This article provides an in-depth analysis of Integral Coaching Canada’s coaching model using Integral Methodological Pluralism (IMP). The author uses five primary methodologies and the perspectives available through eight zones to evaluate what makes Integral Coaching Canada’s model unique in the field of coaching. This article is based on first-, second-, and third-person approaches to research and an original study and master’s degree thesis that evaluated over 20 coaching models.
As integral theory has moved from the hands of theorists to the hands of those who seek to practically apply its principles, we have begun to see many fields emerge that are naturally suited for such application. Coaching is one of those fields. Yet, how can integral theory be applied to coaching such that it not only informs the field itself, but also provides methodological guidelines through which coaching models and coaches may be evaluated? What follows is an analysis of one such application.
Coaching is in the unique position to aid individuals and groups in development. As a practice, coaching involves inhabiting other perspectives. At the very least, the coach must be able to take the client’s perspective, and the client is invited to take a new perspective as well and build related capacities to support this new view. It can be said that development, or growth, is dependent upon and begins with widening one’s perspective. It is important then to understand how the use of perspective taking can help coaching models increase the efficacy of coaches in enabling the development of their clients.
This article is an adaptation of a study that included the formal evaluation of three coaching schools and the models they teach, with an informal evaluation of over 20 other coaching models. The following analysis uses the AQAL model to evaluate the various coaching methods of a single school.