Letter from Ireland

Ireland is in a financial crisis. The worst kept secret in the history of the world is out.  The future is only assured through self belief and confidence. The certainty is that the combination of European financial assistance for our banks and economy along with a re-focused political strategy energized by a general election early in 2011 will fuel the progressive process of turning this country around.

It will take time. It will take sustained initiative, courage, skill and consensus across the political, economic and educational landscapes.

Most of all, it will take people equipped with the necessary attributes.

The Government must ensure the availability of training skills necessary to equip those who will be central to that massive national effort to turn the economy around.

Training will be central to the great drive to restore this country to economic prosperity and transparent sovereignty over economic and financial strategic decisions.

Heroes of our time honed from our educational and training processes will lead by example.

We are going to have to dig deep in order to have the strength to cope with future challenges. The profession of coaching is going to be a key play for Ireland in this new and seriously challenging environment.

Seven key principles are fundamental to our hopes of a successful recovery:

1. A focus on our values. When chartering our course through a sea of uncertainty we can lose sight of what is really important to us as human beings. As coaches we understand how fundamentally important it is to ensure that key decisions are in line with our core values in order to go forward with confidence and focus

2. Revisiting our belief systems. So many of my clients now come to me with a need to create an understanding of this new world. We inevitably, at some point in the coaching dialogue, explore what belief system will be most useful as they step into the future. The belief that they are disempowered with no control over their future needs to be challenged in the safe space which coaching provides. Ensuring that our clients are re-energised with an understanding of how they can genuinely create positive changes in their lives is one of the gifts the professional coach brings.

3. Working with our clients to assist them to move with confidence and certainty towards their circle of influence sidestepping circles of concern which suck their energy and can leave them exhausted.

4. A focus on strengths recovering forgotten talents and capabilities creating a springboard to accelerate an action focused approach to the future.

5. Reframing – assisting our clients to understand the importance of language deleting the ‘shoulds’ ‘musts ’and ‘might’s’ and utilising words like ‘will’ ‘can’ and ‘am’. Words which the subconscious will embrace without question thereby allowing true change to take place.

6. Assisting our clients to become more self aware in order to truly grow within the coaching relationship. We listen to our clients to genuinely ‘hear’ what they are sharing with us and assist us to understand their view of the world.  This helps us to understand how, in some incidences, they need to gain a better understanding of flawed patterns and paradigms. Thus they begin the process of crafting a more effective strategy in order to create their vision for the future and achieve true potential

And finally

7. Living in the moment. Bringing to our clients attention the fact that the past is our greatest teacher, the future is waiting for us but the present is truly our greatest gift. Let Philip Larkin speak for me in his beautiful poem ‘Day’ :

Paula King

Minister Mary Hanafin launches EMCC Conference in Ireland 2010

Mary Hanafin T.D., Minister for Tourism, Culture and Sport, today (11^th October 2010) announced that Ireland will host the 17^th annual European Mentoring and Coaching Council Conference which will take place in Fitzpatrick’s Hotel, Killiney, Co Dublin from the 18^th to the 20^th of November 2010. 

Minister Hanafin said that this conference will welcome delegates from 23  Countries to Ireland, many of whom will also extend their stay to spend some time getting to know Ireland a little better. “It is a wonderful opportunity to showcase Ireland to delegates who are travelling from South Africa, Europe, Australia, America  and Canada”.

Paula King, President of the European Mentoring and Coaching Council (EMCC) in Ireland said “increasingly we need leaders who can create a context in which they can empower their staff to make their own ‘intelligent’ decisions.  Management skills of leaders now must include coaching and mentoring.” King says that the conference will welcome thought leaders, academics, authors and practitioners from the field of coaching and mentoring to Ireland to share their knowledge and expertise. “I am convinced that this conference will be the most dynamic to date and urge anyone who is interested in listening to cutting edge speakers, attending stimulating workshops delivered by the best in the industry and networking with coaches and mentors from every corner of the world to attend” . Further information can be obtained on the www.emcc.ie website.

If you would like further information on the above please contact Paula King paula@ecsl.eu or 087 2234518

Coaching at Work Special Offer for ECSL students and graduates

Coaching at Work has teamed up with ECSL to offer our students and graduates a special offer on their subscription. Coaching at work is now more than just a magazine.

Coaching at Work magazine is published six times a year but we also offer: 

• A monthly e-newsletter
• Regular online news updates and other online content
• A growing international community of readers with lively discussion threads on the Coaching at Work website and related Linkedin site
• Online polls
• The chance to access useful Continuing Professional Development (CPD) by reading and reflecting upon our articles
• An international public listing of coaches who are members of recognised professional bodies
• An active LinkedIn group

…a source of up-to-date vital information. Every issue is packed with coaching and mentoring news and features, case studies, opinion from leading thinkers, humour, and research. We carry out our own research, sometimes joining forces with the main professional bodies including the Association for Coaching, the European Mentoring and Coaching Council and the International Coach Federation. Past survey topics have included ageism, meaning and purpose, making a difference and hot topics for the coming year. 

…a bridge and a gateway. We see ourselves as a bridge between the many areas of the coaching and mentoring community, offering a one-stop-shop for key information and acting as gateway to further information. 

…going from strength to strength. Following our management buy-out, we are now independent although we have the support of the Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development, as well as of the other main coaching and mentoring professional bodies – Association for Coaching, Association for Professional Executive Coaching and Supervision, British Association for Counselling and Psychotherapy Coaching Division, British Psychological Society’s Special Group in Coaching Psychology, European Mentoring and Coaching Council, International Coach Federation and the Society for Coaching Psychology – all of which have representatives on the magazine’s editorial advisory board. 

If you would like to apply for this special discount please email info@ecsl.eu

Life coach helps you reach your life goals

Have you ever felt that you wanted to do something, or get something accomplished in your life, but just don’t know how to do it? Similar to an athletic coach who will help you reach your athletic goals,  a life coach helps you reach your life goals. Meeting with a life coach is different than going into therapy. When you go into therapy with a psychologist or psychiatrist in a traditional setting, the goal is healing from past issues to deal with the present.

Life coaching begins with the present, and moves forward. It is about growing in an area of life — most people who sign up for personal coaching feel they wouldn’t get as far if left on their own.

If you have never been coached you are probably wondering how the coaching session looks like? Below is a small extract of how the coaching conversation is carried..

By Sheri Fisher

“I haven’t told anyone that I’m doing life coaching,” Michael confessed. “They’ve noticed changes in me, but I don’t think it’s anybody’s business but mine.”

“Would it be bad to let someone know you are working to improve your life?” I asked.

“Most people think I have my act together,” he said. “I don’t want to be seen as weak … not that life coaching makes you weak,” he quickly added.

“Tell me about feeling weak,” I said. “What’s bad about being weak?”

“My father always said that weakness wouldn’t be tolerated,” Michael said. “When I was growing up, I acted courageously whether I felt that way or not.”

“How do you feel when someone else is weak?” I said.

“It varies,” Michael said. “Sometimes I have compassion, but more often I think, ‘Get over it!’ “

“When was the last time you felt and expressed being weak?” I asked.

Michael thought for a long time.

“When I was 12. We were at the lake and the kids were jumping off the top of the houseboat,” he began. “When it was my turn, I froze. I couldn’t do it. My friends teased me, and my father had a look of disgust on his face. I remember him talking to me about the importance of not being weak. Since then, whenever I feel weak, I ignore it.”

“What other emotions might you be ignoring?” I asked.

“I ignore negative emotions like embarrassment, incompetence and feeling sad. Why would anyone want to show those kinds of weaknesses?”

“Why would they?” I asked back.

“I’ve always thought those were weak emotions,” Michael said, “but truthfully, as I get older, it’s harder to ignore them. Maybe I am getting weak, but it’s tougher to shut off my negative emotions. It’s like I’ve had them in a locked box and I just found the key. Do I open it?”

“That’s a great metaphor,” I said. “What if you opened it? You always have the option of closing the box again … but maybe you won’t. What do you think?”

“I’m curious,” Michael said. “Even if it is a Pandora’s Box, I suspect that when I shut off negative emotions, I am unable to fully enjoy the positive ones. It’s like not really knowing what hot is until you’ve experienced cold.”

“Suspecting this, how will you move forward?” I asked.

“Ignoring my emotions is a habit,” Michael said, “and I want to break the pattern. The first thing I’ll do is identify when it’s happening, which means slowing down and tuning in.”

He thought for a moment. “My watch beeps on the hour. What if when it beeps, I tune in to my emotions? I don’t have to do anything but simply notice how I’m feeling. My goal is to become more aware of my emotions and then see how I react.”

“Sounds great!” I said. “How are you feeling now?”

“Excited and curious to find out what’s inside the box,” he said.

Coaching Challenge: If you’d like to gain emotional insight, slow down and tune in. Try checking in a couple of times a day or every hour. Note the emotion and what effect it has on you and your body. Use your imagination to see what it would look like if you fully expressed this emotion. How do you handle the emotion? What is the difference and how does this behavior serve you?

Sheri Fisher is an intuitive life coach living in Grand Junction. The situations and characters in her column are fictional to maintain client confidentiality.

For information and to access her blog, go to http://www.coachwithsheri.com.

Create a compelling picture of your dream reality. Keep your visuals in front of you as you make your way forward.

How many dreams do you have that have never become reality? How many goals have you set that have never been reached? What has happened? If you are still hanging on to them what is in the way of your attaining your exciting reality? When are you planning to accomplish your goals? If they are not in process at this very moment ask yourself, “If not now, when?”

In this article  Lynn Banis, PhD, MCC is  showing  you some ways you can actually move your dreams to reality. You can do it but it hasn’t happened yet. What is your dream? What have you done to make it real? Are you leveraging the Law of Attraction to make it happen?

Read  how you use the coaching techniques to turn  your dream to reality at Discovery Points Blog

The general benefits of coaching still apply but there are also some other things an executive coach can do for the over 50 executive. Even if he is doing very well an executive coach can help him keep on top of his game. Look at pro sports. The pros keep their coaches for a good reason. It is very easy to pick up little shifts in technique and behavior that greatly impact their performance. The same is true of the executive and this is the time for them to shine.

Read full Article at the Author’s Blog: Discovery Points Blog

The effectiveness of a leader within an organization makes a big difference in the performance of everyone on the executive's team

By: Art Gib

Today’s increasingly competitive global market requires business leaders to maximize their performance and that of their teams in order to successfully meet the new challenges. Old skills that may have suited in the past are no longer enough to lead companies to the top and keep them there. This is why forward-thinking companies are engaging executive leadership coaches to enhance leadership skills and strengths for exceptional business achievement.

An executive leadership coach provides valuable, objective feedback to business leaders to offer insight into their accountability for their actions, the quality of their decisions, and the impact of those actions and decisions on others. This honest evaluation and input is necessary for growth as a leader to enable more effective communication, confident decision-making, and identification of strengths and weaknesses.

A leadership coach will tell an executive what he or she needs to hear when others in the company won’t. Team members will rarely offer what they might consider to be negative input for fear of adverse consequences. Peers and supervisors may not have a clear picture of the effects of the executive’s interactions, decisions, and behaviors that affect performance. Working within the same culture, they are subject to the same pressures that could impede objective evaluation and complete honesty.

