|
ICF Coaches Take A Stand has been looking to its future and collecting options. The options that have come in are just that: options. At this point, options have only been identified – not assessed, researched, evaluated, or assigned leaders.
Thus far, the options fall into three key areas:
1. Continue efforts to change the strategic direction and leadership structure of ICF in order to be more responsive to its members
2. Transition the ICF Coaches Take a Stand to its next purpose
3. Establish a new organization or align with other coaching organizations/associations
1. Continue efforts to change the strategic direction and leadership structure of ICF in order to be more responsive to its members
a. Credentialing
• Assessors suspend conducting portfolio credential assessments until such time as Assessors feel that the organization has returned to integrity
• Establish a professional diagnostic /assessment of current credentialing process conducted by an experienced assessor group and propose alternate solutions
• Allow the ISO Credential to replace ACC credential, and preserve the PCC and MCC credentials as they stand
• Establish a paid assessor system
• Return to non remunerated (i.e., receiving CCEU’s) assessor system
b. Stay with ICF and continue to work within the system for improvement:
• Accept Status Quo and see what happens with the Board’s decision January 2010
• Initiate a process of petitioning to the Board to make changes to the ICF by-laws for a revised governance structure, a member-driven and member-representative nomination and election process
• Initiate a vote of no confidence in the Board of Directors
• Stay in ICF and put forward new Board Members
• Go public – inform the press / hire a PR company and let the public weigh in
• Drive ICF to return to its roots of being an organization based on social norms or create a new organization based on social norms – where no one is paid – neither Assessors (in CCEUs or monetary compensation) nor Board members
• Think about better ways to use/leverage the Chapters tied into ICF – how to think in local and global terms
• Create a Fact Sheet for members, many of whom are unaware of the issues and policies in ICF (e.g., changes in the bylaws in 2008 that no longer allow members to elect the Officers of ICF; currently, the ICF Board, not the membership, elects the Officers)
• Pursue legal course of action
2. Transition the ICF Coaches Take a Stand to its next purpose
• Convert ICF Coaches Take A Stand website to client review registry website
• Continue this group as a group of coaches with conscience and convert site to a social network
3. Establish a New Organization, or Align with Other Coaching Organizations/Associations
• Create a new coaching organization
• Leave ICF and join another professional coaching organization (e.g., ICCO, Association for Coaching, WABC, EMCC)
• Establish a consortium of senior coaches to affiliate /partner with another organization
• Launch a public registry of coaches where clients can rate us much like Amazon – public rating website for coaches
• Partner with ACTO to keep students informed – as we are informing each other so that misinformation does not occur
• Establish an independent credentialing body and migrate the ACC, PCC, and MCC credential, and professionally administer and fund an objective, independently run certification testing and credentialing body – completely independent from ICF and other professional coaching organizations
• Approach other organizations as a newly established group, making clear what this group of experienced coaches has to offer
• Create a Global Council on Coaching to manage the public face of coaching
• Resign from ICF/not renew membership
• No longer maintain your ICF credential (discontinue collecting/supporting/paying for CCEUs)
ICF Coaches Take A Stand invites you to add to this list.
Tweet This
Email to a friend
There are 6 Responses so far...
I think it might be helpful to clarify that this is the compilation of what was, essentially, a brainstorming session. Some of the ideas are mutually exclusive and others are not.
Am I correct in saying that these are ideas that have been “floated” by participants in ICF Coaches Take a Stand and which would require more discussion, and are not specific recommendations from the group as a whole?
Also, at the risk of repeating myself, I feel there is still work to be done on agreeing on and communicating what the top credentialing issues are – whether that is done by the ICF leadership or others. It’s hard for me to see how we come up with the best solution if we haven’t agreed on what the root problems are.
Susan, thank you so much taking the time to organize then provide this comprehensive summary. With this, a URL is also created that will be an invaluable resource for others to gain succinct clarity quickly and effectively.
- Sign me – a very appreciative MCC coach based in Austin Texas USA
I am still wondering if the ICF credentialling issue is rooted on ‘leadership’, ‘management of change’, ‘technical’, ‘differences of opinions or perspectives’, ‘understanding the ICF members’ needs particularly PCCs & MCCs’, ‘ICF’s strategic directions, operating structures, systems, processes & modes (including about the assessor’s issues)’, or any other ‘missed agendas’?
Perhaps, facilitating a root cause hopefully using coaching process modelling could help?
Merry Christmas, Happy New Year, and towards a great 2010 to everyone.
Billy C H Teoh
Malaysia.
