Ámbito interlingüístico

Background theory. Cognitive-Behavioural Coaching (CBC) draws on the work of the cognitive behavioural theorists, researchers, and therapists Aaron Beck (1976), Albert Ellis (1971; 1972; 1994) (see also Neenan, 2008: 4), and Albert Bandura (1997) (see Abbott and Rosinski, 2007: 65). Beck (1976) contributed to the development of the cognitive therapy and Ellis (1971; 1993;

1994) to the rational emotive behaviour therapy, jointly forming Cognitive Behavioural Therapy (CBT), which has its roots in the work of Stoic philoso-phers Epictetus and Marcus Aurelius (see Neenan, 2008: 4).

The key principle behind CBT is that thoughts serve as mediators between a stimulus or event and a person’s emotions, in the sense that the interpre-tation of an external event determines a person’s emotional response and not the event itself (Gray, 2006: 481–2; see also Ducharme, 2004: 214; Ives, 2008: 101; Neenan, 2008: 4). The way we think about these events can increase our difficulties in dealing with them (Neenan, 2008: 4) and CBT helps clients to replace cognitions that are maladaptive and inaccurate (Ives, 2008: 101).

Under CBT, coachees are guided to identify and dispute the negative thoughts

or beliefs they have about themselves (this includes learning new skills, mon-itoring one’s personal train of thoughts, identifying beliefs, and subjecting them to reason) (Gray, 2006: 482). Also, the behavioural approach in coach-ing gives emphasis on the facilitation of practical change through personal development and learning, rather than seeing the coaching relationship as therapeutic (Ives, 2008: 101).

Cognitive and behavioural change is said to lead to emotional change.

However, although the role of emotions is not totally ignored by CBT, it is not deeply explored either since under the CBT logic, too much dwelling on emotions may lead to strengthening them and their underpinning beliefs (Neenan, 2008: 4).

Applying CBT to EC. Cognitive coaching is considered to be the old-est approach, first introduced in coaching by a tennis coach, Timothy Gallwey, who famously argued that ‘an opponent is as much a manifesta-tion in the head of the player as a person on the other side of the net’ (Berg and Karlsen, 2007: 5). Cognitive behavioural coaching has been defined as ‘an integrative approach which combines the use of cognitive, behav-ioural, imaginal and problem solving techniques and strategies within a cognitive behavioural framework to enable coachees to achieve their real-istic goals’ (Palmer and Szymanska, 2007: 86—quoted in Williams et al., 2010:  37). This coaching approach is time-limited and goal-directed, in that it ‘does not aim to provide coaches with definite answers to problems but uses guided discovery to help individuals to find their own answers or solutions’ (Palmer and Gyllensten, 2008: 41). For this reason it has been suggested that Socratic questioning is its cornerstone, since it allows rais-ing awareness, promote reflection, and improve problem-solvrais-ing thinkrais-ing (Neenan, 2009: 249).

CBT has a twin track of psychological and practical approaches to goal achievement (Neenan and Dryden, 2002; Neenan, 2008: 6). The psychologi-cal track refers to removing any obstacles to change such as procrastination, excessive self-doubt, indecisiveness, and self-depreciation, while the practical track helps clients in developing an orderly sequence of goal-directed action steps (Neenan, 2008: 6). The purpose of CBT is to help clients to ‘identify, examine and change such thoughts and beliefs, develop productive behav-iours and become more skilled at emotional management’, focusing on the client’s current concerns with the ultimate goal to make the client a coach of himself/herself so as to be able to tackle both present and future challenges (Neenan, 2008: 3). A central tenet of the CBT approach is the development of a ‘collaborative relationship’ between the coach and the coachee, placing particular emphasis on empathy, which helps adapting to the specific coachee through an explicit process of negotiation and renegotiation, in order to build, establish, and maintain an optimal coaching alliance (O’Broin and Palmer, 2009).

An EC intervention that adopts a cognitive behavioural approach would include as a first step a detailed psychological study of the individual (e.g., interviewing, including a full personal history, personality and ability tests), which may be shared, upon the permission of the executive, with his/her manager in order to find better ways to help the individual. This feedback is interpreted and discussed with the executive, combined with follow-up meetings with the respondents, the executive, or both of them. The process then continues with repeated one-on-one meetings with the executive on an ongoing basis (see Tobias, 1996: 90). Several tools and techniques can be used in CBT, such as teaching the cognitive model, inherence chaining, common cognitive distortions, experiments, self-acceptance, task assignment record, and three key insights (for more details see Neenan, 2008: 8–13).

A model in which the cognitive behavioural approach is being operational-ized is the ABCDE model, which is a framework used to understand and deal with psychological blocks in coaching with a view to removing them (for a description see Neenan, 2008: 6–7). The ABCDE model of individual change is drawn from the work of Ellis (1993), Ellis and MacLaren (1998), Neenan and Dryden (2000), Dryden and Neenan (2004), and its acronym refers to the following steps that can be used in EC: A (Activating event), B (Belief), C (emotional and behavioural Consequences), D (challenging and Disputing unreasonable beliefs), and E (result in Effective outlook) (see Sherin and Caiger, 2004: 227–8; Neenan, 2008: 6–7).

