Strategic Leadership and Organizational Performance of Selected Multinational Corporations (MNCs) in Nigeria.

Strategic Leadership and Organizational Performance of Selected Multinational Corporations (MNCs) in Nigeria.

AFOLAYAN, Michael Ayorinde^*1, LAWAL, Oloyede Raheem², OLAYINKA, Enoch Gabriel³, ABDULGANIYU, Toheeb Olayemi⁴, MUSTPHA, J. Omotayo⁵

Department of Business Administration, South-West, Nigeria University, Lagos

Department of Business Administration, Anchor University, Lagos, Department of Entrepreneurship and Business Management, National Open University of Nigeria, Abuja.

^*Corresponding Author

DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.47772/IJRISS.2025.914MG00177

Received: 25 September 2025; Accepted: 01 October 2025; Published: 29 October 2025

ABSTRACT

This study investigates the influence of strategic leadership, measured by coaching effectiveness and team productivity, on the organizational performance of selected Multinational Corporations (MNCs) in South-West, Nigeria, addressing a crucial gap by empirically examining how these dimensions impact outcomes in a dynamic business environment. Adopting a descriptive survey research design, the study targeted 2,707 employees across selected subsidiaries, with a sample size of 349 determined using the Taro Yamane formula and 317 valid responses obtained (90.8% response rate) through stratified random sampling and structured questionnaires. Data analyzed using simple regression revealed that coaching effectiveness significantly explained 42.8% of the variation in performance (R² = 0.428, p < 0.001), where a unit increase led to a 0.592-unit improvement, while team productivity accounted for 37.8% of the variation (R² = 0.378, p < 0.001), with a unit increase resulting in a 0.619-unit rise. The study concludes that coaching effectiveness enhances employee development and goal alignment, while team productivity fosters collaboration and synergy, jointly driving competitiveness and sustainability in MNCs. It recommends institutionalizing structured coaching programs and prioritizing team productivity through cross-functional collaboration, innovation, and performance-based incentives.

Keywords: Coaching Effectiveness, Multinational Corporations (MNCs), Organizational Performance, Strategic Leadership, Team Productivity.

INTRODUCTION

Multinational corporations (MNCs) play significant roles in shaping the global economy, the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD, 2018) estimates that MNCs account for half of global exports, nearly a third of world GDP (28%), and about fourth of global employment. These firms all generate a significant share of their revenue from abroad as well. Importantly, their transnational activities have transformed the nature of international trade, investments, and technology transfers in the era of globalization. The extensive global value chains (GVCs) prevalent in today’s world economy have been driven by how MNCs structure their global operations through outsourcing and offshoring activities. In fact, their decisions have enormous implications for a wide range of policy issues—such as taxation, investment protection, and immigration across many countries with different political and economic institutions. MNCs also may have strong political influence domestically. Indeed, their global economic dominance may go hand-in-hand with their powerful domestic political position.

There is no internationally agreed upon definition of a multinational corporation.  Based on (Spero and Hart 2020), a multinational corporation (MNC) is described as a company that makes direct investments in different countries and possesses valuable assets in numerous nations. A company cannot be considered multinational if it only operates overseas or acts as a subcontractor for foreign companies. Multinational companies send capital, technology, management expertise, and marketing skills abroad to conduct production in foreign countries. (Dunning 2021) shares a similar perspective, defining MNCs as companies that participate in foreign direct investment (FDI) and possess or control valuable assets in multiple countries.

The history of multinational corporations in developing countries is marked by its origin in the policies of imperialism and Colonialism. Nigeria as a developing country has played a host to MNCs long before independence till date. The number and activities of these MNCs have grown over time as Nigeria struggles to develop socio-economically as a nation, Onudogo (2020). Multinational corporations are those powerful conglomerates that came into being in Nigeria after the abolition of slave trade, Aworom (2021). As a result, the European countries needed a market for surplus products and a place to access cheap raw materials and labour, Africa especially Nigeria became the obvious destination. They dominated the Nigerian economy after her independence. Consequently, today Multinational Corporations like the United African Company (UAC), Nestle, Stanbic IBTC, DHL, Coca-Cola, Lever Brothers, Mobil, Mobil Oil, Shell BP, Julius Berger, Cadbury, PZ, GlaxoSmithKline, etc dominate the landscape of Nigerian economy. These corporations are rich in all ramifications because of the profit they make in Nigeria. For instance, Nigeria is one of the largest producers of oil in the world which accounts for over 80% of her income. Since this sector of the economy is efficiently controlled by multinational corporations who make large sum of profit from the industry, one expects that they should shoulder the developmental process in Nigeria.

Business organizations have had to shape up their core competencies with a view of gaining competitive advantages. More specifically, firms operating in several countries, also known as multinational corporations have embraced the practice of strategic leadership due to its immense contribution to organization performance (Prewitt, Weil & McClure, 2020). Strategic leadership refers to the leaders’ ability to predict, expect, show flexibility, and empower others, with the view of creating strategic change where necessary (Shoemaker and Krupp, 2021). Shoemaker and Krupp (2021) further posit that strategic leadership not only concerns the adaptive capacity to effectively respond to complexity and dynamism in the external business environment but also possessing unique abilities that allows learning and absorption of new ideas and information. Having such abilities enables strategic leaders to tactically and continuously adjust their organizations to respond to uncertainties in the business environment. Strategic leadership is multifunctional as it relates to managing the employees and the challenges faced by organizations in the current globalized business environment (Jaleha & Machuki, 2018).

Moumin (2024) noted that organizational performance is multidimensional as it involves various aspects such as social performance (adoption of norms based on ethical considerations, employee satisfaction and customer satisfaction), economic performance (based on productivity, profitability and sales), and legal performance (adherence to laws and regulations). According to Moumin (2024), organizational performance is influenced by strategic leadership dimensions such as coaching effectiveness and team productivity (Jaleha & Machuki, 2018). These dimension are briefly discussed in the study and forms the theoretical underpinning of the current research study.

Over the past three decades, scholars have come to agree that coaching is an effective learning and development strategy (Bozer and Jones, 2021) and that its benefits include: more meaningful work, improved individual performance, greater job satisfaction and a better work – life balance (Jones , 2018). According to the literature, one of the main factors contributing to successful coaching outcomes is competencies (Bozer and Jones, 2018). Coaching effectiveness no doubt will contribute to employee competencies which in turn reflect on organization performance.

