Summary - Organizations spend huge amounts of money on coaching and consultancy. But due to a lack of research rather little is known about the effectiveness of different coaching and consultancy approaches. We believe the field of coaching and consultancy can borrow fruitfully from the field of psychotherapy, both to improve and to demonstrate its effectiveness. In this article we present a first attempt with some encouraging results.

We have been inspired by two developments in psychotherapy. First, we think the  effectiveness research literature (see for instance Hubble, Duncan and Miller (2000) can be valuable for providing ideas and a framework for measuring and improving coaching and consultancy effectiveness. We are specifically referring to the four factor model (Asay & Lambert, 2000). This research-based model states that the following factors explain therapy effectiveness: 1) client-specific factors (explaining 40% of  therapy effectiveness, 2) relationship factors (explaining 30%), 3) model and technique (explaining a mere 15%) and 4) hope and expectation (explaining also 15%). These findings imply that specific models and techniques play a modest role in therapy success. Much more important are the ideas, behaviors and solutions the client develops (client specific factors) and the quality of the relationship between the client and the therapist (as perceived by the client).

Second, the solution-focused approach, which was developed by Steve de Shazer (1982) and Insoo Kim Berg (DeJong & Berg, 2001) and their co-workers, provides a very useful set of principles and techniques for coaching and consultancy. The solution-focused approach is characterized by its respectful and flexible style and by its focus on what works rather than on deficits. These two schools of thought, the solution-focused approach and the four factor model, are, in our opinion, highly associated. In fact, we believe the solution-focused approach is a method of helping clients that is specifically helpful in establishing the four factors of therapy effectiveness.

Years ago, we have started to adopt these frameworks, principles and techniques. We believe it helped to make us a lot more effective as coaches and consultants. Our experience is that the solution-focused approach leads to results faster and in a more pleasant way, both for the consultant and the client. But before anyone can make substantiated claims about effectiveness, some sort of systematic approach is needed. In therapy there is already some support for the value of the solution-focused approach (Gingerich & Eisengart, 2000) but in coaching and consultancy there seems be a lack of support for any kind of approach as far as we know. We have made a modest start by designing a questionnaire in which we asked 158 clients of consultants and coaches a list of simple questions. Soon, we will publish an article outlining the details of this study. Here we will give you a preview of the highlights.

Our study

In the questionnaire we used 4 sets of questions:

1. Variables referring to the interaction.

This section is inspired by research findings from psychotherapy, in particular the four factor model (Asay & Lambert, 2000). Clients were asked to what extent: 1) they were given the opportunity to direct the conversation, 2) their perspective was accepted and respected, 3) they could easily come to agreement with the coach/consultant on what to expect and what to do, 4)  could get a clear picture of what the coach/consultant could contribute, 5) succeeded in making explicit what the desired outcomes of coaching/consultancy were, 6) found evidence that the coach /consultant was prepared to change his approach when the client asked for this, 7)  the coach / consultant paid ample attention to evaluating the effectiveness of the approach followed

2. Variables referring to the approach followed

Questions about how the coach/consultant behaved. This section was directly inspired by the solution-focused approach. Clients were asked to describe the behavior of the consultant/coach. They were asked to describe whether the coach/consultant: 1) mainly focused on what went right or what went wrong, 2) mainly focused on the coaching/consulting approach or on the desired results, 3) mainly explained a lot or mainly asked a lot of questions, 4) mainly let the client determine what was discussed or determined this himself, 5) used abstract models and language or used simple language, 6) argued for a drastic approach or for a small steps forward approach, 7) explored and respected the clients view or confronted the client.

3. Variables referring to the effectiveness of the coaching / consultancy project

In this section we asked clients about the effectiveness of the coaching or consultancy project. Based on a model for evaluation consultancy effectiveness by Jack Philips (2000) we asked the clients about: 1) their overall satisfaction, 2) the extent to which they felt they had learned (learning effect), 3) the extent to which the coaching/consultancy has led to actual useful change, 4) the financial benefits they experienced from the coaching/consultancy, 5) the pay-back time. Based on these variables we computed an overall success measure.

4. Background variables

Finally, we asked some additional questions tapping background information on the respondent and the project.

Findings

Just as we expected, all the variables from section one (interaction) are significantly correlated with four of the five success measures: client satisfaction, learning effect and useful change and financial advantages. Not surprisingly, all the variables correlate significantly with the overall success measure. The only success measure that was not significantly associated with was pay back time.

Further, four additional aspects of the solution-focused approach correlated significantly with overall coaching/consultancy success. Asking questions (as opposed to explaining what to do), letting the client determine what was discussed (as opposed to letting the coach / consultant determine this), using simple language (instead of abstract language and models) and following a small steps approach (instead of arguing for drastic change) were significantly correlated to overall success. Asking questions and letting the client lead are also significantly correlated to client satisfaction, learning effect and useful change. Other interesting correlations are: 1) success focus is significantly correlated to useful change, 2) Following the client is significantly correlated to financial advantages, 3) a small steps approach is significantly correlated to financial advantages. A more detailed description of our analysis will follow in an article which will be published soon.

We do not pretend that this study provides any definite answers on what makes coaching and consulting effective. For one thing, it is not possible to deduce causal statements from correlations. Rather it is an attempt to make a start in trying to figure out what might make coaching and consultancy work and what not. It is encouraging to see that this study provides some first support for the idea that the client directed and solution-focused approach can be valuable for coaching and consultancy.

References

Asay, T.P. & Lambert, M.J. (2000). The Empirical Case for the Common Factors in Therapy: Quantative Findings. In: Hubble, M.A., Duncan, B.L. & Miller, S.D. (2000). The Heart and Soul of Change. What Works in Therapy. American Psychological Association. Washington.

De Shazer, S. (1982). Patterns of Brief Family Therapy. New York: Guilford Press.

DeJong, P. & Berg, I.K. (2001). De kracht van oplossingen. Handwijzer voor oplossingsgerichte gesprektherapie. Swets & Zeitlinger. Lisse

Hubble, M.A., Duncan, B.L. & Miller, S.D. (2000). The Heart and Soul of Change. What works in Therapy. American Psychological Association. Washington.

Gingerich WJ, Eisengart S: Solution-focused brief therapy: A review of the outcome research. Family Process 39:477-498, 2000

Philips, J. (2000). The consultant’s scorecard. McGraw-Hill Companies.

Coert Visser (coert.visser@planet.nl) is a consultant, coach and trainer using the solution-focused approach to change. This approach is focused on simply helping individuals, teams and organizations to make progress in the direction of their own choice. Coert has written many articles and a few books. His latest book (Doen wat werkt) was awarded a prize for best (HR)management book by a professional jury and also by a public jury. He has also interviewed thought leaders like Insoo Kim Berg, David Maister, and Jeffrey Pfeffer. More information: www.m-cc.nl / www.m-cc.nl/solutionfocusedchange.htm / Dutch network / Dutch blog

René Butter is a self employed consultant in Rotterdam, The Netherlands. He does applied research, test development, methodology consulting, assessment, coaching, career counselling, and training. He also teaches at The Erasmus University of Rotterdam.