J Bus Psychol (2013) 28:315–330
DOI 10.1007/s10869-013-9286-9
The Impact of Managerial Coaching Behavior on Employee
Work-Related Reactions
Sewon Kim • Toby M. Egan • Woosung Kim •
Jaekyum Kim
Published online: 23 March 2013
Ó Springer Science+Business Media New York 2013
Abstract
Purpose The purpose of this study was to examine the
relationships between perceived managerial coaching
behavior and employee work-related outcomes.
Design/Methodology/Approach Data were collected from
482 employees in a Korean public organization. The col-
lected data were analyzed by structural equation modeling
with a two-step approach.
Findings The hypothesized conceptual model was ade-
quately supported by the sample data. Further investigations
suggested managerial coaching, which had a direct impact
on employee satisfaction with work and role clarity and an
indirect impact on satisfaction with work, career commit-
ment, organization commitment, and job performance.
S. Kim (&)
Business, Management, and Economics, SUNY Empire State,
Two Union Avenue, Saratoga Springs, NY 12866, USA
e-mail: Sewon.Kim@esc.edu
T. M. Egan
Organizational Leadership and Supervision, Purdue University,
IUPUI, 799 W. Michigan Street, ET 324H,
Indianapolis, IN 46202-5160, USA
e-mail: tobyegan@iupui.edu
W. Kim
KEPCO, Tosung-dong 2-ga, Seo-gu,
Busan 612-729, South Korea
e-mail: kimws98@hanmail.net
J. Kim
Samsung Human Resources Development Center, Samsung
Values Research Institute, San 12-21, Gasilin, Pogok-eub,
Cheoin-gu, Yongin, Kyoungi-do 449-811, South Korea
e-mail: jaekyum.kim@samsung.com
Implications Findings provide empirical support to the
hypothesized conceptual model of managerial coaching
outcomes in organizations. Study findings offer evidence
regarding prospective, but unexamined, benefits of
managerial coaching. Such knowledge can be also used by
practitioners for selecting and developing effective man-
agers and leaders and understanding and managing
employee attitudes and behaviors in organizations.
Originality/Value This article is one of the first studies to
provide evidence for the influence of managerial coaching
behavior on employee role cognition, work attitudes, and
performance. Since there is no commonly acknowledged
theory or conceptual model for managerial coaching out-
comes, this finding of the current hypothesized model can
notably contribute to the research on managerial coaching.
Furthermore, to date, no study of managerial coaching in
Asian cultural contexts has been identified.
Keywords Managerial coaching
Management and
leadership
Employee response
Coaching outcome

Organization behavior
Organizational learning and
change
As work life has become more dynamic and ongoing
change has become commonplace, organizations have
emphasized the role of managerial behavior in shaping
employee behavior and attitude. As managers’ behavioral
influence on employee reactions has been more recently
emphasized, managerial coaching has gained increasing
attention as a way to align and influence employees toward
collective organizational success (Ellinger et al. 2010;
Gilley et al. 2010; Hankins and Kleiner 1995; Larsen 1997;
McGill and Slocum 1998). Managerial coaching is defined
as an effective managerial and leadership practice that
123
316
advances employee learning and effectiveness (Ellinger
et al. 2010; Peterson and Hicks 1996). It mainly occurs in
one-to-one conversations and applies active listening and
questioning as well as constructive feedback for improving
employee work and organization relevant issues. Mana-
gerial coaching is often considered a successful way to
enhance employee performance and prepare future man-
agers and leaders for organizations and also an effective
strategy to facilitate organization development and change
in a rapidly changing work environment (McLean et al.
2005; Rothwell et al. 1995).
The earliest usage of the term coach referred to a vehicle
used to move people from one place to another. According
to Evered and Selman (1989), the verb coaching was first
used in sports and the noun coach referenced a trainer or
leader for players and, in general, having a coach in sports
was understood as a means by which to create motivation
and performance improvement. Later, advantages of hav-
ing a coach were also noticed by business managers and
organizations (Evered and Selman 1989). Employees who
received coaching appeared to be more satisfied and
motivated employees who were provided coaching were
perceived to be more effective. Within practice circles,
coaching of employees by managers began to be associated
with high productivity and elevated profits in organiza-
tions. For those organizations that have embraced it,
coaching has become to be a part of a business managers’
responsibility and, in recent organizational literature, has
become recognized as an important performance manage-
ment and training technique.
During the past two decades, managerial coaching has
become increasingly popular in organizations (Park 2007).
As with an increasingly dynamic work environment,
organizations began to search for a new management and
leadership approach to address developmental needs of the
employees and organizations. Organizations and managers
started to recognize managerial coaching as one of the most
desirable behaviors for the learning organization and suc-
cessful management and leadership (Ellinger et al. 2003;
Hargrove 2008). Many consulting firms have provided
organizations with training programs on managerial
coaching and a number of books and magazine articles
have been written in this topic area (Ellinger et al. 2003).
Furthermore, Longenecker and Neubert (2005) found that
employees desire more coaching from their managers and
believe such managerial coaching results in personal
advancement and organizational competitiveness.
Dyadic, developmentally oriented interactions in the
workplace have been examined from several vantage
points in both scholarly and practice focused literature.
Managerial coaching is often differentiated from mentoring
in supervision and organization contexts, in that coaching
occurs in a short-term period while mentoring is a long-
123
J Bus Psychol (2013) 28:315–330
term process for employee or protégé’s development
(Passmore 2007). Both formal and informal mentoring are
commonly less associated with specific work applications,
knowledge, and skills. Although some mentors may exhibit
coaching behaviors, common definitions of mentoring
dimensions (Kram 1985; Ragins and Kram 2007) are
wholly different from managerial coaching. Informal, for-
mal, and supervisory mentoring, are commonly defined
as providing protégés opportunities for upward mobil-
ity, sponsorship, and psychosocial and career support
(Scandura and Schriesheim 1994). Available meta-analytic
research indicates that those receiving mentoring in the
workplace receive better pay, are more confident about
their upward mobility, and have greater career satisfaction
and career commitment than those not receiving mentoring
(Allen et al. 2004). In addition, mentoring is often defined
as a nonsupervisory activity—in fact it is common for
mentoring scholars and practitioners to emphasize the
importance of mentors’ not having supervisory responsi-
bility over their protégés. Different from mentoring, man-
agerial coaching commonly emphasizes proximal, task
relevant improvement through feedback immediacy and is
most often framed as a behavior or set of behaviors rather
than a holistic developmental strategy. While the cumula-
tive effect of managerial coaching may provide a long-term
benefits, unlike mentoring, there are no commonly implied
long-term developmental goals—like those referred to in
much of the mentoring literature.
It must also be noted that these terms are used differ-
ently in some parts of Europe, including the United
Kingdom (Hamlin et al. 2009), but careful review of
the literature and related practices, again, provides differ-
entiation between supportive managerial behaviors and
long-term, most often non-supervisory, developmental
relationships (as outlined above). In the Korean context,
the term managerial coaching translates in a manner similar
to English and as, a workplace practice, is understood
similarly across the U.S. and Korean contexts (Korea
Coaching Center 2012).
Managerial coaching appears to be more popular in the
U.S. and European countries than in other parts of the
world. Evered and Selman (1989) and Kim (2010) argued
that practicing coaching in organizations requires managers
and leaders to take a value shift from the traditional
directive, rational management mode (e.g., correcting,
controlling, and directing) to an alternative human resource
development approach (e.g., participative, empowering,
and self-directed). However, these projected values of
coaching may not be adequately aligned with Confucian
cultural values of many Asian organizations (Rosinski
2008). For instance, in the high power distance-oriented
culture (Hofstede 2001), one of the representative charac-
teristics of the Confucian Asian culture, power and
J Bus Psychol (2013) 28:315–330
decision-making tend to be centered in managers and
leaders rather than distributed to employees and team
members (House et al. 2004). The patriarchal nature of
Confucian Korean organizations may favor directive and
bureaucratic management and leadership styles (House
et al. 2004; Kim 1991). Furthermore, Korean employees
expect a managerial relationship framed by high power
distance (Hofstede 2001). Such expectations include Kor-
ean managerial decision-making practices that involve low
participation and involvement in decision-making—even
when employee input may lead to more informed decision-
making processes (House et al. 2004). Therefore, partici-
pative and team approaches of managerial coaching may
generate uncertainty or unpredictable reactions from
Korean employees. Depending on these employees’ expe-
riences, it may take some time for them to adjust to direct,
up-close supervisory feedback behaviors associated with
coaching. Some may doubt if coaching can actually be put
into practice in high power distance cultures and, if
implemented, if employees would appreciate and respond
to managers exhibiting such behaviors. However, no
identified studies have closely examined this argument.
Despite the popularity of coaching in the U.S. and
European organizations, there exist only a few studies on
managerial coaching (Gilley et al. 2010; Park 2007). Even
fewer empirical studies have examined outcomes of man-
agerial coaching, although some case studies and practi-
tioner reports have been presented considering potential
managerial coaching outcomes (Ellinger et al. 2003; Park
2007; Peterson and Hicks 1996; Zemke 1996). As with the
dearth of extant empirical research on managerial coach-
ing, less than a handful investigating the direct and indirect
associations between managerial coaching and related
employee responses have been studied. In particular, no
studies exploring managerial coaching outcomes in Korea,
or any other Asian contexts, were identified. Hence, much
more investigation is warranted on the area of managerial
coaching outcomes.
