Leadership Style in Executive Coaching with Multisource Feedback and Its Impact on Proactive Influence Tactics
Pramudianto (pram.coach@gmail.com) Lieli Suharti (lieli.suharti@staff.uksw.edu)
Doctorate Program of Management, Faculty of Economics and Business Satya Wacana Christian University
Abstract
Research on executive coaching has grow rapidly, especially in the fields of management consulting, training and development of employees. Recent research on executive coaching has led to the implementation of executive coaching by using the method of Multi source feedback (MSF), because MSF has advantages over single-source feedback. However, previous studies have not considered leadership style that can affect executive coaching in an effort to improve employee performance. This study aims to determine (1) the impact of executive coaching intervention with multisource feedback on proactive influence tactics of sales staff; (2) the effect of leadership style with multisource feedback on proactive influence tactics of sales staff; (3) the influence of the leadership style in executive coaching with multisource feedback on the proactive influence tactics of the sales staff. This research uses experimental design method (field experiment), which deploy a 2x2 factorial design with the first level is executive coaching (coaching vs no coaching) and the second level is the type of leadership (transformational vs. transactional). Participants in this experiment amounted to 100 sales staff of one multinational automotive company in Indonesia. Participants in this research are randomly classified into 4 groups of manipulation condition. The hypothesis in this research are tested using Analysis of Variance (ANOVA), which comparing the results of manipulation in the experimental group and control group.
The study found that: (1) the proactive influence tactics of sales staff with MSF executive coaching better than the sales staff without executive coaching; (2) the proactive influence tactics of sales staff with the transformational leader is better than the performance of sales staff with the transactional leader; and (3) The existence of executive coaching with the type of transformational leadership may improve the proactive influence tactics of Sales staff. Originility value of this research is that this research seeks to develop a model of executive coaching with MSF to include therein a variable of leadership style to maximize the impact of multisource feedback in executive coaching.
Key words: executive coaching, multi-source feedback, transformational leaderships, proactive influence tactics, sales staff.
INTRODUCTION
Research on executive coaching has experienced rapid growth (for ex: Kilburg 1996;
Filipezak 1998; Qucik & Macik-Frey, 2004; Feldman & Lankau 2005; Nieminen 2013). The
development of executive coaching literature in the areas of management consultation,
training and development of employees as well as psychological counseling has been
increased too (Kampa-Kokesch and Anderson 2001).
According to the International Coaching Federation (ICF) in 2003, Executive
coaching is an ongoing professional relationship between a Coach who will help the coachees
to deepen and improvetheir performance, as well as improve their quality of life. According
behavioral changes, and the growth of the coachess that eventually can lead to career success
and organizational performance. Thus, executive coaching can be defined as a process on the
relationship between the executive (coach) with the subordinate staffs (coachee) for the
purpose of increasing the coachees'behavioral change through self-awareness and learning,
and thus ultimately to tachieve the success of individuals and organization.
In the domain of human resource development, Feldman and Lankau (2005) described
some characteristics of executive coaching as formalized, had a short to medium term, one to
one relationship with a coachee that focused on providing a wide range of feedback in order
to improve the effectiveness of a coachee in work and organization. Accurate feedback is
very important to learn how to improve behavior (DeNisi & Kluger, 2000).
Feedback that is sourced from many parties is called multisource feedback (MSF).
Multisource feedback for a manager is one of the popular methods for the development of
human resources through the provision of specific feedback on the behavior of the manager.
MSF has more advantages than single-source feedback. MSF program has at least two
independent sources, such as subordinates, peers, bosses, and people outside the organization
(Lepsinger and Lucia, 1997). MSF process includes the value collection from the
leader/supervisor, peers, direct reports, and coachees themselves, and then, the results are
presented to the leader tofacilitate the learning and progress of the personnels.
Research in the field of MSF has been grown very rapidly in recent decades, namely in
terms of development, assessment and decision making of the personnels (Antonioni 1996;
Brutus & Derayeh 2002; Brutus et al., 2006; Hedge, Borman & Birkeland 2001; Waldman,
Atwater & Antonioni 1998). Nieminen et al., (2013) used executive coaching as a
complement of multisource feedback to help the leaders to develop goals and develop proper
development action. The research results by Nieminen et al.,(2013) showed that the effect of
MSF with feedback only had a smaller value than feedback workshop combined with
executive coaching.
Niemenen et al., (2013) also provided empirical evidence that executive coaching
with MSF in the workshop could improve the individual performance of the coachees.
Unfortunately, the ability to generalize the conclusion of the study (Niemenen et al., 2013;
Kochanowski et al., 2010) is still limited because leadership type if the coach involved in
executive coaching has not been studied in more depth. Though the type of leadership plays
an important role in an organization, research in the field of executive coaching has not
An effective leadership type that is often studied in depth is transformational leadership
type. The theory of transformational leadership is influenced by the researches conducted
byBurns (1978) and Bass (1985), which explaind the importance of leadership. Empirical
research found that transformational leaders could improve employees'motivation (Bogler
2001), job satisfaction, and employees'commitment (Koh 1990). Transformational leadership
is emerging as an effective approach in educational settings (Leithwood 1994).
