Organizations are increasingly investing in developing the coaching skills of their managers, and coaching by line management is an important factor in enhancing employee engagement, well-being and performance (Chartered Institute of Personnel Development, 2004; Ellingeic, Ellinger, & Keller, 2003). Workplace coaching tends to be highly goal-focused, helping employees to set goals, develop action plans, and stay on track for success (Graham, Wedman, & Garvin-Kester, 1994). Reflecting the increasingly widespread use of coaching (Jarvis, 2003; Wright, 2005), one in five UK managers has received specific training in coaching skills (The Work Foundation, 2004). However, coaching skills are rarely measured or assessed using valid and reliable assessment tools (Lidbetter, 2003). The measurement of goal-focused coaching skills is an important part of assessing the impact of coach-skills training programs, and as a means of benchmarking coaching skills. Such measurement would be helpful to manager-coaches, professional coaches and human resource managers who oversee the learning and development needs of employees, as well as researchers exploring psychosocial factors related to personal and workplace coaching.

Our objective was to develop a short self-report measure which could be used quickly and with ease. Long complex questionnaires tend not to be warmly received, and we wanted the questionnaire to be both practical and reliable. This exploratory study reports our preliminary findings on the Goal-focused Coaching Skills Questionnaire (GCSQ) and presents directions for future research.

Goal-focused coaching can be understood as a collaborative, solution-focused and systematic process which is aimed at enhancing performance, self-directed learning and well-being (Grant, 2003). Although many proprietary models of coaching are presented as complex methodologies, in fact the essence of goal-focused coaching is a simple series of processes in which an individual sets a goal, develops a plan of action, begins action, monitors his or her performance (through observation and self-reflection), evaluates his or her performance (thus gaining insight) and, based on this evaluation, changes his or her actions to further enhance performance, and thus reach his or her goal (Graham et al., 1994). The role of the coach is to facilitate the coachee’s progress through this cycle. In order to purposefully move through this cycle, individuals need to be able to regulate their thoughts, feelings and behaviors to best help them achieve their goals. Intelligent and purposeful use of emotions is thus central to the coaching process (David, 2005).

Emotional intelligence (EI) can be understood as having four key branches; a) the ability to accurately perceive emotions in oneself and others, b) the ability to use emotions to facilitate thought, c) understanding how different emotions arise and change over time, and d) the ability to use the knowledge from the first three branches to regulate emotions and translate them into constructive action (Mayer & Salovey, 1997). Not surprisingly, EI has been shown to be an important factor in workplace performance (Abraham, 2005). Emotional intelligence in the workplace is important both on an individual level, with EI predicting individual leadership behaviors (Byrne, 2004), and on a team level with leaders’ EI being associated with higher levels of group effectiveness (Stubbs, 2005).

Although the relationship between EI and goal-focused coaching skills appears self-evident, to date no research has examined this issue. In this paper preliminary findings are reported in the initial development and validation of the Goal-focused Coaching Skills Questionnaire (GCSQ), including factor analysis, validity, and test-retest reliability and the differences between professional and nonprofessional coaches’ scores are examined. In addition, the relationship between goal-focused coaching skills, EI and a measure of personal insight is examined.

It was hypothesized that EI would be positively correlated with scores on the GCSQ, that there would be a positive correlation between a measure of personal insight and scores on the GCSQ, and that professional coaches would have higher scores on the GCSQ than would nonprofessional and novice coaches.

Drawing on the previously outlined conceptualization of goal-focused coaching and in reference to the theoretical and empirical literature on goal attainment (e.g., Locke, 2002), helping relationships (e.g., Egan, 1974) and the change literature (e.g., Prochaska & DiClemente, 1982) five key competencies related to goal-focused coaching were identified.

Firstly, goal setting skills. Clearly, goals are a vital part of the coaching process. Distal and proximal goals act as standards by which individuals can evaluate their performance as they make progress towards their desired outcomes (Locke, 1996). Further, there is evidence from the self-concordance literature suggesting that goals that are aligned with individuals’ personal values are associated with higher levels of goal attainment, satisfaction and well-being (Sheldon & Houser-Marko, 2001). Thus a key coaching competency refers to goal-setting skills in which the coach helps the coachee set goals which are valued by the coachee and are specific and stretching, but also realistic and attainable (Evers, Brouwers, & Tomic, 2006).

