Zonas a considerar en columnas de encadenado (CAP.9.12.1.) A los fines del dimensionamiento de los estribos para columnas de

The research paradigm selected by the researcher was defined and influenced by the epistemological stance. That is, how the researcher thinks about what is accepted as knowledge and the ontological view, that is, how truth is defined. This understanding assisted the researcher to conduct the study in an effective manner as it concerned how the social world is experienced (King and Horrocks, 2010). The researcher compared ontological stances in order to answer the question “what is the nature of

social reality” and epistemological stances in order to take a view on “what counts as knowledge”

(Blaikie, 2007:13)

In order to set an ontological stance the researcher viewed the two main ontological approaches that can be followed for social scientific enquiry – realism and idealism (Blaikie, 2007). The researcher selected an idealist stance. Idealist ontologies assume “what we regard as the eternal world is just

54 | P a g e

approach locates reality in individual thoughts and experience and assumes that reality has no independent existence. For the purpose of this study, the researcher took an idealist ontological stance, in line with the interpretivist epistemology. This claims or has an assumption about a particular approach to social enquiry and what this makes about the nature of social reality (Blaikie, 2007). As social reality is an individual’s own perception of what is real, this is different for each individual. This stance assumes that we cannot separate ourselves from what we know and is therefore appropriate for the study of Executive Coaching.

A realist ontology stance would not have been appropriate as it assumes that “both natural and social

phenomena are assumed to have existence that is independent of the activities of the human observer”

(Blaikie, 2007:15). It relates to positivism and assumes that there is a single reality. It also makes the assumption that each of us observes phenomena that are regarded objectively and interpreted as facts in common. This allows enquiries that test established existing theoretical positions by using deductive methods. Although this paradigm may be relevant in studying inanimate objects, for example in a natural science study it would not meet the aims of the study for two reasons. Firstly, it denies the intrusion of human values and feelings into a context, which can be diverse, not least due to cultural differences. Secondly, individuals will not always behave in predictable ways (Burrell and Morgan, 1979).

Having established an ontological stance the researcher then sought to agree an epistemological stance to be taken. In order to achieve the aims of the research, the researcher took an interpretive epistemological approach through the lens of social constructionism in which the world is viewed as socially constructed. This approach understands that the observer is part of what is observed and knowledge of the world is intentionally constituted through a person’s lived experience and constructed through social conversation and interaction. Therefore, the approach is that social science

55 | P a g e

enquiry is driven by human interests (Easterby-Smith, et al. 2008). This was selected in line with the research aim that is to understand from the perspective of the Executives what makes their experience of coaching effective. This knowledge recognising that reality is found “in one way or another as

people talk it, write it and argue it” (Potter, 1996:98), was constructed through conversation within

the semi-structured interviews that were conducted.

Whilst acknowledging that although both interpretivism and positivism are valid and “not mutually

exclusive” (Saunders et al. 2012:85) it was felt that the most appropriate approach to unlocking the

research questions was interpretivism. An interpretivist paradigm is guided by a set of beliefs and feelings about the world and how it should be understood and studied (Guba, 1990). Trauth’s (2001) view is that if the research involves ‘social intervention’’ then an interpretivist stance is appropriate and fits with this view.

Diverse views need to be encouraged in the study to reflect individual accounts of becoming and understanding. This justifies the use of a social constructivist approach, which “reflects the

indeterminacy of our knowledge of the social world” (Bryman and Bell, 2011:23) and “social actors construct their reality and interpret their own actions and experiences, the actions of others and social situations” Blaikie, 2007:22).

This current study aims to understand what contributes to ensuring that Executive Coaching is effective from the Executive’s perspective, and will seek to understand how coaching sessions, which occur in a conversation between the Executive and the coach contribute to that effectiveness. The study used the data generated through semi-structured interviews and information gained from questionnaires. Bryman (1988:52) is more direct when he comments that for social scientific

56 | P a g e

researchers the subject matter is “people and their social reality” and they cannot usefully be extracted from that reality to be examined in a laboratory. Additionally, Bryman (1988) recognises that to gain an understanding of social reality, a researcher requires experience of that reality. This was the case in this research as the researcher had experience as an Executive Coach and as a director in Local Government.

A positivist approach was discounted as this supports the view that the world exists externally and that its properties should be measured through objective methods (Goulding, 1999; Easterby-Smith et al. 2008). Ayer (1990) questions the applicability of the positivist philosophy to studies of human behaviour as the stance seeks a single truth and therefore would not be appropriate for this study of Executive Coaching activity.