Abstract
Executive Coaching is a relatively new Human Resource Development process aimed at helping a client to reach his full potential in an organization. This process consists of preparing him to execute the responsibilities of a leader, a decision maker, change facilitator as well as guiding him to deal with the stress, maintain a work life balance and develop an ethical approach towards his work. Although the profession of an executive coach does not need a specific academic degree or practice license like the well established profession of a Psychologist, there are some distinct similarities between the two which have been discussed in the paper. However, the paper also addresses the elements which have a marked difference in both professions. A theoretical framework has been developed from the researches on the subject to compare and contrast the definitions of both the terms, their methods of practicing and the results expected from the clients receiving inputs from them. The findings are listed as five distinct similarities and differences between the two professions. The limitations and scope of future research has also been addressed in the concluding part of the research.
Keywords: Executive Coaching, Psychology, client response, one-to- one interaction
Human Resource Management processes have undergone a vast change in the last thirty years owing to remarkable transformation of the global business environment. This transformation has necessitated that the human resource of any organization is well equipped to meet the demands of the changing business processes. There is a realization that the human capital is perhaps the most significant resource of a firm, the productivity of which can be altered positively by certain inputs from the management and which has the capability of enhancing its performance. This realization has led to the discovery of new training and development processes aimed at chaining the mindset of the recipients. However, preparing the employees to meet the challenges in the new atmosphere, both internally and externally needs effective training and development program in the organization, especially at the executive level. The executive level of an organization has the responsibility of implementing change for which it has to apply knowledge acquired from academic as well as experience. This can be achieved through specific training inputs aimed at developing his abilities that encourage independent decision making, the ability of discerning challenges and dealing with them. This kind of training process involves providing inputs and monitoring the effects of those inputs continuously to determine whether desired results are being achieved. Known as Executive Coaching, this training input is gaining popularity among business organizations. Organizations are employing professionals to coach their executives to realize their full potential and execute the roles assigned to them effectively.
Researchers have compared this newly developed profession with the age old profession of a psychologist. A psychologist is a healer who treats mental conditions that restricts an individual from behaving rationally. Since both the professions are concerned with behavioral modification of the client, there are some elements of similarities between them. Scholars argue that both coaching and therapy follow analogous theoretical constructs, and similar interactive issues may emerge in both cases (Hart, Blattner & Leipsic, 2001). Both practices are based on continuous, confidential, one-to-one interaction between the provider and the recipient of inputs. However the likeness is linked with certain features only. Some of the components of the professions bear a marked difference with each other. The prior researches in this area have been studied and a review of the available literature is presented to understand the areas which are similar and which are distinctly different. A theoretical construct is then developed to present the findings summarized from the review of literature presented below
Literature Review
There are many scholarly views on the concept of Executive Coaching in Management theory. Many works on the subject have attempted to define the term and the functional process. The most appropriate definition has been conceptualized by Kilburg, (1996) as ‘a helping relationship formed between a client who has managerial authority in an organization and a consultant who uses a wide variety of behavioral techniques and methods to help the client achieve a mutually identified set of goals within a formally defined coaching agreement’. Kilburg further emphasized that the ultimate aim of the whole exercise was to improve organizational performance by influencing client attitude towards his job. There are some distinct elements of the exercise evident in the definition; first it is a an attempt to help the client overcome his personal barriers that restrict him from achieving his full potential, it is an exercise exclusively meant for managerial level employees, the objectives are decided by a mutual agreement and the ultimate aim is to improve organizational performance. Kilburg (2000) contended that executives are subjected to constant pressure due to their struggle to improve productivity, resolve workplace conflicts and steer the company towards realistic growth which draws heavily on their physical and emotional resources. It was Kilburg’s opinion that techniques developed in clinical settings are quite effective in coaching executives by developing human wisdom to get an understanding of individual behavioral dynamics. This view substantiates the thinking that executive coaching indeed has some similarities with the profession of psychologist who is essentially a clinical practitioner treating behavioral aberrations. (Stickler, 2009) undertook