The tension shaping coaching (and talent development)

We talk a lot about the future of work and a lot less about the tension shaping coaching right now. But the data makes it hard to ignore.

You see in my work with one of the major coaching platforms I've been looking at the data and find that a pattern keeps repeating:

• Organizations choose goals that protect the system

• Individuals choose goals that protect their careers

Same environment yet very different problems to solve.

Organizations consistently prioritize things like:

• leading change

• communication

• accountability

• collaboration

• resilience

These are system-health skills. They reduce friction, keep performance intact during turbulence.

But when individuals are given a choice, they reach for:

• influence

• shaping strategy

• articulating ambition

• confidence

• operating in complex matrices

These are career-survival skills. They’re about being seen and being taken seriously or not disappearing during the next re-org. Neither side is wrong.

But the tension between them is becoming structural.

For coaches and HR leaders, the real question isn’t which side is right.

It’s:👉 How are we designing development that serves both at the same time?

This didn’t start with AI, but AI is accelerating it

Long before generative AI arrived, something important was already happening. Social and behavioral "soft" skills were rising in value. In some roles, they were overtaking technical expertise.

For the first time in history, organizations can meaningfully separate intelligence from consciousness.

AI can analyze. Optimize. Generate. Decide.

But it doesn’t care. It doesn’t take responsibility. It can’t build trust. It doesn’t navigate politics or power. And that lack changes where human value sits.

Not in knowing more. But in:

• influencing without authority

• making judgement calls with incomplete data

• leading through uncertainty

• handling conflict productively

• navigating complexity without burning out

And I'm sure you've noticed, careers are getting shorter. Not jobs - careers!

We’re moving away from the idea of a 30-year career built on deep specialization. stead, many people are entering repeated reinvention cycles:

new role → skill up → AI catches up → role reshapes → repeat

So when employees prioritize influence, confidence, and strategy, it isn’t ego. It’s adaptation.

What coaching in 2026 is really being asked to do

All of this reshapes the role of coaching. Coaching in 2026 won’t be about fixing performance gaps in stable roles, because stable roles are no longer the default.

I see three shifts are already underway.

1. Human skills become the top currency

These skills aren’t “soft” anymore. They’re how work actually gets done when the ground keeps moving.

2. Development becomes personalized and moment-driven

People don’t experience their careers as linear pathways. They experience them as a series of moments: re-orgs, promotions, loss of visibility, new expectations, strategic pivots.

Development that doesn’t respond to where someone is now quickly loses relevance.

3. Coaching data becomes organizational intelligence

At scale, coaching stops being anecdotal.

Patterns emerge:

• where confidence is eroding

• where influence breaks down

• where change fatigue is building

• where leadership strain is rising

Used well, this data becomes a sensing system for the organization, positioning L&D not as a service function, but as a strategic voice.

Designing for both performance and movement

This brings us back to the original tension.

Organizations are optimizing for stability. Individuals are optimizing for agency.

The future of coaching, and talent development more broadly, isn’t about choosing one side over the other.

It’s about designing development that does both:

• strengthens the system

• gives people the ability to move within it

That’s the real work ahead. Because tools will keep changing. Roles will keep reshaping. Career paths will keep fragmenting. What compounds is human capability.

For coaches and HR leaders, the question isn’t which side is right. It’s this:

Are our development choices helping people perform today… and move tomorrow?