Two, there is a significant literature demonstrating the importance of development of a strong working alliance between therapists and their clients (e.g., Horvath & Symonds, 1991). The building of such alliances requires that the coach (or therapist) demonstrates appropriate levels of empathy and understanding, and creates an environment where coachees can feel free to express their own ideas (Schlegelmich & Fresco, 2005). However, it should be noted that the development of a strong working alliance requires considerable skill. Given that in the workplace many managers do not have good rapport building skills (Ambler, Roberts, & Vagneur, 1992), it is not immediately clear whether or not such skills can be fully developed in short training courses in workplace settings. The present measure may be useful in exploring this issue.

Three, a solution-focus to the coaching conversation is necessary, which helps the coachee to generate insights and means that the coaching process is primarily aimed at developing solutions rather than exploring the past. Not surprisingly, coaching is typically understood as being less about advice-giving and more about client-generated solutions (Whitmore, 2004). The empirical literature suggests that solution-focused interventions can be effective in a range of populations including domestic violence (Lee, Uken, & Sebold, 2004), workplace safety behaviors (Geller, Perdue, & French, 2004), and brief coaching (Berg & Szabo, 2005).

Four, the coach’s skill in managing process and accountability is a vital competency in ensuring the coachee completes any agreed action steps, and holding the coachee accountable for completing any agreed action steps. In order to make consistent progress, it is important that the coach be able to help the coachee monitor and evaluate his/her performance. In essence this is a core part of the self-regulation cycle (Graham et al., 1994). This requires that the coach addresses any shortfalls in performance promptly; failure to do so is a key factor in derailment whereby the coachee becomes disengaged from coaching (Kilburg, 2001).

Finally, the key purpose of coaching is to help the coachee attain outcomes that are valued and meaningful. Thus the outcomes of coaching is a key factor referring to goal attainment and the coachee’s actually valuing the coaching process (Peterson & Miller, 2005). Questionnaire items were constructed which reflected these five competencies (see Table 1).

Convergent validity was explored by comparing the GCSQ with a measure of trait EI, and a measure of personal insight, and professional coaches’ scores were compared with nonprofessional coaches’ scores. In addition, behavioral observations and ratings of coaches’ skills were used to investigate the validity of the scale: following a coaching session, coachees rated the coaching skills of coaches, and these ratings were compared with the coaches’ own self-reported skills.

Participants were 218 individuals who were from a wide range of coaching and management-related backgrounds. These included Human Resource professionals and managers who were learning coaching skills for use in the workplace, as part of professional development programs and/or postgraduate degree programs in Human Resource Management and Coaching Psychology. This group included both novice and experienced coaches. In addition, another group of experienced professional coaches were used in the study. In total there were 68 males and 150 females, reflecting the gender composition of the coaching industry. Participants also indicated their age, gender and if they were a professional coach or not. The term “professional coach” was used to indicate whether or not participants derived all, or some, of their income from fees for the provision of coaching services. Average age was 44 years and 5 months. Participants completed the GCSQ using a seven-point scale (1 = very strongly disagree, 7 = very strongly agree). There were no significant differences between male and female scores on the GCSQ.

One hundred and thirty-four of the 218 participants also completed the Schutte Emotional Intelligence Scale (SEIS; Schutte et al., 1998) and the Insight subscale of the Self-reflection and Insight Scale (SRIS-IN; Grant, Franklin, & Langford, 2002).

This exploratory study produced a scale with good internal consistency and indications of convergent and face validity and test-retest reliability. The significant correlational relationships between the GCSQ, the SEIS and the SRIS-IN indicate that the GCSQ possesses good convergent validity.

It could be expected that individuals who had good coaching skills would also have higher levels of EI. Indeed, therapists have been found to have higher levels of EI than their clients (Schutte et al., 1998) and individuals with good goal-setting skills also have higher levels of EI (Martinez-Pons, 1997). The positive correlational relationship between the SRIS-IN and the GCSQ also lends support for the convergent validity of the GCSQ, as insight is central to the coaching (Grant, 2003) and goal attainment processes (Locke, 2002).

