Background to the Study

Coaching, as a developmental process, supports individuals in achieving personal or professional goals, reflecting a system aimed at enhancing individual contributions to a team [1]. This concept has evolved over the past two decades, with considerable research focusing on the manager-as-coach model, complementing the broader scope of external and internal organisational coaching [2]. In Indonesia's current management landscape, with its more horizontal hierarchy, the importance of coaching, particularly in training managers to adopt coaching techniques, is increasingly recognized. This approach aligns with the leadership trend of empowering employees, particularly relevant in organizations dominated by Generation Y and Z. These generations, characterized by a desire for workplace autonomy and self-improvement, respond well to management that promotes growth through learning, development and collaboration.

Mazars in Indonesia exemplifies the challenges and opportunities presented by this shift in managerial approach. The company has observed varied team performances, with some teams excelling and others struggling under pressure from workload and tight deadlines, leading to high employee turnover and potential long-term reputational damage. These issues are exacerbated during peak seasons, highlighting the need for effective managerial coaching to enhance team productivity and employee satisfaction. The company's strategic management has identified a potential link between team performance and managerial coaching skills, prompting a reevaluation of their approach to harnessing these skills for better organizational outcomes.

The investment in coaching programs is substantial, with organizations worldwide dedicating significant resources to gain competitive advantages ICF [3]. However, the risk of misallocating these resources towards ineffective managerial coaching initiatives is a concern, as highlighted by Nyfoudi et al. [4]. To address this issue and optimize coaching programs, there is a need for research that provides evidence-based insights and practical recommendations. The author's study at Mazars in Indonesia aims to fill this gap by exploring the relationship between managerial coaching skills and team effectiveness. This research seeks to offer solutions for optimizing coaching programs and fostering high-performing teams, focusing on the impact of these skills and contextual factors on team performance and productivity.

Objectives of the Study

The main objectives of this research are:

• To examine the extent to which managerial coaching positively influences team effectiveness

• To identify the fundamental mechanisms through which managerial coaching impacts team effectiveness

• Examine the contextual factors mediating and moderating the relationship between managerial coaching skills and team effectiveness

Theoretical Review

Managerial coaching

Coaching has always been associated with sports [5]. Coaching has grown its branches in every field, including business, life and sport. Organisations today invest billions of dollars to gain the competitive benefits that coaching promises [3]. Some businesses take a pragmatic approach to coaching, attempting to centralise programs that assure coaching occurs [6]. Other organisations have no formal coaching program and rely on managers to coach employees. Regardless, a more in-depth glimpse at the history of managerial coaching was necessary to understand how managerial coaching impacts team effectiveness.

Coaching was popularised by Mace [7] in the management literature. Many studies have shown that coaching is a significant managerial tool for individual improvement and team performance, based on the works of Fournies [8] and Evered and Selman [9]. Prior research on managers as coaches has predominantly concentrated on three operationalizations of managerial coaching. One operationalization assesses the level at which a manager exhibits coaching behaviours, as demonstrated by Matsuo [10]. Other focuses on the extent to which managers lead by displaying a coaching style, as exemplified by Hui et al. [11]. A third operationalization examines managerial coaching as a team-level resource, specifically managers' competence in coaching efficacy, as studied by Dahling et al. [12] and Hagen and Aguilar [13]. This research would like to contribute to the study of the latter. While traditional managerial coaching is individual-focused, it is essential to conduct focused research on its impact on team potency as it is in team performance that drives organisational success [14].

While numerous worldwide studies have examined the relationship between managerial coaching and team effectiveness, it is still considered immature and lacks concrete insight. Minimal studies have been done on this topic in Indonesia.

Managerial Coaching Skill and Team-Level Architectural Knowledge

Ellinger and Bostrom [15] used the critical incident technique to indicate that managerial coaching behaviour as a facilitator of learning may be separated into two types: Empowering and facilitating. Giving employees more power and authority by pushing them to take more personal responsibility and accountability for their actions and decisions is what "empowering behaviour" means. "Facilitating behavior" promotes enhanced comprehension and perspectives, while offering guidance and assistance to staff in order to aid learning and growth. In a similar vein, Heslin et al. [16] devised a managerial coaching assessment with three key factors: facilitation (helping employees analyze and explore solutions to problems and enhance their performance), guidance (communicating explicit performance expectations and providing constructive feedback on performance outcomes and ways to improve) and inspiration (encouraging employees to recognize and cultivate their potential). Hui et al. [17] differentiated "facilitation coaching" (assisting employees in exploring and evaluating the task, as well as self-developing the necessary replies for better performance) from "guidance coaching" (delivering clear expectations and prescriptive comments on how to improve). According to this research, managerial coaching encourages subordinates to reflect, provides feedback to enhance their performance and stimulates them to accept challenges [10].

