A Comparison of Face-to-Face and Distance Coaching Practices: Coaches’ Perceptions of the Role of the Working Alliance in Problem Resolution

By Ian Mondrow, PHR

In psychoanalytical psychology, the term working alliance discusses the relationship that buds between a patient and a therapist but there are many professionals who claim that the working alliance is also prevalent in the relationship with a leadership coach and their client. A working alliance is defined by the commitment between a client and a therapist to agree on the planned therapy outcomes, the process to achieve the outcome, and the bond created between the two that a established a relationship with a capacity for warmth. Much of these factors are also crucial to the success of coaching within the corporate realm. In any coaching scenario, this relationship is essential for success.

However, technology has introduced some modifications to the therapeutic process. A coach now have the option to use telephone, web-conferencing, or e-mail to provide services; with telephone being the most prominent means. Within psychotherapy, the practice of using these technologies has been found to be equally effective to face-to-face sessions when achieving the end result. This study intends to examine the impact of distance relationships on business/leadership coaching.

All data for this study was collected exclusively from professional coaches using the internet as a primary recruitment method. 51 coaches provided all of the needed information. 20 coaches only provided details on a face-to-face client while 26 coached completed the details only about a distance client. Only 51 responses were utilized as these coaches utilized both methods.

 Participants completed a survey online that included a form to collect data on their demographics and coaching experiences/practices. The coaches were asked to identify one coaching client who primarily receives face-face coaching within the past year and are still seeing.  They were also asked to identify an individual who they have and continued to coach over the past year on a distance format.  Participants were asked to complete the Working Alliance Inventory-Short Form, which demonstrates a strong working alliance with higher scores and the Target Complains Scale that lists one to three conditions and the level of severity for which treatment was sought. Additionally, the researchers developed a short survey to understand the coaches’ background.

When examining the results, it was found the clients working with their coach face-to-face or  at a distance had similar levels of problem severity, t = -.37,  p > .05. A repeated-measures MANOVA was conducted to determine the difference between working alliance and the method used by the coach (face-to-face vs. distance). No significance was found and no follow-up analyses were completed. When examining the severity of a client’s condition and the working alliance, a regression showed that the face-to-face condition did not have an impact. However, when working in the distance condition, results were significant between working alliance and client severity, R² =.11, F = 9.65,  p < .01. A MANOVA was conducted to determine if the coaches’ experiencse differed whether they provided services via distance or face-to-face, but no significance was found.

Overall, the study demonstrates that face-to-face and distance coaching are similar in regards to effectiveness. Specifically, working relationships between a client and a coach are not impacted by the distance. However, the change in severity was higher in the distance relationship, which may be a result of a stronger working alliance.

While the study produces some interesting findings, there are some important limitations to consider. One big constraint is the fact that there was a low ceiling in scores in the working alliance and problem resolution measurement, making data difficult to analyze. Furthermore, since the study used a convenience sample, there was an overall low response rate. It is also suggested that recruiting participants online may have been a factor because these participants may have already been technologically savvy.

IMPLICATIONS FOR HR PROFESSIONALS

Although the limitations of the study demonstrate that further investigation is needed, the findings reveal revelations that could be utilized by learning and development professionals. Primarily, future organizational leaders do not have to be limited by locations. Organizations that don’t have mentors available on-site for these employees can utilize mentors at other site to provide distance coaching. The findings show that the coaching relationship continues to impact others even if done through the telephone or internet.

If an organization decides to implement this approach, the structure of a program is the key to success. Organizations should not rely on mentors alone to create the coaching program for growing talent. Instead, human resources can create a structure developmental program by using scheduled telephone calls with the coach, weekly online journaling (to be reviewed by coach), and online group discussions for all employees. Effectiveness of a leadership program relies on providing individuals with a well-rounded a background and therefore introducing a variety of events can enhance the learning experience, whether it be local of through technology.

This also introduces cost-saving methods for organizations. Many smaller organizations have not been  able to afford executive coaches due to the costs of travel expenses. However, today’s technology offers organizations the same coaching quality through a long-distance relationship. Human resources departments can rest assured that there will be resources available to them even if they are not located in a primary city without the need to pay for the travel of the cost.

Much like many other aspects of human resources, technology introduces cost saving methods to assist the organization with its continuous growth. Thanks to technology, affordable and competitive programs can be implemented by organizations without fear of going bankrupt.   


