The scope of coaching in the context of organizational change

Nowadays, organizations operate in the dynamic, competitive and challenging global environment (Allen et al. 2013). As the global business environment continues to be uncertain, complex and ambiguous, organizations should be ready to initiate and manage change (Amagoh 2008). Change affects all organisations (By 2005). Dynamics in both external and internal environment can trigger a requirement for change (Spector 2007). The impact of external environment and the shift between life cycle stages can cause organisational change. Burnes (2004) defines organizational change as ‘an ever-present’ form of organizational life that focuses on both the performance of the whole organisation and day-to-day operations.

Organizations respond to the trigger events in different ways: focusing on new behavioral patterns or enhancing the financial or technological effectiveness. It is worth mentioning that effective change involves both content – ‘what is being changed’ and process – ‘how are the changes being implemented’ (Spector 2007).

Rank et al. (2004) believe that creativity, innovation and initiative facilitate organizational change. Open innovation is considered as the latest corporate philosophy which integrates internal experience and capabilities and external knowledge and competence to accelerate the development of organization (Patra and Krishna 2015). Corte et al. (2015) argue that customers are a valuable source for innovation because they can contribute to organization’s innovative process by sharing their opinions and expressing their ideas.

To cope with the constraints on changes in the business environment, it is necessary to develop new knowledge and skills as well as the ability to apply integrated ways of thinking in a short period of time. Change demands from organizations the ability to manage change, to develop and apply new knowledge and skills. This is especially important in the current period of increasing globalization, deregulation and the high growth pace of technological innovation (By 2005). Ambiguity, uncertainty and inconsistency of business environment provide the impetus for organizational learning, diversity and renewal (Graetz and Smith 2010).

Change can also cause a number of problems. Individuals need to achieve goals and develop, at the same time, they have to deal with the troubles caused by change. In the period of organizational change, people face with the need to develop and carry out the established goals, and at the same time, they need to deal with organizational turbulence (Grant 2014). Therefore, there is a need to facilitate people in organizations in the period of change to enhance goal attainment, encourage development and support them to tackle change problems.

There are a variety of practices, including coaching, that facilitate people providing them support and accelerating the process of setting and achieving work-related goals (Megginson & Boydell 1979, Grant 2014). According to the opinions of different scholars (Kelley et al. 2005; Connor and Pokora 2007; Garvey et al. 2009; Cox et al. 2011; Audet and Couteret 2012; Cox 2013; Bozer et al. 2013; Page and de Haan 2014), coaching can promote sustainable organizational change.

Therefore, the aim of this paper is to explore the scope of coaching that is the extent of the subject matter in the context of organizational change considering peculiar issues associated with the use of coaching in Latvia and Lithuania.

The paper seeks to address the following research questions:

For the purposes of this study, the authors employed two-step research: content analysis of both coaching definitions extracted from the literature and experts’ interview with subsequent comparative analysis of the obtained results.

Coaching is becoming increasingly popular in today’s business environment (Hamlin et al. 2011); more and more organisations are using coaching as a means of improving performance, developing skills and capability, facilitating leadership development, as well as career managing. CIPD’s (Chartered Institute of Personnel Development) Coaching Climate survey report (2011) proves this fact. As it was stated, compared with CIPD coaching survey 2009, the number of respondents who reported that coaching is focused on improving good performance increased from a quarter to almost half. More than 60 % of respondents reported that the purpose of coaching is to aid leadership development, this is three times more compared to 2009. Almost a quarter of respondents always focus on improving personal effectiveness delivering coaching assignments. Supporting career transition is also among key areas of coaching agenda, 10 % of respondents always and 44 % frequently address this issue in coaching agenda.

Vidal-Salazar et al. (2012) offer empirical evidence of the positive effect of coaching on organisational change. The results of Baron and Morin (2010) study suggest that coaching can have a real practical impact on the development of strong self-efficacy that enables to perform tasks more effectively. As a management developmental activity, coaching promotes organisational change and leads to sustainability (Bozer et al. 2013). As an interactive form of organisational learning and leadership development (De Haan et al. 2011, Page and de Haan 2014), coaching enhances the executive’s behavioral change through self-awareness and learning, and thereby contributes to individual and organizational success (Bozer et al. 2013, Berg & Karlsen 2011). Behavioural change within the organisational change opens a number of opportunities for coaching as a tool in implementing and sustaining change (Stober 2008). Coaching can be used to encourage teamworking of existing groups, develop newly-formed teams, improve the communicating skills of team leaders and develop cross boundary teams (Connor and Pokora 2007). Coaching promotes the development of entrepreneurial skills through facilitating implementation of the own strategic vision (Audet and Couteret 2012). Coaching facilitates moving beyond innovative technologies from finding ideas and developing them to linking innovations to the company’s strategy and the markets for what they have done (Kelley et al. 2005).

