Quantitative and qualitative processes of change during staff-coaching sessions: An exploratory study Wietske M.W.J. van Oorsouw a,b, *, Petri J.C.M. Embregts a,c,d , Anna M.T. Bosman e a Tilburg University, Tranzo, Scientific Center of Care and Welfare, The Netherlands b Amarant, The Netherlands c HAN University of Applied Sciences, The Netherlands d Dichterbij Kennisn@, The Netherlands e Radboud University Nijmegen, Behavioural Science Institute, The Netherlands 1. Introduction To date, there is common agreement about the need for support of staff members in clinical settings. Particularly staff members serving clients with intellectual disabilities (ID) and challenging behavior (CB) report high levels of workplace stress (Jenkins, Rose, & Lovell, 1997; Mitchell & Hastings, 2001). CB of clients with ID cause negative emotional reactions in staff and may induce avoidance behavior of staff towards their clients (Bromley & Emerson, 1995; Hastings & Remington, 1994). Supporting staff by offering staff training is one of the interventions managers can embed in their organizations to help staff improve their professional competences related to CB of clients with ID. Research in Developmental Disabilities 34 (2013) 1456–1467 A R T I C L E I N F O Article history: Received 25 October 2012 Received in revised form 25 January 2013 Accepted 26 January 2013 Available online Keywords: Staff Coach Intellectual disabilities Challenging behaviour Interaction A B S T R A C T Staff training is one of the interventions that managers can embed in their organizations to help staff improve their professional competences related to challenging behaviour of clients with intellectual disabilities. Individual coaching adds learning opportunities that are feasible but difficult to achieve in an in-service setting. In the present study, we have followed the coaching process of three staff members. Based on differences in the Linell balance of power across sessions, we explored the question: do different coaching processes have similar patterns in the development of dominance and coherence in interactions between coach and staff? Additionally, a qualitative approach was conducted to illustrate and enrich the meaning of quantitative outcomes. Processes were different regarding the balance of power at the start of the coaching, probably due to differences in resistance and insecurity. As a consequence of different starting points and differences in learning styles, each coaching process had its unique development over time. At the end, all dyads were comparable in the sense that all dyads were highly satisfied about the outcomes and process of coaching. This is in line with similar levels of power at the end of the coaching sessions suggesting equal contributions and leadership. The present findings suggest some relevant competencies of coaches within health-care services. Due to the small number of participants, the results have to be interpreted with caution. The present study provides suggestions for future research and clinical practice. ß 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. * Corresponding author at: Room T528, Tilburg University, Tranzo, Scientific Center of Care and Welfare, P.O. Box 90153, 5000 LE Tilburg, The Netherlands. Tel.: +31 13 466 2633; fax: +31 13 466 3637. E-mail addresses: W.M.W.J.vanOorsouw@UvT.nl (Wietske M.W.J. van Oorsouw), P.J.C.M.Embregts@UvT.nl (Petri J.C.M. Embregts), A.Bosman@pwo.ru.nl (Anna M.T. Bosman). Contents lists available at SciVerse ScienceDirect Research in Developmental Disabilities 0891-4222/$ – see front matter ß 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ridd.2013.01.020