Content uploaded by Sheila Boysen-Rotelli
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Sheila Boysen-Rotelli on Jan 09, 2020
Content may be subject to copyright.
International Journal of Evidence Based Coaching and Mentoring
2018, 16 (1), DOI: 10.24384/000475
© The Authors
Published by Oxford Brookes University
159
Reflections from the field
Organisational Coaching Outcomes: A
comparison of a practitioner survey and
key findings from the literature
Sheila Boysen1, Michael Cherry1, Wende Amerie2 and Mike Takagawa2
1Lewis University, 2Corporate Edge, Inc., USA. Contact email: sheila.maureen@gmail.com
Abstract
This paper compares the measurements of organisational outcomes from executive and leadership
coaching based on existing studies and research that has been conducted throughout the
literature. An overview of executive and leadership coaching is provided and a case study
measuring executive and leadership coaching effectiveness is reported. The survey methodology
used in this case study was not originally intended for an academic research design, rather it was a
customer satisfaction survey. However, the results can provide insights into the value, ROI and
impact of executive and leadership coaching.
Keywords: coaching outcomes, executive coaching, survey methodology, ROI
Introduction
The purpose of this paper is to review measurements of organisational outcomes from executive
and leadership coaching. The paper provides an overview of executive and leadership coaching
outcome research as well as a case study measuring executive and leadership coaching
effectiveness. The survey methodology used in this case study was not originally intended for an
academic research design: it was a customer satisfaction survey. However, the results can provide
insights into the value, ROI and impact of executive and leadership coaching.
Overview of outcome research
Bennett and Bush (2009) confirmed a number of benefits of executive and leadership coaching
found in other research (Dexter, Dexter & Irving, 2011; Jackson & McKergow, 2012; Walker-
Fraser, 2011) including, improving the ability of leaders to inspire and impact followers, freeing time
for strategic thinking and discussion, and more effective delegation. Earlier, Baek-Kyoo (2005) had
suggested that coaching can also enhance self-awareness, behavioral change, and executive
performance, while Jules (2009) believed that market forces were a key driver for the need for
executive coaching which could lead to a number of benefits concluding that:
The market has changed and in order to maintain a competitive advantage, businesses
need a cadre of leaders who can set clear direction, mobilize the energies of people
throughout the enterprise, foster a performance culture, and most importantly, lead
others through times of great uncertainty (p. 8).
Walker-Fraser (2011) confirmed the benefits listed above and added that executive coaching was
viewed by human resource professionals as being, “time-bound and focusing on leadership
behaviors, specific performance issues, and people development skills” (p. 72). Since then,
International Journal of Evidence Based Coaching and Mentoring
2018, 16 (1), DOI: 10.24384/000475
© The Authors
Published by Oxford Brookes University
160
Stokes and Jolly (2016) addressed several distinctive elements of executive and leadership
coaching. These include goals of improving leadership, assessment of current effectiveness, a
strong coaching relationship of challenge and support, and objectives of behavior change and
increase in wisdom.
Ultimately, executive coaching is driven by the business needs and preferences of both the
executive and the organisation (Stern, 2004). Natale and Diamante (2005) identify numerous
positive benefits of coaching for organisations: achievement of personal and professional goals,
increased sales, enhanced employee satisfaction, better organisational communication, greater
self-knowledge, ability to lead more effectively change, and capacity to make quicker and better
decisions. However, many companies “lack a disciplined approach to managing the coaching
process and measuring outcomes” (McDermott, 2007, p. 35).
Another complication is the vast variety of reasons that a person hires a coach, making it difficult to
report on the outcomes and success of coaching in general. As Greif (2007) points out, “A
fundamental difficulty of coaching outcome research is the extreme heterogeneity of issues,
problems and goals, which can be picked out as themes in different coaching interventions.
Therefore, it is difficult to identify outcome measures which are applicable to the whole range of
coaching interventions” (p. 224). Research from the Corporate Leadership Council (2016) indicates
that, “coaching can provide a high return-on-investment (ROI) and satisfaction rate” (CLC, 2016).
