Coaching Leaders to Inspire Adoption, Not Just Drive Change

From a recent discussion about integrating coaching with organizational change management, the following question/thoughts came up:

"𝘏𝘰𝘸 𝘥𝘰 𝘸𝘦 𝘤𝘰𝘢𝘤𝘩 𝘭𝘦𝘢𝘥𝘦𝘳𝘴 𝘵𝘰 𝘨𝘦𝘯𝘶𝘪𝘯𝘦𝘭𝘺 𝘪𝘯𝘴𝘱𝘪𝘳𝘦 𝘢𝘥𝘰𝘱𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯 𝘳𝘢𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘳 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘯 𝘴𝘪𝘮𝘱𝘭𝘺 𝘥𝘳𝘪𝘷𝘦 𝘤𝘩𝘢𝘯𝘨𝘦? 𝘛𝘩𝘦𝘳𝘦'𝘴 𝘢 𝘮𝘦𝘢𝘯𝘪𝘯𝘨𝘧𝘶𝘭 𝘥𝘪𝘧𝘧𝘦𝘳𝘦𝘯𝘤𝘦 𝘣𝘦𝘵𝘸𝘦𝘦𝘯 𝘢 𝘭𝘦𝘢𝘥𝘦𝘳 𝘸𝘩𝘰 𝘴𝘢𝘺𝘴 "𝘸𝘦'𝘳𝘦 𝘥𝘰𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘵𝘩𝘪𝘴" 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘰𝘯𝘦 𝘸𝘩𝘰 𝘩𝘦𝘭𝘱𝘴 𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘪𝘳 𝘵𝘦𝘢𝘮 𝘶𝘯𝘥𝘦𝘳𝘴𝘵𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘸𝘩𝘺, 𝘧𝘦𝘦𝘭 𝘰𝘸𝘯𝘦𝘳𝘴𝘩𝘪𝘱 𝘪𝘯 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘫𝘰𝘶𝘳𝘯𝘦𝘺, 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘸𝘢𝘯𝘵 𝘵𝘰 𝘮𝘰𝘷𝘦 𝘧𝘰𝘳𝘸𝘢𝘳𝘥."

This is so pertinent and raises a deeper question about how to distinguish between gaining compliance and fostering true commitment to change adoption. And in my professional opinion, coaching is an essential part of the answer.

Typically, leaders don’t struggle with driving change because they lack authority. On the contrary, the challenge (especially for newer leaders) is with their 𝗮𝗯𝗶𝗹𝗶𝘁𝘆 𝘁𝗼 𝗶𝗻𝘀𝗽𝗶𝗿𝗲 𝗼𝘁𝗵𝗲𝗿𝘀, because they often haven’t built 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗸𝗶𝗻𝗱 𝗼𝗳 𝘁𝗿𝘂𝘀𝘁 𝘁𝗵𝗮𝘁 𝗺𝗼𝘁𝗶𝘃𝗮𝘁𝗲𝘀 𝗽𝗲𝗼𝗽𝗹𝗲 𝘁𝗼 𝘄𝗮𝗻𝘁 𝘁𝗼 𝗳𝗼𝗹𝗹𝗼𝘄 𝗮𝗹𝗼𝗻𝗴 in the first place.

This reminds me of the principles from Stephen M.R. Covey's book, "𝘛𝘩𝘦 𝘚𝘱𝘦𝘦𝘥 𝘰𝘧 𝘛𝘳𝘶𝘴𝘵." Covey makes a compelling case that trust isn’t simply a “soft” concept, but rather a measurable performance multiplier. When trust is low, change takes longer; but when it's high, engagement and discretionary effort increase. From a coaching standpoint, this shifts the focus from “𝘏𝘰𝘸 𝘥𝘰 𝘐 𝘨𝘦𝘵 𝘮𝘺 𝘵𝘦𝘢𝘮 𝘵𝘰 𝘢𝘥𝘰𝘱𝘵 𝘵𝘩𝘪𝘴?” to “𝙒𝙝𝙖𝙩 𝙗𝙚𝙝𝙖𝙫𝙞𝙤𝙧𝙨 𝙖𝙢 𝙄 𝙚𝙭𝙝𝙞𝙗𝙞𝙩𝙞𝙣𝙜 𝙩𝙝𝙖𝙩 𝙚𝙞𝙩𝙝𝙚𝙧 𝙗𝙪𝙞𝙡𝙙 𝙤𝙧 𝙚𝙧𝙤𝙙𝙚 𝙩𝙧𝙪𝙨𝙩 𝙖𝙩 𝙩𝙝𝙞𝙨 𝙢𝙤𝙢𝙚𝙣𝙩?”

