SPACE model · Atlas

1. Introduction

Version followed: the SPACE model of Nick Edgerton with Stephen Palmer (Edgerton & Palmer, 2005, The Coaching Psychologist 1(2), 25–31; reprinted as chapter 1 of J. Passmore & D. Tee (Eds.), Coaching Practiced, Wiley, 2022, pp. 9–18), as Edgerton teaches it in his SPACE workshop at the UK Centre for REBT (Blue / Red / Green work) and as set out in the authorised Polish adaptation SFERA (Syrek-Kosowska, Edgerton & Palmer, 2010; described in Syrek-Kosowska, 2014). Source status: the five SPACE areas and their wording, Edgerton's authorship, the Blue/Red/Green workshop stages, the SFERA stages, letters, ABCDE worksheet and "9-ka" action-planning technique, the ABCDEF letters used in cognitive behavioural coaching, and published session formats are taken from the sources listed under Sources. The 2005 paper and its 2022 reprint are used through the published abstract only, so the original figure layout, Edgerton's own thinking-error list, his Green-work technique menu and the nine questions of the 9-ka remain [uncertain]. Where the guide fills these gaps it uses cognitive coaching sources co-authored by Palmer, marked as such.

What it is. SPACE is a cognitive behavioural assessment and case-conceptualisation model, not a full therapy and not a stage model of change. Its authors present it for three settings: cognitive behavioural coaching, therapy and stress management. The 2005 abstract gives it three jobs: assessing the client, explaining the cognitive model to the client, and planning a coaching, therapy or training programme [source: SGCP abstract of Edgerton & Palmer 2005]. The UK Centre for REBT credits Nick Edgerton as the model's developer, with Palmer and Helen Williams as co-authors of the SPACE publications [source: UK Centre for REBT course page].

The acronym. It names five interacting areas of a person's experience of a specific situation: Social context, Physical (Edgerton's and Palmer's own wording; written "Physiology" by Lautsten et al. and in SFERA), Action, Cognition(s) and Emotion(s) [source: UK Centre for REBT; Palmer 2008, Introduction ("Edgerton developed the SPACE model"); Lautsten et al. 2018, p. 44]. Lautsten et al. call them "five reciprocal and interacting modalities". Adaptations exist in Portuguese (FACES; Dias, Edgerton & Palmer, 2010), Polish (SFERA) and Danish (SKAFT) [source: UK Centre for REBT; Spaten et al. 2012]. SFERA spells out S as social context or situation, F as physiology, E as emotions, R as reaction (behaviour) and A as cognitive analysis [source: Syrek-Kosowska 2014, p. 63].

How change happens. The theory comes from cognitive behavioural work. Syrek-Kosowska traces it to Lazarus's multimodal therapy, Greenberger & Padesky's five-part model, Ellis and Beck. In a given situation the five areas act on one another as a single process: thoughts, bodily arousal, feelings and behaviour keep each other going in a loop. Mapping that loop lets the client see it, and the client can then break it by changing one or more links, most powerfully the cognitive one [source: Syrek-Kosowska 2014, pp. 62–64].

2. Framework

Phases (two published framings that map onto each other).

Phase	Edgerton's workshop label	SFERA stage (Syrek-Kosowska 2014)	Goal	Typical format
1	—	Describe the problem situation	The client tells the story freely; build the working alliance; pick the situation to work on	Usually the first session
2	Blue work	Analyse the situation with the diagram	Run a preliminary SPACE analysis of one concrete incident and draw the five-area map with its links	First or second session; can be redone for each new incident
3	Red work	(part of stage 3)	Look more deeply for thinking errors and self-defeating behaviours in the map	One or more sessions
4	Green work	Work on change and the goal	Develop interventions with the client for each area, refine the goal, plan actions and between-session tasks	One session or the rest of the engagement

[source: UK Centre for REBT course page (Blue/Red/Green); Syrek-Kosowska 2014, pp. 65–66]

