Decoding dog training philosophies: Planet Compliance vs. Planet Partnership

In the diverse world of dog training, owners are often faced with a bewildering array of philosophies, methods, and opinions, leading to confusion and frustration. This article delves into the heart of the ideological divide that separates the dog training community into two main camps: those who adhere to traditional, compliance-based methods and those who advocate for a more modern, partnership-based approach.

This article is based on the ideas shared by Maya (Rose) Badham in her presentation on the Wheel of Compliance vs. Wheel of Partnership—a concept that resonated deeply with me. I have been waiting for 2 years for a written version of this but since I still can’t find one, I have decided to summarise the ideas in a blog post so that more people can learn about this brilliant conceptualisation. I’ve also added some of my own thinking that deepens the ideas she presented, and extended this thinking in a followup article on a dog training approach matrix.

Note: the original version of this article used the term Wheel – it has been updated with the original author’s latest versions which includes renaming the wheels as planets. Images and content used with permission.

How the idea of the Planets came to be: In the presentation, Maya Badham tells the story of her journey of adopting a border collie puppy which led to an epiphany about the necessity for a trauma-informed approach in dog training. Driven by a desire to “get it right” as a first time dog owner, she embarked on a quest for knowledge, diving into a vast array of materials and workshops. This journey of learning and reflection led her to critically evaluate traditional, compliance-focused training methods, and fostered a growing appreciation for the nuances of canine emotional and behavioural needs. Drawing parallels between her professional experience with trauma survivors and dog training, she adapted the Duluth Power and Control Wheel & Equality Wheel into the canine world.

---

Introduction

In the realm of dog training, two distinct philosophies have emerged, shaping the way humans interact with their canine companions:

• On one side of the spectrum lies the traditional, compliance-based approach, a method grounded in the principles of obedience and control.
• On the opposite side stands the partnership-based approach, an emerging philosophy that prioritizes mutual respect, understanding, and empathy.

These differing mindsets can be visualized as the “Compliance Planet” and the “Participation Planet,” represent not just alternative training methods but fundamentally contrasting views on the nature of the human-dog relationship.

The divide between these approaches has created an ideological rift within the dog training community, challenging owners, trainers, and enthusiasts to navigate a landscape marked by conflicting advice and deeply held beliefs. This rift is more than a mere disagreement over techniques; it reflects a broader debate on ethics, animal welfare, and the role of dogs in human society.

For new dog owners, this divide can be particularly bewildering, leaving many unsure which path to follow in the quest to build a healthy, happy relationship with their pets.

The challenge of reconciling these divergent philosophies is compounded by the difficulty of changing deeply ingrained beliefs. Adopting a new approach to dog training often requires more than learning new methods; it demands a shift in perspective and a willingness to confront and reevaluate long-held assumptions about dominance, authority, and the emotional lives of dogs.

The planets represent two different goals in dog training and our relationship with dogs:

• Compliance, which is characterized by an emphasis on physical and emotional pressure to achieve obedience. This pressure, whether intentional or not, can stem from traditional training methods that prioritize immediate results over the dog’s emotional well-being. The compliance model often overlooks the dog’s natural behaviours, needs, and communication signals, leading to a relationship based on dominance and submission rather than mutual understanding.
• Partnership, on the other hand, is rooted in collaboration, compassion, empathy, consent, and a protective stance towards the dog. This mindset recognizes the dog as a sentient being with its own needs, preferences, and emotions. Training and interaction are approached with an emphasis on understanding and respecting these aspects, aiming to build a relationship where the dog’s agency is acknowledged and valued. The partnership model fosters a deeper, more empathetic connection between human and dog, promoting a harmonious coexistence that benefits both parties.

Characteristics of the Compliance Planet

The Compliance Planet is emphasizes control and obedience as the goal of training without much consideration for the dog’s perspective, emotional well-being, or natural behaviours.

The planet has four main dimensions, reproduced and summarised below.

