international coaching psychology revieworganisationalpsychology.nz/wp-content/uploads/... · and...

Interest Group in Coaching Psychology

ISSN: 1750-2764

International Coaching Psychology ReviewVolume 8 No. 1 March 2013

International Coaching Psychology ReviewEditorial BoardCo-ordinating EditorsUnited Kingdom: Stephen Palmer, PhD, Coaching Psychology Unit, Department of Psychology, City University London, Northampton Square, London, UK.Australia: Michael Cavanagh, PhD, Coaching Psychology Unit, School of Psychology, Sydney University, Australia.

Co-EditorsSandy Gordon, PhD, University of Western Australia, Perth, Australia.Anthony M. Grant, PhD, Coaching Psychology Unit, School of Psychology, Sydney University, Australia.Travis Kemp, PhD, International Graduate School of Business, University of South Australia, Australia.David Lane, PhD, Middlesex University, London, UK.Alex Linley, PhD, School of Psychology, University of Leicester, UK.Alison Whybrow, PhD, Coaching Psychology Unit, City University London, UK.

SubscriptionsInternational Coaching Psychology Review (ICPR) is published in March and September. It is distributed free of charge to members ofthe British Psychological Society Special Group in Coaching Psychology and the Australian Psychological Society Interest Group inCoaching Psychology members. It is available to non-members (Individuals £50 per volume; Institutions £60 per volume; single copies£25) from: The British Psychological Society, SGCP, St. Andrews House, 48 Princess Road East, Leicester LE1 7DR. UK.

Abstracting and indexing: The ICPR is abstracted in psycINFO, Applied Social Sciences Index and Abstracts and Google Scholar. The ICPR is included Cabell's Directory of Publishing Opportunities in Educational Psychology and Administration and Cabell'sDirectory of Publishing Opportunities in Educational Curriculum and Methods.

Notes for ContributorsThe ICPR is an international publication with a focus on the theory, practice and research in the field of coaching psychology.Submission of academic articles, systematic reviews and other research reports which support evidence-based practice are welcomed.The ICPR may also publish conference reports and papers given at the British Psychological Society Special Group in CoachingPsychology (BPS SGCP) and Australian Psychological Society Interest Group in Coaching Psychology (APS IGCP) conferences, noticesand items of news relevant to the International Coaching Psychology Community.

Case studies and book reviews will be considered. The ICPR is published by the BPS SGCP in association with the APS IGCP.

1. CirculationThe circulation of the ICPR is worldwide. It is available in hardcopy and PDF format. Papers are invited and encouraged from authorsthroughout the world. It is available free in paper and PDF format to members of the BPS SGCP, and free in PDF format to APS IGCPmembers as a part of their annual membership.

2. LengthPapers should normally be no more than 6000 words, although the Co-Editors retain discretion to publish papers beyond this lengthin cases where the clear and concise expression of the scientific content requires greater length.

3. ReviewingThe publication operates a policy of anonymous peer review. Papers will normally be scrutinised and commented on by at least twoindependent expert referees (in addition to the relevant Co-Editor) although the Co-Editor may process a paper at his or herdiscretion. The referees will not be aware of the identity of the author. All information about authorship including personalacknowledgements and institutional affiliations should be confined to the title page (and the text should be free of such clues asidentifiable self-citations, e.g. ‘In our earlier work…’).

Continued on inside back cover.

International Editorial BoardHilary Armstrong, PhD, Institute of Executive Coaching,Sydney, Australia.Paul Atkins, PhD, Australian National University,Canberra, Australia.Tatiana Bachkirova, PhD, Oxford Brookes University, UK.John Bennett, PhD, Queen’s University of Charlotte, North Carolina, USA.Michael Carroll, PhD, University of Bristol, UK.Ian Cockerill, PhD, University of Birmingham, UK.Cary Cooper, PhD, Lancaster University, UK.Sarah Corrie, PhD, CNWL Foundation Trust, Royal Holloway University of London, UK.Paula Cruise, PhD, University of Cambridge, UK.Susan David, PhD, Melbourne University, Australia.Suzy Green, PhD, University of Wollongong, NSW Australia.Kate Hefferon PhD, University of East London, UK.

Stephen Joseph, PhD, University of Warwick, UK.Carol Kauffman, PhD, Harvard Medical School, USA.Roy Moodley, PhD, University of Toronto, Canada.Richard Nelson-Jones, PhD, Cognitive Humanistic Institute,Thailand.Lindsay Oades, PhD, University of Wollongong, Australia.Jonathan Passmore, PhD, Evora University, Portugal.James Pawelski, PhD, Positive Psychology Center,University of Pennsylvania, USA.Gordon Spence, PhD, University of Wollongong, NSW Australia.Ernesto Spinelli, PhD, Regent’s College, UK.Catherine Steele PhD, University of Worcester, UK.Reinhard Stelter, PhD, Coaching Psychology Unit,University of Copenhagen, Denmark.Lewis R. Stern, PhD, Harvard University Medical School, USA.Dianne Stober, PhD, Fielding University, USA.Mary Watts, PhD, City University, London, UK.

The British Psychological SocietySpecial Group in Coaching Psychology

❋

The Australian Psychological Society LtdInterest Group in Coaching Psychology

❋

InternationalCoaching Psychology Review

❋

Volume 8 No. 1 March 2013

❋

Contents4 Editorial: Editorial: Research in Coaching Psychology: Qualitative and

Practitioner PerspectivesStephen Palmer & Michael Cavanagh

Papers6 Signalling a new trend in executive coaching outcome research

Erik de Haan & Anna Duckworth

20 ‘The assessment needs to go hand-in-hand with the debriefing’: The importance of a structured coaching debriefing in understanding and applying a positive psychology strengths assessmentBrenda Roche & Kate Hefferon

35 Towards a systems model of Coaching for Learning: Empirical lessons from the secondary classroom contextQing Wang

54 Developing a healthcare leadership coaching model using action research and systemsapproaches – a case study: Implementing an executive coaching programme tosupport nurse managers in achieving organisational objectives in MaltaHo Law & Reggie Aquilina

72 A framework for family life coachingKimberly Allen

Practitioner-based Research80 The experience of team coaching: A dual case study

Catherine Carr & Jacqueline Peters

Response99 What is personality change coaching and why is it important?

A response to Martin, Oades & CaputiHugh McCredie

Rejoinder101 What is personality change coaching and why is it important?

A response to Martin, Oades & CaputiLesley S. Martin, Lindsay G. Oades & Peter Caputi

Reports104 Special Group in Coaching Psychology 8th Annual Conference

Judit Varkonyi-Sepp

109 Special Group in Coaching Psychology NewsSarah Corrie

111 Interest Group in Coaching Psychology News David Heap

113 SGCP Research Award Winners 2012Alison Whybrow

International Coaching Psychology Review ● Vol. 8 No. 1 March 2013 3© The British Psychological Society – ISSN: 1750-2764

Editorial: Research in CoachingPsychology: Qualitative and PractitionerPerspectivesStephen Palmer & Michael Cavanagh

4 International Coaching Psychology Review ● Vol. 8 No. 1 March 2013© The British Psychological Society – ISSN: 1750-2764

IT ONLY SEEMS LIKE yesterday whensome of us discussed the possibility ofsetting up of a peer-reviewed interna-

tional coaching psychology journal to besupported by the BPS Special Group inCoaching Psychology and the APS InterestGroup of Coaching Psychology. We and ourcolleagues at the SGCP and IGCP believedthat this journal would help to establishcoaching psychology as a new branch ofpsychology. Almost a decade later after ourinitial discussions, we are now publishingVolume 8, with papers on a range of topicswhich are a testimony to the development ofthe field. The journal has been the conduitthat brings the SGCP and IGCP to workclosely together, with our representativesattending each other’s conferences and alsoother projects with other professional bodiessuch as the international congresses ofcoaching psychology.

In this issue we have a selection of stimu-lating papers on a range of topics. It is note-worthy that so many of our contributors inthis issue have submitted articles that usequalitative research, and which focus on theexperience of the client and the implicationsfor practice and research. This focus bothcomplements quantitative research in thefield and demonstrates a growing scientistpractitioner approach within coachingpsychology. The scientist practitioner modelhas been a goal in psychology since theBoulder Conference of 1949, and it is verywelcome in this journal.

The first paper is Signalling a new trend inexecutive coaching outcome research by Erik deHaan and Anna Duckworth in which theyargue for a new way of studying executive-coaching outcomes. They suggest that it is

time now to be creative and pull together thelimited resources for research we have incoaching psychology and as a profession weshould make the most of this opportunity todiscover how we might improve our serviceto our clients. Our second paper was a studyutilising a qualitative design by BrendaRoche and Kate Hefferon on The assessmentneeds to go hand-in-hand with the debriefing’: Theimportance of a structured coaching debriefing inunderstanding and applying a positive psychologystrengths assessment. Their objective was to testthe impact of a structured debriefingfollowing completion of Realise2, an onlinestrengths assessment, in relation to strengthsapplication. The study found that all 20participants benefited from having a struc-tured debriefing after completing astrengths assessment. The debriefing led to agreater understanding and utilisation of thestrengths assessment. They suggest that thispairing has practical implications for thoseinvolved in strengths-based coaching anddevelopment.

Our third paper by Qing Wang is entitledTowards a systems model of Coaching forLearning: Empirical lessons from the secondaryclassroom context. Wang aimed to investigatehow coaching implemented in enquiry-based learning, would make a difference tothe knowledge construction process, thedevelopment of positive learning disposi-tions and learning agency in secondarystudents. Wang concluded that the nature ofcoaching in learning can be captured in thesystems model of Coaching for Learning.

Our fourth paper by Ho Law and ReggieAquilina is a case study which used an exec-utive coaching programme in order tosupport nurse managers in achieving organ-

Editorial:

International Coaching Psychology Review ● Vol. 8 No. 1 March 2013 5

isational objectives. The research was under-taken in Malta. Action Research approachwas adopted for this study and the UniversalIntegrative Framework was used to evaluatethe impact of the coaching programme. Theauthors concluded that the structuredcoaching programmes had a substantiveimpact on developing nurse ward managers’leadership skills. In the next paper KimberlyAllen argues that it is time to begin a globaldiscussion on the topic of family lifecoaching as a unique field of study. She high-lights the similarities and differencesbetween family life education and coachingpsychology, and creates a framework forprofessionals to begin a global discussionabout how to integrate the two fields inorder to create a theory and evidence-basedpractice in family life coaching.

The last paper is a dual case studyfocusing on the experience of teamcoaching. The authors, Catherine Carr andJacqueline Peters compared the experienceof team coaching between their two leader-ship teams using a qualitative case studymethodology that tracked the participants’experiences. They concluded that the partic-ipant’s descriptions of team coachingoffered insight into valuable aspects of teamcoaching that informed the proposedevidence-based high performance teamcoaching model. They assert that the modelcan be used and studied by team coachingpractitioners and researchers alike.

In the next section we have a response byHugh McCredie to a previously publishedpaper by Lesley Martin, Lindsay Oades andPeter Caputi. Their original paper was enti-tled What is personality change coaching and whyis it important? McCredie argues that whilstthere is support for long-term plasticity ofBig 5 personality scores, the case for short-term coaching effects is unconvincing andcoaches may be better served by focussing onthe achievement of clients’ personal goals.Martin, Oades and Caputi respond to hispoints in their rejoinder.

In the Reports section of this issue, inaddition to the usual SGCP and IGCP news,we have a write-up on the BPS Special Groupin Coaching Psychology 8th Annual Confer-ence held last December in Birmingham andthe concluding article announces the SGCPResearch Award Winners 2012.

Last year the APS IGCP held a verysuccessful coaching psychology congress inSydney. Congresses were also held bycoaching psychology groups in other coun-tries too. The next event in the InternationalCongress of Coaching Psychology calendar isbeing organised by the Society for CoachingPsychology Italy and is being held in Romeon the 16–17 May. It will have speakers anddelegates attending from around the world.We look forward to seeing you.

CorrespondenceStephen PalmerCoaching Psychology Unit,Department of Psychology,City University London,Northampton Square,London, UK.Email: [email protected]

Michael CavanaghCoaching Psychology Unit,Department of Psychology,Sydney University,Sydney, Australia.Email: [email protected]

International Congress of CoachingPsychology website:http://www.coachingpsychologycongress.org


Introduction: Boundary conditions forcoaching outcome research

S PROFESSIONAL COACHES, we arefaced with a challenge: on the one

hand, we would like to know howmuch value we bring to our diverse clientsand whether there are any particularly effec-tive ‘ingredients’ that we can introduce toour sessions, and on the other hand we havelittle access to time and resources forcarrying out the research necessary toaddress these uncertainties with anythinglike the statistical rigour typically required inpsychology. This paper attempts to address

this dichotomy with a new proposal forfuture coaching research.

Executive coaches and their clients arenaturally very interested in the answers tothe following questions:● Does our coaching work? Does it help

clients with their critical objectives?● What aspects of coaching work? What are

the ‘active ingredients’? Under whatcircumstances do they work best?

● What intervention would work best hereand now, with this client at this moment?

These questions about effectiveness andoutcome occur frequently in the coaching

Paper

Signalling a new trend in executivecoaching outcome researchErik de Haan & Anna Duckworth

Purpose: This contribution argues for a new way of studying executive-coaching outcome. The argumentaccepts that we are not likely to get rigorous data on coaching outcome from well-designed clinical trials inthe near future, and assumes a degree of effectiveness that is based upon the first indications and the morerigorous studies that have been undertaken in psychotherapy. Assuming a moderate degree of effectivenesshas afforded a concerted effort amongst researchers to identify the ‘active ingredients’ which predict theeffectiveness of executive coaching.Design/Methodology: This article contains a detailed overview of the quantitative studies of executivecoaching undertaken to date. It covers both the body of evidence which we believe substantiates our keyassumption of general effectiveness and some early research findings resulting from using that assumption.It also gives a brief overview of the findings of the more rigorous randomised control trials in psychotherapyoutcome. Altogether we believe we have demonstrated that there are sufficient parallels between the new pathof coaching outcome research and the well-trodden path of psychotherapy research to enable the explorationof ‘active ingredients’ research in executive coaching.Results: By combining the early results in coaching research described in this paper and the overview of meta-analysis studies in the parallel field of psychotherapy, we have been able: (1) to show that – although the effectsizes in coaching are generally found to be smaller than in psychotherapy – it is safe to assume that executivecoaching is generally an effective intervention, and: (2) to use that assumption as a basis for further coachingresearch. We have used this assumption ourselves to carry out research into the ‘active ingredients’ of effectivecoaching and to design a new research programme on a scale that has not previously been possible.Conclusions: It is time now to be creative and pull together the limited resources for research we have incoaching psychology. As a profession we should make the most of this opportunity to discover how we mightimprove our service to our clients.Keywords: Executive coaching; outcome research; leadership development; client-coach relationship; self-efficacy; coaching interventions; common factors; active ingredients.

A

literature; however, it is rare to encounterserious attempts at answering them withanything more than a coach’s opinion or afew carefully selected case studies. On thebasis of our literature search1 we estimate thatthere are probably fewer than 20 robust quan-titative outcome studies throughout thecoaching literature. One reason for this is thecostly and cumbersome requirements of arigorous outcome study. Another is thatrather than studying, with detachment, theirown effectiveness, a coach’s priority is usuallyto satisfy their clients and meet their coachingcommitments. However, if we do not addressthese questions we may find it difficult tojustify our fees; difficult to assert unequivo-cally that coaching conversations are indeedbeneficial and difficult to avoid the potentialrisks of executive coaching, such asmisjudging the situation, aggravating thestatus quo or abusing our influence (Berglas,2002). It is for these reasons that in this articlewe want to give a brief overview of the existingcoaching outcome literature, including thethree articles that approximate a properresearch design with effectiveness ratings notinfluenced by the client or coach themselves,a control group as part of randomisedcontrolled trials, and N large enough toensure convincing statistical power (Smitheret al., 2003; Sue-Chan & Latham, 2004; Everset al., 2006). We also want to brieflysummarise the more extensive andconvincing outcome research findings inanother area of one-to-one conversations:psychotherapy, where research budgets havetraditionally been much higher. The overviewof studies in this parallel field will give indica-tors of what is needed to enable coachingresearch to continue into the future.

We define executive coaching as a form ofleadership development that takes place

through a series of contracted one-to-oneconversations with a qualified ‘coach’. Execu-tive coaching aspires to be a form of organi-sation and leadership development thatresults in a high occurrence of relevant,actionable and timely outcomes for clients.Coaching is tailored to individuals so thatthey learn and develop through a reflectiveconversation within an exclusive relationshipthat is trusting, safe and supportive.Coaching is, therefore, much more psycho-logical in nature than the more conventionaltraining and development that is charac-terised by the imparting of actionable infor-mation, instruction and advice. A 2004 surveyconducted by the Chartered Institute ofPersonnel and Development (CIPD) in theUK reported that 64 per cent of organisationssurveyed use external coaches, with 92 percent of survey participants judging coachingto be ‘effective’ or ‘very effective’ and 96 percent saying that coaching is an effective wayto promote learning in organisations (Jarvis,2004). In the same year (November 2004),the Harvard Business Review reported thatbusiness coaching – including mentoring –was a $1bn industry in the US and $2bnworldwide. The recent 2012 ICF GlobalCoaching Study (ICF, 2012) reported that theprofession still appears to be growing withnumbers of professional coaches currentlyestimated to be 47,500 worldwide.

If we take a step back and look at thenature of this industry there are a fewfeatures that are striking. Firstly, thecoaching profession is in high flux and isonly beginning to be regulated more rigor-ously, with professionals entering from verydiverse backgrounds, such as senior manage-ment, organisation development, sportscoaching, psychology and counselling. Thiswide range of backgrounds and the plethora


Signalling a new trend in executive coaching outcome research

1 In our search for original studies into coaching effectiveness we studied all the papers quoted in review articlessuch as Kampa-Kokesch and Anderson (2001), Feldman and Lankau (2005), Greif (2007), Ely et al. (2010),Peterson (2010), and Grant et al. (2010). We also perused the latest (2009) version of Anthony Grant’sannotated bibliography of coaching articles (Grant, 2006). Criteria for selection into the summary in thisarticle were: (1) original quantitative research; (2) into effectiveness; (3) within executive or managerialcoaching; and (4) that was peer-reviewed. We also checked all references within the outcome studies to coverthe coaching outcome literature as completely as we could. Finally, several of our MSc students who wereresearching the coaching outcome literature came up with helpful references.

of models and approaches mean that indi-vidual professionals are practicing in vastlydifferent ways. Not only is the executive-coaching intervention tailored to the indi-vidual client, it is likely to be tailored to theindividual coach as well and to that indi-vidual’s particular background, educationand experiences. Overviews of the field haveshown a wide range of practitioners, somepsychologically or psychotherapeuticallytrained, some with a sports coaching back-ground (Peltier, 2001) and others with influ-ences as wide apart as the GROW-model,solution-focused brief therapy, psycho-analysis and person-centred counselling (De Haan & Burger, 2005).

Not only are assignments mostly tailoredaround the needs of the individual client or‘coachee’, assignments are also frequentlyindividually commissioned by an organisa-tion or as part of a leadership-developmentor organisational-change programme.Contrary to other helping professions suchas counselling and psychotherapy, executivecoaching is commissioned and paid for by awide range of individual contractors, some-times at board level, sometimes from withinthe HR function, and oftentimes also morelocally within large corporate organisations.In terms of Porter’s well-known 5-forcesanalysis (Porter, 2008), the bargaining powerof customers is, therefore, extremely weakand the bargaining power of suppliers corre-spondingly strong. This adds to the freedomof executive coaches to approach thecoaching sessions as they see fit.

These features of the industry have clearrepercussions for research. Whilst inpsychotherapy most of the services arecentrally commissioned by very large healthinsurance companies or national healthservices, this is entirely different in executivecoaching. As executive coaches we arefinding ourselves in a situation where thereis very little pressure on rigorous outcomeresearch and a dearth of funding for thistype of research. At the same time we knowfrom psychotherapy outcome research (seethe historical overview in Wampold, 2001)

that we are likely to need very high N,possibly well above 10,000, and a rigorousdesign with randomised control trials, todemonstrate beyond doubt that executivecoaching is effective – with even greaterstatistical power needed to differentiallyexplore active ingredients in effectiveness.For the same reasons as outlined here – littlepressure from customers and little fundingfor research – there are as yet no rigorousrandomised-control-trial studies available inthe coaching literature.

In other words, presently all coachingoutcome studies are weak by the standards ofpsychology and general medicine and thereare good, understandable reasons for thisstate of affairs. This is a young profession andthere is simply no funding for major researchprogrammes. Moreover, there is no likeli-hood of funding by large and centrally co-ordinated bodies in the foreseeable future. Itis, therefore, to be expected that the presentsituation will continue and that we will keepseeing interesting individual studies of effec-tiveness, but no firm conclusions.

In our view, the way forward for quantita-tive researchers in this field is now to assumewhat in our experience and from earlyresearch indications we sense to be true, thatthe general effectiveness of helping conversa-tions as convincingly demonstrated inpsychotherapy (see, for example, Roth &Fonagy, 1996, or Cooper, 2008) will also betrue in executive coaching. If we then alsoassume that client’s perceptions of outcomeare indeed a meaningful measure of effective-ness (which is supported by research as well –see, for example, Stiles et al., 2008), we canproceed by studying the active ingredients incoaching. Interestingly and significantly forour field, within the much more advanced andrigorous psychotherapy outcome literaturethere is also a separate place for measuringactive ingredients, and this research is done insimilar ways (see chapters 4 and 5 ofWampold’s 2001 authoritative overview). Weare thus following a parallel path to that of ourwell-funded neighbouring field and usingthose parallels and that understanding of

8 International Coaching Psychology Review ● Vol. 8 No. 1 March 2013


method to enable the coaching profession toembark on meaningful studies into coaching’sactive ingredients with some confidence.

Brief overview of psychotherapyoutcome research to dateAs also argued by McKenna and Davis(2009), executive coaches can learn fromthe fact that in the older and more estab-lished profession of psychotherapy thesesame questions of effectiveness have beenstudied since at least the 1930s (Rosenzweig,1936). In this tradition, rigorous researchfindings which seemed initially unclear andcontradictory have begun to yieldconvincing results (starting with Smith &Glass, 1977), so that the demonstration ofgenerally high effectiveness of psycho-therapy is now near universally acceptedamongst professional practitioners.

In summary the answers to our initialquestions, when applied to psychotherapy,are as follows:● Does psychotherapy work? Yes, in fact, it

has been demonstrated that the averagepsychotherapy client achieves a highereffect on the relevant scales than 80 percent of the people in the control group(Smith & Glass, 1977; Wampold, 2001).This is considered a large effect size inboth psychology and medicine.

● What aspects of psychotherapy work?Different interventions, approaches,models and protocols don’t appear tomake any difference in effectiveness. Theaspects that dominate are common to allapproaches, for example, client context(what happens outside the therapeuticrelationship); therapist characteristics(including empathy, understanding,respect, warmth and authenticity; beingattractive; inspiring confidence andappearing confident; the therapist’s ownmental health and the ability to tailor the

therapy to the patient), and therelationship between client and therapistduring the session (Cooper, 2008;Norcross, 2011). Common factors2 are,therefore, central to effectiveness inpsychotherapy.

● Under what circumstances do we finddifferential effects? Not a lot is knownyet but there are strong indications thatmotivational factors such as thetherapist’s allegiance to their approachand the client’s expectations are moreimportant than was previously thought(Wampold, 2001). These are alsocommon factors.

For a more detailed appreciation ofpsychotherapy outcome research and itsrelevance in the executive-coaching profes-sion, see De Haan (2008) and McKenna andDavis (2009).

One can always argue that theseintriguing and convincing findings frompsychotherapy are not relevant for coaching,because the investigations were conductedwith professional therapists working clini-cally with clients suffering from mentalhealth problems such as depression andanxiety, which is markedly different from theneeds and issues typically addressed in exec-utive coaching. On the other hand, these areconvincing results based on meta-analysis ofmultiple rigorous studies.

Overview of executive-coachingoutcome research I: Evaluation studiesMost empirical research into executivecoaching is concerned with the value ofcoaching from the perspective of the client,with the research taking the form of anextensive evaluation of ‘customer satisfac-tion’. On some occasions clients are asked toestimate how much their coaching hascontributed financially to the bottom line oftheir organisation (e.g. McGovern et al.,



2 The idea of common factors was already introduced by Rosenzweig (1936). He argues that if all professionaltherapies are equally effective, there is a good chance that the ingredients they have in common will determinethe effectiveness of therapy – and not the specific interventions of an individual school of therapy. The activeingredients of therapy must, therefore, be common to all approaches. Examples are the relationship, thesetting, the expectations, the personalities of coach and client, the presence of an ideology or approach, etc.

2001). Levenson (2009) provides detailedinformation demonstrating the positivebusiness impact of coaching in 12 casestudies. Wasylyshyn et al. (2006) andKombarakaran et al. (2008) both show highoutcome ratings for in-company coachingprogrammes. Wasylyshyn et al (2006)provides ratings for N=28 clients and N=17‘others’ (direct colleagues of clients) in apharmaceutical company. Kombarakaran etal (2008) provides ratings for N=104 clientsand N=29 coaches. In both of these studiesthe majority of those surveyed report highvalue or ‘sustainability of learning’ fromcoaching. Schlosser et al. (2006) measuredthe outcome of executive coaching across arange of variables and industries and fromthe perspectives of manager/sponsor(N=14), client (N=56), and coach (N=70).Whilst a significant positive outcome wasreported for all subjects, a significantly lowerrating for the managers, in terms of returnon investment, was reported.

In a different approach, taken by Grantand Cavanagh (2007), the results of a self-report measure of coaching skill (scored byN=218 coaches) was correlated with N=38clients’ assessment regarding outcome. Thiscorrelation was significantly positive (r=0.58;p<0.001) thus providing a good indicationthat coaching skill can be inter-subjectivelyestablished.

Overview of executive-coachingoutcome research II: Incorporatingindependent outcome variablesThe following studies explore the effective-ness of coaching by looking at independentvariables over and above client, coach ormanager satisfaction, but with no controlgroup. Peterson (1993) studied N=370leaders from various organisations at threepoints in time (pre-coaching, post-coachingand follow-up) with outcome defined bytheir own coaching objectives and five stan-dard ‘control’ items, rated by at least them-selves, their manager and their coach(multi-source ratings). The coachingprogramme was intensive and long-term,

with typically 50+ hours of individualcoaching with a professional coach over atleast a year. Peterson found that clients, onaverage, achieved significant improvementon all measures of outcome related tocoaching objectives (effect sizes d>1.5).Olivero et al. (1997) studied managers whohad taken part in a three-day educationaltraining course followed by eight weeks ofcoaching. They found that both the trainingand the coaching increased productivityconsiderably, with most of the increaseattributable to the coaching (increase of 22.4per cent with training alone and of 88.0 percent with training and coaching, that is,almost fourfold; a difference which wassignificant at the p<0.05 level). In anotherstudy by Thach (2002), N=281 managersparticipated in four one-hour sessions ofcoaching over five months with a 360º(multisource) feedback process before andafter the coaching. They found an averageincrease in ‘leadership effectiveness’ both asrated by the coaches and their co-workers(average increase 60 per cent but no signifi-cance reported). Bowles et al. (2007) lookedat effectiveness in terms of increased produc-tivity in army recruitment managers (N=30)and executives (N=29) who receivedcoaching as compared to productivitychanges in a non-random group of experi-enced recruitment managers over a similar,but not contemporaneous, time interval.The individuals who were coached showedgreater productivity gains (d=0.43 withp<0.05 for the middle managers and d=0.75with p<0.01 for the executives). Finally,Perkins (2009) studied the effectiveness ofexecutive coaching on improving leadershipbehaviours in meetings, as rated by thecoach. Using quantitative and qualitativemethods with a small sample (N=21), pre-and post-measurement of meetingbehaviours were scored by the coach andauthor, with a clear improvement ofbehaviours reported (effect sizes d>0.95 fornine out of 11 behaviours measured, andp<0.01). There may, of course, have beenresearcher bias in these scores as coaches



might understandably want their clients todo well.

There is also substantial work that hasbeen done in the area of ‘leadershipcoaching’, that is, coaching as an aspect ofmanagement practice. This is coachingwithin a direct-report relationship, done byuntrained managers. Two studies are worthmentioning because they have a rigorous,large-N design. Ellinger et al. (2003) havemeasured employee perceptions of thecoaching skills of their supervisors in anindustrial setting (on the shop floors of USwarehouses). When these perceptions werecorrelated with their performance ratings asmarked by their supervisors, a significantsmall effect was found (11 per cent of vari-ance or d≈0.2; N=458). Similarly, Gregoryand Levy (2011) looked at employee or lead-ership coaching at front-line managementlevel in Fortune-500 companies, and foundthat supervisors’ self-scored ‘individualconsideration for their employees’ actuallycorrelates with employees’ ratings of thecoaching relationship (50 per cent of vari-ance or d≈0.5; N=702).

Overview of executive-coachingoutcome research III: Employingcontrol groupsA significant impact of executive coachingwhen compared with a control group hasbeen found by Smither et al. (2003), Sue-Chan and Latham (2004), and Evers et al.(2006). Sue-Chan and Latham (2004)compared the impact of internal andexternal coaches with a wide difference inreputation in terms of (perceived) expertiseand credibility. This outcome study involvedMBA students in two countries (total N=53)and compared the performance in terms ofteam playing and exam grades and foundsmall but statistically significant differencesat p<0.05, between faculty, peer and self-coaching with the first the most impactful.As in Perkins (2009) above, this study maysuffer from researcher-bias as the externalcoaches/tutors did the scoring of perform-ance.

Evers et al. (2006) measured self-efficacybeliefs and outcome expectancies, on eachof three dimensions. Their study compared apre-intervention and post-intervention meas-urement and also involved a (non-randomised) control group. Theintervention was short with an average ofonly four coaching sessions. Although thesample was not very large (30 managers inboth the experimental and the controlgroup) they did find some objectiveevidence for a positive outcome of thecoaching intervention. There was a signifi-cant increment for the coached group overthe control group for one of the threedimensions in both self-efficacy beliefs(‘setting one’s own goals’) and outcomeexpectancies (‘acting in a balanced way’)[d≈0.5 with p<0.05].

One of the most thorough studies on theimpact of executive coaching was under-taken by Smither et al. (2003). This studyworked with a (non-randomised) controlgroup and conclusions were based on moreobjective criteria than evaluations by theclients. Smither et al. (2003) included evalu-ations by independent researchers togetherwith clients’ superiors, colleagues and staff(multisource feedback). This researchinvolved 1202 senior managers in one multi-national organisation with two consecutiveyears of 360º feedback. However, there wereno more than ‘two or three’ coachingsessions per client (Smither et al., 2003;p.29). The researchers found that managerswho worked with an executive coach weresignificantly more likely than othermanagers to: (1) set specific goals (d=0.16;p<0.01); (2) solicit ideas for improvementsfrom their superiors (d=0.36; p<0.01); and(3) obtain higher ratings from direct-reportsand superiors in the second year (d=0.17;p<0.05).

Brief overview of mentoring outcomeresearch The above findings are further supported inthe more extensive mentoring outcome litera-ture reviewed by Allen et al. (2004), through



a meta-analysis comprising 43 outcomestudies of mentoring in the organisa-tional/workplace domain. Taking only thestudies with control groups they foundgenerally small, but significant effect sizes(e.g. 10 per cent explained proportion ofvariance for the mentoring effect on numberof promotions and four per cent explainedproportion of variance for the mentoringeffect on career satisfaction; that is, d<0.2).They also found the criterion measuring thementoring relationship (‘satisfaction withmentor’) to be the best predictor of careeroutcomes (14 per cent explained proportionof variance or d≈0.2 for career mentoringand 38 per cent explained proportion ofvariance or d≈0.4 for supportive or‘psychosocial’ mentoring).

One thorough study of mentoringoutcomes included by Allen et al. (2004), isRagins et al. (2000) who studied a group of1162 professionals from a wide variety oforganisations and looked at the effect offormal/informal mentoring relationships ona range of work and career attitudes. Forty-four per cent of the respondents had aninformal mentor, nine per cent a formalmentor as part of a mentoring programmeand 47 per cent had no mentor. This lastgroup was used as the control, which was,therefore, not randomised. Their resultsshow that the crucial factor in effectiveness isthe client’s satisfaction with the mentoringrelationship. In the absence of that factor,there were no demonstrable differencesbetween professionals who were mentoredand those who were not. If client satisfactionwith the relationship is present, however,professionals clearly demonstrate more posi-tive attitudes towards themselves (self-confi-dence), their work, promotion prospects,their organisation and their career. Theauthors of Allen et al. (2004) later confirmedthe results summarised above in a muchlarger meta-analysis, with N >10,000 andincluding workplace, youth and academicdomains (Eby et al., 2008).

Conclusions from coaching andmentoring outcome research In summary, we note that outcome researchin coaching is still in its infancy and that theholy grail of executive coaching – ‘Is execu-tive coaching an effective intervention?’ – is still there to be sought. In fact, no clearand agreed sense of what ‘outcomes’ shouldbe or how outcome should be measured hasyet emerged. There is no agreed researchstandard like the randomised controlledtrials used in psychotherapy outcomeresearch (Norcross, 2011). Also, the studiesinclude a variety of processes which mightthemselves affect outcomes, such as explicitgoal-setting, written development objectives,360º feedback and other assessment tools,manager involvement, and even trainingprogrammes and a presentation to seniorexecutives to summarise achievements (e.g.Olivero et al., 1997). Treating this body ofresearch as equivalent is too simplistic. Thatsaid, what is striking is that the first fiveresearch papers above (Peterson, 1993;Olivero et al., 1997; Thach, 2002, Bowles etal., 2007; Perkins, 2009), which did not makeuse of a contemporary control group, foundlarge effects (d>0.75), generally larger thanthose found in psychotherapy. On the otherhand, the more rigorous studies involvingcontrol groups (such as Allen et al., 2004;Smither et al., 2003; and Evers et al., 2006)only found small effects, generally smallerthan those found in psychotherapy (d<0.5;compare with average d≈0.8 in psycho-therapy – see Wampold, 2001). However,these are studies with mentors and internalcoaches whilst many of the studies withoutcontrol groups involve more significantcoaching programmes with qualified profes-sional coaches, and this is also a possiblefactor in the higher effects. It appears that ifthe client alone is the focus of the study, theoutcome tends to be very positive. However,when such common-methods bias iscontrolled for, the effect is much smaller,although still positive.



Overview of executive-coachingoutcome research which comparesconditionsThe overview of effectiveness studies incoaching above has shown that there aresome indications that executive coaching isan effective intervention. However, there isalso another body of coaching research, towhich our own most recent research study(De Haan et al., 2013) belongs. This newerbody of research in coaching outcomeassumes general effectiveness of coachingand then compares conditions to determinethe degree to which various aspects ofcoaching, coach or client impact onoutcome. If one accepts the assumption ofgeneral effectiveness (e.g. as demonstratedby the studies quoted above) the experi-mental conditions of this type of researchcan be a lot less stringent. In particular,client, coach or sponsor satisfaction can beused as the outcome variable, and one doesnot need to employ randomised controlledgroups, because the various conditionscreate proper comparison samples withinthe study.

We have found the following eightstudies which explore the question of whatsort of coaching is effective; in other words,which coaching models, personality matches,or coaching behaviours make a significantdifference to clients?

Scoular and Linley (2006) looked at howboth: (1) a ‘goal-setting’ intervention at thebeginning of the conversation; and (2)personality (dis-)similarities between coachand client as measured by MBTI, impact onperceived effectiveness. The sample size wasN=117 clients and N=14 coaches. No statisti-cally significant difference resulted foroutcome measurements at two and eightweeks after the session between ‘goal-setting’and ‘no goal-setting’; but when the coachand client differed on particular aspects of

the personality instrument (the MBTI‘temperaments’) the outcome scores weresignificantly higher.

Stewart et al. (2008) looked at how bothclient personality and client self-efficacycorrelate with coaching outcome. Theymeasured so-called ‘big-five’ personalityfactors (Digman, 1990) and general self-effi-cacy (see Schwarzer et al., 1999) for 110clients and correlated these with coachingoutcome. They found moderate positiveeffects for conscientiousness, openness,emotional stability and general self-efficacy,but warned that other factors are likely toplay a role as well.

Boyce et al. (2010) studied 74 coach-client relationships in a US military academywhere clients were cadets and coaches weresenior military leaders who had had sometraining in executive coaching. The studyanalysed the impact of relational aspects(rapport, trust and commitment) andmatching criteria (demographic common-ality, behavioural compatibility, and coachcredibility), on coaching outcome. Theirmain findings were that matching had nosignificant impact on outcome, whilst rela-tionship, as assessed by both client(explained proportion of variance around50 per cent) and coach (explained propor-tion of variance around 25 per cent),affected outcomes significantly.

With a sample of internal coachesworking alongside a leadership developmentprogramme within a manufacturingcompany involving 30 coach-client pairs,Baron and Morin (2009 and 2012) were ableto show that coaching clients’ rating of theworking alliance 3 as a measure of thecoaching relationship correlated withcoaching outcomes (measured in terms ofchanges in client self-efficacy, explainedproportion of variance around 25 per cent)whilst coaches’ ratings of the working



3 Working alliance, as originally defined by Greenson (1965), is a measure for the strength of the coachingrelationship. Bordin (1979) suggested that the working alliance can be thought of as a combination ofagreement on tasks, agreement on goals and strength of bonds. Based on Bordin’s (1979) model, Horvath andGreenberg (1986) designed the Working Alliance Inventory with three sub-variables: tasks, goals and bonds;which is now the most widely used of many well-validated tools to measure working alliance.

alliance did not correlate with outcomessignificantly.

De Haan et al. (2011) examine howvarious executive coaching interventionsmake a difference to clients. Seventy-onecoaching clients, from as many organisa-tions, reported on the various interventionsof their coaches and these ratings werecompared with their evaluations. In thatwork, De Haan et al. found no distinctionamong specific coach interventions, leadingto the conclusion that effectiveness is muchless correlated with technique or interven-tion than by factors common to all coaching,such as the relationship, empathic under-standing, positive expectations, etc.

