• Posted: February 2013
  • Comments: 2

Would you be coached by someone who hasn’t been coached?

This is an interesting question which I have been contemplating over the past few weeks. Personally I feel the best way to discuss this is to transfer the same theory across different contexts. Would you seek advice about investing from someone who has never invested? Or have golf lessons from someone who has never picked up a club? Though these are two fairly cut and dry examples it provokes an interesting conundrum when choosing who to work with, surely it makes sense to receive coaching from someone who has been through a successful coaching process themselves. At the same time with the same theory let’s say your outcome from coaching is to be a happy surely finding and modelling someone who is happy all the time is the way to go right? Let’s say you want to lose weight, is being given advice from someone else who has lost weight is the way to go? Or like the happy person is finding someone who is healthy all time so has never needed to lose weight the person to go and work with? But if both the happy or healthy person hasn’t been formally coached then doesn’t that mean they’re out of the picture? Or have we all being coached one way or another informally in a professional and educational structure?

A pretty interesting debate, I’d love to hear your thoughts on this.

Jack

Bookmark and Share

Leave a comment

Comments

avatar

noah.scales

15 March, 2013 - 6:12am

the emprint method specified intrinsic versus prerequisite behaviors to distinguish modeling people who had your current outcome at an earlier time in their lives but now have the outcome you desire, (seeking their help to be healthy or happy, starting from not being either), from people who have always had your desired outcome. The authors covered the differences in some detail, smoking might have been an example: “learning to quit smoking is different than imitating someone who never had the habit”.  It might not be that they were coached, but that they changed, and then codified those changes (a stage 3 modeling effort) to become coaches themselves. A lot of self-made people do that, they become a success, and then get rich teaching others how they became a success (at whatever). Others teach their research, which they applied to themselves. Neither would be said to be coached.
Even people who’ve never golfed could be said to have some information on golfing, for example, I read a book about visual attention and golfers, and could have (if I remembered the book’s content), give a golfer that I’m watching useful advice, based on what I read. However, it would be limited to what I read, and would basically be a report quoting an expert. If that’s coaching, it might work to the degree the report is useful input. But that’s small-scale stuff, you wouldn’t want to then offer me 100 hours as your golf coach. I think the 5 stages, especially model selection, help. Years ago, I wrote a post, which I then deleted. It wasn’t a good fit for the forum. Anyway, I had figured out roughly what stage 1 really was. It was an ecology check for whether you could model someone whose behavior you liked. (a) did they do what you wanted to do (b) could you get time with them to imitate them. Unstated, but implicit, was (c) would imitating them be helpful. This is where dei and oic analysis is helpful.

avatar

noah.scales

18 March, 2013 - 9:52pm

Sorry, I guess that would be stage 4 modeling effort, not a stage 3 modeling effort? You’ve been coached, is that right?

Testimonial

  • An awesome 11 days. The most profound change I have ever experienced in such a short space of time. A fantastic experience.

    Mike Jackson
  • Read more...