Group coaching represents a distinctive intervention modality within coaching psychology that leverages collective learning, peer support, and shared goal achievement among participants. Distinguished from both individual coaching and group therapy, group coaching facilitates personal and professional development through structured sessions where a trained coach works with multiple individuals simultaneously. This approach harnesses group dynamics, social learning theory, and collaborative problem-solving to enhance self-awareness, accountability, and behavioral change. Group coaching has demonstrated effectiveness across diverse contexts including leadership development, career transitions, health behavior change, and academic performance enhancement. The methodology integrates evidence-based coaching frameworks with group facilitation principles, creating synergistic learning environments where participants benefit from both coach expertise and peer insights. As organizations increasingly recognize the cost-effectiveness and unique advantages of collective development approaches, group coaching has emerged as a vital tool within the broader coaching psychology landscape.
Introduction to Group Coaching
Group coaching has evolved as a powerful modality within coaching psychology, offering a unique blend of individual development within a collective learning environment. Unlike traditional one-on-one coaching or group therapy, group coaching occupies a distinctive space where multiple individuals work toward their respective goals while benefiting from shared experiences, diverse perspectives, and mutual accountability. This approach has gained considerable traction since the early 2000s as organizations and practitioners recognized its potential to deliver high-impact developmental experiences efficiently and cost-effectively.
The emergence of group coaching reflects broader trends in organizational psychology and adult learning theory. As Thornton (2010) articulated in the International Journal of Evidence Based Coaching and Mentoring, group coaching represents a natural evolution in coaching practice, responding to increasing demands for scalable yet personalized developmental interventions. The modality draws upon established theories including social learning theory, group dynamics research, and positive psychology principles, creating a robust theoretical foundation that distinguishes it from informal peer support or traditional training programs.
Contemporary group coaching serves multiple populations and purposes. Corporate settings frequently employ group coaching for leadership development, team effectiveness, and organizational change initiatives. Educational institutions utilize group coaching to support student success, faculty development, and academic leadership. Healthcare environments increasingly adopt group coaching for behavior change interventions, wellness programs, and professional development among healthcare providers. The versatility of group coaching stems from its adaptable structure and its capacity to address both individual developmental needs and collective learning objectives simultaneously.
Theoretical Foundations and Frameworks
Group coaching integrates multiple theoretical perspectives that inform its design, implementation, and effectiveness. Understanding these foundations enables practitioners to make intentional choices about group composition, structure, and intervention strategies.
Social Learning Theory and Observational Learning
Bandura’s (1977) social learning theory provides a cornerstone for understanding how group coaching facilitates development. Within group coaching contexts, participants engage in observational learning by witnessing peers articulate challenges, explore solutions, and implement behavioral changes. This vicarious learning extends beyond simple modeling; participants develop self-efficacy through seeing others successfully navigate similar challenges. The group environment creates multiple opportunities for social reinforcement, where peer recognition and support strengthen commitment to developmental goals.
Research by Brown and Grant (2010) in the International Coaching Psychology Review demonstrated that group coaching participants showed significant increases in goal attainment and well-being, with social support and observational learning identified as key mechanisms. The study involved 63 life coaching clients randomly assigned to individual or group coaching conditions, finding comparable outcomes between modalities while highlighting unique benefits of the group approach. Participants specifically noted that observing others’ progress and receiving peer feedback enhanced their motivation and provided alternative perspectives they would not have encountered in individual coaching.
Group Dynamics and Developmental Stages
Group coaching practitioners must navigate the inherent dynamics that emerge when individuals come together for collective learning. Tuckman’s (1965) stages of group development—forming, storming, norming, performing, and adjourning—remain relevant for understanding group coaching progression. Skilled coaches anticipate and facilitate movement through these stages, recognizing that early sessions require substantial attention to establishing psychological safety, clarifying expectations, and building group cohesion.
The concept of psychological safety, extensively researched by Edmondson (1999), holds particular importance in group coaching contexts. Participants must feel secure enough to acknowledge vulnerabilities, share authentic challenges, and experiment with new behaviors without fear of judgment or negative consequences. Coaches establish psychological safety through explicit confidentiality agreements, modeling non-judgmental curiosity, and intervening promptly when group interactions threaten trust or respect.
