Content uploaded by Jonathan Passmore
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Jonathan Passmore on Dec 07, 2022
Content may be subject to copyright.
The state of executive coaching research:
What does the current literature tell us and
what’s next for coaching research?
Jonathan Passmore & Carla Gibbes
Citation: Passmore, J., & Gibbes, C. (2007). The state of executive coaching research:
What does the current literature tell us and what’s the next for coaching research?
International Coaching Psychology Review. 2(2). 116-128
Note: This text is made available by the authors as part of their commitment to knowledge sharing. This version contains the original pre-publication version of the paper, as a result page
numbers and layout may vary from the published version.
Passmore, J., & Gibbes, C. (2007). The state of executive coaching research: What does the current literature tell us and what’s the
next for coaching research? International Coaching Psychology Review. 2(2). 116-128
Abstract
This paper asks the question; what do coaching psychologists bring to the developing
market of executive coaching? While psychologists are trained in human behaviour, this
paper argues that their real unique contribution may be their ability to undertake high
quality research. The paper moves to summarise executive coaching research to date,
and to suggest new areas for study, drawing from a review of counselling research
history over the past five decades. Finally, the paper calls for coaching psychologists to
address three key research strands, with the objectives of; evidencing the impact of
coaching on performance, improving coaching practice and assisting in identifying the
key components required for effective coaching training.
Keyword: Executive coaching, Coaching research, Counselling research,
Evidenced-based coaching.
2
Passmore, J., & Gibbes, C. (2007). The state of executive coaching research: What does the current literature tell us and what’s the
next for coaching research? International Coaching Psychology Review. 2(2). 116-128
Introduction
Over the past five years the coaching marketplace has become crowded with potential
coaches all offering executives the chance to ‘fulfil their potential’, ‘achieve excellence’
or ‘find the inner hero’. In a global $2 billion per annum market (Fillery-Travis & Lane,
2006), what can coaching psychologists offer?
The unrestricted use of the term ‘psychologist’ in the UK does not help those who have
trained for up to five years to achieve a clear and precise standard. In business
consulting it is not uncommon to find people who claim to be ‘psychologists’. In fact,
they often have, at best, an undergraduate degree in psychology and sometimes little
more than training in a level B psychometric instrument. The situation in coaching is
worse, with limited training available, no regulation and no licensing in the UK, Australia
(Spence, Cavanagh & Grant, 2006) or in the USA (Nowack, 2003).
So what can coaching psychologists bring to coaching that is unique and distinctive?
Garman, Whiston and Zlatoper (2000), writing in the USA (where the term ‘psychologist’
is more strictly regulated) have argued that licensed psychologists do have unique
skills. These skills are in understanding and working with the diversity of human
behaviour. However, they note that these skills are rarely recognised by the media. In
fact, with the confusion around the term ‘psychologist’, organisational client’s or
coachee’s rarely understand the unique contribution psychologists can make.
Berglas (2004) has offered an alternative perspective to the debate on the contribution
of psychologists in coaching. He suggests that the unique contribution is the ability to
identify and work with dysfunctional behaviour. Such behaviour he suggests is more
3
Passmore, J., & Gibbes, C. (2007). The state of executive coaching research: What does the current literature tell us and what’s the
next for coaching research? International Coaching Psychology Review. 2(2). 116-128
common in the boardroom, as such individuals are driven to succeed, a point echoed by
Furnham (2005). However having attained the most senior positions, the individuals and
their organisations are vulnerable to catastrophic failure from dysfunctional behaviour,
which may include inappropriate risk taking or a failure to understand and work with the
more subtle human emotions of key stakeholders or partners.
An additional potential differentiator is the knowledge psychologists have or can acquire
in specialist areas, using new evidence-based methodologies such Motivational
Interviewing (Miller & Rollnick, 2002; Passmore & Whybrow, 2007). These techniques
often demand specialist or accredited training, but can be acquired by psychologists, as
the knowledge builds on an existing understanding of human behaviour (Passmore,
2007).
The most powerful differentiator however, is a desire and commitment to undertake,
contribute to, share and incorporate into their practice the outcomes from coaching
research. Psychological training equips the coaching practitioner with the ability to
undertake research within the scientific tradition of randomised control trials, as well as
within the qualitative traditions using methodologies such as Interpretative
Phenomenological Analysis (IPA), Grounded Theory and discursive techniques. These
can add richness and depth to quantitative studies.
Executive coaching research
As recently as four years ago the evidence that executive coaching could transform
individual performance at work was scant. As Kampa-Kokesch (2001) reminded us
during her own coaching research in 2001/02 at Western Michigan University, the
number of impact studies totalled seven in 2000.
4
Passmore, J., & Gibbes, C. (2007). The state of executive coaching research: What does the current literature tell us and what’s the
next for coaching research? International Coaching Psychology Review. 2(2). 116-128
Table 1: Summarised Executive Coaching Impact Research up to 2000
Author
Key points
Foster & Lendl,
(1996)
A review of the impact of EMDR (Eye Movement Desensitization and
Reprocessing) procedures on four executive coaches, which suggested that
EMDR was an effective intervention for desensitising workplace experiences.
Olivero, Bane, and
Kopelman, (1997)
A comparative study of training and training complemented by behavioural
coaching to enhance performance in a public sector agency. The study was
based on a sample of 31 participants. The results suggested that coaching
increased performance by 88% while training only intervention resulted in an
increase of only 22%.
Judge & Cowell
(1997)
A study of managers using a variety of interventions (behavioural to
psychodynamic coaching).
Gerger,
(1997)
A masters level study based on a sample of 48 participants reviewing the
impact of coaching on management behaviour, in particular the adoption of a
coaching management style. The results suggested that between 70 -93% of
executives made a change in behaviour.
Hall, Otazo &
Hollenbeck (1999)
Astudy consisted of interviews with 75 executives who had received coaching. The
results of the study was a list of coaching behaviours which coachee’s found help and
less helpful, and a comparison with coaches perceptions of coaching behaviours. A
fuller review is set out in Table 2.
