29 ian. 2013

“What do you really want?” Tim Gallwey (3)

(last part)

8.    There is a focus on coaching skills management. How is it different from leadership skills management?

a.     I don’t know of an essential difference.

9.    How could be coaching applied in an educational system to prevent reinforcing Self 1 and to strength Self 2? Is it a matter of a right age?

a.      I believe that in general, the priorities of education could be changed from teaching subject matter to creating a love for learning in the given subject.

                                                             i.     The problem with the traditional reward system is that students who don’t know are made to feel bad about not knowing. Then they identify themselves as stupid and live up to their low expectations of themselves. This keeps them from inquiring and wanting to learn.

                                                          ii.     If it were considered a strength to know when you don’t know or understand, self-judgment could be greatly decreased and self 2 learning increased. 

10.    In your book “Inner Game of Work” one of the most important aspects is mobility. You assert:”A person who recognizes the importance of mobility is not satisfied with being in any flow, it must be in the flow of their choice, heading where they want to go.” On the other hand you do agree with Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi  in his description of performance as a ”flow state”. Did you mean ‘being in the flow’ is not the only stem of Self 2 at work?

a.     “Flow” describes the way of working, but not the direction or goal.  Self 2 is content when the end of working and the means of working are aligned.

11.    You work with Sir John Whitmore, Alan Fine and Myles Downey in developing Inner Game and GROW model. In a recent post on his website, Mr Downey wrote: “No one has the right to define coaching, at least not in the sense of how it is done – a particular model or approach.” What is your opinion on this aspect?

a.     Note: The first sentence is not really true and might be best to omit it.

b.    I work with Myles Downey on the development of an electronic coach (see theinnergame.com) and believe I understand what he means.  There is no individual or body that has authority over the coaching profession. This is the beauty of where the coaching profession is at right now.  It’s an emerging profession that is not fully defined.  Therefore there is lots of room for experimentation  It is ultimately the coaches that will succeed in defining coaching by their actions.  This is a big responsibility.

12.    If you it will be now the moment you start writing Inner Game. It will be “Inner Game of…”what? What would be different? 

a.     The Inner Game of Stress was published in 2010.  There would not be too much new.  Perhaps I could write a companion book to the Inner Game electronic coach, about how people could get the most out of it. 

13.    In the last 10 years people’s ways to communicate have changed dramatically. Are you planning a new book on the issue – Inner Game of Social Media? Anyway, you and Mr Downey have just launched an Inner Game eCoach.

a.     It is true that a new media for communication has emerged, but it doesn’t change the basics of communication.  The internet is a way of distributing communication instantly and widely.   It is because of this fact that Myles Downey and I thought that some of the benefits of coaching could be distributed to a much wider audience at the fraction of the cost of live coaching.  This is not an attempt to replace live coaching, but give millions of people access to coaching that have had none.

14.    There are 37 years since you launched The Inner Game of Tennis. I’ve read somebody naming you “grandfather of coaching”. As a “grandfather-coach in progress”, what would be a question from a “niece” for you to grow?

a.     Same old question – “What do you really want?”

b.    How can games and simulations be best used by the coaching profession?

c.     What are the most promising applications of electronic coaching in the corporate world.” 

d.    How can coaching best address the human domain of feeling?
           I would have to grow in knowledge and clarity to answer well any of these questions.

Pericolele măiestriei nonverbale!

A nins, merg în faţa unui amic, cam alunec.
Insul zice: ”Nu te ajut. Faci prea frumos!”

”What do you really want?” Tim Gallwey (2)


4.    You took your findings from sports to the corporate environment. Was it something you took from business to sports?
a.     Most of my learning in sports was in individual sports, namely tennis, golf, and skiing.  In business, I learned to help people work together in teams. This provided a new understanding for me of what is required in team sports.

