This article argues for a new way of studying executive-coaching outcomes, which is illustrated with a study based on data from 156 client-coach pairs. The argument accepts that we are unlikely to get robust data on coaching outcomes in the near future but assumes that we can expect similar effectiveness for coaching as that demonstrated in rigorous psychotherapy outcome research. Therefore, it is argued that it is more important now to (a) identify the "active ingredients" that predict the effectiveness of executive coaching, and (b) to determine the difference in predictive value of these active ingredients on coaching effectiveness. The outcome study examined some of these active ingredients, such as the working alliance between coach and client, the self-efficacy of the client, the personality of the client, and the "personality match" between client and coach. The results show that client perceptions of coaching outcome were significantly related to their perceptions of the working alliance, client self-efficacy, and to client perceptions of the range of techniques of the coach. The client-coach relationship mediated the impact of self-efficacy and range of techniques on coaching outcomes, suggesting that this relationship is the key factor in determining how clients perceive the outcome of coaching.

*Draft version 10/26/18 submitted for peer review. Please do not circulate or cite without author's permission* Recent research has proposed that the ‘law of less work’ holds for cognitive work (Kool, McGuire, Rosen, & Botvinick, 2010), with people preferring easier over more difficult cognitive tasks. Using two different adaptations of a demand selection task, we show that interest, but not self-efficacy, can influence this effect, such that participants make more choices that involve cognitive work. Interest was also associated with lower feelings of fatigue. In two studies, participants (N=63 and N=158) repeatedly made a choice between completing a difficult or easy math problem. Results show that liking math (but not perceived math skill) predicts choosing more difficult (vs. easy) math problems. Two more studies use the Academic Diligence Task (Galla et al., 2014) where high school students (N=447 and N=884) could toggle between a math task and playing a video game/watching videos. In these studies, we again find that math interest relates to greater proportion of time spent on the math problems. Three of these four studies also examined perceived fatigue, finding that interest relates to lower fatigue. An internal meta-analysis of the four studies finds a small but robust effect of interest on both the willingness to exert greater effort, and the experience of less fatigue (despite engaging in more effort). The meta-analytical effect of self-efficacy on effort exertion and fatigue is non-significant.

Purpose:This contribution argues for a new way of studying executive-coaching outcome. The argument accepts that we are not likely to get rigorous data on coaching outcome from well-designed clinical trials in the near future, and assumes a degree of effectiveness that is based upon the first indications and the more rigorous studies that have been undertaken in psychotherapy. Assuming a moderate degree of effectiveness has afforded a concerted effort amongst researchers to identify the ‘active ingredients’ which predict the effectiveness of executive coaching.Design/Methodology:This article contains a detailed overview of the quantitative studies of executive coaching undertaken to date. It covers both the body of evidence which we believe substantiates our key assumption of general effectiveness and some early research findings resulting from using that assumption. It also gives a brief overview of the findings of the more rigorous randomised control trials in psychotherapy outcome. Altogether we believe we have demonstrated that there are sufficient parallels between the new path of coaching outcome research and the well-trodden path of psychotherapy research to enable the exploration of ‘active ingredients’ research in executive coaching.Results:By combining the early results in coaching research described in this paper and the overview of meta-analysis studies in the parallel field of psychotherapy, we have been able: (1) to show that – although the effect sizes in coaching are generally found to be smaller than in psychotherapy – it is safe to assume that executive coaching is generally an effective intervention, and: (2) to use that assumption as a basis for further coaching research. We have used this assumption ourselves to carry out research into the ‘active ingredients’ of effective coaching and to design a new research programme on a scale that has not previously been possible.Conclusions:It is time now to be creative and pull together the limited resources for research we have in coaching psychology. As a profession we should make the most of this opportunity to discover how we might improve our service to our clients.