Content uploaded by Richard E. Kopelman
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Richard E. Kopelman on Jun 30, 2015
Content may be subject to copyright.
Content uploaded by Richard E. Kopelman
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Richard E. Kopelman on Jun 30, 2015
Content may be subject to copyright.
Content uploaded by Richard E. Kopelman
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Richard E. Kopelman on Jun 30, 2015
Content may be subject to copyright.
'" Training
32:6
aining. "
Public
Federal agency
ig of public man-
sent for the public
transfer process in
velopment. "
ues in training
pment."
Public
tuber 13, 1993),
Executive Coaching as a Transfer
of Training Tool: Effects on
Productivity in a Public Agency
This action research is the first reported attempt to examine the effects of executive coaching in a public
sector municipal agency. Thirty-one managers underwent a conventional managerial training program,
which was followed by eight weeks of one-on-one executive coaching. Training increased productivity
by 22.4 percent. The coaching, which included: goal setting, collaborative problem solving, practice,
feedback, supervisory involvement, ex .!uation of end-results, and a public presentation, increased pro-
ductivity by 88.0 percent, a significantly greater gain compared to training alone. Descriptions of proce-
dures, explanations for the results obtained, and suggestions for future research and practice are offered.
By
Gerald Olivero
K. Denise Bane
Richard E. Kopelman
Ninter 1997)
Numerous factors have been identified that influence the extent to which
knowledge acquired during classroom training transfers to the job (e.g., the
work environment; the personality of the trainee).
1
There is considerable
evidence that a critical factor influencing transfer of training is the extent to
which the trainee receives the opportunity for practice and constructive
feedback.
2
One-on-one executive coaching can provide this opportunity.
Coaching trainees once they return to the job can facilitate the transfer of
training, especially if the coaching fosters the development and use of
knowledge imparted during training. Through coaching, trainees have a
safe, personalized environment in which practice and feedback can take
place.
In recent years, there has been particularly rapid growth in the use of
one-on-one executive coaching.
3
Among the organizations adopting this
practice are: American Express, the American Management Association,
AT&T, Citibank, Colgate, Levi Strauss, Northern Telecom, NYNEX
Corporation, and Procter & Gamble.
4
Yet, the use and efficacy of one-on-one
executive coaching has not, to date, been reported in a public sector munici-
pal agency. To our knowledge, the present action research is the first such
intervention.
Various methods of executive coaching have been employed; some pro-
grams, grounded in a psychodynamic perspective, aim to ameliorate per-
sonal problems; others are more directive, using, for example, goal-setting,
feedback, and collaborative problem-solving.
5
The present intervention
entailed the latter approach, emphasizing: (1) goal-setting, (2) collaborative
problem solving, (3) practice (4) feedback, (5) supervisory involvement, (6)
evaluation of end-results, and (7) public presentation.
Through one-on-one executive coaching, managers were given the opportu-
nity to practice and obtain constructive feedback regarding the subject mat-
ter they had "learned about" during training. Each coach met individually,
on a weekly basis, with one or more managers. Managers received coaching
on topics such as
p
ersonal issues, project planning, implementation of
changes, and the probable short- and long-term impacts of their actions on
Public Personnel Management Volume 26 No. 4 (Winter 1997)
461
Gerald Olivero, Ph.D., is
President, Human Resources
Solutions, Inc. He is a New
York State Licensed
Psychologist, an Adjunct
Management Professor at
Baruch College, past reviewer
for
the Journal of Applied
Psychology,
and has 22 years of
consulting experience.
their personal performance and on the performance of their units.
Naturally, all feedback was constructive in nature, and induded suggested
modifications in behavior where appropriate.
The seventh component of coaching, public presentation, was a central facet
of the present intervention. The managers who were coached were notified
at the outset that they would be required to make an oral presentation of
their results, accompanied by a written report, to a group composed of their
peers, supervisors, and (importantly) top-level executives—including the
agency commissioner.
Method
Sample
Thirty-one participants (top-level managers, mid-level managers, and super-
visors at a health agency in a major Northeastern city) participated in this
action research. All participants volunteered to participate in both phases of
this endeavor. Phase One consisted of classroom training, Phase Two
entailed one-on-one executive coaching.
