I have written before about the purpose of coaching not being about 
actions or solutions.  This seems counter-intuitive to most people 
involved in coaching who seem to focus on coaching in terms of taking 
actions to achieve goals.  Talking to my friend Steve today he was 
reminding me of this having just read the work of Sydney Banks.  He felt
 what he was expressing about the principles of mind, consciousness and 
thought fitted closely with what he had learnt and shared with Chrissy 
and me over the years.  Our conversation moved on to talk generally 
about coaching and the issue of not focusing on action.  This also got 
me thinking about a model I came up with seven or eight years ago for 
thinking about what is going on when we are trying coach people or 
trying to help them.
In 2001/2002 I was working for Ernst & Young at the time that 
Enron collapsed, Andersens folded and the Dot com bubble burst.  As the 
impact of this hit the accountancy industry I was in a prime position to
 watch how Ernst & Young reacted.  What I noticed was that the focus
 on control increased greatly with leaders throughout the business keen 
to measure everything that they could as often as they could.  I also 
watched the way that the focus went very narrow and very short term.  
People also started to talk about things in a very black and white and 
judgmental way.  Thinking about it I began to see that the impact of 
fear was to make our focus go very narrow and short term and to reduce 
our options to one of two variables.  It occurred to me that if you are 
about to be attacked by a tiger you want a very narrow focus – you don’t
 want to be distracted by things in your peripheral vision or to be 
considering what a beautiful little bird there is on the branch up 
there, I haven’t noticed that before – not much use to you when you are 
about to be eaten.  At the same time, carrying on the tiger theme, you 
also don’t want a long term perspective, it really isn’t helpful to be 
considering what you will do once you have dealt with tiger and perhaps 
planning for your next holiday.  Lastly you don’t really want a range of
 complex and interesting options to consider, you want as few as 
possible, effectively fight or flight.  So the core brain, being geared 
up for survival takes over whenever we feel under threat and puts us 
into survival mode.  This is fine for a situation of real physical 
danger.
My experience is that when we are stuck in a black hole or grappling 
with a difficult conundrum, it tends to trigger this survival response. 
 We find ourselves thinking narrowly, short term and in somewhat black 
and white ways.  We generate a tunnel vision and our since none of us 
like negative emotions we want to get out of the negative emotions as 
fast as possible.  Most of us experience the fact that when we share our
 situation with others and they help us, we say it is back in proportion
 or perspective.  What does this mean?
As far as I can see, it seems to mean that our perspective has 
broadened out to see the situation more fully or clearly.  Edward De 
Bono talked about the fact that the creative faculty of humans is 
centred in their ability to think asymmetrically.  He described the way 
that we make breakthroughs.  His premise was that we do not make 
breakthroughs by continuing logically from our current premise.  The 
only way we make breakthroughs is by shifting our perspective to a new 
position.  In order to do this De Bono felt we needed a PO – a 
provocative operation.  This provocative operation prevents us from 
being able to think about things in our habitual way and causes a shift 
in perspective.  His point was that once we see a situation from a new 
perspective, we can immediately see how it links to our current 
perspective but we cannot get to this new perspective by starting from 
our current one.  He used our sense of humour to illustrate this.  When 
we tell a joke, the punch line isn’t obvious to us, indeed we might 
struggle to have any idea what the punch line will be, yet when we hear 
it we can immediately link it back to the thread of the joke.  It is the
 same with a riddle.  It seems to us impossible to answer, yet once we 
hear the answer to the riddle we can immediately see how it connects, 
yet it requires a leap or shift of perspective.
An article in the New Scientist last year linked this switching 
mechanism to the parietal lobe.  This part of the brain on Chrissy’s 
model links to Mars or Aries.  Aries and Mars have long been associated 
with creativity, the ability to see things afresh, to challenge, to see 
things anew.  I often link this to inspiration – breathing in.  In the 
spring (Aries) animals are taking their first breaths and jumping around
 with new fresh energy. At the same time, De Bono’s provocative 
operation sounds very much a Mars or Aries phenomenon.  Since Aries is a
 fire sign, it fits with the idea of “seeing” the situation differently 
(the imagination) and also with the idea of a 
new 
perspective.  On Chrissy’s model of the brain, Aries is linked with the 
I-Ching hexagram Shock.  Again, a very Mars phenomenon.  The I-Ching 
hexagram Shock  says:
Shock brings success.
