Effectiveness of Coaching

DOWNLOAD DOCUMENT HERE:

Effectiveness of Coaching.pdf

Download PDF • 216KB

Foreword

Coaching has grown rapidly in the last decade with estimates suggesting the coaching industry generates twice as much as it did 10 years ago. Within the wider coaching industry, executive coaching, while still a niche industry, is also growing at a fast rate.

This is due largely to the growing understanding that it can provide a wealth of support and performance enhancement to executives at all levels, but particularly to those that lead others. The Ridler Report (2015), which analyses the strategic trends in the use of coaching, reported that of the 105 organisations surveyed (including Deloitte, GSK, the BBC, Lloyds Banking Group and John Lewis Partnership), one-to-one external coaching made up 42% of all coaching activity, with 1:1 internal coaching following suit at 39%. Specific factors have been correlated with successful coaching outcomes. In order of importance, these are: Self-Efficacy, Motivation, Trust, Feedback, Supervisor Support, Goal Orientation and Interpersonal Attraction (Bozer & Jones, 2018).

Questions abound for L&D professionals considering investing in coaching for their executives concerning the potential value and effectiveness of executive coaching. This report aims to answer some of these concerns. At the organizational level, there are considerations about how to embed executive coaching into the overall business strategy and professional development systems and processes; many companies lack a "disciplined approach to managing the coaching process and measuring outcomes" (McDermott, 2007). We have reviewed the literature and gathered data from a number of sources to outline many of the key issues concerning the relevance and usefulness of executive coaching with the goal of enabling L&D professionals within organisations to understand whether to implement executive coaching, and if so, how to go about it.

Why Coaching?

Coaches are brought into organisations for a variety of reasons: the volatile, uncertain, complex and ambiguous (VUCA) nature of the environments in which we live and work; the increasingly blurred boundaries between work and life; the demanding nature of knowledge work; the need to be able to think clearly, be emotionally intelligent, strategic and innovative; the proliferation of mental health and wellbeing issues; and the relentless pace of technological development, among other factors.

None of these issues is discrete. Each intersects with others in complex and nuanced ways, generating endless challenges for the typical executive — challenges which increase in complexity and responsibility the more senior an executive's position is within their organisation. This is why a disproportionate amount of money is spent on developing leaders. Although any workplace talent interventions are important, those with leaders are more likely to pay off due to the number of people, processes and outcomes that leaders control. The spill-over effect can therefore create improvements in the wider workforce (Theeboom, Beersma, van Vianen 2014).

In recent years, the scope of executive coaching has expanded with the ultimate aim often being to create sustainable behaviour change through self-awareness and learning. Most leaders lack feedback — yet studies show that increases in self-awareness correlate with improvements in subsequent job performance (Bozer, Sarros, Santora 2014). The research literature reveals a number of reasons for initiating executive coaching which Chamorro-Premuzic (2017) groups into three common groups:

1. Those who are valuable, but at risk of derailing. Just as 20 per cent of people account for 80 per cent of the productivity, 20 per cent of people cause 80 per cent of the problems. Coaching can help those valuable people to keep contributing positively and not falling foul of their 'dark' or 'defensive' sides which surface when they are under pressure or stress.

2. Those who are high potentials. This group may not be leaders yet but they have the potential to be. They need help to develop the people skills required to make the transition from great contributor to effective managers or leaders of others.

3. Those who have been newly hired or promoted. Coaching can help new employees gather the new skills required to be successful in their new role.

Does Coaching Work?

There is a plethora of academic support for the efficacy of executive coaching although methodology is not always consistent (Grover & Furnham, 2016), and studies have room to improve in this area. A well-documented meta-analysis (Jones et al., 2015) compared the learning outcomes from coaching and compared their effects.