Yes, Jonathan, I think brainstorming is an apt term to use. However, I don’t think it would be accurate to say “a brainstorming session”, as I have heard many of these ideas being floated with increasing frequency since 2006. And yes, there are no recommendations from ICF Coaches Take A Stand other that those requests contained in the letter to the Board which can be viewed and signed at http://icfcoachestakeastand.org/index.php?en_view-and-sign-letter
This is clearly a collection of ideas, thoughts, possibilities, and options – each of which has its proponents, but they are not recommendations.
As far as the root problems, I think you’re right. However, reading through the summary and comments documents provided by ICF, reading all the various threads here, on LinkedIn, etc. listening to all the available recordings, I haven’t been able to find ideas offered, suggestions made or questions asked that weren’t offered, made or asked in one way or another by the Assessors over the last 2 plus years. Of course, I may have missed something but probably not that much. Noticing that I can’t help but think about the so often emphasized need for a “legally defensible” credential by the Board and Credentialing Chair during the early stages of this discussion. And the many times we asked what exactly that meant and where exactly it should be “legally defensible”. That emphasis has faded somewhat, but our questions have never been answered. It makes me wonder exactly what the Board wants in the way of enhancements to the credentialing program and why. And it makes me very hesitant to offer up any more ideas, or suggestions.
That said, I would be happy to sit down – literally or virtually – with you and a group of experienced Assessors, who would most certainly be the appropriate subject matter experts for this endeavor, and work through the process of clarifying the issues and possible solutions. If the ICF environment changes – if we get real answers to our questions – if transparency prevails – if the governance issues are addressed and acted on – if consistency and clarity in positions are articulated forthrightly and openly – etc. then I would be happy to offer the results to ICF.
I’m surprised, in option 3 above, that the International Association of Coaching (www.CertifiedCoach.org) was not mentioned. The IAC has already begun having conversations with ICF Board members regarding how our two organizations could collaborate in ways that would best advance both the future of coaching and the future of coach certification. The IAC sees its certication as comparable to the MCC vis-a-vis the standards set for those who gain the credential. It makes sense, then, to explore the value of this credential in the current conversation regarding certification. As the incoming President of the IAC, I’d love to know your thoughts!
I keep track with the correspondance and the more I read the less I can express my thoughts and feelings around this subject, but, I can hear and read between the lines, and there is a voice that needs to be heard, and it’s the voice of the art of coaching, the coaching leadership that we all seek, the leadership that expresses the art of listening and the art of loving and we are it’s agents, teachers, learners, followers, students, partners and leaders.
I would like to share with you a Parable of this kind of Leadership
by W. Chan Kim and Renée A. Mauborgne Which I received from a Harvard management student following a discussion around ICF and leadership.
The parable that follows shows the essential qualities of coaching leadership and the acts that define a leader coach: the ability to hear what is left unspoken, humility, commitment, the value of looking at reality from many vantage points, the ability to create an organization that draws out the unique strengths of every member.
The Sound of the Forest
Back in the third century A.D., the King Ts’ao sent his son, Prince T’ai, to the temple to study under the great master Pan Ku. Because Prince T’ai was to succeed his father as king, Pan Ku was to teach the boy the basics of being a good ruler. When the prince arrived at the temple, the master sent him alone to the Ming-Li Forest. After one year, the prince was to return to the temple to describe the sound of the forest.
When Prince T’ai returned, Pan Ku asked the boy to describe all that he could hear. “Master,” replied the prince, “I could hear the cuckoos sing, the leaves rustle, the hummingbirds hum, the crickets chirp, the grass blow, the bees buzz, and the wind whisper and holler.” When the prince had finished, the master told him to go back to the forest to listen to what more he could hear. The prince was puzzled by the master’s request. Had he not discerned every sound already?
For days and nights on end, the young prince sat alone in the forest listening. But he heard no sounds other than those he had already heard. Then one morning, as the prince sat silently beneath the trees, he started to discern faint sounds unlike those he had ever heard before. The more acutely he listened, the clearer the sounds became. The feeling of enlightenment enveloped the boy. “These must be the sounds the master wished me to discern,” he reflected.
When Prince T’ai returned to the temple, the master asked him what more he had heard. “Master,” responded the prince reverently, “when I listened most closely, I could hear the unheard—the sound of flowers opening, the sound of the sun warming the earth, and the sound of the grass drinking the morning dew.” The master nodded approvingly. “To hear the unheard,” remarked Pan Ku, “is a necessary discipline to be a good ruler. For only when a ruler has learned to listen closely to the people’s hearts, hearing their feelings uncommunicated, pains unexpressed, and complaints not spoken of, can he hope to inspire confidence in his people, understand when something is wrong, and meet the true needs of his citizens. The demise of states comes when leaders listen only to superficial words and do not penetrate deeply into the souls of the people to hear their true opinions, feelings, and desires.”
With Joy, Sara Arbel, MCC, Tel Aviv, Israel.