Escolar Documentos
Profissional Documentos
Cultura Documentos
www.neuroleadership.com
Contents
Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 Trends in external coaching . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
Background . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 Purpose . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
Purpose . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 Vendors and models . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
Methodology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 Volume . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
Demographics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 Selection criteria . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
External coaching engagements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
Trends in coaching strategy 6
Integration with existing
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Coaching definitions 11
Structure of engagements 36
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Types of coaching 12
Training and development 37
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Volume 16
The value of partnering with
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
In early 2010, the NeuroLeadership Group (NLG) commenced a study into the way organizations around
the world utilize coaching in the workplace.
Coaching has emerged as a key component in most organizations’ human resources and learning and
development strategies.
Through this study and the responses from different organizations from around the world, we aim to better
understand how extensively coaching is being utilized, in what ways it is being deployed, how developed it
is (both globally and in different markets) and how successful it is for these organizations.
Purpose
This study has three main objectives:
n Identify, measure and compare the ways in which internal coaching, executive coaching and coaching
skills programs are being used in organizations
n Identify emerging trends in how coaching is being used in different parts of the world
It is assumed that the findings from this paper will help identify best practice principles that organizations
can apply as they continue to build their coaching strategies.
Methodology
Data presented in this paper was collected via an online survey that consisted of 81 questions across six sections:
n Strategic planning
n Internal coaching
n External coaching
To ensure the data was appropriately focused and accurate, respondents who wanted to take part in the
survey were asked two questions to qualify them.
As this is a study about coaching in medium to large organizations, the first question identified if they were a
small business or not. The second question identified whether they had full knowledge of their organization’s
coaching programs. If either question was answered ‘no’ the respondent did not qualify and was taken to
the end of the survey.
The majority of questions were multiple choice and respondents only needed to answer questions that
were relevant to them and their organization. If the respondent’s organization did not have the modality that
was being measured in that part of the survey (eg. internal coaching, external coaching or coaching skills
programs) the survey skipped that entire section and moved to the next.
So therefore, the percentages presented in this paper are of those who do have active coaching programs
that include the modality of coaching being measured.
If the organization didn’t have an active coaching program at all, it took them to the final section of the
survey relating to information about them and their organization.
The survey was promoted via NLG’s database, as well as through relevant associations, business networks
and group mailing lists.
Respondents could remain anonymous if they wished, however they were required to answer questions
relating to demographics.
Demographics
896 people attempted to complete the survey. From these, 363 respondents qualified and completed the survey.
Respondents from 28 countries completed the survey. For the purpose of analyzing the data and comparing
and contrasting trends, countries are grouped by region. Regions are depicted in the graph below.
Regions:
Europe 26%
Oceania 16%
Asia 11%
Latin America 8%
Africa 7%
Middle East 5%
South Asia 5%
The major countries represented in the survey were (largest to smallest): United States, Australia, Czech Republic,
Brazil, South Africa, China, Finland, New Zealand, UAE, India, Singapore, United Kingdom and Canada.
Other 14%
Executive/C-Suite 11%
Other countries represented included: Austria, Barbados, France, Germany, Hungary, Ireland, Kenya, Niger,
Operations 8%
Pakistan, Philippines, Portugal, Qatar, Slovakia, Switzerland and Turkey.
Sales 6%
Over half of the respondents worked in the Human Resources department of their organization. The other
Administration 3%
47% were a mix of people who worked at the Executive/C-Suite level or worked in Learning and Development,
Organizational Development or Operations.Marketing 2%
IT 2%
The industry in which the respondents operated in was quite varied. The four largest being: Professional,
Finance 1%
Scientific and Technical Services (17%), Finance, Insurance and Real Estate (14%), Manufacturing (14%)
and Government and Education (13%).
0 5 10 15 20 %
The majority of organizations that took part operated in 1–15 countries (62%) and had more than 10,000
employees (30%).
The 21% that did not have an active coaching program within their organization did not answer any other
questions in the survey (except for questions about them and their organization) and are therefore excluded
from the remaining data figures provided in this paper.
Of those that said they did not currently have a coaching program running, 18% were from the Czech
Republic, 11% were from the USA, 11% were from Finland and 10% were from Australia.
0 10 20 30 40 50 %
In relation to strategy, 55% of the respondents who do have a coaching program running within their
organization said they had a clear strategy in place. However, comments later in this paper show the
variations in how clear organizational strategy for coaching is (and isn’t).
Organizations surveyed with 10,000 or more employees appeared less likely to have a clear strategy in place.
