How Do We Know Organizational Coaching Actually Worked?

In my experience implementing organizational coaching programs, three simple questions matter a great deal:

1. What is supposed to change? — Not a broad concept, but one or two specific behaviours or outcomes.

2. Who can see that change? — The leader themselves? Their manager? Team members? Or cross-functional stakeholders?

3. When will we look at it again? — If we only ask about impact at the end of the program, we lose an important chance to learn along the way.

That is why, in the current program architecture, beyond the opening conversation, a midpoint review and a final review are built in. At the midpoint, progress against the goals, the manager’s feedback on observable behaviours, and any change needed in the work environment are reviewed.

When the work environment itself is making change harder, that is often a system question worth examining before treating everything as an individual gap.

For me, this is not only reporting.

It is part of the intervention itself.

In organizational coaching, the manager above the client can be an important source for observing change.

They might say:

“They used to answer almost everything themselves; now they ask more questions.”

Or:

“They used to take issues back; now they let people carry their decisions through.”

That is useful data for assessing behaviour.

Knowing what was said inside the coaching session is something else entirely.

In the current program architecture, manager feedback covers only agreed, observable behaviours — not the content of private sessions.

Measuring impact should not erase confidentiality. Organizational coaching starts with the contract, not the first session goes deeper on that boundary.

In an organizational coaching program, we usually do not need a long list of indicators.

For each manager:

One or two important goals

For each goal:

One or two observable signs

And across the program:

A starting point, a midpoint review and a final review

In the current program architecture, organizational competencies and the manager’s view help shape the goals, but the final goal is formed with the client’s participation. Progress is reviewed along the way and, when needed, the goal is reset by agreement.

For me, that is more useful than a long scoring form.

Before the next organizational coaching program begins, it can help to clarify only three questions:

Exactly which behaviour is supposed to change?

Who can see that change?

When will we look at it again so that measurement becomes part of learning?

If the answers to these three questions are not clear, the problem has probably not started with measurement.

It has started with a vague definition of success.