De Haan et al. (2013) build on theprevious study to research the relative impactand importance of various common factorsfor 156 new executive coaching clients and34 experienced coaches. The purpose of thisresearch was to look at various elementscommon to all coaching approaches (the‘common factors’) and to measure which ofthese are likely to have the highest positiveimpact on clients. The study showed thatclient perceptions of the outcome ofcoaching were significantly related to theirperceptions of the working alliance, clientself-efficacy and perceptions of coachinginterventions (‘generalised techniques’) ofthe coach. The client-coach relationshipstrongly mediated the impact of self-efficacyand the majority of techniques on coachingoutcomes (except for perceived explicit focuson goals and helping the client to makediscoveries), suggesting that the relationshipis the key factor in coaching outcome.

One final article stands out in particularas it is the only quantitative study we havefound analysing executive coachingoutcome on the basis of genuine interactiondata from videotaping initial coachingsessions (Ianiro et al., 2012). Ianiro et al.analysed the full interchange within 33 firstcoaching sessions with trainee psychologistsas coaches and young professionals asclients, in terms of both the client’s and thecoach’s interpersonal behaviour, over two

basic dimensions: affiliation and dominance.Findings suggest that both: (1) the coach’sdominance behaviour; and (2) similarity ofdominance and affiliation behaviourbetween coach and client predict positiveclient ratings of goal-attainment after fivesessions; whilst (2) also predicts positiveclient ratings of the relationship quality afterfive sessions.

The above studies constitute anemerging trend pointing at the importanceof common factors as manifested throughthe coaching relationship. There are varioushelpful taxonomies of ‘common factors’(e.g. Grencavage & Norcross, 1990; DeHaan, 2008), focusing on relationship-,client-, coach-, change- and structure-relatedfactors. The factors that have been studied sofar include coach personality, client person-ality, generalised technique, relationshipand self-efficacy. There are others of rele-vance, such as coach allegiance, clientexpectancy (‘hope’ or placebo-relatedfactors) and ‘client’s life circumstances’ thatcould be relevant as well.

Figure 1 shows the various commonfactors hypothesised to have a positiveimpact on the outcome of coaching conver-sations. This figure also demonstrates howthe impact of these common factors maybemediated through the relationship, as someof the studies (Boyce et al., 2010; and DeHaan et al., 2013) have indicated.

DiscussionAll indications we have from quantitativecoaching outcome research described abovesupport the conjecture that coaching isgenerally an effective intervention even ifsome effect sizes are small. Also, some firstindications have been found as to some ofthe active ingredients in executive coaching:client self-efficacy, the generalised techniquesof the coach, client personality factors char-acterised by looking at the ‘big five’, and thequality of the coaching relationship.

The gold standard in outcome research isstill beyond our reach as a profession and weargue that at this stage we will have to be





Figure 1: A graphical depiction of the various common factors that have been studiedas independent variables: Coach technique, Personality differences and

Client self-efficacy. With additional analysis one can investigate both direct influence ofthe independent variables on coaching outcomes (dependencies B and C), and the

probability of mediation of this influence through the strongest dependency, which inthe literature so far has been the coaching relationship

(dependency A plus B as compared to C).

pragmatic with the resources we have untilsuch a time that coaching psychology andcentralised regulation have grown such thatwe can aspire to proper randomised controltrials of a sufficient scale. It is important tonote that there is now valid justification forcontinuing with research into active ingredi-ents by examining and drawing on methodsfrom a parallel field of helping conversa-tions, psychotherapy. In this field the argu-ment for effectiveness was demonstratedrigorously over many years and tens of thou-sands of participants. Rather than give up onproper coaching research because we don’thave the funding, we argue that the earlyindications from research into effectivenesscombined with the rigorous results from theclosely related field of psychotherapy aresufficient to allow us to continue withresearch into active ingredients bycomparing conditions as in the studies ofScoular and Linley, 2006; Stewart et al., 2008;Boyce et al., 2010; Baron and Morin, 2009and 2012; and De Haan et al., 2011 and2013, cited above.

Moreover, as Stiles et al. (2008) argue,effectiveness research comparing conditionswithin real-life coaching assignmentsbalances the risks of standard randomisedcontrolled trials (such as control-groupsselection biases associated with lack ofrandomisation and the lack of assurance thatcoaching assignments were delivered in astandard way), by a greater realism andexternal validity of the research.

Having said this, we still need to pulltogether resources if we want to achievestatistical significance and make the researchresults meaningful. In De Haan et al. (2013)which looked at what makes coaching mosteffective for the client, the diversity ofpersonality types and number of variablesbeing examined meant that in many areasthe sample size of N=156 was too small forresults to be conclusive. We need muchhigher N, probably an order of magnitudelarger than we have seen in previous studies.In our current work spanning 2012 which isbased on an open-source approach where

executive coaches around the world canbecome co-authors (www.ashridge.org.uk/centreforcoaching), it looks likely that sucha target will be reached.

Active ingredients, and in particular theso-called common factors, seem a promisingavenue to a better understanding ofcoaching. There are clear findings, clearcontroversies to be resolved (e.g. the influ-ence of personality matching where Scoular& Linley, 2006, and De Haan, 2013, havefound contradictory results), and clear indi-cations of mediation by the strongestcommon factors. It would be helpful to havemore findings to achieve greater statisticalpower on the impact of the relationship orworking alliance, so that we can look moreclosely into key aspects of that coaching rela-tionship, such as ‘agreement on task’, ‘agree-ment on goals’ and ‘bond’, as seen by clientsand coaches.

We believe that we can now assume adegree of overall effectiveness, however, wealso need to be wary of accepting only clientsatisfaction as an outcome variable (Mabe &West, 1982). Client perspectives need to becompleted with the perspectives of coaches,peers, bosses and sponsors, or with the find-ings of validated psychometric instruments,as much as possible.

There is still a huge amount of work to bedone in terms of investigating the ‘real’client of executive coaching: the organisa-tion of the client. We need to become morecreative in understanding, mapping andexploring (potential) organisational impactof executive coaching interventions, andalso, for that matter, study the more generalorganisational consulting interventions inquantitative ways. But above all, we need topull all the available resources together tocreate more global studies, with larger N,and with agreement on how to define andmeasure coaching outcome. We hope thatthis overview can help to set the generaldirection for quantitative research in execu-tive coaching.

In summary, executive coaching outcomeresearch has now arrived at a critical and



exciting juncture where two decades ofempirical studies have created someconsensus that executive coaching may wellbe an effective intervention. First indicationsare that executive coaching may turn out tobe less effective than psychotherapy whichwould be understandable as it is a less inten-sive intervention as well (with generally lowerfrequency and number of sessions). At thisjuncture we can safely assume that more ofthe same empirical studies will scarcely tell usmore about effectiveness of coaching. Moresimilar studies will only yield more of thesame indications, whilst to move beyond thepresent level of understanding much morerigour would be needed in terms of controlgroups, randomisation and statistical power.We have argued here that there are ways tomove beyond this juncture into new anduncharted territory, ways to achieve moreconfidence in terms of the factors that impacton coaching effectiveness. These new wayscan only be found in our view by means of:1. Broad agreement amongst professional

coaches and researchers in terms ofresearch design and choice ofindependent variables across studies,such as has already been achieved for, forexample, self-efficacy, personality andworking-alliance instruments, which haveall been used by several research teams.

2. A pooling together of resources in orderto increase the N or statistical power. Thisis what we have done in our own globalcoaching effectiveness study that hasrecently been launched through theAshridge Centre for Coaching, theCoaching Psychology Unit of theUniversity of Sydney and the Departmentof Management & Organisation of theVU University in Amsterdam. By ‘goingglobal’ with effectiveness research we willhave a much better chance to pick uprelatively small and yet importantcorrelations.

We are looking forward to what appears tobe a very bright coaching outcome researchfuture beyond this juncture.

The AuthorsDr Erik de Haan is Director of AshridgeCentre for Coaching and Professor ofOrganisation Development and Coaching atthe VU University of Amsterdam.

Dr Anna Duckworth is Director of Duck-worth Coaching Associates, an AssociateFaculty member of the Ashridge Centre forCoaching and a Coach Mentor Supervisorwith The OCM Group.

CorrespondenceDr Erik de HaanAshridge Centre for Coaching,Ashridge Business School,Berkhamsted,Hertfordshire HP4 1NS, UK.Email: [email protected]/erikdehaan



Allen, T.D., Eby, L.T., Poteet, M.L., Lentz, E. & Lima,L. (2004). Career benefits associated withmentoring for protégés: A meta-analysis. Journalof Applied Psychology, 89, 127–136.

Baron, L. & Morin, L. (2009). The coach-coacheerelationship in executive coaching: A field study.Human Resource Development Quarterly, 20(1),85–106.

Baron, L. & Morin, L. (2012). The working alliancein executive coaching: Its impact on outcomesand how coaches can influence it. In E. de Haan& C. Sills (Eds.), Coaching relationships(pp.213–226). UK: Libri.

Berglas, S. (2002). The very real dangers of executivecoaching. Harvard Business Review, 80(6), 86–92.

Bordin, H. (1979). The generalisability of thepsychoanalytic concept of the working alliance.Psychotherapy: Theory, Research and Practice, 16,252–260.

Bowles, S.V., Cunningham, C.J.L., De La Rosa, G.M.& Picano, J.J. (2007). Coaching leaders in middleand executive management: Goals, performance,buy-in. Leadership and Organisation DevelopmentJournal, 28(5), 388–408.

Boyce, L.A., Jackson, R.J. & Neal, L.J. (2010).Building successful leadership coachingrelationships: Examining impact of matchingcriteria in a leadership coaching programme.Journal of Management Development [Special Issue onCoaching and the Relationship], 29(10), 914–931.

Cooper, M. (2008). Essential research findings incounselling and psychotherapy – the facts are friendly.London: Sage.

De Haan, E. (2008). Relational coaching – journeystowards mastering one-to-one learning. Chichester:Wiley.

De Haan, E. & Burger, Y. (2005). Coaching withcolleagues: An action guide for one-to-one learning.Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.

De Haan, E., Culpin, V. & Curd, J. (2011). Executivecoaching in practice: What determineshelpfulness for clients of coaching? PersonnelReview, 40(1), 24–44.

De Haan, E., Duckworth, A., Birch, D. & Jones, C.(2013). Executive coaching outcome research:The predictive value of common factors such asrelationship, personality match and self-efficacy.Consulting Psychology Journal: Practice and Research(In Press).

Digman, J.M. (1990). Personality structure:Emergence of the Five Factor Model. AnnualReview of Psychology, 41, 417–440.

Ellinger, A.D., Ellinger, A.E. & Keller, S.B. (2003).Supervisory coaching behaviour, employeesatisfaction, and warehouse employeeperformance: A dyadic perspective in thedistribution industry. Human Resource DevelopmentQuarterly, 14(4), 435–458.

Eby, L.T., Allen, T.D., Evans, S.C., Ng, T. & DuBois,D.L. (2008). Does mentoring matter? A multi-discinplinary meta-analysis comparing mentoredand non-mentored individuals. Journal of VocationBehaviour, 72, 254–267.

Ely, K., Boyce, L.A., Zaccaro, S.J., Hernez-Broome, G.& Whyman, W. (2010). Evaluating leadershipcoaching: A review and integrated framework.The Leadership Quarterly, 21, 585–599.

Evers, W.J.G., Brouwers, A. & Tomic, W. (2006). A quasi-experimental study on managementcoaching effectiveness. Consulting PsychologyJournal: Practice and Research, 58, 174–182.

Feldman, D.C. & Lankau, M.J. (2005). Executivecoaching: A review and agenda for futureresearch. Journal of Management, 31(6), 829–848.

Grant, A.M. (2006). Workplace and executivecoaching: A bibliography from the scholarlybusiness literature. In D.R. Stober & A.M. Grant(Eds.), Evidence based coaching handbook(pp.367–387). New York: Wiley.

Grant, A.M. & Cavanagh, M.J. (2007). The goal-focused coaching skills questionnaire:Preliminary findings. Social Behaviour andPersonality, 35(6), 751–760.

Grant, A.M., Passmore, J., Cavanagh, M.J. & Parker,H. (2010). The state of play in coaching today: A comprehensive review of the field. InternationalReview of Industrial and Organisational Psychology,25, 125.

Gregory, J.D. & Levy, P.E. (2011). It’s not me, it’s you:A multi-level examination of variables thatimpact employee coaching relationships.Consulting Psychology Journal: Practice and Research,63(2), 67–88.

Greif, S. (2007). Advances in research on coachingoutcomes. International Coaching PsychologyReview, 2(3), 222–249.

Grencavage, L.M. & Norcross, J.C. (1990). Where arethe commonalities among the therapeuticcommon factors? Professional Psychology: Researchand Practice, 21, 372–378.

Horvath, A.O. & Greenberg, L. (1986). Thedevelopment of the Working Alliance Inventory:A research handbook. In L. Greenberg & W. Pinsoff (Eds.), Psychotherapeutic processes: A research handbook. New York: Guilford Press.

Ianiro, P.M., Schermuly, C.C. & Kauffeld, S. (2012).Why interpersonal dominance and affiliationmatter: An interaction analysis of the coach-client relationship. Coaching: An InternationalJournal of Theory, Research and Practice, 6(1), 1–22.

ICF (2012). The 2012 ICF Global Coaching Survey.www.coachfederation.org/coachingstudy2012.

Jarvis, J. (2004). Coaching and buying coaching services.London: CIPD.



References

Kampa-Kokesch, S. & Anderson, M.Z. (2001).Executive coaching: A comprehensive review ofthe literature. Consulting Psychology Journal:Practice and Research, 53(4), 205–228.

Kombarakaran, F.A., Yang, J.A., Baker, M.N. &Fernandes, P.B. (2008). Executive coaching: It works! Consulting Psychology Journal: Practice andResearch, 60, 78–90.

Levenson, A. (2009). Measuring and maximising thebusiness impact of executive coaching. ConsultingPsychology Journal: Practice and Research, 61,103–121.

Mabe, P.A. & West, S.G. (1982). Validity of self-evaluation of ability: A review and meta-analysis.Journal of Applied Psychology, 76, 280–296.

McGovern, J., Lindemann, M., Vergara, M., Murphy,S., Barker, L. & Warrenfeltz, R. (2001).Maximising the impact of executive coaching:Behavioural change, organisational outcomes,and return on investment. The Manchester Review,6, 1–9.

McKenna, D.D. & Davis, S.L. (2009). Hidden in plainsight: The active ingredients of executivecoaching. Industrial and Organisational Psychology,2, 244–260.

Norcross, J.C. (Ed.) (2011). Psychotherapy relationshipsthat work: Evidence-based responsiveness. New York:Oxford University Press.

Olivero, G., Bane, K.D. & Kopelman, R.E. (1997).Executive coaching as a transfer of training tool:Effects on productivity in a public agency. Public Personnel Management, 26, 461–469.

Peltier, B. (2001). The psychology of executive coaching:Theory and application. New York: Brunner &Routledge.

Perkins, R.D. (2009). How executive coaching canchange leader behaviour and improve meetingeffectiveness: An exploratory study. ConsultingPsychology Journal: Practice and Research, 61(4),298–318.

Peterson, D.B. (1993). Measuring change: A psycho-metric approach to evaluating individual coachingoutcomes. Presented at the Annual Conference ofthe Society for Industrial and OrganisationalPsychology, San Francisco.

Peterson, D.B. (2010). Executive coaching: A criticalreview and recommendations for advancing thepractice. In S. Zedeck (Ed.), APA handbook ofindustrial and organisational psychology: Vol. 2.Selecting and developing members of the organisation(pp.527–566). Washington, DC: AmericanPsychological Association.

Porter, M.E. (2008). The five competitive forces thatshape strategy. Harvard Business Review, 86(1),79–93.

Ragins, B.R., Cotton, J.L. & Miller, J.S. (2000).Marginal mentoring: The effects of type ofmentor, quality of relationship, and programmedesign on work and career attitudes. Academy ofManagement Journal, 43, 1177–1194.

Rosenzweig, S. (1936). Some implicit commonfactors in diverse methods of psychotherapy: ‘At last the Dodo said, ‘Everybody has won andall must have prizes.’’ American Journal ofOrthopsychiatry, 6, 412–415.

Roth, A. & Fonagy, P. (1996). What works for whom? A critical review of psychotherapy research. London:The Guilford Press.

Schwarzer, R., Mueller, J. & Greenglass, E. (1999).Assessment of perceived self-efficacy on theinternet: Data collection in cyberspace. Anxiety,Stress and Coping, 12, 145–161.

Scoular, A. & Linley, P.A. (2006). Coaching, goal-setting and personality type: What matters? The Coaching Psychologist, 2, 9–11.

Smith, M.L. & Glass, G.V. (1977). Meta-analysis ofpsychotherapy outcome studies. American Psycho-logist, 32, 752–760.

Smither, J.W., London, M., Flautt, R., Vargas, Y. &Kucine, I. (2003). Can working with an executivecoach improve multi-source feedback ratingsover time? A quasi-experimental field study.Personnel Psychology, 56, 23–44.

Stewart, L.J., Palmer, S., Wilkin, H. & Kerrin, M.(2008). The influence of character: Doespersonality impact coaching success?International Journal of Evidence Based Coaching andMentoring, 6(1), 32–42.

Stiles, W.B., Barkham, M., Mellor-Clark, J. & Connell,J. (2008). Effectiveness of cognitive-behavioural,person-centred, and psychodynamic therapies inUK primary care routine practice: Replication ina larger sample. Psychological Medicine, 38,677–688.

Sue-Chan, C. & Latham, G.P. (2004). The relativeeffectiveness of external, peer and self-coaches.Applied Psychology, 53(2), 260–278.

Thach, E.C. (2002). The impact of executivecoaching and 360º feedback on leadershipeffectiveness. Leadership and OrganisationDevelopment Journal, 23, 205–214.

Wampold, B.E. (2001). The great psychotherapy debate:Models, methods and findings. Mahwah, NJ:Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Wasylyshyn, K.M., Gronsky, B. & Haas, W. (2006).Tigers, stripes, and behaviour change: Surveyresults of a commissioned coaching programme.Consulting Psychology Journal: Practice and Research,58, 65–81.



STRENGTHS are defined as ‘a pre-existing capacity for a particular way ofbehaving, thinking or feeling that is

authentic and energising to the user and enablesoptimal functioning, development and perform-ance’ (Linley, 2008, p.9). The case forstrengths has gained momentum in the pastdecade, linked heavily to the positivepsychology movement (Sheldon & King,2001). Positive psychology (described as thescientific study of human strengths andvirtues) has amassed a large amount of quan-titative data in relation to strengths use,linking it to subjective and psychological

well-being (Govindji & Linley, 2007). Forexample, Minhas (2010) found thatstrengths use is associated with higher levelsof self-esteem. Other benefits of usingstrengths include: increased profitability,engagement (Harter, Schmidt & Hayes,2002), better performance at work (Clifton& Harter, 2003) and various business bene-fits (Corporate Leadership Council, 2002).

Research has found that a strengths focusis a valuable endeavour and yet approxi-mately two thirds of people when askedcannot name their strengths (Hill, 2001;Arnold, 1997). Strengths assessments fill this


Paper

‘The assessment needs to go hand-in-hand with the debriefing’: The importanceof a structured coaching debriefing inunderstanding and applying a positivepsychology strengths assessmentBrenda Roche & Kate Hefferon

Objectives: Despite extensive empirical evidence supporting the use of strengths, minimal research has beenconducted on the practical application of strengths tools. The objective of this study was to test the impactof a structured debriefing following completion of Realise2, an online strengths assessment, in relation tostrengths application (Linley, Willars & Biswas-Diener, 2010). Design: The study utilised a qualitative design. Semi-structured interviews were employed and thematicanalysis was used to identify themes representing the participant’s experience (Braun & Clarke, 2006). Method: The 20 participants were a mixture of middle and senior managers from a global travelorganisation. All participants completed the Realise2 strengths assessment and a structured debriefing witha qualified coach. Following the debriefing, each participant completed a semi-structured interview todetermine how the debriefing impacted their understanding and utilisation of the assessment findings.Results: The results show that the debriefing was associated with engendering action, enhancing self-efficacy and stimulating psychological development. Conclusions: The study found that all 20 participants benefited from having a structured debriefing aftercompleting a strengths assessment. The debriefing led to a greater understanding and utilisation of thestrengths assessment. This pairing has practical implications for those involved in strengths-based coachingand development. In addition, limitations of the study are discussed and areas for future researchsuggested.Keywords: Strengths debriefing; coaching; action; self-efficacy; positive psychology.

void. To date, over four million people havetaken one of the three strengths assessmentsassociated with positive psychology, the VIAstrengths inventory (Peterson & Seligman,2004), Clifton StrengthsFinder 2.0 (Rath,2008) and Realise2. However, there is littledata demonstrating the individual’s under-standing and utilisation of their strengthsprofiles. This study aims to bridge this gap.

Positive psychology is an applied scienceand a growing number of coaches andconsultants are using a strengths-basedapproach to their practice (Biswas-Diener,2009). Coaching, with its positive focus, is anideal arena for strengths development.Clifton and Harter (2003) describe threestages of strengths-based development. Theinitial stage is the identification of strengthsby completing a strengths assessments. Thesecond stage involves an increase of self-awareness as the individual integrates theresults of their profile report into their ownself-assessment. The final stage involvesbehavioural change. The purpose ofcompleting a structured debriefing is to facil-itate stages two and three of this process bycoaching, supporting and challenging theindividual in relation to their strengths.

Govindji and Linley (2007) suggest thatstrengths knowledge is not a significant inde-pendent predictor of well-being but thatstrengths use is associated with higher levelsof subjective well-being. Therefore, usingstrengths may be more important than justknowing them. Strengths coaching andcoaching psychology are complementarypartners, as both focus on improvement ofperformance and well-being. Linley andHarrington (2006) propose that a strengths-based approach adds significant value tocoaching psychology and complimentscoaching’s overall aim of ‘enhancing well-being and performance in both personaland professional life using evidence basedcoaching models’ (Palmer & Whybrow, 2005,p.7, as cited in Grant & Palmer, 2002). Executive coaches, who are increasinglycalled on to show a return on investment, areadopting a strengths-based approach.

AimThe aim of this qualitative research was toanalyse the experience of 20 participants oncompletion of a structured debriefing oftheir strengths profile report. The researchsought to establish whether the debriefingimpacted the participants understandingand use of their report. This study aimed toget to the heart of the contributing factorsthat led to successful strengths development.To achieve this aim, participant’s datarelating to their experience of the debriefingprocess was analysed. In particular, thisresearch sought to determine whether thedebriefing facilitated the practical applica-tion of strengths assessments. This studyaims to balance the significant amount ofquantitative strengths research by capturingand reporting the qualitative perspective ofpeople’s experience of strengths develop-ment. Linley (2008) suggests that there is aneed to explore the pragmatic application ofstrengths theory to inform practitioners.

The assessment is a good starting pointfor strengths exploration; however, thedebriefing process allows a more in-depthexploration and development of strengths. It provides an opportunity for participants toask questions about their profile report andto explore and express their response totheir results. The Centre of Applied PositivePsychology (CAPP, 2010) has developed astructured debriefing which encouragesstretch goals and action planning. These areimportant considerations as Latham andLocke (2007) suggest that each are integralto positive change. The goal orientated focusof the debriefing is also important as thedesired result of strengths development isbehavioural change (Clifton & Harter,2003). The debriefing process providesknowledge, challenge, feedback, an objec-tive sounding board and a supportive envi-ronment to facilitate this change. In essence,it is a structured coaching conversationfocusing on strengths. To maximise thisprocess, the skills profile of the personleading the debriefing is important. Ideally, astrengths coach will have successfully


The importance of a structured coaching debriefing …

completed a relevant strengths practitionerprogramme and have demonstrated a levelof skill and competence in the use of thestrengths in a coaching context.

Method Methodological paradigmThematic analysis was used for this study asthis method does not require linking tospecific theoretical frameworks. Thismethod was adopted to identify themesembedded throughout the interviews. Aninductive ‘bottom up’ approach was used foridentification of themes (e.g. Frith &Gleeson, 2004, as cited in Braun & Clarke,2006). This flexible approach allowedthemes to emerge that were strongly data-driven and assumed the position of theparticipants being the expert of their experi-ence. The process of qualitative analysis issubjective and thus different researchers willreach different conclusions (Gyllensten &Palmer, 2006). The researcher’s hereacknowledge that themes are not selected inan epistemological vacuum and reflexivity isconsidered in the analysis. Therefore, theresearcher’s framework relevant to thisresearch is stated as a pragmatic andconstructivist one. In this study, theresearcher’s interpretative framework wasinfluenced by training and practice in coun-selling, executive coaching and applied posi-tive psychology. The first author was also thestrengths coach for the debriefing process ofthis study having trained and practiced as astrengths practitioner. In this context, thecoach worked from a person-centred, inte-grative approach, assuming that the client isthe expert in their own life. A solution-focused approach, ensuring solutions weregleaned from the participant not theresearcher and an emphasis on the partici-pant’s strengths and resources compli-mented this theoretical stance.

ParticipantsThe research was conducted in a large multi-national travel company which providesvarious hospitality products and services.

The participant sample was a mixed gender,multicultural group from nine differentcountries including: 10 from Ireland, threefrom England and one each from Australia,Belgium, Argentina, Spain, Hungary, SouthAfrica and Italy. All participants spokeEnglish fluently. The six men and 14 womencomprised of two company directors, eightmanagers, 10 team leaders and one personalassistant. The age range was from 30 to 42years.

Ethical issues Provision was made as per University of EastLondon and British Psychological Societyethical guidelines. Participants were allocatedpseudonyms and these were used throughoutthis study to protect anonymity.

ProcedureRealise2 was deemed to be the most appro-priate fit of the three strengths assessmentsfor this study as its dynamic model fits wellwith the dynamic nature of coaching.Realise2 is an integrated model of 60strengths which are rated according toenergy, performance and use. This modeldistinguishes between strengths you use anddon’t use; realised and unrealised strengthsand the strengths that you do well but finddraining (learned behaviours). This model,unlike the other two, also addresses weak-nesses which need to be overcome in theworkplace when they are performancecritical. Together the four characteristics ofrealised strengths, unrealised strengths,learned behaviours and weaknesses make upthe four quadrants of the Realise2, 4Mmodel. The 4 ‘Ms’ refer to the advice thatfollows from the model output. Realisedstrengths are characterised by high energy,performance and use and the model suggestsmarshalling these by using them appropri-ately for the situation or context. Learnedbehaviours refer to activities that we are goodat; however, they are generally draining,posing a risk to our psychological health andwell-being. The model advises moderatingtheir use. Weaknesses are dealt with head on


Brenda Roche & Kate Hefferon



Table 1: Participant characteristics.

Name Sex Age Nationality Position

Fred M 38 Irish Director

Diane F 40 Irish Director

Damien M 35 Australian Manager

Alex M 30 British Team Leader

Margaret F 40 Irish Manager

Yvette F 36 Irish Manager

Olwen F 40 Irish Manager

Mariene F 36 Irish Team Leader

Sarah F 34 Irish Manager

Christine F 39 Italian Team Leader

Niamh F 33 Irish Manager

Sandra F 42 Irish Manager

Allison F 37 Hungarian Team leader

Rachel F 38 British Personal assistant

Gabriella F 37 British Team leader

Dennis M 34 Belgium Team Leader

Martina F 35 Argentinean Team Leader

Martin M 33 Irish Team leader

Molly F 36 Spanish Manager

Kevin M 38 South African Team Leader

in this model through frank discussion, openacceptance and ownership (Linley, Woolston& Biswas-Diener, 2009). According to themodel, their use needs to be minimised.Finally, unrealised strengths are our strengthsthat energise us but are underused. Themodel advocates maximising these by findingmore opportunities for their use (Linley,Willars & Biswas-Diener, 2010). This studydetermines people’s experience of beingdebriefed through this model and providesvaluable information for best practice forcoaches working with strengths.

Participants were invited to enrol in thestudy by the Director of Operations withintheir organisation. Each participant receivedan email from the first author containingdetails of the study, an attached consent

form and an information sheet outlining theaim of the study, confidentiality and generalinformation regarding the research. Theright to withdraw at any time without expla-nation was clearly documented. Once allsigned consent forms were returned, partici-pants were requested to complete the onlineRealise2 assessment. Their profile report wasavailable immediately on completion of theassessment. Within a timeframe of one weekto one month, each participant had a onehour long debriefing of their profile reportwith the main researcher. The debriefingfollowed a structured format including:highlighting confidentiality, establishingaims and context, explanation of the 4Mmodel, debriefing of strengths, establishingpriorities and agreeing goals and actions.

Data collectionInductive semi-structured interviews wereconducted face-to-face with each participantto get to the heart of their experience of theassessment and debriefing process. Specificopen questions were asked to determine theparticipants’ experience of the assessmentand the debriefing and their understandingof their profiles after completing each one.They were asked if they had set any goals ortaken any action after the assessment or afterthe debriefing. The interviews wererecorded and then transcribed.

Data analysisEach transcript was read several times andsignificant features of the data were noted.Prevalence and significance of the data wasrecorded during this process. These noteswere then coded in a systemic fashion. Asthis was an under-researched area, theresearchers looked for the predominant andimportant themes that captured the partici-pant’s views. Prevalence across the tran-scripts was considered when selectingthemes to accurately reflect the content ofthe entire data set (Braun & Clarke, 2006).Emerging themes were listed and sub-themes recorded. The data was then collatedfor each emerging theme. The data set wasindependently audited to check the credi-bility of the codes and themes. Thefrequency of each of the themes discussed ismapped in Table 2. These were then orderedand a table of themes and sub-themes wasproduced (see Table 3).

ReflexivityThe debriefing conversation appeared to bemore in depth and detailed than would benormally found in an initial coachingsession. As participants gave examples oftheir strengths at play, they provided richinformation relevant to their life. There wasalso a noticeable surge in positive emotionsand energy and as a result this increased thelevel of engagement and narrative. This is animportant finding for coaching, as coachingis often time limited, so a strengths-based

focus potentially increases the amount ofuseful information gleaned in one session.The positive focus of these potential-guideddebriefings seemed to generate ideas andcreativity within the session.

The first author also observed that trustand rapport was established quickly withparticipants which is an important determi-nant for effective semi-structured interviews(Willig, 2001). There may be a number ofreasons for this. For example, whilst thecoach had not met with any of the partici-pants previously, she had worked in theorganisation on a number of occasions as acoach and trainer and had established atrusting relationship with the OperationsDirector who invited participants to enrolfor the research. Also confidentiality wasestablished at the outset. Furthermore, thefact that the coach was external to the organ-isation meant that she provided an objectivesounding board free from any organisationalagenda. The first author completed both thedebriefing and the semi-structured inter-view. As a result there was potential for inter-viewees to be reticent to share negative views.That said, the first author found the partici-pants to be frank and relaxed during theprocess and did not get a sense of anydiscomfort during the interview.

ResultsThe overarching finding was that thedebriefing conversation was instrumental ininstigating the participants to act. Anothersignificant finding was that the debriefingincreased the participants understanding oftheir strengths and how to harness them.The themes and sub-themes that emergedfrom the process are outlined in Table 3.

1. Engendering actionAnalysis of the data showed that there wasdissociation between completing a strengthsassessment and taking action. The partici-pants related that the debriefing engen-dered action in a number of ways which arecaptured under the sub themes of: settingthe stage, understanding the profile and





Table 2: Frequency of themes across participants.

Fred x x x x x x

Diane x x x x x x x

Dave x x x x x x x x

Alex x x x x x x x x

Margaret x x x x x x x

Yvette x x x x x x x x

Olwen x x x x x x

Marlene x x x x x

Sara x x x x x x

Christine x x x x x x

Niamh x x x x x

Sandra x x x x x x

Alison x x x x

Rachel x x x x x x

Gabriella x x x x x x x x

Denis x x x x x x x x

Martina x x x x x x

Martin X x x x x

Molly x x x x x x x

Kevin x x x x x x

Part

icip

ant

Impo

rtan

ce o

fde

brie

f

Enge

nder

ing

acti

on

Sett

ing

the

stag

e

Und

erst

andi

ngpr

ofile

Goa

l cla

rity

Posi

tive

em

otio

ns

Stre

ngth

sac

know

ledg

ed

Self

-aw

aren

ess

and

insi

ght

Stre

ngth

deve

lopm

ent

and

use

Coac

hing

rela

tion

ship

Coac

hing

co

ntex

t

Table 3: Main themes and sub-themes.

Main theme Sub-theme

1. Engendering action 1.1. Setting the stage

1.2. Understanding the profile

1.3. Goal clarity

2. Enhancing self-efficacy 2.1. Positive emotions

2.2. Strengths acknowledgement

3. Stimulating psychological development 3.1. Self-awareness and insight

3.2. Strengths development and use

4. The coaching component 4.1. Coaching relationship

4.2. Coaching context

goal clarity. While the majority of partici-pants found the assessment very accurateand interesting, only three participants tookspecific action. The remaining simply readand reflected on their results. One mightsuggest that they were waiting for thedebriefing to act, however, this did not seemto be the reason for inaction. Prior to thedebriefing, the majority of participantsreported that once the assessment wascompleted, it was put to one side in place ofother priorities.

‘Having the opportunity to discuss the resultsmakes a huge difference. I think that withoutthe debriefing afterwards, it would lose a lot ofits usefulness.’ (Dave)

The specific action that participants took inrelation to the debriefing ranged fromsetting specific goals, committing todiscussing their profile report with theirmanger or significant other and committingto completing the online development planthat accompanies Realise2.

1.1. Setting the stageFeedback from the participants suggestedthat the debriefing ‘set the stage’ byproviding time and space for reflection andfocus. Furthermore, it allowed participantsto explore in more depth the finer detail oftheir profile report.

‘It would probably go as another little exercise I did on myself. I think the debrief is importantbecause you can sit down and you give yourselfthe time to go through it properly.’ (Sarah)

Without the debriefing, participantsreported that their profile report may nothave received sufficient attention toengender action. It seems that the discussionignited their interest and engagement.Setting time aside for a discussion with thecoach transformed the assessment from aninteresting exercise to an opportunity fordevelopment. One typical example of thiswas Margaret who left the debriefing withenthusiasm and a clear written plan ofaction.

‘I didn’t take any action when I completed theassessment. I stapled it, put it in the back of my

agenda, and had a quick look at it again.’(Margaret)

Overall, the debriefing generated energyand interest. One-hundred per cent of theparticipants reported that the debriefing wasa positive experience and used words like‘energised, enthusiastic, excited, focusedand confident’ to describe how they felt aftercompleting it. One referred to it as a poten-tially life changing experience:

‘It addressed both business and personal goals.I think there is life changing stuff in herebroader than just business. There are veryspecific things to work with.’ (Olwen)

The debriefing’s positive focus on strengthswas novel for many who are used to a deficitapproach more commonly found in theworkplace.

‘I loved it, loved it, yeah really enjoyed this. It’slike a breath of fresh air honestly.’ (Niamh)

This encouraged further open and engagingdialogue with participants, who wereinspired to explore and share stories andexamples of strengths use.

1.2 Understanding the profile reportThe data showed that one significant reasonfor inaction following the assessment may bethe lack of understanding of some of thestrengths terminology detailed in the report.Eighty per cent of participants asked ques-tions seeking clarification of at least onestrengths label or how to apply the 4M model.

‘I didn’t do any development planning afterthe assessment. I thought that I would needsome explanation. It was the terminology. Ineeded this to know what some of the termsmeant.’ (Allison)‘I definitely think the debriefing is what reallymade it for me. I think without the debriefingit’s a whole lot of words that don’t necessarilypoint to anything.’ (Martin)

Participants found that the debriefing facili-tated their understanding of the profilereport in the context of their own situation,thus identifying how strengths impact theirlife.



‘I definitely didn’t have the greaterunderstanding until we discussed this.Particularly the incubator I did notunderstand that at all and it makes huge,huge sense to me now.’ (Marlene)

They also became aware of the dynamics oftheir strengths and how they complementeach other. Some recognised how they over-played some of their strengths and exploredthe consequences of this, as in Molly’s case:

‘I see how my strong connecting skills and myempathy can sometimes work against me andtake the energy out.’ (Molly)‘Having a chance to talk with you, that wasdifferent. And I found by describing how I feltand coming up with examples, I foundconnections that I wouldn’t have if I was onlyreading it myself.’ (Christine)

As the participant provided examples oftheir strengths at play, they began to under-stand and appreciate which activities ener-gised and de-energised them. Many of theparticipants reported shifts in energy duringthe debriefing just talking about theirstrengths

‘I would get quite scared by looking at thewords as to what they mean but having goneinto it and trying to put them into context withthe situation has been really energising.’(Gabriella)

The majority stated that they also found theenergy aspect of Realise2 interesting andbeneficial for deciding future goals.

The debriefing helped the participantsunderstand and address any negativeresponses to their profile report. Three ofthe participants were disappointed with anumber of their strengths as listed in theirprofile. Another four participants reportedbeing more concerned with their weaknessesthan strengths when they read their profilereport. The debriefing provided a holistic,integrated perspective and helped tobalance the tendency to pay attention to thenegative aspects of life (Baumeister et al.,2001).

‘My first reaction is that I think it paints avery tough picture of me but now that we’vespoken about this and we’ve put it into context

I realised that it isn’t such a tough picture butmore of a realistic picture of a very realsituation I’ve had.’ (Rachel)

According to the data, the debriefing alsoallowed participants to take ownership oftheir report. Four participants used thedebriefing as an opportunity to add addi-tional strengths to their profile or deselectstrengths they did not agree with. Theresearcher took care not to judge strengthsso as not to influence this process.

