Coaching: An International Journal of Theory, Research and Practice Vol. 2, No. 1, March 2009, 44Á53

Brief cognitive-behavioural for procrastination: a case series Dorota Karas, and Marcantonio M. Spada*

School of Human and Life Sciences, Roehampton University, UK (Received 20 December 2007; accepted 15 June 2008)

The aim of this study was to describe specific coaching skills for procrastination, integrate them into a brief cognitive-behavioural coaching programme for procrastina- tion, and determine the programme’s effectiveness through an A-B direct replication series (n7) with follow-up assessments at three and six months. Results showed that at post-coaching all participants made significant improvements on scores of decisional and behavioural procrastination. Gains were maintained at follow-up. These preliminary results suggest that brief cognitive-behavioural coaching could be an effective and time efficient intervention for procrastination. Further evaluations are clearly warranted. Keywords: case series; cognitive-behavioural coaching; effectiveness; procrastination

Introduction Coaching has been defined as ‘the systematic application of behavioural science to the enhancement of life experience, work performance and wellbeing for individuals, groups and organisations who do not have clinically significant mental heath issues or abnormal levels of distress’ (Australian Psychological Society, 2007). Cognitive- behavioural coaching (CBC: Neenan & Dryden, 2002; Richard, 1999), a branch of coaching psychology, is derived from the well-established principles and practice of cognitive-behavioural theory and therapy (e.g. Beck, 1976, 2005; Ellis, 1962). Cognitive- behavioural coaching is time-limited, goal-directed and focused on the ‘here and now’. Its central premise is that effective strategies for aiding problem-solving and overcoming challenges can be developed through examining and re-evaluating unhelpful beliefs and behaviours. What differentiates CBC from cognitive-behavioural therapy is a primary focus on non-clinical problems and challenges, an emphasis on the enhancement of wellbeing (rather than a diminution in illbeing) and the utilization of specific coaching techniques such as the ‘miracle question’ (de Shazer, 1988) and ‘the rocking chair exercise’ (Coaching Academy, 2001). Procrastination, which has been conceptualized as the intentional delay in the initiation or completion of important tasks to the point of discomfort (Solomon & Rothblum, 1984), is so common that it hardly seems problematic or worthy of significant scrutiny. However, this behaviour can have deleterious effects on relationships, mental wellbeing and work performance (Ellis & Knaus, 1977; Ferrari, Johnson & McCown, 1995; Sto¨ber and Joorman, 2001). Research has shown that there are two typologies of procrastination (Ferrari, 1993; Milgram & Tenne, 2000): behavioural procrastination (McCown, Johnson, & Petzel, 1989), which is the delay of the completion of major and minor tasks, and

*Email: [email protected]

ISSN 1752-1882 print/ISSN 1752-1890 online # 2009 Taylor & Francis DOI: 10.1080/17521880802379700 http://www.informaworld.com Coaching: An International Journal of Theory, Research and Practice 45 decisional procrastination, described as the purposive delay in making decisions within some specific time frame (Effert & Ferrari, 1989). Procrastination has been further described as ‘functional’ and ‘dysfunctional’ (Ferrari, 1993), with functional procrastina- tion being the purposeful and rational delaying of action (i.e. a postponement that benefits an individual as it allows time to obtain more information or to prioritize tasks), and dysfunctional procrastination being a delaying that inhibits the successful completion of a task. Preliminary research evidence indicates that coaching protocols based on cognitive- behavioural techniques can enhance emotional competencies, goal attainment, leadership skills, , metacognition, and quality of life (Conway, 2000; Grant, 2003; Green, Oades & Grant, 2006; Laske, 1999). The view of procrastination as involving a failure to exert control over thoughts, , impulses, and behaviours in regard to preferred standards (Vohs & Baumeister, 2004) has led some theorists to suggest that CBC could be useful in tackling procratinatory behaviour (e.g. Neenan & Dryden, 2002). However, no research to date has either put forward a CBC programme for procrastination or investigated its effectiveness. The aim of the present study was to conduct a preliminary investigation on the effectiveness of a CBC programme for procrastination. The coaching programme developed incorporates six key areas of intervention: 1. enhancing to change; 2. goal setting; 3. monitoring progress; 4. time management; 5. disputing unrealistic beliefs; and 6. relapse prevention.

