It was my Forrest Gump-iness that allowed me to be so brash as to attend my second Conversation Among Masters conference, which was held this year from May 3 – 6 at the wonderful Chateau on the Lake in Branson, MO. It was an extraordinary event.

I could talk about the masterful facilitation by Laura Berman Fortgang and Phyllis Haynes. I could talk about how Zen master Dennis Genpo Menzel Roshi brought us into touch with all our inner voices and had a room full of master-level coaches proudly proclaiming their stupidity. I could talk about how Jody Turner, internationally sought-after consultant on modern cultural trends, helped us to touch the future. I could talk about how Stephen Josephs helped us see that we need to coach the complete human-being, body and psyche, if we are to help others find their inner-smile. I could talk about how Yakov Smirnov dove headlong into the most profound topics, leaving a trail of laughter and self-examination in his wake. I could talk about the vibrant discussion on how Coaching can best support the non-profit world. I could talk about all of that, but I won’t. Because, as gripping as those experiences were, none of that is what CAM is really about.

On the Conversation Among Masters web-site (www.conversationamongmasters.com), CAM is described as ‚Äúan invitation-only event designed specifically and exclusively for Master Level Coaches. We welcome master level coaches of all kinds from all over the world to CAM.” Fortunately, the founders (Bobette Reeder, Donna Steinhorn, and Guy Stickney) clearly view themselves as the stewards of CAM, not its owners, because they have allowed, even supported, the conference in evolving beyond that narrow definition. Bobbette, Donna, and Guy have the Coaching wisdom to let CAM be what it wants to be.

The large majority of attendees at CAM are indeed Coaches, and master-level ones at that, but it is not really about Coaching. CAM is true to its name. It’s about Mastery and it’s about Conversation. The speakers at CAM aren’t ‚ÄúPresenters”. They are ‚ÄúConversation Starters”. Only one of the Conversation Starters (Steven Josephs) self-identified as a Coach in their bio. The others are a Zen master (Genpo Roshi), an anthropologist (Jody Turner), and a comedian (Yakov Smirnov). But they are all Masters in their field. And when these Masters were put into Conversation with the attendees, the magic of cross-pollenization burst into being.

The power of this Conversation is evident in that, unlike most conferences where the presenters do their talk and then leave as soon as possible, most Conversation Starters ask to stay for the entire conference, easily moving from the role of presenter to that of attendee. They want to continue in the Conversation. There is no authority/audience boundary. There is only the Conversation. Oh no, CAM is much more than a Coaching conference. CAM is truly an ongoing Conversation among Masters of all types. The essence of CAM was best exemplified at the concluding Gala Event when Shirley Anderson received the CAM Lifetime Achievement Award. To hear the attendees speak in awe of Shirley as a real Master who has created the truest of Conversations throughout her life, that made it clear what CAM was really all about.

So, being neither a certified master-level Coach nor what I would consider a master of any type, what was I doing at CAM? Having naively attended CAM the year before, I knew what it was really all about. As long as I could Converse, I would belong. And what I also learned the year before was that the CAM founders, the Conversation Starters, and the attendees all warmly welcomed and embraced (literally) passionate conversationalists of every stripe. So, true to my Forrest Gump-iness, I returned to CAM, and you can bet I will keep returning to CAM for as long as the Conversation continues.

Next year’s CAM will take place May 12 – 15 at the Tamaya Resort near Santa Fe, New Mexico. Attendance is limited to 200. Should you be there? If you are a true Master, then you belong there.

Or if you are na√Øve enough to believe you belong there, then you do. Don’t worry about the ‚Äúinvitation-only” part. Embrace your Forrest Gump-iness and ask for an invitation. Remember: ‚ÄúLife is like a box of chocolates. You never know what you’re gonna get.”

Guinevere is a victim of her ego. In her first song she is a young girl who has been condemned to an arranged political marriage to King Arthur. She sings:

“Shall I not be on a pedestal,

Worshipped and competed for?