1.3 Goal clarity According to feedback, the debriefing alsoprovided goal clarification. Participantsreported that the debriefing acted as a plat-form for exploration of goals. This claritywas evident in goal identification and plan-ning. Participants reported that having astructured debriefing helped to simplify theapplication of the profile by prioritisingimportant areas and strengths to work on.This study found that there was a relation-ship between the debriefing and goal choice.The debriefing influenced the goal choiceby enabling participants to choose goals theymay not have thought of prior to examiningtheir strengths.

‘When I saw persistence, I joked that that’swhat I do when I want something done, myhusband would say. I wouldn’t have realisedthat I can do it at work too. It’s a useful tool torebuild my confidence.’ (Yvette)

The debriefing was structured in such a waythat goals and actions were identified andagreed during the session. Participants wereencouraged to choose the most importantand meaningful areas to work on, thereforeprompting the selection of intrinsic goals.

‘That can actually give me better life balance,better success at work and better success ingeneral so I wouldn’t have realised theimportance of my unrealised strengths. I cansee how they fit into the entire model now.’(Margaret)

Finally, participants either chose to writetheir goals at the session or elected tocomplete a development plan immediatelyafterwards. Writing down goals increases the



likelihood that they will be attained (Locke& Latham, 2007). Here, the strengths coachenabled the participants to set specific andchallenging goals.

‘There are very specific things to work with. I always struggle to complete a developmentplan but I think this is very structured.’(Olwen)‘I think it is definitely prompted me to do so. I give you a 99.9 per cent chance of me goingin and doing the development plan.’ (Dave)

The data also highlighted that debriefingprovided the impetus for taking the first steptowards action. Participants were encour-aged to break down goals into manageablepieces.

‘I think what I learned was to take it one stepat a time and if it starts off slow don’t be hardon yourself and let the creativity come out.That’s the biggest thing for me.’ (Martin)

Participants reported an increase in motiva-tion to act as a result of the debriefing.Eighty-five per cent of the participants whenasked ‘what action if any they had taken afterthe assessment’ stated that they had nottaken any action other than reading theirprofile report. After the debriefing, 100 percent of the participants had set specificgoals.

‘I’ve got some very clear objectives. I will use alot of this stuff for the New Year and I feel a lotof energy actually. It’s a very useful process.’(Rachel)

The motivation in relation to goals was self-concordant and this may have been facili-tated by the debriefing. Burke and Linley(2007) found that coaching leads to changesin self-concordance and goal commitment.

The general consensus was that thedebriefing simplified the report by focusingon the strengths and goals that were mostimportant to the individual rather thangiving attention to the less relevant ones.

Strengths were applied to goals in threeways during the debriefing. Firstly, manychose a goal which focused on developing aparticular strength, especially an unrealisedone. For example, one participant, whenexamining her strength of creativity, decided

to harness this creativity in future team plan-ning. Others identified and chose to work onstrengths that would assist in goal attain-ment. A third way strengths were applied togoals was by identification of new ways to usea strength. Seligman (2002) suggests thatstrengths are malleable and with concen-trated effort they can be developed. Theresearch findings concurred with this.

‘After the debriefing, I understood better thewhole thing about emotional awareness andhow to apply it into practice but also startingwith myself.’ (Christine)

2. Enhancing self-efficacyThe second theme of enhancing self-efficacyemerged as a result of participants reportingthat the debriefing helped them to increasetheir belief in their capabilities andstrengths. They reported that the process didthis in two ways: by increasing their positiveemotions and by enabling strengths acknowl-edgement.

2.1. Positive emotions Participants were engaged in talking aboutthemselves ‘at their best’ for part of thedebriefing and this seemed to generate posi-tive emotions and ideas. Seligman et al.(2005) found that the exercise envisioning‘you at your best’ led to a transient increasein happiness. All participants reported thatthe debriefing was a positive experience andbolstered positive emotion and energy.Common words used by participants thatcaptured this affect included: ‘happy, stimu-lating, interesting, beneficial and exciting’.This increase in energy and positive emotionincreased the participant’s ideas for futureaction. This is in keeping with Fredrickson’s(2001) finding on positive emotions,showing that they serve to broaden ourthought-action repertoires and build ourpersonal resources.

‘I’ve known about a lot of these things for along time but now I feel I’ve got the tools toactually be able to do something about it. LikeI say, it was a eureka moment I think. I feelenergised and I’m keen to try it out.’ (Alex)



2.2. Strengths acknowledgementAccording to the feedback from the inter-views, the debriefing process was instru-mental in participants acknowledging theirstrengths. The structured debriefing createda safe environment where participants wereable to explore their strengths in detail.Bandura (1997) contended that ‘people’slevel of motivation, affective states andactions are based more on what they believethan on what is objectively true’ (p.2).

‘I definitely feel more confident now about thereport and the assessment, that it’s actuallyaccurate for me.’ (Allison)

Thus people’s accomplishments are gener-ally better predicted by their self-efficacybeliefs than by their previous attainments,knowledge, or skills. People do not tacklechallenging tasks if they harbour self-doubts,even if they have made a good action plan(Luszcznska et al., 2010).

‘It’s almost like you’re acknowledging it,admitting it to yourself. You know you can dothis so why don’t you give it a go. When yousay it to somebody else it makes it more real.’(Sandra)

Planning is a powerful strategy when individ-uals feel confident that they can take action(Luszczynska et al., 2010). Self-efficacy beliefsinfluence the choices individuals make andthe courses of action they pursue. Grahamand Weiner (1996) conclude that, particu-larly in psychology and education, self-effi-cacy has proven to be a more consistentpredictor of behavioural outcomes than anyother motivational constructs. Clearly, it isnot simply a matter of how capable one is,but of how capable one believes oneself to be.

‘I need to realise that actually people appreciatewhat I do and I need to build on that.’(Gabriella)

Popper and Lipshitz (1992) claim thatenhancement of self-efficacy is a centralcomponent in coaching. The participantsreported that exploring and acknowledgingtheir strengths during the debriefingenhanced their belief that their goals wereachievable. This finding suggests that astrengths assessment accompanied by a

debriefing may give coaches a valuable toolto enhance the self-efficacy of their clients.

‘I plan to push myself to areas that I wouldn’thave been comfortable in before but clearly theyare things that give me energy.’ (Rachel)

3. Stimulating psychological development Participants made frequent reference in theinterviews to the fact that the debriefingincreased their insight and understanding ofthemselves. They also reported an under-standing of how to develop and use theirstrengths. A theme of psychological develop-ment emerged from the data with two sub-themes consisting of self-awareness andinsight, and strengths development and use.

3.1 Self-awareness and insightFirstly, there was consensus that participantsbecame more self aware and gained insightas a result of the debriefing. They alsoreported becoming more aware of their indi-vidual strengths and how to use them.

‘It was great to get out of one’s comfort zone.My role is very numerically, financially based,so it’s great to talk about the softer side of yourskill set. I like the whole, becoming more self-aware.’ (Fred)

Self-awareness and insight was prompted bya number of factors according to feedback,such as: getting out of their comfort zone,putting things in perspective, becomingaware of own thoughts and actions and iden-tifying areas for further growth. A number ofparticipants choose growth goals to work onin the future. Understanding how strengthscan be applied and seeing them in thespecific context of their work and personallife facilitated personal insight. According toSedikides and Skowronski (1995) insight isimportant in facilitating goal attainment andbehavioural change.

‘After the debriefing, I understood better thewhole thing about emotional awareness andhow to apply it into practice but also startingwith myself’. (Christine: 75)

Spending time self-reflecting after the assess-ment did not necessarily lead to developinginsight, but this did occur after the



debriefing process. Grant (2003) suggeststhat self-reflection and insight are two sepa-rate processes and, therefore, self-reflectionwill not necessarily lead to insight.

‘Without the debriefing session, I don’t think I would’ve got that level of insight.’ (Alex)

Forty per cent of participants reported thatthe debriefing gave them insight to thedraining effects of their learnt behaviours.

‘Clearly there are things that give me energy butalso at the same time checking things that I amgood at but they are draining me andunderstanding why they are.’ (Rachel)

The data also found that the debriefing was aforum for addressing weaknesses when theywere performance critical. Discussing weak-nesses in a direct, non-judgemental coachingcontext helped many participants to acknowl-edge, accept and plan to deal with them.

‘In reality I do need to work on that particularweakness and by doing that it will improvethings and make my performance better.’(Sandra)

3.2. Strengths development and useOne of the key findings reported in the semi-structured interviews was that the debriefingenhanced the participant’s ability to developand use strengths. The participant was seenas an expert in their own life and was encour-aged to use the right strength, in the rightway, and at the right time in accordance totheir situation and values (Linley, 2008).They reported an understanding of how to use the 4M model for their futurestrengths development after completing thedebriefing.

The fact that this assessment considersenergy in relation to strengths seemed toresonate with participants. As well asdescribing the debriefing process itself asenergising, participants began to exploretheir strengths and activities in relation toenergy. While the profile report outlinesenergy in relation to strengths many of theparticipants had not paid it any attentionbefore the debriefing. Not one participantmentioned energy when asked about theirexperience of completing the assessment.

However, energy was mentioned by 50 percent of participants during the semi-struc-tured interview as being important to them.The conversation proved to be a good forumto explore this in more detail and feedbackwas given around shifts in energy in terms ofvoice and body language when discussingstrengths.

‘I realise my unrealised strengths are thingsthat give me energy, they are good things. Thereare things that I can do to try and use themmore. Where as I wouldn’t have picked that upjust from doing the assessment in my opinion.’(Rachel)

4. The coaching component The debriefing was conducted in a coachingcontext and this impacted the participant’sexperience. Eighty per cent of the partici-pants mentioned the coaching as being animportant part of their understanding andutilisation of their strengths. Two sub-themesemerged from the data relating to coaching,namely: the coaching relationship and thecoaching context.

4.1. Coaching relationship One significant finding in this study was thatthe coaching relationship was an importantfactor in the success of the debriefingprocess.

‘You can delve in more deeply with thefacilitator then you can reading through whateach of them mean.’ (Fred)

Key skills used by the strengths coach wereperceived by participants to have afavourable impact on their experience.These included goal setting, helping devel-opment of alternative perspectives, stimu-lating problem solving and by challengingand supporting. Research findings show thatthe relationship and the client’s own innerresources are the most important variantscontributing to successful therapeuticoutcomes (Norcross, 2001). Furthermore, acoach’s personal attributes have been foundto have a favourable impact on coachees(Passmore, 2010).



‘Everything about this has been really good andtalking to yourself, not judging or anythingand taking on the feedback and asking a lot ofquestions affirming and recognising some of thethings I’m saying, I’m feeling encouraged andsaying let’s do more here.’ (Kevin)

4.2. Coaching contextThe data reflected the benefits of having thedebriefing as a coaching style of conversa-tion with open and powerful questioning.Participants reported that they found thecoaching debriefing session beneficial byincreasing self-reflection, motivation andfacilitating decision making. These aresimilar to the benefits of coaching describedby Passmore (2006) which include:enhanced personal performance, optimiseddecision making, better self-reflection andhigher levels of motivation.

‘It was great to explain here, to be able to talkabout it. Whereas if was just there in front ofme, I am reading but I don’t remember asmuch. Whereas in conversation, it makes waymore sense to me.’ (Marlene)‘You have a different perception. You are goingto ask the why’s and it’s good to dig downdeeper. It’s good to thrash it out withsomebody.’ (Niamh)

The confidential, non-judgemental andstrengths-guided approach of the debriefingresulted in participants divulging rich infor-mation during the process.

Having a structured debriefing was abeneficial context for strengths work. Thedebriefing was structured to enable theparticipants to capitalise on their strengthsand focus on what works well. This wasapparent when participants focused ondeficits and were coached to find strengths-based solutions.

‘We don’t often talk about her strengths do we?I do tend to ask for feedback from my manageris. Is there things that I can improve on but I never usually ask for feedback on strengthsonly weaknesses.’ (Niamh)

Another example of this was Martin who hada deficit focus but responded really well tothis strengths-based approach.

‘You helped me to relate to something else whichwas great. The conversation turned out muchmore than just talking about skills, lack ofskills or talents. It turned out to be the first stepin a new project, the more creative me.’(Martin)

This suggests that coaching is an idealcontext for strengths development.

Discussion Implications for coaching psychologyThere is evidence to suggest that completingan assessment may in itself be beneficial byleading to a more positive self-assessment(Seligman et al., 2005) and that in the handsof a skilled coach, even more benefits mightoccur. This study certainly provides prelimi-nary evidence of this and is relevant tocoaches as strengths debriefings add value tocoaching conversations. This researchsuggests that a debriefing done in a coachingstyle provides an ideal change methodologyfor strengths-based development by increas-ing utilisation and understanding of astrengths profile report.

Seligman (2007) suggests that ‘coachingis a practice without limits on its scope,lacking theoretical foundations and mean-ingful accreditation’ (p.266). Others havefound little uniformity in executive coachingapproaches (Bono et al., 2009). The resultsof this study show that the combination of astrengths assessment followed by a struc-tured debriefing could potentially givecoaching some of its much needed credi-bility by providing a consistent and evidencebased framework. This study has implica-tions for coaching psychologists as it suggestsa framework which can engender action andenhance the self-efficacy and psychologicaldevelopment of their clients. The increase inpositive emotions, insight and self-awarenessas a result of the debriefings would also be auseful aid to coaches.

This study also leads to a question ofwhether there is benefit to completingstrengths assessments without adequatefollow-up. This is an important point forconsideration for those working in the



strengths arena. This study highlights theimportance of a structured follow-up whenstrengths are completed in the workplaceand suggests that a coach with in-depthstrengths knowledge would be ideally placedto provide this debriefing and subsequentfollow-up.

Study limitationsThere are a number of limitations to thiscurrent study which should be consideredwhen interpreting the findings. Furtherresearch is needed to investigate how theapplication of strengths may be integratedinto the coaching arena. Follow-up coachingsessions after the structured debriefing mayfurther enhance the utilisation and under-standing of strengths. The majority of partic-ipants, when asked what follow-up theywould like, recommended another coachingsession to check progress and reassess status.

The design of the study may have beinginfluenced by a demand effect where partic-ipants may have reported positive experi-ences to please the researcher whoconducted both the debriefing and the semi-structured interview (Grant, 2003). Elstonand Boniwell (2011) suggested strategies tominimise the risk of this demand effect bydiscussing any possible power dynamics andminimising the researcher’s voice within theinterview by using short open questionsspecific to the experience of the partici-pants. This study encompassed these consid-erations.

The debriefing was completed by a quali-fied coach and strengths practitioner withmany years experience in this field. Thedebriefing completed by a less experiencedindividual may not produce the same results.Another limitation of the current study is thefact that there was no follow-up to determinewhether the goals agreed within thedebriefing session were attained. A longitu-dinal study would address this issue. Never-theless, this study adds valuable informationto the growing evidence on strengths devel-opment and coaching practice.

ConclusionsThis study has illuminated the benefits ofcompleting a structured debriefingfollowing a strengths assessment. As the titlesuggests, the debriefing needs to go hand inhand with assessment completion tomaximise the understanding and applica-tion of the profile report. This study hasshown that the debriefing is an effectivecoaching tool to create positive change byfacilitating goal attainment, self-efficacy andpsychological development and provides auseful framework for coaches seeking tointegrate strengths into their work.

AcknowledgementsWe would like to thank Zareen Aziz whoassisted in setting up the research in RCI. Wewould also like to thank Alex Linley andNicky Garcea for access to Realise2 codesand for support. Finally our gratitude goes tothe 20 participants from RCI who gavegenerously of their time and shared theirexperience with us.

The AuthorsBrenda RocheCork, Ireland.

Kate HefferonUniversity of East London, London, UK.

CorrespondenceKate HefferonEmail: [email protected]



Arnold, J. (1997). Managing careers into the 21stcentury. London: Paul Chapman.

Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control.New York: Freeman.

Baumeister, R.F., Bratslavsky, E., Finkenauer, C. &Vohs, K.D. (2001). Bad is stronger than good.Review of General Psychology, 5, 323–370.

Biswas-Diener, R. (2009). Personal coaching as apositive intervention. Journal of Clinical Psychology,65, 544–553.

Bono, J., Purvanova, R., Towler, A. & Peterson, D.B.(2009). A survey of executive coaching practices.Personnel Psychology, 62, 361-404.

Burke, D. & Linley, P.A. (2007). Enhancing goal self-concordance through coaching. InternationalCoaching Psychology Review, 2(1), 62–69.

Braun, V. & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematicanalysis in psychology. Qualitative Research inPsychology, 3, 77-101.

Corporate Leadership Council (2002). Performancemanagement survey. Washington, DC: Author.

Clifton, D.O. & Harter, J.K. (2003). Strengthsinvestment. In K.S. Cameron, J.E. Dutton & R.E.Quinn (Eds.), Positive organisational scholarship(pp.111–121). San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler.

Elston, F & Boniwell, I. (2011). A grounded theorystudy of value derived by women in financialservices through a coaching intervention to helpthem identify their strengths and practice usingthem in the workplace. International CoachingPsychology Review, 6(1), 16–32.

Fredrickson, B.L. (2001). The role of positiveemotions in positive psychology: The broaden-and-build theory of positive emotions. AmericanPsychologist, 56(3), 218–226.

Frith, H. & Gleeson, K. (2004). Clothing andembodiment: Men managing body image andusing thematic analysis in psychology ofappearance. Psychology of Men and Masculinity, 5,40–48.

Gyllensten, K. & Palmer, S. (2006). Experiences ofcoaching and stress in the workplace: An interpretative phenomenological analysis.International Coaching Psychology Review, 1(1),86–98.

Govindji, R. & Linley, P.A. (2007). Strengths use, self-concordance and well-being: Implications forstrengths coaching and coaching psychologists.International Coaching Psychology Review, 2(2),143–153.

Grant. A. (2003). The impact of life coaching on goalattainment, metacognition and mental health.Social Behaviour and Personality, 31(3), 253–264.

Grant, A. & Palmer, S. (2002). Coaching psychology.Presented at a meeting held at the AnnualConference of Division of CounsellingPsychology, British Psychological Society,Torquay, 18 May.

Graham, S. & Weiner, B. (1996). Theories andprinciples of motivation. In D.C. Berliner & R.C.Calfee (Eds.), Handbook of educational psychology(pp.63-84). New York: Simon & SchusterMacmillan.

Harter, J.K., Schmidt, F.L. & Hayes, T.L. (2002).Business-unit-level relationship betweenemployee satisfaction, employee engagement,and business outcomes: A meta-analysis. Journalof Applied Psychology, 87(2), 268–279.

Hill, J. (2001). How well do we know our strengths?Paper presented at the British PsychologicalSociety Centenary Conference, Glasgow, April.

Kaufmann, C. & Linley, P.A. (2007). The meeting ofthe minds: Positive psychology and coachingpsychology. International Coaching PsychologyReview, 2(1), 90–96.

Latham, G. & Locke, E. (2007). New developments inand directions for goal-setting Research. EuropeanPsychologist, 12(4), 290–300.

Linley, P.A. (2008). Average to A+: Realising strengths inyourself and others. Coventry, UK: CAPP Press.

Linley, P.A., Nielsen, K.M., Wood, A.M., Gillett, R. &Biswas-Diener, R. (2010). Using signaturestrengths in pursuit of goals: Effects on goalprogress, need satisfaction, and well-being, andimplications for coaching psychologists.International Coaching Psychology Review, 5(1),8–17.

Linley, P.A. & Harrington, S. (2006). Strengthscoaching: A potential-guided approach tocoaching psychology. International CoachingPsychology Review, 1(1), 37–46.

Linley, P.A., Woolston, L. & Biswas-Diener, R. (2009).Strengths coaching with leaders. InternationalCoaching Psychology Review, 4(1), 37–48.

Luszcznska, A., Cao, D.S., Mallach, N., Pietron, K.,Mazurkiewicz, M. & Schwarzer, R. (2010).International Journal of Clinical and HealthPsychology, 10(2), 265–278.

Minhas, G. (2010). Developing realised andunrealised strengths: Implications forengagement, self-esteem, life satisfaction andwell-being. Assessment and Development Matters, 2,12–16.

Norcross, J.C. (2001). Empirically supported therapyrelationships: Summary of the Division 29 TaskForce. Psychotherapy, 38(4), 345–356.

Palmer, S. & Whybrow, A. (2005). The proposal toestablish a special group in coaching psychology.The Coaching Psychologist, 1, 5–12.



References

Passmore, J. (2006). Excellence in coaching; The industryguide. London: Kogan Page.

Passmore, J. (2010). A grounded theory study of thecoachee experience: The implications fortraining and practice in coaching psychology.International Coaching Psychology Review, 5(1),48–62.

Peterson, C. & Seligman, M. (2004). Characterstrengths and virtues: A classification and handbook.New York: Oxford University Press/Washington,DC: American Psychological Association.

Popper, M. & Lipshitz, R. (1992) Coaching onleadership. Leadership & Organisation DevelopmentJournal, 13(7)15–18.

Seligman, M., Steen, T., Park, N. & Peterson, C.(2005). Positive psychology progress: Empiricalvalidation of interventions. American Psychologist,60(5), 410–421.

Seligman, M. (2007). Coaching and positivepsychology. Australian Psychologist, 42, 266–267.

Sedikides, C. & Skowronski, J.J. (1995). On sources ofself-knowledge: The perceived primacy of self-reflection. Journal of Social & Clinical Psychology,14(3), 244–270.

Sheldon, K. & King, L. (2001). Why positivepsychology is necessary. American Psychologist,56(3), 216–217.

Smith, J.A. (2008). Qualitative psychology: A practicalguide to research methods (2nd ed.). London: Sage.

Willig, C. (2001). Introducing qualitative research inpsychology: Adventures in theory and method.London: Open University Press.



COACHING as an approach to effectivefacilitation of performance enhance-ment and goal-attainment has been

used extensively in organisational andbusiness contexts on executive populations(Allison & Harbour, 2009; Passmore &Brown, 2009). However, more research isneeded to build our understanding ofcoaching for different populations, as well asto understand the nature of how coachingmakes a difference over other learning anddeveloping interventions (Fillery-Travis &Lane, 2006, 2007). The current study is

concerned with exploring the relationshipbetween coaching and learning in thesecondary classroom context and withconsidering the implications to teaching andlearning practices.

Background: A shift in educationalmodel Our predominant educational model is builton a view that values the primacy of knowl-edge and reason characterised by a pre-described curriculum, typified by the themesof acquisition, dependence and competition


Paper

Towards a systems model of Coaching forLearning: Empirical lessons from thesecondary classroom contextQing Wang

Objectives: Coaching psychology has been increasingly used in the discourse of education. However, therehas been a lack of research systematically looking at the nature of coaching in the learning process from aparticipatory and systems approach. This study aimed to investigate how coaching, implemented inenquiry-based learning, would make a difference to the knowledge construction process, the development ofpositive learning dispositions and learning agency in secondary students.Design: An exploratory participatory case study within a prototyping framework was utilised.Methods: One classroom in a mainstream secondary school in south-west England was selected as the case.30 students participated in three prototypes of enquiry-based learning facilitated by teachers who werespecifically trained to be coaches. Semi-structured and narrative interviews, focus group and classroomobservations were conducted with two teachers and 30 students. Teachers’ plans and students’ enquiryproducts were collected in each prototype. Students’ learning power was measured by Effective LifelongLearning Inventory before and after the three prototypes.Results: The thematic analysis and observational analysis showed that coaching in learning was a complexprocess in which teachers and students moved along different modes of coaching relationships. Noticeableincreases in students’ independence, learning relationships, confidence, and learning agency weredocumented. However, the Wilcoxon Signed Test did not show any significant increase in learning powerdimensions.Conclusions: It could be concluded that the nature of coaching in learning can be captured in the systemsmodel of Coaching for Learning. The model has important implication for facilitating the enquiry-basedlearning process. The current study has special value in linking coaching and learning more explicitly andextending our understanding of coaching and coaching psychology to the context of secondary education.Keywords: Coaching; secondary education; enquiry-based learning; participatory research; systemsthinking.

(Marshall, 1999). Thus the way in whichknowledge is encountered by students is‘top-down’ and the teacher-student relation-ship is typically hierarchical. The primarygoal of teaching and learning is students’academic performance and meaningmaking is reduced to repeating pre-pack-aged abstract inert knowledge that has littlerelevance to students’ lives outside the class-room wall. However, rapid societal changehas dramatically influenced our needs ineducation, which in turn challenges us totransform the structure and the process ofteaching and learning (King & Frick, 2000).Disseminating inert knowledge and buildingbasic skills may no longer serve the educa-tional purposes in the 21st century. Bentley(1998) argues that the goal of educationshould be ‘the development of under-standing which can be applied and extendedby taking it into the spheres of thought andaction which, in the real world, demandintelligent behaviour’ (p.19). The educa-tional purposes of the 21st century requirenew ways of managing teaching and learningto cultivate generic and active knowledgeworkers. The paradigmatic shift indicates amovement towards a ‘bottom-up’ develop-ment and change, leading to a participative,collaborative approach to learning.

This article reviews the place of coachingin learning from a participatory, systemsperspective and then to report the empiricalinvestigation into the relationship betweencoaching and learning in a secondary class-room, followed by the emerging model ofCoaching for Learning.

Coaching and coaching psychologyresearch in the educational contextThe vocabulary of coaching is touched uponby some researchers and increasingly used inthe discourse of education (Hargreaves,2004–2006; Claxton, 2008). McDermott andJago (2005) defined coaching as ‘a conversa-tional yet focused discipline that supportspeople in learning how to lead and managethemselves more effectively in relation totheir issues, their resources, their contexts

and their potential’ (p.8). In relatively inclu-sive definitions of coaching, three aspectsare usually tackled: performance, learning anddevelopment (Parsloe & Wray, 2000; Whit-more, 1996; Ives, 2008), indicating thatcoaching has the potential for pedagogicalsignificance in education. Coachingpsychology is defined as ‘for enhancing well-being and performance in personal life andwork domains underpinned by models ofcoaching grounded in established learningtheories or psychological approaches’. Thisdefinition explicitly includes the applicationof appropriate psychological theories (Grant& Palmer, 2002; Palmer & Whybrow, 2006).There has been evidence that coachingpsychology and the psychology of learningare strongly interwoven with each other(Law et al., 2007).

Coaching has been used in a wide rangeof educational contexts for a variety ofpurposes (Burley & Pomphrey, 2011). Theseinclude: Initial teacher training; continuingprofessional development of teachers; lead-ership programmes which use coaching forspecific development of the individuals atsenior level and for broader institutionalpurposes; coaching to support schoolstudents with learning or behavioural diffi-culties; coaching for developing students’motivation and aspiration; and finallycoaching in schools to develop abilities, skillsand talents in specified areas such as music,art or sports. In addition, coaching textsreflect a growing interest in coaching’spotential contribution to education with afocus of studying different coaching inter-ventions and the impact on adult learners(Grant, 2001; Bolton, 1999; Graham et al.,2008).

Of more relevance to the non-adult popu-lation, Hamman et al. (2000) examined typesand frequency of coaching at secondaryschool level and its relation to students’strategic learning. The findings from amultiple regression analysis indicated thatstudents’ strategic learning activities weresignificantly related to teachers’ coaching oflearning. It showed the potential of coaching


Qing Wang

to develop secondary students’ learningcapacity though other factors that influencestudents’ learning, such as learning relation-ships, were neglected in the study.

Passmore and Brown (2009) presentedfindings from a three-year longitudinal studyto explore how coaching contributes toGCSE students’ learning and academicperformance. The study confirmed that withnon-adult population, coaching has poten-tial value as a tool in supporting educationalattainment and examination performance.However, the study focused with one localarea and only examined performance ofGCSE grades; it did not offer any impact ofcoaching on students’ learning capacities ordispositions.

Another perspective on enhancinglearning performance is developing mentalresilience and coping skills, which have beenpicked up by other coaching research(Green et al., 2007; Campell & Gardner,2005; Seligman et al., 2009). Positive educa-tors argue that positive education canpromote skills and strengths that are valuedby most people, produce measurableimprovements in students’ well-being andbehaviours and facilitate students’ engage-ment in learning and achievement.

It becomes increasingly apparent thatthere is a developing trend that coachingresearchers try to understand coaching froma learning perspective, whereas educationalresearchers try to enhance learning by intro-ducing coaching. Nevertheless, there hasbeen no research which systematically looksat how coaching makes a difference to theknowledge construction process andlearning disposition development ofsecondary students. The current study aimsto understand the nature of coaching in theenquiry-based learning process, to explorethe relationship and communicationbetween students and teachers, to investigatehow coaching skills and strategies can beimplemented in the classroom and finallyhow coaching would influence the develop-ment of students’ learning disposition andlearning agency.

The theoretical framework of thecurrent studyThe theoretical framework of this study (seeFigure 1) integrates the participatory para-digm (Heron & Reason, 1997), systemsthinking (Aronson, 1996; Blockley, 2010;Capra, 1994) and Vygotsky’s social-culturalperspective on learning, particularly theconcept of zone of proximal development(Vygotsky, 1978).

The framework reflects a participatoryand systems approach to learning, which iscaptured in a journey metaphor comprisingfour critical stations (Deakin-Crick, 2009,2010). It is a kind of learning where a learnerstarts from identity, personal motivation,experiences and stories within an indi-vidual’s social context (Station One), movesthrough the development of values, beliefs,attitudes and dispositions that individuallearners hold when they learn (Station Two),and then to knowledge construction andsharing (Station Three), to the final presenta-tion of learning outcomes and preparationfor public assessment (Station Four). Themetaphor articulates that the learner is atraveller through this journey, taking respon-sibility of his or her own learning, negoti-ating personally meaningful ways throughcollaborative practices and being nested inevolving relationships with people indifferent contexts.

The personal power to learn is coined as‘learning power’ as ‘a form of consciousnesscharacterised by particular dispositions,values and attitudes, with a lateral and atemporal connectivity’ (Deakin-Crick et al.,2004; Deakin-Crick, 2007). Learning powerhas seven dimensions: changing and learning;creativity; critical curiosity; meaning making;strategic awareness; learning relationship; andresilience. These seven dimensions haveemerged from a factor analytical method-ology (Deakin-Crick & Wilson, 2005).Learning power is viewed as ‘energy’ in thejourney metaphor because the personal andautogenic features of learning power serve asfuel or energy to enable learners to moveforward to their learning goals.


Towards a systems model of Coaching for Learning

The journey metaphor involves coachinginto the big picture in a way that coachingcan be viewed as a ‘vehicle’ which carries thelearner from some starting location to adesired place (Dilts, 2003). Throughout thejourney, the learner is coached by anotherperson who supports and provides prompts,guidance and resources at key points withdifferent coaching skills and techniques andthrough formative use of learning power.Coaching could be facilitative to stimulatechange, scaffold the learning process, movelearners forward through effective support,and develop self-awareness and responsi-bility for their own learning.

How coaching becomes this facilitativetool has deeper theoretical underpinning inVygotsky’s socio-cultural perspective onlearning and development, zone of proximaldevelopment and scaffolding in particular.Zone of proximal development (ZPD) wasdefined as ‘the distance between the actualdevelopment level (of the learner) as deter-mined by independent problem solving and

the level of potential development as deter-mined through problem solving under adultguidance or in collaboration with morecapable peers’ (Vygotsky, 1978, p.86).Coaching works within the learners’ ZPDand it shares a number of important featureswith scaffolding: (1) the essentially dialogicnature of discourse in which knowledge isco-constructed; (2) the significance of theauthentic and cognitively challenging tasksin which knowing is embedded; (3) the roleof social mediation and the establishment ofinter-subjectivity as shared understandingsbetween learners and teachers (Wells, 1999;Wertsch, 1985, 1998); and (4) the transfer ofresponsibility for the task to the students asthe major goal (Mercer & Fisher, 1993). In this highly personalised journey, coachingrecognises the agency in learners, offerscustomised support and facilitation that isresponsive to the needs of particular learnersin any situation where learners are offeredcollaborative interventions.


Qing Wang

Figure 1: The theoretical framework.

MethodologyResearch designThe research design was essentially anexploratory participatory case study within aprototyping framework (see Figure 2).

ParticipantsOne classroom in a mainstream secondaryschool in south-west England was selected asthe case. Thirty Year 7 students and twohistory teachers participated in the currentstudy. The teachers were specifically trainedby external coaches who hold professionalqualification accredited by Association forCoaching. The teachers were invited tocontribute in interviews, classroom observa-tions and collection of teacher plans in eachprototype. The students were coached by thetwo teachers in their enquiry-based learningprojects in the three prototypes. From all the30 students who participated in classroomobservations and surveys, six students wererandomly selected to join focus groups ineach prototype. Three students joined narra-tive interviews.

InterventionsThe current study was conducted in threeprototypes according to the three terms inthe academic year 2010/2011. Each proto-type began with a staff training day whenteachers were specifically coached byexternal coaching experts and practitioners.After the training, the teachers co-designedthe interdisciplinary, enquiry-basedcurriculum and prepared relevant teachingmaterials. Then the teachers conducted a‘Hook Day’ event with students in order toclarify what the enquiry theme would be,identify a range of enquiry questions that thestudents would be interested in exploringand divide students into different groupsbased on their enquiry questions. This wasfollowed by two weeks’ coaching lessons tosupport and scaffold students’ enquiry-basedlearning inside the classroom. During thisperiod of time students were assigned tasksand required to do their own researchoutside of the school, supported by their

peers and parents. Towards the end of eachprototype students presented their enquiryoutcomes to their teachers, peers, parentsand wider communities in a public assess-ment event. At the end of each prototype,the teachers were debriefed with the find-ings from observations and interviews,summarised highlights of the current proto-type and made suggestions of curricular orpedagogical adjustments for the purpose ofimproving the next prototype. The teachersreflected on the process collectively. Futureactivities were refined and re-designed basedon these collective reflections.

EthicsThe current study met the requirements inethical procedures for projects involvinghuman subjects at the University of Bristol.CRB check has been obtained for workingwith children under age 16. Informedconsent, which provided sufficient informa-tion and allowed the right to withdraw at anystage of the study, has been obtained fromeach participant, including the gatekeeperof the school teacher participants, studentparticipants and their parents. Personalinformation concerning individual partici-pants was protected by confidentiality andanonymity.

Data collection The prototyping design required a datasystem capable of informing ongoing activity(Bryk et al., 2011), therefore, data collectionwas embedded into the prototyping processrather than added on top of it. Qualitativeand quantitative methods were employedand the study was primarily driven by quali-tative investigations. Qualitative methodsincluded focus groups with students to inves-tigate their experiences of coaching andenquiry-based learning; narrative interviewswith students to gain information abouttheir learning stories and how well theycould talk about themselves as learners;semi-structured interviews with teachers tounderstand their experiences and practicesof implementing coaching in enquiry-based




Qing Wang

Figu

re 2

: Res

earc

h de

sign

.

Sept

embe

r 20

10 –

Dece

mbe

r 20

11Ja

nuar

y 20

11 –

Apri

l 201

1M

ay 2

011

–Au

gust

201

1

Qua

litat

ive:

Sem

i-st

ruct

ured

inte

rvie

ws

(2 t

each

ers)

Focu

s gr

oups

(6 s

tude

nts

Dire

ct o

bser

vati

on (4

coa

chin

g le

sson

s)

Colle

ctin

g te

ache

rs’ p

lans

and

stu

dent

sen

quiry

wor

ks

Qua

ntit

ativ

e:

Pre-

test

of

ELLI

and

eng

agem

ent

Qua

litat

ive:

Sem

i-st

ruct

ured

inte

rvie

ws

(2 t

each

ers)

Focu

s gr

oups

(6 s

tude

nts

Dire

ct o

bser

vati

on

(4 c

oach

ing

less

ons)

Colle

ctin

g te

ache

rs’ p

lans

and

st

uden

ts e

nqui

ry w

orks

Pre-

and

pos

t-na

rrat

ive

inte

rvie

ws

(3 s

tude

nts)

Qua

litat

ive:

Sem

i-st

ruct

ured

inte

rvie

ws

(2 t

each

ers)

Focu

s gr

oups

(6 s

tude

nts

Dire

ct o

bser

vati

on

(4 c

oach

ing

less

ons)

Colle

ctin

g te

ache

rs’ p

lans

and

st

uden

ts e

nqui

ry w

orks

Qua

ntit

ativ

e:

Pre-

test

of

ELLI

and

eng

agem

ent

Phase 1

Phase 2

Phase 3

➤➤➤➤

Colle

ctiv

e ev

alua

tion

Colle

ctiv

e ev

alua

tion

Anal

yse

data

and

fee

dbac

k to

the

tea

cher

s

Eval

uati

on v

isit

by

UoB

Eva

luat

ion

team

Mak

e im

prov

emen

t hy

poth

esis

col

labo

rati

vely

Refi

ne a

nd r

evis

e Co

achi

ng f

or L

earn

ing

for

next

pha

se

learning; and unstructured classroom obser-vations to see how exactly coaching wouldlook like in the secondary classroom contextand how it would affect the dynamicsbetween teachers and students. Teachers’plans and students’ enquiry outcomes werecollected after each prototype.

Quantitative methods included the Effec-tive Lifelong Learning Inventory (ELLI)online questionnaire measuring students’positive learning dispositions on the sevendimensions of learning power. ELLI is aresearch-validated, self-assessed learningquestionnaire containing 72 items, meas-uring what learners say about themselves in aparticular dimension of their learning powerat a particular point in time (Deakin-Crick etal., 2004; Deakin-Crick & Yu, 2008). Learnersrate themselves on each item ranging fromto 1 (‘not like me at all’) to 4 (‘very muchlike me’). Samples of items in each dimen-sion are presented here:● ‘I like to be able to improve the way I do

things.’ (changing and learning)● ‘I prefer an interesting question to an

easy answer.’ (critical curiosity)● ‘I like it when I can make connections

between new things I am learning andthings I already know.’ (meaning making)

● ‘When I’m stuck I don’t usually knowwhat to do about it.’ (opposite of resilience)

● ‘I like to try our new learning in differentways.’ (creativity)

● ‘I learn equally well on my own and withothers.’ (learning relationships)

● ‘I often have a good idea of how longsomething is going to take me to learn.’(strategic awareness)

The teachers and the technician staff in theschool were trained to how to use install anduse ELLI. The students were instructed andsupported to answer the questions as accu-rate as possible. There were 25 studentscompleted their ELLI questionnaires beforethe interventions and 22 students completedtheir ELLI questionnaires after the interven-tions.

