Does a Coach need to be able to walk the talk?

[Scott Ames]

Does an IM coach need to be one of the successful so called "guru" types?

I see basketball and football coaches that could no more play a game than fly to the moon. I'm sure however they know a lot about it, and perhaps were a really good player in their day. Often these coaches are more famous for coaching than anything else.

[MaskedMarketer]

Scott,

My personal opinion is if I were to pay a coach for helping with my business or online money making opps., I would like someone with experience.

I'm sure there are exceptions to this, but I wouldn't feel comfortable with someone that hasn't done something themselves and trying to teach me to do it.

I work with a seminar and information publishing company and all of our coaches have a lot of experience in their choosen niche.

[Ron Douglas]

Originally Posted by Scott Ames

Does an IM coach need to be one of the successful so called "guru" types?

I see basketball and football coaches that could no more play a game than fly to the moon. I'm sure however they know a lot about it, and perhaps were a really good player in their day. Often these coaches are more famous for coaching than anything else.

Yes, a coach needs to be an expert at what he teaches. Not neccesarily a "guru."

In sports, most coaches at least have experience coaching winning teams. They usually start out as assistant coaches to gain experience. It's different with sports because you may be an expert on strategy but may not have the physical ability to play.

On the flip side, my college basketball coach was a former standout player but was one of the worst coaches I ever had. Just like an IM guru is very successful with his own business but may suck at teaching Internet Marketing.

[ShayRockhold]

In IM, I would want a coach who has had success with what he or she was teaching me.

Asking someone for advice in IM that had no experience would (to me) be like asking for parenting advice from someone without kids. Do they know theory? Sure. Can they have good advice? At times. But "book learnin'" and real-life experience are 2 entirely different things.

[trafficwave]

I'm one of those basketball coaches that couldn't play the game if you put a gun to his head. I understand the game. I understand strategies. I understand how to analyze my players and the players of the opposing team. I can recognize what the other coach is doing and adjust my strategies.

I've still got a LOT to learn and I employ the help of some very qualified assistants and get advice from other accomplished coaches. So I'm getting coached while I'm coaching.

Am I any good?

My Jr High boys team was #2 in the state of Texas for Home School Basketball. We were undefeated in our district against other home school, private school, and public school teams.

We ranked 5th in the nation against other Home School teams. (I think we could have won but had a couple of key players get very sick just before the semi-finals).

Parents of some of my players have told me that my coaching style and personality are one of the reasons their boys love the game of basketball and would rather play for me than any other coach.

Comments like, "He will work harder for you than any other coach he's had" really make my day. I love helping these boys succeed at this game. It can teach them a lot about life.

There are also some parents and boys that don't like the way I coach at all. (Typically, complaints come from those parents whose boys never practice and don't apply what they're being taught. No mystery there.).

In my case, I was thrust in to the world of coaching due to a shortage of coaches in the organization I was with. I was asked to step in and help. I took on the role and I thrust myself in to studying and learning as much as I could. I assisted other proven coaches and I asked a lot of questions. I watched videos, read books, and learned as much as I could.

Then I got to put what I had learned in to practice by teaching it to the team and executing the plan on the court.

I had some amazing athletes on the team so that certainly helped.

When I started, there was a LOT of skepticism about my chances of success as a coach. Other coaches wanted that team. Other coaches had experience. I think my leadership is a big part of why I got that opportunity and I enjoyed every minute of it.

Personally, I think it's possible that this same thing could be applied in the world of being an IM coach. But like most people, I'd sure like the person coaching me to have some real-world experience.

Some of the most successful personal development coaches have stories of how they lived in their vehicle, were broke at one time (or more), didn't have a job, etc... But they found their inspiration and wrote a book, started public speaking, started personal coaching, etc...

My bet is that some of our best military generals couldn't fire half the weapons available to their troops. But they can strategize, lead, inspire, and direct. And that's what leadership and coaching really come down to, IMO.