Mathieu et al. [18] say that teams are essential for organisations that work well. So, learning and development needs have changed from focusing only on the person to helping the team as a whole learn and grow in the context of its functions to make the team more effective [9]. Much research has been done on the effectiveness of different team-focused learning and development strategies, with team coaching being the most recent in the framework of architectural knowledge. Architectural Knowledge in the context of software engineering and system design refers to the understanding and documentation of the fundamental structural choices critical to system design. Architectural knowledge encompasses the software systems' structures, including elements, their relationships and the principles and guidelines governing their design and evolution over time [20].

This knowledge is not limited to the architecture of individual software systems but extends to the architecture of the overall software ecosystem and its interdependencies within a business context. Nyfoudi et al. [4] say that team-level architectural knowledge is a body of situated knowledge about work processes, roles and dynamics.

Employees’ Learning Goal Orientation

Learning Goal Orientation describes an individual's disposition towards developing competencies and acquiring new skills in a learning situation [21]. It is a dimension of goal orientation theory, which posits that individuals are motivated by mastery of tasks or demonstration of competence [22]. Dweck [21] introduced the concept of goal orientation, distinguishing between performance and learning orientations. VandeWalle [23] refined this by suggesting a three-factor model comprising learning, performance-prove and performance-avoid orientations. 

Button et al. [24] found that individuals with a high learning goal orientation are more likely to seek feedback and demonstrate higher adaptability in challenging tasks. Similarly, Payne et al. [25] observed that learning goal orientation positively correlates with self-efficacy and intrinsic motivation, leading to better performance outcomes.

Janssen and Van Yperen [26] demonstrated that learning goal orientation enhances employee creativity, suggesting that a learning orientation fosters an open-minded approach to problem-solving. Meanwhile, Porath and Bateman [27] linked learning goal orientation to increased job satisfaction and overall well-being, indicating a broader impact on employee attitudes.

Organisations that foster a culture of learning and development can enhance learning goal orientation among employees. Gong et al. [28] noted that supportive leadership and an emphasis on continuous learning are critical for cultivating learning goal orientation. This is echoed by Noe et al. [29], who highlighted the role of organisational learning culture in promoting learning goal orientation.

Managerial Coaching Skill and Team Performance

Team performance is defined as the quality, quantity and timeliness of work completed as a team, as well as the cooperation of team members [30]. It has been found to be a significant outcome of team-related development [31]. Hackman [32] states that team effectiveness can be defined in terms of output, social process and learning. Hackman [33] also says that a study has shown there are five conditions that optimise team effectiveness and these are: real team, compelling direction, enabling structure, social support and coaching. 

Managerial coaching is an essential leadership skill that facilitates employee development and team success [34]. It involves guiding, encouraging and supporting team members towards achieving organisational goals. Hamlin et al. [35] proposed that effective managerial coaching consists of a combination of skills and attributes, including empathy, patience and the ability to provide constructive feedback. These capabilities foster a positive work environment and enhance team performance. Ellinger et al. [36] found that managerial coaching leads to improved job performance, employee commitment and satisfaction. Agarwal et al. [37] observed a positive correlation between managerial coaching and team innovation, suggesting that coaching enhances creative thinking and problem-solving. Gregory and Levy [38] demonstrated that coaching by managers significantly impacts employees' perceptions of organisational support, thereby increasing their engagement and productivity.

Similarly, Ladyshewsky [39] linked managerial coaching to improved interpersonal relations and team dynamics. Joo [40] emphasised the role of coaching in developing a learning-oriented culture, which positively affects team performance. Meanwhile, Kim et al. [41] highlighted that coaching skills are particularly effective in environments where teamwork and collaboration are crucial.

Organisations seeking to enhance team performance should invest in developing their managers' coaching skills. Orth et al. [42] suggested that training programs focusing on communication, feedback and motivational skills are beneficial. This is supported by McLeod [43], who argued for the integration of coaching skills into leadership development initiatives.