Teams are considered one of the most important components in today’s corporate world. As a result, employee productivity and the company’s overall performance are suffering. Managers and leaders understand the importance of collaboration in the workplace when it comes to accomplishing company goals and objectives. To increase team productivity in the workplace, it is important to encourage employees to step up their activities and seek assistance from their superiors. Self-esteem and productivity will improve for everyone in the team as a consequence of the increased cooperation amongst them (Gonzalez, 2021). Working as a team may enhance the efficiency and effectiveness of an organization. Managers will find it easier to place employees in their positions if they create cohesion in the organization. The employee will have a stronger sense of belonging to the company and a better sense of pride in the job he does there as a recognized team member. As a company, they work hard, but also for the sake of their teammates, whom they do not want to disappoint As long as it is organized and led by an experienced team leader; teamwork may be an excellent learning opportunity in the workplace (Kotlyar & Krasman, 2022; Meslec et al., 2020). Every member of an organization’s team should participate completely and work together to achieve a common goal to improve the organization’s performance.

Existing studies haven’t to the best of the researcher’s knowledge, comprehensively examined how strategic leadership and team productivity influence organization performance of MNCs. This lack of targeted empirical evidence hinders multi-national corporations and stakeholders in taking decisive steps to channel course of action in coaching effectiveness and embracing team productivity that will result in meaningful effect on organization performance of MNCs.

This study aims to investigate the influence of coaching effectiveness and team productivity on organization performance of MNCs in South-West, Nigeria. It seeks to gain a clear understanding of how coaching effectiveness and team productivity elements can be used to overcome the challenges faced by MNCs. The study hopes to enrich academic discussions while providing actionable insights for strategic planning, policy formulation, and efforts to support and advance MNCs in South-West, Nigeria. Ultimately, this research aspires to contribute valuable knowledge that could ignite and sustain a competitive edge for MNCs owners. It’s a research work that will be an additive factor for the economic modernization and improvement in work processes in organizations.

Statement of the Problem

Contemporary organizations face significant challenges in two critical areas: managerial leadership and strategic leadership (Alvarenga et al., 2021; Pitelis & Wagner, 2022). Notably, strategic leadership challenges tend to be abstract and operate at a level above daily operations, resulting in a knowledge gap regarding the impact of strategic leadership capabilities on everyday performance (George et al., 2022; Gupta et al., 2020).

Strategic leadership is often hindered by execution-related challenges (Verweire, 2024). The complexity of implementing strategic leadership initiatives is compounded by the need for comprehensive understanding and alignment throughout the organization (Kozyra, 2020). Research reveals a significant misalignment between organizational accountability and leadership in strategy execution, resulting in strategy implementation failure rates ranging from 50% to 90% (Wiles, 2020). Even well-crafted strategies can falter due to inadequate execution (American Management Association, 2021). Successful strategic leadership implementation requires a holistic approach that extends beyond well-designed plans (Kalali et al., 2022).

Furthermore, coaching effectiveness is hindered by challenges such as unclear outcomes, variability in coaching approaches, and limited research designs (Jarosz, 2021). These challenges can lead to ineffective coaching, lack of accountability, inconsistent results, and missed opportunities (Jarosz, 2021). Additionally, team productivity is hindered by poor teamwork, conflict, and low trust, resulting in inefficient teams and higher stress levels (Gomez et al., 2023). Limited skills and knowledge also hinder team performance, ultimately affecting organizational competitiveness (Nguyen et al., 2022).

Gomez et al., (2023) identified challenges in team productivity as: poor teamwork, conflict, and low trust leading to inefficient teams experience higher stress levels. In the same vain, Nguyen et al., (2022) emphasize that limited skills and knowledge hinder team performance and eventually leads to organizations with unproductive teams that struggle to compete.

However, many studies have been carried out by researchers on the challenges faced by MNCs, few scholars have explored the influence of strategic leadership on organization performance of MNCs. Drawing on the research gap in MNCs coaching effectiveness and team productivity as mentioned earlier and researchers divergent views and inconsistent findings, it is imperative to examine the influence of strategic leadership on organization performance of MNCs specifically in South-West, Nigeria.

Hence the need to further make this the purpose for further research as very few researchers have worked on coaching effectiveness and team productivity influence on organizational performance, specifically selected multinational corporations in South-West, Nigeria. Drawing on the research gap in the MNCs coaching effectiveness and team productivity literature, the researcher intend to fill the gaps identified.

Research Objectives

The main objective of the study is to investigate the influence of strategic leadership on organizational performance of selected Multinational Corporations (MNCs) in South-West, Nigeria.

The specific objectives are to:

1. Examine the effect of coaching effectiveness on organizational performance of selected Multinational Corporations (MNCs) in South-West, Nigeria.
2. Assess the effect of team productivity on organizational performance of selected Multinational Corporations (MNCs) in South-West, Nigeria.

Research Hypotheses

1. Coaching effectiveness does not have a significant impact on organizational performance in selected Multinational Corporations (MNCs) in South-West, Nigeria.
2. Team productivity does not have a significant impact on organizational performance in selected Multinational Corporations (MNCs) in South-West, Nigeria.     

LITERATURE REVIEW

Conceptual Review

This section presents the detailed literature reviewed on the basis of the study objectives. The perspectives of previous researchers and scholars on the relevant concepts and constructs of this study would be reviewed.

Strategic Leadership

Strategic leaders apply both linear and nonlinear thinking to make strategic choices that make a difference to their organization and the environment, resulting in strategic outcomes for the organization (Samimi et al., 2020). Strategic leadership is fundamentally about setting a direction and creating alignment and commitment within an organization towards achieving its long-term goals (Deliu, 2019). This leadership style is distinguished by its focus on enduring performance potential, which is crucial for the sustained success of any organization. Farhan (2021) asserted that effective strategic leaders must undergo four stages to survive unexpected crises, namely, gathering, protecting, challenging and integrating. Samimi et al. (2020) identified eight functions of strategic leadership, including to “creating vision,” “strategic decision making,” “stakeholder engagement,”“resource management,” “information management,”“empowerment,”“motivating and influencing” and “social and ethical issue management.” Thus, strategic leadership sets strategies and creates mindsets in preparation for crises and uncertainties. Klockner (2017) suggested that to develop organizational resilience, leaders must be complex system thinkers who possess an adaptive leadership style concerned with human capital interactions and information sharing through social networks.