The effectiveness of a leader within an organization makes a big difference in the performance of everyone on the executive’s team, with even small improvements magnified throughout the company for often dramatic results. An executive coach works with the leader to create a culture within the organization that fosters employee creativity, teamwork, and ownership. Improvements in communication style and skill will define clear objectives in a diverse environment through respect and inspiration rather than coercion.

An executive leadership coach will assist an executive to fully clarify and define the vision for the company and communicate it in a compelling way to align and build commitment across the organization. The coach will help the executive get beyond a personal lack of objectivity with positive, constructive feedback to enable the leveraging of strengths while minimizing the impact of weaknesses.

Coaching enables the executive to set clearer goals, increase personal and team effectiveness, make better and more confident decisions, and build a corporate culture that encourages teamwork and creativity to unleash the potential of every employee within the organization. Coaching creates dynamic leadership within the company to build a company that will lead in today’s competitive global market.

Author Resource:-> (http://www.drmaureenkearneycoach.com/management-coaching.html) one of the best executive coaches in the business.

Article From ArticleCue.com Free Article Directory

by Peter MacKechnie

Experienced Business and Executive coach & mentor specialising in adapting business behaviour.

I’ve been involved in a range of discussions as part of the research for my book on coaching and a number of key points have arisen. One of them is the difference between therapists and coaches. It’s clear that there are a wide range of views from people who align themselves with therapists and those to coaches, there are a few who claim to be both. However, I’d like a view from both sets of specialists as to why you think you are what you call yourselves.

A couple of points to get the discussion going:

DEFINITIONS.

The range of definitions for both therapy and coaching is very wide. The lack of any one accepted definition makes it difficult to be explicit in what you do. This is an area that is being widely debated across both approaches and seems likely to continue. A flavour of the definitions available includes:

COACHING

AC Grant-Coaching was defined as a collaborative, solution-focused, result-orientated systematic process, used with normal, non-clinical populations, in which the coach facilitates the self-directed learning, personal growth and goal attainment of the coachee.

Stober-Coaching is a collaborative process that facilitates the client’s ability to self-directed learning and growth, and is evidenced by sustained changes in self-understanding, self-concept, and behaviour.

THERAPY

Princeton University-the treatment of mental or emotional problems by psychological means.

Merriam Webster-Psychotherapy any form of treatment for psychological, emotional, or behavior disorders in which a trained person establishes a relationship with one or several patients for the purpose of modifying or removing existing symptoms and promoting personality growth.

INTENTION

I feel there the main unstated difference between the two is that of ‘intention’. I suggest the following:

THERAPIST

The intention of the therapist is to heal, treat, fix, etc. problems (past/present) that the client has. The focus of their intention is based on a medical/treatment model in that a problem exists that is damaging, or restricting a person’s mental and/or physical health. Therefore they will work with the client/patient to fully explore the problem, identify the underlying cause and provide a medical, treatment based solution. This may, or may not include movement toward a future learning and development goal.

COACH

The intention of a coach is to identify the clients future based point of development, present position in relation to the area the client wants to develop, identify the gaps and enable the client to take the necessary action. This focus is on learning and development in that a problem does not, necessarily, have to exist for the client to want to develop. Work may, or may not include solving a pre-existing problem (this is dependent on the level of barrier it’s causing to the move toward the desired development goal).

PROBLEM AND OVERLAP

The issue of term ‘problem’ seems to sit in the overlap area on the continuum of therapy and coaching. At one end sits therapy dealing with, and concentrating on, the past/present problem. On the other end sits coaching with its focus on future solutions and development. Each specialism will work comprehensively with clients within their sphere. However, the overlap comes in the middle. Both therapist and coach can, and do deal with problems but how far along the line can each other go before the intention changes, and the role changes?

TOOLS

When does a tool become therapy or coaching? I’m thinking of the likes of CBT, NLP, modeling, hypnosis, etc. all of which are used in both fields. Both therapists and coaches have argued that whatever tool is used it is appropriate to them, a point I’d agree with (dependent on their level of proficiency). Is then the argument of appropriateness of the tools being discussed more to do with the area of ‘intention’ rather than specialism?

Pete Mackechnie

ASSOCIATION FOR COACHING.

Fiona Adamson

Coaching&Coaching Supervision

I think intention matters on both the coach and the client’s part. The other issue is psychological readiness for a coaching approach.
My experience has been that where a person realises in conversation that the past still haunts them and they are not responsive to a coaching approach, then I suggest a number of ways they might do the more recovery type of work and when they feel free enough of their past, return to me or at least to someone else to use a coaching approach. Some people respond well to NLP and EFT for example, others may wish to take a slower route perhaps. The key thing is choice for a way that feels right.
Many people find that a current issue they are troubled by has resonance with a past event and simply by acknowledging this they can, as it were, step back, see it for what it was, an influence that was outside their awareness, and then move forward. They then have a choice to do so. There are so many tools and ways of facilitating such a process that part of the skill lies in choosing with clients what will work for them. One of my psychotherapy trainings was in Gestalt and the other Transpersonal. Both these approaches have tools and philosophies that are useful in coaching. I think the key thing for me is what will work for my coaching clients.
In many ways the richness of the trainings I have done prior to coaching means that I am fortunate to have a range of tools and of ways of making sense of experience, mine and the clients, and find I am not wedded to any particular model or approach. I regard what I do as improvisational most of the time.

George Kelly

Life Coach at Paths from Crossroads

As a mature student of coaching with a background in counselling I am very interested in this discussion. To me the difference seems to be centred on the issue of a coaching client being ‘whole’, i.e. having the mental, emotional, spiritual and physical strength or ability to understand, learn and develop as a person. This I believe creates a state of psychological readiness as Fiona mentions in her comments. Those clients who are haunted by their past and who do not appear ‘whole’ might be best served by counselling/psychotherapy, depending on the circumstances they could do this in tandem with coaching or follow up with coaching if necessary.

I agree also with Fiona that many people can be assisted to overcome some of their issues using NLP, Gestalt or one or a combination of other coaching tools in a coaching environment.

Whatever the difference, your discussion gives me lots of food for thought.

Becky Wright

Specialist Coach at Harely Street Coaching

Dear Peter
Thank you for generating this discussion. I initially trained to MSc level as a counsellor and now as a coach. I see there are big differences between the two professions. In therapy there is often an emphasis on the therapist to have undertaken therapy themselves and therefore have emotional capacity to hold and work with clients on an emotional / mental level. In coaching I have not come across this requirement and it’s often left to the discretion of the individual coach to how emotionally healthy they deem themselves to be. I have also noticed that coaching training varies on the work on the, “self,”.
In therapy we are required to have 1.5hours of supervision per month in order that our work can be monitored and our ethical practice can be assessed. In coaching this again seems like an individual choice and no specific ethical requirement.
I’m not happy with your idea of a medical model in therapy and would need to hear more about this. I don’t see as a counsellor that we fix problems. I feel in many ways we help our clients to locate their own inner resources to resolve their issues and depending on which model you practice with this process will differ. Counselling is very much a weekly process where as coaching can be as and when the client requires.
Both use the relationship as a focus but perhaps in counselling the counsellor would develop the therapeutic relationship in a deeper way than perhaps a coach would. I’m trying not to make sweeping statements here but instead talk from experience.
In coaching there is often a focus on future vision, in therapy this is very much present as an end goal but the connection with past events is often explored in order to work in a forwards direction. Patterns and unconscious blocks can be explored where as in coaching these tend to be explored I have found but only if relevant to future change.

I hope these thoughts help.

With regards Becky Wright

CMI

Natalie D Kershaw

Founder, Practitioner and Trainer

I’m lucky because I have the ability to do both but I can see that if you study one area in particular you may believe that method to be the right one – it of course also depends on the practitioner.

In addition, and I don’t know if this will help but I thought about something that I said a while ago – the title of the [coach / therapist] is important. I prefer “practitioner” to be honest although my official title is adviser and my studies in the holistic disciplines asked me to chose either from therapist, practitioner or professional – interesting isn’t it that I choose practitioner to cover all I do?

Does the title you give yourself reflect the role that you play and do with the client and how that client perceives you? I think so. As a business counsellor I end up with all sorts of issues from the clients despite the fact from the very first meeting parameters are set – i.e. what role I play and yet because I had “counsellor” in my title (I wasn’t a qualified counsellor incidentally) I had “…..and my son won’t even get out of bed…!” and other such similar stories as though I could do something about it – as a business adviser – that’s what I am and do – I advise in business and that’s that – more clear cut and defined.

COACH SUPERVISION

Edna Murdoch

Director: Coaching Supervision Academy

Peter, one area that you have not mentioned is that of relationship. The nature and use of the relationship can be quite different in these two practices.

In coaching, I would suggest that the relationship is more likely to be adult-to-adult and robust from the outset. In many forms of psychotherapy, since the child-in-the-adult is the one who needs healing, quite often it is only in the later stages of the work that true adult-to-adult relationship occurs. The ‘technology’ of many psychotherapies includes using and magnifying transference so that unhealed material from the past becomes a here-and-now relational event in the consulting room. So the robustness comes later in the work. Coaching works much more in the here-and-now and uses the relationship to enhance focus and outcome, rather than as a means to ensure healing.

It is so difficult to speak of psychotherapy as if it were one practice. Some therapies are very similar in theory and practice to coaching; indeed, coaching has happily co-opted some of them, almost without noticing. Certainly without much acknowledgment. Solution focussed coaching is one of them.

I also know that many psychotherapists would strongly disagree with you that therapy works with a medical/treatment model; indeed much of the professional disagreements between psychotherapy and the government’s attempts to define and control it, centre on this very principle.

As an ex-psychotherapist and a practising coach/coach supervisor, I think that it is easy to classify too neatly and miss some important aspects of ‘intention’, theory and practice in both areas.

I wish you well with a very difficult task!
Edna

Alison Fletcher

Principal at The Coach Within

There was a great quote from Michael Cavanagh in Tatiana Bachkirova’s fascinating interview with him in the AC research journal: Michael says as a psychotherapist he often found himself comforting the distressed whereas when working as a coach he is more often distressing the comfortable!

COACHING AT WORK

Jens Boris Larsen

Chair at Society of Evidence-based Coaching of the Danish Psychological Association

Thank you, Peter, for starting this subject. It is not easy to formulate an answer but I will try anyway to share some perspectives with references if possible.

First of all, Michael Cavanagh from Sydney, argues that the differences between coaching and therapy are not absolute. They are more like differences in degree. Furthermore, the two practices have more to do with whom we are dealing with than what we are doing. Anthony Grants’ definition – coaching is for non-clinical populations – is in alignment with this view.

At first glance, this might not seem a satifsfying answer, but it certainly points to an important aspect of it. The Tools part, where you refer to CBT, NLP and others that are used in both fields, is explained, in part, by looking at the “who” and how the tools are adapted to suit the needs of different client populations. Solutions-focused approaches are another case in point. One of my coaching coleagues has a wife that works at a place where they do Solutions-focused therapy and to him, as a coach, it looked indistinguishable from a coaching manual! In other words, the “who” is what makes the difference.

