Y. Gabriel, D.E. Gray, & H. Goregaokar (2013): 'Job loss and its aftermath among managers: wounded, fragmented and flexible'

I am pleased to announce that this article is to be published in early 2013 in Work, Employment and Society.

Abstract: 

Based on longitudinal fieldwork with unemployed managers and professionals in their 50s, the article examines the meaning of job loss to these people and charts their subsequent efforts to restore their lives. The article identifies core similarities in their experiences and discerns different narrative strategies through which they have tried to make sense of their dismissal and sustain their selfhood. For all, job loss was a considerable trauma leading to a fragmentation of identity; this was compounded by subsequent rejection and perceived discrimination. Few were able to resume their earlier careers; the majority had to adjust their expectations downwards and opt for either virtual deskilling in less well paid and less demanding jobs or for an assortment of part-time, casual and voluntary work. Best ‘adapted’ (and least fragmented) were those who were prepared to forsake hopes of a return to high-powered jobs and display flexibility, resourcefulness and opportunism in adapting to their reduced circumstance.

New article: International Journal of Selection and Assessment

I'm please to announce that an article entitled: A Five-Dimensional Model of Attributes:
Some precursors of executive coach selection is to be published in the above journal in December 2011. Here is a copy of the abstract:


The purpose of this study was to specify a set of attributes, identified as important precursors
to coach selection. Executive coaching has grown exponentially, but there have been few
studies as to the efficacy of coaching, including the factors that influence a manager’s choice
of coach.This study sought to identify these factors.The 45-item, online survey produced 267
useable responses. Results of the principal component analysis suggested a five-factor solution,
with women showing a statistically significant preference over men for coaches who have
the Ability to Develop Critical Thinking and Action, the Ability to Forge the Coaching Partnership ,and Coach Experience and Qualifications.The impact of coachee age was not significant in selecting executive coaches.The findings show a statistically significant relationship between coach attributes and the intention to continue with coaching. The implications of these
findings for the selection of coaches, and for the coaching profession are discussed.

Article: Professionalisation of coaching

I am pleased to announce that my latest article: 'Journeys towards the professionalisation of coaching: Dilemmas, dialogues and decisions along the global pathway' has just been accepted by the journal: Coaching: An International Journal of Theory, Research and Practice. The article should appear early in 2011.

Team Coaching and Action Learning

The Leadership Academy (http://www2.surrey.ac.uk/leadershipacademy/) held another successful event on 27th May, this on the theme of action learning. Designed and facilitated in collaboration with the International Foundation for Action Learning (http://www.ifal.org.uk/) the event explored definitions of action learning (the ‘classic’ Revans model compared with more flexible approaches) and included a number of experiential sessions.

One question which arose was: what is the difference between action learning and team coaching? Both, it would seem, are growing in popularity, but are they just different ways of describing the same thing? The answer which emerged from the event was probably not. In action learning, the role of the facilitator is to help the group give ‘space/air time’ to the person presenting their problem and to ensure that other members of the set ask open, insightful questions (not closed questions, or observations/opinions). The task of the set is focused on helping the presenter of the problem to gain insight into the problem and to formulate action. In team coaching, the facilitator’s role is that of coach. Here, the coaching conversation may be held with and between all members of the group, with the coach (rather than the set members) posing questions.

It is probable that both approaches offer powerful opportunities for learning. An interesting research question would be: does a combination of coaching and action learning work more effectively as a catalyst for learning than each intervention experienced separately?

Becoming a First-time Coach: some voices of aspirants, ‘newbies’ and ‘old hands’

This post describes the first stages in a new research study which will be completed by summer 2010.
Introduction
Like any expanding industry, coaching is drawing in new entrants from other occupations. In a survey, for example, the International Coach Federation (2007) found that 32 % of coaches had less than 2 years coaching experience. While many of these new entrants bring with them knowledge and experience from their original sectors (including human resource development, academia, teaching, counselling and the police, to name but a few), for most, the experience of becoming a coach is novel and brings with it the unique challenges of learning new skills, gaining confidence and building a new business. Coaching is also provided within organisations by internal human resource development (HRD) professionals, supervisors and managers, and by external HRD and management development consultants (Hamlin et al., 2008). Although on the payroll of an employer, even in these circumstances, novice coaches face the challenge of establishing their confidence, and credibility. In contrast to these new entrants are those for whom coaching has been a central part of their working lives and business for many years. So, and especially in current challenging business conditions, what kinds of help and advice can the more experienced coach offer to their first-time colleagues? Knowing what they know, is the coaching industry worth joining? If it is, what kinds of strategies should new coaches adopt in order to survive and flourish? What kinds of pitfalls are best avoided? What are the kinds of first steps that should be taken?

This article does not claim to offer a global, universal picture, or to give definitive answers on this issue, but attempts to illuminate some key themes that new entrants might like to consider. The inspiration for writing the article came from one of the authors attending the 2009 International Coach Federation (ICF) conference in Orlando, Florida. What was surprising about the conference was not just the number of coaches attending (of course), but the significant number of people who are currently in full-time employment (for example, in human resource development, information technology or consultancy) who see coaching as their next career move. They were attending the conference to learn more about the coaching industry, to discover new coaching approaches and techniques and to locate suitable training programmes and qualifications that they might wish to undertake. In a sense, this article is written for them, and for those who have recently made ‘the jump’ into the coaching profession.

