# For coaches: how to be discovered without spending a rupee

**A companion to the Coach Selection Index.** Generated from the same specification
(`csi-spec-v1.0.0`) that buyers score you against, so nothing here is advice about a
test different from the one you will actually sit.

---

## The problem you probably have

You have the credential. You have the years. You are good in the room — your clients say so.
And almost nobody finds you.

So you try things. Posting daily. A podcast. A newsletter. Boosting posts. A website refresh.
A directory listing. An SEO consultant. Each works for about six weeks. None compounds. And
the coaches who *are* visible do not seem better than you, which is the part that stings,
because it is usually true.

Here is the uncomfortable diagnosis, in one line from the buyers themselves.

> In the ICF South and Southeast Asia study, corporate sponsors ranked **visibility eighth of
> nine** selection factors, at **2.6%**. Experience came first at 68.4%, industry knowledge
> second at 52.6%, clarity of approach third at 47.4%.

You have been buying the one thing your buyer is not shopping for. Not because visibility is
worthless, but because by the time a serious buyer is choosing between three coaches,
visibility has already done its only job — getting you into the consideration set — and every
remaining question is evidentiary. Can you show it? And most coaches, at that point, cannot.

## What changed, and why it now favours you

Buyers used to search. Increasingly they ask — ChatGPT, Gemini, Claude, Perplexity, Google's
AI overview: *"who are the best executive coaches in India for a CXO transition?"*

That is a different game with different rules, and the rules are unusually kind to a coach with
substance and no budget:

- **You cannot buy the answer.** There is no ad slot in a synthesised response.
- **Volume stops working.** Publishing more of the same thin content is actively penalised.
- **Specifics get cited; adjectives get dropped.** "1,900 logged hours on the ICF register"
  survives summarisation. "Highly experienced transformational coach" does not.
- **Consistency across sources decides whether you exist at all.** Answer engines resolve
  *entities* — is this the same person, with the same credentials and the same claims,
  everywhere? A coach whose site, LinkedIn, credential register and book jacket disagree about
  their own hours is not a trusted entity. They are noise.
- **Being corroborated beats being loud.** A third party confirming a fact about you outweighs
  any amount of you asserting it.

Read that list again next to the evidence tiers this index scores you on — T1 verified, T2
corroborated, T3 your own word for it, T4 nothing. **They are the same thing.** An answer
engine and a serious buyer are asking the identical question: *can this be checked?*

Which means the work is one piece of work, not two.

> **Stop marketing. Start disclosing.**
> Every item below is an act of disclosure, not spend. Each one raises your score with a buyer
> and your citability with an answer engine, in the same afternoon, for the same nothing.

## The honest catch

This will not make you discoverable next week, and anyone promising that is selling you the
last decade's game. What it does is make you *checkable* — so that when a buyer or a machine
reaches the evidentiary question, you are one of the few who has an answer. Most of your
competitors will still be posting.

It also cannot manufacture substance you do not have. If you have 200 hours, publishing that
you have 200 hours is honest and will score as 200 hours. The index is not a marketing tool
with extra steps; it is a mirror. Several of the items below are things you may not be able to
claim yet. Those are your development plan, not your copywriting brief.

---

## The twenty-one things

Five carry a **gate** mark: fail those and a buyer's calculator will not score you at all, at
that level, however good the rest is. Start there.

### C · Context Fit
*Worth 20.2% to a corporate sponsor hiring for a CXO, 13.5% to a self-funded first-time manager.*

**`CTX1` Sector engagements**
- *Scored on:* Documented coaching engagements in the buyer's sector in the last 5 years.
- *Top of the scale:* 10 or more
- *Cost:* nothing but an afternoon
- *Why it also makes you findable:* A sector-specific page with counts and dates is extractable. "I work across industries" is not.

**`CTX2` Level engagements**  **· gate ·**
- *Scored on:* Documented engagements with coachees at the buyer's leadership level or above, last 5 years.
- *Top of the scale:* 10 or more
- *Cost:* nothing but an afternoon
- *Why it also makes you findable:* Name the level you work at, in the words a buyer would use: CXO, SBU head, first-time manager.

**`CTX3` Operating lineage**
- *Scored on:* The coach's own years in line, P&L or senior functional leadership before coaching.
- *Top of the scale:* 20 or more years
- *Cost:* nothing but an afternoon
- *Why it also makes you findable:* Your pre-coaching career is an entity signal. It is also the single hardest thing for a newer coach to fake, which is why it is worth stating plainly.


