| Abstrakt: |
Purpose: This study aims to investigate how university students' basic psychological needs (autonomy, competence and relatedness) determine whether coaching or training is more supportive for them. Design/methodology/approach: Real-life coaching (N1= 110) and training (N2= 176) processes with students as clients were examined, measuring the students' needs before the coaching/training, their need fulfilment after the coaching/training and their satisfaction and goal attainment/intrinsic motivation after the coaching/training. Findings: The results show that university students with a higher autonomy need had this need fulfilled to a greater extent through coaching, while university students with a higher competence need had this need fulfilled to a greater extent through training. Research limitations/implications: The research focused on university students and was conducted at German-speaking universities, so it is unclear to what extent the findings are transferable to other contexts. In addition, future research is needed to further compare other personal development tools, such as mentoring or consulting. Practical implications: The results depict the relevance of the most appropriate personal development tool (coaching or training) depending on students' needs. Furthermore, coaches should be autonomy-supportive, while trainers should be competence-supportive. Originality/value: Supporting students with the most appropriate personal development tool is essential for the effectiveness of this tool. Thus, the personal development tool used should reflect students' needs: students with a high autonomy need should receive coaching, while students with a high competence need should receive training. |
