IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eme/regepp/rege-07-2018-0082.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The coaching process seen from the daily (and controversial) perspective of experts and coaches

Author

Listed:
  • Amyra Moyzes Sarsur
  • Cristina Parente

Abstract

Purpose - The purpose of this paper is to analyze the coaching process as perceived by experts and coaches, addressing its routine aspects and areas that are object of dissent in the organizational field. Design/methodology/approach - Qualitative research conducted through interviews with 20 experts and coaches who work in Portugal. Findings - Lack of consensus on conceptual approaches, few demands from organizations for concrete results, and elitism due to its selective use for high-level professionals. There is an expectation of companies that adopt a “coaching culture,” which includes participative actions, dialogue and humanization of relationships. There are benefits for organizations and professionals that result from its application, which raises care in considering it just another management fad. Originality/value - Professionals and organizations are increasingly adopting coaching processes, but there are few academic studies, with a scientific view, and more rarely from the perspective of practitioners (coaches). Hence, this topic lacks a more accurate approach, to better understand its application and extend the debate on controversial aspects, in order to make the discussion on its value more consistent.

Suggested Citation

  • Amyra Moyzes Sarsur & Cristina Parente, 2019. "The coaching process seen from the daily (and controversial) perspective of experts and coaches," Revista de Gestão, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 26(2), pages 126-142, March.
  • Handle: RePEc:eme:regepp:rege-07-2018-0082
    DOI: 10.1108/REGE-07-2018-0082
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/REGE-07-2018-0082/full/html?utm_source=repec&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=repec
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/REGE-07-2018-0082/full/pdf?utm_source=repec&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=repec
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1108/REGE-07-2018-0082?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eme:regepp:rege-07-2018-0082. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Emerald Support (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.