Research Methodology

Our methodology [i] offers a holistic, forward-looking, and culturally relevant lens on the future of coaching. We recognize that global trends are often shaped by shifting cultural narratives, lived experiences, and systemic forces. To surface deeper meanings beyond surface-level analysis, we applied interpretive and critical research approaches grounded in sociology and futures studies.[ii] This included integrating sociocultural theories with anticipatory frameworks to make sense of complex transformations in coaching.[iii] We intentionally blended methodological rigor with creative foresight. Our approach combines qualitative and quantitative methods to ensure that insights are grounded and actionable with a future-oriented perspective.

Topic Selection Process

The 2026 ICF Annual Futures Report began with an iterative, collaborative process designed to reflect a wide range of stakeholder voices:

April 2024: During the ICF’s All-Boards Meeting in Madrid, Spain, round-robin discussion generated input on six trends potentially shaping coaching’s future. The data from the discussion was analyzed using the ICF Thought Leadership Institute’s STEERE Framework [iv], which maps trends and drivers of change across Social, Technological, Economic, Ecological, Regulatory, and Ethical domains.[v]
August 2024: A cross-functional Topic Selection Working Group — comprising leaders from the ICF Global Enterprise, each ICF family organization, ICF’s CEO, and co-chaired by ICF Thought Leadership Institute Board members and VP — narrowed the topics to three high-impact themes through structured discussions and asynchronous reflections.
September 2024: The final selection — Expanding Access to Coaching — was approved through a majority vote by the ICF Global Enterprise Board and ICF Staff Senior Leadership Team.

Desk Research

From September 2024 to January 2025, we conducted an extensive literature review, drawing from both academic and gray literature (e.g., industry reports, white papers). Peer-reviewed research ensured depth and credibility, while gray literature expanded inclusivity and surfaced emerging insights.[vi] We applied a sociological lens to examine access, informed by theories on social structures.[vii] This multidisciplinary foundation ensured that our analysis accounted for the broader social, institutional, and cultural forces shaping coaching accessibility.

Expert Interviews

Between October and November 2024, we conducted 24 expert interviews using a structured, but flexible interview guide. The goal was to explore how coaching can expand access while embracing diversity and digital innovation.[viii] Interviewees responded to open-ended questions on challenges, opportunities, and scenarios for the future.

Thematic Analysis & Key Insights

Using grounded theory methods[ix], we identified themes through iterative coding. Key categories included:

Barriers to Access (9 themes)
Opportunities for Transformation (10 themes)
Historical Context (7 themes)
Best-Case Scenario (8 themes)
Worst-Case Scenario (9 themes)
Middle-Case Scenario (5 themes)
Future Innovations (12 themes)
Advice for Coaches (6 themes)

Participant Overview

Our 24 interview participants reflect broad diversity in background, geography, and expertise:

Geographic Reach: Representation from 20 countries across six continents, with voices from established coaching hubs (USA, UK) and emerging markets (Zambia, Uganda, Vietnam).
Gender Balance: 12 female, 12 male.
Professional Backgrounds: 20 coaching professionals; four experts from philanthropy, academia, tech, and HR.
Sectoral Expertise: Predominantly leadership development, DEI, cultural competency, AI, and EdTech.
Innovative Practices: AI-powered coaching, grassroots community models, and hybrid coaching ecosystems.
Stakeholder Categories: CEOs, directors, academics, and self-employed professionals offered systemic and practitioner-level insights.

Scenario Building Survey

In January 2025, we conducted a Scenario Building Survey with 52 expert coaches, ICF Board members, and ICF staff. This helped inform the futures scenarios featured in this report.[x] This method was rooted in sociological traditions of scenario planning, which allow for the systematic exploration of alternative futures based on collective imagination and structured analysis.[xi]

Objective: To collect diverse insights shaping future coaching scenarios.
Format: Eight multiple-choice and three open-ended questions focused on long-term trends, uncertainties, and emergent shifts.
Topics: Technology, digital access, global regulation, economic shifts, ethics, and global coaching trends.
Analysis: Responses were thematically coded using grounded theory methods[xii] and triangulated with interview data to shape futures scenarios that are provocative yet plausible.

