Profile of a Sportswoman

This list was compiled by G. Ward, (then Hon Sec of Women’s Advisory Group to British Athletics Federation) in conjunction with Alma Thomas (Sport Psychologist to PAS 1996 to 2000), in response to participant feedback on the Mental Preparation Foundation Courses run by WAG (and independently) from 1992-1996. The list has been recognised by many coaches as typical of female athletes. The crucial question though, is around the way coaches themselves deal with these traits when they come across them. Are they seen advantages or disadvantages to performance? The answer to this is dependent on coach interpretation.

  1. Internally motivated, wanting to be as good as she can be: Internal motivation is advantageous, but can be turned to disadvantage if the coach misunderstands it. If, for example, a male coach has always assumed that the only motivation for taking part in the sport is to do with competing, winning and comparison, he may well assume that female athletes tend to be insufficiently motivated, resulting in assumptions and coaching styles which are inappropriate.
  2. Sees herself and the coach a team: This can be disadvantageous if it prompts the athlete to be over-dependent on the coach, to stick with a coach who is inadequate in some way, or to compete “for” the coach. It is essential that the coach adopts facilitative, non-authoritarian and enabling coaching style, in which case this trait can be advantageous. Otherwise there is a danger that the coach will be in a position to take advantage of the power relationship in a variety of ways – for example, emotionally (building HIS self-esteem at her expense) athletically (his reputation, his success) or even sexually. Sexual relationships between coach and athlete, even if apparently initiated by the athlete, are exploitative because of the power relationship and therefore unacceptable. They are extremely likely to be damaging to performance. (See Taboos)
  3. Inclined to carry out instruction without question: Disadvantageous. The athlete must “own” her performance and this must start intraining.
  4. Sees herself performing for others, perhaps the coach: Disadvantageous, as 3.
  5. May be unused to taking unilateral decisions: Disadvantageous. The coach must allow the athlete to develop the capacity to make decisions. This is a crucial performance skill.
  6. Feels obligations to others and that her time is not therefore her own: Disadvantageous. Encourage the athlete to “give herself permission” to concentrate on own needs when being an athlete, i.e., training and competing.
  7. Prone to guilt and takes full responsibility for failure: Can be disadvantageous – objective evaluation of performance and precise goal setting and positive thinking necessary.
  8. Behaviour and dress may be calculated to boost self esteem: Advantageous, unless coach or other athletes deride her for paying “frivolous” attention to her appearance. (Such cases have been reported by elite level athletes.)
  9. Anticipates significant males’ worries about being overshadowed by her success. May be more submissive in order to compensate: Disadvantageous. Her worries may be unfounded. In either case she needs to fully understand assertive behaviour.
  10. A couple may sub-consciously decide that HE should be successful and SHE must be the support: Disadvantageous. Again, she may anticipate this. Openness, self awareness and, again, a full understanding of assertive and responsive behaviour are needed for both parties

NOTE. All these traits can be misunderstood, used or compounded by lack of awareness in either coach or athlete. Coaches in particular need to understand their own motivation with regard to dominance and control versus empowerment of athletes.

Fig 14 Presidents Council Research – Physical Activity and sport in the Lives of Girls (1997) supports Holbrooke and Barr.

Presidents Council - Physical Activity and Sport in the Lives of Girls (1997)

There are more similarities between the sexes than differences, but there are specific areas of difference that require coach awareness.
  1. In general, females are more internally motivated by self-improvement and goals related to team success. Some can even be "turned off" by coaches who over emphasise winning. It is not that they want to win anyless than men, they just approach competition differently.
  2. More motivated by a co-operative, caring, sharing team environment
  3. Females are more likely to blame themselves for poor performances
  4. Females tend to place more emphasis on fair play and sportswomenship than males
  5. Under similar circumstances, men appear to be more "self" or "ego" orientated and more "win at all costs".

The causes of these differences are unknown. They could be gender related, but could also be highly influenced by social and cultural expectations

Gill, 1994

We must remember that these are general conclusions based on statistical evidence and be careful not to stereotype women and girls. We are also in a period of ever increasing social change which has greatly influenced the attitudes, expectations and behaviour of young people. The current generation of young women, in particular, are growing up in social context crucially different from that of their mothers’, let alone their grandmothers’. Studies have noted increases in violentand anti-social behaviour by “girl gangs”. Attitudes to sex and relationships have been transformed. Liberal minded parents encourage their daughters to think and act for themselves and, by inference at least, to resist authoritarian constraints.

All of these factors, and many others, can cause underlying gender issues to be disguised in the case of a particular individual. As coaches, we obviously still need to understand the individual athlete. But this should not be used as an excuse to negate the effects of gender and return to the simpler but illusory world of gender blindness.

Additionally, it may be that very high achieving female athletes tend not to conform to these norms anyway. If that is so, a contributory factor could be because male coaches see females with more “masculine” personalities as more likely to succeed, setting up a self-fulfilling prophecy. That would mean that females with more typical personality traits are less likely to find an empathetic coach with interpersonal skills that are likely to bring out their best. We cannot necessarily infer that athletically talented women and girls who also have atypical personalities are inherently advantaged in terms of competitive success. The crucial thing is to widen perceptions of the criteria for success and develop skills that can respond to more diverse needs.

The coaching methodologies implied by all this are, of course, the crux of the matter. In terms of the question “Should women and girls be coached differently” our conclusion at this point must be that the requirement is for a difference of emphasis rather than a total difference of approach. The skills which are implied by the arguments so far are, of course, crucial to all good quality coaching. But, as shown in various pieces of academic research, they are of particular significance when working with women and girls. Unfortunately it is also fair to conclude that these inter-personal skills have been under valued or absent in coaching in the past and that all athletes stand to gain to some degree by their inclusion now.

INTER-PERSONAL SKILLS – WORKING WITH WOMEN AND GIRLS

This may appear to be unrealistically demanding of the coach. However, coaches will already have addressed some as part of their basic coach education so far. They are also very likely to be utilising the basics of many of these skills in everyday life already, but may not be aware of it or have labelled these abilities. However, before we start to analyse some of these skills in detail and with that, imply that coaches should adapt some of their behaviour, it is crucial to examine the perspective and pressures on the coach him or herself. The use of the word relationship, as in coach/ athlete relationship, implies an equal regard for the needs and contributions of both parties. In a sport endeavouring to become athlete centred, where does that leave the needs and motivations of the coach?