The unique scientific-professional theory and method specialized in catalyzing the tacit component of human knowledge (engendering)
What is coaching?
Eo ipso Center recognizes different levels of depth when answering the question of what coaching is. It could be defined briefly and synthetically as the unique aid methodology for the catalysis of internal dynamics of the operative and singular engendering of people. However, to understand this definition, it is necessary to understand (1) what is the distinctive essence of this methodology, (2) what is the meaning of engendering, and (3) in what sense, or why, it is operative and singular.
Therefore, on a more detailed level, coaching could be defined as:
...the unique scientific-professional methodology specialised in catalysing the tacit component of human knowledge (engendering), where is sought, without transfer, that clients achieve their singular objectives or solve their singular problems on their own.
And by going even deeper and wider, since unusual concepts continue to appear in such definition, it is possible to define it as
(1) a process and/or helping relationship (determined by different, stages, phases, structures and/or procedures), (2) temporary (where a voluntary relationship is established between the coach and his/her client, which has a determined beginning and end), (3) under an operational methodology without transference or non directive (that is, where the coach abstains from consciously and/or deliberately transferring judgments, judging, information, knowledge and/or experiences on the natural dynamics of the participation of the personal coefficient of knowledge within the client's cogito-cogitatum relationship - and which is synthesized in the concept of content) and self-directed (who determines the direction towards which the process accompanies him, and the focus of the consciousness on the elements within it, is the client), (4) discursive or dialogical (established for the purpose of facilitating reflection, introspection and extrospection of the client), (5) eidetic and mainly praxeological (based on eidetic science and mainly on the study of deliberate or intentional human action, and oriented, therefore, to the change that the client expects to achieve), (6) trying that the client engenders or generates knowledge (it is sought to catalyze - activate, develop and/or enhance - the dynamics of the personal coefficient or tacit component of the human knowledge of the client eo ipso - that is to say, in, from and for himself), through constant testing and adjustment from his own experience, resulting in self-learning, self-management and/or self-regulation) , (7) facilitating him to face the circumstances in which he finds himself, in order to be in a better position to achieve his objectives or solve his problems as he understands them.
Defining coaching involves recognizing, understanding and articulating its essence and fundamental principles. When this is done, through proper study and research, it is possible to build, little by little, a General Theory. This is what Dr. Ravier has done throughout his more than 20 years of studies on the subject, which have allowed him to articulate and systematize, for the first time, the General Theory of Coaching.
Coaching is the unique aid methodology for singular and operative engendering in people
What is the General Theory of Coaching?
I s the theoretical-scientific systematization that explain the discipline and profession of Coaching.
In Dr. Ravier's doctoral thesis in Psychology addressed the fundamental problems that afflict the coaching profession and discipline, such as (1) the lack of a sufficiently agreed definition, (2) its intrinsic link to an amalgam of disparate methodologies, and in many ways contradictory, (3) its excessive inclination to consume tools and/or theories from other fields and disciplines, alien to it, and isolated from common and coherent methodological, philosophical and/or scientific bases and roots, (4) the non-recognition and/or articulation of a binding tradition, where their identity can be clarified and understood in the face of the many other aid processes that exist today, and (5) the scarcity of academic research that addresses these fundamental problems, as well as the absence of accurate information on their identity, application and real scope of their interventions.
Through his research, he managed: (1) descriptively articulate the theoretical essence of coaching as an identifying and fundamental element in the recognition of its own nature, (2) establish the guiding and fundamental principles that guide its practice, (3) describe and develop the fundamental competences and/or skills that must be mastered in its professional practice, being consistent with its essence and principles, (4) to scientifically base its relational,procedural and conversational structure, and finally (5) to propose a General Theory of Coaching, which integrates all the above, and which accounts for its distinguished epistemology, teleology (or purpose), operational methodology, competence approach, orientation of the tools and types of results achieved in its relationships, processes and conversations.
The research was carried out on the basis of dualism, individualism and methodological subjectivism, together with the subsidiary postulate of the existence of the tacit component of knowledge, under the combination of historical-evolutionary analysis (of the thinking of key authors who influenced the emergence of coaching) and an axiomatic-logical-deductive articulation.
The most important results of the research, are framed in the very articulation of the General Theory of Coaching, based on three scientific references: (1) First reference (prior est actio), relating to the continent, (2) Second reference (post actio), relating to content and operational methodology, and (3) Third reference, (per actum), relating to theoretical application.
The synthesis of the scientific foundations that make up the General Theory of Coaching and its main components are reflected in the following table.
| Scientific Foundations | Main components |
|---|---|
First reference (ante actio): the continent. |
- The Axiom of Human Consciousness. |
Second reference (post actio): the content and operational methodology. |
- The Nature of Tacit Knowledge. |
Third reference (in actio): theoretical application. |
- Definition of coaching. |
Below you can listen and watch the reading and defense of Dr. Ravier's doctoral thesis in Psychology "General Theory of Coaching" at the Autonomous University of Madrid (UAM). This thesis obtained the highest possible qualification in Spain "Outstanding Cum Laude".
In this way, the coaching that Eo ipso Center promotes and endorses, thanks to Dr. Ravier's research and contributions, has a solid scientific foundation, and enables coherent, efficient and ethical professional practice. In this sense, the General Theory of Coaching, not only solves the problems that afflict the mainstream of coaching, but has managed to establish the terms in which it manages to be really efficient and harmless.
The Endorsed Facilitators and Certified Professionals at Eo ipso Center master the scientific and professional fundamentals of coaching.
