How to investigate the local and global change potential of questioning sequences in executive coaching? A call for interdisciplinary research

Abstract

<jats:p>Coaching outcome research convincingly argues that coaching is effective and facilitates change in clients. While coaching practice literature depicts questions as key vehicle for such change, empirical findings as regards the local and global change potential of questions are so far largely missing in both (psychological) outcome research and (linguistic and psychological) process research on coaching. The local change potential of questions refers to a turn-by-turn transformation as a result of their sequentiality, the global change potential is related to the power of questions to initiate, process and finalize established phases of change. This programmatic article on questions, or rather questioning sequences, in executive coaching pursues two goals: firstly, it takes stock of available insights into questions in coaching and advocates for Conversation Analysis as a fruitful methodological framework to assess the local change potential of questioning sequences. Secondly, it points to the limitations of a local turn-by-turn approach to unravel the overall change potential of questions and calls for an interdisciplinary approach to bring both local and global effectiveness into relation. Such an approach is premised on conversational sequentiality and psychological theories of change and facilitates research on questioning sequences as both local and global agents of change across the continuum of coaching sessions. We present the TSPP Model as a first result of such an interdisciplinary cooperation.</jats:p>

Lösungsorientierte Fragen im Coaching- und Psychotherapie-Gespräch – Ein gesprächslinguistischer Vergleich ihres interaktionstypspezifischen, lokalen Veränderungspotentials

“…Anstellte einer isolierten Betrachtung von Fragen werden deshalb in der Gesprächsanalyse "Frage-Antwort" bzw. "Frage-Antwort-Reaktion Sequenzen" analysiert (Graf et al 2020). sie möcht n bisschen mehr Urlaub haben, ab und zu von ((unv.,0,5s)).• Ja?…”

LEAN diversity management in practice: The multi-functionality of questions as a resource to ensure understanding, participation and procedural compliance in a diverse workplace

“…As pointed out in previous studies that take an interactional approach to phenomena such as questions and directives (Freed and Ehrlich, 2009;Sorjonen, Raevaara, and Couper-Kuhlen, 2017;Steensig and Drew, 2008b;Steensig, Heineman, and Lindström, 2011), the contextual factors are central to determining the function of any fi rst pair part and the response it projects (See also Graf et al, 2020;Mayes, 2020;Worsøe and Jensen, 2020). Contextual factors previously described, such as who has the deontic authority in the interaction (Stevanovic and Peräkylä, 2012), issues of entitlement and contingency (Curl and Drew, 2008;Heineman, 2006) and relations of power in any given situation (Clayman and Heritage, 2014) have so far been addressed in isolation from one another and as such been used to illuminate diff erences in function.…”

“…Th is paper explores the use and function of questions in a workplace setting from a conversation analytical perspective (See also Graf, Dionne, and Spranz-Fogazy, 2020 ;Mayes, 2020 ;Worsøe and Jensen, 2020 in this volume), looking at how they are used as management resources within a production setting in Denmark, namely an industrial laundry facility. In this facility, 80% of the employees in production come from a range of other countries than Denmark and speak only little Danish, whereas management employees are predominantly ethnically Danish.…”

“Now once again this idea of yours (…) how does it sound when I say that?” – Changing the perspective: how coach’s questioning practices elicit self-reflecting processes in clients

“…The coach's reaction to the client's response plays a pivotal role in recognizing the transformational power of questioning sequences, as it is the "place" where the coach either accepts a client's response as appropriate and sufficient or flags it as inappropriate and insufficient (Sidnell, 2010;Graf et al, 2023a). If the coach accepts and ratifies the answer, they can move forward in the coaching process to further facilitate change, whereas if the coach decides that the client's answer did not meet his or her expectations, the coach has various options to continue exploring the topic without moving forward in the conversation, e.g., by asking for a clarification or an elaboration, rephrasing the question or insisting on the question (see Graf et al, 2023a). Whether or not a questioning sequence can be defined as successful or unsuccessful therefore depends on the coach's reaction to the client's response.…”

“…Coaches have a wide repertoire of questioning actions to stimulate selfreflection in clients and thus successfully advance the coaching change project (Bercelli et al, 2008;Muntigl and Zabala, 2008;Graf and Spranz-Fogasy, 2018a;Spranz-Fogasy et al, 2019). This transformational power of questioning practices in coaching has been asserted in the practice literature for many years, but there is little empirical research on the change potential of reflection-stimulating techniques used by coaches (Peräkylä, 2019;Graf et al, 2023b;Fleischhacker and Graf, 2024). This article aims to contribute to closing this research gap.…”