• Authoritatian leadership: The emphasis in training is on a hierarchical relationship where the dog’s emotional state and communication are undervalued. This mindset doesn’t recognize the dog as a sentient being with its own needs and feelings, leading to a relationship based on dominance rather than mutual respect.
• Distortion of perspective/reality: Dog behaviour is interpreted through a human lens, expecting dogs to adapt to human expectations without effort from the human to understand canine communication. This can lead to labelling dogs with negative traits when they fail to meet these human-centred expectations.
• Over-reliance on training: The focus is heavily on training and obedience without addressing the dog’s underlying needs. The use of intimidation or forceful methods can create stress for the dog, potentially leading to fear-based responses rather than true learning or cooperation.
• Insecure attachment: Unrealistic expectations set for dogs based on their age, breed, or individual capabilities, neglecting the emotional bond and security that are crucial for a healthy relationship. This approach can result in a lack of trust and security, hindering the development of a positive, mutually respectful partnership.

In a nutshell: The Compliance model in dog training is rooted in concepts of dominance, control, and obedience. This approach often utilizes techniques that enforce a hierarchical relationship between the dog and the owner, where the primary goal is the dog’s submission to human commands. Key features include:

• Dominance-Based Methods: Training strategies that emphasize the human’s role as the ‘alpha’ or pack leader, often inspired by outdated interpretations of wolf pack dynamics.
• Control Through Correction: The use of corrections, such as verbal reprimands, leash jerks, or even physical punishment, to discourage undesirable behavior.
• Obedience as the Ultimate Goal: A focus on the dog’s ability to perform commands accurately and promptly, often under any circumstances.

And here’s a summary of the behavioural manifestations of these dimensions of the Compliance Planet (directly from the presentation):

Dimension	For example
Authoritarian leadership	Doesn’t appreciate the dog as an emotional being. Doesn’t listen to the dog or ignores dog communicating physical or emotional discomfort, instead believing they know what’s best. Expectation of unconditional compliance /obedience at all times, in all situations. Can use the dog as an ego boost/tool where dogs needs come second. Limited to no understanding of natural canine behaviour/body language.
Distortion of perspective/reality	Expectation of dogs to understand our language and expectations ithout attempting to learn theirs. Believes the dog should ‘respect’ them & when they don’t conform then they’re ‘naughty’, ‘stubborn’ ‘manipulative’ or ‘should know better’ Reliance on myths and outdated knowledge e.g. Dominance Theory, Use of ‘balanced training’, Earn to Learn training, rejects dogs as having emotional needs
Over-reliance on training	Prioritises training rather than meeting underlying need. Uses Tone/Body Language the dog may perceive as threatening e.g. raising voice, pointed fingers, invading their personal space without their consent. Focus is on commands, cues & artificial behaviours plus focus on ‘outcome’ e.g. wait for food, tricks, winning/ribbons. Focus is often on ‘quick fixes’ or getting outcome as fast as possible. Training methods used often punishment, pressure or coercion based.
Insecure attachment	Unrealistic expectations e.g. for their age, their individual ability, breed. Not fostering an emotional connection with the dog. Preventing access to companionship. Not providing safety and security so the dog feels unsafe. Placing pressure on them to perform and achieve. Rejecting requests for comfort/connection. Inconsistency

Characteristics of the Partnership Planet

The partnership wheel represents a paradigm shift in the human-dog relationship, moving away from traditional dominance-based methods to a more compassionate, understanding, and mutually respectful approach.

The wheel has four quadrants, reproduced and summarised below.

• Benevolent guidance: Recognizing dogs as emotional beings with inherent needs for communication, choice, and connection and setting dogs up for success through understanding canine body language, offering choices, and respecting those choices. It’s about fostering a bond and encouraging natural behaviours, promoting a learning environment based on consent rather than coercion.
• Canine responsive practice: Emphasizing acceptance of the dog’s current state and limitations, offering protection and support through adverse experiences. Focus is on providing safety, minimizing re-traumatization, building resilience and regulation, setting realistic expectations, and providing relief, thereby ensuring a responsive and supportive environment for the dog.
• Appreciating the individuality of a dog: Recognizing and valuing the unique aspects of each dog, including personality, learning style, resilience level, learning history, traumatic experiences, environmental preferences, breed and genetic heritage, age, health, wellbeing, sex, and ability. Understanding and appreciating these factors are crucial for tailoring interactions and training to fit each dog’s specific needs and preferences.
• Understanding the impact of negative experiences: Acknowledging the potential causes and types of trauma that dogs can experience and understands the common responses to such trauma. By focusing on describing behaviours rather than labelling dogs, this approach aims to mitigate the impact of negative experiences and support recovery and healing.

