Magda Mook: CEO, International Coaching Federation

In this episode of Coaches on Zoom Drinking Coffee, Coaching.com CEO Alex Pascal welcomes Magda Mook - CEO and Executive Director of the International Coach Federation - as his guest. During their conversation, Magda explains how she came into this role and gives her unique perspective on what the ICF represents in 2022.

Having been with the ICF for 17 years, Magda has observed radical changes in the coaching industry. Here, she shares her observations about how executive coaching has moved into the mainstream. She also talks about how 1-to-1 coaching has evolved from a remedial measure to something much more aspirational.

The ICF started in 1995, and since then, it’s had to adapt significantly to meet the new needs of the developing coaching industry. On the podcast, Magda explains what the ICF has done to remain relevant - and how it demonstrated a commitment to modernizing even in the midst of the pandemic.

Listeners may be surprised to hear Magda say that the ICF was not initially created to create a coaching community. Instead, its objective was to cultivate credibility for the coaching industry. Alex and Magda discuss the current goals of the ICF in this episode, so listen in to access insider insights!

For a general health check of the coaching industry including reflections on its past, an evaluation of its current position, and predictions for its future, make sure you check out the full conversation.

Resources:

Magda Mook: https://coachingfederation.org/

Socials
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/magdalena-nowicka-mook-644bb74/
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/magda.mook
Twitter: https://twitter.com/Magdunia

Transcript

(interview blurb)

Magda: Now more than ever, we need to be prepared to respond in a different way, be a modern association but also be a voice, be a strong voice for coaching and coaches in very challenging circumstances.

(intro)

Alex: Hi, I’m Alex Pascal, CEO of coaching.com and this is Coaches on Zoom Drinking Coffee. Today’s guest is the CEO and Executive Director at the International Coaching Federation, the ICF. She also is a professional coach who received her training from the College for Executive Coaching and holds a Certificate in the Fundamentals of Systemic Coaching. Her formal education includes an MS in economics and international trade from the Warsaw School of Economics in Poland and the completion of the Copenhagen Business School’s Advanced Program in International Management and Consulting. She is fluent in English, Polish, and Russian and has a working knowledge of French. Please welcome, Magda Mook.

(interview)

Alex: Hey, Magda.

Magda: Hey, Alex. So good to be here. 

Alex: It’s so good to have you. I’m excited to spend some time together. We see each other often but it’s nice to do it in Coaches on Zoom Drinking Coffee. As you may know, we usually start the podcast by talking about what we’re drinking. So what are we drinking today? 

Magda: We are drinking a seltzer water. It’s noon where I am in the eastern time zone and it was an early start to the day so if I had more coffee, I probably would not be able to stop talking and I thought that maybe that would be prudent to switch the beverage of choice to water.

Alex: Well, thank you for doing that but I’m sure even with more coffee, you’d be an amazing guest. So I am really thrilled to have you in our podcast today. Would love to start at the beginning in terms of your experience with coaching. So, how did you first become acquainted with coaching?

Magda: Yeah, actually, my journey with coaching, which started almost 17 years ago, was really not through coaching, per se, but through the association management. I’ve been working with another organization that was a not for profit and, at this time, ICF was seeking a position of the Assistant Executive Director and, specifically, they were looking for somebody with the international experience. And, lucky me, through my previous work and experience, I certainly had that. So I was hired and I was the fifth staff person for ICF at that point, and, soon after, of course, and I’m very grateful for that, I was offered an opportunity to work with the professional coach. So that was my very first exposure to professional coaching, through being a client, and it was life changing, seriously life changing. 

Alex: Yeah, I bet, and you also became a certified coach throughout the process. 

Magda: Yeah. So, as I learned more about coaching and as I worked with multiple coaches, I am a coaching junkie, I love working with different coaches that come from different methodologies, cultures, even languages so that gives me a very unique insight into what that profession represents. And, in the meantime, yes, I did become trained and, frankly, I continue my professional development in this field just about every year, participating in events, participating in conferences, and definitely speaking a lot about coaching and what coaching can bring to an individual, organization, or a system. 

Alex: So you’re one of the five, the first initial five employees at the ICF. How many do you have now?

Magda: Ninety.

Alex: That just speaks to what’s happened in the last 17 years in the coaching profession and a lot of the development of the profession is due to the work at the ICF so let’s talk about that. So, what has changed in coaching over the last 17 years? 

