When Coaching Fails: Understanding Coachable Moments in Leadership

In the world of leadership development, coaching is often hailed as the ultimate skill. The ability to ask powerful questions, delegate thinking, and foster autonomy is undeniably transformative. However, like any tool, it has its limits. There are specific moments when using a coaching approach is not just ineffective—it is dangerous.

The Trap of the "One-Trick Pony"

Once leaders learn the power of coaching, there is a tendency to overapply it. The newly trained manager might respond to every employee question with, "What do you think?" While this intends to build capability, it can quickly become frustrating, especially when the employee lacks the competence or context to answer.

If a team member is new, lost, and genuinely needs direction, asking them to generate their own solution is not empowering; it is abandonment. It can damage morale, leaving the employee feeling unsupported and incompetent. In these moments, what is needed is not a question, but a clear instruction.

The Firefighter Analogy: Competence vs. Context

Consider a fire captain arriving at a burning building with a highly competent, committed crew. Despite their expertise, the captain does not gather the team to brainstorm the pros and cons of different entry strategies. The situation is volatile, time is scarce, and lives are at stake.

In high-risk or crisis situations, leadership must be directive. Roles must be assigned, and commands must be clear. The time for reflection and learning comes later; the immediate priority is execution.

This principle applies beyond emergency services. In corporate environments—such as mining, aviation, or heavy industry—strict adherence to process is often a matter of life and death. If a safety protocol is ignored or a corner is cut, the result can be catastrophic. In these "swim lanes" of non-negotiable standards, there is no room for coaching on how to follow the rule. The rule simply must be followed.

The "After Action Review": When to Switch Back

While directive leadership is necessary during a crisis or when competence is low, it should not become the permanent state. The coaching opportunity returns once the dust settles.

This is where the After Action Review (AAR) or Retrospective comes into play. After the fire is out or the project is delivered, the leader shifts back into coaching mode:

"What went well?"

"What didn't go well?"

"What did we learn, and what must we change next time?"

This is coaching for growth. It allows the team to process the event, learn from the directive phase, and build the skills necessary to handle future challenges with more autonomy.

The Balance: Skill vs. Will

A helpful distinction for leaders is the balance between Skill (competence) and Will (commitment).

Low Skill: Coaching cannot build technical skills from scratch. If an employee doesn't know how to use a specific tool or process, they need training and direction.

Low Will: If an employee has the skill but lacks the motivation or confidence, coaching is the ideal intervention to uncover the blocker and reignite commitment.

Effective leadership is not about choosing between being a boss or being a coach; it is about knowing when to be which.

If a team member is drowning, throw them a rope—don't ask them how they feel about the water. Rescue first, coach later. Recognizing the difference between a teachable moment and a crisis is what separates a good coach from a great leader.