Confidence, competence and credibilty and community – Those 4 can all be achieved by joining a coaching organization (ICF, IAC, WABC, AOC, EMCC etc) and being part of the profession…

Generally this is not only happening for coaching, but also for many other corporate interventions/initiatives/activities.

This could mean that ‘credentialling’ is serious business, and that, the credentialling bodies could be held ‘legally’ accountable ‘indirectly or directly’ for poor or non performance or other issues like ‘unethical’ or ‘inconsistent’ practices, etc. for those they had credentialled? What happens when there are differing views, inconsistencies in practices and ‘philosophies’, etc. among those ‘credentialled’ from the same body?

Billy C H Teoh
Malaysia.

In the 18 years I have been coaching only 2 non-coach client asked me if I had a certification. About half want to know about my training and what makes me qualified to coach ~ though usually the answer they are looking for is in the area what they want coaching on rather than coaching i.e. they want to know if I know anything about running a manufacturing company, etc.

The only clients who have ever been interested in my credentials are other coaches. By the time I list off the litany of training I’ve had, the years of experience, the types of clients I’ve worked with, and coaching leadership (local chapter president & ICF Ethics Committee) – they’ve made up their mind that I’m right one for them. The exception to this are newer/younger coaches who are going after certification themselves and must have a certified coach as a mentor. As I am not a PCC or MCC (currently) This has created snags in their excitement to hire me. Some of these have circled back over the years after they get their own credential to then work with me to stretch them in new ways that they can’t find elsewhere from “credentialed coaches”. Seriously this is what I am told.

There is one other client situation where coach certification is becoming a prerequisite – that is in corporate coaching programs. HR has been burned too many times by unqualified coaches working with their staff. There is an increasing trend to require certification from the ICF as a prerequisite. Do they know what credential means – no, not usually. What they do know is that they can cover their behinds if the coaching blows up in their faces.

Those are my current 2 cents as it were on the subject.

Matthew Rochte
Coach for Seasoned Coaches
http://www.CoachingIntentionally.com

The coaching ‘profession’ needs a ‘unifying body’ or ‘consensus’ that can validate the acceptable coaching ‘standards & practices’, and steer clear of too many descriptions of coaching standards? We may have ‘core standards’ that applies across all coaching niches, and perhaps optional standards that could be ‘fitted’ for coaching niches like ‘creativity’ or ‘media’ or ‘business’ or ‘wealth’ coaching, etc. (attempts of doing this already exist, but cross-validation among certifying and credentialling bodies, has yet to be established). Will this be doable, or is it a better option to leave this to free market forces?

Currently within many coach’s certifying and credentialling programs, there are often sub-specializations like leadership, life, career, etc., built into the certifying and credentialling processes. But, these tend to vary from certifying and credentialling bodies, until the layman is often posed with challenging decision making on which to choose or is the right choice?

Modelling coaching excellence are the many ways each certifying and credentialling body ‘elicited’, ‘developed’, and ‘established’ the coaching standards. These are often ‘modelled’ against practising ‘master coaches’ who have already ‘mastered’ those specific coaching ‘technologies/styles’. Should ‘modelling coaching excellence’ of ‘master coaches’ determine ‘best coaching practice’ or should we base on other theoritical-based approaches or more scientifically based basis?

Modelling is usually further grounded on specific anchors like developmental psychology, transpersonal psychology, leadership sciences, communication sciences, etc., to value-add to that specific niche coaching models.

The specific niche coaching models are then further ‘refined’ when put into practice during coaching in varied coaching contexts (bringing contexts into the development of the standards).

So the vicious cycle of differing coaching ‘standards’ naturally evolves, as each specific niche coaching domain migrates to become ‘recognizable’.

The challenge now is how to ‘marry’ many of these ‘contextually valid’ coaching standards from each niche coaching domain (leaving behind ‘commercial and political motives’, if avoidable), to arrive at a generally acceptable ‘recognition framework’ for all shareholders (the various coaching certifying and credentialling bodies) and stakeholders (holders and buyers of the certification and credentialling) concerned?

Should this be the path that the coaching ‘profession’ should be moving forward to, or are there other better alternatives?

Perhaps when the coaching ‘profession’ has got it right, certification and credentialling will become the hallmark practice for all coaching engagements? The day should have arrived by then, that the coaching ‘profession’ has matured into a true profession.