During its long history, coaching has been associated with individuals’ professional and personal goals attainment, performance improvement, and personal potential enhancement (Garvey et al. 2009 Garvey 2011). The goal-oriented nature of coaching lies in its historical roots. At the same time psychology, psychotherapy, education, sport and business influenced the development of coaching (Stojnov and Pavlovic 2010). Incorporated range of therapeutic and personal development approaches enable to diversify coaching and expand its implementation as developmental practice. The Dublin declaration on coaching (2008) proposed the recognition of the multidisciplinary roots of coaching and recommended to affirm the nature of coaching as a specific synthesis of “a range of disciplines that creates a new and distinctive value to individuals, organizations and society”.

Cox et al. (2011) investigated theoretical approaches genres and contexts of coaching. They ascertain a tight relationship between cognitive-behavioural approach and genres and contexts of coaching used in organisational context, such as, for instance, executive and leadership coaching, team coaching. They argue that coaching adopted the cognitive-behavioural approach focuses on the replacement of dysfunctional thought patterns with more adaptive versions. As a result, executives as well as managers learn to become efficient in managing their emotions, maintaining an appropriate level of self-confidence and developing high level of interpersonal and communication skills (Cox et al. 2011).

Although coaching has become incredibly popular, there is still a lot of uncertainty and vagueness around what coaching is really about (Ives 2008). There is no general agreement on the definition of coaching among scholars and practitioners (Ladyshewsky 2010) and no coherent approach to define coaching (Passmore and Fillery-Travis 2011). The essence of a ‘typical’ coaching intervention still remains difficult to define (Kempster and Iszatt-White 2013). Bond and Seneque (2013) have stated that early definitions of coaching were focused on the improvement of individual and organizational performance while more recent definitions have defined coaching as a process emphasized a stronger link with learning and development.

Coaching is still a relatively new professional field in Latvia and Lithuania. Global Coaching Survey 2008/2009 defined the life-cycle stage of coaching for each European country. Under the Survey, coaching in Latvia was in pre-introduction phase while coaching in Lithuania was in transition between introduction and growth stages. Based on the overview of the answers, it was stated that in Latvia and Lithuania people do not fully understand the essence of coaching and tend to confuse coaching with consulting.

The online study has been conducted by the authors to investigate the current state of affairs in the field of coaching in Latvia and Lithuania with special emphasis on the use of coaching for organisational purposes. The observation of the current situation is presented in the table (see Table 1).

While gathering information, it was revealed that the interest in coaching among organisations is growing. The increasing number of leaders and managers participating in different coaching events proves this. The surveys in 2011 and 2013 conducted by TNS, demonstrate positive dynamics of the topic development. The number of top managers who are aware of coaching is increased by 5 % in 2013. The comparison of the results of two surveys about executives’ perception of coaching shows that there is a rise in opinion that coaching can contribute to the achievement of the organization business objectives. However, the view on coaching as a fashion trend is increased as well. The author of the TNS survey considers that this is explained by the fact that a considerable number of company executives (45 %) still do not know what coaching is.

Coaching in Latvia and Lithuania is viewed from different perspectives – as means of achieving one’s individual goals, business targets, implementing change management, etc. Coaching in organisations is mostly focused on the development of a new style of leadership as well as on the support provided to entrepreneurs to implement their new ideas. International accredited professional business coaching training program “Leader as a Coach” is created for leaders, managers and HRM specialists. The aim of the program is to facilitate development of basic skills of people management in the coaching style. A special annual event Coaching Week has been running for the last few years. Different events such as lectures, workshops, master classes, coaching sessions and activities take place.

The paper employs two-step research: content analysis of both coaching definitions extracted from the literature and experts’ interview with subsequent comparative analysis of the obtained results. Triangulation of research results was obtained through cross verification from two sources.

The definitions for analysis were drawn from the published articles as well as books relating to coaching. General definitions of coaching, definitions of executive coaching and definitions of coaching in different business contexts were taken for analysis. The articles (Bozer et al. 2013; Moen and Federici 2012; Passmore and Fillery-Travis 2011; Stober 2008) were chosen from the academic peer-reviewed journals including: Coaching: An International Journal of Theory, Research and Practice, Journal of Management Development. In addition, books on coaching (Cox et al. 2011; Cox 2013; McCarthy 2014) and the definition accepted by International Coach Federation (ICF) in ICF Code of Ethics were explored as well.

