A.E.M. van Vianen

Does coaching work? A meta-analysis on the effects of coaching on individual level outcomes in an organizational context

Whereas coaching is very popular as a management tool, research on coaching effectiveness is lagging behind. Moreover, the studies on coaching that are currently available have focused on a large variety of processes and outcome measures and generally lack a firm theoretical foundation. With the meta-analysis presented in this article, we aim to shed light on the effectiveness of coaching within an organizational context. We address the question whether coaching has an effect on five both theoretically and practically relevant individual-level outcome categories: performance/skills, well-being, coping, work attitudes, and goal-directed self-regulation. The results show that coaching has significant positive effects on all outcomes with effect sizes ranging from g = 0.43 (coping) to g = 0.74 (goal-directed self-regulation). These findings indicate that coaching is, overall, an effective intervention in organizations.

A Tailored Policy‐capturing Study on PO Fit Perceptions: The ascendancy of attractive over aversive fit

Job‐seekers are attracted to organizations if they perceive fit between their personal values and those of an organization. It is often assumed that peoples person–organization (PO) fit perceptions reflect an overall comparison between the person and the organization: fits on values that are personally attractive, aversive, or relatively neutral are weighed equally. In this study, we questioned this assumption. Based on regulatory focus theory and construal level theory, we proposed that fit on values that are personally attractive would especially contribute to the perception of PO fit. Four policy‐capturing studies indeed showed that job‐seekers do not weigh all value fits equally. Rather, they weigh fit on personally attractive values more heavily than fit on personally aversive and neutral values. Thus, job‐seekers perceive high PO fit particularly when information about a prospective organization supports values that are personally attractive to them. Theoretical implications and directions for future research are discussed.

Informal learning of temporary agency workers in low-skill jobs : the role of self-profiling, career control and job challenge

Purpose. The purpose of this paper is to develop and investigate the idea that self-profiling and career control by temporary agency workers (TAWs) in low-skill jobs are positively related to informal learning and that this relationship is mediated by job challenge. Design/methodology/approach. An online survey study was conducted among 722 TAWs in low-skill jobs in the Netherlands. Bootstrap mediation analyses were used to test the hypotheses. Findings. Self-profiling and career control are positively related to informal learning of TAWs and these relationships are mediated by job challenge. Research lmitations/implications. This is the first study to develop and empirically test the proposition that self-profiling and career control are important factors for enhancing employees’ learning experiences in low-skill jobs. Practical implications. Hiring companies and temporary work agencies could stimulate and train TAWs’ self-profiling and career control competencies to enhance their job challenge and informal learning. Organizations should consider assigning challenging tasks to TAWs, which may be a good alternative for expensive formal training programs. Social implications.Many TAWs in low-skill jobs do not possess the skills and capacities to obtain a better or more secure job. In general, temporary workers face a higher risk of unemployment and greater income volatility (Segal and Sullivan, 1997). Gaining knowledge about how to develop this group is important for society as a whole. Originality/value. Research on the determinants of informal learning mainly concerned higher-educated employees and managers with long-term contracts (e.g. Dong et al., 2014), whereas very little is known about factors that stimulate informal learning among TAWs in general, and among TAWs in low-skill jobs in particular.

Person–environment fits as drivers of commitment

This chapter describes how employees’ fit experiences drive their commitments to their job, supervisor, team, and organization. Employees commit – that is, become attached – when they experience positive affective reactions as a consequence of the correspondence (versus discrepancy) between their attributes and those in their work environment. Because work environments comprise varying domains (for example, the job, the supervisor, the team, and the organization) to which employees may connect, the authors suggest that employees can experience multiple fits, which combine into holistic fit perceptions and result in various types of commitment. They distinguish two types of fit that inform these holistic perceptions: the needs, preferences and values that all people share (universal fits) and those that vary among individuals (distinctive fits). Finally, the authors delineate several opportunities for research and practice relating to how different fit perceptions emerge, how they combine, and how they might inform an organization’s selection and change practices.