Laske (1999)
A study is also an unpublished dissertation. He interviewed a small sample of six
executives. His conclusion was that executive coaching is only of value if the executive
is ready for development. This implies a need for a stronger assessment stage prior to
commencing coaching.
Garman, Whiston, &
Zlatoper (2000)
The study involved a content analysis of coaching publications and thus failed to
demonstrate based on primary empirical research clear evidence of the impact of an
executive coaching intervention.
5
Passmore, J., & Gibbes, C. (2007). The state of executive coaching research: What does the current literature tell us and what’s the
next for coaching research? International Coaching Psychology Review. 2(2). 116-128
Unfortunately, few of the studies provided comparable data points and in many cases
failed to summarise the key points of their study such as research design, sample size,
sampling procedures and a description of the methodology. The papers were reviewed
in her paper, but for convenience a short summary is provided in Table 1.
The most interesting of these studies for coaching practice was Hall, Otazo and
Hollenbeck’s (1999) work which, while based solely on coachee perceptions, does offer
some interesting insights into understanding the perceived value of coaching in the eyes
of the coachee. Aspects such as listening and questioning skills are present, alongside
integrity, caring and the ability to challenge constructively.
Table 2: What works best in coaching?
From executives
From coaches
Honest, realistic, challenging feedback
Good listening
Good action points ideas
Clear objectives
No personal agenda
Accessibility , availability
Straight feedback
Competence, sophistication
Seeing a good model of effectiveness
Coach has seen other career paths
Connecting personally, recognising where the
coachee is
Good listening
Reflecting
Caring
Learning
Checking back
Commitment to coachee success
Demonstrating integrity
Openness & honesty
Knowing the ‘unwritten rules’.
Pushing the coachee where necessary
(From Hall, Otazo & Hollenbeck, 1999)
6
Passmore, J., & Gibbes, C. (2007). The state of executive coaching research: What does the current literature tell us and what’s the
next for coaching research? International Coaching Psychology Review. 2(2). 116-128
Since Kampa-Kokesch’s literature research was published in 2001, the trickle of
empirical studies into the impact of executive coaching has continued (Bush, 2005;
Conway, 2000; Dawdy, 2004; Evers, Brouwers and Tomic, 2006; Gonzalez, 2004;
Gyllensyen & Palmer 2005a; Jones and Spooner, 2006; Kampa-Kokesch, 2002;
Orenstein, 2006; Passmore 2006; Smither & London, 2003; Sue-Chan & Latham, 2004;
Wang, & Wentling, 2001).
This research data, both published in peer reviewed journals and unpublished studies
conducted in university settings, is beginning to build a wider literature base of evidence
about the impact of coaching and its potential to assist individuals in the workplace.
Echoing Kampa-Kokesch’s work, this paper sought to draw these recent studies
together in summary form, including masters and doctoral level studies which have
been conducted. As with the previous review of papers it can be difficult to draw
comparisons between papers as authors frequently miss out key information about the
sample size, sampling process, methodology and occasionally fail to adequately
summarise their results. Following this review, the paper moves on to consider where
coaching research should turn its attention to next.
McGovern, Lindeman, Vergara, Murphy, Baker and Warrenfeltz (2001) (commonly
referred to as the Manchester Review study) sought to explore coaching return on
investment (ROI). The study involved a sample of 100 executives in the USA who had
received coaching during the previous four years. The participants were interviewed and
asked to quantify the impact which the coaching had made on their business. Secondly,
they were asked to estimate the confidence level of their estimates. Costs were
collected on the cost of the coaching received and a ROI was undertaken using a
simple formula;
7
Passmore, J., & Gibbes, C. (2007). The state of executive coaching research: What does the current literature tell us and what’s the
next for coaching research? International Coaching Psychology Review. 2(2). 116-128
ROI (%) = adjusted ROI – cost of the coaching received x100
cost of the coaching received.
To create the adjusted ROI figure, adjustments were made to isolate the effects of other
factors and the confidence level was used to further adjust down the potential impact.
Having made these adjustments the study concluded that coaching made a ROI of
545%, or that for every dollar invested in coaching, executives estimated that it
contributed $5.45 to the business.
Wang, and Wentling, 2001 – This study was based on a group of participants from a
World Bank of Asia training programme. Participants attended a three-week course and
were supported with six months online coaching. In addition to supporting transfer of
skills from the training programme, the researchers also found that on-line coaching
improved relationship, problem solving and enhanced motivation.
Kampa-Kokesch, 2002 – This study used the Multi-factor leadership questionnaire
(MLQ) to assess the impact of coaching on leadership behaviour. The study was based
on a sample of 50 coachees and 27 coaches. In reviewing the biographical data one of
the suggestions made in the paper was that coaching may be an intervention
associated with enhancing good behaviour rather than addressing under-performance.
The results suggested that coaching did impact leadership behaviour with increased
ratings on charismatic behaviour, impact on followers and inspiration action.
Smither and London, 2003 – This was a longitudinal study of over 400 managers which
found that executives who worked with a coach showed an improvement in
performance in terms of direct report and supervisor ratings using a multi-rater feedback
instrument.
8
Passmore, J., & Gibbes, C. (2007). The state of executive coaching research: What does the current literature tell us and what’s the
next for coaching research? International Coaching Psychology Review. 2(2). 116-128
Sue-Chan and Latham, 2004 – This paper re-visited work by behaviourial psychologist,
Monroe Lefkowitz on influencing undertaken during the 1950’s. The 2004 study looked
at the skills of experts, colleagues and the individual to bring about personal change. It
confirmed the important role of an expert whose opinion mattered. In establishing
credibility one important feature was how individuals dressed. The study found that
influencing was increased by 35% when the authority figure (coach) wore a tie.
