CULTURECHARACTERISTICSINCOACHINGCOMPANIES 1
Culture Characteristics in Coaching Companies
T.L. Cadorine University of Texas at Dallas
CULTURECHARACTERISTICSINCOACHINGCOMPANIES 2
Abstract
Links between organizational culture and use of coaching is explored to identify
environmental factors that could support coaching effectiveness. Twenty-three
participants, solicited through social media, answered survey questions on culture and use
of coaching in their organization. Five of the survey respondents were then interviewed
for further insight on the connections between organizational culture and coaching use.
Culture definition is based on the organizational cultural profile characteristics and
factors as defined by O’Reilly, Chatman and Caldwell in the 1991 study, “Profile and
Organizational Culture: A Profile Comparison Approach to Assessing Person-
Organization Fit”. The findings of this study indicate that stable and people-oriented
cultures are the most likely to use coaching as a behavioral intervention tool and are also
more likely to apply coaching solutions effectively. Four specific actions coaches can
implement during a coaching engagement to establish a favorable environment for
success are provided. The findings are based on situational study, so best application at
this time is for coach practitioners and organizational users of coaching solutions. The
foundation of this study can be used to structure future social scientific studies in order to
create links between culture, coaching and organizational return-on-investment that, in
turn, will compel individuals and organizations to invest in coaching as a key behavioral
change tool.
CULTURECHARACTERISTICSINCOACHINGCOMPANIES 3
Culture Characteristics in Coaching Companies When reading literature on coaching effectiveness and in my own personal
experience as a team member of a Fortune 500 company, coaching does not always have
a consistent advocacy in the corporate ranks. Some organizational leaders are strong
proponents of coaching, such as Eric Schmidt, formerly CEO of Google, and Bill Gates
(Jubelirer, 2013). Magazines, ranging from Psychology Today to Fortune, have had
articles in the last five years advocating hiring a coach. Titles such as “Why Every CEO
Needs a Coach” to “Why You Need to Hire a Coach in 2015” to “Coaching is hot. Is it
right for you?”, encourage people to explore the benefits of coaching for their personal
goal achievement and growth (Arruda, 2014; Elmer, 2011; Williams, 2012).
According to a 2016 study conducted in partnership between the Human Capital
Institute (HCI) and the International Coaching Federation (ICF), 55% of senior-level
executives work with an external coach practitioner compared to 23% at mid-level and
10% at entry-level (Filipkowski, Heverin, & Ruth, 2016). In this same work, we see that
coaching for mid-level and entry-level becomes much higher when we count coaching
done by internal practitioners and managers/leaders; however, these groups often include
activities such as training, directing, consulting and mentoring as coaching (Filipkowski
et al., 2016). For some reason, while there is popular opinion that coaching is a valuable
tool for learning and behavioral change, its use in organizations remains mostly tied to
the executive elite or diluted by other behavioral change approaches.
In this study we, (a) explore the contradiction between the value of coaching and
organizational use of coaching to establish what’s important in resolving the discrepancy;
(b) narrow the scope of study to an exploration of organizational culture, and; (c)
CULTURECHARACTERISTICSINCOACHINGCOMPANIES 4
describe the method and the results of analysis. Upon conclusion, coach practitioners and
organizational users of coaching will gain insight to potential cultural characteristics and
factors of an organization that can better facilitate the effective use of coaching.
The Contradiction Between Coaching Value and Organizational Hesitation
Organizational leaders are widely rewarded on creation of stockholder value,
which is itself a result of optimizing profit and controlling costs (McClure, n.d.). Given
performance-based compensation, many organizational leaders need to see a value-over-
cost business case before investing in coaching as a behavioral change option for all team
members. Below is an explanation of both the value of larger scale availability of
coaching solutions in organizations and reasons why it is not available today.
Why everyone needs coaching. The deficiency of coaching accessibility at the
frontline of organizations matters for a host of reasons.
Concerns with frontline performance. First, according to a McKinsey survey
study, most companies’ senior executives and nonexecutive managers are unhappy with
frontline manager performance. They perceive that frontline leaders should be more
effective in, “making decisions, anticipating problems and coaching direct reports”
(Smet, McGurk, & Vinson, Looking ahead section, para 2); however, frontline managers
roles are structured to follow through on orders (Smet et al., 2010). In order for lower
levels of the organization to have the decision-making, skill-building and problem-
solving skills desired by senior leadership, training and coaching is needed. Training can
transfer the knowledge of processes that support these skills (Training, n.d.). In his book,
Coaching as a Leadership Style, Robert Hicks, PhD, described coaches supporting
frontline leaders by helping them envision what the skills look like specific to their role
CULTURECHARACTERISTICSINCOACHINGCOMPANIES 5
(2014, p. 19). Coaching also helps participants stay motivated when the skills become
uncomfortable by refocusing coachees to the goals they created (Hicks, 2014, pp. 123 –
127). To summarize, training introduces a skill and a process behind a skill; whereas,
coaching strengthens the skill through contextual application and motivational support.