Positive Psychology and Strengths-Based Approaches
Contemporary group coaching frequently incorporates positive psychology principles, emphasizing strengths identification, positive emotions, and optimal functioning rather than deficit remediation. Biswas-Diener and Dean (2007) described how positive psychology coaching leverages character strengths, optimism, and well-being research to enhance coaching outcomes. In group settings, strengths-based approaches enable participants to recognize and amplify their capabilities while learning from the diverse strengths present within the group.
Group coaching that emphasizes appreciative inquiry—introduced by Cooperrider and Srivastva (1987)—focuses attention on what works well, creating generative conversations about desired futures rather than dwelling on problems. This approach proves particularly effective in organizational group coaching contexts where the goal involves building collective capacity and fostering innovation. Participants engage in discovering and building upon existing strengths, both individual and collective, creating momentum toward positive change.
Group Coaching Methodologies and Structures
Effective group coaching requires deliberate attention to program design, session structure, and facilitation approaches that maximize both individual development and collective learning.
Program Design Considerations
Group coaching programs typically range from six to twelve sessions, though duration varies based on objectives, context, and participant needs. Sessions commonly last between 90 and 120 minutes, providing sufficient time for meaningful exploration while maintaining engagement. Clutterbuck (2010) recommended optimal group sizes between four and eight participants, balancing the benefits of diverse perspectives with the practical necessity of ensuring adequate airtime for each individual.
Program designers must make strategic decisions about group homogeneity versus heterogeneity. Homogeneous groups—composed of individuals in similar roles, life stages, or facing comparable challenges—offer the advantage of immediate relevance and shared understanding. Participants readily relate to each other’s experiences and can exchange highly applicable strategies. Heterogeneous groups provide broader perspective diversity, exposing participants to different worldviews, problem-solving approaches, and experiences that challenge assumptions and broaden thinking.
Pre-coaching assessments frequently inform group coaching design. Instruments such as the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator, StrengthsFinder, or 360-degree feedback tools provide participants with self-awareness data that enriches coaching conversations. These assessments create common language and frameworks that facilitate group discussions while respecting individual uniqueness.
Facilitation Approaches and Techniques
Group coaching facilitation requires balancing attention to individual coaching needs with management of group process and dynamics. Coaches employ various techniques to achieve this balance, including hot seat coaching, where one participant receives focused coaching while others observe and reflect; triadic coaching, where participants coach each other in structured trios with rotating roles; and whole-group exploration of themes that emerge from individual sharing.
The concept of the “learning edge,” introduced by Drago-Severson (2004) in adult learning contexts, applies powerfully in group coaching. Effective facilitators help participants identify and work at their developmental edge—the zone where growth occurs through manageable challenge. In group settings, this involves calibrating discussions and activities to engage participants at various developmental levels while maintaining collective momentum.
Action learning principles, originally developed by Revans (1980), frequently inform group coaching methodology. This approach emphasizes learning through tackling real challenges, with the coaching group serving as a reflective community that helps individuals gain insights, test assumptions, and develop action strategies. Participants present actual workplace or life challenges, receive questions and perspectives from peers, and commit to specific actions between sessions.
Technology-Mediated Group Coaching
The evolution of video conferencing and digital collaboration tools has expanded group coaching possibilities. Virtual group coaching enables participation regardless of geographic location, increases scheduling flexibility, and can reduce costs associated with physical meeting spaces. Research by Berry, Ashby, Gnilka, and Matheny (2011) in the Journal of Technology in Counseling found that online group coaching produced outcomes comparable to face-to-face formats while offering unique advantages such as increased reflection time and the ability to review session recordings.
Technology-mediated group coaching presents particular facilitation challenges, including managing turn-taking in virtual environments, maintaining engagement without physical presence cues, and ensuring equitable participation when technical capabilities vary. Coaches must develop specific competencies for virtual facilitation, including skillful use of breakout rooms, digital whiteboards, and asynchronous communication tools to extend learning between synchronous sessions.
Applications Across Contexts and Populations
Group coaching demonstrates versatility across numerous settings, each requiring contextual adaptations while maintaining core coaching principles.
Leadership and Executive Development
Organizations widely employ group coaching for developing leadership capabilities at various levels. Executive coaching groups bring together senior leaders facing similar challenges around strategic thinking, organizational influence, and executive presence. Mid-level manager coaching groups frequently focus on delegation, team development, and navigating organizational complexity. Emerging leader programs use group coaching to accelerate development of foundational leadership competencies.