Only 45% of those respondents cited that they have a clear strategy compared to 55% of organizations overall.
North America was the region that had the largest percentage of organizations with a clear coaching
strategy (59%). Organizations from South Asia (27%) and the Middle East (25%) were most likely not to have
a clear coaching strategy.
Just under a third of all respondent organizations with an active coaching program said they were focused
solely on immediate needs. Only 4% said they were not planning or thinking strategically about coaching.
57% said they were thinking and planning one to four years ahead.
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 %
“We have trained certified internal coaches, and give some training to managers to use coaching as
one of their leadership styles.”
“Multiple strategies across geographies. Leader as Coach is one of the prominent ones whereby leaders
in the organization are trained as coaches by an external provider. They then take this back to their
businesses and coach team members. There is also an Executive Coaching program whereby senior
leaders of the organization are matched with an applicable coach and they have a formal coaching
program set up that is monitored through performance. The external coaches are led by a ‘chief’
external coach and the coaches are kept up to date around the strategic priorities of the organization.”
“Use of internal and external coaches as part of our high potential programs; Heavy reliance on managerial
coaching; combination of internal and external executive coaching to address ad-hoc coaching situations.”
“To have qualified key personnel trained as coaches, supporting high potentials at various levels within
the organization.”
“Blend of internal and external coaching focused on development of HiPo leaders. Priority is individual
coaching engagements followed by group/team coaching that supports executive development initiatives.”
“We support our people at key career transition points and offer coaching to special hi-potential populations.”
Coaching strategy was generally focused on performance, transition, culture and leadership.
These were common themes throughout:
“Focus: to develop technical, leadership and behavioral competencies at all levels of leadership
in the organization. Key is adoption of a coaching style of leadership to promote a coaching culture.”
“The objective is to develop a coaching culture (especially by using listening and questioning skills)
amongst all our client-serving people, so they can, in turn, use the same coaching skills to enhance
relationships with their own clients”
“Improve the performance of people in key organizational roles including leaders in transition, people
managing change and people managing major projects. We’re currently examining ways to better
incorporate coaching as a support for team leaders and managers who want to improve their ability
to lead and manage others.”
“Coaching is the fundamental element for on the job development. 90% of employee development
is on the job, therefore coaching plays a key role on it. Besides we use external coaching to support
senior leaders in leadership development.”
“Growing talent pipeline to make sure sufficient and qualified leaders in place to support company
business growth.”
“We coach our HiPo’s and senior executives to help them meet their current demands and get ready
for the next challenge. We traditionally ask for a lot from our senior leadership and coaching is aimed
at helping the to cope with these demands and excel.”
“Coaching is driven by KPIs – and we work very closely with Department Heads to ensure all coaching
activities are aligned with Business Strategy.”
“It links to our OD strategy which ensure we have the knowledge, skills and ways of working to deliver
our business goals and also to maintain employee engagement through change.”
“Coaching leads to greater success for franchisees in their business and personal situations – which
flows on to business benefits for us. Our business strategy is to help them grow their business,
coaching is the mechanism to help us achieve this.”
“Fundamental part of achieving business turn-around and growth. Coaching supports the training
transfer and get people motivated about achieving higher levels of efficiency and effectiveness.”
Only a small amount said that coaching was not linked to their business strategy:
“At individual effectiveness level. No systematic alignment to business strategy beyond helping
individual executives deliver against strategic plan
Overall, organizations with 5,000 or more employees were more likely not to use outside help in creating their
coaching strategy. 55% of the respondents who said they didn’t use outside help were from organizations
with more than 5,000 employees.
At a regional level, Asian (54%), North American (51%) and European (45%) organizations were most likely to
not use outside help to create their coaching strategy.
Of those that said they used outside help to create their coaching strategy:
n They had more support at the CEO level (75% compared to 52% across the full data set)
n They plan to increase their spend in coaching skills programs and internal coaching this coming year
n More were thinking long term and strategically (81% thinking 1 – 5 years ahead compared to 65% across
all responses)
n They were much more likely to have one definition for coaching that is widely understood (51% vs. 28%
across all responses)
Coaching program
Just focused on support and management
immediate needs
Just over half (52%) of all respondent organizations that have an active coaching program had support
Thinking 1-2 years ahead
for the coaching strategy at the CEO level.
Thinking 3-4 years ahead
Ownership of the coaching strategy mostly sits with HR or L&D with each gaining 33%. Only 5% of
organizations
Thinking morehad
than a5 dedicated
years ahead team to manage the coaching strategy.