The significant differences between professional coaches’ and nonprofessional coaches’ scores on the GCSQ is an important finding and good initial evidence for the scale’s ability to distinguish between theoretically different groups. This finding suggests that the GCSQ may have practical discriminatory characteristics. This study also revealed that self-reported EI and personal insight are related to goal-focused coaching skills. This is the first study to investigate these issues and to provide preliminary evidence that goal-focused coaching skills and EI are related.

In addition, the face validity and the real-world applicability of the GCSQ are supported by the fact that in a blind rating process, coachees’ ratings of the coaches’ actual coaching skills were significantly correlated with the coaches’ own self-reported ratings of their own skills. This finding lends additional weight to the validity of the GCSQ. In short, the scale appears to have good validity and appears to map real-world coaching experience. Thus overall this study presents useful preliminary evidence that the GCSQ is a valid and useful self-report measure of goal-focused coaching skills.

As regards limitations, the present study was cross-sectional, and scores on the GCSQ were not investigated in relation to actual outcomes of coaching, such as coachee’s levels of goal attainment following a series of coaching sessions. Further, it should be borne in mind that in this study a self-report EI scale was used, rather than an objective ability measure. The concept of EI has been somewhat controversial (Davies, Stankov, & Roberts,1998). A key debate has been about the differences between ability EI and trait EI, and the roles of objective ability measures versus self-report trait measures (Petrides & Furnham, 2001). Objective measures assess individuals’ actual performance on specific tasks and assess cognitive-emotional abilities, whereas trait measures use self-report questionnaires to assess emotion-related behavioral dispositions and self-perceived abilities. Although self-report measures of EI have been criticized as being closely related to established personality measures and for not thoroughly assessing the full EI construct, in terms of measurement most success has been achieved in relation to trait EI rather than ability EI (Perez, Petrides, & Furnham, 2005).

Future researchers should use longitudinal methodologies to examine the relationship between the coaches’ self-reported coaching skills on the GCSQ and coachees’ actual goal attainment following coaching sessions. In addition, it would be useful to examine whether or not the GCSQ is responsive to change in coaches’ levels of goal-focused coaching skills, such as may occur following a training program designed to enhance coaching skills. Future researchers should also seek to develop norms for the GCSQ in a range of populations.

In conclusion, this exploratory study indicates that the GCSQ shows promise as a self-report measure of goal-focused coaching skills. As coaching is increasingly being used in organizations, the GCSQ may prove to be a useful tool in the assessment and measurement of coaching skills in the workplace, and in measuring the impact of coaching skills training programs.

Abraham, R. (2005). Emotional Intelligence in the workplace: A review and synthesis. In R. Schulze & R. D. Roberts (Eds.), Emotional intelligence: An international handbook (pp. 255-270). Ashland, OH: Hogrefe & Huber.

Ambler, T., Roberts, A., & Vagneur, K. (1992). Developing international marketing managers: Getting out of the boxes. European Business Journal, 4(2), 40.

Berg, I. K., & Szabo, P. (2005). Brief coaching for lasting solutions (Vol. xvi). New York: Norton & Co.

Byrne, J. C. (2004). The role of emotional intelligence in predicting leadership and related work behavior. Doctoral dissertation, Stevens Institute Technology, NJ, USA.

Chartered Institute of Personnel Development. (2004). New CIPD evidence proves front line leaders make the difference between low-performing and high-performing firms. Management Services, 48(3), 6.

David, S. (2005). Integrating an emotional intelligence framework into evidence-based coaching. In M. Cavanagh, A. M. Grant, & T. Kemp (Eds.), Evidence-based coaching (Vol. 1): Theory, research and practice from the behavioral sciences (pp. 57-68). Bowen Hills, Queensland, Australia: Australian Academic Press.

Davies, M., Stankov, L., & Roberts, R. D. (1998). Emotional intelligence: In search of an elusive construct. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 75(4), 989-1015.

Egan, G. (1974). The skilled helper. Pacific Grove, CA: Brooks/Cole Publishing Co.

Ellingeic, A. D., Ellinger, A. F., & Keller, S. B. (2003). Supervisory coaching behavior, employee satisfaction, and warehouse employee performance: A dyadic perspective in the distribution industry. Human Resource Development Quarterly, 14(4), 435-458.