Purpose of the Study and Research Question
The purpose of this study was to examine the relationships
between perceived managerial coaching behavior and
potential employee outcomes. The endogenous variables
(or dependent variables) were identified as perceived
employee role clarity, satisfaction with work, career com-
mitment, job performance, and organization commitment
(to avoid repetitiveness, the term of perceived will be
omitted hereafter). In particular, we focused on examining
the direct and indirect relationships between managerial
coaching behavior and employee outcomes in Korean
employees. For the current study, we sought the answer to
317
the following research question: What are the relationships
between and among perceived managerial coaching
behavior and employee self-reported role clarity, satisfac-
tion with work, career commitment, job performance, and
organization commitment?
Potential Outcomes of Managerial Coaching
In this section, we provide the review of literature relevant
to the conceptual model and research hypotheses for the
current study. First of all, we acknowledge that our liter-
ature review did not lead to the identification of as many
scholarly articles as we desired—due to the nature of this
understudied topic area as discussed earlier. There were
more practitioner articles and books than journal articles
and the journal articles available rarely involved system-
atic, human subject-based empirical research. Given that
we are interested in the direct and indirect effects of
managerial coaching behavior on employee work-related
variables, managerial coaching outcomes and theories
supporting such an investigation are emphasized herein.
First, the direct relationships between managerial coaching
and employee outcome variables are addressed. The direct
relationships among employee work-related outcome
variables are subsequently assessed. Then, the indirect
relationships between managerial coaching and employee
outcome variables are examined. This procedure is con-
sistent with Kenny et al.’s (1998) frequently cited recom-
mendations to establish indirect or mediating relationships
in social science research.
Hypothesized Conceptual Model and Structural
Correlations
Organizational researchers and practitioners have identified
several potential benefits of managerial coaching out-
comes. Increased role clarity is often identified as a pri-
mary potential outcome of managerial coaching
(Allenbaugh 1983; Ellinger and Bostrom 1999; Peterson
and Hicks 1996). Amplified satisfaction with work is
another main expected outcome of managerial coaching
(Ellinger et al. 2003; Hargrove 2008; Lok and Crawford
2004). Coaching is also likely to be linked to employee
work-related commitment (e.g., career commitment and
organization commitment) and job performance improve-
ment (Ellinger et al. 2003; Evered and Selman 1989;
Hargrove 2008; London 1983; Meyer and Allen 1997;
Zemke 1996). Although many assumed there would be
potential benefits of managerial coaching outcomes, few
studies have been found to address how managerial
coaching brings about these outcomes in a systematic
123
318
manner. Thus, for this study we explored these potential
advantages of employee outcomes in association with
managerial coaching, and employee work-related variables
within the hypothesized model below, guided by earlier
theories and empirical studies.
Role Clarity
Employee role state is often discussed in terms of role
ambiguity (lack of role clarity) in organizations. Role
ambiguity can be regarded as the ‘‘lack of necessary
information regarding role expectation for a given organi-
zational position’’ (Rizzo et al. 1970, p. 151) and, in this
study, is identified as a state of employee cognition
regarding their role. Peterson and Hicks (1996) claimed
that systematic feedback provided by managerial coaching
could raise employee self-awareness on the job. This
effective feedback can also help employees better com-
prehend their goals and responsibilities in relation to their
organizational roles and further refine paths toward
accomplishing the established goals (Allenbaugh 1983;
House 1996). According to the role theory, role clarity can
also considerably influence employees on their attitude and
behavioral responses. The lack of role clarity increases
employee stress in a dynamic, complex work environment
(Kahn et al. 1964). And, if employees do not clearly
understand expectations from their manager and organi-
zation, related tasks and relationship with their manager in
the organization may be misaligned (Rizzo et al. 1970). In
their empirical studies, Gilboa et al. (2008), Fried et al.
(1998), and Tubre and Collins (2000) reported that role
clarity was significantly and positively correlated with job
performance. Several researchers also found that dissatis-
faction with work could be caused by a high level of role
ambiguity (Brown and Peterson 1993; Jackson and Schuler
1985).
Thus, informed by the research and theoretical per-
spectives outlined above, we proposed the following
hypotheses for this study (also see Fig. 1 depicting these
Fig. 1 Hypothesized
conceptual model of managerial
coaching outcomes
Managerial
Coaching
123
J Bus Psychol (2013) 28:315–330
proposed relationships, along with the others comprising
our hypothesized model):
Hypothesis 1 There will be a significant positive rela-
tionship between perceived managerial coaching behavior
and employee role clarity.
Hypothesis 2 There will be a significant positive rela-
tionship between perceived employee role clarity and sat-
isfaction with work.
Hypothesis 3 There will be a significant positive rela-
tionship between perceived employee role clarity and job
performance.
Satisfaction with Work
Satisfaction with work refers to employee emotional
responses to one’s current work or job (Cammann et al.
1983). Several organizational studies reported that effec-
tive, participative management and leadership behavior
could promote employee satisfaction on the job (Ellinger
et al. 2003; Lok and Crawford 2004). In other words,
managerial coaching, which has attributes of participation,
empowering, and self-directedness as discussed earlier, is
likely to influence employee satisfaction with work.
Although the impact of coaching on work-related satis-
faction is understudied, positive experiences in other types
of dyadic relationships (such as mentoring) have been
found to be positively associated with positive career out-
look and job satisfaction (Ragins and Kram 2007). And,
human relations theorists noted that healthy management–
employee relationships could be described as an endeavor
to increase productivity in workplace by satisfying
employee needs (Vroom 1964). The perspective that sat-
isfaction with work positively influences job performance
has been also reflected in various recent organizational
studies (Judge et al. 2001; Petty et al. 1984). George and
Jones (1997) reported that their meta-analysis indicated a
significant positive association between satisfaction with
work and job performance. Judge et al. (2001) and Riketta
Career
Commitment
Satisfaction
with Work
Job
Performance
Role Clarity
Organization
Commitment
J Bus Psychol (2013) 28:315–330
(2008) found that employee satisfaction on the job influ-
enced their performance levels significantly and positively.
Therefore, based on the aforementioned literature asso-
ciated with satisfaction with work, the following hypoth-
eses were developed for the current study:
Hypothesis 4 There will be a significant positive rela-
tionship between perceived managerial coaching behavior
and employee satisfaction with work.
Hypothesis 5 There will be a significant positive rela-
tionship between perceived employee satisfaction with
work and job performance.
Career Commitment
Career commitment, which is one of the most under-
researched areas in work-related commitment, is to be
explored as another potential outcome of managerial
coaching in this study. Career commitment is defined as the
strength of individual ‘‘motivation to work in a chosen
career role’’ (Hall 1976, p. 59) or individual ‘‘attitude
toward one’s profession or vocation’’ (Blau 1985, p. 278).
One main perspective on career commitment and behavior
highlighted situational characteristics (e.g., management-
employee relationships), while the other perspective
emphasized individual characteristics (e.g., employee per-
sonality) (Den Hartog and Belschak 2007; Goulet and
Singh 2002). Although there exist only a handful of
empirical studies carried out on examining correlates of
career commitment, satisfaction with work has been found
to have a significant positive relationship to career com-
mitment (Goulet and Singh 2002). Similarly, Carless and
Bernath (2007) reported that employee satisfaction with
work influenced career commitment significantly and
positively.
Thus, a related hypothesis was proposed in this study:
Hypothesis 6 There will be a significant positive rela-
tionship between perceived employee satisfaction with
work and career commitment.
Organization Commitment
Organization commitment is another outcome variable to
be explored in the current study. Organization commitment
refers to the psychologic attachment that an individual feels
for the organization (Meyer and Allen 1997). Meyer and
Allen (1997) introduced the importance of differentiating
the types of organization commitment (e.g., affective,
normative, and continuance). Among these, affective
organization commitment, which is related to emotional
attachment to, identification with, and involvement in the
organization, has been found to be the most prevalent and
319
desirable type of employee commitment to the organization
(Allen et al. 2004). Allen and Meyer (1990) reported that
new employees showed higher organization commitment
in a supportive organization, rather than new employees in
a less supportive organization. Meyer and Allen (1997)
found that organization commitment, particularly affective
organization commitment, was predicted by employee
satisfaction on the job. Liou and Nyhan (1994) and Rom-
zek (1989) also found that employees in the public sector
were more likely to be committed to the organization based
on their affective attachment than on the basis of other
types of organization commitment. Other researchers also
reported that satisfaction with work was significantly and
positively correlated with organization commitment (Blau
and Boal 1987; Mathieu and Zajac 1990; Meyer et al.
2002).
Therefore, we proposed a hypothesis associated with
organization commitment in the current study:
Hypothesis 7 There will be a significant positive rela-
tionship between perceived employee satisfaction with
work and organization commitment.