5.    The core of Inner Game – you said – is the belief that people have the innate capabilities to perform at an exellence level, and having the intention/wish/interest/ to live their lifes at that level. On the other hand there is so called Peter Principle: "in a hierarchy every employee tends to rise to his level of incompetence", meaning that employees tend to be promoted until they reach a position at which they cannot work competently. How does coaching work in this regard?
a.     Obviously there are different levels of excellence in the mastery of any skill or knowledge base.  Innate excellence lies in the ability to learn.  From childhood on one can learn to increase competence.  In some activities, like sports, competence can naturally decrease past a certain age.
b.    Some abilities that need not decrease with age  are the abilities to enjoy, to appreciate, to love.
c.     The Peter Principle has to do with organizational  behaviors, and does not speak to the ability to learn to increase competence once in a position beyond his competence.  The coach’s job is to facilitate that learning. 
6.    As far as I know there were some Romanian participants at the Inner game seminar in London, last year. Did you noticed some limitting beliefs?
a.     Every culture passes down its limiting belief’s.  The differences between the specific limiting beliefs is not important.  The coach’s opportunity is to learn to spot limiting belief’s and help the one being coached to move beyond those that he’s ready to.
b.    We all have difficulties being creative enough to pass beyond the limits we impose on ourselves.  Coaches can help if they realize that some limiting belief’s are valid and others the person is simply not ready to give up.

7.    The folklor/proverbs/ of a nation is its “story” of  - well – success. Romanian people have sayings like that: “To beat a child is a help from God to him”, “The bent head is not cut by the sword”, and, to be sure we are completely successful: “Time is not something to bother for”. What would be the appropriate coaching question for such a “body”? Particulary, in organizations.
a.      I would ask questions that inquired into the extent that a person believed in such “truths” before the coaching workshop and then the same question after the training.  Bringing belief’s from unconscious to conscious is the first step to examining them.  Beliefs are not Knowledge.  Once they are seen as only belief’s and not knowledge, they can best be changed by new experience and new insight. 

meaning by your being (sic)

A poem should not mean
But be

Archibald MacLeish

A fost citat pe facebook acest poem şi însoţit de întrebarea:
”Oare, oare, oare - nu ar fi nevoie şi de una, şi de alta?”

Am comentat aşa:
Io sunt cititor, public ”gen”.
Dacă meaningu nu mă îmbrăţişează, nu e! –
vorba aceea*:
”ce-ai vrut, domnule, cu tratatu de ontologie?
să te îmbrăţişez, dragă.”

Social media e un loc util, dacă îl ”utilizezi” cum trebuie.
Poţi afla multe lucruri ”pe iute” şi ”încredere”,
dacă ai în grup oameni care sunt referinţe în domeniile lor,
ei ”lucrează” pentru tine ca un certifyed browser
(ca outsider, nu poţi niciodată da nişte criterii de căutare
de calitatea celor date de cei care sunt specialişti pe zona aia)

Pentru un coach - dacă e coach -
feed-ul cu conversaţiile celor cu care e conectat
e ca agora cu atenienii lui Socrate!
Citeşti nonverbalul din spatele postărilor,
cadrul de referinţă al fiecăruia e mai vizibil chiar.
Şi pui o întrebare sau reformulezi o frază pe care
omul a scris-o şi care arată o 
pre-judecată care îl conduce,
şi pe care o foloseşte să îşi justifice o nemulţumire
pe care o practică.. confortabil.
Dacă reformularea sau întrebarea sunt bune,
ţi se răspunde cu un zâmbet sau
cu un ”chiar aşa, nu m-am gândit” –
şi chiar ai făcut ceva bun, coach :)

*”vorba ceea” e ca şi cum frumoasa frază ar fi ajuns folclor –
frumoasa frază cu care Noica răspunde la întrebarea ”Ce aţi vrut?”
(am să o transcriu – e în Jurnalul de la Păltiniş)

28 ian. 2013


În anii 70, domnul Constantin Noica scria, în România, 
despre nevoia de antrenare, despre piedici interioare depăşite prin piedici exterioare, ”construite” conştient. 

Tot atunci, domnul Timothy Gallwey scria, în SUA, despre nevoia de antrenare, despre piedici interioare depăşite prin piedici exterioare, ”alese” conştient. 

Şi unul, şi celălalt aveau încredere în ”intenţia vieţii fiecăruia” dintre noi şi în capacitatea de a trăi la nivelul ei de performanţă. 