First-timers: some lessons from other helping professions
In the ‘helping professions’ such as psychology, counselling and psychotherapy, the pathway from ‘aspirant professional’ to ‘professional in practice’ is, typically, accomplished by a number of stages and activities. These include: long periods of higher education and training, and a period of socialisation into professional values and skills development (in part delivered by supervision both in initial training and post-qualifying) (Webster, Hingley and Franey, 2000). According to Eraut (1994), however, the period in which novice professions have to develop their proficiency continues well after their qualification, with the first two or three years vital for acquiring personalised patterns of competent practice. It is at this point that novice professionals are most vulnerable and exposed. As Schon (1987, 1996) argues, a key is helping new practitioners to deal with real-world practice and how to problem-solve in situations of uncertainty, uniqueness and conflict. Hence, he recommends the development of the ‘reflective practicum’ (Schon, 1986: 16-17) in which new professionals learn to acquire skills in situations where there are no wrong or right answers (a situation not too dissimilar to coaching!). Indeed, he recommends that this process is coached by a more experienced practitioner. Within the practicum, the learner performs set tasks, with the role of the expert practitioner being to demonstrate skills, provide advice, question and criticize.

A study of the induction journey taken by 53 educational psychologists, found that their motivation for becoming a professional could be characterised by four clusters. First there were the pragmatists, those who wanted to use their new skills and knowledge to ‘make a difference’; then there were the ‘philanthropists’, those seeking to improve the lives of their clients; next came the ‘passionate psychologists’ who were fulfilling a strong (and emotional) career commitment to the profession – an overwhelming desire to do this kind of work; and finally, there were the ‘career psychologists’ with the role offering more status, autonomy and better working conditions (Webster, Hingley and Franey, 2000). Most were aware that professional training would have to continue well after the end of formal training, and that good quality supervision was essential. The research found that, for those in paid employment (as opposed to freelance consultancy) induction programmes that included shadowing senior colleagues (including opportunities to see demonstrations of professional techniques) and feedback from senior staff were all seen as vital. A review of critical incidents identified skills and knowledge gaps, interpersonal disagreements and ethical conflicts as areas of professional concern requiring further support.

As this description of induction into educational psychology shows, even where the profession is well established with formal training programmes, placements and arrangements for supervision, new entrants can still find the entry process daunting. So how much more difficult must this be for those wishing to enter the coaching profession? As Wilson (2007) points out, one of the advantages of becoming a coach is that it requires only a small financial outlay to start a business – essentially a business card, a telephone, a headset (if coaching is to be over the telephone) and the ability to create rapport. Some even start their own coaching business without having to give up their day job – gradually building up a set of clients before ‘taking the plunge’. Some also make the move into coaching by undertaking some training and then becoming an in-house coach (Wilson, 2007). However, while many of the professional coaching associations (such as the ICF and the European Coaching and Mentoring Council) offer training programmes or accredit training, none of these are compulsory, nor is membership of any association, or linking up with a supervisor. Hence, while many coaches undertake a professional training programme prior to entering the profession, or at least soon afterwards, many do not.

Then, there is the challenge of building a new (coaching) business. As Gray (in print) comments, many new or aspirant coaches lack both coaching experience and the ability to manage their own business. They face challenges such as identifying their own coaching niche or brand, designing and producing marketing material, networking and achieving referrals, finance and cash flow, and managing their time between coaching, marketing and other activities. Vilas (2005) advises that new coaches need to focus on building up their own networks of prospective clients, offer pro bono coaching at first if necessary and launch an e-newsletter. Intriguingly, she also suggests that coaches should also seek to improve the quality of their own lives – a personally content coach will be more effective in offering their services.

This research study, then, will seek to evaluate the hopes, fears and anxieties of coaches as they enter the industry, and the strategies they employ for survival and success. To provide a perspective on these findings, the study also seeks to explore the experiences of established coaches, to examine their journey to ‘sustainability’ to see what lessons can be learned.

References
Gray, D.E. (in print) ‘Towards the lifelong skills and business development of coaches: An
integrated model of supervision and mentoring’. Coaching: An International Journal of
Theory, Research and Practice.
Hamlin, R.G., Ellinger, A.D. and Beattie, R.S. (2008) ‘The emergent ‘coaching industry’: a wake-
up call for HRD professionals’. Human Resource Development International 11(3) 287-305.
Jabri, M. and Pounder, J. (2001) ‘The management of change: a narrative perspective on
management development’. Journal of Management Development 20(8) 682-690.
Schon, D. (1987) Educating the Reflective Practitioner. London: Jossey-Bass.
Schon, D. (1996) The Reflective Practitioner: How Professionals Think in Action. Hants: Arena.
Vilas, S. (2005) Becoming a Coach. Steamboat Springs, Colorado: Coach U Press.
Webster, A., Hingley, P. and Franey, J. (2000) ‘Professionalization and the Reduction of
Uncertainty: a study of new entrants to educational psychology’. Educational Psychology in
Practice, 16(4) 431-448.
Wilson, C. (2007) Best Practice in Performance Coaching. London: Kogan Page.

