WEBVTT NOTE This file was generated by Descript 00:00:00.769 --> 00:00:04.609 Hey, this is Mark Butler and you are listening to a podcast for coaches. 00:00:04.609 --> 00:00:04.670 I. 00:00:06.215 --> 00:00:09.694 This week I've had two different experiences where clients have struggled 00:00:09.905 --> 00:00:16.294 to trust their own assessment of situations and behaviors and feelings 00:00:16.564 --> 00:00:24.095 because they were looking first through a pathological diagnostic lens. 00:00:25.144 --> 00:00:29.434 and what I mean by that is that they had studied these definitions. 00:00:29.484 --> 00:00:33.744 they had types for themselves, they had labels for themselves. 00:00:34.254 --> 00:00:38.844 And so their primary question wasn't what can I learn from my thoughts and feelings 00:00:38.844 --> 00:00:43.404 and behaviors in this specific set of circumstances, but something closer to. 00:00:44.479 --> 00:00:49.249 Well, is this an example of the pathology or of the label that I've applied 00:00:49.249 --> 00:00:55.159 to myself or that someone else has applied to me and am I consistent or 00:00:55.159 --> 00:00:57.079 am I not consistent in my way of being? 00:00:57.079 --> 00:01:00.919 So it was a way of disconnecting from their experience and trying to make 00:01:00.919 --> 00:01:05.989 sense of themselves through the label rather than through their lived reality. 00:01:06.289 --> 00:01:07.070 It's this way of. 00:01:08.005 --> 00:01:14.815 Essentially othering themselves through the potential diagnosis or the type 00:01:14.905 --> 00:01:18.954 that they've assigned themselves, and it creates distance from their own 00:01:18.954 --> 00:01:23.695 experiences instead of leaning into those experiences and learning from them. 00:01:26.334 --> 00:01:28.465 What struck me most was how they were. 00:01:29.079 --> 00:01:33.369 Externalizing their own authority through these labels. 00:01:33.969 --> 00:01:39.639 So instead of asking what feels true to me, what aligns with 00:01:39.970 --> 00:01:42.914 my experience, my values, I. 00:01:43.584 --> 00:01:49.495 My desires, they were asking, am I fitting my definition? 00:01:51.144 --> 00:01:53.005 So I have this definition of myself? 00:01:53.245 --> 00:01:55.164 Am I fitting the definition? 00:01:56.305 --> 00:02:01.555 And it seemed to be true that their desire to fit their definition was part of an 00:02:01.585 --> 00:02:04.465 attempt to feel internally consistent. 00:02:05.384 --> 00:02:09.945 The label had become more the authority and they felt compelled 00:02:09.974 --> 00:02:13.515 to consult that authority before trusting their own experience. 00:02:14.515 --> 00:02:19.584 I totally understand the comfort of labels I have experienced the comfort of labels. 00:02:19.915 --> 00:02:22.765 If a person who has struggled to make sense of themselves and their 00:02:22.765 --> 00:02:28.495 behavior, and then they find that a practitioner or a book, or a podcast 00:02:28.495 --> 00:02:35.635 or a YouTube video has given a name to a way of being that they believe maps 00:02:35.635 --> 00:02:40.045 pretty well onto their own experience, it can feel incredibly validating. 00:02:41.004 --> 00:02:44.694 I experienced this a few years back when I did start to learn things 00:02:44.694 --> 00:02:51.444 about A DHD and I observed that there was probably a an A DHD thread 00:02:51.444 --> 00:02:53.094 that ran through my way of being. 00:02:53.784 --> 00:03:00.654 And I had a couple of different coaches who helped me feel like I wasn't crazy 00:03:01.104 --> 00:03:06.444 and that I wasn't alone, and that there was hope for me in situations where I 00:03:06.444 --> 00:03:11.394 had felt like there wasn't that much hope, that I was sort of stuck in a way 00:03:11.394 --> 00:03:13.224 of being that was essentially doomed. 00:03:13.854 --> 00:03:17.424 So I understand the allure. 00:03:18.429 --> 00:03:22.570 And the benefit, the real benefit, of looking to these categories, 00:03:22.570 --> 00:03:27.159 looking to these labels as a way of self-validating and saying, okay, 00:03:27.760 --> 00:03:29.980 I'm not alone and I'm not crazy. 00:03:30.489 --> 00:03:35.020 And as coaches, having these labels ready and having these what are essentially 00:03:35.020 --> 00:03:39.760 diagnoses reduces the uncertainty that we might feel in our coaching interactions. 