Coaching vs. Feedback
December 9th, 2009 | 
Author: So often “coaching” is used as a buzz term for almost any kind of interaction in the workplace (and everywhere else. Who would have thought there would be such a thing as a “knitting coach”?).
The term has been confused, misused, misunderstood and blasphemed. This is unfortunate, because coaching is a powerful skill for leaders to have in their tool kit.
Yet, coaching is hot everywhere, and especially in the workplace. Executive coaches are a popular choice for developing high potential employees and working with senior leaders. More to the point, many organizations consider the skill of coaching as an essential core competency for their managers. These organizations understand that coaching can foster development and learning culture.
Coaching is hard to define, because it’s a skill that borrows from teaching, psychology, consulting and other professions. But I find that in the workplace, “coaching” is most often confused with “feedback”, and “advice”. To help make the distinction, here are some differences between coaching and feedback:
Coaching is:
- Focused on future behavior
- Developmental
- Inquiry oriented
- Used to help the better performers move ahead by releasing potential in a way that works best for the individual AND the organization
Feedback is:
- Focused on past behavior
- Evaluative
- “Telling” or “Advice” oriented
- Often used to help poor performers change behavior in a prescribed direction in a way that works best for the organization
In the end, coaching is about “letting go” of advice-giving and assuming the person being coached is whole, smart, and understands the best direction to head in. When we give feedback, we believe that the person we are giving feedback to requires our advice to figure out the actions they need to take.
There is a time and place for feedback, as there is for coaching. But they are not the same.
Posted in 16 Responses to “Coaching vs. Feedback”
Leave a Reply
View my complete profile
I think “operational definitions” of what we do are important. “Coaching” and “counseling” are similar entities, perhaps in the ballpark of “mentoring” or “discipleship”. In my profession, for example, there is a great distinction between “counseling” and “psychotherapy”. I think your “bullet points” defining “coaching” are valuable. I also think you have opened the door to a vigorous discussion on an important issue, and I look forward to the comments that come in! BTW, I love your thought, “In the end, coaching is about “letting go” of advice-giving and assuming the person being coached is whole, smart, and understands the best direction to head in.”
Mary Jo,
I understand what you are saying but isn’t one of the fundamentals of coaching to amplify feedback for the person being coached so they cannot ignore it?
I guess the dynamic is different as it is not the coach providing the feedback it is the coach asking the questions on “how it’s going” and then amplifying the coachee’s self feedback in context of the goal.
Ok, I answered my own question…wow you are good!
Thanks Tom, for your comments. I actually love word distinctions, and find them valuable in the work I do. Thus making the distinction between these two entities seems important. I regularly teach a “coaching skills for managers” class, and ask at the front end – “how many of you would use coaching for your poor performers” – often, most hands shoot up. It is the 80/20 thing here – coaching takes more time than feedback, so why would you waste your precious time on the poorest performers? Give them feedback, but spend your time coaching and investing in your best!
Perry, I’m still chuckling about your comment. Self discovery works (maybe even for you?)!
Nice distinctions – could you distinguish between coaching and mentoring? These are two that I see interchanged often – by myself included
I echo your experience about coaching being confused with feedback in the workplace. In environments where it is uncommon to give continuous feedback, “coaching” is a euphemism for telling people what you expect from them, why they need to change and how they are not on track! It is no wonder that even top performers might have a resistance to coaching, when that perspective has been the norm. I agree with you that coaching is a distinct practice and involves more time, attention, art. I had heard it before and love your distinction about where you would invest your coaching time (on your top performers). Always food for thought in your posts. Thanks
Lisa, not one to squander an opportunity to write another post providing some distinctions, I’ll write about coaching vs. mentoring soon. And, I’ll throw “consulting” into the mix too. Watch for it (are you breathless yet)? Thanks!
Monica, I feel better after writing this post. Its bothered me that I have HR clients who use the term “coaching” as a process and skill set that managers should use for those on performance warning. I don’t think so! Thanks for taking the time to add your thoughts.
Excellent distinctions! I love that you identified coaching as a “buzz term”. People and organizations do well to understand the difference between developing an employee to reach their potential, versus getting an employee to complete a prescribed task. I find that you could also substitute the word “managing” for “feedback”. Managing also tends to be about numbers, telling, tasks, and is critical in nature. While coaching tends to focus on behaviors, asking, delegating, and is positive in nature. There are many other differences, and I appreciate your thoughtful approach. Bravo! Well done!
