Executive Coaching and Business Strategy

Successful executive coaching requires sophisticated understanding of organizations as well as of individuals. Nowhere is that more apparent than in the intersection of business strategy and the executive coaching that supports it. Senior leaders play a critical role in setting direction, defining strategic positions, and providing focus for the business operations needed for successful execution. Through executive coaching, a leader can be more effective, as an individual, in guiding the execution of the strategy. Furthermore, given the positions these individuals occupy in their organizations, coaching can also affect the formation of strategy.

An essential HR responsibility is to support the business strategy with initiatives, programs, processes, and business partner consulting that may help the organization achieve its business goals. Executive coaching is one area in which HR has the potential to support not only the execution of the strategy but its development as well. Involvement of HR in executive coaching may take a variety of forms that include supporting an ad hoc request for coaching, developing a coaching program as part of a larger HR or executive development strategy, or providing executive coaching directly as an internal coach.

Four Different Coaching Roles

This approach (Witherspoon and White, 1996) defines each coaching role according to its purpose:

• Coaching for skills, which focuses on specific skills required for a current job

• Coaching for performance, which focuses more broadly on a present job

• Coaching for development, which is directed toward learning for a future job

• Coaching for the executive's agenda, which focuses on learning that is related to an executive's agenda in the broadest sense

The last role, coaching for the executive's agenda, is the most directly relevant to strategy. Building on Witherspoon and White's model, in this role, a coach might:

• Be a sounding board for an executive who needs to explore the feasibility of several potential strategy scenarios
• Help test an executive's assumptions regarding marketplace realities and the opportunities they present
• Point out blind spots on the part of the executive that are impeding implementation
• Enhance creativity
• Support the efforts required to pursue a given strategic direction by helping an executive lay out a change strategy that supports the business strategy

The role of coaching for the executive's agenda seems to have the greatest relevance for strategy; however, any of the roles could help focus learning that relates to business strategy. For example, when coaching for skills, an executive may need to address some of the following areas:

• Acquiring more knowledge about the new Internet economy in order to fully understand emerging strategic options
• Honing negotiation skills for new partnerships with customers who simultaneously become partners, suppliers, and competitors
• Further refining expert communication skills with the goal of implementing and providing leadership through major organizational change.

The other two roles, coaching for performance and coaching for development, may also be appropriate for specific situations involving strategy formation or execution.

Ref: Catherine Fitzgerald and Jennifer Berger

360-Degree Feedback Appraisal System

A Study of 360-Degree Feedback Appraisal System. In this atmosphere, the 360-degree feedback concept has much to offer. Unlike the traditional performance appraisal model, in which superiors evaluate subordinates, the 360-degree approach does not rely solely on the superior to provide feedback to the employee. Instead, it enlists multiple constituencies to provide feedback to selected organizational members. These constituencies include superiors, peers, and coworkers in support areas, subordinates, internal customers of the unit's work, and external customers of the organization's products. In this process the feedback recipient is expected to evaluate his or her own performance on the selected behavioral dimensions. This self-evaluation is then compared with that provided by the other feedback providers. The recipient is encouraged to use the feedback to improve performance and to make a greater effort to blend his or her contributions with the needs of the group. This linking of individual performance with feedback from all relevant constituencies fits well into the emerging team-based workplace. Another difference from traditional performance appraisal is that 360-degree feedback is supposed to be given anonymously. Study has demonstrated that anonymous feedback is more honest and closer to what raters actually feel about the feedback recipients. Appraisers whose identity is known to the feedback recipients give higher ratings than those who are anonymous.

While the 360-degree concept has much to offer and many successes have been documented there are also stories of confusion and disappointment. Many of the 360-degree programs are carried out in the absence of a strategic context, and fail to focus on contributions that they can make to a firm's competitive advantage. There is little consistency to what is being done, and 360-degree feedback programs can range from any deviations from the traditional vertical form of performance appraisal to highly sophisticated feedback systems that systematically gather, analyze, and disseminate behavior data to managers, professionals, and even rank-and-file workers functioning in teams.

Many organizations adopt 360-degree feedback without clearly defining the mission and the scope of the program. Consequently, employees who receive the feedback are left to figure out for themselves how to cope with the results and tend not to develop goals and action plans following 360-degree applications. One study concluded that while such programs are popular, in many cases little more than lip service is paid to them. Furthermore, there is discouraging evidence regarding the effectiveness of feedback-intervention programs as tools in bringing about improvements in performance. A review of over 600 feedback studies found that only one-third reported improvements in performance. Another third reported negative changes in performance, while the final third reported no impact. In their haste to gain the advertised benefits of 360-degree feedback, organizations may not be sufficiently aware of the problems that often accompany its adoption. Failure to recognize the problems that often occur can lead to disillusionment, reduce the value of the exercise, and confirm the lip service that tends to be paid to 360-degree results.

Future Prospects & Recommendations.

360-degree feedback is powerful because it makes it easy to gather and report credible feedback about important issues that are otherwise hard to quantify. Like any powerful tool, it needs to be used with care in order to derive all the benefits.

Here are seven recommendations for avoiding problems.

1. Learn about the technology before you invest in it. 360 feedbacks is changing as rapidly as hardware and software systems are changing. Much is possible now that wasn't dreamed of a decade ago. Innovations in 360-degree systems such as 20/20 Insight GOLD have made feedback easier, more accessible, more affordable, more flexible and more versatile than ever. Not all 360-feedback publishers are innovating at the same pace or in the same direction. This creates a challenge for the prospective user who is learning about feedback options. However, a thorough, up-to-date review of what's available now will ensure that you get the maximum capability for the least investment.

2. Make sure that organization is prepared for 360-degree feedback. Readiness can be improved by addressing the following areas:

* The climate of trust

* Organizational stability

* Feedback practices

* Development practices

* Awareness and acceptance of 360 feedback

* Availability of computers

3. Use well-researched, well-constructed survey items. A 360-degree assessment is only as effective as the items that make up the survey. The best surveys are carefully constructed and locally validated. This is challenge is made easy by customizable survey platforms such as 20/20 Insight GOLD.

4. Protect confidentiality. People are willing to give honest feedback if they believe that doing so will benefit them and the people receiving it. You should establish policies and procedures that keep ratings anonymous and give supervisors only the summary data they need to help direct reports improve performance—and no more.

5. Use skilled facilitators. When people receive 360-degree feedback the first time, they often need help sorting through, accepting, understanding and making use of the information. People who have experience making this process successful should lead these meetings.

6. Follow up. Don't make the mistake of thinking that 360 feedbacks alone will improve performance. It can focus on priority development needs and produce strong motivation to change in many people, but individual development planning; coaching and empowerment of developmental activities are essential.

7. Separate developmental feedback from personnel and compensation decisions. 360 are best used for measuring the hard-to-quantify aspects of work, such as interpersonal skills. Reward systems are expensive, so they're best applied to reinforce desired results. It's a mistake to apply rewards to the work processes rather than work outcomes. Follow developmental feedback with developmental initiatives, not rewards.

On the other hand, interpersonal behaviors (e.g., leadership, team interaction, communication, sales, service, negotiation and instruction) aren't easily quantified or measured. The best way to get objective data about this aspect of performance is 360-degree feedback.