
Signs that (business/life coaches) just want your money - chime
http://chir.ag/201011051505
======
zavulon
My rule of thumb is usually, I don't want to listen to somebody who got
rich/successful by teaching other people how to get rich/successful. They have
become rich before, and then teach others just because they enjoy doing it.

When I read self-help advice by Mark Cuban, or Benjamin Franklin, I tend to
trust that a lot more than advice from Tony Robbins or Richard Kyosaki.

That is not to say I'd never listen to their message.. but I take everything
they say with a big grain of salt.

~~~
3dFlatLander
> I don't want to listen to somebody who got rich/successful by teaching other
> people how to get rich/successful

I heard someone describe this as 'incestuous'. Web hosting review sites that
make money from links to the hosts come to mind. But yes, I also get a red
flag whenever seeing someone making money by telling others how to do so.

~~~
mikecarlucci
Like say, The Four Hour Work Week? It got so much buzz I'm glad I was able to
borrow a copy and see what it was all about. Just as glad I didn't buy it too.
His best example is to write a book that may provide insight into shortcuts.

------
rfrey
_If what you say cannot be proven or disproven, I'm not interested, even if
all of it might be true_

Although a good starting point, that's a disappointing place to end up. The
scientific method was a monumental leap forward in epistemology, but it is not
the alpha and omega of knowledge.

~~~
chime
In the context of how I wrote it, I meant if you're providing me an
explanation/solution to a problem, you better be able to prove that is indeed
the case. Telling me that "concentrate on your chakras to reduce your stress"
won't cut it. Mentioning the <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atharvaveda> or
translations of it, isn't good enough either. As far as I know no chakras have
been found during any dissection nor have we found any evidence of them
indirectly. So any claims made on the basis of chakras are invalid as far as
I'm concerned. I would be open to interpreting chakras as aspects of our
personality if someone can provide a reasonable basis for them.

~~~
psyklic
Ah ha - but there are so many things that cannot be "proven" to be true, yet
are still helpful. Stress relief techniques are a case in point - most of us
probably try lots of techniques and ultimately end up using what works best
for us. There are also complications - e.g. meditation might work best for
most people, but I personally may not have the time (or the patience) to do it
properly.

Hence, I am fine with being given a non-scientific list of stress relief
techniques - as long as they are not harmful or time-consuming, then I would
be willing to try them.

~~~
chime
> Stress relief techniques are a case in point - most of us probably try lots
> of techniques and ultimately end up using what works best for us.

Wouldn't it be awesome if you could input variables like your personality,
lifestyle, and preferences and get a reliable list of stress-relief techniques
along with the probability that they'll work for you? Maybe it's impossible
with our current standard of knowledge but surely you can imagine an advanced
civilization that can do it by simulating "you" inside a virtual machine or
just solving trillions of linear equations for every variable that defines
you. What isn't provable today may be provable (within bounds) tomorrow.

Unfortunately, the problem today is that the moment someone shows that X works
for Y in condition Z, everyone starts trying to sell X to everyone else for
every problem.

~~~
psyklic
First, no physical science has "provable" results - they are merely
correlational. Second, such a study would have a gargantuan cost, merely for
results that would have limited practical use. An expert in stress relief can
probably come up with a very accurate list of techniques for someone that
would help them out. Using your approach only gives a small optimization on
this.

However, scientists should investigate _why_ stress relief techniques work,
and that investigation may overlap a bit.

------
SabrinaDent
Theory: The key sign that business/life coaches just want your money is that
they call themselves business or life coaches.

------
iantimothy
This is a subject that resonates with me for deeply personal reasons.

One of the arguments that supporters of such coaches, and the coaches
themselves use is that knowledge is valuable only if recipients of that
knowledge value it. The extension of this argument is that a recipient of
knowledge will not value it unless he or she has parted money to obtain it.

One phrase I hear tossed around a lot in Singapore is, "You must sow before
you reap."

What really irks me is how these gurus/coaches really know how to position
themselves as individuals who are returning to the community.

So, I've been thinking whether there is a way to flip this model around. If
someone is truly seeking to help the community and truly believes that the
seeker of knowledge needs to pay a price before they can extract full value of
imparted knowledge, then this model, that I'm hoping I eventually can
personally implement, should not be too hard to digest.

The model: The guru/coach creates a program with very clear milestones and
deliverables. The student pays a lump sum which is held in escrow by a third
party (e.g. charity, educational institution...).

When the student meets all the milestones and deliverables, at the end of the
program, the money is returned to the student. If the student fails to achieve
any milestone, the money is donated to a charity. If the student partially
achieves the goals set in the beginning, then teacher and student need to sit
down and determine what went wrong and reach a consensus on the amount
returned to the student and amount given to charity.

