What kind of coaching relationship best predicts coaching success?

This article is a reprint of a Coaching Research in Practice (May, 2014).

It is undeniable that the coach-coachee relationship is a foundation for coaching success. What is debatable however are which factors of a coach-coachee relationship ultimately lead to coaching success. This month’s issue of Coaching Research in Practice identifies the priority relationship factor that best predicts coaching success.

COACHING RESEARCH:

In his paper “Autonomy support, relationship satisfaction and goal focus in the coach-coachee relationship: which best predicts coaching success?” (2014), Anthony M. Grant highlights four aspects of the coach-coachee relationship that influence the success of coaching:

autonomy support (empathy, unconditional positive regard and trust)
how satisfied the coachee is with the coaching relationship
the ‘idealness’ of the coaching relationship
how goal focused the relationship is

The study involved conducting 4 coaching sessions over a 10-12 week period with 49 adults. Notably (as this may inhibit the findings’ relevance to coaching with the general public), every study participant was a student of coaching psychology at the time and all had not only a coach, but also a coachee i.e. it was a reciprocal peer coaching process.

The coaching program they delivered utilized a solutions-focused cognitive behavior therapy coaching process model (p. 25):

identify desired outcomes
delineate specific goals
enhance their motivation by identifying their personal strengths and building self-efficacy
identifying resources and formulating specific action plans
monitoring and evaluating change and
modifying and adapting action plans (where necessary)

Coaching success was measured by rating their goal attainment on a scale of 0% to 100% at the outset of coaching, rating the length of time they’d been trying to achieve the goal and at the conclusion of the program again rating their goal attainment.

Grant points out that the main difference distinguishing coaching from therapy is the importance of goals in the coaching relationship. Indeed, “virtually all definitions of coaching explicitly include references to creating specific outcomes for clients, so that they can achieve their personal or business goals” (p. 23).

Grant’s findings also indicate that “a goal-focused coach-coachee relationship was a unique and significantly more powerful predictor of coaching success” (p. 18) than the other factors listed above. “The more that the coach-coachee relationship was goal focused, the more successful the coaching engagement was likely to be” (p. 31). As Grant emphasizes, this “act[s] as an empirical counterpoint to … such conceptual propositions” as those that argue that “focusing on goals and outcomes can derail the coach-coachee relationship or can act as barrier to working with emergent issues within the complete dynamic system that is the coaching conversation” (p. 31). This is not unlike the suggestions made in the March 2014 issue of Coaching Research in Practice, To set goals, or not to set goals? Who gets to decide whether and what?

The autonomy support element of a coaching relationship was the ‘runner up’ to predicting coaching success, and because the perception of the ‘ideal’ coaching relationship was also linked to a goal-focused relationship, this too was an influential factor. In contrast, the coachee’s satisfaction with the coaching relationship did not predict coaching success.

IN PRACTICE:

In addition to the summary of a solutions-focused cognitive behavior therapy coaching process, which could serve to provide you with a simple, structured model of goal-focused coaching, Grant’s paper suggests two apparently essential practice points:

Use a goal attainment scaling (%) at the outset and the conclusion of coaching relationships. Goal attainment scaling was highlighted as an effective means of measuring coaching success, and effectively measuring coaching success is an essential data collection tool that can be used both to support and sell the value of coaching.
Incorporate goals and goal attainment into your coaching process. If this is the best predictor of coaching success, it would be wise to ensure that it is at the core of your coaching.

Not all coaches agree that goals need to be a part of coaching. To set goals, or not to set goals? Who gets to decide whether and what? highlights this argument. So, if after reading the March 2014 issue of Coaching Research in Practice you thought about tossing goals out of your coaching process or relaxed into a more meandering style of coaching, in the light of Grant’s paper, if coaching success is a priority for you, you might want to think again!

Reference:

Grant, A. M. (2014). Autonomy support, relationship satisfaction and goal focus in the coach-coachee relationship: which best predicts coaching success? Coaching: An International Journal of Theory, Research and Practice. 7(1), 18-38.

Translating coaching research into coaching practice,

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

Not yet a member?

Already a member?