Coaching and Consultations (Blog)

[Steve Pavlina]

Use this thread to discuss the following entry from Steve Pavlina's blog:

Coaching and Consultations

[Thomas]

How about a Steve-Pavlina-certified-coach system? It could work similarly to what David Allen does and would provide a lower price (and thus more access) to those with less money.

As an aside: Do you plan to stop posting regularly/casually on the forums?

[Dan.Linehan]

Sounds great, good to hear you are offering this.

[Steve Pavlina]

Originally Posted by Thomas

How about a Steve-Pavlina-certified-coach system? It could work similarly to what David Allen does and would provide a lower price (and thus more access) to those with less money.

As an aside: Do you plan to stop posting regularly/casually on the forums?

Training other coaches would be a little premature at this point, but it's a possibility down the road.

Based on how things have been progressing, it seems likely that eventually I'll have to scale back or drop participating in the forums. Most likely I'll have an assistant compile and summarize some of the feedback since I often use the feedback to spawn new article ideas.

[pianoperformer]

Wait, surely you can clone yourself? There could be one for writing articles, one for coaching, and one for posting on the forum. And one for Erin, too, I guess.

I don't know how you do so many things...

[Jeff Lilly]

I just don't see the logic. If you have, say, 100 people who need your help, but you can only help 10 of them, why do you choose the richest ten?

I understand if your primary goal is to make money, you should definitely pick the people who will pay you the most. But if you really want to help people, surely, you should choose the ten people who need your help the most. And if that's your goal, you might do better to pick the ten who are least able to pay you.

Alternatively, you could have a lottery system. At least in that case, the various spirit guides involved could arrange for the neediest people to win the lottery...?

Frankly, I think the chaotic system you're using now (which isn't far from a lottery) is better than choosing people based on their wealth.

I understand you have a goal of making your site ad-free, but honestly I don't think this is a great way to do it.

I offer a lot of downloads and services on my site, and everything is available for a donation of any amount. I've had a lot of success with it so far (though I don't have anywhere near the volume you do). You can read more about the rationale here and here.

[Angela]

Jeff, this system is not one of choosing people based on wealth; it's a system of filtering out people who are not willing to pay the price. Big difference.

It makes perfect sense to me that if you want what Steve has to offer, but you're not willing to pay the price, then you're not going to get the full value of what he's offering anyway.

[seeker5]

Originally Posted by Steve Pavlina

Based on how things have been progressing, it seems likely that eventually I'll have to scale back or drop participating in the forums.

Oh no! The mods will go crazy and really clamp down on us - especially that Angela mod!

We'll miss you though when you reduce your time here. I've always enjoyed and benefited from reading what you've posted to other people as well as what you've posted on my own threads or threads I've participated in.

However, I can see how you think your time is better spent elsewhere.

[theknightwhosaysni-NI]

Originally Posted by Angela

Jeff, this system is not one of choosing people based on wealth; it's a system of filtering out people who are not willing to pay the price. Big difference.

I don't buy that
I think the perceived value of money is different depending on the income one receives. For a student with no real income, the willing to pay the price would actually need to be much greater than for a business leader whose income is 10 000 dollars a month, and yet the absolute price of 500 would be the same for both clients.

This being said, I think putting a price on a service is a pretty good way to filter people. It's not perfect, but obviously without it it would be more unfair as there would be too much demand.

[Steve Pavlina]

Originally Posted by pianoperformer

I don't know how you do so many things...

No job.

[Sam988]

U$500 per consultation? I have a feeling that if pricing is defined through supply and demand, it will go waay above this mark in not much time

Originally Posted by Jeff Lilly

I just don't see the logic. If you have, say, 100 people who need your help, but you can only help 10 of them, why do you choose the richest ten?

I understand if your primary goal is to make money, you should definitely pick the people who will pay you the most. But if you really want to help people, surely, you should choose the ten people who need your help the most. And if that's your goal, you might do better to pick the ten who are least able to pay you.].

Lol this is too senseless... just think a bit about what would happen if steve adopted this model and you would see that it would never work. And who said that steve's primary goal is to make money? He wants to help people, and as steve said, people who can afford/are willing to pay for this consultation are likely those who are the most able to efficiently leverage the growth that they will get from the consultation.

[Angela]

Originally Posted by theknightwhosaysni-NI

I don't buy that
I think the perceived value of money is different depending on the income one receives. For a student with no real income, the willing to pay the price would actually need to be much greater than for a business leader whose income is 10 000 dollars a month, and yet the absolute price of 500 would be the same for both clients.

