This blog post is based on a conversation we had (Suzanne, a neuroscience-based coach and myself - Tiffany, an Auckland email marketing consultant for coaches). If you prefer to watch rather than read you can watch the video here on Suzannes’ YouTube channel.
I'm a neuroscience-based coach, a supervisor, and a trainer. For many people, they probably hear me through the stress and anxiety frame. I work with a lot of people who are just doing life tough and have tried other ways to resolve it and are not getting anywhere.
My company is called bwise™ Coaching Academy, the wise works as a wisdom focus, integrated across multiple modalities, systemic in its approach, and embodied. Understanding what those words (wise) are gives you a little bit of a sense of who I am and what I do.
Thoughts on coaching vs. mentoring and our desire to put them in a box
Even just the term coaching is a challenge to some of us who have really extended and evolved what coaching is.
I use the term neuroscience-based coaching. My background is in neuroscience, which is the study of the nervous system. The nervous system includes the brain, spinal cord, and networks of a range of different nerve cells (neurons) throughout the body.
Globally, I teach other coaches to work with that same frame and to challenge and rethink what coaching is and how they could be even more effective, dare I say.
When we start to explore terms like Coaching, Counselling, Mentoring etc, as humans, we often come from a black and white perspective, we are looking for specific differences - boxes we can place each into. At bwise™ we are looking for other multiple perspectives.
We explore how we define the different terms - and whether there is any restriction in those definitions? Whether we have recently reviewed and updated our working definitions - as coaching is changing - and how others use different definitions.
The reality is there's lots of overlap between modalities, and there's lots of connection between some of these terms.
With coaching it depends on which definition you use, and there are very different definitions, and depending on which context you work within.
Coaching can be quite linear, head-based, specific, always goals-focused, always future-focused. So that's, in my mind, quite a restrictive view of what coaching is in the modern arena, but it is a relatively common basis of a definition.
Mentoring, again if you're gonna put it in a box, is more about working with someone in a skill base that you have expertise in. And so as a mentor, you are mentoring them largely around a skill or a competency base.
Having said that, if you start to mentor coaches, of course, that blurs the edges of what mentoring is completely.
Supervision does sit a little bit separately. Supervision is giving professionals the chance to review and reflect on their practice, to be self-aware of how it might be impacting on them, how they might be bringing their things into a session. Although if you're within a supervision session with someone, you might overlap into some mentoring or into some coaching.
And then the other big one for me in the sort of coaching that I do is therapy.
In a lot of old traditional models, definitions around therapy and coaching would have a very clear black line between the two. You're either in one or you're ‘other’. But as we move into sort of field that I do, stress and anxiety, deep belief change, any of the health coaching work to some extent, the sports coaching work will drift into that as well at some level.
I see it more now like a Venn diagram. There's this area in the middle that can be covered by either or both. And it does put a huge responsibility on coaches about keeping safe, keeping their clients safe, and being really clear where their line is that they won't go beyond, that they would refer on to.
Counseling is another one. I think there's huge overlap with counseling and coaching within some styles of those.
So it can be challenging to give a universal definition of each, although there are several terms that are commonly used, which can give the impression of discreet boxes.
Questions people can consider when trying to work out what help they need
It is different for every client. It is about what does that client need and what does that client want, and at what level are they prepared to work?
If I was a client these days,
- I would be having a one-on-one conversation with whoever that person is, whether it's a therapist, counsellor, coach, mentor, or supervisor, because we know that the relationship between the two is a core part of effectiveness across all of those. So I'd want to have a conversation with them.
- I'd want to know that as I spoke to them, they were listening to me, that they were hearing my needs. Sometimes we listen to respond, and sometimes we listen to understand, and I think the risk is some coaches will be sat there thinking of their own approach and model and already trying to fit the client into that box.
So as a client, I want to know that someone is listening to me, meeting me where I'm at. So that would be one piece of advice I would give anybody looking for any of those roles: to feel into how you were listened to, how you were responded to. Were you given permission to feel what's right for you, or were you told whether or not that person would be suitable for you?
For me it's a much more collaborative partnership approach.
