Leading to effectiveness: Comparing dyadic coaching and group coaching

Although numerous studies have shown that coaching works, the search for “active ingredients” of successful coaching is ongoing. We argue that the coach’s transactional and transformational leadership behavior contributes to coaching effectiveness. In an experimental study on reducing procrastination, participants (N = 108) defined individual goals related to procrastination. They were then randomly assigned to a dyadic coaching session, a group coaching session, or a control group. Procrastination was reduced in all conditions, but participants in the two coaching conditions were better at attaining their individual goals. Furthermore, compared with participants who received group coaching, participants in the dyadic coaching had a higher increase in goal commitment and showed more goal reflection and higher intrinsic goal motivation. Mediation analyses further revealed that the differences between dyadic and group coaching were explained by the coach’s transformational and transactional leadership behavior.