Co-development: a unique approach

A leader arrives at a session with a question they haven’t asked anyone. It has been on their mind for weeks. They feel they need to voice it to clarify their decision. They will finally be able to explore it with people who are going through the same thing.

It is precisely for this moment that professional co-development was designed.

A method rooted in Quebec’s reflexive tradition

Professional co-development emerged in Quebec in the late 1980s, within an intellectual context marked by the rise of participatory pedagogies and reflexive practices. Two practitioners, working independently, arrived at the same insight.

Adrien Payette, a management professor at the École nationale d’administration publique in Montreal, drew inspiration from the action learning movement—the idea that professionals learn best from their own situations rather than from top-down theoretical knowledge. He works with his students—mostly practicing managers—on the real-world problems they face in their work.

Claude Champagne, an industrial psychologist in Quebec’s healthcare system, followed a parallel path. Drawing on the praxeological work of psychologist Yves St-Arnaud and the psychology of small groups, he experimented with a similar approach in his hospital and then extended it to his colleagues.

The two approaches converged. In 1997, Payette and Champagne (you couldn’t make this up!) co-published *Le groupe de codéveloppement professionnel* with Presses de l’Université du Québec, a seminal work that formalized the method and remains the standard reference.

In their book, they define co-development as:

“a development approach for people who believe they can learn from one another in order to improve their practice. "

The wording is simple. It captures the essence: it involves learning from real-life situations, within a structured framework, following a precise protocol, under the guidance of a facilitator who maintains the framework and the process. A method in its own right, which first took hold in Quebec before spreading to France, Belgium, and all French-speaking countries.

What sets it apart

Coaching supports an individual in their personal development; it addresses mindset, beliefs, and career direction. It is in-depth work of a different nature.

Mentoring draws on the experience of a senior figure passed on to a younger one. The relationship is inherently asymmetrical.

Professional networking builds connections, opens doors, and generates visibility. It does not create the conditions for structured reflection on a complex decision.

Professional co-development fills a gap that these three practices do not cover: that of collective work on a real-life situation, with peers at the same level, in a confidential and demanding setting. Each participant brings a problem to the table. The group examines it rigorously. The person who raised the question leaves with a clarity they could not have achieved alone.

What it produces

The value of co-development does not lie in the quality of the advice received. It lies in the quality of the process itself.

Submitting one’s reasoning to high-quality external perspectives forces one to formulate it precisely.

This formulation alone often shifts the focus of the question. Blind spots emerge.

Unquestioned assumptions are revealed. What seemed complex becomes structured. What seemed urgent finds its proper place.

The leader leaves with their decision; it remains their own. But it has been worked through, turned over, and illuminated. The quality of what they decide is transformed.

This, and nothing else, is what co-development produces. That is already a great deal.

Le Cercle Stratégie offers professional co-development spaces for executives in Brussels and Paris. Small groups, a confidential setting, and rigorous facilitation.

For the sake of readability, this article uses the generic masculine form. It is, of course, intended for both women and men in leadership roles.