When the “who” changes during therapy and gets better, many psychology colleagues report that they adapt their approach to a more “coaching like” approach. That is, when the client changes from belonging to a therapeutic population the approach is adapted to accomodate this.

Michael Cavanagh illustrates this further by saying that therapy is about “bringing peace to the disturbed” whereas coaching is more about “disturbing the peace”. Described more formally in the magnificent chapter “Coaching from a Systemic Perspective: A Complex Adapative Conversation” (Cavanagh 2006 – in the Handbook of EBC (Stober & Grant (eds.)), he writes the following:

“The development of internal tension is important in coaching. One of the differenttiation points between therapy and coaching is that in therapy, the level of instability, anxiety, or tension is to high as to be destructive of the person’s ability to function effectively in his systems. They have slipped from the edge of chaos into chaos intself. Hence often one of the proximal goals of therapy is to help the person reduce distress so as to enable the emergence of new order. In other words, therap seeks to comfort the afflicted.

“In coaching, however, the coach is often called upon to afflict the comfortable! We often see to increase information flow, energy, and diversity to a level that helps the person move out of stable mind-sets and behaviors so as to create new insigths, understandings, and actions.” (p. 320).

Other distinctions I have learned from Michael Cavanagh when he visited Denmark in september 2007 is the difference in “the holding environment” in therapy and coaching that needs to be of such depth and intensity in therapy to allow healing and alleviate suffering and improve functioning so that the proximal goal of “comforting the afflicted” can be achieved. The tempo is slowed down to facilite this. The holding environment in coaching is different as the focus is different – it needs to adapt to an environment where coach and client can “disturb the peace” or “afflict the comfortable”. He compared the tempo in coaching to a train, saying that it is more like a train moving forward at a higher speed. I think this metaphor make sense.

Recently, Stephen Palmer and Alanna O’Broin wrote two chapters on the coaching relationship that I highly recommend. “Introducing an interpersonal perspective on the coaching relationship” and “Building on an interpersonal perspective on the coaching relationsip”, both found in the highly recommended book “The Coaching Relationship – Putting People first” (Palmer & McDowall 2009 (eds.)). In these two chapters they seek to differentiate between different types of helping relationships as well as providing a detailed meso-level description on the various aspects of the coaching relationship. (Cont.)

Jens Boris Larsen

Chair at Society of Evidence-based Coaching of the Danish Psychological Association

Distinctions useful for our discussion to keep it relatively brief between coaching and counselling (which seems to be appropriate for therapy as well) are as follows:

Initial motivation. Coaching: Enhancing life, improve performance. Counselling: Eliminating psychological problems and dysfunctions.

Context of interventions. Coaching: Specified by the contract according to the client’s goal, the coach’s area of expertise and the assignment of a sponsor (if involved). Counselling: Open to any and potentially all areas of client’s life.

Expectations for change. Coaching: From relative satisfcation to much higher satisfaction. Counselling: From high dissatisfaction to reasonable satisfaction.

Possible outcome. Coaching: Attainment of goals, increased well-being and productivity. Counselling: Increased well-being, unexpected positive changes in various areas of life.

Theoretical foundation. Coaching: May include psychology, education, sociology, philosophy, management, health and social care, etc. Counselling: Psychology and philosophy.

Source: O’Broin & Palmer (op. cit. p. 18f), a table adapted and extended from an earlier source by Tatiana Bachkirowa.

One of their points behind making this table is to point out that at a global level of description, the differences are virtually non-existing. It is only by probing deeper and describing the different relationships at the meso-level that minor but significant differences become visible.

As a general point, the challenge of defining coaching and therapy is only resolved when we can describe the different qualities of the relationships – and hold all of them constant in our own mind. Only then does the full picture emerge. For instance, both coaching and therapy have the increase of well-being as possible goals but what this mean and how it is achieved and for what purpose is different. The meso-level of describing well-being as an outcome thus reveals subtle but important nuances.

The work-potentiating bond in coaching and counselling is listed in the table as being descriptive of both coaching, counselling and sports psychology in terms of “level and type of affect”, whereas friendship, the fourth category in the table is described as “liking, broad affective bond”. I agree that there exist a work-potentiating bond in both coaching and counselling. However, if we think about the other qualities mentioned in these two posts – for instance, the difference between bringing peace to the disturbed and the fact that the client has crossed the line into chaos vs. disturbing the peace and increasing flow, creativity and information, we can argue that the work-potentiating bond will have to have different qualities. In existential-phenomenological psychotherapy, the emotional relationship is key to therapy and thus the affective, work-potentiating bond will have a much stronger emotional component, resulting in a deeper emotion enabling connection. This view is in alignment with all of the above even though it might be an expression of this particular approach to therapy. It is certainly also useful for coaches to be able to create a strong emotional bond to their clients in order to enable emotions to be expressed and understood with their own content without reducing them to be an epiphenomenon of thinking errors. When I do this in my own coaching, emotional healing invariably takes place so it has a therapeutic effect.

At the 3rd National Coaching Psychology Conference, Ernesto Spinelli did a very detailed and thoughtful analysis of the intricacies of distinguishing between coaching and therapy. The key note was rewritten as an article and published in The International Coaching Psychology Review. See http://www.bps.org.uk/sgcp/publications/international-coaching-psychology-review/coaching-and-therapy-similarities-and-divergences$.cfm

CREATIVE BUSINESS STRATEGY

Ro Gorell

Owner, Ascent2Change

Hi Peter, interesting discussion.

The term therapy suggests some sort of healing process i.e. an expert provides help that ‘makes you better’ whereas coaching is about sitting alongside the client to work with them on finding their own solutions. Ultimately they can both use the same tools and I agree intention is helpful in defining the two.

If I were to be cynical, I might say that this is really a strategic question about how the two ‘industries’ define their market. Both potentially can offer things to the same market so need to find a USP to help prospects decide who to buy from.

Coaches do need to be aware that they are usually not qualified to help clients with deeper rooted issues and must be careful about how they use the tools. The first rule of any coach or therapist is always “First, do no harm”.
Ro

EDINBURGH COACHING HUB

Jackie Cameron

Getting you talking – online and out loud

Thanks for such a thought provoking post Pete.

I wonder if my simplistic view helps at all?

I consider coaching to be a “looking forward” exercise albeit referencing past experiences.

And I agree that coaching is not necessarily a “remedial” intervention…

But there is definitely potential for overlaps ( just to sit on the fence a bit here!)

Malcolm McGregor

Owner, Broadreach Retail consultancy

Hi Peter and Jackie,
You’ve absolutely hit the nail on the head. This is a key debate in the coaching territory, and one that I have contemplated for some time.

I personally think that the fact that we cant agree on a definition for coaching (as you rightly point out) makes the question you posted almost impossible to debate.

I frequently find the psychologists who are in the coaching business, use their history of academic research to occupy the moral high ground, suggesting that it is an essential background for any coach, which it might well be. However, I have compiled some independent research that suggests business users appreciate a coach with a pragmatic base, and not necessarily a therapist.

Personally I believe that one third of the coaching I do is ‘therapeutic’ by nature, and by nature focuses on the client’s past.

Look forward to bringing this to the hub if we get the chance.

In the meantime, all the best, Malcolm.

Ann Astell

Owner, The St. Andrews Consultancy Ltd

Hi
It is a good debate to have in terms of definition of ones own practice and I admire your bravery in putting it into a book! It is a question clients ask and I am not sure I always answer it the same!

I am a business psychologist with three years training in psychotherapy but would not position myself as a psychotherapist. The interesting bit on this is that, from my experience, there is a a paradigm difference between psychology and psychotherapy as fields of study and practice.

The debate in therapy circles is between what is counseling in relation to therapy. Some see as a continuum of depth of intervention and the extent to which models of

On your definitions, these both make sense and I agree that there is a present to forward versus present to backward dimension. I also like the idea of intention and think there is something about intrusion. Certainly for me, one differentiator is that psychotherapy works in the unconscious, with transference being a key concept and tool. my understanding is that most coaches do not engage their analysis at that level. Also, am not sure that all therapeutic modalities would see themselves as working within a medical model

could say lots more but enough for now.

And Malcolm, am trying to not take your comment personally….!

Chris Donegan

Partner, The Change Navigators – Organisation Change and Management Consultants

Is this not a similar to the debate between behavioural psychology and psychotherapy, where the paradigm is indeed very different and the depth of intervention is deliberately different i.e looking at what changes in behaviour can help acheive personal goals vs deep analysis of underlying issues that are inhibiting, blocking or causing current disfunctional behaviour. I think the behaviourists expression is “It is easier to behave your way into a new way of thinking than it is to think your way into a new way of behaving”

As I have used coaching as a method of working with clients on a business front and also been trained in areas such a co-counselling and group therapeutic techniques I would say that it is very much up to the client to determine how deeply they want the coaching to go and the honesty of the coach not to go into places where they can’t get the client back from.

From a practitioner’s point of view the definitiions are helpful but need to be explicit for a client. I believe that you can come at coaching from a variety of places but you should really know your limits and be clear with the client about what these are and how and what you can do to help them. Not all coaching is therapy and vice versa, being clear about this up front is vital.

However what I observe in larger organisations is the purchasing of a style of coaching, be it behavioural or more in depth therapy based and then managers being told to use the “prefered supplier” no matter if the methods used do not suit the issues that they have. So perhaps we need to be a lot clearer about defining what it is that we are about.

EDINBURGH ENTREPRENEURS

Kirsty McWilliam

Owner, Coaching Direct

Hi Peter – really interesting discussion and all the best with your book. A quick response for you:

I am coming at it from a coaches point – I would call myself a professional coach as it spans all the coaching that I do.

So you asked for how I would describe it (hopefully succinctly!) – ‘ I support change in individuals/businesses by helping them imagine and define powerful, motivating goals and then through a structured process to achieve those goals’

Differences?:
I think there are a few difference when discussing say the difference between coaching and counselling (these can be gray areas depending on what type of counselling but as a guide for coachees so they know what to expect)

I would say the main ones are-
1. Coaching is solely future focused and altho reference can be made in the past, it is not dwelt on.
2. The coach does not give advice, opinion or judgement
3. The expert in the coach/client relationship is the client as it is their life.
4. Coaching is not about healing, it is about identifying the way forward. There may be barriers/obstacles to overcome in coaching but not actual healing.

I also think a relevant point is that it it the coaches responsibility to their client that, if they think the client is not moving forward, to have an open discussion with the client and ask them if they think another support would be relevant.

Very interesting comment about CBT and NLP – I am away to think about this one. Thanks for triggering the thought.

EXECUTIVE COACHING AC SUB GROUP

Lorraine Maddams

at LMCoaching

Therapy impies that someone has an aspect of themselves that is ‘not working’ and requires ‘healing’ whereas ‘coaching’ implies that the client has a talent(s) that requires developing.In coaching I believe that ‘therapy’ sometimes happens – but that is not the ‘intention’. I do not assume that my clients are ‘broken’. If I were to go to a therapist I think that I would assume that something in me was ‘broken’ or maladjusted and that I was seeking professional help to ‘put myself together’ again.