The list of definitions was supplemented by coaching definitions gathered by Hamlin et al. (2008) for their study into ‘conceptualizations and definitions of coaching’. The definitions provided by Fournies (1987), Orth et al. (1987), Evered and Selman (1989), Popper and Lipshitz (1992), Mink et al. (1993), Hargrove (1995), Burdett (1998), Clutterbuck (1998), Hudson (1999), Redshaw (2000), Grant (2001, 2006), Peterson (1996), Kampa-Kokesch and Anderson (2001), Parsloe (1995), Grant and Cavanagh (2004), Zeus and Skiffington (2000), Kilburg (2000), Peltier (2001), Orenstein (2002), McCauley and Hezlett (2001), Hall et al. (1999), Caplan (2003), Plunkett et al. (2004), Dingman (2006), Sanders (1996), Hill (1998), Storey (2003), Bacon and Spear (2003), Clegg et al. (2003), Taylor (2007) were taken for the analysis to get a broader view.

In total, 41 definitions of coaching were taken for the analysis. The aim of the analysis is to identify the characteristics of coaching which are frequently used in the definitions and, based on it, identify the distinctive features of coaching.

Two types of coding: open coding and axial hierarchical coding were applied. The aim of open coding is to generate as many codes as possible to identify relevant themes. The aim of axial coding is to generate the interconnections between these themes.

The second stage of the research was the experts’ interview. The aim of this stage is to explore the views of practitioners in coaching about a place of coaching in organisations based on their personal opinion and professional experience. The interview contains two meaningful parts and consists of basic 12 questions. The interview questions are developed to capture the essence of coaching in organisational context. Supplementary questions are asked based in the individual experience of the practitioners. The duration of interview is one hour.

Online interviews were conducted from September to December, 2013. For the purposes of the research it was decided to focus on the key informants, i.e. experienced practitioners in coaching, to generate primary data for qualitative analysis. The selection of practitioners was based on the following criteria: participation in the training programme for coaches, work with organisations, and experience in the field of coaching for more than 3 years as well as a genuine desire to contribute to the research. Based on the established criteria, four coaches from Latvia, three coaches from Lithuania, one coach from Poland and one coach from Germany took part in the interview. The experts from Poland and Germany were invited with the aim to trace the tendency of development of the subject matter in the countries that might have influence on the Baltic countries.

All most all respondents have graduated from accredited coach training programmes; among them one interviewee has gained Master’s degree in coaching and another one is working to get this degree. All respondents identified that they work at organisational level defining their professional background as an executive coach, organisation leader, HR and training specialist, consultant. The practitioners indicated that their average experience in coaching is 3–5 years. The coaches were asked to define the industry sectors that used their coaching services and the size of the companies. The analysis of responses shows that the respondents work in different industries and with the companies of different size. The coaches are engaged in Retail and Wholesale, Banking and Finance Services, Information Technology, Manufacturing and Production, Education, Health Care. Most coaches identified that they work in the companies of the size from 51 to 250 employees.

The article explored the essence of coaching in the context of organizational change. Change was considered as a trigger event that stimulates the development of organization. At the same time, change demands from organisations the ability to manage change and to cope with a number of problems. Coaching was studied as a practice that is able to facilitate people to in the period of change to enhance goal achievement, encourage development and support them to tackle change problems. Coaching was also explored as a possible means to promote sustainable organizational change.

Taking into consideration the fact that coaching in EU New Member States is not a widespread practice and is not yet investigated thoroughly, the article was focused on the study of the scope of coaching considering peculiar issues associated with the use of coaching in Latvia and Lithuania. The study attempted to answer the research questions relating to the distinctive features of coaching, the aim of coaching intervention, the parties involved in the process and the expected coaching outcomes.

The study employed a two-steps approach. Firstly, general definitions of coaching, definitions of executive coaching and definitions of coaching in different business contexts were extracted from the literature and taken for analysis. The aim of the analysis was to identify the characteristics of coaching which are frequently used in the definitions and, based on it, identify the distinctive features of coaching. The second stage of the research was the experts’ interview. The aim of the interview was to explore the views of practitioners in coaching about the essence of coaching based on their personal opinion and professional experience.

Definitions of coaching and experts’ answers demonstrated a basic agreement in the implementation of coaching. Both sources considered that coaching is beneficial for a person and for a client’s organisation because coaching is referred to as the activity that empowers top leaders and employees to achieve the results.

Achieved results and personal growth was considered as the key expected coaching outcomes. Experts highlighted a lot of advantages of the coaching use for individual and organisational development, among them the opportunity to develop self-awareness. Coaching also can stimulate the ability to organize individual’s thinking process more clearly and more structural. In respect to organisations, coaching provides greater goal clarity, better alignment with the role in organisation that facilitates change in the style of management.

At the same time experts mentioned that it is difficult to predict how effective coaching can be because coaching is not homogeneous and it is difficult to measure the results of coaching.

As far as the paper focuses on the investigation of the essence of coaching, it has not reported on the other authors’ related investigations, such as the study of the similarities and differences between coaching and other facilitating activities, namely: mentoring, consultancy, counseling, therapy, mediation. In the future, the additional research will need to be conducted to study the relationship of coaching and leadership and to explore the application of the theories for organizational learning to coaching.