Goal attainment scaling and coaching client core self-evaluations

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

107 Downloads (Pure)


Objective: With a strengthening of the evidence base for coaching as an effective developmental intervention, greater understanding is needed regarding the factors that may contribute to this effectiveness. This study sought to determine the effect client 'core self-evaluations' (CSEs) may have on the attainment of contracted coaching goals. It also adopted a revised approach to Spence's (2007) goal attainment scaling (GAS) procedure. Design: A quasi-experimental design was employed. 135 participants were recruited from undergraduate awards within a UK university. Seeking to improve on previous client trait research, a homogeneous, objectively measurable criterion variable (overall year end grade), was adopted. Method: Each of the four facets in the CSE construct were measured using established psychometric scales. Participants received training in core coaching skills and then took part in six peer coaching sessions, conducted at monthly intervals over a period of half a year. Results: A multiple regression analysis found a non-significant relationship between the four CSE facets and coaching goal attainment (R 2 = 0.03%, F 4,130 = 1.04., p < .39). Implications: The amount of outcome variance attributable to participant CSE scores was 66% lower than that from a comparable study using self-report measures (Tee, Shearer & Roderique-Davies, 2017), suggesting that the use of objective measures of client goal progress has a marked effect. The rigorous GAS procedure used in this study allowed more consistency in comparing goal attainment across clients. Finally, these findings may imply that 'core-self evaluations' may not be the key set of client traits that predict coachability.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)47-54
JournalThe Coaching Psychologist
Issue number1
Publication statusPublished - 30 Jun 2019


Dive into the research topics of 'Goal attainment scaling and coaching client core self-evaluations'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this