[Ricter]

My lesson from 20+ years practicing and teaching martial arts... There are people who are real a**-kickers but couldn't teach a fart to stink. There are phenomenal teachers who know how to make you train and get better than you ever could elsewhere. Finally there are those rare few who can do both--they are expensive.

[JasonParker]

An IM coach needs to have been there and done it.

That's the only way he/she is going to tell you that one sentence that doubles your business in a short period of time.

You can't really weed through all the garbage out there until you've experienced what REALLY works and what REALLY DOESN'T.

Well, I shouldn't say that. There are things that work on a large scale and things that work on a small scale. There are things that work fast and things that work slow. I don't think you can teach this until you've actually experienced at least moderate success.

[jasonl70]

With IM, it's really only about startegy, tactics, and basicly what's between your ears.

Unlike athletics, and a lot of other endeavors,there's really no other special skills really required to implement those ideas - everything else is fairly easy to either learn or outsource.

So any IM coach or teacher who doesn't 'walk the walk' is about as helpful as someone trying to teach you to tie your shoes, when they don't know how to do so themself!

[Takuya Hikichi]

Scott,

Very good question, as always.

I'll take on lessons from anyone who knows more about something than I do. But whether I pay, how long I listen, how much I believe, those are things I'll later find out once I take in on the content.

There are people with impressive resumes but keep it to themselves and others who might be just above average, but know how to make connection with his/her students.

I don't believe Dr. Phil being America's number one psychologist or Suzie Orman know more about finance than my father-in-law. I assume they're walking the talk but have no idea if they're necessarily more experienced than ones live among the small cities of America.

But the difference is these people have used the medium of TV so masterfully that they've certainly positioned themselves as such and there's a marketing principle to be learned.

[BIG Mike]

Rarely if at all in IM, do you see a "Coach" directing a team of people as in sports or the military to lead them to success. What you do see is an individual paying someone who can presumably lead them to success.

Unfortunately, anyone can hang out a shingle and say "I am Coach" without qualifying for it.

[Mark Riddle]

Yes Yes and Yes

An Internet Marketing coach (what ever that means to you)

Needs to have the ability to train you in their field of focus.

A SEO guy isn't always going to be and expert in adword, or adsense.

But should at least have a familiarity with it.

To know HOW what they know, ties into other subjects, even those subjects where they may not have personal successes.

I have no success with twitter for example, but I do know how it ties into an over all comprehensive operations strategy.

I have great success in creating targeted direct response radio advertising, and I know how to tie that into launches and growth.

An Coach needs to be able to do what they teach.

AND most importantly they need to be able to teach what they do!

Mark

[Ricter]

Originally Posted by netmalls

Yes Yes and Yes

An Internet Marketing coach (what ever that means to you)

Needs to have the ability to train you in their field of focus.

A SEO guy isn't always going to be and expert in adword, or adsense.

But should at least have a familiarity with it.

To know HOW what they know, ties into other subjects, even those subjects where they may not have personal successes.

I have no success with twitter for example, but I do know how it ties into an over all comprehensive operations strategy.

I have great success in creating targeted direct response radio advertising, and I know how to tie that into launches and growth.

An Coach needs to be able to do what they teach.

AND most importantly they need to be able to teach what they do!

Mark

Are you suggesting multiple coaches, then, say one for adwords, another for adsense, still another for SEO, etc.?

[jasonl70]

Originally Posted by Ricter

Are you suggesting multiple coaches, then, say one for adwords, another for adsense, still another for SEO, etc.?

each is it's own thing. If I were looking for a coach or teacher, I'd look for experts in each of these..

I have purchased seo products, ppc products, copywriting products.. and stay away from more generalized 'all in one' type of things. I'd be the same with coaching I'd think.

[Dave Cornish]

If the coach hasn't had success in discovering what methods work on the net then how is he going to give you them most value for your money?

The net is one of those places where you have to do an inordinate amount of work to sift through garbage in order to find the gems. There is just too much misinformation out there to settle on a second-rate coach.

[Quentin]

People seem to forget that a coach is more more of a strategist and negotiator than someone who is overly successful. They are two different animals. Obviously they need a working knowledge of the subject.