A small sample of the literature and its findings is as follows:

• Improved goal setting and self-regard (Evers, Brouwers, & Tomic, 2006; Grant et al., 2009; Grover & Furnham 2015)

• Coaching as a vehicle for increasing satisfaction and reducing stress levels (Jones & Spooner, 2006)

• Improved problem-solving skills and motivation levels (Wang & Wentling, 2001)

• Improving the ability of leaders to inspire and impact followers (Kampa-Kokesch, 2002), freeing their time for strategic thinking and discussion, and more effective delegation (Walker-Fraser, 2011)

• Organisational level outcomes of ROI, and a positive impact on peer and subordinate ratings of coachees' leadership behaviours (Grover & Furnham 2015)

Creating Sustainable Behaviour Change

It is worth considering whether your organisation will develop a coherent approach to coaching, which may contribute to sustainable long-term change. Lawler (2011) defines sustainable behavioural change as follows:

a. The executive displays a change in the targeted behaviour(s) for at least a six-month timeframe from the end of the engagement.

b. This change is consistent even under pressure or stress.

c. The new behaviour is sustained by the internalisation of deeper psychological insights about undesirable behaviour(s), supported by targeted coaching that converts the insights into pragmatic action steps.

Koroleva's (2016) model includes three key categories that executive coaching engagement should address in order to generate sustainable change. Each of these plays an essential role in the creation of sustainable change:

1. The coachee's attitude (their readiness for, commitment to and belief in change)

2. The resources available (such as the time and space to think, feedback from the coach, and trust — a subset of psychological safety (Edmonson, 2014))

3. Routinisation (which embeds and normalises the new behaviour, attitudes or approach)

What Makes Coaching Effective?

Bozer & Jones's (2018) rigorous study analysed 117 empirical (quantitative and qualitative) UK based organisational studies — specifically one-to-one coaching, discounting team and line manager coaching — and found seven key factors linked to coaching effectiveness. Bickerich & Michel (2016) also reviewed a number of characteristics which are key to facilitating effective executive coaching.

These were, in order of effectiveness:

1. Self-Efficacy

2. Coaching Motivation

3. Trust

4. Feedback Intervention

5. Supervisor Support

6. Goal Orientation

7. Interpersonal Attraction

1. The Central Role of Self-Efficacy

Self-efficacy is the belief in one's ability to influence events that affect one's life and control over the way these events are experienced (Bandura, 1994). Higher self-efficacy indicates that the coachee is more likely to set more challenging goals, have a greater belief in his or her ability to achieve the goals, and will experience sustained internal motivation, focus, and persistence in the face of obstacles in the pursuit of these goals. Self-efficacy is malleable and can be affected by mastery, social modelling, verbal persuasion, and emotional support (e.g. coach or supervisory support). The coaching literature reviewed suggests that these four processes are integral components of coaching.

A 2016 review of five case studies by Koroleva showed that improved self-efficacy was the second most common outcome from executive coaching, a finding substantiated by Bozer and Jones (2018), who identify self-efficacy as the predominant factor affecting individual efficiency and productivity. Bickerich and Michel (2016) present a slightly different perspective, arguing that self-efficacy is an imperative characteristic needed for successful executive coaching.

They state that it provides a moderating role during organisational change. Self-efficacy helps to stabilise the changes and improvements that executives make independent of how in flux the context and world around them is. Self-efficacy has also been found to be an antecedent of skill-based outcomes in both job performance (Bozer, Sarros, & Santora, 2013) and in transformational leadership (MacKie, 2015).

Given the centrality of behavioural and cognitive processes in coaching, as well as planning and goal-setting, it makes sense that self-efficacy has a vital role. The higher an executive's self-efficacy, the more likely they are to set more challenging goals and the more confident they will be in their own and their team's ability to achieve these goals.

Self-Efficacy: Organisational Considerations

1. Consider assessing an individual's self-efficacy before sending them on an executive coaching programme.

2. Identify whether a culture of coaching and support is embedded into the organisation.

3. Explore whether individuals higher in self-efficacy could act as brand ambassadors for the effectiveness of the executive coaching programme within your organisation.

