A COMPARISON STUDY ON E-COACHING AND FACE-TO-FACE COACHING

Towanna C. Burrous

A DISSERTATION

in

Chief Learning Officer Program

Presented to the Faculties of the University of Pennsylvania

in

Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the

Degree of Doctor of Education

2021

Supervisor of Dissertation:

______________________________________
James P. Orlando, Adjunct Assistant Professor

Dean, Graduate School of Education:

______________________________________
Pamela L. Grossman, Dean and Professor

Dissertation Committee:

James P. Orlando, Adjunct Assistant Professor

Priscilla Dawson, Ed.D

Lenny Howard, Coach Diversity Institute

 DEDICATION

I dedicate this dissertation to my children, Byron A. Freeman, Jr. and Jenesis A.

Harper, who give me the strength to keep going whenever I feel like giving up. Jen and

Byron, you are my greatest achievement in life. Thank you for making me a proud

mother.

ii
 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

To Dr. Annie McKee, Thank you for your moral support and guidance. You have

set an example of excellence as a researcher, mentor, and instructor.

To Dr. J.P. Orlando, Thank you for working with me so patiently, for seeing the

potential in the research, and for your words of encouragement when I needed them the

most. your suggestions made my research so much richer, and my dissertation something

I can be proud of having written.

To Dr. Priscilla Dawson, Thank you for your guidance and wisdom, for setting

the bar so much higher than I thought I could reach.

To Dr. Lenny Howard, Thank you for being my accountability partner from the

very start. You listened without judgement and challenged me to stay the course when I

wanted to quit.

Thank you to my peer coaches and colleagues who participated in my study. I am

incredibly grateful to all of you.

iii
 ABSTRACT

A COMPARISON STUDY ON E-COACHING AND FACE-TO-FACE COACHING

Towanna C. Burrous

James. P. Orlando

This study identifies and explore the perceptions of advantages, disadvantages,

and means of disadvantages of web-based e-coaching as an alternative to face-to-face

business coaching. With little research in existence on the topic of e-coaching, this study

aims to bring forward insight and details on the viability of e-coaching in a business

context due to its affordability and availability. This study uses qualitative methods to

assist with identifying key factors in assessing the value and efficacy of e-coaching

through lived-experiences allowing for the emergence of unforeseen themes and ideas to

emerge. Participants in the study are chosen using specific criteria: 1) currently a coach

who use computer-based technology for coaching providing e-coaching services in a U.S.

business context; 2) has at least one year of experience providing e-coaching in a U.S.

business context; 3) willing to complete an online questionnaire to answer open-ended

questions about their experiences with e-coaching; 4) must be at least 18 years of age; 5)

must be able to speak and write fluently in English, and; 6) must have access to the

necessary hardware and software to complete the online questionnaire. All participants

are given a 12-question questionnaire that takes between 30 and 45 minutes to complete.

All data from the questionnaires is compiled into an MS Excel spreadsheet when

downloaded from SurveyMonkey and uploaded into NVivo12 for thematical analysis

using the six-step procedure described by Braun and Clarke (2006).

iv
Keywords: coaching, virtual coaching, virtual learning, learning, organizational coaching,

trends in technology, e-coaching

v
 Table of Contents

DEDICATION .................................................................................................................... ii

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ................................................................................................. iii

ABSTRACT ....................................................................................................................... iv

List of Tables .................................................................................................................... iix

List of Illustrations ...............................................................................................................x

Chapter 1: Introduction ........................................................................................................1

Background ....................................................................................................................1

Problem Statement .........................................................................................................3

Purpose of the Study ......................................................................................................4

Research Questions ........................................................................................................4

Definitions of Terms ......................................................................................................5

Significance of the Study ...............................................................................................6

Nature of the Study ........................................................................................................6

Data Collection ..............................................................................................................7

Data Analysis .................................................................................................................7

Ethical Considerations ...................................................................................................8

Positionality Statement ..................................................................................................8

Summary ........................................................................................................................9

Chapter 2: Literature Review .............................................................................................11

Theoretical Framework: Theory of Planned Behavior ................................................12

Practical Applications of the Theory of Planned Behavior 15

The Need for Coaching in Organizations ....................................................................16

vi
 Workplace Coaching..............................................................................................17

Methods of Coaching .............................................................................................20

Core Elements of Traditional Coaching ................................................................26

International Coach Federation and Coaching Competencies ...............................31

Current Trends in E-Coaching ...............................................................................34

E-Coaching: Limitations, Challenges, and Areas of Future Research...................38

TPB and Technology-Mediated Coaching.............................................................40

Summary ......................................................................................................................41

Chapter 3: Research Method ..............................................................................................42

Introduction ..................................................................................................................42

Restatement of Research Questions .............................................................................42

Method and Design ......................................................................................................42

Recruitment and Sampling...........................................................................................44

Data Collection ............................................................................................................46

Data Analysis ...............................................................................................................48

Trustworthiness ............................................................................................................49

Ethical Considerations .................................................................................................50

Summary ......................................................................................................................51

Chapter 4: Results ..............................................................................................................53

Demographics ..............................................................................................................53

Explanation of Theme Development ...........................................................................56

Emergent Themes ........................................................................................................59

Influences of E-coaching on Coaching Practices and Attitudes ............................59

vii
 Advantages of E-coaching Versus In-Person Coaching ........................................64

Disadvantages of E-coaching.................................................................................67

Overcoming Disadvantages ...................................................................................71

Chapter 5: Discussion and Conclusion ..............................................................................75

Introduction ..................................................................................................................75

Summary of Findings...................................................................................................76

Themes Under Research Question 1 ......................................................................76

Themes Under Research Question 2 ......................................................................78

Themes Under Research Question 3 ......................................................................79

Themes Under Research Question 4 ......................................................................79

Strategies to Achieve Core Coaching Competencies in an E-Coaching

World .........................................................................................................81

Modifications to ICF Core Competencies .............................................................83

How ICF Competencies are Maintained and Developed in E-Coaching ..............84

Conclusions and Discussion ........................................................................................84

Limitations of the Study...............................................................................................92

Suggestions for Future Research .................................................................................93

Conclusion ...................................................................................................................95

Appendix A: Interview Protocol ........................................................................................96

Appendix B: Informed Consent Form ...............................................................................99

Appendix C: Recruitment Email......................................................................................102

References ........................................................................................................................104

viii
 List of Tables

Table 1. Participants’ E-coaching Platforms and Media ...................................................55

Table 2. Summary of Themes and Sub-themes .................................................................58

ix
 List of Illustrations

Figure 1. Theory of planned behavior................................................................................14

x
 Chapter 1: Introduction

Background

Coaching is an ongoing, informal interaction in which a leader (the coach)

facilitates goal-focused development in a follower (the trainee) to improve the follower’s

performance in a specific task or set of tasks (Hui, 2015; Thomas, Thomas, & Firestone,

2015). Coaching may be used in a business context to improve the performance of

employees, with improved employee performance leading to positive organizational

outcomes such as increased efficiency and productivity (Grover & Furnham, 2016;

Huang & Hsieh, 2015; Sonesh et al., 2015; Utrilla, Grande, & Lorenzo, 2015; Woo,

2017). Coaching for employees is beneficial to organizations such as businesses when it

supports management’s efforts to achieve greater efficiency and productivity

(Ladyshewsky & Taplin, 2018; Rosha & Lace, 2016). Through coaching, employees can

receive the necessary strategic guidance and personalized recommendations to improve

their job performance within organizational settings (Ladyshewsky & Taplin, 2018;

Rosha & Lace, 2016).

Organizations in both the public and private sectors are increasingly relying on

web-based technologies to improve employee coaching's accessibility and efficiency

(David, Şoflău, & Matu, 2018; Feldman & Lankau, 2005; Jones, Woods, & Guillaume,

2016). Coaching delivered from a coach to a trainee via web-based technologies is

referred to as e-coaching, and technologies used to provide e-coaching in a business

context include email, chat rooms, instant messaging, video chats, and social media

(Chawla, Gabriel, Dahling, & Patel, 2016; Hui, 2015; Hunt, 2015). The use of e-coaching

1
in a business context has enhanced employers’ ability to track trainees’ performance and

engagement, providing employees with additional opportunities for developing skills and

theoretical knowledge (Bucur, 2018; Ewenstein, Hancock, & Komm, 2016; Moussa,

2015).

Researchers have begun to study e-coaching as a distinct subcategory of coaching,

but the pace of research has not matched the more rapid pace of technological

development (Burnett, 2018; Kanatouri, 2016; Nissen & Seifert, 2018; Nissen, Seifert, &

Ackert, 2018; Ribbers & Waringa, 2015). However, researchers have found that the

increasing integration of web-based technologies has changed coaching in several ways.

These include expanding and refining the process and manner of selecting a coach;

eliminating or substituting technological mediation for traditional, face-to-face coaching

practices; driving the development of new coaching engagement practices to compensate

for the reduction in face-to-face interaction; enhancing the ability of trainees to evaluate

their coaches’ performance (Abravanel & Gavin, 2017; Conboy & Kelly, 2016; Drake,

2015; Lynden & Avery, 2016; Seifert & Nissen, 2018).

Research has indicated that there is a correlation between e-coaching and positive

organizational outcomes. Benefits of e-coaching in a business context have included:

increased accessibility of coaches to trainees; faster and more efficient implementation of

coaching in organizations; and, as a result, improved organizational outcomes such as

employee performance and efficiency (Eckstrom & Wirth, 2019; Paine, 2014; Nissen &

Seifert, 2018; Ribbers & Waringa, 2015).

2
 There is also evidence that e-coaching has disadvantages compared to face-to-face

coaching, such as decreased trainee engagement resulting from the mediated nature of e-

coaching interactions (Hui, 2015; Kanatouri, 2016). The interaction's mediated nature's

potential consequences include decreased trainee motivation and performance outcomes

that are inferior to those produced through face-to-face coaching (Hui, 2015). The degree

to which the mediated nature of e-coaching negatively influences coaching outcomes

depends on factors such as the amount of physical distance separating the coach from the

trainee, the frequency of coach-trainee interactions, and the specific combinations of

web-based media through which the coach-trainee interactions occur (Hui, 2015;

Kanatouri, 2016). E-coaching practices are developing rapidly. Further research is needed

to explore e-coaches’ perspectives on the advantages, disadvantages, and strategies for

overcoming disadvantages of e-coaching, to assist coaches in optimizing their practice

and maintaining the research literature current and relevant to practice (Kanatouri, 2016).

Problem Statement

The problem of this research focused on the shaping of e-coaching practices and

attitudes in ways that create advantages and disadvantages for the e-coach, and that the e-

coach must overcome the disadvantages. E-coaching in a business context is a rapidly

developing set of practices with advantages and disadvantages related to several factors,

such as specific combinations of web-based technologies used, frequency of coach-

trainee interactions, the physical distance between the coach and trainee, and the time

delay in coach-trainee communications (Hui, 2015; Kanatouri, 2016). Knowledge of e-

coaches’ perceptions of the advantages and disadvantages of e-coaching practices may

3
lead to insights that would assist coaches, trainees, and organizational leaders in

calibrating e-coaching practices for optimal organizational outcomes. However, more

research is needed to explore e-coaches’ perceptions of the advantages, disadvantages,

and means of overcoming weaknesses of e-coaching practices (Kanatouri, 2016).

Purpose of the Study

The purpose of this generic qualitative study was to explore e-coach perceptions

of how e-coaching practices and attitudes create advantages and disadvantages for the e-

coach, and how e-coaches believe that disadvantages must be overcome. The literature on

the topic of web-based e-coaching in a business context is presently scant, and further

research is needed to explore the advantages, disadvantages, and ways of overcoming the

weaknesses of e-coaching from the perspectives of e-coaches (Hui, 2015; Kanatouri,

2016; Pascal, Sass, & Gregory, 2015). Additionally, e-coaching is a burgeoning area of

practice, and as such, it is crucial for research on this topic to be continually brought up

to date with emerging technological trends (Kanatouri, 2016). This study will be of

interest to scholars because it addresses the scarcity of literature on e-coaching. This

research will also be of interest to practitioners because business leaders and coaches

currently using or considering using e-coaching will benefit from findings and

recommendations related to the e-coaching format.

Research Questions

The following four research questions will be used to guide this study:

RQ1: How do e-coaches perceive their use of e-coaching as influencing their

practice and attitudes toward coaching?

4
 RQ2: What are e-coaches’ perceptions of the advantages of e-coaching as an

alternative to face-to-face coaching in a business context?

RQ3: What are e-coaches’ perceptions of the disadvantages of e-coaching as an

alternative to face-to-face coaching in a business context?

RQ4: What are e-coaches’ perceptions of how disadvantages of e-coaching in a

business context may be overcome?

Definitions of Terms

Business context. In an organizational setting (e.g., in a for-profit or non-profit

entity), coaching focuses on improving employees’ performance in work-related tasks

(Hui, 2015).

Coaching. An ongoing, informal interaction in which a leader (the coach)

facilitates goal-focused development in a follower (the trainee) to improve the follower’s

performance in a specific task or set of functions (Hui, 2015).

E-coaching. Coaching allows the coach and trainee to communicate entirely

through technological tools such as email, chat rooms, instant messaging, video

conferencing, and social media (Hui, 2015). For this study, the term e-coaching will be

given its technical meaning of coaching through web-based media, although the term

may be used loosely in a practice setting to refer to coaching via telephone (Kanatouri,

2016). E-coaching is a coaching format, as distinguished from a method or style of

coaching or the instructional content the coach delivers (Kanatouri, 2016).

5
 Significance of the Study

The field of e-coaching is developing rapidly, with technological innovations

leading to frequent and often discontinuous changes in the quantity and quality of the

tools available to e-coaches (Kanatouri, 2016). As a result, the advantages, disadvantages,

and means of addressing weaknesses may have changed significantly since Kanatouri

(2016) conducted the most recent exploration of e-coaches’ perspectives in a business

context. Additionally, research on the topic of e-coaching is scant (Hui, 2015; Kanatouri,

2016; Pascal et al., 2015), such that an opportunity exists for researchers to contribute

insight and guidance to the study and practice of this increasingly examined, yet still

under-researched coaching format.

This proposed study has the potential to yield insights into the advantages,

disadvantages, and means of overcoming weaknesses of e-coaching that will be useful to

e-coaches in a business context and to business leaders who are considering whether to

utilize an e-coaching format. This research will also be of interest to scholars because it

will add to the small but growing body of knowledge on an emerging coaching format

that can make coaching more accessible, affordable, and efficient in a business context.

Nature of the Study

This proposed study will use a generic qualitative design. A quantitative method

was considered. However, quantitative methods are appropriate for determining

relationships among variables represented numerically (Creswell, 2013). Also, the

existing research on e-coach perceptions in organizations is not sufficiently developed.

Hence, it cannot facilitate the anticipation of response categories of the kind needed to

6
create a quantitative instrument (e.g., the choices in a multiple-choice item on a

questionnaire). A mixed-methods design was also considered but was rejected for the

same reason. A qualitative method is appropriate for conducting an open-ended

exploration of participants’ perceptions and experiences in the contexts of their own

lives, organizations, and cultures. It may be used when the researcher wishes to

encourage participants to discuss their experiences in their own words, such that

unanticipated ideas and themes can emerge (Creswell, 2013). Therefore, qualitative

method was selected.

Data Collection

After IRB approval is received, the researcher will recruit a purposeful sample of

at least 10 e-coaches who have engaged in e-coaching in a business context. The

researcher will privately message potential participants through professional social media

applications such as LinkedIn. Data collection will be through an anonymous online

questionnaire administered through the SurveyMonkey application. The questionnaire

will be developed by the researcher, consisting of approximately 10 open-ended

questions. It is anticipated that the questionnaire will take up to one hour to complete.

Participant recruitment, data collection, and data analysis will continue until data

saturation is achieved.

Data Analysis

Data from open-ended questionnaire items will be uploaded into NVivo 12

software and analyzed thematically using the six-step procedure developed by Braun and

Clarke (2006). The six steps of the analysis are as follows: 1) reading and rereading the

7
data; 2) grouping similar units of meaning into codes; 3) grouping similar codes into

themes; 4) reviewing, revising, and refining the themes; 5) defining the themes

concerning the research questions and theoretical background, and; 6) producing a

presentation of results. Data saturation is achieved when additional data collection and

analysis do not create new ideas or insights (Fusch & Ness, 2015). When analysis and

member-checking of two consecutive questionnaires add no new themes or codes to those

that emerged during the analysis of previous questionnaires, the researcher will conclude

that data saturation has been achieved and will stop participant recruitment and data

collection.

Ethical Considerations

Participant recruitment will not begin until IRB approval is received. Participation

in the study will be entirely voluntary, with potential participants being informed that

they can decline to participate or leave the study at any time without negative

consequences. All participants will review and agree to the terms of an informed consent

form before any data are collected from them. Participants will respond anonymously.

There are minimal risks associated with participation in the study. Participants will be

asked only to discuss their perceptions of e-coaching and not be asked to disclose a

specific employer or trainee information.

Positionality Statement

This research is focused on the activity of coaching. The researcher holds over a

decade of experience in the field of executive coaching and is a coach credentialed by the

International Coach Federation. The experience and credentials held by the researcher are

8
factors that must be considered because of the possibility of bias toward the effectiveness

of coaching and the specific coaching behaviors that the researcher encourages as an

executive coach. For example, the researcher’s experience involves working with several

different organizations as an outside executive coach, rather than as a coach employed in

the firm where they practice. The researcher also has experience working with different

types of firms including the U.S. Armed Forces, U.S. federal government agencies, U.S.

institutes of higher learning, philanthropic foundations, software companies, consumer

goods organizations, and non-profit organizations. The experience of the researcher with

coaching includes several years of the researcher’s professional career. Hence, the

position that coaching is a vital element in organizations. As a matter of reflexivity, the

experience of the researcher is critical because their experiences with these different

firms could result in considering that the similarities and differences observed in practice

could influence the perception of what normal differences exist between profit and non-

profit businesses, particularly their executive coaching needs.

Summary

E-coaching in a business context is a rapidly developing set of practices with

advantages and disadvantages dependent on several factors, such as specific

combinations of web-based technologies used, frequency of coach-trainee interactions,

the physical distance between the coach and trainee, and the time delay in coach-trainee

communications (Hui, 2015; Kanatouri, 2016). Knowledge of e-coaches’ perceptions of

the advantages and disadvantages of e-coaching practices may lead to insights that would

assist coaches, trainees, and organizational leaders in calibrating e-coaching practices for

9
optimal organizational outcomes. The purpose of this generic qualitative study is to

explore e-coaches’ perceptions of the advantages, disadvantages, and means of

overcoming weaknesses of web-based e-coaching as an alternative to face-to-face

coaching in a business context.

Participants will be e-coaches who have engaged in e-coaching for a U.S.

business. The researcher will recruit participants by privately messaging them on social

media outlets such as LinkedIn. Data collection will be through an anonymous online

questionnaire. Qualitative data from open-ended questionnaire items will be analyzed

thematically according to the method developed by Braun and Clarke (2006). Participant

recruitment and data collection will continue until data saturation is achieved. Chapter 2

includes a thorough review of the existing literature on the topic of this study.

