The research in 60 seconds
Researchers at Dublin City University reviewed 38 peer-reviewed studies (2014–2024) on coaching in school leadership development, mostly from the US, UK and Europe. Alongside the expected benefits to the coached leader (confidence, role clarity, resilience), several studies found something less obvious: leaders who experienced skilled coaching began using the same skills themselves, questioning, listening, reflecting non-judgementally, in their everyday interactions with staff. The review also flagged trained peer and group coaching among leaders as a promising, under-researched alternative to relying solely on external coaches.
So what?
Most leadership development treats coaching as something a leader receives. This review points to a second, less visible layer: coaching as something a leader learns to do. The studies describe this as vicarious learning. A school leader who is coached well, by someone non-directive, genuinely curious and skilled at open questioning, doesn't just solve the problem in front of them. They pick up a way of working that carries into how they handle a difficult conversation with a teacher, or support a colleague through a decision, long after the formal coaching relationship ends.
This matters for how coaching gets designed into leadership development rather than bolted on as an individual perk. If the skill transfers, then who gets coached, and how well that coaching models the behaviour worth copying, becomes a design question, not just a wellbeing one. The review also found real interest in leaders coaching other leaders, drawing on the same logic that underpins peer coaching in business settings, though the authors are careful to note this remains thin, and only works where "peer" coaches are genuinely trained rather than simply senior. For a course on coaching as a skill, this is probably the more useful finding than the well-worn one about coaching reducing stress: the skill itself seems to be the thing that compounds and spreads, if the conditions are right.
For leaders
Notice what your coach does, not just what you get from a session. If coaching skill transfers vicariously, paying attention to how your coach questions, listens and holds back from directing you is itself part of the learning.
Deliberately practise the non-directive stance in ordinary conversations. The review linked effective coaching to skilled open questioning and holding back from giving answers. Try it in one low-stakes conversation this week: ask, don't tell, and notice how hard that is to sustain.
Treat your own coaching relationship as a model you might later replicate. If you'll ever coach a colleague or deputy, the relationship you're currently in (how it was contracted, how confidentiality was handled, how directive or non-directive your coach was) is your working template.
For teams and organisations
Design coaching programmes to build coaching capacity, not just deliver coaching sessions. The review suggests the highest-leverage version of coaching may be one where school leaders are selected and coached partly because they will go on to coach others.
Invest properly in training peer coaches rather than assuming seniority is enough. The review is explicit that trained, experienced coaches produced the strongest evidence; informal peer coaching without real training was not the same thing and remains largely untested.
Make the coaching stance visible in how senior leaders are expected to operate day-to-day, not confined to scheduled sessions. Several included studies linked coaching exposure to a broader "coaching culture" where non-directive, curious leadership became a norm rather than an event.