Recognizing and respecting a dog’s choices and preferences (agency) is foundational to this mindset, promoting an environment where dogs can express their true selves, fostering a deeper and more authentic bond between dogs and their owners. This approach challenges societal norms that often misinterpret these behaviours, leading to a widespread misunderstanding of what constitutes a dog’s natural state.

And here’s a summary of the behavioural manifestations of these dimensions of the Partnership Planet (directly from the presentation):

Dimension	For example
Benevolent guidance	Accepts dogs as emotional beings. Communication (knowledge of dog body language and behaviour). Giving our dogs agency/choice and respecting their decisions. Focus on fostering bond/connection. Encourages dog to fulfil natural behaviours. (e.g. sniffing, digging, chewing, sufficient time resting, play etc) Encourages Experiential Learning. Based in Consent – asking not telling. Avoidance of pressure/coercion
Understanding the impact of negative experiences	Knowledge of the potential causes of negative experiences. Knowledge of the different types of trauma (e.g. Acute, Complex, Chronic, Developmental, System Generated). Knowledge of the common responses to negative experiences/trauma (Fight, Flight, Freeze, Fawn, Fool) Language focuses on describing the behaviour rather than labelling dogs.
Canine responsive practice	ACCEPTANCE of where the dog is at & their limitations. PROTECTS against/supports through negative experiences Provides emotional/physical/ environmental SAFETY & SECURITY Minimises RE-TRAUMATISATION Builds RESILIENCE Builds REGULATION Has realistic EXPECTATIONS Provides RELIEF EMPATHY
Appreciating the individuality of a dog	Dogs have individual personalities. Understands behaviour as an expression of need and self. Preferred Learning Style. Recognises individual resilience level. Recognises previous learning history. Recognises previous traumatic experiences. Appreciates their environmental preferences. Appreciates Breed & Genetic Heritage. Age, Health & Wellbeing. Sex (& hormones). Ability.

---

The embedded ideologies of dog training

I also want to extend the original thinking from the presentation to a more philosophical view because the divide between these two models is not merely practical but ideological, rooted in fundamentally different views on the nature of animals and their relationship with humans. Discussions about dog training methods can evoke strong reactions because they tap into deeply held beliefs about authority, empathy, and the right way to live with other beings. 

Compliance Planet: Control and Dominion

The Compliance Wheel is deeply rooted in Cartesian dualism, a philosophical viewpoint where animals are seen as mechanistic entities devoid of thoughts or feelings – an approach that raises significant ethical concerns regarding animal autonomy and welfare.

• This perspective aligns with traditional views that humans have dominion over animals, justified by a perceived absence of shared emotional and cognitive capacities. It views the relationship with a dog as unidirectional where the dog is expected to conform to human desires, often at the expense of its natural behaviors and intrinsic needs. (Some might say that the Compliance Planet is aligned with toxic masculinity in dog training – a hot topic of late!)
• The value system underpinning this model prioritizes human authority and control, reflecting societal tendencies towards hierarchy and dominance. This is further compounded by a utilitarian approach where the ends of obedience and control justify the means, potentially overlooking the emotional and physical well-being of the dog.
• Traditionalism plays a significant role, with an adherence to long-standing but debunked beliefs such as the dominance hierarchy within packs, underscoring a resistance to evolving understandings of animal behavior and welfare.

Partnership Planet: Empathy and mutual respect

In contrast, the Partnership Planet draws inspiration from contemporary ethical theories like biocentrism and relational ethics, which acknowledge the intrinsic value of all living beings and the critical importance of empathy and compassion within relationships.

• This model fosters a philosophy of coexistence, promoting a mutually beneficial and respectful bond between humans and animals.
• It embodies principles of consent, empathy, and mutual respect, advocating for a recognition of dogs as sentient beings with their own needs, desires, and rights
• This mindset also values understanding and responding to the emotional states and requirements of dogs, highlighting a belief in the worth of all beings, irrespective of species.
• Emphasizing collaboration and respect for the dog’s autonomy, the partnership model encourages training methods that are mindful of the dog’s willingness and comfort, moving away from dominance towards cooperation.
• Progressivism is a core value – an openness to new scientific insights into animal cognition and emotion, reflecting a dynamic approach that adapts as our understanding of dogs as sentient beings deepens.

