Even well-meaning coaches can do harm. The fix? Reframing coaching as a shared responsibility among coach, learner and the organization
-
Text originally published at: Smith School of Business
In a recent study, Nicky Terblanche and Frederik Kruger (Stellenbosch Business School) explored what happens when coaching falls flat — when people walk away feeling disappointed. Their voices offer a rare and important perspective on the kind of coaching that not only fails to help but actively damages trust, performance and morale.
From a pool of over 357 professionals, the authors focused on 13 coachees who rated their experience as deeply negative. Their stories are striking, not because they’re dramatic but because they’re surprisingly common-sense scenarios.
What exactly goes wrong? According to the study, it boils down to three key issues: mismatched expectations, poor relationships and organizational interference.
Mismatched expectations. Coaching should begin with a clear understanding of purpose. But in many of the failed cases, that clarity never came. Some participants did not even know why they were being coached. Others felt their coach did not understand their background, culture or goals. One described the process as “going on a road trip without a map.” When the destination is not defined and the route is not discussed, the result is confusion at best and disillusionment at worst.
Poor relationships. Coaching depends on trust. Without it, sessions feel more like a performance review than a partnership. Many participants felt their coaches were not really listening or did not seem invested. Worse, some had coaches with personal ties to their managers, which raised red flags about confidentiality and safety. In such a fragile environment, the space for honest reflection disappears. Instead of growth, people hold back.
Disinterested organizations. While coaching may look like a private conversation between two people, the company is always in the background. That can be a problem. In some cases, coaching was clearly designed to serve the corporate agenda and not the individual’s needs. Others reported receiving little to no support in integrating lessons into daily work life once the coaching sessions were done. And nearly all agreed: Without meaningful involvement from HR or leadership, the entire process felt disconnected.
Why bad coaching matters for HR
The consequences go far beyond one frustrated coachee. When coaching fails, it doesn’t just stall development; it chips away at trust, motivation and belief in the system. People start to question whether the organization truly supports their growth or is just ticking boxes.
This is a wake-up call for HR professionals. Coaching is not a quick fix or a one-size-fits-all solution. It needs thoughtful design, cultural sensitivity and careful follow-up. The coach’s skills matter, but so does the surrounding system. Everything from how coaches are selected to how goals are defined shapes the experience.
Terblanche and Kruger make a compelling case for what needs to change. They propose expanding the popular “working alliance” theory, which traditionally focuses on the coach-coachee relationship, to include the organization as an active third player. After all, the company sets the stage, funds the process and often defines success. Ignoring its influence is like pretending a referee has no impact on the game.
For HR teams and leaders, the finding offers two clear takeaways. Coaching is not just about hiring good coaches. It is about making sure the process is thoughtful, clear and co-owned by the coachee. It isn’t just a personal development tool but a reflection of culture. When done well, it builds bridges between individual potential and organizational goals. But when done poorly, it becomes a silent barrier creating confusion, resentment and lost opportunities. At its best, coaching builds confidence, improves performance and strengthens workplace culture. But if it is handled poorly, it can quietly do the opposite.
By learning from what does not work, organizations have a chance to make coaching not just more widespread, but more meaningful, more human and more effective.
This article is adapted from a story that originally appeared in CoBS Insights, a publication of the Council on Business and Society (CoBS). Smith School of Business is a member of CoBS.