2. Coaching Motivation

The literature on motivation is vast. Fundamentally, motivation as applied to coaching is the amount of direction, effort, intensity and persistence that individuals apply to learning-oriented activities such as coaching before, during, and after the intervention (Salas & Cannon-Bowers, 2001). Motivation is particularly important to ensure that executive coaching is effective as it has been found to have a subsequent effect on skill acquisition, retention and a willingness to apply the newly acquired knowledge, skills and abilities to a job (Quiñones, 1995).

Motivation: Organisational Considerations

1. Review how motivated the individual is to change, and how the organisation can assess this.

2. Establish the extent to which the individual has actively decided to obtain coaching versus the extent to which it has been suggested by their line manager as part of a review process.

3. Consider the organisation's approach to measuring motivation before, during and after the coaching intervention. This will help keep the individual on track and can also help the organisation as a whole to learn more about how to implement the coaching in the future.

3. Trust

The coaching relationship is the vehicle through which the coaching is delivered. As such, the rapport or alliance between the coach and coachee is central to the success of the intervention. A critical factor in determining the effectiveness of the coach-coachee relationship is the extent to which the coachee trusts the coach. With trust, the coachee feels psychologically safe enough to allow themselves to be vulnerable, transparent and to explore their weaknesses and limitations (see for example Koroleva, 2016; Brown, 2018; Kegan and Lahey, 2014). Social scientist Brené Brown's TED talk, The Power of Vulnerability (2014), reports a decade of research on why and how vulnerability is tied to trust.

Boyce et al. (2017) found that coachees' ratings of trust were a significant predictor of effective outcomes and their eventual levels of satisfaction and perception of utility of their coaching programme. Of particular importance in building trust is a confidentiality agreement between the coachee and coach; confidentiality encourages vulnerability behaviours such as sharing sensitive information and personal disclosure. Bozer et al. (2014) note a correlation between coaches with an academic background in psychology and executive coaching effectiveness as measured by improved coachee self-awareness and job performance as reported by direct supervisors.

Trust: Organisational Considerations

1. Consider whether (after the initial chemistry session) to include the coachee's line manager in the first coaching session and in the last; this can help to establish clarity of objectives and aims for the coaching and can also build intimacy and trust. The roles of trust, vulnerability and professional intimacy between the coachee and their line manager should all be considered.

2. The ability to build rapport and empathy, alongside training and expertise of the coach should be considered. Credentials need to be balanced with interpersonal suitability and ability to facilitate a psychologically safe space.

3. Consider post-session surveys to measure the level of trust between the individual and the coach in an effort to monitor the effectiveness of the coaching.

4. Feedback Interventions

There is general agreement regarding the central role that feedback processes play in coaching (Sonesh et al., 2015). Studies have demonstrated the positive role that self-awareness plays in job performance (Bozer, Sarros, Santora 2014). Jones et al.'s meta-analysis (2015) provided a challenge to the effectiveness of multi-source feedback. A coach most often uses multi-source feedback data to gain insight and a comprehensive understanding into the coachee and their organisation. The coach will provide feedback to the client with the aim of enhancing the coachee's awareness of how his or her behaviour affects others so that the coachee can set specific behavioural objectives and create a personal development plan (Feldman & Lankau, 2005).

In order for the feedback intervention to have positive effects, the coach's ability to provide feedback effectively, in a way that can be heard and digested by the client, is important: timing, language, tone and volume of feedback need consideration. The coach will assist the coachee in processing and interpreting feedback, raising awareness, taking responsibility for change, challenging assumptions and gaining a new perspective, setting inspiring personal development goals, and staying accountable for actions to achieve goals despite discomfort and setbacks.

The coachee in the role of feedback recipient is just as important as the coach; Bozer et al. (2013) found that a coachee's receptivity to feedback affects eventual coaching outcomes. Readiness to receive feedback (which aligns with level of emotional adjustment in Draper's (2015) model of potential) is a key consideration.

Feedback: Organisational Considerations

1. Consider a feedback tool or suite of tools to maximise the effectiveness of feedback and provide follow-ups. Examples include stakeholder 360 or 720 feedback processes (including the CDP DELTA360 feedback tool or the JCA Leadership Climate Indicator). Feedback should be carried out at the beginning and end of the process to monitor and record changes.

