Home > Research

Using supervision to assure quality coaching at PricewaterhouseCoopers

PricewaterhouseCoopers (PwC) is an international business advisory firm with 15,000 employees in the UK, including 750 partners and 800 directors. PwC has a strong coaching commitment to support individualised personal development. Most senior managers and partners are expected to provide coaching support for their staff as part of their role. One-to-one coaching is offered to senior managers and partners, with a particularly strong investment at senior manager level, a significant point in career development.

Coaching is provided by a mix of internal and external coaches, including a team of six full-time internal coaches, some 20 human capital consultants, who spend up to 50% of their time coaching, and around 30 external coaches. Barbara Picheta, Leader, Coaching Centre of Excellence said: 'Senior people need a confidential space to explore how they're working and an off-line relationship to think about the issues they're facing.'

Typically, a full-time internal coach has up to 30 clients, who they see every three to four weeks. Their background could be counselling, including career counselling, psychotherapy or consulting and some have qualifications in one or more of these areas. The human capital consultants come from broader backgrounds.

The specialist internal coach team has had supervision arrangements in place for seven years. This has been based on group supervision, led by an external facilitator and complemented by one-to-one supervision. There has also been a strong tradition of co-consulting and shadow consulting. Although the four facilitators chosen to lead group supervision over this period have always been experienced coaches and supervisors, each has come from a different background so that the group could get exposure to a range of perspectives, such as those of Gestalt theory, psychodynamics and bioenergetics.

Human capital consultant coaches have had group supervision for more than a year. Supervision groups for these coaches are led by a facilitator and supplemented by one-to-one supervision sessions.

Group supervision sessions follow the same model in all cases. The monthly sessions last for around three hours and begin with a group check-in that can take up to an hour. Each group has up to five or six members, and those who want to discuss a particular case will bid for time. Normally each will then have between thirty minutes and an hour.

Working together in a group can help coaches see a range of perspectives on an issue, getting others' reactions to their own way of working and learning. It can help individuals understand blind spots, relationship patterns and the tools others are using. It can also promote deeper relations with colleagues. Philip Raymond, Human Capital Consultant and Coach, said: 'All members of the group join actively in this exploration; observing, listening and reflecting on what they see; some of the most valuable insights can be from other members of the group.'

Both the internal coach team and the human capital coaches regularly review organisational issues and systemic themes emerging from the coaching. These may include new policy effects or responses to business positioning. This information is regularly reported back at partner level. It informs perceptions of coaching, as well as having obvious value in organisation development.

Inevitably, this approach raises acute confidentiality issues. Group supervision at PwC is based on very clear contracting regarding confidentiality. There is also a strong ethos of reliance on the personal integrity and ethics of coaches.

In addition to group supervision, PwC have a number of complementary supervision activities. One-to-one coaching explores concerns that crop up between group sessions and provides a way to explore individual learning needs such as learning about a particular approach or model. There have also been learning forums, seminars and workshops in relevant areas of interest.

Reflecting on the value of coaching supervision, Picheta and Raymond agree that it's an important educative practice and that both clients and coaches benefit from improvements in coaches' skill levels and confidence. Just as importantly, however, it helps ensure coaching is delivered ethically, that the quality is right and potential risks both to clients and coaches are managed. As Picheta observes: 'To open one's work to scrutiny is important best practice in any helping activity. If you're going to bother to have coaches in the workplace, this is part of it – it's not an optional exercise.'

 
 
 
 
Bookmark and share
What are these?