Entrepreneurial Coaching and Self-Efficacy: A Systematic Review of Its Pedagogical Integration into Entrepreneurship Education

Abstract

This study explores the integration of Entrepreneurial Coaching (EC) as a pedagogical innovation in Entrepreneurship Education (EE) and its role in fostering Entrepreneurial Self-Efficacy (ESE). The aim is to synthesise existing research to understand how EC supports the development of ESE and addresses the knowing–doing gap in entrepreneurial practice. A systematic literature review (SLR) was conducted following PRISMA guidelines. The search strategy utilised the Scopus and Litmaps databases, identifying 548 records. After removing duplicates, 407 records were screened based on titles and abstracts, resulting in 96 studies in the final synthesis. Findings reveal that EC enhances ESE through reflective and experiential learning but highlight significant gaps, including limited longitudinal research, the need for scalable coaching models, and a lack of standardised evaluation frameworks. This study acknowledges its reliance on selected databases (Scopus and Litmaps) and the exclusion of non-English publications as limitations, which may have excluded the relevant literature. These findings emphasise the potential of EC to complement existing pedagogical approaches in EE while identifying critical areas for future research to establish its theoretical and practical contributions.

1. Introduction

Entrepreneurship Education (EE) has become a pivotal approach for fostering entrepreneurial knowledge, skills, and mindsets, preparing individuals to navigate the complexities of entrepreneurial ventures (Henry et al., 2005; Nowiński et al., 2019; Sunanto et al., 2023). A significant body of literature highlights the role of EE in developing Entrepreneurial Self-Efficacy (ESE), defined as an individual’s belief in their capability to perform entrepreneurial tasks effectively (Bandura, 1986; Chen et al., 1998; Nowiński et al., 2019). ESE is a critical determinant of entrepreneurial intention, resilience, and action, making its development a core objective of entrepreneurship education programmes (Chen et al., 1998; Henry et al., 2005; Sunanto et al., 2023). Entrepreneurship Education (EE) has become a cornerstone of higher education, equipping students with the knowledge, skills, and attitudes necessary to succeed as entrepreneurs (Galvão et al., 2020). Its importance continues to grow globally and locally, as evidenced by its integration into higher education curricula and the rising emphasis on fostering entrepreneurial mindsets (Galvão et al., 2020). EE aims to cultivate Entrepreneurial Self-Efficacy, resilience, opportunity identification, and adaptability, all of which are critical for navigating the uncertainties of entrepreneurial ventures (Verduijn & Berglund, 2020).

Various pedagogical approaches have been employed to achieve these goals, including lectures, case studies, business simulations, and project-based learning. However, recent shifts in educational philosophy underscore the value of experiential and student-centred learning, reflecting the belief that entrepreneurship is best learned through hands-on experience rather than theoretical instruction alone (Gabrielsson et al., 2020; Hägg & Gabrielsson, 2020). While these approaches have contributed to students’ foundational understanding of entrepreneurship, they often fail to bridge the knowing–doing gap inherent in entrepreneurial practice (Timonen & Ruokamo, 2021). This gap highlights a need for fit-for-purpose pedagogical innovations integrating real-world, experiential learning with structured mentorship and personalised support (Kolb, 1981). Entrepreneurial Coaching (EC) has emerged as a promising pedagogical tool to address this gap by providing the experiential, reflective, and tailored learning required to enhance self-efficacy and entrepreneurial competencies (Fellnhofer, 2017). Yet, despite its potential, research on EC as a pedagogy in EE remains limited, with its unique contributions to developing Entrepreneurial Self-Efficacy and achieving the goals of EE still underexplored. This study addresses this gap by systematically examining the integration of EC into EE and its role in fostering entrepreneurial self-efficacy, offering insights into its effectiveness and applicability as an innovative educational approach.

