RSS Feed
Is Coaching & Self-Help really a SHAM?
I’ve recently read a book called “SHAM” which according to the author stands for Self Help & Acualisation Movement. His primary premises are that many of the self-help gurus (and in this category he includes Tony Robbins, Dr. Phil and more) are (1) not qualified and (2) simply interested in building businesses and making money. He’s highly critical of the whole self-help movement arguing that it intentionally makes people feel inadequate so they’ll spend more money on books and workshops etc.
To be honest, I’ve found the book both fascinating and frustrating. On the negative side, his arguments are absurd in that he lumps all motivational speakers and coaches and others into one basket and essentially labels them all as shonks. He says nothing, or very little, about the many good people doing good things to help people live better lives. On the other hand, and at the same time, he’s right when he points to the lack of scepticism many have when engaging the services of a coach or paying to attend a seminar. Few actually look at the qualifications of the presenter to see if he/she has actually been trained to do what he/she says his/she’s going to do.
Read the next Happiness Institute eNewsletter for more thoughts on this and for my opinion about the lessons to be learned from his overly and excessively negative (but also, in some ways, thought-provoking) account of the self-help movement.
This entry was posted
on Friday, September 23rd, 2005 at 4:42 pm and is filed under Happy Tips.
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
You can also leave a response.
September 24th, 2005 at 1:25 am
doc happy
I was thinking about the same thing, because I’ve been reading the Sydney Morning Herald over the past few days as they uncover a lot of psychologists, counsellors etc that have “fake” or dubious qualifications.
Here are the links - I won’t say any more about it, but just to warn the readers to really research the topic ……. better still, if you’re in Sydney then go and see doc happy…….
(by the way, I H-A-T-E Doctor Phil’s TV program and I hate him!!)
http://smh.com.au/articles/2005/09/16/1126750128918.html
http://smh.com.au/articles/2005/09/18/1126981947758.html
http://smh.com.au/news/national/be-careful-what-the-doctor-may-have-ordered/2005/09/18/1126981947794.html
example of some text from this article:
“But there is a catch. She is no ordinary doctor. Her doctorate
comes from a hypnotherapy institute in California.
As for her professorship, it is held at Calamus International
University, an internet extension college. This “university” was founded
in the British West Indies, where any business can call itself a
university, says George Brown, a consultant to the Australian
Universities Quality Agency.”
September 26th, 2005 at 12:34 pm
There was a time when qualifications, as such, were not all that important, just training of some sort and a great way with people.
I’ve been to see great coaches, some who were self-taught through life experience, some who are ‘qualified’ - having degrees in psychology and also coaching qualifications. I’ve been to see ‘qualified’ psychologists who I would never see again in a hundred years as their manner was appalling. Same with doctors - they’re qualified, aren’t they? Have you ever had a dud experience? Wrong diagnosis?
It’s time society started to use common sense again. Don’t blindly leap into anything, whether these coaches/presenters have qualifications or not. Just because a person has a qualification doesn’t necessarily make them good at what they do. Check out a fully qualified stock broker - most of them have no money at all.
The thing that these coaches/presenters are good at is SALES. They have great promoters. In a world which is currently lacking in faith, people are looking for something/someone to believe in, they are looking for an answer, for a quick-fix to make their lives awesome - or most times just better than it is now. Some of these coaches/presenters are opportunists - they have seen the trend and have jumped out in front. Some are genuinely helpful, but you won’t see them on billboards.
If people simply looked within to find their own answers, to find their heart’s desire, it wouldn’t cost them a cent.
September 26th, 2005 at 12:47 pm
Simone - thanks for your comment.
You’re right, that qualifications don’t necessarily guarantee quality but in many cases, they will be associated with a higher standard of service and also with a level of ethics and conduct with which most people would be more comfortable.
This doesn’t mean there aren’t some excellent coaches/trainers who don’t necessarily have qualifications but as a general rule, all I’m suggesting is that for those who’re looking to begin a professional relationship with someone offering to help - ensure you do look closely at who the person is and whether or not they can really offer what you’re looking for.
September 26th, 2005 at 10:00 pm
in “looking closely” then doc happy, how would you do it?
if i thought i was wanting a “long term” commitment to a psychologist-type-of-person, the I would probably use the first session to ask them things which might not be related to what I was there about.
i might ask them how they would answer a particular situation, so i can see whether i agree with their way of communication, information, strategies etc.
i’d watch the way they behaved, spoke etc. to see if they made me comfortable.
that’s a start i suppose……..
September 29th, 2005 at 8:59 am
I have to disagree with some of these responses especially that, that comes from simone. I can see the sense of the whole thing though when you look at the concept and follow how the positives make alot of difference, stop worrying or for that matter outlineing the negatives. There will all was be negative because its the opposite to positive so if we foce on the positive thses people bring to us in our lives, if we choose to let them in, so there will always be negatives, critisism, but as long as we can see the big picture then we should all get a long fine on one hand or the other.
October 13th, 2005 at 4:25 pm
I agree with Tim that reviewing a person’s qualificatons can be one way to begin looking for prfoessional help. Tim, I especially liked your comment “look closely at who the person is .” You may not have intended it to mean this, but I took it to mean looking beyond WHAT the person is, look beyond the fanfare, the big titles and the rest and find out who that person is as a person, who is the real, living human being that you can trust and who can genuinely help you.
iolanda touches on this also with her comments about a person’s communication style, behaviour, etc.
NASA I totally agree with you that there are always negatives and postives, and that in the big picture everything works out fine. My gripe was that sometimes people without qualifications who are doing real good in this world are shot down alongside their counterparts who may indeed be shams. While the so called ‘qualified’ are not put past a human factors test, and in my mind may be qualified but quality (as Tim put it).
I still stick by my earlier comment about using common sense. If it feels ‘right’ (not legally or morally, but that ‘feeling’) then go with it. If you get results without selling your house and kids, and you find an answer or solution or general happiness, then great! Who cares if they are qualified or not. Some of the best advice I’ve ever received is from the ‘Elders’ (aka old people) - they have the most amazing experience in that thing called Life……
October 30th, 2005 at 1:38 am
My opinion: This “qualification” BS is the most ignorant conversation I’ve ever heard. Who or what institution is given the “right?” to “qualify” anyone for anything? Who gives them that authority?
Have you ever used the services of a highly “credentialed professional” only to find them completely enept? Personally, I would rather trust my own judgement as to someone’s “qualifications” than any “mysterious authority”. If I resonate with them, then they’re qualified. If not, I don’t care what titles or degrees they have, they are in the same class as the SCAMMERS your article writes about. Qualifications per se are irrelavent to me.
October 30th, 2005 at 4:34 pm
Hi all and thanks for your replies.
I’m glad this Blog posting has attracted some interest but let’s all please keep our comments respectful and polite. The issue was raised specifically because it is a controversial one and one on which many have different opinions. That’s what this blog is for - open discussion but NOT in a way that anyone might find offensive.
Once again, thanks for your comments. I don’t want to discourage discussion at all but I would appreciate a degree of care in language used please.