Data analysisAll the qualitative data was analysed bothmanually on the transcripts and using QSRNvivo 8 software for a variety of themes usinga coding scheme. Braun and Clarke’s (2006)thematic analysis framework was adopted foranalysing the data from semi-structuredinterviews and focus groups. Students’ narra-tive accounts were examined by narrativeanalysis. For observational data an analyticalframework,was designed focusing on verbal,non-verbal languages and relationshipsbetween teachers-as-coaches and theirstudents. Quantitative data was statisticallyanalysed. Wilcoxon Signed Test wasconducted to see whether coaching had anyinfluence on seven dimensions of learningpower before and after three prototypes. A Critical Synthetic Analysis Framework wasoriginated to synthetically analyse differenttypes of data across three prototypes (seeTable 1).

Summary of findingsDue to the limitation of the length, asummary of the key research findings arepresented in this section.

The qualitative findings from teachers’interviews and classroom observations indi-cated that the enquiry approaches in thethree prototypes took three organicallyevolving processes that naturally occurred inthe current context. Each enquiry approachdiffered from each other in terms of focus,goals, strategies, materials, topics, grouping,and coaching interventions. There was astrong relation between the structure ofenquiry-based learning and coachingapproach: the looser the enquiry structurewas, the more non-direct the coachingapproach was, and the more authenticstudents’ learning outcomes appeared to be.

During the coaching process, teachersseemed to experience a mixture of differentroles in coaching relationship: a knowledgeexpert, a coach, a mentor, and a counsellor.Teachers should be equipped with sensibilityto respond to the individual learner’s needin particular situations and an ability to



make professional judgments regardingwhen and which role to take in differentcontexts. Responses to interviews showedthat teachers were adopting and adapting tothese roles more naturally; they graduallyobtained an ‘ownership of coaching’ anddeepened their understanding of coachingtheories through practice, which indicatedthat coaching was beneficial for teachers’continuing professional development.

There were major differences in instruc-tional styles of conventional teaching fromcoaching: when coaching, teachers didsignificantly less talking and informationtransmitting in the classroom in general,instead they offered more freedom, encour-aged interdependency and co-constructionof knowledge and handed responsibility overto students. Teachers stated that students’engagement level has increased andlearning relationships and positive learningdispositions have developed enormouslyduring the academic year. This notion wassupported by my observations that studentsin coaching lessons have undergone gradualand accumulative change in their engage-ment in on-task moments.

Teachers and students in coachinglessons utilised rich verbal and non-verballanguages to achieve different purposes incoaching conversation. Active listening,open questions, paraphrases, summaries andfeedbacks were frequently used by teacherstogether with eye contacts and other bodylanguages to show recognition and encour-

agement. Students were taking an active rolein the coaching conversations and there wasa dramatic increase in collaboration betweenthem. In contrast, non-coaching lessons wascharacterised by teacher-led communicationand content orientation. Students werepassively responding to learning and therewas less authentic engagement, lessdialogues among peers and less on-taskbehaviour.

The themes from students’ focus groupssuggested that coaching optimised theirlearning experiences in terms of offeringthem more personal choices in learning andmore personal connections to their enquirytopics. Coaching helped to scaffold theenquiry process so that students could gainfeedback and guidance when they didresearch or mind-mapping. However,students had various responses to coachingrelationships and they were becoming morecritical about the overall experience of‘being coached’. By investigating the sugges-tions that students offered for improvingCoaching for Learning, it was found thatstudents expected a balance between‘teaching’ elements and ‘coaching’elements, which indicated that Coaching forLearning in secondary education could notbe the same as life coaching or executivecoaching in terms of the knowledgeconstruction approach.

There was one discrepancy of quantita-tive and qualitative findings resting in thedevelopment of learning dispositions before


Qing Wang

Table 1: Critical Synthetic Analysis Framework.

Qualitative data Quantitativedata

Interviews Interviews Observations Teachers’ plans ELLIwith teachers with students and students’

works

Prototype 1

Prototype 2

Prototype 3

and after the three prototypes. The findingsfrom students’ narrative interviews and focusgroups showed that students’ learning rela-tionships, autonomy, self-awareness andlearning agency were greatly fostered.Students were more able to articulate theirlearning stories and experiences and whatthey would like to achieve in future learning.The narrative accounts also showed fosteredconfidence and self-efficacy in learning.Learning power has been developing as awhole, particularly learning relationships,resilience, and changing and learning werementioned mostly by students. However,Wilcoxon Signed Test of pre- and post-ELLIquestionnaires did not demonstrate anysignificant increase or decrease in learningpower dimensions (see Table 2), which wasin contrast to qualitative findings from inter-views and observations.

DiscussionsThe findings from qualitative and quantita-tive data analysis across three prototypeshave shown a number of interesting corrob-orations and discrepancies between differenttypes of data. Moreover, patterns and rela-tionships between variables were constantlydeveloping across time.

The study posed a number of challengesregarding coaching in the secondary class-room context, including how to balance theauthenticity in students’ learning outcomeswith the intellectual quality that the teachersand parents expected; how to balance publicassessment criteria and independent knowl-edge construction outcomes; how to balanceperformance fixation and process orienta-

tion; and how to evaluate learning outcomesand coaching efficacy through multipleperspectives.

The comparisons between quantitativeand qualitative findings have been foreseenat the start of the study given that learningpower is a complex concept. However,further consideration of the results posed achallenge to think deeper into the relation-ship between self-report assessment toolsand interview responses which also comefrom participants’ self-evaluation. There area number of reasons that we need to becautious in interpreting statistical results oflearning power dimensions especiallycomparing pre- and post-interventionprofiles of an individual learner. The majorreason is that there was a small sample sizeinvolved in the quantitative investigation sothat the statistical power was resulting low.Secondly, there is a level of interpretive flex-ibility built into learning power dimensions:an individual’s understanding of learningpower language and his or her own learningare both highly subjective judgments; that iswhy individuals might respond to the ques-tionnaire in particular ways that would influ-ence the outcomes. Thirdly, ELLI is sensitiveto the context in which learners fill it in andnot a linear tool computed from a set ofobjective facts. Last but not least, it ispossible that students have been changingthrough the process and became morecritical about themselves, so the self-heldstandards of learning power dimensionsmight be raised higher and the scores mightbecome lower. But it did not mean the actualdimension became lower.



Table 2: Wilcoxon Signed Test of learning power before and after the interventions.

Test Statisticsc

t2CL–t1CL t2CC–t1CC t2MM–t1MM t2CT–t1CT t2SA–t1SA t2LR–t1LR t2RS–t1RS

Z –.424a –.309b –.081a –.701a –2.059a –1.315a –1.511a

Asymp. Sig..672 .757 .935 .483 .059 .189 .131

(2–tailed)a Based on positive ranks; b Based on negative ranks; c Wilcoxon Signed Ranks Test.


Qing Wang

Table 3: Coaching for Learning at four stations.

Station 1Agency andidentity

Station 2Learningdispositions,values, beliefs andattitudes

Station 3Knowledge, skillsand capabilities

Station 4Competence,performance andassessment

Aim

Expertise of thecoach

Role of the learner

Values

Methods of coaching

Anticipated outcomesin the classroom

To coach learners tobe reflexive andreflective tounderstand oneselfand one’s situation

A co-learner ofunderstanding selfor a counsellor insupporting learningabout the self

To increase self-awareness andidentity as a learner,to foster learneragency and a senseof responsibility

Contemplation, self-determination,autonomy, self-knowledge, wisdom,sensitivity, empathy

Using narratives,coaching forreflection, exploringpersonal stories andexperiences

More self-aware andcritically awarelearners who aremore self-motivatedand takeresponsibility oftheir own learning

To facilitate learnersto develop positive‘mind habits’ andattitudes

A facilitator inbuilding strengthsand resources incritical awareness,positive dispositionsand meta-learning

To understand andreflect on theirlearning powerdimensions, andnegotiate with thecoach on how toimprove them as awhole

Communication,collaboration,interaction,interconnectivity,interdependence

Developing alanguage oflearning,implementinglearning power intoteaching practice

More confident andpositive learnerswith enhancedlearning power andbetter learningrelationships withteacher and peers

To teach skills andcapabilities to enablelearners to betteracquire knowledgeand be moreefficient throughsocial interactions

An expert or amentor who passeson skills andknowledge, adesigner and afacilitator ofenquiry-basedlearning process

To engage withothers in the processof understanding,developing newinsights and co-constructingknowledge

Meaning making andknowledgeconstruction

Guiding, instructing,lecturing,demonstrating,modelling,facilitatingcollaborative workand group activities

More knowledge andskills gained aroundcertain subjects aswell as meaningfuland connected topersonal value

To coach learners toenhancecompetences andimproveperformance

A mentor or anexaminer whoobserves, evaluatesand offersconstructivefeedback

To improve theirperformance andcompetences inorder to meet publicstandards and fulfiltheir role moreeffectively

Accomplishment,measurement,progress,achievement

Sharing observationsand exploringpossibilities,clarifyingexpectations andstandards, feedback

Better performanceand higherintellectual qualityin learning outcomes

The nature of coaching in learninginvolves multiple layers of relationships andprocesses interact and anticipate the needfor renewal through the psychologicalchange to provide sustainable results(Reeves & Allison, 2009). There should bean appropriate combination of challengeand support to make sure that students areworking within their current zone of prox-imal development and the upper limit of thiszone is able to be extended by effectivecoaching.

The emerged systems model of Coaching forLearningIt emerged from the study that coaching hasmuch to offer to the learning process. It isessential to facilitate learners in the enquiry-based design and not to separate who islearning, what is learned, why it is learned,when and how it is learned and used incontext.

The nature of coaching in the enquiry-based learning process was best understoodas a participatory system. The author namedit as ‘Coaching for Learning’ and it has beenused extensively in this paper. Coaching forLearning can be defined as ‘an evolvinglearning relationship between coach andlearners through effective coaching conver-sations in order to enhance learner’s owner-ship, develop learning dispositions, scaffoldknowledge construction, and improvecompetence and performance and createlifelong learners as the long-term goal’.Coaching for Learning interrogates context,purpose, relationships, processes andperformance that lead to change, grow andco-learning between coach and learner.

One way of making explicit the linksbetween coaching and learning and thenrelating these links to classroom practices isto develop a model of the various factorsrelated to coaching and learning. Such a



Figure 3: The emerging systems model of Coaching for Learning.

model is presented as Figure 3. It compriseselements regarding contexts, purpose,people, processes, and a feedback loop forits sustainability. This model attempts tocapture the main processes involved in thefacilitative approach to enhance learningand highlights some of the factors that acoach may consider during incorporatingcoaching into learning processes.

Features of the systemCoaching for Learning as a participatorysystem demonstrates a number of features ofan open system, such as emergence and inter-relatedness, adaptation, development and sustain-ability. The aim is to ensure communicationand secure desirable growth by transforminginputs and by adapting to changes when theyoccur (Flood, 2010).

Coaching for Learning as a system isregarded as an assemblage of interrelatedelements comprising a unified whole withemergent properties that have their ownregularities which can passed over, influ-enced by, and negotiated between eachother. (Loveridge, 2009). It reflects theemergent coherence to constitute a wholesystem, and this emergent whole displaysproperties that cannot be reduced to thelevel of the individual agents or predictedfrom lower level (Stacey, 2005). Since parts,or sub-systems, comprise people, Coachingfor Learning is concerned with the needsand purposes of both coach and learners. A whole structure reflects the interrelatednature of its sub-systems, so that it is moreable to encourage coaches’ and learners’participation and involvement, to enabledemocracy and to provide conditions forautonomy and agency.

The system is open and adaptive to its envi-ronment. Bertalanffy (1968) explained that inopen systems a final stage can be reached fromvarious starting conditions and throughdifferent processes. This notion is importantfor understanding the system because a coachcan work with learners at various system levelsand through multiple openings created withinthe coaching relationship.

Reeves (2009) acknowledged the neces-sity of coaching for sustainability: ‘Only acoaching system that anticipates the need forrenewal and works through the psycholog-ical and organisational barriers to sustainedchange will provide enduring results’ (2009,p.18). The feature of sustainability is essen-tial in transformative learning, which is‘deeply engaging and touches and changesdeep levels of values and belief through aprocess of realisation and re-cognition’(Sterling, 2003, p.94).

The whole system focuses on the interac-tions between internal systems (individual’sstructure of interpretation, capacity of self-aware and self-adaptation, and so on) andexternal systems (learning place environ-ment, contents of subjects, external assess-ment criteria, social relationships, and soon). Coaches need to create a trusting andsafe environment and relationship forlearners to explore, learn and embracechanges, ideally for the development of self-empowerment. So learners need to beappropriately positioned in a place of recep-tivity, in a state of motivation, balance andcongruence. This is where self-determina-tion (Deci & Ryan, 2000) and sense ofagency come into play.

Feedback is essential in maintaining theintegrity of coaching the system. In acoaching relationship, it is very important forthe coach to model and provide good feed-back for the person being coached(Goodman, 2002). However, feedbackcannot happen without trust and safety.Establishing rapport and connection isimportant at the beginning as well as main-taining this trust through the coachingprocess. In my research, the teachers and thestudents have already known each other, andthis was very helpful for them to move on todeeper coaching conversations. But theymight face a bigger challenge to build a newsystems/relationship structure that wasdifferent from traditional teacher-studentrelationship. Both parties might feel uncom-fortable and even resist or feel threatened byexperiencing changes. In this they are facing


Qing Wang

new challenges, altering behaviours andperformance, adapting to core innovationand developing new necessary competencies.

The context of Coaching for LearningThe context of Coaching for Learningoccurs in the intersection of the coach’scontext, the learner’s context and thelearning context. Individuals in the contextco-create their world with all its meanings,purposes, relationships, etc; and this co-creation is dependent on understanding andsharing context (Carroll, 1996). Thoughteacher (as a coach) and student are still thetwo main roles in the classroom context toconstruct a Coaching for Learning system,the involvement of wider contexts of thesetwo people is of critical importance in orderto extend the learning relationship inside aclassroom to outside wider learning commu-nity (Lave & Wenger, 1991). The classroomis not a closed system but an open system,where there is a continuing relationshipbetween it and its environment (Carroll,1996). Thus to be the most effective, genera-tive and lasting, the system needs to functionwithin a greater system in which the class-room is only one area and being a teacher-coach or a student is only one role that theindividual takes. Moreover, Coaching forLearning needs extended collaboration andpartnerships in communities, includingschools, families and organisations. Eachcoaching partnership is unique, making itsown operating rules, its own discoveries and

its own journey of progress (McDermott &Jago, 2005).

Why: The purpose of Coaching for LearningThe purpose of Coaching for Learningcovers four aspects: (1) to explore andempower learners’ agency, a clear sense ofidentity and self-awareness, learning aspira-tions, a sense of ownership of learning andtake responsibility of their own learning; (2)to develop positive learning dispositions,beliefs, and attitudes that are transferable todifferent contexts in real world learning andliving; (3) to advance knowledge and skillsand to cultivate knowledge construction andintellectual capabilities; and (4) to enhanceauthentic performance, competence andachievement that meet public assessmentcriteria. The next section elaborates how wecan meet these purposes by establishingsustainable processes throughout thelearning journey and attuning to differentfocuses at four stations.

How: The processes of Coaching for Learning Coaching for Learning systems is neverpresented as a linear process. Teachers ascoaches view Coaching for Learning asdistinctive emerging dialogues with indi-vidual learners rather than following guide-lines from coaching manuscripts. We mightexpect various aims, focuses, values, roles,and methods of coaching at differentstations throughout the learning journey(see Table 4).



Table 4: Roles and tasks of teachers in Coaching for Learning.

Role Task

Knowledge To deliver, impart, clarify, inform (knowledge)expert/teacher

Mentor To provide resources, to instruct (skills), to share experiences, to monitor the process, to evaluate practices

Coach To support and share (meanings), to scaffold and model meaning making process, to facilitate enquiry, to create conditions of self-directed learning

Counsellor To protect individuals feelings, to deal with personal issues, to facilitate personal growth

It needs to be noted that these processesare a system of communication and improvi-sation: they are interconnected, not made ofseparate entities; they are not a singularmethodology, not based on one firmly estab-lished way of proceeding. When theCoaching for Learning system is applied tothe classroom practices, it may not appear tofollow a ‘Station 1-2-3-4’ approach. Instead, itis generally structured and based on a set ofprinciples following the theoretical back-ground of four stations in learning. It wouldtouch knowledge about personal experien-tial and identity as well as propositional andpractical knowing to a balance, varyingaccording to individual student’s currentcircumstances, expectations, and needs. Thereasons of using coaching vary, so theapproaches taken and ways in which keysteps in the processes are carried out. Thepoint is to recognise the power of humanagency and dialogues as creators of realityand use these concepts to co-create the facil-itation processes congruent with the needsof a particular student. As a result, no twocoaching processes are exactly the same.This notion reflects teaching as a pedagog-ical design process rather than following ascript (see South Australian Teaching forEffective Learning Framework, TEFL).

There are four main inter-relatedprocesses parallel to each other. Eachprocess entails sub-processes and their factorelements. Since it is difficult to frame themtogether in a single model, each process willbe elaborated in turn.

The process of creating learning environ-ments and sources includes:● Effectively using and updating learning

resources (reference books, magazines,online information, ICT equipments,etc.).

● Providing timely and constructivefeedback.

● Creating time and space inside as well asoutside classroom for individual or groupreflections.

The process of sharing a language oflearning requires a commonly agreed andaccepted language to talk about learning:● Co-defining meanings of vocabularies of

learning power.● Supporting students with interpreting

learning profiles.● Negotiating purposes and values in

learning.● Facilitating narratives about learner

identity.● Co-identifying and describing learning

processes.● Clarifying learning goals and

expectations.Facilitating knowledge construction entailsan open-ended, formative and dynamicprocess which takes a spiral method thatcovers the following key points:● Undertaking an enquiry-based learning

methodology.● Designing an authentic context.● Encouraging generation of meaningful

questions as the focus of enquiry.● Exploring stories and experiences.● Enabling systematic data gathering.● Using and connecting existing body of

knowledge.● Scaffolding mind-mapping and

researching process.● Validating and incorporating knowledge

into presentation.● Negotiating assessment criteria.● Paying attention to both the process and

the product of learning.The process of building and maintaining aquality Coaching for Learning relationshipthrough effective communication is funda-mentally learner-centred. ● Co-developing coaching process and

positions.● Balancing power and relinquishing

control.● Valuing individual voices.● Providing freedom and choices.● Responding to learners’ needs.● Shifting psychological dynamics.● Strengthening classroom emotional

support.


Qing Wang

● Developing interdependency and trust.● Supporting to manage associated

emotions.Throughout the research the relationshipbetween coach and learner has been givenpredominance. Establishing and main-taining a learner-centred relationship througheffective communication is the key processin Coaching for Learning, which is sharedand owned by all people who participate informing, changing and maintaining thesystem. This is one of the core features thatput people in the centre, and every layer ofthe system. For such practice to be realisticand sustainable, teachers need to becomemore aware of their relationship withstudents as knowledge generators and activeparticipants in their own learning. The issueof power in the Coaching for Learning rela-tionship is considered. Power is shared bythe coach and the learners; coachingmethods become a means to serve thepurposes rather than an end in themselves.

Who: People in the system The teacher and the students are the maintwo partners involved in the system becausethey have direct and immediate interactionsand conversations in the classroom. Thesystem has its root in understandings ofCoaching for Learning in which teacher andstudent adopt certain relationships towardsone another. Holloway (1995) stressed thecentrality of relationship as the context inwhich tasks are performed: ‘the structureand character of the relationship embodiesall other factors… and in turn all otherfactors are influenced by the relationship…understanding the relationship is under-standing the process’ (p.51). It has beenclear from the empirical evidence thatteachers adopt different roles in thecoaching relationship. I have categorisedthese roles as knowledge expert, mentor,coach and counsellor. The term ‘role’ wasdefined as ‘the content of a position or thebehavioural implications of occupying thatposition’ (Bee & Mitchell, 1984, p.22). Thecentral meaning here is position-associated

tasks, which are the behavioural side of roles(Carroll, 1999). Tasks exist in no doubt:teachers and students are present to involvethemselves in specific behaviours. Each rolesets up a different framework of tasks to beperformed, with a different kind of relation-ship between teacher and student, and adifferent form of communication. Teacherscan use a combination of roles when appro-priate. The roles and tasks are presented inTable 4.

Two points need clarifying. Firstly, the‘role and task’ framework is to clarify thekind of relationship involved in Coachingfor Learning; it is about the structure andnature but not the quality of the relationship.The second point is that the generic rolesand tasks outlined here might not beaccepted to all teachers. Furthermore theremight be different teachers stress differentroles. The point is to acknowledge theimportance of role/task in understandingpeople involved in the Coaching forLearning relationship, but in no way indicatethat individuals actually carries out therole/task in similar ways.

Evaluation of effectiveness How can we tell whether Coaching forLearning really works or not? How can weknow that Coaching for Learning is not awaste of time and money: does it reallybenefit the learners? How can we know itsimpacts on learners and their learning?Where can we get the evidence? Though theevaluation of effectiveness of this model isnot the focus of this article, the author wouldlike to invite the readers to go beyond thedefinition and identification of processesand think about the above questions.

The author considers that there shouldbe a systematic way to evaluate the effective-ness of Coaching for Learning rather than asingle method, and we need to investigate itsdevelopmental effects rather than merelyfocusing on one person at one point, basedon the following reasons. Firstly, Coachingfor Learning entails a non-singular method-ology and it is such a complex system aiming



at long-term goals; it is difficult to obtaintangible, concrete results at a quick pace.Secondly, the practice of Coaching forLearning is not aimed directly at raising stan-dards as traditionally defined, but at system-atically building wider, tangible andtransferable learning-related dispositions,expanding the range of valued outcomes toinclude the development of the confidenceand capacities to learn and fostering a senseof ownership and responsibility of learningwithin individual learners.

A mixed-method approach to evaluateCoaching for Learning is suggested:● Quantitative: learning power survey or

other psychometric tools for assessinglearning disposition, attainment data.

● Qualitative: learning portfolios, inter-views and narratives and observations.

It is vital to recognise that coaching does notjeopardise students’ performance on testsand examinations; indeed it may evenimprove them. Therefore, if the attainmentand examination results do not go up, it isnot a failure; if these results remain the samewhilst learning power improves or learneragency develops, that is a success. If theconventional standards are raised, that is nota surprise because students know themselvesbetter as learners. They are students who arebetter able to manage and plan their ownlearning, more critically engaged in theprocess of meaning making and knowledgeconstruction, more resilient and interde-pendent in the face of challenges and dobetter at exams and tests. Ideally the impactof coaching prepares students effectively forlifelong learning and real-life learning aswell as for examinations and further study.

ConclusionsIt was intended in this article to theorise therelationship between coaching and learningin the secondary classroom context bypresenting a systems model based on bothexisting literature and empirical investigation.

The model of Coaching for Learning hassignificant potential implications to educa-tional practices. One of the most distinctive

points is that teachers are no longer viewedas the primary deliverers of information orsole distributors of resources. They are trans-formed into coaches for individual learner,to raise aspirations and unlock potentials foreffective learning and better performance.Coaches must be able use their knowledgeand expertise from a broad repertoire ofpedagogical strategies on a continuum fromteacher-led to learner-centred. Students’learning is supported by targeting at andfocused on the needs and demands of thelearners themselves. However, Coaching forLearning faces a huge challenge from thecurrent educational system. The develop-ment of learner agency, learning capabilitiesand dispositions is a long term goal, whilstthe external educational inspectors focusmore on actual achievement in a short term.Teachers would be exposed to external pres-sures that potentially make their pedagogicalapproaches limited. If schools have toomuch intensive pressure to raise standards, itcan be hard for teachers to hold onto thelong-term goal. But this conflict itself iswhere innovation and transformation comesfrom.

The empirical investigation was a small-scale case study designed to be a preliminaryand exploratory investigation of coaching inlearning within a classroom setting. As suchthere are a number of limitations that mustbe taken into account when considering thefindings.

The first concern was the small samplesize in the statistical analysis. The secondconcern was the quality of the interventionsin each prototype. Due to its participatorynature, the interventions were designed andconducted primarily by the teachers. Theprocess of design and re-design were underunpredictable changes. The third concernlaid in the incomplete mapping of datacollection methods in each prototype. Thiscould be a major pitfall in the researchdesign itself. Fourth, data analysis mighthave potential weaknesses in individualstudent’s response to ELLI questionnaires:there might be problem in validity if the time


Qing Wang

for completing the questionnaires was notsufficient for them, unexpected technicalproblems happened, or the students merelywanted to finish the tests rather thancomplete them carefully and accurately. Theemotional and physical status of the studentsat the questionnaire-filling time might affecttheir self-perception of their learning andtheir criteria of judging their learningcapacity. The fifth problem was that thestudents’ genders, social-economic andcultural backgrounds were not considered ininterpreting the findings, nor the students’attainment data. The last concern was that aconsiderable volume of data was produced.The data might hold more information thatwould give a richer and more sophisticatedpicture if analysed further.

Future research directions relatingCoaching for Learning could be examiningwhether coaching has impact on students’subject learning nested in formal curriculumbecause academic performance is still thecentral concern of parents, school principalsand policy makers. It would be extremelyvaluable to include another mainstreamsecondary school which is demographicallysimilar to the school undertaking interven-tions but goes a more traditional route ofteaching and learning, document theirdevelopment and changes, and thencompare their results both quantitatively andqualitatively. In this method we would knowmore about the influence of coaching onstudents’ learning. Longitudinal studies

covering two or three years length, followingthe same cohort of students undergoingcoaching interventions, would generatemuch insight into the study of coaching inenquiry-based learning in terms of its long-term impact. Future research could beextended to different age groups, such asundergraduate students or postgraduatestudents. Moreover it could take a culturaland comparative perspective. For example,how Coaching for Learning would look likein a Chinese classroom? The innovativemodel of Coaching for Learning has thepotential to facilitate young people’slearning, make learning authentically ownedand shared and cultivate individuals to bethe authors of their own learning journey.The author invites the reader to experimentwith this idea in new ways and new places.

AcknowledgementThe fieldwork of the study was funded byPaul Hamlyn Foundation.

The AuthorQing WangGraduate School of Education,University of Bristol,Helen Wodehouse Building,35 Berkeley Square, Clifton,Bristol BS8 1JA, UK.

CorrespondenceQing WangEmail: [email protected]



Allison, S. & Harbour, M. (2009). The coaching toolkit:A practical guide for your school. London: Sage.

Aronson, D. (1996). Overview of systems thinking.Available at: http://www.thinking.net/SystemsThinking/OverviewSTarticle.pdf.

Bee, H.L. & Mitchell, S.K. (1984). The developmentperson (2nd ed.). San Francisco: Harper & Row.

Bentley, T. (1998). Learning beyond the classroom:Education for a changing world. London:Routledge.

Bertalanffy, L. (1968). General system theory: Essays onits foundation and development. New York: GeorgeBraziller.

Blockley, D.I. (2010). The importance of beingprocess. Civil engineering and environmental systems,27(3), 189–199.

Bolton, M.K. (1999). The role of coaching in studentteams: A ‘just-in-time’ approach to learning.Journal of Management Education, 23(3), 233–250.

Braun, V. & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematicanalysis in psychology. Qualitative Research inPsychology, 3(2), 77–101.

Bryk, A.S., Gomez, L.M. & Grunow, A. (2011).Getting ideas into action: Building networkedimprovement communities in education. In M. Hallinan (Ed.), Frontiers in sociology ofeducation. New York: Springer Publishing.

Burley, S. & Pomphrey, C. (2011). Mentoring andcoaching in schools: Professional learning throughcollaborative inquiry. London: Routledge.

Campbell, M.A. & Gardner, S. (2005). A pilot study toassess the effects of life coaching with Year 12students. In M. Cavanagh, A.M. Grant & T. Kemp(Eds.), Evidence-based coaching (pp.159–169).Brisbane: Australian Academic Press.

Capra, F. (1994). From the parts to the whole: Systemsthinking in ecology and education. Seminar MillValley School District.

Carroll, M. (1996). Workplace counselling. London:Sage.

Claxton, G. (2008). What’s the point of school?Rediscovering the heart of education. Oxford:Oneworld.

Deakin-Crick, R. (2007). Learning how to learn: The dynamic assessment of learning power. The Curriculum Journal, 18(2), 135–153.

Deakin-Crick, R. (2009). Inquiry-based learning:Reconciling the personal with the public in a democratic and archaeological pedagogy. The Curriculum Journal, 20(1), 73–92.

Deakin-Crick, R. (2010). Assessment in schools –dispositions. In P. Peterson, E. Baker & B. McGaw(Eds.), International encyclopaedia of education, Vol. 3 (pp.181–188). Oxford: Elsevier.

Deakin-Crick, R., Broadfoot, P. & Claxton, G. (2004).Developing an effective lifelong learninginventory: The ELLI project. Assessment inEducation, 11(3), 248–272.

Deakin-Crick, R. & Yu, G. (2008). The EffectiveLifelong Inventory (ELLI): Is it valid and reliableas an assessment tool? Educational Research, 50(4),387–402.

Deci, E. & Ryan, R. (2000). Self-determination theoryand the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. AmericanPsychologist, 55, 68–78.

Dilts, R. (2003). From coach to awakener. Capitola, CA:Meta Publications.

Fillery-Travis, A. & Lane, D. (2006). Does coachingwork or are we asking the wrong question?International Coaching Psychology Review, 1(1),23–36.

Fillery-Travis, A. & Lane, D. (2007). Research: Doescoaching work? In S. Palmer & A. Whybrow(Eds.), Handbook of coaching psychology(pp.57–70). London: Routledge.

Flood, R.L. (2010). The relationship of ‘systemsthinking’ to action research. Systemic Practice andAction Research, 23(4), 269–284.

Goodman, J.C. (2002). Coaching and systems theory.Glenview, IL: Centre for Internal Change.

Graham, F., Rodger, S. & Rynsaardt, J. (2008).Coaching parents to enable children’sparticipation: An approach for working withparents and their children. AustralianOccupational Therapy Journal, 56(1), 16–23.

Grant, A.M. (2001). Towards a psychology of coaching.Sydney: Coaching Psychology Unit, University ofSydney.

Grant, A.M. & Palmer, S. (2002). CoachingPsychology Meeting held at the AnnualConference of the Division of CounsellingPsychology, British Psychological Society,Torquay, 18 May.

Green, S., Grant, A.M. & Rynsaardt, J. (2007).Evidence-based life coaching for senior highschool students: Building hardiness and hope.International Coaching Psychology Review, 2(1),24–32.

Hamman, D., Berthelot, J., Saia, J. & Crowley, E.(2000). Teachers’ coaching of learning and itsrelation to students’ strategic learning. Journal ofEducational Psychology, 92(2), 342–348.

Hargreaves, D. (2004–2006). Personalising LearningPamphlet, Series. London: Specialist SchoolsTrust.

Heron, J. & Reason, P. (1997). A participatory inquiryparadigm. Qualitative Inquiry, 3(3), 274–294.

Holloway, E. (1995). Clinical supervision: A systemsapproach. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.


Qing Wang

References

Ives, Y. (2008). What is coaching? An exploration ofconflicting paradigms. International Journal ofEvidence-Based Coaching and Mentoring, 6(2),100–113.

King, K. & Frick, T. (2000). Transforming education:Case studies in systems thinking. Education at aDistance, 14(9).

Lave, J. & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning:Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.

Law, H., Ireland, S. & Hussain, Z. (2007). Thepsychology of coaching, mentoring and learning.Chichester: Wiley.

Loveridge, D. (2009). Foresight: The art and science ofanticipating the future. New York & London:Routledge.

Marshall, S. (1999). Principles for the new story oflearning. New Horizons for Learning Online Journal,6(1), March.

McDermott, I. & Jago, W. (2005). The coaching bible:The essential handbook. London: Piatkus Books.

Mercer, N. & Fisher, E. (1993). How do teachers helpchildren to learn? An analysis of teachers’interventions in computer-based activities.Learning and Instruction, 2, 339–355.

Palmer, S. & Whybrow, A. (2006). The coachingpsychology movement and its developmentwithin the British Psychological Society.International Coaching Psychology Review, 1(1),5–11.

Parsloe, E. & Wray, M. (2000). Coaching and mentoring.London: Kogan Page.

Passmore, J. & Brown, A. (2009). Coaching non-adultstudents for enhanced examination perform-ance: A longitudinal study. Coaching: AnInternational Journal of Theory, Research andPractice, 2(1), 54–64.

Reeves, D.B. (2009). Three challenges of web 2.0.Educational Leadership, 66(6), 87–89.

Reeves, D.B. & Allison, E. (2009). Renewal coaching:Sustainable change for individuals and organisations.San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Seligman, M.E.P., Ernst, R.M., Gillham, J., Reivich, K.& Linkins, M. (2009). Positive education: Positivepsychology and classroom interventions. OxfordReview of Education, 35(3), 293–311.

Stacey, R. (2005). Organisational identity: Theparadox of continuity and potential transforma-tion at the same time. Group Analysis, 38(4),477–494.

Sterling, S. (2003). Whole systems thinking as a basis forparadigm change in education: Explorations in thecontext of sustainability. Bath: Centre for Researchin Education and the Environment, University ofBath.

Wells, G. (1999). Dialogic inquiries in education:Building on the legacy of Vygotsky. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.

Wertsch, J. (1985). Vygotsky and the social formation ofmind. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Wertsch, J. (1998). Mind as action. New York: OxfordUniversity Press.

Whitmore, J. (1996). Coaching for performance.London: Nicholas Brealey Publishing.

Vygotsky, L.S. (1978). Mind in society. London:Harvard University Press.




Paper

Developing a healthcare leadershipcoaching model using action research andsystems approaches – a case study:Implementing an executive coachingprogramme to support nurse managers inachieving organisational objectives in MaltaHo Law & Reggie Aquilina

Objectives: This study aims to show how a leadership coaching programme for Nurse Ward Managers maybe implemented in a general hospital with the following objectives:● clarify the Nurse Ward Managers’ idealised leadership attributes (ILA);● identify any perceived gaps in leadership skills; ● develop and provide a comprehensive coaching programme; and● identify the impact of the programme.Design: An Action Research (AR) was adopted to involve the participants in a collaborative partnershipand influence both the implementation process and outcome of the programme. It incorporated two iterativePlan-Act-Reflect cycles.Methods: The sample consisted of 12 randomly chosen Nurse Ward Managers. The coaching methods usedin the Action stages include a range of eclectic coaching psychology approaches. The analytical tools usedin the Reflective stages included thematic analyses and a systems approach. The impact of the programmewas identified using Law et al.’s (2007) Universal Integrative Framework. Results: 27 idealised leadership attributes were identified. Both group and individual coaching sessionswere found to be effective in helping the participants identify areas of development and goals. The impactof the coaching programme included enhanced self-awareness, feelings of support, ability to take decisionsand keep to time frames and achievement of organisational and personal goals. Conclusions: The structured coaching programmes had a substantive impact on developing Nurse WardManagers’ leadership skills, providing them with an on-going support, and helping them achieve bothpersonal and organisational goals.Keywords: Action research; coaching psychology; coaching programme; leadership coaching; executivecoaching; healthcare; learning; nursing; Universal Integrative Framework; systems approach.

UNDER THE current global economiccondition, organisations are increas-ingly expecting employees to do more

with the same, or less, resources (Ohman,2000). Organisations are constantly chal-lenged by the ever increasing demands ofrising costs, continuous change, increasedpatient acuity, multiple professional hierar-chies and staff shortages (Contino, 2004;McAlearney, 2006; Storey, 2010). This entailsleaders to engage and inspire employees toachieve peak performance using transforma-tional and ethical forms of leadership(Alban-Metcalfe & Mead, 2010; Alimo-Metcalfe & Alban-Metcalfe, 2005). The needto develop such leadership styles is experi-enced even more acutely within the health-care sector than other sectors. There is agrowing awareness that the traditional hier-archical and bureaucratic organisationalmodel is incompatible with the newcomplexities of the healthcare system(McAlearney, 2006) and this is leading to thedecentralisation of healthcare managementwith more leadership responsibilities placedon the Nurse Ward Managers (Casida, 2007).However, there is evidence that Nurse WardManagers are frequently ill-prepared inassuming leadership roles and do not receivethe support they need (Mathena, 2002;Grindel, 2003). Thus, developing leadershipcapacity at the mid-management level hasbecome an urgent item on the changeagenda in the healthcare system.

Nevertheless, the effectiveness of formalleadership training programmes is an issuewith little empirical evidence to demonstrateimproved performance (Ford & Weissbein,2008; Kirwan & Birchall, 2006). LeadershipTraining seminars may create a moderate‘buzz’ of enthusiasm for a short period butthey rarely lead to sustained behaviouralchange (Dearborn, 2002). This may be dueto the short duration of such seminars, lackof post-training support to implementchanges and lack of regular reinforcementthrough on-going practice (Clarke, 2002).On the other hand, Executive and Leader-ship coaching has been identified as a

powerful vehicle to develop leadershipwithin the organisational context (Law, et al,2007) and has been linked to several positiveoutcomes including enhanced transforma-tional leadership skills (Abrell et al., 2011);goal self-concordance and attainment(Burke & Linley, 2007; Grant, 2006; Law etal., 2007); self-awareness, accountability andjust-in-time learning (Turner, 2006) andproductivity and ROI increases (McGovernet al., 2001; Olivero, Bane & Kopelman,1997). Leadership coaching can capitaliseon the energy and enthusiasm that is gener-ated during formal training sessions (Finn,2007) since it is not a one-time event, but astrategic process that adds incremental valueboth to those being coached and to thebottom line of the organisation (Goldsmith& Lyons, 2006). It also promotes the appli-cation of knowledge within the reality of thework settings through feedback and on-going customised support; thus makinglearning immediately applicable (Hernez-Broome & Hughes, 2004; Oberstein, 2010).