During Phase One, the senior author served as the classroom instructor, and
the 31 participants were called "trainees." During Phase Two, the senior
author served as consultant to eight managers. The consultant taught these
eight managers how to be one-on-one executive coaches. The project for
these managers (coaches) was to coach the 23 remaining participants
(coachees) during ?hase Two.
Procedure: Phase One
The 31 trainees acquired knowledge of managerial competencies° during
classroom-style, three-day, interactive, training workshops, conducted by
the external consultant. The workshop content provided an overview of the
most important roles managers and supervisors needed to enact to increase
productivity, quality, and effectiveness within the agency. Trainees learned
to identify the roles they had been enacting, new roles they should consider
enacting, and when various roles were appropriate. Thus, the training
phase emphasized two of the four training environments described by Sims
and Sims: those that are perceptually and symbolically complex.?
Trainees completed a knowledge inventory before and after the workshop.
They also completed a questionnaire at the end of the workshop that
gauged their reactions to the training and the instructor.
Procedure: Phase Two
During eight weeks of on-the-job consultations, the senior author provided
the eight coaches with detailed coaching processes and advice tailored to
the agency's context; this facilitated the latter's success with their respective
coachees. Each coachee was required to conduct a real work project that
could be completed during Phase Two, and that would enhance work-unit
performance, esp jolly productivity, quality, and effectiveness. Each project
was chosen by the coachee, subject to approval by his or her administrative
supervisor, and from his or her functional supervisor where appropriate.
Coaches worked individually with their coachees to monitor, and enhance
project progress.
K. Denise Bane, Ph.D. is an
Assistant Professor of
Management in the School of
Business at Baruch College,
CONY. She teaches organiza-
tional behavior and employee
development and training.
Her research interests include
organizational justice and
employee training and devel-
opment.
462
Public Personnel Management Volume 26 No. 4 (Winter 1997)
Re
Richard E. Kopelr
SPHR, is Professo
Management at B
College and Acad
Director of the Ba
Executive MSILR
The author of Ma
Productivity in
(McGraw-Hill), al
articles in profess
academic journal
research and con
focused on mana
mance improverr
Results
uring
ed by
Iv of the
increase
earned
consider
ng
by Sims
kshop.
s.
Suggested
entral facet
re notified
ation of
ed of their
ling the
Ind super-
1 in this
phases of
vo
uctor, and
Htior
;ht these
?ct for
.ts
Richard E. Kopelman, D.B.A.,
SPHR, is Professor of
Management at Baruch
College and Academic Co-
Director of the Baruch
Executive MSILR Program.
The author of Managing
Productivity in Organizations
(McGraw-Hill), and numerous
articles in professional and
academic journals, his
research and consulting have
focused on managing perfor-
mance improvement.
ovided
,
c1 to
pective
hat
c-unit
project
trative
ate.
lance
1997)
463
Each coach provided feedback and guidance during confidential, weekly,
one-hour coaching sessions that occurred over a period of two months. The
content of the feedback emphasized the process of enacting new managerial
competencies (behaviorally specific skills) and implementing new measure-
ment and control systems. Feedback to coachees was also provided by
phone, fax, e-mail, memoranda, and regular mail during Phase Two.
Although each project was tailored to the specific needs of the individual
coachee, and to his or her unit, all projects shared common characteristics:
•
Each project had a written plan;
•
Each project had a time-defined beginning, middle, and end;
•
Each project had customers (internal and/or external) who benefited
from it;
•
Each project influenced the work behavior and job performance of
one or more of the coachee's subordinates;
•
Each project was evaluated against qualitative, and where possible,
quantitative, criteria;
•
Each project was completed within two months.
In summary, eight projects focused on coaching others, and 23 projects
focused on enhancing individual and unit performance. All participants
(coaches and coaulees) orally reported on their respective projects in a
meeting attended by their peers, supervisors, and top executives. Each oral
report included a description of the project objectives, agency-related out-
comes, personal skill enhancements, and reactions to Phase Two.
Additionally, all participants were required to submit a written report con-
taining the same information. It will be noted that the coaching phase
emphasized the remaining two training environments identified by Sims
and Sims: those that are affectively and behaviorally complex.
8
Phase One: Training
Reactions.
