Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.
Development and Evaluation 
of a Self-Coaching Intervention 
Program based on the 
Solution Focused Coaching(SFC) 
Yoga To...
【Objective】 
Solution Focused Coaching (SFC) is a coaching 
method for assisting in Coachee’s goal 
achievement and Person...
Method of the experiment 
(1)Participants (N=26) were randomly 
assigned to Self-caoching and Control. 
(2)Conditions of t...
Interview Sheet of the SFC 
We made an Interview Sheet of the SFC. 
Applying the Practice model (Palmer, 2007, 2009, 2011)...
PRACTICE model(Palmer, 2007; 2009; 2011) 
P:(Problem identification) 
R:(Realistic, relevant goals developed) 
(Ex:SMART )...
Personal Growth Initiative Scale-II 
(Robitscheck et al., 2012) 
■PGIS-II was made for a purpose of the Counseling that 
n...
Figure1 Flow chart of this study. 
Pre-Test 
Participants : University Student 
Intervention of the Solution 
Focoused Coa...
Result N=26 Mean Age : 21.7(SD=2.1) 
◆2 condition & Sex :p = 1 (no significance) 
Woman Man 
Control 6 5 
Self-Coaching 7 ...
◆PGIS-II Total Score 
* p<.05 
6.0 
5.0 
4.0 
3.0 
2.0 
1.0 
0.0 
Total score Control Self-Coaching 
cohen'd 0.12 0.74 
Δ ...
◆PGIS-II 「Intentional Behavior」 
6.0 
5.0 
4.0 
3.0 
2.0 
1.0 
0.0 
Intentional Behavior Control Self-Coaching 
cohen'd 0....
◆PGIS-II 「Readiness for Change」 
** p<.01 
Control Self-Coaching 
6.0 
5.0 
4.0 
3.0 
2.0 
1.0 
0.0 
Pre 3.8 3.5 
Post 3.9...
◆PGIS-II 「Planfulness」 
** p<.01 
Control Self-Coaching 
6.0 
5.0 
4.0 
3.0 
2.0 
1.0 
0.0 
Pre 3.8 3.7 
Post 3.9 4.2 
Pla...
◆PGIS-II 「Using Resource」 
Control Self-Coaching 
6.0 
5.0 
4.0 
3.0 
2.0 
1.0 
0.0 
Pre 3.6 3.7 
Post 3.8 4.4 
Using Reso...
◆Career Planning (Hanai, 2008) 
4.0 
3.0 
2.0 
1.0 
0.0 
Career Planning Control Self-Coaching 
cohen'd 0.08 0.81 
Δ 0.08 ...
Discussion 
■On the part of Self-Coachee, The scores of 
PGIS-II total and PGIS-II Subscales were 
statistically significa...
Future Directions 
(1)Using the intervention to achieve a concrete goal. 
(Career education, Health education program, 
Mo...
Why is this research important? 
• The intervention led to "maximum effect with 
minimum intervention“. Therefore, this 
i...
Solution-focused Inventory (Grant et al., 2012) 
■SFI was made for a purpose of 
a Solution focused approach. 
【12 items w...
Reference material2: Research in Japan 2013.5 ~ 7 N=443 
The relationship PGIS-II and SFI (Grant et al., 2012).
The Relationship PGIS-II and Measurement 
Solution 
focused 
Inventory 
Cognitive 
Flexibility 
Inventory 
Self-Control an...
Main Reference 
• Palmer, S. & Whybrow, A. (2007). Handbook of Coaching 
Psychology: A guide for practitioners. Routledge....
Main Reference 2 
• Grant, A. M., Cavanagh, M. J., Kleitman, S., Spence, G. B., Lakota, M. & Yu, N. 
(2012). Development a...
Correspondence 
Yoga Tokuyoshi 
◆Cognitive Psychology Lab, Graduate School of 
Information Science, Tohoku University, Jap...
Development and Evaluation 
of a Self-Coaching Intervention 
Program based on the 
Solution Focused Coaching(SFC)
Yoga Tokuyoshi 
Syoichi Iwasaki 
Tohoku University
解決志向コーチングに基づくセルフ・コーチングの介入プログラム効果検証 Development and Evaluation of a Self-Coaching Intervention Program based on the Solutio...
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in …5
×

