A diferença entre gerenciar e orientar

The video gives a topic overview and has a viewing time of around 5 minutes. The written learning guide offers a more in-depth exploration and has an approximate reading time of 10-15 minutes.

Learning objectives

By the end of this guide, you will be able to:

• Understand the fundamental difference between managing and coaching.

• Recognise when each approach is appropriate and when it's not.

• Identify when you're defaulting to telling rather than genuinely coaching.

• Apply coaching approaches when developing capability matters more than speed.

• Know when to manage directly instead of trying to coach.

Why this matters

Many managers will say they coach. Yet how many really do?

What they're usually doing is telling, sometimes with questions wrapped around it. They're mentoring (sharing their expertise), directing (telling people what to do), or problem-solving (fixing things for people). All of these have their place. None of them are coaching.

Coaching is fundamentally different. It's not "nicer managing" or "collaborative directing." It's a completely different approach based on drawing out rather than putting in. It requires genuine interest in someone else's development, the patience to let them figure things out, and the humility to believe their answer might be better than yours.

This is hard. It's slower. It challenges your ego. And it requires real empathy, not just going through the motions.

Many people default to telling because it's faster (or feels faster), it lets them be the expert, and it's easier than genuinely caring about someone else's growth. Understanding the difference between managing and coaching, and being honest about which you're actually doing, is essential for developing your team effectively.

What managing actually is

Managing is about getting work done to a required standard, on time, in the right way. It's about direction, clarity, accountability, and control.

When you manage, you:

• Tell people what needs to happen.

• Set clear expectations and standards.

• Monitor progress and quality.

• Correct when things go wrong.

• Make decisions.

• Hold people accountable for outcomes.

Managing is directive. You have expertise, experience, or authority, and you use it to ensure work gets done properly. There's nothing wrong with this. In fact, it's essential.

Good managing is clear, consistent, and fair. It provides structure and certainty. It ensures standards are met and work is delivered.

When managing is the right approach:

When there's a right way to do something and the person needs to learn it. When safety or compliance is at stake. When time is critical. When the person is new and needs clear direction. When performance is poor and needs correcting. When you're accountable for the outcome and can't afford for them to get it wrong.

In general practice, much of what you do requires managing. Clinical protocols, regulatory requirements, practice policies, patient safety standards. These aren't areas for experimentation or "finding your own way." They need to be done correctly, consistently, every time.

What coaching actually is

Coaching is about developing someone's capability to solve their own problems, make their own decisions, and find their own answers.

When you coach, you:

• Ask questions rather than give answers.

• Help someone explore their own thinking.

• Support them to reach their own conclusions.

• Develop their problem-solving capability.

• Build their confidence and autonomy.

• Resist the urge to tell them what to do.

Coaching is non-directive. You believe the person has the potential to figure it out, and your job is to help them access that capacity.

Real coaching requires:

• Genuine interest in the other person's development.

  Not just getting the task done, but actually caring about them becoming more capable.

• Patience and empathy.

  Watching someone struggle when you could solve it in 30 seconds is uncomfortable. Coaching means sitting with that discomfort.

• Humility.

  Believing their answer might be different from (or better than) yours. Being willing to not be the expert.

• Tempo.

  Coaching takes longer than telling. If you're not willing to invest that time, you're not really committed to coaching.

When coaching is the right approach:

When there's more than one good way to do something. When developing the person's capability matters more than the immediate solution. When the person has (or could develop) the knowledge to solve it themselves. When building autonomy and confidence is important. When you want them to own the solution, not just implement yours.

Coaching develops people. It builds their thinking, their confidence, their ability to handle future challenges without needing you. But it requires you to genuinely care about that outcome more than you care about being right, being quick, or being needed.

Why many people default to telling

If coaching is so valuable, why don't more people do it? Because telling is easier, faster, and more satisfying to your ego.

It feels faster

"I could spend 20 minutes coaching them through this, or I could just tell them the answer in two minutes."

The problem? Next time the same issue comes up, you'll need to tell them again. And again. Coaching takes longer initially but saves time in the long run because the person develops the capability to solve it themselves.

But in the moment, when you're busy, telling feels more efficient.

It feeds your ego

Being the expert feels good. Having the answer, solving the problem, being the one people come to. Coaching requires you to step back from that. To not be the hero. To let someone else have the insight.

This is particularly hard if your identity is built around being competent and knowledgeable. Coaching means accepting that developing others is more important than demonstrating your own expertise.

It requires genuine empathy

True coaching means actually caring about someone else's development. Not just saying you care, but being willing to invest time, sit with discomfort, and tolerate them getting there slowly.

You don't trust them to get there

Deep down, you don't believe they can figure it out. You think your answer is better. You worry they'll get it wrong. So you dress up telling as coaching by asking a few questions, then jumping in with "Have you considered...?" or "What I'd do is..."

