Page 17 [17]
OCR
"THERE IS A TIME FOR EACH AND EVERY THING" its own methodologies of original supervision/coaching research. With this observation Knopf opens a view on the next headline: RELATION BETWEEN RESEARCH AND PRACTICE Under this heading the reader may find three articles related to the topic of the relations between research and practice. In an empirical study Heidi Möller, Katrin Oellerich, Denise Hinn and Silja Kotte from University of Kassel, Germany, offer the reader an insight into Research on Consulting - With, For, or Against Practice? Examining the recent literature, they are filtering out which consulting research projects and consulting practices are acting in concert, and are considered beneficial by coaching practitioners. In contrast to that, they focus on the gap between expert knowledge and scientific knowledge; a gap that simply cannot be closed. The distance between them between them is insurmountable. They dig deeper into this topic by describing vividly the futile efforts spent in differentiating consulting formats, thus clearing their own position towards the research issue: “...this means letting go of an ostensible safety net in this most complex of endeavours”. Following this, they examine the current state of consulting research and introduce the first findings from a comprehensive empirical survey in which coaching practitioners were asked about their motivation for — or against — taking part in a coaching research project. They encountered a contradiction: coaches seem to be keen on “hard facts” produced by research, but are unwilling to take part in research themselves. In the next article Latvian Supervisors’ Values Kristine Martinsone and colleagues from Riga Stradin$ University present the results of a pilot study of supervision in different professional groups in Latvia. They state that in their country supervision as a new profession is developing, and they find it important to characterize how its professional basis is created. This study focuses on the content of the value system of supervision by first characterizing the values of the practicing supervisors, and subsequently confronting the question if there are any differences between supervisors practicing in different professional fields. Thirdly, they explore the differences between evaluations of importance and attainability of personal values. After a review of the research methods, the reader gets an interesting and detailed explanation of the results. Martinsone c.s. found significant differences between supervisors practicing in different professional fields, with regards both to the value systems and the evaluations of importance and attainability of personal values.