Entrepreneurial Coaching (EC) has emerged as a promising pedagogical innovation to address these limitations. Rooted in Social Cognitive Theory (Bandura, 1977b, 1977a, 1986) and Experiential Learning Theory (Kolb, 1981). EC emphasises goal setting, reflective practice, personalised feedback, and mentorship to build learners’ confidence, skills, and entrepreneurial resilience (Kotte et al., 2021; Ndlovu-Hlatshwayo & Msimango-Galawe, 2023; St-Jean & Audet, 2009). EC distinguishes itself from conventional methods by focusing on coachee-specific needs and iterative improvement through coaching interactions, fostering self-efficacy development’s emotional and psychological dimensions (Chen et al., 1998; Hassan, 2020; Rahayuningsih, 2022).

Despite its potential, the literature on EC remains fragmented and underexplored compared to EE’s broader body of work. While EE has a well-documented relationship with ESE (Chen et al., 1998; Hassan, 2020; Henry et al., 2005; Nowiński et al., 2019), research exploring EC’s direct contributions to self-efficacy development is limited (Molema et al., 2024; Ndlovu, 2023; Ben Salem & Lakhal, 2018). Furthermore, the integration of EC into formal EE curricula and its long-term impact on ESE remain significant gaps in the literature (Koropogui et al., 2024; St-Jean & Audet, 2009; Timonen & Ruokamo, 2021).

Research Objectives

This systematic review aims to address these gaps by the following:

• Synthesising existing studies on Entrepreneurial Coaching (EC) as a pedagogical approach within Entrepreneurship Education (EE).
• Analysing research trends, thematic contributions, and gaps regarding the relationship between EC, EE, and Entrepreneurial Self-Efficacy (ESE).

By examining these intersections, this study contributes to the discourse on innovative pedagogies, offering insights into the transformative potential of EC as a tool for building entrepreneurial self-efficacy. This review also identifies practical pathways for integrating EC into entrepreneurship education and provides directions for future research.

2. Materials and Methods

This study adopts a pragmatic philosophical stance to guide the analytical process, ensuring that the findings are relevant and actionable in addressing the research objectives (Bachkirova & Borrington, 2019). Within this framework, a reflective thematic analysis (RTA) was conducted, allowing for a flexible and reflexive approach to identifying and interpreting themes within the data (Byrne, 2022). The analysis was further informed by an abductive reasoning process, which facilitated an iterative engagement between data-driven insights and theoretical frameworks (Braun & Clarke, 2019). This combined approach aligns with the principles of pragmatism, prioritising practical relevance while acknowledging the researcher’s active role in shaping the analysis.

In conducting our analysis, we adopted a systematic approach as outlined by (Briner & Denyer, 2012; Kunisch et al., 2018). This builds on foundational methodologies advocated by (Macpherson & Jones, 2010). Guided by these frameworks, we employed a reflective thematic analysis to systematically review and interpret patterns within the journal articles and records. Reflective thematic analysis is a flexible, researcher-driven approach that emphasises the active role of the researcher in identifying, shaping, and interpreting themes within the data (Braun & Clarke, 2019). This approach acknowledges the inherently subjective nature of thematic analysis, allowing for critical reflexivity and incorporating the researcher’s theoretical perspective and assumptions throughout the process.

This systematic review further adheres to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) reporting guidelines to ensure rigour, transparency, and replicability (Page et al., 2021). The methodology involved a structured multi-phase process comprising database searching, screening, and eligibility assessment, followed by data extraction and thematic analysis. The focus of the review is on studies examining Entrepreneurial Coaching (EC), Entrepreneurship Education (EE), and Entrepreneurial Self-Efficacy (ESE), considering their theoretical, pedagogical, and empirical intersections. A combination of traditional and innovative tools was employed to maximise the comprehensiveness of the search. The PRISMA diagram (Figure 1) visually summarises the study selection process, detailing the records identified, screened, excluded, and included in the final review.

2.1. Search Strategy

The literature search was conducted using Scopus, a robust academic database, and Litmaps, a dynamic citation mapping tool. Including Litmaps was instrumental in identifying influential and emerging studies relevant to an innovative topic like Entrepreneurial Coaching (EC). Both tools allowed the capture of foundational works and recent contributions, ensuring a comprehensive field review. The search strategy combined keywords and Boolean operators to reflect the review’s focus on EC, EE, and ESE. Examples of search terms included the following:

• “Entrepreneurial Coaching” AND “Entrepreneurial Self-Efficacy”;
• “Entrepreneurship Education” AND “Coaching Pedagogy”;
• “Self-Efficacy” AND “Entrepreneurship”;
• “Entrepreneurial Coaching” AND “Entrepreneurship Education” AND “Entrepreneurial Self-Efficacy”.