Not be carried off, or better still

Cause a little war?

Where are the simple joys of maidenhood?”

What Guinevere believes she wants is to be coveted, so coveted that nations would go to war for her.

Lancelot is lulled into a false sense of security by the high level of spiritual development he has achieved. In his introductory song he is on his way to seek admission to the fabled Round Table, bored by a life so perfect that he no longer feels challenged, Lancelot sings:

‚ÄúI’ve never strayed

From all I believe;

I’m blessed with an iron will.

Had I been made

The Partner of Eve,

We’d be in Eden still.”

What Lancelot believes he wants is to be tested, certain that he can meet any standard that is demanded of him.

Arthur is, perhaps, the saddest of all because he is the most self-aware of the three. When he first meets Guinevere, he tells her he never wanted to be king … until the moment that he saw her. Then, suddenly, he felt like he wanted not only to be king, but the most splendid king who ever reigned.

What Arthur believes he wants is to become a glorious monarch in order to win Guinevere’s admiration. What he has forgotten to want is to become a man she could love.

At the end of the play the three are standing on a field in France with Arthur and Lance’s armies about to tear each other apart over Guinevere. Their world is in tatters, despite each having gotten exactly what they asked for. Guinevere had not understood the real horrors of war when she asked for one. Lancelot had not understood that tests can sometimes actually be failed, with tragic consequences. Arthur had not understood that kings must sometimes take actions that break their hearts as men.

Wanting what they did not really want was the root of these characters’ tragedy. Wanting what we do not really want is the root of all tragedy.

The wish that is granted with disastrous results is a common motif in the traditional stories of humankind. (For a whimsical take on this motif, you might enjoy my story ‚ÄúThe Post-Modern Genie.” The Universe is an immense, benevolent Genie. When we ask for something with all our mind, all our heart, all our focus, the Universe will see to it that we get what we wish for. That is why it is crucial that we wish for only what we truly want.

Coaching is the most powerful instrument available today for creating wishes, intention, and focus. The Coach guides the Client in formulating the Quest-ions that will form the template for the Universe’s response to the Client’s wishes. That is an immense, and dangerous, responsibility. Wrong questions will result in the client wanting what they do not really want. Wrong questions can result in tragedy.

In my book, ‚ÄúIn Case of Emergency, Ask Question,” I go back two millennia to find the sources of ‚ÄúThe Perfect Question”, the one question that must form the root for any question tree that will result in wanting what we really want. This Perfect Question is an indispensable tool for Coaches as we help our Clients navigate the dangerous terrain of their lives.

Please join me soon for an Uncommon Conversation on ‚ÄúThe Perfect Question.”

Gathered around the table were some of the most experienced practitioners of the coaching art, several of whom had been present at the creation. They had built this profession, and now they came together to set it on fire.

Looking out the windows of the meeting room at the Grove Park Inn, we could see the breathtaking Blue Ridge Mountains stretching out before us. As the conversation unfolded about the future of Coaching, we were put in mind of how, on those mountains, both Nature and Humans will sometimes set fire to sections of the forest to create the opportunity for new growth. We wondered whether, before we could contemplate the future growth of Coaching, we would first have to courageously examine what it is time for Coaching to let go of. We wanted to set the profession on fire with all its glorious possibilities. We knew, at a gut level, that the new fire would have to be fueled by burning up the house.

Imagine, if you will, the courage it took for those who had built the structure of this profession to now examine what they had to say good-bye to in order to insure its future. But there was no hesitation, no regret. The task was approached with a sense of joy and a feeling of liberation. It was a moment for smashing taboos. Anything was on the table. We would refuse to be bound by tradition or convention. The foundation for the future would be preserved. That which had once served us, but now limited our growth would be released with honor and piled on a hero’s pyre.