Research by Ely et al. (2010) published in The Leadership Quarterly examined a leadership development program combining classroom learning with group coaching. Results showed significant improvements in transformational leadership behaviors, with participants attributing changes to both the peer learning environment and the reflective space created by coaching conversations. The group format enabled leaders to test new approaches, receive real-time feedback, and build lasting peer support networks that extended beyond the formal program.
Career Development and Transitions
Group coaching effectively supports individuals navigating career transitions, whether seeking new positions, changing careers, or adjusting to promotions. Career-focused coaching groups provide accountability for job search activities, feedback on professional materials, practice opportunities for interviews, and emotional support during what can be a challenging process.
A study by Taber, Hartung, Briddick, Briddick, and Rehfuss (2011) in the Journal of Career Assessment found that group career counseling (incorporating coaching elements) significantly improved career decision self-efficacy and reduced career indecision among college students. The group environment normalized the uncertainty inherent in career exploration while providing multiple perspectives on career paths and decision-making strategies.
Health, Wellness, and Behavior Change
Health coaching groups address objectives ranging from weight management and physical activity to chronic disease management and stress reduction. The group format leverages social support as a critical factor in health behavior change, with participants serving as both accountability partners and sources of encouragement.
Wolever et al. (2010) conducted research published in the American Journal of Health Promotion examining integrative health coaching for individuals with type 2 diabetes. While the study focused primarily on individual coaching, it noted that group-based approaches showed promise for enhancing social support and reducing costs. Subsequent research has demonstrated that group health coaching produces clinically significant improvements in biometric outcomes, self-efficacy, and health-related quality of life.
Academic and Student Success
Educational institutions increasingly implement group coaching to support student retention, academic performance, and personal development. Student success coaching groups help participants develop time management skills, overcome procrastination, navigate academic challenges, and build resilience. Graduate student coaching groups address unique pressures of advanced study, including dissertation completion, work-life balance, and career preparation.
Robinson and Gahagan (2010) described an innovative peer group coaching model at Florida State University designed to support first-generation college students. The program significantly improved retention rates and grade point averages while fostering sense of belonging and institutional connection. Participants benefited from both coach guidance and peer mentorship, creating a supportive community that addressed both academic and socio-emotional needs.
Empirical Evidence and Effectiveness Research
The evidence base for group coaching continues to expand, though research lags behind the proliferation of practice. Understanding current findings, methodological considerations, and gaps informs evidence-based practice and identifies priorities for future investigation.
Outcome Studies and Comparative Research
Multiple studies have demonstrated positive outcomes associated with group coaching across various measures. Grant (2013) conducted a randomized controlled trial published in the Journal of Positive Psychology examining group coaching for enhancing resilience and well-being. The study involved 103 participants assigned to group coaching, peer coaching, or waitlist control conditions. Results showed that group coaching produced significant improvements in resilience, mental health, and goal attainment, with gains maintained at follow-up.
Comparative research examining group versus individual coaching suggests largely equivalent outcomes on many measures, with each modality offering distinct advantages. David and Matu (2013) in Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences compared individual and group rational emotive behavioral coaching with Romanian executives. Both formats produced significant improvements in unconditional self-acceptance and reduced irrational beliefs, though individual coaching showed slightly larger effect sizes. However, the group format was substantially more cost-effective and provided additional benefits through peer learning and networking.
Mechanisms and Process Research
Understanding how group coaching produces change enables practitioners to optimize interventions. Process research has identified several key mechanisms including social support, normalization of challenges, accountability, perspective diversity, and the modeling of vulnerability and growth.
Theeboom, Beersma, and van Vianen (2014) conducted a meta-analysis published in the Journal of Positive Psychology examining coaching effectiveness. While focused broadly on coaching rather than specifically group coaching, the meta-analysis found that coaching with clear goal-setting and structured feedback produced larger effects. These process elements prove particularly amenable to group formats where peers contribute to goal refinement and provide ongoing feedback.
