I was watching an episode in Professor Brian Cox's latest series Wonders of Life http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p012qczg and moved to the edge of my seat as he began to talk about the senses, sensual data, and in particular - OUR senses.
Fascinating as this section was, I was hoping he would make reference, in detail, to our Reticular Activating System (or RAS). This is our brain's perceptive filter, where we 'let in' the data we want and 'ignore' what we don't want or feel the need to retain. I say "let in" here with a pinch of salted licence because in fact it is already "in our heads" anyway! It's just that we don't begin to perceive it until the RAS has screened it for our conscious awareness.
Over the years I've worked, particularly with sportspersons, on the ability to concentrate and how the RAS can really help us bring a level of control to our manipulation of sensual input. And there's an interesting co-relation here also with a number of hypnotic phenomena - analgaesia, amnesia and hallucination in particular - where perceptual distortions are taking place.
My recent and ongoing work with players from my county's Ladies' Cricket squad (coupled with watching Brian Cox) has brought me back to some of the experimental practical work I've done over the years in applying elements of the amazing powers available to us from within the functions of the RAS.
Watch the ball!
The old adage of "watch the ball (target, opponent, etc)" is a very simple coaching instruction, and yet how often do we get given the FULL instruction - the necessary detail that will really help us? "Watch the ball" is only the start and yet we might believe that just following "watch the ball" will give us everything we need to know about the ball and how we might strike, chest, punch, catch or kick it.
There is more to watching than meets the eye! There is ...
How are we watching?
For how Long are we watching?
What level of Distractions are happening? and so on and so forth.
Ok you could say these are all things that come under the umbrella labelled Concentration - but then do we ever get to learn how to concentrate? Did any teacher in school ever show you how to concentrate? You knew what was meant by pay attention, and you knew in particular how to make teacher think you were paying attention! We all have our own particular definition of what concentration is and (rather like "watch the ball") these all lie somewhere on a sliding scale of quality.
How, and for how long are we watching?
I once sat a group of sixteen young district level cricketers in a circle, with a cricket ball in the middle. I gave them a couple of minutes to study the ball and then tell me as much as they could about that ball. I got back a whole range of answers from the very obvious - it's round and red - to the detailed. I then got them to each handle the ball in turn, with their eyes closed, and then tell me what more they'd discovered about the ball by describing what they could feel.
This was an information gathering excercise about the ball, the kind of information useful to a bowler. The better the bowler, the more useful the information is - and the better the bowler, the better the speed and volume of information gathering. In this exercise the RAS was being directed at characteristics of one object, and to be fair to the sixteen young players, the feedback was all bits of raw data - because that's what I'd asked for. If we'd done the exercise again with another ball, this time I'd have asked for "what do you notice that's different?" And this time the RAS would have been filtering for differences.
Whether it is noticing sameness, differences or patterns; seeing familiar faces in a crowd, hearing our name spoken in the bubbub of a crowded room or noticing subtle nuances in the tastes of wines - our RAS here is very much 'working to order', doing our bidding. However, I digress, so let's return to the RAS with regards to visual matters.
The level of distractions
Reduce the level of distractions and the quality of the processing of visual data goes up sharply. One of the things you can do is to direct the RAS to not process other incoming sensual data, such as sound distractions - draw your auditory attention inwards or even off. It can be done by allowing yourself to become more visually absorbed - rather like the group of sixteen players had been - and with practice you can allow that absorption to muffle and shut out external sounds.
However - the biggest distraction to the working order of the RAS is our own internal dialogue, the demands of which seem to drain away the processing power necessary for good sensual filtering. Think of what was happening to your sporting performance when there was 'mental baggage' around to clutter up your clarity of mind. Your concentration and focus was indistinct and fuzzy, your decision making slow, unclear and flawed, your levels of physicality and athleticism degraded quicker.
If there was a way to leave that mental baggage in the changing room, or back at home, then we'd all do it wouldn't we?
If you subject yourself to a lot of self-talk, or find yourself turning over a lot of thoughts in your mind - notice what happens to that when you are drinking and, particularly, eating. Does it rest and then come back?