Coaching Effectiveness

Coaching is well-defined as a steady, synergetic, personal advancement, objective focused process. According to Auer et al. (2022), many have suggested that “coaching can be thought of as an applied form of positive psychology. Effective coaching is about raising the coachee’s awareness of themselves and their behaviour and enabling them to take responsibility for change (Whitmore, 2021). Coaching is more valuable for people who are responsible for taking actions and decisions. (Zhao & Liu, 2020) stated that coaching is a casual interaction between two individuals. It is so because this method mainly focuses on the overall area while mentoring is focusing on specific tasks or objectives. That is why, in top companies, most of them follow coaching that helps to support behavioural change, personal change, and professional changes.

It is reflected that coaching is one of the main impactful management styles for professional & personal progress. Similarly, (Onyishi, et al., 2020) expressed their views that adopting a coaching system also provide a positive effect on the mental and physical wellbeing which stays for a longer time. That is why the managers need to keep supporting employees through coaching, and this, in turn, also assists in reaching essential motivational needs such that improving interpersonal skills and intrapersonal skills. It is so because when the company did not concern about the health of employees, then it makes employees sick or acts aggressively as well. Therefore, the managers need to make sure that all the basic needs of employees are met and if not, the company must act accordingly. (Cropley, et al., 2020) also examined that every person has their own need, and the Manager must meet those demands to keep employees motivated at the workplace. Hence, through coaching, employees may quickly gain new skills, and managers may easily delegate the task to them with an assured that they perform better. Overall, the method assists employees to develop personally as well as professionally. This method is associated with employee wellbeing because it boosts proper appreciation as well as self-confidence that help to keep performing well within the working area.

Moreover, through effective coaching methods, employees become more reliant and gain more job satisfaction. It helps them to effectively work and even improve efficiency so that they can rapidly achieve their established goals and objectives if a leader or Manager leads workers in the right direction. More than 80 percent of workers agree that coaching as a way for managers/leaders can help improve confidence while enhancing job efficiency, relationships, and the production of excellent communication skills.

Team productivity

One of the most important aspects for the company is productivity, because in the face of corporate competition, it maintains maximum strategic and financial performance to achieve the desired goals and fulfill the stakeholder value proportion (Prabawa & Supartha, 2017). Team productivity refers to the efficiency and effectiveness of a team in achieving its goals and objectives (Cohen & Bailey, 2020). The productivity of an institution can be improved through the support of human resource management to motivate employees to work more productively. However, in some companies, the low productivity of human resources can be seen from the lower working hours compared to other countries and the ability to produce quality products. In achieving company productivity, leaders must be able to carry out their duties and functions by motivating employees to maintain good communication between superiors and subordinates. According to Taylor et al., (2022) the importance of team productivity comprises of: enhanced Performance, competitive advantage, innovation and growth, employee satisfaction and cost efficiency. High employee productivity can be obtained if employees have the drive to increase their ability to increase work productivity, with these abilities the company will be able to carry out its goals effectively and efficiently (Huzain, 2015). With this concept, it can be realized by reflecting on a team work which is a group work for a common goal, an effective team is a work team whose members must be able to work together to achieve the goals they want to achieve and have confidence in the abilities of their colleagues.

Organization Performance

According to Louis Allen cited by Ansari et al. (2023), “Organization is the process of identifying and grouping work to be performed, defining and delegating responsibility and authority and establishing relationships for the purpose of enabling people to work most effectively together in accomplishing objectives.” In the words of Allen, organization is an instrument for achieving organizational goals. The work of each and every person is defined and authority and responsibility is fixed for accomplishing the same. Wheeler “Internal organization is the structural framework of duties and responsibilities required of personnel in performing various functions within the company. It is essentially a blue print for action resulting in a mechanism for carrying out function to achieve the goals set up by company management”. In Wheeler’s view, organization is a process of fixing duties and responsibilities of persons in an enterprise so that business goals are achieved.

Performance can be measured and assessed in a variety of ways, yet there is no one agreed-upon definition of what performance is. The main objectives of the organization are to increase performance, create goals, and discover new methods for performance improvement (Ismail & Al Hosni, 2021; Ghumiem, et al., 2022). Academics continue to show a lot of interest in studying and assessing organizational effectiveness because of organizations’ various aims. (Lu, 2019).  Success requires presenting an organization’s performance to all stakeholders (Akpoviroro & Owotutu, 2018).  Effectiveness, efficiency, and operation are three indicators of organizational performance as per Ismail and Al Hosni (2021) and Ghumiem and Alawi (2022). Organizational performance (OPE) is a concept associated with measuring and evaluating the efficiency and effectiveness of operations and activities within an organization (Al-Okaily, 2024a, 2024b; Teoh and Al-Okaily, 2023a, Teoh et al., 2023b). The organization’s performance involves goal response, mission, and visions. As such, it is a requirement that organizations possess measurable objectives and employees must participate in the set objectives (Banna, 2021). Much so, Anand et al., 2023 discussed that the dimensions of organization’s performance as financial performance, customer satisfaction, internal processes, innovation and learning and social responsibility. Hanes et al., (2022) point out some of the importance of organizational performance as: sustainable competitive advantage, financial success, innovation and growth, stakeholder satisfaction and adaptability and resilience. In addition, OPE aims to achieve the objectives set for the organisation and to ensure that activities are carried out efficiently and effectively to ensure the best results and growth (Magatef et al., 2023).OPE is a concept used in business management to describe how an organization achieves its goals and carries out its tasks effectively and efficiently. OPE is considered an indicator of the organization’s ability to achieve its goals, succeed in implementing its strategies and achieve excellent and sustainable performance that contributes to achieving the organization’s goals and increasing its competitiveness in the market (Albloush et al., 2022). One of the significant requests in the business world is why some institutions succeed whereas others fail. OPE has been the best important matter for every institutions whether it is profit or non-profit (Al-Okaily and Al-Okaily, 2022; Aws et al., 2021; Al-Fraihat et al., 2022). There are many ways in which performance outcomes are measured, this study will use employee competence and quality of task performance. All measures of performance are measures of success in an organization. Additionally, Dahri et al. (2019) elucidated that knowledge in strategic leadership leads to effective organizational performance outcomes.

Theoretical Review

This section deals in critical analysis of existing theories related to the concepts used in the topic of study, aiming to establish a theoretical framework for the study.

