advocates for their careers. Rarely will this help the coachee push into un-
comfortable areas or make desired performance improvements.
When it comes to reporting relationships, a discussion covered in the next
chapter, HR
needs to step aside from this dynamic as well. If HR is closely
involved in the selection process and is also involved in checking up or
reviewing the progress of the engagement, there are a number of risks. First,
HR may be viewed as the de facto client.
Second, the department’s personal
views about the coachee’s and client’s needs and objectives may overly influence
the belief structure of the coach.
The coach should feel empowered to set the ground rules regarding client and
coachee, to clarify reporting relationships, and to work to align the
coachee’s challenges with the client’s or manager ’s objectives. All of these issues
will be discussed in greater detail in the next chapter.
Why Is a Coach Being Hired?
As the paying client, the organization needs to be clear about why a coach is
being hired to work with the coachee. What is the root cause of the decision to
hire a coach? Is it positive or negative? Is it obvious on the surface (i.e., is
there a clear goal in mind), or are there unstated reasons related to politics,
performance issues, or interpersonal dynamics? The reasons for hiring can
usually be broken down into two distinct areas: performance correction and
performance development. Both influence the cost, time, and energy the
organization should be willing to invest.
Performance Correction
How valuable is the coachee to the organization? What is the cost of replace-
ment as opposed to fixing the problem? Would the organization be able to
move faster and more efficiently without that person, or do their other con-
tributions make the effort, expense, and time of coaching worthwhile? Will
performance levels of colleagues and reports improve if that person’s perfor-
mance improves, or will they improve at even greater rates if that person is no
 |
 |
 |
 |