When the models met Mater - Airbrushing your dents and dings away

Two thoughts grabbed my attention yesterday. First watching the news there is a lot of press about the use of airbrushing in photography and the impact on young children. Second, I went with my son to see Cars 2 (I didn’t See Cars) and was struck by some comments made by a key character in the film.

First a cosmetics giant has been forced to act after a watchdog found that consumers had been misled by digitally manipulated images of the stars. The Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) upheld a complaint by Jo Swinson, the Liberal Democrat MP, who claimed the retouched images misled consumers by exaggerating the results the products could achieve. Essentially airbrushing means that women and young girls are being bombarded with images of people with perfect skin, perfect hair and perfect figures that are impossible to live up to. So this false presentation of false body images to young people will cause them to turn to short term enhancing measures as opposed to accepting and embracing the aging process.

Secondly the star of Cars 2 is a rusty old tow truck called Tow Mater. Mater is out of sync with those around him because he doesn’t fit in with the jet set crowd. In the second movie his best friend Lightning rejects him for not fitting in with the crowd because he doesn’t look the part. As the plot unfolds he is given the opportunity to have his dents removed. But surprisingly he retorts, “You can’t touch my dents,” says Mater. “I got every one of them dents with my best buddy Lightning McQueen.” Critically Mater recognised that his dents did not detract from who he was – in fact the dents were a record of his past achievements as he towed cars to safety.

These two made me think that although the world of Airbrushing tends to drive a society that places a perfect body on a pedestal – there is also a temptation to place a perfect ‘inner self’ on a pedestal as well. In the Lead Yourself book – I argue that before we have the moral right to lead someone else that we need to look inside and learn to lead ourselves first. Essentially what moral right do we have to airbrush out someone else’s ‘Dents” if we haven’t had the courage to understand and manage our own.

Inner personal leadership means that we must be prepared to look into our secret shadows and shine a light on the thoughts, feelings and behaviours we have tried to supress or airbrush away. For example, with me it was a long journey to accept my alcoholism. I tried to airbrush my addiction away by cavalier statement of ‘I am just a social drinker’, ‘the government says that one glass of wine a day is good for you – so a bottle can’t hurt’. Or the classic ‘I will stop tomorrow’. My drive to airbrush away the problems is in many ways like the regular use of Botox or some other age defying tool. One day the past catches up you cant airbrush any more without looking slightly. At this point the truth will out. And boy does it out with a bang.

The other thing about airbrushing is that we all know that these actresses and actors are not perfect. In fact the tabloids cash in on this in showing us the star opening the door in the morning to get their milk and splashing how they really look across the front page. In the same way that we all know what the star will look like first thing in the morning – we are generally able to sense someone’s inner dents. We meet people who are full of bravado, who always supposedly have perfect lives and who never admit to having any personal fears. But as Malcolm Gladwell explores in his book Blink, we all have the gift of rapid cognition. This is the perception of others that happens in a blink of an eye. When you meet someone for the first time, or walk into a house you are thinking of buying, or read the first few sentences of a book, your mind takes about two seconds to jump to a series of conclusions. In those two seconds, conclusions we reach are really powerful and really important and, occasionally, really good. Although we think we might be able to airbrush away our inner scars and dents – in most cases they show in one-way or another. Like ‘Tells” in a poker game – we leak our inner thoughts and feelings like a sieve. But in most cases the other person is too polite to mention them.

In the film Mater argues that dents are not something to hide with embarrassment – rather they are something to take pride in as they represent where he has come from, who he is now and the person he plans to be in the future. His goal is not to be the plastic person as demanded by society, rather to be a person of principles who is prepared to present who he really is to the world and not offer a false façade to satisfy the hungry masses.