Research Hypotheses

Following the comprehensive literature review that highlights the significant impact of managerial coaching skills on team performance, it becomes apparent that there is a need to explore further and empirically test the dynamics of this relationship:

H1: The managerial coaching skill has a significant positive impact on team-level architectural knowledge

H2: The employees’ learning goal orientation moderates the significant positive impact of managerial                 on team-level architectural knowledge. The effect is stronger if the learning goal orientation is high and weaker if the learning goal orientation is low

H3: The employees' learning goal orientation moderates the impact of managerial coaching skill on team performance, mediated by team-level architectural knowledge. Specifically, the relationship is more pronounced when employees have a higher learning goal orientation than a low one

Conceptual Framework

The conceptual model that comprised this study's framework was a modified adaptation of the model proposed by Nyfoudi et al. [4] and this is presented in Figure 1.

Figure 1: Conceptual Framework

Note: This conceptual framework was a modified adaptation from Nyfoudi et al. [4]

Nyfoudi et al. [4] proposed that the relationship between managerial coaching skill and team performance mediated by team-level architectural knowledge is likely stronger when the manager’s learning goal orientation is high and weaker when manager’s learning goal orientation is low. The author modified this by taking into account the learning goal orientation of both managers and team members. Hence, in the context of employees rather than on manager side alone.

This study employs a quantitative research methodology to examine the relationship between managerial coaching skills and team performance, mediated by team-level architectural knowledge and moderated by learning goal orientation. The relationship is stronger if the employees' learning goal orientation is high and weaker if the employees' learning goal orientation is low. The quantitative approach is chosen for its rigour and ability to provide generalisable results through statistical analysis [44].

The research utilized a combination of primary data, obtained directly from questionnaires completed by team members and managers and secondary data sourced from company records, with data collection methods including interviews and observations. Permission to access participants and gather information was sought from Mazars Indonesia's Managing Partner and HR Department, with the HR providing an employee database for reference. Participants were selected through random sampling to ensure statistical significance for quantitative analysis, with the researcher emailing 143 employees across audit, outsourcing and consulting departments. The study achieved a 74% completion rate, receiving 106 complete and relevant responses and the subsequent results are presented in Table 1.

Surveys were distributed electronically to employees across various departments. Sampling was random to ensure representativeness. The questionnaire would measure variables such as perceived managerial coaching skills using the modified adaptation from Smither et al. [45] scale; the learning goal orientation was evaluated using Vandewalle's [46] scale, team-level architectural knowledge was measured using the modified adaptation of sub-scale of the Prospector measure [47,48] and team performance was assessed using Sparrowe et al. [30] scale. Each construct was measured using Likert-type scales, which allows for capturing the intensity of respondents' perceptions. 

The survey data was analysed using SPSS 29 software and Andrew F. Hayes' PROCESS Macro (Model 7) SPSS 29 software to conduct regression analysis and other relevant statistical tests. This analysis aimed to identify correlations and potential causal relationships between managerial coaching and team performance.

Reliability Analysis on Questionnaire Items

The Cronbach's α result, as shown in Table 2, shows that the scales and dimensions of the questionnaire items fell under the category of α≥0.9 and 0.7≤α<0.9, which both translate too good to excellent reliability. Therefore, each scale and dimension of the questionnaire items has a high degree of internal consistency.

Means, Standard Deviations and Correlations Analysis

Overall, Table 3 indicates that there are significant relationships between managerial coaching skills, architectural knowledge, learning goal orientation and team performance. It should be noted that correlation does not imply causation and these findings merely suggest associations between the variables.

Table 1: Questionnaire Response Result

Table 2: Reliability Statistics Table of Questionnaire Items

Table 3: Means, standard deviations and correlations analysis

Note: * p<0.05; ** p<0.01; Correlation is based on 2-tailed

Table 4: Summary of Moderated Mediation Regression Analysis Predicting Team-Level Architectural Knowledge

Note: p<0.05 = significant

Table 5: Conditional Effects of Managerial Coaching Skill on Team-Level Architectural Knowledge

Note: LGO=Learning Goal Orientation

Figure 2: Moderating Effect of Learning Goal Orientation Between Managerial Coaching Skill and Team-Level Architectural Knowledge

