Enabling IT Professionals to Cope with Technological ... · Business Process Management Research Report, Nr. 8 ... The constant advancement in technology poses unprecedented complexity

Matthias Boehm Carl Stolze Alexander Fuchs Oliver Thomas

EnablingITProfessionalstoCopewithTechnologicalChange

throughSkill‐basedCoaching

LivingLabBusinessProcessManagementResearchReport,Nr.8,Dezember2013

RESEARCH

www.living‐lab‐bpm.de

Living Lab Business Process Management Research Report

Herausgegebenvon

Prof.Dr.OliverThomasUniversitätOsnabrückFachgebietInformationsmanagementundWirtschaftsinformatikKatharinenstraße3,49074OsnabrückTelefon:0541/969–4810,Fax:–4840E‐Mail:oliver.thomas@uni‐osnabrueck.deInternet:http://www.imwi.uos.de/Bibliografische Information der Deutschen Nationalbibliothek

DieDeutscheNationalbibliothekverzeichnetdiesePublikationinderDeutschenNational‐bibliografie;detailliertebibliografischeDatensindimInternetüberhttp://dnb.d‐nb.deabrufbar.

ISSN2193–777X

Zitationshinweis

Boehm,M.;Stolze,C.;Fuchs,A.;Thomas,O.(2013):EnablingITProfessionalstoCopewithTechnologicalChangethroughSkill‐basedCoaching.In:Thomas,O.(Hrsg.):LivingLabBusinessProcessManagementResearchReport,Nr.8,Osnabrück,LivingLabBPMe.V.DasWerkeinschließlichallerseinerTeileisturheberrechtlichgeschützt.JedeVerwertungistohneZustimmungdesLivingLabBusinessProcessManagemente.V.unzulässig.DasgiltinsbesonderefürVervielfältigungen,Übersetzungen,MikroverfilmungenunddieEin‐speicherungundVerarbeitunginelektronischenSystemen.

Copyright©2013LivingLabBusinessProcessManagemente.V.LivingLabBusinessProcessManagemente.V.UniversitätOsnabrückKatharinenstraße349074Osnabrückwww.living‐lab‐bpm.de

Enabling IT Professionals to Cope with Technological Change through Skill‐based Coaching

MatthiasBoehm,CarlStolze,AlexanderFuchs,OliverThomas

ChairinInformationManagementandInformationSystems,UniversityofOsnabrück

Katharinenstraße3,49074Osnabrück(Germany){mattboeh|cstolze|imwi|othomas}@uni‐osnabrueck.de

http://www.imwi.uos.de/

Theconstantadvancementintechnologyposesunprecedentedcomplexityandchallengestocompanies.Informationtechnology(IT)isattheforefrontofthistrend.SkillstoassessandembracemodernITarebecomingamajorfactorforinnovationandsuccess. ITprofessionalshavetostayeitheruptodateor fail.All professionals working in the IT field are affected by this trend, from thesoftwareengineer implementinganewsolution to theheadof the ITdepart‐ment(ChiefInformationOfficer,CIO).Thepurposeofthisarticleistoconcep‐tualize skill‐based coaching as a new approach for helping IT professionalscopewithtoday’schallenges.Weconducttwoin‐depthcasestudies.Inthefirstcase,anagilesoftwaredevelopmentprojectata food industrycompanyis in‐vestigated.Inthesecondcase,astructuredteachingandcoachingprogramof‐feredbyanuniversityisanalyzed.Thecoachingcubeisusedtocomparebothcases.Throughmeasuringa significant increase in skills the suitability of theconceptisshown.Basedontheresultsofthecasestudies,skill‐basedcoachingisconceptuallydescribedandexplained.Resultsshowthatskill‐basedcoachingis a feasible approach to empower ITprofessionals andenable them toworkwithmodernandfuturetechnologies.

1 Introduction

Intimesofrecessionandeconomicinstability,companiesfaceuniquechallengesonadai‐ly basis. For the year 2015 the alignment of a plethora of differentdevices, people, andtasksaswellastheneedforinnovationwillbeamongthemostimportantandindisputa‐ble trends (Andriole 2012). Professionals have to keep track of technological develop‐mentsanddecide if andhowtoadopt them if theywant tocopewith these trends.Thespeedofprogressintechnologymultipliesthecomplexityandincreasestheneedforper‐sonnelwithappropriateskills(Bullenetal.2007).Additionally,professionalspermanent‐ly have to advance their skill set and consequently develop IT leadership skills (UrffKaufeldetal.2009).Thereisaneedtobuildsuitablestrategiesandplanstomeetthefu‐turedemandsthatthesechangeswillbring(Atos2012,p.11).However,companiesareof‐tennotabletotraintheirstaffontheirown;hence,newteachingandcoachingapproachesarenecessary(Boehmetal.2011b;Stolzeetal.2011).

Atrendtowardcoachingcanbeobserved.Inthepastfiveto10yearsmorethan30%of all companies – from small micro‐firms to global acting enterprises – used coachingconsciously or unconsciously (Bax et al. 2011; Stephan et al. 2010). At the same timecoaching is seenasapopularmethodamong trainers in termsof single, group, or team

2 MatthiasBoehm,CarlStolze,AlexanderFuchs,OliverThomas

Living Lab BPM Research Report 8 2013 |

coaching(Jooetal.2012).Inthepast,nexttostrategyormanagementconsulting,coach‐ing established itself as a person‐oriented form of consulting service (Bax et al. 2011).Coachingshouldnotonlybeseenasanadvisoryserviceinthecontextofcompany‐widechangeprocessesbutalsoastheguidanceofindividualpersonsintheirpersonalandjob‐relateddevelopment(Schreyogg2003). Incontrast topsychotherapy, the targetgroupofcoachingishealthyindividuals(Baxetal.2011).Therehasbeenanattempttoclarifytherolesofcoaching,alongwithadescriptionofcoachingmodels,bestpractices,andrelatedmatters(WitherspoonandWhite1996).Eventoday,coachingisstillafieldwithresearchopportunityandneed.Noconsensusaboutthecoretypesofcoachingapproacheshasbeenreachedsofar;whileHoerretal.(2009)discussthreemaintypes,WitherspoonandRan‐dall(1996)suggestfourtypes,forexample.Uptonow,mostresearchconsideringcoach‐inghasbeenwrittenfromahumanpsychologyperspective,particularlywhenincorporat‐ingpsychotherapeuticapproaches.Therefore,otherdisciplines’contributions(suchasIn‐formationSystems)hasbeenweak,althoughtheywouldbenecessarytoderiveanddevel‐opamoreholisticunderstandingofcoaching(Gray2006,p.475).

The required skills of IT professionals depend on their specific tasks and also varyoverthetimeoftheircareer(Luftman2004).Softwareengineersarerequiredtopossessextensiveprogrammingexperience.AnemployeeworkingattheITservicedeskoran(in‐ternal) ITconsultantneedsmorecommunicationskills.Movingupthecareer ladder, theChiefInformationOfficer(CIO),asheadoftheITdepartment,hastohavemoremanagerialcompetences.UsingITinlearningoftenhasbeendiscussedintheliteratureandinpractice(Alavi and Gallupe 2003), but learning the use and application of IT has not been dis‐cussed. In addition, technological advancements emerge todaywith such a high velocitythattheindividualemployeecannotmanagethesedevelopmentsonhisorherown(HuberandWatson2013).Accordingly,ithasbeenrecognizedthat:

“The IT profession is rather unique in that new developments occur unrelentingly, butoldertechnologiesneverseemtogoaway!Eventhoughlegacysystemscouldeasilybere‐placedbynewertechnologies,thebusinesscaseforreplacingthemisdifficulttomake.Asa result, organizations continue to operate systems and applications coded in older(sometimesancient)languageswhileinterfacingthemwithnewertechnology.Aslongasolder technologysurvives, theneed forexpertise tomanage these technologiesremains.Frequently,themostcriticalskillswithintheITprofessionalranksarethosethatrelatetotheseoldertechnologies.”(McKeenetal.2009,Rn.807)

InmanycasesITprofessionals–especiallythoseworkinginseniorpositions–donothaveenoughtimeforpersonallifelongtraining,forexampletoattendacourseatauniversity(Boehm et al. 2013a). Instead, new forms of coaching such as skill‐based coaching aremoreandmoreapplied(Segersetal.2011).However,aclearunderstandingofwhattheseapproacheslooklikeismissing(Hoerretal.2009).Althoughweconductedacomprehen‐sive literature review, we could not identify any article dealing with the application ofcoachingwithintheITenvironment.Whilethereareactuallycareertrackoptions,suchas,forexample,thoserecommendedintheIS2010modelcurriculum(Topietal.2010),onecancriticizethattheyareimplementedonlybyveryfewuniversities(Belletal.2013,Rn.90).Therefore,newmethodsandapproachesforthedevelopmentofITprofessionalsarerequired(Boehmetal.2011b).

Conceptualizingskill‐basedcoaching in the ITenvironment is therefore thepurposeof thisarticle.Using themethodofcasestudyresearch(Yin2009), twocaseshavebeendeeplyinvestigated.Theresultswillhelpotherresearchersaswellaspractitionerstobet‐

EnablingITProfessionalstoCopewithTechnologicalChangethroughSkill‐basedCoaching 3


terunderstandandapplytheconceptofskill‐basedcoaching.Ourresearchhasbeenguid‐edbythefollowingquestions:

(RQ1)HowcanITprofessionalsbeempoweredtocopewithtechnologicalchangebyskill‐basedcoaching?

(RQ2) How can skill‐based coaching as a practical phenomenon be scientifically ex‐plained?

Toanswertheresearchquestions,ourarticleisstructuredasfollows.AfterprovidingthetheoreticalbackgroundofskillsofITprofessionalsandITleadershipdevelopmentaswellascoachingapproaches,wedescribeourresearchmethod,includingtheresearchframe‐work,datasources,datacollection,anddataanalysis.InsectionIV,thetwocasesarepre‐sentedbydiscussingtherespectivecontext,processes,andresults.Asummaryisalsogiv‐enforeachcase.Next,thetwocasesarecriticallydiscussedandcompared.InsectionVI,theresultsarediscussedandourresearchquestionsareanswered.Finally,aconclusionandoutlookaregiven.

2 Background

2.1 Skills of IT Professionals

Skillsarebroadlydefinedaslearningbasicconcepts,strategies,methods,behaviors,atti‐tudes,andperspectivesforbusinesssuccess(Gray2006,p.478).Theterm“skill”isoftenused interchangeably with “competence” (Peppard 2010, p. 98). The difference is thatwhileskillsaredefinedastheabilitytoapplyknowledgeanduseknow‐howtocompletetasks and solve problems, competencies are the proven ability to use knowledge, skills,andpersonal, social, and/ormethodological abilities, inworkor study situations and inprofessional and personal development (European Parliament and European Council2011).Inshort,competencecanbeconceptualizedasthedualityofskills(knowledge)andexperience(Bassellieretal.2003).

Skillscanbedividedintotechnical(hard)skillsandpersonal(soft)skills.WhennewITpersonnelarehired,softskillssuchas leadershipskillsarebecomingmoreandmoreimportant incomparison tohardskillssuchasprogramming (Josephetal.2010;Groys‐bergetal.2011).However,thedifficultquestiontoansweriswhattheappropriateskillsare;universities“shouldimparttoenable[…]undergraduatestudentstodevelopthebe‐haviorsandpractices theyneed to succeed,both short termand long term” (HuberandWatson2013).Modelcurricula,asforexampletheACM/AISIS2010Curriculum(Topietal.2010), try togivea(high‐level)recommendations in thiscase.However, teachingsoftskillsisespeciallydifficultandoftenneglected.Inordertoovercomethisproblem,HuberandWatson (2013) suggestusingmethodsofmentoring,networking, and long‐termca‐reerdevelopmentforbuildingsoftskills.

A variety of different professionals are usuallyworkingwithin the IT environment.Theyhavedifferentpersonalbackgrounds,educationpaths,andexpectations.McKeenetal.(2009)exploredthenumberandtypesofITskillsthatareimportantcurrentlyandinthefuture.Accordingtotheirstudy,thefollowingroles/titleshavebeenderived:

“Roles/titles that emphasize business and managerial skills include ac‐

count/relationshipmanager,businessanalyst,businesstechnologyspecialist,project



manager, senior platform manager, development manager, strategy consult‐ant/manager,andvariousadministrativeroleswithinIT.

Roles/titles thatemphasize technicalskills includetechnicalspecialist, systemspro‐grammer,programmeranalyst,network/communicationanalyst,storageanalyst,se‐curityanalyst,enterprisearchitect,dataarchitect,developer,qualityassurance,data‐basedevelopmentmanager,applicationmaintenance,productionsupport,datamin‐ing/analytics,andinternetmaintenanceanddevelopment.”(McKeenetal.2009)

Itisobviousthatthereisagreatvarietyofdifferentroles/titlesforITprofessionals.Thelistpresentedabovemaynotevenbeconclusive. In the lastdecades, literatureoften fo‐cusedononerole: thechief informationofficer (CIO).She/he is thecorporateexecutivewhoisparticularlyresponsibleandaccountablefortheirfirm’sITmanagementpractices(Smaltzetal.2006,p.207).Alotofresearchhasbeenconducted,forexample,ontheroleoftheCIOinorganizations(seeforexample(BroadbentandKitzis2005;Joia2010;Smaltzetal.2006;Carteretal.2011;Groveretal.1993;Chenetal.2010)).Researchersalsoin‐vestigate leadership quality and how it affects firm performance (Armstrong and Sam‐bamurthy 1999; Chen et al. 2010; Preston and Karahanna 2009) or career orientationsandcareerpaths (Austinetal.2009;BroadbentandKitzis2005;DawsonandKauffman2011),forexample.However,Smaltzetal.(2006)saidthattherehasbeenlimitedempiri‐calresearchontheCIOrole.Therefore,Boehmetal.(2013b)conductedanempiricalanal‐ysisonskillsofCIOsandhowtheyareinterrelated.Inafirstworkshopskilllistsfoundintheliteraturewereworkedonwitheightexpertsfrompractice.Twenty‐twoCIOsfromdif‐ferent that industriesassessedtheir skills in the itemsof thecompiled list.Boehmetal.(2013b) foundthatCIOshavethehighestskills invirtualizationandmanagement in theinformation age aswell as the highest skills in interpersonal skills, leadershipmanage‐ment,andprojectmanagement.Abacklogdemandwasidentifiedinthefieldsofcoaching,ITtraining,managingsecurity,complianceandrisk,andITgovernance. Inotherstudies,client‐facing capabilities, such as business domain capabilities (Bullen et al. 2007) orcommunicationskills(EnnsandMcDonagh2012)havebeenidentifiedasimportantskillsforITprofessionals.

