Boundary conditions of workplace coaching outcomes

Abstract

In order to address the need for greater understanding about the occupational and practice determinants of effective workplace coaching, this study examines the associations of two coaching practice factors (coaching format and external versus internal coaching provision), and coachees' job complexity with perceived outcomes from coaching. Design/methodology/approach A survey of 161 individuals who had received workplace coaching was conducted. Participants provided data on two outcome criteria (self-reported work well-being and personal effectiveness at work). Findings Analysis indicated that external coaches and blended format coaching were most strongly associated with work well-being outcomes. Our examination of interaction effects showed that coaching provided by external coaches was more strongly associated with outcomes for individuals working in the most complex job roles. Originality/value The original contribution of our findings are in terms of the implications for coaches, managers and HR practitioners by showing how coaching can be implemented differentially and most effectively based on desired outcome criteria and features of coachees' job situations.

The effectiveness of workplace coaching: a meta-analysis of contemporary psychologically informed coaching approaches

“…The present analysis only included coaching offered by independent contracted specialists who use a wide variety of behavioral techniques and methods to help the coachee achieve a mutually identified set of goals, including professional performance, personal satisfaction as well as the effectiveness of the coachee's organization within a formally defined coaching agreement (Kilburg, 1996, p. 142). Whereas certain organizations often conduct coaching through internal specialists such as in-house human resource (HR) professionals, external coaching engagements has larger influences on coachees' affective learning outcomes and workplace well-being than internal coaching (Jones et al , 2018). These affective and psychological welfare related outcomes are important determinants of sustainable behavior or performance improvement (Kraiger et al , 1993).…”

“Two sides of the same coin?” Coaching and mentoring and the agentic role of context

“…The amount of organizations claiming to use coaching as a learning and development tool has risen dramatically, with claims being made regarding improved leadership skills and enhanced job performance 4 . However, how coaching is defined and constituted seems to differ considerably.…”

The Effects of Coachee Personality and Goal Orientation on Performance Improvement Following Coaching: A Controlled Field Experiment

“…The personal nature of coaching means that it is entirely possible to adapt coaching to meet the individual demands of coachees. However, different jobs may have somewhat different degrees of potential to apply learning and development (Jones, Woods, & Zhou, 2018). This property of our sample is a result of sampling within a single organization, a strategy that simultaneously confers the advantage of controlling for organizational function and culture factors that may otherwise confound results.…”