Proper implementation of executive coaching is believed to have a positive impact for
the coachee. Joo (2005) in a meta-analysis of the various executive coaching researches
found that executive coaching was correlated with career success, as well as training and
learning. Through the approach process, the relationship and feedback acceptance from
coaching could produce outcomes such as self-awareness and learning. The end resultswere
individual and organizational success. Additional research by Bono et al., (2009) provided
empirical evidence that the psychological aspect in executive coaching played an important
role in behavioral change of the manager in the organization.
Other transformation in executive coaching is in termof MSF influence on the
behavioral attitude. In testing the impact of executive coaching to behavioral feedback, one
types behavior that can be measured is the proactive influence tactics (Kochanowski et al.,
2010; Yukl, Seifert & Chaves, 2008; Seifert et al., 2003; Seifert & Yukl, 2005). For effective,
an employee must be skilled in interpersonal influence and proactive influence tactics can be
used to influence subordinates, colleagues, or bosses to support the proposed changes (Yukl
2010). There are four proactive influence tactics stated by Kochanowski et al., (2010),
namely rational persuasion, inspirational appeals, consultation, collaboration
Rational persuasion, is a tactic to use logical arguments and factual evidence which
showthat demand is feasible and relevant for the interest in achieving the objectives.
Inspirational appeals, is a tactic thatbcompares the values and ideas of the person to evoke
emotions in order to get a commitment. Consultation, is a tactic that asks people to give
suggestions for improvements or to help activities planning or the proposed changes to
support the desired goal. Collaboration, offers relevant resources or assistance if the person
will perform changes.
Proactive influence tactics are mostly needed to be owned by the employees who are
working in the field of marketing. For example, as the sales staff who acts as the field
implementation team, within work days of is more dominant to meet clients, and he or she
needs the ability to communicate persuasively. Executive coaching with multisource
the form of increased proactive influence their tactics as a result of multisource feedback
mechanism with executive coaching.
Based on the above background, the research issues raised in this study are: 1) Are
transformational and transactional leadership types on multisource feedback have influence
onproactive influence tactics of the sales staffs?; 2). Is the executive coaching intervention
with transformational and transactional leadership types by using multisource feedback can
enhance theproactive influence tactics of the sales staff?.
LITERATURE REVIEW AND HYPOTHESIS DEVELOPMENT
Type of Leadership, multisource feedback and Proactive Influence Tactics
Leadership type in executive coaching has an important role because coaching is
basically maintaining leadership potential in ourself and others to become more productive
and enjoyable (Wattsand Corrie 2013). Both leadership and coaching have similarity in the
process related to human behavior, affecting humans, with the aim to change other people
and organizations. Thus the application of appropriate style of leadership in executive
coaching process will affect the output of coaching activities.
Greenberg and Baron (1995) defined transformational leadership as a leadership
behavior in which a leader used his charisma to transform and revitalize the organization.
Transformational leadership can also be interpreted as a leadership that involves changes in
the organization and motivates the subordinates to be willing to work for the high-level
goals that are considered beyond the personal interests (Bass, 1995; Tichy & Devana,
1986).
In transformational leadership, a leader focuses on the ways to make a person or group
to be more aware of the importance of the results of a job, encourage them to be more
concerned with the organization rather than personal interests, and enable their needs at a
higher rate. Research has found that transformational leadership can increase motivation
(Bogler2001), job satisfaction, and commitment (Koh1990). Transformational leadership
appears to be a very effective approach in the process/system of education (Leithwood 1994).
Leadership is also found to be one of the important factors that may affect job satisfaction,
motivation and performance of employees (Yukl, 2005:7; Pierce & Newstrom, 2006).
On the other hand, transactional leadership focuses on the desire of the subordinates
and tries to fill the expectations, performs rewards they want, responds the personal interests
uses the ways to encourage the coachees to improve their performance with emphasis on
targets rather than the process.
The difference of managerial behavior type will cause different feedback effects
(Kochanowski, Seifert and Yukl 2010). The relationship between behavior and leadership
skills has a positive impact on thee ffectiveness of the organization, this is closely connected
with the values, norms of behavior and work practices (Denison and Mishra, 1995; Denison,
Nieminen, and Kotrba, 2003). The use of feedback to behavioral changes by considering the
type of leadership can potentially improve individual performance and the final impact is
achieving organizational performance
In an empirical study, Shannahan, Bush and Shannahan (2013), found that the nature
of the competitiveness of the seller, the leadership style of sales managers, and sales
performance, showed that the highest sales performance in the sales personnels was gained
by those whose leaders used transformational leadership style. Giacobbi (2000) argued that
the sales personels' performance was strongly influenced by the motivation of the coach, the
sales manager, apriority in the work, values applied in the company, the existing
resources,as well as colleagues and leadership style.
