Here are some key elements to better guide them in their reflection.

This is a question I’ve been asked often. Essentially, the principle remains the same: making a choice.

It’s a misconception that career guidance for a gifted teen is inherently more challenging because of their broad, shifting interests and their tendency to get bored quickly.

In my experience, they need a guide who goes beyond simply understanding their unique way of thinking—someone who shares that perspective and way of processing the world. This mutual understanding builds trust, as gifted teens are constantly evaluating others: their thoughts, their relevance, the connections they make. Everything is scrutinized. They’ll quickly notice if you’re not up to par.

This aspect of guiding gifted teens deserves its own discussion, but let’s focus on the core process for now.

Ultimately, career guidance for a gifted teen is still about making a choice, just like for any other teenager. The real difference lies in the posture the guide must adopt.

The Key Posture: Relevance

Relevance is everything. A guide who doesn’t respond quickly, who isn’t grounded in the truth and authenticity of the interaction, will fail to build trust. A gifted teen evaluates their interlocutor on many levels, asking one key question: “Is this person worth listening to?”

The primary practical difference in the guidance process is that there are often more factors to consider when working with gifted teens.

Areas to Explore

Gifted teens often have a rapid perception of possibilities, which can lead them to believe—or act as if—they’ve “figured out” a subject without truly diving into it.

They may quickly lose interest if a task feels too easy or repetitive, creating the false impression of disengagement.

It’s essential to frame their “I’ve figured it out, I get it” tendency, which is sometimes premature. Without relevance and deeper reflection, this can become a real challenge.

That said, this isn’t exclusive to gifted teens.

However, the difference is that a gifted teen is often much more confident about the depth of their reflection or research, even if it remains superficial. Guiding them to explore further is crucial.

The key is to present other perspectives and let them take the lead.

In a way, it’s simpler than it seems.

The focus should be on guiding their tendency to draw conclusions too quickly. Gifted teens often rely on intuitive thinking to find solutions rapidly, but this can lead them to dismiss options prematurely, especially when they haven’t fully explored them.

Practical Questions to Encourage Exploration

• “What skills have you not yet considered?”
• “Have you explored the variations of this career?”
• “What is something you haven’t yet fully understood about this field?”

Gifted teens typically require less hand-holding when it comes to digging deeper—provided they’re invested in the problem.

Fostering Investment

Getting them invested in the question of career guidance will likely be one of the first hurdles, but even this isn’t entirely unique to gifted teens.

Ultimately, career guidance for a gifted or atypical teen isn’t about inventing a different process but about adapting the approach with relevance and depth. With the right tools and mindset, the journey can be just as rewarding for both the teen and their guide.

This applies to everyone, but for high school and college students (who are still developing), especially during exam periods or in social contexts, it can have significant consequences.

Darwin would be rolling in his grave! He taught us that it’s precisely the ability to adapt to stress that drives the evolution of species.

In fact, by trying too hard to avoid stress, we end up layering one emotion over another (yes, really) and demonizing something that is completely natural.

More importantly, when we’re less exposed to it or actively fear it, our reaction becomes amplified when we inevitably face it. This makes perfect sense and explains the rise of exam stress or social anxiety, which have skyrocketed in recent years.

It’s a bit like people who need to go on a diet but want to avoid ever feeling hungry.

Stress is a natural response to the environment.

The real question is: at what point does it cross the line into being a real (not perceived) problem, or even pathological? Particularly in connection with work, which tends to trigger and multiply these reactions.

But how can we tackle this issue without discussing the different types of stress, their sources, and the scales used to measure them?

To start, here are two tools for evaluating stress:

• The Karasek Job Stress Questionnaire
• The Depression, Anxiety, and Stress Scale (DASS-21)

Aren’t these the very entry points to social phobias and chronic stress in the end?

So, the next time someone sells you "zero stress," be cautious... Well, unless it’s about yoga, of course.

Otherwise, it might just be a recipe to turn a society of warriors into a flock of sheep on Prozac, while selling you some wilted salad! 🐑💊

Because yes, the "zero stress" idea is a marketing gimmick too.

P.S.: This is a message from the CDSU, the Committee for the Defense of Useful Stress 😉
P.S.2: I’m working on a more in-depth article about the different types of stress…

If you don't accept someone else's feelings, watch out! You’re a bad person (yes, this applies to women too).

It's a term thrown at you as an argument, one that you are expected to accept in the name of kindness and empathy.

Everything is about "feelings," and that's the problem.

The invocation of "feelings" has become a mechanism in discussions to shut them down without the need to explain. A subtle form of manipulation.

In reality, it’s just: “Here’s my perception.” And you’re not allowed to discuss it.

Really?

It also assumes that your reality is the reality. Ouch.

But what if this perception has no connection to reality? What then?

So, don’t let yourself be led astray by your interlocutor’s "feelings"—dare to question them.

The key is to question them empathetically, so you’re not seen as the bad guy.

Also, dare to draw a parallel between your own feelings and the actual facts.

More often than not, it’s just an unfortunate mix of both.

Here are some questions, in an order that could lead to constructive dialogue:

• "Why do you believe feelings should not be discussed?"
• "Do you ever find it hard to understand my feelings?"
• "Could you imagine that this might also happen to me?"
• "What is making you feel this way?"
• "What objective elements can we verify together?"
• "What are the facts, separate from any interpretation, that your feelings are based on?"
• "Do you think these facts could have created different feelings for someone else?"

