That reads crudely perhaps, but the self-help industry has been around since Christ was a child. And the bubble has burst a number of times since then. Only to float up to the hungry marketplace again and again.

Yet do we want the self-help industry to go away? Not as long as human beings seek wisdom and growth, personally or professionally. Indeed, we can choose to pursue the journey alone, but even then most of us will pick up a book or some other form of teaching from “other” along the way.

Philanthropy is nice, but most teachers, at least in the beginning, like to get paid

The current economic climate will support another self-help bubble as much as the previous climate did. Yesterday the “gurus” were telling us opportunity abound; today they’re telling us the same thing because now there’s less competition dontcha-know. Religion, in all its slick iterations, preys upon vulnerability, and right now a lot of people are feeling very vulnerable. Nothing new in this playbook except that the Internet permits religion to proliferate very rapidly.

I don’t know anything about Fray or his followers. The incident was tragic, but I can’t get past the whole common sense thing, unsexy as it is. One party was exercising blind faith in his own abilities as a leader (assuming he was earnest in his desire to be a leader who impacts lives in a positive manner). The other party was exercising blind faith in a process that appears–at least on the face of it–questionable and unsafe.

However, the balance of power was–and generally is–tipped toward the PRACTITIONER, and a huge responsibility comes with that. I can only imagine that if one is in a deep meditative state of some kind, common sense might not be so available to one’s faculties.

This wasn’t a one-off or an unlikely outcome. That’s clear.

So, back to your question, Andrea, on how to DO better as practitioners in the future:

It will come down to a willingness to ask more questions prior to the delivery of our products and services. We must seek to understand our client’s abilities, needs, circumstances and so on before we “touch” him or her in any lasting way. Like the doctor prescribing medication to a patient who believes he wants more medication for what ails him, it’s too easy to give him what he “wants” rather than seeking first to understand the source of pain, and the source of desire.

So, do we want more religion?

Or do we want something else?

Cheers,
Karri

I’m using this opportunity to reflect *very* deeply on positive thinking, coercive persuasion, the right uses of power, and techniques of change in personal development. I encourage others to do the same.

I liked Sharon’s comments.

The question certainly passed over my head, as I’m sure it does most people. A cultish retreat in a sweat lodge doesn’t sound anything like a course on CDs or even a live pep talk from Anthony Robbins, who may lead you to walk over the coals.

Therefore, I don’t anticipate much flack for the industry as a whole.

Leadership, or coaching, can aspire to take people beyond their normal limits, past the point at which they would normally give up. The motivation to “Do or Die”, literally, is rarely seen outside of the military.
Evidently, a dead civilian cannot improve from any course.

The bar was set too high. Usually, in health club scenarios people are warned not to spend more than a few minutes in the sauna. Particularly if they follow-up in a plunge pool.

If we enrol a group of sedentary, middle aged people in a Fun Run, training by following an Olympic runner at 4 minute mile pace would be ludicrous. Most untrained people would require say 12 minutes to accomplish the mile. Ordinarily, the sedentary runners would simply be unable to maintain the pace and would slow down without undue harm. If, however, we introduce heat and dehydration into the mix, serious repurcussions become more likely. These are exactly the same circumstances that the retreat participants experienced in the sweat lodge.

Not surprisingly, several members suffered nausea, fainting and even death. They were not capable of enduring a marathon 2 hour session in such heat and humidity in an airless, confined space.

Fortunately, these particpants seem to have been middle aged. The toll would, likely, have been even higher had there been retirees.

It is not clear, so far, whether participants had water?

The basic purpose of the sweat lodge is detoxification. Unfortunately, in a large group, the release of toxins can be counter-productive, in that some can be passed to the other particpants, who are in a receptive state: exchanging bodily fluids (sweat) with their neighbors and having the pores of their skin enlarged to release sweat but also absorb gases.

How might we describe what these ethics and responsibilities? To focus on them is good, but what are they, so we CAN focus on them? Maybe they’re obvious, or feel like they should be obvious, but clearly they’re not, or we wouldn’t be having this conversation.

So to capture the elusive obvious, might we start a list? How about…

Do no harm
Charge a fair price (whatever that is)
Teach people self-sufficiency….
———–

To this list I would add:

* When you appropriate another culture’s ritual, bother yourself to research it with the verve of an adademician & know every single possible side effect both psychological, physical and metaphysical

* Do your own internal work so that you know you are undertaking such a serious ritual as a sweat with the appropriate spirit, intentions and reasons. Any reason that points back to you in any way, is the wrong reason.