Strategic Leadership Theory

Strategic leadership emerged from the upper echelons theory, pioneered by Hambrick and Mason in the 1980s. This theory delves into the significance of dominant coalitions and their influence on organizational performance. It highlights how the social dynamics of top executives shape the growth of the organization. Unlike traditional leadership, which encompasses leaders across all levels, strategic leadership specifically centers on those at the pinnacle of the organization. While conventional leadership concerns itself with leader-follower dynamics, strategic leadership examines how dominant coalitions within the organization shape strategic decision-making process (Cortes & Herrmann, 2021).

In strategic leadership, it is important to consider the effectiveness of the top managers on the middle-level managers and the organizational employees (Schaedler, Graf-Vlachy, &König, 2022). Effective strategic leadership revolves around the congruence between the short-term and the long-term. Effective strategic leadership is also focused on enhancing the long-term viability of the form while at the same time ensuring that the form can achieve its short-term financial stability. Strategic leadership entails a change of vision with a sustainable capacity for change implementation. As such strategic leaders understand the complexity of change in enabling an organization to achieve its goals (Kurzhals, et al., 2020).

Understanding the role of strategic leadership in the performance of MNCs in South-West, Nigeria requires an appreciation of how leadership affects the organization’s performance. Strategic leadership theory identifies the organization as a complex system whereby strategic leaders provide the balance between stability and disorder (Ali & Anwar, 2021). Importantly, strategic leadership helps an organization to exploit its capabilities while at the same time identifying new competencies. These new competencies enable an organization to take advantage of new opportunities thus ensuring that an organization can sustain its growth. The use of strategic leadership theory will support the influence of strategic leadership in setting the right strategic directions, its importance in articulating missions and visions, and its impacts on performance.

Transformational Leadership Theory

Transformational Leadership Theory, introduced by Burns (1978), emphasizes leaders’ ability to inspire, motivate, and empower followers to achieve beyond ordinary expectations. This theory is particularly relevant to MNCs because it highlights how leaders create vision, foster trust, and drive organizational change in complex and dynamic environments (Bass, 1990). Strategic leadership, as conceptualized in contemporary literature, is grounded in transformational behaviors such as visioning, coaching, and empowering employees (Yukl, 2013).

One of the central dimensions of transformational leadership is individualized consideration, which involves leaders acting as mentors or coaches to their subordinates (Bass & Riggio, 2006). This aspect directly connects with coaching effectiveness, as it reflects how leaders develop employees’ competencies, enhance job satisfaction, and promote continuous learning (Bozer & Jones, 2018). In MNCs operating in Nigeria, where diverse workforces and cultural complexities exist, individualized coaching can strengthen employee engagement and contribute to superior organizational outcomes (Prewitt, Weil & McClure, 2020).

Another critical component of transformational leadership is inspirational motivation, which entails fostering team spirit and building collective commitment toward shared goals (Bass, 1999). This element directly relates to team productivity because it emphasizes collaboration, trust, and mutual accountability within organizational teams (Kotlyar & Krasman, 2022). Studies have shown that transformational leaders enhance teamwork by promoting cohesion, reducing conflicts, and motivating employees to exceed expectations (Meslec et al., 2020). In the context of MNCs in South-West Nigeria, such leadership behaviors can improve productivity by ensuring that diverse teams remain focused, coordinated, and committed to achieving organizational objectives (Gonzalez, 2021).

Finally, transformational leadership has been consistently linked to organizational performance across various industries and regions (Avolio & Yammarino, 2013). Leaders who exhibit transformational qualities not only enhance employee competencies and team efficiency but also contribute to long-term organizational growth, innovation, and competitiveness (Judge & Piccolo, 2004). For MNCs, where global competition and local challenges intersect, adopting transformational leadership practices ensures adaptability and resilience (Gupta et al., 2020).

Empirical Review

Dahri, Amin, and Waseem (2022) researched to evaluate the influence of strategic leadership on organizational performance in Pakistani banks, focusing on knowledge management by branch managers. Utilizing a cross-sectional design and a random sampling method, the researchers administered questionnaires to 129 staff members. Upon analysis, the data revealed significant support for all examined relationships. The results of the study underscore the effectiveness of utilizing knowledge management as a key resource for enhancing organizational performance in the banking sector, particularly in the context of developing economies.

Additionally, Dwijaya and Kusnadi (2021) delved into the influence of strategic leadership on organizational performance in the setting of India’s Navy. Employing an explanatory methodology, the study involved 180 officers as the sample. The findings demonstrated a significant effect of strategic leadership on organizational performance. The study contributed to the understanding of how strategic leadership can positively affect organizational performance, providing valuable insights for the naval context in India.

Locally in Kenya Munga, Momanyi and Omari (2021) conducted a study assessing the influence of strategic leadership on the organizational performance of counties in the lake region. Targeting 592 respondents, a sample of 309 was chosen through simple random sampling. The results indicated the application of strategic leadership in the counties, leading to enhanced performance. The study highlighted leaders’ formulation of effective management policies and employees’ participation in strategic planning. The recommendation from the study emphasized the importance of leaders formulating policies to effectively manage their leadership responsibilities

The study by Utrilla et al., (2021) used the Spanish case study to establish the effects of coaching on organizational performance. Structural equations modelling were used to test and analyze the hypotheses. 498 Spanish firms were studied using a sample of 2,303 sampled human resource managers from those firms. The researchers used questionnaires for gathering required data. The results confirmed that coaching had an influence on organizational performance. This was established after the coefficient relationship between individual performance and organizational performance that confirmed a positive relationship between individual performance improvements because of effective coaching and organizational performance.

Similar findings were found by Raza et al., (2022) in their study that sought to examine the impact of coaching effectiveness on organizational performance. The employed hierarchical regression analysis revealed coaching directly influenced job and organizational performance. This study was quantitative and cross sectional and had 280 respondents sampled and obtained through a simple random technique from the pharmaceutical sector in Pakistan. Survey questionnaires were used to collect data from the sample. The regression coefficients run through SPPS showed coaching to have a positive impact on in-role (job) performance and the general performance of the organization.

Tamunomiebi, and Ime, (2022) investigated the effect of team productivity on organizational performance. The study was mostly on military organization. It adopted exploratory research method and used secondary data to carry out qualitative analysis. The study revealed that team productivity has a lot of benefits to the organization as against individualism in terms of higher productivity, better organizational performance, competitive advantage and increased product quality and quantity that highly contributes to organizational productivity compared to other factors. Practically in the military, team productivity is the basis of operation resulting in effective and efficient conduct of any operation; this reinforces the positive effect of team productivity on organizational performance.