Session count and format. SPACE itself has no fixed number of sessions. Syrek-Kosowska says the SFERA steps can be done within a single session or spread over the whole coaching process, usually starting in the first session [source: Syrek-Kosowska 2014, pp. 65–66]. SPACE can be the backbone of a whole coaching engagement or a module inside another model [source: Syrek-Kosowska 2014, p. 64]. Spaten, Imer & Palmer (2012, 2014) place it in the problem-identification step of the PRACTICE / PRAKSIS solution-focused coaching model. For cognitive behavioural coaching in general, Lautsten et al. give a typical agreement of 6–8 sessions of 45–60 minutes (sometimes up to 120) over 4–6 months, with the first two sessions given to case conceptualisation; they place SPACE early, as an educational tool [source: Lautsten et al. 2018, pp. 43–44]. Williams & Palmer (2013) report a single coaching case with a written account plus a graphical SPACE map of the discussion and outcomes. Individual work is the norm in the coaching sources. Edgerton also teaches SPACE for groups and stress-management training [source: UK Centre for REBT; Syrek-Kosowska 2014, p. 62]. One published group programme ran as a weekly 90-minute SPACE training group for 12 weeks with school administrators [source: Ogba et al. 2020, abstract].

Criteria for moving on (the sources give no formal criteria; the following is [synthesis] based on the stage goals above):

Phase 1 → 2: one specific, recent incident is chosen, and the client and coach agree on what the client wants from it.
Phase 2 → 3: all five areas are filled in for that incident, and the client can describe in their own words at least one loop (for example, thought → arousal → avoidance → thought).
Phase 3 → 4: the client has identified the unhelpful thoughts or behaviours they want to change and has stated a goal for each area (for example, how they would like to feel and act).
End: the goal is reached or the client is doing the work themselves. Redraw the map for the target situation to compare before and after (Williams & Palmer's graphical account suggests this use) [uncertain].

Scope: coaching versus psychotherapy. The authors offer SPACE for therapy as well as coaching, so the model does not set the boundary. The contract and setting do.

The EMCC Global Code of Ethics, which the Association for Coaching also publishes, says coaching "is not counselling, psychotherapy or medical intervention". It requires members to work within their competence and to refer clients onward where appropriate. It also requires members to encourage a client to end the work when a different form of professional help would serve them better [source: EMCC Global Code of Ethics v4; AC Global Code of Ethics page].
ICF's referral guidelines (Hullinger & DiGirolamo, 2018) describe coaching as focused on the present and future, performance and development, with generally well-functioning clients. They describe therapy as focused on psychological problems, healing and the past, with clients who have some dysfunction or disorder. Coaches do not diagnose or treat [source: ICF, Referring a Client to Therapy].
Syrek-Kosowska says an ethical coach recognises when coaching is not the right intervention (for example, depression that undermines motivation), says so openly, and suggests psychotherapy [source: Syrek-Kosowska 2014, p. 68].
As a licensed psychotherapist you can use SPACE in either contract. Decide which one you are in, write it into the agreement, and do not slide from coaching into treatment without re-contracting [synthesis].

3. Guiding principles

Situation-specific. Always map one concrete incident, not a general trait. Practical meaning: ask "when did this last happen?" before mapping anything [source: UK Centre for REBT ("an incident"); Syrek-Kosowska 2014].
The five areas interact. No area is analysed alone; the coach's task is to help the client see the links. Practical meaning: after each area, ask how it affects the others [source: Syrek-Kosowska 2014, p. 64].
Cognitions drive much of the loop. The model follows the cognitive behavioural tradition: views of events, not events alone, shape reactions (Syrek-Kosowska opens her section with Epictetus). Practical meaning: give cognition the most time; it is also the hardest area to work in [source: Syrek-Kosowska 2014, pp. 64, 66].
Psychoeducation is part of the method. The map is also a tool for teaching the client the cognitive model. Practical meaning: draw the map with the client, visibly, and hand over the drawing [source: SGCP abstract of Edgerton & Palmer 2005].
Assessment informs the programme. Interventions are chosen for the areas the map shows to be driving the problem. Practical meaning: do not pick techniques until Blue work is complete [source: SGCP abstract; UK Centre for REBT].
The client is responsible. In coaching, the client does the analysis, reaches the conclusions and owns the outcomes; the coach moderates the process. Practical meaning: ask rather than tell, and let the client fill in the map [source: Syrek-Kosowska 2014, p. 61].
The client has influence over the situation. Clients often place the cause in a boss, an organisation or family. Practical meaning: gently ask what part of the loop the client controls [source: Syrek-Kosowska 2014, pp. 67–68].
The relationship carries the work. The first stage stresses the coach–client relationship as central to outcome. Practical meaning: use global listening, reflection and summaries before you analyse [source: Syrek-Kosowska 2014, p. 65].
Not a change model on its own. SPACE describes a problem, not how change unfolds. Practical meaning: pair it with a goal or change model such as GROW, PRACTICE or the Transtheoretical Model [source: Syrek-Kosowska 2014, pp. 64–65; Spaten et al. 2012].
Flexible entry point. You can start from whichever area the client brings first (a thought, a feeling, a bodily sensation). Practical meaning: follow the client's lead, then complete the rest of the map [source: Lautsten et al. 2018, p. 44 (the modalities can be entered at any point); Smith, Coachology in Practice (secondary)].
Work within competence and contract. Practical meaning: screen for clinical need, write the scope and confidentiality limits into the contract, and refer when needed [source: EMCC/AC Global Code; ICF 2018].