These areas of intervention were selected for two reasons: first, there is a longstanding history of psychological literature supporting the utility of tackling these areas in psychological treatment (e.g. Aierly & Wertenbroch, 2002; Austin & Vancouver, 1996; Beck, 2005; DiClemente, Prochaska, Fairhurst, & Velicer, 1991; Gotlib & Hammen, 2002; Prochaska, Velicier, Rossi, & Goldstein, 1994; Sheldon, Kasser, Smith, & Share, 2002); and, second, they are considered key target areas in the cognitive-behavioural approach (Beck, Wright, Newman, & Liese, 1993). The hypothesis tested in this study was that CBC would bring to significant reductions in procrastination at post-coaching and follow-up. Single case methodology was employed as it is the most appropriate form of evaluation at this early stage of research into intervention effectiveness (Agras & Berkowitz, 1980).

Methods Design This case series employed an A-B direct replication across participants design with follow- up to evaluate the effectiveness of CBC for procrastination. In the AB design baseline (‘A’) is tracked, and then some intervention (‘B’) is implemented. If there is a change then the intervention is said to have had an effect. Replication across four or more participants constitutes a ‘direct replication’ (Barlow & Hersen, 1984) and begins to establish the generalizability of intervention effectiveness across the presented problem. 46 D. Karas & M.M. Spada

Participants Seven participants (six females) were recruited after responding to a flyer placed in the local library asking for ‘individuals who considered themselves to be chronic procrasti- nators to participate in an intervention study based on cognitive-behavioural coaching principles’. The mean age for the sample, which was entirely Caucasian, was 26.9 years (SD7.6; range20Á41). Inclusion criteria were: 1. 18 years of age or above; 2. consenting to the study; 3. understanding spoken and written English; 4. absence of a past diagnosis of either Axis 1 or Axis 2 disorders; and 5. no history of having received cognitive-behavioural coaching or .

The mean Decisional Procrastination Scale (DPS: Mann, 1982) and General Procrastina- tion Scale (GPS: Lay, 1986) scores over the four-week baseline period were respectively 21.2 (SD1.1; range19.6Á22.4) and 75.6 (SD7.1; range60.0Á81.2) and in line with previous research involving samples of British chronic procrastinators (e.g. Fernie & Spada, 2008).

Outcome measures Each participant completed two questionnaires: Decisional Procrastination Scale (DPS: Mann, 1982). This scale consists of 5 items and examines indecisiveness as it relates to handling conflicts in decision-making situations. Items include: ‘I put off making decisions’ and ‘I waste a lot of time on trivial matters before getting to the final decision’. Higher scores reflect greater decisional procrastina- tion. The scale has been found to possess good psychometric properties (Effert & Ferrari, 1989). General Procrastination Scale (GPS: Lay 1986). This scale consists of 20 items and examines behavioural procrastination. Items include: ‘In preparing for deadlines, I often waste my time by doing other things’ and ‘I often miss concerts, sporting events, or the like, because I don’t get around to buying tickets on time’. Higher scores reflect higher levels of behavioural procrastination. The scale has been found to possess good psychometric properties (Ferrari, 1989, 1991; Lay, 1986).

Procedure Ethics approval for the study was obtained from Roehampton University, London, UK. Participants were assigned to no-intervention baselines for four weeks until stability in the baseline was established. During this period, participants met with the coach for 15 minutes on a weekly basis in order to complete outcome measures. No coaching was delivered during these meetings. Following the baseline period, the CBC programme was delivered weekly, with each session lasting no more than an hour. Participants completed outcome measures at the end of each session. Following the end of the programme, participants completed outcome measures at three and six months, with no additional coaching delivered. Coaching: An International Journal of Theory, Research and Practice 47