I've noticed, both with clients and myself, that when the tongue is engaged then internal dialogue is diminished. There is an ideomotor response associated with internal dialogue and major tongue activity (like chewing gum for instance) inhibits it. The whole thing about over-active internal dialogue is this - it isn't just with us in a sporting context. It's with us throughout our daily lives, and for us to 'kick it into touch' in our sport we need to deal with it everywhere.
"How do I do that - it's part of who I am," you might say.
It isn't part of who you are, it's just a habit you've learnt and become familiar with - and there are many ways of dealing with it, starting with telling that inner voice to "shut up!"
Trying hard to concentrate
It is said that to concentrate for long periods of time - especially in a sporting context - is an extremely difficult thing to do.
"You should have uptime and downtime, ergo developing an ability to switch on and switch off would be a really useful skill to master."
It is well chronicled that distractions such as pauses, intervals and other breaks in play often lead to dramatic changes in concentration levels for players. In these instances we might all think that those players had lost the means of switching concentration back on.
And yet when we are absolutely and totally absorbed in something - something that requires our concentration (whatever that may be) - we can be in uptime for hours. We can be totally focussed in something to such an extent that time seems to stand still, and those faculties that seem to deplete so quickly when we're putting effort into concentrating, are as fresh at the end of our activity as they are at the beginning.
So, where the powers of concentration and mental fatigue are concerned, perhaps the answer is this - we merely need to allow ourselves to become totally absorbed in the play and in the action.
It is easy to see, on reflection of course, that this is just another way of saying
"Play in the Now".
Conclusion
So did Brian Cox talk about the RAS with regard to the human senses? Sadly no, although he did go in another direction that was equally interesting, engaging and absorbing. The key thing for me was that the connection was made with my own discoveries.
We often make conscious directions and tunings of our RAS, although often just when we are performing an act of concentration. And even then - rather like the length, breadth and depth of quality "watching the ball" - we need to be aware there are degrees of focussing we can apply to our RAS as well. Familiarity and practice are necessary to maintaining and honing ALL our skills - and that includes the ones that go to make up what we call concentration.
Reference links to other articles
The RAS and 'Visualisation in action':-
http://prodigycoachcoachesforum.myfastforum.org/Visualization_in_action__about19.html
The RAS and 'How good is your dead aim?'
http://prodigycoachcoachesforum.myfastforum.org/How_good_is_your_dead_aim__about49.html
The RAS and 'Opening the senses'
http://prodigycoachcoachesforum.myfastforum.org/The_R_A_S_Your_perceptive_filter_about18.html
The Wright Way
Sunday, February 10, 2013
Friday, January 11, 2013
Being Vulnerable
Earlier this week I experienced my first 'slap-in-the-face' of the new year - and as a result I took a firm grip of the metaphorical scalpel, and wielded it with a degree of manic ferocity upon some 'friends' and groups on Facebook. In the end I deactivated my account for a period, in an attempt to feel the negative pleasure of throwing in the towel and just walking away to my own private little corner to lick the wounds.
So what caused it all?
As some may know, one of my daily roles is caring for my Dad who is in his 90s and has dementia. Now, although this is a very personal and dutiful role, I am only able to perform it due to 'knowing what I know' in terms of the workings of the mind - both his AND mine. Without this skillset I know for sure I would not be able to cope, both at an emotional and a functional level. By being able to detach from my personal feelings in this caring role I am able to approach and perform it in a professional manner. To put it another way, I am Working with Dementia - albeit with just one client.
Almost two years ago I was talking with a good friend about my encounters with my Dad's condition and she said that I should really share some of these experiences and 'learnings' with others, as there are many who would find them a useful guide and encouragement in what is an often thankless and taxing undertaking. After due consideration I 'took the plunge' and discovered she was right in so many ways. I received nothing but positive feedback from many quarters both on a personal and professional level, and this bolstered my own resolve to "Keep Calm and Carry On".
Now I share what I share about my Dad's dementia purely on an objective level - or so I felt, until this week when I discovered how vulnerable I actually am in this particular area.
Someone in a 'professionally' oriented online group posted a query inviting comments from anyone who has had experience working with dementia. On the face of it, it sounded as though he was looking for a range of people's findings and experiences. So, feeling duly qualified I responded, by stating nothing specific and yet illustrating the context and background thinking behind my response - ostensibly leaving the door open for them to come back to me for more information if they so wished.
