What is executive coaching?
Currently, there are many definitions for executive coaching and as the profession continues to evolve, so will it’s definitions. Richard Kilburg, PhD, offers a definition that is very comprehensive. “A helping relationship involving a wide variety of behavioral techniques and methods to help the client achieve a mutually-identified set of goals to improve professional performance and personal satisfaction and, consequently, to improve the effectiveness of the client’s organization.”
Does executive coaching have an ROI?
Historically, value for a human resource based service, in particular, one that is related to intangible results has been hard to measure. However, one study surveyed 100 senior executives in 2004 and their findings suggested that ROI was nearly six times the initial cost of the coaching. Further, the study suggested very favorable payoffs for tangible business results including improved productivity, better quality work product, and greater organizational strength.
How much does executive coaching cost?
There are many ways to compute fees for services. Some coaches charge per session (e.g., $100 -$2000), some per month (e.g., $400-$8000), and others per contract (e.g., $5000-$150,000). A typical session is 30 to 60 minutes long, you usually meet two to four times per month, and a contract can last from three to twenty-four months and sometimes longer.
Why should we use employment testing?
The primary purpose for any personnel selection method is to predict job performance. Some personnel specialists have suggested that an appropriate battery of employment testing will explain between 55 and 60 percent of the reasons an employee is successful in a particular job. Other benefits of employment testing include reduced turnover. Annual corporate turnover averaged 15% in recent years and nearly 80% of that turnover stemmed from hiring mistakes according to a Harvard University study. T. C. Walsh suggests that the cost resulting from poor hires is conservatively estimated at three times a manager’s salary and 400 times an hourly worker’s wage. Employment testing significantly reduces turnover and the high costs associated with it.
Aren’t psychology tests for “sick” people?
In a clinical setting, psychological tests are used to evaluate psychopathology. Such tests are frequently used to uncover abnormal behavior and is inappropriate for personnel related purposes. The exception for clinically based tests would be in evaluating individuals hired who deal with public safety issues (e.g., police, firefighters, pilots). The vast majority of employment tests, while developed using psychological principles, are specifically designed to be valid and reliable in the employee selection and promotion process. Broad categories of personnel/employment tests include (1) measures of aptitude and ability (2) personality assessments (3) career interest measures that also measure personal values and preferences (4) job samples and assessment centers.
We use applications and interviews to make our hiring and promotion decisions. Why should we spend additional money on employment tests?
Interviews and job applications are very popular inexpensive (in the short run) methods used for hiring purposes. However, personnel psychology research suggests that valid and reliable employment testing is the most accurate predictor of job performance. The unstructured interview is on average, about 8% more successful than flipping a coin. Hiring decisions made solely from applications and unstructured interviewing typically yields only 14% of the available information on a candidate. Using employment tests and structured interviews (i.e., standardized questions linked to the job analysis) will greatly increase your ability to predict job performance.
Do applicants have access to their assessment reports?
For hiring purposes usually not, but for developmental purposes the information appropriate for an employee can be provided. The assessment reports are written to facilitate communication between the hiring manager and the HR department. Once hired, an employee usually benefits more from a feedback session that covers their assets and developmental needs. For their review, employees and their hiring managers are also given a brief summary of their assets and developmental needs. Additional information may be provided to help the development process if appropriate.
What employees benefit from executive development programs?
The two most common employees in development or coaching programs are “fast trackers” and the “derailers.” Employees on the “company fast track” have their organization attempting to maximize their leadership skills and job performance. Employees who are derailing, typically have leadership styles that get in the way of them performing their jobs efficiently. Other employees may be making the transition from supervisee to supervisor and would benefit from guidance in managing people and new job functions.
How is coaching different from psychotherapy?
This question is still going through a series of debates in various professional circles. The short answer is that there is some overlap in the approach to resolving problems and the issues addressed can be personal or interpersonal in both coaching and psychotherapy relationships. However the aspect of coaching that distinguishes it from psychotherapy is its focus on job relevant competencies. An effective coaching relationship will identify job related goals and develop a plan to help the individual achieve them.
How can our organization benefit from sending our employees through a coaching program?
The major benefit would be developing leadership that interfaces more effectively with subordinates thereby increasing overall organization productivity. Another major benefit would be helping employees in leadership positions identify personal assets that complement each other that leads to a more cohesive and productive team. Additionally, helping a manager understand their leadership style and how to get the best from their subordinates and peers will lead to an overall improvement in achieving organizational goals.