Magda: Oh, memory lane walks are always interesting, aren’t they? And, in fact, yes, when I think back to 2005 when I first started with ICF, yeah, there were five of us, we were doing everything, and we had about 8,000 members at that point. As you know, right now, we’re over 50,000. We’re predominantly North American, right now less than half of our population comes from North America, and I think the ICF is a beautiful reflection of the evolution of the profession. So, much more global. We are talking about specificity of coaching more corporate world adopting coaching. I remember that when I first started with ICF, we defined ourselves more so by what we were not rather than what we were, to finally come to the conclusion that we have to have a language to describe coaching, rather than say, “No, we’re not consultants. No, we’re not counselors. No, we’re not therapists.” So it’s like, okay, so what are you? And right now, when you say, “I’m an executive coach,” there is a knowing nod coming from the person you’re talking to rather than, “What discipline of sports are you coaching?” So that’s wonderful. And the awareness of coaching, as we know, is significantly greater. And speaking from a perspective of ICF, coaching definitely started in a one-on-one conversation and even when corporations and organizations adopted coaching first, it was often offered as a remedial measure. There was a problem, let’s give you a coach, let’s see what happens, or reserved for the very, very top level of the organization, and since we know that strong coaching cultures are offering coaching to everybody within the enterprise and it is more of a badge of honor than a sign of a problem. And individuals, corporations, public sector, and, most recently, not-for-profit sector is really embracing coaching as not just something nice to have but as a strategy for growing their respective enterprises or reaching respective missions and visions. 

Alex: What shifted? How did we go from defining coaching in terms of what it is not to having this more broadly accepted understanding of what it is? What happened throughout the last 20 years or so where coaching became mainstream?

Magda: Persistence. To some extent, persistence, but to a big extent, and I’m not trying to be cute about it, is because we started doing research and collecting data on effectiveness of coaching. Since 2006, ICF is in a very happy and extremely beneficial partnership with PricewaterhouseCoopers and we conduct major studies on the state and the shape of the coaching industry, talking to the clients of coaching, and also talking to the general public about the awareness of coaching. We also engage with the Human Capital Institute, specifically in research around coaching in organizations and I think that that was possibly one of the most pivotal studies where we started showing that, again, coaching is just not nice to have, it’s a business proposition for organizations and more and more started talking, and talking proudly about utilizing coaching as the strategic measure for their accomplishments. 

Alex: Yeah, I think speaking to the outcomes of coaching, the Holy Grail has always been to be able to effectively measure coaching outcomes, and there’s a lot of compound variables, it’s not the easiest thing to do but we’ve found some ways along the line to be able to speak to the CFOs, because when people go through coaching, they typically really like the experience, they see a change in their behavior, people see changes around their behavior, obviously, not in every case, but in most cases, coaching is perceived as a really positive experience for people. But to translate that into something that an organization understands to have a good ROI, it just changes the game. And that really started — I mean, when I think about just the amount of people that are going through coach training today, it’s astonishing.

Magda: But you make a very good point too. ROI in our early work with PricewaterhouseCoopers, we also came up with another measure and we call it ROE, return on expectation. Because many people who had an opportunity to engage with professional coach, they do know that the bottom line or a financial gain may not be or rarely is, quite frankly, the immediate outcome or presumed outcome of the relationship. Again, our studies talk about people engaging with coaching for better communication, for better work-life balance, for professional development, for career moves, does it translate into return on investment? Absolutely, down the road, but the immediate outcome and the observable change is not necessarily associated with the money. So, return on expectation. As we all know, when you first start working with a coach, there are the expectations about what’s going to be an outcome. So, after the coaching engagement, there is a measure of, how would you say, did you improve? Did you not? What other people say, say, teamwork was one of your goals, are your teammates happier with you? Is it better to work together and get better results? So, again, it’s still somewhat subjective but this return on expectation is an excellent, excellent measure of the immediate outcomes of a coaching relationship. 

Alex: One of the fascinating trends, I think, is how we’ve gone through life coaching was seen as like a no-no, and I think, in some ways, it still is. You go to a weekend workshop and now you’re a coach. I mean, there’s a lot of that that has plagued the profession. But if you look at it from a different lens and people that are well prepared, that are going through solid training program to get credentialed, but they’re not necessarily executive coaches, they’re personal, they do personal coaching in different areas. For example, someone that specializes on working with first-time mothers in the workplace. That’s something that 10, 15 years ago, we would have never expected an organization to be interested in. But now, with this focus on wellbeing, we can really think through creatively around different areas of coaching that organizations might be very interested in providing to their employees that are outside of the spectrum of traditional coaching. That, to me, is one of the most interesting and powerful trends that I’m seeing, both in the profession but also when I think about human development and the role that organizations have in helping people find pathways for fulfillment, both in their work and outside of their work. And how would you do both? You get an ROI that perhaps is hard to measure but is absolutely there.