Limitations and Methodological Challenges
Research on group coaching faces several methodological challenges. Many studies employ small sample sizes, lack rigorous control conditions, and rely heavily on self-report measures. The heterogeneity of group coaching approaches—varying in theoretical orientation, structure, duration, and facilitator training—complicates comparison across studies and synthesis of findings.
Few studies have examined long-term sustainability of group coaching outcomes or investigated moderating factors that might explain for whom and under what conditions group coaching proves most effective. Additionally, research rarely includes economic analyses comparing cost-effectiveness of group versus individual coaching, despite this being a primary driver of organizational interest in group formats.
Ethical Considerations and Professional Standards
Group coaching raises specific ethical considerations that practitioners must navigate to ensure participant welfare and professional integrity.
Confidentiality and Privacy in Group Settings
Confidentiality represents a complex ethical issue in group coaching. While coaches can establish clear confidentiality expectations and model appropriate boundaries, they cannot guarantee that all participants will honor these agreements. Responsible practitioners explicitly acknowledge this limitation, documenting confidentiality agreements while ensuring participants understand their information may not remain completely private.
Coaches must also consider confidentiality in relation to organizational stakeholders. When employers sponsor group coaching, questions arise about what information, if any, should be shared with the organization. Best practices involve clarifying these boundaries before coaching begins, ensuring participants understand what will and will not be reported, typically limiting organizational feedback to aggregate data and program evaluation information rather than individual participant disclosures.
Table 1: Comparison of Group-Based Development Modalities
| Characteristic | Group Coaching | Group Therapy | Team Coaching | Training/Facilitation |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Primary Focus | Individual development in group context | Psychological healing and growth | Collective team performance | Knowledge/skill acquisition |
| Client | Individual participants | Individual participants | The team as entity | Individual learners |
| Goals | Participant-defined, individualized | Often therapeutic, healing-focused | Shared team objectives | Predetermined learning outcomes |
| Time Orientation | Present and future-focused | Past, present, and future | Present and future | Present application |
| Content Source | Participant-generated | Participant experiences and patterns | Team dynamics and challenges | Predetermined curriculum |
| Facilitator Role | Process expert, catalyst | Clinical expert, interpreter | Team system consultant | Subject matter expert |
| Typical Duration | 6-12 sessions | Often longer-term | Project or cycle-based | Single session to multi-day |
Competency and Training Requirements
The International Coach Federation’s (2021) Core Competencies include specific skills for group coaching facilitation, recognizing it as a distinct competency area requiring specialized training. Effective group coaches need expertise in both individual coaching methodologies and group facilitation, understanding group dynamics, managing conflict, and creating inclusive environments.
Professional associations increasingly offer specialized training in group coaching. The Association for Coaching established guidelines recommending that coaches seeking to facilitate groups complete specific training in group work beyond their foundational coaching certification. This training typically addresses group developmental stages, managing challenging behaviors, balancing individual and collective needs, and adapting coaching techniques for group contexts.
Informed Consent and Participant Selection
Ethical group coaching practice requires thorough informed consent processes that address the unique aspects of group participation. Participants should understand the format, expectations for participation, time commitment, costs, and how the group coaching differs from both individual coaching and therapy. Screening potential participants for appropriateness ensures that individuals likely to benefit are included while those needing different interventions are redirected.
Coaches must recognize contraindications for group coaching. Individuals experiencing acute mental health crises, those requiring intensive one-on-one support, or people with interpersonal styles likely to disrupt group functioning may be better served by alternative interventions. Ethical practice involves honest assessment of whether group coaching meets an individual’s needs or whether referral to other services would be more appropriate.
Distinctions from Related Modalities
Clarifying how group coaching differs from related group-based interventions helps practitioners, participants, and stakeholders set appropriate expectations and select suitable approaches.
Group Coaching versus Group Therapy
Group coaching and group therapy represent distinct interventions despite superficial similarities. Group therapy, grounded in psychotherapy theories and often led by licensed mental health professionals, focuses on treating psychological disorders, processing past trauma, exploring unconscious patterns, and resolving emotional difficulties. Group coaching, conversely, emphasizes forward-focused goal achievement, enhancing performance, developing specific competencies, and supporting generally healthy individuals in maximizing their potential.
The role of the facilitator differs substantially. Therapists actively interpret group dynamics, explore transference and countertransference, and may direct attention to pathological patterns. Coaches facilitate participant self-discovery, support goal-directed action, and maintain focus on strengths and possibilities. While therapeutic groups may explore the past to understand present functioning, coaching groups concentrate on present awareness and future aspirations.