10
 Chapter 2: Literature Review

Coaching practices are mostly associated with unlocking individual learning

potential as part of their professional growth process. In this way, researchers describe

coaches as professionals who assist others improve their learning (Ensminger et al.,

2015). Researchers have studied coaching in traditional forms but have also studied

coaching facilitated through the rapid development of technology, such as phone

applications and virtual coaching programs. Employees have improved their skills and

renewed their theoretical knowledge by using these new learning technologies and

platforms (Boyce & Hernez-Broome, 2010). The goal of this study is to determine the

precise impact of recent persuasive technological trends on coaching. This literature

review will identify the most current coaching examples as a social phenomenon within

the modern business environment (Athanasopoulou & Dopson, 2018).

Accordingly, what follows is a review of the relevant literature applicable to this

study’s goal. The main themes of this review include: (1) a summary of the study’s

theoretical framework: the theory of planned behavior, (2) the framework’s practical

application to the study, (3) characteristics of effective coaching in organizations, and (4)

the pros and cons of various coaching methods. This literature review draws from

respected peer-reviewed works within the last five years to ensure that trends and

information are current. The literature review also included seminal and groundbreaking

works older than five years relevant to the study’s objectives. Literature that does not

meet the inclusion criteria was excluded from this project.

11
 The literature review was constructed through an extensive periodical search of

relevant research topics. Electronic searches were done utilizing databases, including

PubMed, Google Scholar, Web of Science, PsychINFO, ProQuest, EBSCO, and Medline.

A literature search was completed using key terms and phrases that yield relevant results.

Key search terms included coaching, virtual coaching, virtual learning, learning,

organizational coaching, trends in technology, and coaching,

The last part of this chapter presents a summary of the literature. As well, Chapter

3 shall be introduced. The methodology for this research project is discussed in the

chapter.

Theoretical Framework: Theory of Planned Behavior

This study will be contextualized within the framework of the theory of planned

behavior (TPB). TPB is one of the most influential behavior theories that have been

utilized to explain how behaviors or attitudes are integrated into normative and repeated

patterns (Ajzen, 1991). As both e-coaching and face-to-face coaching encourage repeated

actions and thoughts to increase employee productivity and well-being, the TPB will be

used to guide research questions and give context to the results of subsequent data

analysis.

The TPB was developed by Ajzen (1991). The theory articulates that an

individual's future behaviors and attitudes are influenced by exposure to beliefs and

actions previously (Ajzen, 1991). If an individual has a great deal of prior experience

with a belief or action, it appears normative. If an individual has little experience with a

belief or action or has never been experienced, it does not appear normative (Ajzen,

12
1991). Exposure or experience can come from an individual’s interactions or the

interactions of others they respect, such as parents, siblings, peers, or other authority

figures (Ajzen, 1991). The more normative an action or attitude appears to an individual,

the more likely it is to be accepted and integrated into the value system, or routine, of a

person. Conversely, if an action or belief is not perceived as normative, it will be largely

ignored or disregarded and not integrated into regularly exhibited behaviors (Ajzen,

1991).

In addition to prior exposure, decisions on normative behaviors or beliefs are

based on perceived self-control and self-efficacy (Ajzen, 1991). If individuals have high

perceived self-control within their respective environment, they will trust their ability to

judge normative and non-normative behaviors, such as right versus wrong. Moreover,

when perceived self-control is low, individuals will typically shirk away from behavioral

decision making and more often mimic individuals within proximity to not violate

situationally normative behavior regardless of personal feelings that were originally

associated with the belief or action (Ajzen, 1991).

Similarly, if an individual possesses high perceived self-efficacy, they are less

likely to question or revisit a judgment on whether an action or belief violates social

norms (Ajzen, 1991). High self-efficacy is often associated with the strength of decision

making. Further, once an individual establishes a judgment, it is likely not to be explored,

or the decision reversed unless the need for further exploration becomes apparent through

multiple disagreements with the original decision (Ajzen, 1991). Ajzen (1991) explains

that if an individual has low self-efficacy, then judgments made about behavior or belief

13
will be continuously revisited and internally questioned as they struggle with what is

normative in multiple situations (Ajzen, 1991). An illustration of the TPB is provided

below in Figure 1.

Figure 1. Theory of planned behavior (Orzanna, 2015).

In short, as the TPB has numerous implications for practical applications, it has

become instrumental in multiple research projects since its inception in the early 1990s.

Further, since this study uses TPB as its theoretical framework, understanding the

usefulness of the self-efficacy theory within a practical application is essential to

understand the contextual nature comprehensively. The theory of planned behavior will

aid in answering research questions as the researcher will administer an online

questionnaire to coaches about their perceptions of e-coaching and how these coaches

learned how to incorporate technology within coaching methodology.

14
Practical Applications of the Theory of Planned Behavior

Historically, the TPB framework is used primarily in education, health, marketing,

and business administration (Armitage & Conner, 2010; Montaño & Kasprzyk, 2015).

These sectors utilize the TPB to better illustrate how experience may dictate people's

actions and beliefs within various social situations or interpersonal relationships

(Armitage & Conner, 2010). This study uses the TPB framework to research how

coaches’ experiences dictate their coaching practice's actions and beliefs.

TPB has been used to understand social processes and measure longitude

outcomes. (Armitage & Conner, 2010). In this study, TPB is used to understand coaches’

experiences construct their actions, beliefs, and perceptions of e-coaching as an

alternative to face-to-face coaching. Increased exposure to an action or behavior

established by corporate trainers is more readily integrated into employee behavior if

exposure is high and mimicked by many employees (Armitage & Conner, 2010). In this

way, this study's potential benefits that TPB may lead to the development of new coach

training initiatives, training aids, and corporate trainer preparation. Furthermore, TPB

may also inform more effective implementation of training protocols and other

organizational initiatives (Armitage & Conner, 2010).

This study will utilize TPB as a theatrical framework to examine the efficacy of

using e-coaching within organizational settings (Armitage & Conner, 2010). The TPB

will guide this study as coaches complete an online questionnaire about their perceptions

of e-coaching and how they learn how to incorporate technology within coaching

paradigms. TPB has been utilized in numerous studies with various methodologies,

15
including qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods. As such, TPB can explain a

variety of phenomena within many different modalities (Armitage & Conner, 2010).

The Need for Coaching in Organizations

There has been substantial information in the literature on the effective use of

coaching across organizations. Many organizational entities' primary objective is to

achieve high levels of efficiency and productivity within every aspect of their company,

especially regarding employee performance. Much of the current focus of many

organizations is on creating and implementing more comprehensive and accessible

training initiatives for both employees and management. In this way, organizations can

better improve the performance of their workforce.

Chief learning officers (CLOs) and affiliated employees are often hired as

external employees to implement coaching practices within the workplace. The use of

CLOs is two-fold. First, external coaches are often employed as coaches to bolster

employee performance as outside personnel is more likely to be impartial during

coaching practices. Additionally, when a national survey of 195,600 American

employees amongst 1000 organizations was completed in 2013, 91% of respondents

indicated that they did not feel their superiors were effective coaches (U.S. Gallup Poll,

2013). Thus, the need for coaching within the American workplace persists.

As coaching has long-been established as effective in improving employee

productivity and increased success in organizational outcomes, Organizations in both the

public and private sectors are increasingly relying on web-based coaching technologies to

improve both the accessibility and efficiency of employee coaching (David et al., 2018;

16
Jones et al., 2016). Researchers have begun to study e-coaching as a distinct subcategory

of coaching, but the pace of research has not matched the more rapid pace of

technological development (Burnett, 2018; Nissen & Seifert, 2018; Nissen, Seifert, &

Ackert, 2018).

Improved employee outcomes are expected when coaching is utilized. However,

web-based e-coaching in a business context is largely understudied. Further research is

needed to explore the advantages, disadvantages, and ways of overcoming the

weaknesses of e-coaching from the perspectives of e-coaches (Hui, 2015; Kanatouri,

2016; Pascal et al., 2015). This research will also be of interest to practitioners because

business leaders and coaches currently using or considering using e-coaching will benefit

from findings and recommendations related to the e-coaching format.

Workplace Coaching

Workplace coaching refers to the collaboration between two or more individuals

within an organization to help create and facilitate career goals (Payne, 2018). Often the

coaches have more experience within the organization in which they coach, and the

individual in need of coaching is often a new employee or one in need of performance

remediation (Payne, 2018). Workplace coaching is akin to a mentor/mentee relationship

in which the emphasis is mainly on the realization of goals (Payne, 2018). In the

organizational context, coaching first emerged as part of organizational culture in 1937

(Paine, 2014). However, business coaching did not become commonplace within U.S.

workplaces until the 1970s, as many organizations began to understand better the

psychology behind motivation, goal setting, and workplace behavior (Paine, 2014).

17
 Psychologists started to establish coaching initiatives in the workplace during the

1970s and 1980s. Managers, who comprised many of the first workplace coaches,

discovered that workplace coaching increased productivity and decreased laziness and

employee distraction (Paine, 2014). Further, as management began to employ workplace

coaching, employee turnover was somewhat mitigated as disciplinary issues and subpar

work performance were reduced (Paine, 2014).

In the 1980s and into the 1990s, workplace coaching was refined to include

motivational techniques and goal-setting strategies and include a collaborative framework

(Ross, 2018). Within the 1980s, the ideals of workplace coaching had become widely

implemented throughout the American workplace. During this time, business and

workplace coaching dominated much of the literature surrounding workplace culture

(Ross, 2018). Although lauded as largely successful within organizations, workplace

coaching was primarily associated with workplace counseling and job performance

intervention protocols (Ross, 2018). Thus, during the late 1980s and 1990s, coaching was

mostly reactionary in nature, primarily addressing employee issues once adverse

outcomes occurred (Paine, 2014). One other limitation of coaching interventions was that

coaching was primarily corrective. Coaching was viewed as a punishment (Paine, 2014).

In the 1990s, Ross (2018) emphasized collaboration within workplace coaching

by including one-on-one in-person conversations and adding outside motivators'

influence within coaching initiatives. This emphasis on teamwork was done to understand

individuals in need of coaching better and build rapport between the coach and clients.

Rapport was vital as it has been demonstrated that individuals that have a rapport with

18
management or other stakeholders in a corporation work harder typically and have fewer

disciplinary issues (Stout-Rostron, 2018).

Throughout the last twenty years, workplace coaching has become increasingly

utilized. Coaching is more popular as business culture becomes increasingly competitive,

and employees' demand continues to increase (Stout-Rostron, 2018). Coaches are

regularly hired by organizations to engage both employees and managers (Ross, 2018). In

recent years, workplace coaching researchers have developed models to improve

coaching in the workplace. (Ross, 2018). Additionally, fields like sociology,

anthropology, and behavioral science have informed these implementation models (Ross,

2018).

Currently, much coaching research has emphasized the multidimensional nature

of coaching (Paine, 2014). Specifically, the widespread application of coaching within

various organizations (Paine, 2014). Within the current coaching philosophy, workplace

coaching comprises different developmental and training techniques to improve their

performance within their respective organizations. Additionally, coaching in

organizations often facilitates the behavioral change from both management and

subordinates (Boyce & Hernez-Broome, 2010). Finally, workplace coaching now

involves integrating self-awareness by participants so that proper coaching can facilitate

protocols that allow coached individuals to perform optimally in different business

contexts (Boyce & Hernez-Broome, 2010).

Coaches have become standard in larger organizations, as they are extensively

focused on improving organizational effectiveness and employee engagement (Paine,

19
2014). Yet coaching has the potential to be utilized efficiently in small organizations as

well. This means that coaches are usually perceived as part of the organization’s structure

(Boyce & Hernez-Broome, 2010). Therefore, coaching work is aligned correctly with the

initially set organizational goals to achieve optimal business results in the long term.

Methods of Coaching

The field of workplace coaching has become increasingly diverse in approach, as

workplace coaching has become increasingly prevalent within the past few decades

(Shoukry & Cox, 2018). There are currently seven different accepted methods of

workplace coaching, although many other types of coaching exist as hybrids and

amalgamations of the seven main coaching methods (Shoukry & Cox, 2018).

Humanist approach. The humanist approach is the first approach to workplace

coaching. Humanist coaching focuses on aiding individuals with intrinsic leadership

ability to reach their full potential (Shoukry & Cox, 2018). Additionally, the humanist

approach relies heavily on the concepts of autonomy, self-efficacy, and self-actualization.

(Shoukry & Cox, 2018). The humanist system integrates a great deal of behavioral

psychology as coaches facilitate leadership abilities such as self-confidence and self-

assurance (Ross, 2018).

The transition from follower to leader can be uncomfortable, especially in

workplaces with previously established intrapersonal relationships (Shoukry & Cox,

2018). Further, trust and rapport between the coach and coached are paramount as

dissonance with self-identity can be common within this approach (Ross, 2018). The

humanist approach can groom individuals to assume leadership roles within the company.

20
However, this approach may not always result in active leadership occurring as paid

leadership roles are limited (Ross, 2018).

Adult development approach. The adult development approach is the second

approach to workplace coaching (Ross, 2018). Within this approach, the coach monitors

and interacts with the individual to best assess which leadership abilities need

development (Shoukry & Cox, 2018). Behavioral therapy forms the basis for this

coaching approach, as human development is central to this approach (Ross, 2018). The

adult development approach also stresses patience and tolerance within the workplace,

especially regarding other problematic employees (Shoukry & Cox, 2018).

Cognitive coaching. Cognitive coaching deals with mitigating intrinsic

maladaptive thoughts and reintegrating pro-social thoughts (Ross, 2018). Maladaptive

thoughts can center on beliefs concerning the job performance or perceived roles within

the workplace (Ross, 2018). This approach aims to replace maladaptive thoughts with

those thoughts that encourage self-confidence (Shoukry & Cox, 2018). Individuals

develop qualities that include self-confidence, pride, empathy, and fortitude (Ross, 2018).

Individuals who have undergone cognitive coaching approaches report

satisfaction in other facets of life due to the skills gained through cognitive coaching

(Shoukry & Cox, 2018). Although the cognitive approach is lauded as effective by both

coaching institutions and subjects, this approach is criticized for not being as holistic as

other coaching approaches (Ross, 2018). Cognitive coaching has also garnered negative

criticism as this approach is less collaborative than different coaching philosophies

(Shoukry & Cox, 2018).

21
 Positive psychology coaching. The coach utilizes various strength-based

approaches to facilitate pro-social changes to elicit more comprehensive leadership skills

and qualities within the positive psychology model for coaching (Shoukry & Cox, 2018).

Coaches collaborate closely with those in need of coaching to identify strengths and

weaknesses that are unique to the subject (Ross, 2018). Strengths and weaknesses

discovered are often intellectual in nature but may be emotionally (Shoukry & Cox,

2018).

The participant and the coach each discover strengths and weaknesses within an

individual. The strengths are then encouraged, while the disadvantages are either

strengthened or eliminated as needed (Ross, 2018). Subsequently, positive emotions often

result in higher levels of happiness for the subject and the coach (Ross, 2018). Moreover,

within the positive psychology model, weaknesses are mitigated, resulting in fewer

disciplinary problems and increased job performance (Shoukry & Cox, 2018).

The positive psychology model is increasingly popular within American

workplaces, as this approach has become a strengths-based approach (Shoukry & Cox,

2018). Within the United States, strength-based approaches often align well with the

American workplace's psychology and ideologies (Ross, 2018). However, this approach's

criticism is that this approach is not specifically designed to result in productivity

changes within the workplace (Ross, 2018). In short, a subject’s interpersonal skills and

self-perception increase, although it may not mean increased job performance or

productivity within the workplace (Ross, 2018).

22
 Systemic coaching. Although novel, coaches, and subjects have increased the

systemic approach's usage within recent years (Ross, 2018). First, the coach and the

subject sit and discuss a wide array of factors that may hinder or promote the respective

work performance (Shoukry & Cox, 2018). Factors that affect work performance include

family life, stressors about the job, financial issues, and personality traits (Ross, 2018).

Once the coach and subject have identified these factors, they will meet to focus coaching

efforts on integrating these perceived stressors into positive motivators within the

workplace (Shoukry & Cox, 2018).

The systemic approach utilizes the subject's already developed personality to

facilitate positive thinking about potential stressors (Ross, 2018). Systemic coaching

processes include identifying patterns of antisocial behavior exhibited within the subject

and how best to disrupt those patterns while utilizing the coached individual's already

established strengths. The coach emphasizes making small obtainable goals to disrupt

anti-social thoughts or behaviors (Shoukry & Cox, 2018). In this way, the subject

experiences less negative feelings when changing belief systems, leading to smoother

transitions. Coaches that employ the systemic approach believe that enough small

changes can result in the complete.

The systemic approach has garnered some adverse reactions from critics, as the

systemic approach can take much longer than other coaching philosophies to be effective

(Ross, 2018). Establishing potential stressors takes time, then coaches and subjects must

establish a series of small goals to reach broad goals (Eastman, 2018). Moreover, the

23
systemic approach results may not be measurable for a long time, giving the false

impression that nothing is being done regarding workplace coaching (Ross, 2018).

Goal-oriented coaching. Goal-oriented coaching is most generally associated

with the common perception of workplace coaching (Eastman, 2018). Coaches do not

emphasize goal attainment but rather the proper utilization of intrinsic and extrinsic

factors, known as resources, to aid an individual with proper goal-setting and

achievement (Ross, 2018). To reach a goal is largely inconsequential. However, learning

how to create goal achieving behavior appropriately is paramount. Coaches that utilize

goal-oriented approaches will first meet with a subject to understand their intrinsic

personality and the factors around them that may act as motivators (Eastman, 2018).

Motivators, within this sense, can be a variety of internal or external factors relevant to

those individuals in need of coaching (Ross, 2018).

Intrinsic factors may include attributes like self-esteem, pride, spite, or happiness.

Conversely, extrinsic motivating factors can consist of familial responsibility, debt, long-

term life goals such as retirement, vacation, or promotion (Eastman, 2018).

Once subjects and coaches identify motivators, identifying resources useful in

goal attainment can be established (Eastman, 2018). Like motivators, these resources can

include intrinsic resources such as resiliency, drive, and resourcefulness or extrinsic

resources like money, benefits, and interpersonal relationships (Ross, 2018). Once the

coach and subject identify resources for goal attainment, goal-attaining behavior can

begin (Eastman, 2018).

24
 To do this, coaches will align motivators with resources to facilitate goal

completion. (Ross, 2018). This approach is about allowing coaches to direct and regulate

resources and motivators to create available action plans, regardless of the goal. There

exists some criticism of this approach as a workplace coaching philosophy as it does not

focus on goal attainment, which some argue is the objective of any type of workplace

coaching (Ross, 2018).

As mentioned above, many coaches within American workplaces utilize a

combination of approaches to facilitate increased goal attainment and overall workplace

success within individuals in need of coaching. However, one philosophy for workplace

coaching that has been formally developed integrates many of the approaches into a

distinct form recognized within workplace coaching. This final approach to workplace

coaching is known as adaptive coaching (Ross, 2018).

Adaptive coaching. Adaptive coaching, like many of the other coaching

philosophies, is based primarily on goal attainment (Ross, 2018). Adaptive coaching

integrates strengths from different recognized coaching philosophies. In this way,

adaptive coaching can emphasize the creation of healthy pro-social behaviors and

attitudes, balancing the needs of coaching subjects (Eastman, 2018). Balance in this

context refers to the balance of a subject’s personal needs and what is practical within a

workplace (Ross, 2018). Coaching philosophies need balance, which is often overlooked

in some approaches (Eastman, 2018).