The initial search, which produced 548 records, had no publication date limitation to ensure comprehensive topic coverage. However, during screening, the review was refined to include peer-reviewed journal articles published in English between 2014 and 2024 to capture contemporary developments while retaining seminal works pivotal to the theoretical foundations. Key foundational authors, such as Bandura (1977a, 1977b, 1986), Henry et al. (2005), and Jones et al. (2012), were included irrespective of publication year due to their significant contributions to Social Cognitive Theory, Entrepreneurship Education, and Coaching Pedagogy, respectively. After the removal of duplicates, 407 unique references remained for screening. The subsequent stages of title, abstract, and full-text screening are detailed in Figure 1.

Figure 2, the Litmaps visualisation, offers a comprehensive mapping of key studies and their interconnections within the fields of Entrepreneurial Coaching (EC), Entrepreneurship Education (EE), and Entrepreneurial Self-Efficacy (ESE). Each colour-coded node represents a study categorised by thematic focus: yellow nodes correspond to studies exploring EE and ESE, purple nodes signify works on coaching pedagogy, blue nodes highlight EC-specific research, pink nodes represent studies bridging EC and ESE, while green nodes indicate works integrating EC and EE. The density of connections demonstrates the well-established relationship between EE and ESE, with a significant volume of studies addressing these topics. However, the visualisation also emphasises the relative scarcity of research on EC as an independent concept and its integration with ESE and EE. EC has emerged prominently in recent works, such as Kotte et al. (2021), which define EC and frame its theoretical foundations. This visualisation highlights the need for further research into EC, particularly its distinct contributions to EE and ESE. The diagram serves as both a thematic overview and an illustration of the growing attention to EC as a pedagogical innovation.

2.2. Data Sources and Search Results

The literature search was conducted using Scopus and Litmaps, ensuring comprehensive coverage of both established and emerging research in Entrepreneurial Coaching (EC), Entrepreneurship Education (EE), and Entrepreneurial Self-Efficacy (ESE). These databases were chosen for their ability to identify peer-reviewed studies, map citation networks, and highlight thematic clusters. A total of 548 records were initially retrieved, encompassing studies from all publication years. After removing 84 duplicates, 464 unique references remained. The search was then refined to include only studies published between 2014 and 2024, reducing the number to 402. Additionally, five seminal works foundational to the study’s theoretical framework were retained regardless of publication year, increasing the total to 407 references.

These 407 references underwent a systematic selection process. During the title screening stage, 300 records were excluded, leaving 107 references. Further, abstract screening excluded an additional 11 records, resulting in a total of 96 articles in the review. These 96 studies formed the basis of the systematic synthesis and analysis. Key seminal works included the following:

• Bandura (1977a, 1977b, 1986): Foundational studies on self-efficacy and Social Cognitive Theory.
• Henry et al. (2005): Influential research on entrepreneurship education and the teachability of entrepreneurial skills.
• Jones et al. (2012): Pioneering work on developing coaching pedagogy and integrating theory with practice.

2.3. Inclusion and Exclusion Criteria

Predefined inclusion and exclusion criteria were applied to ensure that the systematic review focused on relevant, high-quality studies.

2.3.1. Inclusion Criteria

The review included studies that met the following inclusion criteria, guided by Boolean search strings targeting records relevant to Entrepreneurship Education (EE), Entrepreneurial Coaching (EC), Entrepreneurial Self-Efficacy (ESE), and coaching as pedagogy:

• Publication Date: Articles published between 2014 and 2024, capturing contemporary advancements in EC, EE, and ESE.
• Seminal Works: Foundational studies, regardless of publication date, that provide key theoretical underpinnings for the study. Examples include Bandura’s (1977a, 1977b, 1986) work on self-efficacy and Social Cognitive Theory, Henry et al.’s (2005) work on entrepreneurship education, and Jones et al.’s (2012) work on coaching pedagogy.
• Peer-Reviewed Publications: Only peer-reviewed journal articles were considered to ensure methodological rigour.
• Empirical Studies: Studies employing qualitative, quantitative, or mixed-method designs with data relevant to EC, EE, and/or ESE.