The response I got rather left me in stunned numbness at first and, frankly, a "zero" response from them would have been better! On the face of it, it appeared as a "thanks but no thanks" comment to which was added "because I've already got a lot of experience of my own." Curious, isn't it, to ask for X and turn down the X that is offered because of ... why?
However, my vulnerability rubbed its hands with glee and proceeded to amplify everything negative within the words, the presuppositions, and all the stuff hidden between the lines. Very soon the reply morphed into being disrespectful, personal, insensitive, and eventually just plain haughty and rude. Coming, as it did, from a fellow 'professional' I took it as being being both undermining and contemptuous.
Now, with my vulnerability having distorted this episode quite out of proportion, I had fewer options with regards to what to do next. "So what are you going to do?" demanded my internal dialogue, sounding as real as my imagination could make it. I could have responded taking the posture of standing up for myself - by asking the person "Why invite comments from people and then casually dismiss them?" The thing is - over the last couple of months on this (and similar 'professional' groups and forums) I've witnessed slanging matches between people who I hold in high regard. Slanging contests matched only by the worst form of Yah-Boo politics. So I declined from going down THAT road and just decided to remove my comment. This I did and my thinking/feeling outcomes followed this pattern ...
Remove comment; still feel bad; unfollow the post; still feel bad; leave the group; still feel bad; leave other groups that contain the same people; unfriend a few people; still feel bad; Sod It - just quit Facebook; feel remarkably lighter! Now THAT indeed was an interesting discovery.
So, now that I've calmed down, what have I learnt from all this?
* No matter how objective I may act with regard to my Dad's condition and his varied behaviour caused as a result of that condition, he is still MY Dad and therefore I do have a degree of emotional involvement in my (working, yet) caring role.
* I am (or at least was) prepared to share some of my experiences and professional discoveries for the benefit of others, and that my judgement of those others needs to be tempered with a degree of realisation that occasionally people do express themselves with less than due consideration.
The meaning of any communication is the response it gets.
* Being "visible" to the World leaves one exposed, vulnerable, open to whatever other people wish to do with that exposure. By becoming public one becomes public property, thus losing some of one's precious private properties. Visibility is about having the courage to be brave, and realising that some thick-skinnedness is necessary to survive the ravages of that vulnerability.
Was this all a storm in a teacup?
Well I'm reminded of the England Rugby's TCUP strategy in the 2003 World Cup, where the acronym for Thinking Clearly Under Pressure was a big psychological part of England's succesful campaign in that competition.
Was my thinking Clear in response to that particular communication? - No it was emotional, and I was caught off balance because of emotional vulnerability. This wasn't just a client that was being dismissed - it was my Dad!
My response led to my feeling Pressure, and did I think Clearly Under Pressure? - Again no.
My Teacup was well and truly Stormed - my 'Bastille' was ransacked!
Of course withdrawing to a place where I could take stock of everything and hit my personal 'reset button' was essential for a speedy return to normality - and my feeling of 'lightness' when drifting away from social media for a period of time was a clear physiological response that told me this was the right course to take.
It was tough going though, and I experienced some of the desperation that makes people turn back to their addictions for the illusion of comfort and solace - where you literally do want to cut off your nose to spite your face.
There is a thin line between being visible and being vulnerable and sometimes we have no idea which side of that line we might be on. We've got there by our own Mind and yes, it's our thinking that's made us vulnerable - but the solution is equally in our own Mind.
This situation is parallel to all others in life where we are Under Pressure. If we don't feel we have adequate resources to be able to hit that 'reset button' - or if we don't realise that the pressure is all of our own making - then we reach for 'comfort' which comes in a variety of guises.
A footballer ranting at a referee = the 'Early Bath'.
After a bad day at the office = cake, chocolate, wine.
The failed zero-tolerance dieter = Binge.
To the alcoholic = Go on a Bender.
After personal attacks = Stay indoors at home.
Me, in this instance = Cut myself off, create personal space.
There are many others of course, and we each of us have our personal favourites.