CBC for procrastination In the first session participants were introduced to the cognitive-behavioural paradigm, followed by psycho- on the nature of procrastination (e.g. task avoidance, perfectionism, fear of failure or success: Rothblum, Solomon & Murakami, 1986). A cost benefit analysis of procrastinatory behaviour was then performed. This involved listing the costs (e.g. problems at work caused by the accumulation of unresolved tasks) and benefits (e.g. not having to face an upsetting task) of procrastination. As a weekly task, participants were asked to complete a motivational assignment based on de Shazer’s (1988) ‘miracle question’. They were asked to consider the following possibility: ‘suppose that when you go to sleep tonight, a miracle happens and the problem of procrastination is resolved. However, since you were asleep you do not know that the miracle has happened until you wake up tomorrow. What will be the difference that will tell you that the miracle has happened?’ (de Shazer, 1988, p. 78). The assignment required the completion of a minimum of two A4 pages of sensory-based experiences written in present tense. The aim of this assignment was to help participants develop a positive vision of what success might look like, increase motivation and commitment to change, and consider the behavioural consequences of the solution. In the second session, participants were helped to determine long- and short-term goals. Exploration of long-term goals was based on ‘The rocking chair exercise’ (Coaching Academy, 2001). Participants were asked to imagine themselves at the age of ninety, sitting in a rocking chair and recounting the most remarkable accomplishments of their lifetime. The story continues until it brings them to their current age and ends with setting short- term goals based on the SMART principle (Specific, Measurable, Attainable, Realistic and Time Framed: Locke, 1996). The aim of this exercise was to increase self-efficacy (Bandura, 1997) by formulating attainable goals, which in turn may help reduce procrastination. The weekly assignment required the participants to keep a weekly time log adapted from Neil Fiore (cited in Burka & Yuen, 1983) and referred to as ‘the un- schedule’. The exercise contains a blank schedule (segmented into 30 minute intervals) for one week including weekends. Participants were first asked to fill in all routine activities in advance such as getting ready for work, travelling, attending appointments, and exercising. They were then instructed to record all the activities they had or had not accomplished. The purpose of this exercise was to give participants a more realistic view of how they were spending their time. In the third and fourth sessions, the task prioritisation and performance of a daily to- do list was introduced. The participants were asked to choose only one task per day which would bring them closer to their goals but which they had found difficult to accomplish. The participants were also asked to note their thoughts and feelings before, during and after completing the task. This exercise was aimed at showing participants that in most cases the task was not as hard to accomplish as they had expected it to be. The weekly assignment focused on monitoring cognitive scripts and irrational self-talk (Ellis, 1985). This exercise was aimed at facilitating cognitive awareness and engagement in the agreed activities. The fifth session aimed to challenge cognitive scripts and irrational self-talk and replace these with more helpful cognitions (Ellis, 1981). This was done through exercises where the participant’s cognitions, identified in the previous session, were elicited (e.g. ‘what beliefs do you hold about yourself that may cause you to procrastinate?’) and then reviewed and questioned (e.g. ‘what other perspective could you take?’, ‘what is stopping you from taking a new perspective?’). The goal for this session was 48 D. Karas & M.M. Spada also to understand how thoughts impact on behaviour. This was done by using the ‘wheel of life exercise’ (Whitworth, House, Sandahl, & Kimsey-House, 1998). Questions included: ‘What do you believe about yourself currently which may lead you to procrastination?’, ‘Do you hold any beliefs that you think are holding you back?’, ‘What are they?’ The weekly assignment entailed continuing to complete all previous exercises. The sixth and final session focused on relapse prevention and incorporated the development of a blueprint, which included a detailed account of the main CBC strategies employed during coaching. Participants were encouraged to implement these strategies to maintain further gains made over the course of coaching. All participants were coached by the first author, a certified life coach.

Data analysis The nature of data analysis in single case research, which refers to the procedure for data collection in which the participant serves as his/her own control rather than utilizing another individual or group, is controversial (e.g. Morley, 1996; Todman & Dugard, 2001). Graphical representation and visual inspection of the data remains the predominant form of analysis. Parsonson and Bauer (1992) argue that the goal of single case research is to detect clear and observable effects and that graphical representation and visual inspection means only such effects will be observed. It is an appropriate form of analysis for preliminary investigations into the effectiveness of novel interventions. For the purposes of this research both visual inspection of individual data and t-tests for the aggregate scores were utilised.

Results Each participant’s scores on the DPS and GPS during baseline, coaching and follow-up phases are shown in Figure 1. Baseline scores appear to be fairly stable across the two outcome measures. T-tests on the aggregate scores (seven participants) showed no significant differences between baseline 1 and 4 on either outcome measures. This stability of the baselines suggests that any effects occurring during coaching are unlikely to be due to spontaneous recovery from procrastination, self-monitoring, contact with the coach, or natural variation in scores. Each participant showed substantial and relatively rapid reductions on the DPS and GPS over the course of coaching and these reductions were largely maintained at follow-up. Mean decrease in decisional and general procrastination scores at postÁcoaching (T6) were 6.3 and 32.6 respectively (see Table 1). These values convert into an improvement of 70.3 and 56.9%, respectively. T-tests on the aggregate scores indicate significant changes on both these measures between baseline and post- coaching, and baseline and follow-up. A closer examination of the participants’ scores on the DPS and GPS indicates that at post-coaching all were below mean scores of a British non-clinical sample reported by Spada, Hiou and Nikcevic (2006). There was a slight deterioration at follow-up, but scores continue to represent a substantial reduction from baseline.