These criteria ensured that the review focused on high-quality, relevant studies addressing the intersections of EC, EE, ESE, and coaching as a pedagogical approach.

2.3.2. Exclusion Criteria

Studies were excluded if the following applied:

• Publication Date: Articles published before 2014, unless they were considered seminal works foundational to the study’s theoretical framework.
• Scope Misalignment: Studies focused on topics unrelated to Entrepreneurial Coaching (EC), Entrepreneurship Education (EE), Entrepreneurial Self-Efficacy (ESE), or coaching as a pedagogical approach (e.g., general business coaching or non-entrepreneurial educational contexts).
• Publication Type: Grey literature, such as dissertations, conference proceedings, or non-peer-reviewed sources, was excluded to ensure methodological rigour.
• Lack of Empirical Evidence: Conceptual or opinion-based papers without empirical data were excluded, as the review prioritised evidence-based research.

This criteria-driven approach ensured that the review prioritised contemporary research while incorporating essential foundational theories to provide depth and relevance.

2.4. Screening and Study Selection

The study selection process followed a systematic and structured approach to ensure the inclusion of high-quality and relevant studies. After applying the inclusion and exclusion criteria, a three-stage screening process was conducted:

Stage 1: Title Screening

Initially, the titles of all 407 unique references were reviewed for relevance to the study’s focus on Entrepreneurial Coaching (EC), Entrepreneurship Education (EE), and Entrepreneurial Self-Efficacy (ESE). Articles with irrelevant titles, such as those centred solely on entrepreneurial intention, general business training, or unrelated educational contexts, were excluded. This stage resulted in the exclusion of 300 articles.

Stage 2: Abstract Screening

Abstracts of the remaining 107 articles were assessed for alignment with the research objectives and inclusion criteria. Articles lacking focus on EC, EE, ESE, or empirical evidence (e.g., opinion pieces or conceptual frameworks without data) were excluded. This process led to removing an additional 11 articles, leaving 96 articles for full-text review.

Stage 3: Full-Text Screening

The full texts of the remaining 96 articles were thoroughly reviewed to confirm their eligibility based on predefined criteria. Studies that demonstrated strong methodological rigour and directly addressed EC, EE, and/or ESE were included in the final synthesis.

This multi-stage process ensured a comprehensive yet focused literature review, capturing key contributions to understanding EC, its integration into EE, and its role in fostering ESE.

2.5. Data Extraction

Data extraction and thematic coding were conducted collaboratively by four researchers. The coding framework was developed iteratively and refined through group discussions to ensure alignment with the study’s research objectives and theoretical constructs. Each researcher contributed to the analysis, ensuring multiple perspectives were incorporated into identifying themes. This collaborative approach mitigated potential individual bias and strengthened the reliability of the findings, even in the absence of formal inter-rater reliability testing. A structured data extraction form was employed to collect details across the following key dimensions:

• Publication Details:
  Author(s), year of publication, title, and journal.
• Study Characteristics:
  Provide information on the research design (qualitative, quantitative, or mixed methods) and study context (e.g., educational settings or entrepreneurial coaching programmes).
• Research Focus and Themes:
  Studies were categorised based on their primary focus, such as the relationship between Entrepreneurial Coaching (EC) and Entrepreneurial Self-Efficacy (ESE), the integration of EC into Entrepreneurship Education (EE), or coaching as a pedagogical innovation.
• Theoretical Frameworks:
  References to underpinning theories were documented, including Bandura’s Social Cognitive Theory (Bandura, 1986), which explains the psychological processes influencing Entrepreneurial Self-Efficacy and Kolb’s Experiential Learning Theory (Kolb, 1981), which supports EC’s emphasis on reflective and action-oriented learning.
• Key Findings and Contributions:
  The main outcomes of each study were summarised, including insights into EC’s impact on ESE, its role in enhancing EE, and its broader implications for entrepreneurial learning practises.
• Quality Assessment Indicators:
  Methodological rigour was evaluated based on the clarity of research design, data collection methods, and analysis techniques, ensuring that only high-quality studies contributed to the review.