At the end of the day, we are all vulnerable to something and knowing our 'harder and softer' areas can be useful information in helping us to pilot our ship through the shifting sands of daily life. We can then be more resourceful and make better choices when deciding where and how visible we allow ourselves to become.
I certainly discovered that talking about my personal encounters with dementia needs to be strictly off limits in certain areas, given my level of visibility and vulnerability.
Footnote:
This article was written early in 2013 and enabled me to learnt a lot about how I handle myself when communicating all sensitive topics and this one in particular. Our emotions often catch us off guard, and our level of grounding and understanding is the best and most recuperative safety net. It is, however, still best to be vulnerable rather than reclusive - which contradicts the 'advice to self' I wrote in the final paragraph of the article.
So what caused it all?
As some may know, one of my daily roles is caring for my Dad who is in his 90s and has dementia. Now, although this is a very personal and dutiful role, I am only able to perform it due to 'knowing what I know' in terms of the workings of the mind - both his AND mine. Without this skillset I know for sure I would not be able to cope, both at an emotional and a functional level. By being able to detach from my personal feelings in this caring role I am able to approach and perform it in a professional manner. To put it another way, I am Working with Dementia - albeit with just one client.
Almost two years ago I was talking with a good friend about my encounters with my Dad's condition and she said that I should really share some of these experiences and 'learnings' with others, as there are many who would find them a useful guide and encouragement in what is an often thankless and taxing undertaking. After due consideration I 'took the plunge' and discovered she was right in so many ways. I received nothing but positive feedback from many quarters both on a personal and professional level, and this bolstered my own resolve to "Keep Calm and Carry On".
Now I share what I share about my Dad's dementia purely on an objective level - or so I felt, until this week when I discovered how vulnerable I actually am in this particular area.
Someone in a 'professionally' oriented online group posted a query inviting comments from anyone who has had experience working with dementia. On the face of it, it sounded as though he was looking for a range of people's findings and experiences. So, feeling duly qualified I responded, by stating nothing specific and yet illustrating the context and background thinking behind my response - ostensibly leaving the door open for them to come back to me for more information if they so wished.
The response I got rather left me in stunned numbness at first and, frankly, a "zero" response from them would have been better! On the face of it, it appeared as a "thanks but no thanks" comment to which was added "because I've already got a lot of experience of my own." Curious, isn't it, to ask for X and turn down the X that is offered because of ... why?
However, my vulnerability rubbed its hands with glee and proceeded to amplify everything negative within the words, the presuppositions, and all the stuff hidden between the lines. Very soon the reply morphed into being disrespectful, personal, insensitive, and eventually just plain haughty and rude. Coming, as it did, from a fellow 'professional' I took it as being being both undermining and contemptuous.
Now, with my vulnerability having distorted this episode quite out of proportion, I had fewer options with regards to what to do next. "So what are you going to do?" demanded my internal dialogue, sounding as real as my imagination could make it. I could have responded taking the posture of standing up for myself - by asking the person "Why invite comments from people and then casually dismiss them?" The thing is - over the last couple of months on this (and similar 'professional' groups and forums) I've witnessed slanging matches between people who I hold in high regard. Slanging contests matched only by the worst form of Yah-Boo politics. So I declined from going down THAT road and just decided to remove my comment. This I did and my thinking/feeling outcomes followed this pattern ...
Remove comment; still feel bad; unfollow the post; still feel bad; leave the group; still feel bad; leave other groups that contain the same people; unfriend a few people; still feel bad; Sod It - just quit Facebook; feel remarkably lighter! Now THAT indeed was an interesting discovery.
So, now that I've calmed down, what have I learnt from all this?
* No matter how objective I may act with regard to my Dad's condition and his varied behaviour caused as a result of that condition, he is still MY Dad and therefore I do have a degree of emotional involvement in my (working, yet) caring role.
* I am (or at least was) prepared to share some of my experiences and professional discoveries for the benefit of others, and that my judgement of those others needs to be tempered with a degree of realisation that occasionally people do express themselves with less than due consideration.
The meaning of any communication is the response it gets.
* Being "visible" to the World leaves one exposed, vulnerable, open to whatever other people wish to do with that exposure. By becoming public one becomes public property, thus losing some of one's precious private properties. Visibility is about having the courage to be brave, and realising that some thick-skinnedness is necessary to survive the ravages of that vulnerability.
