It’s not uncommon for conversations about coaching to get a little tangled. Someone says, “We’re embedding a coaching culture,” and someone nods enthusiastically, while picturing something entirely different. One is thinking of qualified external coaches holding deep developmental conversations. The other is imagining line managers using better questions in one-to-ones.
Both are right, and both are wrong, depending on context.
In this article, I will examine the key differences between professional coaching and coaching as a leadership skill. What does each approach make possible, and where might they get in each other’s way?
One is a job, the other is a skillset
Professional coaches are hired (often externally, sometimes internally) to provide focused, structured support. They’re typically trained, supervised, and work under a coaching body’s code of ethics. There’s formality to the role, a defined coaching agreement, confidentiality boundaries, and clear contracting.
Leaders who coach, by contrast, are using coaching skills as part of everyday work. They might use questions to stretch thinking, reflect a pattern they’ve noticed, or explore options rather than give immediate answers. But they’re not stepping into a different role, they’re doing this within their leadership, not as a separate activity.
That difference matters because it affects expectations, power dynamics, and purpose.
Purpose is where things start to diverge
A professional coach is there to serve the coachee’s goals and that’s that. The agenda belongs to the client. Even in organisational settings, where the coach may be briefed by HR or a line manager, the coaching conversation remains coachee-led (or it certainly should be).
A leader, on the other hand, has a broader task. Their role includes delivering results, managing risk, and developing their team. So even when they’re using coaching techniques, their priorities are more entangled.
This doesn’t make leadership coaching wrong, it just makes it different. And it’s why managers should always be transparent about which hat they’re wearing.
The power dynamic is also different
Coaching thrives in psychologically safe environments. A professional coach has no formal authority over the person they’re coaching. That neutral position is powerful because it encourages honesty, experimentation, and reflection without fear of judgment.
A line manager inherently holds authority. That doesn’t mean they can’t coach, but it does mean their coachees may be more cautious. If someone knows their pay rise or performance rating sits with the same person asking them to ‘open up’, they’ll likely edit their responses accordingly.
This is where trust becomes a key factor. Some of the best leadership coaching I’ve seen happens in high-trust relationships, where both parties understand the intent and boundaries.
Coaching techniques might look similar, but context is everything
Both professional coaches and coaching leaders ask questions, listen actively, reflect, and challenge. But the stakes and scope are different.
A professional coach may focus deeply on mindset, identity, or long-term direction. A leader might use coaching to unlock a solution, build autonomy, or help someone get unstuck mid-project. One works in the wider frame of life and career. The other often zooms in on performance and development in the role.
What matters most is the spirit behind the approach. Coaching is more about the intent than the question format.
Where it gets messy
Problems arise when the distinctions aren’t made clear. A leader who thinks they’re coaching might actually be subtly directing. A professional coach brought into an organisation might be expected to ‘fix’ an underperformer like some sort of surrogate manager.
Clarity helps. Leaders can say, “Would it help if we took a few minutes to step back and chat this through?” Coaches can clarify, “I’m here to help you make sense of this, not to steer you towards a particular outcome.”
When we make the roles clear, we protect the relationship.
Does it matter which one you are?
Yes and no.
Yes, because different coaching roles come with different responsibilities. A professional coach must honour confidentiality, contracting, and scope. A manager must navigate competing priorities and accountability.
But also no. Because at their best, both are in the service of movement and change.
The overlap between coaching as a profession and coaching as a leadership skill is significant. Both require presence, curiosity, restraint, and care. Both can transform conversations. Both can unlock potential.
In the end…
There is a risk in confusing coaching with management, but the bigger risk is that we let coaching become a protected status, i.e. something only the ‘experts’ can do.
The more coaching becomes part of how we lead, the more everyday conversations become moments for reflection, accountability and performance improvement.
So yes, there’s a difference between being a coach and leading with coaching. But both, done well, change things for the better. And if you’re clear on your intent and honest about your role, you’re halfway there already.
Your next read: The 10 laws of coaching
