This title is the genesis of our approach.

We develop here why it is so fundamental to understand it.

We essentially use two modes of psychomotor organization depending on whether the contexts or the environment in which we evolve affect us or not.

One which is natural to us, which we can use and benefit from with no limit. This motor organization is beneficial to us in many ways; it is a source of energy.

The other mode is an alternative to the first one; it complements it when we face situations that are out of the ordinary, that take us out of our comfort zone, out of our routine. We need to use it as well, but it should not be used permanently because the motor organization of this other mode is energy-consuming for the psychomotor organization of the individual. We call upon both systems permanently, for motor as well as cognitive or emotional purposes.

Perceiving and recognizing our motor preferences according to the context allows us to feel how the environment and the context in which we evolve is affecting positively or negatively our psychomotor system; in other words, it helps perceiving and differenciating which motor characteristics are natural to our psychomotor system and which ones we use as a second instance.

As far as mobility is concerned, this lack of consciousness explains a number of clumsiness and even accidents (objects that are dropped, loss of balance, cuts, knocks, strains, sprains…).

At a relational, cognitive or emotional level, as well as at a physical level, these shifts in motor organization allow a better understanding of tensions, relational ambiguities, conflicts, and certain reactions that are surprising others, whereas we too often associate them with character or personality traits. On the contrary, they reveal that it is the context or the change of context in which the person evolves that affects him and in front of which, his system organizes itself cerebrally and physically differently. The forms and intensity of these motor organizations and the way they adapt differ from one individual to another, but they are expressed as much by postural or mobility elements as by expressive or behavioural elements.

A better perception of ourselves and a better sense of how we adapt to contextual changes, no matter how small, brings more contextual understanding. This allows us to differentiate between context, environment and a person.

All too often, we incline to change or make people adapt to changing situations, whereas it is important to adapt the environment to people so that they give the best of themselves.

Our education, our society model push us to position ourselves in a binary way in relation to values only. In doing so, we judge the difference, therefore the person, rather than considering the person in a given context. It is a simplification that explains many of the observations we face : drawing general conclusions from fragmented observations. We observe it individually or collectively, therefore also in business, but just as much in politics, science and economics.

The esSENSiel approach does not dissociate the physical from the cerebral; it relies on one (the physical) to better perceive the other, because both operate together globally all the time; they are inseparable and unique for each individual.