Coaching Guide for Budco Financial

Subject: Employee Management
Pages: 6
Words: 1659
Reading time:
6 min
Study level: College


Employees are the most significant asset for every business because individuals determine whether the stipulated objectives can be achieved. That is why organizations do their best to prove that their workforce members meet the highest standards of professional behavior. This statement denotes that managers and administrators frequently develop specific interventions aimed at helping employees improve their skills and competencies that are needed to succeed in the workplace. Coaching is an appropriate option in this case since it implies that more experienced managers and administrators provide employees with assistance and guidance to help the latter grow and develop. There exist multiple coaching models and processes, which denotes that organizations should carefully select interventions to maximize potential benefits. Thus, current knowledge and scientific evidence reveal that two specific models of coaching, including GROW and OSKAR, and a standard coaching process are suitable for Budco Financial and its dealer relations managers.

Budco Financial Overview

To begin with, one should describe the organization and what job function can be subject to coaching. Budco Financial (n.d.) occupies a significant place in the automotive industry by providing equipment manufacturers and dealerships with essential services. In particular, the business is “a payment plan program management company, specializing in comprehensive, payment plan solutions serving the automotive industry” (Budco Financial, n.d., para. 2). Various businesses refer to the organization when they need to retain clients, improve brand loyalty, and maximize revenue. When such requests appear, Budco Financial (n.d.) can offer various interventions that include shortening a revenue cycle, creating a new revenue stream, or suggesting alternative payment options. This description proves that employees can make a difference for the company because people ensure that client’s needs and expectations are met.

Furthermore, it is reasonable to state that coaching is more appropriate for some job functions. In Budco Financial, dealer relations managers are essential because they interact with dealerships that represent an essential customer group for the organization. These employees establish contact with dealerships, identify their needs, communicate with them throughout the process, and collect feedback. That is why it is rational to develop specific coaching interventions to ensure that these individuals have the required skills and competencies to satisfy the client’s expectations.

Suggested Coaching Models

GROW Model

There exist multiple coaching models, and GROW is one of them. The abbreviation stands for growth, reality, options, and way forward, which denotes that these phenomena should be incorporated into a coaching process. According to Panchal and Riddell (2020), this strategy is “one of the most widely used models in the coaching training and teaching programs” (p. 13). In particular, this approach implies that coaches should take specific steps to guide their subordinates. Firstly, it is necessary to establish realistic goals that can be short-term or long-term. Secondly, both coaches and their followers should understand the reality that is their current position regarding the developed objectives. Thirdly, it is necessary to highlight possible options that can be utilized to reach the expected outcome. Finally, the way forward refers to the development of an action plan that can help these individuals achieve the desired goal.

This model is requested because it offers a few benefits. This strategy is appropriate for individual and group coaching strategies, which denotes that various organizations can utilize it. Furthermore, it is possible to modify the model to make it meet specific requirements. Panchal and Riddell (2020) suggest that the approach can be adjusted to promote sustainable behavioral change, which results in the GROWS model. That is why the given strategy seems appropriate for Budco Financial. If some relationship issues emerge, administrators can rely on the strategy to ensure that their dealer relations managers know how they can improve their professional behavior. The opportunity to use the model in individual and group coaching sessions also denotes that the organization can tailor the strategy to its business needs.


The OSKAR (outcome, scaling, know-how, affirm and action, and review) strategy offers a different approach to coaching in the workplace. It relies on five specific aspects and steps that should be included in every interaction between coaches and their followers. Firstly, leaders should mention the expected outcome and explain how the given result can be reached from a current situation (Alabdali, 2020). Secondly, the current position should be evaluated to assess what particular processes are needed (Alabdali, 2020). Thirdly, coaches need to identify what knowledge and competencies followers should have, and the analysis of similar scenarios from the past can be helpful to succeed in this task (Alabdali, 2020). Fourthly, coaches should cooperate with their subordinates to affirm a created action plan and start taking specific steps (Alabdali, 2020). Finally, the closing process for coaches is to keep monitoring whether the action plan can be correctly implemented in time (Alabdali, 2020). This information demonstrates what specific steps coaches should make to achieve the expected outcomes.

The OSKAR model is also appropriate for Budco Financial since this strategy can help meet versatile objectives. Coaches can rely on this approach and be sure that they can establish productive relationships with their followers. In this scenario, dealer relations managers can improve their professional competencies since coaches rely on straightforward and effective guides. This information reveals that the selected organization should consider using this model.