You know, I've been around a good number of business leaders who would have a much harder time parting with $500 than some of the job-free people I know.

Willingness to pay the price, for anything you want, has little to do with your net worth or your income.

[Steve Pavlina]

It's not a good idea to use neediness as the deciding factor. Lots of people are so needy that when you help them they become more clingy and dependent. Helping the very needy often just perpetuates neediness. I know from experience this is a poor choice in general.

The price isn't meant as a filter for wealthy clients either... at least not directly.

What's most important for me is to help people who are in a good position to pay it forward, meaning that when I help someone, it's likely to have a perpetual positive impact because the person I'm helping has the leverage to apply the ideas more broadly than most people.

For example, if I help someone who's running a mid-sized business, I can potentially benefit everyone that business touches. If I help someone who's in a largely powerless position, however, the impact will likely be much lower. There are always exceptions, but what's the best bet? I'd rather bet on helping those who are in a good position to help others.

Using money as a filter isn't perfect, but it's a realistic option that increases the odds of attracting clients who are in a good position to pay it forward.

I always have the option to help people for free when I can see it's a good idea -- I've been doing that all along. But a price tag is a reasonable way to make sure I'm investing my time in a more leveraged way. People who can afford to pay $500+ for a consultation are probably in a good position (and very motivated) to apply the ideas to good effect.

Imagine you're in charge of deciding which cells of your body you'll divert extra resources to, but those resources are limited. Will you help the neediest cells? That's suboptimal. The best approach is to help the cells that are in the best position to magnify your limited resource.

I also need a way to separate the casual requests (people who impulsively fire off questions with no real commitment to applying the answers) from the serious requests (people who are truly committed to growth and change and who will apply the answers to good effect, paying it forward to benefit others as well). Charging a fee isn't perfectly accurate, but it's realistic, reasonable, and has low overhead. Charging a fee coupled with my own discretion is even better.

Generating income from this also means I can provide a better service than I'd be able to do if it was totally free. Income gives me the option to hire others to help me. It will also help me improve this website, such as by making it ad-free for everyone.

If I only have time to impactfully help X number of people per year one-on-one, I want those X people to be in a good position to apply the ideas and pay it forward. If someone balks at a $500 price tag, it's unlikely they'll be a good candidate vs. someone who can afford it easily.

If you could help shift the mindset of a corporate CEO vs. a broke college student, which person would you choose to work with for an hour? Where could you make the biggest positive difference? Your answer may be different than mine, but I'd choose to work with the CEO because the CEO will likely have a lot more leverage than the student. Being able to afford a certain price is a good sign of leverage.

$500 is actually way too cheap for the kinds of people I ultimately want to reach one-on-one. I'll probably need to get it to at least 10x that amount. Otherwise such people will assume I can't be that good because I only charge $500/hour. But for now it's a start.

In the long run, I expect to get into corporate consulting, helping corporations bring themselves into better alignment with truth, love, and power. In corporate America, for instance, we've got lots of power without enough truth and love. This causes many problems (such as an endless stream of wars) and lowers our collective consciousness. That needs to change. I can't deny responsibility for this situation, so I have to do something about it. Starting with $500 consultations will help get me going on that path. Imagine how much this planet would change if we could raise the consciousness of our most powerful corporate leaders... even by just a small amount. I believe this is a vision worth pursuing.

[Jeff Lilly]

Thanks for laying out your logic, Steve; it makes a lot of sense.

I'm reminded of how Jesus and the Buddha began their ministries. They didn't go out and seek the neediest people first; instead, they immediately sought out disciples that could carry on their teachings when they were gone.

Not to put you on a pedestal or anything. ;-)

Thanks again!

[Playlife]

Originally Posted by Angela

You know, I've been around a good number of business leaders who would have a much harder time parting with $500 than some of the job-free people I know.

I have also noticed on myself that the more money I have [had], the more I worry that I don't have enough.

I think that since Steve is so into optimizing your business and yourself for the productivity, the ones who feel the need for it can optimize that $500 into their lives.

But I see Jeff's point of view very well too. I have also thought, why use the money as a filtering system. Especially with the psychic readings. Shouldn't a psychic be able to attract those who most need to be read to her? And vice versa - the ones who would also benefit the reader most - be it financially or skill-wise.