Summary of the mindsets:

Compliance mindset

Partnership mindset

Dominance and Control: Rooted in a value system that prioritizes human authority over animal autonomy, viewing dogs as beings to be controlled rather than partners. This reflects a broader societal inclination towards hierarchy and power dynamics. Utilitarianism: A focus on the ends justifying the means, where the goal of achieving obedience can override considerations of the dog’s emotional or physical well-being. Traditionalism: Adherence to long-standing beliefs about the “natural” roles of humans and dogs, often influenced by debunked theories such as dominance hierarchy within packs.

Empathy and Compassion: Values understanding and responding to the emotional states and needs of dogs, reflecting a belief in the intrinsic value of all beings regardless of species. Mutual Respect and Consent: Emphasizes collaboration and respect for the dog’s autonomy, promoting training methods that consider the dog’s willingness and comfort. Progressivism: Openness to new scientific findings about animal cognition and emotion, leading to evolving practices that reflect an increased understanding of dogs as sentient beings.

---

Ideological shifts are difficult

Exchanging viewpoints in this topic tends to just entrench people’s views instead of changing anyone’s mind because moving from Compliance Planet to Partnership Planet requires a foundational shift in values and beliefs, not just a change in training methods:

Changing underlying attitudes towards dog ownership and training ideologies means facing a couple of significant psychological and sociological barriers.

1. Transitioning from a compliance-based approach to a partnership-based approach challenges deeply ingrained beliefs and practices. This shift can be uncomfortable as it requires individuals to confront and reassess long-held views about dominance, control, and the nature of the human-dog relationship. The discomfort stems from cognitive dissonance, where individuals experience psychological stress due to holding contradictory beliefs or behaviors. To avoid this discomfort, there’s a natural human tendency to resist changing these beliefs, even in the face of compelling evidence or arguments that suggest a different approach might be more humane or effective.
2. Belief in the Unrealistic Nature of Partnership: The partnership approach, which emphasizes empathy, understanding, and mutual respect, can seem unrealistic to those entrenched in a compliance mindset. This skepticism often arises because the compliance approach suppresses the dog’s natural behaviours and individuality, preventing the dog and the owner from experiencing the deeper, more authentic relationship that comes from a partnership-based approach. As a result, the benefits of partnership seem intangible or unattainable to those who have never witnessed or experienced them firsthand. This lack of firsthand experience reinforces the cycle of skepticism and dismissal towards alternative methods.
3. Dismissal and Ridicule of Alternative Approaches: The cycle is further compounded by social and cultural dynamics within the dog training community, where adherence to traditional methods can be a source of identity or pride. Individuals within the compliance mindset may dismiss or ridicule the partnership approach to protect their beliefs and avoid confronting the possibility that their methods could be causing harm or distress to their dogs. This defensive stance is a protective mechanism, shielding individuals from the discomfort of cognitive dissonance and the challenge of changing deeply ingrained behaviors.

From a psychological perspective, the comfort in traditional views and the avoidance of cognitive dissonance play significant roles in the persistence of the Compliance approach. People with this mindset may find security in familiar methods, even when confronted with evidence that challenges their effectiveness or ethics. This resistance to change can be explained by:

• Cognitive Dissonance: The discomfort one feels when holding two conflicting beliefs. For many, acknowledging the drawbacks of compliance-based methods conflicts with their belief in these methods’ effectiveness.
• Confirmation Bias: The tendency to favor information that confirms existing beliefs. This bias can lead to the dismissal of partnership-based approaches without due consideration.

An added challenge is that compliance-based methods also appeal to many people because they may yield short-term results in dog behaviour, even though they carry significant limitations and potential negative consequences:

• Emotional and Physical Stress: Dogs subjected to harsh training methods can experience increased anxiety, fear, and stress, leading to potential behavioral and health issues.
• Deterioration of the Human-Dog Relationship: Methods based on dominance and punishment can erode trust between the dog and the owner, undermining the bond essential for a healthy, cooperative relationship.
• Suppression vs. Resolution: Compliance-based training often suppresses undesirable behaviors without addressing their underlying causes, potentially leading to the resurgence of these behaviors or the development of new issues.

Addressing these barriers would require a multifaceted approach, including education, exposure to alternative methods, and fostering empathy towards dogs as sentient beings capable of complex emotions and social bonds. By gently challenging existing beliefs and demonstrating the tangible benefits of the partnership approach through success stories, scientific evidence, and personal testimonials, it might be theoretically possible to gradually shift perceptions and encourage more humane, effective training practices that prioritize the well-being and happiness of both dogs and their owners. (However, as someone whose day job is all about behaviour change, I’m not optimistic given the scale of the challenge!)