a comparative analysis of the two definitions of executive coaching and psychotherapy that included almost all the related concepts to arrive at a comparative summary of the two branches. She reflected that executive coaching is a time bound activity usually aimed at developing leadership qualities in an executive which would impact organizational performance whereas psychotherapy is necessarily a clinical process aimed at healing the client using variations of the age old theories on psychological treatment. The target is invariably an individual whose perception has to be altered to get favorable results. Strickler (2009, pp. 12) has tabulated the findings of her research using numerous dimensions and has listed many similarities and differences between the professions. There are overlapping components such as motive of the sessions, methods applied, behavioral modification, feedback, closure process etc. In subsequent sections, five of these similarities will be discussed in detail. There are also certain characteristics signaling differences presented by Strickler (2009) in the table which will also be highlighted further in the paper. Hart, et al; (2001) undertook an extensive research among 30 geographically dispersed participants who held masters or doctoral degrees and practiced coaching or therapy actively or formerly and presented his findings analyzing the differences which were very helpful in developing a theoretical construct of the comparison. An analysis of comparative research of the outcomes of both has also been studied and inferences are drawn on the effectiveness of both. There are researches that point out that psychotherapy results are more pronounced and have more impact on the client behavior, nevertheless executive coaching effects are not negligible either and may be used for further research on coaching techniques (Haan & Duckworth, 2013). Their findings are supported by Levenson’s research (2009) which registers positive outcomes of executive coaching through twelve distinct case studies which show Almost all researchers agree that both processes have evolved through time and the techniques applied are more focused on individual client needs but psychological therapy being older, posts better outcomes than executive coaching. The profession of psychologist, being comparatively older has a distinct advantage upon the profession of executive coaching as it can draw inputs from a vast range of theory available. Executive coaching is relatively new and there is still some cynicism about its effectiveness. But researches have proved its effectiveness through empirical data using multiple outcomes. There is a vast scope of further research in the area.
Discussion
Both the coach and psychologist aim to alter the behavioral pattern of the clients in interactive sessions and try to draw information through client’s perception of situations but although their aim is to change individual behavior, the coach has a greater intention; to use this change in individual behavior as a tool to enhance organizational performance while the psychologist’s ultimate aim is to alter the perception of individual only so that he can lead a healthy and balanced life. Although this modification in individual behavior may have a positive impact on the organization of the individual, this impact is unintentional. Therefore it is evident that though there are similarities in the personalities and techniques of both professionals there is also a marked difference in their ultimate motives and other aspects. A detailed description of the similarities and differences are presented below which is then summarized in the theoretical construct.
Similarities in the profession of an Executive Coach and Psychologist
Researchers have established that there are numerous similarities in both the professions related to the personalities of the practitioners, techniques applied and objectives ( Haan & Duckworth, 2013). Five of these similarities have been described below
Purpose and focus of work. The primary purpose of the coach and psychologist is to bring a discernable change in the client’s behavior. The original objective of the interactive sessions is stated by the individual, which is gradually expanded by mutual interaction between the practitioner and the recipient. The goal involves changing the perception of the individuals so that he is able to deal with challenges and disturbing events more effectively without feeling threatened.
Process and its applications. The process works on an alliance between two people committed to improve the behavioral aspects so as to act in a more objective manner. The exercise observes the individual’s psychodynamics as part of the assessment and consultation and may include suggestions to modify response when confronted by disturbing situations.
Role of Practitioner. Both coach and psychology execute similar roles where they have to win the confidence of the client by assuming an empathetic approach. He is able to extract information which may be very useful in gaining an insight into the client’s emotional responses to challenges. He encourages the client to confide his fears or experiences which may provide the practitioner with the information necessary for applying certain concepts to change his perception towards people or situations. Both the coach and the psychotherapist have to be a good listener which helps in sifting information and use it to guide the client.
Feedback. Giving feedback to the client is an important part of both executive coaching and psychotherapy. It is an ongoing process which helps the client to estimate the effects of the inputs given to him. His responses to similar situations pre and post counseling is studied and informed so that he can evaluate his progress himself and is satisfied by the exercise.