ForstructuringthevarietyofdifferentskillsofCIOs,Boehmetal.(2011b;2013b)de‐veloped a framework based on a comprehensive literature review as well as empiricalanalysisofcontinuingeducationofferingsandworkshopswithprofessionals.Theauthorsconstitutethatskillsareingeneralhighlyinterrelated.Figure1showsthenetworkofdif‐ferentskillsbydepictingthecalculatedcorrelationvaluesbetweenskills.Onlythesignifi‐cant links are shown. Three groups of skills have been identified:methodology courses(orange),personalskillsmodules(green),andup‐to‐dateskills(blue).ManagementintheInformationAgeintegratesaspectssuchasInterneteconomicsandmanagementbasicsaswellasconsultingmethodsandapproaches.InthefieldofISFundamentals,thebasicsofIS/IT,enterprisesoftware,businessintelligence,andoperationsresearcharecovered.En‐terpriseArchitectureManagementdiscusses all aspectsofBusiness ITalignment and ITservice management. Process‐oriented approaches and methods belong to the field ofBusinessProcessManagement.TheITConsultingskillsfocusonknowledgeandmethodsrelatedtobusinessandITadvice.Withinthe fieldofManagingSecurity,ComplianceandRisk subjects such as IT security, legislation, contracts, and risk management are dis‐cussed.SustainabilityandEthicsdealwithgreenIT,managementethics,andsocialaspectsof informationmanagementaswellas interculturalstudies.Thepersonalskillscoveras‐pectsoninterpersonalskills,leadership,andconflictmanagementaswellasprojectman‐agement.ITgovernance,cloudcomputing,outsourcing,virtualization,(process)modeling,



customerandemployeesatisfaction,coaching,EnterpriseResourcePlanning,andITtrain‐ingareelementsoftheup‐to‐dateskillset.TheseskillsarealsoseenashighlyrelevantforITprofessionals in the literature (cf. forexample (Chan2011;Corbett1994;Ekimci andOzkan2009;Groysbergetal.2011;UrffKaufeldetal.2009;Werr2005)).

Figure1.SkillCorrelationNetworkforCIOs(Boehmetal.2013b)Boehmetal.(2013b)identifiedinterrelationsandfoundgapsthathavenotyetbeeniden‐tified(cf.Figure1).Forinstance,therelationshipbetweencloudcomputingandoutsourc‐ingisoftennotseen,andthereforeitcouldbeconcludedthattrainingisnecessary.Thisgapshouldbeovercomeinthefuturebyestablishingabetterknowledgetransferbetweenresearchandpractice.Fromthesestudiesonecanconcludethatthereisademandfornewcoaching approaches to overcome these gaps and enable IT professionals to copewiththeirfuturetasks.OnehastonotethatthestudybyBoehmetal.(2013b)focusedsolelyonCIOs.However,researchershavenotyetanalyzedotherprofessionals’roles/titles.

InordertobeabletounderstandtheskillsthatarerelevantforITprofessionals,itisimportant to understand the environmental and situational surroundings an IT profes‐sionalisconfrontedwitheveryday.ITpersonnelresearchviewstheITprofessionals’con‐textaslayers(cf.Figure2)(AngandSlaughter2000).Eachlayerrepresentsahigherlevelofanalysis.

Figure2.ContextualPerspectiveofITProfessionals(AngandSlaughter2000)

IT Professional

Staffing Motivation Development

IT Human Resource Practices

IT Roles

Strategy Structure Life Cycle and Size IT Work Process

Internal Organizational Context

Technology Trends IT Labor Markets Legal ConditionsNational Culture and

Globalization

External Environment Context



TheexternalcontextforITprofessionals(cf.Figure2)consistsoftechnologicaltrends,ITlabormarketconditions,lawsandregulations,andnationalcultureandglobalization(AngandSlaughter2000).Technological trendsare,asmentionedabove, themostcriticalas‐pect for IT professionals because of the fast evolution of IT. Consequently, the relevantskillsetforITprofessionalsalsoconstantlychanges.TheconditionsoftheITlabormarketaffectITprofessionalsinawaythat,duetotheproliferationofIT,thedemandforhighlyskilledpersonnelishigh.Inthepastyears,aso‐called“warfortalent”(Beulen2008)hasbeendescribed,meaningthatthelabormarketcanbecharacterizedbyasurplusofcom‐paniesofferingjobs,andITprofessionalscanpickajoboutofseveralofferings.However,this situation is not comfortable for both sides because especially highly skilled profes‐sionalsarerare(KeimandWeitzel2006).ThelegalenvironmentalsoinfluencestheskillsetofITprofessionals.Astechnologybecomesmoreandmoreessentialforsurvivalofanorganization, questions of liability and governance also become more important. Addi‐tionally, the number of disputes relating to contractual issues (for example aroundout‐sourcingrelationships)aswellasthenumberofgovernmentalregulationshasincreased[Littleetal.Littleetal.1999].NationalcultureandglobalizationalsoaffectITprofession‐als.TodayglobalteamsworktogetheronthesameITprojectacrossnationalbordersandcontinents.This is fuelledby theentryof thosenewly industrializedanddevelopingna‐tions (e.g.,BRICS states:Brazil,Russia, India,China, andSouthAfrica) into theglobal ITmarket(Angetal.2011;Beulen2008).Globalandvirtualteamsrequireagainanothersetof skills – predominately communication and leadership skills (Kayworth and Leidner2002).

ImportantelementsoftheinternalcontextofanITprofessional(cf.Figure2)areor‐ganizational strategy, structure, life cycle and size, and the IT work process (Ang andSlaughter2000).OrganizationswhereITisseenasanutilityservicerunatthelowestcost,andtheITstrategywillresultinlimitedopportunitiesforpromotionandcareerdevelop‐ment(AngandSlaughter2000).Theimpactoftheorganizationalstructureissimilar.De‐pendingonthelocationoftheITfunctionwithintheorganization,professionalsneedei‐therbroaderornarrowerskills(Angetal.2011).Furthermore,itisobviousthat,depend‐ing on the stage of the organizational life cycle (start‐up, growth, maturity, or decline(BairdandMeshoulam1988))andorganizationalsize,therequiredskillsetofITprofes‐sionalsdiffers.Finally,thequalityoftheprocessoftransforminguser(customer)specifica‐tions into information technologies and systems requires specific skills (Beulen 2008).There isaneed forroutinizedandpredictableprocessaswellasabetter foundation forthe development of client‐facing capabilities, such as projectmanagement and businessdomaincapabilities(e.g.,communication)(Bullenetal.2007).

In conclusion, the IT professional in the center (cf. Figure 2) does not only have tocopewithdirectinfluencessuchasstaffing,motivation,andpersonaldevelopment,butal‐sowithexternalandinternalcontextbeyondher/hisinfluence.Additionally,anindividualITprofessionalcannotunitealltheoreticallyexistingdifferentskillsatahighlevelinoneperson.OrganizationshavetoplantheirITstaffingonthebasisofananalysisofskillsthatare currently and in future important (McKeenet al. 2009).Onepossibilitywouldbe tomap important skills to different time frames while considering specific organizationalstrategies,theroleofITwithintheorganization,andthetechnologicalenvironmentoftheorganization(AngandSlaughter2000).



2.2 IT Leadership Development

ThequestionishowtheITleadershipdevelopmentofprofessionalswhoareincorporatedintodailyoperational tasksofensuringongoingbusinessprocesses (Luftman2004)canbeenabled.Ingeneral,differentstrategiesforcareerdevelopmentarediscussedandtheselectionof theappropriateoffering is ratherdifficult (McKeenetal.2009;Boehmetal.2013a).ThisistrueparticularlyforyoungqualifiedprofessionalsintheITfield.

ThegrowingimpactofITdecisionsonorganizationsandthecomplexityoftheworktobedoneimplythatallITprofessionalsshouldtodaybeexpectedtoactasleadersinde‐pendentlyoftheirofficialrole/title(SmithandMcKeen2005;Silveretal.1995).Thetrenddiscussed as intrapreneuring –meaning personnel behaving like an entrepreneurwhileworkingwithinanorganization(Pinchot1985)–alsocanbeseenasanevidenceforthis.EmpowermentofITprofessionalssothattheycanmanageIT‐relatedproblemsbythem‐selves isalsocrucial for thesuccessof thecompany(Shrednicketal.1992).AneffectiveleadershipteamiscrucialforanyITdepartmenttodeliveranysignificantbenefitstotheorganization(McKeenandSmith2003,p.295).

ITleadershipdevelopmentisacomplexprocessanddoesnotsolelycovertheattend‐anceof seminars (SmithandMcKeen2005). IT leadersneedabalancedmixofdifferentskillscomprisingbusinessskills,technologyskills, leadershipandmanagementskills,or‐ganizationalandculturalskills,andfiscalmanagementskills(Lutchen2004).Developingtechnologyskills,forexample,requirespermanentlymonitoringnewtrendsandtechnolo‐gies.Thisisquitechallengingbecauseseveralinstitutionsidentifydiversetrendsthatareto be covered in research and practice (Gartner Inc. 2011; Hopkins 2011; Luftman andDerksen2012).According toGartner Inc.,media tablets in combinationwithbringyourowndevice(BYOD)strategies,next‐generationanalytics,andbigdataintermsofbusinessintelligenceaswellascloudcomputingareamongthetop10strategictechnologies(Gart‐nerInc.2011).ForresterResearchinvestigatedthisfieldbyasking208ITexecutiveswhichtechnologiesaremostimportantfortheirbusiness.Accordingtothatstudy,businessintel‐ligence, mobile apps, and business processmanagement are seen as themost valuabletechnologies(Hopkins2011).AsurveybyLuftmanandDerksen(2012)of195U.S.‐basedorganizationsrevealedthetop10ITmanagementissuesin2012.Theseare,amongothers,costreduction,ITandbusinessalignment,businessagility,andspeedtomarket.Bycom‐paringthesethreestudiesonerecognizesthat,dependingontheperspectiveandappliedmethod,eveninthissmallsampledifferenttrendsareidentified.Onlyforasmallnumberoftrendsisthereamatchbetweenthestudies.ThismakesitevenmoredifficultforITpro‐fessionalstogetanoverviewofrelevanttrendsandchoosegoal‐orientedcontinuingedu‐cationofferings. In a study,Bassellier et al. (2003) empirically evaluated the connectionbetweenskillsandexperience(summarizedascompetence)withITleadership.Accordingtotheirdata, ITcompetencecanbeaccountedforone‐thirdof thevariance inITprofes‐sionals’leadershipintentions.UrffKaufeldetal.(2009)investigatedtheeffectivenessofITleadership.Intheirstudy,theyfoundthat:

“Akeyattributeofaneffectiveleaderwasfoundtobetheawarenessofandsensitivitytothedynamicsofthebusinessenvironment,thepeople,tasksandorganisationalstructure,whichenablesa leadertouseparticularcompetenciesto invoketheappropriatebehav‐iourortrait.Itshouldbenotedthatinmostcasesitissimplyalackofanyofthesechar‐acteristicsthatmaketheleaderineffective.”(UrffKaufeldetal.2009)

Formal training is seenas the least effective andmost expensiveway tobuildbetter ITleaders[Kesner,2003].EnhancingtraditionalIScurriculumguidelinesthroughactiveen‐



gagementwithan industryadvisoryboard isoneproposedsolution that,however,onlymakes an impact in the long run (Huber andWatson 2013). Smith andMcKeen (2005)suggestacomprehensiveleadershipdevelopmentprogramconsistingof(formal)training,processes practice integration, and a supportive environment. Establishing an environ‐mentis,accordingtotheauthors,themostimportantaspectbutalsothemostdifficultas‐pect.Well‐articulatedandinstantiatedvalues,aclimateoftrust,empowerment,clearandfrequent communication, and accountability are central constituents of this type of cul‐ture.Afterrealizingthisenvironment,theleadershipdevelopmentprogramhastobeinte‐grated into thedailywork.Basedon these layersof IT leadershipdevelopment, trainingcanbeconducted.Moreandmore,traditionalformaltrainingapproachesarereplacedbynewteachingandcoachingapproaches(McKeenetal.2009).

2.3 Teaching and Coaching Approaches

Today’scoachingisrootedinbusinesslifeandismostoftenusedthere–incontrasttoap‐proachessuchassupervision(Jooetal.2012).However,theword“coach”ismucholder.Itwasfirstused inthe16thcenturytodescribeaparticularkindofcarriagethatconveyedpeopletowheretheywantedtobe(Gray2006,p.476).Fromtheretheunderstandingofthetermevolvedtowardthepersonaldevelopmentsphere.Inthe1970sand1980scoach‐ingconqueredtheU.S.managementspheresaspurposefulanddevelopment‐orientedper‐sonnelmanagement.Sincethemid‐1980scoachingwasmoreandmoreunderstoodastheguidance of managers through external consultants. In the 1990s the coaching conceptgained traction outside the U.S. – for example, in Europe. Differentiation and wide ac‐ceptanceofdifferentapproachescreatedaboomingmarket.Atthesametimecoachingin‐crementally developed into a blurred generic term for amultitude of different formsofguidanceandtraining(BöningandFritschle2005;Steiningeretal.2009).Thetypicaltar‐getof coaching is enablingpeople tohelp themselves (Jooet al.2012). It isnota singleeventbutacontinuousprocess(WitherspoonandWhite1996,p.125).Coachingisappliedin miscellaneous situations and settings, such as the delegation of tasks by a manager(DeanandWebb2011),theimplementationofsustainableITinfrastructures(Boehmetal.2011a), or the restructuring in global companies toward centralized shared services(Westermanetal.2011).

