When and How You Should Argue with Your Coach?

This is important, and I hope everyone gets it.

As a coach, I often experience people taking my remarks as criticism, and are compelled to protect or defend themselves. I normally "fire them" as clients. Why? Because they are missing the point. And I am not about wasting my "Light" on black holes...

You hire a coach to point out what they can see from their point of view.

What is their point of view?

That is immaterial. The only thing that matters is that their point of view is not the same as yours, because their eyes (view... get it?) is not behind YOUR eyeballs.

When you are defending what you are doing, you are arguing for staying the same with the exact same results you have gotten thus far.

When you are willing, for a moment, to look and see what the other person is seeing, you are creating the possibility of a future, discontinuous from where your future has headed before this moment.

If my takeaway from this whole 8-week program that cost $1000 were ONLY that I should ask myself a question every time I set up an item on my todo list: "How is this going to make me money?" I would have gotten my money's worth. And more.

Often just asking this question will lead to multiples of that thousand bucks, and I have the opportunity to ask that question 4 times a day!

This is where millionaires are made, in these questions, and in the moments when a coach interferes with your "already always" way of looking at life and doing things.

Your job is to listen and look. And if you are a hotheaded Hungarian/Israeli/New Yorker, like me, you can curse under your breath, but look, nevertheless, and NEVER argue with a coach. It doesn't hurt them, it hurts YOU.

Merry Christmas.
Sophie

What Doesn't Make Sense in Internet Marketing Training

I am a coach. I coach internet marketing, I coach mindset... and I love it.

What I don't love is getting all the people that end up with me that got their start with other coaches... coaches that lack the most fundamental elements of teaching, attitudes , thinking, foundation, and actions steps.

I mean... after all they call it internet BUSINESS... so one could expect that some business know-how rubs off on these coaches... but it doesn't seem that way to me. At least when I look at their results: clueless students.

The latest evidence for the current marketing training culture I had last night when one of my students kept on griping why I would not coddle and nurture his inane, stupid, clumsy, poorly thought out, unproven attempts at product creation. Why I don't tell him "this is good and you could change this, or you could change that..." type of politically correct but mistaken and damaging way of teaching and leading someone to success.

When I learned (and later taught) architecture, the typical scenario was:

  1. you had an idea. you put it on paper and you brought it in for your twice a week consultation.
  2. the teacher looked at it, placed a semi-transparent sketching paper on top of it, and drew his "response" to your idea. Most of the time there seemed to be no connection: just that HIS idea was triggered by your idea.
  3. you went home, you draw the idea, to scale, on paper an brought it back to your next consultation.
  4. the teacher looked at it, placed a semi-transparent sketching paper on top of it, and drew his "response" to your idea. Most of the time there seemed to be no connection: just that HIS idea was triggered by your idea.
  5. you went home, you draw the idea, to scale, on paper an brought it back to your next consultation.

You did this for the next 20-25 times. Then it was time to finalize the plan, so he stopped getting triggered.

You got a grade. You went through this process about 10 times during your 5-year training. On the other end you came out as an architect. You wondered if you were talented or you had good teachers. But you found out soon enough. Your grades reflected your talent and your willingness to take correction very accurately.

I had an A- from all my design subjects. I became an award winning architect. Some of my friends had B's or even C's and their later achievements showed a consistent level... go figure.

Had the teacher told me: this is really good, just try to change this or that, I would have stayed in my own little world of puny. Never would have gone the 20+ incarnation of the same project, 200-300 during my studies. I would have become an "I can design one type of building, if you want that, come along." type of architect. Boring, and not very satisfying, not very profitable.

The architecture school I was studying at and later taught at had a success rate of 90 percent. Internet marketing programs, coaching programs, apprentice programs, etc. have a less than 5% success rate.

Do you think the teaching methodology has something to do with it? ... and the fact that ALL teachers at architecture school had to be successful working architects or they would lose their job?

Do you thing the selection process has something to do with it? To get into architecture school you needed to be better than 95% of the applicants: there were 20 people vying for every spot. My best friend got in only the second time around. She is a good architect, still working. Not great, but good.

Today I teach internet marketing the same way. the student has the idea, works it up, maybe records it, writes it, slides, mindmap, the whole nine yard. Then we meet on the internet and I do the equivalent of the sketch paper: I suggest a new way of doing the whole project. He goes home and does the whole thing again. Some whine that I didn't coddle them. Some get discouraged. But all learn. All... unless they don't have the mental toughness to stick it out.

