Will AI Standardize Coaching?
That is quite a grand title (laughs). Up until now, interpersonal support services like coaching have been centered on people, but this is a discussion about how, by replacing part of that with AI, we might start to see the next trend, such as standardization.
The Limitations of Coaching from a Resource Perspective
For those who recognize its value, professional interpersonal coaching is, I believe, a very useful and precious resource.
In fact, even when I am receiving coaching myself or coaching others, I am sometimes surprised at how intensely vision, goals, and actions are linked, and I do think it increases the actual rate of action implementation. If utilized effectively, I believe it is possible to create an environment where it is easier to achieve results in the short term.
On the other hand, when trying to conduct person-to-person coaching, both the coach and the client must, of course, find the same time to do it. Also, due to the nature of time being finite, there is a limit to the hours a coach can sell, so the more competent and in-demand a coach is, the more their hourly rate tends to skyrocket.
In short, I think the people who need coaching the most are those who are thinking, 'I want to accelerate my own growth' or 'I want to reach that goal,' but often, such people have limited time and money, creating a dilemma where it is difficult for them to receive high-quality coaching.
Too Many Diverse Forms of Coaching
In addition, there are no JIS standards or the like defined for the dialogue format of 'coaching,' and there are an overwhelming number of schools of thought. When I hear and see various things, I am sometimes surprised, thinking, 'Wait, you call that coaching too!?'
What I occasionally see are examples of consulting, advice, or lectures being sold under the name of 'coaching,' while from the perspective of a bystander, I sometimes think, 'Well, if it produces results, maybe that's fine.'
And, surprisingly, a certain number of people attending coaching schools to become coaches have 'never received coaching themselves' (Note: I am speaking from my own personal experience, and I think there is a bias).
This situation, although the analogy might be poor, might be like someone who has never had their hair cut or received a massage from a professional aiming to become a barber or a massage therapist. Well, that might be fine in its own way, as they can learn honestly without any strange habits.
Will AI Coaching Create a Standard?
In that case, when looking for a coach, AI becomes a strong option because it has no time constraints, is inexpensive, and there is no need to worry about the coach's history or background.
That said, for example, if you suddenly say 'coach me' to an AI like ChatGPT, it often starts a long, un-coaching-like dialogue mixed with supplementary knowledge (or preaching?) in response to your answers, so it takes a bit of effort to adjust it to my preference for fast-paced dialogue.
Rather than leaving the flow of coaching to the AI, I flipped through various materials on coaching I had at hand and created an instruction script for the AI, which allowed me to build a model that could perform basic coaching without issue. Well, it's the kind of quality where, if you call this the standard, it might just be.
That said, it is far too unfinished, and since there might be copyright issues with the questions themselves pulled from the materials, I will not release it, but I think anyone with a basic knowledge of coaching could easily create something similar. You just need to pass the AI a list of questions and the flow of which questions to use at which stage.
For those who think that is too much trouble but want to get a feel for it, I think you can try ZAPASS AI Coaching easily.
What AI Can and Cannot Do
Therefore, if there is someone who says, 'I want to receive coaching, but can't I do it for a few thousand yen?', I would recommend an AI coach. It is nearly impossible to find a professional coach who suits you within that budget, and at most, it would end with a single trial session. If you use that money to sign up for a monthly AI subscription, you can try coaching almost unlimitedly every day. And I think you will be satisfied to some extent and feel its usefulness.
On the other hand, since it is an interaction using only language, it might be unsatisfying that non-verbal information cannot be utilized by either party. Also, when doing something a bit complex, such as trying to make the flow of dialogue multi-tracked (e.g., combining two models), the conversation may not go well, so there is still room for future development of AI.
Summary
Writing this, I felt that within the scope of my experience, it might be similar to mahjong or board games. While we can play against people online now, a long time ago, we could only play against computers. Eventually, I got bored of winning against the computer, and when I showed up at a real-life gathering, I had the experience of being completely crushed.
On the other hand, without an entry point like practicing or playing against a computer first, the absolute number of people who want to try playing with others won't increase. Therefore, contrary to popular belief, I think AI coaching might actually contribute to the development of the industry.
In that case, if people experience a standard coaching model through AI first, it might be easier for them to realize the differences compared to human-led coaching, and to that extent, they might be able to understand the value and cost of interpersonal coaching more clearly.