Job Performance
Job performance refers to employee effectiveness on his or
her job and is often understood as the end result of role
achievement in organizations (Porter and Lawler 1968).
Orpen (1985) reported that job performance was affected
by the employee perceptions of organizational support and
work roles, which are likely influenced by managerial
coaching. In a recent study, Kim (2010) found that mana-
gerial coaching had a significant positive indirect rela-
tionship to performance effectiveness, but did not have a
direct relationship to it in the hypothesized model. And, as
stated earlier, several organizational researchers (Judge
et al. 2001; Riketta 2008) reported that employee perfor-
mance was also influenced by their satisfaction levels,
which might be affected by managerial coaching. Overall,
our literature review indicated that there is very little
research conducted in the area of managerial coaching
outcomes.
According to Kenny et al.’s (1998) restatement to the
original causal steps procedure (Baron and Kenny 1986),
two steps are necessary and adequate to establish a medi-
ation or indirect relationship: (1) the independent variable
(or exogenous variable) is significantly related to the
mediator variable and (2) the mediator variable is signifi-
cantly related to the dependent variable (or endogenous
variable) (also see guidelines for improved SEM analysis
by Williams et al. (2009)). In the aforementioned hypoth-
eses, based on extant literature and empirical studies, we
proposed several direct relationships between managerial
123
320
coaching behavior (the independent variable) and
employee role clarity and satisfaction with work outcomes
(the mediator variable) and between employee role clarity
and satisfaction with work outcomes (the mediator vari-
able) and employee commitment and performance out-
comes (the dependent variable). Thus, given the general
notion of the procedure for establishing mediation, we also
conceptualized the impact of managerial coaching to be
indirect, operating through employee role cognition and
satisfaction outcomes. On the basis of our reasoning, we
predicted indirect effects of managerial coaching on
employee satisfaction with work, job performance, career
commitment, and organization commitment in the
hypothesized conceptual model.
Hence, based on the casual steps procedure of mediation
and earlier literature, we proposed hypotheses associated to
the indirect effects of managerial coaching for this study:
Hypothesis 8 There will be a significant positive indirect
relationship between perceived managerial coaching
behavior and employee satisfaction with work.
Hypothesis 9 There will be a significant positive indirect
relationship between perceived managerial coaching
behavior and employee job performance.
Hypothesis 10 There will be a significant positive indi-
rect relationship between perceived managerial coaching
behavior and employee career commitment.
Hypothesis 11 There will be a significant positive indi-
rect relationship between perceived managerial coaching
behavior and employee organization commitment.
In this section, we described key outcome variables of
managerial coaching and accordingly, proposed hypotheses
with rationales. Figure 1 provides the hypothesized direc-
tionality of each association within the hypothesized con-
ceptual model.
Methods
In this section, we provide a brief description of the study
population, the procedures used for the data collection, the
study sample and demographic composition, the measures
employed to collect data, and finally the data analysis
strategy.
Population
The population of this study consisted of 1,315 employees
in a government organization that is recognized as one of
the largest energy providers in South Korea. Although a
123
J Bus Psychol (2013) 28:315–330
few studies have been conducted in private sector organi-
zations (Ellinger et al. 2003; Hagen 2008; Park 2007), there
were almost no studies of managerial coaching outcomes
identified in the government organization context (Kim
2010). Even more, no study of managerial coaching out-
comes was found in the Asian cultural contexts, including
Korean organizations.
Procedure and Sample
An electronic survey was utilized to collect data. Two
rounds of email invitations, with the survey link included,
were sent to 1,315 employees in the organization using
their organization email accounts. Among the population of
1,315 employees, 482 (36.65 %) employees responded to
the survey. Twenty-eight cases (out of 482) were identified
with missing data in the current study sample and those 28
cases were replaced with a mean of the sample data. The
portion of the replaced cases was 5.81 % (28/482) and
indicated that the small amount of missing data was
acceptable (\10 %) (Cohen and Cohen 1983).
Thus, a sample of 482 cases was used for the current
study. This exceeded the sample size (302) suggested by
Krejcie and Morgan (1970) to appropriately represent the
selected population (1,315). The item-respondent ratio
employed for the analyses was 1:15. This also exceeded the
recommended ratio of 1:5 (Bentler and Chou 1987) and
even 1:10 (Jackson 2003).
Among the 482 participants, male respondents
(n = 378, 78.42 %) outnumbered female respondents
(n = 104, 21.58 %). The sample represented a variety of
age groups from less than 26 years to more than 65 years
with the mean (M) 41.24 and standard deviation (SD) 8.84.
More than half of the respondents had an undergraduate or
a higher degree of education (n = 272, 56.43 %). The vast
majority of respondents’ organization tenure was greater
than 5 years (n = 443, 91.91 %).
Measures
Consistent with the conceptual model and structural rela-
tion hypotheses being tested, the survey for the current
study included six measures. They were managerial
coaching behavior—8 items (Ellinger et al. 2003; a = .96;
e.g. ‘‘To help me think through issues, my manager asks
questions, rather than provide solutions’’ and ‘‘My manager
provides me with constructive feedback’’), role ambiguity
(role clarity)—6 items (Rizzo et al. 1970; a = .89; e.g.
‘‘Clear, planned goals and objectives exist for my job’’),
satisfaction with work—3 items (Cammann et al. 1983;
a = .80; e.g. ‘‘In general, I like working at my current
J Bus Psychol (2013) 28:315–330
job’’), career commitment—5 items (Blau, 1989; a = .85;
e.g. ‘‘If I could go into a different profession which paid the
same, I would probably take it’’), job performance—5
items (Carden 2007; Porter and Lawler 1968; a = .95; e.g.
‘‘My actual achievement of work goals compared to my
peers’’), and organization commitment (affective)—6 items
(Meyer and Allen 1997; a = .83; e.g. ‘‘I really feel as if
this organization’s problems are my own’’). The measures
used in the survey totaled 33 items. An estimation of the
readability level for the survey was Flesh-Kincaid Grade
Level 7.1, which indicates a seventh grade reading level
(Kincaid et al. 1975). All of the items used in the study are
also provided in Table 2. Each item was presented as a
seven-point Likert-type scale with one, being ‘‘strongly
disagree’’ to seven, being ‘‘strongly agree.’’
Since Korean is the primary language for the partici-
pants in the current study, all survey items were translated
from English to Korean with a back-translation (Brislin
1980) approach. The first author translated the survey items
from English to Korean and then three other bilingual
managers and professionals conducted back-translation of
Korean survey items to English. Although the validity and
reliability of the six measures have been established in
previous studies, we estimated the construct validity and
reliability once again using the aforementioned sample.
Common Method Bias
Examining employee perceptions to managerial coaching
practice and employee responses to perceived manager
behaviors, our data were based on self-report measures
which may present potential risks associated with common
method bias. Self-report measures are appropriate for pri-
vate events and affective responses, such as stress, satis-
faction, or commitment (Chan 2009; Skinner 1957) and
reasonable to be used for the emerging area of research to
establish that two or more latent variables are related
(Crampton and Wagner 1994; Brannick et al. 2010).
Although self-reports are not necessarily upwardly biased,
especially self-reported performance in Confucian Asian
cultural contexts (Farh et al. 1991), or inferior to other-
reports (Conway and Lance 2010; Lance et al. 2008), we
dealt potential common method bias seriously and explic-
itly throughout the research process. Following recom-
mendations of Podsakoff et al. (2003), Spector (2006), and
Conway and Lance (2010), we applied several techniques
to minimize potential common method bias in the study.
In the design stage, we built our hypothesized structural
regression model by adding complexity, such as mediating
relationships among latent variables guided by earlier litera-
ture and empirical studies. This approach was based on Har-
rison, McLaughlin, and Coalter’s cognitive miser principle
321
(1996) that common method bias may occur more in a simple
model rather than a complex model. Also, the measures we
chose for the study have well-established construct validity or
have long track records, except managerial coaching measure
since coaching is a fairly new and innovative area of research.
Yet, once again we examined the factor structure and internal
consistency of the measures (Conway and Lance 2010; Feldt
and Brennan 1989) to confirm construct validity and reli-
ability with the current study sample.
To attain measurement item improvement (Podsakoff
et al. 2003), we systematically examined the construction of
the measurement items. Flesh-Kincaid readability level was
estimated for all measurement items and two phases of a pilot
test for the measures were conducted. These resulted in
providing supplementary clarifications and examples for
some words used in the items and insured that ambiguous,
unfamiliar, or double-barreled items were not included for
the study measures (Tourangeau et al. 2000). To protect
respondent anonymity and confidentiality and reduce eval-
uation apprehension (Podsakoff et al. 2003), we emphasized
that respondent identification would be protected, there are
no right or wrong answers, and they should answer as hon-
estly as possible during the survey administration process.
Analysis Strategy
The main data analysis in the study included structural
equation modeling (SEM) with a two-step modeling
approach. In particular, SEM was utilized to examine if the
hypothesized conceptual model and structural relationships
at the conceptualization stage were supported by the
empirical data of the study sample (Kline 2005). The SEM
bootstrapping procedures were used to examine mediating
effects in the hypothesized model (Cheung and Lau 2008).