Lorraine Maddams

Martin Eldon

Management Trainer, Consultant, Facilitator & Psychotherapist

Jokingly, I might say that the difference between coaching and therapy is about £1,000 per day!

More seriously, as a Registered Psychotherapist as well as a Trainer and Coach, I always take the view that we are all doing the best we can. I do not consider people to be broken but rather looking to build on what they already have and move towards more of what they want, in order to be even better. Taking Lorraines point, therapists cannot heal people (only the medical professionals are allowed to do that!). Hence solution focussed therapies have very much in common with goal setting based coaching.

The issues people bring are sometimes different but often similar and the two approaches may, at times, seem interchangable. i. e. a person has a present state (problem) and therefore has not achieved their desired state (outcome). Both the therapist and coach will help people establish what these are and provide strategies for getting from one to the other.

Some clients don’t know what they want, therapists/coaches help them establish that. Some clients don’t know how to get what they want, therapists/coaches help them by providing strategies. Sometimes clients feel constrained by past events which may have set up limiting beliefs. Therapists and coaches work with this also.

Classification of the nature of the problem is also tricky. For example how might we classify an extreme fear (phobia?) of giving presentations?

I feel there is a difference when it vast difference when it comes to regulation and training. At present there are no legal minimum standards which prevent anyone calling themselves a therapist. However, the lead body for Psychotherapy in the UK (UKCP) has standards requiring their members to:
* adhere to their code of ethics
* have regular Supervision/Continuous Professional Development
* have professional indemnity insurance

To become UKCP registered, Psychotherapists need to have undertaken a programme of training of at least 4 years covering topics such as human development, sexuality, ethics, psycho-pharmacology, and much more. All of which serves us well as coaches too if we want to be the best we can be for our clients!

MHS EMOTIONAL ASSESSMENT ASSESSMENTS

Mike Fiszer

Director of Leadership Development & Programmes at Edinburgh Napier University Business School

It is neatly summed up in the frame of the Positive Psychology Field by Alex Linley – see: http://www.amazon.co.uk/Average-Realising-Strengths-Yourself-Others/dp/1906366039/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1268772961&sr=8-1
and: http://www.amazon.co.uk/Positive-Psychology-Practice-Alex-Linley/dp/0471459062/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1268772961&sr=8-2
moving folk from the lower (disorder) end of the distribution toward average and wellness is the claimed domain of therapists, coaches work in the average to A+ (high sanity?) range of the norml distribution, however there is gathering evidence that a strengths based solutions orientation works best in both domains, hence intentionality apart they could end up using the same tools at differing levels of intervention and, one would suspect, skill?

After all solutions focused brief coaching had its roots in the Milwaukee family therapy work,,,,,
,,,,,,to be endlessly debated,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
evidence and outcomes are what is needed.
Mike Fiszer

Deirdre Quiery

Leading with Emotional Intelligence

I found Pete’s summary wonderful in terms of clarity of the issue. I agree with Mike that it still stays fuzzy. However, intentionality and goals seem to at least help with clarity in the overlap. It is interesting to note that attending a Conference on Pyschology and Spirituality in New Delhi 2009, it was explained that 70% of western therapy uses “mindfulness based techniques”. The aim of the therapist here may not be to “explore the problem or to identify underlying cause” but rather to cultivate clarity of sensory experience with equanimity rather than entering into an exploration of causes.

If we take a Transpersonal Perspective to Coaching, it may be appropriate to consider any ego-based identity as being “insane” – limited with potential to use ego defence strategies in relationship with others such as projection, denial and repression. Coaching in this area may look to explore even within a corporate context the limitation of ego-based identity asserting itself, how the leader can expand perspectives, drop limiting beliefs and help others release creativity, authenticity and find meaning within a corporate context. You might be interested in looking at Sir John Whitmore’s work in this area with Performance Consulting.

It’s really helpful to have this discussion. Thank you.

Dana Ackley

Owner, EQ Leader, Inc.

As a “recovering clinician” I have a history of “doing” psychotherapy for 20+ years before transitioning to business applications of psychology, i.e., coaching, culture change etc. In part, my transition was prompted by the corruption of clinical psychology by the medical model, from where the concept of emotional disorders, of course, arises. The model and its assumptions are deeply flawed. Among other things, approximately 100% of people have psychological problems. (For anyone who wants to read my whole discussion of the flaws in the medical model, it can be found in my 1997 book Breaking Free of Managed Care (Ackley, published by Guildford Publications). For this discussion, the implication is that the seemingly convenient distinction between therapy and coaching that rests on therapy speaking to emotional disorders may rest on flawed assumptions that are more convenient than accurate.

Dana C. Ackley, Ph.D.

SMALL BUSINESS CLUB

Anna patfield

Owner-Pawsability Pet Behaviour + Pet Shop

wow peter, what a question!!

and ha ha…. your perhaps weren’t thinking of my line of work whilst writing this…..

my tuppenceworth….

I call myself a dog behaviour therapist – i deal with the emotional problems that a dog is having in coping with particular situations and help to change those emotions.

Part of the process includes focusing on the end goals – where the dog needs to get to – focussing on the future – and dealing with the steps in between. This is generally termed training – but it could be presented in the form of coaching.

I have had some coaching training – or should it be coaching coaching ha ha – in my previous life, and discussions with colleagues on whether (dog) training works best as “training / teaching” or “coaching” (when done on a 1-1 basis).
I guess i tend to train specific actions, but try to coach improvement. Hmm- and heres a thought tho’ – I think part of the dog’s training development is actually coaching too.

NLP also comes into the mix to some extent, having again had some beginners training on that. Indeed, one expert colleague of mine is a Master NLP Practitioner.

So, my answer is “all of the above”…..

A different slant on where you’re coming from, but thought i’d just share my thoughts on the matter with you, and it was interesting to think this through. Thanks.

All the best
Anna

Maxine Dodds

Transition Coach at Maxine Dodds Coaching

Hi Peter,

I like the question.

I think from the client’s view point, they are making a journey in self development or growth. I don’t think there is anyone who does not have some baggage/history which has left some impact. What is different is where someone is on their personal journey.

Some seem unable or unwilling to look ahead and keep turning back to issues from the past. While they are in this state, in the present they will continue to repeat the mistakes from the past. I believe this is where therapy comes in.

Other clients are very focused on the present and the future. They are mentally and emotionally ready to commit to making major changes in their lives. A coach is more appropriate for these individuals.

But life tends to have shades of grey, so there will always be individuals who sit somewhere between these 2 definitions. Which is why we need to have some understanding of the other profession and why both should make use of the tools at their disposal. We build up a bag of tricks (range of available tools) which we can draw on at the appropriate time. However we should be fully competent in them before using them with a client.

My final comment, is that we should know our limitations and when to step back and recommend a client to find a professional better matched to their needs.

Cheers,

Maxine Dodds

Ruth McKay

Owner at Unique Marketing Solutions

In my experience coaching is focused on the future and therapy on the past. However, to decide on your future naturally involves you looking at the past too. I would have thought the training was very different for the two roles too.

Mark Lister

Consultant, Coach and Partner at Lister Mcdonald

One definition of coaching I like is “Professionally assisted self-change.”
My favourite though is “Coaching is when you ask dumb questions and the client comes up with brilliant answers.”

Another perspective – starting points.
Coaching assumes the client has what they need and is perfectly well, while therapy assumes the client needs healing to restore wellness.

Put another way, wellness and wholeness is the end goal for therapy and the starting point for coaching.
I’d suggest the overlap is actually pretty small – more like a point of contact.

I think to a large extent the confusion between the two arises because both are about listening. This is something that, in our culture, is WEIRD. If you want someone to listen to you, there most be something wrong. This tends to obscure the fact that coaching is about standing in the present and creating a new future.

There are plenty of very clear differences though. A therapist has a controlling role, and the discussion is directive and based on analytical thinking. The coach-client relationship is much more one of equality, collaboration and partnership; discussion is inquisitive, based on intuition.

BUSINESS MATTERS MAGAZINE

karen gould

Owner, connect consultancy organisation

I am an experienced Coach and Mentor and years ago was involved in Counselling in Education. I now prefer Mentoring – because boundaries are more visable and when boundaries are crossed – I can stop the sesssions without offending or explanation.

Penny Ling

Hypnotherapy & psychotherapy at Oakspring Clinic, Birdwell Clinic and Bedminster Family Practice

As a hypnotherapist I am putting someone in the right place for them to do the changing, I don’t heal, it’s all with the client. I’m a guide. There is an overlap because I use not only hypnosis, but CBT, Solutions focused brief therapy and NLP. My own training though has had a lot of emphasis about how the brain works, not just psychology but from a physiological point of view. Showing someone how their body and mind work together can help someone to understand why they are experiencing the problems they are. Using the SFBT we’re looking very much towards the future and using the clients resources to overcome their issues. So although I am a therapist much of the work is coaching.

karen gould

Owner, connect consultancy organisation

Though – I am about to try hypnotherapy to aid loosing weight – had my first session and will continue.

COACHING – a subgroup of WACCM TOO group on LinkedIn

Pasquale Scopelliti

The Consigliori at TheConsigliori.com Newsletter

Hi Peter, thank you for the stimulating question, and all your effort to lay out an intelligent basis to dive in. I must confess that I’ll have to do a bit of study to catch up with your many very specific terms and areas listed above, and I will do so. I didn’t want to wait, though, to offer you an initial response just to the question itself. I hope you don’t mind…

From my point of view the difference is profound, and significant. I’m a coach, not a therapist. Yet, I employ all kinds of therapeutic techniques in my coaching. How do we parse out the line?

For me, it really does come down to just this one, most important parameter. As a coach, I’m invested into the outcome of the game itself, together with my client. Were I to perform therapy, I’d be there as an aid to, but not participant in the game at hand.

Perhaps an example or two will help. When my clients ask me for my thoughts about ROI, I take it upon myself to rise to their question, and search very hard for such justification, together with them. If I were a therapist, I’d reject the question. Therapy is undertaken to find and adapt to the truth, and is a cost. If there is economic gain, wonderful, but that’s not the driver.

Another example is this. When my clients ask me where I stand, or what my story is, or who I am, or what any of this means to me, I give them direct answers. In fact, I let all clients know that I am the opposite of values free, as would be a therapist. I express my values, often quite boldly. In our work, we seek to find values fits, where our mutual values compound excellence on the mission to win the game at hand!

Ach, I’m droning on already. Thanks for asking the question. I will read up on your terms above and get back to you with some more specific replies to your lay out.

Pasquale
The Consigliori

John W. Countz [LION - Top Linked]

Consultant, Inventor, Patent Holder, Product Developer, Mfg Support, QC, Due Diligence, Asset Reliability Expert – CMRP

Hi Pete,

I agree with your assertion about intention but feel that the overlap is indeed the major sticking point.

Yes the intent of the coach is to allow the client to reach a future goal however cannot the same be said of the therapist?

If I am afraid to go out of my house because of some victimization in my past and I have a goal of wanting to conquer that fear then I go to a therapist. Or they come to me…. (inside joke)

If I have a fear of asserting myself at work because I was a highly disciplined child taught to never question authority or talk back and I want to conquer that fear of assertiveness then do I go to a Life Coach?

