首页> 外文期刊>The Journal of Management Development >Measuring coaching: behavioral and skill-based managerial coaching scales
【24h】

Measuring coaching: behavioral and skill-based managerial coaching scales

机译:衡量教练:基于行为和技能的管理教练量表

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
       

摘要

Purpose - The purpose of this paper is two-fold: to identify the reliability and content validity of two popular managerial coaching scales - the Ellinger Behavioral Scale and the Park Skills-based Scale - to determine the extent to which the construct, coaching, is more accurately measured as a behavioral construct or a skill-based construct from the perspective of the coach, and from that of his or her direct reports using a single data set. Design/methodology/approach - This research utilized survey research which tested the reliability and validity of two existing coaching scales. Analyses included correlation matrices, principle axis factor analysis, and confirmatory factor analysis. Findings - Results of this research indicate that neither scale is perfectly reliable and valid. However, given the results of the analysis, the authors recommend the Park scale for leaders and the Ellinger scale for team members. Research limitations/implications - This research indicates that investment in valid scales for use by direct reports to measure the coaching expertise of their managers is warranted Practical implications - There are several implications that are evident as a result of this research. First, there are implications for the training and development of employees. Too, many organizations look to coaching and coaching skills as a benchmark for selecting future leaders - the understanding of how current scales are able to identify coaching expertise is important to the manager selection process. Originality/value - This research offers one of the first comparative analyses of currently available coaching scales. It contributes to the literature on coaching by providing a clear and thorough review and analysis of scales currently available for testing managerial coaching expertise. Practitioners and scholars can benefit from this research by developing a better understanding of the contexts in which these two coaching scales are most reliable and valid.
机译:目的-本文的目的是双重的:确定两种流行的管理教练量表(埃林格行为量表和基于公园技能的量表)的信度和内容效度,以确定构建,指导的程度从教练的角度以及使用单个数据集的直接报告的角度,可以更准确地将其衡量为行为构成或基于技能的构成。设计/方法/方法-这项研究利用调查研究来检验两个现有教练量表的信度和效度。分析包括相关矩阵,主轴因子分析和验证性因子分析。发现-这项研究的结果表明,这两个量表都不是完全可靠和有效的。但是,鉴于分析的结果,作者建议领导人使用Park量表,团队成员使用Ellinger量表。研究的局限性/含义-该研究表明,对有效规模进行投资以直接报告以衡量其经理的教练专业水平是必要的。实践意义-研究表明,有若干暗示。首先,对员工的培训和发展有影响。同样,许多组织都将教练和教练技能作为选择未来领导者的基准-了解当前的规模如何能够识别教练专业知识对于经理选择过程至关重要。原创性/价值-这项研究提供了当前可用教练量表的首批比较分析之一。它通过对当前可用于测试管理教练专业知识的量表进行清晰,透彻的审查和分析,为有关教练的文献做出了贡献。通过更好地理解这两种指导量表最可靠和有效的环境,从业者和学者可以从这项研究中受益。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号