The sales managers have the ability to vary the coachability in the correlation with
leadership style. However, it has been proven that transformational leadership style leads to
higher sales performance (Humphreys 2002; Mac Kenzieetal. 2001; Russ et al. 1996;
Shoemaker 1999). Transformational leadership style is mostly similar to athletic coaching
that has been proven to improve performance (Armstrong 2001). Likewise, the sales
manager who performs coaching with transformational leadership style may trigger a greater
impact on sales performance. Allegedly a manager who has transformational leadership type
in applying executive coaching with multisource feedback workshop will be able to enhance
the best proactive influence tactics.
Based on the arguments and the results of previous studies, then it can be formulated
the following hypotheses:
H1: Proactive influence tactics of the sales staffs with transformational leadership
type is better than the proactive influence tactics of the sales head with transactional
leadership type.
Leadership Style, Executive Coaching and Proactive influence tactics.
Peterson (1996) stated that coaching was a process to equip people with the tools,
number of previous studies found that executive coaching could improve the management
skills (Orenstein, 2002); could facilitate new skills, and insights for the needs of individual
learning and organization improvement (Bacon & Spear, 2003), improved performance or
behavior of the executive (Hall, Otazo & Hollenbeck,1999), improved personal performance
and satisfaction (Kilburg,1996); produced learning, behavioral changes, and growth of the
coachees to have economic benefits (Sherman & Freas,2004).
Smither (2003) provided empirical evidence with a quasi experiment that executive
coaching with multisource feedback could improve performance. A research conducted by
Smither (2003) showed that managers with executive mentoring as a form of feedback and
interactive discussions, after being evaluated in a certain period of time were able to improve
the performance of the manager. Bono e tal., (2009) stated that the changes in behavior were
the focus of executive coaching with different style variation that can be conducted.
Historically, coaching focuses on preparing the employees with high quality in the
development of their career (McCauley & Hezlet 2002). Coaching is the art of helping
people to improve their effectiveness with indirect empowerment-mentoring (non-directive)
to the coachees and lead them from behind. From the above explanation it appears that
executive coaching can improve the quality of the manager, because there is an effectiveness
process in mentoring by an obvious method.
The individual benefits of executive coaching deal with problem solving at the
managerial level, namely interpersonal skills and ability to a better relationship, ability to
adapt to changes, work-life balance, and reduction in stress levels (Jarvis 2004). Smither et
al., (2003) found that executive coaching had specific goals and wanted to perform feedback
and solicit ideas from the employees so as to improve the performance ratings.
According to Wasylyshyn (2003), most of the executives involved in executive
coaching focused on behavioral changes that made their career to be succeed. MSF is
generally resulting in improved behavior and leadership skills (Nieminen, 2013). Consistent
with previous studies, these findings simultaneously underscore the importance of feedback,
as well as the need to continue to seek effective strategies (eg, DeNisi & Kluger, 2000;
Kluger & DeNisi, 1996, 1998; Smither et al., 2005).
On the sales staffs who act as the field implementation team, the combination of
executive coaching leadership style with multisource feedback workshop, is allegedly
capable of improving the performance of the sales staffs. Since the sales in their daily work
are more dominant to meet the clients, they need the ability to communicate persuasively.
expected to increase the proactive influence tactics of the sales staffa rather than
transactional leadership style. Based on the above arguments then we can formulate the
following hypotheses:
H2: Proactive influence tactics of the sales staffs on the transformational leadership
type with executive coaching is better than the proactive influence tactics of the sales head
without executive coaching.
H3: Proactive influence tactics of the sales staffs on the transactional leadership type
with executive coaching is better than the proactive influence tactics of the sales head
without executive coaching.
STUDY METHOD Study Design
This study design was a field experiment that empirically investigated the impact of
executive coaching on the proactive influence tactics shown on individual behavior changes
as a salesman. The study was designed with a 2x2 mixed-factorial design between-within
subjects. The first factor was the executive coaching that consisted of two levels, namely
without executive coaching and with executive coaching and the second factor was the type
of leadership that consisted of two levels, namely transformational and transactional. Figure
3.1 shows the experimental design matrix.
Figure 3. 1 Exsperimental Matrix Executive Coaching No- Executive
Coaching
Pre Post Pre Post
Leadership style
Transformational cell 1 A cell 1 B cell 3 A cell 3 B Transactional cell 2 A cell 2 B cell 4 A cell 4 B
VARIABLES, SUBJECT, AND RESEARCH MANIPULATION
The independent variables were manipulated variables namely executive coaching and
leadership type. Manipulation of executive coaching was given in a workshop as multisource
feedback form performed by an executive. In this study, the executive used mid-level
managers who became the head of sales staffs. Manipulation of the leadership type was done
by placing two types of leaders wich were designed to transformational and transactional
influence tactis by Kochanowski et al., (2010) which included rational persuasion,
inspirational appeals, coordination and consultation.
Participants (subjects) in the experiment consisted of the sales staffs in the automotive
multinational companies in the daily charge for the exhibition in some big malls in Jakarta,
Semarang and Yogyakarta. Participants were randomly classified into above four
manipulation conditions.
Experiment Procedures
In the first week, the experiment was conducted in a workshop that began with an
evaluation of the sales staffs’ performance through self rating and the evaluation of the leader
(manager). Workshop with self-esteem improvement agenda was divided into four classes.
