The progression of coaching may benefit from dedicated research and evaluation that add value to our profession.
An interesting question has been raised by articles on theoretical models applied to coaching: ‘Can ideas from therapy inform coaching?’ If the issues faced by coaches are the same as for therapists then the transposition may work. If not, the ‘range of convenience’ of the theory then becomes critical.
For example, ideas from cognitive therapy the way in which we let our thinking disturb us feature prominently in coaching books. The research behind these ideas is sound, including work from studies of depression. Research into depression, having uncovered the relationship between thinking patterns and symptoms, correctly sought treatments that corrected those faulty patterns. So, can we take that research into depression and assume it applies to coaching or should we seek new research into factors that we know are relevant in coaching?
Let’s suggest that the client wants to look at performance and overcoming difficulties. It may be that disturbed thinking is behind the difficulty, but this assumption takes the cognitive theory beyond the range of the research. Without new research we have no reason for believing that a cognitive coaching model has validity, because it is derived from research in a different arena. This is not only an argument about cognitive behavioural therapy but applies to the research base of any theory that is applied outside of its range. The idea of range of convenience means we may need to develop coaching-specific models, rather than using therapy-based ones. In the absence of research we draw on what we have, but we must do so with caution. The therapy models were developed from a specific research base, and it is not good practice to apply research that has a different constituent.
Cavanagh & Grant argue that we can adapt models in the interim but must do so with care, and propose using multiple models to meet the breadth of needs arising in coaching. Care implies that we apply ideas within the range of convenience. If our coaching is skills-based, then psychological understanding of skills, from behavioural and humanistic and sports sciences, may fall within the range. If our coaching is performance-based, ideas from performance management in the organisational and business sciences may have credence. If our aim is developmental, then learning theory, intellectual capital and knowledge development models may offer a guide.
For single theory models there are strengths:
- You can gain high degree of competence
- You can clearly define strengths and limitations
- You can review and undertake research
- You can link purpose, perspective and process
- Your client offer is clearer
Multiple models enable you to:
- Protect the client (individual, team, or organisation) from limited value provision
- Monitor, develop and explore from varied perspectives
- Assist development by comparing and contrasting
- Ensure coaching is applied ethically and effectively as the best fit to issues raised
- Offer client choices beyond specific orientations
- Ensure science-based practice – testing via different viewpoints
Coaching-specific research into both single and multiple model use is needed, as well as frameworks for integration. Coaching covers a wide area of practice settings – beyond the scope of any one model. However, coaching-specific research is emerging. Getting practitioners to report on their findings will contribute to a debate on what works, for whom, when, where and why. From the case studies reported in the CIPD research, The Case for Coaching (see p57), it is clear that practitioners are advancing practice-based research. We can look forward to research based in new coaching-led models so that our practice is underpinned by theory which is built within a new understanding. J
David A Lane is a coach and academic. He is visiting professor to the School of Education at Middlesex University and has been an executive coach for 20 years. David is research director at the International Centre for the Study of Coaching at Middlesex University and director of the Professional Development Foundation. He chairs the BPS Register of Psychotherapy and is convenor of the EFPA Psychotherapy Group. (A review of his latest book appears on p57)
“The idea of range of convenience means we may need to develop coaching-specific models”