Evidence of impact. Although there is very limited research that examines the value of the cognitive behavioural approach in EC (e.g., Grant 2002; Libri and Kemp, 2006), the empirical evidence suggests that the benefits from such an approach are important. A case study by Libri and Kemp (2006) showed that the cognitive behavioural EC programme enhanced the participant’s performance. Also, Grant’s empirical study (2002—cited in Libri and Kemp, 2006), using a sample of accounting students to compare the effects of a cog-nitive only approach (CT), with a behavioural only approach (BT), with a cognitive behavioural approach (CBT), showed that the cognitive behav-ioural coaching was the most powerful approach in enhancing performance and goal attainment, self-regulation, self-concept, and general mental health.

Moreover, the cognitive behavioural coaching programme appeared to maintain and elevate performance increases at post-coaching and follow-up measures.

Suitability of CBC to EC. Ducharme (2004) examined the appropriateness of using the cognitive-behavioural approach in EC and concluded that it can be highly effective for stress management and skill development pur-poses. The author argues that cognitive-behavioural coaching is an ‘intuitive approach’, which executives are likely to prefer because of its transpar-ency and simplicity and its ability to offer superior efficacy in managing high levels of stress (Ducharme, 2004: 221). However, CBT is not suitable

for individuals who find it difficult to be introspective (Neenan, 2008: 7–8).

A  further weakness of CBT is its simplicity (high-functioning executives may find CBT to be unsophisticated) and its ‘microfocus’, which does not allow for a holistic view of the individual or its embedding in the organi-zational system (Ducharme, 2004: 221). Berg and Karlsen (2007: 5) further note that although this approach is easily understood, one of its weaknesses is that it may lead to self-deception, since it provides too much emphasis on one’s own thoughts—underestimating the need for change—and this can result in loss of control.

The following subsections include several approaches within the cognitive-behavioural approach that are being used in EC interventions.

2.1.1 RATIONAL EMOTIVE BEHAVIOUR THERAPY

Background theory. Rational Emotive Behaviour Therapy (REBT) is part of the cognitive behavioural approach and has been developed by Ellis (1971; 1972;

1993; 1994). The idea behind Ellis’ theory, which draws on Stoic and Adlerian philosophy, is that personality is defined based on how people interpret and respond to their environment. Their behavioural and emotional reactions are determined by their interpretation of events and not by the events per se and these interpretations are based on the individual’s beliefs (i.e., behaviour is the result of the individual’s belief system) (Sherin and Caiger, 2004: 226–7). Ellis (1993) made specific reference to the ‘irrational’ elements of this belief system and argued that by preventing people from indulging in irrational thoughts and beliefs, they would improve their ability to direct their energy towards self-actualization (‘the rational drive’), which can be achieved through reason (for more information see Sherin and Caiger, 2004: 227).

Applying REBT to EC. Ellis (1972) expressed the view that REBT is a prom-ising method that executives can use to improve their efficiency (Sherin and Caiger, 2004: 226). Kirby (1993) was among the first scholars to suggest that the rational-emotive therapy (RET) model could have an application in management and executive development. More recently Anderson (2002) and Sherin and Caiger (2004) drew the attention of the coaching industry to rational-emotive behaviour therapy (REBT) proposing it as a behavioural change model within the context of EC.

The rational emotive behavioural coaching has been adapted to EC in order to enhance performance and reduce stress (Palmer and Gyllensten, 2008: 41).

The focus of rational emotive behavioural coaching is to address and modify four key types of irrational or unhelpful types of belief: (a) rigid, absolut-ist,, and illogical demands, (b) ‘awfulising’ (i.e., ‘when events are defined as worse than bad’), (c) low-frustration tolerance (i.e., the belief that he/she can-not tolerate discomfort or frustration), and (d) depreciation of one’s self, of

others, or life at large (which incorporates global negative ratings such as ‘I am useless’) (Palmer and Gyllensten, 2008: 41–2). When applying REBT to EC, the notion of ‘irrational beliefs’ is translated in less negative language (e.g., instead of ‘irrational’, they are labelled as ‘unreasonable’ or ‘unrealistic’

expectations that executives may hold for themselves or others). Within the REBT EC the explicit and implicit belief system of the executive becomes the subject of change and the role of the coach is to help the client identify unreasonable expectations that impact negatively on performance and to try to change them (see Sherin and Caiger, 2004: 227).

Where CBT is suitable (and where it is not). According to Anderson (2002: 223), due to ‘its blend of easy understandability and direct applicabil-ity to client problems’, REBT is ‘an ideal tool for use in executive coaching’.

