It's not just the horses that need clarity. One of the great joys these days is hearing just how many people are now engaged with some form of 'natural' (how I hate that word) horsemanship, based on the psychology of the horse. In the end a horse is just a horse and all of his behaviour is a horse's behaviour. Even staunch traditional forums like Horse and Hound, echo with the sound of 'natural' techniques even when no credit is given to the person that came up with the idea or the concept, or at least penned it for the first time. When I used to visit yards there would be just one person practising IH techniques or something along those lines and it was hard for them to be a pioneer. It's not always easy even now.
The down-side is that there are lots and lots of people who offer training without necessarily having studied their subject thoroughly in the first place. That doesn't have to mean one 'brand', set in stone, but it does help if there is a strong framework running through their work. There's a lot of mixing and matching now so that concepts can be diluted or a concoction. Others have done most but not all of the training and set sail without having ever been assessed, examined, approved or even insured.
We can over analyse, intellectualise and ultimately boggle the minds of anyone coming to this for the first time. I like to keep things simple and consistent. Whilst there are no black and white rules, the four basic concepts I work to are straightforward and easy to understand. They underpin everything. And I have been assessed, examined, approved, recommended and evaluated and of course, I am insured for everything that I do. It's been ten years since I got involved with Intelligent Horsemanship and I've lost count, in particular, with the number of horses I have worked with called Molly!
