Comparative group surveys
Surveys to assess employee morale, well-being, and engagement levels are used by 19% of Sherpa respondents to evaluate the effectiveness of coaching. The most sophisticated organizations use control groups to measure performance differentials between employees who have, and have not, been coached. The control groups are then compared on key metrics such as retention levels, promotions, pipeline readiness, revenue gains, etc. Canada’s Rogers Communications, mentioned earlier, compares customer satisfaction levels in corresponding quarters year-over-year as one key measurement of coaching ROI.
Many CCOEs use online surveys to take the “pulse” of participants at key points in the coaching. The coach begins the engagement by conducting three conversations: a 1-on-1 rapport meeting with the client; a 1-on-1 meeting with the client’s supervisor or sponsor; and a 3-way conversation in which coach, client, and sponsor all agree on goals. The data is then loaded into a system, and a survey is sent to both coachee and sponsor at the mid-point and end-point of the engagement to gauge progress and assess results.
Still, the simplest and most widely used metric is how the individual client evaluates the coaching experience. The former director of coaching at Humana speaks not of ROI, but of ROC (Return on Coaching). He found that organization-wide, employees consistently attributed “56-58% of the impact they’re having solely to their coaching experience.” While certainly subjective, this metric nonetheless helps the organization compare the perceived value of the coaching experience to its actual cost of delivery.Download Article 1K Club