4. Intervention inventory

The sources describe SPACE mainly as an assessment and conceptualisation tool with a small set of attached procedures. The items below are what those sources describe. Where a step is filled in from general cognitive behavioural coaching (CBC) practice, it is marked [synthesis]. Edgerton's workshop manual is not published, so the full list of techniques used in Red and Green work is [uncertain].

4.1 Contracting and screening (before SPACE work)

Purpose: Set the scope (coaching or therapy) and the client's responsibility. Explain the limits of confidentiality. Check for clinical need. [source: Syrek-Kosowska 2014, p. 68; EMCC/AC Global Code §2–3; ICF 2018]
Steps:
1. State what the work is and is not: coaching is not counselling or psychotherapy, if that is your contract.
2. Agree the goals, how long the work will run, practical arrangements, and the conditions under which confidentiality cannot be kept (illegal activity, danger to self or others).
3. Make clear that the client does the work towards the goal and the coach runs the process.
4. Ask briefly about current mental health, any treatment, sleep, mood and day-to-day functioning [synthesis].
5. Agree in advance that you will raise it if a referral seems advisable [source: ICF 2018].
Example language (illustrative): "We'll use a map with five parts to look at one situation at a time. You'll do most of the thinking; my job is to keep us on track. If at any point something looks more like a health issue than a coaching one, I'll say so and we'll decide together what to do."
Watch for: distress or impairment that does not fit the contract. If you see it, go to 5.8.

4.2 Free description of the problem situation (Stage 1)

Purpose: Let the client tell the story, build the working relationship, and find a situation to map. [source: Syrek-Kosowska 2014, p. 65]
Steps: Ask an open invitation and then listen without analysing. Use reflection, clarifying questions and summaries. Close by asking the client to choose one recent, concrete incident that stands for the problem.
Example language (illustrative): "Tell me what's been happening." Later: "Of the times you've described, which one would be most useful to look at closely, ideally a recent one?"
Watch for: vague, general accounts ("I'm always anxious at work"). Keep narrowing until you have a time, a place and the people involved.

4.3 Blue work: the preliminary SPACE analysis of an incident

Purpose: Fill in all five areas for the chosen incident. This is the core assessment. [source: UK Centre for REBT ("preliminary SPACE analysis of an incident"); Syrek-Kosowska 2014, pp. 62–65]
Steps: Draw five labelled areas on paper or a whiteboard. Syrek-Kosowska's Figure 1 shows them as interacting parts of one process; the layout of the original 2005 figure is [uncertain]. Fill each area using the questions below. Write the client's own words. Use global listening, open and clarifying questions, reflection and summaries (the SFERA list of techniques). You may start with whatever area the client brings first. The parts are then filled in turn:
- S – Social context: where, when, with whom, and what was at stake; what the client wanted from the situation. Keep facts separate from interpretations. (illustrative) "Where were you, who was there, what was happening just before?"
- P – Physiology: bodily reactions such as a racing heart, trembling hands, sweating, a churning stomach, a tight chest, changed breathing. Awareness lets the client both use helpful activation and manage stress symptoms [source: Syrek-Kosowska 2014, p. 63; Smith (secondary)]. (illustrative) "What did you notice in your body: heart, breathing, hands, stomach?"
- A – Action: what the client did or avoided before, during and after the situation, including strategies like endless preparation, procrastination, withdrawal, defensiveness or agreeing to things they wanted to refuse [source: Syrek-Kosowska 2014, p. 64; Smith (secondary)]. (illustrative) "What did you actually do, and what did you put off or steer around?"
- C – Cognition: automatic thoughts, images, predictions, "musts", and the beliefs underneath. SFERA's example open question asks what thoughts accompany the client in the situation [source: Syrek-Kosowska 2014, p. 65]. (illustrative) "What was going through your mind just then? What were you predicting would happen?"
- E – Emotion: name each feeling and rate its intensity before, during and after the incident, and also now in the session. The intensity rating is [synthesis]. Naming emotions shows how they shape actions [source: Syrek-Kosowska 2014, p. 64; Smith (secondary)]. (illustrative) "What did you feel, and how strong was it out of 10?"
Worked example from the source: situation: a presentation to the board; physiology: butterflies, shaking hands, palpitations; emotion: anxiety; action: putting off the presentation by revising it endlessly; cognition: fear of looking foolish and imagining not being able to answer questions [source: Syrek-Kosowska 2014, p. 63].
Watch for: a client who merges areas ("I felt that I'd fail" is a thought, not a feeling). Sort it gently into the right area. The analysis is working when all five areas hold specific content.