For example, the Council cites a study conducted by Metrix Global, LLC on a Fortune 500
telecommunications firm that reported an ROI of 529%. Other research conducted by Wasylyshyn
(2003) indicates the following outcomes of successful coaching: 63% sustained behavior change,
48% increased self-awareness and understanding, and 45% more effective leadership.
In an earier study aimed at identifying ROI, Phillips (1996) reports that Nations Hotel Corporation
(NHC) instituted a formal, structured executive coaching program and then evaluated it among 25
randomly selected participants. The cost of coaching all 25 executives was $579,800. Based on
the total monetary benefits and the cost of the coaching program, NHC developed two ROI
calculations. The first is the benefit-cost ratio (BCR), which is the ratio of monetary benefits divided
by costs. For every dollar invested, $3.21 was returned. The ROI for this coaching program was
calculated by using earnings divided by investments. For each dollar invested in coaching, the
dollar was returned plus $2.21 was produced.
A study by McGovern (2001) on the impact of executive coaching shows both the intangible and
tangible results of coaching. The researchers studied 100 executives from 56 organisations of
various sizes. The results showed that 43% of the companies were able to identify the return on
investment of coaching. “The majority of the 43 participants . . . reported between $100,000 and $1
million as the return on investment in executive coaching,” state McGovern (p. 7). Additionally,
75% of the sample rated the value of the coaching as “considerably greater” or “far greater” (p. 7)
than the money and time spent. Furthermore, 73% of the study participants indicated they had
reached their goals, “very effectively” or “extremely effectively” (p. 8). The rate of results was
shown to be higher for intangible impacts (i.e., improved relationships with direct reports at 77%,
improved teamwork at 67%, improved job satisfaction at 63%) than for tangible ones (i.e.,
productivity at 53%, quality at 48%, customer service at 39%). As impressive as these numbers
may sound, however, one should keep in mind that this study surveyed the coachees of the
consulting firm to which the authors belong, and the outcomes are based on estimates by the
coachee. On the other hand, certain factors were put into place to enhance reliability in particular,
the data were collected by trained independent contractors, and limits were put on outlier ROI
estimates of $1 million (McGovern, 2001).
Beyond tangible measurements such as cost savings, reduced turnover, and increased
productivity, the results of coaching are often based on the intangible. Fillery-Travis and Lane
(2006) pointedly asked, “Is it sufficient that the coachee perceives coaching to have enabled
International Journal of Evidence Based Coaching and Mentoring
2018, 16 (1), DOI: 10.24384/000475
© The Authors
Published by Oxford Brookes University
161
him/her to achieve an identified goal? Or does the output have to percolate down to the bottom-line
in terms of a quantifiable performance measure for the organisation?” (p. 29). As previously
discussed, Phillips’ (1996) report of NHC’s coaching program revealed several intangible benefits
that were identified through a questionnaire and action plans. Measures that were identified by at
least four of the 25 executives as intangible outputs included increased commitment, improved
teamwork, increased job satisfaction, improved customer service, and improved communication.
Starting in December 2004, Cambria Consulting began an ongoing study of the effects of executive
coaching in large organisations from the perspective of multiple stakeholders (coach, coachee,
managers-sponsors, and others). The results indicate that coaches and coachees perceived the
coaching engagement to have higher value estimations than did the managers. In fact, over 85%
of the 56 responding coaches and 91% of the 51 responding coachees estimated an overall value
of $50,000 during the 18-month coaching process. In contrast, 30% of the 12 responding
managers did not observe value from the coaching, 42% estimated less than $50,000 in value, and
25% estimated more than $1 million in value.
A study on a smaller scale was conducted by Stevens (2005), who interviewed seven top
management executives representing a range of industries (industrial manufacturing, financial
services, health care, and academia). The executives also had received coaching. Of the seven
participants, three had previously been engaged in a coaching relationship with Stevens. Of those
three executives, two had experiences with other executive coaches, and the balance of the seven
had had a coach at some time. All the executives had had a coach during their time as a CEO or
president of their respective companies. Stevens’ study found that the executives view coaching as
a, “helping process wherein something is done with them in a way that also enables them to better
meet their role obligations and responsibilities” (2005, p. 283).
