The Coach's Handbook Part III - The Coaching Model vs. the Managing Model

Coaching revolves around the concept (metaphor) of a game. In sports one plays because he or
she wants to. Both players and coaches are vital to the outcome of the game. Coaches are a
resource to the players. Serious teams, of course, need a coach, even serious athletes at the top of
their game will employ a coach. Why? It is because the perspective, knowledge, and skill of the
coach is not only appreciated but required to excel.

In sports there is always a notion that you have to develop yourself in order to be competitive. The
coach is instrumental and vital to that development. This is in strong contrast to business where
managers are seldom seen as resources to the employees.

In fact, many employees see their bosses as impediments to maximizing individual potential.
Furthermore, managers may take all the credit for their employees’ successes and thereby become
the center point of the organization.

In sports (and acting) the coach never goes on the actual playing field. The purpose of the coach is
to continually enhance the effectiveness of the players who are on the field. Coaches stand on the
sidelines. This is a very different role than that of a traditional manager. Translate that difference
into business and suddenly the traditional hierarchical triangle becomes transformed into a slice
of “performance pizza” with coaches represented as the cheese and tomato sauce. Delicious!

One of the reasons a coach is useful during a game is that he or she is not actually embroiled in the
action. The coach has a different perspective from those on the field and the spectators in the
viewing stands. Coaches are not there to be entertained, like the spectators. The coach is there to
speak to the players so that the ball gets moved most effectively in the right direction. This sideline
perspective often proves to be the winning edge.

In business, managers could be used for their perspective and coaching. Instead, they often go
onto the field and become embroiled in the game rather than coaching the action. This is similar
to being a team captain versus being a coach.

Let’s look at this from a different slant. Instead of examining “the coach,” let’s look at the act of
coaching. “Development” and “coaching” are synonymous and not by any means the exclusive
property of coaches. On great teams, be is sports, debate, families or dramas, all team members
are coaching each other, too.

In order for a manager to become a coach, he or she has to give the employee the responsibility
and accountability for the outcome of the game. In order for the employees to become players,
they need to see themselves as the determinants in the outcome and their managers as resources.
Clearly, the players must “own” the outcomes; to see themselves as responsible for achieving the
desired outcomes.

Next week - Rethinking Managerial Practices