Many of the described coaching philosophies focus on either the personal needs

or growth of a subject or the practical application of coaching to improve workplace

25
performance. However, adaptive coaching integrates both. Within the adaptive coaching

approach, coaches meet with subjects to develop a sense of motivation, strengths,

weaknesses, and goals (Eastman, 2018). Coaches formulate a framework for goal

attainment centered around work-related tasks exclusively, which is then implemented

within a short time (Eastman, 2018).

Adaptive coaching does not emphasize small goals but rather the achievement of

fundamental primary goals without breaking them down into smaller facets (Ross, 2018).

Further, as the name suggests, adaptive coaching will adapt to a new framework if the

subject's work-related goals are not met. Coaches that utilize adaptive coaching

techniques are not interested in creating rapport or long-term goals with those they coach

but are interested in expedient goal attainment within a practical, ethical, and attainable

framework (Ross, 2018).

To accomplish this task, coaches that utilize adaptive coaching will often lead

subjects through a comprehensive framework as collaborative efforts are discouraged

outside initial meetings (Eastman, 2018). The only collaboration between coaches and

residents within this approach come from periodic updates to ensure the goal attainment

strategies are practical and whether strategies need an adjustment (Ross, 2018). In this

way, relationships between coaches and subjects emphasize quick trust and confidence in

both participants for coaching to be most effective (Ross, 2018).

Core Elements of Traditional Coaching

Identifying the taxonomy of core objectives will, in turn, guide the examination as

to how coaching objectives are being achieved as mediated by emerging technologies

26
(Kołodziejczak, 2015). As coaching is carried out within the initial stages, a coach often

arranges a face-to-face meeting with a trainee/learner to learn more about them as

individuals and the goals they hope to obtain. Within these meetings, both the coach and

the learner's body language can convey nonverbal information for the coach to make

increasingly comprehensive determinations about the learner.

Non-verbal communication. Body language can be defined as facilitating the

process of communicating a message without words. Proper assessment of body language

by the coach is critical to ensure that rapport and cooperation between the coach and

trainee develops, and when a trainee is showing commitment and satisfaction to the

framework constructed by the coach (Moen & Allgood, 2009). Much like understanding

the importance of nonverbal communication, coaches must be influential goal setters.

Likewise, they should be effective listeners and provide feedback to those who need

coaching to ensure that coaching methodology is effective.

Goal setting for coaches. Coaches operating within the workplace are

responsible for prioritizing business concepts and strategies. Therefore, awareness,

effective management skills, and collaboration are essential to guarantee a proper

alignment between the goal setting process and the company's business strategies

(Passmore, 2006). In the context of human resource development, coaches are

responsible for helping employees acknowledge the significance of personal growth by

emphasizing the concepts of self-awareness and self-knowledge. Coaches often prefer to

implement a solution-focused strategy to help trainees recognize their potential (Moen &

Allgood, 2009). A solution-focused strategy encourages coaches to use questions that

27
emphasize and refocus on the overall coaching sessions, solutions, existing abilities, and

future opportunities.

Traditionally, this approach has been adopted, as it facilitates trainees with

management positions to align their extrinsic and intrinsic traits with organizational goals

(Boyce & Hernez-Broome, 2010). Intrinsic motivation arises from within a person

(internal), while extrinsic motivation arises outside the organization (Moen & Allgood,

2009). Without proper planning and goal setting, employees can certainly fail to attain

their objectives and pursue undesirable behaviors (Maxwell, 2012).

Listening and coaching. In several organizations, senior management faces a

challenge in listening, comprehending, and acknowledging employee problems and

issues. As a result, a considerable amount of senior management is resolving a different

or secondary problem rather than solving a genuine problem due to miscomprehension

and lack of consideration (Rosha & Lace, 2016). Moreover, the initiatives and solutions

advocated by senior management may be significant through collaborative reasoning. In

this context, traditional coaching is carried out through face-to-face meetings and

seminars to help trainees acquire the necessary listening skills (Utrilla, Grande, &

Lorenzo, 2015). Effective listening can help trainees comprehend and articulate ideas.

During the whole process, they are accustomed to resolving problems and facilitating

other employees whenever they experience similar problems (Boyce & Hernez-Broome,

2010).

Feedback in coaching. Coaching is a powerful approach to ensure that learners

progress toward business goals in their occupational development. As a result of effective

28
communication, coaches need to guarantee that continual feedback is provided to the

learners (Rapp, Gilson, Mathieu, & Ruddy, 2015). A significant number of

trainees/learners prefer to have face-to-face coaching sessions to elicit feedback in real-

time.

In many organizations, employees have attained coaching objectives by focusing

on listening, goal setting, and feedback. Additionally, newly recruited employees could

learn swiftly about the organization through coaching methods (Rosha & Lace, 2016).

There are some drawbacks, as the traditional coaching method is time-consuming and

frequently tedious for both coaches and learners. In the current environment, modern

technologies are being adopted to expand human resource development and coaching.

Technology has impacted the culture of coaching substantially, especially within

workplace organizations. It is apparent that individuals have become more

knowledgeable and experienced due to their persistent use of various technological

applications (Hugill, Sullivan, & Ezpeleta, 2018). As such, employees often feel more

comfortable utilizing virtual tools and the extensive support of coaches to advance their

skills (McLaughlin, 2013).

Research indicates that global workplaces require well-prepared and competent

employees to ensure organizations remain competitive within the global market

(McLaughlin, 2013). This is in line with coaching's objectives, as the primary goal of

workplace coaching is to enhance employees’ performance in today’s organizations.

Coaches help employees address the numerous challenges they encounter in the

29
workplace. In this context, the role of technology is fundamental to support coaches'

efforts to contribute to more positive experiences of employees (McLaughlin, 2013).

Some technology has contributed to developing more effective coaching focused

on objectives to expand the leadership role and organizational effectiveness (Eckstrom &

Wirth, 2019). The development of different technological applications has made it

possible to implement desired coaching programs more quickly. Coaches rely on

technology to communicate more effectively with employees, which means that the

advancement of technology has led to optimal outcomes in some organizations to

improve the focus of employees on completing their tasks and enhanced motivation

(Paine, 2014). It is essential to note that the positive impact of technology on coaching

has resulted in learners' perceptions of coaching as a continuous development opportunity

rather than being considered a single training event.

Some scholars assert that modern technologies have encouraged coaching

(Segers, Vloeberghs, Henderickx, & Inceoglu, 2011). Traditional coaching is less

expected by learners to be adopted by the coaches, as coaches have been substituted by

software and social media-based communication with learners. In this way, face to face

coaches must be increasingly inventive to ensure that their respective coaching

techniques remain novel and relevant (Rosha & Lace, 2016). Moreover, coaches can

swiftly share data such as audio materials, videos, and other relevant content with

trainees (Rosha & Lace, 2016). These core competencies of coaches are reinforced by the

International Coach Federation (ICF), one of the seminal sources of coaching initiatives

and techniques within the United States (Clutterbuck, Whitaker, & Lucas, 2016).

30
International Coach Federation and Coaching Competencies

The ICF is one of the most prominent information and professional development

sources of professional coaches (Clutterbuck et al., 2016). The ICF created core coaching

competencies to aid organizations in implementing coaching and creating a more

comprehensive understanding of coaching benefits (Stober, 2004). The coaching

competencies are broken down into four main categories: setting the foundation, co-

creating the relationship, communicating effectively, and facilitating learning and results

(Stober, 2004; Young, 2018).

Setting the foundation. Setting the foundation is the first category of ICF

coaching competencies. The coach is responsible for developing a coaching agreement

between themselves and the respective organization that seeks their coaching services

(Gebhardt, 2016). This agreement is detailed information on fees, types of coaching that

will be provided, and coaching duration (Young, 2018).

Encompassed within this category are actions and behaviors that ensure that

coaches remain ethical and set clear definitions of how organizations will benefit from

coaching (Stober, 2004). Coaches must establish to organizational management that there

are differences between coaching, consulting, and therapy for employees (Stober, 2004).

When coaches make this distinction clear, coaches are more likely to be successful and

organizational management is less likely to be disappointed by misinterpretation of the

coaches’ services (Young, 2018).

The ICF also ensures that all coaches follow ethical guidelines established in the

ICF Code of Ethics (Clutterbuck et al., 2016). As such, the ICF ensures that coaches will

31
work to treat all clients with respect and dignity (Gebhardt, 2016). Similarly, as coaches

are taught to adhere to ethical standards, coaches are instructed to refer employees to

mental health professionals appropriately (Gebhardt, 2016).

Co-creating the relationship. Co-creating the relationship is the second category

of ICF competencies (Gebhardt, 2016). This category includes behaviors that establish

rapport and understanding between the coach and the client (Young, 2018). Rapport

building occurs by establishing an environment in which trust and respect between the

coach and client are demonstrated (Young, 2018). The coach is likely to show concern

for the client's well-being and speak honestly and candidly (Gebhardt, 2016).

Additionally, the coach is expected to respect how the client learns, and best understands

coaching lessons (Stober, 2004).

The coach will also create an environment in which the client feels at ease

through flexible and spontaneous coaching techniques (Stober, 2004). As the coach

becomes familiar with the client, coaches are more likely to understand best which

moments are appropriate for coaching lessons and which moments are reserved for

listening and absorbing information (Young, 2018). In this way, the coach can create an

environment in which the client feels safe to explore motivations and coaching initiatives

(Young, 2018).

Communicating effectively. Communicating effectively is the third facet of ICF

coaching competencies (Stober, 2004). The coach will communicate to the client to

employ active listening, understanding both verbal and non-verbal cues (Clutterbuck et

al., 2016). Moreover, the coach will utilize coaching methods that promote a client's self-

32
expression and allow them to progress to dictate the pace in which coaching is

accomplished (Clutterbuck et al., 2016).

In addition to active listening, the coach will also utilize a technique known as

powerful questioning, in which questions are asked of a client specifically to gain the

knowledge needed to help the client gain maximum benefits for coaching goals (Stober,

2004). The coach will use powerful questioning to best ascertain the client's feelings and

opinions and create analogies and symbolic representation of goals better to comprehend

coaching objectives (Stober, 2004). Additionally, powerful questioning will be used in

such a manner that is non-discouraging nor offensive to the client, as information

gathering from the coach should be helpful and non-threatening (Young, 2018). Finally,

effective communication will reflect the ethical nature of coaching mentioned previously

(Stober, 2004). Coaches are always to refrain from abusive or offensive jokes, initiatives,

instruction, or criticisms to ensure client comfort and success (Stober, 2004).

Facilitating learning and results. The final category of ICF core competencies

encompasses activities and behaviors needed by a coach to facilitate learning and positive

results for the client (Young, 2018). The coach is tasked with accurately assessing

various forms of verbal, nonverbal, and written information, that when integrated, forms

a comprehensive picture of the goals and wants of the client (Gebhardt, 2016). This

includes allowing clients to discover goals and needs independently with the help of the

coach and interjecting opinion only when necessary (Gebhardt, 2016).

Additionally, the coach must integrate knowledge to facilitate the needed results within

the organization (Stober, 2004). This facet includes coaches' actions, which allows for

33
goal facilitation and strategic planning (Stober, 2004). In this way, organizations or

clients work directly with the coach to create sustainable and measurable goals that

benefit both the employee and overall organization (Young, 2018).

Using the ICF and other aforementioned core competencies, coaches learn

techniques useful in creating safe and nurturing environments for clients (Stober, 2004).

With support from the coaches, the clients are empowered to both create and participate

in coaching initiatives and take an active role in achieving coaching benefits (Young,

2018). As the ICF core competencies have long-been recognized as successful, they are

often interwoven throughout the current trends of e-coaching (Clutterbuck et al., 2016).

Current Trends in E-Coaching

The availability of modern technologies and have been transforming the field of

coaching in four distinct yet interrelated ways. First, new computer-based technologies

are changing the systems of recruiting coaches (Boyce & Hernez-Broome, 2010; Jones et

al., 2016). Second, current coaching trends are replacing traditional coaching with the use

of automated coaching. Third, modern technology is changing coaching engagement

activities with respective clients (Jones et al., 2016). Finally, modern technology is

currently being used to enhance the techniques used for assessing a coach (Boyce &

Hernez-Broome, 2010)

Computer-based recruitment. Technology can impact the recruitment and

selection process of a coach (Maxwell, 2012). Every trainee/learner has unique

expectations and needs that must be considered during coaching sessions (Maxwell,

2012). As a result, finding the right coach for a trainee can be a challenging task. A

34
trainee/learner can use a digital platform to choose a specific coach (Paine, 2014). For

example, individuals can be provided with a digital list of different coaches based on

their skill sets and experience. This means that individuals can select the coach who

corresponds to the trainee's learning style and personality, which would be helpful for the

development of a positive coach-trainee relationship (Rosha & Lace, 2016).

Moreover, a trainee can check different variables, such as the coach’s

geographical location, the coach’s capability to interact effectually with the learner, the

coach’s awareness and knowledge of the human resource development field, and the

coach’s previous experience (Silva & Cooray, 2014). It is quite evident that the existing

literature about coaches adopting modern technologies is slim.

A trainer can also carry out a web-based personality test to assess the traits and

characteristics before deciding whether to select a specific coach. The Big Five

personality model is principally implemented by human resource departments to assess

an individual's features (Passmore, Peterson, & Freire, 2013). Companies use the Big

Five model to determine an employee's traits by considering openness,

conscientiousness, extroversion, agreeableness, and neuroticism (OCEAN) variables.

Practically, high scores of openness have been correlated to whether a person is

ready to acquire new skills, and individuals with a higher score on openness usually show

imaginative and insightful traits (Frazee, 2008). High scores of conscientiousness

typically indicate that an individual is reliable, knowledgeable, and responsible. Such

individuals are acknowledged for their ability to be organized, efficient, and analytical.

Individuals with extraversion traits are motivated to communicate with others, though

35
they are mostly encouraged by internal factors. They are talkative, self-confident, and

energetic. In high scores of agreeableness, individuals are typically friendly, cooperative,

and sympathetic. Individuals scoring low on agreeableness are quite distant (Rapp,

Gilson, Mathieu, & Ruddy, 2015). Neuroticism indicates emotional stability. Individuals

scoring high on neuroticism often demonstrate instability and adverse emotions.

Importance of artificial emotional intelligence. In a study by Schuller and

Schuller (2018), the authors focus on artificial emotional intelligence possibilities

globally. Artificial emotional intelligence allows non-living entities that possess artificial

intelligence to recognize and respond to human emotions appropriately. Further, artificial

emotional intelligence can mimic a high degree of accuracy, situationally appropriate

human emotions (Schuller & Schuller, 2018). This implies that the respective innovations

can be utilized effectively in coaching, as virtual entities can respond appropriately to

users and empathize to some degree.

Schuller and Schuller (2018) also note in their artificial intelligence research that

automatic emotion recognition and emotion generation have positively impacted

conversational agents' work. Emotion can be integrated into the overall optimization

process for ensuring high-quality training about machine learning. In turn, the generation

of affective computing approaches has been found rather helpful by coaches, who aim at

developing more comprehensive methods to instill a sense of lifelong learning among

individuals. In short, research suggests that artificial emotional intelligence should be

holistic in terms of the recognition and generation of diverse emotional principles and

lead to the development of more effective computing systems that can address the needs

36
of coaches in different fields (Schuller & Schuller, 2018). One benefit of artificial

emotional intelligence is that it reinforces learning.

Possibilities of e-coaching through mobile phone applications. E-coaching is

defined as introducing new technological applications that illustrate the development of

artificial entities to undertake the specific coaching functions, such as goal setting and the

facilitation of coping strategies within the workplace (Rapp, Gilson, Mathieu, & Ruddy,

2015). These artificial intelligence bodies are developed in such a way to learn and

predict the behavioral patterns of coaches. E-coaching applications delivered through

mobile phones are rather flexible and convenient, as they can be used at any time and any

location depending on user preferences and schedules (Rapp et al., 2015).

Automated coaching methods. Automated coaching, which comprises the

overall practice of e-coaching, implies that mobile technologies are extensively adopted

to address the emerging communication gap in coaching (Otte, Bangerter, Britsch, &

Wüthrich, 2014). Virtual coaches can be comprised of two primary constructs. First,

virtual coaches may be automated software or platforms that allow interaction with

coaching strategies (Rosha & Lace, 2016). The other construct includes live humans

acting within a virtual construct, responding, and interacting with users utilizing

technologically based platforms. Virtual coaches make coaching practice easily

accessible to different individuals (Rosha & Lace, 2016). As a result, user engagement

tends to increase due to the components of flexibility and accessibility (Rapp, Gilson,

Mathieu, & Ruddy, 2015). Individuals have increased confidence that their learning

37
needs can be supported and improved when they recognize the need for extensive

professional development and growth (Rosha & Lace, 2016).

E-Coaching: Limitations, Challenges, and Areas of Future Research

Researchers have begun to study e-coaching as a distinct subcategory of coaching,

but the pace of research has not matched the more rapid pace of technological

development, especially regarding potential limitations of e-coaching (Burnett, 2018;

Kanatouri, 2016). E-coaching has disadvantages compared to traditional face-to-face

coaching, such as decreased trainee engagement, decreased employee motivation, and

decreased employee productivity following coaching (Hui, 2015; Kanatouri, 2016). The

degree to which e-coaching modality negatively influences coaching outcomes depends

on factors such as the amount of physical distance separating the coach from the trainee

and the frequency of coach-trainee interactions (Hui, 2015; Kanatouri, 2016).

E-coaching practices are developing rapidly. Further research is needed to explore

e-coaches’ perspectives on the advantages, disadvantages, and strategies for overcoming

disadvantages of e-coaching to help coaches optimize their practice and keeping the

research literature current and relevant to practice (Kanatouri, 2016). The results from

this research shall support optimizing practice by including a description of the

advantages, disadvantages, and how disadvantages can be overcome in e-coaching.

Recent historical examples illustrate how significant technological advancements are

being used for employee progress, including increased accessibility to coaching and

organizational coaching outside of the workplace. The use of a new online approach to

coaching implies that professionals in the field have encouraged the utilization of

38
innovative practices that can reveal the optimal potential of individuals for more effective

and reliable learning (Rapp, Gilson, Mathieu, & Ruddy, 2015). Virtual coaches are also

provided with distinct tools and applications to manifest greater creativity while

interacting with trainees. Some of these tools are described as social media platforms--

particularly Facebook, Twitter, and LinkedIn--to initiate effective communication with

employees on different organizational issues and employee performance aspects (Rosha

& Lace, 2016).

Research suggests a positive relationship between the uses of new technological

trends, particularly e-coaching, to improve employee efficiency throughout the

workplace. Compared to traditional coaches' face-to-face instruction, e-coaching has

become a more appealing option to employees (Moen & Allgood, 2009). These

individuals prefer to experiment with diverse forms and learning methods to generate

more substantial knowledge of different concepts used in their workplace. In turn,

employees tend to be more organized and disciplined in performing their daily tasks. E-

coaching impacts employees positively since they ensure greater control over their

learning process (Rapp, Gilson, Mathieu, & Ruddy, 2015). Gaining a solid sense of

ownership over learning additionally motivates employees to perform to their full

potential.

At the same time, it should be considered that the development of e-coaching

systems is associated with a thorough consideration of their design complexity (Ochoa &

Gutierrez, 2018). Some of the prevailing operational systems include increasing social

ability, credibility, context awareness, and learning of user behavior (Ochoa & Gutierrez,

39
2018). In this way, the respective technological trend is identified as overly persuasive in

nature, considering the numerous opportunities to address specific coaching planning

goals. The emphasis should include relevant information to perform particular activities

convincingly and persuasively (Ochoa & Gutierrez, 2018).