Magda: Yes. And it is fascinating. So, I would like to build on couple of things you said. One, and it’s absolutely crucial, and it is that the coaches are well trained and well prepared to offer their services, that it is not some kind of a weekend training, but, as you know, ICF requires actually not less than 60 hours of coach specific training to even be a member, let alone have a credential. Since this is a non-regulated or self-regulated profession, anybody can call themselves a coach. It is so important that the potential purchasers of coaching know what questions to ask, know what to expect from a coaching engagement, and definitely be sure to ask about the credentials, about professional affiliation, and also training, where people receive the training and perhaps ask for some references as well. But where you’re talking about where coaching is supporting the organizations, some were really early adopters of that. ICF has a program which is called the Prism Award. It is recognizing corporations and organizations that utilize coaching and EY was the one that actually started offering coaching to their employees for any, any reason they needed to see a coach. I think they call it a deciding moment, I hope I say it right, because the corporation understood that if you are a first-time parent, if you are maybe a first-time caregiver to your aging parents, if there is something happening in your life, you are not operating in a vacuum. I’m a systemically trained coach so we’re looking at the whole system, you can’t just presume that when people come to the office or sit in front of their computer these days, in the morning, they block off everything else that is happening in their life. So what EY clearly noticed is that if they offer this kind of support through coaching to their employees, they are more productive, in turn, more effective, and what do you know, the effectiveness of the entire organization is greater. So I think that’s very future-oriented thinking about supporting an individual as a whole person rather than focusing only on what’s happening in a work environment. 

Alex: Absolutely. And I’m just so thrilled that we are in this environment where organizations recognize that. Even now headed into an economic downturn, I think it’s the first time that we are headed into a potential recession, where I don’t think coaching is one of the things that will be in the chopping block necessarily. I think, traditionally, I used to work at CCL, I’ve seen, so I remember knowing that leadership development is one of those fragile aspects of budgets when the economy is not doing well. But now, with obviously the remote work culture that’s been developing due to the pandemic and the recognition of the importance of human capital management from a strategic perspective, I am bullish on the fact that coaching will continue to grow regardless of what happens in the macro economy. Going back to regulation, regulation has always been a very interesting conversation when it comes to coaching and there’s different perspectives on regulation. I certainly have mine and before I share mine, I would love to hear more about your perspective on regulation. And based on hearing you talk about this before, I think we shared a lot of common sentiment around regulation in coaching. So, would love for our audience to learn more about your perspective on regulation in coaching. 

Magda: Yeah, it’s an excellent question and, as you said, perennial conversation in a coaching community. And we actually started asking this question in our PwC research, and you probably won’t be surprised and our listeners won’t be surprised that the sentiment about regulation differs pretty significantly, depending on the geography. So, countries with greater level of regulation by government organization already exists, they’re like, “Yeah, sure, let’s regulate. What’s so wrong about it?” And then you talk to, say, the United States where it probably would never be the regulation at the federal level, so that means there could be 50 different regulations and that’s a headache, there are a lot of shortcomings associated with that. And then there is a very interesting question, where is the line between regulation versus recognition? And it could be fine line and the recognition could be a first step into regulation but, at the same time, back to our research, when we asked this question, about half of the respondents say coaching should be regulated. However, when we dig deeper and we ask the next question about who should be a regulatory body, the overwhelming response is professional coach’s bodies. So, it is not necessarily looking for the governmental external regulation but more of the frameworks being built by and administered by professional bodies into regulating the profession. We talked briefly about credentials and proper education. That is a form of regulation and that’s why we call ourselves as a self-regulating or voluntarily regulating profession. Will it change in the future? It could. It certainly could, as I think there is a danger of people just using the term “coach” and offering their services that are definitely not coaching and it might just lead to some harm to their clients. And also, ICF alone, we have almost 60,000 members around the globe, that’s a powerful group of people, could definitely require recognition and one way of gaining that recognition is some form of regulation. 

