Ernie Fitzpatrick asked:


Twelve years ago I read a small book that was far from the kind of reading that I’d normally read. I was ten years into having started a church, and I was seeing that the changes I had made from a denomination to a charismatic church weren’t enough. There was more. I didn’t FIT in the denomination, nor could I wear Saul’s charismatic armor.  

The book was entitled, “A Peacock in the Land of Penguins”.

The COLORFUL Spirit that I felt and embraced didn’t match with the BLACK-n-WHITE constraints of this instead of that, ours and not theirs, as well as believe and don’t question! However, I had questions! I had doubts about things that I was told I could not question. When something didn’t make sense, I had simply been told to JUST BELIEVE.

That’s like telling a Peacock to paint their feathers black and white.

On top of that my “nature” was to question and to embrace all sides of an issue and not just that which I’d grown up with and thought unquestionable. I received a college scholarship because of my debate skills in high school. I attribute my success in part because of my debate coach. In my first debate, I was told I’d be opening the debate on the AFFIRMATIVE. So, I prepared all of the reasons why the question would work.

An hour before I was to debate, the coach came in and said, SURPRISE! Ernest, I want you to take the NEGATIVE side! Say what!

I had an hour to do an about face and prepare just the opposite arguments, but what I realized, to my amazement, was that in preparing for one side, I had to look at the other side to anticipate what they might say. Any good attorney will tell you that you never ask a question of the person on the witness stand that you don’t know what their answer will be – or at least have a good idea.

Unfortunately, most fervent and religious people only know what they’ve been told and that’s all they want to know. They spend their life “defending the faith” regardless of how illogical the arguments may be. And, they have not a clue as to what the other religions believe because they don’t care, etc. In life generally the Mars male doesn’t want to know how the Venus female feels.

Mars rules. NOT!  

The heterosexual doesn’t even want to be around the ********* homosexual, let alone communicate or try and understand the emotions that they’re feeling, being trapped in a body that doesn’t match their emotions. It’s easier to just quote a Scripture and tell them to get “right with God”. Scientifically and spiritually we are ALL RAINBOW people- Peacocks. We’ve just allowed the doctrine, dogma, and law to paint us with a BLACK-n-WHITE brush. Our way or the highway.

Let your LIGHT(s- all the colors)) SHINE!

Matt Somers asked:

A wise man once said that apart from the spelling there is no difference between counselling and coaching. There’s a shade of truth in this but for the sake of the clarity I’m trying to achieve in this piece I am going to illustrate the differences such as they are. In fairness, it’s relatively easy for me to do this as I am concentrating on coaching that takes place at work; usually delivered by a line manager. We’ll see later on when we come to look at the different types and branches of coaching activity that the lines of distinction do become far more blurred.

As with mentoring, the skills of the coach and the counsellor are the same. They each listen attentively, ask probing questions and offer non-judgemental observations in the spirit of helping their ‘clients’ find their own answers. I don’t think either a coach or a counsellor would go down the “You should…”, “You must…” route. The difference does not lie in the skill set; it has much more to do with the content of the conversation and the desired result.

Counsellors are concerned with identifying root causes. They will guide us on a journey through our history to identify critical incidents and problems that have left a mark and cause us problems still. With such issues identified, the work of the counsellor develops into one of exploring ways of dealing with those problems and making changes. We can easily see that relationship counsellors, substance abuse counsellors, bereavement counsellors, etc. focus on dealing with what’s happened.

Coaches are concerned with moving forward. Coaches help the people whom they coach to identify a desired set of circumstances, to examine how that contrasts with current circumstances and then to plan out a series of steps to get from one point to the other. The coach starts from the here and now and, although aware that situations in the past can cause problems today, is more focused on creating mobility and momentum and on getting people started. Coaches focus on dealing with what must happen next.

Picture the scene: you’re three-nil down at half time. The team counsellor would examine the mistakes of the first half, but the team coach would set out the tactics for the second. Both are useful, and as ever are often combined. As always, the needs of the people we’re helping must override any semantic debate around the differences.

However, getting the positioning right is crucial. I’ve seen many a coaching programme get off to a shaky start because staff perceived that they were going to be counselled and were obviously uneasy about how well their managers were qualified to offer this kind of help and whether it was appropriate to talk about potentially emotive personal issues in a work context. Of course there may be a time for counselling at work, and what starts out as a straightforward coaching session may move in that direction. With this in mind it is worth checking out your organization’s welfare and access to counselling policy if you have the slightest suspicion that a coaching approach may uncover a deep seated issue and thus need a professional intervention.

The statements below are an attempt to put these comparisons in simple terms

Managing “Do this.”

Instructing “Here’s how to do this.”

Training “Have a go at doing this.”

Mentoring “My advice would be to….”

Counselling “What feelings does this invoke?”

