Coaching for development of leaders’ awareness of integrity: An evidence-based approach

Abstract

Purpose: There is a need for leading with integrity to contribute to sustainable effectiveness and performance in the organisational context. The purpose of this research was to provide insight into the elements that could facilitate the development of leaders’ awareness of integrity to support positive leader outcomes.Design/methodology/approach: Interpretative phenomenological analysis (IPA) was the research design, and purposive, convenience sampling was utilised to select six leaders. Data were collected through semi-structured interviews with these leaders and reflective notes of the researcher as coach to explore leaders’ experience of the contribution of coaching to the development of awareness of integrity.Findings/results: Based on the experiences of these leaders, the findings suggest that even a small number of coaching sessions using a strengths-based approach contributed towards an increase in awareness of the importance of integrity. Positive leader outcomes were also identified. The study supports the use of a strengths-based approach to coaching, such as a solution-focussed cognitive-behavioural (SF-CB) approach, whilst coaching leaders.Practical implications: The findings have implications for organisations and coaches. The findings confirm the selection of coaching as a suitable intervention to develop awareness of integrity and achieve positive leader outcomes. Findings provide evidence to guide human resources professionals whilst deciding on an appropriate intervention for leader development. In addition, coaches could base their selection of an approach on the evidence supporting the use of an SF-CB coaching approach in the context of developing leaders’ awareness of the importance of integrity.Originality/value: The findings highlight the efficacy of using a strengths-based approach – specifically an SF-CB approach – to increase leaders’ awareness of integrity and drive positive leader outcomes.

Positive Psychological Coaching: An investigation on its efficacy in the workplace

“…As shown in Figure 1, 15 studies met the inclusion criteria and were reviewed for this article. Predominantly, the investigations were peer-reviewed journal articles (Corbu et al, 2021;Elston & Boniwell, 2011;Fontes & Dello Russo, 2021;Guzmán et al, 2017;Kakarala et al, 2018;Palamara et al, 2015;Peláez Zuberbühler et al, 2020;Sparrow, 2007;Toogood, 2012;van der Walt & van Coller-Peter, 2020;van Nieuwerburgh et al, 2021;Yu et al, 2008), and one doctoral dissertation (Parsons, 2016) study. Following a thorough assessment of the papers, the results are presented in accordance with the following four key themes: 1) study characteristics; 2) PPC antecedents; 3) underlying mechanisms; and 4) PPC outcomes research.…”

“…Six studies identified the antecedents of coaching results as being a significant aspect of the process (Corbu et al, 2020;Elston & Boniwell, 2011;Fontes & Dello Russo, 2021;Toogood, 2012;van der Walt & van Coller-Peter, 2020). The majority of the studies (N = 4) were qualitative and employed semi-structured interviews to conduct an interpretive phenomenological analysis (IPA) of the elements that contribute to the effectiveness of the coaching process.…”

“…Only two studies used a quantitative approach (Corbu et al, 2020;Fontes & Dello Russo, 2021). Corbu et al (2020) According to 3 of the 6 studies (Elston & Boniwell, 2011;Toogood, 2012;van der Walt & van Coller-Peter, 2020) focusing on coachees' strengths is an effective approach that contributes positively to their personal and professional development. Elston and Bowell (2011) sought to explain, through a coaching intervention and the VIA strengths inventory, the value of using strengths at work.…”

“…Four studies measured mechanisms underlying the relationship between antecedents and outcomes variables (Elston & Boniwell, 2011;Fontes & Dello Russo, 2021;Van der Walt & van Coller-Peter, 2020;Yu et al, 2008). Two of them employed a qualitative approach (Elston & Boniwell, 2011 (3) coaching-related outcomes (i.e., goal attainment, satisfaction with the process, trusted coaching relationship).…”

“…The majority of the studies (N = 9; Guzmán et al, 2017;Kakarala et al, 2018;Palamara et al, 2015;Parsons, 2016;Peláez Zuberbühler et al, 2020;Sparrow, 2007;Yu et al, 2008) From the 15 selected studies, only 6 of them (Corbu et al, 2021;Elston & Boniwell, 2011;Fontes & Dello Russo, 2021;Toogood, 2021;van der Walt & van Coller-Peter, 2020)…”