Alex: Educating clients is very important when your regulatory structure are these self-regulated accreditation bodies because you have multiple so I think a common thread is making sure that customers and clients really understand what coaching is, what it’s not, when to use it. There’s a gray area for therapists, like let’s just think about within the United States and all the different regulations across state lines, it’s become very popular for therapists to become coaches, but one of the common — I have a lot of friends that run coaching large organizations and one of their common challenges with folks that used to be therapists that are psychologists, etc., they sometimes start using that skill set as part of their coaching relationships and coaching and therapy, going back to what coaching is and what it’s not, coaching and therapy are two different things. So, have you seen any trends around the move towards therapists who want to have a more flexible, less regulated environment that they operate and that’s one of those reasons why they come to coaching? Like from your perspective at the ICF, where can you elaborate on that? 

Magda: Early on, we saw quite an influx of people coming from a medical profession to become coaches and I’m not surprised by that because it is the helping nature of coaching. I would hope to believe that nobody’s abusing the fact that coaching is not as strictly regulated. We know that we have many people in the ranks of our members that are licensed, professionally licensed counselors, therapists, psychologists. Our recommendation is that one does not merge the two or mix the two. It is not to say that an individual client should not work with both a coach and a therapist, but even if the person is licensed and fully prepared to offer both services, it would be very confusing for the client to receive them at the same time from the same person. In fact, our code of ethics very specifically states that even individual coach recognizes that the client could benefit from other kind of support, they have an obligation of referring that person to another professional that could offer that. And some people’s like, “You mean being in therapy and coaching at the same time?” Yeah. Probably the most powerful example that I was a witness of was a person who was a victim of domestic violence. She worked with both the counselor and a coach and she said it’s so powerful because she says, “My therapist helps me deal with the trauma of what happened to me and the coach helps me maintain healthy habits.” So, merging the two is fine, merging the two in the same person could be seriously very, very confusing to the client and, therefore, we do not recommend that. 

Alex: Thank you. That’s very helpful how you broke that down and I’ve known people that are both in coaching and therapy. I mean, it comes down to also a good therapist will know boundaries and I think what we need to do is to educate therapists on what coaching is and what it’s not so that those boundaries are very clear and you know how to navigate those. And, at the end of the day, it really is about training and understanding, which has really expanded tremendously when it comes to coaching. The body of research in coaching has continued to grow. I want to ask you about some of the cool things you guys are doing at the ICF but before we do that, given the scope of the conversation around regulation, I remember years ago that people started freaking out with the ICF when the federal government in the United States decided to start requiring coaches to be ICF credentialed to work with the government. Maybe a lot of our listeners perhaps don’t know about that. I actually think it’s a very interesting chapter that actually explains a lot of the positioning of the ICF and how you think about the coaching market, how you play with others in the space so would love to hear you talk a little bit about that event. 

Magda: Yes, it’s an interesting chapter, as you said, in the history of ICF because certain bodies external to ICF had some theories about ICF heavily lobbying the federal government to require ICF credential. Well, I wish we had the money and the ability to lobby federal government, but we didn’t and we don’t. So I think that that was a little bit before my time with the ICF, but ICF happens to have some very, very strong, super high quality coach training programs that are located in Washington, DC, so, quite naturally, the coaches immediately available in that market where the ICF-aligned coaches. So, we still know that recommendation is a strong factor in finding a coach or an individual or the organization, so, again, very naturally, coaches that were originally employed by some of the US federal government agencies would recommend another ICF coach or a coach with ICF credential. Later, when it became more prevalent, I actually did speak to several individuals in the federal government because internal federal coaching program is tremendous. It’s actually seriously a big, big program. And they said, “Listen, we receive, whenever we issue the request for proposals or for tender, we receive many, many, many, many applications. This is a very simple criterion. Either you are or you are not ICF credentialed.” So, in a way, we’re very proud and we will say that our credential is a world standard, we have almost 50,000 people around the globe that hold the active ICF credential so, yeah, it becomes a criterion that is very objective, either you do or you don’t, and is a sign of quality. So we are happy that we could continue in such a way, not necessarily the plan, I have to tell you, but that we could contribute to establishing the quality check within a very, very large body as the US federal government. And it’s not just US. Many other governments are actually utilizing the same criterion and asking for ICF credential, amongst other criteria, to secure their coaches. 

