Watch the recording as a video:
View the slides:
Listen to it as a podcast:
The instinct to solve a problem you can see is one of the strongest instincts a leader has. Someone on your team is stuck. You see the answer. You have ten seconds to either tell them the answer or ask a question that helps them find it themselves. The first option is faster. The second option produces a problem-solver. Most leaders default to the first option most of the time, and over years of small defaults, they build teams full of capable executors who can't quite think on their own.
Coaching is the discipline that breaks this pattern. It's not a soft skill, despite often being labeled that way. It's an operational competency that determines whether your team can navigate uncertainty when you're not in the room, whether your improvement work compounds or stays dependent on the people who started it, and whether the people you've spent years developing are actually more capable than they were when they joined.
The shift from command-and-control leadership to coaching-based leadership has been happening for decades, and the trend has accelerated as workplaces increasingly run on intrinsic motivation -- mastery, autonomy, and purpose, to borrow Dan Pink's framing. The leaders who can coach effectively are increasingly the leaders organizations want and need. The methodology is teachable, and Steve Kane's session walks through how.
Steve Kane is Director of Coaching and Certification at Gemba Academy. Prior to Gemba Academy, Steve had a diverse career that included a large medical device sales territory, a plant manager role where he applied Lean methods to drive improvement, and VP of Operations at Specialty Silicone Fabricators where he led the company's Lean efforts. He has served on the western region board of the Association for Manufacturing Excellence and has worked with the Michigan Lean Learning Consortium and the California Central Coast Lean Forum.
The session is hosted by Mark Graban, Senior Advisor at KaiNexus and the author of Lean Hospitals, Healthcare Kaizen, Measures of Success, and The Mistakes That Make Us.
Good leaders move between four distinct roles throughout a typical day, often without being consciously aware of which one they're in at any moment. Steve's opening move is to name the four roles explicitly and identify what makes each different from the others.
Teacher. Helps someone gain theoretical knowledge -- facts, data, concepts that can be consumed in a classroom setting or through documentation. Teaching is about transferring knowledge that exists.
Mentor. An experienced and trusted advisor who has been down the road before and can offer insight based on their experience. The mentor isn't always present in daily work -- they're the person you go to when you're stuck on something they've already navigated. Steve points to the recurring mentor character in classic Lean books like The Goal or The Goldmine and The Lean Manager -- the figure who appears at just the right moment with a piece of wisdom that reframes the situation.
Manager. Responsible for getting things done through other people. The manager owns the results of the team and is accountable for outcomes. This is the role most readers of this page hold.
Coach. Partners with a client through a thought-provoking and creative process that inspires them to maximize their personal and professional potential. The coach helps the client navigate uncertainty, develop their own answers, and grow their capability through experience.
The four roles aren't sequential phases or career stages. They're distinct modes that good leaders switch between deliberately, based on what the moment requires. A genuinely effective leader does all four, often within the same conversation, but stays aware of which role they're in at any given time.
One important note about terminology: Steve uses "client" rather than "direct report" when describing the coaching relationship. The word is deliberate. It signals a servant-leader orientation and creates the right relational distance for coaching to work. Even when you're coaching someone who reports to you, treating them in that moment as a client rather than as an employee changes the dynamic in productive ways.
Coaching has several distinguishing features that separate it from teaching, mentoring, and managing.
Coaching is about helping someone develop skill through actual experience, not about transferring knowledge. Steve uses the bicycle analogy. A teacher can give a lesson on how to ride a bicycle -- explain the parts, demonstrate the steering, describe the physics. A coach is the person running alongside the client as they learn to ride for the first time, with their hands on the handlebars and the coach close enough to support but not close enough to interfere. The coach doesn't ride the bicycle. The client does.
Coaching helps someone get from point A through a field of uncertainty to point B, with the work being entirely the client's. The coach engages in purposeful conversations that help the client understand point A deeply, see point B clearly, and find their own path through the uncertainty between them.
Coaching meets the client where they are without judgment. The question "where are you right now?" or "what is your current state?" gets accepted as a starting point, not evaluated against where the coach thinks the client should be. The safety of non-judgment is what makes honest reflection possible.
Coaching doesn't advise, suggest, or recommend a course of action. This is the discipline that separates coaching from mentoring and from managing. The coach asks questions and frames reflection. The client develops their own answers. This is also where the manager-as-coach paradox becomes operational, because managers often need to advise and direct -- and that's fine, as long as the leader is conscious of stepping out of the coaching role when they do.