Shock comes – oh! oh!
Laughing words – ha! ha!
The shock that comes from the manifestation of God within the 
depths of the earth makes man afraid, but this fear of God is good, for 
joy and merriment can follow upon it.
So like De Bono, there seems to be a humour connected to this.  
Initially when events do not go the way we planned we are shocked or 
frustrated, often full of fear but then once we have composed ourselves 
we can manage to laugh at our discomfiture.  My son Luke is an Aries; it
 is to his eternal credit that he seems to have a wonderful natural 
ability to laugh at his own discomfiture.  When he finds that events or 
situations have confounded him a grin spreads naturally and easily 
across his face (I am similar, a grin spreads across my face too, but 
mine is the result of years of hard won practice!).  When we watch 
people struggling blindly in a film or book and then suddenly being 
confronted with the consequences of their blindness we laugh.  Much 
physical humour and slapstick is based on this premise, the greater the 
contrast, the greater the humour – a pompous man in an impeccable suit, 
slips on a banana skin or farts by accident in an important meeting and 
we are amused.
In coaching, I notice that when we get to the real issue for an 
individual, or they see what they are really stuck on, they can’t help 
grinning, even if they try not to.  It is connected to Mars again 
because when you get to the truth of the real emotion we can’t seem to 
help smiling.
Humour is also interesting in that it is only possible to have a 
sense of humour when we are less identified with our personalities and 
their dramas; when we are taking ourselves less seriously.  This is not 
possible when we are in the grip of our fears and our focus has become 
very narrow.  In many coaching situations or in helping people, the 
point is not to solve their dilemma but simply to help them to see it 
differently; to become less identified with it.  When we are stuck in a 
situation, we are in a black hole, there is a gap between how we want 
things to be and how they are.  In this pass our mind tends to circle 
endlessly round the same options.  Simply developing the ability to 
laugh at our situation and how we are stuck is often the most valuable 
starting point and may be enough.  The I-Ching hexagram Shock says that 
the superior man 
examines his heart lest it bear any secret opposition to the will of God. 
 I don’t know whether the Chinese original actually talks about God. 
 This may be Richard Wilhelm’s interpretation as a Christian 
missionary.  It might be more literally translated as the Universe or 
the cosmos.  In this sense, the I-Ching is describing shock as being a 
situation where we are fighting against the nature of life, ie. we have a
 fixed picture about how we want things to be or think they should be 
which is opposed to the way that things actually are.  Seeing this means
 we can shift our frame of reference to accept the nature of reality 
rather than seeking to impose our own frame of reference.
And finally, for those of you still with me (I have Neptune square my Mercury in Sagittarius in the 12
th
 at the moment so an already circuitous and tangential Mercury is 
struggling to coalesce into a coherent thread), back to the model I was 
indicating earlier.  This model was about the process of helping people 
make shifts in awareness or change perspective.  What I was thinking 
about was that there are four different ways (there are almost certainly
 more) that we can shift people’s focus.

One is to change the time-frame.  For instance, where people are 
struggling with a new role or change of job, I ask them how long they 
think realistically it will take them to make the transition.  Often, 
they respond by saying eighteen months or a few years.  Simply realising
 this puts all the anxiety and pressure to perform and prove themselves 
into perspective and they become aware that the problems they are 
currently facing are not of such importance or scale of impact as they 
were thinking.  Their focus and perspective broadens out and they 
relax.  Thinking about our death as Don Juan advises in the Carlos 
Castaneda books or keeping the long term goal in mind in relationship as
 the I Ching advises in the Marrying Maiden (Hexagram 54) – 
the superior man understands the transitory in the light of the eternity of the end (by anyone’s reckoning 
the eternity of the end
 is a pretty long time frame!) . The next dimension is depth.  Here it 
is often about exploring more deeply what people are learning or is 
really going on in the situation.  Usually this shifts the focus away 
from other people and events to the individual themselves and the 
external factors become catalysts or challenges for their own learning. 
