- Mar 27, 2012
- Reaction score
- Hendersonville, NC
So, you dislike when a term is used outside the way you think is "real" (you referred to "real coaches"). Coaching is a term that has been in use in business for as long as I can recall. The training approach I learned 30 years ago was based on a derivation of AMT (Analytical Method of Training), and was called coach-based training. That term goes back at least 15 years before I met it. While I don't recall there being a thing called a "business coach" or such, that's a natural progression of usage.*** Disclaimer*** I have no idea what kind of work you do and do not mean to offend.
I am spit balling some but it is one of those things you commonly see in marketing where a word used in one context is repurposed to be used in another, dissimilar context. For me sometimes this works, sometimes not. Calling someone a 'coach' in a business environment just does not work for me and kind of reeks of a shyster salesman.
Wordplay has spun into an industry of it's own in the work world, even outside of marketing. In the never ending effort to be 'nice' to people, eliminate structure and hierarchy and create mediocrity, titles have less meaning and are handed out willy-nilly.
Want to be a shift leader at a retail store? Sure we will call you a Manager, give you more responsibility and pay you the same money. Then people get upset and bash the company when they feel like they are overworked or underpaid when in reality they done a Lot of it to themselves for playing along.
Maybe it is because I have had a lot of real coaches in my sports life.
This may sound contradictory but I have zero problem following or being under a leader but more often I will have a problem being under a boss.
I have zero problem addressing my instructor as Master or Grand Master because I know he has earned and deserves it.
I have zero problem working with a totally green project leader who has the ability to check their ego at the door, admit they are green, and has the wisdom or training to use the resources around them. Even when they are making mistakes.
Theory never leaves that realm until it is proven in application. The "how to be a winner" motivational speaker doesn't even deserve the title of theory to me.
The most current example I can think of in the manufacturing/project work is six sigma. It has become a hugely successful marketing product and manufacturing strategy. In essence very old methodology in SPC was put into a format similar to MA belting. There are various color 'belts' up to and beyond black belt to signify one's supposed knowledge/ability. In reality it is like most every other similar program I have seen where is has more to do with the simple process of paying for the program than anything else. It is supposed to require 'time in trade' . But it is so easy to step around this requirement that it invalidates the whole program for me.
I do agree six sigma works and adds value but it is really the old grey horse painted white analogy.
That said, it is probably the number one certification out there right now.
And I'm not sure how any of that even links back to the discussion of stages of task learning, which is anything but purely theoretical. It maps directly to things like AMT, and directly facilitates skill development in a real-world environment.