Meeting conventions sometimes offer clients the opportunity to rethink topics they have considered central or secondary and reposition them from a whole new angle. To describe in more detail the central role that contracts and agreements play in coaching and the strength of their operational focus, let`s look at the different “contracting levels” that are typically implemented during a coaching process. The coaching contract is an agreement that sets the tone in a coaching relationship. This article will save you a lot of time by ticking everything that should be in your coaching contract. Indeed, the examination of contracts and agreements can reveal the “framework of success and failure” of the parties concerned, as well as avenues for their future development. An individual coaching contract is the first agreement or legal document you should have as a coach. Confrontation is necessary if one perceives a discrepancy in words, actions or between words and actions of a person, more precisely between the content of an explicit agreement or contract and the acts or behaviors that follow. For example, if you commit to repaying a loan over a set period of time and you do not respect the corresponding repayments, this person may legitimately be confronted by the lending party. The objective of this article is to deepen our understanding of the central role played by contracts and agreements during the blossoming of a coaching relationship. Indeed, beyond the initial contract, which helps to specify the objective and limits of a coaching relationship, we want to develop the other facets of the conclusion of the contract, considering the concept as a family of skills constantly shown by a professional coach every day, if not minute by minute. At each level, the work between a coach and a client is framed, authorized and limited by another form of contractual process.
At each level and as part of the evolution of the coaching relationship, the contract process offers both coaches and clients many new indicators of their common flaws and operational models of success. . . .