Brain sparks flew around the table, igniting conversation and illuminating the path. These are just some of areas the group was courageous enough to put the torch to (Warning: Coaching traditionalists may find some of the following to be shocking and inappropriate for children):

• Being ‚Äö√Ñ√∫agenda-less‚Äö√Ñ√π is a myth. It’s not all about the client. The client is part of a society, as is the coach. The coach has a duty to promote social responsibility in the client.
• Certification is a barrier to many who could greatly benefit the future of coaching. We must welcome those who can help us build that future.
• Coaching has become isolated as a profession unto itself. We must burn down the walls and play in other professions’ sandbox, and welcome them into ours. Even if it means foregoing the safety of the title of ‚Äö√Ñ√∫coach.”
• If there is to truly be a Coaching ‚Äö√Ñ√∫profession‚Äö√Ñ√π, we must stop fragmenting and must open up the borders within the profession. Any profession, to be worthy of that title, must be based on a solid academic foundation which validates it to society and prepares future professionals. And academia means openness, the free exchange of ideas and methods. Which Coaching school one graduated from must no longer matter. Which certification one holds, if any, must no longer matter. We must not hold on to our ideas as if they were property. Rather, we must plant them as seeds for the new growth in our Coaching forest. The ideas that unite us and promote our growth must be nurtured. The ideas that divide us and lead to stagnation must be tossed in the fire.
• To become a ‚Äö√Ñ√∫profession,” Coaching has come to take itself much too seriously. It has lost the whimsy, humor, and perspective that, in the beginning made it such a powerful tool for personal development. We must be willing to let go of the ‚Äö√Ñ√∫seriousness‚Äö√Ñ√π and return the sense of ‚Äö√Ñ√∫joy‚Äö√Ñ√π to Coaching.
• Most importantly, we cannot hold on to the way things are done today simply because we have become masterly at it. If finding new approaches to Coaching means that we must return to a Novice state, we must be willing to place our Mastery on the fire. If integrating with other professions and sources of wisdom means that we become children again, then we are ready to play.

The question, of course, was faced: What next? We realized that the path to that answer might be different for each of us. We decided to pursue a Quest for Fire. We were put in mind of the legendary Grail Quest. No one on that Quest had a clear idea of what the Grail would turn out to be. They just knew they had to search. They each had an individual path to the common goal of the Grail.

We, too, would pledge ourselves to such a Quest. We would individually search for the future of Coaching. And we would form a sort of Round Table here at the Coaching Commons to share what we had learned on the Quest, and to mutually support each other as we faced the Monsters that any Quest inevitably encounters.

We had lit the fire, and it warmed us and lighted the path. But we know there are two types of fire. The ancient Greeks created the word “pyros” for the ordinary, consuming sort of fire that pyromaniacs use so destructively. They also had another word, “tekein” for the melting, shaping, creative sort of fires that tek-nologists use so creatively.

Will the fire that was lit that day be a “pyros” or a “tekein”? Only we – and you – can determine that.

NOTE: Thanks to all who sat around that table and sparked the fire! Lable Braun, Linda Conklin, Joan Cook, Lynne Gilliland, Ruth Ann Harnisch, Susan Klein, Andrea Lee, Maggie Lichtenberg, Rich Maxwell, DJ Mitsch, Isabel Parlett, Jay Perry, Bobette Reeder, Jim Richmond, Drazia Rubenstein, Laurie Sheppard, Diane Krause-Stetson, Scott Wintrip, Karen Wright, Kathy Baske Young.

The history of human labor is a progression of morphing to adapt to the economic environment and to population pressures. We have gone from the Arborial Browser, to the Hunter-Gatherer, to the Agriculturist/Herder, to the Industrial Worker, to our current state of the Knowledge Worker economy. In each case, when the form of labor no longer aligns with the means of production, History calls forth a new form of labor to fill the gap. Because of the acceleration of human economic development and the explosion of human population, the intervals between phase-transitions continually decreases.