In the Lead Yourself book I argue that the development of plastic leadership programmes that supposedly offer short term fixes to long standing problems fail because the recipients of the change (the staff members) can still see the real inner person. The New Model Leaders exit the leadership course with a sense of miraculous self worth with all their faults airbrushed way. They have been convinced by the trainer that they are now wearing the new cloak of leadership (like the cloak of invisibly in Harry Potter). But unlike Harry’s cloak on their return to work the team members can see right through this façade and recognise all to well that the same airbrushed person is sitting in front of them.

A wonderful example of a leader who doesn’t seek airbrush out his dents is Richard Branson. He often explains how at school most academic things at school passed him by. One implication was that, right up until the age of 50 whilst running the largest private company in Europe, he still couldn’t grasp the difference between gross and net profit. It made board meetings quite bizarre. Eventually one of his directors drew him a picture – he drew an ocean showing a net with fish in it which we could take home, explaining that everything else, all the rest of the turnover, goes elsewhere.
For me the subtle message from Mater in Cars 2 is that before we can stop airbrushing our inner dents away we need to know what they are. In the film as well as knowing that the dents were there - Mater could describe just where each one came from.

Personal leadership is about having the courage to look inside and be honest about who we are as human beings and to accept the various dents and dings that we have picked up along the way. By recognising these supposed ‘failings’ – we can choose to embrace them and turn them into brand assets. Unique characteristics that enhance who we are and actually help make us distinct in a crowded market place.

Back to the Bone - Stripping your brand to its simple state

Brand confusion

Over the past few days three separate things happened that seem to have an interesting connection:

1.     Out walking with the wife and we wondered why a local cafe/ restaurant that was so successful at its out of town unit had failed to replicate that apparent success when it opened a place in the centre of town.

2.     With the impending arrival of our new puppy I was looking for some reading material about training dogs. Our local puppy centre highly recommended a book by a well published and famous dog trainer. I found his web site and was keen to find out more about his ideas – but then one of the pages on his site promoted another part of his business where he made and sold guitars. I came away slightly confused and didn’t really follow up on his material.

3.     In looking for someone to come and do some repair work on our house – (some minor jobs) I ended up getting so frustrated trying to find a professional that in the end I asked a neighbors daughter if she wanted to do the work as I knew that she did this type of thing in her spare time.

Although these are seemingly different stories – the one common thing that binds them is the problem of customer confusion and how this can degrade and in some cases block the sales process.

• For the 1^st one – we think the problem stems from the fact that the original place was a café on a local industrial estate. So there was a perfect mix between the customer need and the service provided. It was a café offering what we believed was the best value food in the area. For their new venture they were trying to mix the café and restaurant experience and for us it was hard to get our heads around. The result was that if we wanted ham and chips we went to a café in the high street and if we wanted smoked ham with French Fries we went to the restaurant. That fitted our mental model of the food we wanted and the surroundings we would eat in.
• For the 2^nd point my confusion is that I wanted to get advice from the best dog trainer in the world. The moment I see he is also selling guitars then in some way (and I know this isn’t logical) I was less interested because I didn’t really understand where his priorities lay.
• For the 3^rd one almost every builder or decorator I spoke to wanted to convince me that no matter what job I wanted resolved they were the person to fix it. Painful experience has taught me (leaky roofs, falling down ceilings and dodgy guttering!!) that if I want a wall plastered then I will use a plasterer – not a plumber who has a bag of left over plaster in their boot.

The common problem here is one of brand confusion. And in times when the market is poor, with many alternative service providers and cash is tight maybe we all need to think very carefully about how best to present our brand to the market. If our brand pitch presentation does not have the necessary clarity and focus then the risk is the customer will look elsewhere.

In a world where the “job” is dead and we are all on a six-month contract then you need to manage and protect your brand like you would a newborn baby. If your brand is not pitched to the market in the optimum way then the chances are you will struggle to compete and survive.

BRAND THEORY

This idea of brand management is explored in my Personal Networking book. In this I explore the idea that personal brand needs to be considered using four primary dimensions.

