There’s a stage many leaders go through when they start coaching. They become more available. They ask more questions. They listen. They soften.

And for a while, that alone improves relationships. People feel seen. The leader feels proud of their “new style.”

Then comes the next stage. The leader has to say something the employee won’t enjoy hearing.

That’s where the coaching identity gets tested.

I’ve watched leaders freeze in that moment. Not because they don’t know what to say, but because they fear what it will cost them socially. They fear being labeled harsh. They fear conflict. They fear losing the friendly relationship they worked so hard to build.

So they dilute the message. They wrap it in so many qualifiers that the employee can’t find the point. Or they postpone it until the issue becomes undeniable, and then it comes out with frustration attached.

Neither approach is coaching.

The irony is that many leaders believe directness will reduce trust. In my experience, the opposite is more often true. People can handle a clear message delivered with respect. What they can’t handle is the slow realization that the leader had a concern and chose not to name it.

The most trust-damaging move isn’t firm feedback. It’s delayed feedback.

I’m not advocating bluntness. I’m advocating congruence.

A leader who says, calmly, “Here’s the standard. Here’s where you are. Here’s what needs to change,” isn’t being unkind. They’re being respectful of reality.

It’s also one of the most human things a leader can do. Because ambiguity isn’t kindness. Ambiguity is emotional labor transferred to the employee.

If you’re building a coaching culture, this is a crucial maturity step. Leaders have to stop confusing comfort with care.