Each class consisted of twenty-five sales staffs and was led by a manager as executive
coaching. Manager presented the performance of the team and discussed the case in several
exhibitions in the mall that showed low self-esteem sales staffs in providing services to
customers. As a form of multisource feedback, managers discussed the feedback in the form
of interviews with customers, results of self-rating and appraisal of the manager on the team.
The workshop was held for three days in a row.
In the second up to fourth week, the sales staffs were sent to carry out the task of
exhibitions in various malls. For the group which received the manipulation of executive
coaching, manager supervised the phone or communicated by using e-mail to provide
encouragement and spirit for the team. Meanwhile, in the control group who did not receive
the manipulation of executive coaching, mentoring was not carried out on the members of the
group.
In the group that received manipulation of executive coaching with transformational
leadership type, the assistance was performed in this experimental study, the application of
transformational leadership type was conducted with a friendly approach and charismatic by
providing the words of motivation, giving vice, sometimes the solution and providing an
opportunity for the subjects to argue. Email writing used regular letters. In contrast to the
type of transformational leadership, transactional leadership type application method was
conducted by non-persuasive approach, by applying the questioning methid that led to the
target (result), often give advice or solutions and even command. Communication via email
used capital letters, with short and firm sentences.
After the end of the exhibition period (week 5), one day workshop was held again to
measure the performance of the post-exhibition with multisource feedback measurement
processed in analysis technique. The next phase was the debriefing, which returned the
subjects to their original position and explained the purpose of the study as one form of
research ethics.
Analysis Technique
The analysis was performed by analysis of variance (ANOVA) which compared the
results of manipulation in the experimental group and control group. Subjects in this study
were amounted to 96 participants (subjects) with each different characteristic. The
participants were 93 men and 3 women, mostly were aged 21-45 years with the sales head
position of 83 and the key account head of 13 and had a working period between 1-14 years
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Hypothesis 1 is intended to review the effect of proactive influence tactics of the Sales
head with transformational leadership type is better than proactive influence tactics with of
the Sales head with transactional leadership type. The study results showed that the average
value of transformational leadership type was 76,18 and transactional leadership type was
63.98. This means that the sales staffs under the manager who performed transformational
leadership type had a higher proactive influence tactics than the sales staffs under the
manager who performed transactional leadership type. The test results of Hypothesis 1
indicated that the leader who used transformational leadership type had a better influence
toeards the proactive influence tactics of the sales staffs compared to the Leader who used
transactional leadership type.
Table 1
Proactive Influence Tactics of the Participants for Transformational Leadership
Rational Inspirational Collaboration Consultation Total
Mean 73,11 73,69 73,53 66,71 70,08
Standar Deviasi 17,46 12,00 19,33 20,68 11,26
Tipe Kepemimpinan
Transformasional
Table 2.
Proactive Influence Tactics of the Participants for Transactional Leadership
Rational Inspirational Collaboration Consultation Total
Mean 77,40 76,67 63,13 52,19 63,99
Standar Deviasi 11,58 11,41 21,25 16,50 8,75
Tipe Kepemimpinan
Tipe Kepemimpinan
Transformasional Sebelum Executive Coaching Sesudah Executive Coaching
Rational 59,58 78,08
Collaboration 81,25 86,63
Consultation 78,33 84,13
The study findings showed that the subject with a transformational leader \performed
behavioral changes to be able to communicate better, more energized and motivated to
improve their performance. The opposite was occured in the transactional leader, which
indicated that the subjects were under pressure due to the greeting process always
emphasized the result that was the delivery order. These pressures were coupled with the
words that used capital letters. The subjects felt that the leader was disrespectful, still in
anger, did not appreciate their efforts, invited confrontational actions so they assumed that the
greeting was just a reminder that they had a target, even urgent to complete the target. This
was thought to be the cause that the emergence of better proactive tactics influence on the
sales staffs was not encouraged.
Hypothesis 2 tested whether the effect of proactive influence tactics of the sales staffs
on transformational leadership type with executive coaching was better than the proactive
influence tactics without of the sales head without executive coaching. The results showed
that the implementation of executive coaching with transformational leadership type could
enhance the effect of proactive influence of the subjects, especially the rational, collaboration
and consultation tactics.
Table 3.
Changes of proactive influence tactics before and after Executive Coaching
Rational persuasion, by using logical arguments and factual evidence showed that
demand was feasible and relevant for the interest in achieving the objectives. Consultation is
asking people to give suggestions for improvements or help to plan activities or the proposed
changes to support the desired goal. Collaboration offers relevant resources or assistance if
the person wants to perfom changes. Thus, the performance of the sales head is considered to
be increased with the learning approach through executive coaching with transformational
Tipe Kepemimpinan
Transformasional Uji Statistik Signifikansi Keterangan
Rational Persuasion Uji Wilcoxon 0,000 Diterima Inspirational Appeal Uji Paired t Test 0,815 Ditolak
Collaboration Uji Paired t Test 0,026 Diterima Consultation Uji Paired t Test 0,024 Diterima
Table 4.
