I agree that coaching does empower an employee to reach their potential through positive feedback and positive reinforcements.
Coaching is empowering and encouraging. Managing is direction and expectations.
Wow...Not sure what to say to this other than I think I would say that this individual is definitely a manager, not a leader. Unfortunately sometimes the best learning we can have are from poor examples.
Ryan
True, it is so important as a manager to know when to lead and when to coach. This morning I went to my manager informing him of a few customer complaints. He yelled threw down the phone and said he was quiting this F'n job. I quickly exited the room.
Susan,
I really appreciate your differentiation between these two important skills. To me this is also the difference between a leader and a manager. Both sets of skills are necessary, but they are not the same.
Coaching is focusing on employees strengths and supporting them to reach there goals. Managing is strategically planning for your department to meet its goals through expectations and follow through.
The difficulty I have run into with these terms is that there is no universal definition & so often the interpretation is left open.
Coaching is generally divided into two categories, one being that of performance coaching which usually takes place in the moment & is focused on a specific task.
Then there is developmental coaching which is more of a long-term relationship focusing on assisting employees in their career progression.
From my xperience, coaching an employee entails you focusing on immediate issues and opportunities. Managing an employee is a process that spans a long-term development period.
How about, there is love, then there is tough love? Would this be accurate?
Deborah,
Thank you for your thoughts & I definitely agree. While coaching can be viewed as the more soft, person-centered approach, this does not mean the manager is detached, distant or dictatorial. An effective leader can utilize both sets of skills and understands when to do both. Great comments.
Ryan
I agree with you both. Managing seems to be more about human resources and filling positions with the most qualified or productive individual. Coaching is encouraging improvement in your employees. I believe both titles require professionalism and leading by example.
William,
You are definitely correct in your distinguishing between managing and coaching. In my opinion, the effective leader will know when it is best to utilize both sets of skills. Unfortunately some supervisors only rely on harsh management skills & coercive tactics rather than the more effective coaching & leadership approach. Great comments.
Ryan
In coaching, you are more concerned in helping the employee develop, and become a better, more productive employee.
When you manage, you are allocating resources to accomplish tasks, or processes. It is not employee centered, it is task centered.
Richard,
Great comments. I do agree with you that coaching can be & should be part of the daily routine. Now I do believe that there should be some designated, set aside time for specific developmental conversations with employees. But then I agree that the less formal coaching can occur during the daily interactions especially to provide feedback based on the topics discussed during the more formal conversations. Some great thoughts Richard, thanks for your involvement.
Ryan
Ryan,
I appreciate you using the term "leaders" in place of managers. In my experience, the most effective supervisors are leaders rather than managers, but I guess that discussion would be off topic.
I think a good supervisor has to be able to incorporate informal coaching activities and provide timely feedback and follow-up from previously held formal coaching sessions as an integral part of the daily routine. If all coaching sessions are formal, the supervisor's credibility may be somewhat diminished. If a supervisor only shows interest in employees during formal, scheduled meetings, that interest may appear disingenuous.
Formal coaching sessions are necessary, as pointed out in your first module as are scheduled times for feedback and progress discussion. But a supervisor who is truly interested, or at least one who wants to appear truly interested, in employee growth and development needs to be consistently interested on a daily basis.
This daily interaction with employees makes formal coaching sessions seem more significant, sets the stage for rich and engaging discussion, and raises the level of trust so necessary to successful coaching.
I also agree wholeheartedly with your assessment that most supervisors are strong in one area or the other but not both. Good coaches often produce unrealistic performance evaluations and good managers accurately assess performance but do not have the tools to effectively help their employees grow and progress by developing healthy supportive relationships with them.
When you find a supervisor who can effectively perform in both arenas, you better do whatever you can to hang on to him/her.
What are your thoughts? I know the training suggests that formal coaching take place as a separate activity from managing, but should the types of less formal activities I discussed be part of the daily routine?
Richard,
I completely agree with what you have written & appreciate your thorough analysis.
It has been my experience in working with leaders that they often struggle most with your last point, becoming comfortable functioning in both roles. It seems that often they are either good managers or good coaches but struggle with being both.
A question I would throw at you with the idea of manager/coach:
-Is it possible to effectively incorporate coaching into the day to day activities of managing or does it need to be a somewhat separate discussion/event?
I would love to hear your thoughts on this.
Ryan
Managing generally involves establishing and refining processes and utilizing resources, including employees, in a manner that leads to the accomplishment of a desired outcome. To effectively manage an employee the manager must be able to identify the employee's strengths and weaknesses and position that employee in a manner that enables the employee's strengths to make positive contributions to the organization while simultaneously minimizing the impact of the employee's weaknesses on the operation, process, or organization. Managing an employee involves making an unemotional assessment of demonstrated performance and directing the employee to adjust that performance as necessary to achieve the desired results.
Coaches partner with employees to establish realistic, challenging goals; then help to inspire and empower employees to facilitate the attainment of those goals. Coaches use a variety of techniques to assist the employee in attaining the growth required or adjusting behavior as necessary to become a more valuable and efficient employee.
In the role of manager one needs to be more focused on bottom-line impact of the employee's performance. By contrast, in the role of coach one needs to be more focused on the growth and development of the employee and how the employee interacts with coworkers and his/her environment.
I think an effective supervisor needs to be competent and eventually comfortable functioning in both roles. Do you agree?
You are exactly right. I also like to think of it this way: you manage resources & lead/coach people.
Let me explain a little. A manager ensures that resources are properly deployed to achieve maximum results; in some instances this includes "human resources" or as you said having the right people in the right place.
Coaching, to me, is more of the leadership aspect of what a supervisor does. This is your opportunity to truly get to know the individuals you work with & help them to achieve their fullest potential. Coaching is not about directing them, but helping them discover their paths.
Ryan
I understand managing is putting the right people in the right places to get things done correctly and efficiently, so you can reach your department goals. Coaching on the other hand is helping a person to develop the best of his skills to accomplish his own goals in the organization.