$0 - $49,999
$50,000 - $99,999
$100,000 - $249,999
$250,000 - $499,999
$500,000 +
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 %
Of those that said they had spent more than $250,000 in the previous financial year, 81% had 5,000 or more
employees. They were also more likely to increase their spend across internal coaching and coaching skills
programs in the coming financial year.
The majority of organizations (93%) with less than 1,000 employees invested under $100,000 in the previous
financial year. 29% of organizations with 10,000 or more employees spent more than $250,000. The table
below details the breakdown of investment by company size.
Only respondent organizations with active coaching programs answered questions in the survey relating
to this section (79% of all respondents).
Coaching definitions
The majority of organizations either have multiple or no clear/agreed definition of coaching (72%).
Only 28% of organizations cited having one definition, widely shared and understood.
How clear is the definition of coaching
in your organization?:
One definition, widely shared and understood 28%
A couple of definitions 29%
Many definitions 12%
No clear definitions 31%
Of all regions, South Asia and Oceania appears the most progressive in defining coaching in their
organizations. Only 17% and 22%, respectively, identified that they have no clear or agreed definition for
coaching in the workplace (compared to 31% of all respondent organizations).
“Coaching is an ongoing professional relationship that helps people produce extraordinary results
at work and in their life. Through the process of coaching, clients deepen their learning, improve
their performance, and enhance their quality of life and the results at work.”
“Coaching is defined as a systematically planned and direct guidance of an individual by a coach to learn
and develop specific skills that are applied and implemented in the workplace, and therefore translates
directly to clearly defined performance outcomes that are achieved over a specified period of time.”
“Taking valued people from where they are to where they want to go. Coaching is a facilitated process,
facilitated by a “focus and process” trained individual, with a strong movement to SMART actions. By
applying process and structure to a conversation, we are able to expand a person’s capacity to take
more effective actions.”
“Coaching is a method as well as a working style by which people can help others to find perspective
in order to grow to reach their full potential and extraordinary results.”
Types of coaching
Internal coaching for employees ranked highest amongst the types of coaching that organizations with
active coaching programs are utilizing (58%), followed closely by internal coaching for managers/leaders
below C-suite (57%) and external coaching for C-suite leaders (54%).
External coaching for groups/teams (17%) and external coaching for employees (18%) ranked the lowest.
10 20 30 40 50 60 %
Most organizations with an active coaching program identified a blended approach of internal and external
delivery of the
1 or 2 people various
working on itcoaching
full time programs (76%). And just over a third (38%) identified that they have
1 to 2 employees working on this as part of their job. Only 7% identified that they have a dedicated team
1 or 2 people working on
to manage it ascoaching
their part of theirprograms.
job
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 %
10 20 30 40 50 60 %
Other
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 %
Performance appraisal
Talent development
Succession planning
Change management
Derailment risks
Performance management
Outplacement
Onboarding
Training (follow up)
Other
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 %
Some of the other initiatives or priorities that respondents commented on in the survey included: 360º
feedback, mentoring, leadership assessments, retention, staff support, leadership development, team
building and conflict management.
How many employees are given a coach:
Less than 50 62%
50-99 15%
100-299 9%
300+ 14%
23% of organizations with more than 10,000 employees that have an active coaching program were providing a
coach to 300 or more employees. A further 23% were offering coaches to between 100 and 300 employees.
The table below details the breakdown of the number of employees who are provided with a coach (either
internal or external) by company size.
“External coaching is not easily quantifiable in the organization and tends to be at the executive/senior
manager level on an ‘as-needs’ basis rather than as a program. The internal program is structured and
funded/supported but with internal coaches who essentially act as volunteers and provide coaching in
addition to their regular job. These internal coaches are not necessarily in HR roles (although they tend
to be either in HR or manager roles).”
“Good training for coaches, but erratic engagement with coachees. Not always as well coordinated as
I would like.”
“There are some geographical differences with greater up take in Anglo Saxon countries; slower
uptake in Latin countries and it’s quite new in Asia.”
“This is an area for focused improvement – I do not believe our HR/L&D people really understand how
to use executive or internal coaching programs.”
More organizations have coaching skills training as part of their coaching strategy than any other modality
of coaching (internal coaching, external coaching etc), with 72% of respondents identifying that they currently
run them.
Please note: The remaining 28% who do not have coaching skills training as part of their active coaching program did not answer any other questions
relating to coaching skills programs and are excluded from the percentages provided within this section.
