A tricky task
I encountered the concept of the non-trivial machine (Heinz von Foerster) when I was training to become a coach at Train Consulting (www.trainconsulting.eu). Since the program focused on coaching and leadership, the participants were mostly managers developing their leadership skills by adopting coaching methods. And we all soon learned what a tricky task coaching is. Because you are not supposed to tell people what to do, it is a challenging way to lead.
Instead, a big part of a coach’s function is to strengthen an individual’s sense of agency and self-responsibility. When being coached, a person refines the ability to learn from experience. And this empowers them to take control of their development and produce their desired outcomes.
The coach accompanies the coachee on their learning journey. They support the process, provide an outer perspective, and set impulses. That way, the individual gets nudges that trigger new ways of looking at things. But a coach does not provide answers – and certainly not “the correct answer”.
As a teacher and trainer, this idea was hard for me to grasp in the beginning. Enter the idea of the non-trivial machine.
The non-trivial machine
First, it helps to look at what a trivial machine is to understand what a non-trivial machine is. A coffee vending machine is a trivial machine. I put in a coin, I press a button, and based on my selection, I get my chosen product. So, the input dictates the output in a predictable manner. A trivial machine should always produce the expected output. And if it doesn’t, the machine is broken.
A non-trivial machine is a machine where the output cannot be predicted from the input. The machine is autonomous. It chooses the output based on its current state or mood. Simultaneously, it factors in elements from the surrounding environment. This requires the ability to make judgements and think creatively. Human beings are non-trivial machines. That means you can never be 100% sure what output you’re going to get.
This concept really helped me shift my mindset. Working with people is not a linear process. Human beings are not predictable machines. Cause and effect are rarely transparent. Sometimes it takes different kinds of input to get the desired output, and these can vary from day to day. Hence, it is a continuous process of trial and error. And being able to navigate that uncertainty is what I call leadership.
As a coach or leader, I can set an impulse, such as asking thought provoking questions. Then in collaboration with the individual, we work with the output that emerges.
Traditional teaching is different
This is a different approach to teaching. Especially classical teaching methods, which go more into the direction of a trivial machine approach. For example, the teacher provides input, the learners reproduce it either correctly or incorrectly, i.e., a linear process. In this model, learning is imitation – which has its place depending on the context.
Yet, the assumption behind coaching is that the individual has the resources they need to find a good solution. They just aren’t aware of it yet. The coach supports the coachee in uncovering that. In this model, learning builds on existing knowledge, skills, and talents and is more individualized. This produces more original results.
Learning to become a coach has impacted the way I teach. Instead of feeling obligated to be the source of all knowledge, I want my students to learn that they can design solutions that suit them and their needs best. And the same goes for managers who want to lead their people.
Now I focus more on enabling the learning process – rather than controlling it. My aim is to foster motivation and self-responsibility.
Taking a coaching approach to teaching produces learning spaces that encourage experimentation, reflection, leadership, and innovation. And in this fashion we expand our most precious qualities of being human.
Keep Growing <3<3<3