The roots of the age of the Knowledge Worker stretch back to the birth of Information Technology in the late 1950s / early 1960s. The means of production became more and more information-based, and so the form of labor had to adapt to becoming more and more knowledge-based. It has been almost 50 years now, and that form of labor is about ready to begin its retirement, as are the Baby Boom generation who were its chief practitioners.

What, then, is next? The most reliable means of predicting the answer to that question is to look to where there is a gap. History will always fill the gap.

Right behind the Baby Boom generation is a Baby Bust generation, followed by a Second Boom generation made up of the grown children of the Baby Boomers. The Baby Bust era will last about 20 years. As the experience and insight that the Baby Boomers have gathered throughout their careers exits the traditional workforce, the proportion of Wisdom available to support those just developing their careers will drop precipitously. Baby Busters had a plethora of Baby Boomers to support their career development. Second Boomers will have a severe scarcity of Baby Busters to support their development. I call this the looming Wisdom Gap.

Technology will help fill the gap to some degree by making the transmission of Wisdom easier to accomplish on a broadband basis. The phenomenon of Web 2.0, where Wisdom can be shared broadly through Social Networking is an initial manifestation of History attempting to fill the Wisdom Gap. But the gap will be so wide that Technology by itself will not be able to fill it. It is my firm belief that this is the exact reason that History has called forth the vocation of Coaching – to allow those holding the Wisdom to continue to transfer it without having to continue to fill traditional roles in the workforce. The Coaching vocation is the vanguard of the Wisdom Worker wave. But, to fulfill this mission, Coaching will have to evolve and adapt. As Technology is creating Web 2.0, we in the Coaching vocation need to create Coaching 2.0.

Coaching 1.0 was created at the tail end of the transition from Industrial Worker to Knowledge Worker. It therefore carries characteristics of both those forms of labor: the procedural nature of industrial work, and the focus on competencies of knowledge work. As the Wisdom Age advances, many of these characteristics cannot help but become vestigial.

We stand now at the nexus of the Knowledge Age and the Wisdom Age. Therefore, the characteristics of the Wisdom Worker will need to be some mixture of knowledge skills and wisdom skills, with the accent shifting to a greater extent to wisdom skills as the Wisdom Age progresses.

Over the course of the Knowledge Age we have gained a fair grasp of knowledge skills. But the big unknown is what Wisdom skills are. If we are to lay the foundation of Coaching 2.0 we need to build an academic base capable of developing those skills.

I believe that the movement arising to look more closely at traditional cultures and their mytho-shamanistic forms of transmitting knowledge is one of the means that we are exploring to understand the characteristics of being a Wisdom Worker. Even at the early stages, this approach is bearing extraordinary fruit. But to be truly effective, we will have to understand how to embed this knowledge inside a modern setting such as a corporation.

This is the reason I have chosen to embed myself in the work world as a Director of Organizational Development. In many ways, it is a field-trip for exploring the evolution of Coaching 2.0. I believe that Coaching 2.0 will require that we embed the Wisdom where it is needed, at the point where the work is being done. Coaching must be injected directly into the cellular structure of the organization.

That is not to say that the Executive Coaching elements of Coaching 1.0 are not needed. Without the Executive Coach reinforcing a climate of Humanism among the executive staff, the efforts of the embedded Wisdom Worker are hopeless. We need both the external coach and the embedded coach, and we need for them to work together. I firmly believe that will be the essential nature of Coaching 2.0.

So I would like to share with you what I have learned thus far on my expedition regarding the characteristics that will be necessary for the Wisdom worker. I will start with a simple formula for the nature of Wisdom. Consider this the ingredients that I am throwing into the pot. But we will need more in order to have a full-bodied stew.

Thus far, I would say that Wisdom = Knowledge + Experience + Insight.

Are these the correct ingredients? Should any be removed? Should any be added? And what is the recipe for cooking it all up?

We are only at the very dawn of the age of the Wisdom Worker. When we burned up the house we created the fire under the pot. Your additions to the stew, and your personal recipes for its creation, will help assure that it has a tasty breakfast waiting for it when it arises.