Received a text from a CEO this morning:

"Jonathan, the question I had was, in an executive coaching contract, would you expect to see the coach reporting to the CEO and the Board?"

My response:

"Some might. I wouldn't. As a coach, I can only serve one person. If I’m coaching a CEO, then that’s who I serve. I act in the best interests of that person, not the company, or whatever its board may want. A coach can’t have divided loyalties, and must maintain a client's confidence.

Same goes if a CEO calls me and asks me to coach a CFO. First, I have to see if it’s a fit. If it is, and I agree, my duty is to the CFO not to the CEO who “hired” me. I don't do "dotted line" reporting when I coach.

If there’s performance-based work a Board feels a CEO needs to do, and they want to oversee it, then I’d suggest hiring a consultant.

A consultant may support and advise and even do a bit of coaching for a CEO but, generally speaking, their loyalty is to act in the best interests of the hiring company, and in this case, that is embodied by the Board. Importantly, the CEO knows this from the get go.

Both are reasonable courses of action for a board—just depends on the context and goals of the intervention."

What I wanted to share with you all, my network, is that at the heart this exchange is, of course, divided loyalty.

Many leaders/boards don't immediately see this as an obvious problem.

In fact, they actually want the opposite from me, as in, "can you go coach this person and try "fix things" and loop back and tell us if we should stick with it, or part ways."

Nope. Not how I work.

Ultimately, on coaching, I agree with Robert Ellis who said on a private forum recently, "you can't coach unless the client trusts you. Bottom line." So true.

My larger message: set clear boundaries and clear agreements up front. Avoid divided loyalties wherever you find them, because you'll please no one.