* Adapt what you are doing to minimize the damages

* Fully pre-inform all participants of those potential damages

* Ensure that a minimum of one professional caregiver (nurse, med tech etc.) is present per three to five participants at a potentially life threatening situation.

If you can’t make this minimum set of “ground floor level” responsibility, then cancel your event and teach something that will not have the ability to maim or kill participants.

That’s my .02 as one with history in shamanic practice, and one reason why I’d never do anything for the public like a mass sweat. It’s also why in the twenty-five years I knew him, my teacher only did a bare handful of sweats, only with people he’d worked with for years, only when properly prepared and usually for some community emergency situation, to help others.

Others’ mileage may vary, but I say err on the side of caution. If you can’t do your own internal work, study up, prevent badness & provide reasonable after-care, just don’t do it.

Is/was Mr. Ray a coach.. a guru.. a facilitator.. a cult leader? How about Dave? How about Andrea? How about Thomas? How about me?

Who/what labels me? Do I label myself, or do my clients, “followers”, the government, a diploma or letters after my name? And regardless how or by whom the label is applied, are not my actions and my image colored by anyone who accepts the label – including myself.

I call myself a coach. My clients accept the label and respond to me as a coach. When leading a workshop, I call myself a presenter, or trainer. The participants respond to me as though I were a presenter and/or trainer. It does not matter to me what I am calling myself at any given moment, all that matters is that I offer value to the people with whom I am working. And I am not usually concerned about whether the my offer is accepted. My job is simply to offer it.

I have attended and participated in workshops where a volunteer participant received great value because of a provocative and challenging session with a presenter/trainer (in some cases myself). On occasion someone in the audience did not recognize that the volunteer had received any value at all, and in fact, judged that the volunteer had been overly stressed or even harmed by the experience.

Who was correct? Who decides..? My answer has always been “Ask the client/volunteer.” They are the only one who knows if, and how much value was received. It is personal. It is internal.

Since I believe the client/participant is the only person able to determine his/her level of participation, and his/her level of value received, and to determine his/her boundaries, it is not a leap for me to say, only the coach/presenter/trainer/facilitator/guru is able to determine his/her level of integrity and focus. Their level of caring, supporting, championing. It is internal.

And truthfully, there is not much anyone can do to change that!

Sharon Lindenburger (above) says: “I think this entire incident points to the fact that there is a great need to focus on ethics and responsibility, to realize that when people put themselves into the care and guidance of another, there is a huge ethical responsibility attached to that.”

I don’t quite get the sense of this statement. It isn’t clear to me who has the “huge ethical responsibility” here? The people putting themselves into the situation, or the “leader” whose care and guidance they may be expecting?

I would say it is the responsibility of the people, as individuals, to NOT put themselves into the kind of situation where their well-being is determined by someone else. That being said, a number of people will continue to do just that. And truthfully, not much can be done to change that.

In addition Sharon says “The “correction” that happened on Wall Street regarding financial gougers, and which triggered a worldwide recession, may now also be coming to the personal growth industry–and given that the personal growth industry is a 14 billion dollar industry, it’s about time this happened. It’s time to clean house.”

My understanding of this “correction” was that it happened because many individuals (ignorant or greedy, or both) believed in, and followed certain “leaders” (including the government) into making less than thoughtful choices.

This, to me is what is now most likely coming to the personal-growth industry. Individuals making less than careful choices due to ignorance or greed – following leaders/gurus who say they can have instant fulfillment, enlightenment, or wisdom and they won’t to have to work for it very long or hard… and this, if it goes on long enough enough (like the financial foolishness did) will lead to a dramatic correction.

If any answers are to be found in Andrea’s emerging list [Do no harm, Charge a fair price (whatever that is), Teach people self-sufficiency] I wonder, in today’s society, who or what is going to keep me, or you, following the guidelines of such a list? And who and what will determine whether or not we have remained within those guidelines? Whether we have remained in integrity? Will it be necessary to force some of us into integrity?

If we, as individuals cannot or will not remain focused on the client, and remain in integrity, who will do it for/to us? Is it now time in the coaching/personal growth industry for the government or other authoritative body to enforce such things? I would hope not, because truthfully, there’s not much chance that it will work. Integrity is by its very definition – “internal consistency or lack of corruption” – an inside job!

So, as a coach (which is what I call myself – not yet having been promoted to guru by anyone) I will remain with the basics, examine myself, learn from my mistakes, push the envelope, honor and respect my clients, and do what I love. If or when, what I do becomes too heavily weighted with external regulation, “you have-to” requirements, or fear based structures and strictures, I will gladly move on and find something else with which to occupy myself.