Dawdy, 2004 – This was a study conducted at Capella University, USA. It aimed to
measure the effectiveness of executive coaching of coachees who had used a coach for
more than 6 months in 30-60 minute coaching sessions, compared with the personality
type of the coachee using a US based product; Peoplemap questionnaire. Peoplemap
clusters individuals into six types; leader-free spirit, leader-task, leader-people, free
spirit-task, people-task and people-free spirit. The results suggest that coaches need to
adapt their coaching style to coachee preferences.
Gonzalez, 2004 – The study reviewed coachees perceptions of what contributed
towards the coaching process. The study involved a sample of 12 coachees; six male
and six female who had received coaching using a collaborative coaching style.
Participants were interviewed through a semi-structured interview methodology and the
data was analysed using thematic analysis to reduce and cluster the data. The findings
highlight that for positive progress to be made the coach needed to command respect,
work collaboratively, use a discursive rather than instructional approach and act
authentically. The research identified the need for a combination of action and reflection
using gentle probing for transformational learning to occur.
Bush, 2005 – This study, undertaken at Pepperdine University, used a
phenomenological methodology to assess effectiveness of coaching based on coachee
9
Passmore, J., & Gibbes, C. (2007). The state of executive coaching research: What does the current literature tell us and what’s the
next for coaching research? International Coaching Psychology Review. 2(2). 116-128
perceptions. The results suggested that coaches have an impact on the overall
effectiveness of coaching. Key aspects of this were the experience of the coach in the
eyes of the coachee, the use of a structured process and a focus on development. In
addition, the research identified that coachees’ and the client organisation have
important roles to play through, selection of the coach, organisational culture and
coachee commitment.
Gyllensyen and Palmer, 2005b – This control group study involving 103 participants
from the UK and Scandinavia, examined the potential of coaching as an intervention to
reduce workplace stress. The study using a correlation design found that workplace
coaching was not a significant predictor of depression, anxiety and stress. However,
participants reported high levels of coaching effectiveness. The study found lack of
control and role ambiguity were significant predictors of stress.
Passmore (Forthcoming) – A doctoral study of executive coaches perceptions of the
executive coaching process. The study used Grounded Theory to explore coachees’
perceptions of the coaching relationship and the key elements which they valued. The
study went on to construct a theoretical model of executive coaching which highlighted
the importance of previous experiences in shaping expectations, the behaviour of the
coach in balancing challenge and relationship and the selection of homework tasks
which take account of the executives’ organisational role and preferences.
Evers, Brouwers and Tomic (2006) – This study involved a pre and post test
measurement of individuals and used a control group drawing on a group of 60
managers in a public service organisation; split between the control and experimental
conditions. Participants in the control group benefited from a behavioural coaching
intervention based on the co-coaching model (Whitworth, Kimsey-House & Sandahl;
1998). The results found significant different between the two groups and in favour of
10
Passmore, J., & Gibbes, C. (2007). The state of executive coaching research: What does the current literature tell us and what’s the
next for coaching research? International Coaching Psychology Review. 2(2). 116-128
coaching on two of six variables measured; outcome expectations with respect to acting
in a balanced way and self efficacy beliefs with respect to setting ones’ own goals. The
authors’ concluded that coaching had a positive effect, but noted that the self report
nature of the study limited the conclusions which could be drawn from the results.
Orenstein (2006) – This study used the Empathic Organic Questionnaire (Brown, 1972)
to assess the efficacy of coaching on an individual manager. The manager underwent a
period of coaching and was reviewed by a group of 20 colleagues to identify change at
the end of the period. The results supported the research hypothesis that the coachee
was rated to have changed most in behaviours which were the subject of the coaching.
Behaviours indirectly related to the objectives changed, while behaviours unrelated to
coaching changed least.
Jones and Spooner (2006) – This study used semi structured interviews to explore the
experiences of high achievers drawn from business and sport and their coaches. They
sought to identify which factors were perceived as critical for coaching success. The
researchers interviewed 21 high achievers and 7 coaches. The results echoed the
earlier work above highlighting the role of trust, credibility and challenge. In addition the
researchers drew out the need for the coach to act as a sponge, to be friendly without
becoming a friend, to offer rapid results and for the coach to be confident but focused
exclusively on the needs of the coachee.
In addition to the impact focused studies there have been a number of other valuable
contributions to coach research;
Liljenstrand, 2004 – A study undertaken at Alliant International University, San Diego
which compared the coaching practices of individuals from backgrounds in clinical
psychology, occupational psychology and business. The study drew on 928 practicing
11
Passmore, J., & Gibbes, C. (2007). The state of executive coaching research: What does the current literature tell us and what’s the
next for coaching research? International Coaching Psychology Review. 2(2). 116-128
coaches who undertook a survey describing their behaviours. Differences were
identified between the groups at the level of frequency and length of session, use of
assessment tools, perceptions of what constituted unethical practice and views on
certification. The study points towards the existence of two or more markets in the USA.
Luebbe, 2005 – This study was in two parts. The first part of the study was a qualitative
study of thirteen participants who were interviewed regarding their experiences of
coaching. The second part involved a survey of 66 coaches. The results indicated that
trust is the highest rated attribute, confirming that the relationship is a key component in
bringing about change. Secondary aspects were the coaches’ skills in summarising,
providing candid feedback, fostering independence and self awareness in the coachee
and building a partnership with the client organisation. Also important was the role of the
organisation in communicating the role and purpose of coaching to ensure coach and
coachee were appropriately matched.
Turner, 2004 – This study examined managers perceptions of coaching behaviours in
supporting the transfer of learning from a leadership programme to workplace practice.
The participants attended a two-week leadership programme involving strategic
thinking, marketing and employee involvement. The programme was supported by
coaching both during the event and post event. The researcher used a combination of
qualitative and quantitative unspecified methodologies to assess the impact of the
programme and coaching support. The results suggest that the process was most
effective in assisting coachees to develop more effective coaching behaviours, while it
was marginally less effective in supporting learning transfer.
