Exploring Diverse Models and Theories in Coaching and Leadership

Using Leadership and Coaching models learnt on the module, consider how you can use them to encourage Employee Engagement.

The term coaching comes from a French word that means "to guide”, the means of transporting a valuable individual from one location to the other (Haas, 1992). Coaching in the corporate world began with mitigation for derailed executives in the mid-twentieth century, then turned to training high-potential workers for career development. Since then, coaching and leadership has been an integral part of development of employee engagement across different corporate sectors (Bono et al, 2009; Giglio et al, 1998).

There are several models of coaching and leadership which are The GROW Model is a coaching system for unlocking ability and opportunities in interactions, meetings, and daily leadership. The title is an acronym for the four main steps in GROW coaching: G for goals, R for reality, O for options, and W for Will. It was created by Sir John Whitmore. A leader or coach can easily raise awareness and accountability in each area by asking a few effective coaching queries (Grant and Brown, 2010; Ali et al, 2019). Another coaching model is the JOHARI window model, which is a design of interpersonal knowledge. It's a valuable tool for increasing self-awareness and, as a result, our ability to collaborate effectively with others. It operates by assisting us in comprehending the gaps between our perceptions of ourselves and those of others (worldofwork.io).

In the 1970s, the Leader-Member Exchange Theory was proposed. It emphasizes the interaction between managers and the employees of the organisaton. The theory recently become a point for contention. LMX theory has been critiqued on the basis of not being able to advance leadership theory further, as it is posited to be too narrow in its outlook (Gottfredson et al, 2020). Another leadership theory which can be related to this is the Complex Adaptive Leadership, the theory opposes linear causality and considers the whole system rather than just a portion of it. Adaptability, according to complexity leadership theory, arises in daily experiences with individuals reacting to stimuli in the workplace. Complexity leadership practice is a theory of collaborative leadership, according to several academics (Marrone et al, 2007; Obolensky, 2014; Marion and Uhl-Bien, 2001). The difference between the two can be attributed to the systems which form the base of the perspectives of the two, whereby complex adaptive leadership is more holistic in its approach.

Employee engagement can be defined as the involvement and satisfaction of the individual in the professional environment (Schmidt et al, 2002). Employee engagement is essential as engaged employees are more likely to be productive and less likely to leave their employers (Fleming and Asplund, 2007). Clearly, leadership models and styles have a great influence on the functioning of the professional environment. In an LMX theory of leadership, there exists a high quality relationship between the employees and the managers, whereby the employees have better access to decision making powers and resources (Centre for Leader Development, 2006). It has a certain level of advantage over the CAL theory, because the complexity inherent in the model creates uncertainty (Mowles, 2014).

In practice, coaching models can be extensively beneficial to the employees, in both short and long runs. Whitmore (1937, 1996) operationalised the GROW model into two main parts; the employer can approach this from an educational framework of a single session, where they identify certain goals and then teach the employees how to reach them. Conversely, the employer can use it as a process, whereby they can construct an overarching action-plan, hold multiple audit sessions over days, weeks or months and keep progress reports on how far efforts have reached. A useful way in which employee engagement can be reached using the grow model is by increasing communications through asking questions. Goals of an individual can be understood by asking them where they see themselves in a few years; reality can be understood by asking them what is helping them in their job till now; options can be gauged by asking them about how do they think they can achieve more options professionally and will can be understood by asking what their current goal is and how they plan to achieve it. These and questions like these can be used to understand the short, medium and long-term goals of the employee (thebalancecareers.com).

However, professional needs of two corporate environments are rarely the same; when lack of good communication is understood as a pertinent problem in a workplace, the JOHARI model should be employed for engagement increase. As evident by the model, the self-disclosure quadrant is a part of the model. Employees should be encouraged to give feedback about the working conditions and their colleagues and in-turn, should become receptive to the feedback of others as well. The idea behind increasing communication is to expand on the open area as much as possible, in order to eliminate all forms of doubts and suspicions which may exist within a particular professional space, between employees. When an employee shares their own viewpoints, the are is opened up vertically and when the employee gets feedback from other individuals, the open area increased horizontally(Rao M., 2015).

