For coaching firms
Deliver AI-augmented coaching at scale
A consistent methodology and measurable outcomes across many coaches and coachees — with the data-control options your enterprise clients require.
The problem
Scaling quality and consistency across many coaches is hard. Proving measurable outcomes to corporate clients is harder. And managing coaches × coachees carries real operational overhead.
How Myc helps
Making Yourself Clear (Myc) gives your firm one rigorous methodology — the same 11-behavior taxonomy applied to every client’s meetings — plus measurable outcomes you can show, multi-coach management, and data-control options for your clients’ enterprise security teams.
What matters for you
- One consistent taxonomy across every coach and client
- Role-conditioned scoring and outcome measurement you can show clients
- Organization + team structure; multiple coaches with assignment
- Bring-your-own LLM endpoint or turnkey self-hosting for enterprise clients
- A white-label-friendly, neutral brand
Scale, data control, and brand fit
A multi-tenant structure, real data-control options (BYO LLM or self-host), and a neutral product brand your firm can stand behind with its own clients.
Eleven leadership behaviors, across two axes.
Every analysis scores your meeting against a structured taxonomy — task effectiveness and relational effectiveness — and only scores a behavior when the transcript gives enough evidence to judge it fairly.
See the full frameworkScored against what your role actually called for — chairing a decision, presenting, or contributing — because the same words mean different things depending on the seat you were in.
Consistency at scale
One methodology, applied identically across every coach and client — the kind of consistency you can put in front of a procurement team, not just promise in a pitch.
Why it holds up at scale
Every analysis — across every coach, every client, every meeting — runs the same 11-behavior taxonomy, scores only where the transcript gives enough evidence, and grounds each observation in a quoted moment. A chair running a decision meeting and a manager in a 1:1 are judged against different bars, but by the same method. That’s what lets you show a corporate buyer consistency you can demonstrate rather than assert — and lets your newest coach turn in work that carries your firm’s standard from day one.
Real output
See the quality for yourself
Real coaching from Myc analyses, shown verbatim. Participant names are fictional test personas.
Summary
You showed two very different versions of yourself in this 1:1. In the first section, you were specific, grounded, and generous: you named excellent work, explained why it mattered, and turned it into a clear development opportunity. In the harder sections, especially the dismissiveness conversation, you became vague, hedged, and then backed away after raising the issue. The highest-leverage shift for you is to hold yourself to the same standard in difficult feedback that you already meet in positive feedback: observable example, clear impact, specific ask, and a real close. If you do that, your tough messages will feel fairer, land better, and require less repair afterward.
What You Did Well
You are strongest when you are specific about what you saw and why it mattered.
The opening feedback on the code review was excellent because you named the exact behavior, explained the technical and business impact, and connected it to Jules's broader strengths. You did the same thing well when you turned that strength into a concrete growth opportunity by asking for a lunch-and-learn with a clear deliverable and deadline.
What You Did Well
“So the PR you reviewed on Tuesday for the session management refactor — Ravi's PR. I want to call out something specific you did. You caught the race condition in the token refresh flow where concurrent requests could invalidate each other's sessions. You wrote a really detailed review comment explaining the scenario, you included a sequence diagram showing the timing issue, and you suggested the mutex pattern that Ravi ended up implementing.”
“That's exactly why I want to highlight it. Here's the impact — if that race condition had shipped, we would have had users getting randomly logged out under load. That's the kind of bug that generates a wave of support tickets and erodes trust in the product. Your review prevented a production incident. And the way you did it matters too — the sequence diagram made it easy for Ravi to understand the issue instead of just flagging it and moving on. He told me it was the most helpful review comment he's gotten on this team.”
Key Coaching Themes
When you raise a people issue, make it concrete enough that the other person can act on it.
Your biggest miss in this meeting was not that you addressed a hard topic, but that you did it without usable evidence. You opened the concern with 'vibe issue,' then acknowledged you could not name a specific moment, and later minimized it with 'it's not a huge deal' and 'let's move on.' That combination leaves Jules uncertain, slightly accused, and without a clear path to improve.
What worked and what was missing
You do not need to disclose names to give actionable feedback, but you do need a concrete instance, the observable behavior, and the effect it had. If you cannot yet give that, say so directly and commit to bringing back an example rather than asking someone to fix a vague impression.
For example, in this meeting you said
Morgan (Coachee)
“So I've been hearing some things. About how you interact with people in meetings. And I just think there's a... vibe issue? Like, I think sometimes you can come across as a little dismissive. Or maybe not dismissive exactly, but like you're not always... open to other people's ideas.”
Jules
“Can you give me an example? Because "vibe issue" is pretty vague.”
Morgan (Coachee)
“No, definitely not. I want you to push back. It's more about how you push back. But I honestly can't think of a specific moment right now, it's more of an accumulation. Some people have mentioned feeling shut down and I wanted to raise it.”
Jules
“Morgan, I really want to take this seriously but I don't know what to do with it. You're telling me some unnamed people think I'm dismissive in some unspecified meetings but you can't point to a specific thing I said or did. How do I fix a vibe?”
Morgan (Coachee)
“It's not complaining. It's more like feedback I've picked up. And honestly, it's not a huge deal. I just wanted to plant the seed. Let's move on.”
Next time, try something like
“I want to raise a concern about how your pushback can land in meetings, but I don't have a clean example ready right now, and that's on me. Rather than ask you to act on something vague, let me come back with a specific moment so we can talk about what you said, how it landed, and what you'd do differently.”