Because honestly, we’re tired of being misled with nonsense, disguised under the pretense of virtuous thinking and false benevolence.

These students have a passion that makes their professional goal obvious and assumed, and this question isn’t an issue—except...

Often, they come to me first for problems related to organization or motivation.

The most recent example: he was passionate about robotics. Fine.

He found it interesting. Great.
The parents thought: a promising, stimulating, and lucrative career.

Everyone was happy.

But by quickly questioning his choice and digging into his lack of motivation, it became clear that there was no scaffolding behind it, no deep reflection to support this choice.

And this situation is sadly consistent among those who turn their passion into a career.

The issue is that both the teenager and the parents focus on a projection tied to the passion or a major interest, with preconceived notions.

For the parent, knowing their child has abilities, a passion, and a goal means everything is going well.

The mistake is here.
It works "for now." And given his lack of motivation, something needs to be addressed.

A solution:
Guide them to question their envisioned profession. Identify an element and suggest careers they hadn’t considered.

For example: "What exactly do you like about robotics?"

Answer: "New technologies."

Opening: "In aerospace as well, new technologies are being developed. What do you think about that?"

And then, you end with: "You should think about it, and we’ll talk about it again..."

And of course, a few days later, you bring it up again.

Like in this very telling image… but everyone seems to deny one of the root causes of this gap.

Here’s the image:
A monkey standing by the pool asks a giraffe who is already in the water, “How deep is it?”
And the giraffe replies, “It’s up to my neck!”

…Besides being an imprecise answer, the giraffe only takes its own reality into account.
A giraffe’s neck is long and starts two meters from its hooves.

This is a crucial element in coaching that is never addressed, yet it influences so many things.
(So, dear parents currently asking your teen questions about their career path…)

It’s not about a specific type of communication — it’s a principle.

YES, it is possible to simplify communication. This is the principle of cooperation.

Here’s how it works:
“The other person is asking me a question. Is it clear? What is this person really trying to find out?”

In any communication, there is always a sender and a receiver.

Some people respond without considering the situation, based solely on their own reality.
Like the giraffe in the image — the receiver — who answers without providing enough context for the sender (the monkey) to fully understand.

Others, unlike the giraffe, will realize that the monkey wants to know whether the water is shallow enough to stand in. They will analyze the context and reply accordingly. In this case, they would give a precise answer, such as:
“The water is two meters deep.”

The principle of cooperation is a key element in pragmatic linguistics.
It appears to have been developed by philosopher Paul Grice in 1975.
It refers to the implicit rules that speakers follow to make communication effective.

According to Grice, people naturally cooperate to ensure that their conversations make sense by adhering to several conversational maxims:

The Four Maxims of the Principle of Cooperation

1. Maxim of Quantity: Provide enough information, but not too much.
2. Maxim of Quality: Tell the truth and avoid statements without evidence.
3. Maxim of Relevance: Be relevant in your statements.
4. Maxim of Manner: Be clear, avoid ambiguity, and speak in an orderly way.

Example:
If someone asks, “What time is it?”, answering with “I’m not a talking clock!” would violate the principle of cooperation.

However, replying “It’s 10:30” adheres to the maxims.

Effective communication often requires cooperation between the sender and the receiver.

But the sender must also ask clear and precise questions. Otherwise, the receiver’s answers may be:

• “I don’t understand,”
• completely useless,
• or based on assumptions and guesses.

In short, we often fail to cooperate enough, even though the entire point of communication is to… well, communicate!

In social or business interactions, many factors are at play:
Ego, reputation, power dynamics, perceptions, intentions, and goals.

In a relationship where the goal is shared, and there is an open and calm dynamic, cooperation happens naturally.

But if that’s not the case, something else is likely at play.

In coaching, this cooperation forms the foundation for high-quality reflection and meaningful work.

"I Don’t Know" Doesn’t Mean What You Think… And This Trick Works for Other Things Too!

Your teen has a habit of buying time, staying undecided, and avoiding conclusions. They’ve realized that, most of the time, doing nothing or not knowing leads to you taking care of things for them or offering help.

No need for a long speech.

You need to break this pattern.

And it’s not just about their career thinking process.

So yes, stop cleaning their room — even if they end up living in their mess. This will free up your time, reduce your mental load, and avoid conflicts.

"What do you mean that’s impossible?"
Do you want the room to be tidy? Is that your problem or theirs? Does it really have educational value? Does it teach discipline? I’m not so sure. Maybe you’re just reproducing your own upbringing patterns.

I encourage you to find solutions through dialogue, without resorting to manipulation, blackmail, or exchanges. And don’t listen to generic advice — there’s a lot of nonsense out there that doesn’t take systemic consequences into account. It’s frustrating.

Alright, we’ve established that it’s better not to do things for them.

So, what should you do concretely?

Start by giving them a small goal:
“I suggest you think about it, write down your thoughts, and we’ll talk about it again at 7 PM.”

To ensure they don’t go in circles and before moving on to something else, ask them to define how they want to start their thinking process.

No judgment. Let them figure it out.

At 7 PM, evaluate their progress together when they explain their thoughts.

The only focus during that discussion will be:

• Have you made progress?
• How did you do it?
• Are you satisfied with your progress?
• In what way do you feel you’ve advanced?

Nothing meaningful comes out of it?

Repeat the loop. Day after day.

If after three days nothing has moved forward, question your own approach or their determination.