Both are fears and both are because of past issues. They are not apples and oranges here… They only vary in degree of what we consider to be social norms. The problems are the same and the process to deal with this would presumably be the same. I.E. a form of thought provolking psychotherapy to out the fear and deal with it etc…

I guess my point is, where do we, draw the line between the quest for social normality and the quest for high performance and where is it, that coaches want to operate?

Clearly victimization is trauma and that is in the realm of therapy and but is not the child who was raised in a strict “don’t talk back” home who has problems asserting themselves at work, also a case of systematic trauma?

Are they not just hiding behind their desks at work rather than hiding inside their houses? One we call agoraphobia the other a lack of leadership but in fact they are practically identical except for the degree of social impact.

The same person that is afraid to be assertive at work is also afraid to be assertive in all facets of their life. They are the ones who will not take that gallon of spoiled milk they purchased yesterday back to the store for a refund or the ones that allow salesmen bully them into buying things they neither want or need. We simply refer to these people as timid or call them passive but in fact they are dysfunctional due to past trauma. Their dysfunctions are simply lesser in degree and they can function in daily life without getting into serious trouble so it is ok…

If you want to call yourself a Coach that is fine but if you are going to use psychotherapy to help people deal with past issues in order to help them grow in the future, I would then assert that, you need to be a licensed therapist as well…

It is my opinion that there is too much room for error and mischeif for letting untrained people monkey about in the heads of potentially already dysfunctional people…

John W. Countz [LION - Top Linked]

Consultant, Inventor, Patent Holder, Product Developer, Mfg Support, QC, Due Diligence, Asset Reliability Expert – CMRP

Pasquale, what a delight you are! Thanks for expanding the commentary.

The defining difference being ROI is interesting to say the least. But one wonders if it is particularly safe to be expressing your own values and opionions while employing psychtherapudic methods…

It could be observed that your clients have the at least the presence of mind to expect an ROI and that says something for sure… However we have also seen some Life Coaches specializing in Victimisation and ADHD which are clearly traditionally clinical therapudic issues… These are also deviod of business processes and therefore have no clear hard dollar ROI…

ROI in personal peace and quality of life yes! What we in the business world might call a soft dollar ROI or a Cost Avoidance ROI…;)

Clearly not all coaching has an ROI in hard dollars… What would Mikkel’s ROI be if he were paying for Diana’s coaching? Nothing in dollars but potentially a wealth in happiness. There is no difference in a successful therapy session that helps a patient gain a happier life so I must reject the ROI argument as one that can be applied across the industry as a defining factor. I do however respect your using it to define and limit your own personal practice.

If all coaches were as responsible then i think this discussion might not have grown legs…:)

Cheers,

John
the problem;)

Diana Baker

Personal Performance Coach Student

I am sorry we may have different meaning for things on this side of the ditch but what is meant by ROI?

Mikkel Madsen

Partner at ROHDE CONTEMPORARY, Owner WACCM TOO group on LinkedIn and Independent social media advisor

Diana, its return on investment I believe.

My very best wishes
Mikkel

Pasquale Scopelliti

The Consigliori at TheConsigliori.com Newsletter

Hey Gang,

I have just a few minutes to share (invest . Yes, Mikkel, that’s what I’m referring to, return on investment. Of course, this can be a shallow concept, even a foolish one. But, my new problem friend John ABSOLUTELY understands the concept in its layers and richness, I promise you. He really gets it. Most capitalists don’t…

Mikkel, if I may, I’d like to propose that I could see you approaching the moment of positive ROI in the transcript and the moment when you went past it, from this morning’s session. Of course, to my eye, your real ROI won’t come if you fail to live up to your commitment to do the written assignment. Then, as you progress, gaining real ownership over the problem, benefiting from Diana’s hard work and wonderful skills, and build the team work toward your goal, you’ll find that the return surpasses anything you could have imagined. What’s more, you’ll find you’re not able to reduce the return to simple formulas or numbers, at all. I believe, Mikkel, that this is invariably true when get our work right, no matter how hard the hard number lines we draw may be. So, dollar ROI for me is, well, anything but a necessary evil, maybe I can say its a necessary good! But, dollar ROI is virtually always the most meager, weakest, most boring and least meaninful of the ROIs we fight for and win.

Now, for problem John, I’ll crack open another comment box…

John W. Countz [LION - Top Linked]

Consultant, Inventor, Patent Holder, Product Developer, Mfg Support, QC, Due Diligence, Asset Reliability Expert – CMRP

Yes Return On Investment… Usually expressed in hard dollars…However cost avoidance can be considered a soft ROI meaning ther was no profit to install safety barriers but you likely avoided a wrongful death suit ie soft dollars etc.

Pasquale Scopelliti

The Consigliori at TheConsigliori.com Newsletter

I need a moniker. Nope, I’m surely not allowed the Walton’s famous John-boy, my new friend might feel demeaned as opposed to endeared. Problem John worked, but I’m not sure it can stick. I’ll try out QJ for Quality John…no, QMJ, Quality Man John. Hey, I kind of like it!

Okay, let me know if you hate it, but for now you’re QMJ…okay?

QMJ, first off, thank you so very kindly for the prop to my “responsibility.” Do understand, however, that I guarantee you there are blind spots, gaps in MY reasoning, and I’m dependent on brilliant analysts like you to find them. So, no free passes here, man, not for a second (please?)! Yes, I am quite responsible. But, I still might be wrong, maybe even dead wrong. I beg your readiness to be, if not purely devil’s ongoing advocate, at least a royal pain. What could be more righteous, eh?

That protocol covered, I have a couple of messy links to offer. Here they are, and then I’ll try to pull some pieces together before I light out of here.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lay_analysis

http://www.amazon.com/Question-Lay-Analysis-Standard/dp/0393005038

I’m actually unhappy with both links. The widipedia article, sorry, simply sucks. The book itself is a glory. But, I hate offering an amazon link to reference a book. So…

I’ll just blather a bit. Freud came out, as strong as strong can be, on the side of lay, that is NON-medical analysis. Do not, however, confuse “lay” with “non-professional”. He actually didn’t care, whether one was a pro or not, and believed that the anaylsts contribution came, not from education or professiona dedicationl, but rather directly from personal experience. Ah, but consider him no modern egalitarian, he was anything but! He wanted you to have been analyzed, by a great analyst yourself, first. Thus, what he really believed in was lineage.

Forgive me, I have about 13 different strains SHOUTING in my mind to share, and have to run, maybe because I might surrender if I don’t!

Tie it down, Scopelliti…

Ahem, can I have this, John? In the end, people are just people. In the end, we either help or hurt people. The Dr.s, with their Hypocratic “do no harm,” they’re onto something. If you going to help, or try to help, you should have some idea of what help is, and what harm might be. If not, danger is too weak a word.

Still, Dr., therapist, coach or…oh my…how about being a parent?…in no case do we ever have the full preparation we require for the following painful reason. We really only learn from our mistakes. If we can repeat our victories, we’re lords upon the land. But, the victories come from learning from mistakes.

Okay, I’d better hightail it out of here now! Have it at, QMJ, and do your worst. That’s the only way I can access my best.

Oh, for conversation times, do take a glance at my self-introduction discussion, where I’ll post some timing info, next. For now, I look forward to seeing you all next week, and learning more. I will also get in a bit of GROW research between now and then as well.

The best to you and thank you for having given me more than you can know you’ve given!

Coach P

Mikkel Madsen

Partner at ROHDE CONTEMPORARY, Owner WACCM TOO group on LinkedIn and Independent social media advisor

Hi Pasquale,

This week in WACCM TOO group has been special, also because you entered our group and began to touch my own and I’m sure other members thoughts and lives, with your passionate and intelligent contributions. Thank you and I look forward to more inspiring discussions.

From your intro I understood you’re fairly new to social media’s. I found this on youtube.com about how to behave. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DIyr5TXqe8Y . Hope you enjoy it, only a bit of fun and not to offend anyone. Maybe it can spice up your weekend studies of coaching models.

Until next week, I wish you a good long and relaxing weekend.

My very best wishes,
Mikkel

John W. Countz [LION - Top Linked]

Consultant, Inventor, Patent Holder, Product Developer, Mfg Support, QC, Due Diligence, Asset Reliability Expert – CMRP

From what I gathered from the Wiki the term Lay meant having no formal medical training. Remember however back then Freud was referencing medical training to be something completely separate from psychology, which really was not yet an accepted medical art. I.E. his intent was not to say it was ok not to have any training, just that it was ok that you were not an MD because that brought little or nothing to the table in psychoanalysis… One could argue that some training is required to safely administer psychoactive drugs that might interact with other drug therapies ongoing by an MD etc. However, at the time I think he was referencing the process of psychoanalysis and psychotherapy without the employment of psychotropic drugs, which were developed later.

I think at its root, he was simply saying, that this was an entirely new area in which traditional medicine had no dominion, claim nor advantage in practice.

As to lineage i feel it was more in respect to following the industry pioneers that had been doing the groundwork so as to become an expert yourself built on their work. All sciences have a lineage in this way during their early stages.

I am not really a fan of Freud myself more a fan of Carl Jung…;)

Freud concentrated on the negative baser instinctive or animal mind while Jung focused on the associative, creative and positive mind of man…

Or if you will the Animal side vs the Spiritual side of man…

Clearly both are important to total healing and wellbeing as well as being an important part of a true understanding oneself…

These men have handed those of us who have the capacity to understand, the keys to manipulating he human mind. To me that infers a degree of responsibility on those that would practice in those techniques.

To understand hypnosis is to understand subconscious programming… To understand ritual is to understand brainwashing etc.

In this day and age people are manipulated subconsciously all day long, exposed to a constant barrage of marketing techniques and advertising that employs every allowable technique under the sun to program people to want and buy… No wonder we are becoming a society on Prozac! Just using the drug to take a respite from all the crap being shot at us daily…
No, I am not a user, I prefer to live with my psychosis’s and blog them out

“mu aha ha ha ha…” (Evil Grin)

Pasquale Scopelliti

The Consigliori at TheConsigliori.com Newsletter

Quality Man John, so, you’re a Jungian, eh? Some people I love to hate, Watson and Skinner are perfect examples. Some people, I hate to love. Your man Jung heads up the pack there! There was so much he was just so irritatingly right about. But, if you ever come over to the right side of this debate, and truly give Freud his honorable chance, you’ll see that the father was superior to the son, and yes, it truly was Papa Sigmund and Prodigal Son Karl.

If you want my best shot, let me know and I’ll attempt it. If not, I truly do not wish to bore anyone, and yes, I am that true believer so you obviously have to watch out for me. I will offer this on Father Freud’s account. He was not a true believer, himself. He continued to adapt and move throughout his entire career. It was his followers who settled on their own version of Psycho-analysis from Freud’s earlier stages. Have you ever heard of the Thanatos force? Most likely not, since it does not show up in Freud’s early work.

In his later work, Freud sought to balance this against Eros. He considered these two to be the most basic questions of the human soul. (By the way, how often do you hear any Freudians talk about the “soul”? That single word was the single most common term in his corpus of writing, but it got translated into “Psyche,” in virtually every instance!)