Often,coachingisdiscussedasaconceptrelatedtomentoring.Intheliterature,differ‐entunderstandingsaboutthisrelationshipcanbefound.Kram(1983)definesmentoringasasuperordinateconcept.Sheexplainsthatcoachingisapartofthecareerfunctionfilledbymentors.Swapetal.(2001)developedasimilarunderstandingbasedonmanagementandcognitivepsychologyliterature.Accordingtothem,mentoringfocusesonthetransferof the tacit dimensions of knowledge. Coaching is seen as an extension of mentoring.McKeenetal.(2009)arguethatcoachingfocusesontheimprovementoftheindividualjobperformance;mentoringcoverseverythingelse.Theysuggesthiringexternalcoachesandperformingmentoringinternally.Inthefollowing,wewillusetheconceptofMcKeenetal.(2009)todiscusstheconceptofcoaching.

Teachingandcoachingarealsocloselyrelated.Bothtargetempoweringindividualstocompletepresentedtaskswithknowledgeandskills(Fitzgerald1992).Oftenthetermsareusedinterchangeably.However,thebasicdifferenceisaboutthecommunicationpatterns:teachingfocusesonthepresenter,asingleperson,orgroupspeakinginoneway.Incon‐trast, coaching is a two‐way communication process between coach and client (Hunter2006).Inanycase,teachingandcoachingshouldresultintheactualapplicationoftheac‐quiredknowledgeorskillsandtherebychangedbehavior(Fitzgerald1992).Thereisan‐



otherdifferencebetweencoachingandteaching.Withincoachingthereisoftenlessfocusontheacquisitionofnewknowledgeandskillsratherthanintheenhancementofprevail‐ingskills(Hunter2006).Fortheteacher,respectivelyforthecoach,comprehensiveskillsandmuchpracticearerequired inordertobeabletounderstandtheclientandunleashhis/herpotential(WitherspoonandWhite1996,p.125).

In order to structure and to better understand the coaching industry, Segers et al.(2011)developedaframework(theso‐called“coachingcube”)basedonanextensiveliter‐ature review (cf. Figure 3). The framework offers the three dimensions agenda (what),coach(who),andapproaches(how)tocharacterizeacoachingendeavor.Whiletheleftcu‐be in Figure 3 shows the complete coaching cube, the right part shows the empiricallymostlikelycombinations.Theauthorsidentifiedinanempiricalstudythe15mostlikelytobeobservedcombinationsinrealityoutofthepotential60.

Figure3.CoachingCube(left:complete;right:mostlikelycombinations)(Segersetal.2011)The coaching agenda (cf. Figure 3) distinguishes a focus on specific behaviors (skillscoaching),afocusonanemployee’sspecificperformancepotential,jobrequirements,etc.(performancecoaching),oramoreholisticviewwithafocusonintimate,personalques‐tions(developmentorlifecoaching).Thepersonwhoprovidesanswerstothequestions–namelythecoach–canbeeitheranexternalcoach,aninternalcoach(whoisoutsidelinemanagement), or a linemanager. Additionally, self‐coaching is included as a possibility.TheapproachestocoachinghavebeencategorizedbasedontheEmotionality‐Rationality‐Activity‐Awareness‐Context(ERAAwC)modelfromL’Abate(1981): Emotionality:Focusontheimportanceofexperienceandpersonalfeelings. Rationality:Focusonrational‐emotiveandreality‐orientedapproachesstressingthe

importanceoflogicalprocesses. Activity:Focusonactivity,observation,modeling,andrewards. Awareness:Focusonemphasizingmediation,drawing,guidedimagination,roleplays

etc. Context:Focusonparadoxicalassignments,organizationsetups,orprocessobserva‐

tion.



Asdescribedabove,Segersetal. (2011)distinguishbetweenskill,performance,andde‐velopment/lifecoachingasapproaches. In the literature,othercategorizationshavealsobeendescribed.Hoerretal.(2009)presentthreemaintypesofcoaching: Interventioncoachingoccurswhentheindividualisthoughtbyotherstobeinneedof

improvementanddevelopmentbymeansofanintervention. Developmentcoachingiswhenanindividualreallyseekstodevelopandgrowhimself

orherselfinacertainareaorinmultipleareasorinnewroles. Skill‐basedcoaching occurswhenan individual activelypursuesa coach inorder to

learnnewskills.WitherspoonandWhite(1996)suggestfourtypes: Coachingforskills,withafocusonspecificskillsrequiredforacurrentjob; Coachingforperformance,withabroaderfocusonapresentjob; Coachingfordevelopment,focusedonlearningforafuturejob; Coachingfortheexecutive’sagenda,directedonlearningbroadlyrelatedtotheexecu‐

tive’sowninterests.Themaindifferencebetweenskill‐basedandothercoachingapproachesiswhatshouldbechanged(WitherspoonandWhite1996).Manyformsofcoachingaimatthedevelopmentofnewbehavioralpatternsofthecoachedperson.Examplesforthisareovercomingper‐formance issues, the pursuit of a person’s own agenda, or personal development. Skill‐based coaching approaches focus more strictly on the development of certain, definedskills.Althoughcriticssometimesarguethatskill‐basedcoachingdoesnothavethesamelong‐termeffectasotherformsofcoaching(Gray2006),theskillgainedcanmakeacru‐cialdifferencefortheclient.Additionally,skill‐basedcoachingcanbeoftenfoundinprac‐ticebuthasnotbeeninvestigatedindepthsofar(Segersetal.2011).

3 Research Method

3.1 Research and Methodological Framework

Researchininformationsystemscanbecharacterizedaspluralisticintermsofmodelsandmethodsusedforresearch(BanvilleandLandry1989,p.58).Thereisarichtraditioninthe ISdisciplineespeciallyconcerningqualitative research (forexample (KernandWill‐cocks 2002; Mingers 2003; Remenyi and Williams 1996; Silverman 1998; Lee 1989)).Amongmethodsofqualitativeresearch,casestudyresearchismostwidelyusedbecauseof its suitability to understand the relationship between technology, innovation, people,and organizations (Darke et al. 1998).However, applying thismethod in the field oftenshowspracticaldifficulties.Oftencasestudieslackrigorousness(DubéandParé2003).Intheircomparativeanalysisof85casestudies,Sarkeretal. (2012) foundoutthat inone‐thirdofthecasesonlyaverygenericjustificationforselectingcasestudyresearchisgiven.Furthermore,morethanhalfofthearticlesutilizeonlyonecaseunit.

Inotherdisciplinessuchas,forexample,engineeringanddesign,whicharecloselyre‐latedtoIS,casestudyresearchisespeciallyemployedtoinvestigatepracticalphenomenato derive theoretical constructs (Boehm and Thomas 2013; Sarker et al. 2012). For thesamereason,wechosetoemployaqualitativemethodologicalapproachbasedontwocasestudies.Unlikeahypotheses‐testingdeductiveapproachthisinductiveprocedurewillhelp



us to investigate the field in depth and generate theories for later testing (Eisenhardt1989).Intheexploratorycontextofourresearch,weregardcasestudiesasthebest‐fittingmethodtoexplorethetopicathand.

Theempiricalinquirywithincasestudyresearchexaminesapresentphenomenonindepthandwithin itsreal‐lifesetting(Yin2009).Severalresearchersadvocate thismeth‐odologyforinvestigatingactualevents,includingorganizationalandmanagerialprocesses,becauseitallowstheresearchertoretainthemeaningfulandholisticcharacteristicsofre‐al‐lifeevents(Darkeetal.1998;Yin2009).Althoughtheremaybealackofgeneralizationbyusing thismethodology, it is a relevant tool for the identificationof heuristics, emer‐gencetrends,orweaksignals,whichamorequantitativeapproachcouldnotdisclose(Jick1979).

For analyzing teaching and coaching approaches, a comprehensive reviewmodel isnecessary(AlaviandGallupe2003).Aconceptualframeworkisthestartingpointforcasestudyresearch(Yin2009).Therefore,weelaboratedaresearchframework(cf.Figure4).WeadoptedthemodelofAlaviandGallupe(2003),whichisoriginallybasedontheVirtualLearningEnvironmentmodelbyPiccoliet al. (2001).Accordingly, thehumandimension(administrators, participants, and instructors) and the design dimension (content, tech‐nology,interaction,etc.)arethemajordimensionsforassessingtheeducationalsuccess.

Figure4.ResearchModelThe first set of participants consists of administrators who are involved in managerialpractices.Theyareconfrontedwiththeneedtodevelopstrategies,createsupportstruc‐tures,andadjustorganizationalculturesthatenableateachingandcoachinginitiativetobesuccessful.

Participants are all kinds of ITmanagers, consultants, and other professionalswhoworkintherespectivecontext.Theyhavevariouslearningstylesanddemographicback‐grounds. Participants have different expectations concerning their learning experience.Becauseoftheheterogeneityinthisgroupitisdifficulttounderstandtheirrequirementsconcerningskill‐basedcoaching.Operationalpracticessuchasthequestionoftherightlo‐cation, groupdynamics,distanceor face‐to‐facemeetings, and support issues are a con‐cernforparticipants.

Instructorsdesignanddeliverskill‐basedcoachingapproachestoparticipants.Devel‐oping new coachingmaterial, implementing assessment techniques, and delivering newapproachesarethemaintasksoftheseinstructors.Theycovercoachingpracticessuchas,

Administrators- CIOs- Program Directors- Project Managers

Participants- IT Managers- IT Consultants- IT Professionals

Instructors- Practitioners- Consultants- Coaches

Educational Success- performance- satisfaction- competencies

Actors(Human Dimension)

(engage in)Practices

(Design Dimension)(to achieve) Outcomes

(Effectiveness)

Managerial Practices- strategies- structures- culture

Operational Practices- location- group dynamics- distance or face-to-face- support

Coaching Practices- internal/external- mandatory or voluntary- experience- method

Assessment

Assessment

Assessment



forexample,thequestionofinternal/externalcoaching,mandatoryorvoluntarycourses,andtheexperienceofparticipantsaswellastheselectionoftherightmethod.

Basedonourresearchmodel(cf.Figure4)wedecidedtoanalyzeskill‐basedcoachingfromthreeperspectives:management,operations,andcoaching.Additionally,wehighlightthe importance of the assessment perspective in order to ensure educational success intermsofperformance,satisfaction,andcompetencies.Tobeabletoderivesignificant in‐formation,wedecided to conduct long‐termanalysis,meaning that in each case at leastoneyearofinvestigationwasplanned.

3.2 Data Sources and Case Selection

Derivingaclearsamplinglogicforcaseselectionisessentialforensuringtheoreticalrele‐vance and substantive significanceof the research (Dubé andParé2003).The selectionprocessshouldnotrestentirelyonconvenienceoreaseofaccessibility(Yin2009).Basedon theserecommendations,wedeveloped the followingrationales forour researchpro‐cess: Abilitytoanswerresearchquestions:Thecasestudysiteshavetobeabletodeliver

valuable data for answering our research questions. Therefore, it is necessary thatskill‐basedcoachingisactuallyappliedinthespecificsettingforasufficientperiod.

Appropriatebasicconditions:Thecircumstancesinwhichthecasestakeplacehavetobeappropriatefordeliveringusabledata.Organizationsshouldhaveasufficientfirmsizeandnumberofemployees.

Highvarietyof sites:Forensuringahighergeneralizabilityof theresults, casesitesshouldbedifferent.Thisalsohelpstoshowthebroadpossibleareasofapplicationofskill‐basedcoaching.

Facilitating of cross‐case analysis: Case sites have to be comparable in terms of re‐searchperiod,availableresources,levelofanalysis,andpersonalcontact.Ameaning‐fulcross‐caseanalysis(Yin2009)shouldbepossiblebasedontheavailabledata.

Relevanttopic:Caseshavetocoverhighlyrelevantandup‐to‐datetopicsoftheISdis‐cipline.Thisrationaleaimstoensuretherelevanceofthederivedresearchresults.

Privilegedand long‐termcontact: Inorder todeeply analyze skill‐based coaching, aprivilegedcontacttoallstakeholdersandsubjectsofinvestigationisrequired.Accessrestrictionshavetobeminimized.Additionally,apersonalandlong‐termpartnershipwiththerespectiveinstitutionsishelpful.

Aftersettinguptherationales,possiblecasesitesweresearchedforanddiscussedamongtheresearchers.Finally,wedecidedtousetwocasesthatallfulfillourrequirements.Ta‐ble1givesanoverviewofthetwocasesandexplainswhytheyhavebeenchosen.Withinthefirstcase,weintensivelyinvestigatedasoftwaredevelopmentprojectatanindustry‐leadingGermanfoodretailcompany.Formorethanoneyear,wewereactivelyinvolvedinthe project and therefore got a deep look into all developments. This case represents aclassicalfieldforISresearchinwhichastrongneedforbetterprocessesbecauseofprob‐lemswithclassicalmethodssuchasthewaterfallmodelhavebeenobserved(Kitchenhametal.2009).Inordertoshowthebroadapplicabilityandvarietyofsettingsofskill‐basedcoaching,wesearchedforasecondcase.Inthecasewehavechosen,astructuredteachingandcoachingapproachisconceptualizedandimplementedbyauniversity.Weworkedto‐getherwiththeresponsiblepeopleandaccompaniedtheprojectfornearlytwoyears.Alt‐houghthiscasecoversacombinedteachingandcoachingapproach,thecoreideaofitis



basedontheprinciplesofskill‐basedcoaching.Therefore, thecasehasbeen included inthisstudy.Thecombinationofteachingandcoachinginthesecondcaseisthereforeverysuitabletoshowthebroadrangeofapplicabilityofskill‐basedcoaching.

Table1.RationalesforCaseSelection

CaseSISDEV:AgileDevelopmentwithCutting‐edgeTechnologies

CaseIC:StructuredTeachingandCoachingProgram

Ability to answerresearch ques‐tions

Skill‐based coaching is applied in asoftwareengineeringproject.

Skill‐basedcoachingisutilizedincon‐junction with a structured teachingapproach.

Appropriate basicconditions

Project takes place in internationalleaderinfoodretail.Theorganizationhas3,500employees.

IT professionals who participate inthe program come from a variety ofdifferent organizations from variousindustries. The program vendor is amajorGermanuniversity.

High variety ofsites

Focus on a classical software engi‐neeringproject.

Focus on a new teaching and coach‐ingapproach.

