Application phase data collection

With an initial coaching framework (described in 4.6) in place after the foundation phase, more data were gathered and analysed via AR in the application phase to refine and develop the framework. Before explaining which data were gathered in this phase, the AR process that was followed must be explained.

In principle, this research followed CAR (Davison et al., 2012) as illustrated in Figure 3.1. Six recently promoted transitioning managers (TM1 to TM6) were coached for between five and seven sessions by me following this CAR model. A nested, iterative approach was followed as illustrated in Figure 3.5.

Figure 3.5: Action research nested iterations

Source: Author’s own compilation

Macro- and micro- AR cycles were followed (Terblanche, 2014). A macrocycle consisted of a series of six microcycles where each microcycle constituted an individual coaching session per transitioning manager (denoted as TM). Each TM was coached in sequential order. In other words, TM1 received his or her first coaching session followed by TM2 through to TM6. This sequence of six microcycles constituted the end of the first macrocycle. This was followed by the second set of six coaching sessions, one per TM, which constituted the second macrocycle, etc. In total, there were five full macrocycles (implying each TM received at least five coaching sessions). TM3 and TM4 received two additional coaching sessions (discussed in 5.7.4).

Both the macro- and microcycles followed the plan: act  evaluate → reflect sequence prescribed by CAR (Davison et al., 2004). Note that CAR has an additional first step ‘diagnose’, which was not included in this research. The diagnose step in CAR is used to identify what the problem is that needs solving through CAR. In the case of the present research, the problem was known: ‘How to assist a transitioning manager to be more successful in his or her new role by facilitating transformative learning’, and was therefore omitted from the CAR cycle. This adaptation of the CAR process is condoned and researchers are encouraged to adapt the process to suit their specific research needs (Davison et al., 2004).

The exact meaning of each of the CAR steps for the macro- and microcycles as well as the data that were generated is summarised in Table 3.5. At the start of each macrocycle (plan), the current state of the evolving TTC framework was reviewed

and a decision was made about which aspect needs to be explored further given the focal and instrumental theories. The act step involved performing the six coaching sessions, one for each of the TMs by repeating the same approach and exploring the same aspect of the TTC framework as decided on in the plan step with each TM. The evaluation of a macrocycle involved aggregating feedback from the TMs on how they experienced the specific macrocycle, and recording my observations in the researcher’s journal. The final step involved structured reflection on a number of aspects of the evolving TTC framework as summarised in Table 3.5, most importantly, how the TTC framework had changed during this macrocycle and how the focal and instrumental theories have contributed to the ultimate goal of facilitating transformative learning during the coaching process.

During the microcycles, the plan step implied explaining to the TM what the aim of this macrocycle was in terms of developing the TTC framework, but also to ensure that the specific needs of the TM were addressed in this session. This was done to be truthful to the AR philosophy of generating knowledge and facilitating real-life change (Zuber-Skerrit, 2001). The act step referred to the actual coaching for the session and the evaluate and reflect steps constituted the recording and analysis of data. Data were captured throughout the macro- and microcycles in the form of –

 Researcher reflections in a research journal;

 Field notes taken by the researcher during the coaching sessions;

 A structured reflective feedback form completed by the tm and myself after each coaching session (see appendix c for an example); and

 A post-coaching interview with each tm approximately two months after the coaching had ended.

Table 3.4: Action research cycles, steps and data sources

Cycle Step Description Source of evidence

Macro

Plan Before starting the next macrocycle,

review the current state of the emerging TTC framework and decide which aspect of the TTC framework should be explored in this macrocycle.

Researcher and participant reflections recorded in research journal

Structured coaching feedback forms from TMs

Post-coaching intervention interview with TMs

Act Perform the six sessions of coaching,

one with each of the TMs and record the results.

Evaluate At the end of the macrocycle, aggregate feedback from each TM and update the researcher’s journal. After the last macrocycle, conduct exit interviews with each of the TMs.

Reflect Reflect on the following data in relation to the CAR focal and instrumental theories:

To which extent is the TM closer to showing signs of transformative learning?

Which coaching tools and techniques have been useful?

To which extent has this macrocycle contributed to the emerging TTC framework?

What is still missing from the TTC framework and what still needs to be explored in the next macrocycle?

Micro

Plan Together with the coachee, decide how

this coaching session will proceed, given the research goal of the current macrocycle and the needs of the coachee.

Researcher and TM decisions, actions and reflections as

recorded in the coaching field notes Structured coaching feedback form from TM for this session Post-session

reflections captured in researcher’s journal

Act Coach the person.

Evaluate During the coaching, take notes, play back to coachee, observe and check progress against the aim for this session as agreed in the plan step

Reflect At the end of the coaching session ask coachee to reflect on the session. Discuss my observations with the coachee.

Reflect with the coachee on the effectiveness of the session given the agreed plan for this session in terms of both the TTC framework needs and the coachee’s needs.