Trainees were trained in two groups (to reduce the number of
trainees in each workshop). The trainees rated their workshop on five
dimensions using a 5-point scale, where 1 = poor and 5 = excellent: useful-
ness of materials (4.82), instructor's knowledge (4.88), instructor's facilita-
tion (4.88), overall instructor rating (4.94), and overall workshop rating
(4.85). The mean rating across both training groups and all five dimensions
was 4.87.
Trainees also provided numerous unsolicited laudatory comments regarding
the instructor and the workshops on the rating forms. Many also requested
follow-up assistance in transferring their new knowledge to the job.
Knowledge.
Traine s responded anonymously to a knowledge assessment
pre-test administered before training began. They also responded anony-
mously to a parallel post-test at the end of their workshop. The results for
both groups combined were: 71.1 percent correct for the pre-test versus 88.0
Executive Coaching
ry
percent correct for the post-test. Because trainees provided a four-digit code
number on their pre- and post-tests, it was possible to match their scores
and to perform a paired t-test. The increase in percent of correct answers (24
percent) was statistically significant (t = 4.78, p < .001).
Behaviors.
All trainees reported that the training would improve their skill in
several behaviorally-based managerial competencies. Nevertheless, it is
acknowledged that these reports were essentially impressionistic and
future-oriented.
Outcomes.
The training workshops stressed the importance of developing
specific quantitative indices of production and productivity, and obtaining
systematic data on outcomes in order to control work. Notwithstanding the
fact that productivity did improve after training (and will be reported later),
and that measurement and documentation were emphasized in training, no
quantitative data were collected by trainees after training alone.
Phase Two: Coaching
Reactions.
Virtually all coaches and coachees reported favorable reactions to
the coaching phase (Phase Two). Two themes emerged prominently from
their comments: coaching was beneficial to them personally, and coaching
was beneficial to the agency. These reactions were not, though, quantitative-
ly measured.
Knowledge.
A sample of coaches provided knowledge data before and after
coaching. Although the results indicated a 20 percent increase in test scores,
the number of cases (n=4) was too small to permit any statistical inferences.
Behaviors.
As part of the coaching phase, coachees were asked to retrieve
and analyze data on their productivity levels at three points in time: before
training, after training but before coaching, and after coaching. As noted
above, prior to the coaching phase, no coachees had gathered quantitative
data. This is an important issue. Although training alone was found to have
improved productivity, coachees did not begin to seek evidentiary docu-
mentation of results until they received coaching. Productivity (or produc-
tion) data were collected for the post-training period in nine cases, in the
post-coaching period in 13 cases, and after both training and coaching in
seven (see Table 1).
Outcomes.
The key outcome criterion was an index of productivity, defined
computationally
as
outputs divided by inputs. For illustrative purposes, the
data pertinent to case number 12 (Table 1) are reviewed next. The criterion
for this case was the percentage of timely and fully completed patient evalu-
ation forms (PEFs) per employee. Before training, only three out of 17 PEFs
were completed fully and on time (17.6 percent), and there were four
employees to perform this task—yielding a baseline productivity index of
4.4 percent. (That is, the outputs [.1761 divided by inputs [4] yielded a pro-
ductivity index of .044.) After training, 18 out of 28 PEFs were completed
fully and on time (64.3 percent), and this was accomplished by six employ-
ees—a productivity index of 10.7 percent representing an increase in pro-
ductivity of 143 percent. After training and coaching, 16 out of 20 PEFs were
completed fully and on time (75 percent), a feat accomplished by seven
employees, for a productivity index of 11.4 percent—an increase of 159 per-
cent over baselinL (i.e., before both training and coaching).
464
Public Personnel Management Volume 26 No. 4 (Winter 1997)
Table 1: 1'
After Trail
Case
1
1
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
2
a
b
Note: in
applicabl
Discu;
In each case where productivity data were not obtained, it was assumed for
data analytic purposes that the actual productivity effect in the work unit
was nil. (The assumption of a nil [zero] effect in such cases is a conservative
one.) After training alone, the average increase in productivity was 22.4 per-
cent. When training was augmented by coaching, the average increase in
productivity was 88.0 percent. The difference in the magnitude of produc-
tivity improvement was statistically significant (t = 2.03; p < .05). Further, in
those work units where both post-training and post-coaching data were col-
lected, the median effects on productivity were 33 percent and 167 percent,
respectively—a finding significant on a nonparametric basis at p < .01
(binomial sign test).
