|
Dublin 2008 – (An update about this event) The Global Convention on Coaching began with the question: What’s possible for coaching? The goal since July 2007, was for the GCC Chairs, Facilitators, nine Working Groups and nine Consultation Groups to study, via an online forum, current realities in coaching and to look at what is possible for coaching in the future.
Some groups have adapted well on the virtual forum, collecting and evaluating coaching data in order to create possible future scenarios – with the goal of sharing and discussing with fellow members in Dublin in July 2008.
Other groups have not progressed with the same ease and cohesion, and the question is being raised (for this and other reasons – see Open Letter to Participants of the Global Convention on Coaching Process ) if July 2008 is too soon for any such gathering.
The Global Convention on Coaching Steering Committee is working toward resolving these issues and we look for updated announcements as this group makes decisions about this event.
Tweet This
Email to a friend
There are 5 Responses so far...
I’m puzzled about this group meeting (GCC). It seems that there are many other meetings and groups that exist and have even examined the future of coaching. The GCC seems like it is a very expensive way to duplicate existing data. It also seems like great amount of work that will result in too little value and importance. I think I read on another coaching website that the GCC was like an elephant giving birth to a mouse. I’ve read the GCC statements of purpose. While they appear credible and committed, they lack any really compelling rationale. I don’t want to see coaches wasting their time participating in a process that is doomed and has so little likelihood of success.
Fran
Many in the coaching community have questions about the purpose of GCC at this late stage. Colleagues are attempting to obtain reliable information about whether the event, or a modified version of it, will take place in light of the state of stakeholder and working group engagement. I hope the Steering Committee will move quickly to clarify matters. This may help to restore the credibility of the event and process, re engage stakeholders and perhaps articulate the rationale more clearly to yourself and others. Your challenge to us to clarify GCC is both useful and timely. Thank you.
Fran,
The GCC is not another organisation or conference or repeat of past efforts. It is a community of practitioners working together to imagine the future based on research into current realities and future scenarios. It consists of those who choose to participate. It has no agenda other than to create a space within which ideas are shared. Creating a community is hard and at times frustrating. Many its its members have been working hard to produce the reality and scenario statements to share with consultation group members. Some of the later have been frustrated at the slowness of the process and and we are grateful to them for sticking in out. However, these statements are being produced and the level of consultation will increase and so those in the coaching community will be able to participate.
The GCC has a voluntary Steering Committee which is trying to address the concerns members raise, and plans a communication to the whole community shortly, outlining where we are and the options for the future. Those options will be compelling to some and not to others. Those who feel they want to make a contribution will be encouraged to do so. But all GCC members are using their own resources for the greater good of the wider coaching community. They do not claim to know the answers or speak for others but they are engaged in a serious process of sharing and debate.
While different organisations within the coaching community have, previously, addressed some of the themes GCC is debating, the comprehensive spread across many organisations and fields of coaching has not been attempted before.
As with any community of practice the outcome is uncertain, members join, leave, rejoin, others join and introduce new energy. It is a process, conducted by those interested and is already producing new understandings. Please join in if you would like to make a contribution. Our conclusions, whatever they are, will be shared back to the wider coaching world for further discussion.
Several months ago myself and a colleague independently entered into dialogue with representatives of the GCC. We were concerned with what we believed was a lack of substance, value, and a costly duplication of effort on the part of the GCC. We failed in our attempts to retrieve any statements from the GCC that were convincing regarding the importance of this event (as distinct from other already existing methods, systems, and meetings) to achieve the same goals.
With the latest news from The Coaching Foundation about its status, details have emerged about the costs to participants (registration fees, travel to the GCC site, etc), including those who have spent dozens of hours as volunteers. These costs are totally out of line with other similar events (and other methods of achieving the goal) and underscore our original concerns.
We strongly support the idea of continuing to develop a sense of community within coaching, of providing an opportunity for conversations about the future of coaching and other issues, and to establish a network of coaches around the world.
I appreciate and understand The Coaching Foundation’s explanation as to why it has withdrawn financial and administrative support. Except I don’t think their review went far enough. I think they should have also questioned earlier and more deeply the value of this GCC effort in relation to all the other meetings, events, conferences and methods that have taken place in the coaching world.
In a time when coaches work on concrete results with clients, I can’t imagine why practitioners would be attracted to an expensive conference and lose revenue generating time when the conference organizers are unable to specify potential results with anything but vague terms such as “the future,” or “new understandings.”
From what we understood as the method of dialogue to be used at the GCC conference in Dublin, and from our experience in using that method in highly-charged and long-standing conflicts, we concluded that the method selected as the main way to facilitate interaction was completely inappropriate for this conference.
We don’t think anything of value can be salvaged. We have great sympathy for the coaches who spent many volunteer hours organizing and contributing to the conference protocol. We also don’t see this as a failure on anyone’s part. What it does tell us is more about diversity, the importance of clear purpose, and that no matter how elegant the process, the results matter to coaches.
But to quote, Grey Owl, no matter how much mayonnaise you put in chicken litter, it will not turn into chicken salad.
Great intentions, poor execution. Sad. Hopefully a lot can be learned from this exercise.
Maybe having a gathering in The US where it would be cheaper for all concerned.
I concur completely with Rey Carr’s perspective.
Would it been respectful for the “Committee” to have sent e-mails to the many people they had previously contacted about the GCC to announce the decision and provide the explanation given?