The Effectiveness Test Results of Executive Coaching with Transformational Leadership Type on proactive influence tactics
As presented in Table 2 above, the results of the comparative test conducted on
various proactive influence tactics before being treated and after being treated with the
executive coaching showed that executive coaching was not proven to increase the
inspirational appeal tactics. It means, either the coaching was given or not given there was no
difference in the inspirational appeal. However, the results was different on the other
proactive influence tactics. Executive coaching with transformational leadership was proven
to effectively promote a proactive influence tactics of rational persuasion, collaboration, and
consultation.
Based on the response from the participants, the executive coaching process was
successful. Another interesting thing was that the participants respond to the sentences given
by the coach. In executive coaching with transformational leadership, the participants
answered with an enthusiastic response, they even showed their action plan to the coach.
When the coachee described his action plan, it can be said that there had been trust between
the coach and coachee, which had an impact on an open communication. The existing trust
brought an understanding to the coachee that the coach was not their boss, coach was a
stimulus in provoking their minds to the empowerment process and to achieve goals. How to
think like that eliminates the gap so that the optimization process of the coachee can be
achieved. Through the conversation, it appeared that the coachee really needed continuous
process because they felt theat they were approved parts, considered and supported for the
job. From the evaluation, all subjects said that the model of transformational coaching style
was very useful in order to explore the mind, empower them to discover new ideas, as well as
the execution.
For the third hypothesis which formulated that Proactive influence tactics of the
sales staffs on the transactional leadership type with executive coaching is better than the
proactive influence tactics of the sales head without executive coaching, it was found that the
Tipe Kepemimpinan
Transaksional Sebelum Executive Coaching Sesudah Executive Coaching
Rational 73,96 80,83
Inspirational 72,92 80,42
Tipe Kepemimpinan
Transaksional Uji Statistik Signifikansi Keterangan
Rational Uji Paired t Test 0,018 Diterima Inspirational Uji Paired t Test 0,023 Diterima Collaboration Uji Paired t Test 0,129 Ditolak
Consultation Uji Paired t Test 0,058 Ditolak Table 5.
The Changes of Proactive Influence Tactics with Transactional Leadership With and Without Executive Coaching
The treatment of executive coaching with transactional leadership type could enhance the
proactive influence tactics of the subjects, but only against the Rational and Inspirational
influence tactics. While for the collaboration tactic and consultation tactic it did not have any
influence.
Table 6.
The Effectiveness Test Results of Executive Coaching on Various Types of Transactional Leadership
The results of the comparative test conducted on a variety of proactive influence tactics
without executive coaching and with executive coaching, by using transactional leadership
style, indicated that executive coaching was not proven to improve Collaboration and
consultation influence tactics. It meansthat whether executive coaching was given or not
given, the collaboration and consultation tactics were the same. However, the results for
Rational and Inspirational influence tactics were different. Executive coaching was proven to
increase to two types of proactive influence tactics.
The process of coaching performed by using transactional leadership tyoe had a
different impact on the proactive influence tactics of the coacheescompared to
transformational leadership style. The impactcaused by the leadership transformatioal type
was that the coachees felt that they had more opportunity to think and a chance because they
were respected andheard, even felt a partner who always provide motivation. While the
transactional leadership typewas more likely in the process of pressure, deadlines and
results. A coachee expressed his views about the coach who applied transactional leadership
the target, making me feel to be ignored, we tend to be considered as money-making
machine"s. Most of them expressed discomfort with writing incapital letters, because it is
considered unethical and destructive emotions. They said: "capitali letters are the expression
of anger, an expression of a command to do without any negotiation, may result in a feeling
like the superior dealing with the inferior". The impact of these perceptions created an
obstacle in the communication process, trust became thinnedr and finally there was no
openness.
Executive coaching with transactional leadership type had a tendency to focus on
results and just gave confidence in the results. The coaching process was only seen as a
reminder to hit the target and not as a driver for behavioral changes. The coaching process
actually didnot happen, what happened wasthe command, advice that should be done. As the
response to the transactional leadership style, participants were encouraged to use the rational
influence tactic, by using logical arguments and factual evidence in influencing others to
reach their goals. Likewise, participants in this group used Inspirational appeals tactic,
compared the valuesof the person and wishes to evoke emotions in order to get a
commitment.
Overall, the study showed that Executive coaching with transformational leadership
type had a better effect on the proactive influence tactics of the sales staffs than executive
coaching with transactional leadership type. In executive coaching with transformational
type, the participants obtained virtual coaching by the use of proactive words and convincing
empathy so it could create an impression of positive thing in the participants' view. This
condition caused the coaching process went well and got commitment of the coachees.
In this process there was a change of see (paradigm) that the coachee looked and feel
the communication given by the leadership, made them could change the map of the mind
towards the leader and his work. The change inthethinking map made them do (behavior)
eveything as an action or behavior based on the thinking map. The new behavior was to use
proactive influence tactics to the consumers to achieve the goal. Thus they would enterthe
stage of get (result), the results indicated a significant difference.
This showed that coaching with transformational leadership created openess
opportunities between the leader and the subordinates. This openness made more harmonious
relationship between the leaders and the subordinates. Transformational leadership type in the
coaching process continuously built trust in the relationship between coach and coachee.
