Cover not available
Article published In:
Developing shared languages: The fundamentals of mutual learning and problem solving in transdisciplinary collaboration
Edited by Marlies Whitehouse, Henrik Rahm and Séverine Wozniak
[AILA Review 34:1] 2021
► pp. 57–78

‘Knowing that’, ‘knowing why’ and ‘knowing how’

Aligning perspectives and assembling epistemes for a transdisciplinary analysis of questioning sequences in executive coaching. A research journey

| University of Klagenfurt
| University of Klagenfurt

Our contribution maps the journey towards setting up a transdisciplinary, interprofessional collaboration between coaching practitioners and coaching researchers from the fields of Applied Linguistics and Applied Psychology. The goal of such a project is to build a community of interest around a common cause, i.e., a practically relevant, language-based coaching problem (in our case, questioning practices in executive coaching), and to collaboratively solve the problem on the basis of assembling and integrating the various epistemes. The purpose of our contribution in the form of a travel report is twofold: firstly, to theoretically and conceptually discuss the challenges and affordances of aligning perspectives and assembling epistemes for such a transdisciplinary research project; Secondly, to present the available epistemic bases and offer first empirical results from our applied linguistic research and our cooperation with Applied Psychology that served as the basis for conceptualising the project Questioning Sequences in Coaching (Graf, Spranz-Fogasy, & Künzli, 2020). We end this travel report by critically assessing the transdisciplinary character of the current project and by envisioning another kind of cooperation between coaching practice and coaching research as the future destination of our research journey.