Coaching “How do you think you could…?”

I wonder if in the end these differences are purely academic and of more interest to people like me who muse on these things, than to people like you who have the harder task of getting people to be the best they can at work.

Having said that, an appreciation of the similarities and differences is useful when it comes to positioning coaching in your team and in your organization. You may well find that if your team is unclear about what coaching involves and have confused it with other things, then they may not engage as fully as you’d wish.

Matt Somers asked:

eld of endeavour we need knowledge, skills and an appropriate state of mind to perform well. Coaching is no different. In previous articles I have written about skills and state of mind. In this article I will consider the knowledge base that good coaches need, both in terms of subject matter expertise and knowledge of coaching itself.

Subject Matter Expertise

There is still some debate around whether coaches need a detailed knowledge of the matter in hand or underlying subject in order to be able to coach another person effectively.

Some argue that it is impossible to coach without subject matter expertise, as without it we can’t show another person what to do or give our advice or guidance. However it’s clear that telling people what to do is fraught with danger; do I understand how I get results myself? Can I find a way to express that to another person? Will they be able to remember what they’ve been told? We’ve also come to recognize that, these days, knowledge is out of date within a few months and it is highly risky to approach any situation with out of date knowledge. Far better then to coach in a way that allows other people to develop their own solutions and to do so in a way that encourages them to become self-reliant in the future.

That being said, as far as being a manager coaching in a work situation is concerned, in reality we probably will have some background in the situations being discussed, but we should resist the temptation to jump in with our own quick fix solutions.

Knowledge of coaching itself

This is a far more important area of knowledge for effective coaching and breaks down into four main areas:

1 What coaching is

We need to understand – and may often need to explain – that coaching is NOT about telling people what to do and how to do it. In fact, coaching is an interventions designed to raise awareness, generate responsibility and build trust.

2 How managers can incorporate coaching in their own style

We all have our own style of communication with some of us preferring a more directive approach and others a less directive one. Managers who coach need to develop an understanding and knowledge of incorporating the principles of coaching into their own natural style.

3 The principles of awareness, responsibility and trust

Before I can change and improve anything I must first become aware of how it is now. Ultimately it is I who must take responsibility for making improvements and changes. I must trust myself to try new things and I must trust my coach to help me do them. The best coaching managers are those that understand and apply these principles.

4 The impact of questioning and active listening

Questions evoke awareness, responsibility and trust infinitely better than instructions or advice, but even the best coaching questions are meaningless without effective listening.

Nick Moreno asked:

“Selling Skills … Make Closing A Sale Automatic.”

By Nick Moreno – Sales Trainer & Head Sales Coach

The National Sales Center

There are well-defined moments in the sales process when you absolutely must ask for the order. You can’t afford to have these precious moments slip through your fingers but unfortunately, that’s exactly what happens to too many salespeople. I have some advice that will protect you from becoming one of those salespeople. The key is to make closing automatic and you do that by knowing exactly when you must ask for an order.

“Always Be Closing”

Unfortunately, too many salespeople were mislead into believing that “Always Be Closing” represents the “ABCs” of salesmanship. Frankly, nothing could be further from the truth. You can’t always be closing because asking for an order is only one of the steps in the sales process. At a minimum, before you ask for an order you need to establish some rapport with your prospect, uncover a need for your product and present your solution. “Always Be Colsing” may sound great in a movie but it is meaningless when you’re in your sales territory, attempting to sell something to someone.

Often, salespeople that think they should always be closing are, in reality, never closing. These salespeople do not understand the sales process because if they did, they would know when and how to ask for an order. Well-trained professional salespeople don’t have these problems because they follow a well-defined sales process. These professionals know exactly when the only thing left to do is close the business.

Fear Of Closing

I also work with another group of salespeople in my sales training programs that need help with their closing skills. These sales reps need to overcome their fear of closing. After all, you can’t be sales rep and have a fear of closing, just as you can’t be an electrician and have a fear of electricity! Salespeople close and if you are not closing you’re not a salesperson… you are just a conversationalist. Salespeople that fear closing just keep talking and hopelessly praying that at some point, the prospect will ask for an order form to sign. Guess how often that happens?

In my work, I’ve uncovered many factors that cause some salespeople to fear closing. Some sales reps don’t want to face the moment of truth. Other salespeople fear they may appear “pushy”. There are also other salespeople that assume, without any data to support their assumption, that the prospect is not ready to sign an order. I help these salespeople by making closing an automatic reflex reaction to certain events in the sales process. When closing is automatic, you don’t even have to think about it. You automatically ask for the business. This process helps most salespeople overcome their fear of closing.

Initial Close

At some point in the sales process, you’ll ask your prospect a series of questions to uncover a need for your product or service. You’ll then present your product and explain how the product addresses the needs you’ve uncovered. Once you’ve presented all the benefits your prospect with gain by using your product, you must close. You must ask for the order at this point in the sales process. Don’t think about it … just close.

