The coach‐coachee relationship in executive coaching: A field study
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Numerous authors have suggested that the working relationship between coach and coachee constitutes an essential condition to the success of executive coaching. This study empirically investigated the links between the coach‐coachee relationship and the success of a coaching intervention in an organizational setting. Data were collected from two samples: 73 managers who received executive coaching for a period of eight months and 24 coaches. Results from 31 coach‐coachee dyads were analyzed. Results indicate that the coach‐coachee relationship plays a mediating role between the coaching received and development of the coachees' self‐efficacy. Findings also show four significant correlates to the coach‐coachee relationship: the coach's self‐efficacy with regard to facilitating learning and results, the coachee's motivation to transfer, his or her perception of supervisor support, and the number of coaching sessions received.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it