Facilitating ofcross‐caseanalysis

Researchperiod(1‐2years),availableresources(interviewsanddocuments),levelofanalysis (in‐depth investigation), andpersonal contactarecompara‐ble.

Relevanttopic Software engineering as a classicalfield within the IS discipline (Kitch‐enhametal.2009).

Continuing education as a field of ISresearch that has gained more andmore importance over the time(Steiningeretal.2009).

Privileged andlong‐termcontact

Theauthorshaddirectpersonalcon‐tact to the internal CIO and the pro‐ject team as well as the externalcoach.

Programtookplace incloseproximi‐ty to the authors. Direct connectionwas established to theprogramven‐dor.

3.3 Data Collection

TheperiodofintensivedatacollectionlastedfromDecember2010toDecember2011forCaseSISDEVandfromJanuary2011toJanuary2013forCaseIC.Multipledatacollectionmethodshavebeenutilizedduringthosetimeperiodsaimingatexploitingthesynergeticeffectsofcombiningthemandinvestigatingaspecificconceptfromdifferentperspectives(Yin2009;Capaldo2007).Thisprocedure isalsocalledtriangulation(Webbetal.1966;Jick1979).Threemainsourcesofevidencewereutilized: Focused Individual Interviews:We interviewed all involved stakeholders including

project managers, team members, software developers, consultants, and coaches.Hence,alllevelsofhierarchywithintheareaarerepresented.Theinterviewswithkeystakeholders lasted between 60 and 90 minutes and were based on an interviewguide,whichconsistsof structuredandunstructuredquestions.Conversationshavenotbeenrecordedinordertoensureanaturalmanner.Researcherstooknotesdur‐ing each interview and typed the transcripts immediately after each interview. Alt‐houghweacknowledgethatrecordingandtranscribingincreasesthecredibilityandauditabilityofastudy(Sarkeretal.2012),wehave–similartoSilvaandBackhouse(2003)–aclearreason: Intervieweesmightnot feelcomfortabletalkingabouttheirpersonal skills and related issues in the organization knowing that they would be



taped.Follow‐upquestionswereexplored througha combinationof face‐to‐face in‐terviews and telephone conversations. In total, 10 individuals were interviewed inCaseSISDEVand43interviewsincaseIC.

Observation:Wewereabletodirectlyobserveactionsofallstakeholdersthroughoutnumerousfieldvisits.Thisincluded,forinstance,observingtheworkingprocedures.Eachvisit lasted for at least threedaysand includedat least two researchers.Withthis,in‐depthobservationscouldbemade,whichwereusedtogainanappreciationofhowskill‐basedcoachingworksinpractice.Atbothsitesweattendedperiodicmeet‐ings,programmingsessions,and–incaseIC–alsotheactualevents.Extensivefieldnotesweretakenbyeachresearcher.

Documents:Wegatheredseveralmaterialsincorporatedassupplementarysourcesofevidenceproducedby and about the case companies, includingdigital publications,CD‐ROMs,catalogs,andminutesofmeetings.FurtherinformationwasgatheredfromtheInternet,businesspressarticles,andindustrialjournals.Thisdocumentaryinfor‐mationhelpedustoreconstructeachcasestudysettingingreatdetail.

Throughoutthedatacollectionprocess,allrecordshavebeenmaintainedinastructureddatabase.Notesfromtheinterviews,fieldobservations,anddocumentstudieshavebeentaken independently by each attending researcher. Furthermore, it is important to notethat all involvedpartners fromboth case sites developed a close relationship to the re‐searchersandconsequentlyevenseniormanagement,includingthedirector,werefavora‐blydisposedtowardcollaboratingwiththeteam.

3.4 Data Analysis

Thetaskwithindataanalysis is toprocessthecollectedempiricalmaterial(Sarkeretal.2012,Rn.8).As is typical in inductiveresearch(Eisenhardt1989),weadoptedan inter‐pretiveapproachfortheanalysisofthedata(KleinandMyers1999;Walsham1993).Alltranscripts, documents, and field notes have been read in order to derive issues andthemesrelatedtoskill‐basedcoaching.Hereby,theresearchersproceededtothefirststepindependentlyofeachother.Next, all authorsconjointlydevelopedadraft reportof thefindings.Thispreliminaryversionofthecasestudieswassharedwithkeystakeholdersofthe respective cases. The feedback we received from discussing the draft reports withthemwasincorporatedintothefinalcasestudy.Bydoingso,wecompletedthehermeneu‐ticcircle(KleinandMyers1999).Informantsofthecasesitesapprovedeachcasereportforthesecondandlasttime.

Next to the case studies, the researchers also maintained individual summaries ofeachcaseincludingasynthesisoftheskill‐basedcoachingconcept.Inthenextphase,au‐thors developed individual preliminary propositions concerning the conceptualization.Thenresultswerecombinedandusedtocomparethemwithexistingliteraturetosharpentheinsight.Incaseofconflict,anunbiasedthirdacademicresearchersettledthedispute.

3.4.1 Research Reliability and Validity

Aswithanyqualitative research, casestudyresearchshouldprovidereaderswithsomeassuranceregardingthereliabilityandvalidityoftheiranalysis(Sarkeretal.2012).Inor‐dertoenhancetherigorandvalidityofthestudy,wefollowedtheprinciplesofcasestudyresearch. The literature described several useful guidelines (Creswell and Miller 2000;Gibbertetal.2008;Yin2009): triangulation(usingmultiplemethods),maintenanceofaclearchainofevidence(maintainingadatabasewithtraceableinformation),useofmulti‐



plesources(research‐basedonmorethanjustonekindofsource),orrelevanceofthere‐search(focusingonimportanttopics).Theseguidelineshavebeenimplementedusingourrationalesforselectingcasesandourutilizedmainsourcesofevidence(cf.therespectivesub‐sectionsofthissection).Nevertheless,asLee(1989)alreadyemphasized,casestudiesinISresearchhavefourbasicproblems:

1. Howtomakecontrolledobservations2. Howtomakecontrolleddeductions3. Howtoallowforreplicability,and4. Howtoallowforgeneralizability.Concerningthefirstproblem,Lee(1989)arguesthatcaseresearchoftendoesnotensurecontrolledobservationsusing, forexample, laboratoryorstatisticalcontrols.Wetriedtosolvethisissuebyusingnaturalcontrols.Weinterviewedthesamepeopleintheirdiffer‐entroles.Bydoingso,wecouldholdonefactor(people)constantandvarythesituation.With respect to problem two,we derived controlled deductions, for example, involvingverbalpropositions.Basedonthis,wecandescribelogicaldeductions.Problemthreepre‐sents an obvious difficulty, because any observed situation in the real‐world setting ishighlyunlikelytorecur.Therefore,otherresearchersmightnotverifythefindingsofourconcretecases.Thesolutionforthisproblemis–accordingtoLee(1989)–thattheotherresearchercouldapplythesamemethodologyandtheoriesinadifferentcasesite.Hence,althoughthecasestudyitselfisnotreplicable,thecasestudy’sfindingsare.Finally,gener‐alizabilityisthefourthproblem.Sarkeretal.(2012)arguethatfindingsarenotgeneral‐izable,butthetheoryortheconceptscanbeappliedtoothersettings.Therefore,wetriedtoacknowledgethelimitedgeneralizabilitybuttriedtobalancethisdisadvantagewiththeotheradvantagesofqualitativestudies.

Gibbertetal.(2008)emphasizedthatcasestudiesneedtorevealinternalvalidity,ex‐ternalvalidity,constructvalidity,andreliability.InFigure5theappliedprinciplesincon‐ductingourcasestudyresearcharesummarized.

Figure5.AppliedCaseStudyPrinciples



Especially thevalidityof case researchhas tobeensured.Therefore,weutilized the sixprinciplesproposedbyKlein andMyers (1999) tovalidateour research.Table2 showshowourresearchstandsagainstthesecriteria.

Table2.ValidationCriteria

CriteriabyKleinandMyers(1999,p.72) OurResearch

1.HermeneuticCircle

All humanunderstanding is achievedby iterat‐ing between considering the interdependentmeaningofpartsandthewholethattheyform.

By using an iterative process of draft prepara‐tionandapprovalthroughkeystakeholders,thehermeneuticcirclecanbeseenascompleted.

2.ContextualizationTomake sense, the interpretations require thehistoricalandsocialcontext.

Before visiting case sites, the respective con‐textshavebeenstudiedandanalyzedusingvar‐iousdocuments.Thecontextofeachcaseispre‐sentedintheresultssection.

3. Interaction between the researchers and thesubjectsThesubjectsoftheinterviewsareofferingtheirinterpretationsofthephenomenonunderstudy.The social interaction between researcher andintervieweesinfluencethestudy.

Closepersonalcontactwiththestakeholderwasestablished during the field studies. Interviewpartnershavebeencarefullyselectedbasedup‐on our knowledge of the historical and socialcontext. To complement interview transcripts,weusedfieldnotesfromobservationsandotherdocumentarysources.

4.AbstractionandgeneralizationThegeneralizationofparticularstoabstractcategories;generalizationtosocialtheories.

Interviewguidelinesandothermechanismsen‐sured comparability and generalizability of thefieldwork.Applyingourresearchframeworktothe case studies facilitated the general concep‐tualizationofskill‐basedcoaching.

5.DialogicalreasoningThe confrontation of the original assumptionsandpreconceptions.

Draftsof thecasestudiesweresharedanddis‐cussed with informants. The authors incorpo‐ratedthesecommentsintothepreliminaryver‐sions of the cases. The final descriptions havebeenapprovedbykeystakeholders.

6.MultipleinterpretationsThe relationship among context, power, socialactions,andintentions.

Statements of different people working in dif‐ferent roleswere complementedwith our datafield notes and other documents. This ensuresthecoverageofmultipleinterpretations.

7.Suspicion

Theunravelingofdistortionscreatedbythepo‐litical,social,andhistoricalcontextsofthesub‐jects.

Discussionswithdifferent types of people helpin getting a comprehensive picture. During in‐terviews we investigated different interpreta‐tions.

4 Research Findings

Weconductedqualitativecasestudiestoexplorethecontextofskill‐basedcoachinganditsoutcomes.Inthefollowingwepresentthetwoselectedcases,SISDEVandIC.Followingabriefdescriptionofthecases,weexplorethefacetsofskill‐basedcoachingbypresentingtheprocess.Resultsarealsodepictedforeachcasesite.



4.1 Case SISDEV: Agile Development with Cutting‐edge Technologies

4.1.1 Context

Thefirstcase,SISDEV,isaboutthedevelopmentofaSalesInformationSystem(SIS)withina3,500‐person‐strongfoodretailcompany.Thedevelopmentgoalwastoenablethecom‐pany’ssales forcetoretrieve,edit,andcreateallrelevant informationaboutsalescondi‐tionswithinthehighlycomplexanddynamicstructureoftheGermanfoodretailindustry.Theseconditionsare– formostcustomers–mutuallynesteddiscountsandabatements.Therefore,thesystem’sspecificationswerenotobviousfromthestart,butratherhadtobe discovered through a comprehensive functional and technical analysis. From a tech‐nicalperspective,thesystemhadtobeintegratedintotheexistingandfutureEnterpriseResourcePlanning(ERP)environmentforinvoicingandaccounting.

SeveraldifferentITprofessionalsweremoreorlessexplicitlyinvolvedintheproject.TheCIO of the companywasmostly concerned about introducing a new company‐wideERPsystem.The leadof theSISDEVprojectwashandedoverto itsdeputy,whoalsoranthe ITdepartment’snewlyestablishedprojectoffice.TheCIOthereforedidnothaveanyformal rolewithin theSISDEVproject.Although this structure lookedstraightforward, itwasneverexactlydefinedwherethebordersbetweentheprojectofficeandthemainITdepartmentwere. Also, the skill sets of those involvedwere not clear at the beginning.Therefore,beforeconducting theactual coaching,wedetermined theactual skill levelofthosesupposedtoworkontheSISDEVprojectthroughobservation.

What was most problematic was the lack of flexible and agile procedures andknowledge ofmodern cutting‐edge programming approacheswithin the IT department.Overmanyyears itsemployeeshadgottenusedtotheirdailyroutineworkwithoutcon‐sideringnewprocedures,softwaredevelopmentapproaches,orprogramming languages.Anothercontributingfactortothemiserywasthefactthatexternalserviceprovidersandconsultantssucceededinsellingproductsorservicestothecompanythatdidnotperfectlyfitthecompany’sneeds.Alackofabilitytosteertheseproviderswasidentified.TheCIO,forexample,startedhiscareerinanotherfieldandwasthereforenotatrainedITprofes‐sional,whilehisdeputydidnothaveanypreviousexperiencewithaprojectofthisscale.Besides,theITdepartmentofferedonlylimitedcustomerorientationtowardtheotherde‐partmentswithinthecompany.Thus,thehistoricallygrownlegacysystemlandscapemadeitdifficulttomeetcurrentrequirements.Finally,thelackoflong‐termorientedITdecisionmakingbecameobviouswhennolong‐termimpactmonitoringcouldbefound.Ingeneral,updatedITmanagementskillswerestronglyrequired.

Throughoutourobservationwefocusedon10stakeholdersintheproject:BesidestheCIOandtheviceCIO,weinterviewedandmonitoredtheactionsoftwoendusers,twoex‐ternalcoaches,andfoursoftwaredevelopers/membersoftheITdepartment(cf.Table3).



Table3.Overviewonin‐depthmonitored/interviewedProjectStakeholders

No. ProjectRole Position

1 ‐ CIO2 ProjectManager ViceCIO3 EndUser1 SalesDepartment4 Coach1 ExternalConsultant5 Developer1 SoftwareDeveloper/ITDepartment6 Developer2 SoftwareDeveloper/ITDepartment7 Developer3 SoftwareDeveloper/ITDepartment8 Developer4 SoftwareDeveloper/ITDepartment9 EndUser2 SalesDepartment10 Coach2 SoftwareEngineeringConsultant

4.1.2 Process

Atthestartofthedevelopmentendeavora“classic”waterfallmodelwaschosen:require‐mentanalysis,design, implementation,verification,andmaintenance followastrictpro‐ceduralfashion(Royce1970).Duetouncertaintiesandchangesintherequirementsspeci‐fication,ittookninemonthsfromtheinitialrequirementanalysisuntilafirstrunningver‐sionofthesoftwarewasdeployed.Althoughtheanalysiswasconductedindepth–atleasthalfthetimehadbeenspendonit–theresultwasnotsatisfyingatall:TheimplementedSIShad insufficientresponse times.Endusersdescribed theusabilityas “laborious”and“not task‐compliant.” The IT department (especially Developers 1 and 3) evaluated theapplicationas“hardtomaintain”becauseofitscomplexuseofhard‐wiredcodefragmentsbetweendifferentapplicationlayersindifferentprogramminglanguages.