Percentage of organizations that offer coaching skills programs as part of their coaching strategy:
Yes
No
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 %
The regions most likely to have coaching skills programs as part of their overall coaching strategy were Africa
(77%), Oceania (76%) and Europe (76%). The regions least likely to have coaching skills programs as part of
Number of managers and leaders who have undertaken a coaching skills training program:
their overall initiative were South Asia (58%), Latin America (64%) and North America. Only 66% of respondents
from North America said that coaching skills programs made up a part of their overall coaching strategy.
Less than 100
Purpose of coaching
100 - 500skills programs
In relation to the purpose of their coaching skills programs, around half commented that it was to improve
500 - 1000
leadership or management capability through more effective communication. This was mostly to increase
team/individual performance
1000 - 2000and to develop employees. A small amount commented that their coaching
skills programs were tied to culture change, increasing motivation, improving engagement, retention and
career planning. More than 2000
About half the organizations (52%) were using just one vendor and one model of coaching in their coaching
skills programs, with a further 41% using between two and four vendors/models. Organizations were more
likely to use just one vendor and one model for coaching skills programs than either internal coaching and
external coaching.
Volume
While many organizations have instituted a coaching skills program for their managers and leaders, that
hasn’t necessarily equated to the delivery of those skills across the organization. A significant number (59%)
of respondents indicated that less than 100 managers and leaders had undertaken a coaching skills training
program. 13% said that 500 or more managers had undertaken training.
Of those that said they had trained less than 100 managers in coaching skills, 44% had more than 5,000
employees and 40% had less than 1,000 employees.
Number of managers and leaders who have undertaken a coaching skills training program:
100 - 500
500 - 1000
1000 - 2000
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 %
The table below details the breakdown of the number of managers or leaders who have been trained in
coaching skills by company size. Please note that the company size is in the left hand column. The number
of managers or leaders trained runs along the top.
However, organizations were much more ambitious when looking at their total target population for future
coaching skills training programs. Approximately a third planned to train more than 500 managers and
leaders, whilst another third planned to train between 100 and 500 managers and leaders.
Target number of managers and leaders to undertake a coaching skills training program:
0-100
100-500
500-1000
1000-2000
2000-3000
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 %
The table below details the breakdown of the target number of managers or leaders to undertake a coaching
skills program sometime in the future by company size.
The majority of organizations noted that they have no formal development plans in place for skill retention (42%).
Other
0 10 20 30 40 50 %
Of those that did note development plans for building and maintaining the coaching skills level of their
managers and leaders, they were most likely to have set up peer support networks where managers and
leaders can connect and learn from one another (32%). 28% said they hold regular skills refresher programs
throughout the year, and 23% said they hold new training programs regularly to build on their skills.
Other tools for continuing skills development also included: providing participants with their own coach
(post-training) and providing access to e-learning tools.
Of those that identified that their coaching skills training programs were fully integrated into existing
leadership development and learning initiatives:
n 22% were from North America and 19% were from Asia
n They were generally larger organizations, with 62% identifying they had more than 5000 employees
(compared to 44% for all respondents)
n They were more likely to be measuring the impact more deeply (only 19% identified that they were not
measuring the impact at all compared to 29% across all respondents)
n They were more likely to have trained more people and have a much larger target audience than those
that said the coaching skills training was stand-alone or only partially integrated.
Organizations also identified which (if any) individual or organizational priorities their coaching skills programs
were linked to. These are how they ranked (from highest to lowest):
7. Onboarding 15%
9. Outplacement 5%
Additional priorities that respondents noted were linked to their coaching skills training programs included:
360º feedback, culture change, engagement, sales performance and retention.
Measuring impact
The respondent organizations use varying approaches and degrees to measure the impacts of their
coaching skills programs. 41% indicated they only use a broad observation-based approach to measurement,
31% utilize more specific individual performance metrics and 29% indicate they currently do not use any
measurement approach.
Other
0 10 20 30 40 50 %
67% of respondents indicated that they have internal coaching as part of their coaching program.
Please note: The remaining 33% who do not have internal coaching as part of their active coaching program did not answer any other questions
relating to internal coaching and are excluded from the percentages provided within this section.
The regions with the highest response were Africa (82%), North America, Oceania and Asia (all with 71%).
The regions least likely to have internal coaching as part of their coaching strategy were Latin America (45%),
Middle East (50%) and Europe (57%).