According to Njuguna, Wangari, Jacklyne, and Kiiru, (2021) Impact of team productivity on organizational performance: Study of Faculty Members in Kenyatta University. The study took a detailed form to analyze the subject using data to describe different perspectives in order to meet the study objective fully. The population targeted was faculty members of Kenyatta University and to cover consumer satisfaction students were involved. The study was an analysis of 100 respondents where the questionnaires were distributed among various schools and in the supportive sector which included the cafeteria and health department. The sampling was purposive in the selection of the respondents and mainly focused on experience period at the faculties. The main instrument used to collect data for this study was mainly a questionnaire and an interactive interview. The instrument was structured in a simple format where simple questions, open-ended, were framed based on the set objectives of the study. The findings indicated that team productivity has proven to be closely related to the performance of faculty. This concurs with earlier research work which indicates that team productivity helps to enhance tasks implementation, boosts effectiveness and also efficiency at the workplace. The various faculties and the supporting sectors should seek to enhance team productivity in attaining performance.

Empirical studies have corroborated the positive correlation between team productivity and organizational performance Johnson et al. (2021) conducted an extensive analysis across industries and found that teams characterized by strong collaboration exhibited higher efficiency, reduced errors, and increased output.

RESEARCH METHODS

This investigation utilized a descriptive survey research design. This approach facilitated the planning and execution of the research to obtain the desired outcomes and establish a connection with real-world situations (Hunziker & Blankenagel, 2024).

The target population for this study comprises selected Multinational Corporation (MNC) subsidiaries in South-West Nigeria, with a specific focus on 2,707 senior employees in different leadership positions as the unit of analysis. These employees were considered suitable respondents because of their strategic roles and direct involvement in organizational decision-making.

The study adopted a probability sampling technique, specifically stratified random sampling. In stratified random sampling, the target population is divided into smaller subgroups, also known as strata, based on shared attributes or characteristics such as organizational role, department, or geographical branch. This method ensured that each subgroup within the selected MNCs in South-West Nigeria was proportionately represented, thereby enhancing the validity of the findings.

The sampled research subjects were in a better position to answer the structured questionnaire, as they possess firsthand knowledge of leadership practices, organizational culture, and performance dynamics within their respective corporations.

Table 1: The Population Distribution of the selected Multinational Corporations (MNCs)

Source: Selected MNCs Human Resource Department (2025)

Sample size determination was carried out using the Taro Yamane (1967) formula that guided the calculation in determining the sample size, considering a population size (N) of 2,707; a 5% margin of error (e=0.05).

The Taro Yamane formula is given by:

n = N / (1 + N(e)^2)

Where:

n = Sample size

N = Population size(Number of leaders in different leadership positions in selected MNCs)

e = Desired level of precision (margin of error) – typically 0.05 or 0.01

N = Population size is 2707.

Therefore, sample size(n) calculated thus:

n = 2707 / (1 + 2707 (0.05)^2)

n = 2707/ (1 + 2707 (0.0025))

n = 2707 / (1 + 6.7675)

n = (2707/7.7675)

n = 348.50

Therefore, using the Taro Yamane formula with a population of 2707 and a desired level of precision of 0.05 (5% margin of error), the recommended sample size is approximately 349

Data was gathered through a self-administered structured questionnaire. The questionnaire was developed based on established measures from previous literature and comprised sections covering demographics, strategic leadership and organizational performance. Data collection was conducted through offline channel, based on accessibility of the respondents. Ethical considerations, such as informed consent, confidentiality, and data protection, were strictly adhered to throughout the data collection process.

The reliability of the data collected was established by planning method (consistency method) carefully in order to make sure the researcher carry out the same steps in the same way for each measurement. It was ascertained using the internal consistency method through the pilot study and Cronbach’s alpha coefficient was obtained using the Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS) IBM SPSS Statistics 27 version. The result of the test carried out suggested that the instrument used with its 20 items for evaluation was highly reliable as it gave coefficients above the 0.789 benchmark (kline, 2011; Taber, 2018). Table computation presented below

Table 2: Reliability Statistics

Reliability Tests (Cronbach’ Alpha)

Researcher Computation, 2025.

Content validity was ensured by aligning the language of the research instrument with the study objectives, where the questionnaire was validated by experts to ensure it measures what it intends to measure Face validity was assessed to confirm that the instrument effectively measured the constructs.

The researcher employed inferential statistics for the hypotheses test, specifically simple regression analysis in order to examine the influence of the independent variables on the dependent variable.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION OF FINDINGS

A total of 349 copies of the questionnaire were distributed in accordance with the sample size, and in the end, 317 employees of the selected MNCs in different leadership positions responded representing a 90.8% response rate.

Test of Hypothesis

Hypothesis One

Coaching effectiveness does not have a significant impact on organizational performance in selected Multinational Corporations (MNCs) in South-West Nigeria.

Table 3a: Model Summary

Predictors: (Constant), Coaching effectiveness

Table 3b: ANOVA^a

Table 3c: Coefficient of Result

Source: Author’s computation, (2025).

Note: ***, ** & * indicate statistical significance 5%.

The regression results show that coaching effectiveness has a statistically significant positive impact on organizational performance in selected Multinational Corporations (MNCs) in South-West, Nigeria. The model summary indicates that coaching effectiveness explains 42.8% (R² = 0.428) of the variation in organizational performance, with a strong correlation coefficient of R = 0.672. The ANOVA results further confirm the model’s significance (F = 20.580, p < 0.001), rejecting the null hypothesis. The coefficient table reveals that a unit increase in coaching effectiveness leads to a 0.592-unit increase in organizational performance (β = 0.672, t = 4.537, p < 0.001). This implies that effective coaching practices substantially enhance organizational outcomes, particularly in the context of multinational corporations operating in South-West, Nigeria.

Hypothesis Two

Team productivity does not have a significant impact on organizational performance in selected Multinational Corporations (MNCs) in South-West, Nigeria.

Table 4a: Model Summary

Table 4b: ANOVA^a

Table 4c: Regression Estimation Result

Source: Author’s computation, (2025).

Note: ***, ** & * indicate statistical significance at 5%.

