How Emotionally Intelligent Leaders Use Coaching to Unlock Performance and Develop Future Leaders
Photo by Julia Craice on Unsplash
My last article dealt with the necessity of emotional intelligence for rising leaders. But as leaders, how do we begin to express emotional intelligence to those we lead? As Daniel Goleman described it, emotional intelligence is about better discerning what is going on inside us and regulating those emotions. The other half of the equation is to better understand what is going on inside others and to navigate the relationship appropriately.
In this article, I will borrow some principles from Sir John Whitmore's book, Coaching for Performance: The Principles and Practice of Coaching and Leadership.
Whitmore believed that one of leadership's roles is to create a meaningful and purposeful journey for followers. This makes sense to me. People want to contribute to a cause and make a difference. If followers increasingly see and experience that their unique contribution is meaningful and purposeful, their performance will rise, and retention will increase.
Whitmore offers four guiding principles to help emotionally intelligent leaders create meaningful, purposeful pathways for their followers. The foundation of his premises is that leading with a coaching style will surely elevate follower and employee performance and satisfaction — and will undoubtedly raise up more leaders.
Successful leaders will lead in a coaching style rather than command and control. Prescription, instruction, autocracy, and hierarchy are losing traction and acceptability. Good people want more choice, more responsibility, and more fun in their lives, and that includes the workplace.
Leadership style determines performance, and a coaching style delivers the highest performance. The relationship between performance and leadership style is well documented...yet the public and private sectors still struggle to embed and embody the behaviors they advocate. In many cases, both leaders and followers collude to resist change, even though that benefits neither.
Helping others to build their awareness, their responsibility, and consequently their self-belief lays the foundation stones of their own future leadership capability. Leaders, by definition, have to make choices and decisions every day. To do so effectively, they require these fundamental attributes. Coaching builds leaders, and there is a lack of leadership today, in every sector, in every institution, and in every country.
The external context within which organizations operate is changing fast, due in large measure to circumstances outside the control of the company or even the country. Globalization, instant communication, economic crises, corporate social responsibility, and huge environmental issues are a few obvious examples, and there are many more. Coping with these, along with the speed of change itself, demands new leadership qualities.
What do you think? All four of these guidelines relate closely to emotional intelligence and to leading with a coaching approach. In fact, Whimore states that "coaching is the practice of emotional intelligence." He emphasizes that leading with a coaching approach can unlock potential by fostering self-awareness, responsibility, and self-belief through powerful open questions that overcome fear and self-doubt — and thus maximize performance.
The ultimate question for you as a leader is not “How effective am I at getting results?” but “What kind of leader am I forming others to become?”
Here are some key questions to help you assess your leadership style:
When results are at stake, do I default to telling people what to do, or do I first seek to increase their awareness of the situation and options? (This exposes whether control or awareness is your primary lever.)
How often do I assume that I know the best answer, rather than trusting that the person closest to the work can discover it with the right questions? (This reveals your underlying belief about human potential.)
In my conversations, what percentage of my time is spent speaking versus listening—and what does that say about my leadership posture? (Whitmore viewed listening as a prerequisite to performance.)
When someone underperforms, is my instinct to correct behavior or to explore thinking, assumptions, and obstacles? (This distinguishes performance management from performance coaching.)
Do my questions primarily lead people toward my conclusions, or do they genuinely expand the individual’s own thinking and ownership? (This tests whether you are coaching or subtly directing.)
To what extent do people on my team take responsibility for outcomes without my intervention—and what role have I played in enabling or inhibiting that? (Responsibility is an outcome of leadership behavior, not personality.)
When decisions are made, do people leave my presence more energized and accountable—or more dependent on me? (A key indicator of coaching versus dependency-creating leadership.)
How comfortable am I with silence, uncertainty, and not being the smartest person in the room? (Coaching leadership requires restraint and humility.)
If my leadership were described by my team, would they say I develop people or primarily drive performance, and are those truly integrated in my practice? (Whitmore argued that sustainable performance emerges from development.)
Thanks for stopping by!
I hope this content was helpful and encouraged you in your daily practice of leadership. If you would enjoy receiving more content like this on a regular basis please subscribe by clicking the button below.
