Lawyers are not easily moved to experiment with things new. They are trained to isolate the facts, weigh up the evidence and take account of precedent. They are experienced at exploring the options and evaluating their merits and, when all of that is done, to act where the case is compelling.

So when executive or business coaching starts to gain momentum at senior levels of industry and the professional services, it is only natural that an initial healthy scepticism, responding to the absence of evidence, will kick in.

It is not feasible to eradicate this scepticism entirely in the scope of this article. However, it is perhaps possible to present a case worth examining as to the meaning and value of coaching in the context of the Bar.

The case for coaching begins with its definition. Coaching is an activity centred on learning – learning that derives from the attributes closely associated with successful people: an eagerness for feedback, resilience in the face of challenge, a capacity for honest reflection (on their own performance and on what works and what does not), a readiness to explore things new and unknown, and critically, a willingness to apply what is found out to future behaviour or action.

Significantly, it is learning derived from participation in a dialogue aimed at allowing all of these traits to be practised effectively.

The purpose of the learning – of the coaching process – is clear for those working in large organisations or alone. It is aimed at developing, maintaining and improving personal performance in the face of key business challenges.

Of course, the mere mention of the word 'learning' evokes comparisons with training. Yet 'being taught' is the direct opposite of the impact of coaching. Coaching is a non-directive process founded on drawing out and affirming what already exists. It begins and ends with the individual – their self-awareness, existing skills and motivation. It takes account of these at every stage of the exploration of possibilities for action, change and goal achievement. Its duration and timing is built around individuality, providing supportive accountability and the opportunity to truly embed the learning.

The setting – the dialogue – is one entirely familiar to barristers in practising their trade. A pre-requisite to advocacy is exploration and due reflection, listening and questioning. The value of the opportunity to truly hear the words of another, to focus on the reality and to draw out the facts and the patterns in what is said, will never be underestimated by those who are successful in their craft.

And it is impossible to underestimate it in the context of coaching where there is the opportunity to take the same approach to one's own issues and challenges and derive benefit from resourceful thinking and robust conversation.

The relevance of this to a profession built on the foundations of learning, application of precedent and analysis – all in pursuit of an outcome – should be pretty clear. Coaching has exactly the same foundations and it is just as results-driven. Its distinct purpose is to ensure that the critical thinking used on behalf of clients in advocating their cause is applied to the process of managing one's own performance across a full range of activities, for example the development of a portfolio, career progression and the fostering of relationships across a very broad spectrum.

So what can coaching add to those who already have these skills in spades? The answer is simple. While their application has a proper context in response to client needs, the context has to be created when the need is entirely self-engendered or, commonly, not seen at all. Coaching is not the only construct of course but, critically, it is a construct.

An incentive for creating the setting may not be readily seen until one examines the environment in which members of the Bar, in common with all professionals, work – constant change.

Developments in the regulatory framework, such as following Clementi, proposed changes in funding, new career structures and the onset of greater competition, all have an impact on chambers and the practices of individual barristers alike.

These impacts not only create opportunities but also immense challenges. And they create considerable demands on a profession that has its roots in sole practice and self-reliance. It is this context of separateness that provides a key insight into the role of coaching at the Bar, precisely because it is a setting based on partnership.

In other words, it provides what might otherwise be missing to support actual achievement.

Success in chambers, akin to success in any sphere, requires not only the possession of a full complement of skills – technical, behavioural and commercial – but also the practice of all of these skills with as much rigour as the core expertise (legal in this context) itself.

The results of practising them may be seen in achievement across a whole range of areas: building a sustainable portfolio, developing expertise and renown, progressing to the higher levels of the Bar and to the judiciary, leveraging presentational skills, developing influencing skills, the fostering of key relationships; managing conflict effectively and, importantly, maintaining personal motivation.

Given that these are the potential results, where would the coaching start? In most cases, it begins with a goal that requires focus, an emerging priority competing with others or recognition of something that might need to change.

So, is it possible to see at least the beginnings of a case for coaching? Would it be worth further exploration? If one thing is certain – there can be no uniform answer to that – positive or negative. There are, however, at least three certainties.

First, the coaching engagement is entirely personal. Second, it is driven by an individual's motivation towards changing a current condition, moving in a new direction, managing external change and openness to learning. Last, but not least, it is underpinned by a will-ingness to invest in a partnership – a familiar construct to many and a useful one to all.

Elizabeth Mullins is head of leadership coaching at First Counsel Consulting.