Another example of utilizing novel technology in e-coaching is recognized as the

Talk-and-Tools paradigm, which is developed for automated e-coaching systems,

especially utilizing smartphone platforms (Beun et al., 2017). This model is based on the

idea of interaction at two significant levels: symbolical and physical. From a symbolical

perspective, individuals can interact with automated coaches through the manipulation of

the program. The Talk-and-Tools system includes a wide range of verbal and non-verbal

signs on their smartphones. From a physical perspective, the focus is on the direct

manipulation of the speech, resulting in a higher level of persuasion and understanding

for both sides in the interaction (Beun et al., 2017). It has been indicated that both aspects

can be integrated appropriately into e-coaching within the smartphone platforms to

achieve optimal results.

TPB and Technology-Mediated Coaching

In this evolving field of technology-mediated coaching, however, what has yet to

be determined is how these emerging technologies and their integration in the workplace

influence attitudes and future behaviors of coaches. Accordingly, a literature gap

examines these innovative methodologies through the TPB framework (Ajzen, 1991).

40
 Summary

Coaching practices have a long history in modern work organizations. While there

is a range of traditional coaching techniques, there is a core taxonomy of coaching

elements. Increasingly, technological advances have demonstrated, or hold promise, that

these elements can replace traditional person-to-person coaching. In this way, the

potential effect of new persuasive technological trends may significantly impact

coaching. Yet positive potentialities of technology-mediated coaching have yet been

conclusively established. In conclusion, the explored topic of e-coaching within an

organizational framework has different dimensions that can be further investigated –

particularly within the context of a TPB framework -- to determine the evolving nature of

coaching due to progressively developing technologies.

The next chapter will outline the methodological approach utilized within this

study to answer research questions and fill the gap in literature that persists regarding the

role of technology within e-coaching in various organizational frameworks.

41
 Chapter 3: Research Method

Introduction

The purpose of this generic qualitative study is to explore e-coaches’ perceptions

of the advantages, disadvantages, and means of overcoming weaknesses of web-based e-

coaching as an alternative to face-to-face coaching in a business context. Chapter 3

includes a description of the procedures that will be used to accomplish this purpose.

Chapter 3 also contains the following sections: a restatement of research questions,

method and design, sampling and recruitment, data collection, data analysis,

trustworthiness, and ethical considerations.

Restatement of Research Questions

The following four research questions will be used to guide this study:

RQ1: How do e-coaches perceive their use of e-coaching as influencing their

practice and attitudes toward coaching?

RQ2: What are e-coaches’ perceptions of the advantages of e-coaching as an

alternative to face-to-face coaching in a business context?

RQ3: What are e-coaches’ perceptions of the disadvantages of e-coaching as an

alternative to face-to-face coaching in a business context?

RQ4: What are e-coaches’ perceptions of how disadvantages of e-coaching in a

business context may be overcome?

Method and Design

This proposed study will use a generic qualitative design. A quantitative method

was considered, but quantitative methods are appropriate for determining relationships

42
among variables represented numerically (Creswell, 2013). The existing research on e-

coaches’ perceptions of e-coaching in a business context is not sufficiently developed or

detailed to facilitate the anticipation of response categories of the kind needed to create a

quantitative instrument (e.g., the choices in a multiple-choice item on a questionnaire). A

mixed-methods design was also considered but was rejected for the same reason. A

qualitative method is appropriate for conducting an open-ended exploration of

participants’ perceptions and experiences in the contexts of their own lives,

organizations, and cultures. It may be used when the researcher wishes to permit

participants to discuss their experiences in their own words, such that unanticipated ideas

and themes can emerge (Creswell, 2013). Therefore, a qualitative method was selected.

A generic qualitative design may be appropriate when other, traditional

qualitative designs are not suitable for addressing the study’s purpose and answering the

research questions (Percy, Kostere, & Kostere, 2015). In a phenomenological design, for

example, the researcher’s focus is on understanding the subjective textures of

experiences, or what the experience is like, rather than understanding the external

conditions of those experiences (Creswell, 2012; Percy et al., 2015). In the present study,

the researcher is interested in understanding e-coaches’ perceptions of and experiences

with e-coaching in a business context, including the external conditions of those

experiences and perceptions, rather than understanding what it is like to be an e-coach. A

phenomenological design is, therefore, inappropriate. A case study design might be

appropriate if the study was focused on exploring how a process occurs in a context with

clear boundaries that differentiate it from other similar contexts (Creswell, 2012; Percy et

43
al., 2015). In this proposed study, no bounded case can serve as a useful unit of analysis.

A generic qualitative design may be used when the research is focused on participants’

“reflections on their experiences of things in the outer world” (Percy et al., 2015, p. 78).

Hence, a generic qualitative design was selected.

Recruitment and Sampling

The study population will be that of e-coaches who have engaged in e-coaching

for a U.S. business. LaRosa (2018) noted that there is an estimated 53,300 coaches

worldwide, and that 92% of coaches are currently active. Coaching delivered from a

coach to a trainee via web-based technologies is referred to as e-coaching, and

technologies used to provide e-coaching in a business context include email, chat rooms,

instant messaging, video chats, and social media (Chawla, Gabriel, Dahling, & Patel,

2016; Hui, 2015; Hunt, 2015). Organizations hire coaches to assist with several activities

such as the achievement of critical business goals, increase creativity, boost productivity,

support communication, and to restore confidence in organizations. One-third of these

coaches are located in the U.S. Hence, the size of the population for this study is 17,500

coaches (LaRosa, 2018). There is no available estimation on the number of coaches who

are e-coaches. The inclusion criteria will be as follows: 1) currently an e-coach providing

e-coaching services in a U.S. business context; 2) has at least one year of experience

giving e-coaching in a U.S. business context; 3) willing to complete an online

questionnaire to answer open-ended questions about their experiences with e-coaching; 4)

must be at least 18 years of age; 5) must be able to speak and write fluently in English,

44
and; 6) must have access to the necessary hardware and software to complete the online

questionnaire.

After IRB approval is received, the researcher will recruit a purposeful sample of

e-coaches who have engaged in e-coaching in a business context. Purposeful sampling

consists of focusing recruitment efforts only on persons whose familiarity with the

phenomenon of interest makes them potentially eligible to participate in the study and is

appropriate in qualitative research when the researcher needs to collect as much relevant

data as possible using limited resources (Palinkas et al., 2015).

The researcher will search professional associations’ public membership listings

on social media (e.g., LinkedIn), beginning with professional associations for e-coaches

who work in a business context, and will privately message potential participants using

the publicly available contact information. The researcher will also contact coaches

whom she knows personally and invites them to participate and recommend other

coaches who might meet the inclusion criteria. The researcher will begin by recruiting 10

participants, but participant recruitment and data collection will continue until data

saturation and trustworthiness were achieved, as discussed in the Data Analysis section

below.

The researcher will email or message potential participants with a brief

description of the study, the inclusion and exclusion criteria, and the terms of informed

consent, and will invite potential participants to reply if they are interested in joining the

sample or if they have questions. When potential participants reply and indicate an

interest in joining the study, the researcher will email the SurveyMonkey link.

45
 Data Collection

Data collection will be through a semi-structured questionnaire instrument

administered online through the SurveyMonkey application. Semi-structured

questionnaires consist of open-ended questions to focus on relevant topics (Percy et al.,

2015). Semi-structured questions are an appropriate data collection procedure for a

generic qualitative study because they allow the researcher to focus the conversation on

relevant topics while eliciting the participant’s perceptions of the phenomenon of interest

in his or her own words (Percy et al., 2015). The semi-structured questionnaire format is

aligned with this study's purpose and its research questions because the study is focused

on specific topics. However, the researcher wants to allow unanticipated ideas and

themes to emerge through an open-ended exploration of participants’ perceptions, as

these are described in the participants’ own words.

To prevent researcher bias resulting from pre-existing professional relationships

with participants from influencing the study results, the online questionnaire will be

administered anonymously, meaning that no identifying information will be collected.

Only the potential participants to whom the researcher sends the link to the questionnaire

will take the questionnaire, but the researcher will not know which responses were

entered by which potential participant. If the respondents' total number is less than the

number of individuals invited to participate, the researcher will not know which of the

invitation recipients completed the questionnaire.

The online questionnaire will begin with a page on which the study's nature and

purpose are briefly reviewed. When the participant has read this information, they will

46
click a button to proceed to the second page. The second page will include the informed

consent form. Participants will be asked to read the form and then at the bottom of the

page, select the option, “I agree to the terms of informed consent and wish to proceed

with the questionnaire,” or, “I do not wish to proceed.” If participants select “I do not

wish to proceed,” they will be directed to a page with text in which the researcher thanks

them for their time and interest in the study.

If participants agree with the terms of informed consent and choose to proceed

with the questionnaire, they will answer a series of yes-or-no questions to confirm that

they meet the study's inclusion criteria. For example, to confirm eligibility under the first

inclusion criterion listed in the recruitment and sampling section of this chapter,

participants will be asked, “Are you currently an e-coach providing e-coaching services

in a U.S. business context?” and offered the option of selecting either “yes” or “no.”

Participants who select “no” on any of the eligibility verification items will still be able to

complete the questionnaire, but their data will be excluded from the analysis and results.

After completing the eligibility questions, participants will proceed to the fourth

page, on which they will answer open-ended questions asking them to describe the e-

coaching practices with which they have experience. This shall include the web-based

technologies used, the typical frequency and duration of communication with trainees via

each channel, and other factors determined through a review of the literature relevant to

the efficacy of coaching or e-coaching. The questionnaire will also include open-ended

questions asking participants to describe their perceptions and opinions of the e-coaching

formats they have used, including advantages, disadvantages, and means of overcoming

47
weaknesses. Completion of the questionnaire shall require up to 30 minutes of time from

respondents.

Data Analysis

Participants’ questionnaire responses will be compiled into an MS Excel

spreadsheet and downloaded from SurveyMonkey. The Excel sheet will be uploaded into

NVivo 12 software and analyzed thematically using the six-step procedure developed by

Braun and Clarke (2006). The six steps of the analysis are as follows: 1) reading and

rereading the data; 2) grouping similar units of meaning into codes; 3) grouping similar

codes into themes; 4) reviewing, revising, and refining the themes; 5) defining the themes

about the research questions and theoretical background, and; 6) producing a presentation

of results.

Step 2, in which the researcher groups similar meaning units into codes, will be

performed in the following manner. In reading the transcripts, the researcher will note

phrases or groups of consecutive phrases that express an idea, experience, opinion, or

perception relevant to the study topic. In NVivo, the researcher will place these meaning

units into child nodes, labeled with descriptive words or phrases. The child nodes will

represent codes. Meaning units from different transcripts or different parts of the same

transcript that express the same idea or theme will be placed in the same child node.

In step 3 of the analysis, the researcher will review the content of the child nodes

created in step 2. Child nodes containing meaning units that express similar ideas or

themes will be grouped under a parent node, labeled with a descriptive phrase. The parent

nodes will represent themes. This thematic analysis procedure is aligned with the

48
researcher’s goal of allowing unanticipated ideas and themes to emerge from

participants’ accounts. It does not involve imposing preconceived codes or themes on the

data but will enable themes and codes to appear inductively from the content of

participants’ responses.

Data saturation is achieved when additional data collection and analysis do not

produce new ideas or insights (Fusch & Ness, 2015). When analysis of two consecutive

questionnaires adds no new themes or codes to those that emerged during the analysis of

previous questionnaires, the researcher will conclude that data saturation has been

achieved. Participant recruitment and data collection will then cease.

Trustworthiness

The trustworthiness of qualitative study results is enhanced through procedures

designed to strengthen the four trustworthiness elements identified by Lincoln and Guba

(1985). The trustworthiness elements include credibility, transferability, dependability,

and confirmability (Lincoln & Guba, 1985).

Credibility indicates the accuracy of the results or the fidelity of the results in

describing the reality they are intended to illustrate and is the qualitative analog of the

quantitative construct of internal validity. Credibility will be enhanced through

assurances that participants will remain anonymous to encourage participant honesty.

Additionally, credibility will be strengthened through participants’ entering their

responses into the online questionnaire. This procedure will preclude transcription errors

and the need for member-checking associated with the transcription of questionnaire data.

49
 Transferability is the degree to which qualitative study results hold in other

research contexts and is analogous to the quantitative construct of external validity

(Lincoln & Guba, 1985). To assist future researchers in assessing the transferability of

this study's results to their specific samples and populations, the researcher will present

and adhere to clear inclusion criteria for the sample and collect detailed descriptions of

the e-coaching formats participants have used.

Dependability is the degree to which a qualitative study’s results would be

reproduced if the same study were repeated in the same research context at a different

time and is analogous to the quantitative construct of reliability (Lincoln & Guba, 1985).

Dependability will be enhanced through the presentation of detailed descriptions of the

study procedures.

Confirmability is the degree to which the results in a qualitative study are

determined by the participants' perceptions and opinions, rather than by researcher bias,

and is analogous to the quantitative construct of objectivity (Lincoln & Guba, 1985).

Confirmability will be enhanced in the proposed study by presenting detailed descriptions

of the processes by which data were gathered and analyzed. Confirmability will also be

strengthened by using direct quotes from the data as evidence of all study results.

Ethical Considerations

Participant recruitment will not begin until IRB approval is received. Participation

in the study will be entirely voluntary, with potential participants being informed that

they can decline to participate or leave the study at any time without negative

consequences. All participants will review and agree to the terms of an informed consent

50
form before any data are collected from them. Participants will be informed that they can

refuse to answer any question on the questionnaire, with or without giving a reason,

without negative consequences.

There are no incentives for participating in the study, other than knowing that the

results may be useful to practitioners and researchers of e-coaching and may lead to

better e-coaching practices. There are minimal risks associated with participation in the

study, in that participants are not expected to experience more danger or distress than at

any other time during their day-to-day activities. All reasonable precautions will be taken

to ensure that participants’ identities remain anonymous. Participants will not be asked to

disclose any potentially identifying information.

Summary

This proposed study will use a generic qualitative design to explore e-coaches’

perceptions of the advantages, disadvantages, and means of overcoming web-based e-

coaching as an alternative to face-to-face coaching in a business context. Participants will

be a purposeful sample of business coaches with at least one year of experience providing

e-coaching services in a business context. The researcher will recruit the purposeful

sample by searching for and privately contacting potentially eligible participants through

professional acquaintances and social media platforms such as LinkedIn.

Data collection will be through an anonymous, online questionnaire administered

through the SurveyMonkey application that will take between 30 minutes and one hour.

Qualitative data from open-ended questionnaire items will be uploaded into NVivo 12

software and then analyzed thematically using the six-step procedure described by Braun

51
and Clarke (2006). Participation in the study will be entirely voluntary, and participants

will review and agree to the terms of an informed consent form before any data are

collected from them. Chapter 4 includes a presentation of the results of the study.

52
 Chapter 4: Results

This chapter is a presentation of the results of the online questionnaire instrument

administered to 10 coaches anonymously through the online SurveyMonkey application.

As stated in previous chapters, the four research questions used to guide this study were:

RQ1: How do e-coaches perceive their use of e-coaching as influencing their

practice of and attitudes toward coaching?

RQ2: What are e-coaches’ perceptions of the advantages of e-coaching as an

alternative to face-to-face coaching in a business context?

RQ3: What are e-coaches’ perceptions of the disadvantages of e-coaching as an

alternative to face-to-face coaching in a business context?

RQ4: What are e-coaches’ perceptions of the ways in which disadvantages of e-

coaching in a business context may be overcome?

The first section of this chapter is a description of the relevant demographic

characteristics of the study participants. In the second section of this chapter, the

implementation of the data analysis procedure is described, and the emergent themes are

introduced. The third section of this chapter comprises a detailed presentation of the

emergent themes, including evidence for each theme in the form of direct quotations from

the data. This chapter concludes with a summary.

Demographics

Data collection was conducted through an anonymous, online questionnaire

because the researcher had pre-existing, professional relationships with the participants,

and these relationships may have had the potential to create conflicts of interests if data

53
collection was conducted by the researcher in person. To ensure that participants

remained anonymous, including to the researcher, personal demographic data were not

collected from them. Instead, participants were only asked to confirm that they met each

of the inclusion criteria for the study, which were: 1) currently an e-coach providing e-

coaching services in a U.S. business context; 2) has at least one year of experience

providing e-coaching in a U.S. business context; 3) willing to complete an online

questionnaire to answer open-ended questions about their experiences with e-coaching; 4)

must be at least 18 years of age; and 5) must be able to speak and write fluently in

English. All 19 participants confirmed that they met these criteria. Next, participants

were asked to list the platforms and media they were utilizing for e-coaching. Table 1

indicates the platforms and media used by each of the 19 participants.

54
Table 1

Participants’ E-coaching Platforms and Media

Participant E-coaching media and platforms (duration of use in years at time of study)

P1 Skype (2); conference line (2); Zoom (1 - 1.5)

P2 Email (10); Freeconferencecall.com (10); Zoom (3); Uber conference (0)
P3 Item skipped
P4 Zoom; phone; email (no durations indicated)
P5 Zoom (3); FaceTime (4); Google (Gmail and Google Docs - 5);
messaging via Apple iPhone (4).
P6 Item skipped
P7 Phone (10); email (10); Skype (2)
P8 Skype Business, Zoom, Freeconferencecall.com (2.5 for all)
P9 WhatsApp (2); Zoom (1); Skype (3); Freeconferencecall.com (2); phone
(3)
P10 Video (Skype – 9; Zoom - 4; Facetime - 6; WhatsApp - 6); email
(Outlook – 20; Gmail – 15; Apple – 6); messaging (Apple – 10; SMS –
18; WhatsApp – 7; GroupMe – 7)
P11 Email (20); Skype (10); Zoom (1); Freeconferencecall.com (1)
P12 Email (10); Zoom (5)
P13 Email; messaging; phone; Zoom; Skype (all for 3 years)
P14 Zoom (2); Freeconferencecall.com (1); email (2); messaging (2);
FaceTime (2)
P15 E-mail; messaging; Skype; Zoom; BetterUp's proprietary platform;
Bravely's proprietary platform; Slack; Whatsapp (all for 4 years)
P16 Skype; Zoom (duration of use not stated)
P17 Messaging (3); Zoom (3); WebEx (9); Coaches Console (16); Outlook
email (19)
P18 Zoom; Whatsapp (duration of use not stated)
P19 Zoom (5)

55
 As Table 1 indicates, of the 17 participants who responded to the pertinent

questionnaire item, all 17 used at least one videochat application, with the most

commonly used applications being Zoom (n=15) and Skype (n=9), and with all

participants using at least one of either Zoom or Skype. All participants except P18 and

P19 used phones, either for conference calls or messaging, with the most frequently

reported platform being Freeconferencecall.com (n=5), but with most participants not

indicating the specific conference call or messaging platform they used. Six out of the 17

participants who responded to the item indicated that they used email through free

services such as Gmail or Outlook.

The sample size of 19 was determined because data saturation was reached with

19 participants. As discussed in Chapter 3, data saturation is achieved when additional

data collection and analysis do not produce new ideas or insights (Fusch & Ness, 2015).

When analysis of the questionnaire responses from P18 and P19 resulted in the creation

of no new themes or codes, the researcher determined that data saturation was reached,

and participant recruitment and data collection were concluded.