Closure. The process of ending the sessions after both the client and the practitioner are satisfied with the responses is quite similar in executive coaching and psychological interventions. The intervals between the sessions are increased so that the client is able to progress without continuous inputs and monitoring from the practitioner. After gradual tapering off of the suggestions from the practitioner and the client’s initiatives to make his own choices, the practitioner and the client call an end to the exercise with mutual agreement.
Differences between Executive Coaching and Psychotherapy
Although the basic framework of executive coaching and psychotherapy has certain resemblance there are considerable differences in the skills and techniques applied in both the professions. Researchers like Hart, et al. (2001) have presented the differences perceived by both practitioners and clients, five of which have been listed below
Focus of attention. A Psychotherapist generally focuses his attention on a specific ailment of the client/ patient such as depression, anxiety or habitual disorders. His sessions are directed at identifying the cause of the ailment underlying in some previous unpleasant experience and addressing the patient’s perception of the experience. A coach on the other hand focuses his attention on developing certain skills that equip the recipient to fulfill his organizational role more efficiently. The aim is to enhance organizational performance through individual competency development in contrast to psychotherapy which aims to treat the individual only. If this treatment helps the organization also in which the patient the works, it is purely unintentional.
Interactive relationship. The relationship between a coach and his client is more informal, friendly and cooperative in contrast to the relationship between a psychotherapist and his client where the interaction is more clinical and formal. Usually the practitioner has to coax information out of the patient who is unwilling to reveal private thoughts to the therapist. Sometimes he may outright resist treatment which is in stark contrast to the outlook of the client who is more forthcoming, open to suggestions and willing to be changed in order to facilitate professional advancements.
Confidentiality. Coaches are engaged by the organizations to develop the competency of individuals in managerial ranks for organizational benefits, and so the element of confidentiality is not necessary. Unless the client prefers otherwise, coaches do not take the confidentiality issue seriously. However, the element of confidentiality is a must in psychotherapy. Psychotherapists are bound by professional integrity standards and cannot reveal the identity or ailments of their patients casually. A psychotherapist cannot reveal private details of a patient without his permission. Although protecting confidentiality and honoring agreements are practiced by some coaches it is not required legally as in the case of therapy.
Theoretical Construct
A theoretical construct is developed from the above discussion which depicts the similarities and differences. The coach aim of improving organizational performance along with individual behavior is shown in contrast to psychologist interventions for individual behavior and indirectly organizational behavior.
Conclusions
It can be inferred that both the professions of psychologists and Executive Coach has certain similarities yet they have considerable differences in techniques, motive and effect. Although the psychologist may assume the role of an executive coach and use the inputs from his academic qualifications, he has to be more involved and goal oriented as a coach. His focus must shift from past experiences as factors to present situational context of business environment. A psychologist can be a successful coach only if he implements certain changes in his methods and orientation to address client issues.
Limitations
The profession of executive coach is relatively new and the research is limited. Although empirical data is used from prior researches to derive results there may be some element of personal bias. Some features in both vocations have overlapping elements and distinguishing them is difficult.
Future Scope of Study
Future researchers may focus on areas like the competencies required in an executive coach and the accountability of the coach to the organization and the client. Inputs on formal degrees needed for a coach also deserves attention from scholars. Documentation of progress and results are areas which need to be addressed in future studies on the subject.
References
De Haan, E., & Duckworth, A. (2013). Signaling a new trend in executive coaching outcome research. International Coaching Psychology Review, 8(1), 6-19.
Hart, V., Blattner, J., & Leipsic, S. (2001). Coaching versus therapy: A perspective. Consulting Psychology Journal: Practice and Research, 53(4), 229.
Kilburg, R. R. (1996). Toward a conceptual understanding and definition of executive coaching. Consulting Psychology Journal: Practice and Research, 48(2), 134.
Kilburg, R. R. (2000). Executive coaching: Developing managerial wisdom in a world of chaos. American Psychological Association.
Levenson, A. (2009). Measuring and maximizing the business impact of executive coaching. Consulting Psychology Journal: Practice and Research, 61, 103–121
Strickler, L. E. (2009). Determining the Boundary between Executive Coaching and Psychotherapy.