That's not coaching. That's directing with extra steps.

What mentoring is (and why it's not coaching)

There's a third approach that often gets confused with coaching: mentoring.

Mentoring is sharing your expertise, experience, and knowledge to help someone develop. It's saying "When I faced this situation, here's what I learned" or "Let me show you how I approach this."

Mentoring is valuable. It's how people learn from those with more experience. But it's not coaching.

In mentoring, you're the expert sharing wisdom. In coaching, you're helping someone access their own wisdom.

Some managers think they're coaching when they're actually mentoring. They ask "What do you think you should do?" and when the person shares their idea, they respond with "That could work, but here's what I'd do..." That's mentoring, not coaching.

Mentoring has its place. When someone genuinely doesn't have the knowledge or experience and needs to learn from yours, mentor them. But be clear that this is different from coaching.

The coaching trap: when you should manage but try to coach instead

As valuable as coaching is, it isn’t the right approach for every situation. When managers try to coach when clear direction is needed, it can create confusion and delay.

Coaching when there's a right answer

"So, what do you think about completing the safeguarding training by the deadline?"

There's no coaching conversation to be had. The training is mandatory. The deadline is fixed. Just manage: "You need to complete the safeguarding training by Friday."

Coaching when performance is poor

When someone is consistently making mistakes or not meeting required standards, the first priority is clarity. They need to understand that there is a problem, what the standard is, and that change is required.

That means being direct about the issue before moving into coaching. Asking reflective questions without first naming the gap can feel vague or evasive, and leaves too much room for misunderstanding.

For example, starting with “Your documentation doesn’t meet the required standard, and it needs to improve.” creates the necessary clarity. Once that’s established, it can be entirely appropriate to follow with coaching questions such as “What do you think is getting in the way?”, “What would help you meet the standard consistently?”.

In performance situations, coaching works best after expectations are clear, not instead of being clear.

Coaching when you don't have time

Starting a coaching conversation when you have five minutes doesn't work. You'll either rush it (which defeats the purpose) or you'll get frustrated and resort to telling anyway.

If you don't have time to coach, don't pretend to.

Coaching to avoid being direct

There is a risk of managers adopting a coaching approach as a way to avoid difficult conversations or clear direction. They ask endless questions hoping the person will figure out what they should be doing, rather than being direct about expectations.

The managing trap: when you should coach but default to telling

Similarly, it's just as common to default to a directive, management approach when coaching would be more effective..

Telling when they could figure it out

Someone comes to you with a problem. You immediately solve it for them because you can, and it's quick.

But they had the capability to solve it themselves. You've just taught them to bring you every problem rather than developing their own problem-solving ability.

Directing when there are multiple good solutions

"We need to improve the appointment system. Here's what we're going to do."

But there are several viable approaches, and involving the team in figuring it out would build ownership and capability. You've chosen speed and control over development.

Fixing when they need to learn

Someone makes a mistake. You fix it and move on.

But they haven't learned why the mistake happened or how to prevent it next time. A coaching conversation would develop their understanding. You've chosen efficiency over growth.

Taking over when they're struggling

You watch someone struggle with something. Rather than coach them through it, you take over and do it yourself.

You've got the task done. But they're no more capable than they were before, and they've learned that if they struggle, you'll rescue them.

Signs you're really coaching rather than telling

Here are some indicators of whether you're genuinely coaching or just telling with questions:

Who's doing most of the talking?

In a coaching conversation, the other person should be talking far more than you. A simple rule of thumb: if you're doing most of the talking, its likely you're not coaching.

Can you tolerate the silence?

Are you comfortable with silence while they think? Or do you jump in to fill the gap? Coaching requires patience with pauses.

Whose solution is it?

At the end of the conversation, who came up with the solution? If it's your idea that you led them to, that's not coaching. If it's their idea (even if you think yours might be better), you're coaching.

What matters more to you?

Do you care more about the problem getting solved your way, or about the person developing capability? If it's the former, you'll default to telling. If it's the latter, you'll coach.

Are you genuinely invested in their growth?

Do you actually care about this person's development? Or do you just want the task done? If you're not genuinely invested, you probably won't have the patience to coach.

Knowing which approach to use

The question isn't "Should I manage or should I coach?" It's "What does this situation need?"

Use managing when:

• There's a clear right way and the person needs to learn it.

• Safety, compliance, or quality standards are at stake..

• The person is new and needs direction.

• Performance is below standard and needs correcting.

• Time is genuinely critical.

• You're accountable for the outcome and can't afford mistakes.

• The person lacks foundational knowledge or skill.

Use coaching when:

• There are multiple good solutions.

• Developing the person's capability matters more than immediate efficiency.