Note: GO = Learning Goal Orientation

Moderated Mediation Analysis

The relationship between Managerial Coaching Skill and Team-Level Architectural Knowledge (the mediator) was tested if significantly moderated by Learning Goal Orientation. The interaction effect of Managerial Coaching Skill and Learning Goal Orientation on Team-Level Architectural Knowledge was not statistically significant (b = 0.138, SE = 0.089, p = 0.123). However, both Managerial Coaching Skill (b = 0.407, SE = 0.073, p<0.001) and Learning Goal Orientation (b = 0.335, SE = 0.073, p<0.001) were significant predictors of Team-Level Architectural Knowledge, explaining 58.4% of its variance (R² = 0.584, F(3, 102) = 47.640, p<0.001). The summary of moderated mediation regression analysis predicting team-level architectural knowledge is presented in Table 4 and the moderating effect is further shown in Figure 2. The graph demonstrates that the relationship between managerial coaching skill and team-level architectural knowledge is stronger for employees with high on learning goal orientation and weaker for employees who scored moderately or lowly on learning goal orientation. Table 5 presents the conditional effects of the focal predictor (managerial coaching skill) at three values of the moderator (learning goal orientation).

Table 6: Conditional Effects of Managerial Coaching Skill and Team-Level Architectural Knowledge on Team Performance

Table 7: Conditional Indirect Effects of Managerial Coaching Skill on Team Performance

Table 8: Research hypotheses validation results

Table 9: Proposed Implementation Plan

Regarding the outcome variable Team Performance, the model explained 37.1% of its variance (R² = 0.371, F(2, 103) = 30.423, p<0.001). Both Managerial Coaching Skill (b = 0.217, SE = 0.075, p = 0.005) and Team-Level Architectural Knowledge (b = 0.264, SE = 0.084, p = 0.002) were significant predictors of Team Performance. The moderated mediation was evident in the conditional indirect effects of Managerial Coaching Skill on Team Performance through Team-Level Architectural Knowledge at different levels of Learning Goal Orientation. This analysis is presented in Table 6. At low levels of Learning Goal Orientation (mean - 1 SD; -0.652), the indirect effect was significant (b = 0.084, BootSE = 0.049, 95% CI [0.017, 0.204]). The effect became stronger at mean Learning Goal Orientation (b = 0.107, BootSE = 0.053, 95% CI [0.036, 0.235]) and was strongest at high levels of Learning Goal Orientation (mean + 1 SD; 0.652) (b = 0.131, BootSE = 0.062, 95% CI [0.042, 0.278]). The index of moderated mediation was significant (b = 0.036, BootSE = 0.028, 95% CI [-0.009, 0.099]), suggesting that the strength of the mediation effect of Team-Level Architectural Knowledge on the relationship between Managerial Coaching Skill and Team Performance changes with levels of Learning Goal Orientation. The analysis is presented in Table 7.

It should be noted that the overall data result for the moderated mediation analysis was unstandardised regression coefficients. Number of bootstrap samples was 5,000. Coaching skill and learning goal orientation were mean centred.

Hypotheses Testing Result

In summary, the results indicated that the effect of Managerial Coaching Skill on Team Performance through Team-Level Architectural Knowledge is moderated by Learning Goal Orientation. This implies that the transfer of coaching skills to enhanced team performance through team-level architectural knowledge acquisition is more effective when individuals have a higher learning goal orientation. Table 8 wraps up the result.

Business Solution

Based on the moderated mediation analysis results, which explored the relationship between Manegerial Coaching Skill, Team-Level Architectural Knowledge, Team Performance and Employees’ Learning Goal Orientation, the below implementation plan can be proposed to enhance team performance across departments in Mazars Indonesia. The plan focuses on leveraging coaching skills and learning goal orientation to maximise architectural knowledge acquisition and, consequently, team performance.

Justification of Implementation Plan

The proposed implementation plan is based on a moderated mediation analysis that highlighted significant relationships between Managerial Coaching Skill, Team-Level Architectural Knowledge, Team Performance and Employees’ Learning Goal Orientation. This analysis found a direct link between Managerial Coaching Skill and Team-Level Architectural Knowledge, suggesting that enhanced coaching skills facilitate the acquisition of architectural knowledge. To reinforce this skill set, the plan emphasizes training and continuous learning for managers. Although the interaction term between employees' Learning Goal Orientation and the connection between managerial coaching and team-level architectural knowledge was not statistically significant, it still highlighted the relevance of Learning Goal Orientation. The plan, therefore, includes strategies to assess and develop this orientation among employees, fostering a learning-centric environment that could heighten the effectiveness of managerial coaching.