Thanks for the thoughtful definitions, Mary Jo. I suppose coaching includes feedback but feedback does not necessarily include coaching.
Excellent distinction and comments. Perhaps there is another distinction to consider here as well – observation vs. feedback. When I am giving feedback about performance I have both made observations and drawn conclusions. The feedback is more about delivering my conclusions with observations as grounding. When I am coaching I will share my observations suspending my conclusions so the “coachee” can inquire about what there is to learn and discover for themselves. I may offer my perspective as speculation, but not as conclusion.
Jen, thanks for stopping by and offering depth to the post.
Doug, I do tell the managers I teach to coach that when they are in a “coaching conversation”, best to stay away from feedback; except the kind that Susan Mazza describes in the next comment. Thanks for your addition to the conversation.
Susan, really wonderful insight. Thank you.
Hi Mary!
Interesting post! I do agree that there is a distinction between feedback and coaching. @Doug explained it well. I think that feedback is a combination of both your definitions. Helpful feedback doesn`t simply focus on your past and inform you of what you did poorly or well, it offers suggestions as to how to improve. It`s focused on the future. Enjoyed the post and all the comments, great discussion!
This was a thought-starter of a post for me. I like the distinction between the past and future orientation of coaching and feedback. Where I find that I differ is that I understand them as two parts of a single process. For me feedback is the tool I use to get more good behavior (positive) or get a client to stop doing something that’s counter-productive (negative). In other words, for me, “feedback” is as important for good performers and for poor ones and “coaching” is the part of the discussion where we talk about what should happen next and how we’ll make it so.
Don’t disagree Wally. Maybe the distinction between a “coaching conversation” and a “feedback conversation” would be better. I find people using “coaching” synonymously with what you call negative feedback. And, I encourage managers to have those purely coaching conversations from time to time with their employees. They already know how to have feedback conversations. A coaching conversation is often something that is foreign and can be learned.
Hi Mary,
I find your article informative and insightful. However, I beg to differ in interpreting one part that you have highlighted. I am in total agreement with the first 3 differences, but not the 4th distinction that prescribes coaching as designed for “better” performers and feedback for “poor” performers.
I really believe this is a fundamentally biased way of perceiving the function of coaching and feedback. My argument is as follows:
1. You said that coaching is “……assuming that they are whole, SMART, and understand the best direction to head in”. Hence, when you say that feedback is better suited for poor performers, it implies the inverse assumption that “poor” performers are not whole, smart and cannot discern the best direction to head in. I find difficulty accepting because it undermines the spirit of leadership believe in the potential of each and everyone soul in the team or organisation.
2. You have singled out that coaching works in the best interest of the individual AND organisation, whereas feedback is meant for ONLY the organisation. How can this be?. It conveys as if feedback is myopic in signalling a one-way orientation and data reporting session where an employee has no option other than to be told or advice what best to do for the company. I do not believe this to be the way for the future.
I wonder if we are missing the “forest for the woods” in getting caught up with semantics and drawing distinctions with words. Can we afford this when we acknowledge that coaching and feedback (and mentoring) form an integral part in helping to realise the potential in our most treasured and important asset – people.
According to an article that appeared in HBR sometime back, coaching is the strongest amongst 7 types of leadership style, yet the least adopted. We need not look far on how to turnaround the 21st century leadership development challenge. There is more assuring and effective way how managers can proactively create a high performance culture in helping people discover their talent, passion and calling that fulfills the interest of ALL – stakeholders (including society and mother nature).
I concur with Doug that coaching does have occasions for feedback, but feedback does have coaching. Well, I guess, we now know which is the more powerfully facilitating, engaging and empowering tool to exploit and capitalise on.
Cheers and Happy New Year.
Coaching works, especially in the workplace! The key to RESULTS is for organisations to embrace an ecological coaching culture where everyone is supported and developed to their full potential. As individuals we know that when someone takes an active interest in our success, and won’t accept the limits we place on ourselves, we stretch and grow with pride and give them our best everytime. Why wouldn’t an organisation want to adopt this approach for everyone?
[...] The truth is that leaders must give advice and opinions. The wisdom to be learned in this is discernment about when to give answers and when to guide (or coach). [...]