What about those in the fifth group? Sadly, I must nominate some of my fellow psychologists who insist that professional coaching is nothing more than unregulated and undisciplined “psychotherapy-for-normals.” We might include other human service professionals who view professional coaching as a threat to and intrusion on their own space: “why do we need anything more than we already have in our existing human service fields.” These recalcitrant are often those calling for the certification of all professional coaches by one or more of the established agencies and associations in other disciplines and fields that now license human service professionals.
Other recalcitrants can be found in countries where human services of any kind that smack of “psychology” and “psychotherapy” are considered unnecessary or even a source of malpractice. There is also the matter of professional coaching being sacrilegious by some conservative religious groups: “Don’t do work of the devil by trying to address spiritual matters from a secular perspective.” Matters of the human heart and spirit, as well as interpersonal relationships, can best be handled by physicians, teachers or religious leaders: “go back from where you came and leave us to our own proven services and solutions!” This eighth essay might be capturing some of this recalcitrance across different cultures (though not yet in some religious populations). Future cross-cultural studies are certainly warranted—especially given the primitive and highly tentative nature of the current study.
This study, after all, is very exploratory—and perhaps pioneering—in nature. More established studies must be conducted—helping to build a culture of evidence in our field. Hopefully, this can be done without losing the pioneering spirit. If the results from this study and studies done in the near future help to foster a more global dialogue then we might be able to retain this spirit.
