The Coaching Culture Trap Where Good Intentions Lead to Bad Outcomes
- Brainz Magazine
- 2 days ago
- 7 min read
Written by Gilles Varette, Business Coach
30 years of experience in Leadership: NCO in a paratrooper regiment in his native France, leading a global virtual team for a Nasdaq-listed company, Board stewardship, Coaching, and Mentoring. Gilles, an EMCC-accredited coach, holds a Master’s in Business Practice and diplomas in Personal Development and Executive Coaching, as well as Mental Health and Well-being.
Coaching culture is often seen as a hallmark of progressive organizations, one that empowers individuals and fosters growth. But when it's implemented without depth, accountability, or genuine leadership engagement, it can lead to the opposite effect: frustration, disengagement, and quiet toxicity. In this article, I explore how even the best intentions can go wrong, drawing on research, personal experience, and a deeper look at the systemic barriers that too often get ignored.
When coaching culture turns counterproductive
Coaching culture is often seen as a hallmark of progressive leadership, a sign that an organization values growth, self-awareness, and empowerment. But behind the buzzwords, a subtler risk can unfold.
When coaching is introduced without depth, accountability, or genuine leadership engagement, it becomes performative and sometimes quietly toxic. Rather than fostering development, it can breed confusion, cynicism, and harm. This article explores how even the best intentions can backfire, and what it takes to build a truly sustainable coaching culture.
The promise of coaching culture
At its best, a coaching culture fosters learning, trust, and transformation. Leaders model vulnerability and curiosity, while employees are supported to grow in a psychologically safe environment.
Organizations invest in coaching to unlock potential. Done well, it’s scalable, human-centred, and a catalyst for cultural change. As Hawkins (2012) notes, coaching culture isn’t a set of interventions; it’s an ecosystem of relationships, conversations, and shared learning.
But like any tool, coaching is only as effective as the intention and integrity behind it.
When coaching culture becomes a trap
Superficial adoption: Performative coaching without accountability
In some organizations, coaching culture becomes a checkbox exercise. Leaders attend workshops, adopt coaching language, or roll out tools, but real behavioural change is absent. Coaching is presented as a strategic priority, yet senior leaders themselves may opt out of being coached or offering meaningful feedback. There’s no reflection, no role modelling, only delivery.
This disconnect erodes trust. As Clutterbuck (2008) and Grant (2014) both suggest, coaching without leadership accountability quickly loses credibility. When coaching is reduced to technique rather than transformation, it risks becoming theatre, encouraging others to grow while leaders remain unchanged.
Misapplied techniques: When coaching tools become harmful
When coaching is misused, it can quietly reinforce the very dynamics it claims to disrupt. Employees may be encouraged to “self-coach” through burnout, ambiguity, or poor leadership without the psychological safety or structural support to succeed. In these cases, coaching becomes a subtle form of emotional bypass, shifting responsibility from the system to the individual.
Common tools like the GROW model are sometimes applied mechanically or without consent. Coaching is imposed, not co-created. Feedback is framed as “developmental,” but the real goal is compliance. This erodes trust, disempowers employees, and can create resistance disguised as engagement.
As Bachkirova (2016) warns, coaching that avoids power dynamics or systemic realities risks becoming a tool for control rather than growth. Without ethical safeguards and context, even well-known models can do more harm than good.
Training without integration
Organizations often invest in leadership development by sending managers to coaching programs or high-value training. While these experiences can be transformative, they often lack meaningful follow-through.
Without internal debriefs, accountability structures, or support to apply new insights, even the most powerful learning experiences fail to take root. Under operational pressure, leaders revert to old habits.
Over time, training risks becoming a symbolic gesture, a checkmark rather than a catalyst for change. Without integration, development remains isolated, not institutionalized.
A personal reflection
In a previous role, I submitted a well-researched business case for launching an internal coaching program, grounded in global best practices. The response? A dismissive remark: “How come you have so much time on your hands?” I feared it might cost me my job.
Some time later, coaching was introduced, but not in the spirit I had envisioned. I found myself on the receiving end of a rigid, one-sided process. Despite my qualifications, the sessions lacked consent, clarity, or shared purpose. The experience left me disengaged and disillusioned.
That moment taught me a lasting lesson: when coaching lacks mutual respect and systemic alignment, it can undermine the very growth it claims to promote. Culture isn’t created by titles or toolkits; it’s shaped by how we treat each other when no one’s watching.
The missing link: Middle management resistance
One of the most overlooked barriers to coaching culture is not a lack of belief but the burnout of middle management.
These leaders carry operational burdens without adequate authority, support, or time. With KPIs tied to output, not culture, coaching feels like an added demand rather than a strategic enabler.
Comments like “We don’t have time” or “It’s not my job to make people feel better” are less about resistance and more about resource strain and system misalignment.
As Gartner (2023) notes, managers face 51% more responsibilities than they can reasonably manage.
As Forbes (2024) notes, middle managers are essential culture carriers, but only when they’re empowered, trusted, and coached through uncertainty, not left to manage it alone. Without this support, resistance becomes quietly entrenched.
To create space for coaching:
Redesign KPIs to reward relational behaviours.
Provide reflective spaces and peer support.
