Coachability: Looking at Coaches and Coachees

If you object to sports analogies being used in a business context, please forgive this blatant attempt to draw yet another parallel. Athletes at the peak of their game and at the pinnacle of their career have one thing in common: they all have a coach. Part of the maturation process of a child moving into adulthood involves learning when to give up a piece of ego in order to learn how to improve their skills and work together with others to form a winning team. As any youth coach will tell you, kids arrive at this moment of realization according to some random cosmic reasoning that is beyond anyone’s control. Some become coachable at an earlier age and others have trouble with a need to hang on to their stubborn pride into adulthood. By the time we see them in the business world, most have at some point had to let go of self for a teachable moment from someone more knowledgeable. But just as every individual brings a unique set of talents and skills into the workforce, everyone also has a different level of coachability.

Key people in an organization, the “franchise players” that are usually VP or above, can make or break a business. It is so important for them to get it right that executive coaching has become very big business. It begins with consultants using an overly complicated detailed assessment methodology (read that COSTLY) on the individual to be coached. Proof of the variability in individual’s ability to absorb coaching, one landmark firm LORE International Institute (now a wholly owned subsidiary of Korn/Ferry) came up with a seven point scale that defines coachability:

• 0 – Not Coachable at present – Psychological issues identified.
• 1 – Extremely Low Coachability – Narcissistic personality.
• 2 – Very Low Coachability – Resists or defies feedback.
• 3 – Fair Coachability – Is complacent or unmotivated to change.
• 4 – Good Coachability – Assessment comes as a wake-up call.
• 5 – Very Good Coachability – Shows an earnest desire to improve.
• 6 – Excellent  Coachability – Has an intrinsic need to grow.

It goes without saying that other leaders in the organization could also benefit from a coaching experience. In a large corporation, applying metrics to measure the effectiveness of coaching programs determines how deeply into the organization a formal coaching program can go. The cut-off line is not as much a matter of cost as it is the ROI. It becomes more difficult to accurately measure contribution to the bottom line from smaller boxes on the org chart, so the remainder of key leadership coaching responsibilities rests on a partnership between HR and management. At this level there is usually not the same commitment to resources for training and standards vary from company to company. Talent management systems become the key to determining which employees are of star quality to move up in the organization but the challenges are daunting. Raw talent is only one measure of promotability, and performance at one level is no guarantee that the employee is prepared to succeed at the next higher level. Often senior technical or professional employees find themselves in a management role for the first time and learn that the old skill set did not really prepare them for a people oriented job. Opportunity is everywhere, but coachability is an important factor in selecting the candidates for advancement and to groom them even further when they arrive.

There is more to the coachability problem than determining the perfect coachee. The use of internal coaches instead of hiring costly outside consultants may be the only recourse, so the selection of coaches is equally important… and challenging. Again borrowing from the sporting world, consider the ten characteristics of highly successful coaches as devised by the US Olympic Committee Coaching Development Office.  

• Committed to individual integrity, values, and personal growth – Key word is “committed.”
• Profound thinkers who see themselves as educators, not just coaches – Coachees learn at the feet of the masters.
• Well-educated (formally and informally) in a liberal arts tradition – Technical ability is a plus.
• Long-run commitment to their [athletes] and their institution – Often becomes lifetime engagement.
• Willing to experiment with new ideas – Improvisation and innovation is important.
• Value the coach-player relationship, winning aside – Sometimes it IS how you play the game.
• Understand and appreciate human nature – It is in fact an interpersonal relationship involving many other people.
• Love their [sport] and work – Passion for the work being done takes this to the next level.
• Honest and strong in character – Ethical behavior is an essential part of coaching.
• Human and therefore imperfect – Both coach and coachee will make mistakes and move on.

With all the subjective analysis used in selecting coachees and coaches, one final aspect is to create and maintain a culture that respects and encourages personal development. There is no cutoff financially or otherwise in a commitment to promote an environment for learning. Interns and entry level hires will improve themselves, boost company productivity, and build loyalty when assigned a formal mentor to coach them through the rough parts of becoming acclimated to the organization. Building on this concept will strengthen the climate of coaching upward through the organization. It is much better to have a culture that doesn’t simply tolerate the concept of coaching but demands it!