For several days I’ve been haunted by this word: authenticity. It seems to be everywhere: I hear it when I talk to my friends, during my coaching sessions, on the Internet, I read it in a book, well, it is all over the place! Julie Hay, at the opening of the Annual Conference of the Romanian Association of Transactional Analysis this week, had a presentation about – guess what? – authenticity! Maybe if I couch down some thoughts about it on paper (or, well, on the computer’ screen), I might get rid of it…
I don’t take the risk for a definition. It seems to me, though, that this concept may be associated with a few other terms: originality, truth, childhood, courage, wholeness, and consistency.
The prime meaning of authentic is original. As two people are never the same, it means that, at least theoretically, we are authentic by default. Provided, of course, we are honest and truly manifest our inner self. If we reverse things and suppose there are two identical people that fully express the same moods, feelings and thoughts – exactly as they are, would that mean they are no longer original, therefore they are not authentic? That’s absurd! They remain authentic! In other words, the originality of authenticity should not be confused with uniqueness (even though it may be often implicit).
Every time I stay around small children I am amazed of how authentic they can be. Small children do not judge! They have no fear acting according to their needs, feelings, and thoughts. As they grow up, the influence of experiences and environmental education is prevailing and all kinds of filters begin to alter their native authenticity. Coherence between the inner self and the outward manifestation is altered by interests, or fear; therefore, behavior may become, in certain situations, aberrantly false. I remember when my parents took me to the kindergarten (I hated it from the first moment!), I went right back home with my nose full of beads, buttons and small pieces of sponge – medical intervention was needed – pretending that other kids had tied me up and stuffed my nose with all those things… It was the first and only day (half a day, actually!) which I spent at the kindergarten in my life. My parents never had the courage to send me back there again!
Could we be only partially authentic? I suppose not. We cannot feel a mixture of envy and admiration towards one’s success, express only the admiration and pretend we are authentic, because it is not true! Therefore, authenticity requires the full expression of reality towards the others and ourselves. This is when a new feature shows up, and that one is the time. We cannot talk about authenticity in the past or in the future, because they are uncontrollable. We can only be spontaneously authentic. Only in the present time spontaneity endorses authenticity. Here is another issue: how do we know whether we are authentic? In very detail, when we acknowledge (in order to know) that we are authentic or not or when we check the level of authenticity, that moment is already gone! Consequently, we cannot appreciate it any longer! So, what can we do? We can either be satisfied with whatever we have (well, nobody’s perfect…), or we could assume that maybe this is not the most appropriate way to achieve authenticity. Maybe it is not the consciousness the one called to make this evaluation. Maybe it is enough to wish to be authentic. (By the way, could animals be unauthentic?)
Coaching cannot exist outside authenticity. Coaching requires the change by the co-creation of that unique relationship between coach and client. Without authenticity no beneficial relationship will be generated or the changes are ephemeral or drive us in a wrong direction. Whenever the coach fails to be fully present, unconditionally tolerant, nondirectional altruistic, a truthful and spontaneous mirror – all these in total accordance with his inner frame, the necessary space to spring up the coaching relationship is vitiated, and that space would be distortedly created, eventually. On the other hand, the inability of a client to open honest and coherent communication channels (it is true that the coach’s ability to build a full of confidence and safe environment is a strong factor) contributes to the miss of the entry to an authentic coaching relationship. The client will become prisoner in his inauthenticity. The only thing that the coach can (and has to) do, though, is to make the client become aware of it. Once inauthenticity is assumed, it may become the turning point of the change.