解決志向コーチングに基づくセルフ・コーチングの介入プログラム効果検証 Development and Evaluation of a Self-Coaching Intervention Program based on the Solution Focused Coaching(SFC)

857 views

Published on

Development and Evaluation of a Self-Coaching Intervention Program based on the Solution Focused Coaching(SFC)

Published in: Data & Analytics
  • Be the first to comment

解決志向コーチングに基づくセルフ・コーチングの介入プログラム効果検証 Development and Evaluation of a Self-Coaching Intervention Program based on the Solution Focused Coaching(SFC)

  1. 1. Development and Evaluation of a Self-Coaching Intervention Program based on the Solution Focused Coaching(SFC) Yoga Tokuyoshi Syoichi Iwasaki Tohoku University
  2. 2. 【Objective】 Solution Focused Coaching (SFC) is a coaching method for assisting in Coachee’s goal achievement and Personal Growth using their Resources. However, there have been few studies that evaluate the relationship between the SFC and the Personal Growth. This study reports on the development and evaluation of an intervention for the SFC which takes account of the Personal Growth and the direct effect model.
  3. 3. Method of the experiment (1)Participants (N=26) were randomly assigned to Self-caoching and Control. (2)Conditions of the intervention ◆Coachee filled out the interview sheet . ◆Control did not do anything during the intervention. (3) The effect of the intervention was assessed with PGIS-II by comparing pre- and post-intervention scores. ◆Analysis Strategy : ANCOVA ANOVA, Effect Size (Cohens’d, Δ)
  4. 4. Interview Sheet of the SFC We made an Interview Sheet of the SFC. Applying the Practice model (Palmer, 2007, 2009, 2011). ◆What is the difference between this Interview sheet and Practice model? The rule of wanting to be more is "maximum effect with minimum intervention" (1) It is used within one coaching session. (2) The imagery technique was added to run a simulation. (3) The Flow concept was added. (4) The evaluation of Confidence, Self-efficacy of SF were added.
  5. 5. PRACTICE model(Palmer, 2007; 2009; 2011) P:(Problem identification) R:(Realistic, relevant goals developed) (Ex:SMART ) A:(Alternative solutions generated ) C:(Consideration of consequence) T:(Target most feasible solution(s)) IC:(Implementation of Chosen solution(s) E:(Evaluation) 5
  6. 6. Personal Growth Initiative Scale-II (Robitscheck et al., 2012) ■PGIS-II was made for a purpose of the Counseling that necessitates an approach based on a Personal Growth. 【16 items with 6-point Likert scale. 4 subscales】 ◆【Using Resources】: 3 items (e.g., “I ask for help when I try to change myself.”), ◆【Readiness for Change】: 4 items (e.g., “I can tell when I am ready to make specific changes in myself.”) ◆【Intentional Behavior】:4 items (e.g., “I take every opportunity to grow as it comes up.”) ◆【Planfulness】: 5 items (e.g., “I set realistic goals for what I want to change about myself.”)
  7. 7. Figure1 Flow chart of this study. Pre-Test Participants : University Student Intervention of the Solution Focoused Coaching ◆Coachee (n=15) Coachee filled out the interview sheet (20 minute) . 【Questionnaire】 PGIS-II(Robitscheck, 2012) (Personal Growth Initiative Scale- II) ◆Control (n=11) Not do anything ◆Allocation Randomized (n=26, Mean age=21.7 (SD=2.1) Post-Test 【Questionnaire】 PGIS-II ◆Data analysis 1: ANCOVA: Post-test (Bound variables), Pre-test(Covariate) 2 conditons(Fixed Factor) 2:ANOVA: 2 conditions:Coachee,Control & 2 intervention phase (Pre, Post) 3: Effect Size (Cohen’s d, Glass Δ) :It was derived from & Intervention phase (Pre, Post)