The opposite occured in coaching with transactional leadership type, the study
always focuses to the results ofdelivery order or vehicle reservation mails. These pressures
were coupled with the words that used capital letters. The coachees felt that the coach was
impolite, was in anger, so that they assumed coaching was just as a reminder that they had a
target.
These findings confirm previous research findings by Sherman & Freas (2004), who
stated that the purpose of executive coaching was to produce learning, behavioral changes,
and growth of the coachees. Northouse (2001 ) emphasized that transformational leadership
was a process that converted and transformed individuals. Transactional leadership according
to Burns (1978) was the relationship between leaders and subordinates based on a series of
bargaining activities between the two and had the characteristics of contingent reward and
management by- exception.
The coachees who trust to their superior will be able to make changes themselves.
They know what to run, they arei able to build hthemselvesand their motivations. Their
expressions show that they always be together with thrir team to move forward, the target is
not a destination, but a change in behavior as a lead measure that they believe may affect the
results.
Egan (2013) stated that executive coaching research had a potential to be developed
by examining the research agenda and Lankau Feldman (2005) and Joo (2005) statef that
coachee could improve self-ratings in achieving the goals by developinga relationship in
executive coaching. Coaching media that had been done by face-to-face and telephone media
gave the results of improved performance (Niemenien et al., 2013; Kochnowski et al. 2010).
Current research by Ghods and Boyce (2013) and Filsinger et al. (2014) provided empirical
evidence that executive coaching could be perforned with virtual devices. The development
of electronic-based coaching research (e-coaching) with a phone was made by Filsinger et al.
(2014). The implementation of coaching by using email device is one part of the
electronic-based or virtual coaching.
These findings confirm the findings of previous studies such as conducted by Seifert
(2003), which combined executive coaching approach with multisource feedback and found
that multisource feedback veryeffective to improve the coachees'It also supports the research
results on multisource feedback and executive coaching conducted by Niemenin et al ( 2013)
which showed that the average performance wasbetter from the managers with executive
coaching thanfrom the managers without executive coaching. The study added that
multisource feedback collaborated withexecutive coaching and leadership styles of the Coach
It can be concluded that executive coaching with MSF accompanied by the
application of appropriate leadership style was a mix of human resource development
techniques that had a future orientation. Improved performance of the human resources was
expected to be maximized so it might give a greater contribution to the company
Conclusion
The study provides empirical evidence that executive coaching affected proactive
influence tactics of the sales staffs. Executive coaching with transformational leadership type
had a better effect on the proactive influence tactics of the sales staffs compared to executive
coaching with transactional leadership type. The study findings showed coachees who were
given the coaching with a transformational leader had a behavioral change behavior that was
able to communicate well, it seems that they conducted a form of intensive consultation with
the leaders to find a solution. These findings are in line with research conducted by
Leithwood (1994), that transformational leadership was very effective in the learning process
and Bogler (2001), that transformational leadership could improve motivation
Furthermore, this study also found that the method of virtual executive coaching with
transformational leadership type had impact on proactive influence tactics, and was better
than the virtual method executive coaching with transactional leadership type. These findings
support the research report that virtual coaching team that focused on building a good
relationship could have an impact on positive behavior of the coachees (Caulat 2012). It also
shows that the virtual coaching is as good as face to face coaching (McLaughlin, 2013)
Limitation and Recommendation for Future Studies
This study has several limitations as follows. First, this study used email in the form
of a written narrative. The use of a written narrative has its limitations when the subject does
not like to argue or explain in writing. Various cultural background affect the responses
expressed in the narrative, if we want more striking as in face to face executive coaching that
is capable of using pacing as the alignment process, then the investigator must also
understand the culture of the subjects related to writing.
Second, this research was performed by focusing on the virtual executive coaching
while sales personnels have quite a lot of activity outside the office. Although most of them
have already used the gadget, it is often difficult to get a signal, so that the executive
coaching process may not take place quickly. The future studies should use the provider that
Third, this study used the subjects of sales staffs who performed virtual executive
coaching with thedirect transformational leadership type to their sales personnels. So, the
fuure studies should be carried out with indirect or cross-level leadership that of course has
different impacts, because of the culture association about shy, obedience, respect and so
forth.
Future research may develop the method of virtual executive coaching of
transfomasional leadership type with skype, or 3G, so that the subject can argue orally in the
form of discussion. Research conducted by Murthy and Kerr (2003), showed that the subjects
who were given the opportunity to express their opinions face-to-face had better professional
judgment than when expressed their opinions through the medium of computer (computer
mediated communication) and expressed through the medium of telephone (Reckers and
Schultz, 1982; Schultz and Reckers, 1981).
References
Antonioni, D. 1996. Designing an effective 360-degree appraisal feedback process. Organizational Dynamics. 25 24-38
Armstrong, S. 2001. Are you a transformational coach? Journal of Physical Education, Recreation & Dance, 72(3), 23–29.
Askew, S., dan E., Carnell. 2011. Transformative coaching: A learning theory for practice. London, England: Institute of Education, University of London.
