Framework Mapping Worksheet

A coach with four years of practice draws on several frameworks she learned in training and has adapted over time. She rarely names them in session because she doesn't think of herself as a framework-oriented coach - she just uses what fits. When clients ask how she works, she gives a general answer that doesn't reflect the actual structure she brings to engagements.

Use the worksheet to make the implicit explicit. 'You already use frameworks - you probably use them every session. What you don't have is a documented version of which ones, when you use them, and why. Completing this for three frameworks you actually rely on gives you two things: a clearer answer when clients ask how you work, and a basis for recognizing which frameworks are load-bearing versus which ones you've drifted away from.' Start with the framework she reaches for most automatically.

Watch whether she writes framework descriptions that read like textbook definitions rather than descriptions of how she uses them. 'The GROW model moves a client from current state to desired future state' is a textbook summary. 'I use GROW when a client has a clear problem but is cycling on options without evaluating them - the Reality and Options phases slow the cycling down' is how she actually uses it. The worksheet is useful in proportion to how practice-specific her descriptions are.

After documenting three frameworks, ask: 'If you had to pick one of these to teach to a new coach in thirty minutes, which would it be?' Her answer usually identifies the framework she understands most deeply and applies most reliably. That's worth knowing - it's often the core of a signature system she hasn't named yet.

A coach designing her first training program for other coaches has realized that much of what she wants to teach is based on frameworks she applies intuitively. She understands them well enough to use them, but she hasn't broken them down into teachable units. Her curriculum outline keeps stalling because she can't organize content she hasn't yet made explicit.

Use the worksheet as a curriculum pre-work tool. 'You can't teach what you haven't yet articulated. The worksheet gives you a structured place to break down each framework into its components, use cases, and the conditions under which it works best - which is exactly what a curriculum module needs.' Have her complete a worksheet for each framework she intends to teach before attempting to write any curriculum content.

Watch whether the use cases she writes for each framework are too narrow to generate multiple teaching examples. If the use case for a framework is 'useful when a client is stuck,' the curriculum will run out of material after one example. Push for three distinct use cases per framework that produce different kinds of client conversations. The variety is what makes a curriculum rich enough to teach across a multi-day program.

After completing the worksheets, ask her to look at the overlap between frameworks: 'Where do two of these frameworks address the same moment in a coaching conversation?' Overlap usually means one of two things: the frameworks are serving different functions at the same moment (both are load-bearing), or one is redundant (the curriculum can drop it without losing coverage). Identifying that distinction early saves curriculum design time.

A coach joining an established coaching firm as a contractor has been asked to document her primary frameworks so the firm can assess fit with their methodology and client base. She has never been asked to do this before and isn't sure how to represent her approach in a way that is accurate without being overly formal or overly casual.

Use the worksheet to produce the documentation the firm needs in a format that is specific enough to be useful. 'The firm is asking this because they need to know how your approach will land with their existing clients and whether it creates friction with the frameworks their other coaches use. A worksheet that documents three frameworks with use cases and signals gives them exactly that picture.' Have her complete the worksheet as-is, then review with her whether the descriptions are accurate to how she actually works.

Watch whether she writes descriptions that emphasize credentials or training lineage rather than practical application. 'I trained in ORSC and use systems-informed approaches' tells the firm where she learned; it doesn't tell them what she does in sessions with a senior team under pressure. Push for the session-level description: what does she actually do differently because of this framework?

After completing the worksheet, ask: 'Is there anything in here that you would not want the firm to see?' If the answer is yes, that's usually a sign that she has documented an aspirational version rather than an accurate one. The firm will find out what she actually does once she starts working with their clients - it's better for everyone if the documentation is honest about where her approach is strong and where it has limits.