Approaching solutions or avoiding problems? The differential effects of approach and avoidance goals with solution-focused and problem-focused coaching questions

Braunstein, Katharine; Grant, Anthony M.

doi:10.1080/17521882.2016.1186705

Cited by 24 publications

(25 citation statements)

References 42 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Coaching approach. Engaging and applying real-life solutions to real-life problems are at the heart of any coaching intervention (Braunstein & Grant, 2016). As such, coaching approaches have foundational links to two different approaches that are rooted in the fields of psychotherapy and counseling: (a) problem-focused and (b) solutionfocused approaches.…”

Section: Coaching Approach As a Moderator In The Association Between mentioning

confidence: 99%

Bringing Context to Workplace Coaching: A Theoretical Framework Based on Uncertainty Avoidance and Regulatory Focus

Bozer

Delegach

2019

Human Resource Development Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Workplace coaching is increasingly popular as a global learning and development tool for enhancing employees’ professional capabilities. However, little is known about the role of cross-cultural factors in coaching and the relationships between cross-cultural factors and both coaching approach and motivation factors. Accordingly, by drawing on and integrating theories from the research areas of cross-cultural psychology, regulatory focus, and training, we propose a theoretical framework that unravels the effectiveness of different coaching approaches in different cultural and coaching contexts. We propose that chronic regulatory focus is an underlying mechanism that predicts the effectiveness of a chosen coaching approach in specific contexts of societal uncertainty avoidance (i.e., low vs. high uncertainty avoidance). Furthermore, we propose that coaching context elicits coachee situational regulatory focus, and that compatibility between coachee chronic and situational regulatory focus has a significant impact on coachee pre-coaching motivation. We conclude by discussing implications for future research and practice.

show abstract

Section: Coaching Approach As a Moderator In The Association Between mentioning

confidence: 99%

Bringing Context to Workplace Coaching: A Theoretical Framework Based on Uncertainty Avoidance and Regulatory Focus

Bozer

Delegach

2019

Human Resource Development Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Other studies further support the superiority of SF questions. For example, Braunstein and Grant (2016) found that relative to PF alternatives, SF questions led to a statistically significantly greater increase in positive affect, perceived self-efficacy and perceived goal progress and a statistically significantly greater reduction in negative affect, regardless of whether participants had approach or avoidance goals. Once again effect size estimates can be calculated using the data presented by the authors and Morris' (2007) recommendations.…”

Section: Background and Prior Researchmentioning

confidence: 97%

Obstacles vs. Resources - Comparing the Effects of a Problem-Focused, Solution-Focused and Combined Approach on Perceived Goal Attainability and Commitment

Abdulla

Woods

2020

Int J Appl Posit Psychol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Previous research suggests that solution-focused (SF) questions may be superior to problem-focused (PF) alternatives for a range of practical and psychological outcomes. However, a great deal remains unknown regarding the effects of specific SF (or PF) approaches and the mechanisms through which they occur. The aim of this pre-registered study was to investigate the extent to which SF questions targeting resources have a more positive effect on perceived goal attainability (PGA) and goal commitment than PF questions targeting obstacles or a combination of PF & SF questions targeting both resources and obstacles. 115 students aged 15–16 were randomly assigned to either (i) a SF condition targeting resources, (ii) a PF condition targeting obstacles or (iii) a combined-approach condition targeting both. All participants were asked to identify a challenging area of study before answering condition-specific questions. Although not all statistically significant, results indicated that the SF group had higher mean PGA and goal commitment than both the PF and combined PF & SF group. Effect size estimates were small-to-medium for PGA and small for goal commitment. Results of a mediation analysis suggested that condition had an indirect effect on goal commitment through enhanced PGA. Qualitative data analysis suggested that the PF question was more likely than the SF question to elicit thoughts of self-regulation, whereas the SF question was more likely to elicit thoughts of tools and resources. These findings are consistent with those from previous research and broaden our understanding of SF (vs PF) questions.

show abstract

“…In addition to the gratitude-only intervention, the current study explored the impact of the gratitude intervention combined with a coaching practice on clients' wellbeing. It applied an amalgamation of the GROW model (Whitmore, 2009) and a solution-focused framework, which is complementary to the strength-based approach, as it maintains a focus on setting and achieving goals (Grant, 2019). The GROW model was modified by adding a positive, strengths-based focus that included reflection on the procedure, attainment of goals, specific actions, and self-ratings (MacKie, 2014), in order to provide a standard structure during a coaching conversation and encourage goal-setting.…”

Section: Positive Psychology Interventions (Ppis)mentioning

confidence: 99%

Positive psychology intervention (PPI) coaching: an experimental application of coaching to improve the effectiveness of a gratitude intervention

Trom

Burke

2021

Coaching: An International Journal of Theory, Research and Prac

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Combining positive psychology with coaching is a complex matter. While most positive psychology coaching research promotes the use of positive psychology interventions in a coaching practice, the current study attempted to turn it on its head, and use coaching to amplify the effect of positive psychology interventions. In one-week-long randomised controlled trial with 45 participants, 24 (wait/control group) of them completed a gratitude-only intervention, whilst the remaining 21 (experimental group) engaged in a gratitude-and-coaching intervention. Three measures were used to identify the wellbeing differences of wait/control and experimental groups preintervention and immediately after the intervention. Pairedsample t-test results showed that participants in the gratitudeonly intervention enhanced aspects of their subjective wellbeing, whereas those in the gratitude-and-coaching intervention increased an aspect of their eudaimonic wellbeing and dispositional gratitude. The study provided preliminary evidence that coaching can be used to amplify the effect of positive psychology interventions. The implications of the study are discussed along with the recommendations for future research.

show abstract

Approaching solutions or avoiding problems? The differential effects of approach and avoidance goals with solution-focused and problem-focused coaching questions

Cited by 24 publications

References 42 publications

Bringing Context to Workplace Coaching: A Theoretical Framework Based on Uncertainty Avoidance and Regulatory Focus

Bringing Context to Workplace Coaching: A Theoretical Framework Based on Uncertainty Avoidance and Regulatory Focus

Obstacles vs. Resources - Comparing the Effects of a Problem-Focused, Solution-Focused and Combined Approach on Perceived Goal Attainability and Commitment

Positive psychology intervention (PPI) coaching: an experimental application of coaching to improve the effectiveness of a gratitude intervention

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About