In the healthcare setting there is still adearth of research studies related to nursecoaching. However, the few studies availablehave also shown positive outcomes with aleadership coaching intervention. A study byKushnir, Ehrenfeld and Shalish (2008)found that compared with the control groupnurses who participated in a coachingproject improved in training motivation, self-efficacy and behavioural transfer of severalskills. These results were in contrast with thedecline in most outcomes of the controlgroup. Another study by Johnson, Sonsonand Golden (2010) found that coachinghelped to improve individual and organisa-tional performance and job satisfaction.Rivers et al. (2011) found that a coachingprogramme for 30 Nurse Ward Managershelped with setting goals, making realisticplans, accountability, and setting priorities.Further research and case studies on imple-mentation of leadership coaching in thehealthcare setting are, therefore, welcome.

This paper provides such a case studywith an aim to show how a leadership


Developing a healthcare leadership coaching model using action research and systems approaches…

coaching programme may be implementedfor Nurse Ward Managers in a generalhospital. More specifically, the key objectivesof this study were to:● Clarify the Nurse Ward Managers’

idealised leadership attributes (ILA).● Identify any perceived gaps in leadership

skills.● Identify an ideal model to implement a

comprehensive coaching programme.● Identify the impact of the programme.

MethodologyAction Research (AR) was chosen as amethodology approach since it focuses ongenerating evidence through research so asto find solutions to practical problems orissues of pressing concern with the aim ofhelping practitioners improve the quality oftheir practice (Craig, 2009; Elliott, 1991;Reason & Bradbury, 2006). With its focus ongenerating collaborative solutions to prac-tical problems it empowers practitioners toengage themselves within the researchprocess (Meyer, 2000). It consists of a collab-orative spiral of reflective cycles, or itera-tions, that include identifying a problem,designing inquiry-based questions, planninga change, acting and introducing thechange, observing and reflecting on theprocess and re-planning again (Craig, 2009;Kemmis & McTaggart, 2005). Thus it is anideal approach for facilitating the process ofintroducing a coaching programme into theorganisation (the primary aim of thisresearch). It is also in line with the principlesof coaching as a learning process (Law et al.,2007), a reflective practice (reflection inaction, Schön, 1983, 1991), and a collabora-tive partnership to improve personal andprofessional performance (Kilburg, 1996).The AR approach adopted for this study .

Design The researchers designed to incorporate theAR process in two cycles, (iterations orphases). Each cycle maps on to Kolb’s (1984)learning cycle, that is, integrating planning,action, and reflection stages with the aim of

addressing the research objectives (seeFigure 1).

The detailed methods and proceduresfor implementation are described next; theoutcome of the reflection forms part of theresults and discussions.

The inclusion criterion is that partici-pants were the Nurse Ward Manager in thehospital. For practical purpose, the stratifiedrandom sampling approach that was basedon the random choice of two Nurse WardManagers out of seven from each of the sixdepartments ensured that that the finalsample of 12 Nurse Ward Managers reflectedan unbiased representative sample of thewhole hospital and all departments. Theexclusion criteria are seemly those who havenot been randomly selected. There were nomatching criteria for the sample, as this wasan action research, not a quasi-experimentaldesign.

Methods A mixed range of research methods wereused. A stratified random sampling tech-nique (Polit & Hungler, 1999; Burns &Grove, 1993) was used to identify the partic-ipants. Thematic and systems analyses wereapplied in the reflective process (evaluationand conceptualisation) to identify the rele-vant themes and develop a conceptualmodel for leadership coaching. Finally, Lawet al.’s (2007) Universal Integrative Frame-work (UIF) was used to evaluate the impactof the coaching programme.

The coaching programme consisted offour one-to-one coaching sessions. While thebasic coaching process followed the GROWmodel (Whitmore, 2002), a range of eclecticcoaching psychology methods wereembedded according to the individualcoachee’s need. This included cognitivebehavioural coaching (Palmer & Szymanska,2007) and solution-focused (Green, Oades &Grant, 2006). These aimed to help theparticipants to focus on identifying andachieving self-congruent goals within speci-fied time-frames. In general, the coachingapproaches were underpinned by the philo-


Ho Law & Reggie Aquilina

sophy of Positive Psychology (Seligman,2002) and integrated transpersonal andnarrative collaborative practice – the ‘thirdgeneration’ coaching practice advocated byStelter and Law (2010) to support reflectiveexploration of personal meaning and aspira-tions. These would address the individuals’psychological, cultural and spiritual needsand identify core values as guiding markersfor decisions in their private and profes-sional lives (Law, Lancaster & DiGiovanni,2010; Law, 2007; Stelter & Law, 2010).

Research area and participantsThis study was conducted at Mater DeiHospital which is the largest acute hospitalin Malta. A stratified random sampling of 12 Nurse Ward Managers was carried out toextract the study sample from the total targetpopulation of 42 Nurse Ward Managers ofthe hospital. Participation in this study wason a voluntary basis and there was no pres-

sure on the Nurse Ward Managers to partici-pate. The age group of the participants wasbetween 32 and 46 years and all the NurseWard Managers drawn up through the strati-fied random sampling willingly accepted toparticipate in the study. Seven of the partici-pants were female and five participants weremale.

Reflexivity – validity and rigourKock (2007) states that action research hasthree validity threats to contend with,namely: Subjectivity threats, due to personalbias of the researcher; Contingency threatsdue to the broadness and complexity of datagenerated; and Control threats due to thelack of full control over the environment.

As an ‘antidote’ to counter these threatsKock (2007, p.103) suggests actionresearchers to conduct multiple iterations ofthe AR cycle and collect cumulative data tostrengthen the findings. It is also suggested



Figure 1: Action research learning cycle (adopted from Law et al., 2007).

that findings are validated by participantsthroughout the study (Meyer, 2000). Inconducting this research, the researcherswere fully aware of their own subjectivity andhow this might have an impact upon theresearch process and the participants’responses. In line with the qualitativeresearch philosophy, participants wereregarded as co-researchers who equallycontributed to the knowledge production.

Ethical considerationsThe Research proposal for this study wasapproved jointly by the University of EastLondon, the CEO of Mater Dei Hospital andthe Director of Nursing. A covering letterexplaining the issues of confidentiality,anonymity and the aims of the actionresearch was given to the participants andinformed consent was obtained in line withethical principles (Polit & Hungler, 1999;Bowling, 2002).

ProceduresAs previously stated, the AR process incorpo-rated two cycles.

Cycle 1:Planning PhaseA meeting was held with the Director ofNursing to discuss the Agenda for the FocusGroups and coaching sessions. It was agreedthat the main organisational objective for thisstudy would be to help Nurse Ward Managersbecome more aware of their Leadershipattributes. During this planning phase thestratified random selection of participantswas carried out and an Action plan and thedate for the first focus group was decided.The Idealised Leadership Attributes (ILA)Exercise consisting of a list of LeadershipAttributes was developed and piloted.

Action PhaseThe first Focus Group was carried out usinga Nominal Group Facilitation Technique.Following this two coaching sessions witheach individual participant were carried outand these sessions were followed by a Valida-

tion Group meeting to decide the wayforward for the second iterative cycle processand to validate the emergent themes fromthe first Focus Group.

The reflective outcomes from this firstcycle are presented in the Results section.

Cycle 2: Planning PhaseThe reflection on the experience of the firstCycle led to the development of a CoachingLog template to structure better the next setof individual coaching sessions with theparticipants. The ILA exercise was revisedand simplified and a plan for a second roundof coaching sessions was drawn up. A datewas also agreed for the second Focus Group.

Action PhaseThe second round of coaching sessions wereconducted with the participants and thefinal Focus group was carried out as a way ofconcluding the second cycle.

The results of the two cycles will now bepresented.

ResultsThe First IterationFindings of the first Focus GroupThe first iteration of the study was initiatedthrough a Focus Group with the aim ofpiloting the ILA Exercise and identifying theLeadership values and attributes that theparticipants identified as the most importantand impactful in effective leadership. Thefollowing themes and attributes emergedfrom thematic analysis of the discussion tran-scripts:

Intrinsic values – Intrinsic values such ashonesty, loyalty, fairness, empathy and trust-worthiness emerged as a central componentof idealised leadership. These were viewed asblending within each other to provide anethical foundation that could be expressedin any life situation.

Vision – Having a vision that is congruentwith one’s behaviour was also emphasised.



It was stated that although Nurse WardManagers were not directly involved increating the Organisational vision they stillneeded to create their own ‘mini’ vision.

Visibility – Visibility and presence of theNurse Ward Manager in the clinical areahelped to integrate the leaders withfollowers, create a sense of teamwork andprovide an opportunity to role model goodvalues. It also helped the leader remainconnected and in control, know the teambetter and delegate and supervise moreeffectively.

Assertiveness – Assertiveness was viewed as ameans of expressing one’s certainty, commit-ment and conviction about doing what isright in a persistent way without beingaggressive. It gave a sense of empowerment,control and pride as well as the ability torealise the vision through role modellingand educating others.

The experience of the first iterative cyclesuggests the need of integrating the GROWmodel (Whitmore, 2002) within thecoaching sessions to increase the focus ongoal attainment. The ILA pilot exercise alsoshows the need to make the tool morecompact.

The Second IterationFindings of the second Focus GroupFrom the findings of the second focusgroup, we can provide possible answers toour research questions as follows:

1. What are the idealised leadership attrib-utes of Nurse Ward Managers?In total, 27 Idealised Leadership Attributeshave been identified from the focus groupdiscussion and the thematic analyses. Theseare summarised in Table 1.

It is important to emphasise that the listin Table 1 does not reflect the complex inter-actions of the attributes. Consequently, avisual representation was drawn up to inte-grate the chosen attributes and provide a

depiction of their interrelationships. Forexample, values related to Authenticity,Direction and Caring emerged as a centralcomponent while dominant, competitive andmanipulative approaches were rejected asbeing incongruent with these values. Visualrepresentation was found to be useful as aframework to develop a 360º feedback tool.This visual representation was further devel-oped using a General System Approach(GSA,) during the Reflection stage (concep-tion phase in the learning cycle) to handlethe complexity of organisational interactionsand relationships. This is congruent with therecent discussions and current debates onusing systems approach for coaching andaction research (Ulrich, 1996; Cavanagh,2006; Eidelson, 1997; Cavanagh & Lane,2012; Shams & Law, 2012). A conceptualmodel was mapped out in a Systems Rela-tionship Diagram (SRD) (Figure 2). Thisshows the potential positive effect on thebehaviour of the healthcare team, patientcare and the subsequent output (patientsatisfaction) as a positive feedback loop. Thesystem of interest that emerged from themodelling exercise is named as a healthcareLeadership System (HLS).

2. Do Nurse Ward Managers identify deficitsin their leadership attributes or skills?The Nurse Ward Managers stated that theprocess of going through the ILA and ValuesClarification Exercises helped them to iden-tify both their strengths and areas of devel-opment. The one-to-one coaching furtherfine-tuned the process and specific develop-ment areas were identified. However, therewas also consensus on the need of doing a360º feedback as part of the self-awarenessprocess. The ILA exercise increased partici-pants’ knowledge about different leadershipattributes and served as a self-assessmentexercise to increase their insights aboutpersonal strengths and areas of develop-ment. This self-awareness was further devel-oped through the Values ClarificationExercise and one-to-one coaching. Althoughthe ILA, Values clarification exercises and





Table 1: Idealised Leadership Attributes of Nurse Ward Managers.

Idealised Characteristicsleadershipattributes(themes)

Authenticity honesty, integrity, fairness, equality, transparency, respect, self-awareness,trustworthiness, loyalty, ethical behaviour, role modelling, openness to criticism, acknowledging mistakes.

Responsibility accountability, reliability, dependability, dedication, fidelity, constancy, consistency,commitment, self-discipline.

Collaboration teamwork, communication, co-operation, partnership, solidarity, support, conflict management, consensus building.

Caring empathy, concern, compassion, dignity, kindness, generosity, nurturance, helpfulness, consideration, understanding.

Excellence high quality, competence, skills, high standards, aptitude, professionalism, effectiveness, evidence-based practice.

Safety security, protection, well-being, risk containment

Empowerment involvement, power sharing, delegation, broad-mindedness, freedom, self-determination, autonomy, non-blame culture

Influence authority, power, decisiveness, assertiveness, command, control, confidence.

Growth development, coaching, learning, guidance, counsel, mentoring, supporting, challenging, knowledge-sharing.

Vision clarity, strategy, purposefulness, direction, future minded, pro-activity, initiative

Visibility support, presence, instruction, supervision, accessibility, role modelling

Contribution serving others, making a difference, leaving a legacy, altruism, generosity, selflessness, abundance mentality

Patience serenity, flexibility, tolerance, endurance, temperance

Inspiration passion, optimism, encouragement, engagement, charisma, motivation, energising, confidence, stimulation, humour

Determination resolve, certainty, fortitude, hardiness, resilience, persistence, perseverance, steadfastness.

Courage daring, boldness, challenge, risk-taking, audaciousness, non-conformity.

Orderliness tidiness, neatness, structure, efficiency, organisation

Appreciation praising, thanking, gratitude, acknowledging, rewarding, gratefulness, cherishing

Creativity originality, inventiveness, innovativeness, imagination, ingenuity, resourcefulness.

Humility serving others, modesty, humbleness, gentleness, reserve.

Diligence duty, industry, accountability, conscientiousness, self-discipline.

Pragmatism practicality, realism, sensibleness, factuality, expediency, feasibility, convenience

Prudence carefulness, cautiousness, non-risk decisions, discretion.

Reputation status, esteem, standing, popularity, admiration, recognition.

Ambition achievement, results, success, accomplishment, being the best, competition, superiority, pride, winning, drive, triumph, territorialism.

Meticulousness precision, accuracy, perfection, exactness, thoroughness.

Conformity stability, constancy, compliance, observance, conventionality.

one-to-one coaching provided awarenessand insights about personal strengths andareas of development, a 360º feedback wasrequested to provide participants with agenuine and complete picture of their lead-ership strengths and weaknesses.

3. What form of development or coachingdo Nurse Ward Managers need to improvetheir leadership skills?From the focused group discussion, it wasidentified that a coaching service providingan integrated approach of formal trainingprograms, group coaching and individualone-to-one coaching sessions was required.These are further elaborated on below.

Formal Training Programmes: It was stated thatthere is still a place for traditional leadershiptraining sessions were the basic theoreticaland practical elements of leadership couldbe covered. It was also suggested that NurseWard Managers could be provided with a

formal and basic coaching skills trainingprogramme to help them hone theircoaching skills.

Individual Coaching: It was suggested thatone-to-one coaching sessions should form anintegral part of any effective leadershipprogramme. These sessions should be basedon self-awareness, personal core values, iden-tification of leadership strengths, areas ofdevelopment, organisational and personalgoals including homework and reminders. Itwas also stated that a coaching service shouldbe available according to needs and thatbooster sessions should continue asrequired.

Group Coaching: It was identified that groupcoaching could serve as a healthy forum forsharing ideas and group goals. 360º feedbackbased on the Idealised Leadership Attributeswas also suggested as a way of developingself-awareness.



Figure 2: A Healthcare Leadership System (HLS); note: the leadership coaching system isstill outside the system, which is to be implemented. The hand drawn line represents the

HLS system boundary and emphases the fact that it is a human system.

4. What is the impact of Executive Coachingon Nurse Ward Managers at a personal andprofessional level?The perceptions of Nurse Ward Managersrelated to the impact of the four coachingsessions they received included enhancedself-awareness, clarifying personal strengthsand areas of development, and enhancedsocial and professional skills. Although indi-vidualised coaching was limited to foursessions, participants verbalised a number oftangible organisational and personalachievements. The organisational goalsachieved included changes in the Medica-tion distribution systems, enhanced interdis-ciplinary documentation and developmentof training programmes and standard oper-ating procedures. The other benefits elicitedby the participants in relation to the effectsof this coaching programme could be organ-ised according to the structure of theUniversal Integrative Framework (Law,Ireland & Hussain, 2007) as follows.

Personal Competence ● Enhancing self-awareness about intrinsic

core values, beliefs and behaviour. ● Understanding own behaviour and

associated beliefs, rules, ‘musts’ and‘shoulds’.

● Identifying personal strengths and areasof development.

● Using personal strengths as leverage toenhance expertise.

● Providing a structured way of identifyingand achieving personal and professionalgoals.

● Creating accountability to achieve goalsand keep to time-frames.

● Utilising and adopting insights into newsituations.

● Eliciting ‘out of the box’ thinking andexploration of new solutions fromdifferent perspectives in a flexible way.

● Increasing resilience in challenging time.● Providing a positive outlook for each

situation.● Supporting and encouraging authen-

ticity and mindfulness.

● Providing a healthy and safe environ-ment to discuss concerns, feel reassuredand understood whilst reducing feelingsof isolation or helplessness.

● Receiving total attention and personaltime from your coach without any hiddenagenda.

Social Competence● Developing communication skills.● Managing anger when communicating

with others.● Conflict management techniques to

handle different situations.● Learning to appreciate and praise others.● Delegating more to others.● Role modelling values and taking

congruent decision and actions.● Becoming honestly open to criticism and

feedback from others.

Cultural and Organisational Competence● Building a sense of cultural bonding to

enhance collective consciousnessthrough group coaching.

● Developing new ways to enhance team-work, for example, more efficientdocumentation systems.

● Championing empowerment of staff bylistening more, using effective questionsand giving people space and time to talkand be involved in decision-making.

● Supporting and integrating those whomay seem ineffective to cope with theirresponsibilities or situations.

Professional Competence● Development of Nurse Ward Manager’s

Coaching skills to introduce one-to-onecoaching for staff.

● Developing CPD training programmesfor nurses.

● Introducing changes and standardoperating procedures that lead toenhanced safety for staff and patients.

● Helping new Nurse Ward Managers to gothrough transition process to reduce fear.



DiscussionIdealised Leadership AttributesOn reflection, the researchers conclude thatthe participants themselves effectively co-developed the emerging idealised health-care Leadership System in relation to howthey desire to be as leaders. Using GSA/SRD,the researchers have developed a conceptualmodel to represent such system (Figure 3).The emergence of Authenticity as a funda-mental ideal component within this SRDprovides further evidence to the claim that –Authentic leadership represents an overar-ching component that beneficially encom-passes other forms of effective leadership(Avolio et al., 2004; Avolio & Gardner, 2005).The main attributes in Figure 3 shows analignment towards an authentic-transforma-tional leadership style (Bass, 1985; Nichols,2008) with aspects of Servant leadership(Greenleaf, 2003) and Spiritual leadership(Fry, 2003). These leadership styles revolvearound the values-based, ethical leadershipcompass focusing on authenticity andintegrity of the leader (Poff, 2010).

The findings of this study are also in linewith the findings of several other nursingstudies. Stanley (2006 a,b,c,) found thatnurses preferred a ‘congruent’ leadershipstyle aligned to actions based on authenticand ethical core values. Other studiespointed out the importance of enduringrelationships, presence and visibility, caringabout the team’s well-being, loyalty, trust,respect, flexibility, shared vision, self-disci-pline, commitment to principles, andempowerment of others rather thanpersonal prestige (Cummings, Hayduk &Estabrooks, 2005; Johansson, Sandahl &Andershed, 2011; Kleinman, 2004; Manley,2000; Shirey, 2006; Stanley, 2008). Thesewere all referred to in this study and form anintegral component of the HLS. The factthat the participants also rejected manipula-tive, competitive and dominant styles of lead-ership also reflects the findings of a study byHendel et al. (2006). Although the desirableattributes of managers have been well-docu-mented in the literature, the finding addedvalue by confirming that similar leadership



Figure 3: A Healthcare Leadership Coaching Model (HLCM).

attributes are required for nursing managersand thus it has implications on the knowl-edge transfer in terms of applying leadershipto the nursing sector. Also the study high-lighted the different priority of the leader-ship attributes in nursing in comparison withother sectors (e.g. care and ethics).

Thus, through the application of a GSA,the complexity and interaction of the partic-ipants’ idealised leadership attributes wasmapped out. The SRD provided a means ofexplaining the pattern of relationship andinteraction of these values with systemelements and how these adapt in novel ways,interact and provide feedback to the systemto impact on ongoing behaviour and change(Cavanagh, 2006).

Identifying strengths and areas of developmentThe ILA and Values Clarification Exercisesserved as a prompt for the participants toidentify both their strengths and areas ofdevelopment, thus developing a benchmarkagainst which to measure their performanceand leadership style. However, it was alsoacknowledged that self-reported scoring waslimited in providing a complete picture and360º feedback was requested. This methodhas been confirmed by research to be effec-tive in promoting awareness about personalskills and deficiencies (Hagdberg, 1996;Shipper & Dillard, 2000; Lord & Emrich,2001, Law et al., 2007). Kleinman (2004)also identified a discrepancy between NurseWard Managers’ perceptions of their leader-ship styles and staff perception of theirleaders, thus indicating the importance ofhaving unbiased feedback from others.Accordingly, it was agreed that the nextphase of the coaching programme wouldinclude a 360º feedback exercise.

Leadership Development ProgrammesThe results of this study further confirms theimportance of an integrative approachtowards leadership development (Carey,Philippon & Cummings, 2011; Clarke, 2002;Dearborn, 2002; Horner; 2002; Reno, 2005;Tobias, 1996, Law et al., 2007), which is not

only limited to conventional trainingprogrammes, but also to post-trainingsupport. The participants stressed the impor-tance of using a combined approach thatincludes formal training programmessupported by one-to-one and groupcoaching.

The systems mapping exercise in Figure 2shows how coaching matches onto the needof leadership. We call the model in Figure 3a healthcare Leadership Coaching Model(HLCM) which may represent a blueprintfor leadership coaching programmes. This iscongruent with the good coaching practiceas exemplified by Law, Lancaster and DiGiovanni (2010). A further systems model-ling shows how leadership coaching may beembedded within the healthcare system asan integral part leading to an organisationaldevelopment process (Figure 4).

Impact of Coaching The impact identified in this study alsorelates to the coaching outcomes reported inthe literature – reflection, insights, increasedself-awareness, and the importance ofcontinuous one-to-one attention, expansionof thinking and personal accountability(Grant, 2006; Horton-Deutsch, Young &Nelson, 2011; Passmore, 2010; Turner,2006). Other benefits mentioned in thisstudy include: goal self-concordance andcommitment, values alignment, andincreased resilience (Burke & Linley, 2007;Grant, Curtayne & Burton, 2009); enhancedplanning and accountability (Rivers, Pesata,Beasley & Dietrich, 2011); non-judgementalsupport (Du Toit, 2006; Byrne, 2007); well-being (Green, Oades, & Grant, 2006; Pass-more, 2010); adoption of a coachingleadership style as a result of being coached(Gegner, 1997); solving own problems, iden-tifying development needs and improvingwork-life balance (Jarvis, 2004); develop-ment of authentic behaviour (Drenthen,2010); and resistance to social pressures thatchallenge one’s ethical values (Avolio &Gardner, 2005).



The Values clarification exercise usingpicture cards to evoke critical reflectionprovided a number of important insights tothe participants about their attitudes, beliefsand values, thus providing transformationallearning (Mezirow, 1991). The participantsalso felt challenged to stretch and committhemselves to timeframes to achieve theiridentified goals and ‘homework’ given. Thismovement out of one’s comfort zone isreferred to by Stacey (2000) as a place wherethe tensions between chaos and stability,described as the ‘edge of chaos’, elicitscreativity and innovation. On the other hand,the therapeutic environment of groupcoaching referred to in this study seems to bein line with Wenger’s theory of communitiesof practice (COP), which are ‘groups ofpeople who share a common concern orpassion for something they do and interact

regularly to learn how to do it better’ (Lave &Wenger, 1998). It also provides a way to iden-tify and address system wide issues (Crethar,Phillips & Brown, 2011; Edmondstone, 2011).

Limitations of the studyLike most qualitative methods, lack of gener-alisation is a limitation. However, the ARprocess may be replicated as a standard ofgood practice. Since AR is dynamic it is diffi-cult to control all stages of the study,however, the support and commitmentshown by the participants ensured a positiveoutcome and no derailing issues emergedduring the research process. To address facil-itator and social desirability bias allperceived measures were taken by theresearchers by limiting their personal inputto asking questions, reflecting back andsummarising.



Figure 4: A Healthcare Leadership Development System (HLDS) which shows leadershipcoaching is embedded as part of the HLDS. The hand drawn line represents the HLDS

system boundary and emphases the fact that it is a human system.

Research implicationsFuture research may include replicationstudies to identify any variances in leader-ship attributes, preference of leadershipdevelopment programmes and impact ofcoaching on Nurse Ward Managers (ordifferent management level) in differenthospitals (or organisation) and countries.The impact of a comprehensive coachingprogramme as discussed in this researchstudy, that includes formal, one-to-one andgroup coaching can be further explored.Such studies can further inform healthcareorganisations on the benefits of adoptingsuch coaching programmes as an integralpart of their healthcare leadership develop-ment programmes. Research can also shedlight on the impact of coaching programmeson the outcomes of patients and the effecton accountable, effective and efficient use ofscarce resources of society.

An exploration of the effect of intro-ducing values clarification exercises forhealthcare students can also be researchedsince there seems to be a gap in this area.This research may be further informed byexploring present value system of studentnurses and newly-graduated nurses.

In line with good practice of actionresearch, in addition to the publication ofthis paper in an appropriate professionaljournal, the researchers have also presentedthe findings of this study at the 3rd Interna-tional Orthopaedic Nursing Conference aspart of wider dissemination of knowledge(Aquilina & Law, 2012, in press).

ConclusionThe constant changes and decentralisation ofmanagement in healthcare has put moreresponsibility on the Nurse Ward Managers(Casida, 2007). Thus, an organisationalcommitment towards appropriate on-goingtraining to support these key frontline leadersis required to sustain the healthcare systemand provide quality care to patients (Care &Udod, 2003; Mathena, 2002; Kowalski,Bradley & Pappas, 2006; Smith & Sandstrom,1999; Wessel Krejci & Malin, 1997).

This study has identified a list of idealisedleadership attributes as established by theparticipants of the study and developed ahealthcare leadership model that centresaround authentic-transformational andservant leadership styles. It has also indicatedthe importance of using an integrative,eclectic framework of coaching psychologyapproaches coupled with the formaltraining, group and one-to-one coachingsessions as a recommended format for thedevelopment of the Ward Leader’s skills.

The researchers hope that this study hascontributed to the growing evidence on theeffectiveness of coaching as a mode ofsupport, self-awareness, empowerment, self-concordant goal setting and impact on theprofessional and personal levels. It hasconfirmed that as little as four coachingsessions can be effective in providingtangible benefits and goal achievement(Burke & Linley, 2007; Grant, Curtayne &Burton, 2009).

In addition, this study recommends theintegration of leadership coaching in ahealthcare system to develop the futureleaders. As suggested by Walumbwa et al.(2008), such an eclectic leadershipprogramme may be effective in building acoaching culture so as to develop leadersand promote authentic, ethical, and trans-formational leadership that can lead to posi-tive impacts and high levels of performance.While the hospital in Malta is funded by thegovernment, the value added interventionmay enable further funding from thegovernment. Embedding coaching culturewithin the existing infrastructure wouldrequire very little additional resources.Moreover, the transferability of the modelmay be applied across cultures to the areaswhere healthcare systems have not sufferedfrom the same financial constraints as thoseexperienced in the UK. Finally, this study hasalso resonated with the importance ofadopting an ethical leadership as a coachingmodel; as Law (2010, p.97) described:



‘If a leader is to move people, he or she mustmove them with their hearts and minds so as toinstill the team with a sense of great purpose, a mission that they are compelled to achieve.They and their leader share the same goal. To do that, the shared vision has to begrounded in an ethical principle.’

AcknowledgementsThe authors are very grateful to thereviewers for their helpful comments. Therevised paper has taken their suggestions onboard which hopefully would enableimproved readability and facilitate furtherknowledge transfer.

The AuthorsHo LawChartered & Registered Psychologist,PhD CPsychol CSci CMgr MISCP(Accred)AFBPsS; FCMI; FHEA Chartered Psychologist, Chartered Scientist,Chartered Manager, Registered Psychologist, Registered AppliedPsychology Practice Supervisor (APPS);Senior Lecturer, School of Psychology, University of East London, UK.

Reggie AquilinaDip. Adult Training & Development (U.M.),BSc Nursing Studies (U.M.),MSc Coaching Student (UEL),Practice Development Nurse,Mater Dei Hospital, Malta.

CorrespondenceHo LawUniversity of East London,Stratford Campus, Water Lane,London E15 4LZ, UK. Email: [email protected] Skype username: hochunglaw

Reggie AquilinaPractice Development Team Office,Yellow Foyer, Ground Floor,San Gwann,Mater Dei Hospital, Malta.Email: [email protected]



Abrell, C., Rowold, J., Weibler, J. & Moenninghoff, M.(2011). Evaluation of a long-term transforma-tional leadership development programme.Zeitschrift für Personalforschung, 25(3), 205–224.doi: 10.1688/1862-0000_ZfP_2011_03_Abrell

Alban-Metcalfe, J. & Mead, G. (2010). Coaching fortransactional and transformational leadership. In J. Passmore (Ed.), Leadership coaching(pp.211–228). London: Kogan Page.

Alimo-Metcalfe, B. & Alban Metcalfe, J. (2005).Leadership: Time for a new direction? Leadership,1(1), 51–71.

Aquilina, R. & Law, H.C. (2012, in press). Anexecutive coaching programme to support NurseWard Managers achieve organisational objectives– an action research. Conference Proceedings for theAMON 3rd International Orthopaedic NursingConference. 11–12 October, Qawra, Malta.

Avolio, B.J., Gardner, W.L., Walumbwa, F.O.,Luthans, F. & May, D.R. (2004). Unlocking themask: A look at the process by which authenticleaders impact follower attitudes and behaviours.Leadership Quarterly, 15, 801–823.

Avolio, B.J. & Gardner, W.L. (2005) Authenticleadership development: Getting to the root ofpositive forms of leadership. Leadership Quarterly,16, 315–338.

Bass, B.M. (1985). Leadership and performance beyondexpectations. New York: Basic Books.

Bates, R. (1999). Measuring performance improve-ment. In R.J. Torraco (Ed.), Performanceimprovement theory and practice (pp.46–67). BatonRouge, LA: Academy of Human ResourceDevelopment.

Bondas, T. (2003). Caritative leadership. Ministeringto the patients. Nurse Administration Quarterly,27(3), 249–253.

Bowling, A. (2002). Research methods in health.Investigating health and health services (2nd ed.).United Kingdom: Open University Press.

Burke, D., & Linley, P.A. (2007). Enhancing goal self-concordance through coaching. InternationalCoaching Psychology Review, 2(1), 62–69.

Burns, N. & Grove, S. (1993). The practice of nursingresearch: Conduct, critique and utilisation (2nd ed.).Philadelphia: W.B. Saunders.

Byrne, G. (2007). Guest Editorial: Unlockingpotential – coaching as a means to enhanceleadership and role performance in nursing.Journal of Clinical Nursing, 16(11), 1987–1988.doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2702.2007.02074.x

Care, W.D. & Udod, S.A. (2003). Perceptions of first-line nurse managers. Nursing Leadership Forum,7(3), 109–115.

Carey, W., Philippon, D.J. & Cummings, G.G. (2011).Coaching models for leadership development:An integrative review. Journal of Leadership Studies,5(1), 51–69.

Caruana, C. (2005). Nursing managers’ leadership skills:An investigation. Unpublished Master’s thesis.University of Malta.

Casida, J.M. (2007). The relationship of nurse managers’leadership styles and nursing unit organisationalculture in acute care hospitals in New Jersey.PhD Dissertation, Seton Hall University.

Cavanagh, M.J. & Lane, D. (2012). CoachingPsychology Coming of Age: The challenges weface in the messy world of complexity.International Coaching Psychology Review, 7(1),75–89.

Cavanagh, M.J. (2006). Coaching from a systematicperspective: A complex adaptive conversation. In D. Stober & A.M. Grant (Eds.), Evidence-basedcoaching handbook (pp.313–354). New York: Wiley.

Cerni, T., Curtis, G.J. & Colmar, S.H. (2010).Executive coaching can enhance transforma-tional leadership. International Coaching PsychologyReview, 5(1), 81–85.

Clarke, N. (2002). Job/Work environment factorsinfluencing training transfer within humanservice agency: Some indicative support forBaldwin and Ford’s Transfer Climate Construct.International Journal of Training & Development,6(3), 146–162.

Contino, D.S. (2004). Leadership competencies:Knowledge, skills, and aptitudes. Nurses need tolead organisations effectively. Critical Care Nurse,24(3), 52–64.

Craig, D.V (2009). Action research essentials. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Crethar, M., Phillips, J. & Brown, P. (2011),Queensland Health – a leadership developmentjourney: A case study. Leadership in Health Services,24(4), 308–324.

Cummings G., Hayduk L. & Estabrooks C. (2005)Mitigating the impact of hospital restructuringon nurses: The responsibility of emotionallyintelligent leadership. Nursing Research, 54(1),2–12.

Dearborn, K. (2002). Studies in emotionalintelligence redefine our approach to leadershipdevelopment. Public Personnel Management, 31(4),523.

Drenthen, C.C.H. (2010). Associations of authenticleadership training with attitudinal outcomes. MSc International Business Thesis. MaastrichtUniversity.

Du Toit, A. (2006). The management of change inlocal government using a coaching approach.The International Journal of Mentoring andCoaching, 4(2), 45–57.



References

Edmondstone, J. (2011). Developing leaders andleadership in healthcare: A case for rebalancing?Leadership in Health Services, 24(1),8–18.

Eidelson, R. (1997). Complex adaptive systems in thebehavioural and social sciences. Review of GeneralPsychology, 1(1), 42–71.

Elliott, J. (1991). Action research for educational change.Milton Keynes, England & Philadelphia, PA:Open University Press.

Ely, K., Boyce, L.A., Nelson, J.K., Zaccaro, S.J.,Hernez-Broome, G. & Whyman, W. (2010).Evaluating leadership coaching: A review andintegrated framework. The Leadership Quarterly,21, 585–599.

Evers, W.J., Brouwers, A. & Tomic, W. (2006). A quasi-experimental study on managementcoaching effectiveness. Consulting PsychologyJournal: Practice and Research, 58(3), 174–182.

Finn, F.A. (2007). Leadership development throughexecutive coaching: The effects on leaders’ psychologicalstates and transformational leadership behaviour.Unpublished doctoral dissertation, QueenslandUniversity of Technology. Retrieved 20 February2009, from:http://eprints.qut.edu.au/17001/1/Fran_A._Smith_Thesis.pdf

Ford, J. & Weissbein, D. (2008). Transfer of training:An updated review and analysis. PerformanceImprovement Quarterly, 10(2), 22–41.

Fry, L. (2003). Toward a theory of spiritualleadership. Leadership Quarterly, 14(6), 693–727.

Gallo, K. (2007). The New Nurse Manager: A leadership development programme paves theroad to success. Nurse Leader, 5(4), 28–32.

Gegner, C. (1997). Coaching: Theory and Practice. San Francisco: University of San Francisco.

Goldsmith, M. & Lyons, L. (2006). Coaching forleadership (2nd ed.). San Francisco: Pfeiffer.

Grant, A.M. (2006). An integrative goal-focusedapproach to executive coaching. In D.R. Stober& A.M. Grant (Eds.), Evidence based coachinghandbook: Putting best practices to work for your clients(pp.17–50). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.

Grant, A.M., Curtayne, L. & Burton, G. (2009).Executive coaching enhances goal attainment,resilience and workplace well-being: A randomised controlled study. The Journal ofPositive Psychology, 4(5), 396–407.

Green, L.S., Oades, L.G. & Grant, A.M. (2006).Cognitive-behavioural, solution-focused lifecoaching: Enhancing goal striving, well-being,and hope. The Journal of Positive Psychology, 1(3),142–149.

Greenleaf, R.K. (2003). The servant-leader within: A transformative path. New York: Paulist Press.

Grindel, C.G. (2003). Mentoring managers.Nephrology Nursing Journal, 30(5), 517–522.

Gyllensten, K. & Palmer, S. (2005). Can coachingreduce workplace stress: A quasi-experimentalstudy. International Journal of Evidence BasedCoaching and Mentoring, 3(2), 75–85.

Hagdberg, R. (1996). Identify and help executives introuble. HR Magazine, 42(8), 88–91.

Hartman, S. & Crow, S. (2002). Executivedevelopment in healthcare during times ofturbulence. Journal of Management in Medicine,16(5), 359–370.

Hernez-Broome, G. & Hughes, R.L. (2004).Leadership development: Past, present andfuture. Human Resource Planning, 27(1), 24.

Horton-Deutsch, S., Young, K. & Nelson, K.A. (2010).Becoming a nurse faculty leader: Facingchallenges through reflecting, persevering andrelating in new ways. Journal of NursingManagement, 18, 487–493.

Jarvis, J. (2004) Coaching and buying coaching services. A CIPD guide [online] Available from:http://www.cipd.co.uk/NR/rdonlyres/C31A728E-7411-4754-9644-46A84EC9CFEE/0/2995coachbuyingservs.pdf

Johansson, G., Sandahl, C. & Andershed, B. (2011).Authentic and congruent leadership providingexcellent work environment in palliative care.Leadership in Health Services, 24(2), 135–149.

Johnson, M., Sonson, R. & Golden, T. (2010).Developing charge nurse leaders withexperiential learning. Nurse Leader, 8(6), 40–45.

Kemmis, S. & McTaggart, R. (2005). Participatoryaction research: Communicative action and thepublic sphere. In N. Denzin & Y. Lincoln (Eds.),Handbook of qualitative research (3rd ed.,pp.559–603). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Kilburg, R.R. (1996). Toward a conceptualunderstanding and definition of executivecoaching. Consulting Psychology Journal: Practiceand Research, 48(2), 134–144.

Kirwan, C. & Birchall, D. (2006). Transfer of learningfrom management development programmes:Testing the Holton model. International Journal ofTraining and Development, 10(4), 252.

