Most coaches favour internal rather than external regulation of the profession, suggests a straw poll at an Association for Coaching (AC) debate on 16 November. The ‘Regulation Debate’ was held because the government recently moved to regulate counselling and psychotherapy, and some believe the spotlight will now fall on coaching.
Coaches heard from panellists including Alison Whybrow, former chair of the British Psychological Society’s (BPS) Special Group in Coaching Psychology; David Lane, research director of the International Centre for the Study of Coaching at Middlesex University; and Mike O’Farrell, CEO of the British Acupuncture Council and part of the Joint Working Group reporting to the Department of Health on acupuncture regulation.
Two rounds of voting were held. Whybrow said: “Regulation is a bit like the hygiene factor – if it’s working well, you don’t notice it; if it’s not, you do. We need to ask what are the important things we don’t want to lose such as the huge amount of diversity and creativity.”
She added that we should think about who would represent the profession. “External regulation exposes the rifts that are there already. We have an opportunity for the coaching profession to have a dialogue before this happens.”
Lane outlined possible routes for regulation, including by functionality or title. He said some countries have tried to protect coaching function. “The International Coach Federation is fighting lots of battles in the US to keep this under control and in South Africa there is a battle between coaching and psychotherapy bodies.”
Should coaches be regulated? Cast your vote at www.coaching-at-work.com/discussions-and-polls/
| AC MEMBER VOTES (BY %) | ROUND 1 | ROUND 2 |
| Yes to external regulation | 16 | 12 |
| No to external regulation | 31 | 31 |
| If inevitable, yes to regulation by professional body | 40 | 39 |
| If inevitable, no to regulation by professional body | 6 | 3 |
Volume 5, Issue 1