Group Coaching versus Team Coaching
Team coaching and group coaching serve different purposes despite both involving multiple individuals. Team coaching focuses on enhancing collective performance, improving team processes, building interdependence, and achieving shared goals. The team itself constitutes the client, and interventions target team-level functioning including communication patterns, decision-making processes, and role clarity.
Group coaching, in contrast, focuses on individual development within a group context. Each participant pursues personal goals, and while peer learning and support enhance the experience, the primary coaching relationship exists between coach and individual participants rather than between coach and collective entity. Hawkins (2011) distinguished these modalities in his text “Leadership Team Coaching,” emphasizing that team coaching requires attending to team-level systemic dynamics while group coaching prioritizes individual development trajectories.
Group Coaching versus Training and Facilitation
Training programs deliver predetermined content focused on building specific knowledge or skills, with facilitators serving as subject matter experts who present information, lead exercises, and assess learning. Group coaching, alternatively, works from participant-generated content, with coaches serving as process experts who facilitate self-directed learning rather than imparting specific knowledge.
The power dynamic and knowledge source differ fundamentally. Trainers position themselves as experts transferring knowledge to learners. Coaches adopt a stance that participants possess inner wisdom and capability, with the coach’s role involving drawing out insight, challenging assumptions, and supporting application of learning. Training evaluation measures knowledge or skill acquisition against predetermined criteria, while coaching evaluation assesses progress toward individually defined goals and self-reported development.
Best Practices and Implementation Guidelines
Successful group coaching requires attention to design, facilitation, and evaluation elements that maximize effectiveness and participant satisfaction.
Establishing Group Agreements and Psychological Safety
The initial session sets the tone for subsequent interactions. Skilled coaches invest substantial time in co-creating group agreements that establish norms for confidentiality, respectful communication, constructive feedback, and shared responsibility for the learning environment. These agreements should emerge through facilitated discussion rather than imposed rules, creating participant ownership and commitment.
Building psychological safety requires ongoing attention throughout the coaching journey. Coaches model vulnerability by sharing appropriate personal examples, demonstrate genuine curiosity through powerful questioning, and respond non-defensively to feedback. When group interactions threaten psychological safety—through judgment, unsolicited advice, or dominating behavior—coaches intervene promptly and skillfully, reorienting the group toward established agreements.
Balancing Individual Attention and Group Process
One of the most challenging aspects of group coaching involves ensuring each participant receives adequate attention while maintaining group cohesion and momentum. Practical strategies include time allocation structures that guarantee each person designated airtime, check-in rounds that give everyone voice, and rotating focus where different participants receive deeper coaching across sessions.
Coaches must also balance different learning styles and participation preferences. Some individuals process through verbal expression while others need reflection time before contributing. Incorporating varied activities—dyadic conversations, small group discussions, individual journaling, and whole-group dialogues—creates multiple avenues for engagement. Virtual environments can facilitate this through features like chat functions for asynchronous input and breakout rooms for more intimate conversations.
Measuring Progress and Demonstrating Value
Rigorous evaluation serves multiple purposes including demonstrating coaching value, supporting continuous improvement, and contributing to the evidence base. Comprehensive evaluation addresses multiple levels: participant reactions, learning and development, behavioral application, and organizational or life results.
Pre- and post-coaching assessments using validated instruments provide quantifiable outcome data. Goal attainment scaling, where participants rate progress toward individually defined objectives, captures personalized development while enabling aggregation across the group. Qualitative data through participant interviews or reflective journals enriches understanding of how coaching contributed to change and what elements proved most valuable.
For organizational contexts, return on investment analyses compare coaching costs against benefits such as improved performance, reduced turnover, or enhanced leadership bench strength. While challenging to execute rigorously, such analyses help secure organizational commitment to coaching initiatives and guide resource allocation decisions.
