There will be times where you will be tested to choose between “tell” versus “teach and coach”. 

In the frantic calendar of businesses cycles; a lot of managers eventually default to “telling”. The perception of efficiency and the urgency to say “we’ve done it” encourages this behaviour. Furthermore when managers get flustered with the “ticking of the clock” they succumb to the temptation of escalating from “telling to doing”. The need to be the super hero arises.

“Tell situations” such as sales calls where salesmen are instructed to do “Canned Calls” where talents are left to literally recite the script on a customer call or moments where a department head rewrites the whole business plan out of frustration are wasted moments where a talents creativity and potential could be unlock. “Telling and even personally doing” would work in the short run but this would do more harm in the long-run if this is the “default mode” of folks assigned to such roles. This behaviour over time will define the culture of the team. Symptoms of “team delegation upwards, echo chambers and disengaged members” will surface.    

Managers may feel that the method of “coaching and teaching” sounds “romantic and ideal”. They may even feel it is cumbersome, unrealistic and hard. True leaders; I believe; deems this essential and the necessary path for any team. Don’t get me wrong; there will be moments that leaders step in to “tell mode” to right a ship but the prevailing mode for folks finding themselves in leadership roles should be that of a “coach and teacher”. 

The coaching path though is actually the hardest path which is why it separates a manager from a leader. Most of the leaders I meet would share that choosing this harder path became clearer when they realized that deadlines are “arbitrary and relative” whereas “sustainability of performance” is non-negotiable. They have also come to realize that helping a colleague or a team grow via empowerment is its own reward. The main aspirational goal was not a “number” but creating that capability in an individual or an organization or a team - that they could reach their potential. The “numbers” eventually follows. 

To achieve this; folks in roles of leadership should invest and nurture growth in the craft and knowledge of their teams. Embedded in this principle are the words “potential and willingness” which makes this path harder. Leaders need to ascertain if the individuals in the team truly have the potential and willingness to learn/apply so that the energy spent in coaching is not gone to waste. Coaches find time to drill, share, practice and hone the coachee. They endlessly look for teaching moments in the day; sprinkling the day with nuggets of questions, catch-phrase, reminders, scribbles and anecdotes. Moreover they also teach through example. 

If the default should be coaching, then the challenge would be identifying when are the “tell moments”. Even in these 'tell moments,' it's crucial to approach the situation with a coaching mindset. Having this in mind would allow you to shape this types of experiences so it takes a form quite similar to a coaching moment. Situations where it merits “tell” and some tips:  

• If the sense of urgency or intervention is heightened due to a risk of hurting customers, the organization and the stakeholders. These are moments that leaders truly need to step in, lead from the front and at most times be prescriptive. The necessity of such actions should be explained to the stakeholders involved in the organization. Leaders should take the opportunity to guide the team through the urgency or skill gap, fostering a learning environment even in challenging situations. Viewing these 'tell moments' as learning opportunities is key. Leaders can articulate the rationale behind their actions, ensuring that the team understands the stakes and the decision-making process. This, in turn, contributes to a culture of continuous learning and development. A leader in this case would “own up to accountability for the intervention”; remind the team of the “values the organization” stand for, articulate clearly the stakes involved and find ways to pull in the team or the individual to be part of the solution.  

• If upon “deep assessment” one discovers that the tasked at hand does not match the current know-how and skill set of the team or the individual, one would need to pivot into a greater degree of instruction. “Deep assessment” here assumes that one has adequately provided empowered opportunities for the team or individual to test and show a degree of competency on addressing the task. Having this step in itself is already a form of teaching and coaching especially if it is augmented with briefing reviews and exploratory discussions on solving related issues. If the skill set and know how does not match then more prescriptive instructions should be given which should include an explanation of the rationale of each step. Execution should still stay with the assigned team as a form of “On-The-Job Training” to be later supported by relevant formal training. 

• In training and coaching, one would experience a range of calibrating from empowering, coaching and telling as it is the nature of how we learn. It is important to note how much time and instances where one “tells”. Reflection is a crucial step after instances of 'telling.' If “telling” moments are more frequent, this could either be symptom of one’s management style hence warranting a level of change or it could be a symptom of the talent being coached needing additional support or even that the talent is the wrong fit for the task. In either case it is a “call to action” to reflect and act. This reflective process should lead to tangible actions aimed at fostering a more effective and sustainable coaching approach.

As you eventually imbibe this practice of coaching you would eventually realize that the growth not only is experienced by the coachee but in the journey the coach also improves thereby lifting everyone in the process.