[Steve Pavlina]

Originally Posted by Playlife

Shouldn't a psychic be able to attract those who most need to be read to her?

When people truly need a reading (and are ready to receive one), the money they need often comes to them via some synchronicity.

[Love]

I don't buy the idea that you couldn't get the full impact of an idea without be willing to pay $500 for it. Nor does it seem likely to me that someone with more money would necessarily integrate growth related material better, faster, or more fully than anyone else.

However, I do understand that people with money can have more influence because of the number of people their lives may touch, either directly or indirectly.

This is where the *power* part of the equation comes in, right?

[Sam988]

Originally Posted by Love

I don't buy the idea that you couldn't get the full impact of an idea without be willing to pay $500 for it. Nor does it seem likely to me that someone with more money would necessarily integrate growth related material better, faster, or more fully than anyone else.

Well generally (and i must stress the generally/on average), those with more money have already grown more and will get more benefits than someone who hasn't really gone anywhere yet with his life.

[Angela]

Originally Posted by Love

I don't buy the idea that you couldn't get the full impact of an idea without be willing to pay $500 for it.

Just to be clear, I didn't say that you can't get the full impact of an idea without being willing to pay $500 for it. I said: "if you want what Steve has to offer, but you're not willing to pay the price, then you're not going to get the full value of what he's offering anyway."

That's true of anything: if you want something, but you're not willing to pay the price, then you're not going to get the full value of it.

$500 is not necessarily the price of what Steve has to offer. As he has pointed out, the price might be that you must be a person who will pay it forward. Or it might be that you must be willing to generate $500 by means other than what is normal for you. Or you could be a person who is capable of garnering the donation of the fee. Or you could get really good at the Law of Attraction. Just because Steve says he can give you what you want if you give him $500, that doesn't mean that you must give Steve $500 in order to get what you want.

If you are a person who is sitting around wishing you could have the value Steve provides, and isn't willing to figure out a way and pay the price (again, it's not necessarily a certain amount of money I'm talking about), then you're not in a position to really *get* that value, in my view.

Then again, he may just pick you at random and ask you if you want a free consultation, just to see what happens.

[Love]

Originally Posted by Angela

If you are a person who is sitting around wishing you could have the value Steve provides, and isn't willing to figure out a way and pay the price (again, it's not necessarily a certain amount of money I'm talking about), then you're not in a position to really *get* that value, in my view.

Then again, he may just pick you at random and ask you if you want a free consultation, just to see what happens.

Now you've got it, Angela!

I didn't say anything about whether the process was good or bad. I was just reflecting on whether money equated to integration of good advice.

[GreenTea]

I think it's great that Steve is going to be coaching and I can see how the expectation that he will need to charge way more than $500 an hour soon makes a lot of sense. Fairly recently, I may have felt negatively about that price, but now I am really understanding the whole scarcity mentality thing (thanks to Abraham-Hicks and Steve's articles) and so...the current price and future increase seems quite reasonable. Rather than be upset about the price Steve is charging for his coaching or Erin for her readings, I'm directing my energy towards resonating at the income level that would allow me to easily pay for either. That may sound cheesy but it feels so much better!

[seeker5]

Originally Posted by Steve Pavlina

If you could help shift the mindset of a corporate CEO vs. a broke college student, which person would you choose to work with for an hour? Where could you make the biggest positive difference? Your answer may be different than mine, but I'd choose to work with the CEO because the CEO will likely have a lot more leverage than the student. Being able to afford a certain price is a good sign of leverage.

I assume you're talking about a CEO who wants to use the consultation to increase the good he is doing. I can see perhaps a darkworker CEO who may want to consult you simply to gain more ability to do what he is doing. Will you automatically accept anyone who buys the consultation like Erin automatically accepts all new clients who buys a reading from her site, or will you have another screening mechanism to filter out people who are able to pay the $500, but whom you're not interested in helping out, such as a darkworker CEO?

Although, I can see that a darkworker CEO may not want to reach out to get a consultation with you considering your known lightworker views. Furthermore, it's possible you could help a darkworker CEO see the benefit of being a lightworker if he is spending money to consult with you. However, I still thought I'd bring up the question.

[Ron Stoppable]

Originally Posted by seeker5

I assume you're talking about a CEO who wants to use the consultation to increase the good he is doing. I can see perhaps a darkworker CEO who may want to consult you simply to gain more ability to do what he is doing. Will you automatically accept anyone who buys the consultation like Erin automatically accepts all new clients who buys a reading from her site, or will you have another screening mechanism to filter out people who are able to pay the $500, but whom you're not interested in helping out, such as a darkworker CEO?