What are your inner thoughts about my thoughts on this issue? Is it worth our time to think about our coaching ‘profession’?

Meta-cheerio.

Billy C H Teoh
Malaysia.

I couldn’t agree more with your post or the comments made, especially the “difference maker” for me has been coach confidence! I notice that when I interview coaches for my group that have certification they just seem to stand a little taller during our conversations.

If in the end, and probably the future of coaching engagements, it’s really all about “results”, then you could point out that certification doesn’t matter much. I find that the only people who ask me about my certifications are fellow coaches! We can all get together and line up our certifications, but it’s just like everything else, it’s the execution that matters most.

Keep up the good work!

Sam Palazzolo

I agree with the points here about clients’ lack of interest in certification and its small impact as a marketing tool. At the IAC, we believe the primary value of our certification process is to help coaches improve their effectiveness (so that they can be more successful and clients can benefit). We aim to keep our certification process as simple as possible, while assessing the highest possible coaching standards with high validity.

The benefits for those who achieve IAC certification are greater confidence and better coaching, which of course benefits their clients as well.

As our profession develops, I expect more clients will learn to rely on coaching certification systems to help them choose coaches. But that will only happen if the certifiers manage to reliably distinguish the good from the not so good. In something as personal and sophisticated as coaching, that is a continuing challenge.

Cheers,
Angela

President of the IAC
http://www.certifiedcoach.org

To me, certification and credentialling is just a ‘formal acknowledgement’ of the coach’s meeting the ‘proprietary benchmarks or standards’ for coaching practice, for a certain certification or credentialling body (mind you, there are hundreds of proprietary certification and credentialling bodies, and there will always be debate on how could we validate each of them to an ‘exacting standard framework’ for coaching excellence – when this happens, coaching should become a respectable ‘profession’?).

Certification and credentialling by no means validate the proficiency and mastery of coaching to all circumstances & situations. It probably is the ‘starting point’. Only through persistent practices and experiences can one move to mastery level.

My experience is that by ‘passionately’ understanding the coachee’s needs & preferences first, and by pre-framing the coaching procedures I will be using (depending on the diagnosis), coaching method or methods to be used (the menu of methods I will be able to offer to the coachee), establishing doable and precise coaching outcomes/KPIs, establishing the coach-coachee relationship chemistry (most crucial for success), and a host of ‘necessities’ to get the coach-coachee relationship moving forward and arriving at the agreed outcomes/KPIs; far outweights one’s certification or credential.

Often, the coachee’s ‘preferences’ will point towards which coaching model/process/style/methodology/concept would likely produce the optimum results.

Some coachee’s prefer a ‘structured approach’, while others may prefer a free-style coaching approach. Some coachee’s prefer to go through a coaching process that is ‘to-the-point’ (here perhaps the GROW Model or similar hybrid models work best), while some prefer the holistic approach (here perhaps the Matrix Model or similar hybrid models work better because the interlinked of other issues may indirectly or directly lead to the resolution of the coaching outcomes/KPIs sought).

Bottomline to me is always the coachee and the stakeholders (sponsors of the coaching), if that applies. Some evidences would be the measurement in the coachee in his/her positive changes in awareness and aha moments; positive directional shifts in thinking, attitudes, behaviours and feelings; positive changes in intentions, beliefs, outlooks, etc., personally and/or the stakeholders (sponsors).

Certification or credentialling is great, though the critical focus is from which certifying or credentialling body (who wouldn’t claim theirs is the ‘best’?)

Perhaps, food for thought, three questions:
- if our clients measure our coaching performance via evidences & results, and if our certification or credentially increases our coaching performance, why not be certified or continued to be credentialled?
- what are the evidences of how much of our coaching performances is contributed because we are certified or credentialled?
- What if we are already producing excellent coaching performances, yet is not certified or credentialled, is there really a need to do so, then? (double bind huh?).

BTW, almost all of my clients do not request evidences of my coaching certification, probably because they are more focused in their bottomlines, and partially because I spend time in pre-framing what would likely happen in the coaching sessions, so as to establish their ‘expectations’ and ‘values’ they are getting out of coaching.

Meta-cheerio.

Billy C H Teoh
Malaysia.