Schlosser (2006) concurs that the value generated from coaching is not always a tangible
measurement when he says, “Value is in the eyes of the beholder” (p. 3). Schlosser indicated that
the decision makers within an organisation look for value creation when determining how to
proceed with executive coaching. Schlosser pointed out that this value creation is both implicit and
explicit, suggesting that costs are not the only factor when evaluating whether executive coaching
is the appropriate intervention. Schlosser also stated that ROI is an organisation-specific metric, at
least in part. Thus, any metrics should relate to what is important or valued within a given
organisation: “This perspective . . . is aligned with the trend toward viewing executive coaching as
serving a strategic rather than remedial role” (2006, p. 10). According to Schlosser, organisations
that look beyond the financial impact and returns of coaching into value creation will generally take
into account the following company issues and needs: (1) competencies (i.e., behaviors and
abilities) necessary of leaders and coachees for the execution of business strategy, especially the
competencies needed for considerable impact on short- and long-term results; (2) individual
leaders who largely need these competencies; and (3) ways in which expert coaching can facilitate
building these important competencies with these leaders and coachees, as they are likely to have
noteworthy impact on business results.
According to a study conducted by de Hann et. al (2016), coaching effectiveness was measured
based on the perceived outcomes as reported by the coach and separately by the coachee, using
the averaged score to these four questions: (a) “successful in creating reflective space”; (b)
“successful in creating new insights”; (c) “successfully engaged in new action or behavior”; and (d)
“overall coaching outcome”. The results of this study showed that the longer the coaching
relationship, the greater the coaching effectiveness, the stronger the working alliance, and the
stronger the self-efficacy of the coachee.
International Journal of Evidence Based Coaching and Mentoring
2018, 16 (1), DOI: 10.24384/000475
© The Authors
Published by Oxford Brookes University
162
Case Study
The numerous studies highlighted above have explored the benefits and outcomes of executive
and leadership coaching. We continued to see a need to expand this investigation. Given that the
International Coach Federation’s (ICF) projects an increased need for coaches and continued
growth in the industry (Axmith, 2004) the importance of accurately assessing the impact of
coaching and justifying coaching investments will continue to be important. The data outlined and
analysed in this section comes from a customer satisfaction survey that has been administered
since 2009 at an organisation that receives coaching from a California based coaching
organisation. Several of the survey results are offered, in summary, as a case study example of
‘real-world’ coaching outcomes and effectiveness.
Survey Methodology
Coaching clients (coachees) were questioned via a Survey Monkey inquiry as well as selected,
structured phone interviews in an effort to determine their satisfaction with coaching, coaching best
practices, gaps in the coaching process and methodology, and to determine the coaching return on
investment (ROI). Response rates have ranged from a high of 78% to a low of 66%. On average,
the survey garnered a 73% response rate. The number of participants of the survey has ranged
from 23 to over 100 depending on the level of coaching activity i.e., coaching contracts. While the
same population is surveyed each year, the individual participants vary given the cyclical nature of
coaching relationships.
Reasons for Coaching
Coachees articulated a variety of reasons for seeking executive and leadership coaching. Many of
these echo the results of the previously outlined studies. Some of the reasons included assistance
with change management, organisational and team development, managing career transitions and
on-boarding. In addition, survey respondents highlighted that they sought coaching assistance to
explore stakeholder and relationship management as well as strategic thinking and planning.
Coaching Methodology
Determining the executive and leadership coaching approach that was used by the various
coaches was difficult in this survey because of the range of client needs and the strengths of the
individual coaches. What was similar throughout the coaching process were the following ‘phases.’
Coaching began with a client/coach matching process conducted by the coaching organisation.