Was this all a storm in a teacup?
Well I'm reminded of the England Rugby's TCUP strategy in the 2003 World Cup, where the acronym for Thinking Clearly Under Pressure was a big psychological part of England's succesful campaign in that competition.
Was my thinking Clear in response to that particular communication? - No it was emotional, and I was caught off balance because of emotional vulnerability. This wasn't just a client that was being dismissed - it was my Dad!
My response led to my feeling Pressure, and did I think Clearly Under Pressure? - Again no.
My Teacup was well and truly Stormed - my 'Bastille' was ransacked!
Of course withdrawing to a place where I could take stock of everything and hit my personal 'reset button' was essential for a speedy return to normality - and my feeling of 'lightness' when drifting away from social media for a period of time was a clear physiological response that told me this was the right course to take.
It was tough going though, and I experienced some of the desperation that makes people turn back to their addictions for the illusion of comfort and solace - where you literally do want to cut off your nose to spite your face.
There is a thin line between being visible and being vulnerable and sometimes we have no idea which side of that line we might be on. We've got there by our own Mind and yes, it's our thinking that's made us vulnerable - but the solution is equally in our own Mind.
This situation is parallel to all others in life where we are Under Pressure. If we don't feel we have adequate resources to be able to hit that 'reset button' - or if we don't realise that the pressure is all of our own making - then we reach for 'comfort' which comes in a variety of guises.
A footballer ranting at a referee = the 'Early Bath'.
After a bad day at the office = cake, chocolate, wine.
The failed zero-tolerance dieter = Binge.
To the alcoholic = Go on a Bender.
After personal attacks = Stay indoors at home.
Me, in this instance = Cut myself off, create personal space.
There are many others of course, and we each of us have our personal favourites.
At the end of the day, we are all vulnerable to something and knowing our 'harder and softer' areas can be useful information in helping us to pilot our ship through the shifting sands of daily life. We can then be more resourceful and make better choices when deciding where and how visible we allow ourselves to become.
I certainly discovered that talking about my personal encounters with dementia needs to be strictly off limits in certain areas, given my level of visibility and vulnerability.
Footnote:
This article was written early in 2013 and enabled me to learnt a lot about how I handle myself when communicating all sensitive topics and this one in particular. Our emotions often catch us off guard, and our level of grounding and understanding is the best and most recuperative safety net. It is, however, still best to be vulnerable rather than reclusive - which contradicts the 'advice to self' I wrote in the final paragraph of the article.
Friday, December 14, 2012
My Shop Window!
Just in case you are looking for some Christmas stocking fillers or that little bit of beneficial personal indulgence - here are some online links to my little corner of Author's World ...
"Don't Think of a Black Cat - A beginners guide to NLP", while also available at Amazon, is in the Lulu Marketplace at a discount.
There is also an eVersion at Lulu as well.
http://www.lulu.com/shop/peter-wright/dont-think-of-a-black-cat/paperback/product-5199699.html
"Mind How You Go - Steps to enhance your life's journey" is my first large scale work. A journey into and around the Mind!
It is available at Amazon:
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Mind-How-You-Peter-Wright/dp/1471757250/ref=tmm_pap_title_0
and also via my publishers at Lulu:
http://www.lulu.com/shop/peter-wright/mind-how-you-go/paperback/product-20353518.html
"Lamplighters" is just out and the eVersion is my first venture onto Kindle:
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Lamplighters-ebook/dp/B00AJP69O2/ref=sr_1_2?s=digital-text&ie=UTF8&qid=1355487053&sr=1-2
The paperback version is, curiously, entitled "Lamplighters 2". The reasons for this are a shrouded mystery which is not revealed at the end of the book!
It is also at Lulu and will be available at Amazon in the New Year:
http://www.lulu.com/shop/peter-wright/lamplighters-2/paperback/product-20558715.html
All the paperbacks have ISBN numbers so they can be ordered from your local bookshop.
I'm always happy to dispense signed copies, so if you would like to take that option then you can order your signed copy by emailing me here: peter@haveamindto.com
NB There is a small charge for P&P in addition to the listed price.