Cultural norms and institutional roles in shaping dog training practices

In the webinar, Maya Badham also introduces the extended planets concept to consider broader societal and cultural influences.

She outlines how the extended planets consider not just the direct interaction between a dog and its owner but also the wider context in which these relationships exist. This includes societal norms, media influences, and the pervasive culture around dog ownership and training, which often prioritizes obedience and control over understanding and empathy. For example, we expect dogs to behave quietly and unobtrusively in all settings, and many people believe that a well-trained dog must respond robotically to commands.

Such societal expectations can lead to a misalignment between our practices and the dogs’ innate needs, pushing owners towards training methods that suppress rather than nurture natural canine behaviours. The emphasis on obedience and control, often at the expense of understanding the underlying emotional and physical needs of dogs, illustrates a fundamental gap in recognizing dogs as sentient beings with their own ways of communicating and interacting with the world.

The discussion of the extended wheels highlights the complexity of shifting from a compliance-based approach to one rooted in partnership and empathy. It recognizes that individuals’ practices are shaped by a multitude of factors, including widely held beliefs about dogs, the influence of dog training shows on television and social media, and the lack of regulation in areas such as dog walking and daycare. These factors contribute to a culture that often misunderstands or misrepresents dogs’ needs, leading to training and care practices that do not align with a trauma-informed or partnership-based approach.

By acknowledging these broader influences, the extended planet concepts provide a framework for understanding why changing dog training practices is challenging – pointing to the need for a cultural shift that values empathy, understanding, and respect for dogs as sentient beings with their own needs and preferences. This shift requires not only changing individual behaviors but also addressing the wider societal norms and expectations that influence how dogs are trained and treated. Furthermore, it means we need to acknowledge the diversity of natural canine behaviours — such as the need for social interaction, mental stimulation, and physical activity — and adjust our expectations and training practices accordingly.

In conclusion

Stepping into the world of dog training can often feel like navigating a maze, filled with conflicting advice and deeply entrenched philosophies. The ideological rift within the dog training community isn’t merely a debate over techniques – it’s a reflection of the values we hold dear and the kind of relationships we aspire to have with our dogs. For those who are new to dog ownership, this divide can be overwhelming.

The transition to the Partnership mindset is full of barriers – particularly for those accustomed to the fast-paced, outcome-driven methods characteristic of the Compliance mindset, because the Partnership mindset requires us to slow down and truly listen to our dogs. Shifting to a more mindful, empathetic approach to dog training requires patience, understanding, and a willingness to observe and respond to dogs’ needs and signals.

The webinar presenters also discussed the importance of giving dogs agency within the confines of a human-centric world so that dogs could have as much control over their choices as possible. Giving dogs agency not only respects the dog’s autonomy but also fosters a healthier and more genuine relationship between dogs and their humans. This is a fundamental shift from traditional training paradigms (and societal norms!) that prioritize human convenience over the well-being of the dog.

The challenge lies not only in navigating these waters but in daring to question and, possibly, to change long-standing beliefs about dominance, authority, and the nature of our interaction with dogs. The shift from a compliance-based to a partnership-based approach is more than a change in training methods – it’s a commitment to understanding, empathy, and respect. This choice has the power to transform the human-dog relationship into one of mutual trust and profound connection.

Ultimately, our relationship with dogs reflects our values and our broader philosophy in life.

---

If you want to read about how to put this thinking to practice, the next post might also interest you:

Navigating the matrix of dog training approaches

---

The original presentation:

References from original presentation

• Andrew Hale – Dog Centred Care & the Unlocking the Emotional Experience of Dogs Workshop
• Tricia Hollingshead – Listen to Me: Exploring the Emotional Life of Your Dog
• Hierarchy of Dog Needs by Linda Michaels
• Rachel Leather – PLACE for Dogs Model
• Kim Brophey – LEGS Model • Laura Donaldson – Slow thinking is life saving for dogs
• Sarah Fisher – ACE (Animal Centred Education) & Free Work
• Danielle Beck – Control the Meerkat
• Kathy Murphy – Barking Brains • Grisha Stewart – BAT & Working with Empathy
• Laura Dobb – Slow Dog Movement