### O · Outcome Evidence
*Worth 17.3% to a corporate sponsor hiring for a CXO, 9.8% to a self-funded first-time manager.*

**`OUT1` Measurement design**  **· gate ·**
- *Scored on:* The strongest outcome measure the coach agrees in writing before the engagement starts.
- *Top of the scale:* + business-impact analysis
- *Cost:* nothing but an afternoon
- *Why it also makes you findable:* Publish the measure you agree before an engagement starts. Almost nobody does; it makes you quotable on a question nobody else answers.

**`OUT2` Documented results**
- *Scored on:* Outcomes in the last 3 years attributable by a third party (promotion, retention, 360 delta, named business result).
- *Top of the scale:* 11 or more
- *Cost:* nothing but an afternoon
- *Why it also makes you findable:* Anonymised, dated, specific. "Promoted to SBU head within 7 months, 2025" is citable. "Transformational results" is noise.

**`OUT3` Contactable references**
- *Scored on:* References at or above the buyer's level the coach will release on request.
- *Top of the scale:* 4 or more
- *Cost:* nothing but an afternoon
- *Why it also makes you findable:* Say how many references you release and at what level. You do not have to publish the names.


### A · Authenticity & Chemistry
*Worth 15.4% to a corporate sponsor hiring for a CXO, 34.4% to a self-funded first-time manager.*

**`AUTH1` Chemistry protocol**  **· gate ·**
- *Scored on:* What the coach offers before any commitment.
- *Top of the scale:* structured session plus two or more alternate coaches offered
- *Cost:* nothing but an afternoon
- *Why it also makes you findable:* State the format: length, written brief, alternates. This is a fact an answer engine can repeat.

**`AUTH2` Buyer-rated chemistry**
- *Scored on:* THE BUYER'S OWN RATING after the chemistry session. The only judgement input in the model, and it belongs to the buyer, never to an AI.
- *Top of the scale:* I felt understood and appropriately challenged
- *Cost:* nothing but an afternoon
- *Why it also makes you findable:* Not yours to influence. It is the buyer's rating of you after the session — earn it in the room.

**`AUTH3` Claim integrity**
- *Scored on:* Proportion of the coach's material public claims (hours, clients, results, credentials, awards) that can be independently verified.
- *Top of the scale:* all material claims verifiable
- *Cost:* nothing but an afternoon
- *Why it also makes you findable:* The highest-leverage item on this page. Every claim you make must match everywhere it appears — site, LinkedIn, ICF register, book jacket, podcast bio. Inconsistent entities do not get cited.


### C · Credential & Ethics Floor
*Worth 6.8% to a corporate sponsor hiring for a CXO, 5.8% to a self-funded first-time manager.*

**`CRED1` Credential level**
- *Scored on:* Highest current professional coaching credential.
- *Top of the scale:* ICF MCC / EMCC Master Practitioner
- *Cost:* a fee you are probably already paying
- *Why it also makes you findable:* Your credential body's public register is a third-party corroboration you already own. Link it.

**`CRED2` Supervision and CPD**
- *Scored on:* Ongoing professional development and reflective supervision.
- *Top of the scale:* + documented supervision 6 or more times a year
- *Cost:* a fee you are probably already paying
- *Why it also makes you findable:* Supervision and CPD are rarely published and easily verified. Publishing them is close to free differentiation.

**`CRED3` Ethics and indemnity**  **· gate ·**
- *Scored on:* Written protections the coach signs up to.
- *Top of the scale:* + disclosed complaints and sanctions record
- *Cost:* a fee you are probably already paying
- *Why it also makes you findable:* Confidentiality undertaking, indemnity cover, complaints record. G1 makes the first of these a hard gate: without it you cannot be scored at all.


### H · Hours & Practice Depth
*Worth 21.6% to a corporate sponsor hiring for a CXO, 15.9% to a self-funded first-time manager.*

**`HRS1` Documented coaching hours**  **· gate ·**
- *Scored on:* Logged paid coaching hours, evidenced.
- *Top of the scale:* 3,000 or more
- *Cost:* nothing but an afternoon
- *Why it also makes you findable:* A number with a source beats an adjective. "1,900 logged hours, ICF register" outranks "highly experienced" in both a buyer's checklist and a citation.

**`HRS2` Years in practice**
- *Scored on:* Years in professional coaching practice.
- *Top of the scale:* 15 or more
- *Cost:* nothing but an afternoon
- *Why it also makes you findable:* Give the year you started. Dates are entity anchors.

**`HRS3` Repeat and extension rate**
- *Scored on:* Share of engagements in the last 3 years that were repeat business or extended beyond the original contract.
- *Top of the scale:* 60% or more
- *Cost:* nothing but an afternoon
- *Why it also makes you findable:* Repeat and extension rate is the most persuasive number most coaches have and almost none publish.