Alex: Seems like as we’ve educated the market, there’s an understanding of what is the ICF, what are some of the alternatives as well and what are their credentials and expand those criteria, but the work that you guys have done, I mean, you’re certainly the leading credentialing body in the coaching profession and so much of what’s happened in coaching in the last 10 years also piggybacks on the work that you guys have done because a lot of the companies that are growing new modalities of coaching, they always talk about the fact that the coaches are ICF credentialed. So those are some interesting things that are happening in the industry, which we’ll cover a little bit later. I want to talk, I know that over the last three years, you and your team have been working on a new vision for the ICF and your strategic plan, so we’d love to take this opportunity to talk about what that vision is and some of the work that you’ve done over the last couple years and some of what you see as the work ahead for the International Coach Federation. 

Magda: Yeah, very, very intriguing times. The impetus for thinking differently about the ICF comes from a very simple principle of any association management and it is to stay alive, you have to be relevant. So, we covered just a little bit about how coaching changed over the last, well, let’s just take my 17 years with the ICF, so coaching changed so dramatically, application of coaching changed so dramatically, and ICF didn’t, so it was like, okay, if we want to be a reflection of the profession, we need to change what we offer and how we offer. One, probably the most significant thought went into exactly corporations and organizations embracing coaching and using it in a very significant way, organizations being interested in building coaching cultures and the phenomenon that we did not even have on the radar was leaders and managers being trained in coaching skills, not to be coaches but to be better in their job. So, with a little bit of a retrospect, we say, like, “Huh,” and we do not have currently, as an organization, offerings for those very fast growing portions of the marketplace. And the other reflection came from the fact that ICF was started in 1995 and we are lucky that we still have some individuals who truly were the founding mothers and fathers of the organization to still be alive and when I talk to them and ask why ICF, why they felt this need for creating ICF, fully expecting that the answer will be to create the community for coaches. The reason why I say it was created was to give the legitimacy to the coaching profession. So that was another reflection, kind of like, okay, so ICF was always about coaching and not just about coaches. Of course, there is no coaching without coaches —

Alex: And we’ll talk about that.

Magda: Right. 

Alex: When we talk about AI in a few minutes, yeah.

Magda: Sure. So, what can we do as an organization to, of course, pay keen attention to the development of our coaches but also to see and influence different applications of coaching, making sure that that understanding from the perspective of a purchaser is accurate about what coaching is, how to elevate coaching to the level of not nice to have but must have, strategy business proposition, and so on and so forth? So, about two and a half years ago, beginning of 2020, we introduced a different structure for ICF that would allow greater focus, going deeper in certain areas that we perceive as the most prevalent for the continuous and future growth of the recognition of coaching as the modality that in fact is offering solutions that are long lasting, sustainable, and very positive. It’s been interesting, to say the least, because we introduced that major transformation of our organization and very soon after the pandemic happened and, of course, I am so proud of our board because they seriously could have said, “Let’s put it on hold, let’s just pause it, let’s just stop it,” and they were like now more than ever, we need to be prepared to respond in a different way, be a modern association but also be a voice, be a strong voice for coaching and coaches in very challenging circumstances. 

Alex: That’s an interesting transition from wanting to legitimize the profession to having legitimized it and understanding that you play a neutral role in finding your voice that encompasses the neutrality but also has something to say. And I think that is the evolution of the ICF and I think you guys have always been very careful with that neutrality and the understanding that you sit in the middle of a lot of things that are happening in an industry and how do you find the right voice without changing fundamentally the nature of your organization, which I commend you for the work that you do on that front. It’s always very palpable and visible with everything that that you do, Magda, and we talked throughout the years and I have a lot of respect for the way you managed, navigated the complexity of the world that you operate in. I mean, you guys legitimized the profession and now it’s a real thing. It’s an entity. It’s its own thing. So navigating through that is sometimes challenging. Over the last, let’s say, seven, eight years, there has been an influx of new approaches to coaching, new companies, essentially venture-backed coaching firms that have a layer of technology that just the incumbent players, whether they were independent coaches, boutique coaching firms, or large scale global consultancies just didn’t have, and I think the key catalyzer there was focusing on the coachee experience when it comes to the coaching process. And we know who those players are, there’s a lot of different companies in the space now that follow a similar model. From my perspective, they’re essentially coaching firms that have a technology layer and a lot more money than we traditionally have seen in coaching. So, how have the last seven years changed the coaching profession? 

