Hey Coach, Now What?

A majority of companies in the United Kingdom fail to use executive coaching to address corporate objectives, according to new research from across the pond. Is there a lesson to be learned for American organizations?

By Michael O'Brien

When it comes to the idea of providing coaching to executives, the question most organizations should be asking is not "Who should get the coaching?" but rather, "What are we coaching them toward?"

Recently, a survey by London-based Hays Senior Finance found that a majority (68 percent) of more than 100 U.K.-based organizations said they fail to use coaching to directly address specific business objectives and that outcomes are often "simply referenced" at a personal level.

Nearly one in seven (15 percent) say they have absolutely no measurements in place to assess the impact of their programs.

"In far too many cases, companies are leaving it to the individuals to set the framework for their own coaching or mentoring -- with little or no reference to business needs," says Chris McCarthy, director at Hays Senior Finance. "They then fail to check the standards of their programs and show little concern for the outcomes."

McCarthy says that support can be extremely effective, especially when a professional starts a new role, "but it is essential it is carried out in the right manner by people who understand the specific needs of these individuals."

And a new survey of 243 American companies by Nashville, Tenn.-based talent-management firm OI Partners backs McCarthy's stand for more coaching.

It finds that more than half of companies (53 percent) say their executives need coaching in new management styles and techniques, with 51 percent of employers saying their executives need to work on motivating and engaging employees.

But experts say the overall success of a coaching experience is based on an organization's expectations going into it.

"Companies have to have a clear view of their objectives," says Danielle Grant, a director at Abingdon, U.K.-based coaching firm LeaderShape, which conducted the study with Hays.

"Are they looking for a change of direction or financial savings? Is a key target to reduce staff churn, so saving costs? Then they can look at the interventions that are possible," she says. "After the process, they should measure against those targets to see if there are quantitative or qualitative results that shed an accurate light on what has been achieved."

Ed Modell, incoming president of the Lexington, Ky.-based International Coach Federation, says the U.K. findings "surprise me, because more and more, our experience has been that companies have become really sophisticated in what they're looking for in a coaching experience, and clients often have clear goals with coaches before they begin."

He says the federation's 2009 global coaching-client study found that 64 percent of 15,000 global respondents use written agreements between coach and "coachee" to define the relationship's goals, and that figure jumps to 67 percent in North America.

"Written agreements need to be clear, and include what the coaching is being used for and what can be measured," he says.

As for what HR executives can do to ensure that their executives' coaching experiences are fulfilling for both company and coachee, LeaderShape's Grant says getting the right coach is a must.

"The important thing is to make sure that the coach selected is properly qualified," she says. "Sector-specific experience may not be as relevant as having a well-qualified practitioner with a wide range of tools to call upon."

Modell agrees, adding that organizations would do themselves a favor by requiring appropriate credentials from coaches before they are engaged to work with executives.

"Everyone wants to call themselves a coach today," he says, "and we're in the middle of taking steps to raise the bar on professionalism in the industry as a whole" through more training and stricter certification of coaches.

Grant also says organizations should "check whether coaching is actually the right intervention, rather than other development activities."

Barbara Adler, a managing consultant at St. Louis-based career-management firm IMPACT Group, says measuring the effectiveness of coaching "can be accomplished via specific goal attainment as well as increased engagement rates within the organization, decreased turnover and improved overall retention."

HR executives embarking on creating a coaching program should begin with the organization's broad vision, she says, "and then need to ensure that these goals are cascaded through the organization so that business unit, department and individual goals are consistent with and contribute to the overall strategy.

"Through consistent messaging and measuring key factors, the HR executive can turn vision into productive action," she says.