Just because someone is good at something does not mean they can coach it.

You only have to go to any university to see how successful PHD students become lectures and are lousy at it.

My friend is a salesman of welding equipment and sells millions of dollars of equipment a year for his company. They decided he should develop a sales force so took him off the road and got him to train 6 young guys. After 6 months they looked at the figures and all 6 guys had not performed as well so they scrapped that idea and put him back on the road.

So some people who are good at something are not necessarily the best teachers. I know I am not the best marketer but have taught a lot of people and many of them have done a lot better than me at IM.

quentin

[Erum Munir]

Some people are better at theory while others are better at practice.

It is about imparting knowledge and teaching in a way that motivates the other person to take advantage of what they have been taught.

A person of average success who is a great teacher can get better results than a guru who can't teach.

Because see teaching isn't just about telling a person the greatest new technique. It is about making the basics so plain and simple and encouraging the student in such a way that they find their own. Anyone can give you a technique to copy but only a great teacher can give you the knowledge and wisdom to find your own.

Some people may not make it themselves but sure know how to get other people to. It is just what they are good at.

[Mark Riddle]

Ricter asked

Originally Posted by Ricter

Are you suggesting multiple coaches, then, say one for adwords, another for adsense, still another for SEO, etc.?

Ricter, you may want multiple coaches, but I don't think it is required.

Most coaches have access to people who are experts in fields that they are not expert in.

Your main coach will be able to help you determine if you want or need additional coaches or specialists.

Depending on your situation, and your personal strengths you may find you are better severed by hiring a specialist on a case by case basis for the projects that you are working with.

One of the goals of a good coach is to help you streamline your business and make it more efficient, more profitable and help you balance life and work.

Mark

[mr2monster]

I suppose I'm opposite of the general consensus here.

I think that a coach needs to be someone that can motivate you to accomplish a task. That's it.


In fact, many times coaches and teachers don't have even half of the talent or potential as their students at the given task... that's why they're coaches and not doing it for themselves.

What a coach SHOULD possess is excellent motivational skills and the ability to bring the highest potential out of any person that they're "coaching".

Granted, someone that knows nothing about a given topic shouldn't be coaching people on it... but you don't have to be the best. Sometimes someone can have all the knowledge in the world and just not know how to apply it.

Think of how many people surpass their coaches ability on a regular basis, but still require "coaching".

Think about Tony Robbins.... he's got personal issues like everyone else, but he's damn good at motivating people to make the best of themselves... and he's made billions doing it. But he still has regular problems just like everyone else.

It's about motivational ability, and less about knowledge IMO.

[Rachel Goodchild]

My regular coach has pretty much nil expereince in IM
However he is fantastic at spotting levels of performance, and suggesting where I can improve and grow
He's not an IM expert
But he is a person, and business expert. And he works

[David Surk]

Personally I think a coach should have real world experience in whatever they are teaching. I would be very upset if someone was giving me advice they "think" is correct. What's funny is I see people who some consider guru's give advice in areas they really don't know about. They just parrot what they hear...

Much love,
Dave.

[PPC-Coach]

I think a coach in the online world has to walk the walk. IF not, why bother with them? It's not the same as an athletic team.

I think it's more about moving up maslows hierarchy for online coaches then the money. Most coaches would make a lot more if they just focussed on their own business and didn't bother teaching anyone else. But when you hit the point where money doesn't motivate you as much anymore, you need something to keep you going. That's when you seek ways to expand your personal growth and that usually involves giving back and helping others. (although not for everyone I suppose). Plus you learn from the people you're teaching too and it's a mutually beneficial relationship that is created.

[Joshua N. Rabon]

Depends on the topic.

In IM yes.

In sports, music etc... no

In those cases a coach only needs to help you access your potential, move past blocks, strategize better and/or create a better mindset.

[ShayRockhold]

Originally Posted by mr2monster

I think that a coach needs to be someone that can motivate you to accomplish a task. That's it.

I would think of a person like that as a cheerleader, not a coach.