Magda: I think that this is always important to think about why those coaching companies even came to be. When there is something popping up in the market, clearly there is a need, and I think that one was that, as we talked, larger organizations started utilizing coaching, started having demand for multiple coaches, started creating their own internal coaching programs, and somebody had to manage it. So technology came to the rescue, in a way, to support that side of the process. The flip side of that conversation is a coach. We did a study some time ago, it’s not very new but probably seven, eight years ago, and we found out that individual coach having their own coaching practice, on average, would coach about 30 percent of their time. The rest of it came to run the business and run the business meant marketing, prospecting but also paying bills and setting up invoices and this and that. So, technology, again, came to the rescue with offering better way to run the business side of coaching. 

Alex: I know a thing or two about that, yes.

Magda: So, in fact, I think that was great, it was great that it was happening because it’s changing now as well, which is another interesting conversation about the demographic of coaches, but even then, majority of coaches, coaching would be the second profession for them and oftentimes coming from an employment situation where somebody else took care of all these things that you don’t even want to think about, and often coming from very successful careers, not really realizing what it means to run your own business. So, technology supporting the coach side and the coachee side came at a very great time and I would say that the last three years, especially pandemic, pointed to the fact that technology was what enabled coaching to happen and still continue at the times where it was so, so desperately needed and otherwise would not. Having said all that, we also know from other professions that, often, technological advances are running a little bit ahead of conversation around ethics, a little bit ahead of a conversation about dealing with proprietary information, with the conversation about what could be an unintended and not very positive outcome of the application of technology and something that we’ve been observing for the last probably at least six years is exactly that. How do you deal with data that are being collected? How do you store or discard the notes from the coaching engagement? How do you make sure that, say, your virtual assistant is bound by the same set of ethics as you are as a coach and so on and so forth? So, again, 17 years with ICF, we review our code of ethics every three years and this is because the marketplace is changing so much. So that points into new challenges the great solutions being offered by technology and, yeah, just about every single one of these gains comes with a little bit of a challenge that needs to be addressed. And, again, we think that this is our absolute obligation to be in that conversation. 

Alex: Thank you for that. That’s very interesting how you cover really a broad spectrum of the intersection of the use of technology in coaching. So there’s technology for coaches in large and small organizations to run their coaching programs so the operational piece for coaches focus more time on your coaching and not just on running your business, then there’s a whole layer or a whole industry of companies that do that for people, which was the way coaching has always worked. So you have the traditional firms like CCL and LHH and Korn Ferry, they aggregate coaches, they aggregate content, and they package it and they go sell it and coaches typically are independent contractors and work with multiple firms so you see that today with the tech-enabled coaching firms but there’s more of an Uber model and, obviously, it’s different in that it’s not a derogatory thing, it’s just the idea that contractors can be aggregated at scale and connected with the demand. That has actually been so positive for coaching because it has increased the demand and now we also have increased supply. You touched upon how coaches used to do coaching as a side gig. Just the market for coaching wasn’t big enough for a lot of people to have coaching be their main profession. Now it is and it’s fascinating and it completely changes the thinking about things from a systemic perspective, not only does that increased demand for coaching puts pressure on the supply side to increase, but when you do that, there’s all these coach credentialing, there’s coach training, that really starts to flourish and you see those traditional firms that were running at smaller volumes because coaching was not as appealing as it is today, now, really, they’re thriving, there’s a lot of private equity firms getting into the coach training business, like there’s a lot of money coming into coaching, which both is good and bad. But the idea of that increased demand is what we were talking about maybe 20, 30 minutes ago around just the power of coaching, how it’s perceived and better understood today and now we can connect it to the business of coaching that’s really just been thriving over the last couple of years. So very, very interesting times. The other thing you touched upon that I thought was really interesting is the little nuances around the use of technology and like notes, and like even before we used technology, people maybe were writing it on notebooks, what happened to those notebooks? It has all your client information. So this is a perennial kind of issue with information when you’re talking about the issues related to coaching. A lot of those issues relate to just the world in general. We are not prepared for the revolution that we’re about to see when you get to human level machine intelligence, which we’ll get to in this century according to most experts, just that exponential rise in computing power and capability, how can that be good for humanity if we have all these other issues around ethics, understanding our level of consciousness, how we relate to others. So those issues that touch coaching also touch humanity as a whole so we’re up for an interesting ride this century, aren’t we? And that’s where I connect it to coaching, it’s like how can coaching help the world be that which we want it to be? 

