fbpx
  • en
    • fr
    • de
    • it
    • es

What are typical characteristics of coaching process?

This article is a reprint of a Coaching Research in Practice (February, 2016). All ReciproCoaches receive complimentary limited-time access to each new issue (10 per year). For unlimited access to more than 10 years of Coaching Research in Practice archives, purchase a membership or a subscription.

 

The coaching field, including coaches, coaching organizations and the body of literature, has yet to agree on what constitutes a universal coaching process.

 

The research presented in this article highlights some findings of a recent study that identified a set of typical (and less typical) characteristics in the coaching process. The article also provides suggestions on how coaches may use this research to distinguish themselves as coaches and to make deliberate improvements to their coaching process.

 

COACHING RESEARCH:

 

In their paper “Developing and Applying a New Instrument for Microanalysis of the Coaching Process: The Coaching Process Q-Set” (2015), Tatiana Bachkirova, Jonathan Sibley and Adrian Christopher Myers, all experienced coaches, described the process by which they created a list of 80 statements to describe the coaching process. The process involved a series of focus groups, followed by evaluations from 167 coaches. Then, 41 coaches from 5 countries were asked to think about a typical coaching session and sort the statements according to the degree to which they perceived each process as “characteristic” or “uncharacteristic” of a typical coaching session.

 

Presented below are some of the descriptive statements of coaching processes submitted to data analysis and rated from most characteristic (+5) to least characteristic (-5) of a typical coaching session (drawn from pp. 449-451):

 

  • Coach asks questions helping the client to elaborate. +5
  • Coach asks questions that appear to open new possibilities for the client. +5
  • Coach inquires about client’s aim for the session. +4
  • There appears to be rapport (strong connection). +4
  • Coach shows empathy. +4
  • There is an exploration of the client’s underlying mind-set. +4
  • There is a discussion about the client’s overall goals. +3
  • Coach checks if her understanding is correct. +3
  • There is a sense of optimism in the coaching session. +3
  • Coach and client appear to be engaged. +3
  • There is an exploration of the client’s values. +3
  • Coach follows up on key/significant statements made by the client. +2
  • Coach and client appear to understand each other. +2
  • Coach initiates exploration of client’s resources and how they might be leveraged. +2
  • Coach and client explore the deeper meaning of a presenting issue. +2
  • Coach challenges client’s perspective of situation and/or self. +2
  • Coach points out recurrent theme in client’s behavior. +2
  • Coach encourages client to make choices. +1
  • There is discussion of the client’s progress. +1
  • Coach invites client to consider other people’s perspectives. +1
  • Coach gives feedback from coach’s experience of client. +1
  • Coach expands on client’s statements. +1
  • There is an exploration of the client’s environmental influences (e.g. organizational, family, politics, history). 0
  • Coach redirects client to client’s agenda. 0
  • There is a discussion of the client’s impact on his environment (e.g. organization, family). 0
  • Coach and client explore their differences in perception of the situation. 0
  • Coach asks for permission to give feedback. 0
  • Coach takes an active role in the session. 0
  • Coach broadens the focus of discussions. 0
  • Coach explains the reason behind using a specific intervention. 0
  • There is a discussion of external feedback. –1
  • Coach discloses own fallibility. –1
  • Coach makes explicit a shift in role during the session. –2
  • Coach points out potential unconscious motives of the client (out of client’s awareness). –2
  • Coach works with client’s apparent defensiveness. –2
  • There is a discussion of the results of a psychometric instrument. –2
  • There is a discussion of boundaries and/or ethical issues related to the coaching engagement. –2
  • Coach explores client’s level of engagement in coaching. –2
  • The session is fast-paced. –3
  • Coach encourages client to feel more deeply within session. –3
  • There is discussion of a potential referral to an outside specialist (e.g. therapist, doctor, financial advisor). –3
  • There is a discussion of issues related to the termination of coaching. –3
  • Coach gives advice. –4
  • Coach appears to focus on a third-party’s agenda. –4
  • The session appears highly structured. –4
  • Coach appears to be using an intervention mechanistically. –5
  • Coach appears to be pursing her own agenda. –5

 

In summary, a characteristic coaching session aims to focus on the client and ensure connection and positivity and a fluidity of process that is based on collaboration (rather than expert mode). A coach aims to be “of service to the concerns of the client” (p. 449). The coach asks questions to help the client make sense of their experience (as opposed to the coach’s experience of their situation). Understanding the client and addressing immediate in-session concerns is more important than speeding the process or holding the client accountable. “High value is given to the importance of connection, warmth, understanding and respect” (p. 450) with a sense of hope and positivity, and “[t]he coaching session is considered to be fluid and absorbing but not fast paced or highly structured” (p. 450) to ensure engagement as well as what is known as “flow” (Czikszentimihalyi). In this study, coaches did not tend to focus on “uncovering unconscious motivations or feelings as in some therapeutic contexts” (p. 450) and “deeper meanings of the client’s worldview or behavioral patterns” (p. 451).

 

 

IN PRACTICE:

 

Of course this research has application for coach training organizations, as well as assessment and regulatory bodies, and questions arise such as the degree to which the coaching of ICF, IAC, AC or EMCC credentialed/certified coaches reflect these characteristic tendencies.

 

In addition, these research findings also have highly practical application for coaches. The above list of processes may be easily converted into a tick sheet and used as a reflection tool after sessions or while listening to recorded sessions. After reflecting on several of your own sessions, you would soon see the characteristics of your coaching process.

 

Armed with this data about the characteristics of your own coaching process, not only will you be in a better position to distinguish yourself as a coach, but you will also be able to make conscious and deliberate changes to your coaching process by using this information to guide your choices for professional development, further training and self-study.

 

What do you think about these typical characteristics of coaching process? Share it here.

 

Reference:

Bachkirova, T., Sibley, J., & Myers, A. C. (2015). Developing and Applying a New Instrument for Microanalysis of the Coaching Process: The Coaching Process Q-Set. Human Resource Development Quarterly,26(4), 431-462.

 

Kerryn Griffiths (PhD – The Process of Learning in Coaching)
Global ReciproCoach Coordinator

 

Not yet a member?

Already a member?