Results
Descriptive statistics, reliability estimates, and correlations
are reported in Table 1. As indicated in Table 1, the six
scales were found to be reliable in the current study sam-
ple. Cronbach’s alpha for all scales exceeded .79 ([.70,
Kline 2005) and meant that at least 79 % of the total var-
iance was systematic and consistent. Correlation analysis
indicated that multicollinearity was not a major concern in
the reported sample since all correlation coefficients were
below .70 (\.70, Tabachnick and Fidell 1996). Variance
inflation factor (VIF) tests also indicated similar results by
having all VIF scores below 2.5 (\4, Kline 2005).
The SEM analysis was conducted to investigate the
hypothesized structural regression model. Two-step mod-
eling (Anderson and Gerbing 1988) was conducted: (1) to
123
322
Table 1 Means, standard deviations, reliabilities, and correlations
Variable M SD
1. Managerial coaching 5.52 1.14
2. Role clarity 6.05 .69
3. Satisfaction with work 5.68 1.09
4. Career commitment 5.41 1.23
5. Job performance 5.56 .96
6. Organization commitment 5.77 .93
Note n = 482. Reliabilities are indicated in parentheses along the diagonal. Correlations with absolute values of .16 or greater are significant at
the p \ .01 level or better
validate the measurement model and then, (2) to determine
the goodness-of-fit of the hypothesized structural model.
Two-step modeling is commonly known as an effective
approach to precisely locate the source of poor model fit
when the overall fit of the hypothesized structural regres-
sion model is poor, since the hypothesized structural
regression model can be misspecified in the measurement
portion, the structural portion, or both (Kline 2005). A
relative Chi square (v2/df) value of two or less (B2), a
comparative fit index (CFI) score greater than .90 ([.90),
an incremental fit index (IFI) score greater than .90 ([.90),
and a root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA)
score of .08 or less (\.08) were used to indicate the
acceptable goodness-of-fit of the hypothesized conceptual
model to the sample data (Bollen 1989; Browne and
Cudeck 1993; Byrne 2001; Hu and Bentler 1998; Ullman
1996).
Before testing the hypothesized structural model, we
conducted the CFA measurement modeling to confirm
model identification by the study sample. The measurement
model had a relative Chi square (v2/df) greater than two
(v2 = 1,313.14; df = 480; p \ .001; v2/df = 2.74).
Although the relative Chi square did not indicate the ade-
quate goodness-of-fit (v2/df \ 2, Ullman 1996) of the
measurement model to the data, these results were not
pervasive in the study since Chi square (v2) relevant fit
indexes are sensitive to the large sample sizes (Byrne
2001). To make a holistic evaluation of the measurement
model fit, three other fit indexes (CFI, IFI, and RMSEA)
were examined. This holistic fit examination indicated that
the measurement model had a good fit; CFI was .93 ([.90);
IFI was .93 ([.90); and RMSEA was .06 (\.08) (Bollen
1989; Browne and Cudeck 1993; Byrne 2001; Hu and
Bentler 1998; Ullman 1996). Therefore, the measurement
model was adequately supported and confirmed by the
empirical data in the study. In addition, we compared the
hypothesized measurement model with two constrained
nested measurement models: (1) a one factor model, in
which all of the hypothesized factors were set to load on a
single underlying factor and (2) a five factor model, in
123
J Bus Psychol (2013) 28:315–330
1 2 3 4 5 6
(.96)
.42 (.89)
.46 .45 (.80)
.47 .42 .58 (.85)
.16 .52 .28 .26 (.95)
.52 .54 .59 .67 .32 (.83)
which two hypothesized factors of career commitment and
organization commitment were set to load on a single
underlying factor. In each comparison, the hypothesized
measurement model fit the data significantly better than
any of these alternatives: (1) one factor model (Dv2 =
5,608.36; Ddf = 15; Dp \ .001; v2 = 6,921.50; df = 495;
p \ .001; v2/df = 13.98; CFI = .48; IFI = .48; RMSEA =
.16) and (2) five factor model (Dv2 = 220.15; Ddf = 5;
Dp \ .001; v2 = 1,533.29; df = 485; p \ .001; v2/df = 3.16;
CFI = .92; IFI = .92; RMSEA = .07). All factor loadings of
the items were .50 or greater which indicated reasonable
convergent validity ([.50, Kline 2005). All items were sig-
nificant at the \.001 level. Table 2 displays the standardized
factor loadings for the indicators used in the hypothesized
measurement model.
Given the acceptable fit of the CFA measurement
model, we conducted estimations of the hypothesized
structural model. The hypothesized structural model was
found to have a relative Chi square (v2/df) greater than two
(v2 = 1,410.96; df = 488; p \ .001; v2/df = 2.89).
Although the relative Chi square exceeded the desired
threshold (v2/df \ 2, Ullman 1996), the other three fit
indexes revealed that the hypothesized model had a good
fit; CFI was .93 ([.90); IFI was .93 ([.90); and RMSEA
was .06 (\.08) (Bollen 1989; Browne and Cudeck 1993;
Byrne 2001; Hu and Bentler 1998; Ullman 1996). There-
fore, the holistic fit evaluation identified the hypothesized
structural model with an adequate model fit.
In addition, to assess the suitability of the hypothesized
structural model, we also tested a set of alternative struc-
tural models. First, one criticism that could be posed given
the nature of the cross-sectional data is that high per-
forming employees receive more attention from their
managers rather than managerial coaching improving per-
formance. However, this alternative explanation is less
likely if the relationship between managerial coaching and
performance is shown to flow through role clarity. To rule
out this alternative interpretation, we examined alternative
model 1, in which added a direct path from job perfor-
mance to managerial coaching behavior while omitting
J Bus Psychol (2013) 28:315–330 323

Table 2 Measurement model

Factor Indicator Loading
indicator loadings
Managerial coaching My manager uses analogies, scenarios, and examples to .88
help me learn
My manager encourages me to broaden my perspectives by .95
helping me to see the big picture
My manager provides me with constructive feedback .93
My manager solicits feedback from me to insure that his/ .87
her interactions are helpful to me
My manger provides me with resources so I can perform .82
my job more effectively
To help me think through issues, my manager asks .73
questions, rather than provide solutions
My manager sets expectations with me and communicates .88
the importance of those expectations to the broader goals
of the organization
To help me see different perspectives, my manager role- .85
plays with me
Role clarity I know exactly what is expected of me .65
I know that I have divided my time properly .73
Explanation is clear of what has to be done .83
I know what my responsibilities are .85
Clear, planned goals and objective exist for my job .81
I feel certain about how much authority I have .74
Satisfaction with work All in all, I am satisfied with my job .80
In general, I do not like my job .68
In general, I like working at my current job .82
Career commitment I like this career too well to give it up .77
If I could go into a different profession which paid the .67
same, I would probably take it
If I could do it all over again, I would not choose to work .71
in this profession
I definitely want a career for myself in this profession .78
This is the ideal profession for a life’s work .80
Job performance My overall performance compared to my peers .91
My ability to get along with other compared to my peer .75
My ability to complete tasks on time compared to my peers .91
My quality of performance (as opposed to quantity of .95
performance) compared to my peers
My actual achievement of work goals compared to my .91
peers
Organization commitment I would be very happy to spend the rest of my career with .64
this organization
I really feel as if this organization’s problems are my own .50
I do not feel like ‘‘part of the family’’ at my organization .72
I do not feel ‘‘emotionally attached’’ to this organization .86
This organization has a great deal of personal meaning for .62
Note n = 482. All loadings me
were significant at the p \ .01 I do not feel a strong sense of belong to my organization .79
level or better

direct paths from managerial coaching behavior to role
clarity to job performance.
Second, another relevant criticism could be that high
committed employees receive more attention from their
managers rather than managerial coaching improving
commitment. To address this, we examined two alternative
models: alternative model 2, in which added a direct path from
career commitment to managerial coaching behavior while
omitting direct paths from managerial coaching behavior to
satisfaction with work to career commitment and alternative

123
324
model 3, in which added a direct path from organization
commitment to managerial coaching behavior—while omit-
ting direct paths from managerial coaching behavior to satis-
faction with work to organization commitment.
Third, another criticism is that some meta-analytic
findings (Brief and Weiss 2002; Gilboa et al. 2008; Landy
1989; Mathieu and Zajac 1990) suggested attitudes predict
attitudes, but not always or strongly performance, and
behavioral proxies such as role clarity predict performance.
Thus, managerial coaching behavior may predict role
clarity and job performance only and attitudinal variables
may be simply correlated to one another. To test these
competing structural relations, we examined alternative
model 4, in which added and changed one-way direct paths
to two-way direct paths between satisfaction with work,
career commitment, and organizational commitment, while
omitting direct paths from managerial coaching to satis-
faction with work, from role clarity to satisfaction with
work, and from satisfaction with work to job performance.
In addition, the final model was determined based on the
following three criteria: the theoretical considerations,
goodness-of-fit, and parsimony of the model (Kline 2005).