JMHO

[AndrewCavanagh]

What you're really looking for is a coach WHO HAS HELPED AT LEAST ONE OTHER PERSON ACHIEVE THE KIND OF RESULTS YOU WANT.

Someone being successful doesn't mean they know how to help you become successful (although it should help).

Most of the world's best coaches have dedicated themselves to the art of coaching and their results show in the people they've coached.

That's what you should be looking for.

Kindest regards,
Andrew Cavanagh

[PatDoyle]

I think a coach has to know how to do what they are teaching you.

But I don't think they need to be a "guru". To me, a "guru" is someone famous. There are people who know how to make money, but they are not well-known as a "guru".

Besides being successful in internet marketing, I think a coach also has to have a certain personality - one who can teach others. Someone who can make things simple for you. Some people make things a lot more complicated than they need to be.

That's my 2c on the topic

[Bayo]

Originally Posted by Scott Ames

Does an IM coach need to be one of the successful so called "guru" types?

No.

Every coach needs to be able to coach, understand people, what makes them tick and how to help them get results.

Coaching in IM is no different to coaching in any other area.

Just one example...Jose Murinho. The guy never played football (or soccer as it's called here in the US) and he is a great coach who gets results.

The 'guru' types in IM live off of their 'gurudom' because that is what the market is used to, wants and responds to (sad as it is) - In reality, 'gurudom' in IM is an 'old boys club', but that's gradually changing.

[TorontoCarol]

I was asked a couple of years ago to teach some eBay workshops for a local community center. I was teaching computer applications there, so I said yes, even though I had no experience at the time.

I did have a son who is a power seller - I picked his brain. A daughter who had an ebay store - I picked her brain. Then I read every book and tutorial I could find.

I started using eBay just because I didn't want to be a fake if people asked me questions, but I was upfront that it wasn't my preferred Internet activity. Bottom line: I still do so-so on eBay, partly because I'm not that interested. But a number of my students have done very well. Go figure.

[Steven Wagenheim]

We've been down this road before.

I don't know who Dan Warthan, the Mets pitching coach is (I know he was
no great pitcher) but he has completely turned around several of the Mets
starters since taking over the team.

Just because you can't do something yourself doesn't mean you can't teach
it.

[deannatroupe]

I'll give you guys another example at this. Math is not my best subject. However, my classmates used to always get better grades than I did after I explained whatever we were talking about to them. Now I wouldn't go into teaching math, but I do plan to teach since I know I have talent in that area. I hope I have answered the question. Hmm maybe this is an article in the making...

[deannatroupe]

I wound up writing a blog post about this question. Here it is: Learn Small Business Blog Archive Should a coach be able to walk the talk?
Do let me know what you think about it.

[Andyhenry]

Hi Scott,

I think a lot of people confuse the term coaching with other terms like mentoring, consulting etc.

So you question really only means whatever people think that term means.

As a coach, a mentor and a consultant I've had a lot of discussions about this with other people in the business.

The 'general' rule for coaching seems to be that strictly speaking, most trained coaches are taught not to offer advice. It's a very strict differential and if you consider it - your comparison against football coaches wouldn't work, so there's clearly some room for miscommunication when it comes to coaching.

If you take someone like Tony Robbins who is a 'success' coach, he's no more a golfer or basketball player than you or I, but he's coached the best in the game and the same goes for politicians, business people and individuals.

So, while I understand why people would say that a coach needs to be an expert in that area - I don't believe it's actually required at all to get great results.

Most of the things people want to achieve really only require a shift in mindset and focus, so while it's great to have someone to get advice from and bounce ideas off - that's not what coaching is usually about.

As for IM coaching, as I do this too, I can say that what most people need is coaching, but what most IMers want is mentoring.

The reason being the same as always - they're looking for someone else to tell them how to be successful.

Coaching is about asking the right questions so that people come to their own version of what success is for them and create their own plan. This is fine - but it's not what most IMers are looking for when they ask about coaching.

