Premium
Where philosophy meets culture: exploring how coaches conceptualise their roles
Author(s) -
Watling Christopher J,
LaDonna Kori A
Publication year - 2019
Publication title -
medical education
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.776
H-Index - 138
eISSN - 1365-2923
pISSN - 0308-0110
DOI - 10.1111/medu.13799
Subject(s) - coaching , context (archaeology) , grounded theory , curriculum , psychology , medical education , vulnerability (computing) , pedagogy , qualitative research , medicine , sociology , psychotherapist , computer security , paleontology , social science , computer science , biology
Context Although conceptually attractive, coaching in medicine remains ill‐defined, with little examination of the transferability of coaching principles from other fields. Here we explore how coaching is enacted both within and outside of medicine; we aim to understand both the elements required for coaching to be useful and the factors that may influence its translation to the medical education context. Methods In this constructivist grounded theory study, we interviewed 24 individuals across three groups: physicians who consider themselves coaches in clinical learning settings ( n = 8), physicians with experience as sports, arts or business coaches ( n = 10), and sports coaches without medical backgrounds ( n = 6). Data collection and analysis were conducted iteratively using constant comparison to identify themes and explore their relationships. Results We identified a shared philosophy of coaching, comprising three core elements that our participants endorsed regardless of the coaching context: (i) mutual engagement, with a shared orientation towards growth and development; (ii) ongoing reflection involving both learners and coaches, and (iii) an embrace of failure as a catalyst for learning. Enacting these features appeared to be influenced by culture, which affected how coaching was defined and developed, how the coaching role was positioned within the learning context, and how comfortably vulnerability could be expressed. Participants struggled to clearly define the coaching role in medicine, instead acknowledging that the lines between educational roles were often blurred. Further, the embrace of failure appeared challenging in medicine, where showing vulnerability was perceived as difficult for both learners and teachers. Conclusions Medical education's embrace of coaching should be informed by an understanding of both coach and learner behaviours that need to be encouraged and trained, and the cultural and organisational supports that are required to foster success.