• Simple - Simplicity exposes the quality of an idea. Its helps others to remember you and your brand. Making the simple complicated is commonplace; making the complicated simple is quite difficult
• Singular - Dare to be different - seek to be unique within your chosen market - ‘Be distinct or be extinct’. Your personal brand recognition needs to be instantaneous and sticky. If you are not sure what makes you different - then ask e others what they believe makes you stand out
• Symbolic - Make it easy for people to recall you and your personal brand – ensure you don’t inadvertently alienate people. This can be a logo, story, artifact, drawing or catch phrase – something that represents who you are and what you do. It must be easy to read/understand/recall, eye catching, recognisable, timeless and memorable.
• Sincere - Design your brand around you – not you around your brand. People know when someone is faking it, so always ensure your brand is authentic and true to your beliefs and values. Work inside out – discover your beliefs – don't import someone else’s because they are convenient.

For me all three stories suggest that the "Simple" test had been compromised. That cafe trying to be a restaurant, the dog trainer selling guitars and the builders trying to cover all jobs. For me contact with each one left me slightly confused as to what they were offering and more importantly where their core expertise

Link - "The global brand simplicity index is a report published by Siegel+Gale, a global branding and communications company that highlights the simple fact that customers pay more for brands that provide simpler services.
The global study asked 6,000 consumers across seven countries questions relating to their experience of using services and buying products. The data showed that between 5 and 15 percent of UK consumers are willing to pay more for brands they believe offer the greatest value of simplicity.

“The Global Brand Simplicity Index™ then generates a Simplicity Score™ which is a rating of each brand and its category on the elements used within the simplicity methodology”. Basically this means that Siegel+Gale can rank brands based on how simple they are to interact with."

Testing your brand simplicity

If you want to be sure that your personal brand be not being presented in a confused to your market then maybe take a few minutes to talk with clients and ask the following:

• Can they describe your brand to otherwise in a few words or does it need to be explained?
• If your brand were on the bag of a playing card would people get it?
• Can people get an emotional as well as a logical connection with what you do?
• Can you sum up what you do in ten, then five then one word?

The key to brand simplicity is the need to be merciless. Strip away that which does communicate value immediately, strip out fluff and if you cant do it then get someone else to tear your brand pitch to pieces.

Finally – I do believe that the secret to developing brand simplicity is about detachment. I once heard Elton John say that he left the selection of a single to others because he was too close to the creative process. In the same way often we can be too close to what we do and love to be able to be ruthless and cut away the crap. This is where it is key to use other people. Find people you trust and then trust the feedback they offer on ensuring that your brand pitch is simple.

Google+ and ‘The +1 problem’

Some years ago I managed to go from a relatively healthy 14 stone up to a less than comfortable 21 stone. The strangest thing is that I didn’t realise it at the time. The reason this happened is because of the +1 syndrome. Typically it would be one more wine gum won’t hurt me, one more can of beer isn’t a problem, one more rib and so on. The invisible hand of the ‘+1’ problem meant that I crept up to a dangerous weight and essentially became fat and bloated. Because of this my life slowed to a crawl as I was just unfit and fat.

The strange thing is that I see this same effect in the way that people manage their professional networks. There is a seemingly huge race to acquire as many contacts as possible on Facebook, LinkedIn or Google+. In the same way that just one more wine gum gave me a quick hit of sugar – the just one more network contact can give us a give ego boost and a sense that we are loved by the world. But the end result is often a fat and bloated professional network. It may be large in size but will be limited in usefulness.

I tried to address this issue in my book on personal networking. This pulls together a number of theoretical ideas about the development of social networks and how they might be used to map a your personal or professional network. In this article

I want to move from mapping what our networks look like to understand how we make choices, who to include in the network and how to avoid the +1 problem of network density.

My argument is that a lot of the networking choices are intrinsic and innate.  We find it easy to say yea to a new networking request without really thinking about the value it will add and the extent to which it will bloat our social capital. The risk is we run the risk of creating a professional networking system that rapidly becomes unmanageable and of little personal value. The +1 effect tends to occur where we add just one more name to our network without really thinking through why we have pushed the accept button and what the consequence will be. Just think – when you get that friend request – what criteria do you use to either accept of reject the enquiry.

