As a coach, in my work I meet clients who come to the first session carrying a baggage that, for my own reference, I call the “miscoached effect” (skołczowany).
These are people who have had experiences they thought were coaching, but in reality encountered other forms of activities or conversations – often disappointing them and leading them to believe that coaching was not for them.
They usually give coaching a second chance through recommendations from other clients who have experienced coaching with a professional coach.
What causes the “miscoached effect”?
In general, it is the incorrect use of the word “coaching” in reference to what is actually being done.
The most common misuse is calling a training session “coaching.” This is particularly noticeable in international companies, where English is the common language, and the line between the two concepts often becomes blurred.
A lack of precision in using these terms leads to misunderstandings, leaving participants feeling that the “coach” (in reality a trainer) TAUGHT them skills in a particular area – which, in their perception, means they were “coached.”
Of course, that is not what coaching is. Training is a different, equally valuable method of development, depending on the client’s needs. Even if a trainer uses tools, conversation techniques, or questioning methods borrowed from coaching, it still remains a training session.
“Coaching Skills”
From my perspective and experience with clients, another key reason for the “miscoached effect” is the so-called “coaching skills.”
Nowadays, among the key competencies expected from leaders is the ability to use “coaching skills.” With good intentions and a true belief in the effectiveness of coaching, leaders are encouraged to have conversations with their team members in a coaching-like manner to unlock their real potential. The premise is excellent and definitely worth the effort.
In practice, however, distortions occur. I observe with concern the offers of online courses, short reading capsules promising to provide “coaching essentials/fundamentals/basics” – pick your term. Leaders with less awareness of development methodologies may be convinced they are ready to conduct coaching conversations with this preparation.
They are not. I emphasize – they are not. The visible effect of such actions is sometimes increased frustration and misunderstanding among team members, potentially leading to a further drop in motivation. If these actions are labeled as coaching, participants feel “miscoached” and may close themselves off to coaching, sometimes for years.
Why do people feel “miscoached”? Because behind a mask of openness, partnership, and question-focused approaches, leaders or managers may try to push their own perspective or expected outcomes.
People feel it. They know it’s fake and feel manipulated. The effect on mutual trust, shared goals, and partnership is catastrophic. They feel that under the guise of focusing on their development, someone tried to impose their own opinion or, worse, their will. They go home thinking: “That X tried to miscoach me today – I didn’t like it.” In response, they may hear: “Yes, we need fewer miscoaches and more human ones.”
“Manager as a Coach”
There are also other courses of the “manager as a coach” type, after which participants gain confidence that they are now, and forever, coaches. The results can be similar.
CAN be – because fortunately, they DO NOT have to be. I know people for whom such courses were the beginning of further development as coaches, bringing excellent results for those lucky enough to be in their teams.
It’s worth noting – using questions or best practices from coaching in a conversation is not coaching. It may still lead to positive results, but it’s important to know what you’re doing and to be honest with your conversation partners from the start.
To clarify: coaching is a process based on a partnership between coach and coachee. It requires trust, full openness, and focus on the coachee. That’s why it’s considerably harder for any leader or manager to be a true coach for their team – because it requires, I emphasize: partnership, trust, and openness. If hierarchy or fear of being honest appears, there is no room for coaching.
When a “miscoached” client comes to a professional coach
I am always happy when I notice that my work can dispel the negative experiences of someone who has previously felt “miscoached.” It’s an opportunity to rebuild the client’s faith and hope that development methods can genuinely put their growth at the center.
And above all, it’s an opportunity to focus on topics important to the client, ideas, their implementation, or, more generally, the changes they want to make in their life.
To ensure the client is confident they are working with a professional, a coach – the true professional – constantly refines their craft. They participate in training, undergo assessment and supervision with more experienced coach-mentors, and adhere to the frameworks, standards, and codes of ethics defined by coaching institutions and higher authorities.
And most importantly…