New research from DDI says AI coaching works best when a human coach is also involved. For coaches, that is good news. It is not a reason to relax, though. The same study shows how thin the human side often is.
DDI published the findings on November 10, 2026, as part of its Global Leadership Forecast 2027. Here is what it says, what it does not say, and what a solo coach can do with it.
What the study found
DDI surveyed 11,395 leaders and 2,519 HR professionals across more than 1,900 organizations, according to its press release. The numbers that matter for coaches:
- 72% of HR professionals say they use or are considering AI-based learning for leadership development.
- Only 37% of organizations already using it see strong results.
- 64% of leaders who got both AI coaching and manager coaching rated their development as high quality.
- That compares with 45% for manager coaching alone and 39% for AI coaching alone.
- Only 1 in 4 leaders says their manager is an effective coach.
HR Dive's summary reports the same figures. DDI's own researcher is quoted as saying that the technology alone is not the answer.
How to read it
Three points before you share this on LinkedIn.
This is leadership development inside companies. The people surveyed were leaders and HR staff. The "manager coach" in the study is a boss who coaches, not an independent coach you hire. So the numbers do not directly describe a one-to-one coaching practice.
DDI sells leadership development. That does not make the data wrong. It means you should read it as one company's research, and note what it measured. These are ratings from people, not proof of results.
The comparison is rough. The group that got both kinds of coaching may differ from the others in other ways. The press release summary does not say, so we should not claim more than it does.
Still, the direction is clear in this data set. AI alone scored lower than AI with a person.
What this means for a solo coach
I would take away three things. These are my opinions, not DDI's.
1. Sell the human part clearly
If AI tools are cheap and everywhere, the part that stays scarce is a skilled person who listens, asks the hard question and holds the client to what they said. Say that on your website and in your intro calls. Be specific about what you do in a session that a chat tool does not.
2. Use AI for practice between sessions, with your guidance
DDI's own researcher says AI coaching can give leaders a safe place to practice the skills their manager is helping them develop. A coach can play the same role. You might suggest a client rehearse a hard conversation with a chat tool, then bring the transcript to your next session. You stay in the loop. The client does more practice.
If you do this, tell the client what the tool is, what data it sees and what stays private. That matches the direction of the guidance coaching bodies have been publishing on AI.
3. Do not outsource the part that needs judgment
AI can draft a recap or suggest a question. It cannot tell if a client is ready to hear something hard. That call is yours.
The weak spot in the data
Only 1 in 4 leaders says their manager is an effective coach. That is the number I would not skip.
It means many organizations do not have a strong human coaching base for AI to build on. If you work with companies, that is your opening. A team lead who is a poor coach is a problem you can help solve, with or without AI.
For coaches who work with managers, a short offer could be:
- A group program for managers on how to coach their own teams.
- A few one-to-one sessions for a new team lead.
- A simple practice routine that mixes live sessions with between-session practice.
What to do this week
- Read the DDI press release yourself. It is short.
- Write two sentences on what you do that AI does not. Put them on your services page.
- Pick one client and one skill. Ask if they would like a short practice exercise between sessions.
- Update your coaching agreement if you plan to suggest an AI tool. Say what it is and what data it sees.
The study does not say AI will replace coaches. It says AI works better with one. That is a good reason to get better at the human part.