Discussion The fundamental goal of this study was to answer one question: could a brief form of CBC be effective at reducing procrastination? The results of this case series suggest that CBC is Participant 1 Participant 2 Participant 3 Participant 4 Decisional General Decisional General Decisional General Decisional General Baseline Coaching Follow-up Baseline Coaching Follow-up Baseline Coaching Follow-up Baseline Coaching Follow-up 25 90 25 90 30 90 30 100 80 80 80 90 25 25 20 80 20 70 70 70 70 Practice and Research Theory, of Journal International An Coaching: 60 60 20 60 20 15 15 60 50 50 50 15 15 50 40 40 40 General General 40 General 10 10 General Decisional Decisional Decisional Decisional 10 30 10 30 30 30 20 20 20 20 5 5 5 5 10 10 10 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 T2 T3 T4 T5 T6 B4 B3 B2 B1 B0 T2 T3 T4 T5 T6 B4 B3 B2 B1 B0 T2 T3 T4 T5 T6 B4 B3 B2 B1 B0 T2 T3 T4 T5 T6 B4 B3 B2 B1 B0 3 months 6 months Time Intervals Time Intervals 3 months 6 months 3 months 6 months Time Intervals 3 months 6 months Time Intervals

Participant 5 Participant 6 Participant 7 Decisional General Decisional General Decisional General Baseline Coaching Follow-up Baseline Coaching Follow-up Baseline Coaching Follow-up 25 70 30 100 30 100 90 90 60 25 25 20 80 80 50 70 70 20 20 15 60 40 60 15 50 15 50 30 40 General General 10 40 General Decisional Decisional Decisional 10 10 30 20 30 20 5 20 5 5 10 10 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 T2 T3 T4 T5 T6 B4 B3 B2 B1 B0 T2 T3 T4 T5 T6 T2 T3 T4 T5 T6 B4 B3 B2 B1 B0 B4 B3 B2 B1 B0 6 months Time Intervals 3 months 3 months 3 months 6 Time Intervals 3 months 6 months Time Intervals 49 Figure 1. Individual decisional and general procrastination scores at baseline, coaching and follow-up. 50 D. Karas & M.M. Spada

Table 1. Aggregate decisional and general procrastination scores at baseline, coaching and follow- up.

Decisional Percentage General Percentage procrastination change procrastination change

Baseline 21.2 75.6 T2 15.7 25.8 63.6 15.9 T3 12.7 39.9 52.1 31.0 T4 9.7 54.1 46.7 38.2 T5 7.7 63.6 39.4 47.8 T6 Á post-coaching 6.3 70.3 32.6 56.9 3 month follow-up 8.7 58.8 43.0 43.1 6months follow-up 8.6 59.5 44.4 41.2

indeed an effective intervention for procrastination. Substantial reductions were obtained on the outcome measures at post-coaching and at 3- and 6-month follow-up when considering aggregate scores. Every participant also achieved recovery at post-coaching according to mean scores of a British non-clinical sample. The presence of stable baselines, marked effects following introduction of CBC, and replication across participants makes it unlikely that the effects observed are attributable to natural remittance or extraneous factors. Moreover, since the duration of procrastination is likely to have varied substantially across participants before the introduction of coaching, an explanation of all coaching effects in terms of coaching coinciding with spontaneous recovery is implausible. However, the possible contribution of spontaneous improvement cannot be completely partialled-out from the percentage improvement observed in outcome measures that might be due to coaching. The results of this study must be interpreted cautiously. The study relied solely on self- report measures of procrastination, and therefore a role of demand effects on outcome cannot be ruled out. The lack of a coaching placebo condition means that the impact of non-specific coaching factors on outcome cannot be assessed. Finally, the study was based on a small sample of predominantly female procrastinators, who may not be fully representative of all procrastination cases. Despite these limitations the present results suggest that continuing evaluations of this new CBC approach are warranted. Future studies should employ larger and more gender- balanced samples. Randomized controlled trials are also needed in order to determine the effectiveness of CBC generally and in specifically reducing procrastinatory behaviour. It would also be valuable to identify the key active components of this coaching approach as they are still unclear at present. In conclusion, the presented brief CBC approach emphasizing motivation, goal-setting and targeting beliefs has shown to be an effective intervention for procrastination with all participants registering significant improvements. Coaching: An International Journal of Theory, Research and Practice 51

