After 3 days of transition time with Jackie, I realized in my excitement of trying to fill my mind with so much content, I had not covered a basic question - how will I introduce myself? what title will I put on my business card?
Because Jackie and I had been immersed in the global coaching space during our time together I noticed Jackie's Asia Pac "counterpart" (no one is really her counterpart globally - she is in a league of her own) calls herself the Asia-Pac Coaching Leader. This title has a nice ring to it, yes?? Asia-Pac has taken so many pages (perhaps all pages) out of Jackie's coaching playbook, this was one play it made sense for us to steal.
Jackie Bayer, America's Coaching Leader.
This title speaks to the legacy Jackie is building and the thought leadership she provides everyday. This title is Jackie's brand, no doubt. When I inherit this title, I will always be reminded of the big shoes I am filling (in Jackie's case, white go-go boots - who knew she was a lead dancer in a band??)
So this begs the question: If Jackie is the America's Coaching Leader, can we be the America's Coaching Team (ACT) ? It's a leading question on my part, I know. I like that it is simple and crisp and I like that I can easily recall the acronym. I like that it names us as a team (I know there has been great conversation around us as a "group" or a "team").
OK - I admit it. I just broke the rules of every leadership transition book I have ever read- I am advised to sit back and watch - don't make any big moves too soon - I just can't help myself. Having said this, please know that I genuinely appreciate that you have already played the name game and perhaps are very attached to the Professional Coaching Group, "PCG" name. So if nothing else, this is a good test for our brand, our identity and a great education for me.
Here is my ask. Share (POST) your uncensored reaction. I believe this dialogue will help us all articulate what's in a name and appreciate the strength of our brand - no matter where we land. Thank you for playing.
I really like Jackie's/soon to be Janice's title. I also like the suggestion for the team title -- both for the logic and the simplicity. The truth of the matter is I always trip over EY PCG (professional coaching group...professional coaches group....). So this would be fine by me. The only down side is this is the whole renaming game from the clients' perspective...why?...what's different? On the other hand it worked for Prince (The Artist Formerly Known As Prince, etc). That's my initial reaction but it could evolve into something more once we start a dialogue.
ReplyDeletego TEAM!! go TEAM!! (just kidding) I am flexible and like the flow of Americas Coaching Leader translating to the Americas Coaching Team. I think we are still relatively new and that the name isn't how people know us (they know us by what we do and who we are), so I don't think it will be a hard switch.
ReplyDeleteAnd....Janice- I have never known you to break rules- so unlike you :)
I so appreciate the seamless way the two of you are thoughtfully making this transition. Lucky for us we get two incredible leaders through May!!
I'm not attached to our current name. I think it's recognized in L&D but not widely elsewhere.
ReplyDeleteI like the simplicity of ACT. I like the word team, which is another debate.
I am stuggling with the breadth implied in the title, Americas Coaching Leader/Team. I believe the title implies anything coaching. As we are a team of nine, soon to be eleven, and then ten, we can't do everything coaching. Last year we said we would draw the line and only coach senior managers and above, which we all apply as we'd like. The service lines would love someone to push coaching down to the daily level with eveyone. I'm afraid the broad title might imply things we don't intend.
What we really do is provide executive coaching and thought leadership in all arenas impacting our leaders.
Perhaps not as simple, but more overt, Americas Leadership Coaching Team. Jackie/Janice become Americas Leadership Coaching Leader.
I'm just starting to think about this. I'll be back.
Ugh - just typed a long response and there were technical issues posting it. Here's the gist of what I said, abbreviated so I can get started "battening down the hatches" here in DC : )
ReplyDelete1 - I figured we'd consider the name again anyway now that we have completed a year and have some proven value and established work behind us so it's no big deal to open this door. I appreciate your boldness in doing so and breaking the rule - it shows yours and Jackie's thoughtfulness overall! Thank you.
2 - While PCG flows for me, I really like and prefer ACT - for its meaning and for the alignment with Jackie/your title.
3 - I hear Jim's suggestion though it feels clunky to me. Perhaps we are named ACT and we more actively use a tagline/slogan to accompany it (i.e. executive coaching for Americas Leaders or Leadership). Jim's point is relevant for the general conversation about scope as apporpriate.
4 - With this door open I'd like to see a new name sooner than later. We can minimize the risk of people (clients or apt colleagues) associating the name change in conjunction with Jackie's departure to mean that is changes anything about our nature of work or scope. That could mess with her legacy to much, in my view. So ideally she'll still lead with the new name and that will be clean.
Thanks for the invite to react.