Coaching into wellbeing: A realist review of cognitive behavioral coaching interventions in the workplace
Ola Amr Abdelfatah et al.
What the paper says
This article develops a programme theory for Cognitive Behavioural Coaching (CBC) in workplace settings to provide a theoretical foundation for its application. While CBC is frequently cited as an evidence-based coaching approach, its effectiveness in organisational contexts remains contested. This review aims to clarify how CBC interventions generate outcomes. Methods: A realist review methodology was used to explore the underlying mechanisms of CBC interventions in workplace settings. A total of 68 relevant articles were analysed to identify patterns of causation and key contextual factors influencing CBC outcomes. The study follows Pawson et al.’s (2005) realist approach, addressing what works, in what circumstances, and how. Findings: The review generates seven provisional programme theories explaining CBC effectiveness across three key themes: cognitive processes, behavioural mechanisms, and goal progression. The findings illustrate the conditions under which CBC facilitates positive change or fails to do so, highlighting both its potential benefits and risks. Practical Implications: By developing programme theory, this review provides practitioners and researchers with a framework to design, implement, and evaluate CBC interventions more effectively. The findings contribute to bridging the gap between coaching theory and practice, ensuring CBC applications in organisational settings are context-sensitive and evidence-based. Conclusion: This study advances the theoretical foundation of CBC by explaining its mechanisms of action and context-dependent effectiveness. The proposed programme theories provide a conceptual roadmap for future research and practical applications of CBC in workplace coaching.
Evidence weight
Balanced mode · F 0.40 / M 0.15 / V 0.05 / R 0.40
| F · citation impact | 0.50 × 0.4 = 0.20 |
| M · momentum | 0.50 × 0.15 = 0.07 |
| V · venue signal | 0.50 × 0.05 = 0.03 |
| R · text relevance † | 0.50 × 0.4 = 0.20 |
† Text relevance is estimated at 0.50 on the detail page — for your query’s actual relevance score, open this paper from a search result.