Table 2: Key Competencies for Group Coaching Practitioners
| Competency Domain | Specific Skills | Development Approaches |
|---|---|---|
| Coaching Fundamentals | Active listening, powerful questioning, goal-setting, accountability | ICF-accredited coach training, supervised practice, mentorship |
| Group Facilitation | Managing group dynamics, time management, creating psychological safety | Group facilitation training, co-facilitation experience, feedback from peers |
| Conflict Navigation | Addressing challenging behaviors, managing disagreement, maintaining boundaries | Role-play scenarios, conflict resolution training, clinical supervision |
| Multicultural Competence | Cultural humility, recognizing bias, adapting to diverse needs | Diversity training, multicultural counseling education, reflective practice |
| Ethical Practice | Confidentiality management, informed consent, appropriate referral | Ethics courses, case consultation, professional association involvement |
| Assessment and Evaluation | Selecting appropriate tools, measuring outcomes, interpreting data | Research methods training, psychometric education, program evaluation experience |
Future Directions and Emerging Trends
The field of group coaching continues evolving in response to technological advances, changing workplace structures, and accumulating evidence about effectiveness.
Integration of Technology and Hybrid Models
The acceleration of virtual work precipitated by the COVID-19 pandemic has permanently altered group coaching delivery. Hybrid models combining synchronous virtual sessions with asynchronous digital engagement platforms enable extended learning between sessions while maintaining flexibility. Coaches increasingly leverage learning management systems, mobile applications, and social platforms to sustain momentum, share resources, and facilitate peer connection beyond formal sessions.
Artificial intelligence and machine learning may augment human coaches through automated goal tracking, personalized resource recommendation, and pattern identification in participant data. However, such technologies supplement rather than replace the human connection and intuitive responsiveness that characterize effective coaching relationships.
Specialized Applications and Niche Programs
Group coaching is expanding into increasingly specialized domains. Examples include coaching for individuals with specific chronic health conditions, groups focused on neurodiversity in the workplace, coaching for family caregivers, and specialized programs for underrepresented populations in leadership. These targeted applications require coaches to develop domain-specific knowledge while maintaining core coaching competencies.
Cross-cultural and international group coaching presents both opportunities and challenges. Virtual connectivity enables diverse participation that enriches learning through multiple cultural perspectives. However, coaches must develop sophisticated cultural competence to navigate differences in communication styles, power dynamics, individualism versus collectivism, and culturally specific approaches to development.
Evidence-Based Practice and Research Priorities
The maturation of coaching psychology as a discipline demands more rigorous research on group coaching effectiveness, mechanisms, and optimal designs. Priority areas include longitudinal studies examining sustainability of coaching outcomes, component analyses identifying essential versus optional program elements, and research on moderating variables that predict for whom group coaching proves most effective.
Research methodologies must evolve to capture the complexity of group coaching while maintaining scientific rigor. Mixed-methods designs combining quantitative outcome measures with qualitative exploration of lived experience provide rich understanding. Practice-based research networks where practitioners contribute data from their coaching engagements could substantially expand sample sizes and ecological validity.
Conclusion
Group coaching represents a sophisticated intervention modality that harnesses collective learning, peer support, and skilled facilitation to catalyze individual development. Grounded in robust theoretical foundations including social learning theory, group dynamics research, and positive psychology principles, group coaching has demonstrated effectiveness across diverse contexts and populations. The approach offers unique advantages including cost-effectiveness, peer learning opportunities, normalization of challenges, and development of social support networks.
Effective group coaching practice requires specialized competencies beyond foundational coaching skills, including group facilitation expertise, conflict navigation capabilities, and ethical sophistication regarding confidentiality and participant selection. Practitioners must thoughtfully design programs attending to optimal group size, composition, duration, and structure while remaining flexible enough to respond to emergent group needs.
As the evidence base continues expanding and the modality evolves in response to technological capabilities and changing contexts, group coaching is positioned to play an increasingly central role within coaching psychology. The unique synergy created when skilled coaches bring together individuals committed to growth creates transformative experiences that extend beyond what either individual coaching or group training alone can provide. For organizations seeking scalable developmental interventions and individuals desiring growth-oriented communities, group coaching offers a compelling approach that honors both individual uniqueness and collective potential.