I resonate with what Fran Henry addresses with regards to people ultimately being responsible for listening to their own physical/emotional guidance system. This is something I have come to learn, practice and teach by partnering with horses and their unbiased ability to provide honest and immediate feedback from our internal emotions and external actions.

However, it’s also quite clear that the vast majority of people are not in touch with their own “internal guidance system” and most often look outside of themselves for answers and direction. Even if the answers and direction they are seeking are “how to understand their own internal guidance system”!

I’m not going to throw stones and James Ray or insinuate that hes’ a money driven ego maniac. I’m sure his attorneys whisked him away and advised him not to speak to the media. Personally, I think that’s a tragedy in itself. For someone who proclaims to show others how to stand in their own power and authenticity I find it incongruent that he didn’t stay and address the situation.

As for people taking responsibility for themselves to keep themselves safe, the reality of the situation is that most of them were probably in an extremely vulnerable place of opening up to a new way of understanding themselves and were following the “leader”.

As a society, we are trained to follow the leader. We have a natural curiosity about the ones who have gone before us and slayed their demons, or at least made friends with them. We want to know how we can do that too!

When we find ouselves leading others on a path that we have traveled ouselves, then it is paramount that we always hold their best interest at the forefront of our intentions and honor the trust and vulnerability that has led them to us in the first place.

While common sense seemed to be absent all around in the development of this tragic incident in which all were harmed and two died, Ray’s behavior seems to be focused more on the good of his ego, the transformation of his bank account and less on his responsibilities to those who entrusted their desire for clarity and personal development with him.

I hope the lessons reach far…they only will if we agree it’s important they do…and spread the word accordingly. Those who work in this industry that don’t read further and think this through will be behind the curve – an unnecessary waste of good minds. Instead I hope we can help create the curve ahead.

Since the industry will undoubtedly survive in one shape or other, Dave, I would love to hear your and everyone’s thoughts about how to do it better.

Sharon said, “there is a great need to focus on ethics and responsibility, to realize that when people put themselves into the care and guidance of another, there is a huge ethical responsibility attached to that.”

How might we describe what these ethics and responsibilities? To focus on them is good, but what are they, so we CAN focus on them? Maybe they’re obvious, or feel like they should be obvious, but clearly they’re not, or we wouldn’t be having this conversation.

So to capture the elusive obvious, might we start a list? How about…

Do no harm
Charge a fair price (whatever that is)
Teach people self-sufficiency

Is this what we mean? Something else? What else would you add to this kind of foundational code of ethics and responsibilities for teachers/leaders/mentors/coaches?

So I think the lesson here is that seminar leaders, motivational speakers, coaches, and teachers have to be always cognizant of not succumbing to hubris–the kind of overweening pride and ego–and greed–that can seduce a successful teacher into what appears to be almost total narcissism. I think this entire incident points to the fact that there is a great need to focus on ethics and responsibility, to realize that when people put themselves into the care and guidance of another, there is a huge ethical responsibility attached to that. Most coaches don’t cram people into an oven-like atmosphere, but I have seen ego on the part of coaches and seminar leaders wound people in other ways–by fostering over-dependence, by continually upselling needy people on products and services they cannot afford, by pushing people into dealing with issues they are not yet ready to deal with, by distorting both science and reason in favour of some quackery pseudo-science (such as those “gurus” who attempt to use the principles of quantum physics, which they don’t understand, to give people the idea that they can have and attract anything they want, and that if they don’t get what they want, there is something wrong with them–a cruel blow to people’s self-esteem and sense of functionality in the world.)

As Dave Lakhani says, the lessons are far-reaching. The entire personal growth industry is now under scrutiny by the public, and the fallout is likely to be a severe erosion of trust. Coaches may have to work a lot harder to convince their clients that they (the coaches) are not cult leaders, money-grubbers, or purveyors of lies.

Ultimately I think the Buddhist idea of right livelihood is salient here. To the Buddha, right livelihood entailed not making one’s living by harming others, nor carrying out your business practices at the expense of others. I think the coaching industry needs to start a dialogue about “what is right livelihood in the field of coaching and teaching–what does it mean to be in integrity, and how do we educate people to recognize when their teachers or coaches have drifted away from integrity into ego?”

The “correction” that happened on Wall Street regarding financial gougers, and which triggered a worldwide recession, may now also be coming to the personal growth industry–and given that the personal growth industry is a 14 billion dollar industry, it’s about time this happened. It’s time to clean house.