 I find that almost any situation can be seen differently once we see it
 as a challenge from which we are learning.  Thirdly is detail; when we 
are stuck in a black hole, we tend to generalise or distort experience 
and so we lose sight of indicators that things might be different.  We 
use words like “always” and “never” and make definitive statements.  
Often it will be about other people, e.g. he is always criticising me.  
Often asking people questions to get under the generalisation helps 
shift their perspective. “So when you say he always criticises you, have
 there been any times when he has been positive?”  “What exactly does he
 say?  Give me an example.”  “What do you think he is thinking or his 
intention is?”  Suddenly the fixed or closed picture shifts to a richer 
one with more possibilities and options.  Lastly, there is position or 
perspective itself.  This entails helping people put themselves in other
 people’s shoes to see the world through their eyes so that they are 
able to see themselves or other people differently.  It might also be 
imaginary positions – “What does the wisest part of you say?” “What is 
your heart telling you about this situation?”  It might be describing or
 reflecting back to the individual how the other person could be feeling
 about the situation, eg. “It sounds like they are worried” or “It 
sounds like they are under pressure” or “It sounds like they are anxious
 about how to respond to you”.  You can also use stories or experiences 
from your own learning as a different position.  I think one of the most
 valuable here is to consider what the Universe or Life might be 
teaching them.  The point is not necessarily that we know, but for the 
individual to see that there might be more at play than only themselves 
and considering a broader perspective puts their own drama in context.  
We can even be very clever and creative in the way we manipulate others 
into breakthroughs using these dimensions.  Of course one word of 
warning in this context; it goes without saying (well clearly not since I
 am saying it…) if you are going to manipulate others, you had better be
 sure it is genuinely for their benefit rather than to satisfy your own 
agenda.  In any event the important and lovely paradox here is that you 
cannot shift anyone else’s perspective, only they can shift it.  So 
providing individuals with lots of solutions and actions to take or your
 own insights is of no value unless it generates an insight for them.
The key for me is that if there is no shift in the way someone sees 
their situation then nothing will change.  In this sense focusing on 
action or options is of little value, similarly once someone’s 
perspective has genuinely changed you can trust that they will act 
differently without having to do anything further.  From my experience 
working on coaching programmes, what trips people up in coaching or in 
trying to help others is that the person trying to help or coach the 
individual accepts the picture or frame of reference that the person 
presents.  If you do this, then you can be of no value to the 
individual, you will be as stuck as the individual and the solutions you
 try to generate will leave them as stuck as they already are.  This has
 always been my concern with NLP practitioners.  In many cases their 
focus is to use techniques to help people achieve their goals without 
questioning whether their initial assumptions or picture behind these 
goals or even the goals are valid.  This certainly seems to be the 
opposite of what Milton Erickson was doing.  His whole focus was on 
shifting people’s perspective, not so they could achieve the original 
goals of their personality – wealth, ambition, everlasting happiness, 
faultless brilliance, in essence becoming a super being who can get 
whatever they think they want or need but rather shifting their 
perspective so they became more aware of themselves and their true 
motives.
The more I think about this, the more I see this issue is Mars and 
how we use it.  If we use Mars to see creatively and gain perspective 
then the actions we take will bring fresh, positive energy from the 
heart into the situation.  It will open up and expand the creative 
possibilities.  If we simply focus on action without the creative work 
to see differently then our actions are likely to lead to frustration 
and further complications.
In the third line of Shock the I-Ching says:
In such times of Shock, presence of mind is all too easily lost: 
the individual overlooks all opportunities for action and mutely lets 
fate take its course.  But if he allows the shocks of fate to induce 
movement within his mind, he will overcome these external blows with 
little effort.
In the hexagram 52 Keeping Still the I-Ching says:
When a man has thus become calm, he may turn to the outside 
world. He no longer sees in it the struggle and tumult of individual 
beings, and therefore he has that true peace of mind which is needed for
 understanding the great laws of the universe and for acting in harmony 
with them. Whoever acts from these deep levels makes no mistakes.