Obstacles to executive coaching during planned radical organisational change
type: CreativeWork
description: There is currently limited research on either coaching in organisations or executive coaching in Planned Radical Organisational Change (PROC). The research that does exist on these subjects focuses primarily on whether coaching is considered efficacious, and there has been no research on the obstacles preventing the adoption of executive coaching to assist divisional, functional and central leaders during PROC as part of change implementation programmes. The primary aim of this research was to uncover the reasons why executive coaching is not used in these situations, including whether some senior PROC leaders may block such investment because they are Machiavellian or not change-ready. The research uses a mixed-method design. Two hundred and sixty-two high-ranking executives were surveyed on their attitude towards executive coaching, their Machiavellianism and their change-readiness. Details about their previous roles in PROC, their rank and current employer were also collected. Nearly half of these leaders were in organisations with more than 10,000 employees and over three-quarters in organisations of more than 1,000. Over three-quarters were chief officers or directors. Hierarchical regression was used to create three models to understand the relationship of these variables with the attitude of senior executives towards coaching. Quantitative analysis informed the next step of the sequential mixed method, and 12 executives were interviewed. These were systematically chosen from the survey respondents, based on their Machiavellianism score and role in PROC. These semi-structured interviews examined the results from the survey analysis and other potential issues relating to the procurement of coaching. Qualitative analysis was used to uncover underlying themes from interview transcripts. The quantitative and qualitative elements were then synthesised. A key qualitative finding was the belief among senior executives that, although coaching was valuable for an indiv…
abstract: There is currently limited research on either coaching in organisations or executive coaching in Planned Radical Organisational Change (PROC). The research that does exist on these subjects focuses primarily on whether coaching is considered efficacious, and there has been no research on the obstacles preventing the adoption of executive coaching to assist divisional, functional and central leaders during PROC as part of change implementation programmes. The primary aim of this research was to uncover the reasons why executive coaching is not used in these situations, including whether some senior PROC leaders may block such investment because they are Machiavellian or not change-ready. The research uses a mixed-method design. Two hundred and sixty-two high-ranking executives were surveyed on their attitude towards executive coaching, their Machiavellianism and their change-readiness. Details about their previous roles in PROC, their rank and current employer were also collected. Nearly half of these leaders were in organisations with more than 10,000 employees and over three-quarters in organisations of more than 1,000. Over three-quarters were chief officers or directors. Hierarchical regression was used to create three models to understand the relationship of these variables with the attitude of senior executives towards coaching. Quantitative analysis informed the next step of the sequential mixed method, and 12 executives were interviewed. These were systematically chosen from the survey respondents, based on their Machiavellianism score and role in PROC. These semi-structured interviews examined the results from the survey analysis and other potential issues relating to the procurement of coaching. Qualitative analysis was used to uncover underlying themes from interview transcripts. The quantitative and qualitative elements were then synthesised. A key qualitative finding was the belief among senior executives that, although coaching was valuable for an indiv…
author: Graynoth, Terence
language: en
date published: 2022
date modified: 2026-07-24T03:42:40Z
provider: Oxford Brookes University
publisher: Networked Digital Library of Theses and Dissertations
type: WebPage
source organization: Oxford Brookes University

PropertyValue
property ID: DOI
value: 10.24384/ep54-dq31