Notes on contributors

Dorota Karas, a qualified Corporate Coach and NLP (Neuro- Linguistic Programming) trainer, specialises in assisting individuals in becoming productive and efficient by breaking through procrastination and time management issues. Dor- ota’s work draws upon her backgrounds in psychology, leadership and motivation in offering a cutting-edge cogni- tive-behavioural approach to coaching.

Dr Spada is a chartered , an accredited cognitive behaviour therapist, and a registered psychotherapist. He is currently appointed principal lecturer in psychology in the School of Human and Life Sciences at Roehampton Uni- versity, and consultant cognitive behaviour therapist with the Community Alcohol and Drugs Service of the Borough of Brent. His research focuses on developing novel cognitive- behavioural theoretical accounts and intervention strategies for addictive behaviours and procrastination.

References

Agras, W.S., & Berkowitz, R. (1980). Clinical research and behavior therapy: Halfway there? Behavior Therapy, 11, 472Á487. Ariely, D., & Wertenbroch, K. (2002). Procrastination, deadlines, and performance: Self-control by precommitment. Psychological Science, 13, 219Á224. Austin, J.T., & Vancouver, J.B. (1996). Goal constructs in psychology: Structure, process and content. Psychological Bulletin, 120, 338Á375. Australian Psychological Society (2007). Coaching psychology interest group mission statement. Retrieved December, 2007, from http://www.groups.psychology.org.au/igcp/ Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York: Freeman. Barlow, D.H., & Hersen, M. (1984). Single case experimental designs: Strategies for studies behavior change. New York: Pergamon. Beck, A.T. (1976). Cognitive therapy and the emotional disorders. New York: New American Library. Beck, A.T. (2005). The current state of cognitive therapy: A 40-year retrospective. Archives of General Psychiatry, 62, 953Á959. Beck, A.T., Wright, F.D., Newman, C.F., & Liese, B.S. (1993). Cognitive therapy of substance abuse. New York: Guilford Press. Burka, J.B., & Yuen, L.M. (1983). Procrastination: Why you do it, what to do about it. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley. Coaching Academy. (2001). ‘‘How to set goals and motivate others’’. Training Programme. London: Coaching Academy. Conway, R.L. (2000). The imapct of coaching mod-level managers utilizing multi-rater feedback. Dissertation Abstracts International. A (Humanities and Social Sciences), 60(7-1), 2672. de Shazer, S. (1988). Clues: Investigating solutions in brief therapy. New York: Norton & Co. 52 D. Karas & M.M. Spada