Both are needed for effective implementation of new skills.
Broader responsibility and more complex communication. Second, some
organizations have structured to become flatter or more matrixed. In these cases, a team
member’s job has become more complex as they have greater areas of responsibility and
more people with whom to communicate. These team members may not have a clear
boss or they may have many bosses. Relationship skills, relationship motivation,
decision-making, critical thinking and communication are very important in these types
of organizations (Meehan, n.d.). Training and coaching solutions create value for these
skills just as they improve skills needed for successful frontline performance.
Shift in ownership of employee development. Third, there is an emphasis today
about employees owning their future (Molina-Ray, 2013). Sixty-eight percent of
employees say their manager is not involved in their development (“When it Comes to
Career Development”, 2015). By 2020, it is estimated that 50% of the US workforce will
be an independent worker (Field Nation Videos, 2014). In order for freelance workers to
have a relevant skill set, they will need to be adept at identifying which skills are needed
and how to get them; otherwise, with an aging population, we may run into significant
skill shortages in our workforce (Sparshott, 2016). If we want people to blaze their own
career path, this requires new skills and thought processes that both the individual and
CULTURECHARACTERISTICSINCOACHINGCOMPANIES 6
direct supervisors may be missing since companies no longer spend as many of their
resources on developing career paths for people (Cueni-Cohen, 2014).
People connecting with people is the solution to the problem of disheartened team
members lost in the structures of large, flat or matrixed organizations. Coaching is a tool
that can help change the story of what people expect from their employer, what they
expect from their supervisor, what they expect from themselves and how they go about
achieving their goals and dreams. It does not have to be the supervisor’s responsibility.
It does not have to be the responsibility of the training department or Human Resources;
however, if we want people to own their futures, we need to help them know what
ownership looks like and feels like. Since “coaches honor the client as the expert in his
or her life and work and believe every client is creative, resourceful and whole” (“What is
professional coaching”, n.d.), opportunities for development in the area of personal
ownership are an ideal match for a coaching solution.
Frontline responsibility to adapt and make decisions. Fourth, the foundation of
our economic system continues to evolve: e.g. agricultural economy, industrial economy,
information economy, services economy, and sharing economy (“Transformation in
Economics”, n.d.). Companies who want to survive in ever-evolving conditions must be
flexible. According to Peter Block in his groundbreaking book, Stewardship: Choosing
Service Over Self-Interest, the days where an organizational patriarch makes all the
decisions that trickle down through the hierarchy to workers who carry out orders is
becoming an extinct business model (2013, pp. 1-2). For maximum organizational
profitability and effectiveness, most members of an organization need to be able to act on
their own judgment on behalf of the organization’s vision (Senge, 2006, p. 192).
CULTURECHARACTERISTICSINCOACHINGCOMPANIES 7
Aligning a personal vision to an organizational vision is an individual journey. Each of
us has different experiences and values that inform our beliefs and behaviors (Connors &
Smith, 1999, p. 21). Of the options available in the learning and development tool kit,
coaching is uniquely situated to align organizational members’ attitudes, beliefs and
actions to the organizational vision. Coaching provides a personal solution for the
personal journey to alignment.
Employee engagement value and transparency. Finally, according to a June
2015 release of Gallup engagement survey results, 30% of US employees and 13% of
workers worldwide are engaged (Royal & Sorenson, 2015). Two different meta-analysis
run on coaching studies show that coaching is significantly correlated to client well-
being, attitudes and relationships (Sonesh et al., 2015; Theeboom, Beersma, & van
Vianen, 2014). Coaching is a tool that improves the human experience at work and,
clearly, there is much room for improvement. In an age where team members can
anonymously and publicly review their employer, a consensus of poor experiences on
sites such as Indeed, LinkedIn and Glassdoor will make it harder for non-favored
employers to gain the best talent for their organization (Bersin, Agarwal, Pelster, &
Schwartz, 2015). Less talented workforce equals poorer outcomes. That is why in
Deloitte’s Global Human Capital Trends for 2015, 78% of survey respondents cited
culture and engagement as an important to very important issue, making it the most
important talent trend for organizations (Bersin et al., 2015).
Reason for Organizational Hesitation. Coaching seems like a panacea to
organizations’ challenges. Given all the valuable benefits of coaching to the person and
the business, it seems logical that organizations would flock to have this tool added to
CULTURECHARACTERISTICSINCOACHINGCOMPANIES 8
their toolkits for organizational behavioral change; however, as we saw from the
McKinsey study earlier, this is not the case. I think the reason for this lack of
organizational adoption is because, as discussed earlier, coaching is an individual journey
and not an organizational journey. Outside of the coach-client relationship, the value of
coaching is not as clear. Table 1, copied from a study conducted through partnership
between Cambria Consulting and Babson College, clearly illustrates this issue (Schlosser,
Steinbrenner, Kumata, & Hunt, 2007).