Best Wishes and very many thanks to all my new and regular readers!
Monday, December 10, 2012
Coachability
I read an interesting article by a colleague that alluded
to ‘teachability’ – the factor that recruiters, coaches, ‘people developers’,
teachers, look for in individuals and make their judgements accordingly. This ‘teachability’
or ‘coachability’ factor is not so much about raw talent or current ability,
but is about potential – a person’s ability to gain experience and knowledge
and to harness that gain for their own good and/or for the good of the
organisation (be it company, school, club or team, choir, orchestra, etc.)
So given the sliding scale of 'coachability', where might be a place to start in order to view someone's location on that scale.
Task performance
There’s an interesting way of viewing how we take on the performance of tasks, and this falls into four main categories:-
· Planning
· Initiation of action
· Perseverance
· Conclusion of action
So why do people give up on themselves so easily?
It’s all in a word – belief.
When we believe we cannot do something then we will look for and interpret our actions and their outcomes to back up our beliefs, to prove them right – to prove we are right for, after all, we are our beliefs aren’t we?
“There – see! I told you I couldn’t do it. Stupid of you to try and change my mind wasn’t it!?”
And there, out of our thoughts and our very mouths, are the clues to our failure.
“My mind was closed and set; you – the coach – tried to change it and I proved you wrong.”
The "I", here, is in denial of their ability to learn or change and hands all responsibility for their change over to the coach.
When minds are closed, beliefs never change.
Wanting to change
Conclusion
Many of those thousands could have changed what they have via their own resources. However, they may have wanted the process accelerated, or they may have believed they didn’t have those resources at the time.
I’ve changed many things in my own life too, yet I know that life would have been different if I knew back then what I know now. But I can’t go back – I can’t unburn the toast. But I can start with a new slice of bread right here – right now – and make better toast. There are still things I’d like to change and learn, and now I’m in a better place than I ever was because of my own ‘teachability’, my ‘coachability’.
Now in linguistic terms, ‘coachability’ implies there is a
rating upon some sliding scale - whereas 'coachable' or 'uncoachable' is much more of a
flat judgement - praise or condemnation. And to my mind when a coach uses comments like “that lad is
uncoachable” it says more about themselves than the person they are describing.
Of course there are contexts and constraints upon coaches such as time, the
rest of the group, the need for results, etc. These may be part of the 'whys' of such condemnation, unwise as it might be. However, in an unconstrained
1-to-1 scenario - 'coachability' is very much about coach ability.
Task performance
There’s an interesting way of viewing how we take on the performance of tasks, and this falls into four main categories:-
· Planning
· Initiation of action
· Perseverance
· Conclusion of action
When we objectively rate ourselves out of 10 in each of
these areas, we not only get a handle on our relative strengths and weaknesses
in task performance, we also get clues as to how to bring about change for
ourselves.
It is the level of our open-mindedness to spot, acknowledge and act upon those clues that gives us our ‘coachability’ or ‘teachability’ rating and here's why:-
Bringing about change is, in itself, a task. And the planning, starting, continuing and concluding of bringing about that self-change, whatever it may be, is the very kernel of our coachability.
Of course, if we are working with someone else (a coach for instance) then they can help us spot the clues and they can set up some routines, some practices, to help us to act upon those clues. However, that is all they can do.
It is the level of our open-mindedness to spot, acknowledge and act upon those clues that gives us our ‘coachability’ or ‘teachability’ rating and here's why:-
Bringing about change is, in itself, a task. And the planning, starting, continuing and concluding of bringing about that self-change, whatever it may be, is the very kernel of our coachability.
Of course, if we are working with someone else (a coach for instance) then they can help us spot the clues and they can set up some routines, some practices, to help us to act upon those clues. However, that is all they can do.
The pivotal area of acknowledgment belongs entirely with
us. If we choose not to acknowledge the clues, then we deny ourselves any
possibility of change. Try as they may, no coach, teacher or therapist can
bring about any change without their clients’ acknowledgement of those clues.
Giving
up
Returning to coach ability for a moment, I like to think
that I never give up on any client – before they give up on themselves. I do know
how easily people give up on themselves so, given MY beliefs about everyone
being capable of far more than they think, then my path of perseverance is a very
straightforward one. Perseverance will always outweigh severance – and not just
by three letters!So why do people give up on themselves so easily?