Amândoi au înţeles necesitatea de a fi însoţit - de a beneficia de atenţia neîndoită a altuia. 

Unul l-a numit ”antrenor”pe acest altul, celălalt – coach. 

În imagine, marcând 40 de ani de la apariţia ”The Inner Game of Tennis” -Tim Gallwey, dreapta, împreună cu John Whitmore ,
autorul celei mai traduse cărţi în domeniu ”Coaching for performance”,

26 ian. 2013

”What do you really want?” Tim Gallwey (1)

Tim Gallwey, in an interview I took three years ago:
Q: As a “grandfather-coach in progress”, what would be a question from a “niece” for you to grow?
A: Same old question – “What do you really want?”

Today is his birthday. God bless him.. further, I should say.

The interview was published in COACHING NETWORK, 
the only Romanian magazine on coaching.
I put it on this blog, but here you are it in English.

part 1 (it is a long interview :))

1.    People had being always coached one way or another. What was new in your approach with Inner Game? You know there is a rock band Modern Talking. Are you the “soloist” of  Modern Coaching?

a.      Modern coaching must contain the elements of excellence of ancient coaching.  Socrates is a good example of modern coaching.  Modern coaching should be as simple as the principles that have always been effective.  Developing the trust and respect with those you are coaching are ancient principles that are still true.  I would advise modern coaches to continue to increase their facility for honest inquiry in a way that helps those being coached to think for themselves.  The coach must trust the coachee so that the coachee can increase their trust in themselves. 

b.    Having said that, the modern coach must encourage a new kind of accountability as well as empowerment.  Some have learned the ways of empowerment of employees of an organization – a skill set that is much needed when the employee is feeling disempowered and victimized by the larger organization.  But empowerment must now be balanced by accountability not only to those in the organization but to oneself.  Accountability can be re-defined as the ability to be counted upon. 

c.     As far as being a soloist – I’m the only one who can sing my heart’s song.  In that sense everyone should be a soloist and keep their coaching relevant to both the age old needs as well as to those needs that are more current.

2.    How did coaching evolve? What do coaches have to preserve while experiencing new tools or coaching models?

a.     I hope coaching is evolving towards helping those coached be more aware, clearer about their commitments, and more trusting in their better selves.  Tools can always evolve that help people move in the direction of desired outcomes in a way that is fulfilling and in a time that is satisfactory.

3.    In one of your interviews you said that people are doing that or that in order to “have fun” and you assert that empirical way is the only one that works. What could be a physiological (neuronal) support for what you call “magic”?

a.     In my view what I call Self 2, the innate potentialities of human beings is always magical when not surpressed or distorted by Self 1, the critical, imposing, controlling self that has been conditioned to interfere with the excellence of Self 2.  You can see this magic in any young child, can’t you?  Also in any adult who overcomes the self- interferences of Self 1 for a given period of time. 

b.    I have been told by reputable neuroscientists that this view finds evidence in the latest brain research.  But I cannot speak to this with authority.  My evidence lies in the domain of observation of clients. 



25 ian. 2013

Attention, please, here ;-)

Those who follow me on facebook – and not only ;-) –
knows I do admire and support a purple coach (!) Motanov Motanul Mov*
He is an imagination coach, and he works helping people to feel, you know:
”I feel my life growing great on me!”
He has daily imagination trainings on his wall.

He and Simna Diaconu are the editors of
a unique literary short-story magazine in Romania
”Revista de Povestiri”.

It is a very interesting project to keep people reading literature
altogether understanding the new reading habits.
Or, shall I say ”living habits”.

So, it is an attention&love approach.
It happens I knew people before participating,
and being coached by Motanov, and read the stories
and it is a remarkable change in the way they access their creativity,
and deal with daily life situations. 

Now, they want to make all that accessible
to be read in English:
a selection of the best texts which have been published
in the 2012’s issues of Revista de Povestiri (March – December).
This Best Of edition will have 100 pages and 1000 copies.

