One of the major distinctions between 20th and 21st century organizations is the shift from stability to constant change. The primary function of managers throughout most of the 20th century was to maintain stability of process. In today’s technology-driven world, stability is a thing of the past that has been replaced by constant and unpredictable change, which requires a new and different mindset for the manager/leader.

Not only is the manager/leader required to achieve organizational goals, but to achieve those goals while effectively managing the never-ending winds of change that they may be confronted with at any point in time. This is a new dynamic that is challenging for many seasoned leaders, and a daunting challenge for those who are newer to the role, especially those without the MBA background.

Recognized as a genuine dilemma in many companies today, especially within blue collar industries that are more likely to find themselves with more inexperienced manager/leaders, there is significantly more research being conducted not merely about the efficacy of professional and executive coaching, but the efficacy of coaching during seasons of turbulence and change. In other words, as professional coaching continues to rise as a reputable and valuable helping field, researchers are now looking more intently at the effects of coaching during change.

One such study, an Open Access article from the Journal of Change Management, Grant (2013) made some important findings that shed light on why so many companies today find themselves struggling to sustain the success achieved in the previous century. The essence of Grant’s findings are that today is in fact a new ballgame that requires using new strategies. What worked before is not going to work today. More important is the fact that Grant’s findings related to executives who are struggling with the complex dynamics in today’s workplace. If the executives are struggling, how much more the novice manager/leader must be struggling?

Without venturing deep into the details of Grant’s findings from his coaching research, e.g., quantitative vs. qualitative, how he measured his results, or the structure of his research, a cursory look at his findings are eye-opening.

Goal Attainment: His preliminary findings were that coaching during periods of change had a positive effect on goals that were directly related to the mission of the company. The key takeaway is that having the support of the coach empowered the leaders to maintain their focus during instability and change, enabling them to accomplish goals.

Solution-Focused Thinking: Coaches were able to help leaders make better decisions about when to use solution-focused thinking as opposed to problem-focused thinking. His message was not that one should be used to the exclusion of the other; but that there were times when one type of thinking is more appropriate than the other, and that effective leadership requires cognitive flexibility.

Managing Change: Readiness for change is said to be associated with job satisfaction, and a necessary mindset for leaders to feel confident in approaching problems. Having access to the confidential, non-competitive, and good-will support of coaches during troubled times, had a positive effect on job satisfaction, which in turn increased confidence in the ability to manage difficulties. Confidence motivates engagement because people are much more apt to engage when they feel confident.

Decreasing Depression: Stress is troubling to the soul because it highlights the feeling of insufficient control. Because coaching increased the leaders’ abilities to achieve goals, to manage their thinking while feeling confident on the job, stress-related depression decreased.

A. M. Grant, The Efficacy of Executive Coaching in Times of Organizational Change: Journal of Change Management, 2013.