hrseminar coaching frederik anseel

Frederik Anseel (Ghent University)

Contact: [email protected] Downloads (web): fanseel.be Twitter: @fanseel

Does coaching work (and why you should care)

Does coaching work?

Does coaching work? Of course, why otherwise

–  Are coaches paid to do it? –  Do businesses buy it? –  Do individual clients pay for it? –  Do individual clients come back for more? –  Do they have coaching qualifica<ons? –  Are there conferences on coaching? –  Are lots of books published about coaching? –  Are so many employed to do it? –  Does it keep growing? –  Are there so many coaching businesses? –  It’s helping other people, what can possibly go wrong?

Well, that’s se9led then…

The coaching field is filled with contradic>ons. Coaches themselves disagree over why they’re hired, what they do, and how to measure succes… In this market, as in so many others today, the old saw s>ll

applies: Buyer beware! (Harvard Business Review, Coutu & Kauffman, 2009)

Problemen Wat is ‘coaching’?

–  Evenveel defini<es als coaches

Regula>e?

–  Meerdere federa<es -‐ cer<ficering –  Who cares? “Clients and endorsements are the currency of coaching business”

Wie coacht? Wat gebeurt er in coaching?

–  Werkingsmechanisme? –  Doelstellingen en match tussen doelstelling, methode en context?

Why should you care?

Why you should care Indien u een kwakzalver bent

–  Dan weet u het wellicht niet (maar iedereen praat achter uw rug). –  Vroeg of laat valt u door de mand. –  Kan u veel meer verdienen met methodes die ook echt werken –  Kan u ook schade aanrichten –  HoeL u niet langer met collega’s te discussiëren over uw methode

Indien u een effec>eve coach bent

–  Kan u eindelijk begrijpen waarom u zo effec<ef bent, ondanks uzelf –  Kan u uw effec<viteit verhogen –  HoeL u zich niet langer te ergeren over de toestand van uw vakgebied –  Kan u zich duidelijk onderscheiden van de kwakzalvers –  HoeL u niet langer met collega’s te discussiëren over uw methode

Wat zegt de wetenschap?

(Noot: ik ben een believer)

Hoe coaching evalueren?

Satisfaction

Self-report progress

Coaching Meting achteraf

Objective outcomes

Supervisor or other ratings

80% of studies that evaluated the accuracy of self-assessments of

knowledge, skills or abilities concluded that learners’ self-assessments were

remarkably inaccurate (Sitzmann et al., 2010)

Pre - test / post – test

Pre – test / post – test met controlegroep

Coaching Meting achteraf

Meting Vooraf

Random

Meting Vooraf

Meting Vooraf

Coaching

Coaching

Meting achteraf

Meting achteraf

Hoe coaching evalueren?

Evidence? •  Quite a lot of coaching research has been done

–  “How sa<sfied are you?”

•  Rela>vely li9le of it is good-‐quality research –  Objec<ve outcomes, control group, performance or development

•  No long-‐term effects research

•  No compara>ve research with other interven<ons

•  Researchers lament the state of the field

Why I believe coaching works

Importance of reflec>on •  Kolb, Dewey: “Without reflec>on,

experience may be of li9le use”

•  “For most individuals reflec<on is probably the least favorite ac>vity”

TUM -‐ 01.10.2013

Theore>cal basis of reflec>on •  Dual process-‐models in cogni<ve en social psychology

•  Two modes of cogni<ve processing

•  Strategy 2: stronger and longer-‐las<ng learning effects

TUM -‐ 01.10.2013

Strategy 1 Automatic Implicit Rapid Undemanding of cognitive capacity

Strategy 2 Controlled Explicit Slow Demanding of cognitive capacity

Systema>c Reflec>on Interven>ons

•  How to elicit strategy 2 ?

•  Self-‐explana*on: "how did you contribute to the performance observed in the experience", "why did you do A or decide B?“

•  Data verifica*on: "consider a different approach that could have been taken" and "what might have happened if that approach was chosen“

•  Feedback: "what worked, what did not work", "what has been learned from the experience", and "how will you behave in the future?”

•  Ellis, S., Carebe, B., Anseel, F., & Lievens, F (in press). Systema<c Reflec<on: Implica<ons for Learning from Failures and Successes. Current Direc*ons in Psychological Science

After Event Reviews

“Learning procedure that gives learners an opportunity to systematically analyze their behavior and to be able to

evaluate the contribution of its components to performance outcomes”

(Ellis & Davidi, 2005: 857)

28

Study procedure

•  Experiment –  Feedback: quan<ta<ve and qualita<ve feedback for each

competency –  Reflec<on: behavioral example of a correct and an incorrect

response for each competency required

Performance 1 Performance 2

In-basket Task 1

No feedback + No reflection

Feedback + reflection

Feedback + reflection

No feedback + reflection

In-basket Task 2

Vertical bars denote 0.95 confidence intervals

No Feedback / No ReflectionFeedback / No Reflection

Feedback / ReflectionNo Feedback / Reflection

11

12

13

14

15

16

Mean Task P

erformance

Task 1 Task 2

Anseel, F., Lievens, F., & Schollaert, E. (2009). Reflection as a strategy to enhance task performance after feedback. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 110, 23-35.

Vertical bars denote .95 confidence intervals

No feedback/ No reflectionFeedback/ No reflection

Feedback/ ReflectionNo feedback/ Reflection

12

13

14

15

16

Mean Task P

erformance

Task 1 Task 2

Anseel, F., Lievens, F., & Schollaert, E. (2009). Reflection as a strategy to enhance task performance after feedback. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 110, 23-35.

So, what have we learned here?

Limited evidence for effec>veness coaching –  If you are a believer, you should care!

Focus needed in coaching interven>ons

1.   Data verification!2.  Self-explanation!3.  Feedback and self-

awareness!4.  Goal-setting!

Thanks! Contact: [email protected] Fanseel.be @fanseel