Emma Short & Max Blumberg

In the five years since the inauguration of the SGCP, one of our core aims has been to encourage, promote and support the research and study of coaching psychology in a variety of personal, organisational and training contexts. Following the paper ‘What is research to the profession of coaching psychology and what is the SGCP doing to promote it?’ by Whybrow and Short (2008) in the last issue of The Coaching Psychologist (TCP), and the interest it received, we are introducing a new section in TCP called ‘Coaching Psychology in Action’. This coincides with the launch of The SGCP Interactive Forums, among which is a specific forum devoted to sharing ideas about research and sourcing participants for research that you are engaged in.

The purpose of ‘Coaching Psychology in Action’ is to provide an opportunity for professional coaching psychologists to discuss and develop the way in which research informs their practice. A hallmark of professional psychology - as promoted by the Society - is that member psychologists adhere to a scientist- practitioner model in order to maximise their credibility in the psychology and wider social communities, but what does this mean for a practising coaching psychologist? What exactly is the scientist-practitioner model? In essence, it recommends that psychologists adopt two interlinked roles in their work: that of Scientist and that of Practitioner.

The Practitioner role is probably the reason that many of us became psychologists in the first place. It is the work we do and interventions we apply in our everyday practices with clients and other stakeholders.

The role of scientist requires Society psychologists to use interventions based on evidence-based practice and to limit the use of anecdotal practices or those based on personal experience. But the role goes further than that, by asking that psychologists also add to the body of psychology knowledge by contributing scientific knowledge gained through their practice. Because there has been no formal ‘CPD’ for this scientist role, many practitioners gratefully leave it behind when they pass their final University dissertation!

In fact, many psychologists believe that scientific psychology - and coaching psychology is no exception - is the remit of ‘academics’ perhaps because as ‘real world practitioners’, they either find that scientific research too difficult, forget the value of qualitative enquiries or believe that conducting research does not yield direct financial benefits.

What exactly, then, are the benefits of adopting - at least occasionally - the ‘scientist’ role of the scientist-practitioner model?

(1) The very real evidence base we work from and contribute to, adds value and impact to clients. It is one of the ways we distinguish ourselves from nonpsychologist coaches who are also required to undertake CPD, but not required to base their interventions on evidence-based science. One clear benefit, therefore, is that scientific practice can be used to separate coaching psychologists from other coaches in the eyes of prospective clients.

If we wish to raise the profile of coaching psychology in the community and be recognised as a separate discipline - like organisational or clinical psychologists, for example, we need to demonstrate with some rigor how our interventions work and the impact they have.

If it is predominantly academics who document this emergent discipline, the diversity of practice and methods of observing the effectiveness of practice may not be fully represented. One reason for this is that it is relatively more difficult for academics to find context specific research samples than it is for those with everyday coaching practices. Therefore, the credibility of coaching psychology as a discipline can only be enhanced by encouraging the development of a body of research generated by coaching psychologists active in a diversity of settings.

(2) Many psychologists join the profession because they believe in the power of human development. This is probably even more so for coaching psychologists who often promote lifelong learning to their clients. Surely if we are to be authentic, we need to ensure our own continuous learning practice? The scientific route is an excellent way to achieve this and in addition, aligns us with the Society’s ethic which asks us to develop both as practitioners and as scientists.

The SGCP would like to invite you to get involved by expanding the group of coaching psychologists who contribute to this publication and explore how we can help to increase the credibility of our profession through the sharing of scientific- and enquiry-based practice.

If you would like more information about how you might contribute to this process, please contact Emma Short ([email protected]) or post your views, ideas, current research enquiry onto the research forum on the SGCP website.

Reference
Whybrow, A. & Short, E. (2008). What is research to the profession of Coaching Psychology and what is the SGCP doing to promote it? The Coaching Psychologist, 4(3), 169-170.