The barriers to a scientific, evidence-based coaching evaluation practice

Miriam Schneider, A. McDowall, David Tee
{"title":"The barriers to a scientific, evidence-based coaching evaluation practice","authors":"Miriam Schneider, A. McDowall, David Tee","doi":"10.22316/poc/07.1.05","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Workplace coaching has grown in popularity and is increasingly used for a plethora of purposes across organisations. As a growing field, coaching is still in need of a continuing commitment to evidence-based evaluation, especially considering the current unsystematic outcome literature. However, this need for scientific, evidence-based evaluation is not actioned and there is indication that coaching evaluation is even less rigorous in practice. This position paper explores what might be the barriers against a scientific, evidence-based coaching evaluation in practice. Suggestions grounded in the literature are presented with the aim that these might inform future research and practice.","PeriodicalId":353597,"journal":{"name":"Philosophy of Coaching An International Journal","volume":"58 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-05-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Philosophy of Coaching An International Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.22316/poc/07.1.05","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Workplace coaching has grown in popularity and is increasingly used for a plethora of purposes across organisations. As a growing field, coaching is still in need of a continuing commitment to evidence-based evaluation, especially considering the current unsystematic outcome literature. However, this need for scientific, evidence-based evaluation is not actioned and there is indication that coaching evaluation is even less rigorous in practice. This position paper explores what might be the barriers against a scientific, evidence-based coaching evaluation in practice. Suggestions grounded in the literature are presented with the aim that these might inform future research and practice.
科学的、基于证据的教练评估实践的障碍
职场辅导越来越受欢迎,并越来越多地用于跨组织的各种目的。作为一个不断发展的领域,教练仍然需要继续致力于以证据为基础的评估,特别是考虑到目前的非系统的结果文献。然而,这种对科学的、基于证据的评估的需求并没有被采取行动,有迹象表明,教练评估在实践中甚至不那么严格。这篇立场论文探讨了在实践中科学的、基于证据的教练评估可能存在的障碍。基于文献的建议被提出,目的是这些可能为未来的研究和实践提供信息。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信