It's partly due to this multiple meaning of the word coach, and also partly due to IMers offering 'coaching' without actually really understanding coaching themselves.

As usual, it's another area of IM where lack of understanding and over-inclination to try and make money with any technique has resulted in lots of people paying a lot of money for 'coaching' and getting something completely different and adding it to the list of 'confusing things about IM'.

Also since many people offering IM related services are focused on the money, they don't take the time to properly understand the things they're selling to others and are setting everyone up for failure - but since they still make the money they're charging, even failure fulfills the criteria of earning them money.

I love coaching and I'd love to see more IMers actually wanting it, but right now it's the same as most IM things - people want to be told how to make money and you can call it what you like as long as that's what they think they're getting.

This is the reason I have strict filtering procedures before working with anyone. I also like providing mentoring to get people skilled-up in IM areas, but that's completely different to coaching.

I use coaches myself and although I find it constantly surprising that IMers seem to confuse these things so much - it's is understandable when you look at all of the misinformation around.

Andy

[jjpmarketing]

I agree 100% Steve. Some people are just born educators. Coaching is more about teaching concepts. Once a coach/teacher has taught a student those concepts it is really the responsibility of the student to go out and apply the concepts learned... or in this case implement the concepts learned.

On top of that... there is a reason that a lot of those that don't have a track record for success become great teachers. You learn 1000 times more through failures than you do through successes.

There is an X factor to all of this. If you find the rare person that can both teach and do... hang on to that mentor/coach/teacher. It would be the equivalent of learning from Yoda if you were a Jedi.

[Paul Duxbury]

Originally Posted by Andyhenry

Hi Scott,

I think a lot of people confuse the term coaching with other terms like mentoring, consulting etc.

So you question really only means whatever people think that term means.

As a coach, a mentor and a consultant I've had a lot of discussions about this with other people in the business.

The 'general' rule for coaching seems to be that strictly speaking, most trained coaches are taught not to offer advice. It's a very strict differential and if you consider it - your comparison against football coaches wouldn't work, so there's clearly some room for miscommunication when it comes to coaching.

If you take someone like Tony Robbins who is a 'success' coach, he's no more a golfer or basketball player than you or I, but he's coached the best in the game and the same goes for politicians, business people and individuals.

So, while I understand why people would say that a coach needs to be an expert in that area - I don't believe it's actually required at all to get great results.

Most of the things people want to achieve really only require a shift in mindset and focus, so while it's great to have someone to get advice from and bounce ideas off - that's not what coaching is usually about.

As for IM coaching, as I do this too, I can say that what most people need is coaching, but what most IMers want is mentoring.

The reason being the same as always - they're looking for someone else to tell them how to be successful.

Coaching is about asking the right questions so that people come to their own version of what success is for them and create their own plan. This is fine - but it's not what most IMers are looking for when they ask about coaching.

It's partly due to this multiple meaning of the word coach, and also partly due to IMers offering 'coaching' without actually really understanding coaching themselves.

As usual, it's another area of IM where lack of understanding and over-inclination to try and make money with any technique has resulted in lots of people paying a lot of money for 'coaching' and getting something completely different and adding it to the list of 'confusing things about IM'.

Also since many people offering IM related services are focused on the money, they don't take the time to properly understand the things they're selling to others and are setting everyone up for failure - but since they still make the money they're charging, even failure fulfills the criteria of earning them money.

I love coaching and I'd love to see more IMers actually wanting it, but right now it's the same as most IM things - people want to be told how to make money and you can call it what you like as long as that's what they think they're getting.

This is the reason I have strict filtering procedures before working with anyone. I also like providing mentoring to get people skilled-up in IM areas, but that's completely different to coaching.

I use coaches myself and although I find it constantly surprising that IMers seem to confuse these things so much - it's is understandable when you look at all of the misinformation around.

Andy

Excellent post Andy and one which should help people to understand the differences between the various disciplines. What it also makes clear is that when you are looking for help you need to be clear (or become clear through discussion) exactly what it is you want/need.

Take care

Paul

[Andyhenry]

Originally Posted by Michael D Price

Those Who Can, Do
Those Who Can't, Teach.

