I just got done reading some material for an upcoming class of mine which emphasized the importance of leadership in successful business ventures and as always I found a lot of carryover into the field of athletics and I was wondering if some of the coaches could share their thoughts on or styles of leadership which they use with their athletes and the difference between one on one coaching vs team coaching?
The most important topics discussed in my readings revolved around leaderships effect on employee (athelete) motivation and commitment. Obviously this is a big aspect of training especially at the intermediate stages of athlete development, high school and college, where levels of commitment can flucuate widely. It could be the difference between the athlete just showing up at practice and being done when practice ceases or the athlete who follows a proper diet, work out in the weightroom if its not mandatory, uses proper recovery methods, get adequate sleep, and educates themself in their event and/or sport.
At times I think having good leadership skills are just as important to coaching as developing a good program. The belief that something is good and worthwhile doing will get more athletes then something that is top notch but doesnt motivate an athlete.
Anyhow I was wondering if some of the coaches could give their thoughts on what they do in general in terms of goal setting, educating, motivating, etc to get their athletes to want to improve and improve using their system?
I’ll try to offer something that is true for me . . . and hope at least some of it may be relevant to you and your studies.
Good coaching is good management. A good manager needs to be a good leader, by virtue of the fact that you guide your athletes to fulfil their own goals (which are probably also the coach’s goals) by following a pathway or system of training (work) that is logical, systematic and progressive, on a timeline that is realistic making the most productive use of resources available to the athlete-coach.
In my own reality check as a coach, I recognised I didn’t have all the answers to any of the many threads from which an internationally competitive performance is woven (manufactured), but I wasn’t so egotistical that it mattered at all to me that my vulnerability was exposed because I was always a collector of human resources who could willingly if not passionately contribute their superior level of expertise to enable the worthwhile project to move forward.
But as a coach/manager I drew on those resources (successful coaches, athletes, literature) to a sufficient extent, at least, to be able for the most part to call bullshit when I could smell it on the track/gym/paramedical/nutritional etc etc. And what I knew I didn’t know (comprehend) I brought to the attention of experts who were willing to help me as the coach.
As coach, the onus would be on me to override or cancel any arrangement if it was proven not to be productive. That hurt the feelings of some self-proclaimed experts, but coaches like leaders have to take decisions that aren’t always going to make them popular.
(one of those self-styled “experts” dislikes me to this day, but he never understood that his weightlifting program made my senior female 400 runner heavier, reduced her ROM, tore her down so much with sundry exercises and reps that she soon became slower
because, in part also, she had nothing left for the track sessions. This practical exercise in disaster hasn’t hurt him though because he is now one of the leaders of the local coaches’ association - yet even 20-years later he still has produced no-one for the national team.
But 20 years ago as coach responsible, I had to flick him so that the woman involved could qualify for the Olympic Games, where she went on to reach her final. The end justifies the means, you might say )
Leadership comes into the scenario at all stages of the coaching process.
And it starts with leading the communications process, making sure the orders of the day have been received and understood by all concerned. If you’re not certain your e-mail has been received and read, follow up with a personal phone call. Get it done. Make it happen.
As coach you lead by example, like the Israeli army commanders who ride at the head of the attack.
If it’s an early morning session, as the coach I would be there on time every time. I would leave when the session was completed (although when working with experienced athletes I would often depart before they had completely warmed down). If it’s a session which happens to fall on Christmas Day, we all get out there together, have a bitch and then get on with the session - together.
If it’s pissing down rain and you want the session to continue, then I as coach (albeit it mostly from the comparative comfort beneath an umbrella) would stand in the middle of the infield (of wherever it was revelant) to observe (and sometimes) clock the runner.
I led by writing the programs, but with athletes of good mind I always led them into a closer understanding and ownership of their program by co-opting their experiences, biases etc to draft future progressions of the basic program.
By getting them involved in a mentoring process under which they became proficient at designing and individualising a program perfectly suited to themselves, I know they worked harder to make “their” program succeed, thus vindicating “their” design and intellectual input. In so doing the coach has indulged in another form of leadership.
As coach I tried to show of level of decorum, tried to demonstrate good time-management (by rushing back to my office etc).
As coach you are often the most important role model (a leadership role by another name) the young athlete has after their own parents (and, unfortunately, sometimes better) so you better watch what you say, how you say it, how you behave, how you operate in the wider world. Because the athletes’ eyes are constantly upon their coach.
Yea it is definately some good stuff and I’m glad to see the contribution came from somebody that has some significant experience under their belt.
I wish more people would contribute as I think this is a very important area even more so in the lower levels of sport where motivation can make all the difference.
Much of what you said is in line with my thoughts as well.
I was wondering if you or others could perhaps touch a little more of what you would use or have used to have the team mesh as a whole. Perhaps its just the setting I came from but often times I see teams disjointed by position or event due to differences within the various coaches or because of varying goals between athletes, what types of mechanisms can be put into place so that a team can function as a single unit? Does goal setting on the individual or team level work? How about captains? Or can a good coach as a competent leader work on its own?
Also what can you do with an athlete that comes from a system that is opposition to your methodology in training and who has had past success or even just believes that they will not be successful with your system?
I think a lot of athletes in low level track compete just for social benefits and don’t really care much about the team or even their own performance. I think if you cut the dead weight / troublesome members (like many of the more experienced coaches here seem to have done) then things might change. When your team consists of many people that care more about where they’re going to eat for dinner after the meet than how well they perform, I think you have a problem.
