Matthew Richter posts daily comments in LinkedIn—well, almost daily. You can follow him and join the conversation by going to http://linkedin.com/in/matthew-richter-0738b84.
For the benefit of our readers, we decide to compile and reprint some of his provocative pieces from the past. Let us know what you think.
A Function or a Role?
Before you roll your eyes, I know it is technically both. But, in practice, are we doing a disservice to our industry by identifying coaching as a role? A coach has so many different connotations and meanings in the English language. If we don’t think of coaches as psychologists and we don’t think of them as managers, then aren’t they just a subset of a category of consultants? Rather, I think it is much more useful for us to identify coaching as a function where one person with a particular expertise facilitates another person to a higher level of development— be that for enhanced skills or performance. (I’ll avoid the whole life coaching thing— I’ll never understand that one!).
By focusing on function, the consultant adds a feature set to her portfolio and can easily describe what is done more specifically. The role of coach is often defined by what it isn’t: a psychologist, an executive, a manager, a decision-maker, or an expert. In other words, by using the title coach, one is diminished from what one could be. All of the listed titles and more include the function of coaching. So, be any one of them and do coaching.
What Is a Coach?
One of the fastest growing segments of the L&D world is coaching. There are certifications and professional organizations. There are annual conferences. Life coaches, executive coaches, performance coaches, and others. A search on Amazon produces over 30,000 results. Coaching may even supersede L&D as an industry. All of my friends are now coaches along with being trainers. But, what exactly is it? Are coaches clinical psychologists without the years of training and education? Are they there to provide insights into the psyche, just only with business clients? Are they trainers, who essentially provide one-on-one training? Are they consultants, providing guidance and wisdom based on their previous careers in business? What methodologies do coaches use? Do their methods withstand the rigor of APA standards? Should they? How then are coaches measured? Perhaps simply by the likability factor with clients? Coaches certainly shouldn’t be misconstrued to be like sports coaches. Sports coaches have authority and the power to fire. In L&D, we spend time training managers to be coaches and developers of people. Is a single training program enough to do that?
Psychometric Tools
Here are six tips for an HR or training professional for evaluating whether a psychometric tool may work.
1. Ask who is promoting the tool and espousing its research vigor. Often, it is people associated with the product and not independent researchers. If I use a psychometric tool based on a model, I want research independent of those who make money off it.
2. Ask for peer-reviewed research on the tools’ applications and concepts. Again, most research on the types of product are done by researchers and organizations with a stake in the results.
3. Ask to look at the research and get a grad student or a statistician in social science to explain it to you. Or, take a stats course yourself. Don’t accept, “tons of research...”
4. Ask for the research methodology used to validate the instrument. Test design is more important than the results. A bad design yields worthless results.
5. Remember, there is a difference between the validity of the instrument and the validity of the model the instrument theoretically measures. Just because the evaluation works, doesn’t mean it gives you what you think it gives you.
6. Ask yourself whether the tool really meets the objective you need, or if it is just “cool.” In other words, do I need this?