Table 1: How Coach, Coachee and Manager Perceive Structure and Value of Coaching
Table 1 shows that both the coach and coachee involved in a coaching engagement
perceive the value of the coaching engagement higher than the manager. The manager
and coachee shared similar perceptions when the question was about the relationship with
CULTURECHARACTERISTICSINCOACHINGCOMPANIES 9
the manager and the strategy and vision of coaching to the company. In summarizing
these findings, we see that whoever is more directly party to the relationship has a more
aligned point of view. Since coaching confidentiality ensures the coach-client
conversations are private (“Section 4: Confidentiality/Privacy”, n.d.), managers and
others in the organization outside of that direct relationship may never truly see the value
of these coaching conversations to the company as a whole.
Much of the information available on coaching effectiveness focuses specifically
on the relationship between the coach and the coachee. In fact, studies released by the
American Management Association in 2008 and echoed in findings released in
“Coaching: An International Journal of Theory, Research and Practice in 2015” show
coach-coachee relationships are significantly successful as self-reported by the coachee
(Thompson et al., 2008; Sonesh et al., 2015). Goal attainment, on the other hand, shows
statistically relevant correlation with performance indicators in only limited
circumstances (Thompson et al., 2008). So, coaching feels good, but may not visibly be
impacting the bottom line. Organizations will hesitate to invest in behavioral change
solutions where return-on-investment outcomes are unclear.
Resolving the Discrepancy - Coaching as both an Individual and Organizational
Advantage
In order to more clearly see the benefits of coaching organizationally, coaching
needs to move beyond the personal relationship of the coach and client. In an October
2016 interview with Dr. Jan Austin, MCC, she described what she sees as the most
important element to successful coaching within an organization, alignment of coaching
to business strategy (personal communication, October 11, 2016). In “Making Coaching
CULTURECHARACTERISTICSINCOACHINGCOMPANIES 10
Work: Creating a Coaching Culture” the authors describe the different levels of coaching
culture. The levels, pictured in Figure 1, range from nascent, characterized by low
commitment to coaching, to embedded where coaching is tied into the company culture,
formal, informal and owned by everyone at every level within the organization
(Clutterbuck, & Megginson, 2005). When coaching is aligned to business strategy, the
client, the coach and the organization all have insight into what the coaching relationship
is about and what the relationship needs to achieve. In order for coaching to be
organizationally effective and available, the organizational decision makers need to be
able to draw lines to the business value of coaching.
Figure 1: Description of Coaching Culture at Each Level
McCarthy, 2014 p. 48
For coaches to be successful in an organizational context, they need to understand where
the organization falls on the spectrum of coaching culture. If the organization is at a
tactical stage, then the coach and coachee relationship may be successful, but will likely
not translate to organizational success because the coaching relationship may not be
clearly aligned to business strategy.
Coaches who understand organizational conditions conducive to impacting
desired business performance outcomes will help coaching professionals and the
coaching profession gain credibility with C-suite decision makers. It will help
CULTURECHARACTERISTICSINCOACHINGCOMPANIES 11
organizations create better outcomes and give them another reliable behavioral change
tool to count on.
In addition, the more mainstream coaching becomes as a tool for behavioral
change at work, the deeper it will reach into organizational structures, and the more
people will be able to have the empowering experience of working with a true coach. It
becomes a virtuous cycle as pictured in Figure 2.
Figure 2: The Virtuous Cycle of Coaching Engagements with Strategic Alignment
In conclusion, to resolve the discrepancy between the benefits of coaching and
organizations’ not using coaching as a behavioral change solution, the benefits of
coaching need to have more transparency. This can be achieved by explicitly aligning
coaching engagements to the business objectives. The more an organization embeds
coaching in their organization’s strategic objectives, the more aligned they will be
between coaching engagements and business results. This relationship means that the
level of coaching culture has an important role to play in the success of coaching within
organizations.
Scope
Strategic alignment of coaching to business strategy best creates conditions for
organizational success as a result of coaching. Business strategy consists of many
CULTURECHARACTERISTICSINCOACHINGCOMPANIES 12
dimensions including clarity of organizational values, defined organizational goals,
customer-value proposition, culture of the organization, and rewards & consequences.
Since coaching success is contingent on strategic alignment of coaching engagements to
business strategy, we could explore any one of these alignment opportunities to create
conditions for greater organizational effectiveness through coaching solutions.
In my 15 plus years experience as a Learning and Development practitioner, I
observed some teams were able to handle behavioral change initiatives more quickly and
with less pain than other groups. Those same groups were more likely to initiate change
and be more flexible than others. This applied at a team level, a department level, a
function level and an organizational level. Anecdotally, I further observed the groups
with better change adaption behaviors were at higher levels in their coaching culture,
either strategic or embedded, and that their leaders were skilled at coaching. Within these
groups, I felt a different energy from them. It was not just that they used coaching. The
values and mindset of the groups seemed to also be different. Given these observations,
I questioned if there was some cultural commonality between groups, outside of having a
strategic or embedded coaching culture, that effectively aligned coaching to strategy. If
so, these groups could be studied to give a set of criteria that all organizations could
implement within their overall culture to be more effective when using coaching as a
behavioral change solution.