ThoughSISwasdeployedandusedproductively,therewasstillaneedforapreferablyquickbutsustainablereplacement–especiallyfortheuser‐facingfrontend.Whenprojectresultswereevaluated,theinsightthataclassical,plan‐drivenapproachisnotappropriatefordealingwithuncertainandchangingrequirementsregardingfunctionalityandusabil‐itybecameobvious.Thus,adifferentmethodologywascontemplated.

Anexternalconsultantwasemployedasacoach.Askill‐basedcoachingforagilesoft‐waredevelopmentapproacheswaschoseninordertohandlethisspecificsituation.Agilesoftwaredevelopmentreliesonadifferentopiniononhowsoftwaredevelopmentshouldbe realized. Instead of creating big, upfront requirement specifications, the process ofsoftwaredevelopmentandthesoftwareproduct itself isassumedtobeunpredictable. Incontrast to traditional,plan‐drivenapproacheschange iswelcomeandsupposed tosup‐portthecustomer’scompetitiveadvantage.ExtremeProgramming,Scrum,AdaptiveSoft‐wareDevelopment, and FeatureDrivenDevelopment are common examples ofmethodsfollowingthisnewparadigm.TheyallembracetheprincipleslaiddownintheAgileMani‐festo,whichrelativizestheestablishedfundamentalsoftraditionalapproaches(Cunning‐ham2001): Individualsandinteractionsoverprocessesandtools, Workingsoftwareovercomprehensivedocumentation, Customercollaborationovercontractnegotiation,and Respondingtochangeoverfollowingaplan.Within four weeks of coaching a small team of four developers achieved the re‐implementationofanewSISfrontendfromscratchusingagilemethods.Deliveringhalf‐



bakedbutrunnableandtestablepiecesofsoftwareatshorttimeintervals(rapidprototyp‐ing)ensuredearlyandcontinuousend‐user feedback.Thispracticehelpedtomeettheirspecialrequirementsregardingresponsetimesandusability.

Afterthispromisingresultontheend‐userside,theprojectmanagerinvestigatedhowto improve the back end components aswell. Eventually, instead of reusing the just re‐implemented front end, a radical restart was chosen. An external software engineeringconsultancy provided a holistic skill‐based coaching into the agile technology Ruby onRails.Workshopswereused to teach fundamentalknowledge in systemdesignandpro‐gramming, using the latest technologies and tools to exemplify the educational content.Basedonthis,thecoachessupportedtheparticipantsintransferringthelearnedtheoreti‐calskillstoarealsituationthatwasgivenbytheSISproject.Whileworkshopswereper‐formedastypicallecturesessions,thepracticalcoachingwasdoneinone‐on‐onesessionsusingthetechniqueofpairprogramming.Followingthisapproach,theteamimplementedthesoftwarewithinsixweeks.Thus,notonlytheacquisitionofknowledgebutalsodeliv‐eringasolutionforarealprobleminthatparticularcompanywasachieved.

The integrated SIS solution is currently actively used in mission‐critical areas. Itproved to be sustainable in terms of changeability and enabled the skill transfer to allmembersofthesoftwaredevelopmentteam.

4.1.3 Results

Theapplicationwascompletely implementedandput intooperationsixweeksafter thedecisionhadbeenmadetodevelopitfromscratch.

“WefirstcouldnotbelievethatitwouldbepossibletorewriteasystemascomplexasSISsoquicklyfromscratch.”‐‐Adeveloper

All requirementsweresatisfied thanks tocontinualand timely feedback. Inaddition theendusers’satisfactionincreasedbecauseoftheirinvolvementinthedevelopmentprocess.

“Whatweallaskedourselvesinthesalesdepartmentwas:WhydidtheITdepartmentnotgoforthissolutioninthefirstplace?Whydidtheynotshowusprototypesearlier?Thenthedisasterofthefirstattemptcouldhavebeenavoided.WeknowourrequirementsarecomplexbutweknowiftheyaresatisfiedwhenweseeanactualpieceofsoftwareratherthansomePowerPointdeck.”‐‐Anenduser

Finally,thesystemwashandedovertothecompany’sITdepartment,whichisnowabletomaintainandexpandthesystemeffectivelyandefficiently,becausethesoftwaredevelop‐mentprojectalsoprovided training for thebusiness’ownsoftwaredevelopers.Fromaneconomic perspective the project reduced costs not only due to increased end userproductivity,butalsobygettingridoflicensingfees.AllusedtechnologiesareopensourceandsubjecttopermissivelicensessuchastheMITlicense.Thus,thetypicallock‐in‐effectsofproprietarysoftwarecouldbeavoided.

“Honestly, Iamstillsurprisedabout thesuccessfulandquickreimplementationwithoutusingbig‐name,big‐costtooling.”‐‐TheCIO

Froma skill perspective a change in skill levels couldbeobserved. In order toquantifythis,theinvolvedstakeholdersoftheprojecthavebeenaskedtodocumenttheirskillsus‐ingaquestionnaire.Basedonaself‐assessmentmethod(Vygotsky1962),skillsbeforeand



aftertheprojecthavebeenrecordedonascalefrom‐2(deficient)to+2(verygood).Re‐sultsaredepicted inFigure6.Themostsignificantchangescanbedocumentedwithre‐specttoprojectmanagementskillsand,interestingly,insustainabilityandethics.Thesub‐sequent skill increaseessentially comes from the larger feelingofownershipamong theprogrammersaswellastheusers.Togethertheywerenotonlyworkingonsometool,buttheywerealsoworkingon“their”toolandwantedtomakeitaslong‐lastingandsociallyacceptableaspossible.

“Formethisisalsoapersonalsuccessstory.Ialwaysbelievedthatchangemusthavebeenpossible,butdidnotknowhow toachieve it.With thehelpof thecoacheswecouldgetthere.IamalsoproudofmyteamandthewholeITdepartment.Itevolvedinagreatway,butwestillhavea longroadaheadtobecomethe21stcenturyworkplace I imagine.” ‐‐TheViceCIO

Figure6.ObservedSkillLevelsBeforeandAfterCoaching

4.1.4 Summary

Theskill‐basedcoachingapproachprovokedacomplete180° turnof theSISproject. In‐steadoffollowingtraditionalapproaches,theinvolvedpeoplefocusedontheirskillsandthensearchedforanappropriatetechnology.Coachingbytheinvolvedconsultanciesena‐bledandempoweredthecompanyanditsITdepartment.Thepreviously identifieddefi‐citsofskillshavebeenclearlyloweredalthoughtheyhavenotbeencompletelyremovedyet.Infuture,morecoachingisnecessarytodoso.

4.2 Case IC: Structured Teaching and Coaching Program

4.2.1 Context

ThepermanentchangeinbusinessandITisachallengeforallcompanies.Smallandmid‐sizedenterprises (SMEs)especiallyhave tocopewith thisvolatileenvironmentbecausetheydonothavetheresourcestomanageextensivetrainingprogramsontheirown.In‐steadtheyneedtogetready‐to‐useknowledgeinawaythatdoesnotdistractemployeesfromtheirjob.Atthesametimeuniversitiesshouldfostertheexchangeandinventionofnewideas.ThetransferofITknowledgeintoSMEshasbeenpoliticallyadvocatedandhas



especiallyledtothedevelopmentofastructuredteachingandcoachingprogramintheICcase.

Inprinciple,theprogramthatwasintensivelyinvestigatedforthiscaseworkedasfol‐lows:Astructuredteachingconceptwasdevelopedandofferedincooperationwithmem‐bersofauniversityandsuccessfulCIOs.ITprofessionalsfromdifferentindustriesandper‐sonalbackgroundsparticipated.Afterseveralpresencemeetings,phasesofcoachingwereconducted inwhichpersonaldevelopment isemphasized.Anonlineplatformwasdevel‐oped that facilitatedcontactamongparticipantsandcoaches(CIOsanduniversitystaff).Basedonacomprehensivestate‐of‐the‐artanalysis, thepartiesconjointlycreatedaplat‐form for skill‐based coaching in which the taught skills are derived from experience.Coachingisanintegralpartoftheconceptbecauseteachinglessonsareonlyseenasatrig‐gerforpersonaldevelopment.

Wewereabletoobservethewholeprocessofconceptdevelopmentandimplementa‐tion.Weinterviewedcoachesandparticipantsoveratwo‐yearperiod(cf.Table4).Fieldnotesweretakenduringmeetings.Usageoftheonlineplatformwasalsoanalyzed.Finally,documentsthathavebeenusedfordevelopingtheprogramhavebeeninvestigated.Overthetwoyears,theprogramhasbeenofferedsuccessfullytwice.

Table4.OverviewonExperts

No. Role Position Size Industry

1 Participant(1stround) ITconsultant 4.950 Consulting2 Participant(1stround) CIO 200 Machinery and plant engi‐

neering3 Participant(1stround) Department head of

SystemsEngineering70 ITservices

4 Participant(1stround) CIO 151 Timberprocessingindustry5 Participant(1stround) ITconsultant 1.500 ITservices6 Participant(1stround) ITconsultant 1 ITservices7 Participant(1stround) CIO 30 Timberprocessingindustry8 Participant(1stround) Developer 100 Foodindustry9 Participant(1stround) Projectmanager 200 Consulting10 Participant(1stround) Developer 121 Foodindustry11 Participant(1stround) ITconsultant 2 Consulting12 Participant(1stround) Softwaresupport 19 ITservices13 Participant(1stround) CIO 650 Machinery and plant engi‐

neering13 Participant(2ndround) CIO 2.100 Machinery and plant engi‐

neering14 Participant(2ndround) CIO 3.500 Foodindustry15 Participant(2ndround) Developer 19.000 Publishingindustry16 Participant(2ndround) ITprojectmanager 1.500 ITservices17 Participant(2ndround) CIO 90 ITservices18 Participant(2ndround) ViceCIO 3.500 Foodindustry19 Participant(2ndround) Business Develop‐

mentManager350 Automobileindustry

20 Participant(2ndround) Projectmanager 19.000 Publishingindustry21 Participant(2ndround) CIO 230 Machinery and plant engi‐

neering22 Participant(2ndround) CIO 30 ITservices23 Participant(2ndround) SolutionArchitect 10.000 Logistics



24 Participant(2ndround) CIO 450 Automobileindustry25 Programprovider Universitystaff 16 University26 Programprovider Universitystaff 16 University27 Programprovider Projectmanager 16 University28 Coach Lawyer 34 Law29 Coach CIO 21.767 Automobileanddefense in‐

dustry30 Coach Personalcoach 1 Consulting31 Coach ITprojectmanager 14 ITservices32 Coach ITadministrator 200 E‐commerce33 Coach CIO 840 Foodindustry34 Coach CIO 10.000 Logistics35 Coach CIO 3.210 Automobileindustry36 Coach CIO 12.342 Machinery and plant engi‐

neering37 Coach CIO 350 Insurance38 Coach CIO 150 Financialservices39 Coach ViceCIO 200 ITservices40 Coach CIO 600 Research41 Coach CIO 1.200 Insurance42 Coach ITprojectmanager 326.000 Machinery and plant engi‐

neering43 Coach ITprojectmanager 76.400 ITservices

4.2.2 Process

Theobservedprocessforconceptdevelopmentandimplementationwasdefinedbyapro‐ceduremodel.Theprojectteamhadpreviouslydevelopedthismodelasaguidingplanfortheproject.Theproceduremodelconsistsofsupportingactivitiesandcoreactivities.Pro‐jectmanagementandqualitymanagementsupporttheprojectandensureoverallsuccess.Thecoreactivitieswhilesettingupanintegratedcourseconsistofthreephases:initiation,formalteachingandcoaching,andpost‐teaching.Withintheinitiationphase,ananalysisofthestateofthearttakesplace.Thecourseisconceptualizedandfinallysetup.Thislastac‐tivity is the bridge to the formal training and learning phase,which consists of the4E‐CircleofTeachingandCoaching.Enrollment,execution,evaluation,andevolutionarenowrunincycles.Marketingactivities,registrationofparticipants,andotherorganizationalac‐tivitieshavetobedonewithintheenrollment.Theexecutioncontainstheactionsofteach‐ingand coaching.Withina teachingphase,practical information ispresented topartici‐pantsanddiscussed.Throughthis,aself‐coachingphasestartsinwhichnewinputcanbeusedindailybusiness.Whileevaluationcapturesallactivitiesrelatedtotheassessmentofthemodules, the evolution activity ensures that all stakeholders improve the approachconstantly.Iftheactualteachingphaseisover,alifelongself‐coachingandtheapplicationofthetaughtskillshastobeensuredwithinthepost‐teachingphase.Methodsfordoingsohavetobediscussedinthepreviousphaseandarenowapplied.Paralleltothecoreactivi‐ties, comprehensivedocumentation takesplace.This isnecessary,becauseother institu‐tionsanduniversitiesshouldalsobeabletoimplementtheapproach.



Figure7.ProcedureModeloftheTeachingandCoachingProgramIngeneral,universitiesoffermanydifferentcoursestovariousstudents.Thesecoursesaremostlytaughtbyprofessorsorotherfacultymembers.Nextto“normal”graduateandun‐dergraduatecoursestherearealsocoursestargetedatITprofessionals.Whatisproblem‐aticisthatinmanyofthesecoursesprofessorsteachthesamecontenttheyusefornormalstudents.Theuniquecharacteristicofthenewteachingandcoachingprogramisthatthelecturersarepractitioners.However,theselectionoftheselecturersisverydifficult.Onlythosepractitionersshouldbechosenwhohaveproventhesuccessoftheirprojects.With‐in the IC case, only thosepractitionerswere selectedwhowon industryprizes for theirwork. Using these people has two advantages: Firstly, they have demonstrably proventheirsuccessand,secondly,theyarepeoplewhoareabletopresentthemselvesandtheirworkinaprofessionalway.