Limitations & Considerations

While our methodology prioritizes diversity and depth, some limitations remain:

Geographic Representation: While spanning six continents, there is an overrepresentation of Western voices.[xiii]
Industry Bias: The majority of participants are from the coaching sector, limiting perspectives from health care, education, and public policy.
Gender Diversity: The study captures male and female perspectives but lacks representation from non-binary or gender-diverse individuals.
Community Representation: Grassroots and marginalized communities are underrepresented.[xiv]
Tech Emphasis: The emphasis on AI and digital innovation may overshadow alternative models of access expansion.
Client-Perspectives: We did not include interviews with coaching clients or potential clients, which limits our understanding of access from the perspective of coaching recipients.

Future editions will intentionally amplify diverse voices, geographies, and perspectives, while also balancing feasibility, to broaden representation and deepen the rigor of our collective foresight.

Final Thoughts

This methodology reflects the ICF Thought Leadership Institute’s commitment to foresight-driven and participatory research that balances scientific integrity with accessible storytelling. By combining stakeholder engagement, multidisciplinary research, and foresight methodologies, we offer a roadmap toward a more adaptive, ethical, and globally relevant coaching profession. Our methods align with best practices in foresight and qualitative research while creating space for new paradigms to emerge.[xv]

[i] https://thoughtleadership.org/beyond-prediction-a-new-paradigm-for-the-future-of-coaching-research/

[ii] Inayatullah, S. (1998). Causal layered analysis: Poststructuralism as a method. Futures, 30(8), 815–829; Slaughter, R. (2002). Futures studies as an intellectual and applied discipline. American Behavioral Scientist, 42(3), 372–385.

[iii] Bourdieu, P. (1984). Distinction: A Social Critique of the Judgement of Taste. Harvard University Press; Inayatullah, S. (2004). The Causal Layered Analysis Reader. Tamkang University Press.

[iv] https://thoughtleadership.org/the-icf-thought-leadership-institutes-futures-thinking-framework-a-coachs-guide-to-navigating-disruption/

[v] Miller, R. (2018). Transforming the Future: Anticipation in the 21st Century. Routledge.

[vi] Sardar, Z. (2010). The Namesake: Futures; futures studies; futurology; futuristic; foresight—What’s in a name?. Futures, 42(3), 177-184; Stehr, N. (2001). The fragility of modern societies: Knowledge and risk in the information age. Sage.

[vii] Bourdieu, P. (1984). Distinction: A Social Critique of the Judgement of Taste. Harvard University Press; Giddens, A. (1984). The Constitution of Society: Outline of the Theory of Structuration. University of California Press; Sen, A. (1999). Development as freedom. New York: Alfred A. Knopf.

[viii] Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative Research & Evaluation Methods. Sage.

[ix] Charmaz, K. (2006). Constructing Grounded Theory. Sage.

[x] Voros, J. (2003). A generic foresight process framework. Foresight, 5(3), 10–21.

[xi] Bell, W. (1997). Foundations of Futures Studies. Transaction Publishers.

[xii] Charmaz, K. (2006). Constructing Grounded Theory. Sage.

[xiii] Connell, R. (2007). Southern Theory: The Global Dynamics of Knowledge in Social Science. Polity Press.

[xiv] Fine, M. (1994). Working the hyphens: Reinventing self and other in qualitative research. In N. Denzin & Y. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of Qualitative Research. Sage.

[xv] Bishop, P., & Hines, A. (2012). Teaching about the Future. Palgrave Macmillan; Bourdieu, P., & Wacquant, L. J. D. (1992). An invitation to reflexive sociology. University of Chicago Press; Giddens, A. (1984). The Constitution of Society: Outline of the Theory of Structuration. University of California Press; Inayatullah, S. (2004). The Causal Layered Analysis Reader. Tamkang University Press.