'Play of the Day'
Fostering
employee loyalty in a tight labor market, companies
are offering workers personal coaches as a tool
to help them thrive
by Francine Russo
Time Magazine
September 25, 2000 Vol. 156 No. 13
Dan Carlson should have been a happy
man. After 10 years as a department manager at Eastman
Kodak in Rochester, N.Y., the 19-year veteran was
given a big promotion this spring, to division manager
for color-film sensitizing. But after a few months,
Carlson felt frustrated. Instead of spending time
with the technical folks on the shop floor, which
he had always enjoyed, he found himself fidgeting
through cost-review and planning meetings.
So he brought his dissatisfaction
to his coach, Jan Austin. She responded with a bold
suggestion: Carlson himself should choose where
to spend his time. So Carlson assigned subordinates
to go to those boring meetings, freeing him to hold
two-hour workshops to inspire his people about the
future of the photographic-film industry. Thanks,
Coach. Coach? Yes, Eastman Kodak had contracted
with Austin, director of corporate coaching training
at Corporate Coach U, a training institute, to offer
personal guidance to Carlson and other managers
and to train managers to coach their own people
in turn.
Kodak is far from alone. Coaching
management is a hot trend at a growing number of
FORTUNE 500 companies, from IBM and Dow Chemical
to Marriott International and Glaxo Wellcome. It
is a kinder, gentler variant of the sort of bare-knuckle
corporate training made notorious last month on
Survivor by corporate trainer--and winner--Richard
Hatch. Eastman Kodak's Charles Barrentine, who oversees
Carlson and 4,000 other employees, finds coaching
"invaluable. It points out things people would not
notice themselves and plays a big role in shaping
behavior."
The main reason behind the
trend is the booming economy, which makes good staff
hard to get and harder to keep. All the more reason,
a growing number of megacorporations think, to hire
even more people to help good managers over the
bumps and hurdles of adaptation. Companies also
see it as a way to help valued employees evolve
in a swiftly changing business environment. "It's
basic human nature," says Tony Latham, divisional
V.P. for executive sourcing and development for
Abbott Laboratories World Wide, who is starting
up an in-house coaching program. "It boils down
to caring."
There is evidence to support this
belief, says David A. Thomas, Fitzhugh professor
of business administration at Harvard Business School.
"Some data show that the quality of the relationship
between boss and subordinate is a major predictor
of intentions to remain. Coaching--which can help
managers talk with subordinates about their developmental
needs--absolutely affects that relationship positively.
And there's a big potential payoff."
The human-relations niche was first
carved out in 1992 with the founding of Coach U,
a university without walls that trains personal
and professional coaches by teleconference. The
private company was created by Thomas Leonard, an
accountant and financial planner whose young clients
in the San Francisco Bay Area began leaning on him
for personal and lifestyle advice. Leonard developed
a system of management tools for helping people
set priorities and solve problems. With Coach U,
he started training others who wanted to set up
their own practice. Now the business has two additional
branches, Corporate Coach U, founded in 1997, which
trains business coaches, and Corporate Coaches,
which hires them out to needy firms. Currently owned
by CoachInc.Com CEO Sandy Vilas, the company, based
in Steamboat Springs, Colo., has 60 staff members
who work from home and 3,800 students and graduates
in 36 countries. "Last year we took in $4 million,"
says Vilas. "We're expecting revenues of $10 million
in 2001."
Coach U is by far the largest
coach-training institute, but there are at least
12 others. They include the Academy for Coach Training
in Bellevue, Wash., and the Newfield Network in
Silver Spring, Md.; both offer in-person workshops
as well as teleclasses. Coaching's rise is just
beginning, predicts Joel Cutcher-Gershenfeld, a
research scientist at M.I.T. who studies workplace
change. "It's a vehicle for the transfer of knowledge
and skills. And in a knowledge-based economy, it
will be increasingly important." Jane Creswell,
39, who attended Corporate Coach U's first teleclass
in 1998, is a case study in the merits of online
coaching.
An overstressed IBM product manager
in Raleigh, N.C., Creswell sought training because
she wanted to leave IBM and set up an independent
coaching practice. While continuing her job, she
coached a few outside clients on the phone. "I realized,"
she says, "that I was talking about things I needed
to talk to folks at IBM about--stress on the job,
communications problems with people, whether they
were doing the wrong kind of work." She approached
the head of her division and asked to coach colleagues
who might be interested in talking about such issues
as job-fit and departmental-communications problems.
She got permission to try a pilot project. "That
pilot never ended," says Creswell. Within six months,
she was appointed full-time coach at her office,
at her previous salary. Six months later, IBM's
corporate chieftains invited her to the company's
global headquarters in Armonk, N.Y. When her successful
division was spun off this year to become Home Director,
there were several full-time coaches at IBM, and
the program was growing. "We've done lots of research
over the past three years," says Tanya Clemons,
V.P. of global executive and organizational development
at IBM, "and we've found that those leaders who
have the best coaching skills have better business
results."
When these corporate higher-ups describe
their coaching sessions, they sound suspiciously--well,
shrinky. But coaching is not therapy, practitioners
insist. Neither is it mentoring, training or some
other form of repackaged management skills. Actually,
it's a grab bag of techniques that combine bits
of all these with "nuggets of wisdom" from arenas
as diverse as football and 12-step programs. Sometimes
what a coach does, says Kathleen Phillips, an in-house
coach at Cap Gemini Ernst & Young, the former management-consulting
arm of Ernst & Young, is help a client see a problem--or
a problem job--a different way. In that way, say
proponents, coaching helps shore up weak points
in their employees
as well as build on their strengths.
Coaches may use some of the
27 prepackaged Coach U assessment "programs" that
resemble school workbooks, with fill-ins and progress
charts. The CleanSweep program, for example, lists
four categories: physical environment, well-being,
money, relationships--with 25 statements in each,
alongside little boxes to be checked if true. These
range from "My teeth and gums are healthy" to "My
investments do not keep me awake at night" and "I
receive enough love from people around me to feel
good." You're not allowed to check one as true until
it is virtually always true, and the program, which
promises that it "can be completed in less than
one year," asserts, "You have more natural energy
when you are complete with your environment, well-being,
money and relationships."
Once you have swept clean, you can
go on to the NeedLess Program, which makes the incredible
claim that you can learn how to have all your needs
permanently met. It takes you through the steps
of identifying 20 unmet needs, reducing them to
the four most important ones and then redirecting
your behavior and that of those around you to get
them met. Whatever the methods they employ, many
of those who go through the programs persuasively
describe positive results: practical solutions to
problems, increased job satisfaction, even advancement.
Moreover, although there are no direct data, says
Harvard's Thomas, corporations believe that coaching
helps keep employees and that the dollar investment
in it is far less than the cost of replacing an
employee. Still, in encouraging folks to follow
their feelings and develop their strengths, corporations
are taking a risk: that their most valued employees
may be coached right out the door. Companies accept
this risk--because they have to. "I expect job movement,
job redefinition, attrition," says Creswell. "Those
are the realities. It's the people who decide."
END