Abstract
Few empirical studies have used a randomized controlled design to evaluate the impact of coaching, and there are even fewer that have compared coaching with other interventions. In the current field study, we investigated the relative effectiveness of coaching as an intervention to reduce procrastination. In a randomized controlled study, participants (N = 84) were assigned to an individual coaching, a self-coaching, a group training, or a control group condition. Results indicate that individual coaching and group training were effective in reducing procrastination and facilitating goal attainment. Individual coaching created a high degree of satisfaction and was superior in helping participants attaining their goals, whereas group training successfully promoted the acquisition of relevant knowledge. The results for the self-coaching condition show that independently performing exercises without being supported by a coach is not sufficient for high goal attainment. Moreover, mediation analysis show that a coach’s transformational and transactional leadership behavior influenced participants’ perceived autonomy support and intrinsic motivation, resulting in beneficial coaching outcomes. The results may guide the selection of appropriate human resource development methods: If there is a general need to systematically prepare employees to perform on specific tasks, group training seems appropriate due to lower costs. However, when certain aspects of working conditions or individual development goals are paramount, coaching might be indicated. However, further research is needed to compare the relative effectiveness of coaching with other interventions in different contexts.
Highlights
In today’s fast-changing economy, the growth, productivity, and continuity of an organization are determined by employees’ professional and personal qualifications (Kauffeld, 2010; Salas et al, 2012)
To test the hypotheses on the effectiveness of individual coaching, self-coaching, and group training, the intervention programs were evaluated by comparing the degree of contentrelated knowledge and satisfaction at posttreatment (t2)
Our findings show that both individual coaching and group training were effective interventions to reduce procrastination, which is in line with existing research on the effectiveness of procrastination and time-management-related interventions (e.g., Van Eerde, 2003; Green and Skinner, 2005; Karas and Spada, 2009; Schmidt and Thamm, 2008, Unpublished)
Summary
In today’s fast-changing economy, the growth, productivity, and continuity of an organization are determined by employees’ professional and personal qualifications (Kauffeld, 2010; Salas et al, 2012). One of the most widely used methods for enhancing individual and organizational performance is training (Arthur et al, 2003). Relative Effectiveness of Coaching invested $62 billion in training in 2014. There is a large body of literature on the effectiveness of organizational training suggesting that this investment is justified (e.g., Morris and Robie, 2001; Arthur et al, 2003; Keith and Frese, 2008; Salas et al, 2008). Organizations have increasingly relied on workplace and executive coaching, which has grown into a mainstream developmental activity (Grant et al, 2010)
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