Percentage of organizations that have internal coaching as part of their coaching strategy:
Yes
No
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 %
Relating toofthe
Percentage purpose that
organizations of internal coaching,
have internal 92%
coaching responded
as part with true
of their coaching or somewhat true for ‘internal
strategy:
Improve individual performance
coaching is being used to improve individual performance’. The lowest responses were to internal coaching
being used
Improve asbusiness
overall a sounding board for senior leaders (45%) and for the statement ‘internal coaching has a
performance
behavioral focus for problem employees’
Yes (50%).
Develop high potentials
Organizations were more likelyNoto be using internal coaching than external coaching as a strategy to improve
employee Improve engagement
engagement andlevels
retention. There was a 17–18% difference in favor of internal coaching for
improvingSupport
engagement and retention
leaders in transition
0 when
10 comparing
20 the
30data. 40 50 60 70 80 %
Increase retention
Purpose of internal coaching programs: percentage of organizations that responded with very true or somewhat true:
Improveboard
Sounding individual performance
for senior leaders
Increase retention
0 20 40 60 80 100 %
Volume
60% responded by saying that they have fewer than 10 internal coaches delivering formal coaching
engagements in addition to their primary responsibilities, or as a stand-alone role. Only 17% of respondents
said they had more than 50 internal coaches within their organization.
2-4
5-10
10-25
26-50
50-100
100+
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 %
These organizations100%
were generally larger; with 93% identifying they had more than 10,000 employees, and
line managers / leaders
80% identifying they operate in more than 50 countries.
A mix of HR and line managers
The table below details the breakdown of the number of internal coaches operating by company size.
Other
0–10 10–25 25–50 50+
<1000 employees 86% 0 5% 10 20 4% 30 405% 50 %
1000–5000 60% 16% 19% 6%
5000+ 47% 13% 13% 27%
31% said that their internal coaching team was made up of HR/training/OD people exclusively and 14% said
that their internal coaching team was made up of only line managers/leaders.
Most internal coaches are senior leaders and executives, with the majority being between 1 and 4 levels
down from the C-suite. 27% identified that some of their internal coach cadre were C-Suite.
Of the North America respondents, 23% identified their internal coaches were given no training at all and
40% said that their coaches were given 13+ days of training. Most other regional trends were very similar to
the global figures.
Approximately one third of organizations with internal coaching programs utilized an external consultant
or company to train their coaches. Another third of organizations identified a blended approach of utilizing
external and internal facilitators to train their coaches.
Other
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 %
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 %
Who conducts the training?:
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 %
Coaches are trained by someone internally
No formal
Skillsdevelopment plans
refresher programs
for our coaches
throughout the year
Internal coaches are provided
Other
with mentors
Provide opportunities where internal coaches
can connect and learn from one another 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 %
New training programs regularly
to build on their skills
Other
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 %
n Generally have well-structured coaching engagements (with a defined number of sessions and goals)
n Are more likely to have integrated internal coaching into other leadership development and L&D initiatives
n Have more sophisticated development plans in place for their coaches (through providing mentors,
regular skills assessments and further training)
1 - 2 coachees
3 - 5 coachees
6 - 10 coachees
11 - 15 coachees
0 10 20 30 40 50 %
Generally, coaching engagements taking place in responding organizations are quite unstructured. Only 32%
of these organizations noted that their coaching engagements were well structured with a defined number of
goals and sessions.
The majority (42%) identified that the coaching engagements last between 3 and 12 months in length, with
19% identifying that internal coaching is only one-off sessions as needed.
57% identified that the internal coaching initiative was only partially integrated into other leadership
development and learning initiatives.
n Onboarding 23%
n Outplacement 6%
In relation to how internal coaching was working with other L&D initiatives, it was evident that internal
coaching is not replacing classroom training completely. 58% of respondents said that internal coaching was
being used in conjunction with classroom training. 3% said it was replacing classroom training and a further
39% said that neither of these was occurring.
It was also found that internal coaching is generally not replacing mentoring. Only 14% of responding
organizations said it was replacing mentoring. 26% identified that it was replacing other formal development
programs. However, many comments made showed internal coaching was not replacing other things
necessarily, just supplementing.
Replacing mentoring?
Other
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 %
Other
© NeuroLeadership Group 2011 25
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 %
Replacing mentoring?
Other
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 %
Comments made by respondents showed that generally, internal coaching as an L&D strategy was
still in the development phase:
“In process of making internal coaching robust and linked to business strategy.”
Many said that while it’s called coaching, it’s not really coaching. It more resembled training
or mentoring:
“Internal coaching is very new and very limited. There are a few HR leaders that engage in informal
and/or one-off coaching but it isn’t even called coaching.”
