Some coaching schools teach that, before taking on any executive coaching engagement, the first step is to determine whether the potential new client is “coachable.”
However, there seems to be no scientific research supporting the idea that some people are simply “uncoachable“. On the contrary, Éthelle Gemma Lord writes in her doctoral thesis that: “[Flaherty] also discounted any theories that some clients are uncoachable. That all clients are coachable was also supported by Porché and Niederer.” (Lord, 2010)
So why do coaches—and others—sometimes claim that certain people are uncoachable? And what does that label really mean?
A fellow executive coach once claimed that signs of an uncoachable leader include denying they have a problem or blaming everyone else. In such cases, he advised, it’s best to “save time, skip the heroic measures, and move on.”
Personally, I can’t imagine sitting in front of a client and saying, “Sorry, but you’re uncoachable.” To me, that would feel a bit like telling a patient that there’s no cure for their disease. That’s why I’d like to offer a different perspective: labelling someone uncoachable is often more of an excuse to shy away from a potentially difficult coaching assignment than a meaningful or accurate assessment.
Of course, every coach likes to work with clients who are intelligent, open to feedback, and committed to change. That’s easy and it’s nice to see the often rapid progress. But frankly, anyone can coach such a person. I believe the moment a great coach learns about an uncoachable client, they get curious and look forward to dealing with a “tough nut to crack.”
Understanding Resistance to Change
To support a client who is difficult or resistant to change, the coach needs a deep understanding of how change actually works.
There’s a common belief among coaches that coaching must always be action-oriented. I believe that’s profoundly wrong.
Behavioral change is a process with different phases—and action is just one phase of that process. For example, Prochaska et al. identified six stages of change in therapeutic contexts:
Pre-contemplation, Contemplation, Preparation, Action, Maintenance, and Termination. (Prochaska, Diclemente and Norcross, 1994)
They found that therapy often fails when the therapist doesn’t recognize which stage the client is in—or uses the wrong approach for that stage.
Translated into coaching, this means instead of labeling the “difficult” or “resistant” executive as “uncoachable,” the coach would do well probing if this person is in what Prochascka refers to as the pre-contemplation stage—one symptom of which is denial.
Meeting Clients Where They Are
When coaching a client in this early stage, pushing them toward action is unlikely to be effective—after all, from their perspective, there is no problem to solve. So why would they want to chnage anything?
Instead, the coach may want to understand the client’s perspective better, trying to put themself in their client’s shoes while demonstrating genuine curiosity rather than being judgmental. In time, the coach may be able to gently open new perspectives: “I wonder why John, the HR Director—whom you otherwise hold in high regard—says that some people feel threatened by your straightforward communication style?”
Or, they can gently hold up the mirror and explore with their client why raters across the board attested an “urgent need for improvement” for “building effective teams” in their latest 360-degree feedback.
By doing so with care and curiosity, the coach helps the client begin to see what others see—without forcing conclusions.
Progress Looks Different for Everyone
A “well-trained coach who demonstrates care, is resourcefulness and focused” (Lord, 2010) can often help the client shift from pre-contemplation to contemplation—the stage where they begin to recognize there might be a problem and start reflecting on it.
They may not be ready for action yet, and that’s perfectly okay. At this point, the next steps may still be unclear, but the journey has begun.
With time, others in the organization may see marked behavioral changes that positively affect both their leadership and the business as a whole.
Final Thoughts
Of course, some executives may not want coaching. Others might not be willing to invest the time and energy it requires. That’s their choice. But uncoachable? I don’t think so.
References
Lord, É.G. (2010). A Quantitative Study on Executive Coaching from a Learning Transfer Perspective. pp.59, University of Phoenix
Prochaska, J.O., Diclemente, C.C. and Norcross, J.C. (1994). Changing for Good. New York: Collins.
If someone in your organization seems “uncoachable,” I’d be happy revisit that assumption with you. Feel free to contact me now via mail@gerritpelzer.com for a complimentary, no-obligation consultation. I look forward to hearing from you