4.4 Linking the areas and explaining the cognitive model (psychoeducation)

Purpose: Show the client how the areas keep each other going, and teach the cognitive model by using their own material. [source: SGCP abstract of Edgerton & Palmer 2005; Syrek-Kosowska 2014, p. 64; Lautsten et al. 2018, p. 44: the coach shows the coachee a graph of how the five modalities interact and can block the goal, usually early in coaching. Their example runs exam (S) → negative appraisal (C) → anxiety (E) → sweating and racing heart (P) → pacing (A).]
Steps:
1. Draw arrows between the areas the client links.
2. Ask how each area affects the others.
3. Trace one full loop aloud, using the client's words.
4. Name the general principle: how we interpret an event shapes how we feel, how our body responds and what we do, and those in turn feed back into the thoughts.
5. Give the client the drawing or a photo of it. [Steps 3–5 are synthesis]
Example language (illustrative): "So the thought 'I'll look stupid' comes, your heart races, you feel more anxious, so you keep rewriting the slides. The day comes with less rehearsal, which feeds the thought. Where in this circle could we cut in?"
Watch for: the client explaining the loop back to you unprompted. That shows they understand it. If they see the map as blaming them, stress that it shows a pattern, not a fault.

4.5 Introspection training: learning to notice thoughts

Purpose: Some clients cannot yet report their thoughts, and cognition is the hardest area to fill. [source: Syrek-Kosowska 2014, pp. 64, 68, citing Peltier 2005]
Steps: Check the client's ability to notice thoughts with questions such as whether they can say what they are thinking, and whether their thinking runs in words, sentences or images. Practise in session by replaying the incident slowly. Set a between-session task to notice and write down thoughts when the target emotion rises; the written log is [synthesis].
Example language (illustrative): "Let's slow the moment down. You walk into the room; what's the very first thing your mind says? Is it words, or more of a picture?"
Watch for: the client reporting only feelings ("I just felt awful"). Use the physiology and emotion entries as cues: "When your stomach dropped, what did that mean to you?" [synthesis]

4.6 Red work: identifying thinking errors and self-defeating behaviours

Purpose: Go deeper into the C and A areas. Find the specific thinking errors and self-defeating behaviours that keep the problem going. [source: UK Centre for REBT course page]
Steps: Go through each thought in the C area and ask what kind of thinking it is. Then go through the A area and ask whether each behaviour helps the goal or feeds the loop. Edgerton's own Red-work list of thinking errors is [uncertain], and the SFERA article names none. A published cognitive behavioural coaching list that sits beside a SPACE description is: all-or-nothing thinking, jumping to conclusions, personalisation, overgeneralisation, fortune-telling, emotional reasoning, labelling, magnification and demands [source: Lautsten et al. 2018, p. 41; a general CBC list, not Edgerton's own]. In a study of cognitive coaching co-authored by Palmer, which analysed situations across the same five factors (cognitions, emotions, behaviour, physiology and social context), the thinking errors coachees found most useful to spot were catastrophising, mind reading, personalisation and "musts" [source: Gyllensten et al. 2011, pp. 90, 94]. Self-defeating behaviours include avoidance, procrastination, over-preparation, safety behaviours and reassurance-seeking [synthesis]. Mark the strongest beliefs, for example "I must always be the best" or "I'm hopeless" from the SFERA example [source: Syrek-Kosowska 2014, p. 66].
Example language (illustrative): "Look at 'this will be a disaster'. Is that a fact or a forecast? Does it remind you of any of the usual thinking traps?"
Watch for: intellectual agreement ("yes, I catastrophise") while the emotional rating does not move. In that case, move to 4.7 and test the belief through behaviour (4.9).