Since this is the first time you’ve asked your prospect for the order, this closing attempt is called the Initial Close. Your prospect has two possible reactions to your Initial Close. Your prospect will either give you the order or give you an objection. Obviously, if you get the order, you’ve accomplished your goal. On the other hand, if you get an objection, you still have some work ahead of you.

Overcoming Sales Objections

It is not end of world if you get some objections after your first closing attempt. In fact, you probably will get some objections after your Initial Close. Most prospects feel it is their duty to have some objections for the person attempting to sell them something. So relax and don’t panic. Now that the objection has surfaced, you just moved one step closer to the order. Keep in mind that an objection is not rejection. An objection is only a request for more information. Your prospect is confused and unclear about something you said or something you failed to mention. By addressing the sales objection, you give your prospect new and additional information. Armed with the new information, your prospect is able to develop a new and favorable opinion about their decision to purchase your product.

Objections should not be ignored and must be answered in a way that completely salifyes the prospect. The salesperson should not get defensive or start debating the prospect. The goal is not to win an argument. The goal is to get the order.

The “No More Objections” Close

Once all objections have been successfully addressed, you must close the prospect and ask for the order. As with the Initial Close, don’t even think about it and make this closing attempt an automatic part of your sales process. I refer to this closing attempt as the “No More Objections Close”. Once the prospect runs out of objections, the salesperson must ask for the order. Don’t think about it … just close.

Salespeople should always be direct and confident when closing a sale. The salesperson’s confidence makes the prospect confident about the decision to purchase. All objections have been successfully addressed and the salesperson must confidently assume the prospect is ready to do business.

Also, you must remain silent after you ask for an order. The prospect must be the next one to speak. There could be an uncomfortable pause while the prospect thinks about the final decision. If you interrupt that pause, you greatly diminish your probability of receiving the order. That’s why this is called strategic selling.

When You Must Close The Sale

As you now see, there are two moments in the sales process that call for a closing attempt. The first attempt is after you’ve presented the benefits of your product. The second time is after all objections have been successfully addressed. Implement this process and make closing automatic.

David Horne asked:


There are many coaching styles out there which is what makes our game of tennis so unique. All you have to do is see the various beliefs and methods of coaches and you often find that the way they coach is a direct result of the way that they were taught.

The modern game of tennis has seen the introduction of the “Big” forehand which is used by players such as Roddick, Williams, Sharapova and Federer to intimidate their opponents and be able to crunch winners from all over the court.

The forehand today is often taught with the player having a slight bend at the elbow and allowing the racket to loop around completing a circle before making contact with the ball. The traditional forehand was where the player turn side on to the ball, move the racket straight back behind them with arm extended between the hip and the knee. The closed stance prevailed during this swing.

The Negative aspect with this type of swing from a biomechanical perspective is that the athletes does not generate the fluid swing involved with a continuous swing nor do they allow the elbow to play a major role in the generation of racket head speed. When you take the racket straight back you are indeed able to generate better racket preparation, however, you inhibit your momentum by having the racket complete a stop or pause at the “turn around” point of the back swing. The continuous loop swing prevents this from happening.

I have often found many younger players developing the bad habit of using too much “wrist” during their loop on their backswing which ultimately leads to poor racket preparation and a slapping of the ball due to the player having to rush through the racket to meet the ball out in front.

With these players I have found that starting off with the straight racket back swing eliminates this problem and i then progress to the loop once they have taken the wrist out of their swing.

As with most tennis theories, we should follow the basics but also be willing to make adjustments for individuals using various techniques to correct their own bad habits.

The loop swing allows the player to maintain a continuous motion and allowing this racket head speed to continue as the racket drops below the ball just prior to impact thus generating the “brushing motion behind the ball” leading to topspin.

In summary, we should try to teach the players a loop swing but may need to follow different stages of progression with those players who show poor technique on their back swing. Teaching early racket preparation is the key to developing a great forehand and not waiting until the ball has bounced before we start our backswing. The power and spins used in today’s game will get you in trouble and will cause problems with timing.

Federer is a great example of great forehand technique where as Roddick has his own unique style involving explosive power that is difficult to teach to younger players as they don’t have the footwork or intensity to hit that ball like Roddick at their age.

Remember that tennis is an individual sport and you must use your experience and skills to help players get to a point where they still have their own natural style while maintaining sound and correct technique. Trying to copy the exact patterns or swing of a professional goes against the natural given talents of each individual.

Tennis is constantly evolving due to racket technology, improved physical conditioning of the athletes and the invention by certain players of new grips and swings. Tennis has become a power based sport and as a result we need to teach the younger players the right way from the start so that they have the opportunity later on to develop a big forehand weapon.