2.6. Data Analysis

The data were analysed using a thematic synthesis approach to identify patterns, recurring themes, and gaps across the included studies. Initially, extracted data were grouped based on their primary research focus, such as the relationship between Entrepreneurial Coaching (EC) and Entrepreneurial Self-Efficacy (ESE), the integration of EC into Entrepreneurship Education (EE), and coaching as a broader pedagogical strategy. Thematic analysis was conducted iteratively to refine the emerging categories and ensure a comprehensive understanding of the data. Key themes were mapped to theoretical frameworks, such as Social Cognitive Theory (Bandura, 1977b) and Experiential Learning Theory (Kolb, 1981), to interpret the findings about established models of learning and self-efficacy.

The synthesis process also involved evaluating methodological rigour and contextual relevance, focusing on studies that provided empirical evidence of EC’s effectiveness in fostering entrepreneurial self-efficacy. Visual tools, such as citation mapping and thematic clusters generated via Litmaps, enhanced the analysis by highlighting influential studies and underexplored areas within the literature. This analytical approach provided the foundation for synthesising key insights, identifying research gaps, and discussing the implications of integrating EC into EE frameworks.

3. Results

This systematic review synthesised findings from 96 full-text studies, addressing the research objectives. The findings reveal thematic trends, underscoring EC’s emergence as a transformative pedagogical innovation that complements and enhances traditional EE approaches.

3.1. Entrepreneurial Coaching as a Defined and Distinct Concept

The publication of Kotte et al. (2021) marked a pivotal moment in the conceptualisation of Entrepreneurial Coaching (EC), establishing it as a structured and theoretically grounded practice. Through 67 interviews with coaches and early-stage entrepreneurs, Kotte et al. (2021) defined EC as a custom-tailored, active, and reflection-oriented approach uniquely situated between workplace coaching and start-up consultancy. Their two-dimensional framework, which differentiates EC based on its process- versus expert-consultation focus and individual- versus venture-level impact, continues to shape the field.

Building on this foundational work, recent studies have expanded EC’s role as a core component of entrepreneurship education. Azizi et al. (2023) proposed a novel EC framework to foster innovation within small and medium enterprises (SMEs), emphasising the importance of coaching in stimulating entrepreneurial creativity and problem-solving. Similarly, Rafaelsen et al. (2024) explored EC as a comprehensive framework for enhancing entrepreneurial success, reinforcing its value in equipping entrepreneurs with critical competencies.

Further contributions have highlighted EC’s potential to address specific challenges in entrepreneurship education. For example, Molema et al. (2024) examined the role of EC in developing entrepreneurial self-efficacy among women entrepreneurs, revealing its effectiveness in fostering confidence and resilience (Ndlovu, 2023). This perspective was extended by applying the integral AQAL model to EC within South African business incubators, illustrating how EC can be tailored to diverse cultural and institutional contexts. Together, these studies reinforce the potential of EC as a pedagogical innovation that bridges theoretical learning and practical entrepreneurial applications.

3.2. Thematic Insights from the Literature

The analysis revealed several recurring themes related to EC’s integration into EE and its role in fostering ESE:

3.2.1. Enhancing Self-Efficacy and Addressing Gaps in Traditional EE

Studies consistently demonstrate the significant impact of Entrepreneurial Coaching (EC) on enhancing Entrepreneurial Self-Efficacy (ESE). For example, Kisubi et al. (2021) emphasised EC’s role in fostering Entrepreneurial Self-Efficacy through iterative goal setting and mastery experiences, aligning closely with Social Cognitive Theory (Bandura, 1986). Similarly, Rafaelsen et al. (2024) emphasised how EC strengthens ESE by providing structured feedback and tailored support, enabling entrepreneurs to navigate uncertainty confidently.