4.7 Cognitive restructuring with the ABCDE(F) framework

Purpose: Challenge the unhelpful thoughts found in Red work and build a more helpful view. This is the main cognitive tool paired with SFERA. [source: Syrek-Kosowska 2014, p. 66 (Table 1, "Technika ABCDE"), citing Palmer & Szymańska 2007; Lautsten et al. 2018, p. 45 for the ABCDEF letters; Gil-Monte 2014 abstract names ABCDEF alongside SPACE]
Steps:
1. Write the goal (in the source example: deliver the presentation calmly and composedly).
2. List the limiting beliefs about the event.
3. Note their emotional and behavioural consequences (in the example: anxiety, paralysing fear, low mood).
4. Challenge each belief with realistic, helpful counter-thoughts. In the example: losing the job is possible but would not hinge on one talk, and "I know my subject".
5. Write an effective new approach in practical terms (rehearse several times; highlight other strengths such as product knowledge).
6. Set homework (visualise a successful presentation between sessions). The SFERA worksheet is a goal-first variant. Its columns run: problem/goal; beliefs or thinking patterns that limit effectiveness; emotional reaction; beliefs or thinking patterns that support effectiveness; an effective new approach to the problem [source: Syrek-Kosowska 2014, p. 66; which letter heads which column is not clear in the text read, uncertain]. The standard coaching letters are: A activating event; B beliefs about A; C consequences of those beliefs; D disputing and modifying unhelpful beliefs; E effective new approach; F future focus on personal or work goals. Ellis's original model was ABC, and D, E and F were added later [source: Lautsten et al. 2018, p. 45]. The challenging questions to use are [synthesis]: Is it true? Is it helpful? Is it logical? What would I tell a friend?
Example language (illustrative): "If a colleague said 'one weak talk and I'm fired', what would you say to them? What's a more balanced way to put it that you can actually believe?"
Watch for: the client only half-believing the new thought. Ask them to rate their belief in it. If belief stays low, design a behavioural test (4.9).

4.8 GROW applied to each SPACE area

Purpose: Turn each area of the map into a goal and options for change. [source: Syrek-Kosowska 2014, pp. 64–65]
Steps: For each area that is driving the problem (cognition, emotion, physiology, action, and the social context where it can be changed), go through Goal (how would you like it to be?), Reality (how is it now?), Options (what could you do?) and Will (what will you do, and when?). The source example is emotion: how the client wants to feel, how they feel now, and what options they have.
Example language (illustrative): "In that meeting, how would you like to feel instead? Where are you now on that? What might help you get one step closer?"
Watch for: goals that rely on other people changing ("my boss should be fairer"). Bring the focus back to the client's own influence [source: Syrek-Kosowska 2014, pp. 67–68].

4.9 Green work: designing interventions for each area

Purpose: Work with the client to build a plan that targets the links in the loop, using the map as a menu. The 2005 abstract says SPACE is used to develop the coaching, therapy or training programme; the workshop calls this stage "developing interventions with the client". [source: UK Centre for REBT; SGCP abstract]
Steps: For each area, ask what the client could do differently, then choose one or two changes with the most leverage. The SFERA example combines cognitive change (4.7), rehearsal, using strengths, and visualisation. Lautsten et al. name Socratic questioning, imagery, behavioural experiments with data collection, and between-session homework as core CBC techniques [source: Lautsten et al. 2018, pp. 46–48]. Gyllensten, Palmer and colleagues group cognitive coaching techniques by modality: cognitive (identifying performance-interfering thoughts and performance-enhancing thoughts, imagery), behavioural (time management, assertion training, behavioural experiments), and emotional and physiological (psychoeducation, exposure, relaxation) [source: Gyllensten et al. 2011, p. 90]. The per-area menu below draws on these; the rest is a CBC menu [synthesis]. Edgerton's own Green-work list is [uncertain]:
- Social context: problem-solving, assertive requests, changing timing or setting, getting support, preparing for specific people.
- Physiology: psychoeducation about stress arousal, relaxation [source: Gyllensten et al. 2011], slow breathing, sleep routines, reframing arousal as readiness [synthesis]. Palmer has described relaxation and, for suitably trained practitioners, hypnosis as adjuncts to coaching for stress and performance [source: Palmer 2008 abstract; the procedures are uncertain].
- Action: time management, assertion training and behavioural experiments [source: Gyllensten et al. 2011, p. 90]; rehearsal, graded approach instead of avoidance, dropping safety behaviours, time-boxing preparation [synthesis].
- Cognition: ABCDE(F) (4.7); spotting performance-interfering thoughts and replacing them with performance-enhancing ones, and imagery [source: Gyllensten et al. 2011, p. 90]; coping statements, perspective-taking [synthesis].
- Emotion: naming and normalising feelings, choosing a target emotion (for example, concern instead of panic), tolerating discomfort while acting.
Example language (illustrative): "Looking at the map, which one change would knock over the most dominoes?"
Watch for: a plan that targets only one area while another area restarts the loop, for example calm thoughts but untouched avoidance. Check every link that is still active.