Enough Said.

That's BS.... - nuff said..

[ExRat]

Hi Michael,

I don't know whether what you posted is true or false in general, but I do know that Eben Pagan seems to be proving that rule as BS.

I just watched one video by him that on it's own proves that he can teach. And I guess most of us know about his 'doing'.

Here's the video on a subject that I have seen/read many trying to teach, but for me they never got through and hit the spot. This one did -

http://www.wakeupproductiveblog.com/.../time-mgmt.php

About 549 other people so far, seem to agree. Props to Lynn Terry for pointing me to this video in another thread.

[ExRat]

Hi Michael,

I can't make sense of your example because -

Most coaches would probably rate 'teaching self-discipline' as one of their most powerful assets. And if they don't posess it themselves, I doubt they could possibly teach it. To teach discipline to someone who doesn't have it, must be very difficult therefore they must have hands-on experience to be able to do so.

Take my example - Eben Pagan. Surely he had the discipline to be able to make himself a guru? And now he is teaching it.

I don't see that your example proves or explains anything, sorry.

If your example is to show that there could be exceptions around that fit the mould of 'Bob and Nick' - maybe there are.

But that does nothing to make your statement about 'those who can't, teach' have any more substance.

Edit -

The man with no legs knows everything there is to know about becoming a marathon runner, but cannot run so he is still a qualified teacher or trainer, even know he has never put any of his knowledge to successful use, due to his own disabilities

Maybe this could happen, but again -

...that does nothing to make your statement about 'those who can't, teach' have any more substance, if you actually examine what that statement implies.

But I agree that the person in the example may have trouble 'walking the talk.'

[ExRat]

Hi Michael,

Either we are simply going around in circles, or perhaps we have totally different comprehensions of what the underlying message is in the original statement you made which was -

Those Who Can, Do
Those Who Can't, Teach.

Enough Said.

You appear to be trying to prove that the underlying message is -

'you don't have to be able to do it yourself to be good at teaching it.'

I'm not disagreeing with that last statement itself.

But my understanding of the original statement in red is that the underlying message is -

'anyone that teaches is doing so BECAUSE they can't 'do' it.

Two completely different meanings. And my interpretation of it is one which is used as an insult to coaches/teachers. It implies that they shouldn't really be teaching it at all because the only reason that they are teaching and not doing is because they FAILED at doing.

Therefore I don't believe that the statement is valid because not every teacher/coach chooses that path BECAUSE they failed at the doing of it.

Is the misunderstanding here due to different interpretations of the original (red) statement and it's underlying implication?

[paul8368]

When thinking fo a topic like this I always think of the old adage "Those who can do and those who can't teach".

I don't think an IM coach has to be successful in walking the talk but I do think they need to understand the walk and to have had experience in doing so I woudl say certainly makes a difference.

Personally I wouldn't engage an IM coach who had not shown they could walk the talk even if on a small scale. Many people can do things but would rather help others than do it themselves. There are those who's skill set really suits working with others and motivating them while others are better at getting the job done themselves.

We are all different aren't we?

I would suggest the best way for an IM coach to prove himself would be to runa company coaching a number of individuals and using their own techniques to achieve, but if this was successful would they want to coach others to compete with themselves?

[Scott Ames]

I agree with this. The old saying "those that can't do, teach" is just that, a trite saying probably said by a disgruntled student.

There are many basketball coaches that used to be great players, but they could no longer play because of age or condition. Probably there are just as many that never played but have a passion for the game and can see from altitude what the players can not.

Obviously one needs some knowledge of the subject in order to coach. Olympic skating coaches however have often had lots of knowledge but never won a Gold medal of their own. Are they therefore failures that teach? Not according to the Olympians they taught that did win Gold.

Then, you have those that have excelled at doing a thing, still can and do, and want to teach others how. Certainly not all who coach or teach have failed.