2. Consider what your organisation can do to enhance and develop the level of emotional intelligence in the leadership team, as well as raising awareness of its importance.

3. 'Checking in' on the individual at the beginning, halfway through and at the end of the coaching programme can provide informative check points that provide both reassurance to the coachee of the progress they are making, guidance on any blind spots, and/or feedback to the organisation/line manager/L&D team of the effectiveness of the coaching programme.

4. Consider the possibility of embedding feedback throughout the organisation (see for example, Next Jump, an organisation profiled in Kegan and Lahey, 2016).

5. One meta-analysis (Jones et al., 2015) reports the negative effects of feedback on coaching effectiveness. They hypothesise that some coachees can become preoccupied with the negative content of feedback which limits the positive benefits of sessions, or can receive feedback which pertains to areas other than their coaching goals. Discuss the use of feedback with your coaches especially for those coachees with lower levels of self-confidence.

5. Goal Orientation

In a training and learning context, goal orientation — which can be either based on a learning orientation or performance orientation (Dweck, 1986) — is considered to be a major individual motivational factor that influences the allocation of effort to learning and performing (Fisher & Ford, 1998). The link between goal orientation and coaching outcomes is consistent with the underlying assumption in coaching that individuals have the ability to change and achieve their goals (Ennis, Otto, Goodman and Stern, 2012).

Trainees with a strong goal orientation are more likely to make sustained efforts in training interventions (Hertenstein, 2001) and seek feedback (VanderWalle & Cummings, 1997). Specifically, coachee goal orientation has been positively correlated with skill-based outcomes as reflected in improved self-reported job performance (Bozer et al., 2013) and in self-reported professional development focus (Scriffignano, 2011). A learning goal orientation indicates that a coachee is more likely to hold the belief that they can change, and this belief will influence their focus on their likelihood to seek challenging goals and persistence towards desired results even in the face of failure.

Goal Orientation: Organisational Considerations

While goal orientation positively affects coaching outcomes, it can also be fostered through coaching if a coachee is lacking in it. For those individuals displaying a more fixed mindset, this should be a priority goal on their coaching agenda.

6. Supervisory Support

Research findings have consistently confirmed the positive impact of supervisor support. Feeling supported by one's supervisor or line manager impacts variables such as pre-training motivation and skills transfer (Awoniyi, Griego and Morgan, 2002).

Lim (2001) highlighted three factors that influence positive skill transfer:

1. Discussion with a supervisor about implementing new learnings

2. Receiving positive feedback from the supervisor

3. The supervisor's level of familiarity with or awareness of the coaching process

Athanasopoulou & Dopson (2017) reinforce the positive impact that demonstrated organisational support (whether real or perceived) has on coaching outcomes through signalling the organisation's commitment to a coachee's development.

Baron and Morin (2009, 2010) also found positive associations between supervisory support as perceived by the coach, and the coach-coachee working alliance. They suggested that the support of the supervisor reinforces the perceived value of the coaching process and therefore encourages the coachee's efforts to develop and make use of the development opportunities offered by the coaching intervention.

Supervisory Support: Organisational Considerations

1. Ensure that supervisors reinforce the perceived value of the coaching process and therefore encourage the coachee's efforts to develop — whether real or perceived, organisational commitment has a positive impact on coaching outcomes.

2. Transparency and honesty from supervisors about their own weaknesses or areas for development will assist coachees in taking ownership of their own development area.

7. Coach-Coachee Relationship

Interpersonal attraction is a mechanism which explains why human beings have a natural tendency to identify with and be attracted to individuals they perceive to be similar to themselves. This similarity may be based on actual or perceived similarity, or on given personal attributes. Research has shown that interpersonal attraction — otherwise described as the 'match' or compatibility/chemistry between coachee and coach — is essential for an effective coaching relationship (De Haan et al., 2013).