12
Passmore, J., & Gibbes, C. (2007). The state of executive coaching research: What does the current literature tell us and what’s the
next for coaching research? International Coaching Psychology Review. 2(2). 116-128
Life coaching research
A small number of non-work based coaching studies too have been gathering and
publishing evidence of the impact of coaching. While these are not the focus of this
paper, they can provide useful insights into the parallel processes between executive
coaching and health and life coaching. Two examples of these are Grant’s paper (2003)
on life coaching and goal attainment, and his study comparing cognitive with
behavioural coaching (Grant, 2001). The study, based on a population of post-graduate
students, revealed that participation in the life coaching programme was associated with
goal attainment. In addition, coaching impacted positively on depression, anxiety and
stress, while the level of self-reflection increased among participants. As Grant noted
one of the key weaknesses of this, as with many other studies, was the lack of a control
group. The 2001 study was based on a non-clinical population of trainee accountants
and included the use of a control group. The study employed three parallel groups who
were offered cognitive, behavioural and cognitive-behavioural coaching. Participants in
the cognitive only stream benefited from ‘deep’ and ‘achieving’ approaches to learning,
reduced anxiety and lower levels of depression. However, academic performance
declined relative to the control group. Participants in the behavioural only coaching
benefited from reduced anxiety and improved academic performance. The combined
stream also benefited from improved academic performance along with reduced
anxiety.
The role of coaching case studies
While these empirical studies have been under way, others (Tobias, 1996; Giglio,
Diamante, & Urban 1998; Kraji, 2001; Cooper & Quick, 2003; Schnell, 2005; Winum,
2005; Blattner, 2005) have been publishing their own case studies.
13
Passmore, J., & Gibbes, C. (2007). The state of executive coaching research: What does the current literature tell us and what’s the
next for coaching research? International Coaching Psychology Review. 2(2). 116-128
Lowman (2001) has argued that case studies provide excellent evidence for building the
case for coaching, and were used extensively at the start of psychology by
psychodynamic thinkers. He cautions that to be useful the case studies should adhere
to a set of guide principles:
1. Description of case events
2. Diagnostic interpretation by the psychologist
3. Specific intervention used
4. Results
5. Possible explanations for the results.
However, the evidence from psychological research suggests that while case studies
have their place, the case for coaching needs to be built on control group studies with
random selection of participants between the study group and a wait list group. Where
students and others are drawn to use case studies, the following guidance might
provide the reader with an improved understanding of the study.
The evidence appears to be building to support the claim that coaching does have
positive impacts in a range of areas from stress management to self regard and
performance. However a word of caution from the wider evidence on 1-1 interventions
shows that the evidence is not totally conclusive. One example is the meta-study on
feedback (Kluger & DeNisi, 1996). The meta-research of 600 studies on feedback
interventions suggests that in just over 30% of cases feedback was followed by a
decrease in performance. As feedback is often seen by coaches as a key tool in
developing self awareness, caution should be advised when offering it. While the
evidence is not available to confirm this, gently building the evidence from feedback,
monitoring the coachee’s changing reactions and responding appropriately, may be
14
Passmore, J., & Gibbes, C. (2007). The state of executive coaching research: What does the current literature tell us and what’s the
next for coaching research? International Coaching Psychology Review. 2(2). 116-128
features which reduce the potential negative effects. A second issue, common to all
scientific research, is that while studies showing positive results are published, those
that fail to find an impact go unrecorded.
Table 3: Guidelines for coaching case studies
●Description of the context (organisational setting)
●Description of the coachee’s issue
●Objectives agreed by the coach & coachee
●Selection of approach by the coach
●Description of what happened during the coaching
relationship
●Outcomes and how were these measured/assessed
●Reflections on lessons learnt by the coach.
As a result, it is fair to say that the evidence for coaching having an impact on work
based performance was weak, but is slowly beginning to build. Three generic criticisms
can be made of many of the twenty or so studies to date. The studies have typically
been based on a small sample size. In the main they have failed to use control groups.
They have lacked a random allocation to groups. If coaching is to evidence, without
doubt its impact, and answer the question which Filery-Travis and Lane (2006) reflected
on, then more robust studies are needed.
15
Passmore, J., & Gibbes, C. (2007). The state of executive coaching research: What does the current literature tell us and what’s the
next for coaching research? International Coaching Psychology Review. 2(2). 116-128
The first conclusion from this paper is that coaching research needs to continue, and
that studies using larger sample sizes, control groups and random allocation of
participants should become the norm, not the exception. But in which direction should
coaching research travel? For the answer to this question, this paper looks to research
work in counselling which has a fifty-year head start on coaching.
Counselling psychology research
One obvious comparison of the coaching process is with counselling, as both involve
one to one relationship, which are largely confidential, between a paid worker and
customer and employ a series of techniques to help the person achieve a goal set at the
start of the relationship. There are also of course some important differences, such as
client group and presenting issues. What does a review of the counselling literature
reveal about the research into behaviours in the counselling room?
An initial review of the counselling literature suggests that counselling research has
travelled a similar pathway. As a 1-1 working relationship, counselling’s hundred year
history has provided evidence from thousands of studies. There is a good
understanding of what work, some shared assumptions about why this works and
evidence based practice which has emerged as a result of this history of research.
Fillery-Travis and Lane (2006) asked a crucial initial question of coaching; does it work?
The answer from the research into counselling is ‘yes’, and the evidence from coaching
appears to be heading towards a similar conclusion. While in counselling this is a strong
conclusion to reach, a meta-analysis of 475 controlled outcome studies concluded that,
at the end of the treatment, the average client was 80% better off than a similar
untreated client (Smith, Glass and Miller, 1980). Other meta-studies have reached
similar conclusions for the impact of counselling (Lambert, Shapiro and Bergin, 1986;
16
Passmore, J., & Gibbes, C. (2007). The state of executive coaching research: What does the current literature tell us and what’s the
next for coaching research? International Coaching Psychology Review. 2(2). 116-128
Howard, Kopt, Krause and Orlinsky, 1986) although with different rates of gain for
treated over untreated clients. The trend is clear, counselling as an intervention
produces beneficial results as evidenced in multiple control group studies.