Avolio, B. J. dan B. M. Bass.1995. Individual consideration viewed at muldple levels of analysis: A multi-level tramework for examining the diffusion transformational leadership. Leadership Quarterly, 6, 199-218
Bass, B. M. 1985. Leadership and performance beyond expectations. New York: Free Press.
Bass, B. M. 1990. Bass dan Stogdill’s Handbook of Leadership: Theory, research, and managerial applications, New York: Free Press; London: Collier Macmillan.
Bacon, T. R., dan K. I. Spear. 2003. Adaptive coaching: The art and practice of a client-centered approach to performance improvement. Palo Alto, CA: Davis-Black.
Bogler, R. 2001. The influence of leadership style on teacher job satisfaction. Educational Administration Quarterly, Vol. 37, pp. 662-83.
Burns, J. M. 1978. Leadership. New York: Harper & Row.
Bono, J. M., I., Purvanona., A. J. Towler., dan D. B. Peterson. 2009. A Survey of executive coaching. Personnel Psychology. 62: 361-404
Brutus, S., dan M. Derayeh. 2002. Multisource assessment programs in organizations: An insider’s perspective. Human Resource Management Review, 7: 299-315
Brutus, S., M. Derayeh, Fletcher, C., Bailey, C., Valazquez, P., Shi, K., et al. 2006. Internationalization of multi-source feedback systems: A six-country exploratory analysis of 360 degree feedback. International Journal of Human Resource Management. 17: 1888-1906 Chalagala, N. G. dan A. T. Shervani. 2006. Dimensional and type of Supervisory Control: Efect on
Salesperson Performance and Satisfaction. Journal of Marketing (60):89-105.
Cox, E. 2013. Coaching Understood: A pragmatic inquiry into the coaching process., London: UK: Sage Publications
Dalessio, A. T. 1998. Using multisource feedback for employee development and personnel decisions, In J. Smither (Ed). Performance appraisal: State-of-the-art in practice: 278-330
Epstein, S., R. Pacini, V. Denes-Raj, dan H. Heier. 1996. Individual differences in intuitive-experiential and analytical-rational thinking styles. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 71, 390–405.
Filipezak, R. 1998. The Executive Coach: Helper or healer? Training. 35
Feldman, D. C. 2001. Career executive coaching: What HR professionals and managers need to know. Human Resource Planning, 24, 26–35
Feldman, D. C., dan M. J. Lankau. 2005. Executive coaching: A review and agenda for future research. Journal of Management 31: 829-848
Giacobbi, P. 2000. The athletic coachability scale: Construct conceptualization and psychometric analyses. Doctoral dissertation. Knoxville: University of Tennessee.
Greenberg, J dan R. A. Baron. 1995. Behaviour in organization understanding and managing the human side of work. 5th ed. Englewood Cliffts, New Jersey: Prentice Hall International, Inc Hall DT, Otazo KL, Hollenbeck GP. 1999. Behind closed doors: What really happens in executive
coaching. Organizational Dynamics, 27, 39–53.
Hazucha, J.F., S. A., Hezlett, dan R. J. Schneider. 1993. The impact of 360-degree feedback on management skills development. Human Resource Management, 32: 325-351
Hatch, W. N., dan H. J., Dyer. 2004. Human capital and learning as a source of sustainable competitive advantage. Strategic Management Journal, 25, 1155-1178
Humphreys, J. H. 2002. Transformational leader behavior, proximity and successful services marketing. Journal of Services Marketing, 16(6), 487–501
Hezlett, S. A. 2008. Using multisource feedback to develop leaders: Applying theory and research to improve practice. Advances in Developing Human Resources, 10: 703-720
Hedge J. W., W. C. Borman dan S. A. Birkeland. 2001. History and development of multisource feedback as a methodology. In Bracken D, Timmreck C, Church A (Eds.), Handbook of multisource feedback.Hick. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
http://www.business coaching.com/business-coaching-statistic/
Jarvis, J. 2004. Coaching and buying coaching services. Retrieved 02/03/2007, 2007
Joo, B. K. 2005. Executive coaching: A conceptual framework from an integrative review of practice and research. Human Resource Development Review. 4: 462-488
Kampa-Kokesch, S. dan M. Z. Anderson. 2001. Executive coaching: A comprehensive review of the literature. Consulting Psychology Journal: Practice & Research 53 (4): 205-228
Kilburg, R. R. 1996. Toward a conceptual understanding and definition of executive coaching. Consulting Pyschology Journal: Practice and Research 48: 134-144
Kemp, T. J. 2009. Is coaching an evolving form of leadership? Building a transdisciplinary framework for exploring the coaching alliance. International Coaching Psychology Review, 4(1): 105–109
Koh, W. 1990. An empirical validation of the theory of transformational leadership in secondary schools in Singapore. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Oregon, Concordia. Kochanowski, S., C. F., Seifert dan G. Yukl. 2010. Using executive coaching to enhance the effects of
behavioral feedback to managers. Journal of Leadership and Organizational Studies, 17: 363-369Knowles, M.S. 1980. The Modern Practice of Adult Education: From Pedagogy to Andragogy. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Cambridge Adult Education.