“It’s called coaching but it’s not real coaching, just a word used for reps to spend time with lower tier
reps for informal training and/or recognition of numerical goal achievement.”
“Four Master Coaches (selected by senior management for their experience and advanced training)
oversee the ongoing development of our internal coaches.”
“Our internal coaching program began in mid-2010, and is focused on key leaders identified through
succession management. Participation in the internal coaching program is determined and prioritized
by the CEO and the C-Suite leaders.”
“We are call centre. We have a Coach Manager, 4 full time coaches (1:75 ratio). Managers request
coaching for individuals on their teams based on metrics and performance. We coach for period of
4-6 weeks (methods and frequency depends on individual needs). We supplement full time coaching
with Rotational Coaches where we need language specific coaching.”
Other comments indicate promise for the future of internal coaching programs:
“Internal coaching is being conducted by OD professionals with prior experience therefore training
hasn’t been relevant at this stage. If the organization support increasing the number of internal
coaches, it will likely use an accredited, externally delivered coaching program.”
“Requires a co-ordinator role (not full time) to manage coach-coachee matching, support coach
development, maintain information channels and provide opportunities for coaches to learn informally
or formally from each other. Without this role and a formal program, previous organizational experience
has shown that the benefits are not realized.”
“Are seen as a way to save money right now; once metrics are in place, impact will be emphasized
and hopefully coaching will be integrated into more HR programs and technical projects.”
66% of respondents cited that their organization offers external coaching as part of their coaching program.
Please note: The remaining 34% who do not have external coaching as part of their active coaching program did not answer any other questions
relating to external coaching and are excluded from the percentages provided within this section.
The regions most likely to have external coaching as part of their strategy were Latin America (83%),
Oceania (76%) and North America (75%). The regions least likely were South Asia (33%), Asia (48%)
and the Middle East (50%).
Percentage of organizations that have external coaching as part of their coaching strategy:
Yes
No
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 %
Purpose
Percentage of organizations that have external coaching as part of their coaching strategy:
The most common purpose for external coaching cited by responding organizations with external coaches
Purpose of external coaching programs: percentage of organizations that responded with very true or somewhat true:
operating was ‘to improve individual
Yes performance’ (95%). The next highest response was to the statement
‘external coaching is being used to develop high potentials’ (76%). The statements that had the highest
Improve individual performance
‘untrue’ or ‘somewhat untrue’ Noresponses were for external coaching having a behavioral focus for problem
employees Develop
(35%) and external coaching being used to increase retention (26%).
high potentials
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 %
Here isoverall
Improve how business
the purposes ranked
performance (from highest to lowest):
Increase retention
0 20 40 60 80 100 %
Of those that responded with ‘very true’ to the statement ‘external coaching has a behavioral focus for
problem employees’, 28% were from the United States and 18% were from Brazil.
Volume
The majority of organizations with external coaching programs appear to be using between 1 and 10
external coaches (74%). Only 3% stated they were using more than 50 coaches.
1 - 10
More than 50
1 - 10
10 - 500 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 %
More than 50
The majority
Number of organizations
of employees being given anappear
external to be providing
coach: external coaches to less than 100 employees (84%).
Only 13% of organizations
0 10 identified
20 that
30 they40
were providing
50 coaches70to more
60 80than%100 people.
0
10 -1000
More than1100
- 10
10 -1000 10 20 30 40 50 %
0 10 20 30 40 50 %
Of those that were providing coaches to more than 100 employees, they were most likely to be driving
performance (96%) and/or supporting leaders in transition (88%). Not surprisingly, the majority of organizations
providing coaches to more than 100 employees had more than 10,000 employees worldwide (70%).
Selection criteria
Ranking the importance of selection criteria for external coaches, it was found that organizations ranked the
following criteria as ‘very important’ in the following order (most to least common):
1. Proven results with past clients in a similar role to the coachee (44%)
This data shows that what is most important for organizations when selecting an external coach is that the
coach has a demonstrated track record of good results with similar coachees.
In the comments about selection criteria, most reinforced that word of mouth, track record and
recommendations were very important. Also a good ‘fit’ with the culture and the coachee was very
important. Surprisingly, only a few commented that cost was a factor in selecting coaches.