In this study, I identified four cultural characteristics a coach practitioner or
organizational user can implement to potentially create more successful partnerships with
client organizations when using coaching solutions.
CULTURECHARACTERISTICSINCOACHINGCOMPANIES 13
Method
Organizational culture is easily defined, but difficult to quantify. Webster defines
organizational culture as “the beliefs, customs . . . ways of life . . . way of thinking,
behaving, or working that exists in an . . . organization” (Culture, n.d.). For this research,
we needed more concrete criteria. According to Daniel Denison, creator of an
organizational culture assessment tool, “culture surveys are most appropriate when the
focus of investigation is at the level of observable and measurable manifestations of
culture . . . and when the research purpose calls for making comparisons across
organizations using the same set of culture concepts” (Denison, Nieminen, & Kotrba,
2014). Given that comparison across organizations is the goal with this research, a
survey seemed the best approach.
Identifying the Organizational Culture Profile Tool
I used Google Scholar Search to find scholarly studies frequently used as
reference. One article stood out from the Academy of Management Journal. In 1991, an
article emerged, “Profile and Organizational Culture: a profile comparison approach to
assessing person-organization fit.” In this article, the authors identified 54 organizational
characteristics. Based on a scree test, the 54 characteristics were bucketed into eight
categories. A scree test is a statistical validation test used to determine the number of
categories to retain. These eight categories were further validated because they tied into a
normal personality measure, which corroborated seven of the eight categories that arose
(O’Reilly, Chatman, & Caldwell, 1991). Today, these characteristics and categories
form the Organizational Culture Profile or OCP. A visual of the seven categories adapted
from the original O’Reilly, Chatman & Caldwell work is pictured in Figure 3.
CULTURECHARACTERISTICSINCOACHINGCOMPANIES 14
Figure 3: Organizational Culture Categories from OCP
Anonymous, 2012
After a review of available instruments, the OCP was selected as the survey
instrument for this study. The OCP is considered a profiling survey with a subset
purpose of measuring fit (Ashkanasy, Wilderom, & Petereson, 2000, p. 135). Profiling
surveys, as the name suggests, are intended to provide a profile of an organization’s
culture. Fit profiles have historically looked at congruence between individuals and an
organization with the intent of hiring the right people for a given organizational culture
(Ashkanasy et al., 2000). The OCP was chosen because it is “reported as reliable and
possessing consensual, construct and criterion validity” (Ashkanasy et al., 2000, p. 135).
Although this study does not specifically attempt to create a statistically relevant set of
data, it could be the basis for future study that does.
In addition, through review of other scholarly works on organizational culture,
learning culture and coaching culture, it does not appear that any specific organizational
CULTURECHARACTERISTICSINCOACHINGCOMPANIES 15
culture survey tool is used with the intent of defining broad cross-organizational
characteristics that may precede effective organizational coaching engagements. A
profiling/fit survey type seemed best since the intent is to evaluate if coaching as an
organizational behavioral intervention fits some organizational cultural characteristics
more than others. Finally, the OCP was chosen because the questions used for this tool
and the logic for evaluating results are easily available and inexpensive.
The OCP questions were reduced and refined to eliminate perceived overlaps in a
study by Cable and Judge in 1997 (Cable, & Judge, 1997). In 2005, another study
revised the OCP to use a Likert scale evaluation system versus a Q-sort (Sarros, Gray,
Denston & Cooper). Both of these adjustments were used for this study to simplify and
shorten the survey process for respondents.
Coaching culture versus OCP. Earlier, I reviewed levels of coaching culture
from a nascent level to an embedded level, pictured in Figure 1. You may be wondering
why we are then using a different organizational culture description, pictured in Figure 3.
The embedded coaching culture describes the immersion of coaching within an
organization; however, is not a culture by itself. For instance, it could be possible to have
an embedded coaching culture and also have a people-oriented culture. It could be
equally possible to have a nascent coaching culture and a people-oriented culture. They
are two organizational culture definitions describing different characteristics of an
organization.
I hypothesize that some cultures, such as people-oriented cultures will be more
likely to have embedded or strategic coaching cultures which will make them more
effective users of coaching solutions. Aggressive cultures are likely to be less effective
CULTURECHARACTERISTICSINCOACHINGCOMPANIES 16
in using coaching as an organizational solution. If an organization’s strategy does not
advocate for a culture that is aligned to the conditions needed for coaching effectiveness,
then that organization would likely not benefit from an attempt to introduce embedded
coaching. Individuals within the organization still could benefit, so tactical coaching
solutions are still a possibility.