The selected practitioners have worked together with faculty members to preparetheir insights frompractice forteachingotherpractitioners.Theaddressedskills ineachmodulehavebeenderivedbasedoninputfromthepractitionersaswellasbasedontheliterature.Figure8showsexemplarydocumentsthatwereusedinthedevelopmentphaseandthatwerealsoanalyzedbytheauthorsofthisarticle.Moduledescriptionsofcontinu‐ing education offerings for IT professionalswere utilized. In addition, a framework thatwasdevelopedbytheprogramdirectorsprovidedmoreinsightintothemarket.Basedonthesedocuments,thestructuredteachingandcoachingapproachwasdevelopedandim‐plemented.Theuniversityteamensuredtheappropriatenessofcontentandmethods.Bydoing so, unique information and best practices could be shared. Even better, lecturerscould also learn from the participants through intensive discussions. The following listshowssomeexemplarytopicsthatweretaught:

HolisticapproachofITmanagement, Cloudcomputing–legalaspectsandcompanydevelopment, Implementationofprocessmanagementinchangeprojects, Socialbusinessstrategies, ERPconsolidationandharmonization,and CoachingmethodsforITprofessionals.

Execution

Evolution



Figure8.ExemplaryDocuments(left:moduledescriptions,right:framework)Thenewteachingandcoachingprogramwasexecutedas follows:Foreightconsecutiveweeks,theclassmetonanevening(usuallyfrom5:30pmto9:00pm)onceaweek.Aftertheparticipantswerewelcomed,themainsessionstartedat6:00pmwithapresentationbythelecturer.Afterthepresentationtheformatshiftedtoanopendiscussionround.Thewholesessiontookinmostcasestwohours.Afterwards,allparticipantswenttoanotherroom toget somedistance from the learningenvironment.Horsd’oeuvreswere served.Thena second, importantphaseof theevening started.Networkingamongparticipants,between participants and lecturers, and between faculty members and all other actorstookplace.Anotherimportantpartoftheprogramwasthevirtuallearningenvironment.Here,allactorscoulddiscussquestions,downloadallrelevantfiles,andgetfurtherinfor‐mationonthediscussedtopics.

After the presence sessions, participantswere asked to adopt the taught content intheirdailybusiness.Thenecessaryadviceonhowtodosowaspartofonetheoreticalses‐sion.Additionally,anonlinecommunitysystemsupportedparticipantsinthisphaseasanenabling platform. The systemwas part of a larger socialmedia platform. This solutiongavetheopportunitytoeasilyofferacomprehensivediscussionboardandtoprovideallnecessarydocumentsinaneffortlessway.

In a follow‐up to these self‐coaching sessions, the participantswere interviewed inordertogaininsightsintotheirchangedbehavior.Interviewstookplaceeitherinpersonorviatelephone.Ofcourse,theactivitiesonthecommunitysystemhavebeendocumentedcarefully.

4.2.3 Results

The teaching and coaching program can be seen as awin‐win situation for all involvedstakeholders.Participantsreceiveduniqueinformationandgetincontactwithothercol‐leagues.Lecturersalsogotnewinputfortheirwork.Newcontactstothepracticewereal‐soextremelyvaluablefortheuniversity.

Fieldnotesandinterviewtranscriptscanbeseenasthemostvaluabledocumentsforanalysis.Fromvariousdiscussions,weknowthatcoveringcurrentandfuturetrendsand



newtechnologyisakeyadvantageofthiskindofprogram.However,familiarizingoneselfdeeplywithspecifictopicsiscrucial.

“Iliketobesurprised,simplybecauseattendingsuchaprogrambroadensmyhorizonandsetsupmyselfmorebroadly.AndthenIwouldnotevensayinadvance,okaythisisatopicthatIwouldliketogivespecialcare,butIjustwanttogetnewinputsthere,newandsim‐pletriggers.”‐‐Aparticipant

ItiscrucialforITprofessionalstogettoknowdifferentperspectivesandwaysinordertoacquireabroadknowledgeandtoworkoutrelevantideasfortheowncompany.Develop‐inga“criticalself‐image,”seeingthe“bigpicture,”and“lookingbeyondtherimofone’steacup”arecatchphrasesthatwereutteredbyallinvolvedstakeholdersasevidencethatitisimportantnottobeleftbehind.DiscussingproblemsrelatedtoITandotherorganizationalissuesisalsoamajorfieldforprofessionals.

“MyITalwayshasastrongfocusonbusiness.It’spartofthevaluechain,especiallyinourarea, in theautomotive industry.Here it isclear that the taskof IT is to implement thebusinessneedsandtoseewhereITcansupportit.Wherearepossiblynewrequirements?CanIcoverthem?HowcanIcoverthem?WhatdoIhavetodoinordertoremaineffec‐tive?”‐‐Aparticipant

Duringourresearchwegottheimpressionthatallstakeholderswerewillingtoimprovetheirownperformancethroughbetterknowledgeaswellasthroughacommunicationandexchangeamonglike‐mindedpeople.Thereasonforthisisthefactthatthescopeofdutiesofeachemployeeenlargeswiththeprogressionoftimeworkinginacompany.Long‐termplanningofthefast‐changingrequirementsintheITsectordoesnotmakesense,accord‐ingtoaprogramdirector.

“Especially in the dynamic IT environment, good people are expensive and rare. Theyshouldnotbebotheredforhourswithbureaucracyandallthosethings,whichisperhapstheoreticallyusefulbutdoesnotgenerategreatutilityinpracticalapplicability.”‐‐Apro‐gramdirector

Discussingtrendsisnottheonlyadvantageofprogramssuchastheoneweinvestigated.Oneoftheinterviewedorganizersremarkedthatnewtechnologiessuchas, forexample,cloud computing are widely discussed in various forms of teaching and coaching pro‐grams.However,oftennopractical experience canbepresentedandonly superficial in‐formationisgiven.Assessmentofqualityofsuchofferingsisthereforeverydifficult.Me‐dium‐sizedenterprisesoftenwaittoolongbeforetheyspendtimeonattendingcontinuingeducationofferings.Otherspermanentlysearchfornewopportunities.

“Wegowithmanynew thingsor simply say that this isnot interesting forus.When itcomestotraining.Firstly,therearewebportalsonthe Internetwithcomprehensive in‐formation.Secondly,thereareexternalconsultantswhocomeintoourorganization.Fur‐thermore,weattendseminars,workshops,webinars,andmuchmore.”‐‐Aparticipant

ITprofessionals ingeneraldonothavemuch time for training.Organizershave tokeepthis inmindwhen designing courses. The investigated skill‐based coaching approachesfulfillsthisrequirementverywellbecauseitcombineseveningsessionswithflexibleper‐sonalcoachingphases.



Next to the time issue, also differences in the personal development of the partici‐pantswerehighlightedduringourresearch.Theproblemisthatthereareavarietyofdif‐ferentprofessions in the fieldandconsequentlyvariousstatesofknowledgeandexperi‐ence.Additionally,youngerparticipantsoftenlearnfasterthanolderones.Nevertheless,inthiscase,anotheradvantageoftheskill‐basedcoachingapproachbecomesvisible.

“Younger employeesoftenareable to learnnew things faster.This isaproblem.Olderemployeesusuallyhaveproblemsinunderstandingunknowncircumstancesorneedmoretimeforlearning.Althoughthisfactiswellknown,itisstillaproblemforus.Otherwise,those employeeswhowork for the organization for a long time have special practicalknowledge,forexample,onprocesses.Theexchangebetweenbothkindsofemployeesisabigadvantageofthediscussedcoachingapproach.”‐‐Aparticipant

Theheterogeneitywithinthegroupis thereforeastimulus formutualstimulationof theparticipants.Thisisespeciallytruewhennewtrendsarediscussedandlesstrueforspe‐cial topics suchasprogramming.A coachhighlighted thenetworkingopportunities as afurtheradvantageoftheskill‐basedcoachingapproach.

“Thediscussedteachingandcoachingprogramisaveryspecialformofcontinuingeduca‐tion.Thelinkageisindispensablebecausethelecturerofthepresencemeetingsdoesnotact like ina classicalpresentation.Therefore, Iused to see itmoreasa conceptof ex‐changebetweenexperiencedcolleaguesandcolleagues.”‐‐Acoach

“Theconversioninbreaksandduringthecoachingphasesweremoreimportantthantheactualpresencemeetings. Igot toknowcolleagueswhohave similarproblems.Theex‐changeofexperienceshelpedmeinmydailywork.Ineversawaprogramsimilartothisone.”‐‐Aparticipant

Usagenumbers of the community system show thehighutilization of the provided fea‐tures.Toensure the successof theprogram, the skills of theparticipantshavebeenas‐sessedusingquestionnaires(similartothequestionnaireusedinthefirstcase).Basedonthe self‐assessment method (Vygotsky 1962), skills before and after participation havebeenrecordedonascalefrom‐2(deficient)to+2(verygood).Theresultsfromthefirstruninautumn2011with21participantsaredepictedinFigure9.Byanalyzingthemitbe‐comesobvious that the assessmentof technicalhard skills couldbe raised considerably(0.35pointsonaverage).Thebiggestdifferencecanberecognizedinthefieldsofmanag‐ingsecurity,complianceandrisk,andbusinessprocessmanagementaswellassustaina‐bilityandethics.Thesoftskillshavebeenconstant.Onlywithinprojectmanagementwasaslightgainrecorded.Altogether,asignificantimprovementofskillsusingtheteachingandcoachingapproachwasreached.



Figure9.SkillsoftheParticipantsBeforeandAfterParticipationFromour fieldnotesweknowthatnotall aspectswereperfectly fulfilled.Somepartici‐pantsrecommendeddiscussingspecificmethodssuchas,forexample,methodsinprojectmanagement;otherswantedto focusmoreonsmallerorganizations insteadofmedium‐sized enterprises, and others complained about foreign technical terms and Anglicisms.Nevertheless,mostparticipantsappreciatedtheprogram.

During the interviews, the project team got valuable information about the self‐coachingphases.Thestructuredteachingandcoachingprogramwasespeciallyhelpfultogive participants the skills to select appropriate new technology. Because of the largeamountofnew trends in the ITbusiness, thiswasveryvaluable for them.Furthermore,participantsnowareabletobetterreflectontheirownwork,havenewwaysofthinking,and can improve internal communication.However,participants argued thatmore focushastobeputonsoftskillsinthefuture.

“I think thatweneed to focusmoreonsoftskills.Morecommunication isnecessarybe‐causethisisoftenaproblemwhenITprofessionalswhoaretechnicallywelltrainedneedtopresent something somewhere.Standing in frontofothersand communicating tech‐nicalsolutionsisoftenveryhardforthem.”‐‐Aparticipant

4.2.4 Summary

The structured teaching and coaching program is another form of skill‐based coaching.Theuniversityactsasanacademicfacilitatorandoffersanenablingplatformforcompa‐nies. Participants are induced to work on new topics and develop new skills by them‐selves.

5 Comparison of Cases

Skill‐basedcoachingcouldbeobservedinthetwoSISDEVandICcases.Bothhavesimilari‐ties and differences in multiple dimensions with regard to management, operations,coaching, andassessment.To gain insights into the topic andderivemeaningful conclu‐sions,westructuredthecharacteristicsofbothcasesinTable5followingthedimensionsofourconceptualresearchmodel(cf.Figure5).

‐2

‐1

0

1

2

Management in the InformationAge

Fundamentals of InformationSystems

IT Consulting

Enterprise ArchitectureManagement

Business Process Management

Managing Security, Complianceand Risk

Sustainability and Ethics

Interpersonal Skills

Leadership Management

Project Management

Before

Aferwards



Table5.OverviewinComparison

Dimension Characteristic CaseSISDEV CaseIC

Management

Strategicgoals Integrated ITsystemandbet‐terskillset

Skilldevelopment

Structure On‐demandmeetings,dynam‐

icprocessRegular meetings, laid‐outprocess

Management cul‐ture

Hierarchical,top‐down Participative,bottom‐up

Operations

Location On‐sitemeeting Off‐sitemeeting

Groupdynamics High, very interactive meet‐

ings crossing the hierarchicalculture

High,veryinteractive

Groupsize Upto6 Upto15

Distance or face‐to‐face

Face‐to‐face Face‐to‐faceanddistance

Support Ad hoc documentation, group

lunchProvision of presentations, E‐learning environment withnetworkingfeatures

Coaching Internal/ExternalCoaches

Externalandinternal External

Management iscoached

Yes No

Mandatory orvoluntary

Mandatory Voluntary

Experience ofCoaches

Skillandcodingfocusedexpe‐rience

Project and skill‐focused ex‐perience

Method(“Typeofcoaching”)

Groupwork,hands‐oncoding Group work, best practicesharing

Assessment Indicators Systemuptime,cost,timesav‐ings

Generated revenue, self‐assessedskillgain

First,welookedatthetwocasesfromamanagerialpointofview.Theoverarchingques‐tioniswhichstrategicgoalhadbeenpursued.IntheSISDEVcasearunningITsystemwasthegoal,whileintheICcasetheskilldevelopmentitselfwassetastheobjective.Thenextcharacteristicisthestructure:adynamicprocesswithon‐demandmeetingscomparedtoapre‐structuredseriesofmeetings.Alsothemanagementculturebetweenthecasesisfun‐damentallydifferent.Oneishierarchicaltop‐down,whiletheotherisbottom‐upparticipa‐tion‐driven.Withonlythemanagerialdimensionsbeingcompared,theresultisthatbothcasesaretoacertainextentfundamentallydifferent.

Thisdifferencecontinues in theoperations’ typeof location: in theSISDEVcaseon‐sitemeetings,andintheICcaseoff‐sitesessions.Howeverthegroupdynamicswerehighinbothcasesandveryinteractive.IntheSISDEVcase,theinteractionpatternsalsoover‐cametheprevailinghierarchicalculture.Thesizeofthecoachedgroupsisdifferentagainaswellastheuseofelementsofdistancelearning.ThelatteroneisonlyusedinthecaseICwhile in SISDEV only face‐to‐face meetings could be observed. This goes hand‐in‐handwiththeuseofsupportingmaterialandactivities:whileonecaseonlyhadadhocdocu‐mentation and group lunches, the other case revealed an e‐learning environment withnetworkingfeaturesanddistributionofpresentations.Thismightalsobeinterlinkedwithdifferentlocations–on‐siteandoff‐site.