Table 1: Percent Change in Productivity After Training Alone and After Training Coaching
After Training Alone
1
After Training and Coaching
2
Case
Productivity Computed
% Change in
Productivity Computed
% Change in
Productivity
Productivity
I
No
a
nca
Yes
72
2
No
a
nc
a
No
a
nc
a
3 Yes
-100
Yes
167
4
No a
nc
a
Yes
41
5
Yes
0
Yes
300
6
No
b
na
b
No
b
na
b
7
Noc
na '
Noc
na
8 Yes
41
No
a
nc
a
9
Yes
14
Yes
20
10
No
a
nc
a
Yes
100
11
No
a
nc
a
No
a
nc
a
12
Yes
113
Yes
159
13
Yes
76
Yes 103
14
Yes
32
No
a
nc
a
15
No '
na ' No '
na '
16
Yes
33
Yes
200
17
No '
na '
No '
na
18
No
a
nc
a
Noa
nc
a
19
No
a
nc
a
Yes
133
20
No '
na '
No '
na "
21
Noa
nca
Yes
86
22
Yes
275
Yes
603
23
No
a
nc
a
Yes
40
Change in Productivity (or Pro'luction) after training compared to before training
2
Change in Productivity (or Production) after training and coaching compared to before training
a
Not calculated or no written report
b
Not applicable; Project consisted of improvement in interpersonal relationships
Not applicable; Project generated a plan or program where productivity was not applicable
Note: in all cases (superscripts a, b, and c) where productivity and productiond data were not available or not
applicable, a zero effect was assumed.
Discussion and Conclusions
The present research demonstrates the dramatic effects of one-on-one exec-
utive coaching as a transfer of training tool. As is typical of many manage-
ment training programs today, the training phase focused on enhancing
participants' self-awareness, and knowledge of managerial competencies
-digit code
r scores
mswers (24
leir skill in
s, it is
and
eloping
∎
btaining
nding the
7ted
later),
aining, no
ctions to
✓
from
)aching
tntitative-
td after
;t scores,
ferences.
rieve
: before
toted
itative
to have
ocu-
-
oduc-
the
gin
'fined
es, the
erion
t evalu-
' PEFs
9( of
pro-
ed
ploy-
∎
ro-
were
' per-
,
997)
Executive Coaching
465
that they could potentially use in their current supervisory or managerial
jobs. Although the training phase emphasized the importance of developing
indicants to track progress, none of the trainees systematically or quantita-
tively measured productivity after training alone. However, after trainees
underwent one-on-one executive coaching, archival data were collected
indicating that training alone increased productivity by 22.4 percent. Most
importantly, training, when augmented with coaching, yielded productivity
increases almost four times the level achieved by training alone (88.0 per-
cent).
There are a number of explanations for the dramatic increase in productivity
as a result of coaching. The coaching phase consisted of one-on-one interac-
tions emphasizing (1) goal-setting, (2) collaborative problem solving, (3)
practice, (4) feedback, (5) supervisory involvement, (6) evaluation of
end-results, and (7) public presentation. While all of the steps in the coach-
ing were important, we believe goal-setting and public presentation were
critical.
Several researchers have indicated that goal-setting leads to higher transfer
levels.
9
With one-on-one executive coaching, the coach and the coachee
worked together to define concrete actions (goals) that coachees would
undertake by the end of the coaching phase. In order for goal-setting to be
effective, the goa: must be specific, challenging, measurable, assignable,
realistic, and time-bound.
10
All these conditions existed in the present action
research intervention.
Goal-setting has also been demonstrated to enhance perceived self-effica-
cy.
11
Because one-on-one coaching provided participants with hands-on
experience performing the tasks they had learned about in training, they
were able to receive feedback regarding the results of their actions from the
job itself (when production and productivity were measured), organization-
al peers, superiors, coaches and customers. Consequently, they saw the
extent to which their newly-acquired knowledge had been converted to
practical skills that had positive utility. In essence, the positive reinforce-
ment from all sources enhanced participants self-efficacy.