Two main reasons you don't have the life you want

put your todo list on your calendarAs you know I am a coach, and I don't have to think much to find something to teach... hey, my clients is a never ending source of inspiration for writing.

I want to share something about the kind of life you live... because I want you to sign up to the 100 day challenge, so consider that I am selling you... shamelessly, pushing you, pressuring you: because it is that important.

So, here are the two main reasons that just came up in conversations with clients:

1. You don't know what you want. When you don't plan your life, other people will do it for you. And their plan is not much of anything for you... in fact, people will keep you in your status quo, if you let them do it.

How do you know that you have given the reigns to other people... after all you have a todo list, you have goals, etc. This is how I know: when I ask you when you are going to do something that's on your list, you look in your mind not on your calendar.

Anything that only lives on a list is a setup for an incompletion, a think that sits heavily on your conscience.

When you say: I should really clean my garage (for example) your mind hears that what you should be doing it right now is cleaning your garage. So you eat dinner while your mind says: you should be cleaning out your garage... and you get indigestion. You go to sleep and your mind says: you should be cleaning out your garage... so you sleep poorly.

When you put your commitments on a calendar, your mind allows you to do what you are doing, leaves you alone and in peace, unless (of course) you don't honor your calendar.

After a few weeks of putting everything on the calendar, and "uncommitting" from everything you don't intend to do... like visit Uncle Joe in  Tahiti, or some other unrealistic wish... you'll find that you'll sleep better, and will have the energy to do the things that you are really committed to do.

It is also easier to say to your mother in law, when she asks you to mow her lawn, that right now you have something else on your agenda, but will schedule it for Friday... or something like that.

Your relationship to yourself, your environment and your life will change dramatically.

what is going on below the surface that run your life 2. The second reason you don't have the life you want is because you don't know what is running your life, behind your back.

I always say that the purpose of life, the reason we are born, is to change the movie script we came with.

The movie script is like a machinery that makes sure your life follows its dictates to the t.

The life-goal you've set goes in another direction.

Your movie script is going to win unless you unearth, with a good coach, what is running the script.

I have seen "I am a failure", "I am not smart enough", "people will always take advantage of me", "you can't trust", etc. etc. etc. etc. as the backbones of the movie scripts that win... unless the mechanism gets dismantled, and redirected to a healthier path.

The 100-day challenge is such an opportunity. My courses are such an opportunity. Don't wait another year. Start the process now. I beg you. Go there...

Email me with your receipt and I'll figure out a perfect gift for you... I don't know what you want, but I'll help you with that... a webinar, a recommendation, a good pdf... I have a lot of goodies. I care about you. Go. Now.

Clarity... delusions of grandeur

In my coaching practice I often bump up against a certain type of client, it's never rewarding, it's never pleasant.

Let's call the type "I am so great, why no one is seeing it?" Or maybe let's call him Pete... why Pete?

Because some twenty years ago I had a fling with an alcoholic whose name was Pete. He was from Poland, and he spoke a little English. But when he was drunk he SPOKE a lot of Polish-English gibberish... and he was sure he just needed to drink and his English instantly improved.

So the type of coaching client, "Pete" shows the same characteristics.

He is always ready to be offended, when people treat him like he is less smart and less knowledgable that he is in his mind's eye.

His life is full of failures, full of dullness... his grand plans don't pan out, but it is never his fault. The plan was good, he was great, other people didn't understand him, didn't appreciate him.

He is not appreciative for help, instead he gets annoyed. What you give him is never good enough, he will turn around and redo it... even if the result is exactly the same.

If you are his teacher or his coach, he will always point out where you are teaching or coaching the wrong way.

In axiology1 , which is the science of measured relationship to value, there is a distinction: clarity.

An applied axiology profile2, based on a 20-minute simple exercise, can tell you a lot about you. It can tell you where you are strong, where you are weak, and what you can expect to fail at, and what to excel at. Amazing 20-30-40 page profiles come out of that little 20-min. test.

One of the things it bases its assessment on is your clarity on three different levels. On the intrinsic level, on the extrinsic level, and on the systemic level.3

Our Pete has a serious problem on the extrinsic level, the level of worldly value, what people are willing to pay for and what they aren't.

When you are crystal clear, have the highest level of clarity, you know exactly what the stuff you make is worth... a lot, or a little, doesn't matter. What matters in clarity, what matters is that you see a spade for a spade.

You can also be just clear, and you can be hazy, foggy, delusional, or as the science of axiology puts it "visible."

Our Pete is delusional. He has delusions of grandeur. And a life of disgruntlement, a life of being hurt, displaced, and failures.