The plan also addresses the significant predictive link between Team-Level Architectural Knowledge and Team Performance identified in the analysis. By implementing personalized coaching and mentorship programs, it aims to promote knowledge transfer and positively affect team performance. Additionally, the plan incorporates monitoring and evaluation mechanisms to track the impact of improved coaching skills and Learning Goal Orientation on knowledge and performance, ensuring alignment with empirical evidence and allowing for necessary adjustments. While the statistical analysis did not directly measure the effects of collaboration and knowledge sharing, these aspects are crucial to applying knowledge and skills within a team, likely contributing to enhanced team performance.

This study's exploration into the dynamics of managerial coaching skills, team-level architectural knowledge, employees’ learning goal orientation and team performance has yielded insightful findings with practical implications for Mazars Indonesia’s development and leadership strategies. By employing a moderated mediation model, the analysis provided a nuanced understanding of how managerial coaching skills directly influence team performance and indirectly through the mediating effect of team-level architectural knowledge within the context of varying levels of learning goal orientation.

The significant direct effect of managerial coaching skill on team-level architectural knowledge and the subsequent influence of team-level architectural knowledge on team performance underscore the pivotal role of effective coaching in fostering knowledge acquisition, which in turn enhances team performance. This finding echoes the importance of managerial proficiency in coaching, highlighting it as a key lever in driving team success. The analysis also revealed that while the interaction effect of managerial coaching skill and learning goal orientation on team-level architectural knowledge was not statistically significant, learning goal orientation still contributes to this dynamic. The conditional indirect effects indicated that higher levels of learning goal orientation tend to strengthen the mediation effect of team-level architectural knowledge on the managerial coaching skill-team performance relationship, suggesting that a strong learning orientation within teams can enhance the efficacy of coaching.

Recommendations

The implementation plan derived from these findings proposes actionable strategies for organisations capitalising on these dynamics. Organisations can create a more effective and dynamic work environment by enhancing managerial coaching skills, promoting a learning-oriented culture and strategically linking these elements to team-level architectural knowledge acquisition and team performance. The plan emphasises the importance of personalised coaching and mentorship, alongside regular monitoring and evaluation, to ensure the alignment of these initiatives with organisational goals and employee development needs.

However, the study also highlights areas for further research. The non-significant interaction between managerial coaching skill and learning goal orientation in directly influencing team-level architectural knowledge suggests a complex relationship that may require deeper investigation, possibly exploring other moderating variables or different organisational contexts. Additionally, longitudinal studies could provide more insights into how these relationships evolve over time and the long-term impact of managerial coaching and learning orientation on team performance.

In conclusion, this study contributes to the growing body of knowledge in organisational behaviour and leadership by delineating the mechanisms through which managerial coaching skills impact team performance, mediated by knowledge acquisition and moderated by learning goal orientation. The findings offer a foundation for developing targeted interventions aimed at enhancing team performance and underscore the need for further empirical exploration in this field.

1. Whitmore, John. Coaching for Performance: The Principles and Practices of Coaching and Leadership. 5th ed., Nicholas Brealey Publishing, 2017.

2. Lyons, Paul and Robert P. Bandura. "Coaching to Build Commitment for Generating Performance Improvement." Journal of Work-Applied Management, vol. 15, no. 1, 2023, pp. 120–134. https://doi.org/10.1108/JWAM-05-2022-0025.

3. International Coaching Federation. 2023 ICF Global Coaching Study. 2023, https://coachingfederation.org/research/global-coaching-study.

4. Nyfoudi, Maria, et al. "Managerial Coaching Skill and Team Performance: How Does the Relationship Work and Under What Conditions?" Human Resource Management Journal, vol. 33, no. 2, 2023, pp. 328–345. https://doi.org/10.1111/1748-8583.12443.

5. Wildflower, Leni. The Hidden History of Coaching. Open University Press, 2013.

6. Gormley, Helen and Christian van Nieuwerburgh. "Developing Coaching Cultures: A Review of the Literature." Coaching: An International Journal of Theory, Research and Practice, vol. 7, no. 2, 2014, pp. 90–101. https://doi.org/10.1080/17521882.2014.915863.

7. Mace, Myles L. The Growth and Development of Executives. Division of Research, Graduate School of Business Administration, Harvard University, 1950.