So how do we naturally and instinctively form social networks? There are many reasons we form tribal groupings – but in simple terms people often make a choice to include someone in their group according to their fit with the following criteria:

·       Profession: It is very easy and comforting to be with people that we know and trust. Because we spend so long with work colleagues it can be very easy to slip from a work based relationship to a network relationship. But from a networking perspective – your work colleagues are about the past and present – networking is about the projected and where you are going. If your network system is clogged with today’s people how will you find time to manage the tomorrow people?

·       Personality: Sometimes we want to spend time with people because we like them. We might not share the same hobbies, skills or goals –we might just enjoy their company. The trouble is that professional networking is about shared success and ensuring that both parties gain from the relationship. It is not about finding drinking buddies or people to have fun with. That is better allocated to the “friends circle” and kept away from the professional circle.

·       Proximity – if I were walking through the outback of Australia and suddenly came across someone from my hometown – the chances are that I would get a rush of comfort. That sense of shared connection, place and experiences can form an important driver that stimulates the creation of network nodes. Because someone is near they must be important and so can be included on my network. If the goal of your professional network is to get to know your local town better – then it may be a laudable criterion. But if your goal is to build a professional network that will help with your career – then maybe having two thirds of your network group who all live within a mile might be someone self defeating.

·       Purpose: Think about that thing which is important to you. It might be spending time on a charitable cause, working on a local campaign or simply being member of a sports team. The binding force between these people will be their purpose or that thing that find important and are working towards achieving. Building a network structure around purpose is important. But if your network only consists of these people then it will lack diversity and richness. What happens when your goals change and you want to take like in a new direction? Having to create a whole new group of network contacts is massively time consuming and may prevent you from being successful. Also keep a few obscure contacts in your network that have little or nothing to do with your purpose in life – it keeps it fresh and open to new opportunities.

·       Passion: This might be a member of a rock group, people who love to play golf or maybe a desire to play chess in a local club. The binding force within the network is driven by passion and a heart felt desire to spend time on something they love. The one risk of being surrounded by passionate people is that love blinds people and can prevent them from making sensible decisions. It is this very problem that can be seen in politics where leaders surround themselves with people who share a similar passion for a new project, war or campaign. They often end up making silly decisions because they believe their own hype. By all means draw people with passion into your network – but ensure that you keep a level of sensibility in the network structure to avoid making a bad professional choice.

Why do we need to understand the subtle choice criteria that impact how we form social networks? One of the hard facts about the development of a robust and valuable network structure is that the law of diminishing returns will kick in. The greater the number of people in your network the less time and energy you will be able to offer each person. Although technology is often offered as a solution to this – in my experience it makes it worse because we simply end up with a greater number of people in our network – namely because we don’t like to say no to a network request.

This is so clearly evidenced in the current climate. As people worry about their jobs and careers so the number of invites I receive to the online networking groups is increasing each week. But as these people augment their groups then need to consider whom have they invited and what will they do with the connections once in place.

Before sending out yet another online invitation to join Google+ then just think about why you are including them in your circle of contacts. If you are simply building a network of friends and effectively using Google+ or Facebook as an inline contact book - then fire away celebrate when you hit the magical 1000 friends. But if you are seeking to grow your professional network and pt. it to good use then think carefully about who is in your network and how you plan to use the connection.

With each network connection ask:

·       Why have you sent/received the invite?

·       What value exists for you in the connection?

·       What value exists for them?

·       What shared and compound value can be created?

·       Make sure that you are not just connecting because of the Personality, Profession, Proximity, Passion and Purpose preferences?

The demise of the job for life, final salary pension plan and the emergence of global markets means that all jobs (even those with a guaranteed contract) are effectively 6-month contracts. No job can offer anything more concrete than that. You personal security and capacity to feed your family or buy the latest Porsche rest on a combination of what you know and whom you know. The ‘Job’ died many years ago. We are all contractors now.