Explanation of Theme Development

Participants’ questionnaire responses were compiled into an MS Excel

spreadsheet and downloaded from SurveyMonkey. The Excel sheet was uploaded into

NVivo 12 software and analyzed thematically, using the six-step procedure developed by

Braun and Clarke (2006). The six steps of the analysis were: 1) reading and rereading the

data; 2) grouping similar units of meaning into codes; 3) grouping similar codes into

themes; 4) reviewing, revising, and refining the themes; 5) defining the themes in relation

56
to the research questions and theoretical background, and; 6) producing a presentation of

results.

To code the data, the researcher grouped phrases or groups of consecutive phrases

that expressed similar ideas, experiences, opinions, or perceptions relevant to answering a

research question. In NVivo, the researcher placed these meaning units into nodes, which

were labeled with descriptive words or phrases. The nodes represented codes. Meaning

units from different transcripts or different parts of the same transcript that expressed the

same idea or theme were placed in the same child node.

In step 3 of the analysis, the researcher reviewed the content of the codes created

in step 2. The nodes representing similar codes were grouped as child nodes under a

parent node, which was labeled with a descriptive phrase. The parent nodes represented

themes, and the codes became sub-themes under their respective parent themes. In step 4,

the themes were reviewed and refined by comparing them to the original transcripts to

ensure they accurately captured participants’ reported experiences. Step 5 involved

naming and defining the themes to clarify their significance as answers to the research

questions. This thematic analysis procedure facilitated the inductive identification of the

patterns of meaning in the data that are presented in this chapter as answers to the

research questions. Table 2 indicates the themes and sub-themes that emerged during data

analysis.

57
Table 2

Summary of Themes and Sub-themes

Theme Sub-theme n of % of
responses participants
contributing
(N=19)

1. Influences of Positive attitudes toward e-coaching as 19 100%

e-coaching on an enhancer of the convenience and
coaching reach of coaching practices
practices and
attitudes Positive attitudes toward e-coaching as 14 74%
an enhancer of attention and openness
in coaching practices

Preference for meeting new clients in 6 32%

person

Theme 1 totals: 38 100%

2. Advantages of Scheduling flexibility is an advantage 24 100%

e-coaching for clients
versus in-person
coaching Increased efficiency and reach are 24 100%
advantages for coaches

Theme 2 totals: 48 100%

3. Disadvantages Unreliability of technology 21 58%

of e-coaching
The potential for diminished coach and 19 84%
client engagement

Theme 3 totals: 40 100%

4. Overcoming Overcoming client reluctance through 14 74%

disadvantages trial sessions and reassurance

Pre-empting coach and client 6 32%

disengagement

Theme 4 totals: 21 79%

58
 Emergent Themes

Overall, there were a total of 239 open-ended participant questionnaire responses

(excluding close-ended questions for verification of eligibility to participate). The

following sections are a detailed discussion of the themes and sub-themes that emerged

during analysis of the questionnaire data to answer the research questions. Supporting

evidence is provided in the form of direct quotations from the data.

Influences of E-coaching on Coaching Practices and Attitudes

All 19 participants expressed a positive attitude toward e-coaching through their

descriptions of its benefits. E-coaching changed all participants’ coaching practices by

allowing them to reach more clients and to bond more effectively with existing clients.

Although some participants still preferred to conduct one or two face-to-face meetings

with new clients to establish an initial bond, the convenience, comfort, and greater

openness and rapport they experienced in e-coaching caused them to prefer to transition

clients to that modality after the introductory face-to-face meeting. These findings

resulted in the emergence of three sub-themes, which are discussed in the following sub-

sections.

It is important to note that all participants reported using the same format for in-

person and e-coaching sessions, meaning that influences of e-coaching on coaching

practices did not extend to session content. For example, in a representative response, P9

stated that e-coaching session formats were “very much the same as the face to face,

except I don't offer coffee” (questionnaire response, March 15, 2020). As further

examples, P1 stated, “e-coaching and face to face are conducted the same” (questionnaire

59
response, March 8, 2020), while P6 copy-pasted the questionnaire response describing a

typical in-person session into the field for describing a typical e-coaching session. The

influences on coaching attitudes and practices described in the following sub-sections are

focused on interpersonal and circumstantial factors, rather than on session content.

Positive attitudes toward e-coaching as an enhancer of the convenience and

reach of coaching practices. All 19 participants expressed positive attitudes toward e-

coaching because they perceived it as enhancing the comfort, convenience, and

geographic reach of their coaching practices. Nine out of 19 participants expressed that

they preferred e-coaching to an in-person modality because of those benefits, and the

participants who preferred face-to-face coaching cited the same benefits of e-coaching as

other participants and reported a positive attitude toward the modality. P5 reported

feeling gratitude for e-coaching because it increased the geographic reach of the coaching

practice: “I would say that my overall attitude about e-coaching is gratitude for having

the increased flexibility and possibility to coach remotely and to increase my client

outreach” (questionnaire response, March 15, 2020). P18 referred specifically to the

greater reach of e-coaching versus in-person as contributing to their positive perception:

“E-coaching has allowed me to work with international clients” (questionnaire response,

May 2, 2020). P6 expressed a positive attitude toward e-coaching for its influence on

increasing the comfort and convenience of coaching practices:

I have a positive, confident attitude toward e-coaching. I feel comfortable with the
camera and with videoconferencing due to years of experience with both . . . I
prefer e-coaching because it enables me to conveniently coach clients in different
locations and time zones. (P6, questionnaire response, March 14, 2020).

60
 P15 referred to specific aspects of coaching that became more convenient and

accessible in e-coaching, stating that the modality provided, “Easy access to deal with on-

demand issues. Easy to check in with people to see how they are doing via message. Easy

to send resources and follow-up. Reduces the need to commute for face-to-face meeting”

(questionnaire response, June 16, 2020). P10, who expressed a personal preference for in-

person coaching, agreed with other participants’ positive perceptions of e-coaching as

making coaching practices more convenient:

I think I'll always prefer face-to-face coaching (it's more satisfying for me,
personally), but given the constant client demand for faster outcomes and lower
costs, I am preparing for fewer in-person engagements. I enjoy the flexibility, and
once I've had one or two in-person sessions, usually my clients will easily move
to remote sessions going forward because they understand how it can be effective
without my direct presence. (P10, questionnaire response, March 8, 2020).

P12 described e-coaching as having improved their coaching practice because its

convenience and inherent flexibility allowed them to accommodate circumstantial

changes that would otherwise be obstacles to coaching, thereby increasing the reach of

the coaching practice to situations in which an in-person modality would not be feasible:

“When circumstances (time, situations, distance) present themselves, my practice can

continue seamlessly” (questionnaire response, June 20, 2020).

Positive attitudes toward e-coaching as an enhancer of attention and

openness in coaching practices. 14 out of 19 participants expressed positive attitudes

toward e-coaching because they perceived it as increasing the openness and intimacy of

their relationships with existing clients. P6 reported greater attentiveness to clients in an

e-coaching modality because there was no need to divide attention between notetaking

and coaching: “Knowing that I will have a recording of the session has enabled me to be

61
more present, and to listen more actively, rather than focusing on note taking”

(questionnaire response, March 14, 2020). P2 reported feeling more present and attentive

during e-coaching sessions: “E-coaching has sharpened my coaching competencies,

especially listening and presence, to help the client create awareness” (questionnaire

response, March 28, 2020). P17 noted that taking full advantage of the potential for

connecting with clients through e-coaching required coaches to develop proficiency with

electronic communications: “Once I developed equal efficacy between phone, face-to-

face and e-coaching, my attitude towards e-coaching changed dramatically. It is a huge

benefit to my highly interpersonal clients who need that visual connection”

(questionnaire response, May 27, 2020).

P7 indicated that e-coaching demanded greater attentiveness to social cues on the

part of the coach, with the result that the coaching relationship was more open: “E-

coaching requires focusing on client's words, tone, cadence, pace in order to be effective .

. . E-coaching has improved my practice by helping me to become much more

forthcoming with my intuition” (questionnaire response, March 13, 2020). P7 added: “I

prefer e-coaching. It helps to support deep listening without the distraction of attempting

to interpret facial expressions and body movements” (questionnaire response, March 13,

2020). P1 perceived e-coaching as promoting more openness in coaching by freeing up

energy to create a more comfortable experience for the client: “I find that I expend more

energy with face-to-face coaching versus e-coaching. With e-coaching, I am able to

create a friendlier space which has allowed clients to open up” (questionnaire response,

March 30, 2020). P18 indicated that e-coaching allowed for the same connection between

62
coaches and clients as in-person sessions: “I am able to create trust and safety with the

client when I use video chat. I consider that it is possible to establish a deep and powerful

connection with the client similarly on e-coaching and face-to-face coaching”

(questionnaire response, May 2, 2020). In P14’s perception, e-coaching was more

conducive to openness than in-person sessions because clients were able to participate

from a place where they were completely comfortable: “Because they can tune in from

their places of comfort, my clients are more organic, honest, and relaxed during sessions”

(questionnaire response, June 16, 2020).

Preference for meeting new clients in person. Six out of 19 participants

indicated a preference for meeting new clients in person once or twice before

transitioning to the e-coaching modality. P9 reported a preference for e-coaching after

one or two initial, in-person meetings to establish rapport: “I prefer face to face for a

first-time client that I don't know . . . After the first one to two sessions, I prefer e-

coaching because it saves time in travel” (questionnaire response, March 11, 2020). P8

expressed reasons for perceiving in-person meetings as more effective for establishing an

initial bond with new clients: “Face-to-face coaching allows for coaching to go deeper

sooner because I am able to read body language and connect and see a person eye to eye”

(questionnaire response, March 12, 2020). Like other participants who contributed to this

sub-theme, P19 preferred to conduct at least one meeting in person before transitioning to

e-coaching in order to build rapport: “I prefer e-coaching with at least one face-to-face

during discovery, if possible. The in-person allows connection and rapport more than e-

coaching” (questionnaire response, April 5, 2020). P5 preferred in-person, introductory

63
meetings for establishing initial bonds with new clients because of the perception that

face-to-face meetings facilitate interpersonal attunement more effectively:

With face-to-face, I can be more attuned to the client's nonverbal communication,

which is very essential as a coach. It helps with my intuition, interpreting what
isn't said, as well as with building a trusting relationship between coach and
client. (P5, questionnaire response, March 15, 2020).

Advantages of E-coaching Versus In-Person Coaching

All 19 participants expressed the perception that e-coaching had significant

advantages over the face-to-face modality. Two sub-themes emerged to indicate the two

major advantages. The first major advantage, cited by all participants, was that e-

coaching enhanced their ability to coach according to their clients’ comfort, convenience,

and scheduling needs. The second major advantage was the greater economic efficiency

of e-coaching, which participants described as requiring fewer expenditures for resources

such as staff, office space, travel, and other supports needed for in-person coaching. The

two sub-themes are discussed in the following sub-sections.

Scheduling flexibility is an advantage for clients. All 19 participants cited as a

significant advantage of e-coaching that it allowed them the flexibility to meet their

clients’ scheduling needs. P9 expressed the perception that clients preferred e-coaching

because the scheduling was more flexible: “[Clients] seem to prefer the e-coaching

because they too have busy schedules and can be anywhere to take the call. Some

[sessions] even occur after hours so [clients] are home” (questionnaire response, March

11, 2020). P14 indicated that e-coaching made access to coaching feasible for women

who were working from home while handling childcare responsibilities: “My clients,

who tend to be women, love e-coaching. They can be coached before their afternoon

64
business call, while their child is lying down for a nap nearby. Flexibility is priceless for

busy clients” (questionnaire response, June 16, 2020). P5 stated that scheduling flexibility

allowed clients to make themselves more comfortable and open than the in-person

modality typically allowed: “Clients are able to find the most comfortable, private, or

accessible spaces for the coaching sessions. I have coached clients who are in their homes

and that often brings out more vulnerability and focus for the clients” (questionnaire

response, March 15, 2020). In P10’s experience, the e-coaching modality allowed greater

flexibility to meet clients’ needs between sessions:

[E-coaching] allows me to respond to just-in-time requests for insight and support

for my executive clients. I can respond to questions and offer feedback via text
and email in ways unavailable if I were to be required to be physically present for
the support. (P10, questionnaire response, March 8, 2020).

Participants indicated that considerations of scheduling flexibility influenced

many of their clients to prefer or at least accept e-coaching as an alternative to in-person

coaching. P2 indicated that scheduling flexibility was a decisive consideration for many

clients: “Most clients like and prefer e-coaching based on time convenience, [although]

sometimes clients will want face-to-face coaching for the first coaching session or

periodically when switching to e-coaching” (questionnaire response, March 28, 2020).

P11 referred specifically to the convenience of e-coaching for clients during the COVID-

19 pandemic, stating: “I think [clients] are relieved to do e-coaching because it more

efficiently fits into a busy schedule and is not disrupted by COVID-19” (questionnaire

response, June 25, 2020). P8 expressed the belief that most clients would otherwise prefer

in-person coaching, but chose to receive e-coaching because travel distances were

prohibitive: “Most of my clients, I believe, would prefer in-person, but because we are

65
often located in other states and/or countries, that is not feasible” (questionnaire response,

March 12, 2020).

Increased efficiency and reach are advantages for coaches. Participants

indicated that e-coaching was more efficient and affordable for them as coaches than the

in-person modality. P10, for example, stated that e-coaching permitted “decreased

overhead of support staff” (questionnaire response, March 8, 2020). Similarly, P1 stated,

“E-coaching allows the firm to work with clients from all over with little overhead to do

so” (questionnaire response, March 30, 2020). P4 associated cost savings with not

needing to maintain and staff a site for meeting with clients: “I don't have to maintain a

physical office or worry about insurance” (questionnaire response, March 21, 2020). P19

also referred to dispensing with an office for conducting in-person coaching sessions with

clients as an advantage of e-coaching: “[E-coaching] eliminated the need to have a space

for in-person clients” (questionnaire response, April 5, 2020). P13 referred to e-coaching

as increasing efficiency by eliminating travel and introducing a level of flexibility not

achievable in in-person coaching, stating that e-coaching allowed, “Flexibility in work

hours and in workspace. The virtual platform reduces need for office space and

commuting to work and allows me more control over my schedule” (questionnaire

response, June 17, 2020).

Participants also described e-coaching as expanding the geographic reach of their

coaching practices by allowing them to provide coaching from any location to a client in

any other location. P7 related the expansion of the reach of practice to cost-savings in

stating, “[E-coaching facilitates reaching a much wider client base without expense of

66
travel” (questionnaire response, March 13, 2020). P5 described the expansion of the

geographic reach of the practice as a primary advantage of e-coaching: “E-coaching has

given me the ability to work with clients who are not local. My reach is limitless and thus

helping others is not limited to my geographic or demographic area” (questionnaire

response, March 15, 2020). As a third example, P8 reported that e-coaching “allows for

my client base to be national in scope, as opposed to in-person, so a greater client pool”

(questionnaire response, March 12, 2020). P15 stated that avoiding the hassle of travel

through e-coaching contributed to financial efficiency, reach, and maintenance of a

mindset conducive to effective coaching: “No commute saves time and stress. For me this

allows me to keep my rates lower and serve more people. It also improves my mental

health” (questionnaire response, June 16, 2020)

Disadvantages of E-coaching

All 19 participants reported that e-coaching has some disadvantages. The first

major disadvantage (cited by 11 out of 19 participants) was the potential for glitches in

the technology to negatively impact the coaching session. The second major disadvantage

(cited by 16 out of 19 participants) was that e-coaching could limit engagement in the

coaching session on the part of coaches and clients by allowing distractions to intrude and

by limiting some kinds of interpersonal engagement and interaction. These two major

disadvantages are discussed as sub-themes in the following sections.

Unreliability of technology. Eleven out of 19 participants reported that the

limited reliability of technological media was a disadvantage of e-coaching. Connectivity

issues in particular had the potential to disrupt or prematurely terminate coaching

67
sessions, and other issues, such as a lack of user-friendliness in some platforms, could

alienate clients from the e-coaching modality. P11 reported that connectivity issues

sometimes impeded e-coaching but that the advantages of the modality more than

compensated for those inconveniences: “Disadvantages are technology failing due to

electrical storms or weak signals. The advantages of e-coaching far outweigh this

disadvantage” (questionnaire response, June 25, 2020). P9 addressed technological

limitations by having a backup system ready in case the primary one failed during a

session: “One challenge is the tech issues that arise whether in the sound, the wifi

connection, etc. This can impact time commitments and efficiency. I've learned to always

have a backup in the event tech issues arise” (questionnaire response, March 11, 2020).

P8 gave a similar response, stating: “Internet connection and service can sometimes

interrupt or taint sound and connection” (questionnaire response, March 12, 2020).

P4 cited a lack of user-friendliness in a specific platform as a representative

example of how the underlying technology could become an impediment to successful e-

coaching, stating, “Google Hangout is clunky. It's hard to open multiple windows at once.

You can't really show a PowerPoint or video without losing your attendees. They will

have to sign in again” (questionnaire response, March 21, 2020). P3 described unreliable

and distracting technologies as disruptive to e-coaching: “The screen freezes and disrupts

the flow of conversation, [and there are] sound distractions--email and text message alerts

continue to pop up through sessions” (questionnaire response, March 27, 2020).

However, P2 provided a representative response in acknowledging the disadvantages of

unreliable technology while affirming an overall preference for e-coaching, stating that

68
disadvantages included “technical difficulties and sound quality. Sometimes these factors

cause time delays and difficulty understanding clients. These disadvantages haven't

changed my view of e-coaching. I still find e-coaching very beneficial” (questionnaire

response, March 28, 2020). P17 described issues related to Skype as initially prohibitive

to effective e-coaching: “The original disadvantage when e-coaching first came out

(Skype) was poor connection. After my first foray into Skype-based e-coaching, I stepped

out of it due to having the frequent video/audio lag time and disruption of the coaching

flow” (questionnaire response, May 27, 2020). However, P17 returned to Skype when

technical issues with the platform were resolved: “This technology disadvantage has been

mostly corrected. When this happens today, we just shut down video and quickly switch

to audio only” (questionnaire response, May 27, 2020).

The potential for diminished coach and client engagement. Sixteen out of 19

participants reported that the potential for diminished coach and client engagement in

coaching sessions was a disadvantage of e-coaching. Four participants stated that without

the more intense interpersonal engagement facilitated by the in-person modality, clients

and coaches were more susceptible to becoming distracted by things in their physical

environments. Those environmental distractions lowered engagement. P10 described this

disadvantage in stating, “I feel there is a greater chance for distraction when coaching

remotely, on all participants’ part. Distinct influencers in either party's environment can

demand attention where an in-person session yields higher accountability between coach

and client” (questionnaire response, March 8, 2020). P8 provided a response similar to

P10’s in citing the increased risk of clients and coaches both becoming disengaged during

69
e-coaching: “Disadvantages are 1) coach can more easily be distracted, 2) sometimes

coaching clients can be also distracted” (questionnaire response, March 12, 2020). P15

expressed the perception that the informality of an online platform encouraged clients to

believe their full attention was less necessary than during an in-person session:

“Distraction - easy to be looking at phone/e-mail and it's almost ok to do that. I notice

clients doing this sometimes, which cuts against presence” (questionnaire response, June

16, 2020). P14 cited specific distractions that could diminish the quality of e-coaching for

clients, listing, “Distractions and interruptions [like] web surfing/texting/emailing during

session, family interruptions, or background noise” (questionnaire response, June 16,

2020). P9 suggested that susceptibility to distraction among participants in e-coaching

was at least partly due the limitations the modality placed on interpersonal engagement,

with the result that minimizing distractions could compensate for the less intimate nature

of the modality:

Coaching requires a great deal of listening and paying attention to body language,
and e-coaching may impact that, especially since most video conferencing is
chest-up. It has caused me to be very intentional about managing my space,
ensuring that it's private and uninterrupted in my home. (P9, questionnaire
response, March 11, 2020).