Understanding OCP factors that are more likely to correlate to coaching cultures
and therefore more likely to create strategic alignment and organizational effectiveness is
the goal of this study. If a coach practitioner understood the organization she was
entering did not have an environment conducive to success of the engagement to
organizational outcomes, she could have that conversation up front and incorporate
readiness activities into the implementation plan or revise expectations of her client
organization to be more tactical in nature. This would create more satisfied clients,
which delivers us back into the virtuous cycle pictured in Figure 2.
Methodology
SurveyMonkey was used to design the survey and collect results for analysis. See
Appendix for the survey. A solicitation to complete the survey was announced via
LinkedIn and Facebook. After three weeks of no response from initial solicitation, direct
contacts were solicited through personal emails and phone calls. In all, 23 people
completed the survey questions. Seven people completed via SuveyMonkey and 16
completed via a phone interview. Of those 23 respondents, five human resource
professionals were interviewed for additional insight on the culture and coaching link in
their organizations. The 23 people who completed represented different industries
ranging from hospitality, to insurance, to consulting to technology. The most known
CULTURECHARACTERISTICSINCOACHINGCOMPANIES 17
respondents from any one industry were four people from the travel and hospitality
industry. Of the 23 respondents, 13 were from Human Resources, two from Information
Technology and nine were from other departments.
Once responses were obtained, the data was viewed by question and by category
for potential patterns between the use of coaching and the presence of a certain factor or
category. As a final step, interviews were conducted to gain clarity around some of the
results.
Findings
The survey data was analyzed on both a factor basis and a category basis.
Individual questions in the survey are considered a factor. Some of the individual factors
are further linked to one of the categories of organizational culture pictured in Figure 3.
Not all questions are linked to a category because in the initial O’Reilly study, some
questions did not show a statistically relevant correlation to any of the categories. I
included the questions, however, because the factors could still be tied to understanding
of an organization’s culture (O’Reilly et al., 1991).
Category Analysis Findings
First, we look at the category analysis. Findings are pictured in Figure 4.
Figure 4 Category Analysis
CULTURECHARACTERISTICSINCOACHINGCOMPANIES 18
Ten of the surveys were for respondents whose organization did not use coaching.
Thirteen surveys are for respondents whose organization did, so the data pictured is fairly
evenly represented between coaching and non-coaching respondents. The neutral line
indicates that respondents scored a three on the Likert scale meaning the category was
neither characteristic nor un-characteristic of their organization. For instance, you can
see for the category of Stable, respondents whose organization did not use coaching
scored a three overall since the orange dot is on the neutral line. Respondents whose
organizations used coaching, showed the category of Stable as much more characteristic
as shown by the blue dot in the Stable column.
Using the Figure 4 view of the category outcomes, one can see that people
orientation and stability are the two categories with the widest disparity between
respondents whose organization used coaching and respondents whose organization did
not. Of the 13 respondents whose organizations used coaching, none of them currently
look at individual or group business results as a direct output of coaching. Success is
evaluated using reaction of the participant and observations of the direct supervisor
related to on-the-job behaviors. Two of the 13 respondents whose organization used
coaching indicated their organization was neutral for people orientation and slightly on
the characteristic side of stable. These 2 respondents surveys were against the trend, so I
interviewed them for greater clarity. What I found for these 2 respondent’s organizations
was a culture and business strategy in flux. Both organizations had new leadership who
were attempting to move the organization from rules and policies based culture to
empowered frontline decision-making culture. Prior to the transition, both respondents
felt their environments were people-oriented and stable; however, desired changes around
CULTURECHARACTERISTICSINCOACHINGCOMPANIES 19
customer orientation and employee ownership made lines of responsibility unclear and
new skills required. The interviewees indicated that coaching was considered an
important factor for moving the organization forward and helping employees feel safe,
but unskilled supervisors and managers embedded in legacy cultures were holding back
the initiative. In these two cases, coaching was getting poor or neutral outcomes as
measured by coachee reaction and perceived behavioral changes motivated by coaching.
Based on these findings, the patterns emerging around organizational culture
categories are that stability and people-orientation cultures are most likely to precede
successful coaching engagements.
Factor Analysis Findings
In order to understand which factors most contributed to the difference between
respondents whose organization used coaching and those that didn’t, further analysis was
done at the factor/question level. The average score was calculated for each question
based on group: using coaching versus not using coaching. A rating of one means the
factor was most characteristic of an organization. A rating of five means the factor was
least characteristic of an organization. The difference was then calculated between the
two groups. A difference of greater than 1.5 points was flagged for interview
exploration. Figure 5 shows how each question was evaluated based on group. Factors
with a difference of greater than 1.5 points are highlighted. The highlighted questions
also show the cultural category so that we can tie the factor analysis and the category
analysis together when relevant. NSA under the Category column means the question is
Not Statistically Aligned to any of the culture categories.
