Matching (coaching)

from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The term matching in connection with coaching describes the relationship quality (fit) between the coach and his client (coachee), which enables both to enter into a professional working relationship.

Similar to the therapist-patient relationship in psychotherapy , matching is ascribed a fundamental importance for a functioning coaching process. Accordingly, the matching decides whether the coachee and coach trust each other, whether the “chemistry is right” between them and whether they want to start working together. For coaching, however, there are also individual empirical results that are contrary to this, which do not confirm the importance of matching for coaching success.

The matching concerns aspects of gender , age , preferred work and approach, background of experience and interaction style . The (professional) milieu of origin and the associated topic preference can also be basic criteria for the success or failure of the coaching.

The individual aspects of matching are perceived very subjectively by those involved. However, the advisory relationship in coaching can in part be actively influenced and shaped by the coach.

With regard to the matching of the preferred approaches to a task or a topic, opposing ideal types can be described on the basis of various points of view: In this context, Böning (2005) describes, for example, the extreme types of speech thinkers and result speakers or monochronous time types and polychronic time types.Thus , coach and coachee understand each other as the same Type often faster and better, but sometimes the combination of completely opposing approaches can be an inspiring and target-oriented combination. Ultimately, the specific work context decides which constellation is successful and pleasant for those involved.

Individual evidence

  1. ^ The Executive Coaching Forum (2008): The Executive Coaching Handbook. Principles and Guidelines for a Successful Coaching Partnership. Pp. 34-35.
  2. ↑ Greif, S. (2008): Coaching and result-oriented self-reflection. Göttingen: Hogrefe. P. 157.
  3. ↑ Maurer, I. (2009): Management coaching. A study on the effectiveness of process-oriented intervention techniques in problem solving. Marburg: Tectum Verlag. P. 107.
  4. ^ Baron, L, / Morin, L. (2009): The Coach – Coachee Relationship in Executive Coaching: A Field Study. Human Resource Development Quarterly, vol. 20, no. 1, pp. 85-106.
  5. ↑ Grawe, K. (1998): Psychological Therapy. Göttingen: Hogrefe.
  6. ^ Trudeau, DA (2005): Toward a conceptual model of executive coaching practices in organizations in the United States. A modified Delphi forecasting study. Lincoln, Nebraska: Dissertation, University of Nebraska. P. 78.
  7. ↑ Dzierzon, SA (2004): Person-centered relationship behavior in coaching. Master's thesis in Social Behavioral Sciences. FernUniversität Hagen. P. 40.
  8. ↑ Maurer, I. (2009): Management coaching. A study on the effectiveness of process-oriented intervention techniques in problem solving. Marburg: Tectum Verlag. Pp. 100-101 .; P. 107.
  9. ↑ Schreyögg, A. (2008): Coaching for the newly appointed manager. Wiesbaden: VS publishing house for social sciences. P. 29.
  10. ↑ Schreyögg, A. (2008): Coaching for the newly appointed manager. Wiesbaden: VS publishing house for social sciences. P. 32.
  11. ↑ Migge, B. (2005): Handbuch Coaching und Beratung. Effective models, commented case presentations, numerous exercises. Weinheim: Beltz Verlag. Pp. 552-554.
  12. ^ Böning, U. / Fritschle, B. (2005): Coaching for Business. What coaches, HR professionals and managers need to know about coaching. Bonn: manager seminars. P. 214ff.
  13. ^ Böning, U. / Fritschle, B. (2005): Coaching for Business. What coaches, HR professionals and managers need to know about coaching. Bonn: manager seminars. P. 232.
  14. ^ Böning, U. / Fritschle, B. (2005): Coaching for Business. What coaches, HR professionals and managers need to know about coaching. Bonn: manager seminars. P. 233