I received some really good information yesterday from a friend and fellow CEO Peter Mollan. At the conclusion of our conversation I went away with some very clear advice. Which I implemented today because it made sense and will it would make a big difference to the success of my business.
As you know things come in waves and as I was talking to Angie Speteri today who is from Perth, we ended up talking about this subject. What we talked of was the phenomenon of ‘internal coaching’ and how in large organisations such as the one she worked within they called this coaching however it was actually performance management. She found that the problem children were often put on her team so she could ‘coach’ them. Angie realised only after she had completed a coaching course that what she had been doing was performance management.
So, after those two interactions I started to ask myself – did my friend Peter coach me, mentor me or performance manage me. One he is not my boss so I can knock out performance management, he is not my coach we do not have a formal arrangement. He was mentoring me from his observations and his vast experience he gave me some very good advice, what I did with it was up to me.
So what is the difference and how do you know when you are being coached, when you are being performance managed or when what you need is a mentor someone who has been there and done that.
Here are 4 points that make these activities different:
| THE COACH | THE PERFORMANCE MANAGER | THE MENTOR |
| Is and external provider and has no attachment to results other than they are committed to you and your success. Relationship is for a set period of time | Is internal and will most times be your boss or an appointed HR coach. Has a defined time period | On-going relationship that can last for a long period of time |
| The coachee responsible for implementation of new learning – personal responsibility. Meetings are scheduled in advance | Day to day, with frequent feedback with accountability measures in place. With very clear expectations. Interaction could take place formally and informally | Can be more informal and meetings can take place as and when the mentee needs some advice, guidance or support. The mentee is responsible for taking action |
| It is non-directive or prescriptive and has the coachee do the thinking that is required for them to move forward. The coach’s role is to challenge the thinking of the coachee and stretch their horizons. They are the question asker. | Highly directive with a clear agenda measures will have a ‘by when’ with a ‘if not’ consequences. | Is non-directive, advice is given if not acted on the mentor may or may not wish to continue. No mentor likes to give their time and expertise and for it to be ignored |
| Coaching activities have both organisational and individual goals. The coach has a very broad set of issues that may be discussed. | The performance manger focus is on the organisational goal. | Mentor is more experienced and qualified than the ‘mentee’ in the area that the ‘mentee’ requires advice. Who can pass on knowledge, experience and open doors to otherwise out-of-reach opportunities |
After doing this thinking I realised something in my own business, because I am a coach so I seem to have coaching conversations with my team. When in fact I am supposed to be performance managing them.
We would produce better results if I did my job and drove the result I truly want for my business.
So, have you got your role confused like me and muddied the water?
Clarity leads to power just doing this exercise has given me more power to act on the things I need to act on in my business.
Thank you Peter and Angie for making me think!
{ 1 comment… read it below or add one }
These familiar concepts turn out to be not-quite-so-familiar because of ‘muddied’ definitions, thankyou for the beauty of this clarity. It is easy for us to confuse or fuse our roles across different relationships, and no wonder we then get ineffectiveness and cloudiness around accountability.