The Difference between

Coaching and Training

Coaching and training are often used interchangeably, and that leads to
confusion, especially when words like "mentoring" and "counseling" are added
to the mix. It's not so much that managers don't know the differences between
coaching and training but that so many of their actions imply that they don't.
More about that shortly.

Just to put us all on the same page, let's make the distinction between
coaching and training right up front. Essentially, training is
about transferring knowledge while coaching is
about enhancing knowledge (or skills)—development, in other words.

For example, one may have basic culinary knowledge that acts as a
foundation onto which is layered general training about how to make, let's say,
a soufflé. Not all soufflés are created equal, however. And chances are the
fiftieth a learner makes will be a lot more satisfactory than the first.

Clearly, a person can be trained to make a soufflé and turn out an acceptable
textbook creation. It is also true that practice over time will improve the result.
But consider the impact of coaching from a veteran soufflé maker. It will be
the tips, tricks and secrets of a seasoned coach that will propel the newbie's
soufflés from okay to Oh My!

The following is a quick summary of the major differences between training

and coaching.

TRAINING COACHING

Transferring knowledge Enhancing knowledge or skills

Often used in group setting Usually one-on-one

Frequently off-site or at a special facility Usually on-the-job

Often used for new hires More often used with experienced empl

Usually structured Usually unstructured

Formal Informal, conversational

Depends on telling Depends on asking

Learning focused Development focused

Obviously, coaching is a way to apply learning in an informed way. Training
hopes that learners will remember knowledge so it can be applied. In the case
of sales reps, remembering and being able to apply knowledge will improve
performance and productivity. More sales. Bigger smiles. All is well.

The only problem is that humans don't remember very well. One source says
that research shows an average of 50 percent of the information received in a
presentation is forgotten within one hour. After 24 hours, on average, 70
percent is gone. And within a week a staggering 90 percent is nowhere to be
found.

Since the best coaches do so frequently and on an ongoing basis, coaching is

one way to impact the fact that even the best of employees will simply not
remember valuable information. Training is not enough. So we'll say it
again: It's not so much that managers don't know the differences between
coaching and training but that so many of their actions imply that they don't.

Perhaps no one really thinks or says aloud, "Why should I invest time, effort
and money in coaching someone who has already been trained?" But when
coaching is nonexistent, haphazard, inadequately funded or rests several
rungs from the top of the priority ladder, this might as well be what is said.

Certainly training can't do the job on its own. And coaching, applied without
the foundation of basic prior knowledge, won't succeed either. Clearly, this is
one tango that takes two. Maybe if some of the 60 billion spent annually on
corporate training were redistributed and reprioritized to reflect a
training/coaching mix, the ROI would be a lot more satisfying.