Somewhat structured
0 10 20 30 40 50 %
It appears less likely that external coaching is used on an ‘ad-hoc’ basis (11%) than internal coaching (19%).
n 41% of the organizations had more than 10,000 employees (compared to 30% with that many
employees across all respondents)
n 25% were from Brazil, and another 25% were from the USA
n 46% had formal frameworks in place for managing external coaching (compared to only 28% with similar
structures across all respondents who answered this question)
n 20% were not measuring the impact at all (similar to 22% for all respondents) and 49% said they were
measuring coaching against individual performance metrics (compared to 37%)
In responding organizations with external coaching programs, it was found that the coaching is commonly
linked to many other individual or organizational priorities. The following outlines the percentage of
organizations who said that it was linked to the priority, ranking from highest to lowest:
Onboarding 17%
Outplacement 8%
26% said they do not supervise external coaching at all. This was similar to the figure for internal coaching (25%).
Other
0 10 20 30 40 50 %
37% identified that they measure against individual performance metrics while only 18% measure against
changes in organizational metrics.
Choice of modality
Overall, coaching skills for managers and leaders is the most popular modality used within organizations.
72% of organizations that have an active coaching program indicated they have coaching skills training as
part of their strategy, compared with 67% for internal coaching and 66% for external coaching.
Regionally, these percentages varied greatly. The graph below shows the regional breakdown:
Africa
Middle East
Europe
South Asia
Asia
Oceania
Latin America
North America
Global
0 20 40 60 80 100 %
n Coaching skills for managers and leaders programs are less popular in North American organizations
than formal coaching programs (internal and external)
n External coaching formulates a much larger part of coaching strategy for Latin American organizations
than any other modality
n Coaching skills training programs are not used widely used in South Asia
n Internal coaching is more widely used than external coaching in Africa and Asia
n There is relatively equal use of all three modalities in coaching strategy for organizations in Oceania
n Internal coaching is used much less than coaching skills programs and external coaching in Europe
n Overall, internal and external coaching was being used to drive individual and business performance and
to develop high potentials
n Internal coaching is more commonly used than external coaching to improve overall business
performance and increase retention and engagement levels.
n External coaching is utilized more than internal coaching as a sounding board for senior leaders
Develop high potentials
A sounding board for
senior leaders
Has a behavioural focus
Support leaders
in transition
Improve engagement
levels
Increase retention
Improve overall business
performance
Improve individual
performance
40 60 80 100 %
External Coaching Internal Coaching
Investment
The majority of respondent organizations with an active coaching program plan to spend more or at
least the same amount across all modalities. Coaching skills for leaders and internal coaching show the
most planned investment increases, at 41% and 38% of respondents, respectively, while executive coaching
investment increases were at only 22%. Similarly, investment decreases in the coming financial year were
noted more commonly for executive coaching (15%) as compared to 9% for coaching skills for managers
and leaders programs and 5% for internal coaching.
Internal Coaching
External Coaching
0 10 20 30 40 50 %
Increase our spend Spend about the same Decrease our spend Not applicable
Number of coaches
When comparing the number of coaches delivering coaching within the organization, there are significantly
more internal coaches than external coaches operating.
Number of coaches - external vs internal:
1 - 10 coaches
10 - 50 coaches
More than 50 coaches
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 %
External coaches Internal coaches
Coaching supervision - external vs internal:
No supervision at all
Informal frameworks
in place
Formal frameworks
in place
Other
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 %
External Coaching Internal Coaching
Structure of engagements
Almost half (49%) of the respondents with an active coaching program indicated that their external
coaching engagements are well structured, while only 32% indicated the same for their internal coaching
engagements. In contrast, almost half of the respondents indicated their internal coaching engagements
were instead “somewhat structured”.
Coaching structure - external vs internal:
Unstructured -
coaching sessions
occur as needed
Somewhat structured
Well structured - with a
defined number of
sessions and/or
number of goals
10 20 30 40 50 %
External coaches Internal coaches
Length of coaching engagement - external vs internal:
10 20 30 40 50 %
External coaches Internal coaches
Similar to the structure, external coaching engagements also typically appear to be longer in duration than
internal coaching:
Length of coaching engagement - external vs internal:
One off sessions as needed
1 - 3 months
3 - 12 months
More than 1 year in length
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 %
External Coaching Internal Coaching
In relation to how organizations build and maintain the skills of their internal coaches and managers/leaders
who have undertaken a coaching skills program, it was indicated that:
n Organizations are less likely to have formal plans in place for participants of coaching skills programs
than internal coaches
n Providing opportunities for participants or coaches to connect with one another and share learning
is the most popular form of development
n Organizations are much more likely to provide mentors to internal coaches than those who completed
a coaching skills training program
Integration into other leadership development and learning initiatives:
Fully integrated
Partially integrated
Stand alone
10 20 30 40 50 60 %
The graph below shows which individual and organizational development priorities that each coaching
modality is linked to:
Training (follow up)
Onboarding
Outplacement
Performance management
Derailment risks
Change management
Succession planning
Talent development
Performance appraisals
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 %
n Overall, talent development is the most popular priority across all three modalities of coaching
n Coaching skills programs are much more likely to be used to manage employee performance when
compared to external and internal coaching
n Internal coaching is being used for onboarding new employees more than the other two modalities
n External coaching is being used more for derailment risks than any other modality
n Coaching skills programs are being used to drive performance appraisals more than internal coaching
and external coaching
One fifth of organizations identified that internal coaching is replacing the hiring of external coaches. 39%
said that internal coaching in their organization is provided to different communities (or employee groups)
than is external coaching.
