Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t8hqh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-01T04:42:12.779Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Balancing Development With Day-to-Day Task Demands: A Multiple-Goal Approach to Executive Coaching

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  07 January 2015

James W. Beck ,
Jane Brodie Gregory  and
Alison E. Carr
James W. Beck*
Affiliation:
The University of Akron
Jane Brodie Gregory
Affiliation:
The University of Akron
Alison E. Carr
Affiliation:
The University of Akron
*
Brodie Gregory, and Alison E. Carr, Psychology Department, The University of Minnesota, College of Arts and Science Building, Akron, OH 44325-4301
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Commentaries
Information
Industrial and Organizational Psychology , Volume 2 , Issue 3 , September 2009 , pp. 293 - 296
Copyright
Copyright © Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology 2009 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Ashford, S. J., & Northcraft, G. (2003). Robbing Peter to pay Paul: Feedback environments and enacted priorities in response to competing task demands. Human Resource Management Review, 13, 537–559.Google Scholar
Bell, B. S., & Kozlowski, S. W. J. (2002). Adaptive guidance: Enhancing self-regulation, knowledge, and performance in technology-based training. Personnel Psychology, 55, 267–306.Google Scholar
Carver, C. S., & Scheier, M. F. (1998). On the self-regulation of behavior. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
DeShon, R. P., Kozlowski, S. W. J., Schmidt, A. M., Milner, K. R., & Wiechmann, D. (2004). A multiple-goal, multilevel model of feedback effects on the regulation of individual and team performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89, 1035–1056.Google Scholar
Gregory, J. B., Levy, P. E., & Jeffers, M. (2008). Development of a model of the feedback process within executive coaching. Consulting Psychology Journal: Practice and Research, 60, 42–56.Google Scholar
Kampa-Kokesch, S., & Anderson, M. Z. (2001). Executive coaching: A comprehensive review of the literature. Consulting Psychology Journal: Practice and Research, 53, 205–228.Google Scholar
Kernan, M. C., & Lord, R. G. (1990). Effects of valence, expectancies, and goal-performance discrepancies in single and multiple goal environments. Journal of Applied Psychology, 75, 194–203.Google Scholar
Kerr, S. (1975). On the folly of rewarding A, while hoping for B. Academy of Management Journal, 18, 769–783.Google Scholar
Locke, E. A., & Latham, G. P. (2002). Building a practically useful theory of goal setting and task motivation: A 35-year odyssey. American Psychologist, 57, 705–717.Google Scholar
London, M., & Smither, J. W. (2002). Feedback orientation, feedback culture, and the longitudinal performance management process. Human Resource Management Review, 12, 81–100.Google Scholar
Louro, M. J., Pieters, R., & Zeelenberg, M. (2007). Dynamics of multiple goal pursuits. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 93, 174–193.Google Scholar
McKenna, D. D., & Davis, S. L. (2009). Hidden in plain sight: The active ingredients of executive coaching. Industrial and Organizational Psychology: Perspectives on Science and Practice, 2, 244–260.Google Scholar
Peterson, D. B. (1996). Executive coaching at work: The art of one-on-one change. Consulting Psychology Journal: Practice and Research, 48, 78–86.Google Scholar
Schmidt, A. M., & DeShon, R. P. (2007). What to do? The effects of discrepancies, incentives, and time on dynamic goal prioritization. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92, 928–941.Google Scholar
Schmidt, A. M., & Dolis, C. M. (2009). Something's got to give: The effects of dual-goal difficulty, goal progress, and expectancies on resource allocation. Journal of Applied Psychology, 94, 678–691.Google Scholar
Schmidt, A. M., Dolis, C. M., & Tolli, A. P. (2009). A matter of time: Individual differences, contextual dynamics, and goal progress effects on multiple-goal self-regulation. Journal of Applied Psychology, 94, 692–709.Google Scholar
Schmidt, A. M., Northcraft, G. B., & Ashford, S. J. (2008, April). Feedback and the rationing of attention among competing demands. In Stitzmann, T. (Chair) and Ely, K. (Chair ),Goals, feedback, and performance: A dynamic self-regulation perspective. Symposium presented at the 23rd Annual Conference of the Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology, San Francisco, CA.Google Scholar
Silverman, S. B., Pogson, C. E., & Cober, A. B. 2005). When employees at work don't get it: A model for enhancing individual employee change in response to performance feedback. Academy of Management Executive, 19, 135–147.Google Scholar
Taylor, M. S., Fisher, C., & Ilgen, D. 1984). Individual's reactions to performance feedback in organizations: Control theory perspective. In Rowland, K. & Ferris, G. (Eds.),Research in personnel and human resource management (pp. 81–124). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.Google Scholar