In response to Lucy Kellaway's article "More Harm Than Good",
The Financial Times, Monday July 8. 2002. (...read it here)

The damning indictment of executive coaching and the clients they serve by Lucy Kellaway ("More Harm Than Good", July 8, 2002) is so alien to my experience that I am moved to respond to it. I am, for the record, an Organizational Development Consultant who practices executive coaching, although it comprises a small percentage of my income.

If Ms. Kellaway's research and personal observations are to be believed, CEO's and officers of companies are "uncivilized", "competitive" and apparently developmentally arrested individuals, hungering for a Svengali pal to influence their business decisions, cater to their egos and pay exorbitant fees in the process. Its been my experience that most of these so called ego maniacal characters are successful and therefore disinclined to spend the time or the money on coaching, and are usually resistant to get objective feedback on their behavior, particularly from a "shrink."

My clients are typically concerned companies that are interested in the development of their officers, or have had a problem that has been identified by human resources surveys and reviews. These clients don't bump business appointments or brag about their coaching, but instead tend to be reluctant and even resentful of being "recommended" for the process by their bosses or the human resources department.

There are professional guidelines for psychologists, standards and procedures that guard the client against potential overdependency and undue psychological disruption. The coaching process is not to be confused with therapy, and is unlikely to cause the harm Ms. Kellaway believes is so prevalent. She appears to derive this slant from Dr. Berglas' article in the Harvard Business Review but distorts his main message. The good doctor warns of nonprofessionals and fellow mental health personnel who lack the competence to distinguish between those who can benefit from coaching and those who need other assistance.

The approach I have used successfully is to forge behavioral contracts with my clients. We work together for a relatively short period of time, 34 months with perhaps 6 sessions and phone support, identifying target behaviors, devising options, considering alternatives and experimenting with different approaches to improving the behavior. The focus is on fostering adaptive and constructive behavior. That is by definition those behaviors that work in the best interest of the individual and the people around him or her. We decide, mutually, how we can best measure the improvement. The client is usually responsive to the challenge of doing this work in the short term and not signing up for an indeterminable relationship. It is not the job of the executive coach to change the person but to increase their behavioral competence.

Maybe I should be offended? I don't recall once in twenty years being asked to assist in a business decision. To the contrary, I take great honor in working with the person for the person as an honest broker of feedback and not as a business expert.

In today's atmosphere of corporate "yes men", unbridled greed and wayward ethics, it would seem that a small reasonable investment in providing a different perspective on behavior, can be helpful to the individual and the company.

One last thing, I can't help but notice the vitriol and distain that Ms. Kellaway expresses throughout the article. I 'd be happy to help her work it through…no charge!