Sherin and Caiger (2004: 229–30) also mention several other benefits that REBT offers to EC, such as: its value in addressing dysfunctional behaviour/

executive derailment that has led to ineffective performance, the fact that REBT is appropriate as a short-term intervention in discrete issues, it has a similar format to other training programmes, and is suitable to one-on-one interventions. In terms of weakness, the authors mention that REBT is based more on anecdotal rather than empirical evidence to support its success and suffers from poor psychometrics (Sherin and Caiger, 2004: 230).

2.1.2 MULTIMODAL APPROACH

Background theory. This is another approach that belongs to the cognitive behavioural theory. It draws on the multimodal therapy model of Lazarus (1976; 1985; 1989; 1997). Richard (1999: 24) was the first to propose this as an integrative and holistic approach to EC. The multimodal approach views per-sonality as having seven dimensions (behaviour, affect, sensation, imagery, cognition, interpersonal relationships, and drug/biology modality—they form the acronym: BASIC ID) and by addressing all seven of them, the coach can facilitate the executive’s performance (see Richard, 1999: 24; Palmer and Gyllensten, 2008: 42).

Applying the multimodal approach to EC. According to Richard (1999:  24–5), when applying the multimodal approach, during the initial assessment session and the subsequent meetings, the coach asks the coachee a set of seven questions which respond to each of the above seven BASIC ID dimensions—for example, with regard to Behaviour, the respective ques-tion would be ‘What behaviours need to increase or decrease?’ After the ini-tial assessment, the coach can plan strategically the didactic interventions within each of the seven modalities in order to help resolve any problems. The multimodal model allows the use of a variety of techniques which are being

used in EC, such as education, training, reading assignments, role modelling, simulations, brainstorming, and journalling (Richard, 1999: 25). 360-degree feedback (i.e., an assessment process that involves soliciting feedback regard-ing the coachee from one’s immediate work circle—subordinates, peers, and superiors/supervisors—and often also involving self-evaluation) is also used in combination with the multimodal approach. Moreover, instruments such as the 16 Personality Factor and Myers-Briggs inventories in multimodal therapy allow the coach to focus the coaching intervention more on specific and possibly problematic issues and help to identify conflicts between the coachee’s personal traits and job demands (Richard, 1999: 26).

2.1.3 MINDFULNESS COACHING

Background Theory. Mindfulness training has been embraced by the so called ‘third wave’ in cognitive behavioural psychotherapy and is derived from Eastern traditions (i.e., Yoga, Tibetan and Zen Buddhism, and Taoism) (Collard and Walsh, 2008:  31). The purpose of mindfulness training is to reduce human suffering caused by distorted beliefs and, similar to CBT and REBT, the mindfulness meditation includes thoughts, feelings, perception, sensory awareness, intention, and behaviour (Collard and Walsh, 2008: 33).

Applying Mindfulness Coaching to EC. Mindfulness training focuses on a set of beliefs and behaviours that will help a coachee to improve his/her practice.

These are: non-judging attitude and acceptance, patience, trust, non-striving/

letting go, and enlightened self-interest (for more detail see Collard and Walsh, 2008: 33). Examples of exercises as part of the mindfulness training are sound meditation, power of breathing, and body scan (which involves lying on your back or sitting on a chair and moving your mind through the different regions of your body) (Collard and Walsh, 2008: 34–5). Collard and Walsh (2008) also propose Sensory Awareness Mindfulness Training (SAMT) as a set of skills that can help coachees achieve better life/work equilibrium by balancing cognitive and emotional brain activities. It involves the integration of cognitive information (rationality) and the heart (mindfulness). SAMT entails regular connection with one’s senses and non-judgemental focus on the ‘here and now’ experience of life.

Finally, mindfulness training may be important not only for coachees, but also for the training of coaches themselves. Bluckert (2005b: 173) notes that coaches need to develop psychological skills and competence to be able to cope with the breadth of issues coaching typically requires. The author proposes psychological-mindedness (a term borrowed from psycho-therapy and appearing in the work of Lee (2003) on leadership coaching) as ‘the critical foundation for working psychologically as a coach’ (ibid.).

Psychological-mindedness is also a term used in describing the ‘higher level’

competency categories of EC and refers to ‘a person’s capacity to reflect on themselves, others, and the relationship between’ and the ability ‘to see the past in the present and make links between current issues and what has hap-pened previously’ (Bluckert, 2005b: 173).

Evidence of impact. Very few studies have empirically tested the outcome of mindfulness interventions. For instance, Spence et al. (2008) conducted one of the few studies that empirically examined the impact of mindfulness training in health coaching. The authors observed the outcomes from the participa-tion of three groups, each in one of the following three programmes accord-ingly: (a) mindfulness training, (b) cognitive-behavioural, solution-focused coaching, and (c) a series of health education seminars. Spence et al. (2008) found that the goal attainment for the groups that participated in mindful-ness training and cognitive-behavioural, solution-focused coaching was significantly greater than for the group that attended the health education seminars. According to other research, mindfulness interventions result in significant improvements in several conditions including anxiety, depression, stress disorders, and relapse prevention (Collard and Walsh, 2008).