Coaching, Feedback, Mentoring… all part of Guided Development

Erik Thoren

We often hear these terms used as if they’re the same thing. But they’re not.

👉 Coaching = asking questions that unlock someone’s own thinking.

👉 Feedback = holding up a mirror with your observations.

👉 Mentoring = sharing your experience to guide someone else.

They each serve a different purpose.

And that difference matters.

Here’s the catch: too many leaders mix them up in the same conversation.

You start with coaching (“What do you think you should do?”)… but two minutes later you’re mentoring (“When I was in your shoes, I did this…”)… and before the person has even processed, you’re giving feedback (“You need to improve here”).

The result? Confusion.

Instead of clarity, people leave thinking: “So what was that conversation actually about?”

That’s why all three — coaching, feedback, mentoring — require structure and models.

👉 Coaching is most effective when leaders follow a framework.

👉 Feedback creates change when it’s specific, actionable and timely.

👉 Mentoring builds trust when it’s relevant and doesn’t overpower the other person’s own thinking.

The research is clear: leaders who use these practices with awareness and skill create better outcomes. Not because they “wing it” — but because they’ve trained. Because they know which behavior to use, when and how.

This is why I call it Guided Development.

It’s the umbrella term for these leadership practices — but with the expectation that we:

✅ Know the differences.

✅ Use models and structure.

✅ Train and practice deliberately.

If we want to be leaders who truly enable growth, we need to move from good intentions to skilled execution. That’s what research calls effective leadership behaviors.

💡 Guided Development is what turns everyday talks into a leadership practice that actually works.

👉 How do you and your organization make sure leaders train on this — instead of just improvising in the moment?