This conclusion for counselling was not reached without much trial and error. Early
studies neglected the use of control groups, as counsellors did not wish to exclude
people from treatment. Once control groups were established, this was done through
waiting list groups, with participants being seen on the basis of need. The result was
that study results were challenged over the lack of random allocation of participants to
groups. As the number of studies increased these procedural issues were gradually
overcome and the evidence of counselling as an effective intervention became
compelling (Lambert and Cattani-Thompson, 1980). Coaching psychology is inching
towards this outcome, at present, with a predominance of poor-quality studies.
Once an answer to the question ‘does it work?’ was resolved in counselling, the
research question was redefined. The next challenge was to understand what within
counselling produced the positive impact on clients who themselves had diverse needs.
The research question generated significant numbers of comparative studies (Hill and
Corbett, 1993). The result of this research is that many forms of intervention appear to
produce a positive effect across a wide group of needs in varying timescales. The one
exception, agreed internationally, to this is anxiety disorders which appears to be best
treated by cognitive behaviour therapy (Barlow, Craske, Cerny, and Klossko, 1989;
Lambert and Bergin, 1992). In the UK, opinions are stronger regarding the potential
advantages of cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) over other interventions. This view is
built upon the work of the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE,
2005), a government agency reviewing clinical impacts, whose research supports the
claims that CBT is the most effective 1-1 interventions for mental health treatment.
17
Passmore, J., & Gibbes, C. (2007). The state of executive coaching research: What does the current literature tell us and what’s the
next for coaching research? International Coaching Psychology Review. 2(2). 116-128
Luborsky, Singer and Luborsky, (1975) have argued that all counselling interventions
make a positive contribution, whatever the methodology. Further USA meta-analysis
comparing different theoretical approaches concluded there was no significant
difference between interventions which were intended to be therapeutic (Wamplod,
1997).
One of the problems is that there were no agreed assessments for client level of need
or of the outcome achieved over a defined period in counselling. This led to disputes
about which intervention works best, and what is best anyway. In response several
changes have been made to standardise the input (client need), process (counsellor
behaviour) and outcome (client improvement). Outcome batteries were developed to
measure client outcomes (Waskow and Parloff, 1975). Behaviour questionnaires have
been developed to assess client need (Lambert and Hill, 1994) and manuals devised to
assist counsellor’s in adherence to the methodology (Lambert and Ogles, 1988). This
work has helped NICE and others to attempt a more balanced comparison of
interventions.
This debate is beginning to occur in coaching psychology (Kilburg, 2004). At present
there is limited evidence-based research (Grant’s 2003 study being the exception) to
support which interventions generate the most positive outcomes for coachees, or
which methodologies work best with which coachee problems. Kilburg (2004) has
argued the results from coaching research will be the same as in counselling, and that
‘all should have prizes’. His conclusion is that psychologists should focus attention on
other areas of research as opposed to researching which method works best.
However, the evidence from Grant’s study (2003) and the NICE research in the UK
suggests that this area may be worthy of further research, and that differences maybe
found between different interventions. This difference may be magnified given the
18
Passmore, J., & Gibbes, C. (2007). The state of executive coaching research: What does the current literature tell us and what’s the
next for coaching research? International Coaching Psychology Review. 2(2). 116-128
diverse range of needs in the non-clinical population, that different interventions maybe
more suited to both different individuals (Dawdy, 2004) and to different issues
(Passmore, 2007).
In counselling there has been a steady shift towards the blending of different methods to
form an integrated approach (Smith, 1982). Hill and Corbett (1993) note; “few therapists
now rigidly adhere to a single theoretical model”. Instead most blends cognitive, with
behavioural and humanistic elements.
If we can make progress on the evidence of using different methodologies, what role
does the counsellor or coach play in the process? Research in counselling suggests
that the therapist has a crucial role to play. A key skill in this regard is empathy. Early
research (Robinson, 1950) demonstrated that a counsellor’s remarks did have an
impact on the client’s next statement and that contributed to the process of client
change. What has been more difficult has been to capture the behaviours.
In executive coaching this research has begun and has started to identify common
coach behaviours which may be most beneficial. These include; using a collaborative
approach with the coachee (Gonzalez, 2004; Luebbe, 2005; Jones & Spooner, 2006),
an organisation culture which is open about the reasons for coaching and offers wider
support to the coachee (Luebbe 2005; Bush 2004), being authentic or congruent in the
work with the coachee (Gonzalez 2004) and being seen by the coach as experienced or
credible (Bush, 2005; Jones & Spooner, 2006). In the UK the work of the European
Mentoring and Coaching Council (EMCC) (Willis, 2005), using the Delphi technique of
an expert panel has developed a set of coaching competencies which are believed to
contribute to positive outcomes.
19
Passmore, J., & Gibbes, C. (2007). The state of executive coaching research: What does the current literature tell us and what’s the
next for coaching research? International Coaching Psychology Review. 2(2). 116-128
The history of counselling research also reveals similar problems to those suggested
earlier for coaching (Roth and Fonagy, 2005). Firstly, counselling has seen a tendency
to publish only positive outcome studies. Studies with null or with negative findings
(damage to coachees) are either never submitted or are rejected during the peer review
process. This is the ‘file drawer’ problem; with unsuccessful studies being left in the
drawer. Secondly the measures of success vary widely. Thirdly, the success criteria are
not always fully described. Finally, many studies have suffered from small population
sizes which impacts on the ability to do more sensitive analysis of the data.
The implications for coaching psychology
What are the implications of counselling research for executive coaching? Firstly, we
need more research to understand the impact of coaching on performance. In doing
such research we need to clearly define what aspect of performance we are seeking to
assess, and to describe the nature of the coaching intervention, frequency and
methodology. We also need to be explicit about the results which are expected. Such
studies at post-graduate level can begin to build a useful bank of evidence for
subsequent meta-studies.