I just share that much in hopes of inviting your interest. To that end, though, let me turn this into my own question back.

What is Jung’s great power for you, John? What is it, in Jung’s work, that so inspires you? And, how does his work inform your consulting?

P

Pasquale Scopelliti

The Consigliori at TheConsigliori.com Newsletter

Hi Peter,

No, I’m really not caught up to your defintions, yet, and I’m sorry. But, I do keep reading over them, and meditating. And, I have to say, you’ve laid out a truly important set of questions for us to tackle.

What’s more, even while I have some real study and meditation I must yet engage via your terms as laid out, I think I need to add another term into the mix here, and that is “cure.” I’ll explain.

First, we know that in the final analysis, Freud did not believe in a cure for the neuroses, just amelioration. For my part, I’ve always been deeply moved by the humility of that. In serving humans, we do not seek perfection, rather progress. But, the ideal of cure cannot so easily be put aside.

As we delve the term, the very medical model from which Freud came, as a physician, rises back into question. Can the psyche be treated the same way any other diseased organ can be? I doubt we have an absolute answer in, even yet. But surely, the definition of therapy, and the line separating it from coaching, would have to have some significant tie to the medical model and its ultimate goal, cure.

But, can we say that in coaching we do not cure; or that we do not need the medical model? Should coaches be taught the same model as therapists, as physicians?

Few would argue, I suspect, that we should. But, what do we coaches do when a “sick” person arives in our training room, willing to pay our fees? Do coaches have an ethical obligation to draw a tight, strong, clean line about what they’ll tackle and what they’ll refer on to a therapeutic or even a medical professional?

It’s tempting to consider an athletic coach, splinting his performer’s broken or sprained leg. When is that service, and when is it malpractice? When should an atheletic coach refer to a doctor, paramedic, or just call 911? When shouldn’t he?

But sadly, the lines cannot be brought over cleanly, and that takes us right back to the question of the psyche as an organ, or the soul as a spirit. Endless loop?

Maybe. But, maybe practice and pragmatism can help…a little anyway! In practice, coaches do actually tend toward a positive mission of improved performance, even victory. Sure, there are always problems to be solved, even nightmares and demons to battle. But the goal of the trophy is something every coach signs on for, regardless of context. I suspect therapists love trophies as much as anyone, but that really is not their measure of success.

So, what does therapeutic cure look like, impossible though it may be in the absolute? Why, low and behold, it looks like normality. Mabye we should call it good normality since so many people find horrible lives their truly normal condition. But, perhaps we can assign to therapy the pragmatic leaning of “fixing” lives that have fallen out of their normal path.

In law, divorce law to be specific, the phrase, “lifestyle to which they’ve become accustomed” is a very real, tangible and not particularly difficult one to establish intellectually. Perhaps in therapy and coaching we can import some of that clarity.

Perhaps a therapist’s challenge is to help re-establish or gain normality, in a good way, when its been lost or when failure to thrive, in that low level normal sense, has occured. Perhaps the lifestyle to which we coaches can attach is that of the battle for the next level of thrilling victory.

Yes, I’m certain a therapist is thrilled when he sees any gain, of any kind. I truly don’t mean to diminish the sister art. Yet, as an avowed coach, the lifestyle I’m accustomed to enjoys a set of new victories that, no, do not equal a cure, but they do, I suspect, differentiate my art.

What do you think?

Pasquale

John W. Countz [LION - Top Linked]

Consultant, Inventor, Patent Holder, Product Developer, Mfg Support, QC, Due Diligence, Asset Reliability Expert – CMRP

Hi Pasquale,

Would that all coaches would restrict their activities to lending high performance to normal people then I think we would all be in agreement that there was a clear line in the sand anf that Coaching and Therapy were clearly definable. I think you have forestated the noble position that should be assumed by the title Coach…

However I can’t see that happening if we are Coaching robbery and rape victims who have clearly been deeply traumatized and have, due to that trauma, fallen off the normal wagon so to speak.

We also have Coaches specializing in ADHD cases which are clearly not normal behaviors but rather a mental illness…hence the term “Disorder” in the acronym………

This only makes the case for the need for some regulation along the lines of what Coaching should be allowed to encompass before considering malpractice.

As I said before this will likely be settled in court and by insurance companies in the end…

What I would suggest to all life coaches, until the industry is regulated that you regulate yourselves and put clear verbage in your coaching contracts that expressly states your intent and scope of improving performance rather that treating the ill or dysfunctional…

If you leave yourselves open then when the first lawsuit happens you can expect a chain reaction of investigations and lawsuits to ensue so my advice is to cover thy backside past, present and future…

John W. Countz [LION - Top Linked]

Consultant, Inventor, Patent Holder, Product Developer, Mfg Support, QC, Due Diligence, Asset Reliability Expert – CMRP

Oh yes Pasquale,

Yes Jung was heavily influenced by the work of Freud as he was befriended and mentored by him for many years.

However where Papa Sigmund got stuck focusing everything on sex and animal nature, Karl went on to explore all of the other realms of human existence like art, religions, cultures, mysticism, occult, the effects of ritual and symbols on the psyche etc. He had an extremely open and inquisitive mind… I feel that is what is required to find real truth…

I consider Karl Jung the Albert Einstein of the mind if you will as he applied a theory of relativity across the human experience rather than across physics…;)

Sure sex is a primal force in all procreative beings but we are so much more than that as human beings. Can you see sex I our art and religion and rituals? Of course but is that all you see? Certainly not…

One could argue that if you have no air that breathing is the overriding sub-conscious concern or if you have no food then eating becomes the king! If you have plenty of sex it is the same as plenty of air or food… No doubt it’s a craving but not the only one and certainly not in older men/women who are no longer functional or hormonally inclined so to speak.

They still have loads of creativity and drive to do other things… Jung saw that and saw the value in humanity’s creative and positive traits as well, not just their animal or reptilian brain functions…

Freud was a brilliant man and his research no doubt has contributed to the human existance in endless ways but Jung opened more doors to whar we are evolving into and not just where we have been as animals…

And yes you are right, lets not bore everyone else with aour banter haha.

Cheers,

John

Pasquale Scopelliti

The Consigliori at TheConsigliori.com Newsletter

Hi John, I’m not sure how Freud and Jung seem to have taken over the conversation here, but I can’t say I’m sad they have! And, in my next posting, I’ll be talking about Freud yet again. He truly is a hero to me, of the very highest order. Let me share a bit of information about his practice.

He met with clients, Monday – Saturday, 11 months out of the year. He had little trouble after his first successes, in filling his caledar, and could only work with 8 clients at a time. Why? They met at the same time, every day, six days per week. Imagine that. At first, he tried to take notes during sessions, but discovered that it simply did not work. So, at the end of his 8 sessions, he invested an hour or two in belated note taking every day, trusting most of the information to his subconscious. He met with his circle once per week, in the evenning, but the other evennings were when he did most of his writing. We know all this because he reported it to us, himself. Awesome, no?

In fact, in his inner circle of analysts, they had a running joke about the Monday “crust”. Meeting six days per week, taking Sunday off, the patients would return on Monday with greater resistance and regression than on any other day. The phenomenon was so obvious to the analysts that they couldn’t help but joke about it.

I have to conclude, John, simply sharing that I do, lovingly, disagree with you about the categories of Freud for the base instincts and Jung for the spirit. I know this is commonly accepted, but to me acceptance and truth are, well, not always correlated.

Thanks again for the great romp here. I repeat, no man’s work has inspired my own coaching practice more that Papa Sigmund, and for my part, I say honor to him for what he created. I believe that just as Jacob and Esau descend from Isaac, so also both therapists and professional coaches, in one way or another, descend from Freud…including of course, Jung!

Pasquale

Pasquale Scopelliti

The Consigliori at TheConsigliori.com Newsletter

I’ll begin my comments here, Peter, in response to two levels problem. This posting will focus on the first, and next posting on the second.

The first problem level I found was that over the question of research-vs.-analysis. The first several times I studied your definitions, my thought was that I needed to go research the elements I did not know. Specifically, AC Grant-Coaching, Stober-Coaching, and the source materials from Princeton and even the Merriam Webster Dictionary. On that last tome, I was thinking that there have to be many entities and texts that have struggled with these definitions, and thus, the research project of dealing with these sources. But, upon my last (most recent) reading, it dawned upon me that I carry definitions inside myself that I’ve simply never analyzed before. To that end, I’ll go ahead and offer my own, somewhat long-winded definitions right now. Sadly, I have to credit your work above as having poisoned my definitions with your influence. Thus, you’ll find your own themes repeated and I am, thereby, disallowed the slightest claim of creativity or originality. Alas.

I do not propose them for technical value, nor for general acceptance. Rather, I’ve simply come to believe that the important definition is the one we sign on for, as opposed to the general or group definition, let alone a social or legal one. At least for now. I’ll come back to the second level of problem after my two so-Peter-influenced definitions here offered:

Pasquale’s candidates:

1. Therapy: a medical model based intervention, by trained and certified professionals, to establish or re-establish psychological normality. The easy case is where the abnormality has a medically definable basis, and the intervention includes modification of physiological factors. The tough case is the “talking therapy” dating back to Freud. It must be accepted that terms such as “normality,” “treatment,” “cure” and even “therapy” will always be plagued by fuzzy borders in the domain of “talking treatments.” Therefore, the boundary separating therapy from such sister arts as coaching can never be made into a thick (as opposed to a thin) line, or absolutely black and white.

2. Coaching: a training and mentoring art form built on the objective of attaining improved performance, breaking previous boundaries and rising to new levels of mastery in any performance field. Models for the practice come from every endeavor, and root in the one-to-one relationship. Of course, there is group coaching and training, but the coaching dyad is certainly the atomic unit of coaching. The line separating teaching, instruction or training from coaching is the fuzziest of all, as no good coaches do no teaching, and no good teachers do no coaching. But, teaching may be generally considered to focus on the imparting of new information and coaching may be generally considered to focus on the use of accessible information, by way of improved efforts, to attain new performance outcomes. Prime examples are the positive parent/child relationship, master training of musicians, and the sensei/unsui relationship of Eastern Martial Arts. Historical foundations may be found in the master/apprentice relationship in the West, as well as in the Don system of British Higher Education and too many other such examples to list. The group coaching model may be inspired by virtually any and every team sport, as well as athletics instruction at all levels from infancy forward.

In my next post, I’ll discuss the problem and the gap you indicate.

Pasquale Scopelliti

The Consigliori at TheConsigliori.com Newsletter

My two definitions offered above, we can now turn to your stated problem and overlap. You bring up spectacular points. I wonder if the therapists would agree with you that they focus on the past and present, not the future. If so, you’ve offered one of the mightiest of lines possible. No coach would ever elect for the past as his focus. Sure, we use the past, and we must. But, our focus is on the future and the present. Again, if the therapists would sign off on this line, you may have solved the problem as well as can be. I know I’d never thought of that solution before, and I’m deeply impressed.