Once the client had selected a coach the work was defined in three phases. The first phase was
for assessment. In this phase, self-assessments as well as qualitative, multi-rater, 360 degree,
feedback were implemented. The intent of this coaching phase was to enhance the client’s
awareness of how their leadership and personal preferences were experienced by those working
around them. The results from these assessments were reviewed with the client and leveraged to
begin the second phase which was development planning. In this phase, developmental goals
were identified and agreed upon by the coach and client. Finally, the formal coaching phase began
which included regular coaching sessions either in person or via phone conference.
Overall, all coaches for the firm lean toward on a Solutions Focused Coach Approach. The
Solutions Focus process is a powerful, practical, and proven approach to positive change with
people, teams, and organisations (Cavenagh & Grant, 2016). With this approach, the search for
the causes of problems is sidestepped. The focus is on solutions, strengths and on what is going
well. This approach has been shown to lead to a positive and pragmatic way of making progress
(Axmith, 2004).
International Journal of Evidence Based Coaching and Mentoring
2018, 16 (1), DOI: 10.24384/000475
© The Authors
Published by Oxford Brookes University
163
Coaching Success Metrics
In the conducted surveys, a variety of ROI metrics for coaching success are evaluated. Table 1
represents a sample of some of the intangible metrics:
Table 1 Coaching Success Metrics
Retention of key executives
Enhance cross-functional collaboration and cooperation
Executive Coach serves as trusted advisor/counsel
Enhanced team performance and productivity
Faster decision making and effective conflict resolution
Alignment and influence with key stakeholders (peers, upper management)
Development of a strategic/systemic perspective
Strategies for developing high performers/succession plan
Increased decisiveness for addressing poor performers
Foster a culture of learning and engagement
Encourage a ‘shared vision’ across teams
Improved executive presence (confidence, poise under pressure, presentation skills, engaging
others).
In addition to the success indicators above, ‘harder’ metrics that explored ROI have also been
explored. A question that was revealing regarding the economic impact of coaching was:
Using the categories below, what is your estimation of the total economic impact of the individual
and organisational benefits from your coaching?
1. $1 Million annually (15 + times investment)
2. $500K-$1M annually (8-15 times investment)
3. $200K-$500K annually (4-8 times investment)
4. $100K-$200K annually (2-4 times investment)
5. Less than $100K annually (1-2 times investment)
6. No Response (i.e., I don’t know how much the coaching engagement costs to make an
accurate determination)
Key findings
Since 2009, 100% of respondents indicated complete satisfaction with the coaching. In addition,
100% of respondents were confident of a positive return on investment from the coaching
engagement. A majority of respondents estimated total ROI/Economic Benefits of rough $200,000
to $500,000. The respondents determined this metric in a wide variety of ways including calculating
what it would cost to replace an executive, costs related to loss of productivity, and gains realized
through higher employee engagement. Respondents identified a variety of intangible metrics of
success which have, consistently, included the following:
• Executive coach serves as a trusted advisor/counsel
• Improved executive presence (i.e., confidence, poise under pressure, presentation skills,
engaging others)
• Alignment and influence with key stakeholders
International Journal of Evidence Based Coaching and Mentoring
2018, 16 (1), DOI: 10.24384/000475
© The Authors
Published by Oxford Brookes University
164
• Enhanced cross-functional collaboration and cooperation
• Development of a strategic/systemic perspective
One of the benefits of this survey design was the ability to read, and hear, how clients experience
executive and leadership coaching. This narrative provided a ‘story’ of the impact coaching has
had on their development and growth as leaders. How clients’ experience coaching, and its
benefits, have been described by the clients in the following quotations:
• “The coaching experience has empowered me to contribute even more. My coach has
been a trusted advisor who has been my confidant and sounding board when tough
decisions need to be made.”
• “The Organization has coaches that are highly engaged which is unique. They take the time
to understand you, what is going on in your life and how that impacts your ability to perform
on the job. They are fully plugged into the entire person. They are not just leadership
coaches but look at all parts of the person’s life and help you make balanced decisions. If
we did not have this sort of support, we would feel inadequate in various areas of our lives.”