Thecoachinginbothcaseswasperformedbyexternalcoaches.IntheSISDEVcaseal‐so internal coaches could be observed in the project as knowledge and skills started tospread.Themanagementofthecase’sendeavoritselfwasonlycoachedintheSISDEVcasewhilemanagement remainedoutsideof thecoaching itself in the ICcase.This is insofarconsequent as in the IC case employeesweremandatorily coached and only voluntarilycoachedintheICcase.Theselectionofcoachesandtheirmainmethodisalsointerrelatedwiththesefactors:coacheswithexperienceincodingdoinggroupworkinhand‐oncodingsessionshadbeenselectedintheSISDEVcase,whileprojectexperienceandbest‐practicesharingingroupworkweretheselectioncriteriaintheICcase.

Froman assessmentperspectivedifferent indicatorshavebeenused. In theSISDEVcase not the skill transfer itself but the achievements with these new skills have beenmeasured. Technical indicators such as system uptime aswell as cost and time savingswereused.IntheICcaseself‐assignedskillgainwasthepremierindicatorwhilegeneratedrevenuesonlyservedasaproxylater.

Inordertocomparethetwocases,weusedthecoachingcubebySegersetal.(2011)tocharacterizethetwocases(cf.Figure10).Case1(SISDEV)addressestheskillsaswellastheperformanceagenda. Itusesanactivity approach.Allpossible coaches canbe foundhere. Incontrasttothis, incase2(IC)thecoachingonlyaddressestheskillsagenda.Ra‐tionalityandContextapproachesareused.Here,onlyexternalcoachesandself‐coachingcanbefound.Theclassificationofthetwocasesisbasicallyinlinewiththehighestproba‐blecombinationsfoundbySegersetal.(2011)(cf.Figure10).However,thereisonedis‐tinctivedifference:Thedescribedcasesuseacombinationofdifferentcoachesandarenotlimitedtoexternalandinternalcoaches.Thedevelopment/lifeagendaisnotaddressedbythetwocases.Basedupontheseresults,thetwocasesdeliverimportantnewinsightsonskill‐basedcoachingapproachesforITindustryprofessionals.

Figure10.AppliedCoachingCube(caseSISDEVleft,caseICright)

6 Discussion

Ourresearchhasbeenguidedbytwoquestionsthatcannowbeanswered.RQ1isabouttheproblemofhowITprofessionalscanbeempoweredtocopewithtechnologicalchangethrough skill‐based coaching. In order to answer this question we conducted two casestudies.TheresultspresentedinsectionsIVandVcanbeseenastheanswertoourfirst



researchquestion.Bydescribingandanalyzingthetwocasesonegetsagoodimpressionofhowthisimportantempowermentcanbeachieved.Helpingpeopletohelpthemselvesistherightwaytodothis.Inourfirstcase,coachingqualifiedthecompanyanditsITde‐partment to successfully implement the SIS project.Without the application of this ap‐proach,theprojectwouldnotberealizableontime,withinbudget,andinresourceutiliza‐tion.Anotherformofskill‐basedcoachingwasdepictedinoursecondcase.Thestructuredteachingandcoachingprogramrepresentsanenablingplatformfororganizationstocopewithnewtopicsandthenecessitytodevelopnewskills.Therefore,thetwoverydifferentcases showhow skill‐based coaching can empower IT professionals. Based on these re‐sults,wedevelopedhypothesesthatcanbeassessedquantitativelyinfutureresearch:

H1:CurrentcoachingapproachesareinsufficientfortrainingITprofessionals.

H2:Skill‐basedcoachingisanappropriateinstrumentforITprofessionals.

H3:Skill‐basedcoachingcanbeused indifferentsituations,settings,orgoalsetswithintheITsector.

H4:Skill‐basedcoachingasanovelapproachissuitableanddeliversvaluableresults.

H5:Skill‐basedcoachingensuressustainableresults.

Researchers canbuildonour results and investigate furtherpossible case sites.Makingpractitionersawareofthecapabilitiesofskill‐basedcoachingisalsooneadditionalimpli‐cationofourresearch.Furthermore,duetothedetaileddescriptionofthetwocases,theyhavetwopracticalexamplesathandthatcanbetransformedtotheiractualfieldsofappli‐cation.

Oursecondresearchquestionaimedatexplainingskill‐basedcoachingasapracticalphenomenon.Basedonourresultsand thecomparisonof thecases in theprevioussec‐tions,wederivedaconceptualizationofskill‐basedcoaching(cf.Figure11).Centralstake‐holders are coach and coacheeswhowork together in a discussion and feedback circle.Personal skills, present and new technologies, andmethod knowledge are input factorsthatdirectlyaffect theperformanceof thecoach.Aftereachcoachingphase, thecoacheehastoapplythelearnedthings.Networkingamongthecoachesisalsoacentralelementoftheapproach.Ouranalyzedcasescanbedifferentiatedinawaythatinthefirstcasethein‐itiative to start came from the coachees (pull) and in the second case it started on thecoachside(push).Inallsituations,theinternalorganizationalcontextaswellastheexter‐nal environment context influence the coaching process. Also, the usage of an enablingplatform(forexample,thesoftwaresolutionusedinthesecondcase)positivelyinfluencetheprocess.Theresultof theapproach isan increase inskill levelsaswellassuccessfulchanges.



Figure11.Skill‐basedCoachingThisconceptualmodelofskill‐basedcoachingcanbeusedbybothresearchersandpracti‐tioners.Themodelhelpsindevelopingatheoreticalunderstandingofapracticalphenom‐enon.Thisunderstandingcanbeutilizedbyscientistsforotherempiricalresearch,forex‐ample. Further theory development is also imaginable. For practitioners, themodel (cf.Figure11)isaneasy‐to‐understandillustrationofacomplexapproach.Thishelpsinob‐taininga fasterandbetterunderstanding.Throughthis,practitionerscanbemoreeasilymadeawareofnewformsofcoaching.

Therearetwoimportantremarkstobemadeaboutourconceptualization.First,itisimportanttonotethatourmodel(cf.Figure11)explainsskill‐basedcoachingintheITsec‐tor.Thebasicprincipleoftheapproachmaybemoreorlessalsoapplicableinotherset‐tings.Nevertheless,wefocusedonITprofessionals inconsideringtheirspecificcontexts,skills, technologies, andmethods. Therefore, an application only in this sector currentlymakessense.Second, theconceptofskill‐basedcoachingcanbeappliedtoall ITprofes‐sionals (CIOs, ITpersonnel, ITconsultants,andothers)atall career levels.Nevertheless,concreteskillsandmethodsmayvarybetweendifferenttypesofprofessionals.Therefore,thisneedstobeconsideredintherespectivecontextsofapplication.However,asweknow,forexample,fromthesecondcasethathalfoftheparticipantswereCIOs(andotherpeopleworkingatanITdepartment)andtheotherhalfITconsultants.Bothconjointlyandsuc‐cessfullytookpartintheprogram.

Every (empirical and conceptual) researchhas its limitations. First,we investigatedonlytwocases.Althoughtheresultsarehighlyvaluable,theanalysisoffurthercasesmightbedesirable.Thereevenmightbecasesinwhichtheutilizationoftheapproachwouldnotbesuccessful.Thisalsoneedstobedocumented.Second,resultsofthecasestudiesneedto be compared with other groups who follow other (traditional) approaches. By con‐trastingbothapproaches,theadvantagesanddisadvantagesofskill‐basedcoachingcanbebetterworkedout.Asuggestionistosetupalaboratorysituationasacomparisongroup.Third,longitudinalstudiesneedtobeconductedinordertoshowlong‐termeffectsofthecoachingprograms.Althoughweinvestigatedskill‐basedcoachingfor1‐2years,a longertimeframecouldyieldmoreinsights.



7 Conclusion and Future Research

In this articlewe examined how skill‐based coaching can help IT professionals to copewith future challenges. After providing a theoretical backgroundon skills, IT leadershipdevelopment,andcoachingapproachesanddescribingourresearchmethod,weconduct‐edtwoin‐depthcasestudiesonskill‐basedcoaching.Weshowedthatcoachingisafeasi‐bleapproachtoempowerITprofessionalsandenablethemtoworkwithmodernandfu‐ture technologies.Wediscussedandcompared the twocases. Inbothcases,positive re‐sultswereyielded.Themeasuredindicatorspointtoanincreaseinskillfromthecoachedpeople.Thereby,skill‐basedcoachingtransferredskills intotheorganizationwheretheybecomecompetenciesafterawhileinuse.Finally,wederivedaconceptualizationofskill‐basedcoachingthatcanbeusedintheoryandpractice.

Theliteraturecanbuildonthederivedresultsinordertodevelopcomprehensivethe‐oriesofskill‐basedcoaching.Theusageofthecoachingcubegivesagoodclassificationofthecasesthatisparticularlyimportantforpractitionerstoknow.Thepresentationofthetwosuccessfulapproachescanbeseenasafoundationforresearchandpracticetodevel‐op andderivemoremethods.The conceptualizationof skill‐based coaching as themaincontributionofourresearchisagoodfoundationforfuturestudies.

In future, more research on skill‐based coaching is necessary in order to extendknowledge in this important field. Quantitative research using sophisticated statisticalmethodswillsupportandmeasureourresults.Futureresearchisalsonecessaryinorderto analyze more cases and also get quantitative figures on the relationships betweencoachingandorganizationalsuccess.However,weknowfromtheinterviewsthatlookingbeyondone’sownculturalhorizondoesnotonlysupportparticipantsdirectlybutalsoaf‐fects the company indirectly by resulting in more skilled, satisfied people with highercompetencesandperformance.

8 Acknowledgments

ThispaperwaswritteninthecontextoftheresearchprojectIMUCONwhichisfundedbytheEuropeanRegionalDevelopmentFund(ERDF).TheauthorsacknowledgethesupportbyERDFandallinvolvedprojectpartners.WewouldliketothankHeidrun‐JessicaMüllerforassistingusinconductingtheinterviewsintheICcaseaswellasweacknowledgethesupportthecompanyoftheSISDEVcase,especiallytheViceCIO,forpermittingustocon‐ductthisresearchinsidethecompany.

References

Alavi,M.;Gallupe,R.B.(2003):UsingInformationTechnologyinLearning:CaseStudiesinBusinessandManagementEducationPrograms.AcademyofManagementLearning&Education2(2):139–153

Andriole,S.J.(2012):SevenIndisputableTechnologyTrendsThatWillDefine2015.Com‐municationsoftheAssociationforInformationSystems(30):Article4

Ang,S.;Banker,R.;Bapna,R.;Slaughter,S.;Wattal,S.(2011):HumanCapitalofITProfes‐sionals:AResearchAgenda.In:ICIS2011Proceedings,Paper5

Ang,S.;Slaughter,S.A.(2000):TheMissingContextofITPersonnelResearch.In:Zmud,R.W.:FramingthedomainsofITmanagement.Projectingthefuture‐throughthepast.PinnaflexEducationResources,Inc.,Cincinnati,Ohio,305–328



Armstrong,C.P.;Sambamurthy,V.(1999):InformationTechnologyAssimilationinFirms:The InfluenceofSeniorLeadershipand IT Infrastructures. InformationSystemsRe‐search10(4):304–327

Atos(Hrsg)(2012):AscentJourney2016:Enterprisewithoutboundaries,AtosSAAustin,R.D.;Nolan,R.L.;O'Donnell,S.(2009):TheTechnologyManager'sJourney:AnEx‐

tendedNarrativeApproachtoEducatingTechnicalLeaders.AcademyofManagementLearning&Education8(3):337–355

Baird,L.;Meshoulam,I.(1988):ManagingTwoFitsofStrategicHumanResourceManage‐ment.TheAcademyofManagementReview13(1):116–128

Banville,C.;Landry,M.(1989):CanthefieldofMISbedisciplined?CommunicationsoftheACM32(1):48–60

Bassellier, G.; Benbasat, I.; Reich, B. H. (2003): The Influence of Business Managers' ITCompetenceonChampioningIT.InformationSystemsResearch14(4):317–336

Bax,J.;Negrutiu,M.;Calotă,T.‐O.(2011):Coaching:APhilosophy,Concept,ToolandSkill.JournalofKnowledgeManagement,Economics&InformationTechnology1(7):320–328

Bell,C.;Mills,R.;Fadel,K.(2013):AnAnalysisofUndergraduateInformationSystemsCur‐ricula:AdoptionoftheIS2010CurriculumGuidelines.CommunicationsoftheAssoci‐ationforInformationSystems32:Article2

Beulen,E.(2008):Theenablingroleofinformationtechnologyintheglobalwarfortalent:Accenture's industrialized approach. Information Technology for Development14(3):213–224

Boehm,M.;Freundlieb,M.;Stolze,C.;Thomas,O.;Teuteberg,F.(2011a):TowardsanInte‐gratedApproachforResource‐EfficiencyinServerRoomsandDataCenters.In:ECIS2011Proceedings,Paper100

Boehm,M.;Jasper,M.;Thomas,O.(2013a):TheFurtherEducationMaturityModel:Devel‐opmentandImplementationofaMaturityModelfortheSelectionofFurtherEduca‐tionOfferingsintheFieldofITManagementandITConsulting.In:AMCIS2013Pro‐ceedings,HumanCapitalinInformationSystems,Paper4

Boehm,M.;Stolze,C.;Breitschwerdt,R.;Zarvić,N.;Thomas,O.(2011b):AnIntegratedAp‐proachforTeachingProfessionalsITManagementandITConsulting.In:AMCIS2011Proceedings,Paper72

Boehm,M.;Stolze,C.;Thomas,O.(2013b):TeachingtheChiefInformationOfficers:AnAs‐sessment of the Interrelations within their Skill Set. In:Wirtschaftsinformatik Pro‐ceedings2013,1573–1587

Boehm,M.;Thomas,O. (2013):Lookingbeyond the rimofone’s teacup:Amultidiscipli‐nary literature reviewofProduct‐ServiceSystems in InformationSystems,BusinessManagement,andEngineering&Design.JournalofCleanerProduction51:245–260