Source: Berry, R.M., Ashby, J.S., Gnilka, P.B., Matheny, K.B. (2011). A comparison of face-to-face and distance coaching practices: coaches' perceptions of the role of working alliance in problem resolution.. Consulting Psychcology Journal: Practice and Research, 63 (4), 243-253.

Harming High Performers: a Social Comparison Perspective on Interpersonal Harming in Work Teams

Summary and Commentary by Ian B. Mondrow, M.A.

Interpersonal harming within the work environment is behavior that contradicts the interests of another person within the organization. These type of behaviors can include disturbing others while they are working, starting arguments, and gossiping about coworkers. Social comparisons (comparing one's performance to another individuals as either better or worse) may be cause of interpersonal harming. A upward comparison is when an individual views him/herself as better than others and is self-affirming. A downward comparison (viewing oneself as inferior to another) may be perceived as threatening and therefore the individual may compensate by doing emotional harm to others. When a downward comparison is negative, conducting interpersonal harm may negatively affect the target's job performance and therefore reduce any threats perceived by the harmer.

Two independent studies were conducted, one with student teams from a university and another with work teams within a corporation. Study 1 collected data from students at a university in Macau, China with a final data set of 141 students and 30 teams. Students were working in teams of three to seven to complete a group project. Data was collected at two different time periods. Time 1 occured 1.5 month after the team has been working together and Time 2 was conducted one month later.Study 2 collected data from sales associates in a state-owned telecommunications company in China. Teams consisted of four to five members. All members in the team were of the similar seniority. The final data set included 128 individuals from 31 teams.

Two items from Lockwood et. al. (2002) were used to measure  interpersonal social comparisons. Respondents were also asked to compare their performance to their team members on a 9 point scale. Respondents were then asked "how likely is it that you will perform like this member?" This question was also measured on a 9 point scale.  Three items from Tjosvold et. al. (2004) were used to assessed cooperative goals within the team based on a 5 point scale. Interpersonal harming  was measured using peer ratings developed by Cohen-Charash & Muelle (2007), which distinguishes between six types of harmful behaviors. In study 2, supervisors were asked to evaluate each team's performance.

Researchers found a three-way interaction between social comparison, anticipated future performance, an cooperative team goals with statistical significance in Study 1 (B = .07, p<.01) and Study 2 (B = .06, p<.001). This suggests that teams with less cooperative goals and an individual exhibiting a upward comparison was positively related to the possibility harming a target when the expected future performance was considered low to the target.  However, when expected future performance was high, there was no relationship to social comparison. Furthermore, when highly cooperative team goals were established,  then there was no relationship with interpersonal harming and/or social comparison.

Results revealed that harmful behavior was positively correlated with upward comparison and negatively related to expected future performance. However, these results were only applicable to Study 1 and not Study 2. In both studies, it was found that interpersonal harming and cooperative team goals were negatively correlated. Results continued to show that team members were more likely to to harm others when there was an upward performance comparison accompanied with low expectations of future performance.

Results of this study suggest that establishing team goals is crucial to reduce the likelihood of toxic behaviors occurring. When goals are not established or agreed, individuals are more likely to compare themselves to others and possibly cause interpersonal harm. Therefore, to increase the chance of team success, teams should establish goals from the start and ensure that everyone agrees with them. This will reduce the possibility of team members comparing themselves to one another and instead create a sense of community, in which the perceived success of the individual depends on the success of the team.

The study has several apparent limitations. First, it was studied in China and therefore may not be applicable to all cultures. Future studies should examine multiple cultures to determine if it can be considered a variable. Second, the sample n Study 2 was only from one organization within a specific industry. This makes it difficult to generalize to the population. In future research, the researchers should be sure to include several companies of different industries to ensure it can be generalized to the public.

IMPLICATIONS FOR HR PROFESSIONALS
For organizations that require employees to work in teams (i.e. consulting, marketing, etc.), this study brings some valuable perspective. It suggests that by establishing cooperative team goals, it can create a positive dynamic between team members and encourage them to work as one.