Although a substantial body of the literature examines the relationship between Entrepreneurial Intentions (EIs) and Entrepreneurship Education (EE), this review focuses specifically on the role of EC in fostering ESE, which remains comparatively underexplored. Numerous studies have thoroughly investigated EI’s determinants, including ESE as a mediator (Nowiński et al., 2019; Nowiński & Haddoud, 2019; Sunanto et al., 2023). However, the distinct mechanisms through which EC directly influences ESE, beyond its indirect effects on EI, warrant deeper exploration.

Recent contributions have begun to address these gaps. Gajardo-Vejar (2024) explored the dynamic relationship between EC processes, ESE, and entrepreneurial growth, reinforcing the importance of personalised coaching in building resilience and adaptability. Ndlovu-Hlatshwayo and Msimango-Galawe (2023) extended these findings by illustrating how culturally adaptive coaching models can foster ESE within diverse institutional settings, providing actionable insights for integrating EC into EE frameworks. Additionally, Molema et al. (2024) demonstrated EC’s ability to enhance self-efficacy in underrepresented groups, such as women entrepreneurs, highlighting its role in overcoming systemic barriers.

These findings emphasise the catalytic potential of EC in enhancing ESE while addressing critical gaps left by traditional EE approaches, which often fail to provide the personalised and reflective learning environments necessary for sustained self-efficacy development.

3.2.2. Integrating and Sustaining Entrepreneurial Coaching in Entrepreneurship Education

Entrepreneurial Coaching (EC) is increasingly recognised as an innovative pedagogical tool within Entrepreneurship Education (EE), offering experiential, reflective, and feedback-driven learning opportunities that bridge the gap between theoretical instruction and real-world application. Studies have demonstrated EC’s ability to stimulate student engagement, practical skill development, and entrepreneurial resilience through action-oriented and practice-based approaches (Koropogui et al., 2024; Mukesh et al., 2020). Gabrielsson et al. (2020) further emphasised that integrating EC into EE frameworks enhances experiential learning by providing a structured, reflective process for students to refine their entrepreneurial competencies.

A key element in the successful integration of EC into EE is its reliance on critical enablers that ensure its sustainability and effectiveness. Access to trained coaches is one of the most significant factors. Effective coaching requires educators who possess pedagogical expertise and practical entrepreneurial experience, enabling them to align their guidance with students’ individual goals and aspirations (Hassan, 2020; St-Jean & Audet, 2009). Institutional support is another pivotal component, with Gabrielsson et al. (2020) identifying the need for adequate resources and organisational buy-in to embed new pedagogical initiatives within EE curricula.

Another critical success factor is learner coachability, a concept introduced by Somià et al. (2024), which highlights the importance of students’ openness to feedback and willingness to actively engage in the coaching process. Ben Salem and Lakhal (2018) also noted that the effectiveness of EC is deeply rooted in the strength of the coach–coachee relationship, including trust, mutual understanding, and tailored guidance. Rafaelsen et al. (2024) added that adopting scalable coaching models—supported by technology and hybrid delivery methods—can ensure the accessibility of EC across diverse educational and institutional contexts, further broadening its reach.

Lastly, studies such as Hägg and Gabrielsson (2020) and Fellnhofer (2017) have investigated how EC integrates with other pedagogical approaches, such as project-based and experiential learning. Their findings reveal that EC amplifies these methods by fostering iterative reflection, goal setting, and creativity, which are crucial for developing entrepreneurial competence and self-efficacy. Together, these findings highlight EC’s dual role as a complement to traditional EE methods and a standalone mechanism for enhancing entrepreneurial growth.

By considering these critical enablers and integrating EC within EE frameworks, institutions can enhance EC’s full potential to develop resilient, confident, and competent entrepreneurs prepared to navigate complex entrepreneurial challenges.

