Stephen Palmer & Michael Cavanagh

In this issue of the ICPR we have three types of research, empirical data on the outcomes of coaching interventions, empirical data on the internal dynamics of the coaching relationship and theoretical research into nature of the coaching enterprise.

Passmore and Gibbes present a thought provoking article on the state of executive coaching research. They draw parallels between the counselling research literature and the coaching literature, and identify a number of potential pitfall and suggestion for the future.

Feggetter reports on the results of a multi-method empirical study investigating return on investment (ROI) and success in gaining promotion among 10 high performing Ministry of Defence personnel. Her results suggest that participants rated the coaching positively and felt that their leadership skills had benefited. Although working with small sample sizes, preliminary results suggest a positive ROI beyond improved leadership, promotion and skills transfer.

Govindji and Linley present empirical evidence which supports the use of strengths based approach to coaching. Their study using 214 college students suggests that which suggest that when a strengths based approach is used, people are likely to experience an increased sense of authenticity, vitality and well-being.

Spence presents both the benefits and limitations of measuring progress in coaching using Goal Attainment Scaling. He presents in some detail this method of tracking progress and shows its applicability for both research and day to day practice.

Gyllensten and Palmer present qualitative data on the role of the coach-coachee relationship in the coaching engagement. While strong goal setting and performance enhancement are important features of coaching for clients, the authors also find that the relationship is highly valued aspect of the engagement. This value is related to the level of trust and transparency in the coaching relationship. This has clear implications both for the way in which coaches work with clients and for contracting on issues such as confidentiality.

Cox and Bachirova examine 39 coaches’ use of emotion in the coaching session. In this qualitative study they find that coaches tend to deal with difficult emotional one of four ways ranging from self reflection through to termination of the coaching engagement. This paper raises a number of issues regarding the boundary between coaching and therapy and for the training and supervision of coaches.

In two quite different ways, Stelter and Laske present papers which seek to understand the purpose of the coaching engagement. Stelter looks at coaching as a process of making meaning from a social constructivist and phenomenological perspective. Based on the work of Piaget and Kegan,among others, Laske takes a cognitive developmental perspective on the coaching enterprise. He presents a model of coaching which sees development as a gradual process of diminishing egocentricity.

The growing proportion of empirical papers in this issue appears to be indicative of a growing body of research and researchers in coaching. It is this growing research agenda that will ultimately determine the place of coaching and coaching psychology in the world.