Daily Reminders, Missed Actions, and a Sponsor Rating

Conclusion: A owns the actions; the coach owns the coaching process. The coach should stop overfunctioning, explore A's commitment and obstacles, and renegotiate the plan. Reasoning: The coach has moved from support into rescue: daily reminders, midweek check-ins, and drafting the client's work. That reduces A's ownership and increases the coach's sense of responsibility. The IAC mastery of helping clients set and keep clear intentions does not mean the coach completes the intention. Action: Name the pattern without blame: 'We've agreed to actions three weeks running and they haven't happened. I want to understand what's real about the commitment.' Explore confidence, competing priorities, fear of delegating, and whether the 40% goal is realistic. Ask A what A is willing to own. Revise the goal or the timeline if needed. Agree on a smaller, observable action and a client-owned review method. Document the change. What to avoid: shaming A, doing the delegation matrix, or assuming the coach's reminders are the only reason A has not acted.

Conclusion: Do not accept the request as stated. Negotiate a time-limited, client-owned accountability design, and clarify that the coach is not a project manager. Reasoning: Daily morning texts and nightly calendar review create dependency and blur the boundary between coaching and personal assistance. They may also be unsustainable and unfair to both parties. Accountability works best when the client designs the tracking and owns the follow-up. Action: Acknowledge the request and ask what A hopes it will solve. Explain the dependency risk and the coach's availability. Offer options: A sends a brief weekly update before the session, A uses a calendar block or accountability partner, or A checks in with a colleague. If the coach agrees to any reminder, make it narrow, time-bound, and part of the written agreement, with clear response hours. If the scope expands, discuss fees. Ask A to choose and commit. What to avoid: agreeing to nightly reviews, texting outside agreed hours, or framing reminders as the coach's responsibility for A's behavior.

Conclusion: Do not provide a progress rating without A's informed consent and a clear contractual basis; do not extend sessions for free to relieve the coach's anxiety. Reasoning: The manager is the payer but not the client. A rating is evaluative and could affect A's employment. The original agreement should determine what the sponsor receives. Free extension rewards the coach's discomfort and hides a contracting problem. The IAC ethics framework calls for clear agreements and avoiding conflicts of interest. Action: Tell the manager what the agreement permits: attendance and agreed goal-progress information, not a performance rating. Meet A to explain the request and ask what may be shared. If a rating is genuinely required, recontract with A's consent, define criteria, and consider whether the coach can remain neutral. If not, refer the rating to A's manager or a separate assessor. Discuss any extension as a paid, explicit agreement only if the goals still justify it. What to avoid: giving a verbal rating, letting the payer redefine the coaching purpose, or using free sessions to compensate for missed client actions.