  8. 8. Result N=26 Mean Age : 21.7(SD=2.1) ◆2 condition & Sex :p = 1 (no significance) Woman Man Control 6 5 Self-Coaching 7 8 ◆The ANOVA between PGIS-II total score and 2 conditions: F(1,24)=1.22, p=0.28 (no significance) The ANOVA between Self-esteem and 2 conditions: F(1,24)=.001, p=0.95 (no significance) ■This Result showed no significance differences in 2 conditions
  9. 9. ◆PGIS-II Total Score * p<.05 6.0 5.0 4.0 3.0 2.0 1.0 0.0 Total score Control Self-Coaching cohen'd 0.12 0.74 Δ 0.14 0.90 ◆Main effect:significance(F(1,23)=17.5, p<.001) ◆Interaction:no significance(p=.11) Middle Control Self-Coaching Pre 4.0 3.8 Post 4.1 4.2 PGIS Total Score
  10. 10. ◆PGIS-II 「Intentional Behavior」 6.0 5.0 4.0 3.0 2.0 1.0 0.0 Intentional Behavior Control Self-Coaching cohen'd 0.11 0.23 Δ 0.12 0.25 ◆ Main effect: significance (F(1,23)=32.3, p<.001) ◆ Interaction: no significance (p=.8, n.s.) Small Control Self-Coaching Pre 4.6 4.2 Post 4.7 4.4 PGIS-II Intentional Behavior
  11. 11. ◆PGIS-II 「Readiness for Change」 ** p<.01 Control Self-Coaching 6.0 5.0 4.0 3.0 2.0 1.0 0.0 Pre 3.8 3.5 Post 3.9 4.0 Readness for Change Readiness Change Control Self-Coaching cohen'd 0.03 0.73 Δ 0.03 0.75 ◆Main effect:significance(F(1,23)=9.8, p<.01) ◆ Interaction: no significance (p=.20) Middle
  12. 12. ◆PGIS-II 「Planfulness」 ** p<.01 Control Self-Coaching 6.0 5.0 4.0 3.0 2.0 1.0 0.0 Pre 3.8 3.7 Post 3.9 4.2 Planfullness Control Self-Coaching cohen'd 0.03 0.79 Δ 0.03 0.88 Planluness Score ◆Main effect:significance(F(1,23)=15.8, p<.001) ◆Interaction:marginally significance(p=.07) High Self > Control †p=.1
  13. 13. ◆PGIS-II 「Using Resource」 Control Self-Coaching 6.0 5.0 4.0 3.0 2.0 1.0 0.0 Pre 3.6 3.7 Post 3.8 4.4 Using Resource Control Self-Coaching cohen'd 0.16 0.66 Δ 0.17 0.70 Using Resource ◆ Main effect:significance (F(1,23)=28.1 p<.001) ◆ Interaction:no significance (p=.11) Middle
  14. 14. ◆Career Planning (Hanai, 2008) 4.0 3.0 2.0 1.0 0.0 Career Planning Control Self-Coaching cohen'd 0.08 0.81 Δ 0.08 0.97 ◆ Main effect:significance (F(1,23)=19.7, p<.001) ◆ Interaction: marginally significance (F(1,23)=3.1, p=.09) High Control Self-Coachig Pre 2.7 2.2 Post 2.8 2.8 Career Planning Score Self > Control †p=.1 ** p<.01
  15. 15. Discussion ■On the part of Self-Coachee, The scores of PGIS-II total and PGIS-II Subscales were statistically significant. ◆High effect: Planfulness, Career Planning ◆Middle effect: PGIS-II total, Using Resource, Readiness for change. ◇Results indicated the Self-Coaching using the sheets based on the SFC causes significant improvement in level of PGIS at one coaching session. ◇This intervention and tools might be related to a Planning.
  16. 16. Future Directions (1)Using the intervention to achieve a concrete goal. (Career education, Health education program, Motivational education, Business situation) (2)Longitudinal assessment of outcomes including follow-up. (3)Develop intervention programs and tools to create more effective, efficient organizations. (4)Further assess the need for the interview sheet and Coaching intervention programs. (5)It is necessary to confirm whether scores of the intervention improves more if we will provide practices of the coach. (Ex, practices; psychological theory, leadership skills, Thinking Skills, Attentive listening, Questioning skills, etc.)