I think it’s the coaches job to gather athletes who are at least a little bit self motivated and driven to excel. I’d rather have a team of people who cry when they lose and call me an idiot than a team of people who do athletics just for “something to do”.
In conclusion, I don’t know the answers. I think motivation has to be there first then you as a coach must influence that in a positive way.
I would say a great leader in athletics creates an environment where the athletes feel they can be successful. People like John Smith make their athletes believe they can win. This making people believe is really important and one very important way of doing it is making sure the athlete succeeds every workout and performs consistently. People who are injured or struggle at sessions do not feel motivated. Getting this balance is highly important. At the same time you need to challenge the athlete as much as is possible. I think Istvan Balyi calls this “child psychology”, where the emphasis is on challenging but rewarding and Charlie emphasises this approach a lot as well. Creating and managing this environment is what a coach is all about - and simply doing that will inspire athletes to believe they are more and can do more than those they compete against.
That is very interesting. How much do you all feel that improvement is based on stimulous-reward along the lines of operant conditioning where improvement is based largely upon how the athlete feels they did(eg. if they won against tough competition they perceived it as a great reward)? I remember in speed trap charlie talked about trying to find tough competition for his athletes but not so tough that it would be discouraging.
By the way, great thread everyone who has posted so far!
Sometimes this can backfire. My first experience with coaching, and maybe one of my only experiences ever, was coaching a former state champ for 300m 35 low, 48 in 400m, 100m 10.8 limited hs experience; less then two years, soccer All-American.
He was coming off a four year lay-off from track. He was fat and out of shape, though coming from a good athletic background. He played soccer at Univ. South Carolina and later proffesionally for a few years.
I called him up and mentioned to him that even though he was done playing soccer, track could be an option for him (I needed a training partner).
First, I attempted to breakdown how I could help him run faster. Secondly, I attempted to break down why it was possibly for him to make a comeback. Third, I had to make him believe I knew more then his hs coach who was the national coach of the year and one of the top hs coaches in the country.
Then it was time for hype. Stories of Allan Wells, Ben Johnson, Donovan Bailey. Anything I could think of. Shrivington running 11.1 at georgia tech. I made him love the sport of track and field. And most importantly understand the sport of track and field.
By the end of the year, I had convinced this kid that with proper training he had the talent to become a world class sprinter for 200m. I’m not sure if this was the right thing to do but I did it anyways.
It seemed to work. He started to go train and at least get off his tail. By the end of the year he had run a pr for three events. He had full-squated 395+ for a 3x3 workout.
Unfortunately, this hype backfired on me.
By the end of the year, he had basically turned on me. Now I was his competition. All the hype I had given him made him think that he could destroy me in the 100m. I didnt mean for this to happen at all.
After all this had occured, and a major falling out had taken place, I get a call from the athletic director of my hs, (his former soccer coach). He asks me: What did you say to this kid, he is going around town telling everyone he has a legitimate shot at the NFL?
I tried not to laugh, but it made me realize the tremedous affect I had on him as an athlete/coach.
I would refer back to mort’s post on this, that kind of stuff probably works to an extent to for athletes who actually truly care about the sport. But in lower levels even up into college, how do you motivate athletes who’s positive reinforcement is social based? Also in the same vein its hard to match competition in the sub elite levels where your poorer athletes cant pick and choose who to compete against.
Anybody have any opinions on goal setting for the year or career of an athlete/team?
ie. individual vs team goals, specific vs generalized goals, short term vs long term
What should a coach do if in situation where an athlete is not meeting their goals or is underperforming in general and is there a difference here between highly motivated and unmotivatd atheletes. (this in terms of a social/leadership perspective, not in terms of analysis of the athlete from a technical standpoint)
So what should you do instead? Surely any stance on any issue can backfire and the masters are the ones who adjust to the situation. If they are getting too cocky bring them back to earth if they lack confidence try and work on this. Just because you have a philosophy doesn’t mean you calve it into stones outside your house and then stick to it like scripture.
I do not believe John Smith convinces anybody that they can win. He sets tasks that are achievable for his athletes and, as they continually meet them successfully, they develove confidence. When use use Special Endurance effectively, it’s the greatest confidence builder there is. all you need to do in the meet is repeat what you’ve done in practice, nothing else and nothing more!
As for leadership, the athletes will never be more committed than the coach. the coach sets the tone in terms of the seriousnes of the venture, starting with showing up on time, every time for practice!!
Very good points. What would be ideal and what actually is possible given the realities of the particular situation are different. I guess you just have to try and do the best as you can.
Just doing a bit of reading on Tools for Team Leadership by Huszczo and came across this little equation, probably something good to think about as a coach or athlete as well as how much actual control you have over each.
P = f{A x M x 0}
Performance is a function of abilities, motivation, and opportunity.
A clear indication that coaching has to do with more than just coaching someones ability. Something that I think a lot of coaches should look at and discuss more so than is currently happening.
I believe that another factor that is often lost site of here deals with the opportunity in relation to the performance.
I.E. given that training is optimal or at least sufficient enough to produce results, this only increase performance, which actually may be better defined as probability of performance. So given adequate training the probability of a given higher level of performance or set goal should increase. That is just the probability of said goal. One must greatly look at the opportunity be it early in the season, poor weather conditions, meets not properly periodize, etc.
Also there are obviously other considerations in such a complex system that would also effect ability be it other outside influences as psychological stress, testing, distance to meet, poor sleep, etc.
There coaches must be aware of the fact that they are only increasing probabilities to the best of their potential and athletes should be doing the same. However, if both occur that does not guarantee success, it just increases the likelihood.