Gan and Chong (2015) found that both rapport and commitment, both of which are impacted by interpersonal attraction, significantly influence executive coaching effectiveness. A recent study at Ashridge Centre for Coaching (2016) confirms the criticality of a coach-coachee's working alliance on coaching effectiveness — but they did not find that personality and coach matching had an effect on coaching effectiveness, rather the strength of the agreement on the tasks and goals of the intervention. Coach and coachee 'seeing eye to eye' remains critical, and chemistry sessions are advised to evaluate this.

Diversity and Interpersonal Attraction: Organisational Considerations

1. Address the level of diversity in the roster of coaches.

2. Ensure that chemistry sessions involve goal setting to ensure that coach and coachee are fully aligned.

Measuring the Impact of Coaching

Despite less than 15 per cent of organisations setting out to evaluate the effectiveness of their coaching initiatives, measuring the impact of coaching programmes is key to establishing their value. While no intervention can move someone from 0 to 100 per cent on any chosen behaviour, well executed coaching programmes should be able to easily achieve improvements of 25 per cent. A review of 46 independent studies (Theeboom, Beersma, van Vianen 2014) suggested that 70 per cent of coaching recipients can be expected to outperform the average person in a control group and boost job performance drivers by around 20 per cent. Fortunately, these results are replicated when looking at supervisor ratings vs self-reports, as relying solely on self-report has been seen to overestimate success rates (Boysen, 2018; Glover & Furnham, 2017).

Points to note about measuring the impact of coaching:

• The value generated by coaching is not always a tangible measurement, so organisations must choose measures which relate to what is important or valued within their organisation (Schlosser, 2006).

• Diversified outcomes addressed in coaching make coaching objectives hard to compare as an outcome measure. Outcome measures investigated in coaching effectiveness studies include, but are not limited to, job satisfaction, job performance, self-awareness, self-efficacy, positive affect, depression, anxiety, resilience, hope, autonomy and goal attainment (Theeboom et al., 2014).

• While the cost of executive coaching can be large, measuring ROI can be difficult to ensure accuracy. The links between coaching and monetary changes within an organisation are complex and as yet there is no reliable way to measure or calculate the benefits of coaching in terms of a financial ROI estimation (Glover & Furnham, 2017).

• Coaching outcomes and goals differ from session to session and from individual to individual as well as during the engagement. Context and environmental factors differ from one intervention to the next; for example, within the same organisation, one individual's supervisor might be supportive of coaching while another is not. Coaches also vary significantly, for example in terms of their training, their background and the techniques and models that they use.

• Very few studies examine the long-term or longitudinal influence of coaching, even though the continued effectiveness of coaching interventions is a very important area for organisations to understand. The influence of coaching a number of months or years after a coaching intervention can prove insightful in terms of cost-benefit analysis and also potentially determine the suitability of the intervention in a particular scenario.

• Ensure a control group and adequate sample size is utilised in measurement studies.

Conclusions

Despite the growth in organisations offering coaching to their employees over the last 10 years and a number of studies which provide evidence for its effectiveness, organisations need to continually ensure that its impact is maximised and relevant.

This review provides a number of organisational considerations to bear in mind when implementing and measuring the impact of coaching interventions, to ensure that coaching is offered to those who will benefit the most, as well as providing the backdrop for wider organisational learnings and development for HR, managers and senior leadership teams.

References

1. Athanasopoulou, A., & Dopson, S. (2018). A systematic review of executive coaching outcomes: Is it the journey or the destination that matters the most? The Leadership Quarterly, 29(1), 70-88.

2. Awoniyi, E. A., Griego, O. V., & Morgan, G. A. (2002). Person-environment fit and transfer of training. International Journal of Training and Development, 6(1), 25-35.

3. Bandura, A. (1994). Self-efficacy. Encyclopedia of Human Behavior, 4(1), 71-81.

4. Baron, L., & Morin, L. (2010). The impact of executive coaching on self-efficacy related to management soft-skills. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 31(1), 18-38.

