Overview. Change Article. The Change Article By Grant (2014),

1196 WordsMar 14, 20175 Pages
Overview Change Article The change article by Grant (2014), has been chosen for its in-depth psychological analyses of a possible human resource (HR) issue; executive coaching. It parades an analysis of executive coaching in times of change that eventuates into an opinionated, yet empirical outcome. Some assumptions asserted in this article include; that change is not a level of intensity but a Boolean style aspect of HR (yes or no), small sample sizes are justifiable, and the value of providing a one-sided article persuades readers to support this side. With these assumptions in mind, Grant (2014) hypothesises that executives undergoing coaching, deliver on organisational goals more frequently. This is supported by a research case study…show more content…
Table 1: Change Article Weaknesses and Strengths Some Identified Strengths Some Identified Weaknesses Very specified yet broad aim. Disregards experience for coaches of change. Clearly referenced statements. Fails to facilitate an opposing argument. Multinational organisation as case study. Research skewed towards males. Fails to acknowledge cultural differences. Assumes effective-leadership is determined by goal-oriented outcomes. Participants The participation of only 1 organisation, disregards the differences in organisational structure, culture or size, and heightens the idiosyncrasies of the organisation at hand; especially in regards to the type of change (Kuipers et al. 2014, p. 8). The article presents a diverse range of manager’s. However, these participants are of a mean age of 42.7 and hence may reflect a response to coaching as part of change management that is niched to that age group (Grant 2014). For instance, higher age tends to reflect greater commitment to organisations (Madsen, et al., 2005). Likewise, since the sample size is greatly skewed towards males with a ratio of 3.75:1, male dominant characteristics such as ‘risk taking’ may skew results (Byrnes, et al, 1999; Grant 2014).). The lack of a controlled environment across participants could then identify that any correlation is possibly illusory or related to an external causation (Tversky & Kahneman
Open Document