International Coaching Research Forum 2: Measure for Measure

I have just had the good fortune to attend this two-day London conference. There is really too much to report in just one blog post, so I'll start by focusing on one issue. More posts may follow.

Methodological and Measurement challenges in coaching research
How might you respond when you see a research article that claims that:'75% of coached respondents reported that thier relationships with others in their team had improved by 50%. At first sight this looks like a 'good result' for coaching, and adds further data to just how great coaching is. But does it?
Here are a number of questions we should ask before accepting this study at face value.
1 What was the quality of the inputs (e.g time, quality of the coaches)
2 What exactly was improved?
3 Did the respondents merely move from being 'Very ineffective' to just 'Ineffective'?
4 Who reported the changes - were these self -reports, with all the inherent biases of this approach.
One of the challenges faced by coaching researchers is defining what we actually mean by coaching - the precise nature of the intervetion. We also need proof that coaches actually do what they say they do or think they do. Furthermore, one of the most common research designs that we use, pre-post is inherently weak as a design; most of the measures that we use are not sensitive to detecting change. The impact of coaching may even work in a reverse direction (even though the intervention is effective!) For example, take a manager who is highly unreflective and rates herself quite highly on a trait; the effect of coaching might be to improve her reflection, with the result that she now rates herself lower on the trait because she has more self-understanding!
A better design than pre-post is the use of repeat measures both pre and post. Hence: AAABBB
In this design a series of repeat measures on the same person are taken (AAA); then repeat post measures are taken on this person (BBB). This allows for some stability of measurement.

Is coaching a profession?

The term ‘profession’ derives from the Latin word ‘profiteor’ meaning to profess. It implies, therefore, that a professional is someone who possesses knowledge (theoretical and practical) about a particular field. Professionalisation, is the process whereby a gainful activity moves from the status of ‘occupation’ to the status of ‘profession’ (Emener and Cottone, 1989). The literature offers three alternative models of professionalism. First, the Process Model explores the process through which an occupation becomes a profession (Ritzer, 1977). Professionalisation, then, is the sequence of stages of organisational change that must occur before an occupation can call itself a profession (Pickard, 2009; Wilensky, 1964). Second, the Structural-Functionalist Model which focuses on the characteristics that distinguish a profession from other occupations. These characteristics include: (a) a theoretical body of knowledge; (b) long specialised training for members to master the body of knowledge; (c) a service of altruism; (d) authority over clients; (e) professional autonomy; (f) community sanctions of professional norms are transgressed by a member; (g) the existence of a professional culture (Cullen, 1978; Ritzer, 1977). Third, the Power Model defines a profession in terms of its ability to obtain a set of rights and privileges from societal groups that might not otherwise be granted to them (Ritzer, 1977).

In a seminal paper, Goode (1960) outlines a range of features that an occupation acquires for it to become a profession, including:
• The profession determines its own standards of education and training
• Professional practice is often legally recognised by some form of license to practice
• Licensing and admission boards are manned by members of the profession
• Most legislation concerned with the profession is shaped by members of the profession themselves
• The practitioner is relatively free of lay evaluation and control
• The norms and practices enforced by the profession are more stringent than legal controls
• Members strongly identify with the profession and are affiliated to it
• Members see themselves as ‘tied’ to the profession and have no plans to leave it.

So, is coaching an occupation or profession? A glance at the web sites of some of the coaching associations suggests a claim for the latter. Certainly, there have been extensive moves over recent years, for example, to ensure that most of the associations have a written code of ethics that members are required to adhere to. There is also extensive education and training, including the creation of standards for coaching programmes.

Problems, however, remain. It would be difficult to argue that within coaching there is a'body of knowledge' that is widely accepted. Indeed, it could be argued that there are at least two strongly contested bodies of knowledge between psychological/therapeutic approaches to coaching and the more business focused approaches - to name but two.

At Surrey, we are currently completing the analysis of a major online survey (with 267 responses) that sought the views of managers (as beneficiaries of coaching) as to what they were looking for in a coach. Personal factors such as the coach's ability to listen, provide empathy and constructive support came out highly positively correlated with decisions to select a coach. However, criteria such as the possession of qualifications, including coaching qualifications, were negatively correlated with the decision to select a coach. So, far from coaching qualifications being seen as factor in choosing a coach, they tend to put people off! This finding is not good news for the coaching associations who see qualifications and credentialing as one of the cornerstones of the push towards professionalisation of the industry.

There is, however, an alternative perspective. Rather than placing the emphasis on formal qualifications, professionalisation could be nurtured through other forms of personal development. Mentoring by more experienced coaches would be just one possibility.
More details on the results of our survey will be provided in later reports on this site.

Do you have a view on whether coaching is, or should be a profession? If so, do post a comment.