Can a leader also be a good coach?

A leader is required to possess many skills, many of which are very different, including coaching their team... But is this a good idea? And, more importantly, can they do it effectively enough? I have some doubts about this, and I'll explain why.

Leaders like... bumblebees!

I googled the following: “Leadership topics”, and I came across the 15 main topics typically covered in leadership courses: effective communication, time management, stress management, conflict resolution, the ability to inspire a team, taking responsibility, problem‑solving, delegation, developing Emotional Intelligence, strategic thinking, agility, decisiveness, change management, DE&I (diversity, equity and inclusion), coaching and mentoring.

In my opinion, they forgot the multiplication of the loaves and fishes, and knowing how to unclog a sink (you never know…).

I’ve often expressed doubts about this obsession with glorifying the figure

of the leader by attributing to them almost thaumaturgical powers.
A leader is a man or a woman who takes responsibility for bringing

others from point A to point B, and to do that they must be able to

manage a whole series of things—like those listed above…

but without necessarily becoming an expert in each

individual area.

I’m not saying that the 15 leadership topics listed above are useless, but I don’t believe that learning and applying individual skills is what actually improves leadership.

Leadership cannot be classified, nor can it be forced into predetermined behaviors.

It’s a bit like the bumblebee: due to its weight, physics says it shouldn’t be able to fly with the wings it has… except it doesn’t know that.

And so it flies!

For example, if we take someone like Steve Jobs—who certainly didn’t shine for Emotional Intelligence or for many of the other skills listed above—we can’t deny that he was one of the most important industrial leaders of our time.

He probably didn’t even know that his behaviors didn’t fit the standards of “good leadership”.

And yet he… flew!


A leader leads... they’re no one's buddy.

Sure, Steve Jobs flew… but would he have been able to make others fly? Would he have had the patience, the knowledge, and above all the willingness to sit next to someone and help them shine?

I doubt it.

And there are many Steve Jobs in the world—perhaps not as brilliant as he was, but certainly capable of bringing together human and non‑human resources to accomplish even very ambitious projects.

Many observers, with this new understanding of leadership that has gradually taken hold—often with a somewhat saccharine “do‑gooder” tone—would say that Jobs wasn’t actually a good leader… something I personally disagree with.

A leader is a leader not because they are “good”, but because they take people from point A to point B. And since that is exactly what Steve Jobs did—and brilliantly—he was undoubtedly a strong leader… but very likely a terrible coach, assuming he ever even tried to be one (personally, I doubt it).

Hitler, Stalin, and Genghis Khan were also great leaders, despite having massacred an exorbitant number of people—but those were different times… or rather, times and places where freedom and respect for life weren’t even options.

The point is: could that work today?
Maybe… but would it be sustainable over time?
Could those same leaders still do today, successfully, what they once did?
These are the questions we must ask ourselves.

Mentorship and Coaching

My answer to these questions is “no”, because a leader—even a minimally intelligent one—is naturally motivated by the result they want to achieve, and the moment they realize that a certain behavior is counterproductive, they will abandon it instantly.

Essentially, a leader adapts to the situation—including the people involved—to reach the result they have set.

For this reason, I believe a leader can be a great mentor… but not a good coach.
The problem is that these two roles are often confused, even though they're very different.

A mentor is a guide (usually a leader themselves) who, thanks to the knowledge, experience, and successes accumulated over the years, is in a position to pass them on to their mentees.
The problem is that we often forget that the mentor most likely had to find their own path to achieve their success, and there’s no guarantee that their strategies can be replicated by someone else.

A coach, on the other hand, does not work on the knowledge or experience accumulated over time in the areas the learner wants or needs to master, nor is it necessary for them to have achieved particular success in those areas.
The coach works on and with the person in front of them, helping them bring out the best they have to offer, starting by removing blocks and internal obstacles.

Of course, many coaches have acquired specific knowledge

and share it with their clients, but it's not that knowledge that

makes them coaches. What makes them coaches is their

understanding of certain dynamics, which they propose to the

client, who in turn “tests” them on themselves.

Extroverts and introverts

Leaders tend to be extroverts by nature—that is, they are naturally drawn to what they can “conquer” out there, and they are very good at involving people in their initiatives. This is why they can be excellent mentors: they are motivated by achieving a result.

They are, however, far less attracted to the idea of working on people—on what they feel, on their motivations, their blocks, etc. For this, the intervention of an introvert is needed—such as a coach (or a psychologist or counselor)—who is much more skilled at “rebuilding” a person from the inside.

As an introvert, the coach is far more attentive to and interested in the process (and therefore the dynamics) rather than the result, because they see the latter as an inevitable consequence of the former.

This “separation” between leader and coach (or professionals in general),

and between extroverts and introverts, is not drawn with an axe,

and of course there can be excellent leaders who coach and

excellent coaches who mentor—but it is almost a stretch, something

that most of the time does not happen spontaneously.

Conclusion

To avoid misunderstandings, let me say right away that what I’ve written here is not the Bible. However, I can assure you that even in the field of personal and professional development, I’ve met many leaders who loved teaching and sharing their knowledge with others—but usually at a group level, where the dynamics are very different from 1‑to‑1.

I stress: anyone can do anything if they are truly passionate about it, but the performance will probably differ… at least in most cases.