### E · Explicit Method
*Worth 15.4% to a corporate sponsor hiring for a CXO, 13.3% to a self-funded first-time manager.*

**`MTH1` Named written method**
- *Scored on:* How far the coach's approach is written down and testable before you buy.
- *Top of the scale:* + a published evidence base with citations
- *Cost:* nothing but an afternoon
- *Why it also makes you findable:* A written method of a page or more, with a name. This is the difference between being summarised and being cited.

**`MTH2` Contracting artefacts**
- *Scored on:* What is agreed in writing at the start.
- *Top of the scale:* + written mid-point review protocol
- *Cost:* nothing but an afternoon
- *Why it also makes you findable:* Publish a blank agreement. Three-way goal contracting with the sponsor is directly supported by the outcome research.

**`MTH3` Cadence and exit**
- *Scored on:* How much of the engagement's shape is specified before it starts.
- *Top of the scale:* + written exit criteria
- *Cost:* nothing but an afternoon
- *Why it also makes you findable:* Cadence, duration, between-session protocol, exit criteria. Specifics are extractable; promises are not.


### S · Straight Pricing
*Worth 3.3% to a corporate sponsor hiring for a CXO, 7.3% to a self-funded first-time manager.*

**`PRC1` Fee transparency**
- *Scored on:* When and how the fee becomes knowable.
- *Top of the scale:* + published inclusions and exclusions
- *Cost:* nothing but an afternoon
- *Why it also makes you findable:* A published band ends the discovery call that was only ever about price, and makes you the answer to "what does an executive coach cost in India".

**`PRC2` Value rationality**
- *Scored on:* Where the fee sits against the published band for this level, and what justifies it. Cheapest is NOT best.
- *Top of the scale:* declared inclusions plus an outcome-linked fee component
- *Cost:* nothing but an afternoon
- *Why it also makes you findable:* Declare what the fee includes. An outcome-linked component scores highest because it is the only one that costs you something.

**`PRC3` Commercial terms**
- *Scored on:* How many of these five are written: cancellation, confidentiality, IP, data handling, exit.
- *Top of the scale:* all 5
- *Cost:* nothing but an afternoon
- *Why it also makes you findable:* Cancellation, confidentiality, IP, data handling, exit — written.

---

## The four AEO moves that are not scored here

The index measures what a *buyer* checks. These four make you legible to a *machine*, and
none of them costs money either:

1. **One entity, everywhere.** Pick one form of your name, one credential list, one set of
   numbers, one description of what you do — and make every surface agree: your site, LinkedIn,
   the ICF or EMCC register, book jackets, podcast bios, conference programmes, your email
   signature. This is the same discipline as `AUTH3` claim integrity. Inconsistency is the most
   common reason a genuinely qualified coach is invisible to an answer engine.
2. **Answer first, explain after.** Lead every page and every heading with the plain answer in
   the first 30–50 words, then elaborate. Extraction happens at the top.
3. **Mark it up.** `Person` and `ProfessionalService` structured data, and FAQ markup on your
   questions page. It is one file, it is free, and it tells a machine what a human can already
   see.
4. **Get corroborated, not just published.** One dated third-party mention — a client
   organisation naming you, a credential register entry, a conference listing, a cited paper —
   is worth more than a month of your own posts. Ask for the mention. Most people say yes.

---

## What this costs you, and what we charge

Everything above is published in full, free, and complete. There is no further tier, no
withheld advice, no premium checklist. **You do not need to hire anybody to do any of it**, and
if you follow it yourself your score will be identical to the score of a coach who paid
somebody.

Nirvedha does sell coaches help *implementing* it — assembling an evidence pack, writing a
method document, getting the entity consistency right. That is a service, and it is worth
saying plainly what such a service can and cannot be:

- **It cannot change a code.** A coach who is or has been a paying client within 24 months has
  their register entry coded by the independent adjudicator, never by Nirvedha.
- **It is disclosed.** Every register entry publishes whether that coach is a commercial client
  of the compiler.
- **There is no fee, ever, for being listed, scored, re-scored, corrected or removed.**
  Corrections are free and always will be. The moment you can pay for position, this becomes
  the search engine it was built to replace.

If Nirvedha ever breaches those, the specification, the weights and the code are CC BY 4.0 —
fork the index and publish one that does not.

---

*Generated from `csi-spec-v1.0.0`. If an indicator here does not match what the
calculator scores, the calculator is right and this file is stale — regenerate it with
`python3 gen_coaches.py`.*