Kleinman, C.S. (2004). The relationship betweenmanagerial leadership behaviours and staff nurseretention. Hospital Topics, 82(4), 2–9.

Kock, N. (2007). The three threats of organisationalaction research: Their nature and relatedantidotes. In N. Kock (Ed.), Action Research: An applied view of emerging concepts and methods(pp.97–129). New York: Springer Science+Business Media LLC.

Kolb, D.A. (1984). Experiential Learning: Experience asthe source of learning and development. EnglewoodCliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Kowalski, K., Bradley, K. & Pappas, S. (2006). Nurseretention, leadership, and the Toyota SystemModel: Building leaders and problem solvers forbetter patient care. Nurse Leader, 4(6), 46–51.



Kushnir, T., Ehrenfeld, M. & Shalish, Y. (2008). Theeffects of a coaching project in nursing on thecoaches’ training motivation, training outcomes,and job performance: An experimental study.International Journal of Nursing Studies, 45,837–845.

Lave, J. & Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of Practice:Learning, meaning, and identity. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.

Law, H. (2007). Narrative coaching and psychologyof learning from multicultural perspectives. In S.Palmer & A. Whybrow (Eds.), Handbook ofcoaching psychology: A guide for practitioners.London: Routledge.

Law, H. (2010). An Asian perspective on leadershipcoaching: Sun Tzu and the art of war. In J.Passmore (Ed.), Leadership coaching (pp.93–114).London: Kogan Page.

Law, H., Lancaster, L. & DiGiovanni, N. (2010). A wider role for coaching psychology – applyingtranspersonal coaching psychology. The CoachingPsychologist, 6(1), 24–32.

Law, H., Ireland, S. & Hussain, Z. (2007). Thepsychology of coaching, mentoring and learning.Chichester: Wiley.

Lee, H., Spiers, J.A., Yurtseven, O. Cummings, G.G.,Showlow, J., Bhatti, A. & Germann, P. (2010).Impact of leadership development on emotionalhealth in healthcare managers. Journal of NursingManagement, 18(8), 1027–1039.

Lord, R.G. & Emrich, C.G. (2001). Thinking outsidethe box by looking inside the box: Extending thecognitive revolution in leadership research.Leadership Quarterly, 11, 551–579.

Manley, K. (2000). Organisational culture andconsultant nurse outcomes. Part 2. NurseOutcomes. Nursing Standard, 14(37), 34–39.

Mathena, K.A. (2002). Nursing manager leadershipskills. Journal of Nursing Administration, 32,136–142.

McAlearney, A.S. (2006). Leadership development inhealthcare: A qualitative study. Journal ofOrganisational Behaviour, 27, 967–982.

McGovern, J., Lindemann, M., Vergara, M., Murphy,S., Barker, L. & Warrenfeltz, R. (2001).Maximising the impact of executive coaching:Behavioural change, organisational outcomes,and return on investment. The Manchester Review,6(1), 1–9.

McNiff, J. & Whitehead, J. (2011). All you need to knowabout action research (2nd ed.). Los Angeles: Sage.

Merriam, S. & Leahy, B. (2005). Learning transfer: A review of the research in adult education andtraining. PAACE Journal of Lifelong Learning,14(1), 1–24.

Meyer, J. (2000). Using qualitative methods in health-related action research. British Medical Journal,320, 178–181.

Mezirow, J.(1991). Transformative dimensions of adultlearning. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass,

Moen, F. & Skaalvik, E. (2009). The effect fromexecutive coaching on performance psychology.International. Journal of Evidence Based Coachingand Mentoring, 7(2), 31–48.

Oberstein, S. (2010). Capitalising on coachingchallenges. Training & Development (T+D),February, 54–57.

Ohman, K.A. (2000). The transformationalleadership of critical care nurse managers.Dimensions of Critical Care Nursing, 19, 46–54.

Olivero, G., Bane, K.D. & Kopelman, R.E. (1997).Executive coaching as a transfer of training tool:Effects on productivity in a public agency. Public Personnel Management, 26(4), 461–469.

Palmer, S. & Szymanska, K. (2007). Cognitivebehavioural coaching: An integrative approach.In S. Palmer & A. Whybrow (Eds.), Handbook ofcoaching psychology: A guide for practitioners.London: Sage.

Passmore, J. (2010). Leadership coaching. Working withleaders to develop elite performance. London:Association for Coaching.

Poff, D.C. (2010). Ethical leadership and globalcitizenship: Considerations for a just andsustainable future. Journal of Business Ethics, 93,9–14.

Polit, D.F. & Hungler, B.P. (Eds.) (1999). Essentials ofnursing research: Methods, appraisals, and utilisation.Pennsylvania, PA: J.B. Lippincott Company.

Reason, P. & Bradbury, H. (Eds.) (2008). Sage handbook of action research: Participative inquiryand practice (2nd ed.). London: Sage.

Reno, K. (2005). Management skill training: The top10 lessons learned. Nurse Leader, 3(1), 28–30.

Rivers, R., Pesata, V., Beasley, M. & Dietrich, M.(2011). Transformational leadership: Creating aprosperity-planning coaching model for RNretention. Nurse Leader, 9(5), 48–51.

Schön, D.A. (1983). The reflective practitioner. New York: Basic Books.

Schön, D.A. (1991). The reflective practitioner: Howprofessionals think in action. New edition. London:Ashgate.

Seligman, M.E.P. (2002). Authentic happiness: Using thenew positive psychology to realise your potential forlasting fulfillment. New York: Free Press.

Shams M. & Law, H. (2012) Peer coachingframework: An exploratory technique. The Coaching Psychologist, 8(1), 46–49.

Sharples, J. (2003). The relationship between leadershipstyles and nurses’ satisfaction at work. UnpublishedMaster’s thesis, University of Malta.

Shipper, F. & Dillard, J.E.J. (2000). A study ofimpending derailment and recovery of middlemanagers across career stages. Human ResourceManagement, 39(4), 331–348.



Shirey, M.R. (2006). Authentic leaders creatinghealth work environments for nursing practice.American Journal of Critical Care, 15(3), 256–267.

Smith, L. & Sandstrom, J. (1999). Executive leadercoaching as a strategic activity. Strategy Leadership,27(6), 33–36.

Stacey, R.D. (2000). Strategic management andorganisational dynamics (3rd ed.). Harlow, UK:Pearson Education.

Stanley, D. (2006a). In command of care: Clinicalleadership explored. Journal of Research inNursing, 2(1), 20–39.

Stanley, D. (2006b). In command of care: Toward thetheory of clinical leadership. Journal of Research inNursing, 2(2), 132–144.

Stanley, D. (2006c). Recognising and definingclinical nurse leaders. British Journal of Nursing,15(2), 108–111.

Stanley, D. (2008). Congruent leadership: Values inaction. Journal of Nursing Management, 16(5),519–524.

Stelter, R. & Law, H. (2010). Coaching narrative-collaborative practice. International CoachingPsychology Review, 5(2), 152–164.

Storey, J. (2010). Signs of change: ‘Damned rascals’and beyond. In J. Storey, (Ed.), Leadership inorganisations: Current issues and key trends (2nd ed.,pp.3–13). Abingdon, UK: Routledge.

Sutherland, V.J. (2005). Nurse leadership development:Innovations in mentoring and coaching – the wayforward – a summary. Report for the NHSLeadership Centre. Retrieved 20 February 2012,from: http://research.mbs.ac.uk

Tobias, L.L. (1996). Coaching executives. ConsultingPsychology Journal, 48(2), 87–95.

Turner, C. (2006). Ungagged: Executives onexecutive coaching. Ivery Business, May/June,1–5.

Ulrich, W. (1996). A primer to critical systems heuristicsfor action. COPY MISSING?

Walumbwa, F., Avolio, B.J., Gardner, W.L., Wersning,T. & Peterson, S. (2008). Authentic leadership:Development and validation of a theory-basedmeasure. Journal of Management, 34, 89–126.

Wessel Krejci, J. & Malin, S. (1997). Impact ofleadership development on competencies.Nursing Economics, 15(5), 235–241.

Whitmore, J. (2002). Coaching for performanceGROWing people, performance and purpose(3rd ed.). London: Nicholas Brealey.

Xuereb, A. (2001). Factors related to nurses’ absence in aMaltese general hospital. Unpublished Master’sthesis, University of Malta.



THE FIELDS of family life education(FLE) and coaching psychology (CP)are destined to unite. Historically, the

field of FLE has been the primary mode foreducating families and families were never abig part of the conversation in the field ofCP. The field, however, is changing andfamily practitioners are utilising the tech-nique of coaching in their work withfamilies. Likewise, the field of CP has histor-ically catered to individuals, but there is agrowing need for coaches to help family-relationship coaching, youth coaching, andcouples coaching are all growing areas of CP.Although work is happening in the area offamily life coaching (FLC), there is a vastdeficit of information for family practi-tioners about the practice of and theory ofcoaching families.

In order to establish a theoretical foun-dation and evidence-based approach tocoaching families, there must first be aconceptualisation and discussion of familylife coaching. Coaching families has longbeen an informal methodology used infamily practice, illustrating the need forfamily life coaching to be a part of thenational conversation of family life and CP.This paper aims to present a framework tobegin the conceptualisation of FLC and togenerate interest and debate on the role of

family life coaching in the arenas of familylife and CP.

Family life educationFamily life education (FLE) is a field of studyand application that involves qualifiededucators delivering family science princi-ples designed to strengthen familial relation-ships and foster positive development ofindividual, couple, and family development(Duncan & Goddard, 2011). In its broadestdefinition, FLE is a process where a profes-sional provides skills and knowledge thathelps families function at their optimal level(National Council on Family Relations,2009). The educational delivery may happenin a variety of settings, but typically occurs insettings outside of the formal educationsystem. Information is delivered to individ-uals, couples, parents, and on occasion, towhole families. The theoretical foundationof FLE is diverse, having drawn from homeeconomics, social work, family sociology,marriage and family therapy, education, anddevelopmental psychology (Lewis-Rowley etal., 1993).

Although the scholarship of FLE is rela-tively new, application of FLE by profes-sionals dates back over a century. The turn ofthe 20th century brought a great manychanges to families, therefore creating a


Paper

A framework for family life coachingKimberly Allen

Many family life educators utilise a coach approach to serving families, and many coaching psychologistsserve families in their coaching profession, yet there is a deficit of theoretical or application literature oncoaching families. This paper argues that it is time to begin a global discussion on the topic of family lifecoaching as a unique field of study. The author explains the similarities and differences of family lifeeducation and coaching psychology, and creates a framework for professionals to begin a global discussionabout how to integrate the two fields in order to create a theory and evidence-based practice in family lifecoaching. Keywords: Coaching; family; family life; family life coaching; family coaching; family life education;coaching psychology.

need for education for women and children(Allen, Dunn & Zazlow, 2011). FLE wasformed as a response to those changes withthe goal of helping families improve theirwellbeing (Arcus, 1995) and continues toprovide family science scholarship in appliedsettings.

Most often, family life educators aim tohelp parents and couples improve their rela-tionships and gain skills to make their familylife successful. Duncan and Goddard (2011)highlight seven principles of FLE: relevancyacross the lifespan, based on needs of clientsserved, multi-disciplinary, varied contentdelivery platforms, focuses on education,honors diversity, and requires educatedprofessionals to deliver education. In fact, toreceive the credential of certified family lifeeducator, professionals must show compe-tence in 10 content areas specific to familylife (NCFR, 2009).

Most often, FLE is considered to be a top-down process where a credentialed educatorshares information with participants(Doherty, 2000). FLE does acknowledge thatthe family brings wisdom and experiences tothe table, but the emphasis is generally onthe expert sharing knowledge with partici-pants, and participants using that knowledgefor positive change. This approach has itsstrengths and weaknesses. Having an expertthat can clearly articulate the evidence-basedapproaches can provide families with muchneeded credible information. On the flipside, however, families have little ownershipin the process of change. There are variedapproaches to FLE, some of which put less

emphasis on the expert-model. For example,Duncan & Goddard (2011), identify sixapproaches to FLE, including the ‘criticalinquirer approach’ (p.17), which bearsresemblance to coaching. In this approach,educators utilise questions to help partici-pants move forward and the approachacknowledges that participants have respon-sibility in their own life (Czaplewski &Jorgensen, 1993).

Although very little is written on using acoach approach to serving families in the FLEliterature base, there is some informationabout the varying domains of practice.Doherty (1995) proposes that there are fivelevels of family involvement ranging fromsimple FLE lessons to full on family therapy.He identified differences between FLE and alicensed therapist working with families, andstated that FLE should contain componentsof imparting knowledge and skills whilekeeping a focus on the feelings, attitudes, andgoals of the families served. Myers-Walls et al.(2011) expanded Doherty’s conceptualisationof FLE by suggesting family case managementas a third professional role in family life work.Because of the personal and emotional focusin working with families, FLE involves a rela-tionship, making it unique and separate fromother academic subjects or courses one mightstudy. While these one-on-one and groupinteractions may appear to resemble therapyand often contain elements of relationaltheory, Doherty stresses the importance offamily educators to remain objective and referthe family, when necessary, for additionalcounseling and therapy (1995).


A framework for family life coaching

Table 1: Family life education content expertise areas.

Families and individuals in social contexts Internal dynamics of families

Human growth and development across the life span

Human sexuality

Interpersonal relationships Family resource management

Parenting education and guidance Family law and public policy

Professional ethics and practice Family life education methodology

Though there are variations amongservice offerings and styles of services in FLE,the primary foci is on factors such asimproving the relationship between parentand child in the specific context of thefamily, reduction in externalised childbehaviours, and increasing the family’s skillsand resources (Gockel, Russell & Harris,2008). FLE can take place across levels ofintensity and settings, from basic workshopsto more intensive interactions involving in-home services and coaching. Some mighteven argue that coaching is a natural fit withFLE. Very little, however, is written about theuse of coaching with families.

Coaching psychologyLike FLE, the literature field of coachingpsychology (CP), or coaching, has experi-enced rapid growth over the past fewdecades (Grant, 2011). The roots of CPcome from humanistic psychology (Grant,2011). As the field grew, so did the theoret-ical framework of practicing coachingpsychologists. Coaching frameworks nowinclude cognitive/behavioral, solutionfocused, psychodynamic, rational emotive,and transactional among others (Whybrow& Palmer, 2006). The field of coaching isgrounded in psychological theory, butconsists of a variety sub categories. The focusof coaching practices includes executive,personal life, business, performance, leader-ship, career, team, mentoring, health, andsports. All coaches are not psychologists; infact, 95 per cent of coaches are non-psychol-ogists (Grant & Zackon, 2004).

The field of CP is young, although thepractice of using coaching in work with indi-viduals and groups is not new (Gant, 2011).The technique of coaching in psychologicalpractice was written decades ago (see Filippi,1968), but until recently, there was scarcelyany literature about the field of CP (Gant,2003). There is now a theoretical foundationand major surge in research that is trulyshaping the field into a science-basedapproach to helping others.

The definition of CP is to enhance the‘well-being and performance in personal lifeand work domains underpinned by modelsof coaching grounded in established adultlearning or psychological approaches’(adapted from Grant & Palmer, 2002). This isdone through a partnership with the client.Unlike FLE, CP leads with the premise thatthe client is an equal partner in the processand comes to the table with expertise, knowl-edge, and abilities to create the change theyseek. Coaches work with their clients tocreate change; there is no hierarchy.

Some view coaching as similar or thesame as therapy. Although there are similari-ties, there are also distinct differences (Hart,Blattner & Leipsic, 2001). Therapy or coun-seling is often used with clients that havesignificant mental issues while coachingclients tend to be more goal directed andmentally healthy (Hart, Blattner & Leipsic,2001). Coaching works to ‘enhance the lifeexperience, work performance and well-being for individuals, groups and organisa-tions who do not have clinically significantmental health issues (Grant, 2006, p.16).This approach tends to be for people whoare doing well, and express a desire to doeven better. Over the past decade, the fieldof coaching has shifted somewhat to becomemore than problem solving or remediation;it now has a focus of preparing people andorganisations to deal with emerging needs.

Although coaching practices have longbeen used in therapeutic settings(McGoldrick & Carter, 2001), coaching is, inmany instances, a separate profession thatutilises different techniques than therapy.Unlike therapy, coaching deals with thepresent and future, and views emotions asnatural (Williams & Menendez, 2007).Although some professional coaches doutilise a variety of techniques such asmentoring and consulting simultaneously,many consider coaching as separate fromconsulting and mentoring. Like therapy,both mentoring and consulting identifies anexpert model whereas coaching is co-creative and both members form a partner-


Kimberly Allen

ship. Williams and Menendez (2007) createda matrix that highlights the differencesbetween therapy, mentoring, consulting, andcoaching (see Table 2). These differencesdemonstrate the uniqueness of coaching inrelationship to other helping professions.

One major disadvantage of the coachingprofession is the lack of unified qualitycredentialing. Although there are someefforts underway to form a unified accredita-tion or qualification process such as thosewith the International Coach Federation, arigorous, standard accreditation does notcurrently exist (Gant, 2006). As such, anyonecan call themselves a coach, regardless ofqualifications. Of the training programmesthat do exist, many are ‘credentialing mills’;that offer a short, expensive training that

scarcely provides needed information andskills practice to be a professional coach(Gant, 2006, p.14). Furthermore, there is adeficit of literature specifically regardingcontent necessary for quality education inprofessional coaching (Grant, 2011), as wellas a deficit in integrating evidence-basedcoaching techniques (Moore & Highstein,2004).

The good news is the literature of CP isgrowing, and there is an openness to newideas, frameworks, and techniques to movethe field forward. The world is getting morecomplex, and models of professionalpractice are emerging to help people posi-tively respond to change (Cavanagh & Lane,2012). CP is a prime example of a profes-sional rising to meet a unique need. Slowly



Table 2: Professional distinctions of coaching and other fields.

Therapy

Deals mostly with aperson’s past andtrauma, and seekshealing

Doctor-patientrelationship (therapisthas the answers)

Assumes manyemotions are asymptom of somethingwrong

The therapistdiagnoses, thenprovides professionalexpertise andguidelines to giveclients a path tohealing

Mentoring

Deals mostly withsuccession trainingand seeks to helpsomeone do what you do

Older/wise-younger/less-experiencedrelationship (mentorhas the answers)

Limited to emotionalresponse of thementoring parameters(succession, etc.)

The mentor allows youto observe his/herbehaviour andexpertise, will answerquestions, and provideguidance and wisdomfor the stated purposeof the mentoring

Consulting

Deals mostly withproblems and seeks toprovide information(expertise, strategy,structures,methodologies) tosolve them

Expert-person withproblem relationship(consultant has theanswers)

Does not normallyaddress or deal withemotions(informational only)

The consultant standsback, evaluates asituation, then tellsyou the problem andhow to fix it

Coaching

Deals mostly with aperson’s present andseeks to guide theminto a more desirablefuture

Co-creative, equalpartnership (coachhelps clients discovertheir own answers)

Assumes emotions arenatural and normalisesthem

The coach stands withyou, and helps youidentify the challenges,then works with you toturn challenges intovictories and holds youaccountable to reachyour desired goals

Williams & Menendez, 2007

and methodically, the bar is being raised forprofessional standards, the literature base isgrowing, and evidence-based techniques ofCP are being documented. People likecoaching and they want to be coached. Infact, the majority of individuals that havebeen coached say it positively impacts theirlives (Filler-Travis & Lane, 2006).

Family life coaching modelClearly, FLE and CP are two strong fields ofstudy that have much in common. The gap,however, is the use of coaching with familiesas a field of study. The time is right to intro-duce a theory of FLC. FLE and CP both haveunique qualities and offer a profoundimpact on the practice of serving families,yet little to no discussion and research hasbeen conducted on the field of usingcoaching in family life. In a search for thewords ‘Family Life Coaching’ conducted bythe author of this manuscript on Summondatabase in May, 2012, only three resultswere found. A similar search of ‘FamilyCoaching’ yielded only 44 journal articlesand of those, none addressed the field ofcoaching families from a theoretical orapplied point of view.

The literature field is bare, yet the work isbeing done. Although it has never beenlabeled ‘family life coaching’, there isevidence that family life educators have beenusing coaching techniques as an approach tohelping families for many years, primarily inthe field of social work and home-visitationprogrammes. In the past 10 years, coachinghas become an integral part of family inter-ventions ranging from health and familyeducation to professional and managerialwork (Heimendinger et al., 2007). Oftenused as a parent education intervention,coaching is a process-driven relationshipbetween a learner and a coach designed tofoster achievement of agreed-upon goals toinclude growth, change, and fulfillment inlife or work (Heimendinger et al., 2007).Specific to families, coaching provides astructured means by which knowledge can

be imparted, skills can be shared in a recip-rocal process and further honed, andnurturing feedback can be given to familymembers (Rush, Shelden & Hanft, 2003).

It is time to consider FLC as a uniquefield of study and practice that is influencedby the theoretical foundations of coachingpsychology and family life education.Combining tenants from both FLE and CPshould be the first step towards identifying anew theory of practice. The theoretical foun-dation of FLC must come from the roots ofCP and family practice. Based on humanisticpsychology, FLC should be strengths basedand optimistic, with the focus on a family’spotential. FLC must also approach the familyfrom a systems perspective, both the ecolog-ical system and the family systems theories, asno family moves through life in a vacuum.

The purpose of FLC will combinecomponents of FLE and CP to help familiesreach their goals and achieve wellbeing. Inorder for families to achieve success, theywill engage in a process with a certifiedfamily life coach that will partner with themto gain insight, acquire knowledge and skills,and build strengths personally and as afamily unit. Family life coaches will work witha family when the family seeks them out orshows an interest in the coaching process;the family or individual member of a familywill guide the process based on their goalsfor change while the coach serves as apartner and appreciative inquirer. Once thefamily identifies the goal or issue to beexplored, the family life coach will utilise aseries of powerful questions to guide theprocess, and will offer educational nuggetsas agreed upon by the family. FLE is aboutcreating positive change, enhancing familialwell being and fostering development offamily life through models of coaching andfamily life education. The similarities anddifferences of FLC, FLE and CP areproposed in Table 3. This is presented as afirst attempt to generate a global conversa-tion on the field of coaching families, and isin no way conclusive or set in stone.


Kimberly Allen

Limitations of FLC modelAnytime there is a new concept introduced,there are possible limitations and this articleis no exception. Although there is someevidence that family life educators are imple-menting coaching strategies with thefamilies they serve (Heimendinger et al.,2007), the movement toward a collaborationof FLE and CP may not be easily achieved. Asmentioned earlier, FLE has a primary focusof teaching family relations content tofamilies via an expert/recipient model.

Family life educators would have to sustain amajor shift to incorporate FLC model. Mostdramatically, the focus would move awayfrom the expert/recipient model towards aco-expert model; it is right to questionwhether this is a direction the field of FLEwould consider.

Furthermore, although FLE is somewhatbroad in the scope of work done withfamilies, there are additional family-relatedfields that merit consideration in a model ofcoaching families. Fields such as special



Table 3: Comparison of FLE, CP and FLC.

Family Life Education

Education focused; educator asexpert

Focus on family dynamics andrelationships

Primarily adult focus

Foundational knowledge infamily studies and lifespandevelopment; pedagogical oranagogical

Unified credentialing processand standardised accreditededucation programmes toprepare practitioners

Non-formal public education(face-to-face trainings,publications, media)

Coaching Psychology

Collaborative partnership;client as expert; partnershipwith two equalsrepresentatives

Focus on individual, group ororganisational relationships

Primarily adult focus

Foundational knowledge inpsychology, strengths basedmethodology

Unstructured credentialingprocess and gap in qualityaccredited educationalprogrammes to preparepractitioners

Individual or family focusedsessions or small groupinteractions often throughdistance technology

Family Life Coaching(Proposed)

Collaborative partnership witheducation as secondaryapproach; partnership with twoequal representatives. Coachhas expert credentials andshares family processinformation

Focus on family relationships,personal and familial well-being and goal setting

One-to-one, couple or fullfamily support with focus onone or all members of thefamily unit

Foundational knowledge infamily studies and psychology,strengths based with emphasison family studies and lifespandevelopment

No current: unifiedcredentialing process andstandardised accreditededucation programmes toprepare practitioners expected

Individual or family focusedsessions or small groupinteractions in face-to-faceand/or distance technology

education, occupational therapy, public andcommunity education, sports, familyresource management, K-12 education, andhealth education all merit inclusion in adiscussion on coaching families. There isroom for collaboration in any field thatserves families in such a way that a coachingapproach could be implemented to helpwith familial growth. Although this articlefocuses on FLE, it is important to keep theconversation open to all family related fields.

ConclusionGiven what is known about the amount ofwork occurring in FLC and the promisingresults from coaching work with caregiversand their families, it is clear that the time isright to introduce a theory of FLC that willlead to evidence-based practice. It is time toexpand the work of family life educators andconnect the work of CP to build a model ofFLC. This does not come lightly; there is aneed for further discussion on what thetheory should entail and further research isneeded on the topic of coaching in familylife. In fact, so little is written on this topicthat first steps must include identifying theo-retical foundations, understanding currentpractices, and creating a national dialogue tocreate this field of study.

Coaching is a practice being utilised inwork with families. Those practitioners needa theoretical foundation and education toguide their work. Because there is currentlyno governing body determining who canserve as a coach, the idea that coaching isbeing offered for issues that typically fallunder the jurisdiction of mental health prac-titioners is of concern (Caspi, 2005). Thefield of FLC needs to have a more definedrole with family life practitioners and thereneeds to be an approach to make sure thatthe individuals involved with coachingfamilies are the ones that are most preparedto take on the profession.

CorrespondenceKimberly Allen Department of 4-H Youth Development andFamily & Consumer Sciences,North Carolina State University,512 Brickhaven Drive,Campus Box 7606,Raleigh, North Carolina 27695.


Kimberly Allen

Allen, K., Dunn, C. & Zaslow, S. (2011). Ozzie andHarriett never were. Journal of Extension, 49(3).Retrieved from:http://www.joe.org/joe/2011june/comm1.php.

Arcus, M.E, (1995). Advances in family lifeeducation: Past, present, and future. FamilyRelations, 44, 336-344.

Cavanagh, M. & Lane, D. (2012). Coachingpsychology coming of age: The challenges weface in the messy world of complexity.International Coaching Psychology Review, 7(1),75–90.

Capsi, J. (2005). Coaching and social work:Challenges and concerns. Social Work, 50(4),359–362.

Czaplewski, M.J. & Jorgensen, S.R. (1993). Theprofessionalisation of family life education. In M.E. Arcus, J.D. Schvaneveldt & J.J. Moss(Eds.), Handbook of family life education (Vol. 1,pp.51–75). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

Duncan, S.F. & Goddard, H.W. (2011). Family lifeeducation: Principles and practices for effectiveoutreach. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Doherty, W.J. (1995). Boundaries between parentand family education and family therapy: Thelevels of family involvement model. FamilyRelations, 44(4), 353–358.

Doherty, W.J. (2000). Family science and familycitizenship: Toward a model of communitypartnership with families. Family Relations, 49,319–325.

Filippi, R. (1968). Coaching: A therapy for peoplewho do not seek help. Zeitschrift Fuer Psychotherapieund Medizinische Psychologie, 18(6), 225–229.

Fillery-Travis, A. & Lane, D. (2006). Does coachingwork or are we asking the wrong question?International Coaching Psychology Review, 1(1),23–36.

References

Gockel, A., Russel, M. & Harris, B. (2008). Recreatingfamily: Parents identify worker-client relation-ships as paramount in family preservationprogrammes. Child Welfare, 87(6), 91–113.

Grant, A.M. & Palmer, S. (2002). Coaching Psychology.Workshop and meeting held at the AnnualConference of the Division of CounsellingPsychology, British Psychological Society.Torquay.

Grant, A.M. (2006). A personal perspective onprofessional coaching and the development ofcoaching psychology. International CoachingPsychology Review, 1(1), 12–22.

Grant, A.M. (2011). Developing an agenda forteaching coaching psychology. InternationalCoaching Psychology Review, 6(1), 84–99.

Grant, A.M. & Zackon, R. (2004). Executive, work-place and life-coaching: Findings from a large-scale survey of International Coach Federationmembers. International Journal of Evidence-BasedCoaching and Mentoring, 2(2), 1–15.

Hart, V., Blattner, J. & Leipsic, S. (2001). Coachingversus therapy: A perspective. ConsultingPsychology Journal: Practive and Research, 53(4),229–237.

Heimendinger, J., Uyeki, T., Andhara, A., Marshall,J.A., Scarbro, S., Belansky, E. & Crane, L. (2007).Coaching process outcomes of a family visitnutrition and physical activity intervention.Health Education & Behavior: The OfficialPublication of the Society for Public Health Education,34(1), 71–89.

Lewis-Rowley, M., Brasher, R.E., Moss, J.J., Duncan,S.F. & Stiles, R.J. (1993). The evolution ofeducation for family life. In M.E. Arcus, J.D.Schvaneveldt & J.J. Moss (Eds.), Handbook offamily life education. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

Moore, M. & Highstein, G. (2004). Principles ofbehavioural psychology in wellness coaching. Paper presented at the International CoachFederation’s Coaching Research Symposium.

Myers-Walls, J.A, Ballard, S., Darling, C.A., & Myers-Bowman, K.S. (2011). Reconceptualising thedomain and boundaries of family life education.Family Relations, 60, 357–372.

McGoldrick, M. & Carter, B. (2001). Advances incoaching: Family therapy with one person.Journal of Marital and Family Therapy, 27(3),281–300.

Moore, M. & Highstein, G. (2004). Principles ofbehavioural wellness in coaching. Paper presented atthe International Coaching Federation.Retrieved from:http://www.healthandwellnessmatters.com/images/Behavioral_psychology.pdf

National Council on Family Relations (2009). Familylife education content areas: Content and practiceguidelines. Retrieved from: http://www.ncfr.org

Rush, D., Shelden, M. & Hanft, B. (2003). Coachingfamilies and colleagues: A process forcollaboration in natural settings. Infants & YoungChildren: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Special CarePractices, 16(1), 33–47.

Whybrow, A. & Palmer, S. (2006). The coachingpsychology movement and it development withinthe British Psychological Society. InternationalCoaching Psychology Review, 1(1), 5–11.

Williams, P. & Menendez. D. (2007). Becoming aprofessional life coach: Lessons from the Institute forLife Coach Training. New York: Norton &Company.



TEAM COACHING is a growing trend inthe coaching field as evidenced by theincrease in team coaching publications

over the past 10 years (Adkins, 2010; Dolny,2009; Mitsch & Mitsch, 2010; Niemala &Lewis, 2001; Thorton, 2010). Although manyof these publications offer suggestions forpractice, most team coaching approachesare not comprehensive or research-based.

Our objective as practitioners was to doevidence-based team coaching research thatwas based on our own team coaching prac-tices and a review of the team effectivenessand team coaching literature. As Fillery-Travis and Tyrrell state, ‘practitioner researchhas a specific role to play in the developmentof the coherent and robust body of knowl-edge required to underpin coaching as aprofessional practice’ (2012, p.1).

Clutterbuck (2007) and Hawkins (2011)have written some of the more comprehen-sive team coaching books that are informedby team effectiveness research. Clutterbuck(2010) says that building team relationshipsis not useful on its own and recommendsinterventions that ‘improve performancewhen aimed at specific team processes orobjectives’ (Clutterbuck, 2010, p.273).Hawkins (2011) emphasises that teamcoaching must expand beyond one-day,internally-focused events. He points out thatteam coaching has been loosely defined andused as an umbrella term that includes facil-itation, team building, and other groupprocess interventions.

For this study, we proposed a definitionthat was adapted from Hawkins (2011) andHackman and Wageman’s (2005) definitions


Practitioner-based Research

The experience of team coaching:A dual case studyCatherine Carr & Jacqueline Peters

Objective: This paper presents a dual case study of leadership team coaching with one government and onecorporate team. The authors discuss the findings and propose a new high performance team coachingmodel.Design: In this study, the researchers documented and compared the experience of team coaching betweentheir two leadership teams using a qualitative case study methodology that tracked the participants’experiences. Methods: The case study data were collected through three triangulated methods: semi-structured teammember interviews; case study notes and observations; and a collaborative journal. Results: The analysis of the separate case studies resulted in a rich description of the team coachingexperience for two teams. The findings revealed valuable coaching elements that were common between thecases and linked to the literature, including the importance of: (i) a team charter and working agreements;(ii) full participation; (iii) coach manner and actions; (iv) a team launch; and, (v) coaching structureand follow-up. Six changes that participants identified included improvements in: (i) collaboration andproductivity; (ii) relationships; (iii) personal learning; (iv) communication and participation; (v) impactbeyond the team; and (vi) peer coaching.Conclusions: These participant’s descriptions of team coaching offer insight into valuable aspects of teamcoaching that informed the proposed evidence-based high performance team coaching model. The model canbe used and studied by team coaching practitioners and researchers alike. Keywords: Coaching; team coaching; qualitative research; practitioner research; high performance.

of team coaching. We propose that teamcoaching is a comprehensive and systemicapproach to support a team to maximisetheir collective talent and resources to effec-tively accomplish the work of the team.

The academic literature on teamcoaching has not caught up to the growingpractitioner interest in offering teamcoaching, and there is even less researchabout coaching leadership teams. One of thefew studies was completed by Wageman et al.(2008) who assessed the performance of 120 leadership teams worldwide on three key areas of effectiveness. These included: (i) the ability to create outputs and performat a level that met or exceeded stakeholderstandards and expectations; (ii) the ability towork together effectively and build capacityto work together interdependently in thefuture; and (iii) whether the team experi-ence contributed positively to teammembers’ learning and development (2008,pp.9–13).

Wageman et al. (2008) categorised the120 teams into high, mediocre and poorperformance and analysed the differenti-ating factors between groups. They created amodel that outlined three essential andthree enabling conditions for team effective-ness. The essential conditions included: (i) a real team with clear membership andboundaries; (ii) a compelling purpose toguide the team’s work; and (iii) the rightpeople with the knowledge, skill and experi-ence to perform the team’s requisite work.The enabling conditions were: (i) a solidteam structure of less than 10 members whohave a clear set of norms/agreements toguide how they work together; (ii) asupportive organisational context thatprovides the information, time, andresources to do their work; and (iii) compe-tent team coaching from an internal orexternal coach, aimed at helping teammembers grow individually and as a team.

There are many studies that support oneof more of Wageman and Hackman’s sixconditions of team effectiveness. Wageman(2001) studied self-managing teams at Xerox

and concluded that team structure was moreimportant for team performance thancoaching from the team leader. She notedthat well designed teams benefited fromcoaching, whereas poorly designed teamsdid not benefit, or even fared worse, if thecoaching was unskilful or focused on givingadvice.

Additional studies by Hackman andWageman (2005) and Wageman et al. (2008)reported that 50 to 70 per cent of teamperformance variation could be attributed tocreating well designed teams from the start.Other researchers have concluded thatwithout adequate team design and structuresin place, a team cannot succeed (Friedlander& Brown, 1974; Kaplan, 1979; Wageman,2001). Hackman and Wageman indicatedthat ‘Coaching interventions that focus specif-ically on team effort, strategy, and knowledgeand skill facilitate team effectiveness morethan do interventions that focus on members’interpersonal relationships’ (2005, p.274).

As a result, Hackman and Wageman(2005) proposed a theory of team coaching,stating that when the enabling structural andcontextual conditions are appropriately inplace, competent team coaching that isprovided: (i) at the right time; and that (ii)focuses on the task, can effect team perform-ance.

Other researchers have studied Hackmanand Wageman’s team effectiveness and teamcoaching models and concluded that teamcoaching does have a positive impact on ateam’s outputs, including writing products(Heimbecker, 2006), team effectiveness(Liu, et al., 2009), and innovation and safety(Buljac-Samardžic, 2012). Team processesthat improved were effort, skills, knowledge(Liu et al., 2009), and learning (Buljac-Samardžic, 2012).

Practitioners have contributed to theteam coaching literature by providing anumber of case studies (Anderson,Anderson & Mayo, 2008; Blattner & Baci-galupo, 2007; Clutterbuck, 2007; Haug,2011; Kegan & Lahey, 2009; Mulec & Roth,2005; Woodhead, 2011), and models for


The experience of team coaching: A dual case study

facilitating team coaching conversations(Brown & Grant, 2010; Clutterbuck, 2007;Hawkins, 2011). The case studies documentthe benefits and outcomes that teamcoaching participants themselves identified,including increased learning, decisionmaking, information sharing, communica-tion, and participation. Although each studydescribed coaching outcomes, only onestudy (Anderson et al., 2008) reported anobjective business result that was connectedto the team coaching; increased employeeengagement results.

Overall, our review of the team coachingliterature revealed that minimal research hasbeen completed to date, especially oncoaching senior leadership teams. As practi-tioner-researchers, we saw value in doingqualitative case study research with intactleadership teams: (a) to understand what theleadership team coaching experience is likefor the participants; and (b) to identifywhich aspects of team coaching participantsidentify as most and least valuable.

Methodology To study the participants’ experience ofteam coaching, each researcher/coachconducted a team coaching programme overa period of six to 11 months with an intactleadership team. The two researcherstracked and analysed their case studies indi-vidually and then analysed each other’s casestudies before conducting a cross-casecomparison. This qualitative case studyfocused on the rich descriptions from theparticipants’ experience of team coaching.Because this was a qualitative analysis andcomparison of only two case studies, theresults have limited generalisability.

Research aim and questionsThe research aim of this qualitative study wasto explore the experience of team coachingfrom the participants’ perspectives so weproposed the following questions:1. What are the participant’s significant

meaningful experiences or turningpoints during the team coaching?

2. What changes do the participants feelthey made in:a. the business; andb. their effectiveness as a team as a result

of the team coaching?3. What are the implications for practice

from what participants identify as mostand least valuable to them in ourleadership team coaching process?