References
Bandura, A. (1977). Social learning theory. Prentice Hall. https://www.uky.edu/~eushe2/Bandura/Bandura1977.pdf
Berry, G. R., Ashby, J. S., Gnilka, P. B., & Matheny, K. B. (2011). A comparison of face-to-face and distance coaching practices: The role of the working alliance in problem resolution. Consulting Psychology Journal: Practice and Research, 63(4), 243-253. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0026735
Biswas-Diener, R., & Dean, B. (2007). Positive psychology coaching: Putting the science of happiness to work for your clients. John Wiley & Sons. https://www.wiley.com/en-us/Positive+Psychology+Coaching%3A+Putting+the+Science+of+Happiness+to+Work+for+Your+Clients-p-9780470043318
Brown, S. W., & Grant, A. M. (2010). From GROW to GROUP: Theoretical issues and a practical model for group coaching in organisations. Coaching: An International Journal of Theory, Research and Practice, 3(1), 30-45. https://doi.org/10.1080/17521880903559697
Clutterbuck, D. (2010). Group coaching. In E. Cox, T. Bachkirova, & D. Clutterbuck (Eds.), The complete handbook of coaching (pp. 253-264). SAGE Publications. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781446200254.n18
Cooperrider, D. L., & Srivastva, S. (1987). Appreciative inquiry in organizational life. Research in Organizational Change and Development, 1(1), 129-169. https://www.davidcooperrider.com/ai-process/
David, O. A., & Matu, S. A. (2013). How to tell if managers are good coaches and how to help them improve during adversity? The managerial coaching assessment system and the rational managerial coaching program. Journal of Cognitive and Behavioral Psychotherapies, 13(2), 497-522. https://jcbp.psychotherapy.ro/vol-xiii-no-2-september-2013/
Drago-Severson, E. (2004). Helping teachers learn: Principal leadership for adult growth and development. Corwin Press. https://us.corwin.com/books/helping-teachers-learn-263626
Edmondson, A. (1999). Psychological safety and learning behavior in work teams. Administrative Science Quarterly, 44(2), 350-383. https://doi.org/10.2307/2666999
Ely, K., Boyce, L. A., Nelson, J. K., Zaccaro, S. J., Hernez-Broome, G., & Whyman, W. (2010). Evaluating leadership coaching: A review and integrated framework. The Leadership Quarterly, 21(4), 585-599. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2010.06.003
Grant, A. M. (2013). The efficacy of coaching. In J. Passmore, D. Peterson, & T. Freire (Eds.), The Wiley-Blackwell handbook of the psychology of coaching and mentoring (pp. 15-39). Wiley-Blackwell. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118326459.ch2
Hawkins, P. (2011). Leadership team coaching: Developing collective transformational leadership. Kogan Page. https://www.koganpage.com/product/leadership-team-coaching-9780749463816
International Coach Federation. (2021). ICF core competencies. https://coachingfederation.org/core-competencies
Revans, R. W. (1980). Action learning: New techniques for management. Blond & Briggs. https://www.ifal.org.uk/action-learning/reg-revans/
Robinson, C., & Gahagan, J. (2010). Coaching students to academic success and engagement on campus. About Campus, 15(4), 26-29. https://doi.org/10.1002/abc.20032
Taber, B. J., Hartung, P. J., Briddick, H., Briddick, W. C., & Rehfuss, M. C. (2011). Career style interview: A contextualized approach to career counseling. The Career Development Quarterly, 59(3), 274-287. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2161-0045.2011.tb00069.x
Theeboom, T., Beersma, B., & van Vianen, A. E. (2014). Does coaching work? A meta-analysis on the effects of coaching on individual level outcomes in an organizational context. The Journal of Positive Psychology, 9(1), 1-18. https://doi.org/10.1080/17439760.2013.837499
Thornton, C. (2010). Group and team coaching: The essential guide. International Journal of Evidence Based Coaching and Mentoring, 8(1), 1-20. https://radar.brookes.ac.uk/radar/items/64c3e5d7-1fa3-4b48-b0e3-fd64cf0b3d89/1/
Tuckman, B. W. (1965). Developmental sequence in small groups. Psychological Bulletin, 63(6), 384-399. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0022100
Wolever, R. Q., Dreusicke, M., Fikkan, J., Hawkins, T. V., Yeung, S., Wakefield, J., Duda, L., Flowers, P., Cook, C., & Skinner, E. (2010). Integrative health coaching for patients with type 2 diabetes: A randomized clinical trial. The Diabetes Educator, 36(4), 629-639. https://doi.org/10.1177/0145721710371523