Muddying the waters back up, allow me to argue further in favor of the fuzziness mentioned above, though. Let’s imagine that we coaches can box ourselves into the present and future, and the therapists into the present and past. Ah, if we do that (and I suspect we really should) I can promise you this. Therapy will be improved by importing a greater coaching orientation toward the future, and we coaches will be equally improved by better learning how to mine the past for its present and future powers. Let me develop this point further.

If you ever ponder a picture of Freud’s consulting office (interesting term, no?), such as you’ll observe in this link if you wish: http://courses.washington.edu/freudlit/Freud.Office.JPG , you won’t be able to miss the garden of objects and artifacts everywhere. They really were artifacts, too. His avocation here reflected was to collect finds from archeological digs. They were the hints and clues from the past that helped archeologists (considered to be the most serious of true scientists, of course) in their mission to literally unearth the past. Freud felt, as many would agree, that this is mandatory if we are to understand the present. And, as such, they were his most beloved metaphor for his art, which he of course thought of as a pure science. If you’re interested further, this link shows the collection itself: http://courses.washington.edu/freudlit/Antiquities.JPG .

I propose that we coaches will often find exactly the clues we need, in order to explode present and future performance with our clients by a more historical approach to understanding the entire story of our clients’ lives and work histories.

Muddy waters being muddy, though, I ask, what coach would ever disavow the term “dream” and for emphasis, dream for the future? Why, without it, we really wouldn’t have a profession. I propose that T. H. White’s book title, of his famous Arthur story (the inspiration for the Disney film called “The Sword in the Stone”) is instructive. He terms Arthur “The Once and Future King.” Well, I propose that our art is actually centered in exactly that. The dreams our clients share with us and are driven by, truly are once and future dreams. They root into the past, but of course, cover the future where they will be realized, or not, as a result of effort in the ever-present moments, as they flow, of the continuous present.

Pasquale

John W. Countz [LION - Top Linked]

Consultant, Inventor, Patent Holder, Product Developer, Mfg Support, QC, Due Diligence, Asset Reliability Expert – CMRP

Don’t think the therapists will sign off on that guys. You both look into the past to identify issues and you both seek to modify future behavior.

The only line that can be defining here seems to be that of normality…

Does that excluse eccentricity? Wow that a tough one… Well If you were goint to be honest about Coaching then you would have to say that you must start with a “normal person” or if you will “a person that is able to function in society in a normal and healthy way”. That normal person would have to be seeking higher performance in their profession or daily life or desirous of a more fufilling life etc.

Of course this must then exclude ADHD folks as well a trauma victims whose normality has been upset by a traumatic experience.

As to teaching and coaching… A coach teaches no matter what you say… Subliminal teaching does count as teaching guys… If I show you how to balance a ball on your finger I have taught you something. If I show you how to balance your life or perspectives I have also taught you something. The Martial Arts Master teaches repetative moves called Katas you learn by repetition… But magically when you begin to spar you find yourself using those moves to block and punch and kick your opponent… You have been taught at two levels without realizing it as is the case with the teaching of all Masters oddly enough… I have had things come to me years after being taught something by a master like a flash of light everting becomes clear and it was because of a seed planted long ago. Athletic coaches are much the same, they teach repetive exercises that will develop inside athlete’s as game skills, but the best ones also plant the seeds of strategic critical thinking. Got Game?

Carrie Nicolini

Founder/Certified Business Coach at CN Coaching, LLC

Coaching v’s therapy?…. a coach is a coach….whether a business coach, a speech coach, an acting coach or a sports coach….our goal, as a (effective) coach, is to help the team (or individual) achieve the desired results/outcome they want. We work with clients in a number of areas, in order to achieve this. In having said that, it comes down to commitment, accountability, determination and motivation.

A coach will acknowledge a client’s past, in order to know how they got to where they are today and identify areas where they may be stuck, perhaps due to past circumstances, but we focus on the present and how to move them towards creating, being, living the future they want for themselves/their business.

I think most will agree we all have our own unique way of accomplishing the goals of our clients. They key is to keep the team in alignment with the results they’re working towards.

Just as there are various types of coaches, there are a variety of therapists who also specialize in particular areas/fields, but I believe most will agree that a therapist focuses on past circumstances, conditions or problems that may have occurred and contributed to where a person is today. I would imagine, a therapists primary goal is to help their client correct something that’s gone wrong (perhaps, only in their eyes) or acknowledge and cope with past occurrances that may be preventing them from moving forward and living a more fulfilling life.

WEST LOTHIAN CHAMBER OF COMMERCE

Comments (1)

1. 1. Helen Campbell

Project Coordinator at Edinburgh University Settlement Homeopathy Project

Hi Pete,

The concept of therapy has as we know many different aspects but the success can well founder on whether we separate the physical, mental and emotional aspects of the individual when considering the individual. Talking of tools arises when a focussed approach limits itself to particular approaches to the subject. Allopathic Medicine (eg GP practice, chemotherapy, psychiatry) is therapy in its many sectors as also are the alternatives (homeopathy, acupuncture, herbal medicine, osteopathy or chiropractic). Within any subset there are further subdivisions – (eg CBT psychotherapy – you are channeled there via the senior consultant)
Taken worldwide the range of therapies is vast. Currently there is raging an ongoing battle between those who consider that only they are scientists as they isolate certain symptoms in double blind trials (DBT) and those who would correlate all aspects of the individual together. These scientists study separate factors to the nth degree and are reluctant to acknowledge there are other possibilities. The alternatives are those who consider we need to be holistic and observe the complete picture of an individual. Most important element to my mind is whether mental, emotional and physical symptoms are treated separately or together. Orthodox medicine so often separates these areas whereas most of the alternatives take the whole picture. The fallacy of DBT is that it is essential that everyone taking part starts from the same starting point – that is the $64,000 question. I have treaed c 5,000 patients and they vary so much in their personal history, their needs, their relationships that they need ,many different prescriptions.

Which brings us to coaching – which is usually focussed on the outcomes of business or other enterprises or of very specific problems. The objective is to help us think more effectively, deeply or help us be more at ease with ourselves and others and solve problems perhaps change behaviours to interrelate with others

I am not aware of coaches medicating their clients as happens in the therapies of orthodox and alternative medicine.

As a homeopath the most important function is to listen to what the individual expresses is holding them back and give medication as part of the therapy in the practice of homeopathic medicine. A homeopath sees a very close connection with digestive problems or skin problems and when an individual is under stress – very frequently caused by home relationships or perhaps the work environment. Homeopathic medicine is a therapy but one which accepts that it is our energy balance which is important and so often becomes critical when we are under stress.

Tell us about your own background in coaching?

Paula King

My personal journey to become a Master Coach commenced in America all of 15 years ago.  At that time in Ireland the concept of ‘life coaching’ was really unheard of which is amazing when you consider it is now the 5th largest growing industry in Ireland today! My primary degree is in HR. I subsequently studied psychology and I am a qualified counsellor. I am currently completing an MSc in Coaching and Organisational Development with Portsmouth University. I have total belief in the strength of coaching as an intervention in a human beings life.  I have witnessed first hand the positive impact a coaching intervention can have.  It encourages a person to take control of their lives and focus on their circle of influence and move away from their circle of concern thereby learning to live their lives to their full potential. I love to facilitate the reclaiming of dreams by reflecting and endorsing people’s innate gifts.

How did coaching  become a particular focus for you?

I loved the message of coaching i.e. that we have responsibility for our own lives and that although our past is, of course important to us, we are better served if we focus on today and  from this position put in place our goals for the future.

My greatest joy is working with top performers and winners who are characterised by individuals who are committed to and assume responsibility for their own success.  They seek to understand themselves, and then set specific, measurable goals in all areas of life and develop detailed plans and actions for accomplishment.

How do you personally define coaching?

My personal definition of coaching is ‘A powerful alliance designed to forward and enhance the life long process of human learning, effectiveness and fulfilment’.

My reason for using this definition is that I view coaching as an alliance between two people whereby in a safe and confidential relationship a person is allowed the reflective space to grow and develop to achieve their true potential.  Coaching is forward facing and, I believe that a fulfilled human being is an effective human being.

Being happy should never be viewed as of secondary importance – I believe that an employee who is truly happy brings so much  to the workplace as opposed to an employee who is struggling with their own self worth.

What are the different kinds or branches of coaching?

Currently, there are two major branches of Professional Coaching: Personal Coaching and Business Coaching, but each is quickly gaining sub-specialties. Each one goes by various names.

For example, Personal Coaching is also known as life coaching, success coaching, personal life coaching, and career coaching. It is commonly used to help everyday people in their personal lives accomplish their dreams and grow personally. Usually, it does not focus on professional development, leadership skills, company profitability, management training, business development, team building, organizational development, or change management.

Business coaching is also known as: executive coaching, corporate coaching, management coaching, small business coaching, sales coaching, and leadership coaching, to mention a few. There are distinctions and separations between these areas and even the specific names, but the primary differences are in the people served and the problems most commonly encountered, rather than the techniques used, the coach’s ability, their training, or even their personal experiences.

What are the particular models and styles of coaching do you prefer?

I am a performance coach and I would like to qualify that statement.  Underpinning my personal coaching philosophy is the following:

* I view my clients as creative, resourceful and whole. My coaching style is action oriented. Plans, goals, and dreams are great, but ultimately if they are not accompanied by concrete actions they are worthless.
* My coaching relationships are dependent on accountability and truth telling therefore I hold my clients accountable for their stated actions and goals
* I deeply believe that every great coaching relationship is built on mutual trust between the Coach and Client. I view my coaching relationships as a partnership. I believe that a coach is not above or below their clients, but rather beside them, walking along with them on their journey of assessing, planning, achieving their goals, and fulfillment.
* I believe that actions in the coaching relationship is created when the client develops and implements their S.M.A.R.T. goals—Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Realistic, and Timed. I hold my clients accountable to their S.M.A.R.T. goals and confirm the client’s action plans at each coaching session.
* My coaching is results driven. Ultimately, coaching must produce actual results to be a worthwhile investment.
* Confidentiality. What is said within my coaching relationships remains at all times confidential. I respect my clients and their privacy.
* My coaching style is values based. I strongly believe happiness is not achieved by being rich, famous or powerful, but by living according to one’s values. You can use coaching to clarify your values and learn how to live your life in accordance with them.
* Focused on developing strengths. While every person has strengths and weaknesses, research indicates you will get much further ahead faster if you learn how to maximize your strengths rather than simply trying to shore up your weaknesses.

When generally do organisations engage the services of an executive coach?

There are three common scenarios when a Coach is likely to be called in to work with an individual or a team:

Developmental Coaching: When an individual or team has the fundamental knowledge, skills and abilities  to be successful, but for various reasons (like excessive team conflict or poor communication skills) are not effectively using them, developmental coaching is often the perfect solution. If the individual or team is not delivering on their promised results or they are consistently inconsistent, coaching can be helpful, assuming they recognize their responsibility and are willing to change. About 40% of my work is Developmental Coaching.

Enhancement Coaching: In this scenario, the individual or team not only has the necessary  knowledge, skills, and abilities to be successful, but is using them. There may be occasional performance issues, but the primary focus of coaching is on helping them achieve even greater goals and plans

Remedial Coaching: When an individual or team is having significant problems in their day to day ability to get the job done, remedial coaching can help. They are on the verge of experiencing disciplinary measures or perhaps being asked to leave.

