Enhancing Subordinate Job Performance Through Coaching Behaviors: A Lay Epistemic Approach

Abstract

ABSTRACT This paper explores the downstream effects of coaching behaviors, conceptualized as a behavioral intervention that helps subordinates learn in an organization. We propose that supervisors serve as “facilitators of learning” and knowledge transfer agents in an organization by coaching their subordinates. Drawing on the lay epistemic approach, we examine the effects of guidance versus facilitation coaching behaviors on psychological and job‐related outcomes. Supervisors who display guidance facilitation coaching behaviors tend to provide their subordinates with direct feedback and knowledge, whereas those who display facilitation coaching behaviors provide inspiration and exploration opportunities. The guidance style is particularly effective for subordinates with a high need for closure, an epistemic motivation that drives individuals to conduct quick searches for answers and solutions in psychologically uncertain situations, whereas a facilitation style is more effective for subordinates with a low need for closure who engage in more elaborate and prolonged searches for information. We investigate subordinates' self‐efficacy, trust in their supervisor, and job performance as outcomes of the interaction effect of coaching behaviors and subordinates' need for closure. Field data collected from supervisors and their subordinates using a two‐wave, multisource design indicate that when supervisors engaged in facilitation coaching, subordinates with a low need for closure reported higher job‐based self‐efficacy, leading to improved supervisor‐rated job performance. Conversely, guidance‐oriented supervisors gained the trust of their subordinates, which in turn positively influenced the subordinates' job performance. The implications of the epistemic properties of coaching behaviors and learning approaches through interaction with supervisors are discussed.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 1 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.