Effect of Head Nurses’ Workplace Polarity Management Educational Intervention on Their Coaching Behavior

Table 4

Nurses’ perception of their HNs’ coaching behaviors subscales pre and after 3 months of educational intervention (n = 300).

Coaching-leadershipbehaviors subscales	Pre		After 3 months		Test of sig.	value
	No.	%	No.	%
Working alliance
Low	210	70.0	125	41.7	MH = 316.50	<0.001
Moderate	62	20.7	101	33.7
High	28	9.3	74	24.7
Total mean score	8.4 ± 3.3		10.7 ± 2.4		Z = 8.543	<0.001
Total mean percent	45.5 ± 27.9		64.6 ± 20.1
Open communication
Low	206	68.7	129	43.0	MH = 329.50	<0.001
Moderate	66	22.0	93	31.0
High	28	9.3	78	26.0
Total mean score	14.3 ± 4.7		17.4 ± 3.9		Z = 8.122	<0.001
Total mean percent	46.8 ± 23.9		62.4 ± 19.6
Learning and development
Low	210	70.0	147	49.0	MH = 292.50	<0.001
Moderate	62	20.7	115	38.3
High	28	9.3	38	12.7
Total mean score	32.2 ± 9.4		37.9 ± 5.6		Z = 8.014	<0.001
Total mean percent	48.3 ± 21.3		61.3 ± 12.9
Progress and results
Low	228	76.0	129	43.0	MH = 338.00	<0.001
Moderate	52	17.3	84	28.0
High	20	6.7	87	29.0
Total mean score	17.0 ± 4.4		21.6 ± 4.6		Z = 9.803	<0.001
Total mean percent	46.1 ± 18.4		65.1 ± 19.5
Overall, nurses’ perception
Total mean score	72.2 ± 20.0		87.8 ± 12.4		Z = 9.538	<0.001
Total mean percent	44.4 ± 19.2		59.4 ± 11.9

Note. MH, marginal homogeneity test; Z, Wilcoxon signed ranks test; , probability value; , statistically significant at  < 0.05; n, subsample.