Originally Posted by ExRat

Hi Michael,

Either we are simply going around in circles, or perhaps we have totally different comprehensions of what the underlying message is in the original statement you made which was -


You appear to be trying to prove that the underlying message is -

'you don't have to be able to do it yourself to be good at teaching it.'

I'm not disagreeing with that last statement itself.

But my understanding of the original statement in red is that the underlying message is -

'anyone that teaches is doing so BECAUSE they can't 'do' it.

Two completely different meanings. And my interpretation of it is one which is used as an insult to coaches/teachers. It implies that they shouldn't really be teaching it at all because the only reason that they are teaching and not doing is because they FAILED at doing.

Therefore I don't believe that the statement is valid because not every teacher/coach chooses that path BECAUSE they failed at the doing of it.

Is the misunderstanding here due to different interpretations of the original (red) statement and it's underlying implication?

[CDarklock]

Originally Posted by Scott Ames

The old saying "those that can't do, teach" is just that, a trite saying probably said by a disgruntled student.

More likely, by someone who had a boatload of real-world experience and still failed a test.

I've taught a lot of people how to do their first kickflip on a skateboard. In one single day, at the Auburn skate park in Washington, I taught seven people how to kickflip.

But I can't do one myself. Been trying for twenty years. Just can't do it. Don't really know why.

However, I suggest the reason I can teach it is that I've been trying to do it myself for twenty years.

[OSContent]

I think it depends on the type of "coaching" you want. If you're looking for someone who is closer to a consultant than a coach, then you're probably going to want someone who has a proven record of technical proficiency. I don't think it matters whether that record comes from consulting with clients and helping them to achieve success; or whether it comes from personal success in that area. If the person is a really good coach--and, as a result, is making a lot doing it--then it makes sense that she'll spend her time finding ways to coach better, rather than providing endless demonstrations of her technical proficiency (and, in the process, choosing to earn less).

On the other hand, if you're looking for something more generic (like personal motivation), then it may not be terribly important whether the person has a track record of technical proficiency. If the person is capable of influencing whether or not people succeed by motivation alone--and if people find this useful enough to pay a lot for it--then I don't see why he needs to have a history of success in areas other than motivation.

[Topher Walker]

It's not likely, but it's possible.

If someone offered coaching who had never done walked the walk themselves but honestly had a stellar record of repeatedly taking people at your level in IM to the next level and beyond then you'd be stupid to say no.

[Steven Fullman]

Originally Posted by Michael D Price

Those Who Can, Do
Those Who Can't, Teach.

...And Those Who Can't Teach, Teach Gym.

--Woody Allen, (c) 1977, Annie Hall. I think.

[a1journo]

And I guess it depends entirely on what you are hiring your coach to do - if you are hiring your coach to show you the ropes (a Mentor, really) then yes, they do need to have knowledge and experience.

However, if you are hiring a coach to encourage you to do all the things that YOU want to achieve, they don't necessarily have to know exactly what it is you ar doing.

I have a success coach, and in our fortnightly meetings we discuss the goals that I want to achieve and how I plan going about making those goals - its a process of breaking down each step to MAKE SURE that i achieve what I set out to do, and have someone to be accountable to if I DONT do those things.

A mentor, on the other hand, should have experience, have failures and successes and be able to offer solutions to specific problems in the genre in which you are working.

Coaches are encouragers - and they also act like the guilty consciounce on your shoulder - Like a personal trainer for your life - encouraging while also being firm and pushing you out of your comfort zone to achieve everything you want...

Originally Posted by Scott Ames

I agree with this. The old saying "those that can't do, teach" is just that, a trite saying probably said by a disgruntled student.

There are many basketball coaches that used to be great players, but they could no longer play because of age or condition. Probably there are just as many that never played but have a passion for the game and can see from altitude what the players can not.

Obviously one needs some knowledge of the subject in order to coach. Olympic skating coaches however have often had lots of knowledge but never won a Gold medal of their own. Are they therefore failures that teach? Not according to the Olympians they taught that did win Gold.

Then, you have those that have excelled at doing a thing, still can and do, and want to teach others how. Certainly not all who coach or teach have failed.