Not applicable
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 %
Across all modalities, around one in five organizations measure against organizational metrics and only one
in ten measure business impact.
Full return on investment
Business impact in detail
Against individual
performance metrics
Changes in
organizational metrics
Through observation only
Currently not
measuring impact
0 10 20 30 40 50 %
The breakdown of respondents by region was Europe (26%), North America (22%), Oceania (16%), Asia
(11%), Latin America (8%), Africa (7%), Middle East (5%) and South Asia (5%). The majority of respondents
(30%) had more than 10,000 employees.
The following chart shows, by country, the percentage breakdown for respondents with coaching strategies:
North America
Europe
Oceania
Latin America
Asia
Africa
South Asia
Middle East
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 %
n 66% of respondents provide coaches (either internal or external) to fewer than 50 people in their organization.
n 51% of all respondents invested no more than $50,000 in coaching programs in the previous financial
year. About a third spent between $50,000 and $250,000 on coaching. Only 16% spent more than
this amount.
n 28% of respondents have one definition of coaching that was widely shared and understood.
n 7% indicated that they have a dedicated team to manage their coaching programs.
Across all modalities of coaching, approximately a quarter of all respondents do not measure the
impact of coaching at all. From those that are, around one in five measure against organizational metrics,
and only one in ten measure business impacts.
n 81% of respondents plan to maintain or increase their level of spending on coaching skills training.
n Of those organizations with coaching skills training programs, 57% have programs of one to two days
in length and 43% have programs of three days or more.
n 42% of respondents have no formal plans for coaching skills training retention or development, post training.
Internal coaching
67% of respondents utilize internal coaching as part of their coaching strategy. Those respondents
indicate that they use internal coaching to:
The following chart shows, by country, the percentage breakdown for respondents with coaching strategies:
Improve individual performance
Improve overall business performance
Develop high potentials
Improve engagement levels
Support leaders in transition
Increase retention
Focus on behavioral improvement
Help the thinking of senior leaders
0 20 40 60 80 100 %
n 60% have fewer than ten internal coaches delivering formal coaching engagements as part of what they
do, or as a stand-alone role.
n Approximatelyhalf of the respondents cited that they do not assess the skill level of their internal
coaches. Only 6% of respondents indicated their coaches are assessed by the International
Coach Federation.
n 76% of coaches are working with between one and five coachees at any one time.
n One in five organizations indicated that they have formal frameworks in place for supervising
internal coaching.
n One in five of the organizations indicated that internal coaching is replacing the hiring of external coaches
in their organization.
n 77% of respondents plan to increase or maintain their level of spending on internal coaching.
n 70% of respondents plan to increase or maintain their level of spending on external coaching.
n Had more support at the CEO level (75% compared to 52% across all the respondents).
n Were thinking more long term (81% thinking one to five years ahead compared to 65% across
all responses).
n Werenearly twice as likely to have one definition for coaching that is widely understood
(51% vs. 28% across all responses).
n Provide
an internal or external coach to more employees (46% provide coaches to 50+ employees
compared to 34% across all responses).
Conclusions
Despite increased interest in the use of coaching, it is still largely reserved for the top. Investment in
coaching is surprisingly low, which may be linked to the fact that coaching is not being managed strategically
or measured well. With the increased pressure on leadership and learning, finding cost-effective solutions to
provide coaching more broadly across organizations is more important than ever.
A very special thanks to Christine Williams, Director, Systems Engineering Leadership Development NASA
and David Clutterbuck, one of Europe’s most prolific and well-known management writers and thinkers
for their invaluable feedback on the survey and study.
And finally, a special thanks to Garrett Weiner from the NeuroLeadership Group for his assistance
in reviewing the final paper.