The regression results indicate that team productivity has a significant positive effect on organizational performance in selected Multinational Corporations (MNCs) in South-West, Nigeria. The model summary shows that team productivity accounts for 37.8% of the variation in organizational performance (R² = 0.378) with a strong correlation (R = 0.615). The ANOVA confirms the model’s statistical significance (F = 17.429, p < 0.001), thereby rejecting the null hypothesis. The coefficient results further reveal that a unit increase in team productivity leads to a 0.619-unit increase in organizational performance (β = 0.615, t = 4.175, p < 0.001). This demonstrates that enhancing team productivity substantially contributes to improved organizational outcomes in MNCs within South-West, Nigeria.

DISCUSSION OF FINDINGS

The findings of this study revealed that coaching effectiveness has a significant positive effect on organizational performance in selected Multinational Corporations (MNCs) in South-West, Nigeria. The regression analysis indicated that coaching effectiveness explained 42.8% of the variance in organizational performance (R² = 0.428), with results showing that a unit increase in coaching effectiveness leads to a 0.592 increase in organizational performance (β = 0.672, p < 0.001). This outcome suggests that effective coaching enhances employee capabilities, aligns individual goals with organizational objectives, and fosters a supportive environment for improved performance. These findings align with the study of Jones, Woods, and Guillaume (2016), who emphasized that coaching promotes goal achievement, professional development, and organizational effectiveness. Similarly, Ladyshewsky (2017) confirmed that coaching interventions improve decision-making and leadership outcomes, further reinforcing the crucial role of coaching effectiveness in organizational performance.

Similarly, the results on team productivity revealed a significant positive impact on organizational performance, explaining 37.8% of the variance (R² = 0.378), with a unit increase in team productivity contributing to a 0.619 increase in organizational performance (β = 0.615, p < 0.001). This demonstrates that when employees collaborate effectively, share diverse perspectives, and maximize synergy, organizational outcomes are significantly enhanced. The result corroborates the work of Mathieu, Gallagher, Domingo, and Klock (2019), who highlighted that team productivity fosters adaptability, innovation, and collective problem-solving in dynamic organizational environments. Furthermore, Salas, Reyes, and McDaniel (2018) emphasized that high-performing teams enhance communication, trust, and efficiency, which are critical drivers of organizational competitiveness and sustainability. Collectively, the findings underscore that both coaching effectiveness and team productivity are essential levers for driving superior organizational performance in MNCs.

CONCLUSION

In conclusion, this study on Strategic Leadership and Organizational Performance of Selected Multinational Corporations (MNCs) in South-West, Nigeria establishes that strategic leadership practices, particularly through coaching effectiveness and team productivity, play a significant role in enhancing organizational outcomes. The findings revealed that coaching effectiveness fosters employee development, goal alignment, and improved decision-making, thereby strengthening overall performance, while team productivity promotes collaboration, synergy, and innovation, which drive competitiveness and sustainability. These results underscore the importance of adopting strategic leadership approaches that prioritize people-centered development and collective performance as critical levers for organizational success in today’s dynamic and competitive business environment.

RECOMMENDATIONS

Based on the findings, it is recommended that;

1. Management of multinational corporations in South-West, Nigeria institutionalize structured coaching programs that focus on skill development, knowledge transfer, and leadership mentoring. By embedding coaching into their strategic leadership framework, organizations can enhance employee capabilities, foster alignment with corporate goals, and strengthen decision-making processes that ultimately improve organizational performance.
2. Furthermore, organizations should prioritize team productivity by fostering a culture of collaboration, innovation, and accountability. This can be achieved through the adoption of cross-functional teamwork, digital collaboration tools, and performance-based incentives that motivate employees to work towards common goals.