3.2.3. Emerging Approaches to Entrepreneurial Coaching

Entrepreneurial Coaching (EC) continues to evolve as a pedagogical tool, with recent research focusing on its customisation, adaptability, and effectiveness in diverse learning environments. Rafaelsen et al. (2024) explored coaching frameworks tailored to learners’ needs, reinforcing the importance of flexible delivery methods in EE to enhance entrepreneurial self-efficacy. Azizi et al. (2023) introduced structured coaching interventions to stimulate entrepreneurial innovation, particularly in small and medium enterprises (SMEs).

Laydes et al. (2024) emphasised the role of coaching in fostering innovation skills, linking EC’s reflective and action-based learning approach to improved self-efficacy and entrepreneurial outcomes. Marras et al. (2024) highlighted EC’s multifunctional nature, noting its ability to bridge theoretical knowledge with practical entrepreneurial tasks through iterative feedback and personalised guidance.

Hägg and Gabrielsson (2020) stressed the complementarity of EC and experiential learning frameworks, demonstrating that coaching amplifies the impact of action-based pedagogies by embedding goal-setting and reflective practises. Similarly, Fellnhofer (2017) argued that tailored EC programmes enhance creativity and entrepreneurial problem-solving, supporting learners’ ability to navigate complex challenges.

These studies collectively highlight EC’s pivotal role in enhancing Entrepreneurial Self-Efficacy (ESE) through iterative feedback, personalised coaching, and reflective learning environments, underscoring its potential to transform traditional Entrepreneurship Education (EE) frameworks.

3.3. Summary of Results

This systematic review demonstrates that Entrepreneurial Coaching (EC) is an appropriate, distinct, and impactful pedagogical tool within Entrepreneurship Education (EE). Building on foundational works like Kotte et al. (2021), EC complements traditional EE methods by fostering Entrepreneurial Self-Efficacy (ESE), bridging theoretical and practical knowledge, and enhancing experiential learning. Recent contributions underscore the effectiveness of EC in promoting entrepreneurial resilience, creativity, and adaptability through structured, personalised coaching frameworks (Azizi et al., 2023; Rafaelsen et al., 2024).

The findings also reveal that EC’s effectiveness hinges on critical enablers such as access to trained coaches, institutional support, and learner coachability. Studies highlight the importance of interpersonal dynamics, including trust and tailored feedback, in achieving successful coaching outcomes (Ben Salem & Lakhal, 2018; Somià et al., 2024). Furthermore, EC’s alignment with experiential learning methodologies amplifies its capacity to develop entrepreneurial skills and self-efficacy.

However, this review highlights key gaps in the literature. There is limited longitudinal research exploring EC’s sustained impact on entrepreneurial success and self-efficacy over time. Additionally, while scalable coaching models are proposed (e.g., Rafaelsen et al. (2024) and Koropogui et al. (2024)), practical implementation across diverse educational contexts remains underexplored. Addressing these gaps through robust empirical studies and adaptable frameworks is crucial to realising EC’s full potential in fostering entrepreneurial growth.

4. Discussion

The findings from this systematic review highlight the potential of Entrepreneurial Coaching (EC) as a pedagogical tool within Entrepreneurship Education (EE). By fostering Entrepreneurial Self-Efficacy (ESE) through personalised, reflective, and action-oriented approaches, EC addresses significant limitations in traditional EE, including the gap between theoretical instruction and practical application. This discussion synthesises EC’s theoretical underpinnings and practical contributions while addressing key challenges and avenues for future research.

4.1. Theoretical Contributions

Entrepreneurial Coaching (EC) is uniquely positioned at the intersection of Social Cognitive Theory (Bandura, 1986) and Experiential Learning Theory (Kolb, 1981), and both underpin its pedagogical significance in fostering Entrepreneurial Self-Efficacy (ESE). Social Cognitive Theory emphasises the role of self-efficacy as a determinant of behaviour, highlighting how mastery experiences, vicarious learning, and social persuasion can enhance individuals’ confidence in their abilities. In alignment with this framework, EC facilitates ESE by providing personalised guidance that allows learners to develop entrepreneurial skills through repeated practice, goal achievement, and reflection on outcomes.