CULTURECHARACTERISTICSINCOACHINGCOMPANIES 20
Figure 5 Factors Comparison
Eight of the questions showed a difference of greater than 1.5 points when
comparing the survey responses for those who used coaching versus those who did not.
Interestingly, the factor around Being Reflective, which is not statistically tied to an
CULTURECHARACTERISTICSINCOACHINGCOMPANIES 21
organizational culture category, showed the greatest difference. Interviewees indicated
this as a time management and prioritization difference. Based on interviewee feedback,
organizations that used coaching interventions created space, support and accountability
for continuous improvement: organizational, departmental and personal. Organizations
who did not use coaching came across as more reactive in the interviews. Said one of the
interviewees not using coaching, “My organization doesn’t give me time to reflect, good
or bad. It’s all about responding to today’s fires. If I want to reflect or be more strategic,
I’m going to have to work more hours to do it and I’m already tired.”
Unsurprisingly, three of the eight questions with the biggest difference were
related to the people-oriented cultural category: being supportive, fairness and sharing
information freely. Based on this sample, respondents whose organization used coaching
have implemented support systems for their team members that are perceived as more
people-oriented than those respondents whose organization has not. In the interviews, the
support devices were mentioned in juxtaposition with outcome orientation for both
groups of respondents. Examples of interview feedback are
• Interviewee whose organization is using coaching and scored positive on stable
and people-oriented said, “My organization wants us to achieve goals, but they
also want to make sure you have the tools and resources to do it. Coaching is one
example of that.”
• Interviewee whose company is not using coaching and scored negatively on
people-oriented said, “[Company] is all about the bottom line. I wish we had
more support and things were more fair, but we are so hard driving, there isn’t
always time. I don’t see that as bad, though. It’s just who we are.”
CULTURECHARACTERISTICSINCOACHINGCOMPANIES 22
• Interviewee whose organization is using coaching and scored neutral on people-
oriented said, “We used to be more open with our communication, but there is a
lot going on and it feels more chaotic. Coaching is supposed to help with that.
We need to make changes fast. It’s on [Leader’s] goals and he expects us to get
there.”
The factor scores for the two interviewees whose organizations who are using coaching
unsuccessfully are neutral, neither characteristic nor uncharacteristic, for the people-
oriented factors of fairness, sharing of information and supportiveness.
Being team oriented and developing friends at work also saw differences of
greater than1.5 points between respondents whose organizations use coaching and
respondents whose organizations do not. While these are not tied to the same culture
category, I grouped them together based on interview feedback. The interviews for the
non-coaching organizations reflected a view of people as a commodity.
• “Everyone’s replaceable and I don’t need friends at work. My family is what gets
me going in the morning.”
• “Team oriented is just another way of saying some people will do nothing while I
do all the work. Just kidding. But, really, sometimes a team approach just slows
things down.”
• “Team oriented seems like a good idea, but often it creates indecision. I would
like team oriented as long as it doesn’t keep me from getting stuff done on time.”
In the organization that uses coaching and still is stable, her feedback here is a lot
different.
CULTURECHARACTERISTICSINCOACHINGCOMPANIES 23
“I understand why people can feel frustrated by team-based work, and sometimes,
going to happy hour seems like a job all by itself! That being said, at the end of a
day or a project, or a toast at On the Border, it means a lot more to me to share the
moment with someone who has been there with me and who I care about.”
Organizational cultures that make opportunities for people to be together as people and
not just as cogs in the corporate wheel appear to have greater effectiveness in creating
conditions that nurture coaching effectiveness.
Conclusions
Organizational Culture as defined by O’Reilly, Chatman and Caldwell appears to
have some bearing on whether an organization also uses and is effective with coaching
solutions. Stable and people-orientated cultures seem to precede successful coaching
engagements; therefore, as a coach practitioner, if you are engaged to help an
organization shift their culture, it is important to ensure that stability and people
orientation are part of the change management process. Either an organization needs to
implement processes, communications and accountability that create these conditions or
the organization needs to make sure these important cultural dimensions do not break
during the shift.
Based on the findings around the factors, four specific actions would align
coaching engagements to cultural conditions that are more conducive to organizational
success in addition to individual success: (a) set up time for reflection as part of the
coaching agreement with the individual, individual’s manager and the sponsor of the
project; (b) assess supportiveness, fairness and sharing information freely prior to onset
of coaching engagement. If these factors are not present, include these as topics in the
CULTURECHARACTERISTICSINCOACHINGCOMPANIES 24
coaching agreement with the individual, individual’s manager and organizational
sponsor; (c) set up group coaching in addition to individual sessions to create a team-
oriented environment; and (d) build bonding observances into the coaching agreement
that allow time for connection outside of the task at hand.
Recommendations for Future Research
This data, while interesting and potentially beneficial, is not statistically relevant.
