EVIDENCE · RESEARCH · CITATIONS
What we know, and how we know it.
iLeader is based on renowned coaching techniques, behavioral science, and best-practices — all with citations verifiable against primary sources.
Coaching effectiveness
Three meta-analyses, one consistent finding.
g = 0.59
Overall coaching effect size from 37 randomized controlled trials.
De Haan & Nilsson, Academy of Management, 2023
0.74
Effect on goal-directed self-regulation across 18 studies.
Theeboom, Beersma & van Vianen, J. Positive Psychology, 2014
1.24
Effect on individual-level outcomes in workplace coaching.
Jones, Woods & Guffey, J. Occupational Psychology, 2016
Theeboom, Beersma & van Vianen (2014)
Combined 18 studies and found coaching produced significant positive effects across five outcome categories — Hedges' g ranging from 0.43 (coping) to 0.74 (goal-directed self-regulation).
Jones, Woods & Guffey (2016)
Focused on workplace coaching specifically: positive overall effect (δ = 0.36), with skill outcomes at 0.28, affective at 0.51, and individual-level results at 1.24.
De Haan & Nilsson (2023)
Restricted to 37 RCT-only studies and found an overall effect size of g = 0.59 — and these results held across format: face-to-face, phone, and digital delivery produced equivalent outcomes.
Coaching works — and digital delivery works as well as in-person.
Non-cognitive skills
Why non-cognitive skills matter as much as IQ.
Two decades of research from Nobel laureate James Heckman and colleagues — published in NBER, the Journal of Labor Economics, and the American Economic Review — converge on three findings.
Heckman, Stixrud & Urzua (2006)
Non-cognitive abilities — motivation, persistence, self-esteem, conscientiousness — predict wage attainment, employment, and avoiding incarceration on par with cognitive skills.
Heckman & Rubinstein (2001)
GED recipients have cognitive ability equivalent to high school graduates who don't go to college, yet earn at the rate of dropouts. The gap is non-cognitive.
Heckman & Kautz (2012)
Non-cognitive skills remain developable into adulthood — unlike cognitive ability, which is largely set by adolescence.
Transfer of training
Practice in context is what makes training transfer.
Baldwin and Ford (1988), in Personnel Psychology, produced the foundational framework for transfer of training — the question of whether what is learned actually transfers to behavior at work. Their model identifies three critical factors: trainee characteristics, training design (especially practice in context), and work-environment support. Subsequent research has consistently shown that practice in realistic scenarios is one of the most reliable ways to produce transfer.
Role-play is one of the most reliable ways to make training stick.
Goal-setting theory
Specific goals plus accountability produce durable change.
Locke and Latham's goal-setting theory, developed over 35+ years and summarized in their 2002 American Psychologist article, is one of the best-supported theories in organizational psychology. Three findings form the backbone:
- Specific and challenging goals produce higher performance than vague or easy ones.
- Feedback and progress tracking amplify the goal effect.
- Commitment to the goal is necessary for goals to work.
Youth & workforce programs
An honest picture of the youth-employment evidence.
The soft-skills-for-youth literature is mixed — and naming the mixed evidence is part of iLeader's scientific posture.
~250%
ROI within eight months — soft-skills training at Shahi Exports, Bangalore.
MIT Sloan / Kala et al.
17%
Increase in job formality for men — Juventud y Empleo RCT, Dominican Republic.
Ibarrarán et al., IZA 2014
+50%
Higher earnings vs. control — Argentina's Entra 21 program.
Card et al., 2011
What works
Programs that integrate soft-skills training into broader support — placement, mentorship, follow-up — show meaningful gains in formality, earnings, and non-cognitive skills.
What doesn't
Groh et al. (2016) tested a 45-hour stand-alone soft-skills program in Jordan and found no employment impact. Short, isolated training without integration into broader program support often fails to move labor-market outcomes.
Academic outcomes
Non-cognitive skills predict graduation more than test scores do.
15.7 pp
Increase in on-time high school graduation per 1-SD in non-cognitive skills.
Jackson, Journal of Political Economy, 2018
6×
Non-cognitive skills mattered roughly six times more than test scores for graduation.
Jackson, JPE 2018
109 studies
Meta-analysis confirming self-efficacy, motivation, and goals predict academic persistence.
Robbins et al., Psychological Bulletin, 2004
Jackson (2018)
A one-SD increase in a student's non-cognitive factor is associated with a 15.7 percentage-point increase in on-time graduation — versus 2.66 pp for a one-SD increase in test scores.
Robbins et al. (2004)
Meta-analysis of 109 studies: academic self-efficacy, motivation, and goals are significant incremental predictors of academic persistence and performance — over and above GPA, cognitive tests, and SES.
Nepal deployment
Built for the language, philosophy, and reality of returning migrants.
We are partnered with an international NGO working with returning migrant workers in Nepal — people coming back from years of labor abroad, navigating reintegration, family expectations, and the search for the next or first job. The deployment was built as a capability test.
Language
Nepali, reviewed by native-speaking coaches for tone and conversational fit. Not machine translation.
Philosophical framing
Eastern frames — duty (kartavya), right livelihood, community-self balance — that shape how returning migrants understand self-improvement, in contrast to Western individualist frames.
Scenarios
Co-designed for what migrant returnees actually face: reintegrating with family, negotiating with employers, navigating informal job markets, managing the identity shift of return.
Outcome metrics
Aligned to the partner NGO's logframe for reintegration and employability.
Peru Coachee research
Before scaling, we listened.
Before scaling the B2B product, iLeader ran Coachee validation research directly with individuals in Peru — students, young professionals, working adults — bringing real problems to the Coach: workplace conflict, prioritization under overwhelm, confidence, personal challenges. The research taught us what actually helps Coachees versus what sounds good in a demo. Every coaching flow in iLeader today reflects those learnings.
The iLeader Coach gave me tools I could immediately use for specific challenges. When I felt scattered and struggled to prioritize tasks, the Coach helped me identify clear strategies to organize my workload, achieve my goals, and boost my confidence. It was incredibly practical and genuinely useful.
— iLeader Coachee, Peru
The first time I used iLeader, it helped me a lot with approaching a workplace issue. I learned how to make myself understood and address an uncomfortable situation — not by complaining, but by calmly addressing the problem. I was able to have a constructive conversation about taking on responsibilities that weren't mine. The result? Everything went smoothly, and both of us are now doing much better at work.
— iLeader Coachee, Peru
Working with the iLeader Coach has been a very positive experience. It helped me work through a specific personal challenge with patience and practical steps I could take on my own time, in my own way.
— iLeader Coachee, Peru
Built on the science. Proven in the field.
Apply to the Charter Partner Program — and help us add your outcomes to the evidence base.