I used to think my job was “teacher”.
No joke: if you came to one of my CrossFit classes in 2011, you’d have probably watched me draw a graph. On the floor. In colorful chalk.
I’d have explained the force/time curve, or maybe fat metabolism, or energy expenditure during a Tabata workout.
I thought depth of explanation meant “excellence”.
I was wrong.
As a client, you wouldn’t have cared about the x-axis or Rate of Force Development in the deadlift. You just wanted to get as strong as possible in the hour; burn some calories; feel some burn. THAT would have made for an excellent hour. Time and money well spent.
Whose definition of “excellent” really matters? Let me pose the question another way:
A new client says, “Ugh, I haaaaate deadlifts.” Imagine you’re able to mask your shock (it would be hard for me, too.)
Is our job, as coach, to convince them to love deadlifts? Or is it to give them a different hip extension exercise, explain the benefits, and get them back again tomorrow, when we’ll try to introduce the deadlift in a different way?
Can coaching be “excellent” if the client doesn’t perceive it to be?
Is “excellence” the same as “expertise”?
And if it’s not, then are we actually pursuing imbalance by focusing on training expertise and ignoring the creation of excellent systems and delivery in our business?
I think so.
People don’t care how much you know until they know how much you care.