|
|---|
When you think of an executive coach, you have a mental picture of an outside expert, often a one-man shop, who works with a number of different client companies. The Sherpa Executive Coaching Survey does ask executive coaches whether they work as the ‘outside expert’ or work as a staff member, inside the walls. We have learned that executive coaches can be looked at differently, based on who employs them. We call the two classes of coaches ‘internal coaches’ and ‘external coaches’. External coaches offer services independently to a number of clients. They are responsible for their own training and preparation. Many start their own business, and a vast majority work for small companies. Some organizations prefer to have an internal staff of executive coaches, full time employees who provide coaching services to fellow employees. These executive coaches are referred to as “Coaching Champions: Internal experts who learn, practice and deliver executive coaching, team coaching and related training and development.” (Sherpa Leadership Institute) Often, an employer will use a combination of internal and external coaches to meet their needs. Issues of rank and confidentiality often lead an organization to use external coaches for top-line executives and senior leaders, while relying on internal coaches for vice presidents, regional managers, department heads and other leaders. The two approaches have been termed:
A true coaching culture includes both, defined by the Sherpa Leadership Institute as follows: Sustainable Coaching: Proven ways to help teams and leaders create high performance partnerships. Widely deployed processes and programs to empower and educate. Integration of coaching into evaluations and development plans. Imperative Coaching: Intervention in sensitive leadership situations including broken relationships, disciplinary and performance problems. Usually handled by an external coach. |
|---|
WHAT EXTERNAL COACHES DO:
|
|---|
1) External coaches are more confident about the value of their services. 93% of external coaches see the value of coaching as ‘very high’, with the remaining 7% saying value is ‘high’. Only 78% of internal coaches agree, with an additional 19% saying value is ‘high’ as opposed to ‘very high’. |
3) External coaches are less likely to be called in for remedial coaching, and more likely to be used proactively. 60% of the coaching that externals do is for pure leadership development, while less than half of internal coaching is for that purpose. |
|---|---|
2) External coaches work at the top more often. 26% of external coaches offer services to the highest level executives, versus just 9% of internal coaches. |
4) External coaches use video conferencing more often than internals, by a 17% to 14% margin. Internal coaches have access to better equipment. Over half of internals’ video meetings are high-definition. Fewer than 20% of the externals’ video meetings are high-def. |
WHAT INTERNAL COACHES DO:
|
|---|
 |
|---|
|
|||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Internal coaches are more likely to be trained together, on site, usually under the auspices of a university executive education department. As a result, internal coaches have a different view of training and certification than externals, who personally select their own training. 91% of internal coaches cited classroom training and certification as their background, compared to 78% of externals. Internal coaches place more value on training and certification, with 56% saying it is absolutely essential, versus just 45% of external coaches. Because they are trained together, and expected to contribute to a common culture, More than 60% of internal coaches follow a published process, while only 26% of externals do. 80% of internal coaches favor standards of practice for executive coaching, similar to the accounting or financial planning professions. They say such standards are either ‘very important’ or ‘absolutely essential’. Only 35% of external coaches hold that view. Internal coaches feel universities are most qualified to certify a coach training program, by a two to one margin. Four out of five external coaches favor the International Coach Federation.
We asked whether participants in this year’s survey were in favor of regulations for coaching. 30% of internal coaches favor regulation of coaches by federal, state or provincial government. Only 15% of external coaches favor regulation. Internal coaches typically provide services at larger companies. They are also more optimistic about the future of coaching, seeing an increased demand for coaching more frequently than external coaches. Under the umbrella of imperative coaching, external coaches are called in for top level assignments. Only one third of external coaches work ‘top to bottom’ in the ranks of their clients’ leadership. |
|---|
|
|---|
| Sherpa Executive Coaching | 513.232.0002 | info@sherpacoaching.com |
|---|
This is a bonus topic, information not included in the seventh annual Sherpa Executive Coaching Survey. Media contact: For exclusive material and interviews: Karl Corbett, Managing Partner, Sherpa Coaching LLC, (513) 232-0002 USA, kc@sherpacoaching.com For a library of 60-second videos about executive coaching, visit http://www.youtube.com/user/sherpacoaching.
|
|---|