Coaching detaches the coach from the outcome. The client owns the journey. Failures sting less for the coach because they're not the coach's failures. Successes belong fully to the client. The detachment is what allows the coach to give the client real space to experiment and learn.
The coaching model Steve teaches has five steps, which map directly onto the five questions in Mike Rother's Toyota Kata Practice Guide. The version Steve uses for general business coaching:
Where do you want to be? (Toyota Kata: What is your target condition?)
Where are you now? (What is the actual condition now?)
What's keeping you from getting there? (What obstacles are keeping you from reaching your target condition?)
What are you going to do? (What is your next step?)
When will you have it done? (What do you expect from taking that step, and how quickly can we see what you've learned?)
The five questions are deceptively simple. The work is in the depth of clarity the client develops on each question. Most clients don't actually have a clear picture of where they want to be. They have a vague sense. Most don't have a precise read on where they actually are right now. They have impressions. Most can name some obstacles but haven't isolated which one matters most. Most have a sense of what they could do next but haven't committed to a specific testable action with a defined timeline.
The coach's job is to ask deepening questions that produce real clarity on each of the five points. When you get a vague answer, you ask another question. When you get specificity, you move forward.
The model does one thing better than almost any other leadership tool. It changes the client's mental state from things-happening-to-me to me-making-things-happen. From reactive to proactive. From searching for the right answer to deciding the next step. That shift is the operational outcome of coaching, and it's what makes coaching produce capability rather than just compliance.
One specific reframe in the model worth noting: the word "why" doesn't appear in the questions. Steve is direct that this is deliberate, at least in American/Western culture. "Why didn't that work?" puts people on their heels. They start searching for the right answer or defending themselves. "What were the causes? What were the circumstances? What led to this?" keeps the focus on the issues rather than on the person and produces more honest reflection. The shift from why to what is one of the smallest and most useful adjustments coaches can make.
The single most practical skill Steve emphasizes is the willingness to sit with awkward silence after asking a question.
Most coaches, especially new ones, ask a question and then fill the silence that follows with either a clarification of the question, a hint at the answer, or a different question entirely. The instinct comes from a good place. The silence feels uncomfortable. The coach wants to help. But the help robs the client of the moment where the actual thinking happens.
Mark adds a useful number in the Q&A: the awkward silence usually breaks at around eight or nine seconds. That feels like a lifetime, but you'd be amazed how many times after roughly nine seconds the client produces a response or reflection that wouldn't have emerged if the silence had been broken sooner.
Steve adds a related technique. When you ask a question and get a superficial response that lacks depth, the move isn't to ask another question. It's to remain silent. The client often hears their own superficial answer, recognizes it as superficial, and digs deeper without prompting.
The discipline of silence requires biting your tongue when you have a great idea to share. The greatest challenge for coaches isn't asking good questions. It's keeping quiet while the client works through them.
Most discussions of coaching assume formal scheduled coaching sessions -- planned conversations with specific objectives and structured time. Steve introduces a related concept that he calls covert coaching, with the metaphor of a ninja who gets in, does the work, and gets out without being seen.
Covert coaching is unscheduled coaching that happens in the flow of normal work. Someone is dealing with a challenge. The coach engages them in what looks like a casual conversation. The conversation touches on the five points of the coaching model -- where they are, where they want to be, what's getting in the way, what they're going to do, how they'll hold themselves accountable -- without ever feeling like a coaching session.
The technique works because the structure of the model is portable. Once you've internalized the five questions, you can ask them in any conversation. A hallway exchange becomes a coaching opportunity. A coffee chat becomes development time. The formal coaching session has its place, but most of the coaching that actually changes behavior happens in these unscheduled moments.
The discipline still requires active listening and the avoidance of advice or suggestions. The coach is still asking, not telling. The client is still doing the work. The difference is just that the work doesn't feel like a structured exercise.
The most common operational tension for leaders applying coaching skills is the conflict between the coach role (let the client struggle through to their own discovery) and the manager role (deliver results on time, with quality, within budget). Both roles are real. Both are necessary. The question is when to be in each.
Steve offers three diagnostic questions he uses to decide whether to stay in coaching mode or shift to manager mode:
Will a bad outcome hurt anyone? Specifically, is anyone going to be injured? If yes, the manager role overrides coaching -- you intervene. If no, you can keep coaching.
Will the customer be adversely affected? If yes, manager mode. If no, keep coaching.
Will this create unreasonable expense for the organization? If yes, manager mode. If no, keep coaching.
If all three are no, the leader can stay in coaching mode and let the client work through the challenge, even if the work goes badly and they have to recover from it. The failure becomes learning. The recovery becomes more learning. The capability builds.
