 |
| Positive Search #09-12: December 2009 |
A Way Forward
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.
These authors used a quasi-experimental design to examine the effectiveness of executive coaching in helping leaders meet goals, become more resilient, and feel more positive about work.
Potential Benefits of Executive Coaching.
The authors identified the core elements of executive coaching as: “collaboration and accountability, awareness raising, responsibility, commitment, action planning and action.”(p. 397). In their review, the authors noted that the research literature supports the following benefits of executive coaching:
• Developing a constructive leadership style and improved problem solving.
• Reduced stress, anxiety, and depression.
• Increased hope, flexibility, well-being, and resilience.
• Improved self-evaluation and goal attainment.
The Study
Study participants were 41 executives and senior managers (38 women, 3 men) working in a public health service agency who were randomly assigned to two groups. Both groups participated in a 360-degree feedback process and received a half-day workshop focused on leadership. One group received 4 sessions of executive coaching from external coaches over the 10 weeks immediately following the workshop. The second group began their four sessions with these same coaches 10 weeks after the leadership workshop.
The executive coaches used the GROW model of coaching: Goals, Reality, Options, and Way Forward. “When using the GROW model the session starts by setting a goal for the coaching session. Coach and coachee then explore the current reality, before developing options for action and concluding with specific action steps that help define the way forward.”(p. 399)
Results
In the analysis, the authors found that executive coaching showed statistically significant results in the following areas:
• Increased goal attainment.
• Increased resilience.
• Lower depression.
• Increased workplace well-being.
They found no change in:
• Anxiety levels.
• Stress levels.
Those who provided qualitative comments (39 of 41; 95% of participants), identified the following benefits:
• Increased confidence (64%).
• Build management skills (62%).
• Improved ability to deal with organizational change/stress (59%).
• Increased personal/professional insight (36%).
• Insight into career development (31%).
Commentary: Choices in Development.
This research is important because they used a quasi-experimental design with random assignment. This approach allowed the researchers to assess the immediate effectiveness of the coaching program. Having both the comparison between the two groups, as well as the changes in people once they completed coaching, is helpful in assessing effectiveness.
As we come out of the economic downturn, organizations will be able to devote more resources to executive development. In fact, the resulting downsized executive teams will need even greater skills and support to deal with the challenges ahead. The authors indicate that this was the first study they knew of that focused on using external executive coaches, rather than internal programs. It is this element I want to comment on this month. Is better to use internal executive coaches or hire external coaches to help meet organizational needs? I will assume equally high skills in both groups.
Coaches internal to the organization have several potential benefits:
• They have an intimate understanding of the organization, its goals, and culture.
• They know the people and relationships involved.
• They should have a clearer understanding of the coachee’s role in the organization.
• They may be more invested in the outcomes for the organization.
On the downside:
• They may be too close to the organization to provide a new perspective.
• Conflict may arise if the coach disagrees with the coachee’s perspective.
• They may have conflicting loyalties because of personal/professional relationships with others in the organization— including dual relationships.
• Often internal coaches have coaching as only a part of their job.
Furthermore, the coachee and coach will likely have a pre-existing relationship with each other, as well as continued contact after the cessation of the coaching relationship. This can be viewed as a positive or a negative, depending on the quality of relationship and boundaries of both people involved. My opinion is that these types of dual relationships can cause problems.
Potential benefits of external coaches include:
• They are independent of the organization and can provide a new perspective.
• They will be less likely to assume they already know and understand the situation.
• The coachee will need to describe the situations/people involved which can bring about new insight and require them to use communication skills.
• External coaches are focused solely on coaching and are less likely to be distracted by other organizational issues.
On the downside:
• They will likely need more information on the coachee’s position and may require more information about the organization.
• They may not be as invested in the organization as a whole.
• They may experience conflict based on who is paying for the sessions (this would need to be spelled out in the initial contract).
The above listing is not exhaustive, but highlights some of the issues to consider when deciding between internal or external coaches. Regardless which approach is used, it is important that both parties enter an executive coaching contract that spells out the specifics of the relationship (confidentiality, goals, roles, responsibilities, etc.).
The researchers found that even brief coaching can have a noticeably positive effect on the self-reported functioning of an executive. Examine the cost of these executive coaching sessions against the human cost of burnout, poor relationships with subordinates/superiors, lost productivity, and the cost of replacing executives or subordinates. Not only would the sessions be cost-effective, but executive coaching may move us towards a more humane way to develop leaders.
Trial By Fire should have gone out with the Dark Ages.
Copyright 2009 Positive Leadership Solutions-James Hill
|
|
 |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