REFERENCES

1. Akpoviroro, K. S., & Owotutu, S. O. (2018). Impact of external business environment on organizational performance. International Journal of Advance Research and Innovative Ideas in Education, 4(3), 498-505.
2. Albloush, A., Alharafsheh, M., Hanandeh, R., Albawwat, A., & Abu Shareah, M. (2022). Human capital as a mediating factor in the effects of green human resource management practices on organizational performance. International Journal of Sustainable Development and Planning, 17(3), 981-990.
3. Al-Fraihat, D., Al-Debei, M. M., & Al-Okaily, A. (2022). Factors influencing the decision to utilize eTax systems during the COVID-19 pandemic: The moderating role of anxiety of COVID-19 infection. International Journal of Electronic Government Research (IJEGR), 18(1), 1-24.
4. Ali, B. J. and Anwar, G. (2021) ‘Strategic leadership effectiveness and its influence on organizational effectiveness’, International Journal of Electrical, Electronics and Computers, 6(2), pp. 67-75.
5. Al-Okaily, M. (2024a). So what about the Post-COVID-19 era?: Do users still adopt FinTech products? International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction, doi: 10.1080/10447318.2024.2305992.
6. Al-Okaily, M. (2024b). Advancements and forecasts of digital taxation information systems usage and its impact on tax compliance: Does trust and awareness make difference? Journal of Financial Reporting and Accounting, doi: 10.1108/JFRA-09-2023-0567.
7. Al-Okaily, M., & Al-Okaily, A. (2022). An empirical assessment of enterprise information systems success in a developing country: The Jordanian experience. The TQM Journal, 34(6), 1958-1975. doi: 10.1108/TQM-09-2021-0267.
8. Alvarenga, J. C., Branco, R. R., Guedes, A. L. A., Soares, C. A. P., & E Silva, W. D. S. (2021). The project manager core competencies to project success. International Journal of Managing Projects in Business, 13(2), 277–292. doi: 10.1108/IJMPB-12-2018-0274
9. American Management Association and Human Resource Institute. (2021). Magnifying Customer Focus: A Study of Current Trends and Future Possibilities, 2006-2016.
10. Anand, A., et al. (2023). Examining the relationship between leadership style and organizational performance. Journal of Management Studies, 60(2), 347-372. doi: 10.1111/joms.12853
11. Ansari, S., Martina, T., Salfitri, M., & Ernesta, R. (2023). Organizational effectiveness: Bibliometric analysis. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ECONOMICS AND MANAGEMENT REVIEW, 1(1), 39-46.
12. Avolio, B. J., & Yammarino, F. J. (2013). Transformational and charismatic leadership: The road ahead (2nd ed.). Bingley, UK: Emerald Group Publishing.
13. AworomAnnang (2021). Multinational corporations and development in Nigeria. African Journal of Culture, Philosophy and Society, 3(1), 62-67.
14. Aws, A. L., Ping, T. A., & Al-Okaily, M. (2021). Towards business intelligence success measurement in an organization: A conceptual study. Journal of System and Management Sciences, 11(2), 155-170.
15. Banna, S. (2021). Strategic plan formulation process in public service organizations in the Gambia. Retrieved from (link unavailable)
16. Bass, B. M. (1990). From transactional to transformational leadership: Learning to share the vision. Organizational Dynamics, 18(3), 19–31. https://doi.org/10.1016/0090-2616(90)90061-S
17. Bass, B. M. (1999). Two decades of research and development in transformational leadership. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 8(1), 9–32. https://doi.org/10.1080/135943299398410
18. Bass, B. M., & Riggio, R. E. (2006). Transformational leadership (2nd ed.). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
19. Bilgin, Y., Bilgin, G. D., & Kilinc, I. (2017). Strategic leadership in civil society organizations: A research on Turkish charities performing international operations. Voluntas: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations, 28(2), 839-863.
20. Bozer, G., & Jones, R. (2021). Introduction to the special issue on advances in the psychology of workplace coaching. Applied Psychology, 70(2), 411–419. doi: 10.1111/apps.12305
21. Bozer, G., & Jones, R. J. (2018). Understanding the factors that determine workplace coaching effectiveness: A systematic literature review. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 27(3), 342–361. doi: 10.1080/1359432X.2018.1446946
22. Bozer, G., & Jones, R. J. (2018). Understanding the factors that determine workplace coaching effectiveness: A systematic literature review. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 27(3), 342–361. https://doi.org/10.1080/1359432X.2018.1446946
23. Burns, J. M. (1978). Leadership. New York, NY: Harper & Row.
24. Chen, G., Kanfer, R., & Smith, E. (2021). Team processes and team performance: A meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 103(2), 318-339.
25. Cohen, S. G., & Bailey, D. E. (2020). What makes teams work. Journal of Management, 23(3), 239-266.
26. Cortes, A. F. and Herrmann, P. (2021) ‘Strategic leadership of innovation: A framework for future research’, International Journal of Management Reviews, 23(2), pp. 224-243.
27. Dahri, A. S., Amin, S., & Waseem, M. (2019). Effect of strategic leadership on organizational performance through knowledge management. Journal of Managerial Sciences, Volume XIII(3), 56–70.
28. Dahri, A. S., Amin, S., & Waseem, M. (2022). Effect of strategic leadership on organizational performance through knowledge management. Journal of Managerial Sciences, 13(3), 56–70.
29. Dawber, T. (2019) ‘The manager as coach and facilitator for employees in information technology’, International Journal of Evidence Based Coaching and Mentoring, Special Issue 13, pp. 32-48.
30. Didier Noyé. (2022). Manager les performances [Managing Performance]. Paris: Insep Consulting Editions.
31. Dunning, J. H. (2021). Multinational Enterprises and the Global Economy. Edward Elgar Publishing Limited.
32. DwijayaSaputra, T., & Kusnadi, K. (2021). The effect of strategic human resources competency and logistic management on organizational performance mediated by strategic leadership. Journal of Economics, Management, Entrepreneurship, and Business (JEMEB), 1(2), 112–127. doi: 10.52909/jemeb.v1i2.55
33. Farhan, B. (2021). A new strategic leadership model for surviving and coping: Lessons from Canada’s leadership approach to COVID-19. Cogent Business and Management, 8(1), 1883221. doi: 10.1080/23311975.2021.1883221.
34. Gauche, C., Beer, L. T. d. and Brink, L. (2017) ‘Managing employee well-being: A qualitative study exploring job and personal resources of at-risk employees’, SA Journal of Human Resource Management, 15, pp. 1-13.
35. George, N., Karna, A., & Sud, M. (2022). Entrepreneurship through the lens of dynamic managerial capabilities: A review of the literature. Journal of Management & Organization, 1–27. doi: 10.1017/jmo.2022.25
36. Ghumiem, S. H., & Alawi, N. A. M. (2022). The effects of organizational commitment on non-financial performance: Insights from public sector context in developing countries. Journal of International Business and Management, 5(8), 01-13.
37. Gomez, C., et al. (2023). The impact of team dynamics on productivity in the workplace. Journal of Workplace Learning, 35(3), 253-266.
38. Gonzalez, R. (2021). The role of teamwork in improving employee productivity. Journal of Management Research, 13(2), 45–58. https://doi.org/10.5296/jmr.v13i2.18293
39. Gonzalez, R. V. D. (2021). Effects of learning culture and teamwork context on team performance mediated by dynamic capability. Journal of Knowledge Management, 25(8), 2000–2021.
40. Good, T. L. and Brophy, J. E. (1990) Educational psychology: A realistic approach. Longman/Addison Wesley Longman.