8. Fournies, Ferdinand F. Coaching for Improved Work Performance. Van Nostrand Reinhold Co., 1978.

9. Evered, Roger D. and James C. Selman. "Coaching and the Art of Management." Organizational Dynamics, vol. 18, no. 2, 1989, pp. 16–32. https://doi.org/10.1016/0090-2616(89)90040-5.

10. Mathieu, Monique. "How Does Managerial Coaching Affect Individual Learning? The Mediating Roles of Team and Individual Reflexivity." Personnel Review, vol. 47, no. 1, 2018, pp. 118–132. https://doi.org/10.1108/PR-06-2016-0132.

11. Hui, et al. "Performing Versus Adapting: How Leader’s Coaching Style Matters in Hong Kong." International Journal of Human Resource Management, vol. 32, no. 20, 2019, pp. 4163–4189. https://doi.org/10.1080/09585192.2019.1569547.

12. Dahling, Jason, et al. "Does Coaching Matter? A Multilevel Model Linking Managerial Coaching Skill and Frequency to Sales Goal Attainment." Personnel Psychology, vol. 69, no. 4, 2016, pp. 863–884.

13. Hagen, Mark and Melissa Aguilar. "The Impact of Managerial Coaching on Learning Outcomes within the Team Context: An Analysis." Human Resource Development Quarterly, vol. 23, no. 3, 2012, pp. 363–388.

14. Buengeler, Claudia and Deanne Den Hartog. "National Diversity and Team Performance: The Moderating Role of Interactional Justice Climate." International Journal of Human Resource Management, vol. 26, no. 6, 2015, pp. 831–855.

15. Ellinger andrea D. and Robert P. Bostrom. "Managerial Coaching Behaviors in Learning Organizations." Journal of Management Development, vol. 18, no. 9, 1999, pp. 752–771. https://doi.org/10.1108/02621719910300810.

16. Heslin, Peter A. et al. "Keen to Help? Managers' Implicit Person Theories and Their Subsequent Employee Coaching." Personnel Psychology, vol. 59, no. 4, 2006, pp. 871–902.

17. Hui, Rebecca T.Y. et al. "The Contrasting Effects of Coaching Style on Task Performance: The Mediating Roles of Subjective Task Complexity and Self-Set Goal." Human Resource Development Quarterly, vol. 24, no. 4, 2013, pp. 429–447.

18. Mathieu, John E., et al. "A Century of Work Teams in the Journal of Applied Psychology." Journal of Applied Psychology, vol. 102, no. 3, 2017, pp. 452–467.

19. Jones, Robyn J., et al. "Conceptualizing the Distinctiveness of Team Coaching." Journal of Managerial Psychology, vol. 34, no. 2, 2019, pp. 62–78. https://doi.org/10.1108/JMP-07-2018-0326.

20. Jansen, Anton, Jan Bosch and Paris Avgeriou. "Software Architecture as a Set of Architectural Design Decisions." 5th Working IEEE/IFIP Conference on Software Architecture (WICSA’05), IEEE, 2005, pp. 109–120.

21. Dweck, Carol S. "Motivational Processes Affecting Learning." American Psychologist, vol. 41, no. 10, 1986, pp. 1040–1048.

22. Elliot andrew J. and Holly A. McGregor. "A 2 × 2 Achievement Goal Framework." Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, vol. 80, no. 3, 2001, pp. 501–519.

23. VandeWalle, Don. "Development and Validation of a Work Domain Goal Orientation Instrument." Educational and Psychological Measurement, vol. 57, no. 6, 1997, pp. 995–1015.

24. Button, Sabrina B et al. "Goal Orientation in Organizational Research: A Conceptual and Empirical Foundation." Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, vol. 67, no. 1, 1996, pp. 26–48.

25. Payne, Stephanie C. et al. "A Meta-Analytic Examination of the Goal Orientation Nomological Net." Journal of Applied Psychology, vol. 92, no. 1, 2007, pp. 128–150.

26. Janssen, Onne and Nico W. Van Yperen. "Employees’ Goal Orientations, the Quality of Leader-Member Exchange and the Outcomes of Job Performance and Job Satisfaction." Academy of Management Journal, vol. 47, no. 3, 2004, pp. 368–384.