Magda: It is interesting because sometimes when we talk to our members, we say, “You know, guys, you almost have to be a step ahead of your client because if you can help your client to navigate certain things, for many may be very exciting and for many may be a little scary. So how can you do that if you don’t know enough?” So as you well now, ICF just invited several of the major players in this technology and artificial intelligence using coaching to set standards. What is okay? What isn’t okay? What are the boundaries, if you will? They could be challenged, they will be challenged, you’re right, they will be challenged, but that’s okay. We have to start somewhere. This is a new phenomenon, this is something new we observed in a marketplace, and we want to help both the purchasers and the coaches to know what they are agreeing to when they are utilizing technology in a way that they’ve never done before. And for some, again, it probably still will be a choice at this moment and maybe five years from now, it’s not going to be a choice, either you do or you don’t, you’re out of the market, but I think that this is just so important that there are some guidelines. And we never perceived ourselves, ICF as an organization, as we have all the answers. We don’t. But, fortunately, we are surrounded by very smart people in the marketplace and, many times, also providers of those new services so we can gather our thinking together and offer something that’s useful. And we know it, with human nature, any change, even if it’s for the better, comes with a bit of resistance and anxiety, if you will, simply because it is an unknown. 

Alex: But the conversation needs to be had and I’m sure that a lot of — thank you for inviting me to that group, I’m really honored and I think we’re going to have a great time talking about those, setting those standards and thinking about the different perspectives. And it’s a conversation and it’s an evolving conversation so I’m sure that a lot of the outcomes from that will be challenged and will make the ultimate outcomes a lot better, and it will be an evolving set of understanding, really, because it is happening now and the use of technology across every application for humanity is really up for debate in certain ways these days and just the pace of change is so quick and industries have to adapt to them. And the pandemic, as you said, was a great accelerator for a lot of recognition that we need to be more adaptable. Let’s talk about coaching and AI. I think there’s so much of — the applications of AI to coaching are fascinating and are great for coaches and I feel like sometimes the conversation gets to like, “Well, will coaches be replaced by AI?” but that’s a completely different conversation. When we think about the power of these hyper connected, super powerful computing capabilities and the way that it can help, let’s say, coach training and help coaches to navigate their coaching relationships, let’s say, have some touch points across the sessions that they otherwise wouldn’t have, get some immediate feedback. I mean, there’s so much potential and so many companies rising to the challenge and coming up with new really cool things. You’re really at the center of all that. You get approached by different companies doing different. So, talk to us about some of the most exciting things that you’re seeing in the field of AI as it relates to coaching. 

Magda: First, I think some people will think about AI, application of AI in coaching is something in the future. It’s already happening. Well, let’s face it, most of coaches use assessments. Those assessments are often powered by AI and could get only better because of AI. You already mentioned application of AI in adult learning. That’s brilliant for coach education. We also see an application in credentialing, to take away the subjective parts of the evaluation process. Again, AI is just brilliant for that. And, personally, I don’t think coaches will ever be replaced by AI, but especially in the early stages of coaching relationship, that process can be shortened because of the application of AI. So our interest is to be very friendly with the providers of AI in coaching and, at the same time, because they are, in most cases, of course, brilliant, brilliant programmers and they know everything about the technology but they may not know as much about coaching, so our role is to invite them to the conversation so they would have ability to see both sides. Their bailiwick, technology, and our bailiwick, what is really needed and appropriate in a coaching relationship. So our good friend, David Peterson, once was asked if AI will replace coaching, he said no because AI can never be as sarcastic as a human being. Okay, I’ll take it as an answer. But, again, I think AI has a tremendous opportunity for making coaching accessible to more people. And that’s one of the parts of the vision of ICF that coaching is an integral part of a thriving society. And I think that instead of fearing that, we just need to make sure that it’s applied in an appropriate way.

Alex: Like always, David’s so on point. Sarcasm is one of the most difficult things for an AI system to get because it’s so nuanced. I think what’s hard for these advanced computer systems to get is nuance. Nuance is just something that works in the human brain, it doesn’t yet work in computers. We will get to the point where it does work in computers. At that point, you shouldn’t be focused on how does that impact coaching because it reshapes the landscape of existence. It’s really, I mean, what’s happening in our lifetimes is really fascinating and those computing capabilities, I mean, look, when you look at the evolution of species in the planet, to go from these bacteria in a pond somewhere to us talking through this hardware that we produced, I mean, just the nature of existence is fascinating. So we are really at the cusp of an acceleration of understanding through the use of computing devices that I think most of us just really can’t even grasp and comprehend. I mean, the fact that you and I are thousands of miles away and we’re having this conversation, that used to be, when I was — I was born in 1984 and to think about having a video-based conversation with someone was something like the Jetsons. And now look at us, it’s just standard.