• “It has accelerated both the cultivation of healthy and effective management techniques
and my ability to self-assess my management and leadership qualities and behaviors.
Furthermore, I have a better set of tools by which I can assess and influence the
performance of my team.”
• “Part of what I get in my engagement with my coach is confidence in myself and what I do.
This reinforcement is helpful for me and my confidence continues to grow. I look to do more
in the organisation because of this and want, and have, a greater leadership presence. I am
more engaged with the organisation because of coaching.”
Limitations
This exploration sought to highlight coaching outcomes and measures of coaching success as
reported by coachees. This approach was a potential limitation because self-report survey designs
could be subject to respondent bias. Respondents, “may intentionally misrepresent the facts in
order to present a more favorable impression” (Leedy & Ormrod, 2005, p. 184). Essentially, the
respondents may provide answers that the researcher wants to hear (Joseph, Berry, &
Deshpande, 2009; Robson, 2002). This bias can impact the validity of the results.
Another challenge was that this investigation was conducted as a customer satisfaction inquiry at a
single organisation. With any research that focuses on a specific population, the ability to
generalize the research findings to other populations may be challenging (Gay, et al., 2006). In
essence, this specific population may not be representative of the coaching experienced by
coaches in other organisations.
Conclusion
The purpose of this paper was to review executive and leadership coaching literature about the
measurement and attainment of organisational coaching outcomes. This paper provided an
overview of executive and leadership coaching and insight on measuring organisational coaching
effectiveness. Finally, a summary and analysis of actual research conducted in part by one of the
authors was addressed. In conclusion, coaching outcomes are indicators of coaching success
when they are well aligned with the reason for the coaching intervention as well as the goals and
values of the organisation.
References
International Journal of Evidence Based Coaching and Mentoring
2018, 16 (1), DOI: 10.24384/000475
© The Authors
Published by Oxford Brookes University
165
Axmith, M. (2004). Executive coaching: A catalyst for personal growth and corporate change. Ivey Business Journal, 1-5.
Baek-Kyoo, J. (2005). Executive coaching: A conceptual framework from an integrative review of practice and research.
Human Resource Development Review, 4(4), 462-488.
Bennett, J. & Bush, M.W. (2009). Coaching in organizations: Current trends and future opportunities. OD Practitioner,
41(1), 2-7.
Cavanagh, M. & Grant, A. (2016). The Solution-focused Approach to Coaching. In Cox, E. et al. (Ed.), The Complete
Handbook of Coaching (pp. 244-255). London: Sage Publications.
Corporate Leadership Council. (2016). [Fact brief: Executive coaching programs]. Unpublished raw data.
de Haan, E., Culpin, V., & Curd, J. (2011). Executive coaching in practice: What determines helpfulness for clients of
coaching? Personnel Review, 40(1), 24-44.
De Haan, E., Grant, A., Burger, Y. & Eriksson, P. (2016). A large-scale study of executive and workplace coaching: The
relative contributions of relationship, personality match, and self-efficacy. Consulting Psychology Journal:
Practice and Research. 189-207.
Dexter, J., Dexter, G., & Irving, J. (2011). An Introduction to Coaching. London: Sage.
Fillery-Travis, A., & Lane, D. (2006). Does coaching work or are we asking the wrong question? International Coaching
Psychology Review, 1(1), 23–36.
Gay, L.R., Mills, G.E., & Airasian, P. (2006). Educational research: Competencies for analysis and applications (8th ed.).
Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Educations.
Greif, S. (2007). Advances in research on coaching outcomes. International Coaching Psychology Review, 2(3), 222–
242.
Jackson, P.Z. & McKergow, M. (2012). The Solutions Focus: Making Coaching & Change Simple. London: Nicholas
Brealey.
Joseph, J., Berry, K., & Deshpande, S.P. (2009). Impact of emotional intelligence and other factors on perception of
ethical behavior of peers. Journal of Business Ethics, 89, 539-546.
Jules, C. (2009). Feedback as a unit of work: A data-driven approach to organizational coaching. OD Practitioner, 41(3),
8-12.