A Case for Adoption of Green HRM

In today’s modern world, there is a greater recognition for the need for incorporating environmentally sustainable practices into businesses, and to that effect what would be imperative is the adoption of green human resource management, shortened to GHRM. GHRM can be defined as the integration of environmental management into human resource management (Phan and Pham, 2019). This article shall first establish the need and relevance of sustainable environment practices being integrated into modern management practices, cite the advantages of adopting GHRM such as decreasing attrition rates, promoting social responsibility amongst individual employees, and market the products and services better, amongst other advantages and subsequently the article will also attempt to further propose two models where businesses can adopt such practices. Besides detailing the advantages that come with this approach, certain risks and criticisms are also discussed.

It is widely acknowledged that corporate culture plays a critical role in the transition to sustainability (Bertels, et. al., 2015). It is here that human resource management has a pivotal role to play in incorporating the business or organisations sustainability agenda in order to develop the expertise, motivation, and confidence necessary to fully adopt a sustainable model (Nijhawan and Green, 2015). Nijhawan and Green further posit that the long term sustainability and growth of an organisation necessarily requires a green sustainable model.

The reasoning behind this assertion is that having an environmentally and financially sustainable model gives the organisation certain advantages which give it a competitive advantage, which are as follows. The first advantage that adopting a GHRM direction that the organisation would enjoy is the ability to market the product or service offered by the organisation much better.

Numerous studies have shown that a significant percentage of the average consumer takes into account environmental factors while making a choice (Dailey, 2014). The results of this study confirm that corporations&# good environmental management policies make a difference and it will go a fair way in terms of increasing sales. The second advantage is that it can help in two key aspects of human resource management, which are recruitment of the best candidates and reducing employee turnover rates (Odell, 2017).

A survey conducted by SHRM demonstrated that not only do companies with green policies attract the best candidates, who are increasingly environmentally conscious, but also the employees are far less likely to leave the company, because of the good environmental practices adopted by the company (Fox, 2008). What this implies is that adopting green and environmentally sustainable practices not only promote social responsibility amongst individual employees, but also it potentially helps companies lower their costs by lowering employee attrition rates, saving the company the cost to train new employees. Thus it comes as no surprise that big companies like Apple are also turning to policies which are environmentally friendly, such as being carbon neutral (apple, 2021).

With advantages, there inevitably are certain disadvantages to consider. Iravani et. al., (2017) realises that the initial transition to GHRM will require significantly large capital outlays, and the large cost borne by the organisation may potentially put the organisation at a competitive disadvantage. Overcoming employee apathy and reluctance may also potentially be a challenge for the human resource management team. Building of models to overcome these challenges and harness the advantages is necessary, and two models have been described.

Slaper et. al., (2011) describes the model of ‘triple bottom line’ whereby an organisation should look beyond just looking at net profits as the only parameter for success, but instead look at profit, people and planet equally as metrics for success, dubbed as the ‘three P’s’. Organisations which adopt the framework of this model don’t consider people as just their employees, but also the community at large. This is closely linked to an organisations corporate social responsibility, which includes advocating for human right , diversity, equality, and inclusivity, fighting poverty and hunger and promoting a fair and secure workplace and participating in community involvement and volunteerism. With regards to the second ‘p’, that is planet, stakeholders are also keeping companies increasingly accountable for their activities thanks to public opinion, customer buying power, the pace and openness of knowledge sharing through social media, and even industry-led lobbying, and the effects of that can be seen in how positive impacts are rewarded and negative impacts are reprimanded (Edgar et. al., 2018). Thus it can be concluded that companies which consider their responsibility to the planet and the society at large will be better placed to build long term sustainable policies.

The second model which will be elaborated upon is Carroll’s CSR pyramid model. It was initially defined as the corporate social responsibility which includes the economic, legal, ethical, and philanthropic expectations that society has of organisations (Carroll 1979, 1991). The base of the pyramid is to turn a profit, as without a profit, the organisation is not sustainable. Above that is the legal aspect, whereby companies are expected to follow the law and set an example. On top of that are ethical considerations, which include embracing activities which benefit society and avoiding activities which while not unlawful, cause harm to the society or the environment. The apex of the pyramid is philanthropic activities, which is related to the CSR described above.