Research participantsThe participants of this study were two Canadian leadership teams. The first team,coached by Catherine Carr (CC), was anEmployee Engagement Leadership teamfrom the British Columbia government thathad four male and two female employeesbetween the ages of 30 and 58. One memberworked virtually from other locations. Fourmembers had been on the team for over fiveyears while two had joined in the last year.The team initiated team coaching becausethey saw it as an innovative new governmentservice that would help their highperforming team excel even more.

The second team, coached by JacquelinePeters (JP), started as an eight-person lead-ership team for a small corporate financedepartment in a large, Alberta-based, multi-national corporation. Six team memberswere leaders of leaders, and two were tech-nical leaders. There were four male and fourfemale seasoned professionals between 34and 55 years of age. Although they wereforming together in a new leadership struc-ture, they had all worked together for twoyears or more, except for the team’s newleader. She wanted team coaching to supportgreater departmental alignment and effec-tiveness. Although this team started witheight members, one male and one femaleteam member left the organisation duringthe coaching, leaving six team members whoparticipated in the last two coaching sessionsand the final research interviews.

Overview of the team coaching processPrior to commencing coaching, we invitedour team leaders to consider Wageman



et al.’s (2008) six conditions for team effec-tiveness to ensure the team was ready forcoaching. The subsequent team coachingapproach was based on methods and frame-works previously used in the researchers’team coaching practices, including solution-focused coaching techniques such asfocusing on possibilities and signs of change(Meier, 2005). We included a pre-coachingassessment, a two-day team offsite, andfollow-up sessions, similar to aspects ofGuttman’s (2008) and Hawkins’ (2011) teamcoaching approaches. In the offsite andfollow-up sessions, we drew upon Hawkins’(2011) team coaching framework and posedquestions to help the team focus on theirinternal team functioning, and the needsand expectations of their various stake-holders.

We chose to coach both of our teamleaders since Wageman et al. (2008) high-lighted team leader coaching as a usefuladjunct to team coaching, and several practi-tioners included individual coaching in theirapproaches (Anderson et al., 2008; Blattner& Bacigalupo, 2007; Clutterbuck, 2007;Haug, 2011; Mulec & Roth, 2005; Wood-head, 2011). We also included individualcoaching sessions for two corporate leaderswhich began before the team coachingstarted and continued after the teamcoaching was completed. Individualcoaching sessions for one government teammember were requested for issues unrelatedto the team coaching.

We incorporated peer coaching in ourteam coaching interventions since Hackmanand O’Connor (2005) found that peercoaching had the most impact on team effec-tiveness compared to all other team inter-ventions in their study of team leader andteam member coaching behaviours. Thegovernment coach (CC) formally taught herteam to coach each other at the team launchsession, and encouraged them to coach eachother between team sessions. The corporateteam coach (JP) modelled peer coachingtechniques and encouraged her teammembers to engage in peer coaching, espe-

cially for ensuring accountability to theirworking agreements.

A summary of the steps in the teamcoaching and research process is provided inFigure 1 (overleaf).

The parallel team coaching processincluded having all team members completesemi-structured, one-on-one interviews withthe team’s coach to assess team strengthsand gaps. Each team member alsocompleted the Team Diagnostic Survey(TDS; Wageman, Hackman & Lehman,2005) at the start of the coaching. The TDSis a 38-question online survey that assesses ateam’s effectiveness and provides an anony-mous, composite report based on theaverage of each team member’s answers. Thequestions are based upon Hackman and hiscolleague’s team effectiveness model ofenabling conditions, team task processes,work relationships, and individual motiva-tion and satisfaction (Hackman & Wageman,2005). The instrument has some initialnormative data and the TDS authors indi-cate that it has adequate reliability andvalidity, although it would benefit fromfurther testing across a variety of teams(Wageman, Hackman & Lehman, 2005).

For our purposes, the TDS was used as apre- and post-coaching discussion tool but itwas not used as a quantitative measure ofteam effectiveness for the research. Eachcoach reviewed both the interview themesand the TDS pre-assessment results with herrespective team, allowing them to assess anddraw their own conclusions about theirstrengths, gaps, and goals for the coaching.A two-day team launch session followedapproximately two weeks later, with a focuson defining a team charter highlighting theteam’s vision, mission, purpose, values, goals,roles and responsibilities, working agree-ments, and success measures.

Each coach held four (JP) or six (CC)team coaching sessions, one to two hours inlength, over a period of six (JP) to 11 (CC)months to help the teams achieve theircoaching goals and hold themselves account-able to the team charter and working agree-





Figure 1: Team coaching sequence for both case studies.

ments defined during the team launch. Thetwo teams had dissimilar coaching durationsbecause of the different lengths of time ittook for each team to meet their coachinggoals. At the last coaching session, each teamcompared their pre- and post-coaching TDSresults and explored how they would sustainthe positive changes they had made. Bothteams held all coaching sessions in personexcept for two government team sessions inwhich one team member joined via audio-visual conferencing.

Data collection methodsThe primary data source was the individual,semi-structured research interviews witheach other’s team coaching participants atthe end of their coaching intervention. Thegovernment team interviews were conductedin person while the corporate team inter-views were conducted by telephone becauseof business and timing constraints betweenthe interviewees and the interviewing coach(CC), who was in another geographic loca-tion. Although the 12 hours of transcribed

interviews served as the richest and mostimportant data point in this study of theteam members’ experience, several datacollection methods were used to triangulatethe findings, including: (i) 14 hours of precoaching interviews; (ii) 100+ pages of indi-vidual researcher journals that documentedeach team’s coaching notes and observa-tions; and (iii) a 400+ page collaborativejournal in which we discussed our learningabout team coaching, the literature, andconversations with advisors.

We coded interview themes for bothteams separately, looking for major themesamong participants and unique comments.Next, we discussed results with one another,checking for appropriateness and frequencyof themes. Then we compared the twostudies for common and unique themesbetween the two cases. Finally, eachresearcher validated the individual casestudy themes with her respective teamleader, ensuring that all individualcomments remained anonymous in thesummary. No changes were suggested byeither team leader.

Dual case study results by research questionResearch Question 1: Meaningful Experiences or Turning PointsThe first research question explored theparticipants’ meaningful experiences andturning points during the team coaching, asidentified in Table 1. One meaningful expe-rience that both teams identified was estab-lishing working agreements for theirrespective teams, summarised by one of thegovernment team members:

We had to actively practice the things we saidwe wanted, which exposed us to ‘walking thetalk.’ It was a great learning experience foreveryone in the team, and the changes havetaken hold in how we are together.

A second common meaningful experiencewas that coaching encouraged full participa-tion from all team members which enhancedtheir team performance. In the governmentteam, this occurred when one less vocal team

member offered a contrary opinion thatsignificantly changed the team direction.This balanced participation carried forwardto future team meetings, as this governmentteam member highlighted:

I think the team coaching really helped to have[our] voices fully become an equal part of ourteam. Even the members who had been arounda little bit longer… experimented with steppingback and allowing a bit more time and spacefor the less vocal members.

In the corporate team, this participationturning point occurred at the two-day offsitewhen coaching supported team members tocome forward and speak more openly andhonestly than before, as noted below:

A lot of honesty was shared there that withoutit, we would not have moved forward.

The government team identified two uniqueturning points; learning about each others’different styles and approaches, and fullcollaboration on a newly-defined teamproject:

We talked at the beginning to have those twogoals: integration and to get this tool done. We were focused on results. We wanted tocreate… the best tool possible. The integrationpart of it – how do we work together better? We weren’t paying attention to that at ourregular meetings. So then we started [duringthe coaching].

There were two unique turning points forthe corporate team that were related to teamdesign: organisational structure changes thatoccurred at the beginning of the coaching,and the unexpected departures of two teammembers from the company during theteam coaching period. The followingcomment highlights the corporate partici-pants’ awareness that the structural changesand coaching success were highly interde-pendent.

I think it was that the coaching was used inconjunction with the roll out of a new teamstructure… The change in our departmentstructure, and clarification of roles, thatwithout that, the coaching would not havedone any real good.





Table 1: Identification of cross-case themes in interviews for research questions 1 and 2.(Bolded themes indicates similarities in both case studies)

Government Team (CC)Themes

● Working agreements andparticipation (6/6)

● Team member participation(6/6)

● Learning about teammember differences (6/6)

● Collaborative project (3/6)

Corporate Team (JP) Themes

● Team charter and workingagreements (6/6)

● Honesty and disclosure(6/6)

● Team member departures(5/6)

● Structural changes (6/6)

Cross Case Themes

1. Team charter and workingagreements (12/12)

2. Full participation (12/12)


● Collaborative businessproducts (5/6)

● Authentic relationships(6/6)

● Personal learning andchange (6/6)

● Participation and dialogue(6/6)

● Impact outside of the team(6/6)

● Peer coaching (4/6)


● Productivity andcollaboration (6/6)

● Work environment and relationships (6/6)

● Personal learning andchange (6/6)

● Communication improved(4/6)

● Reputation and impactbeyond the team (3/6)

Cross Case Themes

3. Collaboration andproductivity (11/12)

4. Improved relationships(12/12)

5. Personal learning andchange (12/12)

6. Communication andparticipation (10/12)

7. Impact beyond the team(9/12)

1. What are the participant’s significant meaningful experiences or turning points during theteam coaching?

2. What changes do the participants feel they made in (a) the business; and(b) their effectiveness as a team as a result of the team coaching?

Research Question 2: Changes as a Result of Team CoachingThe second research question explored thechanges that participants felt that they madein: (a) the business; and (b) their effective-ness as a team as a result of the teamcoaching. There were a number of similari-ties in the changes each team identified as aresult of the team coaching, once again iden-tified in Table 1. There were five cross-casechange themes that included improvementsin: (i) collaboration and productivity; (ii)relationships; (iii) personal learning andchange; (iv) communication and participa-tion; and (v) impact beyond the team.

(i) Improved collaboration and productivityCollaboration and productivity improved forboth teams, and a representative commentabout general productivity improvementswas provided by a corporate team member:

I see people doing more… [with] a focus ongoing forward versus wasting time worryingabout emotions and dealing with people’sfeelings and how they will react… and moretime looking to the benefit of the company, andhow we can achieve what we need to achieve.

(ii) Improved relationshipsBoth teams indicated that relationshipsimproved during the team coaching. One ofthe government team members said:

We’ve talked about some heartfelt things thattypically wouldn’t come up. We let others intowho we are as people.

A corporate team member described theimproved relationships as follows:

People became friends. The baggage was gone,the honesty was there, the trust was building –people were friends. And they had to find outthat they liked each other.

(iii) Personal learning and changeLearning for individuals on both teamsoccurred over time through new insights,feedback, and experimenting with newbehaviours, as this government teammember’s quote illustrates:

I’m learning to change the way I view things.It’s not overnight.

(iv) Communication and participationimprovementsCoaching supported team members to comeforward and speak more openly andhonestly, and participate more fully in teamdialogues, as described by this corporateteam member:

I do see better relationships and communica-tion amongst people… An example I would say[is that] people are more willing to askquestions or ask for help.

(v) Impact beyond the teamAlthough both teams talked about impactbeyond their own team, the governmentteam members focused on cascading collab-oration and integration among the broaderteams in the organisation.

It feels like people are getting drawn in andthat there is more integration happening fromthe visioning part of the project through tocompletion.

The corporate team also discussed impactbeyond their own team, but focused more onan improved team reputation within theirdepartment and with the senior leadershipteam.

The team coaching addressed the issues thatwere the same issues addressed by the employeesatisfaction survey done independently… Our[executive] vice president was extremelyimpressed with what we had accomplished withthe team coaching.

Research Question 3:Most and Least Valuable Aspects of CoachingWe identified six common themes betweenthe two teams related to what the teammembers found to be most valuable in thecoaching process, as noted in Table 2. Thesesix themes were: (i) specific coaching activi-ties and components; (ii) coach’s mannerand actions; (iii) team launch; (iv) coachingstructure and follow-up; (v) team leadermodelling and support; and (vi) sustain-ability.





Table 2: Identification of cross-case themes in interviews for research question 3.(Bolded themes indicates similarities in both case studies)


● Valuable coaching skillsand components (5/6)

● Style assessmentfacilitated insight and change (5/6)

● Check ins were valuable (3/6)

● Appreciation for coach’s manner and actions (5/6)

● Offsite days were valuable (4/6)

● Just in time coaching supported goals and teamwork (3/6)

● Team leader modelling (5/6)

● Thoughts about the future (3/6)


● Coaching activities and components facilitated insight (6/6)

● Assessments provided insight and marked progress (3/6)

● All of the team coaching was valuable (unspecific) (4/6)

● Nothing was ‘least valuable’ (5/6)

● The coach’s manner and actions matter (6/6)

● Safety was critical (3/6)

● Two day offsite valuable= Turning point theme above (6/6)

● Structure was valuable(6/6)

● Follow-up facilitated progress and accountability (3/6)

● Team leader support was valuable (4/6)

● Hopes and concerns for the future (4/6)

● Individual coaching is beneficial (4/6)

Cross Case Themes

8. Specific coaching activities and components (12/12)

9. Coach’s manners and actions (11/12)

10. Team Launch (10/12)

11. Coaching structure and follow-up (9/12)

12. Team leader modelling and support (9/12)

13. Sustainability hopes and concerns (7/12)

3. What are the implications for practice from what participants identify as most and least valuable to them in our leadership team coaching process?

(i) Coaching activities and componentsThe coaching activities and components thatwere mentioned most frequently in the twoteams were the TDS, specific games, andstructured coaching activities. One corpo-rate team member provided a representativesummary of the impact as follows:

People got engaged… doing the team charterand those activities. I thought that type ofactivity, whether it was a game or not… helpsyou see things differently.

(ii) Coach’s manner and actionsMost team members made comments aboutthe coach’s manner and/or actions. Theyappreciated the coach’s ability to createsafety, ask questions, guide the team, andfollow up on the actions and outcomes theteam had set out to achieve, as described bythis corporate team member:

She asked questions that are more open, theyare not leading, and they are from a differentperspective. She is not in [our field]; shedoesn’t have a clue what we do. But she is ableto pull herself out of the detail and see thebigger picture.

(iii) Team launchThe teams spoke about the value of settingaside time away from their regular offices tofocus on their team, their goals and relation-ships as this government team memberdescribes:

The two days were absolutely fundamental. It developed the foundation upon whicheverything else was built.

(iv) Coaching structure and follow-up Having some structure to the coaching meet-ings was valuable to both teams. The govern-ment team particularly appreciateddedicated time to personally check in anddiscuss how they were working together atevery team coaching session;

It’s about checking in with one another, what’s working and what’s not… We alwaysmade sure we checked in on how folks weredoing and what we struggled with and whatthe learning was.

Similarly, the corporate team talked aboutthe value of having an agenda and a check inon working agreements and commitments/actions as a regular part of their teamcoaching sessions.

(v) Team leader modelling and support Participants of both teams described theactive and important role of the team leaderin supporting their team’s changes. Thegovernment team focused on the teamleader’s positive modelling of behavioursand personal disclosure within the teammeetings. The corporate team focused moreon the team leader’s active role in initiatingand sustaining support for the teamcoaching generally, as quoted below:

Team coaching without a leader supporting itwon’t go anywhere.

(vi) Sustainability Both teams discussed sustainability in theirpost coaching interviews. The governmentteam committed to peer coaching andcontinued use of their working agreementsas keys to sustaining their new interde-pendent approach. They felt that their newways of working together were becomingmore natural, and they were not overlyconcerned about regression. The corporateteam committed to continue to follow theirworking agreements, which included talkingpositively and directly to each other aboutissues. Further, they decided to roll out amodified form of the working agreements totheir whole department as a cultural initia-tive.

There was a mix of individuals on eachcase study team who felt hopeful and at leastone team member on each team whoexpressed concern about the team’s abilityto self-coach and continue their progress, asrepresented in this corporate teammember’s comment:

The question for me now is what happens nowthat the coaching experience is gone? Does theteam continue to ask these questions? And ifthey don’t and no one else is asking thosequestions, do we start to slide backwards?



Hopefully not, but you can see that there wouldbe potential for that.

Least valuable elementsWhen asked to describe what was least valu-able, most of the corporate team memberssaid that nothing about the team coachingwas least valuable. Two government partici-pants found some of the games to be lessvaluable, as one participant indicated:

Being a pragmatic, results-focused individual,I probably didn’t get as much value from theritual/symbolic activities like the toweractivity.

Overall, participants indicated they receivedgreat value through the team coaching, assummarised by this corporate team member:

Coaching is really important if you are goingto roll out… a new direction. And that newdirection goes hand in hand with coaching,and gets people working together and makingchanges. [It] makes it more focused andstrategic.

Discussion High Performance Team Coaching: A new modelAs we reviewed the dominant themes of ourcase study findings, we noted consistenciesbetween the findings and our literaturereview. Thus, we saw an opportunity topropose a new, six stage High PerformanceTeam Coaching Model that can be used byleaders and team coaches alike. We not onlyincluded ongoing team coaching sessions,but also the structure and design elementsnecessary for team effectiveness, as indicatedin Hackman’s (2011) summary of his 40+years of research:

‘Our research suggests that condition-creating accounts for about 60 per centof the variation in how well a teameventually performs; that the quality ofthe team launch accounts for another 30per cent; and that real-time coachingaccounts for only about 10 per cent.’(Hackman, 2011, p.1)

Although these percentages may not beexact, our data suggests this is likely to bedirectionally correct so we accounted for

these three important team performancefactors in the team coaching model.

The components of the High Perform-ance Team Coaching Model are identified inTable 3 (overleaf) and are represented visu-ally in Figure 2. In Table 3, we match the keycomponents of the model with the most rele-vant case study themes, acknowledging thatseveral of the themes also match othercomponents of the model. We also indicatethe key literature that supports the inclusionof that component in our model.

Three team stagesOn the outside of the circle, we aligned thethree main coaching functions with thenatural beginning, mid-point and endingteam stages that Gersick (1988) identified inher punctuated-equilibrium model. Thismodel states that a team hits the groundrunning early in their work together andonly comes up for air around the midpointof their work to consult with others and shifthow they are working together. The teamgoes through a second reorganising pointwhen they move towards finishing theirproject. Any coaching interventions thatfocus on strategy or shifting how a teamworks together don’t have much impactbetween when the team initially begins theirwork and their reflective midpoint (Gersick,1988), which aligns with our team coachingexperiences.

Three coaching functionsThe three coaching functions as matched tothe team’s stage are: (i) define and initiate atthe beginning; (ii) review and realign at themid-point; and (iii) integrate at the end of ateam’s cycle. The arrows indicate the naturalprogression of the team’s stages.

This coaching model has a strong focuson coaching teams at the beginning of a newteam cycle since there is great leverage insetting up the team conditions and doingthe team launch at this stage (Hackman,2011). We also found our case study teamsneeded and wanted a greater frequency andintensity with the initial coaching sessions.





Figure 2: High Performance Team Coaching Model.

dEn

tmenssseAs

m eaTTeing ginnBe

hcaoC

w vieeRSucces&

MamTeStakeho

mOutco

etaegrtnI

ginachCoamTe

ess nReadiersbemMamTe

ersldStakeho

CoaeaTTe

ng nireaLsseSucces

ersbemMersldStakeho

esm

ySafet

ers

orfng chiCoangsiDem ea

ing ginnBe&fine De

etaitinI

inoMidpw vieeRgnlieaR

(oeader LMamTe

Coachin

hcaoCeaderL

reePt in&

nchauLm eaTTeerChartamTe

ioectrDinglipelmCosaloGamTe

entmeerAgngkiroW)ginogn(o

ersbemM

ng

nio

sent

tsutpuOty ilauQ

&s eitilibapCamaeTspishontialeR

laudividnItnemegagEn

Team

tnemegagEn

venessEffectiTeam

veness



Table 3: Dual case study research themes and parallelHigh Performance Team Coaching Model components.

Team StageandCoachingFunction

TeamBeginning➛ Defineand Initiate

Dual Case Study Research Themes

● Specific coaching activitiesand components (e.g. Team Diagnostic Survey)

● Structural changes(Corporate team)

● Team charter and workingagreements

● Team launch● Team charter and working

agreements● Full participation/

Communication and Participation

● Collaboration and Productivity/Collaborative Project (government team)

● Team leader modelling andsupport

● Individual coaching is beneficial

● Personal learning andchange

Literature Review

● Six conditions for teameffectiveness (Wageman et al., 2008)

● Team Diagnostic Survey(Wageman, Hackman & Lehman, 2005)

● Six conditions for team effectiveness (Wageman et al., 2008)

● Team design links to teameffectiveness (Beckhard, 1972; Friedlander & Brown, 1974; Hackman & Wageman, 2005; Kaplan, 1979; Wageman, 2001)

● Team offsite included in team coaching (Anderson, Anderson & Mayo, 2008; Blattner & Bacigalupo, 2007; Clutterbuck, 2007; Guttman, 2008; Hackman, 2011; Kegan & Lahey, 2009)

● Team leader coaching beneficial (Hawkins, 2011; Wageman et al., 2008)

● Individual coaching included (Anderson et al., 2008; Blattner & Bacigalupo, 2007; Clutterbuck, 2007; Haug, 2011; Mulec & Roth, 2005; Woodhead, 2011)

Team CoachingComponents

1. Assessment

2. Coaching forTeam Design

3. Team Launch

4. IndividualCoaching



Table 3 continued…

Team StageandCoachingFunction

Mid-point➛ Reviewand Realign

End ➛

Integrate

Central tomodel(throughoutcoaching)

Outcomes

Dual Case Study Research Themes

● Coaching structure and follow-up

● Full participation● Collaboration and

Productivity● Team leader modelling and

support ● Peer coaching

● Full participation● Coaching structure and

follow-up● Sustainability hopes and

concerns

● Coach’s manner and actions● Team charter and

agreements● Full participation

● Collaboration andproductivity

● Improved relationships● Personal learning and

change● Communication and

participation ● Impact beyond the team

Literature Review

● Follow-up sessions included (Guttman, 2008; Hawkins, 2011)

● Structured team coaching session format called GROUP and RE-GROUP (Brown & Grant, 2010)

● Reflection and learning facilitated team safety and innovation (Buljac-Samardžic, 2012)

● Team reflection and learning is important in coaching (Clutterbuck, 2007; Hackman, 2003; Kegan & Lahey, 2009).

● Team safety is linked to enhanced performance (Edmondson, 1999) and innovation (Buljac-Samardžic, 2012)

● Three measure of team effectiveness as outlined by Wageman et al., 2008

Team CoachingComponents

5. Ongoing TeamCoaching

6. Review Learning and Successes

Safety

TeamEffectiveness

This first ‘define and initiate’ coaching func-tion includes four components: (i) assess-ment; (ii) coaching for team design; (iii)team launch; and (iv) individual coaching.However, the model is not just for brand newteams; even our case study teams were notcompletely new. Certain events can trigger anew beginning for established teams, such asteam member changes, or the implementa-tion of a new strategy, vision, or project.

When a team is in the middle of a task orteam cycle, the coach focuses on inviting theteam to review current processes andperformance, reflect on learning, and refinetheir strategy to achieve their goals goingforward. We interacted less frequentlyduring this middle cycle with our teamsthrough the (v) ongoing team coachingsessions. We note that (iv) individualcoaching, especially of the team leader, can(and did in our cases) continues during thisperiod.

The primary focus of coaching at the endof a task or team cycle is to support a team toindividually and collectively review and inte-grate learning and successes, the sixthcoaching component. The coach may alsoassist the team to develop a maintenanceand follow-up plan, as we did with our teams.

Six team coaching components 1. AssessmentOur participants indicated that the pre-coaching interviews and TDS were valuableteam coaching elements that supportedthem to identify and discuss team strengths,challenges, gaps, and opportunities. Further,we found it beneficial for the coach to meetwith the team leader as the sponsor of thecoaching to identify the initial teamcoaching goals and expected outcomes.Team assessment is also supported in theliterature (Hawkins, 2011; Wageman et al.,2008; Wageman, Hackman & Lehman,2005).

2. Coaching for team designIf the initial team assessments reveal that keyteam effectiveness conditions are not in

place, team coaches could support theleader to get clear about the team’s member-ship, function, structures, and directionbefore launching a full team coaching initia-tive. In the corporate case study, coachingsessions with the team leader resulted in a re-structure before the team coachingstarted. Participants later reported that thisre-structuring was essential to the success ofthe team coaching. The literature has alsoreinforced the importance of team designand structure in team effectiveness (Beck-hard, 1972; Friedlander & Brown, 1974;Hackman, 2011, Hackman & Wageman,2005; Kaplan, 1979; Wageman, 2001).

3. Team launchAll our research participants said that theinitial two-day team launch session providedthem with a more reflective and participatoryforum than they were able to create inshorter meetings in the workplace. Hackman(2011) indicated that an effective teamlaunch can impact up to 30 per cent of teamperformance and other practitioner-researchers have identified a team offsite as acomponent of their team coaching approach(Anderson, Anderson & Mayo, 2008; Blattner& Bacigalupo, 2007; Clutterbuck, 2007;Guttman, 2008; Hackman, 2011; Kegan &Lahey, 2009). We include a team launch inour model, with a focus on learning moreabout each other, and developing a teamcharter that emphasises working agreements.

4. Individual coachingIn interviews, team members commentedabout the value of adjunct individualcoaching, whether they received it or not, asa support for people’s effectiveness on theteam. Other team coaching case studies havealso identified individual coaching as part oftheir process (Anderson, et al., 2008; Blat-tner & Bacigalupo, 2007; Clutterbuck, 2007;Haug, 2011; Mulec & Roth, 2005; Wood-head, 2011). Wageman et al. (2008) andHawkins (2011) identified that coaching theteam leader in particular may be beneficialas leaders develop their skills and capacity to



coach the team. Thus, we include individualcoaching in our team coaching model.

5. Ongoing team coaching Ongoing team coaching occurred throughcoach and/or leader led team sessions inaddition to team members coaching eachother between sessions. Participantsreported that the team sessions helped theteam stay on track while peer coachinghelped individual members do the same.

We note that few practitioners orresearchers have explicitly included peercoaching as a standard team coachingcomponent, except for a few studies (Kegan& Lahey, 2009; Hackman & O’Connor,2005). Hackman and O’Connor (2005)emphasised the high impact of peercoaching on team effectiveness, so we haveincluded peer coaching in our model.

6. Review learning and successes The re-assessment on the TDS and finalinterviews provided an opportunity for teammembers to reflect on their learning andsuccesses individually, as a team, and beyondtheir own team to external stakeholders.Team members in both case studiesexpressed concerns about how they wouldmaintain and extend the improvements theyhad made during the final coaching sessionand in the interviews. Facilitated reflectionhas been identified as an important part ofteam coaching (Buljac-Samardžic, 2012;Clutterbuck, 2007), especially since this isnot something teams tend to consistently doon their own (Hackman, 2003).

SafetyWhile team design and structure appears tobe crucial to team coaching success, psycho-logical or emotional safety is the factor webelieve underpins all coaching, and is high-lighted in the centre of the model. In thesetwo case studies, feeling safe to participate,be honest, and disclose were identified assignificant turning points. This aligns withother researchers’ findings that teammembers often focus on interpersonal

factors, not structure and design, when theyconsider what most influences team effec-tiveness (Beckhard, 1972; Hackman &Wageman, 2005; Martin, 2006). Further-more, Edmondson (1999) and Buljac-Samardžic (2012) emphasised theimportance of psychological safety in teamperformance.

The two teams in this study explicitlyidentified that the relationship with the teamcoach, and the coach’s manner in particular,helped create a safe learning environment.Further, there is a growing body of researchin coaching and an extensive body ofresearch in counselling that attests to thelink between a positive working alliance withthe coach/counsellor and positive clientoutcomes (Horvath & Symonds, 1991;Marshall, 2006).

Team effectivenessWe included team effectiveness in this modelas the key outcome of team coaching. Thisresearch lent support to the ability of teamcoaching to improve team effectiveness asindicated by team members’ subjectiveassessment of the: (i) quality of outcomes;(ii) ability to work together effectively; and(iii) degree of individual engagement. Theseoutcomes are similar to Wageman et al.’s(2008) three measures of team effectivenessand align with other researchers who haveidentified that team coaching can effectimprovements in team outputs and/orprocesses (Buljac-Samardžic, 2012; Heim-becker, 2006; Liu et al., 2009).

SummaryThe six-phase High Performing TeamCoaching Model was developed based onthese case study results and a literaturereview of methods and strategies that werefound to promote team performance. Werecognise that in real workplace practice,coaches may draw upon only one or severalof these six components based upon a realbusiness team’s natural rhythm and perform-ance requirements, which often vary.



LimitationsAs in any research, there were limitations inthis qualitative, dual case study research.Most significantly, this study relied on parti-cipant self-reports through semi-structuredinterviews for identifying outcomes andbenefits. These interviews may have beensubject to recall flaws and bias in what partic-ipants reported particularly since partici-pants were asked to reflect back over theprevious six to 12 months.

Suggestions for practiceMany recommendations for practitionerswere embedded in the High PerformanceTeam Coaching Model, and two of thesesuggestions are highlighted below.1. Team coaching has the potential to be

greater than just what a coach does in ateam coaching session. The teameffectiveness literature suggests strongteam design and structure are critical andthis study also supports the importance ofteam design and working agreements.Thus, team coaches could provide afuller service by supporting teams andleaders to assess the effectiveness of theirteam structure and design whenbeginning coaching.

2. Coaches may propose and includeindividual coaching, peer coaching, andteam leader coaching in addition towhole team coaching. These practitioner-researchers found that participantsvalued all three components.

Suggestions for future researchThe field of team coaching is still new andexploratory. We propose two areas thatresearchers could consider as they furtherexamine team coaching.1. This was an exploratory qualitative study

and while our participants describedenhanced team performance as a resultof team coaching, further research isrequired to link team coaching toquantitative measures of teameffectiveness.

2. The High Performance Team CoachingModel proposed here requires furtherresearch to test the model. For example,are some phases more important thanothers? Is this model more effective thancurrently existing models, such as thoseproposed by Brown and Grant (2005) orHawkins (2011)?

ConclusionAs practitioner-researchers, we discoveredthat not enough of the team effectivenessliterature has been applied to team coachingin organisations. We sought to beginaddressing this gap between research andpractice and carried out a dual case study toexplore team coaching with two intact lead-ership teams working within their complexbusiness settings. As a result of the consisten-cies between our dual case study and litera-ture review, we developed an evidence-basedHigh Performing Team Coaching Modelthat incorporates components identified aslikely to increase team performance andfoster team effectiveness. We believe that thismulti-stage approach to team coaching is auseful full team cycle model and system thatcan be applied and studied further by practi-tioners and researchers.

The AuthorsDr Catherine Carr,BSc, MEd, DProf, PCC, RCCand Dr Jacqueline Peters,BSc, MEd, DProf, PCC, CHRP

CorrespondenceDr Catherine Carr2345 Estevan Avenue,Victoria, British Columbia, Canada, V8R 2S4.Email: [email protected]

Dr Jacqueline Peters83 Sienna Park Terrace S.W.,Calgary, Alberta, Canada, T3H 3L4.Email: [email protected]



Adkins, L. (2010). Coaching agile teams: A companionfor scrummasters, agile coaches and project managersin transition. Stoughton, MA: Pearson EducationInc.

Anderson, M., Anderson, D. & Mayo, W. (2008).Team coaching helps a leadership team drivecultural change at caterpillar. Global Business andOrganisational Excellence, 27(4), 40–50.

Beckhard, R. (1972). Optimising team building effort.Journal of Contemporary Business, 1(3), 23–32.

Blattner, J. & Bacigalupo, A. (2007). Using emotionalintelligence to develop executive leadership andteam and organisational development. ConsultingPsychology Journal: Practice and Research, 59(3),209–219.

Brown, S.W. & Grant, A.M. (2010). From GROW toGROUP: Theoretical issues and a practicalmodel for group coaching in organisations.Coaching: An International Journal of Theory,Research and Practice, 3(1), 30–45.

Buljac-Samardžic, M. (2012). Healthy teams: Analysingand improving team performance in long term care.PhD thesis, Erasmus University.

Clutterbuck, D. (2007). Coaching the team at work.London: Good News Press.

Clutterbuck, D. (2010). Team coaching. In E. Cox, T. Bachkirova & D. Clutterbuck (Eds.), Thecomplete handbook of coaching (pp.271–283).Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Dolny, H. (2009). Team coaching: Artists at work: SouthAfrican coaches share their theory and practice.Johannesburg: Penguin Books Ltd.

Edmondson, A. (1999). Psychological safety andlearning behaviour in work teams. AdministrativeScience Quarterly, 4(2), 350–383.

Fillery-Travis, A. & Tyrrell, E. (2012). Researchingtheir own practice (II): The competenciesrequired by practitioner researchers. In PROpel:Professional Practice, Education and Learning,Stirling, UK. Accessed 3 September 2012, from:http://eprints.mdx.ac.uk/8571/

Friedlander, F. & Brown, L. (1974). Organisationdevelopment. In M. Rosenzweig & L. Porter(Eds.), Annual review of psychology (pp.314–332).Palo Alto, CA: Annual Reviews, 25.

Guttman, H. (2008). Great business teams: Cracking thecode for standout performance. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.

Hackman, J.R. (1983). A normative model of team groupeffectiveness, Technical report 2. Research Program onGroup Effectiveness. New Haven, CT: Yale School ofOrganisation and Management.

Hackman, J.R. (2011). Six common misperceptionsabout teamwork. Harvard Business Review[Internet blog]. Accessed 23 June 2011, from:http://blogs.hbr.org/cs/2011/06/six_common_misperceptions_abou.html

Hackman, J.R. & O’Connor, M. (2005). What makesfor a great analytic team? Individual vs. teamapproaches to intelligence analysis. Washington, DC:Intelligence Science Board, Office of theDirector of Central Intelligence.

Hackman, J.R. & Wageman, R. (2005). A theory ofteam coaching. Academy of Management Review,30(2), 269–287.

Haug, M. (2011). What is the relationship betweencoaching interventions and team effectiveness?International Journal of Evidence Based Coaching andMentoring, Special Issue No. 5, 89–101.

Hawkins, P. (2011). Leadership team coaching:Developing collective transformational leadership.Philadelphia, PA: Kogan Page Publishers.

Heimbecker, D. (2006). The effects of expert coaching onteam productivity at the South Coast EducationalCollaborative. Doctoral dissertation, BostonUniversity.

Kaplan, R. (1979). The conspicuous absence ofevidence that process consultation enhances taskperformance. Journal of Applied BehaviouralScience, 15, 46–360.

Kegan, R & Lahey, L. (2009). Immunity to change.Boston, MA: Harvard Business PublishingSchool.

Liu, C., Pirola-Merlo, A., Yang, C. & Huang, C.(2009). Disseminating the functions of teamcoaching regarding research and developmentteam effectiveness: Evidence from high-techindustries in Taiwan. Social Behaviour andPersonality, 37(1), 41–58.

Marshall, M. (2006). The critical factors of coachingpractice leading to successful coaching outcomes. PhD Thesis, Antioch University.

Martin, E. (2006). Team effectiveness in academicmedical libraries: A multiple case study. Journal ofthe Medical Library Association, 94(3), 271–278.

Meier, D. (2005). Team coaching with the solution circle:A practical guide to solution focused team development.Cheltenham, UK, Solutions Books.

Mesmer-Magnus, J. & DeChurch, L. (2009).Information sharing and team performance: A meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology,94(2), 535–546.

Mitsch, D. & Mitsch, B. (2010). Team advantage: The complete guide for team transformation: Coach’s facilitation guide set. San Francisco: John Wiley & Sons.

Mulec, K. & Roth, J. (2005). Action, reflection, andlearning and coaching in order to enhance theperformance of drug development projectmanagement teams. R and D Management, 35,483–491.

Niemela, C, & Lewis, R. (2001). Leading high impactteams: The coach approach to peak performance.Laguna Beach, CA: High Impact Publishing.



References

Thorton, C. (2010). Group and team coaching: The essential guide. New York: Routledge.

Wageman, R. (2001). How leaders foster self-managing team effectiveness: Design choicesversus hands-on coaching. Organisation Science,12, 559–577.

Wageman, R., Hackman, J.R. & Lehman, E. (2005).Team diagnostic survey: Development of aninstrument. Journal of Applied Behavioral Science,41, 373–398.

Wageman, R., Nunes, D., Burruss, J. & Hackman, J.R(2008). Senior leadership teams: What it takes to makethem great. Boston, MA: Harvard Business SchoolPublishing Corporation.

Woodhead, V. (2011). How does coaching help tosupport team working? A case study in the NHS.International Journal of Evidence Based Coaching andMentoring, Special Issue No. 5, 102–119.




S A VETERAN USER of personalitymeasures, this author was surprised at

Martin et al.’s (2012) assertion thatBig Five factor scores were open to the influ-ence of coaching interventions. The basis ofthe surprise was the knowledge thatmedium- to longer-term re-test profiles werehighly correlated (r circa 0.7 to 0.8) withthose emerging from the original adminis-tration (e.g. Conn & Reike, 1994; Salter et al.1997)

In the circumstances, this author decidedto examine two key sources cited by theoriginal authors. The first of these wasRoberts and Mroczek (2008) on trait changein relation to life experiences, and thesecond Spence and Grant (2005) presentedas the ‘only one study of personality changein a coaching context’.

Roberts and Mroczek (2008) presentedmeta-analytic graphs plotting mean levelchanges in scores for each of Big Five factorsat 10-year intervals. They concluded that:● Significant personality changes can occur

at most ages.● Most mean-level personality-trait change

occurs between the ages of 20 and 40.● Life and work experiences are associated

with changes in personality traits. Themost notable influencers and changesare:

1. Career success with greater emotionalstability and conscientiousness;

2. Remarriage with lower neuroticism;3. Counter-productive work activities

with decreases on measures of con-scientiousness and emotional stability.