P10 agreed with P9 that e-coaching restricts coach-client interactions: “I think the

experience is diminished when there's not a physical presence. This is found in

experiencing the phenomenon of emotional regulation that occurs between coach and

client” (questionnaire response, March 8, 2020). Similarly, P1 stated, “Although e-

coaching brings flexibility, it can impact the human connection that face-to face coaching

offers” (questionnaire response, March 30, 2020). P18 referred to audio-only e-coaching

70
as particularly detrimental to coach-client bonding because of the loss of nonverbal cues

and eye contact: “The disadvantages [of audio-only e-coaching] are not being able to

establish eye contact and learn from the client´s body language” (questionnaire response,

May 2, 2020). P13 described the potential for clients to lose focus during e-coaching

sessions as a consequence of a diminished interpersonal connection, in which the client

might experience the coach as a web application rather than a human being, in stating that

disadvantages of e-coaching included, “Lack of client investment, tending to lose focus,

conception of coach as an app” (questionnaire response, June 17, 2020). P6 provided a

representative response in acknowledging disadvantages of e-coaching while indicating

that they did not diminish his overall preference for the modality, stating that

disadvantages included: “Client may not be as comfortable with recording and might not

be as open in conversation; it might be more challenging to have a coaching presence

because of the virtual format. These disadvantages have not influenced my attitude”

(questionnaire response, March 14, 2020).

Overcoming Disadvantages

Participants reported that disadvantages of e-coaching associated with client

reluctance to experiment with a novel modality could be overcome through trial sessions

and reassurance. Disadvantages of e-coaching associated with limitations on

interpersonal bonding could be overcome through practices that reduced distraction and

increased the client’s and coach’s focus on the coaching interaction. These two methods

for overcoming disadvantages of e-coaching are discussed in the following sub-sections.

71
 Overcoming client reluctance through trial sessions and reassurance.

Fourteen out of 19 participants reported encountering clients who were reluctant to use

the e-coaching modality because it was unfamiliar to them. Participants overcame the

disadvantage of e-coaching’s novelty to some clients by discussing their own experiences

of the modality with clients, offering reassurances, and inviting the client to experiment

with the modality in a preliminary trial. P5, for example, would say to reluctant clients,

“‘Let's try this out for our first session, and hopefully you'll be surprised of the ease and

good connection.’ I would ask what is one thing that would help them give this a try”

(questionnaire response, March 15, 2020). P4 would also offer a trial session: “I would

suggest we meet on Zoom and discuss the issues. This would not be coaching. It would

be the equivalent of a 15-minute phone call that shows the client what [e-coaching] feels

like” (questionnaire response, March 21, 2020). P9 stated of offering clients an

opportunity to test the technology before committing to using the modality, “I find that

when they oppose, it's often because they have never done it before, and it feels like a

change. Once they see that I walk them through it and hold their hand, they overcome

that resistance” (questionnaire response, March 11, 2020). P17 guided new clients toward

e-coaching through a combination of facilitating a trial e-coaching session and price

comparison: “I just quote my in-person rate, often twice my e-coaching rate. I also

explore what is important to them about face-to-face and bridge to their values where

possible. Offering a trial run is usually very successful” (questionnaire response, May 27,

2020). P6 would invite clients to try e-coaching and offer advice on how to make it more

comfortable:

72
 I would ask the client to try a session to see if we were able to have an effective e-
session before making the final decision. I would make the client as comfortable
as possible with the camera, even suggesting turning off self-view if it is
distracting during the coaching session. (P6, questionnaire response, March 14,
2020)

Participants would also offer clients reassurance to overcome initial reluctance.

P1 stated: “I would explain the technology platforms used, and [that] although we are not

in person, we can see one another and part of my job as a coach is assessing the entire

situation” (questionnaire response, March 30, 2020). P9 offered reassurances by

describing the e-coaching experience and offering client testimonials:

I would share my experiences of doing face-to-face and e-coaching of how they

aren't really that different except the rapport-building up front. I would also
provide testimonials of my previous or current clients who are using it and assure
them that I would still provide the same level of expertise and attention. (P9,
questionnaire response, March 11, 2020)

P18 reported a similar practice of talking through concerns with new clients and

reassuring them of the high quality of coaching provided through the e-coaching

modality: “I would explain that we can still establish a powerful relationship and well as

trust and safety by using video conference. I would explain that this is how I think based

on my five years of experience” (questionnaire response, May 5, 2020).

Pre-empting coach and client disengagement. Six out of 19 participants

reported that they overcame the pre-empted coach and client disengagement through

practices that compensated for the mediated nature of communication in e-coaching. P10

focused on progressively identifying and removing distractions from the coaching

interaction:

I take time to teach my clients how to secure their space for a remote session.
block off the time; close their door, move to another space for our session to avoid

73
 interruption, headphones; notepad, airplane mode for the phone if via laptop. It
becomes a part of our practice together to be fully present for the sessions. It also
becomes a part of our debriefs after each session to discuss any distractions
during our call. Each session gets progressively better as we address and remove
distracting factors. (P10, questionnaire response, March 8, 2020)

P4 compensated for the restriction of nonverbal cues by mindfully performing

visible cues: “I compensate by using my talking-head space as a place to communicate

nonverbally. I will, at the very least, use hand gestures” (questionnaire response, March

21, 2020). P9 reported making a strong effort during the first sessions with a new client to

establish a rapport: “I use those [initial] sessions to discuss our backgrounds, experience,

their preferences for coaching, and I work harder to make them feel safe and comfortable

with me” (questionnaire response, March 11, 2020). P5 engaged in more active listening

and confirmed interpretations to compensate for the restriction of nonverbal cues: “I ask

more ‘How does that make you feel?’ and more ‘I'm hearing you say . . . is that correct?’

questions to gain a better sense of the meaning behind the words, since I can't always

read nonverbals” (questionnaire response, March 15, 2020).

74
 Chapter 5: Discussion and Conclusion

Introduction

Business e-coaching is a rapidly developing set of practices with advantages and

disadvantages that depend on specific combinations of web-based technologies,

frequency of coach-trainee interactions, the physical distance between the coach and

trainee, and the time delay in coach-trainee communications (Hui, 2015; Kanatouri,

2016). Knowledge of e-coaches’ perceptions of the advantages and disadvantages of e-

coaching practices showed insights for coaches, trainees, and organizational leaders to

calibrate e-coaching practices for optimal organizational outcomes. Therefore, the

purpose of this generic qualitative study was to explore e-coaches’ perceptions of the

advantages, disadvantages, and means of overcoming disadvantages of web-based e-

coaching as an alternative to face-to-face coaching in a business context.

The literature on the topic of web-based e-coaching in a business context was

scant, and further research was needed to explore the advantages, disadvantages, and

ways of overcoming the disadvantages of e-coaching from the perspectives of e-coaches

(Hui, 2015; Kanatouri, 2016; Pascal et al., 2015). Additionally, e-coaching is a

burgeoning area of practice; therefore, it was important for research on this topic to

develop with emerging technological trends (Kanatouri, 2016). The following four

research questions guided this study:

RQ1: How do e-coaches perceive their use of e-coaching as influencing their

practice of and attitudes toward coaching?

75
 RQ2: What are e-coaches’ perceptions of the advantages of e-coaching as an

alternative to face-to-face coaching in a business context?

RQ3: What are e-coaches’ perceptions of the disadvantages of e-coaching as an

alternative to face-to-face coaching in a business context?

RQ4: What are e-coaches’ perceptions of the ways in which the disadvantages of

e-coaching in a business context may be overcome?

This chapter presents a review of the findings for these research questions. The

conclusions based on the findings are presented, along with a discussion of those results

based on the literature. The limitations of the study are presented, and the chapter ends

with suggestions for future researchers.

Summary of Findings

Four major themes and nine minor themes emerged during data analysis to answer

the four research questions associated with this study. This summary of the key findings

is organized by research questions to indicate the alignment between the research

questions and the themes.

Themes Under Research Question 1

The first research question that guided this study was: How do e-coaches perceive

their use of e-coaching as influencing their practice of and attitudes toward coaching?

The major theme used to answer RQ1 was: Influences of e-coaching on coaching

practices and attitudes. All 19 participants expressed a positive attitude toward e-

coaching through their descriptions of its benefits. E-coaching changed all participants’

coaching practices by allowing them to reach more clients and to bond more effectively

76
with existing clients. Although some participants still preferred to conduct one or two

face-to-face meetings with new clients to establish an initial bond, the convenience,

comfort, and greater openness and rapport they experienced in e-coaching caused them to

prefer to transition clients to that modality after the introductory face-to-face meeting.

These findings were associated with the first three sub-themes.

The first sub-theme was: Positive attitudes toward e-coaching as an enhancer of

the convenience and reach of coaching practices. All 19 participants expressed positive

attitudes toward e-coaching because they perceived it as enhancing the comfort,

convenience, and geographic reach of their coaching practices. Nine out of 19

participants expressed that they preferred e-coaching to an in-person modality because of

those benefits, and the participants who preferred face-to-face coaching cited the same

benefits of e-coaching as other participants and reported a positive attitude toward the

modality.

The second sub-theme was: Positive attitudes toward e-coaching as an enhancer

of attention and openness in coaching practices. Fourteen out of 19 participants expressed

positive attitudes toward e-coaching because they perceived it as increasing the openness

and intimacy of their relationships with existing clients. Reasons included the ability and

necessity to maintain an intense focus on what and how the client was communicating.

The third sub-theme was: Preference for meeting new clients in person. Six out of

19 participants indicated a preference for meeting new clients in person once or twice

before transitioning to the e-coaching modality. The reason for this preference was the

77
perception that face-to-face meetings were more conducive to interpersonal bonding and

the establishment of rapport than were remote, mediated communications.

Themes Under Research Question 2

The second research question that guided this study was: What are e-coaches’

perceptions of the advantages of e-coaching as an alternative to face-to-face coaching in a

business context? The major theme used to answer RQ2 was: Advantages of e-coaching

versus in-person coaching. All 19 participants expressed the perception that e-coaching

had significant advantages over the face-to-face modality. The fourth and fifth sub-

themes emerged to indicate the two major advantages.

The fourth sub-theme was: Scheduling flexibility is an advantage for clients. A

major advantage cited by all 19 participants was that e-coaching enhanced their ability to

coach according to their clients’ comfort, convenience, and scheduling needs.

Participants further indicated that considerations of scheduling flexibility were decisive in

many clients’ acceptance of e-coaching as an alternative to the in-person modality.

The fifth sub-theme was: Increased efficiency and reach are advantages for

coaches All participants described e-coaching as requiring fewer expenditures for

resources such as staff, office space, travel, and other supports needed for in-person

coaching. Participants also described e-coaching as expanding the geographic reach of

their coaching practices by allowing them to provide coaching from any location to a

client in any other location.

78
Themes Under Research Question 3

The third research question that guided this study was: What are e-coaches’

perceptions of the disadvantages of e-coaching as an alternative to face-to-face coaching

in a business context? The major theme that emerged to answer RQ3 was: Disadvantages

of e-coaching. All 19 participants reported that e-coaching has some disadvantages. The

disadvantages were discussed as the sixth and seventh sub-themes.

The sixth sub-theme was: Unreliability of technology. The first major

disadvantage (cited by 11 out of 19 participants) was the potential for glitches in the

technology to negatively impact the coaching session. Connectivity issues in particular

had the potential to disrupt or prematurely terminate coaching sessions, and other issues,

such as a lack of user-friendliness in some platforms, could alienate clients from the e-

coaching modality.

The seventh sub-theme was: The potential for diminished coach and client

engagement. The second major disadvantage (cited by 16 out of 19 participants) was that

e-coaching could limit engagement in the coaching session on the part of coaches and

clients by allowing distractions to intrude and by limiting some kinds of interpersonal

engagement and interaction. Participants stated that without the more intense

interpersonal engagement facilitated by the in-person modality, clients and coaches were

more susceptible to becoming distracted by things in their physical environments.

Themes Under Research Question 4

The fourth research question that guided this study was: What are e-coaches’

perceptions of the ways in which disadvantages of e-coaching as an alternative to face-to-

79
face coaching in a business context may be overcome? The major theme that emerged to

answer this research question was: Overcoming disadvantages. Participants reported that

disadvantages of e-coaching associated with client reluctance to experiment with a novel

modality could be overcome through trial sessions and reassurance. Disadvantages of e-

coaching associated with limitations on interpersonal bonding could be overcome through

practices that reduced distraction and increased the client’s and coach’s focus on the

coaching interaction. The eighth and ninth sub-themes addressed these strategies.

The eighth sub-theme was: Overcoming client reluctance through trial sessions

and reassurance. Fourteen out of 19 participants reported encountering clients who were

reluctant to use the e-coaching modality because it was unfamiliar to them. Participants

overcame the disadvantage of e-coaching’s novelty to some clients by discussing their

own experiences of the modality with clients, offering reassurances, and inviting the

client to experiment with the modality in a preliminary trial.

The ninth sub-theme was: Pre-empting coach and client disengagement. Six out of

19 participants reported that they overcame the pre-empted coach and client

disengagement through practices that compensated for the mediated nature of

communication in e-coaching. Such practices included mindfully ensuring that nonverbal

cues were visible to the client, active listening, and making extra efforts to bond and

establish rapport with clients during early sessions. Chapter 5 includes discussion,

interpretation, and implications of these findings.

80
Strategies to Achieve Core Coaching Competencies in an E-Coaching World

Multiple core coaching competencies exist. The competencies describe the

fundamental requirements for coaches to be successful (Clutterbuck et al., 2016). Stober

(2014) discussed the core coaching competencies, noting that the ICF’s design of these

competencies improves understanding what is required of coaches. These competencies

are delineated into several distinct categories. The four categories include: setting the

foundation, co-creating the relationship, communicating effectively, and facilitating

learning and results (Young, 2018). Setting the foundation entails the initial agreement

for the coaching engagement, particularly related to the coaching services that an entity

shall receive from a coach (Gebhardt, 2016). Based on the findings of this study, the

preferred strategy for setting the foundation entails arranging an initial meeting with the

client in a face-to-face format, followed by virtual sessions with the client. The findings

support successful foundation setting through e-coaching. However by conducting face-

to-face meetings, it is possible to expeditiously develop the relationship. Shortly

thereafter, trust can form. Participant 18 noted “I am able to create trust and safety with

the client when I use video chat. I consider that it is possible to establish a deep and

powerful connection with the client similarly on e-coaching and face-to-face coaching”

(questionnaire response, May 2, 2020). An initial face-to-face meeting can give an edge

to the coach when setting the foundation with clients.

There are other categories involves, as well. Co-creating the relationship involves

the establishment of rapport and understanding between the client and the coach. The co-

creation of the relationship relies on the coach and the individual receiving coaching

81
development understanding how lessons shall be taught in the engagement and the

establishment safety in communication (Stober, 2004; Young, 2018). Just as a face-to-

face meeting can support successful foundational development, face-to-face meeting can

also support the co-creation of the relationship. The norms of communication can begin

to form in a face-to-face meeting. The coach achieves this by being consistent in their

communication with the client. The coach’s speaking and mannerisms should remain

consistent when transitioning to the online format from the face-to-face format.

Communicating effectively requires that all forms of communication, including how the

coach listens and their both verbal and non-verbal responses, support a positive

foundation of the relationship between the coach and their client (Stober, 2004). E-

coaching differs from traditional coaching where communication tools shall mediate

communication between entities. Participant 7 stated “I prefer e-coaching. It helps to

support deep listening without the distraction of attempting to interpret facial expressions

and body movements” (questionnaire response, March 13, 2020). This finding is

supportive of e-coaching because the tools place the coach in a position where they can

select the elements of media to receive. For example, if the coach needs to focus on the

words of the client, they can ignore video or non-verbal communication.

There is also facilitating learning and results. The facilitation of learning and

results requires assessing information from the client to develop a comprehensive view of

how well the client is learning (Gebhardt, 2016; Young, 2018). A critical element of

ascertaining the learning of a client is through honest communication. E-coaching can

support honest, open communication. Participant 14 noted that e-coaching was more

82
conducive to openness than in-person sessions because clients were able to participate

from a place where they were completely comfortable: “Because they can tune in from

their places of comfort, my clients are more organic, honest, and relaxed during sessions”

(questionnaire response, June 16, 2020).

Modifications to ICF Core Competencies

The findings support the need to make some modifications to accommodate the

emergence of technology and the use of e-coaching as a technical alternative to the

limitations coaches experience because of distance. One modification is that there should

be additional stress placed on the importance of initial face-to-face communication. E-

coaching benefits greatly from initial face-to-face meetings. Once people begin to know

one another face-to-face, if communication remains consistent through technological

tools, the coaching engagement shall not suffer because of the venue being electronic.

Another modification that must be made is to account for the naturalness of media as a

factor that can have an impact on how the core competencies are experienced by the

client. Participant 18 supported the use of video chat and other technologies to effectively

support communication. Another is to nest computer-mediated communication

capabilities within the core competencies. Participant 17 noted the importance of

proficiency with electronic communication, stating that once they developed efficacy,

their attitude become more positive toward e-coaching. Coaching can continue to fit

within the capabilities currently available to coaches and acknowledge the strengths and

weaknesses by modifying the core competencies to account for technology.

83
How ICF Competencies are Maintained and Developed in E-Coaching

The ICF competencies are maintained and developed through e-coaching by

relying on technical communication tools to accommodate areas of communication that

would otherwise be difficult or not possible because of distance. Initial foundation setting

is maintained and developed by optimizing the media used to communicate early into the

coaching engagement. Doing so may require face-to-face meetings. However, video chat

could be an alternative. The co-creation of the relationship requires continuing trust

development from foundation setting. Communication should be consistent and rich

media such as video chat is suggested. Effective communication involves using

communication that supports effective knowledge transfer. Maintenance and

development could require less-rich media. Asynchronous communication could be a

benefit because of the amount of knowledge and the benefit of reflecting back on

communication. Plain text can facilitate doing so. E-coaching facilitates learning the

results of the coaching engagement by reviewing the progress along a longitudinal

timeline through a digital record kept by e-coaching through technologies.

Conclusions and Discussion

Research Question 1 was as follows: How do e-coaches perceive their use of e-

coaching as influencing their practice of and attitudes toward coaching? The major theme

used to answer RQ1 was the following: influences of e-coaching on coaching practices

and attitudes. Technology has impacted the culture of coaching substantially, especially

within workplace organizations (Hugill et al., 2018). The findings from RQ1 supported

this finding while also showing that some participants did not view e-coaching practices

84
as very different from in-person practices, stating they would still establish rapport with

the clients, just there would not be handshaking and coffee drinking through e-coaching.