00:03:40.000 --> 00:03:41.770 If a client is coming to us with a whole. 00:03:43.525 --> 00:03:48.295 Sort of mess of thoughts, feelings and behaviors, ways of being. 00:03:48.715 --> 00:03:53.695 And if we feel that we have to guide them in what to do, 00:03:55.734 --> 00:04:01.794 it's very comforting to say, first, let's categorize you first. 00:04:01.824 --> 00:04:07.194 Let's label and validate you, and then let's work through 00:04:07.224 --> 00:04:09.984 the lens of that category or through the lens of that label. 00:04:11.799 --> 00:04:13.989 These things have a name, they're called heuristics. 00:04:13.989 --> 00:04:17.469 Humans love heuristics because they reduce uncertainty. 00:04:19.599 --> 00:04:25.419 They make it easier for us to shortcut, to insight, and to action, and they 00:04:25.419 --> 00:04:27.309 can be very helpful and very powerful, 00:04:29.619 --> 00:04:32.870 especially because as coaches we put so much pressure on ourselves to be 00:04:32.870 --> 00:04:35.870 helpful to help our clients get results. 00:04:37.770 --> 00:04:42.060 And if we want to get our clients to some different place, and especially 00:04:42.060 --> 00:04:44.250 if we wanna do it as quickly as possible because we're trying to 00:04:44.250 --> 00:04:48.480 prove our value or prove our benefit in some way, then having a heuristic, 00:04:48.630 --> 00:04:52.305 having a label, having a category, and running the whole coaching experience. 00:04:52.920 --> 00:04:55.950 Through that category can be extremely comforting. 00:04:56.040 --> 00:04:57.180 And I wanna be clear. 00:04:57.360 --> 00:05:00.150 I'm not saying it's a bad thing necessarily. 00:05:00.750 --> 00:05:08.190 I think there can be incredible benefit in this approach unless the label and 00:05:08.190 --> 00:05:11.010 the category become the whole person. 00:05:11.810 --> 00:05:13.400 yeah, it's fine to have hobbies, but. 00:05:14.285 --> 00:05:17.855 People who make their hobbies, their whole personality are kind of annoying people. 00:05:18.245 --> 00:05:19.175 They're kind of odd. 00:05:19.175 --> 00:05:20.015 They're kind of weird. 00:05:20.015 --> 00:05:24.125 you are multifaceted, you are complex, you're nuanced. 00:05:24.515 --> 00:05:28.625 When you take one thing, especially a diagnosis or a label, and you 00:05:28.625 --> 00:05:33.005 make it your entire personality, you reduce yourself too much. 00:05:33.635 --> 00:05:36.965 And if we, as coaches attempt to do that with our clients, 00:05:37.415 --> 00:05:40.475 we've reduced them too much so. 00:05:41.475 --> 00:05:48.105 My concern is that our eagerness to label our enthusiasm about categorization. 00:05:49.620 --> 00:05:53.700 Might serve us as the coach more than it serves the client, because it might 00:05:53.700 --> 00:05:58.470 make us as the coach, feel like we're imparting knowledge and we're being very 00:05:58.470 --> 00:06:02.460 supportive and we're cutting through a lot of noise, and we're helping 00:06:02.460 --> 00:06:07.080 our client move more intentionally and more quickly to a new place. 00:06:07.920 --> 00:06:10.980 But I'm afraid it sometimes can serve the coach more than it serves the client, 00:06:10.980 --> 00:06:16.349 because the client isn't as simple as our category seeks to make them. 00:06:17.349 --> 00:06:21.299 Instead, what I want to do is I want to always emphasize the client's agency. 00:06:21.299 --> 00:06:24.719 I wanna look at the client's experience through the lens of their thoughts, 00:06:25.049 --> 00:06:31.180 feelings, and behaviors, because that gives them, a more open space in 00:06:31.180 --> 00:06:36.010 which to consider cause and effect, where they look at thoughts and 00:06:36.010 --> 00:06:41.995 feelings and actions as causes In case it's not clear, I don't hyperfocus 00:06:42.265 --> 00:06:44.875 on the pure causality of thoughts. 00:06:45.685 --> 00:06:49.575 I believe that actions have causal effects feelings, have causal effects 00:06:49.575 --> 00:06:50.895 and thoughts have causal effects. 00:06:51.045 --> 00:06:52.725 All of these have causal effects. 00:06:53.475 --> 00:07:00.075 The reason I like to focus on them is that I perceive more agency for the client 00:07:00.075 --> 00:07:04.995 in emphasizing their thoughts and their feelings and their actions than I do in 00:07:04.995 --> 00:07:07.815 emphasizing their type or their category. 