If any of the three are yes, the leader steps out of coaching mode and gives direction. Steve recommends acknowledging the role shift explicitly with the client -- "the circumstances right now are that I really need you to do this one particular thing, and I need you to do it this way" -- so the client understands that the leader is intentionally not coaching in that moment. The coaching role becomes available again once the immediate constraint is resolved.
The three questions work because they put a clear bound on when coaching is appropriate. Coaching isn't a universal answer. It's appropriate when the stakes allow for learning through experience and inappropriate when the stakes don't. Knowing the difference is part of the skill.
Steve's framing of the threshold of knowledge is worth pulling out separately because it inverts how most leaders treat one specific moment in conversations with their teams.
When a client says "I don't know," most leaders interpret this as a problem to solve -- a gap in knowledge that the leader can fill, an answer the leader should provide, a coaching failure that needs intervention. Steve's framing is the opposite. "I don't know" is exactly where you want the client to be, because the next step from "I don't know" leads to genuine learning. The next step past "I don't know" is the threshold of knowledge -- the place where new understanding gets built rather than transferred.
The coaching move when the client says "I don't know" is to stay there, ask deepening questions, and let the client work through to their own answer. The temptation is to fill the gap. The discipline is to honor the gap as the place where real growth happens.
One of the sharpest insights in the session comes from the final Q&A. Mark asks whether it's a good idea to avoid phrasing suggestions as questions. Steve confirms it directly.
The pattern looks like this. The coach has an idea they want the client to consider. Rather than naming it as advice, they phrase it as a question: "Don't you think you ought to try X?" or "What about Y?" or "Have you considered Z?" The question form makes it feel like coaching. But the suggestion is still embedded in the question. The client recognizes it. The coaching dynamic breaks.
Steve's coach at CoachU called this technique "hiding a suggestion in a question." It's the same as directing or telling, just dressed in question form. And it eliminates the possibility of the client shifting -- the moment of genuine discovery the coaching conversation is designed to produce.
The honest version: if you have a suggestion you genuinely think the client should consider, step out of the coaching role and offer it as advice. Then step back into the coaching role and ask whether they want to incorporate it. Don't pretend the suggestion is a question. The pretense damages the relationship and the practice.
Coaching is a skill that develops through repetition. Steve's closing emphasis on this point is worth taking seriously. You don't read a book and become a coach. You don't attend a workshop and emerge competent. You practice the model, often, in real conversations, until the questions become natural and the discipline of silence becomes automatic.
The practice has to be deliberate. Reading from a coaching card or script is fine when you're starting, but the goal is to internalize the model deeply enough that you can hold the conversation without referring to anything external. Once the model is internal, the conversation can become genuinely yours, in your own voice, adapted to the specific client in front of you.
The skill also has to be exercised through what Steve calls productive struggle. Practice is supposed to be uncomfortable. The discomfort is what builds capability, strength, and endurance. Coaches who only practice in easy situations -- supportive clients, well-defined problems, generous time -- don't develop the capacity to coach in hard situations. The hard situations are where the skill matters most.
Steve also names a useful caution: don't let perfect get in the way of progress. Your early coaching sessions won't be great. You'll miss moments to stay silent. You'll slip and offer advice. You'll catch yourself hiding suggestions in questions. That's fine. The recovery move is to acknowledge what happened with the client, reset, and try again. The willingness to do the work imperfectly while you're building the skill is itself part of the practice.
Coaching is fundamentally a human practice. No platform can replace the conversation between a coach and a client. Steve's session is direct about this, and the page should be honest about it too.
That said, the conditions in which coaching can actually happen in an organization depend on infrastructure that the platform supports.
The discipline of regular coaching cycles -- monthly, weekly, or daily depending on the practice -- requires that leaders have time on their calendars protected for the work. The platform's task and workflow features can structure that time as a recognized organizational priority rather than as something leaders are expected to fit in around their other work.
The Toyota Kata coaching pattern, which Steve's coaching model directly parallels, depends on visible target conditions, current conditions, obstacles, and experiments. When these live in a shared system rather than on individual storyboards, the coach and the client can engage with the work asynchronously between formal sessions. The platform can hold the structure that the coaching cycles operate within.
The development of coaching skill across an organization benefits from visibility into who is coaching whom, what they're working on, and what's being learned. When coaching relationships are tracked rather than informal, the organization can identify which coaches are developing capability fastest, which clients are progressing, and where the leverage points for further investment are.