  17. 17. Why is this research important? • The intervention led to "maximum effect with minimum intervention“. Therefore, this intervention might easily be adapted to use with wide variety of populations. • Results of Coachee showed a statistically significant increase in the scores of the PGIS-II Without participants receiving special training of coaching skills.(If we educate and have them to practice, scores of coachee may have increased more. Or, Participants already have skills.) • This study established the validity of the tools based on Coaching Psychology (ex, the Interview sheet, PGIS-II) .
  18. 18. Solution-focused Inventory (Grant et al., 2012) ■SFI was made for a purpose of a Solution focused approach. 【12 items with 6-point Likert scale. 3 subscales】 ◆【Goal Orientation】: 4 items A focus towards desired goal states. ◆【Resource activation】: 4 items A focus on recognizing and utilizing strengths and resources. ◆【Problem disengagement】:4 items A focus on disengaging from problems and problems-focus thinking.
  19. 19. Reference material2: Research in Japan 2013.5 ~ 7 N=443 The relationship PGIS-II and SFI (Grant et al., 2012).
  20. 20. The Relationship PGIS-II and Measurement Solution focused Inventory Cognitive Flexibility Inventory Self-Control and Self- Management Scale Correlation SFI Total Alternative Control (Reverse) Self- Evaluation Self- Monitoring Self-reinforcement PGIS-II(Total) .77 *** .41 *** -.13 .35 *** .57 *** .42 *** Intentional Behavior .72 *** .44 *** -.19 * .35 *** .56 *** .50 *** Planfulness .74 *** .38 *** -.18 * .39 *** .54 *** .37 *** Using Resource .46 *** .17 * .22 *** -.02 .28 *** .13 Readiness for Change .66 *** .32 *** -.18 * .34 *** .44 *** .32 *** Cognitive Flexibility Inventory (Dennis et al., 2009) Self-Control and Self-Management Scale (Mezo, 2009). N=443; N=204
  21. 21. Main Reference • Palmer, S. & Whybrow, A. (2007). Handbook of Coaching Psychology: A guide for practitioners. Routledge. • Robitschek, C., Ashton, M. W., Spering, C. C., Geiger, N., Byers, D., Schotts, G. C., & Thoen, M. (2012). Development and psychometric properties of the Personal Growth Initiative Scale – II. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 59, 274-287. doi: 10.1037/a0027310
  22. 22. Main Reference 2 • Grant, A. M., Cavanagh, M. J., Kleitman, S., Spence, G. B., Lakota, M. & Yu, N. (2012). Development and validation of the solution-focused inventory. The Journal of Positive Psychology, 7 (4), 334-348. • Dennis, J. P. & Vander Wal, J. S. (2009). The cognitive flexibility inventory: Instrument development and estimates of reliability and validity. Cognitive Theory Research, 34, 241-353. • Mezo, P. G. (2009). The Self-Control and Self-Management Scale (SCMS): Development of an adaptive self-regulatory coping skills instrument. Journal of Psychopathology and Behavioral Assessment, 31, 83-93.
  23. 23. Correspondence Yoga Tokuyoshi ◆Cognitive Psychology Lab, Graduate School of Information Science, Tohoku University, Japan • Email: hattoxx@gmail.com • Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/hattoxx • Linkedin: http://www.linkedin.com/in/hattoxx
  24. 24. Development and Evaluation of a Self-Coaching Intervention Program based on the Solution Focused Coaching(SFC)
  25. 25. Yoga Tokuyoshi Syoichi Iwasaki Tohoku University

×