2 clients yesterday presented assumptions about the labour market that I knew to be incorrect. So the issue was not so much do I tell them, but how do I tell them. It seemed important that they did not leave the session without their assumptions being challenged.
In one case I challenged in the form of a question. Does it sound a good idea to spend 12 weeks and £900 on a training course to do a job that you do not intend to do?
In the second case, the client had appplied to a number of organisations we were discussing. But that was 3 years ago, prior to her current job. She clearly thought – I have been tried by them and found wanting. But she was now a different candidate. 3 years of work had given her a strong sense of her strengths as a ploicy researcher. I said several times – you are a diffenrent candidate. I think my intention was to inspire her.
The other interesting thing that happened was that one client had said that what she wanted to do was step outside her comfort zone and ‘make a difference’. What emerged was that all of the avenues we explored that did precisely that were rejected; she said herself – maybe i do not want to step too far outside the comfort zone or ‘make a difference’ to people who were in genuine need. I wondered if i should have spent more time exploring what she meant by those phrases. Another judgement call. Assumptions were made – by me. Not sure whether this damaged the exchange by exploring inappropriate areas. Or helped it by giving the client a reality check. On balance, i think I took the right approach – though the client may not have seen it like that. What price ‘clarifying your thinking’ if the clarification does not yiled the prize of a new and promising direction. she left with a couple of course ideas, both cheaper than the one she was contemplating – and a new job area. Whether she thought this was worthwhile I do not know. But I did. Sometimes a man’s got to do what a man’s got to do.