If your professional network is fat and bloated and full of irrelevance then it will hinder rather than help with any career development you plan to undertake. Treat your network with the same love, care and attention that you would your new Porsche. Check it every week, clean it regularly (weed out the dead contacts) and make sure you keep it topped up with lubricant (new network contacts).

Don’t forget – what you know (your talent) and whom you know (your network) are under your control and no one else’s. You own these so make sure you use them wisely.

 Mick Cope

One swallow does not make a summer

In other words one good or positive event does not mean that everything is all right. We can develop this further to suggest that one instance or action does not mean that a broad generalizable truth can be inferred.

A fight kicking off in my local pub doesn't mean it is a trouble spot - maybe if it happens a second or third time then I might begin to worry that it has gone downhill. A puncture on my car doesn’t mean that my local roads are full of nails and a lucky £10 win on the lottery doesn’t mean that I will win lots of lotteries from now on.

If we accept this premise then why because of one stupid persons action in parliament is there a risk that a rich aspect of our democracy may be withdrawn. Yesterday's pie throwing incident at Mr Murdoch may well result in some major changes to the way that inquiries are handled. As David Allen Green wrote in the New Statesman, this will result in ever tighter security around Parliament, further widening the gulf between rulers and ruled, making life just a bit more unpleasant for those who like living in a liberal democracy. This was also seen in parliament when the purple powder thrown at the Prime Minister a few years ago resulted in a glass screen across the visitors section, Thus creating a barrier between the MPs and their constituents.

I highlight this point because it can be very easy as a coach, consultant or trainer to be given a client contract that is actually a bad choice on their part. The client may well have observed one minor problem in the office and inferred that there is a major issue without ever getting beneath the surface to clarify what the shadow issues might. 

So often I will meet a client for the first time and they give me the solution of ‘I need you to run a training course on xxx’. If I push back and ask why then the response may be ' because yyy happened last week'. But only after pushing further and deeper does it turn out that this action only happened once in the past five years and even then it was driven by some other random and rare activity that is unlikely to ever happen again. 

This idea of systemic challenging is introduced in the 7Cs model using the Client and Clarify stages of the framework. These argue that we must ascertain if there is a real problem and if the problem is a simple fixable issue or if it is a deep and systemic problem to be resolved.

One man throwing a pie at Mr Murdoch does not mean that all committee meetings will have similar problems. The supposed urgent and important issue that your client is pushing you to resolve yesterday may not need such drastic action. 

As a coach, consultant ad trainer I always need to be aware of the ‘Law of unintended consequences’. Any solutions I help deliver will have consequential outcomes for years to come. And most of which I will never be aware of. Hence I need to think carefully before agreeing to deploy any changes at the client’s request.

For more information see 7Cs of Consulting and 7Cs of Coaching

I left last nights Harry Potter film with one great line ringing through my head from the film:

*  HARRY "Professor is it real or just in my head?"
*  PROF: 'Just because it it is in your head it doesn't mean is isn't real"

This so nicely and succinctly summarizes one of the core themes I have discussed in the coaching, consulting and leadership books. Although you may view the other person in a degree of delusional or self doubting fantasy. If they believe it then it may be imagined - but it is very very real to them.

This became so apparent to me this morning in a strange conversation. Most mornings I go to my local coffee shop for some peace and quiet and a nice cappuccino. For ages I have been chatting to a guy about movies, music and general stuff. Although I knew he was a traffic cop I never thought of it because he was always dressed in jeans and t shirt. But this morning he was in full uniform and with his partner.

He started chatting but all of a sudden I felt guilty and panicky. Although I had done nothing wrong (honest guv) the social conditioning from a young age kicked in and he became a powerful figure to fear rather than just a coffee buddy.