At present much of the coaching research from the United States is post graduate in
nature and largely unpublished. As we have highlighted, it has been undertaken with
small sample sizes, no control groups and no random allocation of participants. Further,
the studies frequently fail to define or describe the coaching intervention or methodology
employed. If real progress is to be made, the research needs to be with samples of
hundred plus participants in randomised control studies. We believe this may best be
achieved through the involvement of professional bodies such as the BPS, American
Psychological Association (APA), Chartered Institute of Personnel & Development
(CIPD), Association for Coaching (AC), European Mentoring and Coaching Council and
20
Passmore, J., & Gibbes, C. (2007). The state of executive coaching research: What does the current literature tell us and what’s the
next for coaching research? International Coaching Psychology Review. 2(2). 116-128
the International Coaching Federation (ICF), as well as funding bodies such as
European Social Research Council (ESRC) and the Foundation for Coaching to fund a
series of doctoral level studies at institutions currently offering coaching and
occupational psychology programmes.
The commercial sector too can make a positive contribution. The main large national
and multinational organisations using coaching could commission longitudinal research,
to assess the impact of coaching on team performance over time. A typical study might
involve offering coaching to members of a team over a defined period in geographical
location, while the control study received structured conversations, thus removing the
potential of positive gain from the Hawthorne effect. Agreed targets could be set and
measured at the start, at an intermediate point and 6 or 12 months after the coaching
has been concluded.
Through a series of published studies, we can over the coming three to five years build
up the evidence to confirm what many coaching psychologists intuitively believe; that
coaching does positively impact on workplace performance.
A second focus of study is around the different coaching methodologies. Research in
the UK (Palmer and Whybrow, 2006) identified the three most popular coaching
methodologies as facilitative, cognitive and behavioural coaching. What is less clear is;
what do these different approaches consist of? And which approach is the most
effective for the different challenges which executive coaches face? So is cognitive
behavioural coaching the most effective intervention for addressing self-regard, and low
self-esteem. Is behavioural coaching best at addressing behavioural skills? Is facilitative
the most effective for complex problem solving?
21
Passmore, J., & Gibbes, C. (2007). The state of executive coaching research: What does the current literature tell us and what’s the
next for coaching research? International Coaching Psychology Review. 2(2). 116-128
A third area of study is on the behaviours which coaches use. This is the subject of this
research. At the root of this is a desire to begin to understand what behaviours make a
difference in coaching? The experiences of counselling suggest that this is a complex
and difficult question. The efforts to explore this through micro skills and behavioural
codings have failed to provide a definitive answer. It would seem that with the
substantial overlay between different interventions in the behaviours used. It might be
hypothesised that similar conclusions may be true for coaching. It might equally be
hypothesised that more experienced coaches intuitively discover what works overtime
and unconsciously incorporate this into their behaviour.
The benefits of coaching research
The coaching profession is still in its infancy but psychology has a significant role to
play. We have suggested that one unique role is to use coaching practice for informing
our understanding through research.
Three strands of research on coaching efficacy, the efficacy of different interventions
and the coaching behaviours can help in three different aspects of coaching life. The
benefits for organisations are to understand more accurately whether coaching is an
effective investment, and what outcomes can be anticipated.
The benefits of coaching research for coaching practitioners is to help us better
understand which interventions work and when. Many coaching psychologists already
have an intuitive feel for what works and when, but research provides the evidence for
our practice. Coaching psychology should be about evidence-based practice.
The benefits for those in training are an improvement in the quality of training offered.
To ethically train coaches, coaching psychologists need a clear and evidenced based
22
Passmore, J., & Gibbes, C. (2007). The state of executive coaching research: What does the current literature tell us and what’s the
next for coaching research? International Coaching Psychology Review. 2(2). 116-128
approach. Psychologists also need, in their role as coaching trainers, an understanding
of which behaviours have impact, and how to interact. Many have a view about this,
drawing from experience and from research in other one to one relationships, but even
here the research base, such as counselling, is weak, and coaching psychology has
more work to do.
Conclusions
The psychological profession is only one group laying claim to the important area of
coaching. However, psychological training and understanding of human behaviour puts
the coaching psychologists in a strong position to contribute towards this new
profession. This contribution can be through research-based practice for the benefits of
organisations, coaching practitioners and trainees.
23
Passmore, J., & Gibbes, C. (2007). The state of executive coaching research: What does the current literature tell us and what’s the
next for coaching research? International Coaching Psychology Review. 2(2). 116-128
References
Alderfer, C. P., & Brown, L. D. (1972) Designing an ‘empathetic questionnaire’ for
organisational research. Journal of Applied Psychology, 56, 456-460.
Barlow, D. H., Craske, M., Cerny, J. A., Klossko, J. (1989). Behavioural treatment of
panic disorder. Behavioural therapy, 20, 261-282.
Berglas, S. (2002). The very real dangers of executive coaching, Harvard Business
Review, June, 86-92.
Blattner, J. (2005). Coaching: The successful adventure of a downwardly mobile
executive. Consulting Psychology Journal: Practice and Research, 57(1), 3-13.
Bush, M. W. (2005). Client perception of effectiveness in coaching. Dissertation Abstract
International Section A: Humanities & Social Science. Vol. 66 (4-A). 1417. Ann Arbor,
MI: Proquest, International Microfilms International.
Copper, C. L. & Quick, J. (2003). The stress and loneliness of success. Counseling
Psychology Quarterly. 16(1), 1-7.
Dawdy, G. N. (2004). Executive coaching: A comparative design exploring the
perceived effectiveness of coaching and methods. Dissertation Abstract International
Section B: The Sciences & Engineering, Vol. 65 (5-B) 2674. Ann Arbor, MI: Proquest,
International Microfilms International.
24
Passmore, J., & Gibbes, C. (2007). The state of executive coaching research: What does the current literature tell us and what’s the
next for coaching research? International Coaching Psychology Review. 2(2). 116-128
Evers, W. J. G., Brouwers, A. & Tomic, W. (2006). A quasi- experimental study of
management coaching effectiveness. Consulting Psychology Journal: Practice and
Research, 58(3), 174-182.
