The Coaching Research Agenda: Pitfalls, Potholes and Potentials

Who Participates in the Study?

If there is clarity regarding the criteria to be used in conducting research on professional coaching then the next central question concerns the people who will be studied—including (potentially) the coaches, the clients and other people impacted by the coaching process. This question, in turn, breaks down into two parts. First, how many people will be studied? Second, who specifically will participate in this study?

The issue of quantity is very important, for a researcher can’t have it both ways. If the study is to be quantitative in nature then the sample size has to be large; if the study is to be qualitative in nature, then the sample size can be much smaller, but the research itself must be intensive and in-depth with regard to each person being studied. All too often, the sample size is small even though quantitative measures are being used. We see many coaching studies that yield conclusions based on much too small a sample size (under 50), even though the measures being taken are quantitative, superficial and often one-dimensional (for example, based only on self-ratings of satisfaction with the coaching process or supervisor’s ratings of the coaching client’s improvement in performance).

Later in this essay I will identify multiple methods of data collection and propose that three or more different methods should be used in any broad-based study of coaching practices. At the very least, larger sample sizes should be required – pointing to the value of collaborative research strategies involving multiple coaches, coaching firms and organizations that use coaching services (I will have more to say about this in my Issue Three essay).