The requirement of a public presentation underscored a central feature of
the intervention: namely, that it was important to the highest executive lev-
els of the agency. The oral presentations reflected on the achievements of
both the participants and their supervisors and no doubt served as an addi-
tional incentive for the participants.
Also, due to the fact that the training and coaching culminated in the com-
pletion of an actual project, the trainees found the training eminently use-
ful. Our endeavor underscores the importance of developing skills rather
than merely transmitting knowledge, an issue identified by Gaziel as critical
for successful training.
12
Unfortunately, oftentimes trainees find training to
be "too academic
"
13
The present project coupled training with the opportu-
nity for further learning (coaching), a combination often needed for public
sector career development."
Because the present intervention was undertaken as part of a contracted
training intervention, rather than as a research effort, the selected design
did not permit the conduct of a field experiment, viz., random assignment
of participants to experimental and control groups. As Cummings and his
466
Public
Personnel Management Volume 26 No. 4 (Winter 1997)
Notes
anagerial
developing
quantita-
•
trainees
)llected
ent. Most
•
oductivity
88.0 per--
noductivity
me interac-
ng, (3)
of
he coach-
on were
r transfer
.achee
could
ing to be
;nable,
;ent action
f-effica-
ds-on
g, they
from the
inization-
the
ed to
force-
ture of
itive lev-
?nts of
an addi-
re corn-
ly use-
rather
is critical
-ring to
)pportu-
public
cted
?sign
lment
id his
)r
1997)
colleagues noted in 1985, the conduct of action-oriented inquiry, i.e.,
research that is undertaken for practical purposes, typically rules out the
conduct of rigorous studies, because numerous changes need to be incorpo-
rated simultaneously.
15
Consequently, it is not possible to rule out definitive-
ly several threats to internal validity. It might be argued, for example, that
additional training could have produced the added benefits obtained after
the coaching phase. Yet, it should be emphasized that it was only after
coaching that any of the participants measured performance—not one
trainee measured performance after training alone.
It might also be argued that the coaching phase merely provided the oppor-
tunity for more training, rather than providing a substantively different
experience. We would counter that there is a qualitative difference in the
type of learning that takes place in training and coaching, each phase serv-
ing a unique purpose. The training provided a period of abstract learning of
principles, while the coaching facilitated concrete involvement in a project
specific to each participant's work unit. These two experiences provided a
program sufficiently balanced for individuals with differing learning styles.
In a larger sense, both phases constitute "training," but each provided a
unique contribution to the learning experience. As noted by Sims,
16
when
trainees are provided with a number of varying learning experiences, the
optimal learning environment is created. One suggestion for future research
would be to corn' .:re the results of a "training-only" condition and a
"coaching-only" condition, in order to capture the distinct impact of each
form of learning.
In a similar vein, it is not possible to determine which of the seven facets of
the coaching process were most instrumental in enhancing performance,
given the present research design. Perhaps the requirement of a public pre-
sentation, by itself, might have yielded a significant increase in job perfor-
mance. While we believe that goal-setting and public presentation were crit-
ical elements of the coaching phase, future research might also examine the
relative importance of each of the elements of executive coaching.
The benefits from managerial training will likely be suboptimal if there is
limited follow up, feedback, and measurement of outcomes (end-results).
Executive coaching is an important way of ensuring that knowledge
acquired during training actually emerges as skills that are applied at work.
1
. The importance of the work environment has been examined by J. Bruce Tracey, S. I.
Tannenbaum, and M. J. Kavanagh, "Applying trained skills on the job: The importance of the
work environment,"
Journal of Applied Psychology
80, no. 2 (1995): 239-252. The relationship
between the personality of the trainee and the transfer of training has been researched by A.
Tziner, R. R. Haccoun, and Avi Kadish, "Personal and situational characteristics influencing the
effectiveness of transfer of training improvement strategies,"
Journal of Occupational Psychology
64, no. 2 (1991): 167-177.
2
'
Irwin L. Goldstein, Training in Organizations, 3d ed., (Monterey, CA: Brooks/Cole, 1993): 115;
Kenneth N. Wexley and
C ry
P Latham,
Developing and Training Human Resources in
Organizations, 2d ed., (New York: Harper-Collins, 1991): 73-80; and Gary P Latham and Lise M.