Foster, S. & Lendl, J. (1996). Eye Movement Desensitization and Reprocessing: Four
case studies of a new tool for executive coaching and restoring employee performance
after setbacks. Consulting Psychology Journal: Practice and Research. 48(3), 155-161.
Fillery-Travis, A. & Lane, D. (2006). Does coaching work or are we asking the wrong
questions? International Coaching Psychology Review. 1(1), 23-36.
Furnham, A. (2005). Derailing behaviours of executives. Paper to Chartered Institute of
Personnel & Development Conference, London. April 2005.
Garman, A. N., Whiston, D. L., & Zlatoper, K. W. (2000). Media perceptions of executive
coaching and the formal preparation of coaches. Consulting Psychology Journal:
Practice and Research, 48, 155-205.
Gerner, C. (1997). Coaching: Theory & practice. Unpublished masters thesis, University
of San Francisco, California.
Giglio, L. Diamante, T., & Urban, J. (1998). Coaching a leader: leveraging change at the
top. Journal of Management Development, 17(2), 93-105.
Gonzalez, A. L. (2004). Transforming conversations: Executive coaches and business
leaders in dialogical collaboration for growth. Dissertation Abstract International Section
A: Humanities and Social Science, Vol. 65 (3-A) 1023. Ann Arbor, MI: Proquest,
International Microfilms International.
25
Passmore, J., & Gibbes, C. (2007). The state of executive coaching research: What does the current literature tell us and what’s the
next for coaching research? International Coaching Psychology Review. 2(2). 116-128
Grant, A. M (2001). Coaching for enhanced performance: Comparing cognitive and
behavioural approaches to coaching. Paper presented to Spearman Seminar:
Extending Intelligence, Sydney 2001
Grant, A. M. (2003). The impact of life coaching on goal attainment, meta-cognition and
mental health. Social behaviour and Personality. 31(3) 253-264.
Gyllensyen, K. & Palmer, S. (2005a). The relationship between coaching and workplace
stress. International Journal of Health Promotion and Education, 43(3), 97-103
Gyllensyen, K. & Palmer, S. (2005b). Can coaching reduce workplace stress: A quasi
experimental study. International Journal of Evidence-based Coaching & Mentoring,
3(2) 75-87. Ann Arbor, MI: Proquest, International Microfilms International.
Hall, D. T., Otazo, K. L., & Hollenbeck, G. P. (1999). Behind closed doors: what really
happens in executive coaching. Organisational Dynamics, 27(3), 39-52.
Hill, C. E. & Corbett, M.M. (1993). A perspective on the history of process and outcome
research in counselling psychology. Journal of Counselling Psychology, 40(1), 3-24.
Howard, K. I., Kopt, S. M., Krause, M. S., & Orlinsky, D. E. (1986). The dose-effect
relationship in psychotherapy. American Psychologist. 41, 159-164.
Jones, G. & Spooner, K. (2006). Coaching high achievers. Consulting Psychology
Journal: Practice and Research, 58(1), 40-50.
26
Passmore, J., & Gibbes, C. (2007). The state of executive coaching research: What does the current literature tell us and what’s the
next for coaching research? International Coaching Psychology Review. 2(2). 116-128
Kampa-Kokesch, S. (2002). Executive coaching as an individually tailored consultation
intervention: Does it increase leadership? Dissertation Abstracts International: Section
B: The Sciences & Engineering, Vol. 62 (7-B). 3408. Ann Arbor, MI: Proquest,
International Microfilms International.
Kampa-Kokesch, S. and Anderson, M. (2001) ‘Executive coaching: a comprehensive
review of the literature’, Consulting Psychology Journal: Practice and Research, 53(4),
205-227.
Kilburg, R. (2004) ‘Trudging towards Dodoville: Conceptual approaches and cases
studies in executive coaching’, Consulting Psychology Journal: Practice and Research.
56(4)
Kralj, M. M. (2001). Coaching at the top: assisting a chief executive and his team.
Consulting Psychology Journal: Practice and Research, 53(2) 108-116.
Kruger, A. & DeNisi, A. (1996). The effects of feedback interventions on performance: a
historical review, meta analysis and preliminary feedback theory. Psychological Bulletin,
119, 254-285.
Lambert, M. J., Shapiro, D. A., & Bergin, A. E., (1986). The effectiveness of
psychotherapy. In S. L. Garfield & A. E. Bergin (Eds.), Handbook of psychotherapy and
behaviour change (3rd edition). pp157-212. New York: Wiley.
Lambert, M. J. & Bergin, A. E. (1992). Achievements and limitations of psychotherapy
research. In D. K. Freedman (Ed), History of psychotherapy: A century of change
(pp360-390). Washington DC: American Psychology Association.
27
Passmore, J., & Gibbes, C. (2007). The state of executive coaching research: What does the current literature tell us and what’s the
next for coaching research? International Coaching Psychology Review. 2(2). 116-128
Lambert, M. J. & Cattani-Thompson, K. (1996). Current findings regarding the
effectiveness of counselling: Implications for practice. Journal of Counseling and
Development. 74, 601-608.
Lambert, M. J. & Hill, C. E. (1994). Methodological issues in studying process and
outcome. In A. E. Bergin & S. L. Garfield (Eds), Handbook of psychotherapy and
behaviour change (4th edition). New York: Wiley.
Lambert, M. J. & Ogles, B. M. (1988). Treatment manual: problems and promise.
Journal of Integrative and Eclectic Psychotherapy, 7, 187-204.
Jones, G. & Spooner, K. (2006). Coaching high achievers. Consulting Psychology
Journal: Practice and Research. 58(1), 40-50.
Laske, O. E. (1999). Transformative effects of coaching on executive’s professional
agendas, Dissertation Abstracts International: Section B: The Sciences & Engineering
60(5-B) 2386. Ann Arbor, MI: Proquest, International Microfilms International.