Dig deeper into Exploring Contemporary Leadership Approaches and Organizational Alignment with our selection of articles.

References

The World of Work Project. 2021. The Johari Window: A Helpful Interpersonal Awareness Tool - The World of Work Project. [online] Available at: [Accessed 24 April 2021].

Giglio, L., Diamante, T. and Urban, J.M., 1998. Coaching a leader: Leveraging change at the top. Journal of Management Development.

Haas, S.A., 1992. Coaching. Developing key players. The Journal of nursing administration, 22(6), pp.54-58.

Bono, J.E., Purvanova, R.K., Towler, A.J. and Peterson, D.B., 2009. A survey of executive coaching practices. Personnel Psychology, 62(2), pp.361-404.

Brown, S.W. and Grant, A.M., 2010. From GROW to GROUP: Theoretical issues and a practical model for group coaching in organisations. Coaching: An International Journal of Theory, Research and Practice, 3(1), pp.30-45.

Ali, Z., Mahmood, B. and Mehreen, A., 2019. Linking succession planning to employee performance: The mediating roles of career development and performance appraisal. Australian Journal of Career Development, 28(2), pp.112-121.

Gottfredson, R.K., Wright, S.L. and Heaphy, E.D., 2020. A critique of the leader-member exchange construct: back to square one. The Leadership Quarterly, 31(6), p.101385.

Obolensky, M.N., 2014. Complex adaptive leadership: Embracing paradox and uncertainty. Gower Publishing, Ltd..

Mowles, C., 2014. Complex, but not quite complex enough: The turn to the complexity sciences in evaluation scholarship. Evaluation, 20(2), pp.160-175.

Whitmore, J., 1996. Coaching for performance. N. Brealey Pub..

Linkedin.com. 2021. Johari Window – A Tool for improving communication and trust. [online] Available at: [Accessed 24 April 2021].

Iravani, A. et al. “Advantages and Disadvantages of Green Technology; Goals, Challenges and Strengths.” International Journal of Science and Engineering Applications 6 (2017): 272-284.

Edgar, F., Geare, A. and Zhang, Z.A. (2018), “Accentuating the positive: the mediating role of positive emotions in the HRM–contextual performance relationship”, International Journal of Manpower, Vol. 39 No. 7, pp. 954-970

Fox, A., 2008. Get in the Business of Being Green. [online] SHRM. Available at: [Accessed 24 April 2021].

Pham, N. T., Hoang, H. T., & Phan, Q. P. T. (2019). Green human resource management: a comprehensive review and future research agenda. International Journal of Manpower, ahead-of-print(ahead-of-print). doi:10.1108/ijm-07-2019-0350

S. Bertels, L. Papania, & D. Papania., Embedding sustainability in organizational culture. Network for Business Sustainability, 2010. Retrieved June 02, 2015

G. Nijhawan, Green HRM-A Requirement For Sustainable Organization. PARIPEX – Indian Journal of Research, 3(10), 69-70, 2014. Retrieved June 02, 2015

W. Dailey, Cone Communications Green Gap Trend Tracker, 2013, accessed on December 18, 2014, from https://www.conecomm.com/: https://www.conecomm.com/2013-green-gap-trend-tracker-1

A. M. Odell, Working for the Earth: Green Companies and Green Jobs Attract Employees, 2007, accessed on Decemeber 12, 2014, from https://www.greenbiz.com: https://www.greenbiz.com/news/2007/10/16/working-earth-gr een-companies-and-green-jobs-attract-employees

Slaper, Timothy F. and Hall, Tanya J. (2011). The Triple Bottom Line: What Is It and How Does It Work? Indiana Business Review. 86 (1)

Carroll, A. B. (1991). The pyramid of corporate social responsibility: toward the moral management of organizational stakeholders. Business Horizons, 34(4), 39–48.

Carroll, A. B. (1979). A three-dimensional conceptual model of corporate social performance. Academy of Management Review, 4, 497–505.

The Balance Careers. 2021. 70 Coaching Questions Using the GROW Model. [online] Available at: [Accessed 27 April 2021].