What is the argument against introducing coaching

There are compelling reasons for introducing coaching to organisations but we can nevertheless expect to encounter certain barriers. We need to understand what these barriers are and how we might help others develop their appreciation of the benefits of coaching so that these barriers may be removed.

"We've got enough on our plate as it is."

Most organizations these days seem to be working at the edge of chaos. Change is abundant and managers are rightly worried that one more change will prove to be 'the straw that breaks the camels back'. Viewed in this way, coaching - as just the latest stand-alone initiative - is bound to take a back seat. But coaching should not be seen in this way. Coaching can be the glue that binds change initiatives together. In any event, we know that all change programmes have a people component and that if employees and other interested parties are not carefully guided through the changes, failure is more than likely.

Where managers are equipped with good coaching skills they are able to assist their staff in comprehending both the underlying reasons for change and the unsettling feelings that result. More importantly managers who coach will be able to empower their teams to find their own coping strategies rather than crowbar them into prescriptive methods that usually provoke rebellion rather than commitment.

"Now is not the right time."

If people are claiming this then, paradoxically, it is absolutely the right time for coaching. Good, effective coaching raises awareness, generates responsibility and builds trust. There is never any sense in delaying having access to these qualities.

If we leave coaching until 'other things have settled down' it's like saying we'll put the umbrellas up once it's stopped raining.

Our Team Leaders have a high level of skill anyway

No doubt this is true, but skills need to be developed and adapted to emerging trends and changes.

Coaching appears to be one of those skills that managers are just expected to absorb through some kind of osmosis. Put another way, the expectation is that of course managers can coach - they're managers! But again this is not the case. Whilst most managers would claim that they undertake coaching, few would be able to offer a precise definition of the term or differentiate coaching from counselling, teaching, mentoring or most other forms of people development. However, as we've seen coaching is quite different; in essence it's about helping others learn rather than teaching them things. Learning to coach requires guidance and practise. It is not difficult but it is a very potent intervention that can cause problems if used carelessly.

We would not let our Team Leaders loose on a new IT system without proper training so why let them loose on their teams?

"It will cost too much."

Much depends on how the costs are calculated. Whilst there is an up front investment of time and money in having managers and team leaders trained as coaches this can be saved over and over again by the consequent improvements in team performance.

Compare the cost of a single manager being trained as a coach so that they can help their team become effective at personal organization against the cost of sending the whole team on time management programmes.

Deciding whether we should implement coaching in an organization can be compared with clearing a forest. Do we stop from time to time to sharpen the axe and clear the forest more quickly and effectively in the end or do we keep hacking away with a blunt blade so that we can 'just get to the end of this next tree'?