The participants cited that they used e-coaching if they had familiarity with such

computer practices before and because they perceived it as enhancing the comfort,

convenience, and geographic reach of their coaching practices. This finding supports the

findings of others, as researchers have found that individuals have become more

knowledgeable and experienced due to their persistent use of various technological

applications (Hugill et al., 2018). As such, employees often feel more comfortable

utilizing virtual tools and the extensive support of coaches to help them advance their

skills (McLaughlin, 2013).

E-coaching has changed workplace organizations. Individuals have become more

knowledgeable and experienced because of their persistent use of various technological

applications (Hugill et al., 2018). Some scholars asserted that modern technologies had

encouraged the automation of coaching (Segers et al., 2011). Modern learners no longer

expect traditional coaching by coaches, as learners are used to coaches substituting by

software and social media-based communication with learners. In this way, face-to-face

coaches must be increasingly inventive to ensure that their respective coaching

techniques remain novel and relevant (Rosha & Lace, 2016). This finding seemed to

contradict the findings of this study, as participants perceived it as enhancing the comfort,

convenience, and geographic reach of their coaching practices.

Participants admitted that e-coaching enhanced practices—a finding that mirrored

other research. Researchers found that e-coaches could swiftly share data, such as audio

85
materials, videos, and other relevant content with trainees (Rosha & Lace, 2016). Some

participants, such as P9, still preferred face-to-face meetings, but only for the first one or

two meetings to establish a better rapport. P9 reported, “I prefer face-to-face for a first-

time client that I don't know . . . After the first one to two sessions, I prefer e-coaching

because it saves time in travel” (questionnaire response, March 11, 2020). This

participant response showed some similarities to other research, as Young (2018) found

that rapport building occurred through the establishment of an environment in which trust

and respect between the coach and client were demonstrated.

Most participants enjoyed using e-coaching over the traditional face-to-face

approach, but a few still preferred the traditional approach as it was what was normalized.

This finding mirrored the framework of the TPB. TPB is one of the most influential

behavior theories utilized to explain how behaviors or attitudes are integrated into

normative and repeated patterns (Ajzen, 1991). As both e-coaching and face-to-face

coaching encourage the use of repeated actions and thoughts to increase employee

productivity and well-being, the TPB was applied to the findings of this study.

Exposure or experience can come from an individual’s own interactions or the

interactions of others of whom they respect, such as parents, siblings, peers, or other

authority figures (Ajzen, 1991). The more normative an action or attitude appears to an

individual, the more likely it is to be accepted and integrated into the value system or

routine of a person. Conversely, if an action or belief is not perceived as normative, then

it will be largely ignored or disregarded and not integrated into regularly exhibited

behaviors (Ajzen, 1991). This TPB concept is shown in the findings from RQ1. For

86
example, all participants reported using the same format for in-person and e-coaching

sessions, meaning that influences of e-coaching on coaching practices did not extend to

session content. In a representative response, P9 stated that e-coaching session formats

were “very much the same as the face-to-face, except I don't offer coffee” (questionnaire

response, March 15, 2020). The participants followed a method that had worked for them

in the past and was, therefore, effectively normalized. This finding aligned with the TPB.

The findings from RQ1 lead to the findings from RQ2, which asked about the advantages

of e-coaching over modern techniques.

Research Question 2 was as follows: What are e-coaches’ perceptions of the

advantages of e-coaching as an alternative to face-to-face coaching in a business context?

The major theme used to answer RQ2 was the following: advantages of e-coaching

versus in-person coaching. All 19 participants cited a significant advantage of e-

coaching: It allowed them the flexibility to meet their clients’ scheduling needs, avoided

distractions from the in-person environment, and offered efficiency and affordability to

coaches and clients. P5 stated that scheduling flexibility allowed clients to make

themselves more comfortable and open than the in-person modality typically allowed:

“Clients are able to find the most comfortable, private, or accessible spaces for the

coaching sessions. I have coached clients who are in their homes, and that often brings

out more vulnerability and focus for the clients.” This comment mirrored other research

findings. For example, Rapp et al. (2015) found that e-coaching was flexible and

convenient, as it could be used at any time and any location depending on user

preferences and schedules.

87
 Participants indicated that e-coaching was more efficient and affordable for them

as coaches than the in-person modality. For example, P10 stated that e-coaching

permitted “decreased overhead of support staff” (questionnaire response, March 8, 2020).

This finding supported Rapp et al.’s (2015) finding that using a new online approach to

coaching implies that professionals in the field have encouraged its use for the benefits.

Rapp et al. (2015) opined that e-coaching could reveal the optimal potential of

individuals for more effective and reliable learning. Virtual coaches gain distinct tools

and applications to manifest greater creativity while interacting with trainees, such as

Facebook, Twitter, and LinkedIn, to initiate effective communication with employees on

different organizational issues and aspects of employee performance globally (Rosha &

Lace, 2016). Rosha and Lace’s (2016) finding parallels the findings in this study. P5

described the expansion of the geographic reach of the practice as a primary advantage of

e-coaching: “E-coaching has given me the ability to work with clients who are not local.

My reach is limitless, and thus helping others is not limited to my geographic or

demographic area” (questionnaire response, March 15, 2020). Participants admitted an

advantage that e-coaching “allows for my client base to be national in scope, as opposed

to in-person, so a greater client pool” (P8, questionnaire response, March 12, 2020).

Research has shown a positive relationship exists between coaches using new

technological trends, particularly e-coaching, to improve employee efficiency throughout

the workplace. Compared to face-to-face instruction provided by traditional coaches, e-

coaching has become a more appealing option to employees (Moen & Allgood, 2009).

This finding mirrored the findings in this study. For example, P7 stated, “I prefer e-

88
coaching. It helps to support deep listening without the distraction of attempting to

interpret facial expressions and body movements” (questionnaire response, March 13,

2020). P7 admitted that the e-learning enhanced the coach’s ability to interact with the

client without distraction, as suggested by research (Moen & Allgood, 2009). Despite

these advantages, the participants still found disadvantages to using e-coaching. These

disadvantages are discussed in the following research question findings.

Research Question 3 was as follows: What are e-coaches’ perceptions of the

disadvantages of e-coaching as an alternative to face-to-face coaching in a business

context? The major theme that emerged to answer RQ3 was the following: disadvantages

of e-coaching. All 19 participants reported that e-coaching has some disadvantages. The

first major disadvantage (cited by eight out of 19 participants) was the potential for

glitches in the technology to negatively impact the coaching session. The second major

disadvantage (cited by seven out of 19 participants) was that e-coaching could limit

engagement in the coaching session on the part of coaches and clients by allowing

distractions to intrude and by limiting some kinds of interpersonal engagement and

interaction.

P3 described unreliable and distracting technologies as disruptive to e-coaching:

“The screen freezes and disrupts the flow of conversation, [and there are] sound

distractions--email and text message alerts continue to pop up through sessions”

(questionnaire response, March 27, 2020). Four participants stated that without the more

intense interpersonal engagement facilitated by the in-person modality, clients and

coaches were more susceptible to becoming distracted by things in their physical

89
environments. Those environmental distractions lowered engagement. These findings

mirrored other research findings. For example, researchers found that e-coaching had

disadvantages, such as decreased trainee engagement, decreased employee motivation,

and overall decreased employee productivity following coaching (Hui, 2015; Kanatouri,

2016).

The degree to which e-coaching modality negatively influences coaching

outcomes depends on the amount of physical distance separating the coach from the

trainee and the frequency of coach-trainee interactions (Hui, 2015; Kanatouri, 2016). P10

described this disadvantage in stating, “I feel there is a greater chance for distraction

when coaching remotely, on all participants’ part. Distinct influencers in either party's

environment can demand attention where an in-person session yields higher

accountability between coach and client” (questionnaire response, March 8, 2020).

The findings from the question can also be viewed through the framework of

TPB. For example, TPB theorists state that if an action or belief is not perceived as

normative, then it will be largely ignored or disregarded and not integrated into regularly

exhibited behaviors (Ajzen, 1991). This occurrence can be found in the participants'

explanations of the disadvantages of e-coaching. Participants cited that clients would

become distracted during e-coaching, just as the TPB indicated that if a person does not

see the action as normative (see Ajzen, 1991), that person may become easily distracted

as he or she will not integrate the action into normal behaviors. In-person coaching is

more normative to most people as it is the traditional way of approaching coaching. A

client may have more focus in an in-person setting for this reason and may not take the e-

90
coaching as seriously, a choice explained by TPB (see Ajzen, 1991). Although

participants cited disadvantages, they made suggestions to change such issues. Based on

the disadvantages cited, participants explained ways to overcome such disadvantages to

e-coaching. Those responses answered RQ4, as discussed in the following subsection.

Research Question 4 was as follows: What are e-coaches’ perceptions of the ways

in which the disadvantages of e-coaching as an alternative to face-to-face coaching in a

business context may be overcome? The major theme that emerged to answer this

research question was the following: overcoming disadvantages. Nine out of 10

participants reported encountering clients who were reluctant to use the e-coaching

modality because it was unfamiliar to them. Participants overcame the disadvantage of e-

coaching’s novelty by discussing their own experiences of the modality with clients,

offering reassurances, and inviting clients to experiment with the modality in a

preliminary trial.

Researchers have associated the development of e-coaching systems with a

thorough consideration of the design complexity (Ochoa & Gutierrez, 2018). Some of the

prevailing operational systems include the capacity to increase social ability, credibility,

context awareness, and learning of user behavior (Ochoa & Gutierrez, 2018). In this way,

the respective technological trend is identified as overly persuasive in nature, considering

the numerous opportunities to address specific goals in coaching planning. For the

participants to normalize e-coaching to their clients, they would include relevant

information to perform specific activities in a convincing and persuasive manner, as

suggested by researchers (Ochoa & Gutierrez, 2018). For example, P5 would say the

91
following to reluctant clients: “‘Let's try this out for our first session, and hopefully,

you'll be surprised at the ease and good connection.’ I would ask what is one thing that

would help them give this a try” (questionnaire response, March 15, 2020).

The participants chose approaches to normalize the concept of e-coaching, a

finding that aligns with the framework of TPB (Ajzen, 1991). However, in this evolving

field of technology-mediated coaching, what has yet to be determined is how these

emerging technologies and the integration in the workplace have influenced attitudes and

future behaviors of coaches. Accordingly, there was a gap in the literature that examined

those innovative methodologies through the framework of TPB (Ajzen, 1991). This gap

was examined with RQ4, as participants expressed ways to overcome such issues.

Participants who attempted to connect and establish rapport with their clients by

normalizing e-coaching used techniques suggested by the TPB framework (see Ajzen,

1991), indicating the framework was applicable to this research setting.

Limitations of the Study

This study still had limitations. Limitations refer to issues that a researcher cannot

avoid due to the basic nature of the study (Fusch & Ness, 2015). The first limitation was

in the design of the study itself: qualitative generic. Qualitative research is subject to

issues with bias and honesty among participants. Participants may not have shared the

full information or might have skewed versions of events based on their own perceptions.

The researcher attempted to avoid these issues as much as possible by explaining that

there were no risks associated with participating in this study. Participants also signed a

92
consent form agreeing to remain fully honest. The researcher tried to make participants

feel as comfortable as possible with the open-ended questions.

The second limitation was the small sample size used for the study. The

researcher recruited a purposeful sample of at least 10 e-coaches who had engaged in e-

coaching in a business context. The sample size of 10 was determined because data

saturation was reached with 10 participants. Data saturation is achieved when additional

data collection and analysis do not produce new ideas or insights (Fusch & Ness, 2015).

When analysis of the questionnaire responses from P9 and P10 resulted in the creation of

no new themes or codes, the researcher determined that data saturation was reached, and

participant recruitment and data collection were concluded.

Suggestions for Future Research

Research suggests that there is a positive relationship between the uses of new

technological trends, particularly e-coaching, to improve employee efficiency throughout

the workplace. Compared to face-to-face instruction provided by traditional coaches, e-

coaching has become a more appealing option to employees (Moen & Allgood, 2009).

These individuals prefer to experiment with diverse forms and methods of learning to

generate more substantial knowledge of different concepts used in their workplace. In

turn, employees tend to be more organized and disciplined in performing their daily

tasks. E-coaching impacts employees positively since they ensure greater control over

their own learning process (Rapp, Gilson, Mathieu, & Ruddy, 2015). Gaining a solid

sense of ownership over learning motivates employees to perform to their full potential.

Based on these findings and the findings in the study, future researchers can conduct a

93
similar study but on employees enrolled in e-coaching to show results from the

perspectives of clients and not coaches. The clients can be employees for a workplace;

therefore, they may have unique knowledge about e-coaching that they can share to

expand future research.

Another example of utilizing novel technology in e-coaching is recognized as the

Talk-and-Tools paradigm, which is developed to automate e-coaching systems, especially

utilizing smartphone platforms (Jan Beun et al., 2017). This model is based on interacting

at two major levels: symbolical and physical. From a symbolical perspective, individuals

can interact with automated coaches through the manipulation of the program. The Talk-

and-Tools system includes a wide range of verbal and nonverbal signs on people’s

smartphones. From a physical perspective, the focus is on the direct manipulation of the

speech, which might result in a higher level of persuasion and understanding for both

sides in the interaction (Jan Beun et al., 2017). Both aspects can be properly integrated

into e-coaching within the smartphone platforms to achieve optimal results. Based on

these results and the results of the study, future researchers may study more specific

applications of e-coaching and compare those applications to show which is most

effective. Future researchers can also compare the types of e-coaching to show whether

automated, virtual e-coaching is taken as seriously as e-coaching conducted by a human.

Based on the limitations of the study, future researchers could conduct a

quantitative study comparing the statistics of e-coaching apps to e-coaches set up through

a workplace. They could gather data on the number of users and the successes of e-

94
coaching. Moreover, future researchers could expand the sample size to obtain a greater

quantity of data.

Conclusion

The field of e-coaching is developing rapidly, with technological innovations

leading to frequent and often discontinuous changes in the quantity and quality of the

tools available to e-coaches (Kanatouri, 2016). Therefore, the advantages, disadvantages,

and means of addressing disadvantages might have changed significantly since Kanatouri

(2016) conducted the most recent exploration of e-coaches’ perspectives in a business

context. Additionally, research on the topic of e-coaching was scant (Hui, 2015;

Kanatouri, 2016; Pascal et al., 2015). Therefore, this researcher contributed insight and

guidance to the study and practice of this increasingly common but under-researched

coaching format.

This study showed insights into the advantages, disadvantages, and means of

overcoming disadvantages of e-coaching for e-coaches to use in a business context and to

business leaders considering whether to utilize an e-coaching format. Scholars can use

the findings to add to the small but growing body of knowledge on an emerging coaching

format that can make coaching more accessible, affordable, and efficient in a business

context. E-coaches can use the findings to adjust e-coaching practices to better suit their

clients’ needs due to the normalization of web-based tools (see Hugill et al., 2018). E-

coaching had the potential to positively influencing the workplace, but more research is

needed on its application and the successes of that application.

95
 Appendix A: Interview Protocol

Online Questionnaire Items for A Comparison Study on E-Coaching and Face-to-Face

Coaching

Page 1 of the questionnaire will include the following text:

“My name is Towanna Burrous, a doctoral researcher at the University of

Pennsylvania and the President of CoachDiversity Institute based in Virginia. I
am conducting a comparison study on e-coaching and face-to-face coaching. The
purpose of this study is to explore coaches’ perceptions of the advantages,
disadvantages, and means of overcoming disadvantages of web-based e-coaching
as an alternative to face-to-face coaching in a business context. By completing
the following questionnaire, you will assist in developing insights into the
advantages, disadvantages, and means of overcoming disadvantages of e-coaching
that will be useful to e-coaches in a business context and to business leaders who
are considering whether to utilize an e-coaching format. Your participation is
greatly appreciated. Please click the button at the bottom of this page reading
“proceed” when you are ready to review the terms of informed consent. If you
have any questions or concerns about any aspect of this study, please contact the
researcher at any time.” The researcher’s email address will then be included as a
link.

Page 2 of the questionnaire will include the text of the informed consent form.

Participants will be asked to read the form and then at the bottom of the page
select the option, “I agree to the terms of informed consent and wish to proceed
with the questionnaire,” or, “I do not wish to proceed.” If participants select “I do
not wish to proceed,” they will be directed to a page with text in which the
researcher thanks them for their time and interest in the study.

Page 3 of the questionnaire will include questions to verify eligibility to participate in the
study.

Each of the following questions will be close-ended, with the possible responses to
each item being “Yes” and “No.”

1. Are you currently a coach who use computer-based technology for coaching
providing e-coaching services in a U.S. business context?

96
 2. Do you have at least one year of experience providing e-coaching in a U.S.
business context?
3. Are you at least 18 years of age?
4. Are you able to read and write fluently in English?

Pages 4 – 15 of the questionnaire will each include one open-ended question, which
participants will answer in their own words in an open-ended response field. In
accordance with the voluntary nature of participation in the study, participants will be
able to proceed to the next question without entering an answer for a question, and
participants will be able to quit at any time. Each of the following open-ended questions
will appear on a separate page, with each page including two buttons at the bottom, one
of which will read “Go back to the previous question” and the other of which will read
“Proceed to the next question”:

1. Please list all media you currently use for e-coaching. Please include media (e.g.
video chat, email, messaging) as well as specific platforms (e.g. Skype, Zoom,
etc.). Additionally, please indicate approximately how long you have been using
each platform.
2. How has the use of electronically mediated coaching changed your coaching
practices?
3. How would you describe your attitude toward e-coaching versus face-to-face
coaching, and what are the reasons for your attitude? Do you prefer the face-to-
face or the e-coaching format, and why?
4. If possible, please describe three or more advantages you perceive e-coaching as
having over face-to-face coaching. Why are these advantages? How have they
improved your own coaching practice?
5. Please describe any disadvantages you perceive e-coaching as having versus face-
to-face coaching. Why are these disadvantages? How have they influenced your
attitude toward e-coaching as an alternative to face-to-face coaching?
6. Of the platforms you have used for e-coaching, which is your favorite, and why?
7. Of the platforms you have used for e-coaching, which is your least favorite, and
why?
8. How do you or would you conduct a typical session of face-to-face coaching?
9. How do you conduct a typical session of e-coaching?
10. In your perception, what are your clients’ reactions to e-coaching as an alternative
to face-to-face coaching? Do they appear to prefer one format over the other and,
if so, why?
11. If you perceive e-coaching as having any disadvantages versus face-to-face
coaching, how do you overcome or compensate for those disadvantages?
12. If an important potential client was about to decline your offer of e-coaching in
favor of face-to-face coaching because of the disadvantages you mentioned in
97
 your answer to question 5, what would you say to persuade the client to choose e-
coaching?

Page 16 of the questionnaire will include the following open-ended item only:

“Please use this field if you wish to add any information or comments you did not
have an opportunity to include in your answers to previous questions.” At the
bottom of this page will be two buttons, one reading “Go back to the previous
question” and the other reading “Finish the questionnaire.”

Page 17 of the questionnaire will include the following text:

“This concludes the questionnaire for A Comparison Study on E-Coaching and

Face-to-Face Coaching. Thank you for your time in providing your insights into
the advantages, disadvantages, and means of overcoming disadvantages of e-
coaching. If you have any questions or concerns about any aspect of this study,
please contact the researcher at any time.”

The researcher’s email address will then be included as a link.