5. Bickerich, K., & Michel, A. (2016). Führungskräfte-Coaching bei Change Prozessen. Zeitschrift für Arbeits-und Organisationspsychologie A&O.

6. Boyce, L. A., Jeffrey Jackson, R., & Neal, L. J. (2010). Building successful leadership coaching relationships: Examining impact of matching criteria in a leadership coaching program. Journal of Management Development, 29(10), 914-931.

7. Boysen, Cherry, Amerie, Takagawa (2018). Organisational Coaching Outcomes: A comparison of a practitioner survey and key findings from the literature.

8. Bozer, G., C. Sarros, J., & C. Santora, J. (2014). Academic background and credibility in executive coaching effectiveness. Personnel Review, 43(6), 881-897.

9. Bozer, G., Sarros, J. C., & Santora, J. C. (2013). The role of coachee characteristics in executive coaching for effective sustainability. Journal of Management Development, 32(3), 277-294.

10. Brown, B. (2010). The Power of Vulnerability. TED Talk. https://www.ted.com/talks/brene_brown_on_vulnerability

11. CIPD (2015). Annual Survey Report.

12. Coutu, D., & Kauffman, C. (2009). What Can Coaches Do for You? Harvard Business Review, 91.

13. de Haan, E., Duckworth, A., Birch, D., & Jones, C. (2013). Executive coaching outcome research: The contribution of common factors such as relationship, personality match, and self-efficacy. Consulting Psychology Journal: Practice and Research, 65(1), 40.

14. Draper, D. (2015). DEEP Model of Potential. https://cdp.consulting/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/CDPTThought-Paper-02_APR2018.pdf

15. Dweck, C. S. (1986). Motivational processes affecting learning. American Psychologist, 41(10), 1040.

16. Ennis, S., Goodman, R., Hodgetts, W., Hunt, J., Mansfield, R., Otto, J., Stern, L. (2004). The Executive Coaching Handbook, 5th Edition. The Executive Coaching Forum.

17. Evers, W. J., Brouwers, A., & Tomic, W. (2006). A quasi-experimental study on management coaching effectiveness. Consulting Psychology Journal: Practice and Research, 58(3), 174.

18. Feldman, D. C., & Lankau, M. J. (2005). Executive coaching: A review and agenda for future research. Journal of Management, 31(6), 829-848.

19. Fischer, R. L., & Beimers, D. (2009). "Put me in, Coach": A pilot evaluation of executive coaching in the nonprofit sector. Nonprofit Management and Leadership, 19(4), 507-522.

20. Fisher, S. L., & Ford, J. K. (1998). Differential effects of learner effort and goal orientation on two learning outcomes. Personnel Psychology, 51(2), 397-420.

21. Gan, G. C., & Chong, C. W. (2015). Coaching relationship in executive coaching: a Malaysian study. Journal of Management Development, 34(4), 476-493.

22. Grant, A. M. (2012). Making positive change: A randomized study comparing solution-focused vs. problem-focused coaching questions. Journal of Systemic Therapies, 31(2), 21-35.

23. Grant, A. M., Curtayne, L., & Burton, G. (2009). Executive coaching enhances goal attainment, resilience and workplace well-being: A randomised controlled study. The Journal of Positive Psychology, 4(5), 396-407.

24. Grover, S., & Furnham, A. (2016). Coaching as a developmental intervention in organisations: A systematic review of its effectiveness and the mechanisms underlying it. PloS One, 11(7), e0159137.

25. Hertenstein, E. J. (2001). Goal orientation and practice condition as predictors of training results. Human Resource Development Quarterly, 12(4), 403-419.

26. Jones, G., & Spooner, K. (2006). Coaching high achievers. Consulting Psychology Journal: Practice and Research, 58(1), 40.

27. Jones, R. J., & Bozer, G. (2016). Why Workplace Coaching Research Needs Greater Scientific Rigour: a Systematic Review and Recommendations for Future Research.