Standard Coaching Process

A standard coaching process consists of five steps that determine what actions coaches should take to achieve positive outcomes. The first step refers to setting developmental goals that act as a destination point for the entire coaching process (Aguinis, 2018). After that, a coach should analyze the existing resources to identify what interventions are needed to reach the expected outcomes (Aguinis, 2018). Implementation is the following step, implying that managers and administrators should have particular action plans that demonstrate what actions should be implemented and when (Aguinis, 2018). The following milestone denotes that subordinates’ behaviors and results should be observed and documented (Aguinis, 2018). This information is essential because it can help coaches assess their efforts. Finally, it is necessary to give feedback on whether the process has led to positive outcomes since this data can be used to improve the effectiveness of coaching in the future.

It is possible to suggest that Budco Financial can benefit from implementing the recommendations above. The rationale behind this statement is that a systematized coaching approach may be needed to guide dealer relations managers. One can state that the given guide highlights all the necessary actions that coaches should take to succeed. It is also possible to identify that the coaching process is a combination of the GROW and OSKAR models. The suggested intervention has selected the most effective strategies and united them to maximize the probability of achieving positive results. The coaching process by Aguinis (2018) also provides managers and administrators with opportunities for future growth. That is why Budco Financial should rely on the suggested strategy.

The Best Feedback Practices

Coaching implies close interactions between more and less experienced employees. In this scenario, coaches’ feedback helps subordinates determine whether their actions meet expectations. That is why administrators and managers should actively engage in giving feedback to provide workers with an assessment of their behavior. According to Decius et al. (2019), feedback can be direct and vicarious. It is vicarious when coaches make specific efforts to identify how subordinates assess their leading role. This step is essential for managers and administrators to determine the effectiveness of their contribution. Simultaneously, direct feedback implies that employees contact a coach to determine how he or she assesses their performance (Decius et al., 2019). Both practices should be promoted to prove that all stakeholders give and obtain sufficient information.

Since the best practices imply that all the participants should receive feedback, it is reasonable to implement a specific approach to cope with the task, and 360-degree feedback seems a suitable option. This intervention implies that information about a person comes from multiple sources, including peers, supervisors, subordinates, and clients (Aguinis, 2018). That is why it is a comprehensive tool that promotes effective information sharing among coaches and their followers.

Avoiding Potential Pitfalls

It is worth admitting that coaching is often associated with various pitfalls. Budco Financial administrators and managers should be aware of them to minimize their adverse impact on employees and their performance. According to Athanasopoulou and Dopson (2018), coaching is not a panacea, which denotes that this practice is not always effective for everyone. Thus, the organization should ensure that the coaching process is free from discrimination, which denotes that its intervention should offer equal opportunities to all employees.

Another pitfall can refer to the fact that the organization can suggest that the coaching interventions require enormous resources, which will make them refrain from implementing the intervention. This belief exists because numerous scholars differently assess the effectiveness of coaching, but the discrepancies exist because of various organizational contexts (Athanasopoulou & Dopson, 2018). Consequently, Budco Financial should avoid emphasizing negative assessment of coaching interventions by other companies.

The final pitfall can be associated with the fact that some employees respond to coaching differently. For example, some workers can willingly engage in the practice, while others can actively oppose the intervention (Athanasopoulou & Dopson, 2018). In this case, it is possible to expect that all the stakeholders will face adverse outcomes that can negatively affect their performance and morale. That is why administrators and managers from Budco Financial should establish good and productive relationships with all employees to avoid negative responses to coaching.


The report has presented a comprehensive coaching guide for Budco Financial. Based on the scientific literature, one can state that specific coaching models, including GROW and OSKAR, and a standard coaching process are appropriate for the organization. They can help coaches lead their subordinates and help them achieve the specified outcomes. The report has also highlighted the importance of giving feedback and commented on the best practices to cope with the task. Finally, it has been mentioned what pitfalls should be avoided while relying on coaching.


Aguinis, H. (2018). Performance management (4th ed.). Chicago Business Press.

Alabdali, M. (2020). Activate the learning and development agenda using coaching culture. European Journal of Human Resource Management Studies, 3(2), 134-139.

Athanasopoulou, A., & Dopson, S. (2018). A systematic review of executive coaching outcomes: Is it the journey or the destination that matters the most? The Leadership Quarterly, 29(1), 70-88.

Decius, J., Schaper, N., & Seifert, A. (2019). Informal workplace learning: Development and validation of a measure. Human Resource Development Quarterly, 30(4), 495-535.

Budco Financial. (n.d.). Who we are

Panchal, S., & Riddell, P. (2020). The GROWS model: Extending the GROW coaching model to support behavioral change. The Coaching Psychologist, 16(2), 12-25.