Magda: You’re right, and the other thing is, it’s kind of easy to succumb to sheer panic. But think about some other professions. How many centuries we have doctors, we still have doctors, they use very different technology to help the patients, but they are still around. They are not being replaced by machines. So I think, again, it’s just the attitude of engaging technology in the best use to support coaching and the clients rather than being concerned about how big part of the marketplace they may take. 

Alex: I agree. And there will be a market for AI-based coaching, for sure, and some people find it very interesting. I mean, the history of artificial intelligence research started with Sophie, it’s like a famous system that people would really want to — it was very archaic, it was in the 50s and people were talking to a computer and they actually got very engaged talking to the computer, even with the technology back then. So we know that interfacing even with a computer and having a conversation could be a powerful thing, and as AI systems continue to evolve, it’ll be appealing, but it’s a different approach. It’s not necessarily a substitute to connecting. 

Magda: Correct.

Alex: As a coach, the thing that I enjoy the most is really connecting with someone. Once you get that connection and you operationalize that connection into something that can help someone get insight and set a path for discovery and self-improvement, accountability, it’s just something that is really powerful and I think that will continue to real human coaching very powerful. One of the things that I get really excited about with the evolution of technologies over, let’s say, the next five, ten years, is the ability for technology to help coaches be better. So get immediate feedback and finish a conversation and say what percentage of the time did you talk versus your client, what are the nature of the questions where you maybe get to the point where you can say, “Hey, coach, 57 percent of coaches or maybe 97 percent of coaches that ask this type of question at this juncture in a coaching conversation get differential positive outcomes.” So there’s really a lot of things that we can do for coaches to help them get better. So coach supervision could potentially be completely — traditionally, there’s been a lot of friction with supervision, especially in the US. Technology stands to be able to improve that. So there’s a lot to be optimistic about when it comes to technology in coaching so I’m super pumped on it. 

Magda: Yeah, me too, and I think you just said it well, because it is not technology, per se. It’s how we employ technology to help us find ways to improve. Because, for example, you said this instantaneous feedback, in itself, okay, but if you can benchmark yourself, then it becomes a powerful tool.

Alex: Yeah, absolutely. So many fun things that we can talk about. But I want to spend the last couple minutes along the lines of the conversation we’ve already been having. There is a growing need for organizations to focus on ESG, environmental, social, and governance, issues when it comes to the way they operate. How does the ESG trend impact coaching? How have you seen that trickle into the way we think about the coaching profession? 

Magda: Well, I think that, first and foremost, coaches need to be exactly what their clients need them. An ESG conversation is a huge conversation in a corporate world but also more and more people are interested in, frankly, each of them, E, S, and G, and I just had a conversation earlier today with my colleagues in Europe. As you know, as of next year, publicly traded corporations in Europe will have to report on ESGs so this is, again, not nice to have, it’s a must. Younger generations are paying more attention to especially social and environmental stance of their organization so we at ICF, we started looking into ESGs from two perspectives. One, what does it mean for us as the organization? After all, we are a corporation. We’re not for profit but we are a corporation anyway. And the other one, what does it mean for coaches? The observation, and we’re actually working with our PR company on creating some assets that will be useful to our coaches is because we believe that coaching can support E, S, and G or all of them combined from a perspective of the client. And that conversation is also perennial is the coach to present her or his opinion. Well, our last update to the code of ethics very specifically states that the coach and the client have to be aware of the impact of their work together and bringing something to the awareness of the client is not setting the agenda, it’s just bringing it to their awareness. So I actually think, much to what you said earlier, that the future of coaching is bright is because coaching can so significantly support the leadership development and ESGs not know, per se, but becoming such a focal point for organizations and individuals alike. They will need something to help them grasp and deal with it and, again, we are absolutely certain that coaching can help. 

Alex: With that, Magda, I want to thank you for joining me today in this episode of Coaches on Zoom Drinking Coffee. So fun always to talk to you. So thank you and thank you for everything you do, everything the ICF’s done over the last many decades to help coaching become the force that it is today and it has so much promise to help humanity accomplish a lot of the way in which we want our world to work. I mean, developing self-awareness, clear action plans and pathways for improvement. I mean, that’s really at the core of what it means to be human, especially important in the 21st century. So, thank you for everything you do. 

Magda: Thank you so much, Alex, for the invitation and I think that the tagline that we use at the ICF, “Empowering the world through coaching,” that says it all and sounds it all. So, always fun talking to you. 

Alex: Likewise.