Executive coaching outcome research leans on case studies and self-report; few studies measure organizational effects
A systematic review of 110 peer-reviewed executive coaching outcome studies finds more than 70 reported outcomes, mostly from case studies and self-reports, with few studies looking at organizational results or social context.
Finding
What the study measuredOf 110 studies, 44 were case studies and 15 were experimental, quasi-experimental or randomized. Most focused on coachees (69 studies); three focused on organizational outcomes and four covered coachee, coach and organization together. The studies reported more than 70 positive outcomes in 11 categories; 16 reported negative or mixed outcomes. More than half (60) gave little or no consideration to social context, and many relied only on coachee or coach self-report.
Authors' interpretation
What the authors concludeThe authors conclude that methodological rigour and sensitivity to context matter equally in executive coaching outcome research. They doubt return on investment as an organizational measure, suggest alternatives such as customer service, project management, productivity and quality measures, and recommend triangulating data sources, longitudinal designs and understanding the client organization before coaching.
| Question type | exploration or theory |
|---|---|
| Population and setting | Executive coaching by external coaches working with organizations; Organizations; multiple countries and sectors |
| Intervention | Executive coaching |
| Comparison | Not applicable (qualitative systematic review) |
| Follow-up | Not applicable |
| Outcomes | More than 70 reported positive outcomes in 11 categories; Negative or mixed outcomes (pitfalls) |
| Measures | Mostly coachee and coach self-report; Some supervisor and multi-stakeholder ratings; Two ROI studies |
| Effect size and uncertainty | Not applicable: a qualitative review that does not pool or compare effect sizes. |
| Limitations | Does not quantify effectiveness or compare outcome strength; inclusion decisions for single-method and self-reported studies were debated; positive results may still be biased; no consensus on evaluating qualitative studies. |
| Funding and conflicts | No funding or conflict statement found in the accepted manuscript. |
| Replication | Not applicable (review). |
| Source reuse terms | Accepted manuscript CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 (Oxford Research Archive); published version © Elsevier. |
Figures reported, with their location in the source
- 110 studies: Peer-reviewed outcome studies identified, to December 2016 (Accepted manuscript p. 10)
- 44 case studies; 15 experimental, quasi-experimental or RCT: Design counts (Accepted manuscript pp. 16–17)
- 69 coachee-focused; 3 organizational; 4 all stakeholders: Focus of studies (Accepted manuscript pp. 14–15, 39)
- 16 studies: Reported negative or mixed outcomes (Accepted manuscript p. 30)
- 60 of 110: Gave little or no consideration to social context (Accepted manuscript p. 18)
Read the source
Athanasopoulou, A., & Dopson, S. (2018). A systematic review of executive coaching outcomes: Is it the journey or the destination that matters the most? The Leadership Quarterly, 29(1), 70–88. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2017.11.004
Verification record
- Status
- human-verified
- Access level
- full-text
- Date accessed
- 2026-10-24
- Tool-checked
- 2026-10-24
- Automated retraction check
- 2026-10-24: Crossref record has no update, correction or retraction notices (Crossref carries Retraction Watch data). Owner to confirm.
- Human-verified
- 2026-10-24
- Retraction status
- none-found (checked 2026-10-24); Owner check: "Retraction check: r-0006, none-found"
- Last reviewed
- 2026-10-24
How to cite this entry
consultants.coach. (2026). Executive coaching outcome research leans on case studies and self-report; few studies measure organizational effects (Entry r-0006, version 2026-10-24 00:00:00 -0400 EDT). https://consultants.coach/research/r-0006/
Original source: Athanasopoulou, A., & Dopson, S. (2018). A systematic review of executive coaching outcomes: Is it the journey or the destination that matters the most? The Leadership Quarterly, 29(1), 70–88. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2017.11.004
Change log
- : First published after human verification.
Related entries
Recent workplace coaching studies: moderate effect, but no study measured business results
A meta-analysis of 11 workplace coaching studies published after 2014 finds g = 0.44 overall, larger for skills than for attitudes, and notes that no included study measured results-level outcomes.
Our commentary
consultants.coach editorial viewThis review speaks directly to the question of how to show impact. Its message for practitioners is to triangulate: combine the coachee's view with supervisor or stakeholder ratings and a small number of operational measures the sponsor already tracks, rather than relying on an ROI figure. The review does not show how well coaching works; it shows how thin and self-reported much of the evidence base was up to 2016.