00:07:10.500 --> 00:07:13.500 If I'm emphasizing thoughts and feelings and behaviors, I think 00:07:13.500 --> 00:07:14.910 I'm sending the client the message. 00:07:15.300 --> 00:07:18.870 You can change any of these and all of these in order to 00:07:18.870 --> 00:07:20.010 have a different experience. 00:07:20.190 --> 00:07:24.420 If we lean too much into a category, there's risk and it's not guaranteed, 00:07:24.720 --> 00:07:30.030 but there's risk that the client looks primarily at the label and 00:07:30.030 --> 00:07:34.140 says, I am X, therefore I am. 00:07:34.410 --> 00:07:42.010 doomed or determined to do and to be why there's a risk in a category view 00:07:42.010 --> 00:07:47.540 or a diagnostic view, or a label based view of a client that they slip into. 00:07:47.540 --> 00:07:52.160 What I would call, that's just the way I am thinking The label becomes. 00:07:53.159 --> 00:07:56.070 Both an explanation but also an excuse. 00:07:56.610 --> 00:07:58.590 It absolves them of responsibility. 00:07:58.830 --> 00:08:02.250 I've had client interactions where you can't get through five minutes 00:08:02.250 --> 00:08:07.470 of coaching without them referencing the diagnosis, referencing the label. 00:08:07.620 --> 00:08:11.850 Well, that's just my this and it's because I'm that, and it's a way of 00:08:11.850 --> 00:08:13.920 completely disconnecting themselves from. 00:08:14.415 --> 00:08:17.385 Their own ability to go a different direction. 00:08:19.065 --> 00:08:20.685 And I think there's another risk here. 00:08:20.955 --> 00:08:25.005 The risk is conformity to the label itself. 00:08:25.095 --> 00:08:29.625 The more a person identifies with being X, the more compelled they 00:08:29.625 --> 00:08:33.615 feel to reference the definition when they're deciding what to do. 00:08:34.095 --> 00:08:38.205 So if they, in their study, of their own category, in their study, 00:08:38.205 --> 00:08:42.975 of their label, have learned that people who are X typically do y. 00:08:44.580 --> 00:08:46.710 They might find themselves doing why? 00:08:46.710 --> 00:08:52.020 Just as a way of maintaining internal consistency, whether or not it's actually 00:08:52.020 --> 00:08:57.720 what their true instinct or their wisdom or their intuition, or whatever you 00:08:57.720 --> 00:08:59.820 want to call it, steers them toward. 00:09:00.990 --> 00:09:06.420 If the label and the category have given them relief, then they might fear 00:09:06.420 --> 00:09:11.220 losing that relief if they act against their understanding of the label. 00:09:12.220 --> 00:09:15.069 You may have heard the saying that the map is not the territory. 00:09:16.510 --> 00:09:18.250 That is what we're talking about here. 00:09:19.540 --> 00:09:20.380 Diagnoses. 00:09:21.985 --> 00:09:26.365 Categories, types, and labels are maps. 00:09:26.935 --> 00:09:28.765 They're not the territory. 00:09:29.845 --> 00:09:34.735 They may help the individual understand themselves sometimes in very important 00:09:34.735 --> 00:09:37.525 ways, but they're not the individual. 00:09:37.945 --> 00:09:42.055 and if the individual gets it flipped and they start to view themselves 00:09:42.055 --> 00:09:48.325 not as territory, but as map, and if we as coaches are part of that. 00:09:49.465 --> 00:09:52.075 I think we're off track and I think we need to correct ourselves. 00:09:54.805 --> 00:09:56.335 There is balance to be struck here. 00:09:56.485 --> 00:10:00.685 I'm not suggesting that we abandon frameworks entirely. 00:10:00.985 --> 00:10:05.995 Now, as coaches, we are legally prohibited and rightly so, from 00:10:05.995 --> 00:10:11.295 making diagnoses that are like anxiety disorders or depression or things that 00:10:11.415 --> 00:10:15.825 are left to clinical professionals, licensed clinical professionals. 00:10:17.715 --> 00:10:21.555 so of course we leave those diagnoses to the clinical professionals. 00:10:23.070 --> 00:10:27.780 But I'm in favor of some amount of categorization and exploration 00:10:27.780 --> 00:10:29.280 within categories in coaching. 00:10:30.360 --> 00:10:32.070 I love a good personality test. 00:10:32.130 --> 00:10:35.040 I've taken, I don't know, a dozen personality tests. 00:10:35.040 --> 00:10:36.480 I find them very entertaining. 00:10:38.550 --> 00:10:38.580 I. 00:10:38.580 --> 00:10:40.875 I do gain insight into myself through those personality tests. 