How to tell the difference between Training and Coaching
Training and coaching are often used interchangeably, and that leads to confusion, especially when words like “mentoring” and “counselling” 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.
Defining the difference
Let’s put us all on the same page and make the distinction between coaching and training.
In a nutshell, training is about transferring knowledge while coaching is about developing that knowledge or skills.
For example, one may have basic knowledge that acts as a foundation onto which is layered general training about how to make, let’s say, a process map. Not all process maps are created equally, however. Chances are, the fiftieth map a person makes will be a lot more satisfactory than the first.
Clearly, a person can be trained to make a process map and turn out an acceptable textbook map. It is also true that practice over time will improve the result. But consider the impact of coaching from a Master Black Belt. It will be the tips, tricks, and secrets of a seasoned coach that will propel the newbie’s process map from OK to amazing!
Comparing training and coaching side-by-side
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 employees |
| 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 Green Belts, remembering and being able to apply knowledge will improve process performance. Less defects and quicker lead times. Bigger smiles. All is well.
Move coaching up your priority ladder
The only problem is that humans don’t remember very well. 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 non-existent, haphazard, inadequately funded, or rests several rungs from the top of the priority ladder, this might as well be what is said.
A tango for two
Certainly, training can’t do the job on its own. And coaching, applied without the foundation of basic prior knowledge, won’t succeed either. Great information retention and application requires both coaching and training in equal measures. Maybe if some of the millions spent annually on corporate training were redistributed and reprioritized to reflect a training/coaching mix, the Return On Investment would be a lot more satisfying.