Therefore,  there are several things that can be done to encourage success among teams. When teams are about to start projects, the project lead should hold a "kick off session". Within this session, the lead explains the project and what the work will entail. Then the team can work together to establish goals that can be applied to the project. Most often, the project lead will establish the goals without consulting with the the team members. In this case, team members feel as if they have no voice and are more likely to create a competitive environment. When goals are established and agreed by everyone on the team, it creates a sense of unity that can be reinforced throughout the project.

How can human resources professionals encourage this practice? Its rather simple. HR professionals can hold a one hour training session for project leads on how to establish team goals and how to facilitate the brainstorming process. Project leaders should be educated on the benefits of this practice and provided tools that can help them facilitate a goal-setting session with their team. If these individuals are not provided with training, there is a greater chance that they will create the goals independently or not even bother to establish goals.

Overall, success within teams thrives on establishing the message that the teams success means success for all team members. An individual can not be successful independently unless the team succeeds as well.



Work Cited
Lam, C.K., Van der Vegt, G.S., Walter, F., and Huang, X. (2010). Harming high performers: a social comparison perspective on interpersonal harming in work teams. Journal of applied psychology, 96 (3), 588-601.

Credibility: It's More Than a Matter of Integrity

Florence Stone (2005) claims that many of today's organizations leaders have lost of the trust of their followers due to their lack of honesty. However, Florence suggests that credibility and honesty are sometimes used interchangeably. While honesty is a crucial component of credibility, it is only one component of many. Luckily for us, it is suggested that the skills and abilities of credibility can be learned. Acquiring these can assist in establishing positive first impressions wither interviewers, supervisor or your team. Stone has consolidated a list of skills/abilities to assist in increasing credibility.

1) Interfacing Effectively One-on-One or before Groups

As a leader, one is expected to interact with others on a daily basis. In fact, it is crucial to be successful. While speaking to others seems simple, messages can be easily distorted and risk the loss of credibility. To avoid this, follow three simple guidelines: (1) Say what is intended; (2) Be strong-willed and courteous when assigning work; and (3) Know your presentation (i.e. who is audience? What are the deadlines? etc.).

2) Modeling and Encouraging Initiative

Managers should encourage their employees to be creativity and innovative. To assist in this process, people should remember to be open, listen and educated. Openness is crucial because employees are more prepared to make decisions. Educating/training employees ensures that barriers/issues are avoiding when working on a project. Listening assists a team leader in ensuring that a plan is being followed properly before being put into action.

3) Being Solution-Oriented

Mistakes are bound to happen but a credible leader embraces these mistakes and learns from them. A leader should set objectives and support the objectives regardless of any sudden changes that may occur. Being able to brainstorm and negotiate is an important skill to overcome the challenges. The credible leader can communicate the goal, be objective and show determination to reaching the goal.

4) Heading Courageously

The credible leader is confident that performance is at 100% and works to achieve this on every project. Even if employees fear the leader, they still follow him/her due to their level of respect or trust. The leader should reward those that focus more on the group than his/her well-being.

5) Establishing Loyalty and Trust

As emphasized earlier, trust is crucial to credibility. To effectively establish trust, it is vital to be consistent in messages and encourage employees to express themselves without fear of consequences. Holding in feelings encourages a breeding group for distrust.

6) Thinking Outside the Box

A credible leader embraces change and is prepared for it when it occurs unexpectedly or as planned. The leader clearly communicates the change and works with the team to adapt.

7) Creating and Implementing a Plan

Time management and prioritizing assists a leader with appearing in control the stress occurring in the office. While being open to change, the credible leader uses tools, such as to-do list, to meet his/her goals. He/she is able to politely say "no" to someone to avoid unnecessary work for the group.

8) Thinking Strategically

The credible leader enjoys the work and clearly models it through his/her behavior. As a result, it encourages others to become interested as well. They also stay up-to-date in their industry to be avoid any sudden changes that could affect their work.

9) Reaching Out to Others

This individual is a team player. He/she is more than happy to assist his/her employees and works to make them feel special.

10) Being a Life Long Learner

These professionals are always willing to learn from their experiences and barriers. They are dedicated to solve their goal and be successful in their task.

After reviewing the criteria established by Stone (2005), are you a credible leader? If not, consider sitting down with your supervisor and setting an action plan to become the credible leader. These individuals are priceless to the organization.

Work Cited

Stone, F. (2005). Credibility: it's more than a matter of integrity. Employee Relations Today, 9-15.