Leedy, P.D., & Ormrod, J.E. (2005). Practical research: Planning and design (8th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson
Education.
McDermott, M., Levenson, A., & Newton, S. (2007). What coaching can and cannot do for your organization. Human
Resource Planning, 30(2), 30–37.
McGovern, J., Lindemann, M., Vergara, M., Murphy, S., Barker, L. & Warrenfeltz, R. (2001). Maximizing the impact of
executive coaching: behavioral change, organizational outcomes, and return on investment. The Manchester
Review, 6(1): 1-9.
Natale, S. M., & Diamante, T. (2005). The five stages of executive coaching: Better process makes better practice.
Journal of Business Ethics, 59, 361–374.
Phillips, J. J. (1996). Measuring the ROI of a coaching intervention, part 2. Performance Improvement, 46(10), 10–23.
Robson, C. (2002). Real world research (2nd ed.). Malden, MA: Blackwell
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
Stern, L. R. (2004). Executive coaching: A working definition. Consulting Psychology Journal: Practice and Research,
56(3), 154–162.
Stevens, J. H., Jr. (2005). Executive coaching from the executive’s perspective. Consulting Psychology Journal: Practice
and Research, 57(4), 274–285.
Stokes, J., & Jolly, R. (2016). Executive Coaching and Leadership. In Cox, E. et al. (Ed.), The Complete Handbook of
Coaching (pp. 244-255). London: Sage Publications.
Walker-Fraser, A. (2011). An HR perspective on executive coaching for organizational learning. International Journal of
Evidence Based Coaching and Mentoring, 9(2), 67-79.
Wasylyshyn, K. M. (2003). Executive coaching: An outcome study. Consulting Psychology Journal: Practice and
Research, 55(2), 94–106
International Journal of Evidence Based Coaching and Mentoring
2018, 16 (1), DOI: 10.24384/000475
© The Authors
Published by Oxford Brookes University
166
Author information
Dr Sheila Boysen has a varied professional background that includes supply chain and logistics,
talent management, recruitment and selection and professional coaching. These roles spanned a
number of industries as well as both public and private organizations. She is an Assistant
Professor at Lewis University. Her doctoral studies at Benedictine University in Organization
Development include extensive research on Coaching and Talent Management. She holds a
Bachelors of Science in Marketing from the University of Illinois, an MBA in Organization Behavior
from Northern Illinois University and a Professional Human Resources certification from the Human
Resources Certification Institute and is an ICF certified coach.
Dr. Michael Cherry is an Assistant Professor of Organizational Leadership for the College of Arts
& Sciences at Lewis University. Mike teaches leadership theory, organizational design, team
development and applied research courses. His doctoral studies at Olivet Nazarene University in
Ethical Leadership included extensive research on Emotional Intelligence and Leadership. He
holds a Bachelors of Science in Commerce from Santa Clara University, an MBA in Leadership &
Organizational Change from San José State University and an MSA in Not-for-Profit Management,
University of Notre Dame. He completed his coach education at Lewis University in their
Professional and Executive Coaching program and has his PCC credential from the International
Coach Federation.
Wende Amerie earned her MBA from Golden Gate University and holds a bachelor’s in business
management and a Paralegal Certificate from Saint Mary’s College of California. She completed
training with Integrative Enneagram Solutions and has completed Harvard Law School’s Program
on Negotiation and Leadership. Wende also serves on the Board of Directors for the Sandra J.
Wing Healing Therapies Foundation.
Michael Takagawa is the Founder & CEO of Corporate Edge, and visionary of an advanced and
original organizational model that distinguishes itself from traditional leadership consulting firms and
individual coaching professionals. Prior to launching Corporate Edge, Michael was president and
COO of Discovery Toys, where he helped lead a successful business turnaround and company sale.
In addition, he had a successful career in consumer marketing and brand management, including a
variety of vice president roles for Procter & Gamble, Colgate Palmolive, Del Monte, and Kikkoman
International. Michael earned his MBA from Stanford University and his Bachelor of Science from
the University of California, Berkeley.