Although, I can see that a darkworker CEO may not want to reach out to get a consultation with you considering your known lightworker views. Furthermore, it's possible you could help a darkworker CEO see the benefit of being a lightworker if he is spending money to consult with you. However, I still thought I'd bring up the question.

Check out #13 above.

Originally Posted by Steve Pavlina

Charging a fee isn't perfectly accurate, but it's realistic, reasonable, and has low overhead. Charging a fee coupled with my own discretion is even better.

[seeker5]

Thanks Ron.

I re-read that whole forum post you pointed out and surprisingly, there apparently was a lot he said in that post that I had missed.

Seems that he indeed wants to reach out to those CEOs who may lean toward being a darkworker, so that he can help them align with truth and love. Very admirable, and exciting actually come to think of it, to aim to change the very head of corporations, so that the entire corporation over a period of time can align themselves better with love and truth. That's a powerful way to change society, and a very very ambitious goal. Wow.

[Berix]

Originally Posted by Steve Pavlina

Generating income from this also means I can provide a better service than I'd be able to do if it was totally free. Income gives me the option to hire others to help me. It will also help me improve this website, such as by making it ad-free for everyone.

If I have to choose, I prefer more that you leave ads on this site and with money generated by ads you can hire someone to help you out in your actions of helping others. Ads aren't bad for me as a reader - they are informing me what exist on the PD market - for me that is useful.

[Toine]

To me his plan sounds a little dated. Steve has to be commended for creating a way for people to have access to a rich source of information about personal development. The interaction with his readers is different from many others mainly because he offers his services for free. Offering paid services seems like a strange move. It does not have to be if he applies the same or similar principles as he used starting his blog.

Clearly, Steve’s personal growth is going strong, but one could argue his site and forum have stagnated. However the latter will soon change with his book coming out. For his site to grow along with Steve he needs to professionalize his online presence and services. To do it with personal consulting seems like taking a step back. He will not be able to keep this up for long without neglecting his other work, especially if it grows as fast as everything else Steve has touched. The lack of durability seems to contrast with his ideas. Perhaps it is good for his personal growth and the few people who benefit from it and maybe even the larger group of people benefiting through the pay forward idea, but the largest group only benefits from less or no adds on the site, not very impressive.

To give an example of Steve’s short term thinking.

Originally Posted by Steve Pavlina

If you could help shift the mindset of a corporate CEO vs. a broke college student, which person would you choose to work with for an hour? Where could you make the biggest positive difference? Your answer may be different than mine, but I'd choose to work with the CEO because the CEO will likely have a lot more leverage than the student. Being able to afford a certain price is a good sign of leverage.

Is it not more interesting to work with the one who has the most potential? Perhaps helping to shift the mindset of a CEO would have some direct effects and even lasting ones on the people he works with, but what if this broke student has more potential the CEO. Who knows, maybe a talk with Steve would shift the mindset of the student and set him on a course to change the way business is being done in general and would affect more people as a result. It might take longer for a tree to grow, but with the right support its base will be stronger. You can only prune a CEO.

Perhaps there are alternatives.

For example, to get real leverage on the people wanting consulting Steve should ask for $1000 for two hours. One hour for the person who paid for the consulting and one hour for someone Steve, or an assistant, has selected to get a free consultation. I realize this is probably not a very good idea either, but what I am trying to say is be more original.

Another example could be consulting a group of people with similar questions. They might pay a small fee to participate a web conference. Imagine Steve spending as much time doing conferences as he plans on doing personal consultancies, how much more people he would reach. Perhaps not making the same amount of money and perhaps not being able to remove the majority of the adds, but would that not be worth it? I cannot stress enough that Steve should explore these kinds of alternatives. I hope he will before making his decision.

By the way, whatever Steve decides to do, maybe he should go back to polyphasic sleep! With the increase of his time he could not only remain active on his forum (which I think contributes greatly to the credibility he enjoys), but he could also have telephone consulting (or perhaps an alternative or both) with people who live in other time zones then him. Just an idea.


Then, Jeff Lilly, you talk about Buddha and Jesus, rather strange in this context. These people did not accept payment for their services. Especially Jesus, he encouraged people to give their money back to who it belonged to, the Roman emperor. Buddha was different in the sense he had way more followers during his life. He let wealthy people give him land and build him temples for his followers. After Buddha’s death these temples did not disappear.