In addition, the sample group did not have measurable performance objectives tied to
coaching; therefore, the primary purpose of engaging organizations in the behavioral
intervention solution of coaching through a convincing analysis of business outcomes
was not met. I recommend structuring a statistically relevant study that ties OCP culture
analysis to business results as well as coaching outcomes. A larger audience will be
needed for a statistically relevant study.
Recommended solutions are based on my personal knowledge of actions that
support communication and team building. Further investigation could provide a more
complete list of recommendations supported by both quantitative and experiential studies.
Finally, a good number of the survey respondents were from Human Resources or
Learning and Development. I noticed these groups’ responses had higher overall
Characteristic ratings for all questions than other respondents. Based on this outcome,
further research would likely benefit from using the original Q-sort methodology versus
the Likert scale which would force the data to normalize.
CULTURECHARACTERISTICSINCOACHINGCOMPANIES 25
References Anonymous. (2012). Measuring Organizational Culture. In Creative Commons.
Retrieved from http://2012books.lardbucket.org/books/management-principles-
v1.0/s12-02-measuring-organizational-cultu.html
Arruda, W. (2014, December 9). Why You Need to Hire a Coach in 2015. Retrieved from
http://www.forbes.com/sites/williamarruda/2014/12/09/why-you-need-to-hire-a-
coach-in-2015/#7aa119104de3
Ashkanasy, N.M., Wilderom, C.P., & Peterson, M.F. (2000). Handbook of
Organizational Culture & Climate. Thousand Oaks, California: Sage Publications,
Inc.
Austin, J. (2016, October 11). Personal interview.
Bersin, J., Agarwal, D., Pelster, B., & Schwartz, J. (2015). Global Human Capital Trends
2015. Leading in the new world of work. Deloitte University Press.
Block, P. (2013). Stewardship: Choosing Service Over Self-Interest, 2nd edition. San
Francisco, CA. Berrett-Koehler Publishers, Inc.
CULTURECHARACTERISTICSINCOACHINGCOMPANIES 26
Cable, D. M., & Judge, T. A. (1997). Interviewers' perceptions of person-organization fit
and organizational selection decisions. Journal of Applied Psychology, 82, 546-
581.
Clutterbuck, D., & Megginson, D. (2005). Making Coaching Work: Creating a Coaching
Culture. London. Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development.
Coaching FAQ’s. What is professional coaching? (n.d.). In International Coaching
Federation FAQ’s. Retrieved December 9, 2016, from
http://coachfederation.org/need/landing.cfm?ItemNumber=978&_ga=1.19040568
.1669164914.1475526763
Connors, R., & Smith, T. (1999). Journey to the Emerald City. Achieve a Competitive
Edge by Putting the Oz Principle to Work. Upper Saddle River, NJ. Prentice Hall
Press.
Cueni-Cohen, J. (2014, March 19). Who’s in Charge of Career Development? Retrieved
from http://www.hreonline.com/HRE/view/story.jhtml?id=534356842
Culture. [Def. 5c] (n.d.). Merriam-Webster Online. Retrieved December 7, 2016, from
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/culture
CULTURECHARACTERISTICSINCOACHINGCOMPANIES 27
Denison, D., Nieminen, L., & Kotrba, L. (2014). Diagnosing Organizational Cultures: A
Conceptual and Empirical Review of Culture Effectiveness Surveys. European
Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology. 23(1), 145-161.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1359432X.2012.713173
Elmer, V. (2011, August 29). Coaching is hot. Is it right for you? Retrieved from
http://fortune.com/2011/08/29/coaching-is-hot-is-it-right-for-you/
[Field Nation Videos]. (2014, November 10). The New American Workforce. [Video
file]. Retrieved from https://youtu.be/lUn3RaivEcU
Filipkowski, J., Heverin, A., & Ruth, M. (2016, September 21). Building a Coaching
Culture with Managers and Leaders. Human Capital Institute in partnership with
International Coaching Federation. Retrieved from
http://coachfederation.org/about/landing.cfm?ItemNumber=3674&navItemNumb
er=3675
Hicks, R.F. (2014). Coaching as a Leadership Style: The Art and Science of Coaching
Conversations for Healthcare Professionals. New York, New York: Taylor &
Francis.
CULTURECHARACTERISTICSINCOACHINGCOMPANIES 28
[Jubelirer, Jim]. (2013, November 1). "Everyone needs a coach" Bill Gates & Eric
Schmidt. [Video File]. Retrieved from
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XLF90uwII1k
McCarthy, G. (2014). Coaching and Mentoring for Business. London. SAGE
Publications, LTD.