4.10 Action planning and commitment

Purpose: Turn the chosen options into a concrete plan. [source: Syrek-Kosowska 2014, pp. 64–65: after the GROW Will step, SFERA fixes the plan with a technique called the "9-ka of action" (a series of questions that set the action plan and its schedule) or another tool that specifies the plan. The article does not list the nine questions, so their content is [uncertain], and the steps below are not the 9-ka.]
Steps [synthesis]: Agree what will be done, when, where, and with whom. List possible obstacles and how to meet them. Ask the client to rate their confidence (if it is below 7/10, shrink the step). Agree how you will review it next session.
Example language (illustrative): "What exactly will you do before Thursday's meeting? What could get in the way, and what will you do then?"
Watch for: plans that are vague or set by the coach. The client should be able to state the plan in their own words.

4.11 Imagery rehearsal and behavioural rehearsal as homework

Purpose: Strengthen the new approach before the real situation. [source: Syrek-Kosowska 2014, p. 66 (rehearse several times; visualise a successful presentation between sessions)]
Steps [synthesis for detail]:
1. Rehearse the target behaviour in session through role-play or a run-through.
2. For imagery, have the client picture the situation step by step: arriving, the bodily sensations, using the coping thought, acting as planned, and handling a difficulty such as a hard question.
3. Set daily practice and a log. Use coping imagery (meeting a difficulty and managing it) rather than perfect performance only.
Example language (illustrative): "Picture walking up to the front. Notice your heart speeding up. That's your body getting ready. You say to yourself 'I know this material' and begin with your first slide."
Watch for: imagery that raises anxiety with no sense of coping. Shorten it, add the coping step, or switch to behavioural rehearsal.

4.12 Review and re-mapping (before/after SPACE map)

Purpose: Measure change and consolidate learning. Williams & Palmer (2013) report a case with a graphical SPACE representation of the discussion and its outcomes. [source: SGCP abstract of Williams & Palmer 2013; exact format uncertain]
Steps [synthesis]: After the client has tried the plan, map the latest incident again. Set it side by side with the original map and compare each area: emotion ratings, bodily reactions, actions, thoughts. Ask what made the difference. Then pick the next incident or end the work.
Example language (illustrative): "Let's draw last Tuesday the same way and put it next to the first map. What's different?"
Watch for: change in one area only. Return to the area that has not changed.

4.13 Using SPACE inside PRACTICE / PRAKSIS (or another process model)

Purpose: Give a solution-focused coaching process a thorough assessment at the problem-identification step. [source: Spaten, Imer & Palmer 2012, 2014]
Steps: Run PRACTICE as usual: problem identification, realistic goals, alternative solutions, consider consequences, target the most feasible solution, implement chosen solution, evaluate. At the problem-identification step, run a SPACE analysis of a specific incident (4.3–4.4). Use the map to make the goals realistic and to generate alternatives for each area [the last point is synthesis]. With a client who is not ready to change, use the Transtheoretical Model to judge readiness before Green work [source: Syrek-Kosowska 2014, p. 65].
Example language (illustrative): "Before we look at solutions, let's understand one example in detail."
Watch for: the map taking over the whole session. Set a time limit for the analysis.

4.14 SPACE in stress-management training and groups

Purpose: Teach the model to groups as self-help and as a shared language. SPACE has been used in stress-management training (Williams, Edgerton & Palmer 2008, 2010, cited in Syrek-Kosowska), and Edgerton's workshops use small-group, pair and triad work on participants' own problems. [source: Syrek-Kosowska 2014, p. 62; UK Centre for REBT. One published group format was a weekly 90-minute SPACE training group run for 12 weeks: Ogba et al. 2020, abstract]
Steps [synthesis]:
1. Teach the five areas with a neutral example.
2. Have participants map a mild personal stressor in pairs.
3. Hold a plenary on the links between areas.
4. Teach one tool per area.
5. Set personal action plans. Set confidentiality rules and steer participants towards low-intensity material.
Example language (illustrative): "Choose a mildly stressful moment from this week, not your biggest worry, and map it with your partner."
Watch for: participants disclosing serious distress. Offer a private follow-up and a referral route (5.8).