- What do you need to know working with them? What will they not do, and what will they do, and how will they manage that? I'm very clear as a coach under the coaching umbrella that when somebody works with me, I'm not doing the work for them. In coaching generally you don't give any advice, but when you're working with someone about managing stress, it may be wholly appropriate that I give advice that they might like to consider this breathing technique, or they might like to consider this vagus nerve technique.
Really having a good adult partnership conversation with who you think you're going go to, and does it feel right? And will they allow you to come for a session to check that out before you commit to a long-term package of cost? I offer packages, but I always say, "Come for the first one, see if it works for you, see if you think this is going to be a great trusting relationship. And if it is, we'll move into the package, and that first one will be part of the package. If not, you have it as a single session, and you walk away with no questions," - Also, what are coaching modalities are they trained in? Are they certified in anything? Are they covered by any professional body? Just this week I saw a facebook advert for someone offering a 5 day coaching course for $7 that claimed it covered extensive coaching (including trauma, root cause etc). I personally would be very concerned at whether anyone having done those 5 days of training could safely manage anything beyond superficial coaching. So ask questions about training.
- Does the coach work with a code of conduct? If there was an issue, is there someone you can go to beyond them to raise concerns?
- Do they have professional indemnity and public liability insurance? That gives me an indication, am I working with a professional coach that's taking this seriously, or am I working with someone who, in the extreme, has done a $7 weekend Udemy course and is now calling themselves a coach and really doesn't have any idea of what they're stepping into and would not be able to have real conversations about safety.
So there are some sensible questions that a client might not necessarily think of that I would be asking. Fundamentally I would want to know 'am I gonna be protected working with this person?' Coaching is an unregulated profession. Anyone can call themselves a coach.
If I was a client, I'd want to know what they're qualified in, and whose banner they sit under, and who could I go to if I had a problem with you individually. Who else would hear that complaint? That would be some of the things I'd be asking.
Choosing whether to market yourself as a coach or mentor or other connected profession
I think it's about that clarity with your client; where you sit; how you offer your services; and allowing the client to decide whether or not that's what they want.
And to be fair, sometimes that changes over a relationship, and so what they might present with might not be what you end up working on, and so there's almost a repositioning and a recontracting that sometimes happens, or often happens, when you're working with someone over a period of time. So I think it's about the coach or counselor or therapist being really clear on their own boundaries.
Maintaining boundaries to keep your client safe and yourself safe as a practitioner
I think safely managing boundaries involves having a really good awareness of when they approach that boundary, and then deciding with the client whether or not they're gonna risk crossing that boundary, and do we need to involve somebody else at this point? Or do we acknowledge we're near that boundary, but then we stay within it?
I think that's the professional's responsibility to do that - I wouldn't expect a client to be able to track to that depth or level in a session.
Also keeping safety constantly in mind. And of course, we know people have long histories before they meet with us, and anything might show up in the session. You can't avoid that. You wouldn't want to avoid that.
So it's recognising when you're drifting into that arena, whether you're even going to go there and ask a follow-up question at all, or whether you're going to bring their attention to it to take it somewhere else. How can you keep them safe in that moment if they've just been triggered and they've got very dysregulated because of something they've thought of?
Do you have the skills to get them back to safe ground in order to safely refer them on? Yes - and it's definitely a skill set.
Coaching is not just a ‘conversation’. I think some people don't understand the professionalism of coaching. It is way more than just having a conversation and saying, "Oh, have you tried this?" Or, "Oh, I know someone else that..." That is just not what coaching is at all.
How neuroscience-based coaching impacts my approach to coaching
My neuroscience background impacts my approach absolutely enormously. I think it has taken me into that gray area between therapy and coaching.
So I will work with neurology, I will work with physiology, I will work with breathing. I work with polyvagal theory.
What it's done for me is, over the last five to 10 years, it's meant I have had to upskill. So as I move into that area, I become aware of where the boundary sits, and I make a decision on whether or not I could just extend that boundary slightly by taking another qualification on, or whether or not I choose not to go there.
There are some areas I have chosen not to go into at all. I'm very clear. And there are others that, in working with GPs when they refer people to me, I've deliberately gone and got additional qualifications to be able to be more confident to take that sort of referral on.