00:10:41.175 --> 00:10:45.135 I do like to be able to reference certain ways of being and saying, oh, that's that 00:10:45.135 --> 00:10:47.205 part of a personality sneaking in here. 00:10:47.205 --> 00:10:48.075 How interesting. 00:10:49.095 --> 00:10:52.515 But I do it as a secondary thing, not as a primary thing. 00:10:53.265 --> 00:10:58.095 If we approach these categories, these types, these labels and diagnoses 00:10:58.335 --> 00:11:03.225 as a primary thing, I think we're guilty of a pathological approach as 00:11:03.225 --> 00:11:04.845 opposed to a developmental approach. 00:11:04.935 --> 00:11:08.715 And what I mean by a pathological approach is it's viewing a person 00:11:08.715 --> 00:11:11.085 primarily as their diagnoses. 00:11:11.500 --> 00:11:15.580 And viewing them as something to be fixed within the context of their diagnoses, 00:11:15.880 --> 00:11:20.320 as opposed to viewing a person as an individual with incredible capacity 00:11:21.250 --> 00:11:25.270 and looking at them developmentally and saying, what can you learn? 00:11:25.270 --> 00:11:29.170 How can you apply the thing you learn and how do you become something 00:11:29.170 --> 00:11:31.360 different through that applied learning? 00:11:32.410 --> 00:11:36.310 I think we as coaches are at our best in a developmental view of 00:11:36.310 --> 00:11:40.030 ourselves and our fellow human beings as opposed to a pathological view. 00:11:41.030 --> 00:11:41.840 So what do we do? 00:11:43.380 --> 00:11:47.280 Let's educate ourselves about types and labels and diagnoses. 00:11:48.750 --> 00:11:50.400 I think there's benefit in studying these things. 00:11:50.470 --> 00:11:55.680 I have friends and peers and colleagues who create programs who do coaching 00:11:55.680 --> 00:11:59.940 within the specific context of some of these labels and diagnoses. 00:12:00.240 --> 00:12:04.320 And I wanna say clearly, I think they give incredible value. 00:12:05.320 --> 00:12:07.120 They help people self discover. 00:12:07.765 --> 00:12:11.455 Self accept and self-direct in very positive ways. 00:12:13.195 --> 00:12:19.075 These programs would go awry if they didn't also encourage people to see 00:12:19.075 --> 00:12:21.295 themselves as separate from their label. 00:12:23.635 --> 00:12:24.925 You are not your label. 00:12:25.705 --> 00:12:31.075 You are an individual and there's a lot to you, and even programs that help you 00:12:31.075 --> 00:12:36.925 develop specific parts of yourself within specific contexts need to treat you as 00:12:36.925 --> 00:12:41.905 an individual and to constantly remind you that you're an individual and that 00:12:41.905 --> 00:12:47.605 you have strength and capacity outside of any particular label, type, or diagnosis. 00:12:50.246 --> 00:12:54.956 We keep them as a secondary focus or even a tertiary focus. 00:12:55.136 --> 00:12:59.366 We keep them on the shelf and we take them off the shelf for a minute 00:12:59.426 --> 00:13:02.216 when it benefits the situation and it benefits the client. 00:13:04.016 --> 00:13:04.946 That's my opinion. 00:13:07.181 --> 00:13:12.056 But we never give our clients the impression that they are the 00:13:12.056 --> 00:13:14.126 label that we've applied to them. 00:13:16.326 --> 00:13:21.876 we never in our own heads and hearts and in conversation with our clients, 00:13:23.496 --> 00:13:26.466 define them as the type or the label. 00:13:26.826 --> 00:13:27.336 Never. 00:13:27.836 --> 00:13:28.766 We never. 00:13:29.766 --> 00:13:33.506 Ask our clients to view themselves primarily through that lens. 00:13:36.506 --> 00:13:41.576 We have our clients view themselves as a nuanced, complex individual 00:13:42.326 --> 00:13:46.226 who has a lot in common with other nuanced, complex individuals. 00:13:46.976 --> 00:13:51.146 And to the degree that it's helpful to reference the collective 00:13:51.146 --> 00:13:53.066 experience within those types. 00:13:53.636 --> 00:13:54.056 We do. 00:13:54.056 --> 00:13:58.166 We reference it, we learn from it, and maybe it helps us direct 00:13:58.166 --> 00:14:04.796 ourselves, but we keep it apart from the individual because we don't want 00:14:04.796 --> 00:14:09.566 the individual to ever feel like they need to conform or correct within 00:14:10.436 --> 00:14:13.436 these made up transient definitions. 00:14:16.436 --> 00:14:18.836 And with that, I'll talk to you next time.