Ombudsman Service

Professional and Ethical Behaviour

  • Date Lodged: between 4th August 2020 and 21st August 2020
  • Reason: Professional and Ethical Behaviour
    Following on from a review of the information received, it was determined that:

    • there were three complaints registered:
      1. TCM 12 week NLP Practitioner Programme
        – where the qualified trainer left mid-way through the course, and the resultant qualification is not recognised by the NLP industry or consumers.
      2. TCM 12 week Coaching Qualification Programme, Accredited Foundation Training Course – Equivalent Level 4.
        – where the training organisation awarded their students certification and accreditation; and not a qualification. 
      3. Professional and Ethical Behaviour of Respondents.
    • which resulted in the following complaints: (1) Issuing Invalid Qualification, (2) Issuing Invalid Accreditation, and (3) Professional and Ethical behaviour including Representation, Terminology, and Consistency.
  • Outcome: UPHELD
  • Outcome Issued: 21st September 2020
  • Actions, Recommendations, Sanctions:
    • Complainant: N/A
    • Respondent #1: Sanctions
    • Respondent #2: Sanctions
    • Third Party #1: Recommendations
    • Third Party #2: Recommendations
  • Dates that Actions, Recommendations, and/or Sanctions Lifted:
    The Ombudsman Service has not received an application for these recommendations/sanctions to be lifted. 
    Should an application be received to lift these recommendations/sanctions, this Case Study will be updated.
Ombudsman Service 6-9 - 3

.

Coaches and Mentors CLICK HERE to REGISTER

It has been determined that these Formal Complaints relate to Managing the Expectations of the consumers, as well as representation of the course. The Ombudsman Service has identified that in these Formal Complaints the Consumers are the Respondent’s (Private Commercial Training Organisation) students and the student’s clients.

In NLP there is a globally accepted certification structure, in which there is a common understanding of how the trainers are approved and the students are trained. Therefore, the expectation of the student and the student’s clients is that, on successful completion of the training, the student will be able to register with one of the recognised NLP Professional Bodies.

The issues detailed in this section of the Formal Complaint were not raised by the Complainants and as such, they have not requested any outcomes.

It has been determined that these Formal Complaints have raised additional points that relate to Clear Communication with the consumers, terminology (commonly understood language)consistency, and representation.  The Ombudsman Service has identified that in these Formal Complaints the consumers are the Respondents students and the student’s clients.

The outcome of the Ombudsman Service investigation is that the Respondents have not met the minimum standards required for a Private Commercial Training Organisation in the coaching and mentoring industry.

It has been determined that these Formal Complaints relate to Managing the Expectations of the consumers, as well as representation of the course. The Ombudsman Service has identified that in these Formal Complaints the Consumers are the Respondent (Private Commercial Training Organisation) students and the student’s clients.

In NLP there is a globally accepted certification structure, in which there is a common understanding of how the trainers are approved and the students are trained. Therefore, the expectation of the student and the student’s clients is that, on successful completion of the training, the student will be able to register with one of the recognised NLP Professional Bodies.

In addition, the information received and reviewed by the Ombudsman Service panel raised a number of additional concerns:

    1. Professional and Ethical Behaviour
    2. Representation
      • Complaints Procedure
      • Governance
      • Representation
      • The Respondents Membership
      • The Respondent, UK
        The Respondent, Hong Kong
    3. Terminology
      • Accredited
      • Master
    4. Consistency
      • Terms and Conditions

The details raised in this section of the Ombudsman Service process have predominantly been raised by the Ombudsman Service in its determination to understand the details of the Formal Complaints above.

Therefore, there are no outcomes awarded to the Complainants.

One owner of the Respondents – sanction 1:

The Ombudsman Service sanctions one owner of the Respondents to review the following clauses in relation to their responses to the questions, concerns, and complaints raised by their consumers (students):

One owner of the Respondents is to clearly document their reflection on their actions, specifically relating to the way in which they responded to the questions, concerns, and complaints raised by their consumers (students).

More details on Reflection can be found under Unified Coaching and Mentoring Industry Core Competencies point 7.

One owner of the Respondents – sanction 2:

The Ombudsman Service sanctions the same owner as above, of the Respondents to formally apologise to the four ‘ladies’ in writing for their breach of the unified international coaching and mentoring industry Codes of Conduct, and provide each consumer individually with a response to their own questions, concerns, or complaints.  The Ombudsman Service is to be copied on all communication.

The Respondents – sanction 1:

The Ombudsman Service sanctions the Respondent, in line with their own Complaints Procedure is required to ‘make sure they offer a clear explanation for their decision’ to cancel membership and Facebook access.

It is unclear from the responses received from the Respondents and from a senior member of the coaching and mentoring Professional Bodies team, as to when this Complaints Procedure was first published by the Respondent.

Therefore, it is sanctioned that the Respondents work with a senior member of the coaching and mentoring Professional Body team to review and if required, update their Complaints Procedure.  This review should include adding the review date and making their Complaints Process more obvious on their website.  Once this has been completed, the Respondent is required to notify all their students and the Ombudsman Service.

In light of the Respondents statements that they respect this industry, the Directors of both the UK Company and the Hong Kong Company are required to fully review their Governance webpage and re-write the sections that relate to the coaching, mentoring, and NLP industries in line with the Unified International Coaching & Mentoring Industry definitions, the awarded accreditations by the coaching and mentoring Professional Body, the universally accepted NLP training and qualification structure, and their awarded accreditation by complementary medical Professional Body.

This re-write must be sent to the:

    • Ombudsman Service for confirmation of industry detail.
    • coaching and mentoring Professional Body for confirmation of their accreditation detail.
    • NLP Professional Body for confirmation of the NLP industry detail.
    • complementary medical Professional Body for confirmation of the Medical industry detail.

The Ombudsman Service recommends that the coaching and mentoring Professional Body clarifies to the Respondents how the coaching and mentoring Professional Body represents their own brand; the use of the coaching and mentoring Professional Bodies name and logo in relation to the coaching and mentoring Professional Body accreditation awarded to (1) the Respondents course or courses/workshops, and the (2) trainers/coaches.

The Ombudsman Service recommends that the coaching and mentoring Professional Body clarifies to the Respondents how to represent their course accreditation on their Membership page, in terms of what it is that they have been awarded.

In light of the confusion over who is and who is not a Director of the Respondents companyUK and the Respondents company, Hong Kong; the Respondents are required to:

    • Add to the website the Respondents company, UK company registration details i.e. company registration number, their Registered Office Address, if different their trading address, and full contact details.
    • Add to the website the Respondents company, Hong Kong company registration details i.e. company registration number, their Registered Office Address, if different their trading address, and full contact details.
    • Update the website with reference to which individuals are Directors for which company or companies.

No additional actions, recommendations, or sanctions have been awarded under terminology.

It is unclear from the Respondent’s Terms and Conditions; which terms and conditions apply to which products and/or services.

It is recommended that the Respondent’s review their Terms and Conditions, combine the details into one set of Terms and Conditions and ensure that the one set of Terms and Conditions appears on each webpage.

.
The Ombudsman Service has not received any applications for these actions, recommendations, and sanctions to be lifted.  Should applications be received to lift these actions, recommendations, and sanctions, this Case Study will be updated.

Dated: 21st September 2020
Ombudsman Service
International Regulator of Coaching and Mentoring (CIC)
27 Old Gloucester Street, London, WC1N 3AX, United Kingdom

.
Notes:

  1. The definitions for industry-standard terminology can be found on the IRCM CIC’s Unified International Industry of Coaching and Mentoring Definitions.