McClure, B. (n.d.). A Guide to CEO Compensation. Retrieved from
http://www.investopedia.com/articles/stocks/04/111704.asp
Meehan, C. (n.d.). Flat Vs. Hierarchal Organizational Structure. Retrieved from
http://smallbusiness.chron.com/flat-vs-hierarchical-organizational-structure-
724.html
Molina-Ray, C. (2013). Are We Playing the Same Game? Employee vs. Manager
Perceptions of Education and Career Development. University of Phoenix in
partnership with EdAssist. Retrieved from
http://www.edassist.com/~/media/bh/edassist/resources-media/research-reports-
webinars/education-career-development-perceptions/uopx-edassist-career-
development-report.ashx
CULTURECHARACTERISTICSINCOACHINGCOMPANIES 29
O'Reilly, C. A., Chatman, J. A., & Caldwell, D. F. (1991). People and organizational
culture: A profile comparison approach to person-organization fit. Academy of
Management Journal, 34, 487-516.
Royal, K., & Sorenson, S. (2015, June 16). Employees are Responsible for Their
Engagement Too. Retrieved from
http://www.gallup.com/businessjournal/183614/employees-responsible-
engagement.aspx
Sarros, J.C., Gray, J., Densten, I., & Cooper, B. (2005, June). The Organizational Culture
Profile Revisited and Revised: An Australian Perspective. Australian Journal of
Management, 30(1), 159-182. doi: 10.1177/031289620503000109
Schlosser, B., Steinbrenner, D., Kumata, E., & Hunt, J. (2007). The Coaching Impact
Study: Measuring the Value of Executive Coaching with Commentary,
International Journal of Coaching in Organizations. 5(1), 140-161. Retrieved from
http://www.cambriaconsulting.com/wp-content/uploads/whitepapers/53609-
coaching-impact-commentary.pdf
Section 4: Confidentiality/Privacy. (n.d.). In International Coaching Federation Code of
Ethics. Retrieved December 9, 2016, from
http://www.coachfederation.org/about/landing.cfm?ItemNumber=854&navItemN
umber=634
CULTURECHARACTERISTICSINCOACHINGCOMPANIES 30
Senge, P. (2006). The Fifth Discipline: The Art & Practice of the Learning Organization.
United States of America. Doubleday.
Smet, A., McGurk, M., & Vinson, M. (2010, February). How companies manage the
frontline today: McKinsey Survey results. Retrieved from
http://www.mckinsey.com/business-functions/organization/our-insights/how-
companies-manage-the-front-line-today-mckinsey-survey-results
Sonesh, S.C., Coultas, C.W., Lacerenza, C.N., Marlow, S.L., Benishek, L.E., & Salas, E.
(2015): The power of coaching: a meta-analytic investigation, Coaching: An
International Journal of Theory, Research and Practice, 8(2), 73-95.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/17521882.2015.1071418
Sparshott, J. (2016, April 19). The U.S. Occupations at the Greatest Risk of Labor
Shortage. Retrieved from http://blogs.wsj.com/economics/2016/04/19/the-u-s-
occupations-at-greatest-risk-of-a-labor-shortage/
Theeboom, T., Beersma, B., & van Vianen, A.E. (2014) Does coaching work? A meta-
analysis on the effects of coaching on individual level outcomes in an
organizational context, The Journal of Positive Psychology, 9(1), 1-18.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/17439760.2013.837499
CULTURECHARACTERISTICSINCOACHINGCOMPANIES 31
Thompson, H.B., Bear, D.J., Dennis, D.J., Vickers, M., London, J., & Morrison, C.L.
(2008). Coaching: A Global Study of Successful Practices. New York, New York.
American Management Association
Training. [Def. 2] (n.d.). Merriam-Webster Online. Retrieved December 7, 2016, from
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/training
Transformation in Economics. (n.d.) In Wikipedia. Retrieved November 14, 2016, from
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transformation_in_economics
When it Comes to Career Development, Employees are on their Own. (2015, June 8). In
Association for Talent Development. Retrieved from
https://www.td.org/Publications/Magazines/TD/TD-
Archive/2015/06/Intelligence-When-It-Comes-to-Career-Development-
Employees-Are-on-Their-Own
Williams, R. (2012, August 13). Why every CEO Needs a Coach. Retrieved from
https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/wired-success/201208/why-every-ceo-
needs-coach
CULTURECHARACTERISTICSINCOACHINGCOMPANIES 32
Appendix – Survey
CULTURECHARACTERISTICSINCOACHINGCOMPANIES 33
CULTURECHARACTERISTICSINCOACHINGCOMPANIES 34
CULTURECHARACTERISTICSINCOACHINGCOMPANIES 35
CULTURECHARACTERISTICSINCOACHINGCOMPANIES 36
CULTURECHARACTERISTICSINCOACHINGCOMPANIES 37
CULTURECHARACTERISTICSINCOACHINGCOMPANIES 38
Path if Answer to Number 8 is Yes
CULTURECHARACTERISTICSINCOACHINGCOMPANIES 39
CULTURECHARACTERISTICSINCOACHINGCOMPANIES 40
CULTURECHARACTERISTICSINCOACHINGCOMPANIES 41
CULTURECHARACTERISTICSINCOACHINGCOMPANIES 42
Path if Question to Number 8 is No or I’m not Sure