ArticleBehavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland)2026
AI in the Coach's Chair: How Professional Coaches Navigate Identity and Role Ambiguity in Response to AI Adoption by Their Coaching Firm.
Article in Behavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland), 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The emergence of artificial intelligence (AI) coaching challenges the professional roles and identities of human coaches, yet empirical research on this transformation remains scarce. This qualitative field study investigates how professional coaches navigate their roles following the organizational adoption of AI coaching. Drawing on the automation-augmentation paradox, occupational role identity, and role ambiguity theories, we analyzed 15 semi-structured interviews with 12 professional coaches in an Asian coaching firm, contextualized by pre- and post-interviews with the company CEO and the AI provider. Findings reveal that top-down AI implementation triggered significant role ambiguity, catalyzing both protective and expansive identity work. Coaches defended their unique human value (e.g., empathy), while simultaneously experimenting with AI, shifting their perception from threat to collaborative tool. This adaptive process enabled the emergence of distinct AI functions and new "blended" human-AI coaching models. Our resulting conceptual framework demonstrates that resolving the automation-augmentation paradox in relational professions is fundamentally an identity-driven process rather than a technical task reallocation. Furthermore, our findings demonstrate that organizationally induced role ambiguity can serve as a catalyst for professional renewal and vocational adaptation, particularly when supported by participatory leadership, thereby advancing theory and contributing new insights to the literature on technological and vocational transformation in organizational contexts.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.