Less than 10% of all my coaching is Remedial Coaching because I typically don’t take jobs where coaching is used as a “last ditch effort.” This is not what coaching is designed for and usually is not very successful under these circumstances. Rather than trying to “save” the person, coaching is better used to help the person successfully make a transition and work with the team to design a plan to move forward. The foundation stone to effective coaching is self awareness – both on the part of the client and the coach. Self knowledge leads to enhanced and effective relationships.

What do you think makes coaching different from other aspects of human intervention e.g. managing, mentoring , therapy, counselling training, etc.?

Coaching offers a profound level of support to move an individual from where they are at present to where they want to be.  Coaching honours the skills and resources clients bring to the change process with a distinct methodology and catalyst for permanent change.

Managing deals with supervising, evaluating and meeting objectives. However, I believe, that effective management involves adopting a coaching management style in order to encourage employees towards a vision which embodies new possibilities.  In the CIPD Learning and development survey 2007, 50% said that their organisation sees coaching as a ‘permanent style’ of management and 73% of respondents expect to see coaching by line managers increase in the next few years.

Mentoring can be confused with coaching. I think of mentoring as guiding from one’s own experience or sharing of experience in a specific area of industry or career development.  Certainly some coaches provide mentoring as part of their coaching, such as in mentor coaching new coaches. Coaches are not typically mentors to those they coach.

Coaching can be distinguished from therapy in a number of ways. First, coaching is a profession that supports personal and professional growth and development based on individual initiated change in pursuit of specific actionable outcomes. These outcomes are linked to personal or professional success. Coaching is forward moving and future focused.

Therapy, on the other hand, deals with healing pain, dysfunction and conflict within an individual or a relationship between two or more individuals. The focus is often on resolving difficulties arising from the past which hamper an individual’s emotional functioning in the present, improving overall psychological functioning, and dealing with present life and work circumstances in more emotionally healthy ways. While positive feelings/emotions may be a natural outcome of coaching, the primary focus is on creating actionable strategies for achieving specific goals in one’s work or personal life. The emphasis in a coaching relationship is on action, accountability and follow through..

Training is about teaching specific skills or knowledge through a variety of learning techniques. The onus is on the trainer to impart the information and the student to absorb it. Coaching is about facilitating someone else’s thinking. However, although coaching is different from training in several ways, I believe that they can complement each other very well by building in a system for on-going learning and sustained behaviour change that can exponentially increase the results of a one off training initiative. It is interesting that, for many organisations, training remains the favoured method of executive support although the sustainability of stand alone training interventions has been shown to compare poorly with the results of a coaching program in the longer term.

What are the main benefits of Coaching?

Clients who work with an experienced, professional Life or Business Coach report many benefits. A study conducted in 2000 by the International Coach Federation (ICF) reported the following on why people work with coaches and what some of the key benefits were:

o Self-awareness
o Setting better goals
o More balanced life
o Lower stress levels
o Self-discovery
o Self confidence
o Improvement in quality of life
o Enhanced communication skills
o Better relationships – personal and professional

These benefits speak for themselves  and certainly explain why there are very few multi-nationals who are not presently  utilising  professional coaches either as trained internal coaches or external coaches brought in to  work in partnership with  organizations.

What  for you are the key ingredients of Executive Coaching?

I believe that a company’s most valuable asset is its people and it is people who will always make the difference in the long run.  Today, companies are embracing Executive Coaching because it addresses a variety of issues in preparing individuals for leadership and more responsibility.

My experience shows the power of executive coaching is in the ongoing interaction between the executive coach and client as the client moves towards greater success.  This interaction takes the form of three key ingredients for effecting personal change:

* Personal interaction with a coach
* Personal accountability for change
* Personal application of learned skills

What format would a coaching session normally take?

Coaching interactions may take several forms or combinations.  Initial face to face sessions can be followed up with telephone coaching which has been very popular in the US for a number of years and is becoming increasingly popular in Ireland.

My personal preference is to coach a client off site as it can be difficult to provide the reflective space necessary if the client is still ‘mind crowded’ with the days challenges.

Executive Coaching is tailored to the individual and, in general, features the following:

1. Initial interview with manager and prospective client to set high level goals for the coaching intervention
2. Client intake package – this will include discussion on ground rules and confidentiality within the client/coach relationship
3. Personal assessment and values identification
4. Goal Setting
5. Progress reviews oriented towards specific measurable results.

Where do you see Executive Coaching fitting  into the training and development process?

Coaching facilitates personal growth, professional performance and satisfaction through goal setting and behavioural change.  The focus on sustained behavioural change makes coaching highly compatible with competency based training and follow up coaching can significantly enhance learning from training interventions.

Coaching is effective because it looks beyond the subject and content of the training directly addressing the keys to performance including behaviours, attitudes, motivation, confidence and belief systems .

Are there different styles of coaching that you prefer?

I am a performance coach. Therefore the focus of my coaching interventions is on the behavioural change for my client which will enable them to perform to their optimum.  My personal coaching style is highly practical, future focused. I believe that this style is uniquely placed to assist leaders to meet the challenges of their role with greater confidence.

What is your view on the future of coaching?

I feel very positive regarding the future of coaching both in Ireland and on the world stage.  I believe that coaching is one of the most positive interventions a human being can engage with. I foresee team coaching coming more and more to the forefront in the coming years. Areas such as accreditation and supervision will continue to engage coaching professionals. Work being carried out in these areas is progressing.

I particularly endorse the work of the Irish Coaching Development Network (ICDN) a body who have been actively involved in engaging all stakeholders in the coaching industry in Ireland.

How may trainers develop a coaching culture in organisations?

The 2005 Annual Training and Development Survey from the Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development  revealed that 88% of organisations are now using managers as coaches in some form or other.

A trainer needs to be aware that a coaching culture within an organisation is a culture where not only formal coaching occurs but also where most people use coaching behaviours as a means of managing, influencing and communicating with each other. A trainer can also cite that there is considerable academic support for the view that developing a coaching culture can yield significant organisational benefits.

In a 2004 Harvard Business Review article, Sherman and Freas argued the case for a coaching culture in this way: “When you create a culture of coaching, the result may not be directly measurable in dollars. But we have yet to find a company that can’t benefit from more candour, less denial, richer communication, conscious development of talent, and disciplined leaders who show compassion for people.”

The training professional should be confident in spreading the message of coaching and encouraging the move towards a coaching culture in the knowledge that a coaching culture promotes more open communication. It builds trust and respect. It improves working relationships by showing how everyone can bring something to the party.

In too many organisations, coaching is seen as a remedial activity. By firmly embedding it in the culture of an organisation companies can begin to use it as a development tool where everyone can recognise that part of their role involves facilitating the development of others. This, in turn, can bring significant operational improvements.

I would also encourage the trainer to develop and harness ‘champions’ of coaching in the organization. The key to successfully embedding coaching in any organization is, of course, is to ensure that the initiative is wholeheartedly embraced and endorsed by the Directorate of the organization.

What should a training professional do if they wish to become a qualified and accredited executive coach?

There are a number of excellent coach training companies in Ireland offering qualifications in the area of life and business coaching.  However, anyone seeking to upskill themselves in this area needs to ask some important questions:

* What accreditation has the Coaching Qualification?
* Who will deliver the training – look for experienced coaches with training qualifications and accredited to the level of Master Coach
* What assistance will the individual receive from the training company upon graduation from the programme.?
* Is the training company affiliated to a professional body
* Does the training company have a standards and ethics policy?

Have you any final comments to make on executive coaching?

I would like to finish by quoting from the author Charles Du Bois

“It takes a lot of courage to release the familiar and seemingly secure, to embrace the new. But there is no real security in what is no longer meaningful. There is more security in the adventurous and exciting, for in movement there is life, and in change there is power.”

Paula King is the Managing Director of Executive Coaching Solutions (ECSL) )  The Diploma in Personal and Executive Coaching offered by ECSL  is accredited by the European Coaching Institute and quality assured by the European Mentoring and Coaching Council (EMCC) Paula is the Chair of the EMC in Ireland.

For ECSL services please visit the website: www.ecsl.eu

Saturday, 28^th August 2010

CLean Language Seminar

Berkley Hotel (D4) Dublin

What is Clean Language
Clean Language is an extremely powerful and ethical set of tools for coaching and facilitation which is currently very popular in the UK and further afield.

Using Clean Language you can:

1. Facilitate lasting change through creative self discovery
2. Master the art of powerful open questioning
3. Fully preserve and honour a client’s experience with minimal interference
4. Assist a client in experiencing more of their own core patterns
5. Reduce resistance through fluidly adopting other models of the world
6. Apply these questions in a wide range of settings including coaching, management, marketing, one to one and with teams.

How does Clean Language work?

Clean Language questions are as free as possible of the questioner’s inferences, presuppositions, mind-reading, second guessing, references and metaphors. Clean questions honour the client by incorporating all or some of the speaker’s specific phrasing and might also include other auditory components of the speaker’s communication such as sighs, pitch, tonality, etc. The questioner might also draw attention to any non-verbal signals that coincide with the client’s auditory output, i.e., a fist being raised simultaneously with a sigh, that might also represent elements of the client’s metaphorical representation of experience. (Adapted from comments by Penny Tomkins, Co-Creator of Clean Language. For more information see Metaphors in Mind (2001)by Penny Tomkins and James Lawley)
Clean Language was originated by New Zealand genius, David Grove. His work formed the basis for Symbolic Modelling developed in the UK by James Lawley and Penny Tompkins.   The Clean Language approach is further supported by the latest findings in Cognitive Linguistics and Cognitive Neuro Psychology (See for example the seminal work The Metaphors We Live By (1999) by Lakoff and Johnson)

Who should attend this seminar?

This unique two-day seminar has been developed for Coaches, NLP Practitioners, Leaders, Teachers, Business Owners, Consultants and Health Professionals

What will you learn?

How to ask powerful and open questions in a structured manner.
Work purely with a clients own experience and  how not impose your approach on others
Lead yourself and others through powerful self discovery
Work positively with a wider range of people
How to apply the most cutting edge facilitation tools available

Examples of Clean Language in Practice

Clean Language questions are designed to reduce to a minimum any influence from the facilitator’s ‘map of the world’ via his/her metaphors, interpretations or unwarranted assumptions. They are also designed to direct the client’s attention to some aspect of their experience (as expressed in their words or non-verbal expressions) that the facilitator has noticed and chooses to highlight.

In this example B is the ‘client’ and A the ‘facilitator’:
B: “I feel strange.”
Not-clean response

A says one of: “Have you got a headache?”, “Are you ill?”, “You’re probably catching a cold”, “You must be hung-over!”, “Stop complaining! Take a pill…” etc.
Cleaner response

A asks one of: “Where do you feel strange?”, “What kind of strange?”, “Strange like what?”, “Is there anything else about that ‘feel strange’?”, “What happens just before you feel strange?”

The second set of questions ‘meet the client where they are at’, increase rapport and reduce any element of judgement by the coach. Clients report a far greater level of discovery and support from the process.

To register call us on  1890 788 788