Selecting coaching training providers

It seems as if just about every consulting and training provider offers coaching training. The following guidelines will help you sort out which ones can genuinely offer you a reliable and effective service.

1. What precisely is your coaching need? There is a big difference between the level of knowledge required from a line manager doing ad hoc occasional coaching and, say, a professional internal executive coach. With few exceptions, providers tend to specialise in one or other end of this spectrum.
2. Is coaching a specialism of this provider, or just a small part of a larger portfolio? Depth of subject knowledge is important. Better to choose a provider, who has already delivered coaching training to dozens of other organizations, than one, who is going to do their learning through you.
3. What accreditation does the provider’s courses have? If a course is not accredited by a relevant and reputable body in the field, it cannot be assessed against a professional standard. Valid accreditations are either from professional bodies (for example, European Mentoring and Coaching Council, or International Coach Federation) or an academic body with a coaching faculty (e.g. in the UK, Sheffield Hallam, Oxford Brookes, Ashridge, Henley; in Australia, Sydney Business School; in South Africa, WITS). The Institute of Leadership and Management also accredits courses in coaching.
4. Does the level of accreditation match the participants’ needs? The more professional you want your coaches to be, the higher the level of certification. A provider, who offers a range of levels — from basic, unaccredited short introductions (one-day or half-day briefings) through to masters degree level for people, who want to develop coaching as a vocation – will have the flexibility to accommodate changes in the organization’s needs for support in coaching, over time.
5. What level of professional qualification as coaches do the proposed trainers have? You should expect coach trainers to be highly proficient as coaches in their own right, because they will otherwise not be credible with participants and will also struggle to do effective demonstrations. Having a recognised senior practitioner level qualification is a useful indicator. So is getting them to demonstrate how they coaching, with you observing. Watch out, if you take this route, for mechanical, clunky coaching. (Ask yourself: Would I want to be coached by this person?)
6. How much do you want the training to focus on knowledge and how much on capability in practice? You will find that many academic courses tend to be high on knowledge, but produce people who lack dexterity and authenticity in their practice; while many courses from non-academic sources are big on technique, but lack sound evidence bases to support their views on how coaching should be delivered.
7. Is the training sufficiently broad in its range of approaches? Some providers structure their training around a particular method (e.g. “the inner game of tennis”) or philosophy (e.g. NLP). It’s important that the programme covers a range of approaches because a) none of these methods or philosophies works in all coaching situations and b) participants tend to polarise into “love it or hate it” when there is a limited choice. If you do want to include elements of NLP in a course, satisfy yourself that the provider is able to distinguish between the parts of NLP that are evidenced and those that are not!
8. What is the training provider’s approach to sustaining the programme? No competent provider should need prompting to bring up the topic of how to embed the learning. A significant impact cannot be gained solely from one or two days’ initial training. Training has to take place over time and with a range of support. (See What does good practice in line manager coaching look like?). You will want your training provider to offer support solutions over a number of months, as managers overcome setbacks and gradually become confident in their coaching ability.
9. What is their approach to coachee training? The effectiveness of the line manager as coach is heavily dependent on direct reports knowing how to be coached. The provider organization should be able to offer (without prompting) insights into this issue and experience from educating coachees in other organizations.
10. What is the provider’s experience in diversity training? Coaching frequently requires open conversations between people of different cultures and backgrounds. The course needs to be constructed with an awareness of the impact of diversity on the coaching conversation and relationship.
11. Are they able to provide professional supervision for coaches, if needed? Again, a provider should not need to be prompted to refer to supervision. They should be able to demonstrate the effective use of supervision with other companies. Their supervisors should be professional qualified. (See Supervision for coaches and mentors)
12. How will they measure the effectiveness of the training? You should expect an emphasis on medium term changes of behaviour by participants. Look for a clear evaluate method, which has been used in other companies.
13. Are they able to provide some or all of the training using media other than traditional classroom? Coaching training – and even supervision – is increasingly being delivered using virtual media. Virtual training is typically cheaper and more convenient than face to face, but it presents challenges in how to structure workshops and how to give people sufficient opportunities to practice coaching skills. The provider should be experienced in virtual delivery and able to offer a variety of ways of adapting training to these media.

© David Clutterbuck, 2015

Prof David Clutterbuck
Coaching and Mentoring International Ltd
Woodlands, Tollgate,
Maidenhead,
Berks, UK. SL6 4LJ

www.coachingandmentoringinternational.org
e-mail: info@coachingandmentoringinternational.org
Company registration number : 08158710