IX Coach

Coaching approaches

Self-determination-informed coaching

Self-determination-informed coaching draws on Edward Deci and Richard Ryan's theory that people do best when three needs are met: autonomy, competence and relatedness. A coach supports your sense of choice, so that motivation comes from what you value rather than from pressure, guilt or reward. The theory has a substantial research base, much of it in health, education and workplaces. Little of that research tests coaching directly.

What it is

A session informed by self-determination theory asks what matters to you about a goal, how much choice you feel you have, and what would make the goal feel more like your own. The coach listens for autonomous motivation, acting from your own values and interest, and for controlled motivation, acting from pressure, guilt or the wish for approval.

The approach is less a fixed method than a stance. The coach supports choice and competence and avoids pressure, and much of the work is noticing where your motivation comes from. The coach does not decide what you should want.

Where it comes from

Edward Deci and Richard Ryan developed self-determination theory. Their 2000 review set out the distinction between autonomous and controlled motivation and the idea of basic psychological needs (Ryan & Deci, 2000).

Applications followed in health care, education and organisations. Deci, Olafsen and Ryan (2017) review the workplace line of this work, and coaching built on the theory draws on the same ideas.

The principles underneath

Choice comes first

Motivation lasts longer when you feel a goal is yours. The coach asks what you want rather than telling you what you should want.

Competence grows through small wins

Feeling effective at something you care about supports motivation. Achievable steps give you evidence of your own capability.

Feeling understood supports change

Relatedness is one of the three basic needs. Being understood and respected makes it easier to take on a difficult step.

Notice where the drive comes from

Acting from values or interest differs from acting to avoid guilt or to earn approval. The coach helps you tell the two apart.

How a session runs

  1. Begin with the goal, and ask how it came to matter to you.
  2. Explore what you would choose if no one were judging the outcome, and notice what feels imposed on you.
  3. Notice where you already feel capable in this area, and what that capability has needed.
  4. Name the option that feels most like your own choice, and what would make it easier to act on.
  5. Agree one small step. At the next session, check how it felt to take it and where any pressure came from.

When it tends to fit

  • You know you should do something, and when you try, it feels like a chore done for someone else.
  • You have set a goal that looks right on paper, but you keep dropping it without knowing why.
  • A deadline, a rule or someone's approval is steering you, and you want to find out what you actually want.

What the research shows

Evidence: Randomized trials or meta-analyses

A meta-analysis of studies in health contexts (Ng et al., 2012) reported that practitioner support for patient autonomy was related to patients' sense of need satisfaction, and that need satisfaction was related to mental and physical health. A meta-analysis of intervention programmes designed to support autonomy (Su & Reeve, 2011) covers the parent family of programmes this approach belongs to. A meta-analytic review of leader autonomy support in workplaces (Slemp et al., 2018) sits alongside them. No randomised trial of self-determination-informed coaching itself turned up in the search for this page, so the tier rests on the theory's intervention and health research.

Where the evidence is thin: Much of the research measures associations between autonomy support and outcomes, rather than testing a coaching conversation directly. The coaching form has less direct study than the theory does.

Sources

  1. Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. American Psychologist, 55(1), 68–78.
  2. Ng, J., Ntoumanis, N., Thøgersen-Ntoumani, C., Deci, E. L., Ryan, R. M., Duda, J. L., & Williams, G. C. (2012). Self-Determination Theory Applied to Health Contexts. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 7(4), 325–340.
  3. Su, Y.-L., & Reeve, J. (2011). A Meta-analysis of the Effectiveness of Intervention Programs Designed to Support Autonomy. Educational Psychology Review, 23(1), 159–188.
  4. Slemp, G. R., Kern, M. L., Patrick, K. J., & Ryan, R. M. (2018). Leader autonomy support in the workplace: A meta-analytic review. Motivation and Emotion, 42(5), 706–724.
  5. Deci, E. L., Olafsen, A. H., & Ryan, R. M. (2017). Self-Determination Theory in Work Organizations: The State of a Science. Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior, 4(1), 19–43.

Where it stops

This is not a treatment for depression, anxiety or trauma. When low motivation comes from those, a qualified professional is the right first step.

A focus on choice can overlook a real constraint, such as money, health or a responsibility you cannot set down. Support for autonomy does not remove those limits.

Practices for this approach

Practice this with IX Coach

Try this practice