I went on to relate this positive attitude to the pioneering spirit of those working in this field:
It may be that many people who become coaches have already explored multiple careers in their life and are now trying out coaching. If they succeed then they stay around, if not then they move on. In a previous article . . . I have used the metaphor of a frontier town when describing the inhabitant of the coaching world. This world is inhabited not just by the homesteaders who are in the field to stay, as well as the preachers and teachers who are persistent advocates for highly ethical and knowledgeable coaching, but also by those who are “drifters” or “prospectors” looking for a short-term lucrative venture and (as a result) tend to be attracted to fads, fashion and fantasized futures.
Results from this second set of questions seem to further support this positive and optimistic attitude of those inhabiting the coaching village and embracing the coaching culture.
The Autonomous Professional
I would propose that the coaching culture and frontier town contains yet another element and that all might not be perfect in this culture and town. The element I wish to introduce concerns professional autonomy and isolation. The theme of autonomy and isolation show up in responses to the second question (“When in difficulty, how often do you”). Just as there is very little indication in responses to the first and third questions that coaches view themselves as in trouble with their clients, responses to the second question suggest that they tend to look to their own internal resources when they do experience difficulties with clients. The highest rated responses to Question Two were:
“Try to see the problem from a different perspective”
“Review privately with yourself how the problem has arisen” and
“See whether you and your client can deal together with the difficulty”
Rey Carr
December 17, 2015 at 4:00 pm
The best part of this report of the results of these two surveys is the discussion of the concepts. Such discussion is valuable regardless of the reliability or validity of the results (or evidence).
Unfortunately, the methodology section is missing the most important aspect of methodology: how were each of the surveys distributed and what was the rate of return. If, as I suspect, this was an Internet-based survey, then the results have an exceptionally low chance of being either reliable or valid. That is, the likelihood that they reflect the “coaching industry” or “a typical coach” is incredibly small. Thus, conclusions based on the results are suspect.
But there’s the point. The discussion itself has its own reliability and validity independent of the survey. The points made are worthy of continuing discussion regardless of the surveys.