Kluger, A. N., dan A. DeNisi. 1996. The effects of feedback interventions on performance: A historical review, a Meta analysis, and a preliminary feedback intervention theory. Psychological Bulletin.119: 254-284
Lepsinger, R., dan A. D. Lucia. 1997. The art and science of 360 degree feedback. San Francisco: Pfeiffer.
Leithwood, K. 1994. Leadership for schoolrestructuring. Educational Administration Quarterly. Vol. 30 No. 4: 49
MacKenzie, S., P. Podsakoff, dan G. Rich. 2001. Transformational and transactional leadership and sales performance. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 29(2), 115–134.
McCharty, A., dan T. Garavan. 2006. Postfeedback development perceptions: Applying the theory of planned behavior. Human Resource Development Quarterly. 17: 245-267
Mezirow, J. dan E. W. Taylor. 2009. Fostering transformative learning. In J. Mezirow, E. W. Taylor, & Associates (Eds.), Transformative learning in practice (pp. 3-17). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Morgan, H., P. Harkins, dan G. Marshall. 2005. The art and practice of leadership coaching: 50 top executive coaches reveal their secrets. New York: Wiley.
Nelson, E. dan R. Hogan. 2009. Coaching on the dark side. International Coaching Psychology Review, 4(1), 9–21.
Nieminen, L., Smerek, R., Kotrba, L., dan Denison, D. (2013). What does an executive coachingintervention add beyond facilitated multisource feedback? Effects on leader self-ratings andperceived effectiveness. Human Resource Development Quarterly, 24(2), 145–176 Orenstein, R. L. 2002. Executive coaching: It’s not just about the executive. Journal of Applied
Behavioral Science, 38 (3), 355-374.
Pawar, B. S., dan K. K. Eastman. 1997. The nature and implications of contextual influences on transformational leadership: a conceptual examination. Academy of Management Review, 22, 80-109.
Peterson, D. B. 1996. Executive coaching at work: The art of one-on-one change. Consulting Psychology Journal: Practice and Research, 48, 78–86.
Quick, J. C dan M. Macik-Frey. 2004. Behind the mask: Coaching through deep interpersonal. Consulting Psychology Journal: Practice and Research 56: 67-74
Rasool, A, Bazir dan Azam. 2010. Academy of Strategic Management Journal, Volume 9, Number 2. Russ, F., McNeilly, K., dan J. Comer. 1996. Leadership decision making and performance of sales
managers: a multi-level approach. Journal of Personal Selling and Sales Management, 16 (3), 1–15.
Sadler-Smith, E., G. P. Hodgkinson dan M. Sinclair. 2008. A matter of feeling? The role of intuition in entrepreneurial decision-making and behaviour. In W.J.Z. Zerbe., E.J. Härtel & N.M. Ashkanasy (Eds.), Emotions, ethics and decisionmaking (pp.35–55). Bingley, UK: Emerald Group Publishing Limited.
Sherman, S., dan A. Freas. 2004. The Wild West of executive coaching. Harvard Business Review, 82 (11), 82-90.
Shoemaker, M. 1999. Leadership practices in sales managers associated with self efficacy, role clarity, and job satisfaction of individual industrial salespeople. Journal of Personal Selling and Sales Management, 19(4), 1–19.
Seifert, C., G. Yukl, dan R. McDonald. 2003. Effects of multisource feedback and a feedback facilitator on the influence behavior of managers towards subordinates. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88: 561–569.
Smither, J. W., M. L., London, R. Flautt., Y. Vargas, dan I. Kucine. 2003. Can working with an executive coach improve multisource feedback ratings over time? A quasi experimental field study. Personnel Psychology, 56: 23-44.
Smither, J. W., London, M., dan Reilly (2005). Does performance improve following multisource feedback? A theoretical model, meta-analysis, and review of empirical findings, Personnel Psychology, 58, 33-66.
Tichy, N. M., dan M. A. Devanna. 1986. The transformational leader. New York: Wiley
Van Dierendonck, D., Haynes, C., Borrill, dan C., Stride. 2007. Effects of upward feedback on leadership behavior toward subordinates. Journal of Management Development, 26(3): 228-238.
Waldman, D. A., L. E. Atwater., dan D. Antonioni. 1998. Has 360 degree feedback gone amok? Academy of Management Executive 12: 86-94
Wasylyshyn, K. M. 2003. Executive coaching: An outcome study. Consulting Psychology Journal: Practice & Research, 55(2), 94-106.
Watts, M., dan S. Corrie. 2013. Growing the ‘I’ and the ‘We’ in transformational leadership: The LEAD, LEARN & GROW Model, The Coaching Psychologist, Vol. 9, No. 2, December. Yukl, G. 2010. Leadership in organizations (7th ed.). Upper
Yukl, G., C. Chavez, dan C. F Seifert. 2005. Assessing the construct validity and utility of two new influence tactics. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 26 (6), 705–725
Yukl, G., C.F. Seifert., dan C. Chaves. 2008. Validation of the extended Influence Behavior Questionnaire, The Leadership Quarterly 19 (2008) 609–621