Our fit comparisons indicated that none of these alter-
native structural models had a better fit to the data than the
hypothesized structural model: (1) alternative model 1
(v2 = 1,577.17; df = 489; p \ .001; v2/df = 3.23; CFI =
.91; IFI = .91; RMSEA = .07); (2) alternative model 2
(v2 = 1,643.25; df = 489; p \ .001; v2/df = 3.36; CFI =
.91; IFI = .91; RMSEA = .07); (3) alternative model 3
(v2 = 1,659.19; df = 489; p \ .001; v2/df = 3.39; CFI =
.91; IFI = .91; RMSEA = .07); and (4) alternative
model 4 (v2 = 1,593.80; df = 490; p \ .001; v2/df =
3.25; CFI = .91; IFI = .91; RMSEA = .07). Particularly,
on the basis of the sequential Chi square different test, all
of the four alternative structural models resulted in a sig-
nificantly poorer fit than the hypothesized structural model:
(1) alternative model 1 (Dv2 = 166.21; Ddf = 1; Dp \
.001); (2) alternative model 2 (Dv2 = 232.29; Ddf = 1;
Dp \ .001); (3) alternative model 3 (Dv2 = 248.23; Ddf =
1; Dp \ .001); and (4) alternative model 4 (Dv2 = 182.84;
Ddf = 2; Dp \ .001). Therefore, we concluded that the
hypothesized structural model provided a more valid and
superior explanation of the structural relations in the cur-
rent study data over the alternative.
To further investigate the predictability of the exogenous
variable (or independent variable) in the hypothesized
structural model, regression estimates (two-tailed) were
examined (Tabachnick and Fidell 1996). These estimations
were part of the SEM analysis for the overall model, not
from a series of separate simple regression analyses for each
path in the model. A p value of less than .01 (\.01) was used
as the criterion statistic to determine if the degree of pre-
diction was significant. Several of these estimates were
123
J Bus Psychol (2013) 28:315–330
significant even at the \.001 level. Managerial coaching
was found to be a significant predictor of role clarity
(b = .42, p \ .01); Hypothesis 1 was supported. Role
clarity was found to be a significant predictor of satisfaction
with work (b = .41, p \ .01); Hypothesis 2 was supported.
Role clarity was found to be a significant predictor of job
performance (b = .53, p \ .001); Hypothesis 3 was sup-
ported. Next, managerial coaching was found to be a
significant predictor of satisfaction with work (b = .43,
p \ .01); Hypothesis 4 was supported. Satisfaction with
work was not found to be a significant predictor of job
performance. Hence, Hypothesis 5 was not supported.
Satisfaction with work was found to be a significant pre-
dictor of career commitment (b = .80, p \ .001);
Hypothesis 6 was supported. Satisfaction with work
was found to be a significant predictor of organization
commitment (b = .81, p \ .001); Hypothesis 7 was
supported.
Following recent recommendations of Cheung and Lau
(2008), we conducted bootstrapping procedures to assess
the significance of the hypothesized indirect effects of
managerial coaching—these indirect paths were part of the
hypothesized structural model and were also examined
from the SEM analysis for the overall model. In their
simulations, bias-corrected (BC) confidence intervals per-
formed best for testing indirect effects. Based on their
recommendations, we resampled 1,000 times and used the
BC method to create 95 % confidence intervals (Cheung
and Lau 2008). The lower 2.5 % and upper 2.5 % of the
bootstrap distribution were used to produce the 95 %
confidence interval estimates. Bootstrapping confidence
intervals (two-tailed) revealed the significance of the four
indirect effects of managerial coaching on employee out-
comes in the hypothesized model. Managerial coaching
was found to have a significant indirect effect on satis-
faction with work (b = .17 [.12, .23], p \ .001); Hypoth-
esis 8 was supported. Managerial coaching was found to
have a significant indirect effect on job performance
(b = .24 [.16, .30], p \ .01); Hypothesis 9 was supported.
Managerial coaching was found to have a significant
indirect effect on career commitment (b = .49 [.39, .56],
p \ .001); Hypothesis 10 was supported. Managerial
coaching was found to have a significant indirect effect on
organization commitment (b = .46 [.38, .58], p \ .01);
Hypothesis 11 was supported. In addition, Sobel test (Sobel
1982) scores confirmed four significant mediating effects in
the hypothesized model, role clarity on satisfaction with
work (z = 5.18), role clarity on job performance
(z = 5.40), satisfaction with work on career commitment
(z = 6.72), and satisfaction with work on organization
commitment (z = 7.07). The decomposition effects in the
95 % confidence intervals for the hypothesized direct and
indirect relations are presented in Table 3.
J Bus Psychol (2013) 28:315–330 325

Table 3 Decomposition effects in the associated 95 % confidence intervals

Outcome
Role clarity Satisfaction with Career commitment Job performance Organization
work commitment
Predictor Direct Indirect Direct Indirect Direct Indirect Direct Indirect Direct Indirect

1. Managerial H1: .27* H4: .37* H8: .15** H10: .42** H9: .21* H11: .49*
coaching behavior (.20, .34) (.26, .48) (.10, .21) (.32, .53) (.15, .29) (.38, .61)
.42* .43* .17** .49** .24* .46*
(.33, .51) (.33, 52) (.12, 23) (.39, 56) (.16, 30) (38, 58)
2. Role clarity H2: .54* H3: .75**
(.40, .69) (.60, .93)
.41* .53**
(.31, .51) (.43, .64)
3. Satisfaction H6: .82** H5: .02 H7: .95**
with work (.66, 1.03) (-.12, .16) (.76, 1.12)
.80** .02 .81**
(.73, 87) (-.12, .14) (.72, 90)
Note n = 482. Unstandardized regression coefficients are presented in the first line and standardized regression coefficients are shown in the
second line. The lower and upper bounds of the 95 % confidence intervals (shown in parentheses) are based on the findings from a bootstrapping
analysis using the BC method. H hypothesis
*p \ .01, **p \ .001

On the basis of Preacher and Kelly’s (2011) recom-
mendations, Table 3 reports both standardized and
unstandardized regression coefficients with the confidence
intervals for the effect sizes of the hypothesized structural
relations. These measures satisfy three desiderata (Preacher
and Kelly 2011) for good effect size indexes: (1) inter-
pretable scaling, (2) confidence interval available, and (3)
independent of sample size. Standardized regression coef-
ficients with values less than .10 may indicate a small
effect; values around .30 a medium effect; and values
greater than .50 a large effect (Kline 2005), although it
requires caution to interpret the absolute magnitudes of
regression coefficients in SEM. Thus, results of regression
estimates in the study indicated that managerial coaching
had a medium direct effect on satisfaction with work and
role clarity (around .30) which had a large effect on career
commitment, job performance, and organization commit-
ment ([.50). Managerial coaching also had a small to
medium indirect effect on satisfaction with work ([.10), a
medium indirect effect on job performance (around .30),
and a medium to large indirect effect on career and orga-
nization commitment (close to .50) in the hypothesized
model.
Summary, Discussion, and Implications
In this study, we examined the relationships between
managerial coaching and potential employee outcomes.
We were particularly interested in the direct and indirect
effects of managerial coaching behavior on employee role
clarity, work attitudes, and performance. Specifically, we
proposed that managerial coaching behavior is significantly
and positively related to employee role clarity and satis-
faction with work outcome variables. Led by prior empir-
ical studies, we also proposed that role clarity and
satisfaction with work are significantly and positively
related to satisfaction, commitment, and performance out-
come variables. After establishing these two necessary
direct relationships for mediation (Kenny et al. 1998), we
proposed hypotheses associated to the indirect effects of
managerial coaching behavior in the hypothesized con-
ceptual model. Informed by Hofstede (2001) and other
previous studies (House et al. 2004; Rosinski 2008),
exploring the potential effect of the cultural context (e.g.
South Korea) was another important interest of the current
study.
Our study results demonstrated that the hypothesized
conceptual model and structural relationships were sup-
ported by the empirical data of the current study sample.
The data matched the hypothesized conceptual model of
managerial coaching outcomes explaining how managerial
coaching influences the proposed employee role clarity,
work attitudes, and performance. First of all, since there is
no commonly acknowledged theory or conceptual model
for managerial coaching outcomes, this finding of the
current hypothesized model can notably contribute to
research on managerial coaching. In specific, full empirical

123
326
support was found for Hypotheses 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10,
and 11 in the current study. These findings are consistent
with our anticipated outcomes and to related earlier studies.
Our results revealed that managerial coaching behavior
was a significant predictor for all outcome variables iden-
tified in the hypothesized conceptual model. In line with
our expectations, managerial coaching behavior directly
influenced employee role clarity and satisfaction with
work. We also found that role clarity and satisfaction with
work were significantly and positively associated to satis-
faction, commitment, and performance in the reported
sample data. Although several relationships among these
work-related variables have been tested in earlier studies,
we were able to provide with this study sample further
support for traditional notions on these relations. While the
results of these hypotheses are important and add to the
literature, the key contribution of this study comes from the
investigation of the relationships of managerial coaching
behavior to these potential outcome variables in the
hypothesized conceptual model. Our results further sug-
gested that managerial coaching behavior indirectly
influenced employee satisfaction, career commitment, job
performance, and organization commitment in the current
study. Employees who received coaching from their man-
agers and leaders became clearer in role understanding and
more satisfied with work and, in turn, better committed to
their career and organization and outperformed others who
did not have coaching in our study.