28. Jones, R. J., Woods, S. A., & Guillaume, Y. R. (2016). The effectiveness of workplace coaching: A meta-analysis of learning and performance outcomes from coaching. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 89(2), 249-277.

29. Kampa-Kokesch, S., & White, R. P. (2002). The effectiveness of executive coaching: What we know from the literature and experience and where we should go from here. Handbook of Organizational Consulting Psychology. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

30. Kegan, R., Lahey, L., Fleming, A., & Miller, M. (2014). Making business personal. Harvard Business Review, 92(4), 44-52.

31. Kets de Vries, M. (2014). Coaching the toxic leader. Harvard Business Review, 92, 100-9, 134.

32. Kombarakaran, F. A., Yang, J. A., Baker, M. N., & Fernandes, P. B. (2008). Executive coaching: It works! Consulting Psychology Journal: Practice and Research, 60(1), 78.

33. Koroleva, N. (2016). A new model of sustainable change in executive coaching: coachees' attitudes, required resources and routinisation. International Journal of Evidence Based Coaching and Mentoring, Special Issue No. 10, 84-97.

34. Lawler, S. E. (2012). Coaching for sustained change: How is it accomplished? Unpublished PhD dissertation, Benedictine University.

35. Lim, D. H. (2001). The effect of work experience and job position on international learning transfer. International Journal of Vocational Education and Training, 9, 59-74.

36. Mann, C. (2016). 6th Ridler Report: Strategic Trends in the use of Coaching.

37. Mackie, D. (2015). Who sees change after leadership coaching? An analysis of impact by rater level and self-other alignment on multi-source feedback. International Coaching Psychology Review, 10(2), 118-130.

38. McDermott, M., Levenson, A., & Newton, S. (2007). What coaching can and cannot do for your organization. People and Strategy, 30(2), 30.

39. Quinones, M. A. (1995). Pretraining context effects: Training assignment as feedback. Journal of Applied Psychology, 80(2), 226.

40. Salas, E., & Cannon-Bowers, J. A. (2001). The science of training: A decade of progress. Annual Review of Psychology, 52(1), 471-499.

41. Schlosser, B., Steinbrenner, D., Kumata, E., & Hunt, J. (2006). The coaching impact study: Measuring the value of executive coaching. International Journal of Coaching in Organizations, 4(3), 8-26.

42. Scriffignano, R. S. (2011). Coaching within organisations: examining the influence of goal orientation on leaders' professional development. Coaching: An International Journal of Theory, Research and Practice, 4(1), 20-31.

43. Sherpa (2014). Ninth Executive Coaching Survey. https://www.sherpacoaching.com

44. Smither, J. W. (2011). Can psychotherapy research serve as a guide for research about executive coaching? An agenda for the next decade. Journal of Business and Psychology, 26(2), 135-145.

45. Sonesh, S. C., Coultas, C. W., Lacerenza, C. N., Marlow, S. L., Benishek, L. E., & Salas, E. (2015). The power of coaching: a meta-analytic investigation. Coaching: An International Journal of Theory, Research and Practice, 8(2), 73-95.

46. Stankov, L., Lee, J., Luo, W., & Hogan, D. J. (2012). Confidence: A better predictor of academic achievement than self-efficacy, self-concept and anxiety? Learning and Individual Differences, 22(6), 747-758.

47. Theeboom, T., Beersma, B., & van Vianen, A. E. M. (2014). Does coaching work? A meta-analysis on the effects of coaching on individual level outcomes in an organizational context. Journal of Positive Psychology, 9, 1-18.

48. VandeWalle, D., & Cummings, L. L. (1997). A test of the influence of goal orientation on the feedback-seeking process. Journal of Applied Psychology, 82(3), 390.

49. Walker-Fraser, A. (2011). An HR perspective on executive coaching for organisational learning. International Journal of Evidence Based Coaching & Mentoring, 9(2).

50. Wang, L., & Wentling, T. L. (2001, March). The relationship between distance coaching and the transfer of training. Proceedings from the Academy of Human Resource Development Conference. Tulsa, Oklahoma.