One example is someone with mild depression. I wouldn't work with someone with a high-end clinical depression. But someone who is experiencing low moods, someone who is still fully functional, someone who's struggling to get back to joy and thrive at work. I certainly have taken on some extra skills to be able to move into that space, which is way beyond standard coaching.
The responsibility for coaches to maintain a safe space and clear boundaries
I think that is a huge responsibility for coaches in this space because there is no pathway to follow really, in as much as there's someone, who is not necessarily someone very far ahead of you, that will go, "Right, this is the boundary, this is the line, this is the measure." You're kind of creating that as you walk that pathway.
It helps when you’re having healthy conversations with some medical colleagues, having healthy conversations with mental health colleagues, being in close supervision, as I say, ensuring ongoing training is part of that. It is a lot of work and a lot of expense to be able to move into that space. And I wouldn't do it any other way. So you don't want to go into that space without that kind of professional practice around it.
Risks for coaches and real-world business consequences
It pays to be really careful, you know, there's a particular community that I belong to at the moment that is having some real challenges with, the ASA, the Advertising Standards Authority.
Some people have suggested that they can “Heal”, “cure”, “reduce’ symptoms, and they're being challenged. It appears that there is somebody clearly going through websites of anyone in that field in New Zealand, challenging, and making formal complaints about claims made.
So we do have to be really careful, even with a field like stress and anxiety, where there is some pretty solid evidence of how such coaching and therapy can be helpful. You can make no guarantees. And I think that's what brings it back into the coaching frame: I can give you some tools. I can support you. I can hold that safe space for you. I cannot guarantee an outcome because it all depends on what you do with it outside of the sessions and where your system is at, and it is a system, and the reality is I may know about only a small part of that system.
Personally, I belong to three different supervision groups for different contexts. So I have a trauma group, and I have an NLP group, which is one of the main modalities I use. I also belong to ANZCAL, which is the Australia New Zealand Coaching Alliance, which is as close to a professional body as we have in New Zealand, that provides guidelines, support, standards on supervision, on continuing education, on the standard of coaching that you're working at, and offers a range of different levels. I sit at the Master Coach level. For me this shows that coaches are working at a professional level and offers clients proortection in practice.
I had a conversation with a very experienced coach yesterday who I'm supervising, about regulation of coaching and whether coaching should be regulated. And while I can see an argument for it, my hesitation is as soon as you try and put a boundary and a box around it, there's a risk it becomes restrictive to the old style of coaching that is only head-based, only linear, only goals-focused, which just does not represent what coaching is actually doing in practice. Certain coaching bodies would want to dominate that conversation - and they do not represent many many coaches.
Personally, I choose not to belong to some of those coaching organisations because I cannot be authentically me doing what I'm doing and be part of them. So I could pretend, and, honestly, I have heard some coaches say that they get the stamp of approval by these bodies by saying they do X, and then when they've got it, they go and do Y.
And that to me is not authentic. There's no integrity in that. So I choose not to belong to those bodies that have that old restrictive boundary. But I think it does raise questions of how do you put standards in place for those coaches that are moving outside the boundaries and what protection is available for people using those services?
Why I choose trajectories over goals
Controversially, as a coach, I do not work on setting goals as such. I use the word trajectory more than goal, and there are a few reasons for that.
- One, the sort of client that I see, when they come to me, they may have no idea what they want.
- And we are living in an incredibly complex and fast-changing world so things change and goals change as we work together.
Often when clients come to me they're not in a great space, and they know what they don't want, but they do not know what goal they want at that point. And even if I set and pushed that line of thinking, it would be set from a dysregulated nervous system. And we know that the state that you're in, ie your autonomic nervous system, changes the story, the narrative, the beliefs that you hold about any issue. So you're setting a goal from the problem state and therefore restrictive. So instead of that, I use the term trajectory.
I hold the direction we're moving in softly, gently, flexibly. I am working at moving someone in a direction if they want to. Where do we want to move towards? And we'll keep that as an ongoing kind of systemic movement, reassessing where we're at rather than a traditional SMART goal that is a specific time, a specific measure, because they're just not in that space.