In addition, although culture-based concerns regarding
coaching utility and receptivity in the Confucian Asian
culture were warranted (Rosinski 2008), these study find-
ings suggested that Korean employee perceptions of man-
agerial coaching behavior influenced their work and
organization-related responses. Despite the high power
distance-oriented Korean managerial context (House et al.
2004), coaching behavior appeared to be practiced by
managers and leaders. Also, it was apparent that manage-
rial coaching was an enhancement of positive employee
outcomes among these Korean employee respondents.
Contrary to the majority of the earlier literature, or antic-
ipated results, we found no significant support for Hypothesis
5 in the current study. In several prior studies, it had been
reported that satisfaction with work had a significant positive
relationship to job performance, although the reported rela-
tionship was weak. However, in this study employee satis-
faction was not noticeably associated to job performance. Our
findings may indicate that satisfied employees do not always
lend productivity and higher performance in their organiza-
tion. Pressure for making quality products or services, inter-
nal organizational politics, or employee commitment to work
outcomes might diminish satisfaction with work but at the
same time increase job performance. Thus, this may moderate
the relationship between satisfaction and productivity
123
J Bus Psychol (2013) 28:315–330
(Triandis 1959). Also, given that there were no available
studies on coaching outcomes in the Korean context, cultural
aspects regarding employee work attitude and performance
and the governmental organization context may have also
influenced these research findings.
It is commonly held that employees in the U.S. context
often reflect the common U.S. norms regarding individual-
ism (Hofstede 2001). In general, employees with individu-
alistic orientations (versus collectivistic orientations)—
defined as the extent of relationship orientation to the indi-
vidual, as opposed to the collectivity, in a given society—act
according to their own discretion and inclinations (Hofstede
2001; House et al. 2004) so that their performance behavior
tends to vary depending on individual motivations and
interests within the organization (Thomas and Pekerti 2003).
However, in a collectivism-oriented culture, such as South
Korea, organization members are expected to be undiffer-
entiating regarding individual displays of performance
behavior, even though they may not be equally motivated or
satisfied with their individual work situations (Ng et al.
2009; Snyder and Ickes 1985). Psychologic needs of indi-
viduals may be easily downplayed for collectivistic benefits
and purpose of the bigger entity, the organization, because
people in a collectivism-oriented culture put the good of the
organization and group ahead of individual interests (Hof-
stede 2001). In their meta-analytic study, Ng et al. (2009)
reported that the satisfaction and performance relationship
was likely to be weakened among employees in the collec-
tivism-oriented culture. In addition, this finding might be
because of the context of government work and organization
employed for the current study (Perry and Rainey 1988).
Hierarchical administrations are often not able to supply
employees with an adequate amount of flexibility and sup-
port to improve their job performance (Posner and Schmidt
1996). In the meanwhile, government employees tend to be
more security oriented so that they may be very satisfied
with their degree of job security (Khojasteh 1993). Thus,
these work and organization contexts may alter the satis-
faction and performance relationship.
These study findings have several implications for
organizational researchers and practitioners. First, our study
findings offer empirical evidence to the prospective but
unexamined benefits of managerial coaching. Although
there were practitioner reports and opinion papers that
implied potential outcomes of managerial coaching, few
empirical studies examined these arguments more closely.
The hypothesized model of managerial coaching outcomes
in this study was sufficiently supported by the empirical
data of the current study sample. Therefore, this study offers
comprehensive empirical support to the potential advanta-
ges of utilizing managerial coaching in organizations.
Also, the current study offers a clearer picture of the
impact of and potential for managerial coaching practices
J Bus Psychol (2013) 28:315–330
in organizations. The hypothesized model of managerial
coaching outcomes in the study illustrated how managerial
coaching influences employee work and organization-
related outcome variables, including role clarity, satisfac-
tion with work, career commitment, job performance, and
organization commitment. These study findings may not
only assist managers and leaders to understand how their
managerial action affects employee role cognition, attitude,
and behavior but also identify and focus on specific
coaching behaviors to maximize their management and
leadership effectiveness in organizations.
Lastly, findings from the current study provide ratio-
nales for emphasis of managerial coaching in organizations
as an effective management and leadership behavior. Some
organizations may doubt the efficacy of managerial
coaching (Park 2007), especially in the Confucian Asian
(Korean) culture. However, the empirical impact of man-
agerial coaching from this study can further facilitate
organizations to utilize managerial coaching as an organi-
zation strategy for improving employee satisfaction, role
clarity, commitment, performance, and potentially turnover
conditions in their organization.
Limitations and Suggestions for Future Research
While there are important findings and implications in the
current study, there also exist limitations. First, the self-
selected participant is a limitation of the current study. As
study participation was voluntary, bias associated with this
sample selection method (Walsh et al. 1992) may be
present. If motivation to respond to this survey was
involved with an issue that the participants cared about,
they might give information that only supports their beliefs.
Next, cross-sectional self-report data are another limitation.
We adopted several techniques to rule out or minimize
potential common method bias (Brannick et al. 2010;
Conway and Lance 2010; Podsakoff et al. 2003). However,
although common method bias did not appear to perva-
sively affect our study results, we are still cautious to state
that this study is completely free from any potential com-
mon method effect. Future studies should employ multiple
sources to measure managerial coaching practice and
employee responses to advance coaching research at its
early stages. And, nonresponse bias may occur in this
statistical survey, if employees who responded to the sur-
vey differ from employees who did not respond. Since
nonreponse bias presents vulnerability to accurate reflec-
tion of the population parameter, it may weaken arguments
and conclusions of the study based on findings (Armstrong
and Overton 1977; Rogelberg and Stanton 2007). Last,
common to most published cross-sectional studies in psy-
chology and management, the hypothesized conceptual
327
model for the current study might be under-specified or not
completely exhaustive regarding a holistic dynamic among
managerial coaching and employee responses. Other
potential antecedents, relations, and outcomes of manage-
rial coaching need to be explored in future studies.
Future research is required to extend the current studies
on managerial coaching. This study was one of the first
attempts to test the hypothesized model of managerial
coaching outcomes in the comprehensive manner.
Although the hypothesized model was adequately sup-
ported by the empirical data of the current study sample,
using additional organizations may confirm or extend the
efficacy of this managerial coaching model. In particular,
another organization type, such as profit or non-for-profit
organization, can be employed to test if the model operates
the same across organization types in future research.
Other outcomes of managerial coaching can be examined
in future studies. Satisfaction with manager is a potential
outcome of managerial coaching (Kim 2010) and turnover
intention and actual turnover is another likely outcome
(Park 2007). Organization citizenship behavior also appears
to be a potential outcome of managerial coaching, since
employee organization citizenship behavior is closely
related with effective management and leadership behavior
(Eisenberger et al. 2002; Northouse 2001).
Lastly, it is recommended that researchers conduct
future studies in a cross-cultural context as well as addi-
tional national context. Managerial coaching practice
seems to be more popular in the U.S. and European orga-
nizations—although the current study, as one of the first
empirical studies on managerial coaching outcome in
international contexts, was conducted in an Asian organi-
zation. Since managerial coaching is based on collabora-
tive, self-directed, and empowering values rather than
patriarchal, controlling, and directive (Evered and Selman
1989), as we addressed earlier, comparative studies of
managerial coaching may find interesting results and
implications from a dynamic of the diverse cultural values
in different national contexts.
At the most pragmatic level, this study lends support for
the notion that managerial coaching makes an important
contribution to employee role cognition, attitude, and per-
formance outcomes. As coaching remains understudied,
particularly in relation to the emphasis common to organi-
zational practice (Ellinger et al. 2003; Gilley et al. 2010),
these study findings provide some additional support for
further study of managerial coaching. Our findings also
indicated the potential that managers vary in terms of their
effective use of coaching behavior and that managers per-
ceived to be coaching effectively yield desired employee
results. Despite some articulated doubts regarding the
emphasis of coaching in management development (Zemke
1996), these empirical findings suggest that elaboration
123
328
regarding specific utilization of managerial coaching
behavior and development approaches for managers
regarding effective managerial coaching behavior, particu-
larly in the Korean organizational context examined, is
warranted—as are future studies of coaching behavior in a
variety of national and organizational contexts.
References
Allen, N. J., & Meyer, J. P. (1990). Organizational socialization
tactics: A longitudinal analysis of links to newcomers’ commit-
ment and role orientation. Academy of Management Journal,
33(4), 847–858.
Allen, T. D., Eby, L. T., Poteet, M. L., Lentz, E., & Lima, L. (2004).
Career benefits associated with mentoring for protégés: A meta-
analytic review. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89(1), 127–136.
Allenbaugh, G. (1983). Coaching: A management tool for a more
effective work performance. Management Review, 72(5), 21–26.
Anderson, J., & Gerbing, D. (1988). Structural equation modeling in
practice: A review and recommended two-step approach.
Psychological Bulletin, 103(3), 411–423.