5. Handling problems

The SPACE sources say little about problems. Items 5.1–5.7 are mostly [synthesis] unless a source is tagged. Items 5.8–5.9 follow the coaching bodies.

5.1 Client cannot name thoughts (empty C area). Syrek-Kosowska notes that clients often have to learn to "hear" their thoughts [source: Syrek-Kosowska 2014, p. 68]. Use introspection training (4.5): slow replay, asking for images as well as words, and asking what a bodily cue meant. Give a short thought log as homework. Do not supply thoughts for the client; offer at most two tentative options and let the client correct them [synthesis].

5.2 Externalising ("it's all my boss"). Keep the boss in the S area as a fact. Then ask what the client controls in P, A, C and E: "Given that your boss behaves this way, what part of your reaction is yours to shape?" [source: Syrek-Kosowska 2014, pp. 67–68 (raise awareness of the client's own influence); wording synthesis]. If the issue really is organisational, for example bullying, treat it as a real problem to solve or escalate, not a thinking error [synthesis].

5.3 Low readiness or resistance. SPACE is not a change model; check readiness with the Transtheoretical Model before Green work [source: Syrek-Kosowska 2014, p. 65]. For a client who is contemplating change, stay in Blue work and list the costs and benefits of the current loop. Revisit the coaching contract and the client's responsibility for the work [source: Syrek-Kosowska 2014, p. 68]. If a sponsor imposed the coaching, clarify who the client is and what is reported back [synthesis; EMCC/AC Code on contracting with sponsors].

5.4 Overwhelm during mapping. Focusing on physiology and emotion can raise arousal, especially when the incident is very charged [synthesis]. Signs to watch for are shaking, tearfulness that grows, hyperventilation, and blankness or dissociation. In response:

Stop the analysis and slow your speech.
Shift attention to the present, using feet on the floor and naming things in the room.
Use slow breathing.
Pick a milder incident next time.

If you see repeated overwhelm, flashbacks or dissociation, the client is outside the coaching scope. Move to 5.8. Do not use SPACE to process traumatic memories in a coaching contract [synthesis; ICF 2018 lists ongoing trauma effects as a referral sign].

5.5 Homework not done. Map the non-completion itself as a SPACE incident: the situation (when it was meant to happen), the bodily state, what was done instead, the thoughts ("what's the point", "I'll do it perfectly later"), and the feelings. Then shrink the task and tie it to an existing routine [synthesis]. If non-adherence keeps happening, consider whether low mood is reducing motivation, which is a referral flag [source: Syrek-Kosowska 2014, p. 68].

5.6 Ruptures. If the client feels judged by the "thinking errors" language, or feels the coach is imposing the model, name it and repair: "I may have jumped to labelling your thoughts too quickly. How did that land?" Go back to listening (Stage 1), and give the client control over which area to explore [synthesis; Syrek-Kosowska 2014 on the relationship as central].

5.7 Modality-specific pitfalls [synthesis]:

Mapping a trait instead of an incident. Go back to "the last time this happened".
Intellectual map, no change. Add behavioural rehearsal and experiments (4.9, 4.11).
Endless mapping. Set a time limit for Blue work and move to Green.
One-area fixes. Re-map (4.12) to find links that are still active.
Physical symptoms taken as purely stress. New or unexplained symptoms such as chest pain or palpitations need medical assessment, not only reframing.
Over-reaching tools. Use hypnosis only within your training and contract [source: Palmer 2008 abstract frames it as an adjunct; synthesis].

5.8 When to refer to clinical care, and how. Concrete signs, from ICF's guidelines unless marked otherwise:

Problems that interfere with self-care, work, home or leisure and that have lasted weeks. ICF calls daily functioning the most important indicator.
No progress because of psychological barriers: recurring past issues, constant emotional processing, self-defeating patterns.
Feeling stuck in a victim framing, or continuing to suffer the effects of trauma.
Clusters of distress signs, judged on how long they last, how often they occur and how strong they are: mood change, falling performance, withdrawal, changes in appearance or hygiene, sleep disruption.
Signs of anxiety disorders, depression, eating disorders, PTSD, substance misuse, suicidal ideation, or thought disorder.
Your own reactions: feeling responsible for the client or pushed to fix them, the client becoming over-dependent, or feeling like a failure. Take these to supervision or consultation.
In SPACE terms [synthesis]: the P area shows persistent sleep or appetite change or panic attacks. The A area shows widespread avoidance, self-harm or substance use. The C area shows hopelessness, worthlessness, or beliefs that seem unusual or fixed. The E area shows low mood or anxiety across situations rather than in the target situation. The S area shows abuse or risk at home.