Please, do learn more about the project and how to support it: http://mindfruit.ro/project/Revista-de-Povestiri-Best-of-2012-editie-in-engleza_2

*about Motanov, here you are how a pleasant surprise springs from.. attention&curiosity -
both inner cats qualities which they never forget to use
(apart of us, human :))

Attention, please!

Lack of attention is consuming your life –
literally, it shrinks life.

Attention is the very goods you offer as a coach –
lets name an ”in-loved attention”,
to freely translate Carl Rogers’ unconditional love.
Be an ”in-love stand-by” for each and every one
it will grow you both!

Be attentive is your given right to be great.

11 ian. 2013

”You don't do anything, you let it evolve”

”A înţelege nu e cuvântul potrivit.
Cât timp doar ”înţelegi” nu eşti în ceea ce înţelegi.

Pentru mine, trăirea unui lucru e cel mai important aspect.
Dacă un tânăr poate să treacă prin experienţa 
despre care vorbesc eu ca fiind importantă,
nu doar să creadă ce îi spune Celibidache, 
atunci există speranţa să ajungă cu adevărat la muzică.

Faptul că oameni tineri pot avea asemenea 
rezultate extraordinare nu este o întâmplare.
Lupţi din greu. Sunt vrăjit.
Va fi muzică după mine.

Nu numai note, tonalităţi şi intrări reuşite -
ci măreţie.”

Sergiu Celibidache 

10 ian. 2013

Dacă drumul e scopul, te grăbeşti sau nu te grăbeşti?!

”A ajuns o banalitate să susţii că 
experienţa drumului spre un scop e mai preţioasă decât scopul însuşi, 
care apare, în definitiv, ca un simplu prilej 
de a structura această experienţă în reprezentări posterioare. 

Un scop atins - oricare ar fi el - nu are altă valoare decât 
cea pe care i-o dăruieşte drumul parcurs până la el; 
or omul grăbit nu-şi atinge niciodată scopurile, 
pentru că face abstracţie tocmai de drumurile care îl duc spre ele. 

Grăbitul străbate în eternitate un nesfârşit deşert. 
Sub privirea lui, totul se preface în nisip: 
astfel că în fuga lui nebună, lipsit de orice punct de reper, 
el stă de fapt pe loc. 
A fi grăbit - arată Zacharias Lichter - 
înseamnă a urî lumea sau a nu şti s-o iubeşti - 
ceea ce e totuna.” 
Matei Călinescu/Zacharias Lichter

”Boss, you move me..

 ...  toward me!”

Leadership-ul actual are mare nevoie de vechiul meşteşug de a mişca – în toate sensurile acestui cuvânt. Liderul este un nonsens (sic) fără efectul de a crea o mişcare către împlinirea viziunii pe care o propune. Şi oriunde e vorba de acţiune pentru realizarea unui obiectiv contractat pentru a asigura creştere organică e nevoie de coaching pentru alegerea optimă. (optimism vine de la optim!)

Un conducător trebuie să aibă şi să transmită viziune, organizaţia trebuie să atingă ţinte. Dar liderul nu mai poate conduce ”de pe deal”, şeful de echipă nu mai e cel care pune praful de puşcă – fiecare soldat are controlul propriei ”încărcături”. Mult clamata renunţare la control nu înseamnă pierderea controlului ci.. întărirea lui prin asumarea responsabilităţii şi gestionarea ”mişcării” de către fiecare angajat. A fi responsabil şi în mişcare spre obiectivul dorit implică atenţie, înţelegere, dedicare, creativitate, încredere în sine, control al rezultatelor, învăţare, ajustare şi dezvoltare (schimbare), atenţie şi tot aşa. Responsabilitatea de şi mobilitatea spre scop sunt deprinderi care se antrenează.

”Cum să fiu tot ce pot să fiu?” e o întrebare de antrenament. Liderul e (şi) coach.

(fragment din editorial, revista Coaching Network, numărul 2, Coaching şi Leadership)

New Year & Co

Dear Friends,
it is always a wise approach to let things get a direction - so
after 10 days, I may assume for good that this year is OK
and you will have a Happy New Year!
Best wishes,

(thanks Erik for the occasion to write it,
and Jolanta for the occasion to refine it)