The strange thing is that at the time I knew it was a false fantasy - but like the person who fully understands that flying is safer than driving - I still adopted a belief model of subordination and defensiveness. It is like existing in two world at one time. I know the fantasy is just in my head and not a fact - but I still choose to accept the fantasy as opposed to the fact I know to be true.

The lesson is that when coaching clients, working with teams or trying to help my kids - I need to accept that what is in their head is real for them. No matter how much I try to impose a new way of thinking they have to make that choose to see the world as it is and not how they think it is.

Mick

NB The Fantasy Ladder is covered in the 7Cs of Coaching and Lead yourself books.

Choose your brand and change your fortunes

The observer newspaper today carried an interesting article that comments on the rapid and rent ascendancy of Ed Milliband's brand or stock value. It was only two weeks ago that he was being chastised by the press, the public and his own party. The comments were broadly up your game or get up and go!

All of a sun den he has jumped seven points in the polls and he is on the A list again. The question for me is why did this happen. Is just plan lucky in that Cameron was blind sided and too slow to understand the shadow issues - or did something change inside Ed. Did he choose to be a winner and not choose to be a loser.


The observer notes " he has done what the Times demanded and raised his game – thanks to his swift and firm response to the News International crisis. Suddenly, he is in the ascendancy, having identified the mood of public outrage over phone hacking, and led the attacks on the Murdoch empire. By contrast, Cameron, whose close links to "team Murdoch" have left him exposed to heavy criticism, is looking shakier than at any time in his premiership

I wonder what choices did he make to bring about this change? The observer again notes that "The Labour leader sounded and looked different to a few weeks before; more relaxed and far more confident. Gone were the haunted looks of early summer and the ponderous, cautious sentences that made interviews with him such hard work. Instead, he spoke from the heart with passion and conviction, spurred on by a sense of genuine anger"

In my Personal Networking book I highlight that managing brand is more than usher extrinsic PR statement and new plastic ties. It has to come from an intrinsic sense of personal sincerity and a belief that is underpinned by a passion. Once the head and heart are engaged then the hand or new behaviours will be ready to kick in. Not as false mantras to be repeated with faced with questions form the press - rather as the observer notes - the capacity t speak from the heart and with passion and conviction.

I believe that Ed made a choice to win and not be a loser. I believe he made this choice based upon some core values as opposed to ruthless opportunism. If so then maybe this is why his brand value has raced ahead at such a pace.

The question posed in the Personal Networking book is what have you done to raise your brand value today. And the first choice might be to choose to win and not choose to lose! Choose to align and seek congruence inn how you think, feel and behave. Once these three are in harmony then the total force and brand presence will generally exceed the sum of the parts.

Good luck

Ref observer newspaper - 17 July 2011

Who are the Hidden Persuaders

On the Mark Kermode film programme on the 10th June the BBC Philharmonic Orchestra performed a range of movie films. The conductor Robert Zeiler explained the roles of the various members of the Orchestra. In talking about the Viola players explained how they often don't get the attention received by other sections of the orchestra.

He said that this is because the high end of the orchestra (violins etc) get to play the melody and the low end and they play the rousing bass lines - and in between are the 'Hidden Persuaders' the viola section.

I just loved the term the "Hidden Persuader". Something about it suggested a surface level of simplicity but with an intriguing depth and complexity sitting beneath it. For me it in many ways nicely summed up the role of the coach I outlined in the 7Cs of Coaching book - ie 'The Coach is there to help someone help themselves'.

I believe the role of the coach is to be hidden and in the background. As many a political PR professional has found at some cost  - once they become the story then they are unable to function in the role to which they were recruited. If the coach is the story then I believe that they may well have failed. And much of the coaching process can be seen to be persuasive in nature. Not maybe pushing the client to follow a certain solution - rather being persuasive in the act of challenging and encouraging the client to look beyond and in many cases discard their current mental models.