98
 Appendix B: Informed Consent Form

University of Pennsylvania
Research Informed Consent Form

Research Title: A Comparison Study on E-Coaching and Face-to-Face

Coaching

Principal Investigator: Dr. James P. Orlando

Email: jp.orlando@gmail.com

Interviewer: Mrs. Towanna Burrous

Email: towanna@coachdiversity.com

Thank you for your agreement to participate in this research study exploring e-coaches’
perceptions of the advantages, disadvantages, and means of overcoming disadvantages of
web-based e-coaching as an alternative to face-to-face coaching in a business context.
This study is the dissertation research of Towanna Burrous, who is a candidate for a
doctoral degree at the University of Pennsylvania at the Graduate School of Education.
In advance of your participation, we seek your acknowledgement that you have been
informed of and understand the following terms of your consent to participate in this
research questionnaire:

● The questionnaire is designed to take 30-60 minutes to complete, and with your
permission, may be used for data collection purposes only.

● The researcher (Towanna Burrous) will treat all information obtained during the
questionnaire and throughout the study, as confidential.

● You acknowledge that you understand that protecting your privacy and
confidentiality is an important consideration to the study and that every security
precaution is being taken to protect the data collected, including electronic data
encryption and the destruction of the data once the study findings have been
published.

● You understand that your name will be removed, and all other possible personal
identifiers will be anonymized prior to inclusion in the research, and that only the
interviewer (Towanna Burrous), the principal investigator and the University of
Pennsylvania dissertation committee will review the data collected.

● You understand that no one other than the study researcher and her dissertation
committee will receive any information about what is shared during this
questionnaire.

99
 ● You agree to treat as confidential any information gleaned during the
questionnaire that may reveal the identity of any other research participant or
participant’s organization.

● You acknowledge your understanding that the questions will focus on your
personal experiences and perceptions of the advantages, disadvantages, and
means of overcoming disadvantages of web-based e-coaching as an alternative to
face-to-face coaching in a business context.

● You further acknowledge that you may decline to answer any questions, stop
answering any question, or stop the questionnaire at any time for any reason, or
for no reason whatsoever, with impact of any kind. Your participation is greatly
appreciated, and you have complete authority over your level of participation in
this study.

● You confirm that you are participating of your own free will and that no
remuneration was offered or promised in return for your participation or
comments.
● Your participation in this research study is voluntary. If you decide not to
participate, you are free to leave the study at any time. All notes, recordings,
transcripts and memos associated with your questionnaire will be destroyed
within 14 days of your departure from the study.
● All participant data will be retained for a period not to exceed 180 days or six-
months after the successfully completion and approval of the final dissertation.
Participant information includes all notes, recordings, transcripts, consents and
memos associated with the study shall be destroyed with 180 days or six months
after the approval date of the final dissertation.

If you have questions about your participation in this research study or about your rights
as a research subject, make sure to discuss them with the study investigator. You may
also call the Office of Regulatory Affairs at the University of Pennsylvania at 215-898-
2614 to talk about your rights as a research subject.
You will be asked to sign this form to show that
● the research study and the information above have been discussed with you
● you agree to participate in the study

Thank you for your willingness to participate in this study.

__________________________________ ____________

Subject’s Signature Date

100
_________________________________
Subject’s Name [print]

Please return the signed form to Towanna Burrous via email at

towanna@coachdiversity.com. The document may be scanned and emailed prior to the
questionnaire date.

101
 Appendix C: Recruitment Email

Dissertation Recruitment Email Memo

Principal Investigator: Dr. James P. Orlando
Dissertation Research for Towanna Burrous

EMAIL MESSAGE:

My name is Towanna Burrous a doctoral researcher at the University of Pennsylvania

and President of CoachDiversity Institute. I am currently exploring my dissertation
research on the topic of “A Comparison Study on E-Coaching and Face-to-Face
Coaching” and will be eager to engage with you on the following areas;

1. Secure a thorough understanding of your perceptions of the advantages,

disadvantages, and means of overcoming disadvantages of web-based e-
coaching as an alternative to face-to-face coaching in a business context.
2. Schedule an initial informal chat and consequently a follow up 12-question open-
ended questionnaire (with written consent) with yourself.

You have been identified as a valuable contributor to my study to compare e-coaching

and face-to-face coaching and I am writing to request your participation in my research
study, by agreeing to participate in a 12-question open-ended questionnaire. Eligible
participants must be coaches who use computer-based technology for coaching.
Additionally, all participants must currently be a coach providing e-coaching services in a
U.S. business context; have at least one year of experience providing e-coaching in a U.S.
business context; be willing to complete an online questionnaire to answer open-ended
questions about their experiences with e-coaching; must be at least 18 years of age; must
be able to speak and write fluently in English; and must have access to the necessary
hardware and software to complete the online questionnaire. The questionnaire will
consist of several open-ended questions that will explore your professional experiences
with e-coaching. Your participation in this questionnaire is voluntary, and you will not be
compensated. All of your responses are confidential. The data will be anonymized and
will only be viewed by myself, dissertation committee and a professional transcription
service. All of the data collected will be destroyed within 180 days after the study has
been completed.

Thank you for your time and attention to this request. To review and sign the consent
form online, CLICK HERE, and the completed form will be emailed to

102
towanna@coachdiversity.com. If you have any questions, please contact me at 703-675-
2111.

Yours truly,
Towanna Burrous

Dr. James P. Orlando

Principal Investigator
University of Pennsylvania

103
 References

Abravanel, M., & Gavin, J. (2017). Exploring the evolution of coaching through the lens
of innovation. International Journal of Evidence Based Coaching and Mentoring,
15(1), 24. Retrieved from https://radar.brookes.ac.uk/radar/items/b6bb9783-f20a-
44f6-9e07-f9bdf4437eb1/1/

Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human
Decision Processes, 50(2), 179–211. doi:10.1016/0749-5978(91)90020-T

Armitage, C., & Conner, M. (2010). Efficacy of the theory of planned behaviour: A
meta‐analytic review. British Journal of Social Psychology, 40(4).
doi:10.1348/014466601164939

Athanasopoulou, A., & Dopson, S. (2018). A systematic review of executive coaching

outcomes: Is it the journey or the destination that matters the most? The
Leadership Quarterly, 29. doi:10.1016/j.leaqua.2017.11.004

Beun, R. J., Fitrianie, S., Griffioen-Both, F., Spruit, S., Horsch, C., Lancee, J., &
Brinkman, W. P. (2017). Talk and tools: The best of both worlds in mobile user
interfaces for e-coaching. Personal and Ubiquitous Computing, 21(4), 661–674.
doi:10.1007/s00779-017-1021-5

Boyce, L. A., & Hernez-Broome, G. (2010). E-coaching: Consideration of leadership

coaching in a virtual environment. In D. Clutterbuck & Z. Hussain (Eds.), Virtual
coach, virtual mentor (pp. 139–174). Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing.

Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative
Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101. doi:10.1191/1478088706qp063oa

Bucur, M. (2018). Enhancing organizational performance through e-coaching sessions:

Quantitative approach. Conference Proceedings of eLearning and Software for
Education, 1(14), 370–375. doi:10.12753/2066-026X-18-051

Burnett, N. (2018). E-coaching: Theory and practice for a new online approach to
coaching. New York, NY: Taylor and Francis.

Chawla, N., Gabriel, A. S., Dahling, J. J., & Patel, K. (2016). Feedback dynamics are
critical to improving performance management systems. Industrial and
Organizational Psychology, 9(2), 260–266. doi:10.1017/iop.2016.8

Clutterbuck, D., Whitaker, C., & Lucas, M. (2016). Coaching supervision: A practical
guide for supervisees. Philadelphia, PA: Routledge.

Conboy, K., & Kelly, C. (2016). What are the best practices and the most effective
measurement strategies for companies using formalized internal coaches vs.
104
 hiring external coaches? Retrieved from
https://digitalcommons.ilr.cornell.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1130&context
=student

Creswell, J. W. (2012). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five
approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Creswell, J. W. (2013). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods

approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

David, O. A., Şoflău, R., & Matu, S. (2018). Coaching for rational living. New York,
NY: Springer.

Drake, L. M. (2015). Two kinds of presence: A comparative analysis of face-to-face and

technology based mediated communication methods and the executive coaching
experience (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from
https://researchportal.coachfederation.org/Document/Pdf/1739.pdf

Eastman, C. (2018). Researching organizational coaching using a pilot study. Thousand

Oaks, CA: Sage.

Eckstrom, B., & Wirth, S. (2019). The coaching effect: What great leaders do to increase
sales, enhance performance, and sustain growth. Strongsville, OH: Greenleaf
Book Group Press.

Ensminger, D. C., Kallemeyn, L. M., Rempert, T., Wade, J., & Polanin, M. (2015). Case
study of an evaluation coaching model: Exploring the role of the
evaluator. Evaluation and Program Planning, 49, 124-136.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2015.01.002

Ewenstein, B., Hancock, B., & Komm, A. (2016). Ahead of the curve: The future of
performance management. McKinsey Quarterly, 2, 64–73.
https://www.mckinsey.com/quarterly/overview

Feldman, D. C., & Lankau, M. J. (2005). Executive coaching: A review and agenda for
future research. Journal of Management, 31(6), 829–848.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206305279599

Frazee, R. V. (2008). E-coaching in organizations: A study of features, practices, and

determinants of use. University of San Diego.

Fusch, P. I., & Ness, L. R. (2015). Are we there yet? Data saturation in qualitative
research. The Qualitative Report, 20(9), 1408–1416. Retrieved from
https://nsuworks.nova.edu/tqr/

105
Gebhardt, J. A. (2016). Quagmires for clinical psychology and executive coaching?
Ethical considerations and practice challenges. American Psychologist, 71(3),
216. doi: 10.1037/a0039806

Grover, S., & Furnham, A. (2016). Coaching as a developmental intervention in

organisations: A systematic review of its effectiveness and the mechanisms
underlying it. PloS one, 11(7), e0159137. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0159137

Huang, J. T., & Hsieh, H. H. (2015). Supervisors as good coaches: Influences of coaching
on employees’ in-role behaviors and proactive career behaviors. The International
Journal of Human Resource Management, 26(1), 42–58.
doi:10.1080/09585192.2014.940993

Hugill, K., Sullivan, J., & Ezpeleta, M. L. (2018). Team coaching and rounding as a
framework to enhance organizational wellbeing, and team performance. Journal
of Neonatal Nursing, 24(3), 148–153. doi:10.1016/j.jnn.2017.10.004

Hui, R. T. Y. (2015). Coaching in computer-mediated communication at workplace. 2015

IEEE International Conference on Teaching, Assessment, and Learning for
Engineering (TALE) (pp. 215–219).

Hunt, S. T. (2015). The nexus of performance management and technology. HR People &
Strategy, 38(3), 54–58. Retrieved from https://www.hrps.org/pages/default.aspx

Jones, R. J., Woods, S. A., & Guillaume, Y. R. (2016). The effectiveness of workplace
coaching: A meta‐analysis of learning and performance outcomes from coaching.
Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 89(2), 249–277.
doi:10.1111/joop.12119

Kanatouri, S. (2016). Coaching als individuelle Antwort auf gesellschaftliche

Entwicklungen. Wiesbaden, Germany: Springer.

Kołodziejczak, M. (2015). Coaching across organizational culture. Procedia Economics

and Finance, 23, 329–334. doi:10.1016/S2212-5671(15)00491-8.

LaRosa, J. (2018). U.S. personal coaching industry tops $1 billion, and growing. Market
Research. https://marketresearch.com/us-personal-coaching-industry-tops-1-
billion-and-growing

Ladyshewsky, R. K., & Taplin, R. (2018). The interplay between organisational learning
culture, the manager as coach, self-efficacy and workload on employee work
engagement. International Journal of Evidence Based Coaching and Mentoring,
16(2), 3. Retrieved from https://radar.brookes.ac.uk/radar/items/b6bb9783-f20a-
44f6-9e07-f9bdf4437eb1/1/

Lincoln, Y., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
106
Lynden, J., & Avery, R. (2016). Workplace telephone coaching conversations: a unique
institutional practice as revealed through interpretive and empiricist multi-method
approaches. Coaching: An International Journal of Theory, Research and
Practice, 9(1), 5–23. doi:10.1080/17521882.2015.1105835

Maxwell, J. C. (2012). The Law of Empowerment: Lesson 12 from The 21 Irrefutable

Laws of Leadership. HarperCollins Leadership.

McLaughlin, M. (2013). Less is more: The executive coach's experience of working on

the telephone. International Journal of Evidence Based Coaching & Mentoring,
7, 1–3. Retrieved from https://radar.brookes.ac.uk/radar/items/b6bb9783-f20a-
44f6-9e07-f9bdf4437eb1/1/

Moen, F., & Allgood, E. (2009). Coaching and the effect on self-efficacy. Organization
Development Journal, 27(4) 69–82.

Montaño, D. E., & Kasprzyk, D. (2015). Theory of reasoned action, theory of planned
behavior, and the integrated behavioral model. In K. Glanz, B. K. Rimer, & K. V.
Viswanath (Eds.), Health behavior: Theory, research, and practice (pp. 95–124).
San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Moussa, M. (2015). Monitoring employee behavior through the use of technology and
issues of employee privacy in America. Sage Open, 5(2), 2158244015580168.
doi:10.1177/2158244015580168

Nissen, V., & Seifert, H. (2018). Digital transformation in business consulting—status

quo in Germany. In Digital Transformation of the Consulting Industry (pp. 153–
190). New York, NY: Springer.

Nissen, V., Seifert, H., & Ackert, M. N. (2018). A process model for the virtualization of
consulting services. In Digital Transformation of the Consulting Industry (pp.
207–241). New York, NY: Springer.

Ochoa, S. F., & Gutierrez, F. J. (2018). Architecting e-coaching systems: a first step for
dealing with their intrinsic design complexity. Computer, 51(3), 16–23. doi:
10.1109/MC.2018.1731079

Orzanna, R. (2015). Theory of planned behavior. Shared under the Creative Commons
Attribution-Share Alike 4.0 International license. Retrieved from
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Theory_of_planned_behavior.png

Otte, S., Bangerter, A., Britsch, M., & Wüthrich, U. (2014). Attitudes of coaches towards
the use of computer-based technology in coaching. Consulting Psychology
Journal: Practice and Research, 66(1), 38. doi:10.1037/a0035592

107
Paine, N. (2014). Building Leadership Development Programmes: Zero-cost to High-
investment Programmes that Work. Kogan Page Publishing.

Palinkas, L. A., Horwitz, S. M., Green, C. A., Wisdom, J. P., Duan, N., & Hoagwood, K.
(2015). Purposeful sampling for qualitative data collection and analysis in mixed
method implementation research. Administration and Policy in Mental Health and
Mental Health Services Research, 42(5), 533–544. doi:10.1007/s10488-013-0528-
y

Pascal, A., Sass, M., & Gregory, J. B. (2015). I’m only human: The role of technology in
coaching. Consulting Psychology Journal: Practice and Research, 67(2), 100.
doi:10.1037/cpb0000025

Passmore, J. (2006). Coaching psychology: Applying an integrated approach in

education. International Journal of Leadership in Public Services, 2(2), 27–33.
Retrieved from https://www.emerald.com/insight/publication/issn/1747-9886

Passmore, J., Peterson, D., & Freire, T. (2013). Wiley-Blackwell handbook of the
psychology of coaching & mentoring. Oxford, U.K.: Wiley-Blackwell.

Payne, B. K. (2018). White-collar cybercrime: White-collar crime, cybercrime, or both.

Criminology, Criminal Justice, Law & Society, 19, 16.

Percy, W. H., Kostere, K., & Kostere, C. (2015). Generic qualitative research in
psychology. The Qualitative Report, 20, 2. Retrieved from
https://nsuworks.nova.edu/tqr/

Rapp, T., Gilson, L., Mathieu, J., & Ruddy, T. (2015). Leading empowered teams: An
examination of the role of external team leaders and team coaches. The
Leadership Quarterly, 27. doi:10.1016/j.leaqua.2015.08.005.

Ribbers, A., & Waringa, A. (2015). E-Coaching: Theory and practice for a new online
approach to coaching. New York, NY: Routledge.

Rosha, A., & Lace, N. (2016). The scope of coaching in the context of organizational
change. Journal of Open Innovation: Technology, Market, and Complexity, 2(1),
2. doi:10.1186/s40852-016-0028-x

Ross, A. (2018). Professional coaching: Principles and practice. New York, NY:
Springer.

Schuller, D., & Schuller, B. W. (2018). The age of artificial emotional intelligence.
Computer, 51(9), 38–46. doi:10.1109/MC.2018.3620963.

Segers, J., Vloeberghs, D., Henderickx, E., & Inceoglu, I. (2011). Structuring and
understanding the coaching industry: The coaching cube. Academy of
108
 Management Learning & Education, 10(2), 204–
221. https://doi.org/10.5465/AMLE.2011.62798930

Seifert, H., & Nissen, V. (2018). Virtualization of consulting services: State of research
on digital transformation in consulting and future research demand. In Nissen, V.
(ed.), Digital transformation of the consulting industry. New York, NY: Springer.

Shoukry, H., & Cox, E. (2018). Coaching as a social process. Management Learning,
49(4), 413–428.

Silva, P., & Cooray, R. (2014). Validation of a holistic coaching model in fostering
growth in post-war communities through creative therapies. Procedia - Social and
Behavioral Sciences, 159, 789 –794. doi:10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.12.449.

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. doi:
10.1080/17521882.2015.1071418

Stober, D. R. (2004). Coaching eye for the research guy and research eye for the
coaching guy: 20/20 vision for coaching through the scientist-practitioner model.
In I. F. Stein, F. Campone, & L. J. Page (Eds.), Proceedings of the 2nd ICF
coaching research symposium, 13–21. Washington, DC: International Coach
Federation.

Stout-Rostron, S. (2018). Business coaching international: Transforming individuals and

organizations. New York, NY: Routledge.

Thomas, T., Thomas, J., & Firestone, H. (2015). Mentoring, coaching, and counseling:
Toward a common understanding. Military Review, 95(4), 50–57. Retrieved from
https://www.armyupress.army.mil/Military-Review/

Utrilla, P. N. C., Grande, F. A., & Lorenzo, D. (2015). The effects of coaching in
employees and organizational performance: The Spanish case. Intangible Capital,
11(2), 166–189. Retrieved from https://www.intangiblecapital.org/index.php/ic

Woo, H. (2017). Exploratory study examining the joint impacts of mentoring and
managerial coaching on organizational commitment. Sustainability, 9(2), 181.
doi:10.3390/su9020181

Young, K. (2018). Gestalt coaches as awareness agents. New York, NY: Routledge.

109
 ProQuest Number: 28314611

INFORMATION TO ALL USERS

The quality and completeness of this reproduction is dependent on the quality
and completeness of the copy made available to ProQuest.

Distributed by ProQuest LLC ( 2021 ).

Copyright of the Dissertation is held by the Author unless otherwise noted.

This work may be used in accordance with the terms of the Creative Commons license
or other rights statement, as indicated in the copyright statement or in the metadata
associated with this work. Unless otherwise specified in the copyright statement
or the metadata, all rights are reserved by the copyright holder.

This work is protected against unauthorized copying under Title 17,

United States Code and other applicable copyright laws.

Microform Edition where available © ProQuest LLC. No reproduction or digitization

of the Microform Edition is authorized without permission of ProQuest LLC.

ProQuest LLC
789 East Eisenhower Parkway
P.O. Box 1346
Ann Arbor, MI 48106 - 1346 USA