How to refer [source: ICF 2018]:

Raise it in private and lead with care.
Name the specific signs you have seen and ask how the client sees them.
Offer names of therapists and help with booking.
Normalise seeking help and respond to fears and stigma.
Respect a refusal, but raise it again if the signs continue.
Pause the coaching if the client cannot benefit from it until the clinical issue is addressed. Coaching can continue alongside therapy if it is still productive.
The client decides what to share about therapy. The therapist may need a signed release to talk with you.

The EMCC/AC Code adds a duty to encourage the client to end the coaching when a different form of help would serve them better [source: EMCC/AC Global Code]. If you are the client's psychotherapist as well: decide whether to re-contract to therapy with full assessment and records, or refer to a colleague to avoid dual roles [synthesis].

5.9 Risk to self or others. Confidentiality gives way to safety [source: EMCC/AC Code; ICF 2018]. ICF advises the following: for imminent danger, contact emergency services; when risk is unclear, consult a clinician; stay with the person, remove access to means of harm by giving dangerous items to someone for safekeeping, and give crisis-line details (ICF points to Befrienders Worldwide and the IASP). A licensed clinician should also complete a standard suicide risk assessment and safety plan within their own professional framework, outside the coaching contract [synthesis].

Sources

Pages used:

Further sources:

SPACE: A psychological model… (Aalborg University research portal record of the 2022 reprint in Coaching Practiced, pp. 9–18)
Passmore, J. & Tee, D. (Eds.) (2022). Coaching Practiced. Wiley: table of contents (bookseller listing).
Palmer, S. (2008). The PRACTICE model of coaching: towards a solution-focused approach. Coaching Psychology International 1(1)
Lautsten, M., Frederiksen, U. D., Jensen, T. R. & Spaten, O. M. (2018). Cognitive behavioural coaching: and notes on its foundation in cognitive behavioural therapy. Danish Journal of Coaching Psychology 7(1), 39–50
Ogba, F. N. et al. (2020). Effectiveness of SPACE model of cognitive behavioral coaching in management of occupational stress in a sample of school administrators in South-East Nigeria. Journal of Rational-Emotive & Cognitive-Behavior Therapy 38, 345–368 (abstract page)
Syrek-Kosowska, A. (2014). Coachingowe narzędzia: Model SFERA, full text, Kozminski University repository (for the 9-ka, the ABCDE table and the SFERA letters)
Editorial, The Coaching Psychologist 1(2) (SGCP)
Gyllensten, K., Palmer, S., Nilsson, E.-K., Meland Regnér, A. & Frodi, A. (2011). Experiences of cognitive coaching. Danish Journal of Coaching Psychology 1(1), 89–98: the five-factor situation analysis, techniques by modality, and thinking errors coachees found useful.

Cited [uncertain where relied on]:

Edgerton, N. & Palmer, S. (2005). SPACE: A psychological model for use within cognitive behavioural coaching, therapy and stress management. The Coaching Psychologist, 1(2), 25–31 (used through its abstract). Reprinted as Edgerton, N. & Palmer, S. (2022), chapter 1 in J. Passmore & D. Tee (Eds.), Coaching Practiced (Wiley), pp. 9–18.
Dias, G., Edgerton, N. & Palmer, S. (2010). From SPACE to FACES (Portuguese adaptation).
Syrek-Kosowska, A., Edgerton, N. & Palmer, S. (2010). From SPACE to SFERA (Polish adaptation).
Williams, H., Edgerton, N. & Palmer, S. (2008, 2010). Cognitive behavioural coaching (chapters/papers cited for stress-management use).
Palmer, S. & Szymańska, K. (2007). Cognitive behavioural coaching: an integrative approach. In S. Palmer & A. Whybrow (Eds.), Handbook of Coaching Psychology. Routledge.
Lazarus, A. A. (1989). The Practice of Multimodal Therapy; Greenberger, D. & Padesky, C. (1995). Mind Over Mood; Peltier, B. (2005); Prochaska et al. (2005), as cited by Syrek-Kosowska 2014.

← Previous · VI-139PRACTICE model Next · VI-141 →OSKAR