Armstrong, J. S., & Overton, T. S. (1977). Estimating non-response
bias in mail surveys. Journal of Marketing Research, 14(8),
396–402.
Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. (1986). The moderator–mediator
variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual,
strategic and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality
and Social Psychology, 51(6), 1173–1182.
Bentler, P. M., & Chou, C. (1987). Practical issues in structural
modeling. Sociological Methods & Research, 16(1), 78–117.
Blau, G. (1985). The measurement and prediction of career commit-
ment. Journal of Occupational Psychology, 58(4), 277–288.
Blau, G. (1989). Testing the generalizability of a career commitment
measure and its impact on employee turnover. Journal of
Vocational Behavior, 35(1), 88–103.
Blau, G., & Boal, K. B. (1987). Conceptualizing how job involvement
and organizational commitment affect turnover and absenteeism.
Academy of Management Review, 12(2), 288–300.
Bollen, K. A. (1989). Structural equations with latent variables. New
York: John Wiley & Sons.
Brannick, M. T., Chan, D., Conway, J. M., Lance, C. E., & Spector,
D. (2010). What is method variance and how can we cope with
it? A panel discussion. Organizational Research Methods, 13(3),
407–420.
Brief, A. P., & Weiss, H. M. (2002). Organizational behavior: Affect
in the workplace. Annual Review of Psychology, 53, 279–307.
Brislin, R. (1980). Translation and content analysis of oral and written
material. In H. C. Triandis & J. W. Berry (Eds.), Handbook of
cross-culture psychology (Vol. 2, pp. 389–444). Boston: Allyn &
Bacon.
Brown, S. P., & Peterson, R. A. (1993). Antecedents and conse-
quences of salesperson job satisfaction: Meta-analysis and
assessment of causal effects. Journal of Marketing Research,
30(1), 63–77.
Browne, M. W., & Cudeck, R. (1993). Alternative ways of assessing
model fit. In K. A. Bollen & J. S. Long (Eds.), Testing structural
equation models (pp. 136–162). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
Byrne, B. M. (2001). Structural equation modeling with AMOS: Basic
concepts, applications, and programming. Mahwah, NJ: Law-
rence Erlbaum Associates.
Cammann, C., Fichman, M., Jenkins, G. D., & Klesh, J. R. (1983).
Assessing the attitudes and perceptions of organizational
123
J Bus Psychol (2013) 28:315–330
members. In S. E. Seashore, E. E. Lawler III, P. H. Mirvis, &
C. Cammann (Eds.), Assessing organizational change: A guide
to methods, measures, and practices. New York: Wiley.
Carden, L. L. (2007). Pathways to success for moderately defined
careers: A study of relationships among prestige/autonomy, job
satisfaction, career commitment, career path, training and
learning, and performance as perceived by project managers.
Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Texas A&M University,
College Station.
Carless, S. A., & Bernath, L. (2007). Antecedents of intent to change
careers among psychologists. Journal of Career Development,
33(3), 183–200.
Chan, D. (2009). So why ask me? Are self-report data really that bad?
In C. E. Lance & R. J. Vandenberg (Eds.), Statistical and
methodological myths and urban legends: Doctrine, verity and
fable in the organizational and social sciences (pp. 311–338).
New York: Routledge.
Cheung, G. W., & Lau, R. S. (2008). Testing mediation and
suppression effects of latent variables: Bootstrapping with
structural equation models. Organizational Research Methods,
11(2), 296–325.
Cohen, J., & Cohen, P. (1983). Applied multiple regression/correla-
tion analysis for the behavioral sciences. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Conway, J. M., & Lance, C. E. (2010). What reviewers should expect
from authors regarding common method bias in organizational
research. Journal of Business and Psychology, 25(3), 325–334.
Crampton, S. M., & Wagner, J. A., I. I. I. (1994). Percept-percept
inflation in microorganizational research: An investigation of
prevalence and effect. Journal of Applied Psychology, 79(1),
67–76.
Den Hartog, D., & Belschak, F. (2007). Personal initiative, commit-
ment and affect at work. Journal of Occupational and Organi-
zational Psychology, 80(4), 601–622.
Eisenberger, R., Stinglhamber, F., Vandenberghe, C., Sucharski, I., &
Rhoades, L. (2002). Perceived supervisor support: Contributions
to perceived organisational support and employee retention.
Journal of Applied Psychology, 87(3), 565–573.
Ellinger, A. D., & Bostrom, R. P. (1999). Managerial coaching
behaviors in learning organizations. Journal of Management
Development, 18(9), 752–771.
Ellinger, A. D., Ellinger, A. E., & Keller, S. B. (2003). Supervisory
coaching behavior, employee satisfaction, and warehouse employee
performance: A dyadic perspective in the distribution industry.
Human Resource Development Quarterly, 14(4), 435–458.
Ellinger, A. D., Ellinger, A. E., Hamlin, R. G., & Beattie, R. S.
(2010). Achieving improved performance through managerial
coaching. In R. Watkins & D. Leigh (Eds.), Handbook for the
selection and implementation of human performance interven-
tions (pp. 275–298). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Evered, R. D., & Selman, J. C. (1989). Coaching and the art of
management. Organizational Dynamics, 18(4), 16–32.
Farh, J., Dobbins, G., & Cheng, B. (1991). Cultural relativity in
action: A comparison of self-ratings made by Chinese and U.S.
workers. Personnel Psychology, 44(1), 129–147.
Feldt, L. S., & Brennan, R. L. (1989). Reliability. In R. L. Linn (Ed.),
Educational measurement (3rd ed., pp. 105–146). Washington,
DC: American Council on Education and National Council on
Measurement in Education.
Fried, Y., Ben-David, H. A., Tiegs, R. B., Avital, N., & Yeverech-
yahu, U. (1998). The interactive effect of role conflict and role
ambiguity on job performance. Journal of Occupational and
Organizational Psychology, 71(1), 19–27.
George, J. M., & Jones, G. R. (1997). Organizational spontaneity in
context. Human Performance, 10(2), 153–170.
Gilboa, S., Shirom, A., Fried, Y., & Cooper, C. L. (2008). A meta-
analysis of work demand stressors and job performance:
J Bus Psychol (2013) 28:315–330
Examining main and moderating effects. Personnel Psychology,
61(2), 227–271.
Gilley, A., Gilley, J., & Kouider, E. (2010). Characteristics of
managerial coaching. Performance Improvement Quarterly,
23(1), 53–70.
Goulet, L. R., & Singh, P. (2002). Career commitment: A reexam-
ination and an extension. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 61(1),
73–91.
Hagen, M. S. (2008). The relationship between perceived managerial
coaching and six sigma outcomes. Unpublished doctoral disser-
tation, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis.
Hall, D. T. (1976). Careers in organizations. Pacific Palisades, CA:
Goodyear.
Hamlin, R. G., Ellinger, A. D., & Beattie, R. S. (2009). Toward a
profession of coaching? A definitional examination of ‘coach-
ing’, organization development’ and ‘human resource develop-
ment’. International Journal of Evidence-Based Coaching and
Mentoring, 7(1), 13–38.
Hankins, C., & Kleiner, B. H. (1995). New developments in
supervisor training. Industrial and Commercial Training, 27(1),
26–32.
Hargrove, R. (2008). Masterful coaching. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Harrison, D. A., McLaughlin, M. E., & Coalter, T. M. (1996).
Context, cognition, and common method variance: Psychometric
and verbal protocol evidence. Organizational Behavior and
Human Decision Processes, 68(3), 246–261.
Hofstede, G. (2001). Culture’s consequences: Comparing values,
behaviors, institutions, and organizations across nations (2nd
ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
House, R. J. (1996). Path-goal theory of leadership: Lessons, legacy,
and a reformulated theory. Leadership Quarterly, 7(3), 323–352.
House, R. J., Hanges, P. J., Javidan, M., Dorfman, P. W., Gupta, V., &
Associates (Eds.). (2004). Culture, leadership, and organiza-
tions: The GLOBE study of 62 societies. Thousand Oaks, CA:
Sage.
Hu, L., & Bentler, P. (1998). Fit indices in covariance structure
modeling: Sensitivity to under parameterized model misspecifi-
cation. Psychological Methods, 3(4), 424–453.
Jackson, D. L. (2003). Revisiting sample size and number of
parameter estimates: Some support for the N: q hypothesis.
Structural Equation Modeling, 10(1), 128–141.
Jackson, S. E., & Schuler, R. S. (1985). A meta-analysis and
conceptual critique of research on role ambiguity and role
conflict in work settings. Organizational Behavior and Human
Decision Processes, 36(1), 16–78.
Judge, T., Thoresen, C., Bono, J., & Patton, G. (2001). The job
satisfaction-job performance relationship: A qualitative and
quantitative review. Psychological Bulletin, 127(3), 376–407.
Kahn, R., Wolfe, D., Quinn, R., Snoek, J., & Rosenthal, R. (1964).
Organizational stress: Studies in role conflict and ambiguity.
New York: Wiley.
Kenny, D. A., Kashy, D. A., & Bolger, N. (1998). Data analysis in
social psychology. In D. Gilbert, S. Fiske, & G. Lindzey (Eds.),
The handbook of social psychology (Vol. 1, pp. 233–265).
