Feature
Coaching has always been a resource-intensive endeavor for organizations, often reserved for top performers, those deemed high-potential or leaders navigating complex challenges. When I was in HR with a small development budget, I struggled to figure out who among my group of leaders, high performers and struggling employees needed my very limited resources the most. Coaching was always reserved for a privileged few, and the decision was primarily driven by cost.
Imagine a world where you don’t have to make those sorts of trade-offs. A world where coaching isn't just for a select, exclusive few but for everyone.
That’s the ultimate promise of AI-powered coaching platforms. Companies like CoachHub, Valence, Centrical and others either offer standalone AI coaches or embed AI into parts of their coaching platforms.
It makes sense, too. Generative AI-based solutions offer scalability that human coaches simply can't match. They can engage thousands of employees simultaneously, nudging them toward better performance, helping them solve problems or even guiding them to develop better interpersonal skills — all without the heavy financial burden that traditional coaching entails.
Recent research underscores this potential. For example, an AI tutor at Harvard helped students learn twice as much in less time compared to traditional classes. Students reported feeling more engaged and motivated, suggesting that in the right contexts AI can deliver meaningful learning experiences.
In a corporate context, this ability to scale could mean democratizing access to coaching, providing everyone, including junior employees and those in non-leadership roles, the opportunity to develop and grow.
But the question is: Is coaching the right fit for AI?
What AI Gets Right … and What It Gets Wrong
It’s one thing to use AI to develop hard skills. Skill or knowledge transfer is a fairly straightforward ask for a platform. There are also many ways to learn new skills. I will forever argue that YouTube, for all of its ills, is still the best LMS on the planet.
Coaching is different, though. It isn't just about conveying information or helping people solve surface-level problems. Part of the reason it works is that it’s fundamentally about relationships. AI can deliver sound, structured and goal-oriented coaching — what some call performance coaching — remarkably well. This type of coaching is built on measurable, binary outcomes: hit this metric, achieve that milestone, follow these steps.
I’d argue that AI can guide individuals through these processes just as effectively, if not better, than many human coaches. For example, structured AI coaching tools like those tested by CoachHub have been shown to support clients as effectively as human coaches, provided the goals are clear and the process is linear.
However, when we move into the realm of developmental coaching — the type focused on personal growth, navigating ambiguity and breaking through deep-seated barriers — AI really struggles. Human-driven coaching is about the subtle, non-verbal cues, the empathy and accountability shared between coach and coachee, and the nuanced insights that come from years of human experience.
AI lacks this connective depth. Ultimately, when I evaluate whether a development resource might be worth the cost, I consider whether I would’ve paid for it out of my own paycheck. Of the AI coaching I've seen so far, I'm not sure I’d even throw Netflix money at it.
Others may disagree, but in coaching, I look for that human experience to navigate unclear situations and have a rich discussion. As Dr. Nicky Terblanche, the founder of Coach Vici and an associate professor at the Stellenbosch Business School in South Africa, puts it, AI is simply not ready to handle the complexities of developmental coaching unless we reach a point of artificial general intelligence. We’re still not exactly sure when that will happen, either.
There’s also the psychological element to consider. Many people will struggle to feel accountable to a machine. The lack of genuine human connection can make AI coaching feel impersonal, even if the raw results are there. Part of the experience is a coach who listens, challenges and empathizes with you. For some, AI coaching might feel like something crucial is missing, even if they end up reaching their goals.
Related Article: Can ChatGPT Become Your Next Business Coach?
The Case for a Blended Approach
The best answer may lie in a blended approach.
AI is well-positioned to handle foundational coaching. It’s the kind of skill-building that might have been prohibitively expensive to offer at scale in the past. Organizations could use AI to coach junior employees or those in early-career stages, providing guidance where there was none before.
Being better than nothing is an impossibly low standard, but with other resources in employees’ hands, maybe it’s a compelling offering. This could raise the tide for everyone, providing a baseline level of development across the workforce.
Meanwhile, human coaches could still be deployed strategically. Instead of spending valuable time on routine goal-setting or progress tracking, human coaches could focus on deeper, transformational work, whether it’s helping employees navigate complex decisions, grow their leadership skills or tackle emotional and psychological barriers.
AI and human coaches are already working in tandem, both formally and informally. Whether AI handles initial between-session support or just helps collect and organize information about employees being coached, this can allow coaches to bring their full focus to the high-value parts of the coaching process.
Related Article: AI Is Transforming Corporate Learning. Here's How to Evolve Alongside
It Only Matters if People Use and Value It
The question we have to ask ourselves is this: Even if AI coaching can democratize access and improve outcomes, does it matter if people don’t value or use it?
Conference
Sep
16
HR Tech Conference Las Vegas 2025
Register
Conference
Oct
27
Gartner HR Symposium/Xpo Orlando 2025
Register
I’d say no. A good development tool gathering virtual dust isn’t good for anyone. For organizations trying to stretch limited budgets and make a positive impact across a wide workforce, an AI coach might be appealing for some employees. But for others, where the depth of the coaching relationship is paramount, AI will likely remain off the table or in a supporting sidekick role.
The bottom line: AI coaching has potential, but it's not a cure-all (especially today). We have to keep humans involved, as they bring the depth, empathy and nuance that AI cannot replicate. AI can raise the tide, but humans are essential to navigating the course and leading the way.
Related Article: First-Time Managers Need Help. Is AI the Answer?