In my years of coaching, 99% of Petes are males... I have only come across two Petettes :-) in the past 24 years.

Women, when they are unclear in this area, they suffer from lack of self esteem, even if they have good skills.

My own little brother is a Pete...

Are you a Pete? Or do you know one? Talk back to me!

  1. the study of the nature, types, and criteria of values and of value judgments especially in ethics []
  2. http://www.thenewgame.com/axelrodlearning/samplereports.html []
  3. intrinsic level is the level of values like goodness, honesty, etc. i.e. the "godly" values. extrinsic level is the level of worldliness, something has use value, like a good taste, a nice smell, a fast car, good looks, a comfortable chair... something you would spend money on... Systemic is the on/off switch type of value and is highly cultural, good/bad, moral/immoral, right/wrong, true/false judgments live on this level []

If you were a company: what kind of company would you be?

We all come with different strengths... it could be said, they are inclinations. They are approaches to life and to challenges. When left to our own devices, we always do things the same way... good or bad, effective or not, we say "it should work" then it doesn't.

As a coach I have an unlimited source for ideas to share: my clients provide me with a wide variety of case studies, and insights into the successes and failures of systems, ideas. I am going to share one of these in this article:

When we just look at someone, we already know what they are capable of... or do we? We "see" that they are not cut out to have their own business because... and after that "because" there is a series of words, like they don't have vision, they work to much and don't have time to make money, etc.

Let's look at what is the underlying truth about all that instant insight.

We all come with different strengths... it could be said, they are inclinations. They are approaches to life and to challenges. When left to our own devices, we always do things the same way... good or bad, effective or not, we say "it should work" then it doesn't.

That secret inclination is called conation. the word is archaic, but the meaning isn't.

Not knowing about it has caused countless failures, so listen up.

Let's look at conation from a new point of view to shed light of what's wreaking havoc on your business, ok?

Each company needs a ceo. A ceo's job is to hold the vision of the company and its direction. His job is to know what to do to accomplish the company's goal.

The ceo looks at the company, and the world from his 22nd floor penthouse office, and sees the big picture, sees the connection between stuff... That's the ceo. He is the strategist, or the general of this war...

A company with just a ceo will not go far... and the penthouse office will soon be taken away.

The next job that needs to be filled is the job of a manager. The manager's job is to translate the ceo's vision into doable steps. Tactics are the domain of the manager. Timelines are the domain of the manager. Hiring the right staff is the domain of the manager. Keeping deadlines, answering questions... busy, busy, busy.

A company with just a ceo and a manager will not get much done either.

The next player in this game is the worker, who translates the how to and tactics and what have you, that the manager throws at them.

They build, they correct, they execute, they love to get things done.

Now, we are getting there... these three can make things happen.

But don't hurry just yet: there is a need for another player, because without that player the company will soon get into a rut. That player is the innovator, the maverick of the company, the mad scientist, the one without any sense of time, any sense of money... better keep him in a straight jacket...

Believe or not, each human has these four characters battling it out...

But the strength of these characters is different.

For some, the mad scientist runs the show... we all know people like that. I am one of them... ha-ha-ha... (that was supposed to be the eerie laugh of the mad scientis echoing fromt he empty walls of the dark corridors of the company after midnight when everyone is at home in their bed, but the scientist is roaming those corridors pondering his new breakthrough idea...)

Many others have a great upper management team, but no one to get the work done, and no one to innovate.

One of my students has an even distribution of strengths, but he is so chatty and so enamoured with the latest and greatest guru product, by the time he needs his ceo to tell the rest of the staff what to do, this ceo part of his is so exhausted, that the manager needs to take over.

What happens if and when the manager makes the decisions, predominantly?

Imagine that the task is to put up a sign on a wall. The ceo knows which wall, but leaves the  how to part to the manager.

But if there is no effective ceo, the manager will make the decision based on his criteria: he will pick the wall that is easiest to scale, that is closest to the workers, that is unobstructed by stuff, etc.

The result: there will be a sign on a wall... but the wrong wall. The company's vision is lost... or jeopardized. Time and resources spent on the wrong thing... a net loss.

Well, we can see this happening with this student of mine: he makes decisions based on: I can do it... or that sounds good, or I can afford it... and proceeds building a system that sounds good, but doesn't fit into the big picture, or goes in a totally different direction.

If you were a company: what kind of company would you be?

Make sure you let your voice heard. The best of the answers will win a one-on-one session with me... worth $250... minimum.