Cowboy or professional? Let’s drop the negative discourse and use an inclusive one. Isn’t that what coaching is all about, asks Bob Garvey, professor of business education at York St John Business School
The idea of ‘discourse’ is important in the study of people and society. Discourses are basically how people talk about things. They are ways of supporting and transmitting meaning through social contexts.
Webster (1980, p206) says: “Language is the primary motor of a culture.” And “Language is culture in action…”
It is important also to understand that “… language is never ‘innocent’; it is not a neutral medium of expression. Discourses are expressions of power relation and reflect the practices and the positions that are tied to them” (Layder, 1994, p97).
So, we need to proceed with caution. While discourses may contain ‘truths’, they may also contain ‘lies’ and deceptions (Gabriel, 2004).
This apparent paradox is important. At the heart of discourse is interpretation and it is very clear that one person’s interpretation is not the same as another’s. Any interpretation, therefore, has to be made by taking into account the social context in which it is employed. This is certainly the case with coaching.
Many of us are familiar with the term: ‘the wild west of coaching’. This first appeared in the literature in 2000 and was later picked up in an article by Sherman and Freas (2004) published in the Harvard Business Review called ‘The wild west of executive coaching’. This article really goes to town on the metaphor and uses very graphic ‘wild west’ language to support its claim that, in essence, ‘there is chaos out there and it’s a bad thing’.
This seems to have been an inspiration to fledgling professional bodies and has become the slogan with which to establish standards and controls in the interests of professionalisation. A persuasive argument, but there are alternative discourses, too.
Pioneering spirit
In Canada, for example, the modern cowboy is good. He tends to the animals, mends fences and looks after the land. Here, ‘wild west’ need not mean chaos.
It could also mean pioneering, huge innovation and creativity – working at the boundaries with a sense of adventure and challenge.
Which would you rather have?
What do coaches – both ‘wild west’ ones and professionalised ones – have in common?
Most commentators on coaching say that coaching is derived from a person-centred humanist philosophy. Humanism is about an ethical and democratic way of being.
It is about individuals having the right and responsibility to give meaning and shape to their own lives. It recognises the human potential to act in an ethical way to build a more humane society through a sense of free enquiry and the infinite capacity for people to learn and develop. It is an inclusive philosophy.
A different take
Imagine if subscribers to the negative discourse of the ‘wild west’ could have this perspective; what a different take there would be on what professionalisation would mean.
For example, it would accept difference and variation because diversity is a good thing. It would accept the innovation and creativity and the pioneering spirit. It would not seek to create ‘in’ groups and ‘out’ groups and perhaps it may live up to its espoused philosophy to build a more humane society.
Now wouldn’t that be a fine thing? n
References
l Y Gabriel (ed), Myths, Stories, and Organizations: Premodern Narratives for Our Times, Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press, 2004
l D Layder, Understanding Social Theory, London: Sage, 1994
l S Sherman and A Freas, ‘The wild west of executive coaching’, in Harvard Business Review, 82, 11, November 2004, pp82-90
l F Webster, The New Photography; Responsibility in Visual Communication, London: John Calder, 1980
Research matters
the wild west of coaching
Cowboy or professional? Let’s drop the negative discourse and use an inclusive one. Isn’t that what coaching is all about, asks Bob Garvey, professor of business education at York St John Business School
The idea of ‘discourse’ is important in the study of people and society. Discourses are basically how people talk about things. They are ways of supporting and transmitting meaning through social contexts.
Webster (1980, p206) says: “Language is the primary motor of a culture.” And “Language is culture in action…”
It is important also to understand that “… language is never ‘innocent’; it is not a neutral medium of expression. Discourses are expressions of power relation and reflect the practices and the positions that are tied to them” (Layder, 1994, p97).
So, we need to proceed with caution. While discourses may contain ‘truths’, they may also contain ‘lies’ and deceptions (Gabriel, 2004).
This apparent paradox is important. At the heart of discourse is interpretation and it is very clear that one person’s interpretation is not the same as another’s. Any interpretation, therefore, has to be made by taking into account the social context in which it is employed. This is certainly the case with coaching.
Many of us are familiar with the term: ‘the wild west of coaching’. This first appeared in the literature in 2000 and was later picked up in an article by Sherman and Freas (2004) published in the Harvard Business Review called ‘The wild west of executive coaching’. This article really goes to town on the metaphor and uses very graphic ‘wild west’ language to support its claim that, in essence, ‘there is chaos out there and it’s a bad thing’.
This seems to have been an inspiration to fledgling professional bodies and has become the slogan with which to establish standards and controls in the interests of professionalisation. A persuasive argument, but there are alternative discourses, too.
Pioneering spirit
In Canada, for example, the modern cowboy is good. He tends to the animals, mends fences and looks after the land. Here, ‘wild west’ need not mean chaos.
It could also mean pioneering, huge innovation and creativity – working at the boundaries with a sense of adventure and challenge.
Which would you rather have?
What do coaches – both ‘wild west’ ones and professionalised ones – have in common?
Most commentators on coaching say that coaching is derived from a person-centred humanist philosophy. Humanism is about an ethical and democratic way of being.
It is about individuals having the right and responsibility to give meaning and shape to their own lives. It recognises the human potential to act in an ethical way to build a more humane society through a sense of free enquiry and the infinite capacity for people to learn and develop. It is an inclusive philosophy.
A different take
Imagine if subscribers to the negative discourse of the ‘wild west’ could have this perspective; what a different take there would be on what professionalisation would mean.
For example, it would accept difference and variation because diversity is a good thing. It would accept the innovation and creativity and the pioneering spirit. It would not seek to create ‘in’ groups and ‘out’ groups and perhaps it may live up to its espoused philosophy to build a more humane society.
Now wouldn’t that be a fine thing? n
References
l Y Gabriel (ed), Myths, Stories, and Organizations: Premodern Narratives for Our Times, Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press, 2004
l D Layder, Understanding Social Theory, London: Sage, 1994
l S Sherman and A Freas, ‘The wild west of executive coaching’, in Harvard Business Review, 82, 11, November 2004, pp82-90
l F Webster, The New Photography; Responsibility in Visual Communication, London: John Calder, 1980