Manager-coach : when not to coach?

With so much ink flowing about the virtues of coaching to develop the talents in your team, it is feasible to misconstrue the role of a manager-coach and oversimplify its interpretation as being equivalent to the role of a coach. This would be an erroneous semantic shortcut, and in some circumstances would be counterproductive behaviour in terms of managerial posture even if the manager was an experienced and highly competent coach. There is “manager” in “manager-coach” for a reason. Nobody is asking managers to suddenly stop managing and become and certified professional coaches. The focus on coaching techniques as part of the manager’s toolkit has many virtuous uses, but must not be considered as mutually exclusive with other managerial postures, and it is important to remember that coaching is not the appropriate tool in all situations.

Whether a hierarchical line manager or a cross-functional (project) manager, the nature of the job requires mobilization of a group of individuals towards a set of shared goals, or individual goals that contribute towards a common objective. Paul Hersey and Ken Blanchard worked on what would become known as the situational leadership model when they were working on the management of organizational behaviour in 1969 and the 1970s. Their model focused on whether the manager displays supportive or directive behaviours. In short (whilst their model is not in its pure form displayed in these terms), the manager’s role requires them to be mindful of two crucial elements : on the one hand competency, aptitude, skill or cognitive ability and on the other motivation which leads to commitment.?

A manager, by definition, is entrusted with a people development role as part of their job function. Managers need to recognise that within the collective group of the team each employee is an individual, and the manager will need to adapt their management style to the specific needs of each employee for any given task, bearing in mind what they can do, and what they want to do.

Coach employees “that can”

Employees who have a high competency or experience for a given task, coupled with a low confidence or motivation will require their manager’s input to work together in collaboration to provide reassurance during the task, with visible involvement and regular encouragement. The manager will play a participative role and will work with the employee to try and rebuild confidence, commitment or motivation or give a renewed sense of purpose or meaning.?

Confident employees who have a high competency and a high engagement or motivation can be given greater responsibility to set goals, plan and organise the activity and be allowed autonomy during its execution and delivery. These are the employees to whom the manager can delegate activities. Let’s not confuse delegation of the activity with delegation of responsibility : even for the most competent and motivated employees, the manager remains responsible and accountable for the activities of the team, and as such should check in with the employee at key stages and at the end of the task to review how it has been executed. Care should be taken however not to overly manage these employees, to do so could lead to them losing engagement, and therefore needing more support and re-motivation.

In both these circumstances, the manager can use a coaching posture with the employee, as they have the necessary skill and therefore, with the right coaching questions from their manager, they will be able to find a suitable solution.?

Support employees that lack competency

Employees who lack competency or experience but with high motivation can be given clear goals and explanation but left with autonomy to execute the task, however the manager should remain available for support. The managerial style is more akin to a mentoring posture because it is the manager who will provide the solution by directly sharing their own knowledge, or by introducing an external means of obtaining the required competency perhaps by facilitating a form of on the job peer support or even more formal learning. The aim with these motivated but developing employees will be to increase their skill and enable delegation in future. Delegating too early to an employee who lacks competence can be risky, and lead to added pressure as they will feel vulnerable or ill equipped to handle the task in hand. Coaching them won’t meet their need to upskill either.

Employees who have a low competency or are lacking in experience for a given task, coupled with a low willingness or motivation require the manager to take a more directive management style and provide clear instructions.??For these employees it would be wholly appropriate to adopt a more “command and control” managerial style, setting clear short term objectives, deadlines and closely monitoring progress. Low competency low motivation employees are unlikely to be performing, and a short term performance improvement plan will be a more appropriate management approach than a coaching conversation.

Coaching, by its very nature, does not provide the answers to the individual. As such it is not appropriate to coach someone who doesn’t have the necessary skills or competency to find the answers themselves, unless the purpose of the coaching conversation is in the context of feedback to help gain awareness and realise that they don’t have the necessary aptitude, and explore other means to progress. As a manager you cannot expect someone to come up with the answer by themselves if you haven’t first supported them acquire the skills they need to do so, but coaching can nevertheless be a good mirror to help them recognize their own development needs or skills gap.

Of course, with all things “human”, we don’t fit neatly into boxes. At any one time, different members of the team require different management styles, and this will vary from task to task, and person to person. There is no “one size fits all” approach to people management, and a manager-coach will need to adapt their managerial technique constantly based on the circumstances. An individual may usually display high competency in the task, and high motivation, but the context in which the task is to be executed, or the interpersonal relations with the people they need to interface with, may impede their natural aptitude: it may therefore be more appropriate, in light of the situation, to take a supporting approach and help them rather than a delegative approach. Like so many “people issues” the answer is often “it depends”, and the manager will need to use their emotional intelligence and intuition to sense the right approach to take, and decide whether coaching is an appropriate tool.?

Alan Lambert is an International HR leader currently working at the Corporate HR Strategy division of a global energy major