Business Management

Kleinberg (2001) explored the manner in which a model for executive coaching applies and correlates with current practices of executive coaches. His research focused on the personal and professional experiences that influence the approaches and change methods employed by a group of executive coaches with their clients. Following Kleinberg's thorough review of the literature, it appears that while executive coaching is currently a popular topic for discussion, it lacks theoretical understanding and has not been well researched.

Kleinberg used thematic analysis tests (TAT) and qualitative, semi-structured interviews to explore the responses of 13 U.S. executive coaches in relation to their coaching experience. The interviews were coded into emergent patterns and themes using thematic analysis. The findings were categorized under three fields: descriptive and factual, thematic essences of the executive coaches, and cross sectional. Descriptive findings included work experiences; recipients of coaching/range of outcomes from coaching; coach qualifications and training; use of coaches' resources; and process and outcomes of executive coaching. Thematic findings included: how the coaches described themselves; beliefs about expertise and success; life experiences; communication; use of theory and interpretation; individual characteristics of the executive coaches; and confidentiality and trust.

Although possessing some validity for an executive coaching model, Kleinberg's conclusions presented several obstacles to generalizability. First, the sample size was small, as was the case in Orenstein's (2002) study. Kleinberg had 13 self-identified U.S. executive coaches who responded to questions that he hoped would provide him with an understanding of what theories might be present in the emerging field of coaching.

Second, was Kleinberg's projection or desire for the participants to say that their methods possessed both scholarly and practitioner-based theory and application. The result of this project may have been asking people to make judgments about professional issues beyond their current or conscious level of knowledge and understanding. Third, the Pygmalion effect may help explain why the participants in this research project were able to report such a wide range of positive outcomes for their clients.

There is a paradox with the use of the qualitative research design. Qualitative research yields detailed information about experiences, interactions, quality, story lines, themes, patterns and behaviors, etc. (Spencer & Spencer, 1993). These types of findings are not inherent in quantitative research designs. Kleinberg (2001) suggested it was difficult for him to determine whether the questions asked of research participants yielded the information that he was looking for.

Kleinberg maintained that there is virtually no way of identifying people known as "expert" executive coaches for research purposes due to the wide range of standards and beliefs about what this actually means. Kleinberg suggested researchers' first need to define parameters that define what "expert" means. The coaches in his research were self-identified as such. Only one participant had extensive training (10 years in the fields of phenomenology, ontology, and communication, in addition to a doctoral degree). Additional limitations identified by Kleinberg were personal attitudes, health concerns (illness, low energy), life concerns, time commitments shared by coaches, which might have affected respondents' willingness to share additional information during the interviews.