Implications for Professional Coaches
When applied to the semantics (logical empirical) perspectives, the coaching template yields an emphasis on the discernment that I have already identified—a second look at all of the conclusions reached about the domains of information, intentions and ideas. As coaches we can encourage and help guide a critical examination of all three domains. What do we really know? What are reasonable intentions? What is a good idea? What is coming from the Gods (our “best self”) and what is coming from Satan (“our fearful and distorting self”). Under conditions of diffuse mid-21st Century anxiety, this slowing down of our client’s head and heart is critical.
It is all about deliberation rather than moving prematurely to action. Our decisions and actions are too often determined by an inadequate or distorted view of the forces operating inside ourself, as well as those operating on us from outside. We can too easily create narratives that justify our actions rather than represent what is really happening in the world and/or what we really hope to achieve. While an optimistic, appreciative perspective can be motivating and can move us out of a frozen position, it can also lead us to foolish action that can yield unintended (even undesirable consequences). As coaches we provide some of our most valuable assistance when we encourage our client to reverse the usual advice: “don’t do something. Stand there for a few minutes and think!”
From the semantics perspective, we should encourage our client to test the alignment between their own beliefs and the outside world: what is valid and useful in the information they hold—and in what area(s) do they need to gather additional information. Our client should also be encouraged to spend time sorting out the source(s) of their intentions. Are their goals really what they want to achieve or have they been imposed (or at least influenced) by someone else. Are their aspirations out-of-date (old dreams that are no longer relevant)? Are their aspirations realistic (something more than “pipe-dreams” that are safely unattainable). Clients should also be encouraged to focus on the interactions between their own cognitive and affective processes. As Jonah Lehrer (2009) has suggested, when faced with highly challenging, and often stressful decisions, our coaching client must make the difficult, but critical, choice between the wisdom (“intuition”, “hunches”) inherent in their older mid-brain and the rationality (“reasonable,” “thoughtful”) inherent in their younger pre-frontal cortex.
With the coach’s prodding and assistance, the client reverses their usual focus. They attend to that from which they are attending rather than focusing on that to which they are attending—which means that they identify and test out their own assumptions, beliefs, theories, heuristics and habitual practices. Challenging questions are offered by the coach regarding the source, force and validity of the attentive frame. These are “what” questions: “what is the basis for the conclusion you have reached?” “What leads you to make this choice?” Most importantly, the disheartening assumption that we are rarely or never captains of our own ship is met by recognizing that this is an assumption—and that there is no ship and no captain. There is only the real world with the actual challenges to be met bravely and skillfully—often with the help of a professional coach. The real world operates more like a busy intersection in a large city rather than as a ship on a stormy sea. A coach can help their client look both ways (or many ways) before traversing the intersection.
Download Article 1K Club