I've shared this model with some friends and I do believe there are points
that still need to be worked out, but I sincerely hope there will be a day
when people who seek to better themselves are not impoverished for the
personal aggrandizement of others.

------
ChristianMarks
The worst is being compelled by an employer to endure such presentations. If
you ever find yourself in this position, you have strong evidence that you
have failed in your career.

------
forgottenpaswrd
I use to consider as truth what other people says for a limited time frame,
and test it in real life. I don't care about the person making money or not,
just about if what the person does improve my life or not, or gives me an
insight.

When I was a kid I used to be the "know it all" rational child witch only
believes what it could understand, but as the Buddhist say "if you make the
wrong questions, you get the wrong answers", we know it today as "garbage in,
garbage out", no matter how powerful is your processing unit or the processing
time if you supply it with bad data, you get bad conclusions.

I continue trying to understand "everything", but the time frame of "suspended
belief" lets me to experiment without judging. If you rationalize too much you
could become the ancient Greek that despised experience. The current
ideas(beliefs) in your mind fight against possible new ones.

e.g. Some people(most of them) suffer from being wrong, your "ego" responds
with pain, you could feel hurt if someone publicly prove you are wrong, so the
obvious solution for your brain to protect you is to put down external ideas.
Everybody wants to change the world, nobody(few) wants to change herself.

------
epo
Peddling something that amounts to psychotherapy. without a grounding in
science is clearly suspect. Not necessarily bogus as some belief systems like
religion, which have no scientific basis, can have ends which justify the
means.

These people are promising some kind of transformative process which feeds on
an individuals desire for change. They are literally parasites feeding on the
desperate, but it is important to remember parasites aren't necessarily* bad,
just unpleasant to those of us who don't need their services.

* generally (IMHO) bad, just not necessarily

------
sliverstorm
You had me at "I'm skeptical of people...". We really need more people to be
more skeptical IMO.

------
ahoyhere
Most coaches are full of crap. So are most parents, teachers, therapists,
doctors, lawyers, tax accountants, designers, programmers, consultants and
freelancers of every variety, and anyone who ever talks about, writes about,
or even thinks the word "entrepreneur."

But oh, no, HN hates business coaches especially because of the sneaking
feeling that they're tricked by approaches that HN readers cannot understand.
Those tricksy life coaches, they'll never get one over on us! All advice
should be free! All you have to do is read once to understand! They can't fix
your life if you make no effort therefore they are bogus! If they cannot
quantify and prove the vaguaries of the human heart, more so than the best
scientists in the world, they are a lying thieving scumbag!

Please.

The original essay is fine-ish, except that it states that the mere presence
of good speaking skills means you should suspect a person. The mere presence
of a statement like that in a blog post means you should suspect a person.
When a person makes a statement like that, you should be on your guard about
everything else the person has to say (write), because that indicates a
sweeping generalization and no small amount of personal/professional jealousy.

Oh yes, witty mnemonics, they're a sign that evil is afoot!

But so is showing that you belong to a community and attempting to gain its
respect as "one of us" by loudly attacking a presumed common enemy.

See, bloggers just want your money and attention too.

~~~
yummyfajitas
_Most coaches are full of crap. So are most parents, teachers, therapists,
doctors, lawyers..._

I believe the point being made is that "life coaches" are exceptionally good
at disguising that they are full of crap.

If you force yourself to do the hard work of understanding a dry technical
text, filling in the missing details yourself, BS will stand out. If you smile
and nod to a charismatic speaker, it wont.

------
zackattack
It's easy to find a good business or life coach. Ask them to provide
references of at lest 3 past clients. Ask the references what their lives were
like before and what their lives are like now. If there is a significant
difference, then go for it.

~~~
mahmud
Problem with references is that they're not accurate. People who seek out a
life-coach are already working to improve themselves. Along with seeing the
life-coach they will make other changes to their life that might improve
things, and they will blindly attribute the positive changes to that paid
experience.

You can see this in people who were criminals then become deeply religious.
Their lives "improve" after becoming devout in their faith because they stop
abusing substance, smoking, gambling and associating with other criminals.
What the dogma gave them is just some codified rules, no one else needs to
join the religion to reap the benefits of discipline, but to the
practitioners, their faith is the end all be all and they have evidence to
prove "it works".

~~~
zavulon
> What the dogma gave them is just some codified rules, no one else needs to
> join the religion to reap the benefits of discipline, but to the
> practitioners, their faith is the end all be all and they have evidence to
> prove "it works".

I wouldn't make such a sweeping statement about everybody who became
religious, even if you're only talking about criminals. You have no way of
knowing this.

~~~
mahmud
I am not talking about religion alone, that was only an example, take any
other "system" to organize human behavior that doesn't directly credit the
human adopter, and it's the same.

Another example is people who swear by military service as the only way to
become disciplined.