DiClemente, C.C., Prochaska, J.O., Fairhurst, S.K., & Velicer, W.F. (1991). The process of smoking cessation: An analysis of precontemplation, contemplation, and preparation stages of change. Journal of Consulting & , 59, 295Á304. Effert, B., & Ferrari, J.R. (1989). Decisional procrastination: Examining personality correlates. Journal of Social Behaviour and Personality, 4, 151Á156. Ellis, A. (1962). Reason and in psychotherapy. Secaucus: Citadel. Ellis, A. (1985). Overcoming resistance: Rational-emotive therapy with difficult clients. New York: Springer. Ellis, A., & Knaus, W.J. (1977). "Overcoming procrastination. In J.R. Ferrari, J.L. Johnson & W. G. McCown (Eds.), Procrastination and task avoidance: Theory, research and treatment. New York: Plenum Press. Fernie, B.A., & Spada, M.M. (2008). Metacognitions about procrastination: A preliminary investigation. Behavioural and Cognitive Psychotherapy. 36, 359Á364. Ferrari, J.R. (1989). Reliability of academic and dispositional measures of procrastination. Psychological Reports, 64, 1057Á1058. Ferrari, J.R. (1991). Procrastination and project creation: choosing easy, nondiagnostic items to avoid self-relevant information. Journal of Social Behaviour and Personality, 6, 619Á628. Ferrari, J.R. (1993). Dysfunctional procrastination and its relationship with self-esteem, inter- personal dependency, and self-defeating behaviours. Personality and Individual Differences, 17, 673Á679. Ferrari, J.R., Johnson, J.L., & McCown, W.G. (1995). Procrastination and task avoidance: Theory, research, and treatment. New York: Plenum Press. Gotlib, I.H., & Hammen, C.L. (2002). Handbook of depression. New York: Guilford Press. Grant, A.M. (2003). The impact of life coaching on goal attainment, metacognition and mental health. Social Behaviour and Personality, 31, 253Á263. Green, L.S., Oades, L.G., & Grant, A.M. (2006). Cognitive-behavioral, solution-focused life coaching: Enhancing goal striving, well-being, and hope. Journal of , 1, 142Á 149. Laske, O.E. (1999). Transformative effects of coaching on executives’ professional agenda. Dissertation Abstracts International: Section B: the Sciences & Engineering, 60(5-B), 2386. Lay, C.H. (1986). At last, my research article on procrastination. Journal of Research in Personality, 20, 474Á495. Locke, E.A. (1996). Motivation through conscious goal setting. Applied & Preventive Psychology, 5, 117Á124. Mann, L. (1982). Decision-making questionnaire. In J.R. Ferrari, J.L. Johnson & W.G. McCown (Eds.), Procrastination and task avoidance: Theory, research and treatment (pp. 61Á63). New York: Plenum Press. Milgram, N.A., & Tenne, R. (2000). Personality correlates of decisional and task avoidant procrastination. European Journal of Personality, 14, 141Á156. McCown, W., Johnson, J., & Petzel, T. (1989). Procrastination, a principal components analysis. Personality and Individual Differences, 10, 197Á202. Morley, S. (1996). Single case research. In G. Parry & F.N. Watts (Eds.), Behavioural and mental health research: A handbook of skills and methods (2nd ed). East Sussex: Taylor & Francis. Neenan, M., & Dryden, W. (2002). Life coaching: A cognitive behavioural approach. London: Brunner-Routledge. Parsonson, B.S., & Bauer, D.M. (1992). The visual analysis of data, research into the stimuli controlling it. In T.R. Kratochwill & J.R. Levin (Eds.), Single-case research design and analysis: New directions for psychology and education. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Prochaska, J.O., Velicier, W.F., Rossi, J.S., & Goldstein, M.G. (1994). Stages of change and decisional balance for 12 problem behaviors. , 13, 39Á46. Richard, J.T. (1999). Mutlimodal therapy: A useful model for the executive coach. Journal: Practice and Research, 51,4Á30. Rothblum, E.D., Solomon, L.J., & Murakami, J. (1986). Affective, cognitive, and behavioural differences between high and low procrastinators. Journal of Counselling Psychology, 33, 387Á394. Sheldon, K.M., Kasser, T., Smith, K., & Share, T. (2002). Personal goals and psychological growth: Testing an intervention to enhance goal attainment and personality integration. Journal of Personality, 70,5Á31. Coaching: An International Journal of Theory, Research and Practice 53

Solomon, L.J., & Rothblum, E.D. (1984). Academic procrastination: Frequency and cognitive- behavioural correlates. Journal of , 31, 504Á510. Spada, M.M., Hiou, K., & Nikcevic, A.V. (2006). Metacognitions, emotions and procrastination. Journal of Cognitive Psychotherapy, 20, 319Á326. Sto¨ber, J., & Joorman, J. (2001). Worry, procrastination and perfectionism: Differentiating amount of worry, pathological worry, anxiety and depression. Cognitive Therapy and Research, 25, 49Á60. Todman, J.B., & Dugard, P. (2001). Single-case and small-n experimental designs: A practical guide to randomization tests. London: Lawrence Erlbaum. Vohs, K.D., & Baumeister, R.F. (2004). "Understanding self-regulation: An introduction. In R.F. Baumeister & K.D. Vohs (Eds.), Handbook of self-regulation. New York: Guilford Press. Whitworth, L., House, H., Sandahl, P., & Kimsey-House, H. (1998). Co-active coaching: New skills for coaching people toward success in work and life. California: Davies-Black Publishing.