Evers, W. J., Brouwers, A., & Tomic, W. (2006). A quasi-experimental study on management coaching effectiveness. Consulting Psychology Journal: Practice and Research, 58(3), 174- 182.

Geller, S., Perdue, S. R., & French, A. (2004). Behavior-based safety coaching. Professional Safety, 49(7), 42-49.

Graham, S., Wedman, J. F., & Garvin-Kester, B. (1994). Manager coaching skills: What makes a good coach? Performance Improvement Quarterly, 7(2), 81-94.

Grant, A. M. (2003). The impact of life coaching on goal attainment, metacognition and mental health. Social Behavior and Personality: An international journal, 31(3), 253-264.

Grant, A. M., Franklin, J., & Langford, P. (2002). The Self-reflection and Insight Scale: A new measure of private self-consciousness. Social Behavior and Personality: An international journal, 30(8), 821-836.

Jarvis, J. (2003). Coaching and buying coaching services. London: Chartered Institute of Personnel Development.

Horvath, A. O., & Symonds, B. (1991). Relation between working alliance and outcome in psychotherapy: A meta-analysis. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 38(2), 139-149.

Kilburg, R. R. (2001). Facilitating intervention adherence in executive coaching: A model and methods. Consulting Psychology Journal: Practice and Research, 53(4), 251-267.

Lee, M. Y., Uken, A., & Sebold, J. (2004). Accountability for change: Solution-focused treatment with domestic violence offenders. Families in Society, 85(4), 463-476.

Lidbetter, K. (2003). For good measure. People Management, 9(1), 46.

Locke, E. A. (1996). Motivation through conscious goal setting. Applied and Preventive Psychology, 5(2), 117-124.

Locke, E. A. (2002). Setting goals for life and happiness. In C. R. Snyder & S. J. Lopez (Eds.), Handbook of positive psychology (pp. 299-312). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Martinez-Pons, M. (1997). The relation of emotional intelligence with selected areas of personal functioning. Imagination, Cognition and Personality, 17(1), 3-13.

Mayer, J. D., & Salovey, P. (1997). What is emotional intelligence? In D. J. S. Peter Salovey (Ed.), Emotional development and emotional intelligence: Educational implications (pp. 3-34). New York: Basic Books.

Perez, J. C., Petrides, K. V., & Furnham, A. (2005). Measuring trait emotional intelligence. In R. Schulze & R. D. Roberts (Eds.), Emotional intelligence: An international handbook (pp. 181- 201). Ashland, OH: Hogrefe & Huber.

Peterson, D. B., & Miller, J. (2005). The alchemy of coaching: “You’re good, Jennifer, but you could be really good”. Consulting Psychology Journal: Practice and Research, 57(1), 14-40.

Petrides, K., & Furnham, A. (2001). Trait emotional intelligence: Psychometric investigation with reference to established trait taxonomies. European Journal of Personality, 15(6), 425-448.

Prochaska, J. O., & DiClemente, C. C. (1982). Transtheoretical therapy: Toward a more integrative model of change. Psychotherapy: Theory, Research and Practice, 19(3), 276-288.

Schlegelmich, A., & Fresco, D. (2005). Emotion-focused therapy: Coaching clients to work through their feelings. Counselling Psychology Quarterly, 18(3), September, 225-226.

Schutte, N. S., Malouff, J. M., Hall, L. E., Haggerty, D. J., Cooper, J. T., Golden, C. J., et al. (1998). Development and validation of a measure of emotional intelligence. Personality and Individual Differences, 25(2), 167-177.

Sheldon, K. M., & Houser-Marko, L. (2001). Self-concordance, goal attainment, and the pursuit of happiness: Can there be an upward spiral? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 80(1), 152-165.

Stubbs, E. C. (2005). Emotional intelligence competencies in the team and team leader: A multi-level examination of the impact of emotional intelligence on group performance. Doctoral dissertation, Case Western Reserve University, OH, USA.

The Work Foundation (2004). Managing best practice No 111 Coaching and mentoring. London: The Work Foundation.

Whitmore, J. (2004). Something really has to change: ‘Change management’ as an imperative rather than a topic. Journal of Change Management, 4(1), 5-14.

Wright, J. (2005). Workplace coaching: What’s it all about? Work: Journal of Prevention, Assessment and Rehabilitation, 24(3), 325-328.