that earns more, such as consultancy, headhunting, non-executive directorships, etc. Coaching is satisfying, even inspiring, work and it can often open doors to other work, but for most it works best as part of a mix – the portfolio.

The full-time professional freelance coach

Most freelancers these days follow the portfolio route – in the tougher economic climate, there are relatively few ‘lone rangers’ left for whom coaching is their sole activity. But they do exist. A tiny minority even earn the proverbial fortune, even in one (but only one!) case I know of, £1 million a year. But they are rare and, to achieve that level of earnings, they work ferociously hard. Part of what enables high earnings is being self-sufficient, doing their own marketing and selling, so not giving away percentages to an intermediary. They are also ruthless delegators, with every scrap of administration done by excellent dedicated administrative support, and have built up a group of devoted corporate clients through providing superb service over many years.

But for many people contemplating a switch to freelance life, if they wanted to work that hard, they could have stayed where they were and where they probably earned significantly more. The treadmill around which lone ranger business coaches whizz daily may be heavily gilded, but it is still a treadmill. For many of those leaving the intense pressure of a successful corporate career, life’s too short.

So, there’s a vast spectrum of ways people use coaching at work, from captive to free-range and everything in between.

Tempted?! If you are, but are wondering whether you could really do it, then the next chapter might be right up your alley: it asks, are you suited to be a coach?