A practical way to approach this is to help leaders examine their behavior through the lenses of intent vs. impact. While a leader may 𝘪𝘯𝘵𝘦𝘯𝘥 to support their teams, pressure can create a 𝘯𝘦𝘨𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘷𝘦 𝘪𝘮𝘱𝘢𝘤𝘵—situations where their behavior can feel directive, rushed, or dismissive. Addressing these patterns during coaching conversations paves the way toward greater self-awareness, which is the sweet spot and one of ICF's core competencies. By gaining awareness, leaders are better able to 𝗰𝘂𝗹𝘁𝗶𝘃𝗮𝘁𝗲 𝘁𝗿𝘂𝘀𝘁, which is a critical first step toward being an inspiring leader.

Also, instead of coming up with more talking points, it's better to focus on 𝗮𝘀𝗸𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗯𝗲𝘁𝘁𝗲𝗿 𝗾𝘂𝗲𝘀𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻𝘀. Not only does this work toward helping others reflect on whatever challenges may cause resistance, it also aligns with another tenet of great coaching, which is 𝗹𝗶𝘀𝘁𝗲𝗻𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗮𝗰𝘁𝗶𝘃𝗲𝗹𝘆. Integrating coaching into one's leadership style builds better habits and reduces the natural tendency to be overly directive, seeking to immediately “fix” everything—which often inadvertently grows even more resistance.

Some think leadership means having all the answers; so shifting into curiosity can feel uncomfortable at first (almost like losing control). However, ironically, the opposite tends to be true. When leaders demonstrate genuine curiosity and empathy, they activate psychological safety, which research consistently shows is foundational for learning, risk-taking, and change adoption. 𝗣𝗲𝗼𝗽𝗹𝗲 𝗮𝗿𝗲 𝗳𝗮𝗿 𝗺𝗼𝗿𝗲 𝗹𝗶𝗸𝗲𝗹𝘆 𝘁𝗼 𝗲𝗻𝗴𝗮𝗴𝗲 𝘄𝗵𝗲𝗻 𝘁𝗵𝗲𝘆 𝗳𝗲𝗲𝗹 𝘀𝗲𝗲𝗻 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝗵𝗲𝗮𝗿𝗱—𝗻𝗼𝘁 𝘀𝗶𝗺𝗽𝗹𝘆 𝗺𝗮𝗻𝗮𝗴𝗲𝗱.

Another practical strategy is to coach leaders to reframe their role as change sponsor from being a "𝘥𝘳𝘪𝘷𝘦𝘳 𝘰𝘧 𝘤𝘩𝘢𝘯𝘨𝘦" to a "𝘀𝘁𝗲𝘄𝗮𝗿𝗱 𝗼𝗳 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗲𝘅𝗽𝗲𝗿𝗶𝗲𝗻𝗰𝗲" for those stakeholders going through it. This means paying attention to not just the milestones and deliverables (leave that to your project managers), but also to how people interpret and emotionally process the change as it unfolds. This alone can reveal a completely different level of empathy and deepen conversations.

To summarize what I think makes the biggest difference, it's that 𝗹𝗲𝗮𝗱𝗲𝗿𝘀 𝗮𝗿𝗲 𝗯𝗲𝘁𝘁𝗲𝗿 𝗲𝗾𝘂𝗶𝗽𝗽𝗲𝗱 𝘁𝗼 𝗶𝗻𝘀𝗽𝗶𝗿𝗲 𝗰𝗵𝗮𝗻𝗴𝗲 𝗮𝗱𝗼𝗽𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻 𝘄𝗵𝗲𝗻 𝘁𝗵𝗲𝗶𝗿 𝗯𝗲𝗵𝗮𝘃𝗶𝗼𝗿𝘀 𝗰𝗼𝗻𝘀𝗶𝘀𝘁𝗲𝗻𝘁𝗹𝘆 𝗰𝗼𝗺𝗺𝘂𝗻𝗶𝗰𝗮𝘁𝗲 𝘁𝗿𝘂𝘀𝘁, 𝗰𝘂𝗿𝗶𝗼𝘀𝗶𝘁𝘆, 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝗿𝗲𝘀𝗽𝗲𝗰𝘁. And again, coaching is a huge driver that sets the pace for changing these behaviors.

Can you think of a time when a small shift in a leader’s behavior created a noticeable change in how the team responded?