However, the Spence & Grant (2005) paperrevealed much more tentative findings forshort-term coaching effects. It was a verysmall-scale study (N=64) of personalityresponses to the NEO Five Factor Inventory(Costa & McCrae, 1985) before and after 10weekly coaching interventions. The studyinvolved three subsets as follows:● Group 1 (N=21) who received 60-minute

sessions from professional coaches.● Group 2 (N=22) who engaged in

75-minute peer coaching sessions.● Group 3 (N=21) on a waitlist and,

therefore, did not receive any coaching.The researchers found no significant changein NEO FFI scores for neuroticism andagreeableness and discounted apparentchanges in the conscientiousness scoresbecause these were similar across all threegroups (i.e. including those who were notcoached!). The only other significantchanges were within the peer-coachinggroup for extraversion (p<0.05) and foropenness (p<0.01). With 15 comparisonsbeing made, these might almost have been

Response

What is personality change coaching andwhy is it important? A response to Martin, Oades & CaputiHugh McCredie

This short paper is a response to Martin et al.’s (2012) assertion that Big Five factor scores are open to theinfluence of coaching interventions. It is based on an inspection of two key sources cited by the originalauthors. The first of these reports on the impact of life experiences on the long-term plasticity of Big 5personality scores and the second on the impact of concentrated short-term coaching. Whilst there is supportfor long-term plasticity, the case for short-term coaching effects is unconvincing and coaches may be betterserved by focussing on the achievement of clients’ personal goals.

A


Hugh McCredie

expected as the result of chance effects. AsSpence and Grant (2005) themselvescommented: ‘The current data set does notpermit any strong claim to be made aboutthe ability of coaching to influence person-ality per se.’

Thus, the evidence presented by Martinet al. (2012) for the impact of concentratedshort-term coaching interventions onpersonality change is not convincing. On theother hand Spence and Grant (2005) foundstronger evidence for the effect of bothprofessional (p<0.001) and peer (p<0.05)coaching interventions on personal goalachievement and it is probably into thisdomain that coaching is best directed.

The AuthorHugh McCredieBSc(Hons) MSc PhD(Manc) CPsychol,Chartered FCIPD, AFBPsS.Independent researcher/writer.Vice-Chair The Psychometrics Forum (UK).

CorrespondenceHugh McCredieEmail: [email protected]

ReferencesConn, S.R. & Rieke, M.L. (1994). The 16PF fifth edition

technical manual (p.81). Champaign, IL: Institutefor Personality and Ability Testing.

Costa, P.T. & McCrae, RR. (1985). The NEO PI-Rpersonality inventory manual. Odessa, FL:Psychological Assessment Resources.

Martin, L.S., Oades, L.J. & Caputi, P. (2012). What ispersonality change coaching and why is itimportant? International Coaching PsychologyReview, 7(2), 185–193

Roberts, B.W. & Mroczek, O. (2008). Personality traitchange in adulthood. Current Directions inPsychological Science, 17, 31–35.

Salter, D.W., Evans, N.J. & Forney, D.S.(1997).Test-retest of the MBTI. Educational &Psychological Measurement, 57, 590–597.

Spence, C.B. & Grant, A.M. (2005). Individual andgroup life-coaching: Initial findings from arandomised, controlled trial. In M.J. Cavanagh,A.M. Grant & T. Kemp (Eds.), Evidence-basedcoaching (Vol. 1, pp.143–158). Bowen Hills,Australia: Australian Academic Press.


WE ARE THANKFUL for the usefulresponse on our recent article(Martin, Oades & Caputi, 2012).

It is encouraging that coaching practitionersand researchers are beginning to debatewhether intentional personality changecoaching appear feasible, and worthy offurther exploration. In the following discus-sion we respond to the general themesincluded in the response; that there is littleevidence that facilitating client chosenpersonality change is feasible in a coachingcontext, and that coaching efforts could bestbe directed to an area with stronger empir-ical support, (i.e. personal goal attainment).

We agree that Roberts and Mroczek(2008) was a longer term study, and, there-fore, less relevant to the question of shorterterm intentional personality change in acoaching context. Nevertheless, it is sugges-tive of the plasticity of personality. Further-more, a more recent shorter term four-yearlongitudinal study of over 8000 Australians(Boyce, Wood & Powdthavee, 2012) foundthat, ‘personalities can and do change overtime – something that was consideredimprobable until now – and that thesepersonality changes are strongly related tochanges in our well-being’.

Well-being is an important construct incoaching literature and practice (Green,Oades & Grant, 2006; Govindji & Linley,2007; Spence & Grant, 2005, 2007). Further-more, the literature suggests that personalityis possibly the largest single contributor towell-being (Diener & Lucas, 1999; Boyce etal., 2012). Hence, furthering our knowledge

of personality change in a coaching contextwould appear to be beneficial. This view isfurther supported by a meta-analysis thatfound that personality has a significantimpact on a wide range of life outcomes, andacross life domains (Ozer & Benet-Martinez,2006).

The assertion that Spence and Grant’s(2005) findings do not provide strongevidence that personality change is possibleis correct, if taken in isolation and withoutconsideration of the design of their study.Nevertheless, we think a number of addi-tional points are relevant to this discussion.The arguments presented in Martin, Oadesand Caputi (2012) proposing that person-ality appears amenable to change were basedon the combined findings of several studiesand reviews not discussed in the response(Block & Singh, 2007; Boyce, Wood &Powdthavee, 2012; Clark, 2009; Maddux etal., 2009; Piedmont & Ciarrocchi, 1999;Robinson, 2009; Tang et al., 2009). Thecombined findings of this body of literaturein our opinion suggest that personalityappears amenable to change, and as a corol-lary, further exploration of this possibility ina coaching context appears warranted.

In Spence and Grant (2005), althoughfindings on personality change were notstrong, significant change was neverthelessfound. Furthermore, the more modest find-ings in Spence and Grant (2005) on person-ality change (compared to goal attainment)may have been more a product of the studydesign than personality being resistant tochange. In this study, goal attainment was

Rejoinder

What is personality change coaching andwhy is it important? A response to Martin, Oades & CaputiLesley S. Martin, Lindsay G. Oades & Peter Caputi

Lesley S. Martin, Lindsay G. Oades & Peter Caputi


specifically targeted with the coaching strate-gies, while personality change was not specifi-cally targeted. Variables that are specificallytargeted with coaching interventions may beexpected to change more than variables thataren’t specifically targeted. This line ofthinking is illustrated in Spence and Grant(2007) when they discuss the minimalchange achieved on well-being in a goalfocused life coaching study. They state‘While the minimal impact of life coachingon well-being was surprising, it may be partlyexplained by the design of the study. First,the current intervention was goal-focusedrather than targeted at enhancing well-being, and other coaching interventionsspecifically targeted at increasing well-beingmay have an effect where this interventiondid not’ (p.192). Hence, the more signifi-cant change on goal attainment as comparedto personality reported in Spence and Grant(2005) may have been influenced by person-ality not being targeted. Therefore, it doesnot necessarily suggest that personality is lessamenable to change, or less worthy offurther investigation. From my perspective,the modest but significant changes inpersonality over 10 sessions of coaching, inthe absence of coaching strategies designedto change personality, raises some inter-esting research questions (e.g. could moretargeted personality change strategies attainstronger results).

In response to this line of enquiry, theauthors of this reply are currently devel-oping and empirically testing a model andstep-wise process of intentional personalitychange coaching, designed around the 30personality facets included in the NEO PI-R(Costa & McCrae, 1992). The process isdesigned around the client’s intrinsic moti-vation to increase or decrease a limitednumber of personality facets, chosen by theclient. The preliminary findings from this 54participant study, incorporating both a wait-list control between subjects design, and awithin subjects design, are very encouraging.Furthermore, preliminary findings from a

qualitative study of the clients’ perceptionsof personality change coaching are also verypositive, with some clients finding it ‘lifechanging’.

The conclusion in the short response thatSpence and Grant (2005) suggest coachingefforts can best be directed towards personalgoal attainment rather than personalitychange is one interpretation. From ourperspective, however, it is important thatcoaching research not only expands on ourexisting empirical knowledge (e.g. aroundgoal attainment) but also asks new questions(e.g. can coaching potentially facilitate clientchosen personality change goals, if the clientwishes to change?). Furthermore, the two arenot mutually exclusive. Personality changecoaching involves setting goals aroundpersonality traits or facets the client wishes toincrease or decrease (i.e. goal setting), imple-menting coaching strategies to support suchchange, and assessing progress toward thisgoal (i.e. goal attainment).

Personal goal attainment coaching hasalready received a good deal of attention inthe coaching literature (e.g. Spence &Grant, 2005; Grant, 2008; Green, Oades &Grant, 2006; Green, Grant & Rynsaardt,2007) while intentional personality changeas a goal pursued though coaching remainsrelatively unexplored. This gap in the litera-ture, combined with the above arguments,suggests that further exploration in this areaappears to be warranted.

The AuthorsLesley S. MartinSydney Business School,University of Wollongong.

Lindsay G. OadesAustralian Institute of Business Wellbeing,Sydney Business School, University of Wollongong.

Peter CaputiSchool of Psychology, University of Wollongong.


CorrespondenceLesley MartinPO Box 5059, Wollongong.NSW 2500, Australia.Email: [email protected] Telephone: (02) 4243 1323

Bloch, S. & Singh, B.S. (2007). Foundations of clinicalpsychiatry (3rd ed.). Melbourne: MelbourneUniversity Press.

Boyce, C.J., Wood, A.M. & Powdthavee, N. (2012). Is personality fixed? Personality changes as muchas ‘variable’ economic factors and more stronglypredicts changes to life satisfaction. SocialIndicators Research. Retrieved 7 November 2012,from:doi:http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11205-012-0006-z#page-1

Clark, L.A. (2009). Stability and change inpersonality disorder. Current Directions inPsychological Science, 18, 27–31.

Costa, P.T., Jr. & McCrae, R.M. (1992). Revised NEOPersonality Inventory (NEO PI-R) and NEO Five-Factor Inventory (NEO-FFI). Lutz, Florida:Psychological Assessment Resources, Inc.

Diener, E. & Lucas, R.E. (1999). Personality andsubjective well-being. In D. Kahneman, E. Diener& N. Schwarz (Eds.), Well-being: The foundations ofhedonic psychology (pp.213–229). New York:Russell Sage Foundation.

Govindji, R. & Linley, P.A. (2007). Strengths use, self-concordance and well-being: Implications forstrengths coaching and coaching psychologists.International Coaching Psychology Review, 2(2),143–153.

Grant, A.M. (2008). Personal life coaching forcoaches-in-training enhances goal attainmentand insight, and deepens learning. Coaching: An International Journal of Research,Theory andPractice, 1, 47–52.

Grant, A.M. (2012). An integrated model of goal-focused coaching: An evidence-based frameworkfor teaching and practice. International CoachingPsychology Review, 7(2), 146–165.

Green, S., Grant, A.M. & Rynsaardt. (2007).Evidence-based life coaching for senior highschool students: Building hardiness and hope.International Coaching Psychology Review, 2(1),24–32.

Green, L.S., Oades, L.G. & Grant, A.M. (2006).Cognitive-behavioural, solution-focused lifecoaching: Enhancing goal striving, well-being,and hope. The Journal of Positive Psychology, 1,142–149.

Maddux, R.E., Riso, L.P., Klein, D.N., Markowitz, J.C.,Rothbaum, B.O., Arnow, B.A. & Thase, M.E.(2009). Select comorbid personality disordersand the treatment of chronic depression withnefazodone, targeted psychotherapy, or theircombination. Journal of Affective Disorders, 117,174–179.

Martin, L.S., Oades, L.G. & Caputi, P. (2012). What ispersonality change coaching and why is itimportant? International Coaching PsychologyReview, 7(2), 185–193.

Ozer, D.J. & Benet-Martinez, V. (2006). Personalityand the prediction of consequential outcomes.Annual Review of Psychology, 57, 401–421.

Piedmont, R.L. & Ciarrocchi, J.W. (1999). The utilityof the Revised NEO Personality Inventory in anoutpatient, drug rehabilitation context.Psychology of Addictive Behaviors, 13, 213–226.

Roberts, B.W. & Mroczek, D. (2008). Personality traitchange in adulthood. Current Directions inPsychological Science, 17, 31–35.

Robinson, O.C. (2009). On the social malleability oftraits: Variability and consistency in Big 5 traitexpression across three interpersonal contexts.Journal of Individual Differences, 30, 201–208.

Spence, G.B. & Grant, A.M. (2005). Individual andgroup life-coaching: Initial findings from arandomised, controlled trial. In M. Cavanagh, A.M. Grant & T. Kemp (Eds.), Evidence-basedcoaching (pp.143-158). Bowen Hills, Australia:Australian Academic Press.

Spence, G.B. & Grant, A.M. (2007). Professional andpeer life coaching and the enhancement of goalstriving and well-being: An exploratory study,Journal of Positive Psychology, 2, 185–194.

Tang, T.Z., DeRubeis, R.J., Hollon, S.D., Amsterdam,J., Shelton, R. & Schalet, B. (2009). Personalitychange during depression treatment: A placebocontrolled trial. Archives of General Psychiatry, 66,1322–1330.

References

A response to Martin, Oades & Caputi


OVER 120 delegates and speakers cametogether from around the globe toshare two days of knowledge transfer,

networking, learning, informing, inspiringand being inspired on the fun-filled AnnualConference of the British PsychologicalSociety Special Group in CoachingPsychology (SGCP).

In response to the SGCP member surveyat the beginning of 2012, the SGCP AnnualConference, in its eighth year, has under-gone a major re-vamp this time both bymoving to Birmingham, away from the tradi-tional London location, and also by beingdivided into two distinct days, one dedicatedto Masterclasses and the other to a healthybalance of practitioner sessions, keynotes,workshops and focused papers.

The conference theme, ‘Puttingcoaching psychology into practice: Anevidence-based approach’, originated from

the 2011 conference dinner’s provocativeguest speaker, Professor Rob Briner, himselfnot a coaching psychologist but avidpromoter of evidence-based psychologypractice, who posed the challenging ques-tion whether there is evidence in ourpractice at all and if there is, how robust is it?

Coaching psychology has come of age:these challenging questions can be confi-dently answered with a loud ‘YES’. The twoconference keynotes in 2012, one deliveredby Professor Briner, the other by Dr TatianaBachkirova, beautifully complemented eachother on this topic, openly and honestlyraising the questions around validity and biasin research. The wealth of research papersand posters in this conference demonstratedthe rapidly growing research activity incoaching psychology. But this conferencewas not only about academic research, it wasmore than ever before, about translating

Report

Special Group in Coaching Psychology 8th Annual ConferenceJudit Varkonyi-Sepp

ASTON UNIVERSITY LAKESIDE CONFERENCE CENTRE


research into practice, recognising thecomplex needs of our inclusive community:researchers, practitioner coaching psycholo-gists, coaches, and everyone interested inpsychology behind coaching.

A gorgeous location, Aston UniversityLakeside Conference Centre, gave home tous for the two days, fully dedicated to ourconference. Delegates fed back howwelcoming and friendly the location and theentire conference was, with plenty of space,time and opportunity to interact, network,learn from each other and have fun. On theevening of the first day we were invited to asemi-structured playful networking activitydesigned to break the ice but by that timethe ice melted so much that many delegateswere already deeply engaged in enjoyableconversations with their new friends. Foodwas plenty and good – always a very impor-tant part to any conference, although whenit is really good it is usually not being givenspecial thoughts: and just as well.

With the limitations of a printed article, itis difficult to give a detailed enough accountof this most enjoyable event, so all we canattempt is describe a few highlights.Through our other publications we willcontinue to give further accounts of ourconference proceedings.

Masterclasses on day one spanned overfive hours, a long enough time to really getinto the depth of the topic and choosing towhich one to go to was an agonising deci-sion; we wished we could clone ourselves. ToVicki Vandeveer’s session on self as a keyinstrument in executive coaching webrought our own practical examples andexperiences and after a wonderfully enter-taining introduction she facilitated ourdiscussion forum with openness and genuinecuriosity, maximising our learning duringthe session and we had so much fun, too! We looked into how our own life experi-ences, beliefs, values and our developmentinfluence what goes on in the coaching rela-

PROFESSOR SARAH CORRIE

Special Group in Coaching Psychology 8th Annual Conference

Judit Varkonyi-Sepp


tionship and especially contemplated overthose difficult cases when in the first sessionyou already give up, wondering what yourcoachee is playing at, as they are notengaged. However, we concluded throughcase studies and discussions, many timesthere is much more than meets the eye, andwe ought to give a chance to the ‘difficultcases’ as well. The learning from this sessionis transferable to many other coachingdomains.

Professor Mary Watts’ Masterclass exam-ined a similar topic from a different angle,focused on the ‘I’ and ‘WE’ in transforma-tional leadership, concluding that leader-ship is for all, not just a select few. Learninghow to ‘grow’ it both in ourselves and inothers can be fun and productive. This work-

shop focused on how we can do this. Wewere acquainted with the LEAD LEARN andGROW Model, drawing particular attentionto the ‘I’ – ‘WE’ dynamics followed by ahighly interactive work integrating personalinsights, psychological theory and researchwith the model and the wider application ofthis in multiple contexts. We finished the dayrecognising that there is still work to be donein the leadership area and that coachingpsychologists are in an ideal position to usetheir knowledge and skills, in a collaborativemanner, to bring about change.

A whole afternoon in a Masterclasslistening to and learning from Dr DavidDrake was a real treat. As ever a wonderfuland thoughtful facilitator who conveyedserious concepts as well as allowing for

CONFERENCE TWEET WALL

laughter and enjoyment, David’s masterclassfocused on ‘narrative disintegration’ (thepast) and ‘narrative reintergration (thefuture), by building a relationship of safety,stability and security and then finding theopening to shift the story. He got us to writeabout a personal core strength and thentook it beyond to the shadow, that is, lookingat when the strength does not help us, whatwe have sacrificed in life because of thestrength. Using a delegate’s story a narrativeand chair moving/inhabiting sequencedemonstrated the power of a strength’sshadow in our life story and how being intouch with this helps us to mature ourstrengths and channel our energy into livinglife fully. Grouping into four archetypesfollowed and created movement andlaughter, but with a deeper message of beingaware of moving about them, when are theymost helpful to us, rather than becomingstuck. As David pointed out, growth happensin the in-between – which is where coachingplays its part ‘providing the scaffolding tocross the threshold’.

The conference day offered us topicsfrom looking at coaching psychology appli-cation in the broader context like decisionmaking in the coaching process by ProfessorSarah Corrie, and Professor David Lane andClaire Collin’s session into understandingthe evolution of coaching relationship tovery specialist topics such as animal-assistedcoaching by Dr Dasha Grajfoner and usingcoaching to improve dyslexia and dyspraxiain the workplace by Nancy Doyle.

An engaging session with a fabulousspeaker, Professor Erik de Haan, set thescene by presenting the findings of thecommon ingredients in effective psycho-therapy research. Because of this, he argued,there wouldn’t be the funding for coachingresearch, like there is of psychotherapy.What was interesting to me, was that theschool of thought underlying the therapist’stechnique did not impact on the outcomes;what made the difference was their convic-tion to the school of thought. Twenty yearsafter the first coaching studies we are now

starting to see some robust research ofcoaching outcomes, one of which is from theVrije Universiteit in Amsterdam andAshridge collaborating with coaches. Thisresearch aims to assess how different vari-ables about the coach and coachee affect thecoaching relationship and coachingoutcomes (directly and indirectly). If youwant to be a part of this research, Erik encourages everyone to go to:www.ashridge.org.uk/centreforcoaching formore information.

Griff Griffiths provided a fascinating lookat using positivity (as defined by BarbaraFriedrickson) as a measure of impactthroughout an organisational changeprogramme underpinned by coaching. Afterthe initial traditional results, Griff openedup a exciting world of graphs based on‘chaos theory’ that made the data muchmore interesting to look at in terms ofresults. Although more data is required, theswirly graphs, of which we are promisedmore of next year, showed how positivity oneday was linked to positivity the next.

Case studies speak the loudest for ourpractice and this year’s one, coachingpsychology application in the NHS in Mid-Cheshire Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust,provided an insight into how one element ofthe NHS has sought to transform its ways ofworking to leverage the maximum benefitfor patients and markedly increase staff satis-faction and well-being.

Research papers presented fascinatingtopics, amongst others linking MBTI to theclient’s stage of development, the evolutionof coaching and coaching psychology inItaly, a critical evaluation of coachingpsychology outcome research in executivecoaching, coaching training in Bahrain andthe role for the coach to adapt responsibly totheir coachee to realise shared goals.

The conference also celebrated threeResearch Award winners: Jonathan Passmorewas presented with the Coaching PsychologyResearch Award; Belinda Ryding won for herMaster’s Research; and Angelina Bennettwon for her PhD research work.


Special Group in Coaching Psychology 8th Annual Conference


Judit Varkonyi-Sepp

The workshop Professor Stephen Palmerfacilitated focused on resilience coaching.Working in pairs throughout we wereencouraged to apply the techniques andprinciples discussed to ourselves. Ratherthan delving straight into tools and tech-niques to enhancing resilience, Stephenasked us first to explore what sort of thingswe experience that reduce our resilienceand what boost our resilience. A key issuethat came out of that for me was ‘tiredness’and how for just about everyone in the roomit lowers our resilience. The importance,therefore, of looking after our bodies as wellas our mind was reinforced. Moving on toour minds Stephen introduced varioususeful tools and techniques to apply in acoaching session that would benefit fromenhancing resilience. A thoroughly worth-while session!

Dr Julie Allan stepped in at the lastminute, as one of our speakers could notattend the conference. And boy, was she bril-liant in this ad-hoc session! Julie’s interest,and may we say passion, is about ethicalissues. The word ‘ethics’ might send shiversdown one’s spine thinking about this as anabstract, boring, legislation-filled dry topic,but it is not. Julie skilfully and engaginglyguided us through a variety of areas whereethical dilemmas emerge and then weworked in smaller groups to discuss ourpracice and how we deal with certain ethicalquestions. Ethics is there everywhere in whatwe do and it was a lightbulb moment torecognise how very practical it is.

We were fortunate enough to enjoy thecontribution of international invitedspeakers. Our third keynote speaker, Dr Vicki V. Vandeveer, had come over fromthe US and represented the Society ofConsulting Psychologists, Section 13 of APA.Her engaging presentation was arounddevelopment of coaching psychology in theUS and who would have believed that ourBig Brother looks upon us in this field astheir inspirational mentor! Dr David Drakewho is currently based in Sydney, Australia,

delivered a workshop on the coaches’ devel-opment. Nic Eddy, from Australia, wasworking with us around the simple, quitesubtle moments in the coaching process thatcan introduce unrealised limitations on theexperience and outcome for the coachee –the most dangerous moments in coaching.He said that if the practice of coachingpsychology is as valuable as we believe it tobe, then this implies being better equippedat identifying and avoiding some of thecommon assumptions and methodologicalconstraints that many coaches either intro-duce inadvertently into their coachingpractice or encounter as a result of adoptingless rigorously-based processes and frame-works. Other international contributionswere via research papers and posters andcovered insights on coaching and coachingpsychology development from Italy throughSpain to Bahrain.

Although the speakers represented avariety of coaching/coaching psychologydomains, what stands out is that many of thechallenges, findings, questions and possiblesolutions are very transferable across fields ofpractice in the coaching psychology arena.The emphasis is turning more towards whatis happening in the coaching relationshipand what is the effect on this relationship ofthe coach’s internal experiences: in essencethe interpersonal and the coach’s intraper-sonal processes are getting into focus tobetter understand what makes the coachingprocess work and what hinders it.

With a lot of very positive feedback fromdelegates, speakers, sponsors and the confer-ence organisers, the work has already startedto ensure the SGCP European Conferenceto be held in Edinburgh this comingDecember, be at least as engaging andinspiring as the Birmingham conference.

Thank you to delegates who provided their input tothis article.

Judit Varkonyi-Sepp


Letter from the new Chair of the SGCP

IN DECEMBER 2012, at the AnnualConference in Aston, I took over fromMary Watts as Chair of the SGCP. It is a

real honour to have been appointed to thisposition, to have the opportunity to playsuch a key role in the SGCP, and to be soclosely involved with a discipline that has somuch to offer.

Having been Chair Elect for just under ayear, I have been able to work closely with mycolleagues on the Committee and have bene-fited enormously from the energy, commit-ment, knowledge and experience that theybring to the work of the SGCP. I would liketo thank all of them for welcoming me to mynew role and for the privilege of workingwith them over the last few months – a privi-lege which I am very much looking forwardto continuing in the year ahead. Not leastamongst these colleagues is Mary Wattswhom I would like to thank for her leader-ship over the last year and whom, on apersonal level, I would like to thank forsharing so generously her experience andknowledge on many different levels.

For those of you who don’t yet know me,my first Chair’s Letter also gives me anopportunity to introduce myself. I am aVisiting Professor at Middlesex Universityand currently work as a coaching psycholo-gist, trainer, supervisor and consultant.Much of my career has been concerned with,and driven by, a fascination for how individ-uals learn and how, as coaches, we can bestfacilitate the learning of others. I come tocoaching psychology from a clinical andcounselling psychology background and mywork as a coaching psychologist reflects thisdiversity, with a particular interest in healthand well-being, and performance coaching,

and the interface between coaching, adulteducation and the psychotherapies. And,perhaps also important to state, is the factthat I am a beneficiary of coaching myself,being the client of a skilled, thoughtful andempowering coach. So I have first-handexperience of how transformationalcoaching can be.

The qualities that I value most about thefield of coaching psychology were very muchin evidence at the December conference.The wide variety of domains in which wecollectively practice means that we have thepotential to reach an ever-increasingnumber of individuals and organisationswho can benefit from what coachingpsychology has to offer. We are a diversegroup of theorists, researchers and practi-tioners which I believe is cause for celebra-tion and one of the hallmarks of our identity.And yet, as our theoretical underpinningsand models of practice become established,I was struck how a key theme of the confer-ence was a call to evidence our claims, to ensure that our commitment to scientificrigour keeps us grounded in what is actually

Report

Special Group in Coaching Psychology NewsSarah Corrie


Author name

known and prevents well-meaning butmisplaced enthusiasm from leading us astray.

I came away from the conference feelinggrateful to everyone who had participated sofully and shared their knowledge, experi-ence and skill so generously. The energy andcreativity that was present left me inspiredand thankful once again to be part of thisemerging profession. And to those of youwho perhaps have never ventured to one ofour annual conferences, may I warmlycommend them to you. You will find them awelcoming and inclusive place to be, withvaluable opportunities for networking andenhancing your learning, through some ofthe high calibre work that the field is gener-ating.

As I look forwards, I am anticipating abusy, demanding and exciting time for all ofus at SGCP. At the forefront of my mind isthe very important matter of capitalising onthe British Psychological Society’s recentlylaunched post-qualification Register. This isa highly significant development for the fieldand in progressing this, our focus will be onhow we can best meet the needs for thetraining and credentialing of all ourmembers – including those who practicecoaching but are not eligible to join theRegister.

Now is also a time when we are planningour next European Conference inDecember 2013, as well as our rapidlyapproaching 10th Anniversary in December2014. We would welcome your thoughts onboth of these events to ensure that they arethe celebrations they deserve to be. And, of course, the Committee always welcomesexpressions of interest of involvement. If youwould like to learn more about the work ofthe SGCP and its various working parties, orthink that you might like to becomeinvolved, please contact us. We would love tohear from you.

In the meantime, I look forward toworking closely with you, and on your behalf,during what promises to be an eventful and,hopefully, highly productive year.

With my very best wishes.

Sarah CorrieChair, SGCP.

Sarah Corrie


Report

Interest Group in Coaching Psychology NewsDavid Heap

ON BEHALF OF THE NationalCommittee I’d like to thank all ourmembers for the great support you

have shown the Interest Group in CoachingPsychology throughout 2012. Last year was avery successful year with the InternationalCongress in Coaching Psychology at Manlyin May, as well as the numerous state-basedprofessional development activities we haverun throughout the year across Australia. I’d also like to congratulate those involved inthe re-establishment of the South Australianand West Australian branches, so that we areonce again truly a national organisation.

2013 is shaping up to be just as successful,starting with national tours by Donna Karlinand Sunny Stout-Rostron over February andMarch.

As well as Donna and Sunny, we are alsoplanning to run a series of National eventsacross 2013 around the theme of ‘TheFuture of Coaching’. We are currently plan-ning the details of this and the specific activ-ities should be public by the time this editionof the ICPR is published.

Although 2012 was a very successful yearfor the Interest Group in CoachingPsychology in terms of staging professionaldevelopment events, there are a number ofareas in which the National Committeebelieves we can better meet the challengesfacing coaching psychology and coachingpsychologists. The positioning of coachingpsychologists in the coaching marketplace,especially in the eyes of potential clients, thecontinuing impact of Standards Australia’sGuidelines on Coaching in Organisations, therelative lack of published Australian researchin coaching psychology, professional accredi-tation and recognition of coachingpsychology credentials, and our relationships

with other groups in the coaching industryare all challenges for us in 2013.

We have formed five sub-committees todirectly address these challenges. 1. Marketing and branding: How can

coaching psychology be positioned in thecoaching marketplace for the maximumbenefit to coaching psychologists and ourclients? We aim to publish a handbookon marketing your services for coachingpsychologists in the first half of 2013.

2. Research/publishing: Whilst Australia inmany respects led the way for researchdriven and evidence-based coaching, wehave fallen behind in the quality andquantity of research papers published inthis and other publications. We will belooking to stimulate research and toencourage papers to be published tohelp restore Australia’s leadership inevidence-based coaching psychology.

3. Membership generation: We are lookingto improve the appeal of belonging to the Interest Group in Coaching


Author name

Psychology and are considering variousoptions to attract new members andretain existing members. Optionsinclude distributing hard copies of theICPR, strengthened connections andshared benefits with other coachingpsychology associations as well asaccreditation.

4. Accreditation for members: One of thepurposes of professional associations is toprovide recognition of their members’professionally relevant skills andcredentials to help signal their expertiseto clients and colleagues. We will beinvestigating what we can do within thescope of an APS Interest Group.

5. Liaison with other associations andinstitutions: Coaching is a relatively newarea of psychology and so we do not havethe same relationships with Universities

as do the Colleges. We also practice in anarea of psychology where mostpractitioners (coaches) are notpsychologists. We need to make more ofan effort to reach out to other groupsand bodies involved in coaching andforge strong connections with them forcoaching psychology to have theinfluence it deserves.

We are looking forward to continuing togrow and explore coaching psychology withyou throughout 2013.

Best wishes.

David HeapNational Convener,APS Interest Group in Coaching Psychology.

David Heap

Australian Psychological Society IGCP National Committee

From L to R: Genevieve Moore, Nic Eddy, Claire Nabke-Hatton, Peter Zarris, Vicki de Prazer, Vicki Crabb, Aaron McEwan, Patrea O’Donoghue. Seated: David Heap.

(Absent members: Nanette McComish, Patrizia Santoriello, Naomi Harrison)

THE Special Group in Coaching Psychology is keen to support research into coaching andcoaching psychology and offers a number of awards for researchers in this field. We are pleased to share the details of last year’s winners.

The winner of 2012 SGCP Research Awardfor a Distinguished Research Project inCoaching Psychology was Professor JonathanPassmore. The award was given for ProfessorPassmore’s research into the psychology ofcoaching as a learning methodology andsafety intervention in learner driving and itssubsequent impact on driver trainingpractice in the UK. The research focused onreal world challenges, incorporating beliefsas well as behavioural change through thecoaching interventions researched. Thecollaboration with the driving industry wasnoted.

Two Student Project Awards werepresented for Distinguished StudentResearch Projects in 2012. Dr AngelinaBennett was the recipient of the Doctorallevel award, and Belinda Rydings was therecipient of the Master’s level award.

Dr Bennett’s award was for her compre-hensive research into the use of psycholog-ical type in developmental coaching whichwas original and thoughtful in design. Thecollection of studies contributed new knowl-edge to the profession of coachingpsychology and to the practice of coaching,as well as informing the literature of devel-opmental coaching.


Report

SGCP Research Award Winners 2012Alison Whybrow

Professor Jonathan Passmore Dr Angelina Bennett

Belinda Rydings award was for herresearch into Imposter Syndrome. Her workapproached this body of work from a newperspective using an effective qualitativeresearch methodology. The research willhave wide appeal for coaching psychologistsas Imposter Syndrome is a potentiallycommon issue and the findings are ‘straightfrom the coach’s mouth’.

If you are interested in submitting yourresearch for consideration in 2013, please goto http://www.sgcp.org.uk/sgcp/news/sgcp-awards.cfm for details of eligibility andrequirements.

The AuthorDr Alison WhybrowChair of the SGCP Research Awards Paneland SGCP Research Officer.Email: [email protected]

SGCP Ressearch Award Winners 2012

Belinda Rydings

Alison Whybrow



Notes

4. Online submission process(1) All manuscripts must be submitted to a Co-ordinating Editor by email to:

Stephen Palmer (UK): [email protected] Cavanagh (Australia): [email protected]

(2) The submission must include the following as separate files:● Title page consisting of manuscript title, authors’ full names and affiliations, name and address for corresponding author.● Abstract.● Full manuscript omitting authors’ names and affiliations. Figures and tables can be attached separately if necessary.

5. Manuscript requirements● Contributions must be typed in double spacing with wide margins. All sheets must be numbered.● Tables should be typed in double spacing, each on a separate page with a self-explanatory title. Tables should be comprehensible

without reference to the text. They should be placed at the end of the manuscript with their approximate locations indicated inthe text.

● Figures can be included at the end of the document or attached as separate files, carefully labelled in initial capital/lower caselettering with symbols in a form consistent with text use. Unnecessary background patterns, lines and shading should be avoided.Captions should be listed on a separate page. The resolution of digital images must be at least 300 dpi.

● For articles containing original scientific research, a structured abstract of up to 250 words should be included with theheadings: Objectives, Design, Methods, Results, Conclusions. Review articles should use these headings: Purpose, Methods, Results,Conclusions.

● Overall, the presentation of papers should conform to the British Psychological Society’s Style Guide (available at www.bps.org.uk/publications/publications_home.cfm in PDF format). Non-discriminatory language should be used throughout. Spelling should beAnglicised when appropriate. Text should be concise and written for an international readership of applied psychologists.Sensationalist and unsubstantiated views are discouraged. Abbreviations, acronyms and unfamiliar specialist terms should beexplained in the text on first use.

● Particular care should be taken to ensure that references are accurate and complete. Give all journal titles in full. Referencingshould follow BPS formats. For example:Billington, T. (2000). Separating, losing and excluding children: Narratives of difference. London: Routledge/Falmer.Elliott, J.G. (2000). Dynamic assessment in educational contexts: Purpose and promise. In C. Lidz & J.G. Elliott (Eds.),

Dynamic assessment: Prevailing models and applications (pp.713–740). New York: J.A.I. Press.Palmer, S. & Whybrow, A. (2006). The coaching psychology movement and its development within the British Psychological

Society. International Coaching Psychology Review 1(1), 5–11.● SI units must be used for all measurements, rounded off to practical values if appropriate, with the Imperial equivalent in

parentheses.● In normal circumstances, effect size should be incorporated.● Authors are requested to avoid the use of sexist language.● Authors are responsible for acquiring written permission to publish lengthy quotations, illustrations, etc. for which they do not

own copyright.

6. Brief reportsThese should be limited to 1000 words and may include research studies and theoretical, critical or review comments whose essentialcontribution can be made briefly. A summary of not more than 50 words should be provided.7. Publication ethicsBPS Code of Conduct – Code of Conduct, Ethical Principles and Guidelines.Principles of Publishing – Principle of Publishing.

8. Supplementary dataSupplementary data too extensive for publication may be deposited with the British Library Document Supply Centre. Such materialincludes numerical data, computer programs, fuller details of case studies and experimental techniques. The material should besubmitted to the Editor together with the article, for simultaneous refereeing.

9. Post acceptancePDF page proofs are sent to authors via email for correction of print but not for rewriting or the introduction of new material.

10. CopyrightTo protect authors and publications against unauthorised reproduction of articles, The British Psychological Society requires copyrightto be assigned to itself as publisher, on the express condition that authors may use their own material at any time withoutpermission. On acceptance of a paper, authors will be requested to sign an appropriate assignment of copyright form.

11. Checklist of requirements● Abstract (100–200 words).● Title page (include title, authors’ names, affiliations, full contact details).● Full article text (double-spaced with numbered pages and anonymised).● References (see above). Authors are responsible for bibliographic accuracy and must check every reference in the manuscript and

proofread again in the page proofs.● Tables, figures, captions placed at the end of the article or attached as separate files.

St Andrews House, 48 Princess Road East, Leicester LE1 7DR, UKTel 0116 254 9568 Fax 0116 227 1314 E-mail [email protected] www.bps.org.uk

© The British Psychological Society 2013Incorporated by Royal Charter Registered Charity No 229642

Contents4 Editorial: Research in Coaching Psychology: Qualitative and Practitioner Perspectives

Stephen Palmer & Michael CavanaghPapers6 Signalling a new trend in executive coaching outcome research


20 ‘The assessment needs to go hand-in-hand with the debriefing’: The importance of a structured coaching debriefing in understanding and applying a positive psychology strengths assessmentBrenda Roche & Kate Hefferon

35 Towards a systems model of Coaching for Learning: Empirical lessons from the secondary classroom contextQing Wang

54 Developing a healthcare leadership coaching model using action research and systemsapproaches – a case study: Implementing an executive coaching programme tosupport nurse managers in achieving organisational objectives in MaltaHo Law & Reggie Aquilina

72 A framework for family life coachingKimberly Allen

Practitioner-based Research80 The experience of team coaching: A dual case study


Response99 What is personality change coaching and why is it important?

A response to Martin, Oades & CaputiHugh McCredie

Rejoinder101 What is personality change coaching and why is it important?

A response to Martin, Oades & CaputiLesley S. Martin, Lindsay G. Oades & Peter Caputi

Reports104 Special Group in Coaching Psychology 8th Annual Conference

Judit Varkonyi-Sepp

109 Special Group in Coaching Psychology NewsSarah Corrie

111 Interest Group in Coaching Psychology News David Heap

113 SGCP Research Award Winners 2012Alison Whybrow

international coaching psychology revieworganisationalpsychology.nz/wp-content/uploads/... · and...

Documents