Liljenstrand, A. M. (2004). A comparison of practices and approaches to coaching
based on academic background. Dissertation Abstracts International: Section B: The
Sciences & Engineering 64(10-B) 5261. Ann Arbor, MI: Proquest, International
Microfilms International.
Lowman, R. L. (2001). Constructing a literature from case studies: promises and
limitations of the method. Consulting Psychology Journal: Practice and Research, 53(2),
119-123.
28
Passmore, J., & Gibbes, C. (2007). The state of executive coaching research: What does the current literature tell us and what’s the
next for coaching research? International Coaching Psychology Review. 2(2). 116-128
Luborsky, L., Singer, B. Luborsky, L (1975). Comparative studies of psychotherapies: Is
it true that “everyone has won and all must have prizes”? Archives of General
Psychiatry, 32, 995-1008.
Luebbe, D. M (2005). The three way mirror of executive coaching. Dissertation
Abstracts International: Section B: The Sciences & Engineering 66(3-B) 1771. Ann
Arbor, MI: Proquest, International Microfilms International.
McGovern, J., Lindeman, M., Vergara, M., Murphy, S., Baker, L. & Warrenfeltz, R.
(2001). Maximising the impact of executive coaching: behavioural change,
organisational outcomes and return on investment. The Manchester Review. 6(1), 1-9.
Miller, W. & Rollnick, S. &, (2002). Motivational Interviewing: Preparing people for
change. 2nd Edition. New York: Guildford Press.
National Institute for Clinical Excellence. (2005). Clinical guidelines for treating mental
health problems. London: National Institute for Clinical Excellence.
Olivero, G., Bane, K. and Kopelman, R. (1997) Executive coaching as a transfer of
training tool: effects on productivity in a public agency, Public Personnel Management,
26(4), 461- 469.
Orenstein, R. (2006). Measuring executive coaching efficacy? The answer was right
here all the time. Consulting Psychology Journal: Practice and Research, 58(2),
106-116.
29
Passmore, J., & Gibbes, C. (2007). The state of executive coaching research: What does the current literature tell us and what’s the
next for coaching research? International Coaching Psychology Review. 2(2). 116-128
Passmore, J. & Whybrow, A. (2007) ‘Motivational interviewing’, In Palmer, S and
Whybrow, A. (Eds). The Handbook of Coaching Psychology. London:
Brunner-Routledge.
Passmore, J. (2006) (Ed) Excellence in coaching: the industry guide to best practice.
London: Kogan Page
Passmore (2007) Integrative coaching. Consulting Psychology Journal: Practice and
Research. 59(1).
Passmore. J (2007) Unpublished Doctorate in Occupational Psychology, The
Psychology of Executive Coaching, University of East London.
Robinson, F. R. (1950). Principles and procedures in student counselling. New York:
Harper.
Roth, A. & Fonagy, P. (2005). What works for whom?: A critical review of psychotherapy
research. New York: Guilford Press.
Schnell, E. R. (2005). A case study of executive coaching as a support mechanism
during organisational growth and evolution. Consulting Psychology Journal: Practice
and Research, 57(1) 41-56.
Smith, D. (1982). Trends in counselling and psychotherapy. American Psychologist, 37,
807-809.
30
Passmore, J., & Gibbes, C. (2007). The state of executive coaching research: What does the current literature tell us and what’s the
next for coaching research? International Coaching Psychology Review. 2(2). 116-128
Smith, M. L Glass, G. V. & Miller, T. I. (1980). The benefits of psychotherapy. Baltimore:
John Hopkins University Press.
Smither, J. & London, M. (2003). ‘Can working with an executive coach improve
multi-source feedback ratings over time? A quasi experimental field study, Personnel
Psychology, 56, 23-44.
Spence, G., Cavanagh, M., & Grant, A. M. (2006). Duty of care in an unregulated
industry: Initial findings on the diversity and practice of Australian coaches. International
Coaching Psychological Review. 1(1), 71-85.
Sue-Chan, C. & Latham, G. P., (2004). The relative effectiveness of expert, peer and
self coaches. Applied Psychology. 53(2) 260-278.
Tobias, L. L (1996). Coaching executives. Consulting Psychology Journal: Practice and
Research, 43(2) 87-95.
Turner, C. A. (2004). Executive coaching: The perception of executive coaching from
the executive’s perspective. Dissertation Abstracts International: Section A: Humanities
& Social Science 65(1-A) 48. Ann Arbor, MI: Proquest, International Microfilms
International.
Wamplod, B. E., Mondin, G. W., Moody, M., Stich, G., Benson, K. & Ahn, H. (1997). A
meta-analysis of outcome studies comparing bona-fide psychotherapies: Empirically ‘all
must have prizes’. Psychological Bulletin, 122, 203-215.
31
Passmore, J., & Gibbes, C. (2007). The state of executive coaching research: What does the current literature tell us and what’s the
next for coaching research? International Coaching Psychology Review. 2(2). 116-128
Wang, L. & Wentling, T. (2001). ‘The relationship between distance coaching and
transfer of training’. Paper presented at The Academy of Human Resource
Development, Tulsa, Oklahoma, 4 March.
Waskow, I. E., & Parloff, M. B. (Eds) (1975). Psychotherapy change measures (DHEW
Publications No 74-120). Washington DC: Government printing Office.
Whitworth, J., Kimsey- House, H., & Sandahl, P. (1998). Co-coaching: New skills for
coaching people towards success in work and life. Palo Alto: Davies Black Publishing.
Whybrow, A. & Palmer, S. (2006). Taking stock: A survey of coaching psychologists’
practice and perspectives. International Coaching Psychology Review. 1(1) 56-70.
Willis, P. (2005). Competency Research Project: Phase 2 Output. London: European
Mentoring and Coaching Council. Downloaded on 12 October 2006 from
http://www.coachingpsychologist.net/Forums/showthread.php?t=47.
Winum, P. C. (2005). Effectiveness of a high potential African American executive: The
anatomy of an executive engagement. Consulting Psychology Journal: Practice and
Research, 57(1) 71-89.
32
