In this post from last year I mentioned how I was about to start a program of one-on-one coaching with someone from the procurement department of a major company. A few months later, I did the same sort of thing with an associate from one of the big law firms.
Yesterday I was asked if I would be available to do further such coaching, and my response was decidedly lukewarm.
For one thing, there’s the matter of economics. Because it involves only person from an organization, that organization is unlikely to want to pay very much. I generally deal with groups, so I’m not inclined to take a haircut to do one-on-one coaching.
Furthermore, one-on-one coaching in contract drafting doesn’t really make sense. What makes for clear contract language isn’t rocket science—anyone with a measure of semantic acuity can teach themselves by reading my materials. If that’s too much for someone, are you sure they’re suited to slinging around contract language?
So I’m game to do one-on-one coaching, but only sporadically as part of a broader consulting or training gig.
I think my response might be to suggest that the person attends one of your one-day courses, then offer a daily rate that works for you, for one-on-one coaching to supplement the day’s teaching. You could offer it from your home office and get the other person to do the travelling. People learn in different ways and at different speeds. Some are good at receiving information from books, others need different stimuli, including conversation, practical exercises and feedback.
Alternatively, perhaps you should train a trainer and let them offer one-on-one courses? A kind of franchise operation.