Similarly, Experiential Learning Theory underscores the importance of active participation and reflection in acquiring and applying knowledge. EC aligns with this framework by embedding entrepreneurial learning in real-world, problem-solving contexts, where learners engage in iterative cycles of action and reflection. Unlike traditional pedagogical approaches such as lectures or case studies, EC’s personalised, adaptive nature allows it to address individual learner needs, thereby bridging the knowing–doing gap (Verduijn & Berglund, 2020). This fosters self-regulation, resilience, and adaptability—key attributes of entrepreneurial competence.

By integrating these theoretical perspectives, EC uniquely contributes to the theoretical development of ESE in ways that traditional approaches cannot (Rajasinghe & Mansour, 2018). While lectures and business simulations provide foundational knowledge, EC addresses gaps in the literature by enabling learners to apply this knowledge in context-specific scenarios, fostering the confidence and skills necessary to navigate entrepreneurial challenges. This highlights EC’s potential as a transformative pedagogical innovation in entrepreneurship education, one that complements existing frameworks by addressing real-world applicability and sustained behavioural change.

4.2. Practical Contributions

From a practical perspective, this review displays EC’s value as a learner-centred approach that equips entrepreneurs with the skills, confidence, and adaptability required in dynamic entrepreneurial ecosystems. Studies demonstrate that EC fosters ESE by embedding structured feedback, tailored goal setting, and reflective practises within EE curricula (Azizi et al., 2023; Hägg & Gabrielsson, 2020). These elements enable learners to translate theoretical knowledge into actionable entrepreneurial competencies. This review also identifies critical enablers for successful EC implementation, including access to trained coaches (Hassan, 2020; St-Jean & Audet, 2009), institutional support (Gabrielsson et al., 2020), and learner coachability (Somià, 2022; Somià et al., 2024). By addressing these factors, educational institutions can create an enabling environment for EC, integrating it effectively into EE frameworks. Emerging research also highlights the importance of context-sensitive coaching models considering cultural and institutional diversity (Rafaelsen et al., 2024; Ben Salem & Lakhal, 2018). Such models could extend EC’s reach, particularly through hybrid or digital delivery mechanisms that enhance accessibility and scalability. However, the practical implementation of these models requires further exploration, particularly in resource-constrained educational contexts.

4.3. Limitations

This study has some limitations. First, the reliance on Scopus and Litmaps databases may have excluded studies from other sources, such as the grey literature or non-English publications, potentially limiting the comprehensiveness of the review. Second, this review focused on studies published between 2014 and 2024, alongside select seminal works, which may have excluded earlier contributions that could provide additional theoretical context. Third, while four researchers collaboratively made coding decisions to ensure rigour and reduce bias, formal inter-rater reliability testing was not conducted. Future studies could incorporate such validation processes to enhance methodological transparency.

Fourth, this review did not assess the geographic or cultural diversity of study populations, nor did it include non-English studies, as the focus was on the conceptual framing and application of EC in EE for ESE. Future research should explore how contextual factors influence EC outcomes to improve global applicability. Finally, the lack of standardised frameworks for evaluating EC outcomes across studies limits the generalisability of findings. Developing robust measures to assess EC’s impact on ESE and entrepreneurial success is critical for advancing this field. Addressing these limitations in future research could provide a more comprehensive and globally relevant understanding of EC’s role in entrepreneurship education.

5. Conclusions

This review illuminates the evolution of Entrepreneurial Coaching (EC) into a distinct and impactful pedagogical approach within Entrepreneurship Education (EE). EC addresses key limitations in traditional EE methods by developing Entrepreneurial Self-Efficacy (ESE), bridging the gap between theory and practice, and supporting experiential learning. Using theoretical frameworks such as Social Cognitive Theory and Experiential Learning Theory, EC offers a learner-centred model that enhances entrepreneurial competencies through personalised, reflective, and feedback-driven processes.

Despite its potential, the field of EC remains nascent, with gaps in longitudinal research, scalability, and standardised evaluation frameworks. Addressing these limitations through future research will be critical to unlocking EC’s full potential as a catalytic tool in diverse educational and entrepreneurial contexts. By advancing theoretical and practical insights, EC holds promise as a critical component of entrepreneurial development in a rapidly evolving global landscape.