The other thing is, some of the clients I work with, if they're working very much in that kind of spiritual / purpose / existential space, we're possibly not even working in moving in a direction. We're moving into a deeper awareness and understanding, self-awareness and understanding place that deeply explores who they are or who they want to be. So it hasn't even got that directional component to it.
Showing up authentically versus a disconnect between showing up online and writing
Some coaches are showing up beautifully in person but feeling disconnected when they're writing.
For me, it's about being realistic about what your skills are. My skill is as a coach. As a neuroscience-based coach and a neuro-linguistic coach. My skill is not necessarily in writing script, text, website, social media. So for me, I would get alongside somebody who does that, who has an understanding of where I'm coming from and can help me put that into a clear, plain English, accessible, realistic, honest version.
I don't have the time to learn all those marketing skills. I don't want to learn all those skills. If I'm gonna go and do any more PD (professional development), I'm gonna go and do it in a coaching frame.
So, wouldn't it make way more sense to work with someone like yourself (Tiffany Bartlett) who can say, "Hey, I've looked at your website. I'm not clear what this bit means, or "Hey, I know because I came to that webinar you do this, and you don't even mention that on your website." Someone who can have that outside objective view and the expertise to write the prose that will be honest, engaging and attracting new clients in. That is a skill set in its own right.
When a practitioner finally owns their unique style and the impact
Again, a beautiful example just this morning. Someone who did my bwise™ advanced coaching course in the last cohort, who is very, very unlike me in many, many ways in terms of her, her approach. She doesn't sit in a box. She sits in a different space to me, but not inside that traditional coaching box.
Throughout the course, I challenge people to look at their definitions, look at their philosophy, find their own identity and beliefs. And I heard her on a little social media video this morning and heard some of the words from the course coming through. She'd applied them to her field, and she just shone. Like, she just shone. And you could feel it.
So it wasn't even as much as what she said, you just knew she was being completely authentic. She had complete integrity. She was saying who she was. She was saying, "If this style, that is me, works for you, then get in touch." She was really clear who she was, what she was offering. If you were listening to that and that wasn't what you wanted, you would know, and you wouldn't go and approach them.
I think that's really good, genuine advertising, where you're so clear who you are and what you do, who you can help, that you can put that out and people will hear it, believe it, feel it, and know whether or not it resonates with them.
When someone trusts you they make a commitment
It costs a lot of time, energy and money to engage with a coach. Let's say one of my packages is 12 sessions. Each of those sessions is anything up to 90 minutes. That's a significant amount of time over a period of months, and I can guarantee you after every session I will be leaving you with some thoughts, reflections, activities, things to go and try, and so we can re-talk about them.
So it's not even just 12 times 90 minutes, it's probably another good two or so hours every week. So coaching is, it's not something to take on lightly, really. It is a commitment.
And being able to have the critical reflective ability, because not everything you try will work, and to be able to come back and say, "Hey, I tried this, but, you know, I didn't get that response." Great, that's still a learning opportunity. It's not a problem. So framing that all with people about what it is they're taking on, I very much dissuade people from coming for one-off sessions with me. It's just not my style.
I was rereading my website this morning in light of what's happening with the advertising just to make sure I hadn't said anything inappropriate, and I smiled at one point. I think my website says something like, "If you want a magic bullet or a quick fix, I'm not the coach for you."
Because I'm not gonna pretend that I can change a whole system, a complex adaptive system in one session.
How we can connect
Probably the easiest way to find me is through the website (suzannehenwood.com). From there it'll give you a bit of an overview of the various things that I do, from the coaching, the training, and the supervision. It will also give you an idea of who I am as you feel into what I say on the site.
I'm also on LinkedIn as (Dr) Suzanne Henwood and on Facebook as BWISE Coaching Academy. So do a little bit of stalking. I'm on YouTube, as Suzanne Henwood, as well if you want to hear me in person. There are lots of free tools on YouTube, around stress management which will give at least a glimpse into the sort of coaching work that I do. There's literally 101 stress tips, two to three-minute each, that you can go and just listen to. Have a try, see if it's the sort of neurological, physiological type coaching that you're interested in.
And know that coaching one-on-one is so much more than tools and techniques. It is about truly meeting you and finding out how I can support you to love yourself back to wholeness. Reach out if you would like to know more.
