(Page Updated 12/27/23)
The coaching industry has undergone a significant philosophical and practical evolution over the past century, transitioning from an authoritarian, authoritative paradigm to one focused on empowerment and humanistic development. This progression mirrors expanding perspectives on human potential and aligns with emerging societal values about holistic well-being. Central to this evolution is the conceptual framework based on the hybrid coach-play perspective rooted in principles of self-authorization.
I officially received the title of Coach from the United States Bowling Congress. However, as you'll learn, I evolved and am more than that now.
Pythagoras Hylozoics laid the foundation for future evolution. Hylozoic schools existed before and influenced the development of the popular Socratic questioning technique.
Hylozoics outlines human consciousness development and our place in the cosmos. It liberates Man from illusions and fictions of theological and philosophical speculations; it gives humanity a rational mental framework to comprehend existence and human potential. Hylozoics lays the foundation for future evolution. Pythagoras (Greek cir. 700 BC) intended the system to orient our thinking to accord with reality. Self-research of Hylozoic knowledge helps one resolve life problems of existence and serves as a basis for self-development.
Traditional coaching operated from a command-control code of conduct, with coaches positioned as dictatorial experts responsible for controlling athlete development. This autocratic approach reached its pinnacle in the mid-20th century, as coaches utilized fear, punishment, and regimental drills to exert dominance. While this produced results for some, it often came at the cost of players' well-being and human potential inhibition.
Around the 1960s, as human consciousness expanded, some pioneering coaches began experimenting with more collaborative methods, recognizing the benefits of two-way dialogue and feedback. However, authoritative styles remained prevalent through the 1980s across domains like sports, business, and personal coaching. The coach as an all-knowing taskmaster was still the norm.
A significant inflection point arrived in the late 1980s and 90s with the emergence of empowerment coaching philosophies. Influenced by humanistic psychology principles, coaches like Tim Gallwey promoted a focus on igniting athletes' intrinsic motivation and building self-confidence. This shift emphasized the players' agency in driving their development.
The momentum continued to build through the 1990s-2000s, with models like positive psychology coaching bringing in concepts of flow, resilience, and character strengths. The aim of optimizing well-being and self-actualization gained precedence. Philosophies united around humanistic coaching – concentrating holistically on the full spectrum of human potential.
Today, at the core of coaching evolution is the hybrid coach-play perspective, which integrates principles of self-authorization, which holds that players should not be viewed as passive recipients of coaching but rather as active self-initiated self-authorized agents of development and performance. Players who take ownership of their learning and performance gain knowledge and understand the reasons for and meaning of their achievements and mishaps.
Once adopted, the hybrid coach-play perspective transforms the coach's role from a commanding expert to a dialogue participant and facilitator. Rather than prescribing development paths or a series of specific performance behaviors, the coach asks questions and points out blockages in the ascending-descending learning cycle that systematically guides athletes to decode their conduct and situations, understand emotions, make accurate mental decisions, and activate performance based on their current self-consciousness development level. The athletes authorize the process in dialogue with the coach.
As recently initiated in sports, the hybrid coach-play perspective has cross-disciplinary relevance. Applying its core principles in education, corporate training, therapy, and beyond could empower learners to unlock their human potential. I'm saying that learners who take responsibility for their growth develop lifelong self-actualizing capabilities.
At the core of the hybrid coach-play paradigm is dialogue. It is a two-way process; coaches also need to develop self-initiated self-authorization, as continuous learners focus on self-consciousness development (primarily) and attend to the refinement of their coach-specific practice approach and skill (secondarily). The spirit of maximizing human potential applies equally to guides and learners.
Coaching evolution, which now (upon the publication of this page) includes the hybrid coach-play humanistic perspective coaching paradigm, has been gradual (2,723 years) but inevitable, driven by an accurate worldview, holistic human development, and honest individual life views.
While work remains, this progression reflects the shift toward humanistic societal values and promises to unlock humanity's achievement of higher individual and societal consciousness. The hybrid coach-play shared universal livelihood development and lifespan performance dynamic systemic cyclical process offers a roadmap for humanity's purpose and responsibility.
It's always wise to have a critical eye when compiling an analysis like this. Upon further reflection, here are some aspects I have lingering doubts about concerning total accuracy:
While I aimed to provide an accurate account, limitations and context gaps must be clarified. The coaching evolution journey has many interconnected, challenging ways to understand and capture.
Back to: Beyond Ordinary Coaching