Boston: McGraw-Hill.
Khojasteh, M. (1993). Motivating the private vs. public sector
managers. Public Personnel Management, 22(3), 391–401.
Kim, M. K. (1991). The administrative culture of Korea: A
comparison with China and Japan. In G. E. Caiden & B.
W. Kim (Eds.), A dragon’s progress: Development administra-
tion in Korea (pp. 26–39). West Hartford, CT: Kumarian.
Kim, S. (2010). Managerial coaching behavior and employee
outcomes: A structural equation modeling analysis. Unpublished
doctoral dissertation, Texas A&M University, College Station.
Kincaid, J. P., Fishburne, R. P., Rogers, R. L., & Chissom, B. S.
(1975). Derivation of new readability formulas (automated
329
readability index, Fog count and Flesch reading ease formula)
for navy enlisted personnel (branch report 8–75). Millington,
TN: Naval Technical Training, U. S. Naval Air Station.
Kline, R. B. (2005). Principles and practice of structural equation
modeling. New York: Guilford Press.
Korea Coaching Center. (2012). Retrieved March 12, 2012, from
http://www.lifecoachcourses.info.
Kram, K. E. (1985). Mentoring at work: Developmental relationships
in organizational life. Glenview, IL: Scott, Foresman.
Krejcie, R. V., & Morgan, D. W. (1970). Determining sample size for
research activities. Educational and Psychological Measure-
ment, 30(3), 607–610.
Lance, C. E., Hoffman, B. J., Baranik, L. E., & Gentry, W. A. (2008).
Rater source factors represent important subcomponents of the
criterion construct space, not rater bias. Human Resource
Management Review, 18(4), 223–232.
Landy, F. J. (1989). Psychology of work behavior. Pacific Grove, CA:
Brooks/Cole.
Larsen, H. H. (1997). Do high-flyer programmes facilitate organi-
zational learning? Journal of Managerial Psychology, 2(1),
48–59.
Liou, K., & Nyhan, R. C. (1994). Dimensions of organizational
commitment in the public sector: An empirical assessment.
Public Administration Quarterly, 18, 99–118.
Lok, P., & Crawford, J. (2004). The effect of organizational culture
and leadership style on job satisfaction and organizational
commitment: A cross-national comparison. Journal of Manage-
ment Development, 23(4), 321–338.
London, M. (1983). Toward a theory of career motivation. Academy
of Management Review, 8(4), 620–630.
Longenecker, C. O., & Neubert, M. J. (2005). The practice of
effective managerial coaches. Business Horizons, 48(6),
493–500.
Mathieu, J. E., & Zajac, D. M. (1990). A review and meta-analysis of
the antecedents, correlates, and consequences of organizational
commitment. Psychological Bulletin, 108(2), 171–194.
McGill, M. E., & Slocum, J. W., Jr. (1998). A little leadership please?
Organizational Dynamics, 26(3), 39–49.
McLean, G., Yang, B., Kuo, M., Tolbert, A., & Larkin, C. (2005).
Developing and initial validation of an instrument measuring
managerial coaching skill. Human Resource Development
Quarterly, 16(2), 157–178.
Meyer, J. P., & Allen, N. J. (1997). Commitment in the workplace:
Theory, research, and application. Thousand Oak, CA: Sage.
Meyer, J. P., Stanley, D., Herscovitch, L., & Topolnytsky, L. (2002).
Affective, continuance, and normative commitment to the
organization: A meta-analysis of antecedents, correlates, and
consequences. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 61(1), 20–52.
Ng, T. W. H., Sorensen, K. L., & Yim, F. H. K. (2009). Does the job
satisfaction–job performance relationship vary across cultures?
Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 40(5), 761–796.
Northouse, P. G. (2001). Leadership: Theory and practice. Thousand
Oaks, CA: Sage.
Orpen, C. (1985). The effects of long-range planning on small
business performance: A further examination. Journal of Small
Business Management, 23(1), 16–23.
Park, S. (2007). Relationships among managerial coaching in
organizations and the outcomes of personal learning, organiza-
tional commitment, and turnover intention. Unpublished doctoral
dissertation, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis.
Passmore, J. (2007). Coaching and mentoring: The role of experience
and sector knowledge. International Journal of Evidence Based
Coaching and Mentoring, 5, 10–16.
Perry, J. L., & Rainey, H. G. (1988). The public–private distinction in
organizational theory: A critique and research strategy. Academy
of Management Review, 13(2), 182–201.
123
330
Peterson, D. B., & Hicks, M. L. (1996). Leader as coach: Strategies
for coaching and developing others. Minneapolis, MN: Person-
nel Decisions International.
Petty, M., McGee, G., & Cavender, J. (1984). A meta-analysis of the
relationships between individual job satisfaction and individual
performance. Academy of Management Review, 9(4), 712–721.
Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Lee, J., & Podsakoff, N. P.
(2003). Common methods biases in behavioral research: A
critical review of the literature and recommended remedies.
Journal of Applied Psychology, 88(5), 879–903.
Porter, L. W., & Lawler, E. E. (1968). Managerial attitudes and
performance. Homewood, IL: Irwin.
Posner, B. Z., & Schmidt, W. H. (1996). The values of business and
federal government executives: More different than alike. Public
Personnel Management, 25(3), 277–290.
Preacher, K. J., & Kelley, K. (2011). Effect size measures for
mediation models: Quantitative strategies for communicating
indirect effects. Psychological Methods, 16(2), 93–115.
Ragins, B. R., & Kram, K. E. (2007). The handbook of mentoring at
work: Theory, research, and practice. Los Angeles: Sage
Publications.
Riketta, M. (2008). The causal relation between job attitudes and
performance: A meta-analysis of panel studies. Journal of
Applied Psychology, 93(2), 472–481.
Rizzo, J. R., House, R. J., & Lirtzman, S. I. (1970). Role conflict and
ambiguity in complex organizations. Administrative Science
Quarterly, 15(2), 150–163.
Rogelberg, S. G., & Stanton, J. M. (2007). Introduction: Understand-
ing and dealing with organizational survey nonresponse. Orga-
nizational Research Methods, 10(2), 195–209.
Romzek, B. S. (1989). Personal consequences of employee commit-
ment. Academy of Management Journal, 32, 649–661.
Rosinski, P. (2008). Coaching across cultures: New tools for
leveraging national, corporate & professional differences.
Boston: Nicholas Brealey.
Rothwell, W., Sullivan, R., & McLean, G. (1995). Practicing
organization development: A guide for consultants. San Diego:
Pfeiffer.
Scandura, T. A., & Schriesheim, C. A. (1994). Leader–member
exchange and supervisor career mentoring as complementary
123
J Bus Psychol (2013) 28:315–330
constructs in leadership research. Academy of Management
Journal, 37(6), 1588–1602.
Skinner, B. F. (1957). Verbal behavior. New York: Appleton-
Century-Crofts.
Snyder, M., & Ickes, W. (1985). Personality and social behavior. In
G. Lindsey & E. Aronson (Eds.), Handbook of social psychology
(Vol. 2, pp. 883–947). New York: Random House.
Sobel, M. E. (1982). Asymptotic confidence intervals for indirect
effects in structural equation models. In S. Leinhardt (Ed.),
Sociological methodology (pp. 290–312). Washington, DC:
American Sociological Association.
Spector, P. E. (2006). Method variance in organizational research:
Truth or urban legend? Organizational Research Methods, 9(2),
221.
Tabachnick, B., & Fidell, L. (1996). Using multivariate statistics.
New York: HarperCollins.
Thomas, D. C., & Pekerti, A. A. (2003). Effect of culture on
situational determinants of exchange behavior in organizations:
A comparison of New Zealand and Indonesia. Journal of Cross-
Cultural Psychology, 34(3), 269–281.
Tourangeau, R., Rips, L. J., & Rasinski, K. (2000). The psychology of
survey response. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
Triandis, H. (1959). A critique and experimental design for the study
of the relationship between productivity and job satisfaction.
Psychological Bulletin, 56(4), 309–312.
Tubre, T. C., & Collins, J. M. (2000). Revisited: A meta-analysis of
the relationships between role ambiguity, role conflict, and job
performance. Journal of Management, 26(1), 155–169.
Ullman, J. B. (1996). Structural equation modeling. In B. G. Tabach-
nick & L. S. Fidell (Eds.), Using multivariate statistics (pp.
709–812). New York: HarperCollins.
Vroom, V. H. (1964). Work and motivation. New York: Wiley.
Walsh, J., Kiesler, S., Sproull, L., & Hesse, B. (1992). Self-selected
and randomly selected respondents in a computer network
survey. Public Opinion Quarterly, 56(2), 241–244.
Williams, L. J., Vandenberg, R. J., & Edwards, J. R. (2009).
Structural equation modeling in management research: A guide
for improved analysis. Academy of Management Annals, 3(1),
543–604.
Zemke, R. (1996). The corporate coach. Training, 33(12), 24–28.
Copyright of Journal of Business & Psychology is the property of Springer Science &
Business Media B.V. and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted
to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may
print, download, or email articles for individual use.