John Reed has multiple master coaching certifications, a Dartmouth MBA and University of Georgia PhD in organizational psychology.
Optimistic observers of executive coaching predict that in the next decade, after 70-plus years of unregulated disorganization, one set of competency standards could be established in training, credentialing and skill development for all practitioners. This would delight consumers who have only known a fragmented, buyer-beware market.
Imagine — finally — a set of global executive coaching requirements being agreed to. Could the major groups of practitioners who compete (e.g., business professionals, psychologists, credentialed coaches) shift gears and collaborate to set new, comprehensive qualifications? The potential benefits are tremendous. Let’s briefly consider why these three practitioner groups might collaborate.
Business Professionals
Executives and consultants continue to be the largest group to move into executive coaching. Not surprisingly, the top reason often cited in choosing executive coaches is business/consulting training and experience. This training (e.g., via MBA programs) and experience gives coaches credibility based on expertise in areas such as leadership, governance, strategy, finance, process improvement, technology and mergers and acquisitions.
While competing with business professionals in executive coaching, psychologists readily acknowledge the value of business training. Dr. William Berman, a respected consulting psychologist and executive coach, emphasizes the critical role of this knowledge in working with C-suite executives and business founders. Another leading consulting psychologist and executive coach and developer of the trusted leadership advisor concept, Dr. Karol Wasylyshyn, strongly advocates for the value of business depth. Furthermore, psychology’s principal professional organization, the American Psychological Association, recommends that psychologists entering executive coaching have both business and psychological training and experience.
Psychologists
Psychologists are a second significant source of executive coaches and, arguably, the most influential profession in developing coaching over its lifespan. Psychologist participation dates to the early years of coaching, and psychologists have been leading researchers, practitioners and educators in coaching. Psychologists have served as leaders of the International Coach Federation and have founded ICF-accredited training programs. The American Psychological Association offers postgraduate training in executive coaching.
Many coaches credit psychological knowledge as predating and setting the foundation for coaching competencies (e.g., establishing confidentiality, being fully present, active listening and multi-dimensional awareness).
Credentialed coaches (e.g., graduates of ICF-accredited programs) recognize psychology’s importance, as do business professionals. Research from a leading business organization, the American Management Association, makes multiple references to the historical and current value of psychology in coaching.
Credentialed Coaches
Credentialed coaches are a fragmented community and a third source of executive coaches. One estimate is that more than 70 organizations (e.g., associations, consortiums, training programs) serve credentialed coaches so it is unlikely that this community could agree on a single set of professional standards.
However, an encouraging example of collaboration is an entity formed in 2013, the Global Coaching and Mentoring Alliance. GCMA members include three of the largest organizations supporting credentialed coaches: the International Coach Federation, the European Mentoring and Coaching Council and the Association for Coaching.
Most competencies from the ICF, EMCC and AC are general and non-specific, applicable to any kind of coaching (life, career, etc.). Examples are active listening, powerful questioning, understanding self, enabling insight and learning and communicating effectively. As mentioned earlier, these competencies are rooted in psychology.
By my calculations, less than 10% of competencies from these three organizations call for business knowledge and the skills associated with executive coaching, however.So, overall, GCMA competencies have limited value in setting executive coaching standards and would best be combined with competencies set by business professionals.
The potential for collaboration among business professionals, psychologists and credentialed coaches is reasonable if not promising. If these three executive coaching groups could coordinate and integrate their competencies into a single, comprehensive set, executive coaching’s professional standing could improve markedly.
John Reed PhD, MBA, MCEC, PCC
