Coaching and the poor

'Are coaching services for the wealthy elite – those who can afford it? What could we do to make coaching more accessible to those who are poorer in the world?’ Nick Wright (UK) and Dr Smita Singh (India) offer their own reflections here:

This question first confronted me (Nick) 30 years ago. I was employed by a UK faith-based organisation to provide coaching support for community development workers. I asked myself, ‘What about those who can’t afford this kind of provision, yet could benefit so much from it?’ An answer to that question was to start my own freelance practice with a vision to provide low-cost high-quality coaching – affordable and accessible – for practitioners working with the poor. I did this in my free time, initially for one evening per week, and it grew to become international. The challenges I have faced are how to scale up to extend such provision for greater reach; how to find and connect with those (e.g. local activists in civil society organisations) to offer support; how to provide coaching that is culturally and contextually sensitive, relevant and effective.

These are some of the difficulties I’ve encountered over the years: Coaching is an unregulated industry and the word ‘coaching’ means different things to different people, organisations and practitioners in different countries; some view it as an alien cultural approach, derived from Western assumptions and inapplicable in other contexts; some view it negatively as a remedial intervention and, as such, it can carry connotations of failure and shame; the poor typically have least scope for personal agency, influence and opportunity; the poorest are often too busy working to survive at a subsistence level to make time for coaching-type interventions – and likely to view it as a luxury reserved for the rich; coaches are often self-employed and need to recover the cost of investment in their training as well as pay their own bills through fees.

Against this complex backdrop, here are some ways in which we can make coaching more accessible for the poor: advocate that United Nations, non-governmental organisations, public-private sectors and local civil society organisations include coaching provision in their plans and budgets as integral to enabling critical reflection and social transformation; integrate cross-cultural insights and approaches into coaching professional standards and training; provide scholarships for people from poorer backgrounds and contexts to take part in coach training programmes; offer group coaching or related approaches (such as action learning) to reduce per capita costs; experiment with new technologies to create access to coaching without associated travel time and costs; provide some coaching support low-bono or pro bono.

I (Smita) agree with pro-bono and low-bono approaches to making coaching more accessible. The concerns that Nick has raised are, in my view, primarily about perceptions and deep-rooted norms around coaching that the non-elite may hold (which is what I feel too). We know that such perceptions and norms influence each other. Perceptions and norms (for example, what a person sees others do, and what they believe others expect of them too) often determine behaviour. A person may conform well to a norm because they see and experience that most other people in their cultural context also conform. If, through coaching, we can help people grow in awareness of their perceptions and norms, we can start to create social change – but this will sometimes need to start with changing people’s perceptions of coaching itself.

Some organizational development (OD) interventions may help change these perceptions and norms; for example, the ‘Normative Re-educative Strategy of Change’ that Robert Chin and Kenneth D. Benne introduced some 5 decades ago. Theirs is a framework for managing change in organizations and social settings. In my experience, it tends to be effective because it aims to achieve win-win solutions through collaboration, education and experience. For instance, in the past, we worked to make India a polio-free country. We tried various methods but realized we would only achieve our aim if we were to re-educate the masses. Many people feared the new vaccine, so it was necessary to educate them. We drew on the experience of local volunteers from the relevant communities, which created critical credibility and trust. The non-elite or those in need in any country, including the UK, US, Australia, etc, can be effectively helped using this approach too.

For coaches, paying their bills while offering low-cost coaching to make it more affordable for those at the bottom of the socioeconomic pyramid is a significant concern. As an academic, I would propose writing white papers, offering evidence-based research to demonstrate the value of coaching interventions in social change and sharing them with key policymakers. If coaches can obtain funding from the government or sponsorship from corporate or other funding sources, they can have a stable income while they provide coaching to poorer clients. Training and employing coaches from local cultures and communities will help ensure it is provided in culturally- and contextually relevant ways, including stories of success that the people in need can quickly identify with.

What do you think? We’d love to hear about your experiences, insights and ideas of making coaching provision accessible for the poor.

(Dr Smita Singh is a faculty member at IMT Nagpur Business School in India and is also a management consultant, coach and author.)

[See also: Artificial coaching; Coaching through an East-West lens]