[WilliWibald]

What about offering two kinds of consultations:
1. Private consultation (High Price)
2. Public consulation (the whole consultation will be recorded and available to everybody as mp3 - or for a little subcribtion-fee) (Medium Price)

This way everybody is satisfied. But probably a little bit to complicated for the beginning.

[ellie]

Well I bite (for the negative)...I think it's sad, but at the end of the day it's who you are and you got to do what you believe in. You can't change your values or beliefs to suit everyone else. However, It also gives me a glimpse into steve and erin's values.

My mindset is obviously on quite a different wavelength. I much more interested in helping everyone and sharing the love (this makes me happy). Which steve and erin having been doing up till this point. I understand their logic to this new shift, I just don't connect with it at all.

To me I see a shift in erin and steve. It's kind of like when you see a new actor starting out and their really willing to be nice, give interviews and autographs but as there popularity increases a button switches and they begin to change their personality, they forget there old self and are there less inclined to do those things for the "insignificant people". I think that's really sad, or maybe I imagined steve and erin to be something more. Or maybe this was always who they were and I didn't notice it. Or maybe that's just the way things progress and has to be.

Don't get me wrong on the whole I have gotten so much for steve and this forum (and a lot of contributers). Only the other day I was thinking how lucky I was to stumble across steve's site. I don't think I would of really got to this point today, where I kind of really know who I am. So that's why it's so strange for me to post this, because steve's wisdom has had such a positive effect on me, yet at the same time I don't connect with this new direction or values.

I think the reason I am sad is, that I was able to change my thought patterns and beliefs from encouragement and discussion on this forum and it's sad to think that someone else similar to me would have to be quite well-off to now afford steve and erin's invaluable advice or peronalised help. I'd so rather help those that are less fortunate. I know...I know people who are have money and position can be still not as fortunate, but you know what I mean - don't you? Of course there will always be steve and erin's articles, podcast and books, but it's different.

[Ron Stoppable]

Originally Posted by ellie

Well I bite (for the negative)...I think it's sad, but at the end of the day it's who you are and you got to do what you believe in. You can't change your values or beliefs to suit everyone else. However, It also gives me a glimpse into steve and erin's values.

My mindset is obviously on quite a different wavelength. I much more interested in helping everyone and sharing the love (this makes me happy). Which steve and erin having been doing up till this point. I understand their logic to this new shift, I just don't connect with it at all.

To me I see a shift in erin and steve. It's kind of like when you see a new actor starting out and their really willing to be nice, give interviews and autographs but as there popularity increases a button switches and they begin to change their personality, they forget there old self and are there less inclined to do those things for the "insignificant people". I think that's really sad, or maybe I imagined steve and erin to be something more. Or maybe this was always who they were and I didn't notice it. Or maybe that's just the way things progress and has to be.

Don't get me wrong on the whole I have gotten so much for steve and this forum (and a lot of contributers). Only the other day I was thinking how lucky I was to stumble across steve's site. I don't think I would of really got to this point today, where I kind of really know who I am. So that's why it's so strange for me to post this, because steve's wisdom has had such a positive effect on me, yet at the same time I don't connect with this new direction or values.

I think the reason I am sad is, that I was able to change my thought patterns and beliefs from encouragement and discussion on this forum and it's sad to think that someone else similar to me would have to be quite well-off to now afford steve and erin's invaluable advice or help. I'd so rather help those that are not as fortunate. I know...I know people who are have money and position can be still not as fortunate, but you know what I mean - don't you? Of course there will always be steve and erin's articles, podcast and books, but it's different.

They haven't made all their fantastic articles limited to subscribers only.

Abundance > scarcity, young Jedi.

[JustBe]

Hmm ...I emailed. I am a student. I am wondering if 'broke' applies to me and

if I am broke.

Anyway I think if people really put a lot of energy into it, than they are really
motivated.

And a concrete plan can help too.

Short emails leaves a lot of space for misinterpration (Are ALL students broke??) .

I find it VERY hard to believe someone can 'help' another for 5000 $/hour

without having a concrete plan or without putting a lot of energy into it,

without sharing enough information.


I don't know, but I think if I were Steve (I am not) I would people mail me and

share there ideas, share what they want and if it is APPEALING to me, than

ask them for more details. Why they think I can be of help in the first place.