Person-centred coaching psychology: A meta-theoretical perspective

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Stephen JosephThe fact that clinical and counsellingpsychology have chosen to ground theirpractice in the medical model as opposed tothe person-centred model does not meanthat this is also the best way for coachingpsychologists to view human nature. Indeed,the medical model in psychology is nowsubject to so much criticism (see, Albee,1998; Bentall, 2004; Maddux, 2002; Maddux,Snyder & Lopez, 2004; Sanders, 2005) that itwould seem questionable to also adopt themedical model for coaching psychology.I would argue that historically, clinicalpsychology adopted the medical model inthe first instance for reasons of securingpower and status in a professional arenadominated by psychiatry (see also, Proctor,2005). Ironically, counselling psychology hascome to adopt the medical model (albeit notto the extent of clinical psychology) becausethe professional arena when it was first developingwas dominated by clinical psychology.Counselling psychology began to emergeas a distinct profession from clinicalpsychology in the late 1980s, with an explicitemphasis on the therapeutic relationshipand the full spectrum of functioning,elements largely lacking in clinicalpsychology at the time. But, over the past twodecades, counselling psychology has movedcloser towards the values of traditionalclinical psychology with its emphasis onunderstanding psychological problems as ifthey were discrete medical conditionsrequiring specific treatments. Thus, counsellingpsychology has become more abouttherapeutic technique (at the expense of therelationship), and about psychopathology(at the expense of understanding the fullspectrum of human functioning). This hasbeen the result of market forces in an arenadominated by the values of clinicalpsychology. The very emergence of coachingpsychology at the beginning of the 21stcentury can in some ways be seen as theresult of the failure of counsellingpsychology to stand its ground and maintainits principles as an alternative way ofthinking to that of clinical psychology.Vision and missionBut, times are changing and with the adventof the positive psychology movement ourfundamental meta-theoretical assumptionsare once again the topic of reflection (see,Joseph & Linley, 2004, 2005; in press; Linley& Joseph, 2004). In discussing the future forclinical psychology, Maddux et al. (2004,p.332) conclude: ‘The major change forclinical psychology, however, is not a matterof strategy and tactic, but a matter of visionand mission.’Coaching psychology can be at the forefrontof these changes. As already indicated,how we define the territory of coachingpsychology is bound up in our meta-theoreticalassumptions. We are now in a position totake stock of the history of psychology, thecriticisms of the medical model, and toreflect on the person-centred perspective asan alternative meta-theoretical underpinningfor the profession of coachingpsychology.The medical model disempowers peopleas it is the coach who is the expert, whereascoaching psychology, Palmer and Whybrow(2005) say, is ‘grounded in values that aim toempower those who use their services’ (p.8).As individual practitioners we may indeedhold true to the values of empowerment, butthe profession of coaching psychology is notyet well grounded in these values sufficiently,because it has emerged out of medicalmodel thinking applied to psychologicalpractice.Most coaching psychologists are probablyin agreement that the medical model is notthe path they want to pursue. Various alternativemodels (e.g. Greene & Grant, 2003;Whitworth, Kimsey-House & Sandahl, 1998)which embrace the idea that the coachee isan equal partner who has the answers withinthemselves have been proposed as alternativesto the medical model (see, Kauffman &Scoular, 2004), without always recognisingthat this is in essence the person-centredmeta-theoretical perspective, as developedby Rogers (1959).50 International Coaching Psychology Review ● Vol. 1 No. 1 April 2006
Person-centred coaching psychologyImplications for training and practiceBut what are the practical implications ofcoaching psychology adopting the personcentredmeta-theory as opposed to themedical model? There are four key areas todiscuss: who we work with, what we train to do,what we do in practice, and who we work for.1. Client groupWhat we call ourselves professionally determineswho we work with, and to that extentcoaches and therapists work with differentpopulations (Grant, 2001). But, to definethe profession in this way is to belie a morecomplicated picture and to implicitlycondone the medical model view. As alreadyemphasised, the person-centred perspectiveprovides a unitary way of working with clientsalong the spectrum of functioning. Theoretically,a person-centred coaching psychologyis applicable to the range of clinical andhealth care settings, constrained only by thedepth and duration of experience andtraining of the practitioner, rather than anyarbitrary discontinuity between well-beingand psychopathology.If coaching psychology adopts the metatheoreticalperspective of person-centredtheory it may come into conflict with otherdivisions of professional psychology who viewmaladaptive functioning as their domain.But the possibility of conflict should notstand in the way of developing a theory ledprofession if the dichotomous thinking ofthe medical model is simply incorrect andunhelpful. Certainly, coaching is not aboutthe alleviation of distress and dysfunction perse, but it is about the facilitation of well-beingand optimal functioning. However, the questionis whether these are in reality a unitarytask rather than two separate tasks?Within the person-centred perspective, itdoes not matter where the person starts,coaching can be valuable to all. As Shlien, oneof the founders of person-centred psychology,said in a talk originally given in 1956:‘…if the skills developed in psychologicalcounselling can release the constructivecapacities of malfunctioning people sothat they become healthier, this samehelp should be available to healthypeople who are less than fullyfunctioning. If we ever turn towardspositive goals of health, we will care lessabout where the person begins, andmore about how to achieve the desiredendpoint of the positive goals’ (Shlien,2003, p.26).Depth and duration of training and experienceare the only issues, therefore, in determiningwhere on the spectrum ofpsychological functioning a person-centredcoaching psychologist is able to work. Thereare also other practical issues, such as theassessment of self-harm, which a competentpractitioner must be aware of. But the theoreticalprinciple that coaching psychology isapplicable across the spectrum of psychologicalfunctioning stands in contrast to themedical model view that coachingpsychology would only be applicable to nonclinical and relatively highly functioningpopulations.2. TrainingThere are implications for training. Trainingprogrammes that are influenced by themedical model will emphasise the developmentof intellectual knowledge so that thecoach can take on the role of expert.Training programmes that are influenced byperson-centred principles will emphasise thedevelopment of the self-awareness of thecoaching psychologist and their interpersonaland emotional literacy skills, and inlearning how to facilitate self-determinationin others. Training in person-centredpractice is very different to what mostpsychologists learn in their training. Groom(2005) in writing about how his practice hasdeveloped, says:‘Most of my coaching time is spenttripping over myself. I can hardly wait toexplore the coachee’s issues before I amrushing in to get them ready to set goals,or to analyse their lifestyle imbalance, doa cognitive checklist or evaluate their ownself-care strategies. I am learning to slowInternational Coaching Psychology Review ● Vol. 1 No. 1 April 2006 51
Page 1 and 2: Person-centred coaching psychology:
Page 3: Person-centred coaching psychologyb
Page 7 and 8: Person-centred coaching psychologyi

Person-centred coaching psychology: A meta-theoretical perspective

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?