41. Gupta, A., McMillan, C., & Surie, G. (2020). Multinational corporations and strategic leadership in dynamic environments. International Business Review, 29(3), 101654. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ibusrev.2019.101654
42. Gupta, S., Modgil, S., Gunasekaran, A., & Bag, S. (2020). Dynamic capabilities and institutional theories for industry 4.0 and digital supply chain. Supply Chain Forum: An International Journal, 21(3), 139–157. doi: 10.1080/16258312.2020.1757369
43. Hamilton, D. (2019) ‘Leadership development: A blueprint for building a coaching culture’, Organizational Development Review, 51(3), pp. 42-49.
44. Hanes, D. R., et al. (2022). Exploring the relationship between leadership style and organizational resilience. Journal of Leadership and Organizational Studies, 29(1), 34-48. doi: 10.1177/10717919211073233
45. Hashmi, S. D., Gulzar, S., Ghafoor, Z., & Naz, I. (2020). Sensitivity of firm size measures to practices of corporate finance: Evidence from BRICS. Future Business Journal, 6(1), Article 1. doi: 10.1186/s43093-020-00015-y
46. Heeter, C. (2015) ‘Get Wild* At Work!’, Leadership Excellence, 32, p. 8.
47. Hunziker, S. and Blankenagel, M. (2024) ‘Cross-sectional research design’ in Research Design in Business and Management: A Practical Guide for Students and Researchers, Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden, pp. 187-199.
48. Ismail, F. M. I., & Al Hosni, A. A. H. H. (2021). The influence of job satisfaction and organizational culture on organizational performance: Empirical evidence from Pakistan’s banking sector. Webology, 18(3).
49. Jaleha, A. A., & Machuki, V. N. (2018). Strategic leadership and organizational performance: A critical review of literature. European Scientific Journal, 14(35), 124-149.
50. Jarosz, J. (2021). The impact of coaching on well-being and performance of managers and their teams during pandemic. International Journal of Evidence Based Coaching and Mentoring, 19(1), 4-27. doi: 10.24384/n5ht-2722
51. Jones, R. J., Woods, S. A. and Guillaume, Y. R. (2016) ‘The effectiveness of workplace coaching: A meta-analysis of learning and performance outcomes from coaching’, Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 89(2), pp. 249-277.
52. Jones, R. J., Woods, S. A. and Zhou, Y. (2018) ‘Boundary conditions of workplace coaching outcomes’, Journal of Managerial Psychology, 33(7/8), pp. 475-496.
53. Judge, T. A., & Piccolo, R. F. (2004). Transformational and transactional leadership: A meta-analytic test of their relative validity. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89(5), 755–768. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.89.5.755
54. Kalali, N. S., Anvari, M. R. A., Pourezzat, A. A., & Dastjerdi, D. K. (2022). Why does strategic plan implementation fail? A study in the health service sector of Iran. African Journal of Business Management, 5, 9831-9837.
55. Kamanga, P., & Ismail, S. (2017). Impact of operational and marketing capabilities on firm organizational performance: Evidence from economic growth and downturns. International Journal of Production Economics, 59-71.
56. Keeley, M. (1984). Impartiality and participant-interest theories of organizational effectiveness. Administrative Science Quarterly, 29(1), 1–25.
57. Kitonga, D. M., Bichanga, W. O. and Muema, B. K. (2016) ‘The role of determining strategic direction on not-for-profit organizational performance in Nairobi County in Kenya’, International Journal of Scientific & Technology Research, 5(5), pp. 28-32.
58. Klockner, K. (2017). Developing organisational resilience: Organisational mindfulness and mindful organizing. The Australian Journal of Emergency Management, 32(4), 47-51. doi: 10.3316/informit.222377270002079.
59. Kotlyar, I., & Krasman, J. (2022). Leading effective teams: The role of trust, cohesion, and transformational leadership. Team Performance Management, 28(3–4), 200–216. https://doi.org/10.1108/TPM-02-2021-0015
60. Kotlyar, I., & Krasman, J. (2022). Virtual simulation: New method for assessing teamwork skills. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 30(3), 344–360.
61. Kurzhals, C., Graf-Vlachy, L. and König, A. (2020) ‘Strategic leadership and technological innovation’, International Journal of Business Management, 28(6), pp. 437-464.
62. Lu, Y. (2019). An exploratory study of recharging mechanisms in a shared service context (Doctoral dissertation, Loughborough University).
63. Mackey, J. D., Brees, J. R., McAllister, C. P., Zorn, M. L., Martinko, M. J. and Harvey, P. (2018) ‘Victim and culprit? The effects of entitlement and felt accountability on perceptions of abusive supervision and perpetration of workplace bullying’, Journal of Business Ethics, 153, pp. 659-673.
64. McLeod, S. (2012) Jean Piaget. Simply Psychology.
65. Meslec, N., Curseu, P. L., & Fodor, O. C. (2020). Shared leadership and team performance: The role of coordination, communication, and cohesion. Journal of Business Research, 109, 23–32. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2019.11.054
66. Meslec, N., Duel, J., & Soeters, J. (2020). The role of teamwork on team performance in extreme military environments: An empirical study. Team Performance Management, 26(5–6), 325–339.
67. Mitchell, D. (2018) 50 Top Tools for Employee Wellbeing: A Complete Toolkit for Developing Happy, Healthy, Productive and Engaged Employees. 1st ed. Kogan Page Limited.
68. Munga, B., Momanyi, C., & Omari, S. (2021). Effect of strategic leadership styles on organizational performance of county governments in Kenya: A focus of Lake Region economic bloc counties. International Academic Journal of …, 3(10), 89–111.
69. Nguyen, H., et al. (2022). The relationship between training and development and team productivity. Human Resource Development Quarterly, 33(2), 147-162.
70. Njuguna, M. W., Wangari, C. M., Jacklyne, N. S., & Kiiru, D. (2021). Impact of teamwork on employee performance: Study of faculty members in Kenyatta University. Journal of Human Resource and Leadership, 4(1), 1–8.
71. Northouse, P. G. (2021). Leadership: Theory and practice (8th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
72. Onodugo, V. A. (2020). Multinational corporations (MNCs) and employment and labour conditions of developing countries: The Nigerian experience. European Journal of Business and Social Sciences, 1(6), 67-76.
73. Onyishi, C. N., Ede, M. O., Ossai, O. V. and Ugwuanyi, C. S. (2020) ‘Rational emotive occupational health coaching in the management of police subjective well-being and work ability: A case of repeated measures’, Journal of Police and Criminal Psychology, pp. 1-16.
74. Pitelis, C. N., & Wagner, J. D. (2022). Strategic shared leadership and organizational dynamic capabilities. The Leadership Quarterly, 30(2), 233–242. doi: 10.1016/j.leaqua.2018.08.002
75. Prabawa, I. M. A. and Supartha, I. W. G. (2017) ‘Increasing employee productivity through empowerment, teamwork and training in service companies’, Udayana University Management E-Jurnal, 7(1), p. 497.
76. Prewitt, J. E., Weil, R., & McClure, A. Q. (2020). Developing strategic leadership competencies. Journal of Leadership, Accountability and Ethics, 17(2), 97–108. https://doi.org/10.33423/jlae.v17i2.3042
77. Rosha, A. and Lace, N. (2016) ‘The scope of coaching in the context of organizational change’, Journal of Open Innovation: Technology, Market, and Complexity, 2(2), pp. 1-14.
78. Schaedler, L., Graf-Vlachy, L. and König, A. (2022) ‘Strategic leadership in organizational crises: A review and research agenda’, Long Range Planning, 55(2), p. 102156.
79. Theeboom, T., Beersma, B. and van Vianen, A. E. M. (2014) ‘Does coaching work? A meta-analysis
80. Verweire, K. (2024). Strategy Implementation. Taylor and Francis. doi: 10.4324/9781315.
81. Yukl, G. (2013). Leadership in organizations (8th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.