In this episode, James Tripp introduces the powerful distinction between first-order and second-order change. First-order changes are modifications made within an existing system that ultimately change nothing—like rearranging chess pieces while still playing the same losing game. Second-order changes break the rules of the system entirely, requiring creative acts outside the current logic that keeps problems perpetuating. James explains how effective therapy and change work depends on helping clients escape their rigid frameworks and "the more, the more” patterns (the more I try to fix this, the worse it gets) through illogical, creative engagement rather than logical solutions. This concept underpins approaches from Ericksonian hypnosis to IFS, explaining why all successful therapies share this common thread. Timestamps: [00:00:00] Introduction to the episode [00:01:00] First-order vs second-order change distinction explained [00:01:15] The chess game metaphor - change that changes nothing [00:02:15] Example: Trying to write a book the same way repeatedly [00:02:45] How the logic of a system perpetuates the problem [00:03:00] Insomnia example - desperation perpetuating the problem [00:03:30] Attempted solutions becoming part of the problem pattern [00:04:15] Why Erickson used "crazy stuff" that doesn't make sense [00:04:30] Connecting to adaptive intelligence and novel solutions [00:05:00] Left hemisphere logic vs right hemisphere creativity [00:05:45] The nine-dot problem as an example [00:06:30] The origin of "thinking outside the box" [00:07:30] Unconscious rules blocking pathways to solutions [00:08:00] Relationship dynamics example - pursuing creates withdrawal [00:08:30] The "more pattern" - doing more of what doesn't work [00:09:30] Erickson's approach: "There's nothing you need to do" [00:10:00] Stop doing and start allowing - switching hemispheres [00:11:00] Context and expectations in change work [00:11:45] Hypnotherapy frame allowing for "weird and illogical" [00:12:30] All effective therapists get people outside their logic [00:13:00] IFS requires creative participation [00:14:00] There is no "correct logical process" for change [00:14:30] Staying in the framework vs stepping outside it [00:15:30] Listening for rigidity in client frameworks [00:16:00] NLP presupposition: "Do something different, anything different" [00:16:30] Being recruited by the problem [00:17:00] Clean language and the impulse to "get rid of it" [00:18:00] How IFS builds in second-order changes [00:18:45] First-order/second-order as the "golden thread" across therapies [00:19:15] How reframing works - offering different conceptual frameworks [00:20:15] Getting people to play a different game entirely [00:21:00] Patterns that perpetuate vs patterns that play through [00:21:30] Changing the rules changes the whole game [00:22:00] Chess "castling" example - rule added centuries later [00:22:15] Martial arts rules changing outcomes [00:23:30] Unconscious rule sets blocking outcomes [00:24:15] Signs you're stuck in a thinking box [00:25:15] Red flags in initial client emails [00:25:45] When clients tell you exactly what they want you to do [00:26:30] "If you think you're part of the solution, you might be part of the problem" [00:27:00] Solution-focused advertising engaging left hemisphere logic [00:28:00] The real solution will be a surprise [00:28:30] Holding an outcome like holding a baby bird [00:29:30] Working with rigidly locked-in clients [00:30:00] Pacing and leading vs getting beyond logic quickly [00:31:00] "Your best thinking got you here" [00:31:30] PTSD example - shifting from mind to body [00:33:00] Invitation to "just go with it and notice" [00:33:15] The "more pattern" signature of first-order change [00:33:30] Weight loss and eating control example [00:35:30] "Let the medicine do its work" - breaking the more pattern [00:37:00] Conversational hypnosis as reorganizing reality [00:38:00] Inviting people into different conceptual renderings [00:39:00] Difference between classical suggestion and Ericksonian approach [00:40:00] Changing rules vs giving instructions [00:40:45] When rules change, behavior changes by default [00:41:00] Closing and contact information changeworkingpod@gmail.com www.clientshifts.com

First: This is incredibly human.
If you’ve ever wondered whether you’re good enough, feared not being able to help, or felt pressure to deliver a result… you’re not alone. These are deeply human experiences. They don’t make you a bad coach—they just make you a person doing work that matters to you. That in itself is a good sign.

Second: We don’t get to control complex systems.
This is a foundational distinction for me. There are two types of systems in the world:
• Complicated systems, like machines, where all the parts and dependencies are knowable and can be managed.
• Complex systems, like people, where many of the interdependencies are unknown and even unknowable.
Coaching lives in the domain of complex systems. We cannot predict what will happen. We cannot control it. What we can do is bring curiosity, responsiveness, presence, and creativity to the moment—and see what emerges.

