Executive coaching is often heralded as a highly successful way to support and develop executives and managers. Relationship management, decision-making and personal effectiveness are just a few of the key competences that must be developed over time, and which can be nurtured by this kind of professional support.

Much can be said for the benefits of coaching, but when done badly executive coaching can actually be detrimental to the progress of an employee’s development. In my experience, some managers may have become disillusioned by unsuccessful coaching situations in their past. Here are the five main situations to watch out for before the coach-executive relationship becomes toxic:

In this circumstance, coaching can be used by the company – or an individual within it – as a means to spread a core message or ethos without direct involvement. Despite outwardly appearing as a practice in development, the true purpose of the exercise can often be to excuse bosses from giving out their own feedback or being at the forefront of core training – undeniably, a coward’s way out.

Here, a coach’s role becomes less about involvement with the executive’s professional growth and errs on the side of mediating between the individual and their seniors. This is an ineffective way to operate and undermines the notions of support and motivation that are at the heart of executive coaching.

It can be especially important to monitor the coaching relationships of former executives with current employees. This is due to the propensity of some to start imposing their own ethos onto their subject, teaching ‘the right way’ of managing – by their own standards. Perhaps due to unresolved, long-term issues with power, authority and acceptance, a trait of this behaviour is usually ‘sharing’ their wisdom from years of expertise and passing it off as the norm, or even best practice.

When discussing potential solutions to problematic business situations, the coach may be at liberty to push for what they believe is the most effective means based on their experience. Far from working with the executive to innovate and overcome obstacles, the focus can be realigned onto the coach’s own successes and, perhaps more dangerously, failures.

In some cases, intervention may be needed, but coaching may be the wrong approach. An executive may often need help with taking a step up or overcoming issues – but help in the form of sponsoring or even increasing visibility may be more successful. By not noticing this early on, or even carrying on regardless, the coach is actually damaging the executive further as they struggle on – much like giving a patient a flu vaccine for a broken leg.

Perhaps the most damaging misapplication of coaching is in those who need counselling or other psychological support. Here, the whole practice can become redundant, and the executive in question may feel even further from resolving their issues because of the inappropriateness of this method.

Occasionally, coaching can feel so successful that the executive may begin to depend too much on their sessions. Looking to the coach for help with decision-making is expected at the basic level of the process, but relying on this insight in an advisory sense, rather than for development purposes, can render the coachee ineffective.

A mutual misunderstanding of this type of situation can cause it to snowball, quickly morphing the coach into an altogether different role. Where the executive may not notice, it is the responsibility of the coach to pick apart the dynamic of this working relationship and to steer it away from this kind of mutation. Failure to notice, or even worse, helping this toxic situation to develop, is extremely unprofessional.

Within coaching itself, there is a delicate cohesion between exploring values and ethics and remaining impartial, refraining from raising personal sets of beliefs. However, some coaches have been observed trying to impress a sense of ‘what’s really going on’ or the individual’s own values or techniques in a bid to pass on the knowledge to someone in the company who is likely to keep them alive. Because of an intimate knowledge of the things that the manager takes for granted or refuses to doubt, it can be easier to impose their own strong set of values, ultimately quelling the voice of the person they are coaching.

The impact of these types of situation on those receiving the coaching is often detrimental to their overall view of the practice itself, with failed subjects feeling as though there is something flawed within the process. Professionals may opt to stay away from future ventures into coaching, passing up opportunities to further their development. This can be hindered by the coach’s reaction to their criticism. Where some will try to dismiss these concerns, others may try to rationalise them by referring to a sophisticated coaching model they have developed or learned somewhere else, and still others may put the blame on the coachee by implying lack of “coaching readiness” on their part.

Factors such as the low barriers to enter the coaching profession and a widespread need to acknowledge one’s own biases and choices – on the part of the coach – may be to blame for producing situations in which coaching hurts. However, these individuals are an anomaly and are widely outnumbered by strong professionals working within the field. Vigilance is necessary at all stages of the process, but executive coaching is highly likely to be successful if these five toxic situations are avoided.

When done well, coaching has the potential to make a positive impact on the bottom line by improving the skills of those in charge: a study by Fortune found that training combined with executive coaching improved leadership skills by 77%, as opposed to 22% with training alone.

In the past, coaches were hired to flush toxicity out of leadership; but a Harvard Business Review survey found they are now commonly hired to help companies develop high potential individuals or facilitate transition (48%). Coaches spend a lot of time at the start making sure the chemistry with their coachees is good, and engage in goal-setting around their aims, finding out what their measures of success are, in their current role and for the future.

People on talent schemes may especially benefit from coaching programmes. Steve Blackwell, of the Performance Coach, says: “Very often they are sucked away from the day job to do additional activities, and if the line manager is not on board it can make things very hard for the person on the programme.”

Coaching can also be used to address the matter of an out of kilter work-life balance. Blackwell comments: “One of the by-products of the conversation is that people start to take back control and have more of a life. This is a healthy outcome.”

• Executive coaching
  Finance & Management Magazine, May 2016, p.10-11

The ICAEW Library & Information Service provides full text access to leading business, finance and management journals.

Further reading on executive coaching is available through the articles below.