2008
DOI: 10.1080/13678860802102534
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The emergent ‘coaching industry’: a wake-up call for HRD professionals

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

3
105
0
2

Year Published

2010
2010
2017
2017

Publication Types

Select...
6
3
1

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 127 publications
(110 citation statements)
references
References 25 publications
3
105
0
2
Order By: Relevance
“…Technical work involves theorizing, standardizing, mimicry and education; developing theories, standards, models and world-views and providing education and training is more likely to be carried out by social scientists, consultants, academics and professional bodies. Cultural work involves the construction of normative networks and identities, and is likely to be carried out by journalists, public relations and advertising specialists, professional bodies and social movements, building normative networks and extending the jurisdiction of professional knowledge (perhaps in contestation with other professional groups), as well as constructing professional identities (eg, the current debate about the emerging coaching industry as a profession and its implications for HRD-see Hamlin et al, 2008). Such actors seek to "promote discourses that associate practices with widely accepted norms and values" (Perkmann and Spicer, 2008:829).…”
Section: Institutional Theory and Management Fashionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Technical work involves theorizing, standardizing, mimicry and education; developing theories, standards, models and world-views and providing education and training is more likely to be carried out by social scientists, consultants, academics and professional bodies. Cultural work involves the construction of normative networks and identities, and is likely to be carried out by journalists, public relations and advertising specialists, professional bodies and social movements, building normative networks and extending the jurisdiction of professional knowledge (perhaps in contestation with other professional groups), as well as constructing professional identities (eg, the current debate about the emerging coaching industry as a profession and its implications for HRD-see Hamlin et al, 2008). Such actors seek to "promote discourses that associate practices with widely accepted norms and values" (Perkmann and Spicer, 2008:829).…”
Section: Institutional Theory and Management Fashionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Within organisations, coaching is also provided by internal human resource development (HRD) professionals, supervisors and managers, and by external HRD and management development (MD) consultants. Hamlin et al (2008) contend that professional coaching is substantially the same as many aspects of contemporary human resource development (HRD). This implies that the emergent field of coaching, rather than seeing itself as an independent profession, could fit within the existing and firmly established field of HRD study and practice (Hamlin et al, 2008).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The articles (Bozer et al 2013;Moen and Federici 2012;Passmore and Fillery-Travis 2011;Stober 2008) were chosen from the academic peer-reviewed journals including: Coaching: An International Journal of Theory, Research and Practice, Journal of Management Development. In addition, books on coaching (Cox et al 2011;Cox 2013; Hamlin et al (2008) for their study into 'conceptualizations and definitions of coaching'. The definitions provided by Fournies (1987), Orth et al (1987), Evered and Selman (1989), Popper and Lipshitz (1992), Mink et al (1993), Hargrove (1995), Burdett (1998), Clutterbuck (1998), Hudson (1999), Redshaw (2000), Grant (2001Grant ( , 2006, Peterson (1996), Kampa-Kokesch and Anderson (2001), Parsloe (1995), Grant and Cavanagh (2004), Zeus and Skiffington (2000), Kilburg (2000), Peltier (2001), Orenstein (2002), McCauley and Hezlett (2001), Hall et al (1999), Caplan (2003, Plunkett et al (2004), Dingman (2006), Sanders (1996), Hill (1998), Storey (2003), Bacon and Spear (2003), Clegg et al (2003), Taylor (2007) were taken for the analysis to get a broader view.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%