Third: You’re not the agent of change.
You’re the catalyst. One of the most liberating frames I’ve ever adopted is that I am not the one who “makes” change happen. I don’t “fix” the client. I don’t “make” them change. That’s not my job—and it never was. Instead, I see myself as a catalyst—a participant in a co-creative flow. My job is to create conditions that support the client’s own generative intelligence—the deep inner faculty that actually does the learning, shifting, adapting. That creative intelligence lives in every client. It built their language. It built their identity. It knows how to build new responses. And our job is to help it come back online.

Fourth: Let go of outcome pressure.
There is no universal law that says, “You must get a result in every session.” That’s not how change work works. That’s not how life works. When we take excess responsibility for outcomes, we place ourselves in a trance—a controlling trance. And ironically, we do our worst work from that place. The more we can unhook from needing to “get it right,” the more creative, present, and effective we become. Instead of pressure, choose curiosity. Instead of control, choose participation. Instead of needing to prove something, choose to play.

Fifth: If this is something you struggle with—beautiful.
This is part of the work. This is part of the unfolding. You’re not behind. You’re not broken. You’re just walking a path that includes unwinding old conditioning, unhooking identity from performance, and coming back into relationship with the deeper intelligence in you and in your client. You don’t have to be perfect. You don’t have to know everything. You don’t even have to feel confident. But you do get to keep showing up. You do get to bring presence, curiosity, and care. And you do get to let this work change you as you offer it to others.

In this episode, Ruckus and James explore the idea of showmanship and performance in effective changework, drawing connections between hypnosis, shamanism, acting, and public speaking. The conversation covers practical techniques for incorporating performance elements into coaching and therapy, the distinction between information versus evocation, and how practitioners can expand their communication repertoire to create greater impact with clients.

Timestamps

[00:00:00] Introduction to showmanship and performance in change work

[00:01:00] Why performers make better hypnotists - magic vs therapy backgrounds

[00:01:45] The roots of showmanship in shamanism - "The Death and Resurrection Show"

[00:02:30] Performance as suggestion beyond just words

[00:03:30] Historical hypnotists and the ritual experience

[00:05:00] Bandler vs Grinder - performer vs academic approaches

[00:06:00] On-stage vs off-stage personas in hypnosis

[00:06:15] Playing "one across" vs "one up" - Erickson as performer

[00:08:45] Information versus evocation in communication

[00:09:45] Performance pieces and marking significance

[00:10:30] Street hypnosis and "witch doctoring" techniques

[00:12:00] Head, heart, and gut - using tone for energy shifts

[00:13:15] Ed Jacobs and impact therapy - standing out vs blending in

[00:14:15] David Grove's quadrant model - conversational vs psychoactive

[00:16:15] Steve Chandler - comedy preparation for coaching weekends

[00:18:15] Martin Luther King Jr. and the power of moving people

[00:19:45] The Meisner method - learning lines vs bringing them to life

[00:21:00] Hypnotic language delivery examples

[00:23:00] Acting and oratory training vs technique training

[00:24:00] Theater, Toastmasters, and NLP trainer development

[00:26:30] Teaching screenwriting with hypnotic language

[00:27:30] Bandler and Grinder - "shell vs nut" in Erickson's work

[00:28:45] Tai Chi teaching with Milton language patterns

[00:31:15] Analog marking - feeling artificial at first

[00:32:15] Clint Eastwood and Christopher Walken's performance styles

[00:33:00] Anticipation hooks and pausing techniques

[00:34:00] Storytelling order and performance impact

[00:35:45] Pre-verbal sounds and emotional responses

[00:37:00] Parking ticket story - nonverbal communication power

[00:38:30] Jerry Spence and emotional communication

[00:40:30] Animal sounds exercise for emotional release

[00:42:00] Film pitching vs writing skills comparison

[00:43:15] Willingness to perform - overcoming comfort zones

[00:44:00] "Shatning" - William Shatner as performance model

[00:46:15] Modeling and deep trance identification

[00:47:30] Steve Chandler - "Practice makes the unnatural, natural"

[00:48:15] Comedian mimicry and implicit learning

[00:49:00] Comic timing as implicit vs explicit knowledge

[00:50:45] Modeling Darren Brown and Richard Osterlind

[00:51:30] Aesthetics vs pragmatics in hypnosis style

[00:53:45] Closing thoughts on performance in change work