Embed coaching in planning and review processes.
Recognize emotional labour as part of leadership.
Only then can middle managers serve as culture carriers, not by mandate, but through empowerment.
What a healthy coaching culture looks like
Model before mandate: Leaders must coach, be coached, and share their reflective practice openly. This builds psychological safety and trust.
Measure what matters: Focus on cultural and behavioural outcomes, not just sessions delivered. Tie coaching to strategic priorities and feedback loops (Carter & Miller, 2009; McKinsey, 2021). Companies with embedded learning cultures are significantly more adaptive and resilient in dynamic environments.
Protect boundaries: Coaching is not a performance tool or therapy. Coachees must opt in, define the focus, and own the process. Ethical boundaries are non-negotiable.
Embed, don’t isolate: Integrate coaching into leadership development, team dialogue, and organizational values. It must be part of “how we do things here,” not an HR project.
Create supervision structures for leader-coaches: Even experienced leaders need space to reflect. Offer peer or facilitated supervision spaces where leader-coaches can process difficult conversations, ethical dilemmas, and their growth. This reinforces accountability and psychological safety.
A five-step roadmap to sustainable coaching culture
A coaching culture doesn’t come from a single program; it emerges when coaching becomes part of how leadership, learning, and performance are lived every day. Here’s a concise roadmap for getting it right:
Model the mindset: Leaders at all levels must walk the talk. Be coached, coach others, and reflect openly to signal that learning and growth are valued.
Integrate, don’t isolate: Embed coaching into everyday systems, performance reviews, planning, development, not as an HR initiative, but as part of how work gets done.
Support the middle: Middle managers need coaching themselves, not just training. Offer structured support, supervision spaces, and KPIs that reward relational leadership.
Measure what matters: Track coaching behaviours, team engagement, psychological safety, and internal coach utilization, not just training attendance.
Protect integrity: Ensure coaching is ethical, voluntary, and safe. Offer supervision for leader-coaches and avoid using coaching as disguised performance management.
Culture cannot be coached into existence
Culture doesn’t change through toolkits or slogans; it shifts when leaders consistently model new ways of thinking, relating, and leading. Coaching can be a powerful enabler, but only when grounded in ethical practice, systemic support, and reflective leadership.
If we believe in coaching, we must also be willing to coach our systems and ourselves. That requires honesty about power dynamics, commitment to accountability, and investments in psychological safety and supervision.
Sustainable coaching cultures don’t rely on aspiration; they depend on alignment. As the research confirms, anything less risks becoming theatre.
So, where to begin?
Walk the talk: Be visible in your learning and coaching efforts.
Skill up: Train with depth and support with supervision.
Sync up: Align coaching with strategy and values.
Listen in: Prioritize open dialogue and trust-building.
Back it up: Allocate time and resources to make coaching work.
Track the shift: Measure behaviour change, not buzzwords.
Stay accountable: Make reflection and feedback part of the culture.
A healthy coaching culture isn’t built in a day, but it can begin today.
So, leaders, pick one fun thing to try today, and let’s turn that coaching culture dream into a reality. No more snooze-fest slide decks, let’s make it happen!
Gilles Varette, Business Coach
30 years of experience in Leadership: NCO in a paratrooper regiment in his native France, leading a global virtual team for a Nasdaq-listed company, Board stewardship, Coaching, and Mentoring. Gilles, an EMCC-accredited coach, holds a Master’s in Business Practice and diplomas in Personal Development and Executive Coaching, as well as Mental Health and Well-being. He strongly believes that cultivating a Growth Mindset is the key to Personal Development and a natural safeguard against the expertise trap. He lives by this quote from Epictetus: “It is not what happens to you that matters, but how you react; when something happens, the only thing in your power is your attitude toward it.”
References:
Bachkirova, T. (2016). The Self of the Coach: Conceptualization, Issues, and Opportunities for Practitioner Development. Consulting Psychology Journal: Practice and Research, 68(2), 143–156.
Carter, A., & Miller, L. (2009). Increase Business Benefits from In-House Coaching Schemes.
Institute for Employment Studies.
Clutterbuck, D. (2008). Coaching the Team at Work. Nicholas Brealey. Hawkins, P. (2012). Creating a Coaching Culture. McGraw-Hill Education
ICF. (2025). ICF Research: Fuelling Data-Driven Coaching. [online] Available at: https://coachingfederation.org/resources/research/ [Accessed 26 May 2025].
Ingle, K. (2024). The Hidden Heroes: How To Empower Middle Management. [online] Forbes. [Accessed 26 May 2025].
Gartner. (2023). Managers Are Cracking — And More Training Won’t Help | Gartner. [online] Available at: [Accessed 26 May 2025].
Rock, D., & Donde, R. (2008). Driving Organizational Change with Internal Coaching Programs. NeuroLeadership Institute.
Mukherjee, A. (2012). Does Coaching Transform Coaches? A Case Study of Internal
Coaching. International Journal of Evidence Based Coaching and Mentoring.
Smith, M. and Young McNally, E. (2021). Building a learning culture that drives business forward | McKinsey. [online] www.mckinsey.com.
Varette, G. (2019). In-house or External Coaching Briefing. Internal white paper.
.jpg)