As considered in the 7Cs book - all coaching is about helping the client to change how they feel, think and behave. Without any real behavioral change the the purpose of the coaching may be questioned. So much of the coaching work is driven by the need to help the client discard old habits and acquire new ones with the least amount of pain. Geoffrey Hodgson offers a lovely example of this in his paper on "The Hidden Persuader":

"Consider an example of the role of habit. For reasons of cost, and a desire to minimise pollution and road congestion, a person may use the bus to travel to work. As a result of this repeated behaviour, an associated set of habits of thought and behaviour will be reinforced.


These habits may have further repercussions. However, if the bus service is withdrawn then the individual will be obliged to use another means of travel. It may be that there is no alternative to the car. The individual will then begin to drive to work and develop another set of habits. Even if a preference for public transport is maintained, it could eventually be undermined by repeated personal car use. The change in the provision of public transport can alter preferences for that mode."

In this example the persuasive element is the simple withdraw of a service by the bus company. So it is more of an overt and public form of persuasion. In the 7Cs book I explore a range of persuasive forms as set out in the Coaching Continuum. These consist of Manage, Train, Mentor, Coach, Counsel and Therapeutic. The types and nature of the persuasive forms range from one end where the level is not really hidden through to the type of therapeutic persuasion which may be more about a minimalist form and letting the client make all the change choices.

The questions I have to ask myself as a coach (at least three times today):

• How hidden/overt is my visibility of intervention: Does it come from me in a direct managerial form, do I encourage someone else to trigger a push and so take a third person role, or maybe I just set up a system to trigger the change (like modifying the UK system of cost management for MPs that had to be change after the scandals around false claims).
• What is my form or nature of persuasion: Is it a management one where I direct the outcome, do I simply train them, do I act as a mentor and guide their actions of do I coach them on their terms and let them move as a rate that works for their map of the world.

This brings me back to the term of the "Hidden Persuader". I realised that for the past 28 years my greatest and most significant use of this approach as been with my kids. Like the Viola players I believed my role was to sit between the kids and a tough world and act as a 'hidden persuader'. Through various forms of nudging, bribery and on rare occasion blackmail I wanted to prepare them to face the world and survive with ease.

As a professional coach it forces me to reflect on my style as a hidden persuader and how I can best pull the two sometimes opposing goals together. To ensure that a change happens for the client but do it in a way that no one else can see what my role, function or intervention consists of.





1. Geoffrey M. Hodgson Version of 7 January 2002 - Published in the Cambridge Journal of Economics, March 2003, 27(2), pp. 159-75.

Digging myself out of a coaching hole

There is a well known Buddhist question that asks young monks to consider the question - "What is the sound of one hand clapping". In theory only the Zen master has the wisdom to answer this - but much of the point of the question stems from the process of thinking and reflecting on the question itself.

After coaching someone for the past week and repeatedly ending up frustrated and tearing my hair out - I asked myself the question "How do you help someone get out of a hole when they dont want to?"  And I really don't know. After countless years of being trained, training others and writing about coaching - that one simple question stills leaves me frustrated. Because like the Buddhist question - there is no answer - the journey  to its resolution is the point.

The upside is that this morning I went back to basics and used a few simple rules from the 7Cs of Coaching model:

1. Using the MPH model focus on the micro present and just questioned about now. Pull him forward from the Past and Back from the projected. Once we had the know established we then went to Meta Projected to understand where he wanted to move towards. We could then develop a clear action plan to bridge the gap.
2. Keep focusing on the CHOICE framework and refused to talk about those things that he had no control over
3. Use the Shared Success model and tried to balance out both Inquiry and Advocacy. In avoiding an overly inquiry based degree of understanding what he wanted - I pushed back on how I felt and what impact I felt his behavior had on others. So turned up the advocacy and in many ways directive level of intervention.

I can't lay claim that it was a huge success - but it was far more successful that previous sessions.

The lesson - when the going get tough - then the tough go back to the theory. Theory and practical models are not there to just to sell books and create Gurus - they are there in most cases because they work.

Mick