No abstract

The concept of managers and managerial leaders assuming the developmental role of coaching has gained considerable attention in recent years as organizations seek to leverage learning by creating infrastructures that foster employee learning and development. However, despite the increasing focus on managerial coaching and the many contentions that coaching is an essential feature of really effective management, the literature remains predominantly practice-based and atheoretical. The present study attempts to address this lack of a sound and sufficient empirical base by presenting the results of a cross-cultural comparison of the empirical findings from several previous 'managerial coaching effectiveness' and 'managerial and leadership effectiveness' studies completed by the authors in their three respective countries. Its specific aim is to demonstrate empirically the extent to which being an effective coach is an essential feature of being an effective manager and/or managerial leader

Purpose -The concept of managers assuming developmental roles such as coaches and learning facilitators has received considerable attention in recent years. Yet, despite the growing body of expert opinion that suggests that coaching is an essential core activity of everyday management and leadership, the literature base remains largely atheoretical and devoid of empirical research. While there is some consensus about what effective coaching looks like, little if any empirical research has examined ineffective coaching behaviours. The purpose of this paper is to compare the empirical findings from three separately conducted studies to derive a comprehensive understanding of the ineffective behaviours associated with managerial coaching. Design/methodology/approach -The current study adopted a cross-national "etic" methodology based on the empirical findings generated by three previously conducted and purposefully selected "emic" studies. Drawing on Berry's and Lyons and Chryssochoous' "emic-etic" approach and cross-cultural comparisons, the researchers employed Guba and Lincoln's file card approach to analyze and compare the three behavioral datasets of the previously conducted studies. Findings -The findings from this cross-national comparative "etic" study revealed that the vast majority of ineffective coaching behaviours previously identified in the emic studies were held in common with each other. The predominant ineffective behaviours included using an autocratic, directive, controlling or dictatorial style, ineffective communication and dissemination of information, and inappropriate behaviours and approaches to working with employees. Of the 17 ineffective behaviours that were compared only three were not held in common. Research limitations/implications -Limitations associated with this cross-national study included minor variations in the use of data collection approaches and samples of managers in the previously conducted emic studies. Practical implications -The ineffective managerial coaching behaviours derived from the cross-national comparisons can be integrated as diagnostic tools into coaching training programmes and management and leadership development programmes to improve the practice of managerial coaching. They can also be used to increase managers' awareness of the behaviours that impede their coaching interventions with their respective employees. Originality/value -The literature base on coaching in general and managerial coaching in particular has been criticized for not being research-informed and evidence-based, but rather predominantly practice-driven and guru-led. The findings from the current cross-national etic study not only add to a sparse base of empirical research on managerial coaching, but also illuminate an underdeveloped area, namely that of ineffective managerial coaching practice. Furthermore, the findings provide a foundation on which to compare and contrast future empirical research that may be conducted on managerial coaching behaviours.

No abstract

Various researchers have recently challenged contingent models of managerial and leadership effectiveness, arguing that logic suggesting the universality of manager and supervisory leader behaviors is compelling, although there is sparse empirical evidence to support this view. A comparative study of the findings from three previous empirical factor analytic studies into the criteria of managerial effectiveness, carried out in three different types of public sector organizations in the United Kingdom, support the view that universalistic as opposed to contingent models are more consistent with the facts. A generic model of managerial and leadership effectiveness is presented, and the implications for HRD research and practice are discussed