Saari, (1979). "The application of social learning theory to training supervisors through behav-
ioral modeling,"
Journal of Applied Psychology
64, no. 3 (1979): 239-246.
3
Richard Koonce, "One on one,"
Training and Development
48 (February 1994): 34-40; Bernard
Johann, "The meeting as a lever for organizational improvement," National Productivity
Review 13, no. 3 (1994): 376-377; and Adam Snyder, "Executive coaching: The new solution,"
Management Review
84 (March 1995): 29-32.
4 Lee Smith, "The executive's new coach,"
Fortune
(27 December 1993): 126; and Snyder,
Executive Coaching
467
"Executive coaching," 29.
5
'
Snyder, "Executive coaching," 30.
6.
For example, Robert E. Quinn et al.,
Becoming a Master Manager: A Competency Framework
(New
York: Wiley, 1990).
7
Ronald R. Sims and Serbrenia J. Sims, "Improving training in the public sector,"
Public
Personnel Management
20 (Spring 1991): 75-77.
8
. Ibid., 75-78.
9
'
James Anderson and Kenneth N. Wexley, 'Applications-based management development: A
method to promote practical application of managerial and supervisory training,"
Personnel
Administrator 28 (November 1983): 39-43; Michael Feldman, "Successful post-training skill appli-
cation," Training and Development Journal (September, 1981): 72-74; Edwin A. Locke and Gary F.
Latham,
Goal Setting: A Motivational Tool That Works
(Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1984);
and Kenneth N. Wexley and Timothy T. Baldwin, "Post-training strategies for facilitating posi-
tive transfer: An empirical exploration,"
Academy of Management Journal
29, no. 3 (1986): 503-520.
1
°- G. Doran, "There's a S.M.A.R.T. way to write management's goals and objectives," in
Dynamics of Management,
ed. by Gerald Olivero (New York: New York City Dept of Personnel,
Bureau of Professional Development, 1993) 134; and Edwin A. Locke, and Gary F. Latham,
A
Theory of Goal Setting and Task Performance
(Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1990): 29-31.
11
. Colette A. Frayne, and Gary P Latham, "Self-management training for increased job atten-
dance: A follow-up and a replication,"
Journal of Applied Psychology
74 (1989): 411-416.
12-
Haim H. Gaziel, "Managerial studies and perceived job performance: An Israeli case study,"
Public Personnel Management
23 (Summer 1994): 341.
11
A. Carol Rusaw, "Mobility for federal women managers: Is training enough?"
Public Personnel
Management,
23 (Summer 1994): 258.
14.
Ibid., 261.
15
'
Thomas G. Cummings, Susan A. Mohrman, Allen M. Mohrman, and Gerald E. Ledford,
"Organization design for the future: A collaborative research approach." In Edward E. Lawler
III, Allan M. Mohrman, Jr., Susan A. Mohrman, Gerald E. Ledford, Jr, Thomas G. Cummings,
and Associates (Eds.). Doing Research That is Useful for Theory and Practice
(San Francisco:
Josey-Bass, 1985): 284-289.
16.
Ronald R. Sims, "The enhancement of learning in public sector training programs,"
Public
Personnel Management
22 ( .immer 1993): 253.
References
Anderson, J. and K. N. Wexley. 1983. "Applications-based management development: A method to
promote practical application of managerial and supervisory training,"
Personnel Administrator
28 (November): 39-43.
Cummings, T. G., S. A. Mohrman, A. M. Mohrman, and G. E. Ledford, "Organization design for
the future: A collaborative research approach." In E. E. Lawler III, A. M. Mohrman, Jr., S. A.
Mohrman, G. E. Ledford, Jr., T. G. Cummings, and Associates (Eds.).
Doing Research That is
Useful for Theory and Practice
(San Francisco: Josey-Bass, 1985): 275-305.
Doran, G. 1993. "There's a S.M.A.R.T. way to write management's goals and objectives." In
Dynamics of Management,
ed. by Gerald Olivero, New York: New York City Dept of Personnel,
Bureau of Professional Development, 134.
Feldman, M. 1981. Successful post-training skill application.
Training and Development Journal
35
(September): 72-74.