27. Porath, Christine L. and Thomas S. Bateman. "Self-Regulation: From Goal Orientation to Job Performance." Journal of Applied Psychology, vol. 91, no. 1, 2006, pp. 185–192.

28. Gong, Yaping, et al. "Employee Learning Orientation, Transformational Leadership and Employee Creativity: The Mediating Role of Employee Creative Self-Efficacy." Academy of Management Journal, vol. 52, no. 4, 2009, pp. 765–778.

29. Noe, Raymond A., et al. "Individual Differences and Informal Learning in the Workplace." Journal of Vocational Behavior, vol. 83, no. 3, 2013, pp. 327–335.

30. Sparrowe, Raymond T., et al. "Social Networks and the Performance of Individuals and Groups." Academy of Management Journal, vol. 44, no. 2, 2001, pp. 316–325. https://doi.org/10.2307/3069458.

31. Salas, Eduardo, et al. "On Teams, Teamwork and Team Performance: Discoveries and Developments." Human Factors, vol. 50, no. 3, 2008, pp. 540–547. https://doi.org/10.1518/001872008X288457.

32. Hackman, J. Richard. "The Design of Work Teams." Handbook of Organizational Behavior, edited by J. W. Lorsch, Prentice Hall, 1987, pp. 315–342.

33. Hackman, J. Richard. Leading Teams: Setting the Stage for Great Performances. Harvard Business School Press, 2002.

34. Hagen, Mark S. "Managerial Coaching: A Review of the Literature." Performance Improvement Quarterly, vol. 24, no. 4, 2012, pp. 17–39.

35. Hamlin, Robert G., et al. "The Emergent 'Coaching Industry': A Wake-Up Call for HRD Professionals." Human Resource Development International, vol. 11, no. 3, 2008, pp. 287–305.

36. Ellinger andrea D., et al. "Supervisory Coaching Behavior, Employee Satisfaction and Warehouse Employee Performance: A Dyadic Perspective in the Distribution Industry." Human Resource Development Quarterly, vol. 14, no. 4, 2003, pp. 435–458. https://doi.org/10.1002/hrdq.1074.

37. Agarwal, Ritu, et al. "The Performance Effects of Coaching: A Multilevel Analysis Using Hierarchical Linear Modeling." The International Journal of Human Resource Management, vol. 20, no. 10, 2009, pp. 2110–2134.

38. Gregory, Jane B. and Paul E. Levy. "Employee Coaching Relationships: Enhancing Construct Clarity and Measurement." Coaching: An International Journal of Theory, Research and Practice, vol. 3, no. 2, 2010, pp. 109–123.

39. Ladyshewsky, Richard K. "The Manager as Coach as a Driver of Organizational Development." Leadership & Organization Development Journal, vol. 31, no. 4, 2010, pp. 292–306.

40. Joo, Baek-Kyoo. "Organizational Commitment for Knowledge Workers: The Roles of Perceived Organizational Learning Culture, Leader-Member Exchange Quality and Turnover Intention." Human Resource Development Quarterly, vol. 21, no. 1, 2010, pp. 69–85.

41. Kim, Soonhee, et al. "The Impact of Managerial Coaching Behavior on Employee Work-Related Reactions." Journal of Business and Psychology, vol. 28, no. 3, 2013, pp. 315–330. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10869-013-9286-9.

42. Orth, C. Dennis, et al. "The Manager's Role as Coach and Mentor." Organizational Dynamics, vol. 15, no. 4, 1987, pp. 66–74.

43. McLeod, Lorraine. Coaching and Mentoring: Practical Techniques for Developing Learning and Performance. Kogan Page Publishers, 2012.

44. Creswell, John W. Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative and Mixed Methods Approaches. 4th ed., Sage, 2014.

45. Smither, James, et al. "Can Working with an Executive Coach Improve Multisource Feedback Ratings over Time? A Quasi-Experimental Field Study." Personnel Psychology, vol. 56, no. 1, 2003, pp. 23–44.

46. Vandewalle, Don. "Development and Validation of a Work Domain Goal Orientation Instrument." Educational and Psychological Measurement, vol. 57, no. 6, 1997, pp. 995–1015.

47. Leslie, Jean and Pamela Braddy. Prospector Technical Manual. Center for Creative Leadership, 2011.

48. Spreitzer, et al. "Early Identification of International Executive Potential." Journal of Applied Psychology, vol. 82, no. 1, 1997, pp. 6–29.