• The person has (or could develop) the knowledge to solve it.

• Building autonomy and ownership is important.

• You want them to be able to handle similar situations without you.

• The person is capable but lacking confidence.

• You genuinely have time and patience.

Use mentoring when:

• The person would benefit from your specific experience.

• They're facing a situation you've navigated before.

• They've asked for your perspective or advice.

• Sharing your approach would accelerate their learning.

• You're explicit that you're sharing your experience, not requiring they follow it.

What real coaching sounds like

Here's what genuine coaching looks like in practice, contrasted with telling and mentoring.

Scenario: A practice manager comes to you worried about a conflict between two receptionists.

Telling (managing): "Okay, here's what you need to do. Sit them both down, tell them the behaviour needs to stop, and set clear expectations about professional conduct."

Mentoring: "I had a similar situation last year. What worked for me was addressing it individually first, then bringing them together. Let me tell you how I approached it..."

Coaching: "Tell me more about what's happening... What have you noticed about the impact?... What options have you considered?... What feels like the right next step to you?... What support do you need to do that?"

Notice:

• Coaching asks questions, doesn't provide answers.

• Coaching explores their thinking, doesn't impose yours.

• Coaching trusts them to find a solution, doesn't rescue them.

• Coaching is slower and requires patience.

If you're honest, which do you default to?

The hard truth about coaching

Coaching can be challenging to sustain consistently because it requires you to:

• Care more about someone else's development than being right.

• Tolerate the discomfort of watching someone struggle.

• Trust that their answer might be as good as (or better than) yours.

• Invest time when you're already busy.

• Resist the ego boost of being the expert.

• Have genuine empathy for another person's growth.

In busy practice environments where time pressure is constant, many people find it difficult to maintain this approach.

If you want to genuinely coach:

• Check your motivation. Do you actually care about developing this person, or do you just want the problem solved?

• Check your patience. Are you willing to let them take longer to get there?

• Check your ego. Can you let them have the insight instead of you?

• Check your empathy. Do you care enough to invest the time?

If the answer to any of these is no, consider managing directly instead. Honest, clear direction is better than coaching you're not fully committed to.

Practical strategies: developing both capabilities

1. Name your default

Are you naturally a teller (manager/mentor) or a coach? Most people are tellers. Knowing this helps you notice when you're defaulting rather than choosing.

2. Practice the pause

When someone brings you a problem, pause before answering. Count to three. Ask yourself: "Do they need me to tell them, or can they figure this out with coaching?"

3. Try coaching in low-stakes situations

Don't start coaching in high-pressure moments. Practice in situations where it's okay if they take longer or get it slightly wrong. Build your coaching capability gradually.

4. Ask permission

"Would it be helpful if I share what I'd do, or would you rather think it through yourself first?"

This gives them agency and makes explicit whether you're coaching or mentoring.

5. Catch yourself leading

Notice when you're asking "leading questions" designed to get them to your answer. That's not coaching. If you already know what you want them to say, just say it.

6. Invest in relationships

You can only coach people you genuinely care about. If you don't have empathy for someone's development, you won't have the patience to coach them. Build relationships that create genuine interest in people's growth.

7. Get comfortable with different solutions

Their solution doesn't have to be your solution. If it works and develops their capability, that's success. Work on your tolerance for "good enough but not how I'd do it."

Pontos principais

• Managing is directive and gets work done to standard. Coaching is non-directive and develops capability. Both are essential.

• Many people default to telling (managing or mentoring) because it's faster, feeds the ego, and requires less capacity for empathy in busy environments.

• True coaching requires genuine interest in someone's development, patience, humility, and time

• Some managers think they're coaching when they're really just telling with questions or mentoring with curiosity.

• Use managing when there's a right way, standards matter, time is critical, or performance needs correcting.

• Use coaching when developing capability matters, there are multiple solutions, and you have time and genuine empathy.

• Real coaching means the other person does most of the talking, you resist giving answers, and you care more about their development than being right.

• Coaching can be challenging to sustain consistently because it requires qualities that are difficult to maintain under pressure.

Actions: try this week

1. Audit your default: For the next week, notice every time someone brings you a problem or asks for help. Are you telling, mentoring, or coaching? What's your pattern?

2. Try one pure coaching conversation: Choose a low-stakes situation where someone could figure it out themselves. Ask only questions. Don't give advice. Don't share your experience. Just coach. Notice how it feels and what happens.

3. Check your motivation: Pick one person you manage. Honestly ask yourself: Do I genuinely care about developing this person, or do I just want them to do good work? If it's the latter, you probably won't have the patience to coach them.

4. Notice your ego: Next time you solve a problem for someone, pause and ask: Did they need me to solve it, or did I solve it because I wanted to be the expert? What would coaching have looked like instead?