Observations about coaching

We pass through life and, as you may have read in other posts, learns how to solve life’s problems or events by developing a repertoire that, with greater or less assertiveness, allows us to continue playing the game of life.

Anyway, everyone has some experience and everyone has some wisdom facing life, developed along the way of it. From this simple and true assumption, everyone has something to teach. Everyone carries within themselves a repertoire that can somehow be useful to others.

The relationship between this repertoire and the environment can be assessed by assertiveness: The more functional the repertoire, the better the results obtained by this set of behaviors, the greater the assertiveness. So the more assertive the person, the better their results in the life spam.

Leia aqui em português.

A very simple and personal example. Despite I am very adept at public speaking, including for large audiences, I am shy in my personal dealings and, amazingly, unassertive when the relationship requires informality. That is, I deal well with audiences and the formal space, but in relationships that require greater emotional exposure, my repertoire does not help.

This means that, on the one hand, I have skills that I can teach. But on the other, I have skill that I need to learn. As well as being shy, I am also an introvert, never bothered to overcome my shyness, my books and games help me, supplying the needs caused by loneliness.

The word coaching means training and the coach is the trainer, the handler. We find that word a lot in American movies that portray sports stories (baseball, basketball, etc.). In general, we see the relationship of the player with his coach that, in more emotional films, transcends the space of the sport and moves to training for life.

When the coach transfers his knowledge and experience about the sport to his player, he is being a trainer. When this relationship transcends the game and the coach gives the player his life experience, he is also coaching.

The fact is, since we all have life experiences that are worth sharing, we all have the possibility of acting as coaches. Coaches on specific subjects, coaches on subjects over which we have mastery.

We can also transform this possibility of knowledge transmission into the possibility of increased financial gain by charging for training hours given to others. Thus, we have the knowledge, we have the possibility to transmit it, and on top of that, make money on it. After all, we spend time, mistakes and getting it right to develop our repertoires.

So, nothing fairer than making money from it.

Ready, end of the controversy!!!!

Yes, everyone can be a coach. In spite of all professional coaching associations, this activity is not regulated or protected by any country in the world. You do not need to register with an association, council or institute to be able to coach.

By the way, quite the opposite, if you are a hunchback, who keeps telling others how to do things and lead their lives, you could be quieter and sell your time instead of giving it for free. Chances are you really have a lot to offer your community, but you don’t know how to recognize the hot spots in the market.

Training is not psychology. Training is not psychotherapy. But, training can be a therapeutic process. Coaching can offer certain solutions that bring within themselves, solutions for the reality that directly allow the release of anguish, suffering, pain, and even depression and anxiety.

With 18 years of clinical psychology practice, I’ve seen this happen often.

Almost daily.

The patient is in a therapeutic process have a focus and a goal. But along the way, at one point in time, he comes up with demand about a conversation he will have the next day with the bank manager. A situation that has nothing to do with your therapeutic contract process. But the demand can be resolved with the repertoire I bring from my life experience.

I assure you, at the faculty of psychology we did not learn to handle situations with the bank manager (we would be much, much richer if that were so). But we’ve learned how to organize patient knowledge so that we can more functionally help them develop their repertoires.

So, at this moment, in this type of specific session, more than psychotherapy, we do a training, coaching on a specific and urgent theme that, if well resolved, will have a therapeutic effect on the patient’s life.

Therefore, within a process of psychotherapy, be it cognitive-behavioral or any other line of action of the psychologist, we end up sometimes acting as coaches.

Some techniques of cognitive-behavioral therapy are even called training. A very functional example of a widely used technique daily used is “assertive training.”

This technique, this training, consists of the development of an assertive behavioral repertoire, efficient in the face of reality. Many techniques used in coaching courses derive from variations of assertive training. Also, many self-assessment tools presented in these courses are built on the concepts and tools of cognitive-behavioral therapy.

Behavioral therapy applied to human educational processes took a huge leap during the 1st and 2nd World Wars. Thousands of soldiers had to be trained in a very short time. Covert behavior (state of mind, or personal characteristics) such as initiative, readiness, responsibility, and leadership needed to be developed. Also typical technical capabilities of soldiers: shooting, weapons, marching, tactics, etc.

This coaching, this soldier training is all based on behavioral therapy systems. The same techniques are being used very successfully in many offices around the world.

Cognitive-behavioral therapy techniques are also widely used in the school setting. A whole approach to education methods is based on the relationship between neurological and psychological processes as understood by CBT. So, it is nothing more than a more complex training, it is truly a training.

The fundamental issue in this story is the economic crisis in Brazil. It took a lot of people out of the job market. A lot of people became unemployed and had to reinvent themselves. At this time, the experience brought as life’s baggage quickly became a salable product.

Coaching.

But, there is no danger. Psychologists and their books are irreplaceable. The clinical practice of psychology is not threatened by coaching’s, just as it is not threatened by applications and franchises.

The practice of psychology is unique, as is medicine. It may undergo certain adaptations regarding its contemporaneity, change, adapt. But, it cannot be replaced. Coaching is not a passing thing either and has been around as long as there are people in the world.

Dealing with a human being in development practice is a very exhausting but very enjoyable activity. Whatever development you want, this practice is very enjoyable for the developer, be it psychologist, coaching (personal trainer, trainer, handler, uber, 15 minutes diet, and everything that has become a meme on the internet), psychoanalyst or family constellation. Deal with the human being and watching their growth is fantastic.

I at least love it!

I accompany some coaches and constellators that I know very well. People who passed in my office as a patient. They learned to love the help relationship and development activity of others. Some have graduated psychologists and are amazing constellators, absolutely captivating and inspiring trainers. Others have trained in other ways, courses here and there, and also do jobs where they can mobilize many people and help them transform.

I also accompany psychoanalysts, which today is a profession apart from psychology in Brazil, many of them also psychologists. Brilliant people and brilliant professionals.

When I see some student criticizing coaching, criticizing family constellatiors, I understand their fear. It is not a fear of competition in the labor market, they are distinct jobs, with borders well demarcated by the demand itself. When not well marked, time is in charge of correcting the illegal exercise of the profession.

The fear is the trivialization of certain elements that are absolutely important and that should be taken care of professionally.

But the diploma of psychologist does not guarantee this professionalism.

The absence of the psychology degree does not exclude this professionalism. This professional attitude stems from a personal ethic. It stems from an ability to generate in itself empathy for one’s neighbor to the point of protecting their intimacy and recognizing the limits of these relationships.

Professional identity gets scratched when the public confuses things. But, there has always been confusion between psychology and psychiatry. For a while, there will be confusion between psychology and other helping relationships.

Actually, this is a great shit. If you are good at what you do and your marketing matches what you deliver. you don´t need to give a shit to the market competition!

Give a fuck to the fear at your job and go on. You only have to worry about and oppose new market trends when you are unable to keep up with the changes offered by innovation.

I am not talking about reinventing yourself. Reinventing yourself is another nonsense. I don’t even know what that term refers to. I’ve seen a lot of people make fantastic career turns, 180º changes, transformations. Perhaps reinventing yourself is this process of change, when it happens forcibly after any professional crisis.

Is that right?

When I say that there is no need to fear innovation, I need to say that we need to accompany the innovation, but it is not “to change”, or to transform, or to reinvent herself, any other cliche with “sharks” and “tuna”. I mean doing your job competently, I mean telling your community that your work is good.

So do some marketing and deliver a good product and do not worry about coaching.

Raul de Freitas Buchi

Deixe uma resposta