Frayne, C. A. and G. P Latham. 1989. "Self-management training for increased job attendance: A
follow-up and a replication."
Journal of Applied Psychology
74 (June): 411-416.
Gaziel, H. H. 1994. "Managerial studies and perceived job performance: An Israeli case study."
Public Personnel Management
23 (Summer): 341-356.
Goldstein, I. L. 1986.
Training in organizations: Needs assessment, development and evaluation.
Monterey, CA: Brooks/Cole.
Johann, B. 1994. "The meeting as a lever for organizational improvement." National Productivity
Review 13, no. 3: 369-377.
Koonce, R. 1994. "One on one." Training and Development
48 (February):34-40.
Latham, G. P and L. M. Saari. 1979. "The application of social learning theory to training supervi-
sors through behavioral modeling."
Journal of Applied Psychology
64, no. 3: 239-246.
468
Public Personnel Management Volume 26 No. 4 (Winter 1997)
Locke, E
NJ: Pr
Locke,
NJ: Pr
Quinn,
A
com
Rusaw,
Mana;
Sims, R
Persor
Sims, R
Mana,
Smith, 1
Snyder,
Tracey,
impo
Tziner,
ing tl
Psych
Wexle'
empi
Wexle)
ed.
For further informa
Inc., 521 Fifth Avem
i
t development: A
ning,"
Personnel
t
-training skill appli-
Locke and Gary F.
rentice-Hall, 1984);
r facilitating posi-
o. 3 (1986): 503-520.
jectives," in
Dept of Personnel,
teary F. Latham,
A
all, 1990): 29-31.
creased job atten-
): 411-416.
Israeli case study,"
gh?"
Public Personnel
Locke, E. A. and G. F. Latham. 1984.
Goal setting: A motivational tool that works.
Englewood Cliffs,
NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Locke, E. A. and G. F. Latham. 1990. A
theory of goal setting and task performance.
Englewood Cliffs,
NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Quinn, R. E., S. R. Faerman, M. P Thompson, and M. R. McGrath. 1990.
Becoming a master manager:
A competency framework,
New York: Wiley.
Rusaw, A. C. 1994. "Mobility for federal women managers: Is training enough?"
Public Personnel
Management
23 (Summer): 257-262.
Sims, R. R. 1993. "The enhancement of learning in public sector training programs."
Public
Personnel Management
22 (Summer): 243-255.
Sims, R. R. and S. J. Sims. 1991. "Improving training in the public sector."
Public Personnel
Management
20 (Spring): 71-82.
Smith, L. 1993. "The executive's new coach."
Fortune
27 December, 126-134.
Snyder, A. 1995. "Executive coaching: The new solution."
Management Review
84 (March): 29-32.
Tracey, J. B., S. I. Tannenbaum, and M. J. Kavanagh. 1995. "Applying trained skills on the job: The
importance of the work environment."
Journal of Applied Psychology,
80, no. 2: 239-252.
Tziner, A., R. R. Haccoun, and A. Kadish. 1991. "Personal and situational characteristics influenc-
ing the effectiveness of transfer of training improvement strategies."
Journal of Occupational
Psychology
64, no. 2: 167-177.
Wexley, K. N. and T T Baldwin. 1986. "Post-training strategies for facilitating positive transfer: An
empirical exploration."
Academy of Management Journal
29, no. 3: 503-520.
Wexley, K. N. and G. P Latham. 1991.
Developing and training human resources in organizations.
2d
ed. New York: Harper-Collins.
For further information about this study, please contact Gerald Olivero, Ph.D., Human Resource Solutions,
Inc., 521 Fifth Avenue, Suite 1700, New York, NY 10175-0003, (212) 316-2800, Ext. 5403.
)pment: A method to
;onnel Administrator
nization design for
ihrman, Jr., S. A.
Research That is
objectives." In
Dept of Personnel,
lopment Journal
35
I job attendance: A
raeli case study."
evaluation.
tional Productivity
bald E. Ledford,
Edward E. Lawler
nas G. Cummings,
in Francisco:
programs,"
Public
ncy Framework
(New
ctor,"
Public
to training supervi-
9-246.
0. 4 (Winter 1997)
Executive Coaching
469