Keywords: transdisciplinarity, executive coaching, applied psychology, questioning sequences, epistemic assemblage
Article outline
  • 1.Analysing questioning sequences in coaching: Going on a transdisciplinary journey
  • 2.Setting off: The primary travel companions ‘executive coaching’ and ‘Applied Linguistics’
    • 2.1Executive coaching
    • 2.2“Applied Linguistics of the Professions”
    • 2.3Transdisciplinarity in researching questioning sequences in executive coaching
  • 3.Travelling together: Assembling knowledge and aligning perspectives for the common cause ‘questioning sequences in coaching’
    • 3.1Perspectives on questions
      • ‘Knowing that’ – The coaching practitioners’ perspective
      • ‘Knowing why’: The applied psychologists’ perspective
      • ‘Knowing how’: The applied linguists’ perspective
    • 3.2Moving on: Aligning ‘knowing that’, ‘knowing why’ and ‘knowing how’ as regards questions in coaching to design a transdisciplinary research project
  • 4.Final thoughts: Travelling on
  • Notes
  • References
Published online: 9 September 2021
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/aila.20008.gra
References
De Haan, E.
(2019) A systematic review of qualitative studies in workplace and executive coaching: The emergence of a body of research. Consulting Psychology Journal: Practice and Research, 71(4), 227–248. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2021) What works in executive coaching. Understanding outcomes through quantitative research and practice-based evidence. Routledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Deplazes, S.
(2016) KaSyCo: Kategoriensysteme zur Analyse von Coachingprozessen. Kassel University Press.Google Scholar
Deplazes, S., Graf, E.-M., & Künzli, H.
(2018) Das TSPP-Model. Eine Blaupause für die Coaching-Prozessforschung. Coaching Theor. Prax., 41, 69–82. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fillery-Travis, A., & Cox, E.
(2018) Researching coaching. In E. Cox, T. Bachirova, & D. Clutterbuck (Eds.), The complete handbook of coaching (3rd ed., pp. 518–535). Sage.Google Scholar
Fischer-Epe, M.
(2012) Coaching: Miteinander Ziele erreichen. Rowohlt.Google Scholar
Goodwin, C.
(1994) Professional vision. American Anthropologist, 96(3), 606–633. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Graf, E.-M.
(2019) The pragmatics of executive coaching. John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Graf, E.-M., & Dionne, F.
(2021) Coaching research in 2020 – About destinations, journeys and travelers, Part I. International Coaching Psychology Review, 16(1), 36–50.Google Scholar
Graf, E.-M., Dionne, F., & Spranz-Fogasy, T.
(2020) How to investigate the local and global change potential of questioning sequences in executive coaching? A call for interdisciplinary research. Scandinavian Studies in Language, 11(1), 214–238. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Graf, E.-M., & Kabatnik, S.
under review). “[W]ie und was können Sie noch besser organisieren, um auch Freiräume sich zu sichern? […] Wo kann das irgendwie noch effektiver, ((1,2s)) ja, gestaltet werden?” – Lösungsorientierte Fragen im Führungskräfte-Coaching aus gesprächsanalytischer Perspektive. Zeitschrift für Angewante Linguistik.
Graf, E.-M., & Spranz-Fogasy, T.
(2018) Welche Frage, Wann und Warum? Eine qualitativ-linguistische Programmatik zur Erforschung von Frage-Sequenzen als zentrale Veränderungspraktik im Coaching. Coaching Theor. Prax., 41, 17–32. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Graf, E.-M., Spranz-Fogasy, T., & Künzli, H.
(2020) Questioning sequences in coaching. DACH-research project funded by the FWF, DFG and SNF.Google Scholar
Grant, A. M., & Gerrard, B.
(2019) Comparing problem-focused, solution-focused and problem-focused/solution-focused coaching approach. Coaching: An International Journal of Theory, Research and Practice, 13(1). DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Grant, A. M., & O’Connor, S.
(2010) The differential effects of solution-focused and problem-focused coaching questions: A pilot study with implications for practice. Industrial and Commercial Training, 42(2), 102–111. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Grant, A. M. & O’Connor, S.
(2019) A brief primer for those new to coaching research and evidence-based practice. The Coaching Psychologist, 15(1), 3–10.Google Scholar
Greif, S., & Benning-Rohnke, E.
(2015) Konsequente Umsetzung von Zielen durch Coaching: Praktisch nützliche Erkenntnisse aus der Grundlagenforschung und ihre Anwendung. Coaching Theor. Prax., 1(1), 25–35. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Köller, W.
(2004) Perspektivität und Sprache: Zur Struktur von Objektivierungsformen in Bildern, im Denken und in der Sprache. De Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kramer, U., & Stiles, W. B.
(2015) The responsiveness problem in psychotherapy: A review of proposed solutions. Clinical Psychology: Science and Practice, 22(3), 277–295. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Loebbert, M., & Wilmes, C.
(2013) Coaching als Beratung. In M. Loebbert (Ed.), Professional coaching. Konzepte, Instrumente, Anwendungsfelder (pp. 17–48). Schäffer Poeschel.Google Scholar
Peltier, B.
(2010) The psychology of executive coaching. Theory and application. Routledge.Google Scholar
Pennycook, A.
(2018) Applied linguistics as epistemic assemblage. AILA Review, 311, 113–134. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Peräkylä, A.
(2019) Conversation analysis and psychotherapy: Identifying transformative sequences. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 52(3), 257–280. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Perrin, D., & Kramsch, C.
(2018) Introduction: Transdisciplinarity in applied linguistics. AILA Review, 311, 1–13. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Roberts, C., & Sarangi, S.
(2003) Uptake of discourse research in interprofessional settings: Reporting from medical consultancy. Applied Linguistics, 24(3), 338–359. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ryle, G.
(1949) The Concept of Mind. Penguin.Google Scholar
Sarangi, S.
(2002) Discourse practitioners as a community of interprofessional practice. In C. N. Candlin (Ed.), Research and practice in professional discourse (pp. 95–135). City University of Hong Kong Press.Google Scholar
(2005) The conditions and consequences of professional discourse studies. Journal of Applied Linguistics, 2(3), 371–394. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2015) Experts on experts: Sustaining ‘communities of interest’ in professional discourse studies. In M. Gotti, S. Maci, & M. Sala (Eds.), Insights into medical communication (pp. 25–47). Peter Lang.Google Scholar
Sarangi, S., & Candlin, C. N.
(2011) Professional and organisational practice: A discourse/communication perspective. In S. Sarangi & C. N. Candlin (Eds.), Handbook of communication in organisations and professions (pp. 3–58). De Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Schegloff, E.
(2007) Sequence organization in interaction: A primer in conversation analysis. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Schermuly, C. C.
(2019) Erfolgreiches Business-Coaching. Positive Wirkungen, unerwünschte Nebenwirkungen und vermeidbare Abbrüche. Beltz.Google Scholar
Schön, D.
(1983) The reflective practitioner. How professionals think in action. Basic Books.Google Scholar
Schreyögg, A.
(2012) Coaching. Eine Einführung für Praxis und Ausbildung (2nd ed.). Campus Verlag.Google Scholar
Spence, G. B.
(2007) GAS powered coaching: Goal attainment scaling and its use in coaching research and practice. International Coaching Psychology Review, 21, 155–167.Google Scholar
Spranz-Fogasy, T.
(2020) Fragen und ihre Funktionen in psychotherapeutischen Gesprächen. In H. Gruber, J. Spitzmüller & R. de Cillia (Eds.), Institutionelle und organisationale Kommunikation. Theorie, Methodologie, Empirie und Kritik (pp. 39–69). Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Spranz-Fogasy, T., Graf, E.-M., Ehrenthal, J. C., & Nikendei, C.
(2019) Beispiel-Nachfragen im Kontext von Veränderung: Elitizierungs- und Prozessierungsstrategien in Psychotherapie und Coaching-Gesprächen. In E.-M. Graf, C. Scarvaglieri, & T. Spranz-Fogasy (Eds.), Pragmatik der Veränderung. Problem- und lösungsorientierte Kommunikation in helfenden Berufen (pp. 177–209). Gunter Narr.Google Scholar
Stokoe, E., & Sikveland, R.
(2016) Formulating solutions in mediation. Journal of Pragmatics, 1051, 101–113. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Theeboom, T., Beersma, B., & van Vianen, A. E. M.
(2016) The differential effects of solution-focused and problem-focused coaching questions on the affect, attentional control and cognitive flexibility of undergraduate students experiencing study-related stress. The Journal of Positive Psychology, 11(5), 460–469. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Tracy, K., & Robles, J.
(2009) Questions, questioning, and institutional practices: An introduction. Discourse Studies, 11(2), 131–152. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Vehviläinen, S.
(1999) Structures of counselling interaction. A conversation analytic study of counselling encounters in career guidance training. University of Helsinki.Google Scholar
Voutilainen, L., Peräkylä, A., & Ruusuvuori, J.
(2011) Therapeutic change in interaction: conversation analysis of a transforming sequence. Psychotherapy Research, 21(3), 348–365. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Whitworth, L., Kimsey-House, K., Kimsey-House, H., & Sandahl, P.
(1998) Co-active coaching. New skills for coaching people toward success in work and life. Davis Black.Google Scholar
Widdowson, H. G.
(2018) Applied linguistics as transdisciplinary practice: What’s in a prefix? AILA Review, 311, 135–142. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cited by

Cited by 1 other publications

Graf, Eva-Maria & Frédérick Dionne
2021. Coaching research in 2020 – About destinations, journeys and travelers (Part II). International Coaching Psychology Review 16:2 ► pp. 6 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 28 september 2023. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.