Ideal Client Avatar

A coach who certified eighteen months ago has a website that describes her work in broad terms - 'helping people reach their potential,' 'supporting leaders at every stage.' She gets traffic but few inquiries, and the inquiries she does get are often from people who aren't a fit. She attributes this to the website needing better copy, but hasn't examined whether the copy is vague because her targeting is vague.

Name the sequencing problem before opening the worksheet. 'Copy that speaks to everyone speaks to no one - but the fix isn't better writing, it's better targeting. If you don't know who you're writing for, no copywriter can help you. This worksheet produces the audience description that comes before the copy.' Have her complete Part 1 (demographics) as a starting point, but flag that Part 2 (psychographics and internal experience) is where the copy-relevant material will actually come from.

Watch whether the demographic profile she writes matches who she currently has as clients or who she wants to have. Both are valid starting points, but they require different conversations. If she fills in the avatar with hypothetical ideals rather than patterns from her actual client history, the resulting profile may not match what she can actually attract. Ask: 'Does this describe someone you've actually worked with, or someone you're hoping to work with?'

After completing both parts, ask her to pull up her current homepage copy and read it against the Goals and Pain Points sections of the avatar. 'Where does your copy directly address what's in here? Where does it not?' The gaps are the rewrite brief - not in terms of better language, but in terms of which specific fears, frustrations, and goals aren't yet visible on the page.

A coach who previously worked primarily with mid-career professionals has decided to position for senior executives - VP level and above at mid-to-large companies. She has updated her LinkedIn headline but her content, website language, and conversation style still reflect her old positioning. She is getting interest from the same profile she always attracted, not the new one.

Use the worksheet to clarify the gap between her previous client profile and the new one before trying to update her marketing. 'The reason the repositioning isn't working yet is that all your existing content was built for your old avatar. Before you can update it, you need a clear picture of the new one - not just their title and industry, but specifically what they are worried about that your old clients weren't.' Complete a full avatar for the executive client, then identify the three biggest differences between this profile and her previous one.

Watch whether her executive avatar is based on assumptions rather than actual experience with that client type. If she has never coached a VP or C-suite leader, her psychographic descriptions may reflect what she thinks executives care about rather than what she's observed. If that's the case, flag it and suggest she base the profile on one or two executives she has worked with, even briefly, rather than on a hypothetical composite.

After completing the avatar, ask: 'Which section was hardest to fill in without guessing?' The answer usually identifies where her direct experience with this client type is thin - and that's both a marketing gap and a coaching competence question. A repositioning strategy that doesn't account for experience gaps tends to generate discovery calls she can't convert.

A coach designing a group cohort program has a general topic but hasn't defined a specific participant profile. She keeps describing the program as 'for ambitious professionals who want to grow' - which is accurate but doesn't help her build a curriculum, choose a price point, or write copy that produces applications from the right people.

Use the avatar as program design infrastructure, not just marketing material. 'The participant profile determines everything - the content depth, the assumed vocabulary, the homework complexity, the cohort size, and the price you can justify. Complete the avatar for your ideal participant first, before you make any of those decisions.' Have her work through both parts with the group program context explicitly in mind: who would get the most out of this program, not just who she'd enjoy working with.

Watch whether the avatar she builds is aspirational (who she hopes signs up) versus specific (who the program is actually designed for). The two can diverge when a coach hasn't yet worked enough with her target audience to know them well. If the psychographic sections are vague or generic, ask her to describe one specific person she knows personally or professionally who would get significant value from this program. That individual becomes the anchor for the rest of the profile.

After completing the avatar, ask: 'If ten people matching this profile enrolled in your program, would you need to change anything about how you've designed it?' If the answer is yes, the curriculum isn't yet built for this audience - the avatar has identified a design gap before the program launches. That's a better outcome than discovering the gap after enrollment opens.