The "spread of learning" that follows from successful coaching -- when one team's discovery becomes another team's starting point -- depends on the same kind of infrastructure that supports any improvement work. The platform doesn't create the coaching, but it does create the conditions where coaching can produce sustained organizational change rather than fading when the specific coaching relationship ends.
None of this substitutes for the skill Steve teaches. The platform supports the discipline. The discipline is what produces the outcomes.
Steve Kane is Director of Coaching and Certification at Gemba Academy, where he is responsible for Gemba Academy's Lean coaching and certifications. Prior to Gemba Academy, Steve had a diverse career that included responsibility for a large medical device sales territory, a plant manager role where he applied Lean methods to drive improvement, and VP of Operations at Specialty Silicone Fabricators where he led the company's Lean efforts. He has served on the western region board of the Association for Manufacturing Excellence and has worked with the Michigan Lean Learning Consortium and the California Central Coast Lean Forum.
What's the difference between coaching and mentoring?
A mentor draws on their own experience to offer advice and insight to someone who hasn't yet been through what the mentor has. A coach helps the client develop their own answers through structured questions, without offering advice or suggestions. The mentor's value is in their accumulated experience. The coach's value is in their ability to help the client think more clearly. Both are valuable. They're different practices, and confusing them usually produces watered-down versions of both.
Why does the coaching model avoid the word "why"?
Because in American and Western English usage, "why" tends to land as an attacking question that puts people on their heels. "Why didn't that work?" prompts defense or excuse-making. "What were the causes?" or "What led to that result?" keeps the focus on the issues rather than on the person and produces more honest reflection. The shift from "why" to "what" is one of the smallest and most operationally useful adjustments coaches can make. It's specifically a cultural reframe -- the same dynamic doesn't necessarily apply in all languages or cultures.
How long is the typical pause coaches should allow after asking a question?
The awkward silence that feels too long is usually about eight or nine seconds. The instinct is to fill it before the eight-second mark. The skill is to wait through it. Many coaches report that the most productive responses from clients come right after they've sat through the discomfort of the silence. The technique works because the silence forces the client to develop their own thinking rather than waiting for the coach to provide more structure.
What's covert coaching and when is it appropriate?
Covert coaching is unscheduled, in-the-moment coaching that happens in casual conversation without the client feeling like they're in a formal coaching session. The conversation touches on the five points of the coaching model (where you are, where you want to be, what's getting in the way, what you'll do, how you'll hold yourself accountable) without ever announcing itself as coaching. It works well for spontaneous opportunities -- hallway conversations, coffee chats, brief interactions before a meeting starts -- where formal scheduling would feel forced. It requires the same discipline of active listening and avoidance of advice as scheduled coaching.
When should a leader switch from coaching mode to manager mode?
Steve uses three diagnostic questions. Will a bad outcome hurt anyone? Will the customer be adversely affected? Will this create unreasonable expense? If all three are no, stay in coaching mode and let the client work through the challenge. If any are yes, step out of coaching mode and give direction. The shift should be explicit -- acknowledge to the client that you're moving into manager mode for this specific situation, so they understand the role change. Once the immediate constraint is resolved, you can shift back into coaching mode.
Is it okay to hide a suggestion in a question?
No. The pattern -- "don't you think you ought to try X?" or "have you considered Y?" -- is one of the most common ways coaching breaks down. The question form makes it feel like coaching, but the suggestion is still embedded in the question. The client recognizes it. The coaching dynamic breaks. If you have a genuine suggestion to offer, step out of the coaching role briefly and offer it as advice, then step back into the coaching role and ask whether the client wants to incorporate it. The honesty preserves the practice.
What if my direct report isn't intrinsically motivated and doesn't want to be coached?
Sometimes people aren't coachable in a given moment, and the right move is to name what you're observing and reschedule. "I can see we're not making progress right now. Let's pause and come back to this tomorrow afternoon. Before we do, I'd like you to think about what you're trying to accomplish and where you are now. If there's something else on your mind that's getting in the way, let's start the next conversation with that." Giving someone space and naming the obstacle directly often produces more progress than pushing through resistance.
How do you develop coaching skill?
Through deliberate practice over time. Read the foundational resources -- Steve recommends Drive by Dan Pink, the Toyota Kata Practice Guide by Mike Rother, Managing to Learn by John Shook, and certification programs through organizations like the International Coach Federation, CoachU, and the John Maxwell team. But the books and certifications are starting points, not endpoints. The skill develops through repetition, through productive struggle, through the discipline of catching yourself when you slip out of the coaching role and recovering. Don't let perfect get in the way of progress.
.svg)
Copyright © 2026
Privacy Policy