Coaching Gap Audit

What this is

The Coaching Gap Audit is the diagnostic that closes Chapter 1 of Performance Amplified. It asks where a person (or, for a manager, a team) is experiencing three gaps in how coaching is delivered: Access, Consistency and Timeliness. It ends with five diagnostic questions. The book frames the gaps as a systems problem, not a people problem.

Use when / Do not use when

Use when someone says development is happening to them rarely, unevenly or too late, or when a manager suspects the same about their team. This is the book's stated purpose of the audit: "Where are you experiencing these gaps?" Do not use as a score or a verdict on a manager. The book gives no scoring, bands or thresholds for this audit (operational note).

The Instrument

The three gaps (book definitions, condensed)

Why managers cannot close the gaps alone (book's worked example, illustration of the book's own arithmetic, not data): eight direct reports at one hour of real coaching each per month is eight hours; adding preparation of at least thirty minutes per conversation and about two hours of follow-up across the month brings it to fourteen. Managers are evaluated on delivery, so coaching is what drops when the quarter gets tight.

Part A: For yourself (verbatim)

• Access: Do you have regular access to someone who helps you develop? Or are you waiting for your manager to find time?
• Consistency: Is the quality of coaching you receive predictable? Or does it depend entirely on your manager's mood, energy, and skill that day?
• Timeliness: Do you get feedback when it can still matter? Or weeks later, when the moment is gone?

Part B: If you are a manager, about your team (verbatim)

• Access: What percentage of your team gets meaningful coaching monthly? What percentage is waiting?
• Consistency: Are you delivering the same quality coaching to everyone? Or are some people getting significantly more attention?
• Timeliness: Are you catching moments when they happen? Or batching feedback for later?

Part C: Five diagnostic questions (verbatim)

1. When was the last time you had a development conversation that wasn't driven by a crisis or a review cycle?
2. If you listed everything you want to get better at, who's actively helping you work on that list?
3. When you receive feedback, is it specific enough to act on? Or vague enough to ignore?
4. Do you have a system for deliberate practice on skills you're building? Or are you hoping osmosis works?
5. If you got promoted tomorrow, would it be because someone invested in developing you? Or despite the lack of investment?

The book's framing assumptions (the three false assumptions)

The current system assumes infinite manager bandwidth, consistent manager skill, and that feedback can wait. The book calls all three false and ties this to the Performance Is Personal principle that systems must align with human realities.

How to run it (Performance Lab suggested practice)

1. Give Part A to the client; add Part B if they manage people. Ask for written answers, not ratings.
2. For each gap, mark in the record sheet whether the answer describes a present gap, no gap, or unclear.
3. Work through Part C and capture the actual date or name behind each answer.
4. Note which gap the client names first and which they avoid. Treat this as a coach observation, not a finding.
5. Do not total anything. Use the answers to decide what to explore next.

Record sheet (Performance Lab suggested practice)

Part C answers 1-5: ______________________________ Gap the client most wants to close: ______________ Coach note: ______________