It’s all in a word – belief.
When we believe we cannot do something then we will look for and interpret our actions and their outcomes to back up our beliefs, to prove them right – to prove we are right for, after all, we are our beliefs aren’t we?
“There – see! I told you I couldn’t do it. Stupid of you to try and change my mind wasn’t it!?”
And there, out of our thoughts and our very mouths, are the clues to our failure.
“My mind was closed and set; you – the coach – tried to change it and I proved you wrong.”
The "I", here, is in denial of their ability to learn or change and hands all responsibility for their change over to the coach.
When minds are closed, beliefs never change.
So how do I set about coaching someone with a closed mind,
with beliefs that are unassailably behind castle walls within the client’s “keep”.
Well there are a number of ways of breaching those ramparts, of storming their ‘Bastille’.
I can lay siege and look to decay their fortress through drip-fed remarks, affirmations and comments. I can undermine their foundations by disproving their undeniable proofs at every opportunity, ‘trumping their aces’ if you like. I can assemble a load of weaponry and batter them into submission, or assemble a load of troops, run up some ladders and get in that way.
Well there are a number of ways of breaching those ramparts, of storming their ‘Bastille’.
I can lay siege and look to decay their fortress through drip-fed remarks, affirmations and comments. I can undermine their foundations by disproving their undeniable proofs at every opportunity, ‘trumping their aces’ if you like. I can assemble a load of weaponry and batter them into submission, or assemble a load of troops, run up some ladders and get in that way.
These are all interventions of some form or other. So are
there any other ways – because the beliefs within the castle are likely to
defend themselves against assault aren’t they? Wouldn’t it be better – for the
fabric of the castle – that the beliefs were changed through persuasion,
through dialogue? The end needs to be that the client (the castle) believes
that they changed their own mind, so that they can own and be responsible for
that change.
I cannot get you to give up smoking – but I can get you to change your mind around certain things so that you can give up your own smoking.
Minds can only change through being open.
I cannot get you to give up smoking – but I can get you to change your mind around certain things so that you can give up your own smoking.
Minds can only change through being open.
Wanting to change
So how ‘teachable’ or ‘coachable’ are you? Or – given what
I said before – how ‘coachable’ do you think
you are? How easy is it for your castle’s drawbridge to be lowered? How do you
feel when you hear, “I would if I could but I can’t so I won’t.” We are all
comfortable with the familiar, we wear it with ease – so if your language,
especially the self-directed and familiar language, is liberally sprinkled with
can’t, mustn’t, shouldn’t, won’t, wouldn’t and the like then it will help you
to recognise that and make some changes to those habits.
How open is your mind, how much are you prepared to embrace
change, how much of your own time and work are you prepared to put in to
cementing these building blocks of change into place? How much can you invest
in acknowledging the clues?
Conclusion
Many of those thousands could have changed what they have via their own resources. However, they may have wanted the process accelerated, or they may have believed they didn’t have those resources at the time.
I’ve changed many things in my own life too, yet I know that life would have been different if I knew back then what I know now. But I can’t go back – I can’t unburn the toast. But I can start with a new slice of bread right here – right now – and make better toast. There are still things I’d like to change and learn, and now I’m in a better place than I ever was because of my own ‘teachability’, my ‘coachability’.
Someone said to me very recently that there is still so
much old negative thinking in her life in spite of all the good things she now
enjoys. When I asked her what would her life be like if she could get rid of
all that stuff, her entire physiology lit up and she said “that'd be amazing”. I then asked her how she
might start to put some action towards that and her reply was “I don’t know.” I
said she might need to get more familiar with “I don’t know” and I gave her
some clues and pointers and things to read, watch and listen to - starting with her own body language and thought-driven beliefs.
At some point she may or may not want to see me as a client, and then – and only then - her ‘coachability’ and my coach ability will be factors in those interactions.
And so, in a way this article will be waiting for her when that time comes.
At some point she may or may not want to see me as a client, and then – and only then - her ‘coachability’ and my coach ability will be factors in those interactions.
And so, in a way this article will be waiting for her when that time comes.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)