Böning,U.;Fritschle,B.(2005):CoachingfürsBusiness.ManagerSeminare,BonnBroadbent,M.;Kitzis,E.(2005):ThenewCIOleader.Settingtheagendaanddeliveringre‐

sults.HarvardBusinessSchoolPress,BostonBullen,C.;Abraham,T.;Galup,S.D.(2007):ITWorkforceTrends:ImplicationsforCurricu‐

lum and Hiring. Communications of the Association for Information Systems20:Article34

Capaldo,A.(2007):Networkstructureandinnovation:Theleveragingofadualnetworkasadistinctiverelationalcapability.StrategicManagementJournal28(6):585–608

Carter,M.;Grover,V.;Thatcher,J.(2011):TheEmergingCIORoleofBusinessTechnologyStrategist.MISQuarterlyExecutive10(1):19–29

Chan,C.‐S.(2011):ThechangingfaceoftheCIO.EnterpriseInnovation7(2):16–19



Chen,D.Q.;Preston,D.S.;Xia,W.(2010):AntecedentsandEffectsofCIOSupply‐SideandDemand‐Side Leadership: A Staged Maturity Model. Journal of Management Infor‐mationSystems27(1):231–271

Corbett,M.F.(1994):OutsourcingandthenewITexecutive.ATrendsReport.InformationSystemsManagement11(4):19–22

Creswell,J.W.;Miller,D.L.(2000):DeterminingValidityinQualitativeInquiry.TheoryIn‐toPractice39(3):124–130

Cunningham W (2001): Manifesto for Agile Software Development.http://agilemanifesto.org/.Abrufam2012‐11‐10

Darke,P.;Shanks,G.;Broadbent,M.(1998):SuccessfullycompletingCaseStudyResearch:Combining Rigor, Relevance and Pragmatism. Information Systems Journal(8):273–289

Dawson,G.;Kauffman,R. (2011):CIOSurvival and theCompositionof theTopManage‐mentTeam.In:ICIS2011Proceedings,Paper1

Dean, D.; Webb, C. (2011): Recovering from information overload. McKinsey Quarter‐ly(January)

Dubé,L.;Paré,G.(2003):RigorinInformationSystemsPositivistCaseResearch:CurrentPractices,Trends,andRecommendations.MISQuarterly27(4):597–636

Eisenhardt, K.M. (1989): BuildingTheories fromCase StudyResearch. TheAcademy ofManagementReview14(4):532–550

Ekimci,N.A.;Ozkan,S.(2009):AnInvestigationoftheActivitiesandSkillSetsNeededBySenior InformationTechnology (IT)Managers.Proceedingsof theEuropeanConfer‐enceonInformationManagement&Evaluation:486–497

Enns,H.G.;McDonagh,J.J.(2012):IrishCIOs’InfluenceonTechnologyInnovationandIT‐Business Alignment. Communications of the Association for Information Sys‐tems(30):Article1

EuropeanParliament,EuropeanCouncil(2011):TheEuropeanQualificationsFramework(EQF) for Livelong Learning. http://ec.europa.eu/education/lifelong‐learning‐policy/doc44_en.htm.Abrufam2011‐05‐20

Fitzgerald,W.(1992):TrainingVersusDevelopment.Training&Development46(5):81–84

Gartner Inc. (2011): Gartner Identifies the Top 10 Strategic Technologies for 2012.http://www.gartner.com/it/page.jsp?id=1826214.Abrufam2011‐12‐14

Gibbert,M.;Ruigrok,W.;Wicki,B.(2008):Whatpassesasarigorouscasestudy?StrategicManagementJournal29(13):1465–1474

Gray,D.E.(2006):ExecutiveCoaching:TowardsaDynamicAllianceofPsychotherapyandTransformativeLearningProcesses.ManagementLearning37(4):475–497

Grover,V.;Seung‐Ryul,J.;Kettinger,W.J.;Lee,C.C.(1993):TheChiefInformationOfficer:AStudyofManagerialRoles.JournalofManagementInformationSystems10(2):107–130

Groysberg,B.;Kelly, L.K.;MacDonald,B. (2011):TheNewPathTo theC‐Suite.Harvardbusinessreview89(3):60–69

Hoerr,A.;Cain,S.;Buividas,T.;Liuzzi,J.(2009):CoachingInaDownEconomy.TheCorpo‐ratelearningInstitute,Lisle,Il

Hopkins,B.(2011):TheTop10TechnologyTrendsEAShouldWatch:2012To2014.For‐resterResearch,Inc.,Cambridge,MA

Huber,M.;Watson,H.J.(2013):WisdomoftheSages:PreparingStudentsforCareerSkills.CommunicationsoftheAssociationforInformationSystems32(1):Article3



Hunter D (2006): Teaching & Coaching ‐ is there a difference?http://www.brianmac.co.uk/articles/article017.htm.Abrufam2012‐12‐06

Jick, T.D. (1979):MixingQualitative andQuantitativeMethods: Triangulation inAction.AdministrativeScienceQuarterly24(4):602–611

Joia,L.A.(2010):CriticalCompetenciesfortheBrazilianCIO.In:AMCIS2010Proceedings,Paper57

Joo, B.‐K.; Sushko, J. S.; McLean, G. N. (2012): Multiple Faces of Coaching: Manager‐as‐coach,ExecutiveCoaching,andFormalMentoring.OrganizationDevelopmentJournal30(1):19–38

Joseph,D.;Ang,S.;Chang,R.H.L.;Slaughter,S.A.(2010):Practical intelligenceinIT.As‐sessingSoftSkillsofITProfessionals.CommunicationsoftheACM53(2):149

Kayworth,T.R.;Leidner,D.E. (2002):LeadershipEffectiveness inGlobalVirtualTeams.JournalofManagementInformationSystems18(3):7–40

Keim,T.;Weitzel,T.(2006):StrategiesforHiringITProfessionals:AnEmpiricalAnalysisofEmployerand JobSeekerBehavioron the ITLaborMarket. In:AMCIS2006Pro‐ceedings,Paper438

Kern,T.;Willcocks,L.(2002):Exploringrelationshipsininformationtechnologyoutsourc‐ing:theinteractionapproach.EuropeanJournalofInformationSystems11(1):3–19

Kitchenham,B.;PearlBrereton,O.;Budgen,D.;Turner,M.;Bailey, J.;Linkman,S. (2009):Systematic literature reviews in software engineering – A systematic literature re‐view.InformationandSoftwareTechnology51(1):7–15

Klein,H.K.;Myers,M.D.(1999):ASetofPrinciplesforConductingandEvaluatingInter‐pretiveFieldStudiesinInformationSystems.MISQuarterly23(1):67

Kram,K.E.(1983):PhasesoftheMentorRelationship.TheAcademyofManagementJour‐nal26(4):608–625

L’Abate,L.(1981):Towardasystematicclassificationofcounsellingandtherapists,theo‐rists,methods,processes, andgoals:TheE‐R‐Amodel.ThePersonnelandGuidanceJournal(59):263–265

Lee,A.S.(1989):AScientificMethodologyforMISCaseStudies.MISQuarterly13(1):33–50

LittleJC,GrangerMJ,BoyleR,Gerhardt‐PowalsJ,ImpagliazzoJ,JanikC,KubilusNJ,LippertSK, McCrackenWM, Paliwoda G, Soja P (Hrsg) (1999): Integrating professionalismandworkplaceissuesintothecomputingandinformationtechnologycurriculum:re‐portoftheITiCSE‘99workinggrouponprofessionalism.ACM,NewYork,NY,USA

Luftman,J.;Derksen,B.(2012):KeyIssuesforITExecutives2012:DoingMorewithLess.MISQuarterlyExecutive11(4):207–218

Luftman,J.N.(2004):ManagingtheInformationTechnologyResource.Leadershipintheinformationage.PrenticeHall,UpperSaddleRiver,N.J.

Lutchen,M.(2004):ManagingITasabusiness.AsurvivalguideforCEOs.J.Wiley,Hobo‐ken,N.J

McKeen,J.D.;Smith,H.(2003):MakingIThappen.CriticalissuesinITmanagement.Wiley,Chichester,Hoboken,NJ

McKeen, J. D.; Smith, H. A.; Jin, J. Y. (2009): Developments in Practice XXXII: SuccessfulStrategiesforITStaffing.CommunicationsoftheAssociationforInformationSystems24(1):Article46

Mingers,J.(2003):Thepaucityofmultimethodresearch:areviewoftheinformationsys‐temsliterature.InformationSystemsJournal13(3):233–249

Peppard,J.(2010):UnlockingthePerformanceoftheChiefInformationOfficer(CIO).Cali‐forniaManagementReview52(4):73–99



Piccoli, G.;Ahmad,R.; Ives,B. (2001):Web‐BasedVirtual LearningEnvironments:ARe‐search Framework and a PreliminaryAssessment of Effectiveness inBasic IT SkillsTraining.MISQuarterly25(4):401–426

Pinchot,G. (1985): Intrapreneuring.Whyyoudon'thave to leave the corporation tobe‐comeanentrepreneur.Harper&Row,NewYork

Preston,D.S.;Karahanna,E.(2009):AntecedentsofISStrategicAlignment:ANomologicalNetwork.InformationSystemsResearch20(2):159–179

Remenyi,D.;Williams,B.(1996):Thenatureofresearch:qualitativeorquantitative,nar‐rativeorparadigmatic?InformationSystemsJournal6(2):131–146

Royce,W.(1970):ManagingtheDevelopmentofLargeSoftwareSystems.ProceedingsofIEEEWESCON:1–9

Sarker,S.;Xiao,X.;Beaulieu,T.(2012):TowardanAnatomyof“Successful”QualitativeRe‐searchManuscriptsinIS:ACriticalReviewandSomeRecommendations.In:ICIS2012Proceedings,ResearchMethods,Paper12

Schreyögg,A.(2003):Coaching.Campus,FrankfurtSegers,J.;Vloeberghs,D.;Hendrickx,E.;Inceoglu,I.(2011):StructuringandUnderstanding

theCoachingIndustry:TheCoachingCube.AcademyofManagementLearning&Edu‐cation10(2):204–221

Shrednick,H.;Shutt,R.;Weiss,M. (1992):Empowerment:Key to ISWorld‐ClassQuality.MISQuarterly16(4):491–505

Silva,L.;Backhouse,J.(2003):TheCircuits‐of‐PowerFrameworkforStudyingPowerinIn‐stitutionalizationof InformationSystems. Journalof theAssociation for InformationSystems4(1):Article14

Silver,M.S.;Markus,M.L.;Beath,C.M. (1995):The InformationTechnology InteractionModel:AFoundationfortheMBACoreCourse.MISQuarterly19(3):361–390

Silverman, D. (1998): Qualitative research:meanings or practices? Information SystemsJournal8(1):3–20

Smaltz,D.H.;Sambamurthy,V.;Agarwal,R.(2006):TheantecedentsofCIOroleeffective‐nessinOrganizations:Anempiricalstudyinthehealthcaresector.IEEETransactionsonEngineeringManagement53(2):207–222

Smith,H.A.;McKeen,J.D.(2005):DevelopmentsinPracticeXIX:BuildingBetterITLead‐ers ‐ From theBottomUp. Communications of theAssociation for Information Sys‐tems16(1):Article38

Steininger, K.; Riedl, R.; Roithmayr, F.;Mertens, P. (2009): Fads andTrends inBusinessand Information Systems Engineering and Information Systems Research – A Com‐parativeLiteratureAnalysis.Business&InformationSystemsEngineering1(6):411–428

Stephan,M.;Gross,P.‐P.;Hildebrandt,N.(2010):ManagementvonCoaching‐Organisationund Marketing innovativer Personalentwicklungsdienstleistungen. Kohlhammer,Stuttgart

Stolze,C.;Boehm,M.;Zarvić,N.;Thomas,O.(2011):TowardsSustainableITbyTeachingGovernancePractices for Inter‐OrganizationalDependencies. In:Nüttgens,M.;Gada‐tsch,A.;Kautz,K.;Schirmer,I.;Blinn,N.:ProceedingsofIFIP8.6HamburgConference,70–88

Swap,W.;Leonard,D.;Shields,M.;Abrams,L.(2001):UsingMentoringandStorytellingtoTransferKnowledge in theWorkplace. JournalofManagement InformationSystems18(1):95–114

Topi, H.; Valacich, J. S.;Wright, R. T.; Kaiser, K.M.; Nunamaker, J. F., Jr.; Sipior, J. C.; deVreede,G. J. (2010): IS2010.CurriculumGuidelines forUndergraduateDegreePro‐



grams in Information Systems. Communications of the Association for InformationSystems26:Article18

UrffKaufeld,N.von;Chari,V.;Freeme,D.(2009):CriticalSuccessFactorsforEffectiveITLeadership.TheElectronicJournalInformationSystemsEvaluation12(1):119–128

Vygotsky,L.S.(1962):Thoughtandlanguage.MITPress,Cambridge,MAWalsham,G.(1993):Interpretinginformationsystemsinorganizations.JohnWiley,Chich‐

esterWebb, E. J.; Campbell, D. T.; Schwartz, R. D.; Sechrest, L. (1966):Unobtrusivemeasures.

Nonreactiveresearchinthesocialsciences.RandMcNally,ChicagoWerr, A. (2005): Consultant supported ERP implementation ‐ a learning opportunity?

Stockholm School of Economics. SSE/EFIWorking Paper Series in BusinessAdmin‐istrationNo.2005:3,Stockholm

Westerman,G.;Calméjane,C.;Bonnet,D.;Ferraris,P.;McAfee,A.(2011):DigitalTransfor‐mation:ARoadmapforBillionDollarOrganizations.MITCenter forDigitalBusinessandCapgeminiConsulting

Witherspoon,R.;White,R.P.(1996):Executivecoaching:Acontinuumofroles.ConsultingPsychologyJournal:PracticeandResearch48(2):124–133

Yin,R.K.(2009):CaseStudyResearch:DesignandMethods.SagePublications,ThousandOaks,Calif

Living Lab Business Process Management e.V. Universität Osnabrück Katharinenstraße 3 49074 Osnabrück www.living‐lab‐bpm.de ISSN 2193‐777X