Coaches as Individuals & Partitioners

Coaching is a highly practical activity, so the relationship between coach and athlete is the medium for learning and growth for both parties. The use of the word Relationship implies that the athletics and non-athletics objectives, needs, personal styles and stated and unstated hopes of both parties are equally intertwined in the process of furthering the ambitions of the athlete. Because of the informal, open ended setting in which coaching takes place, the individual nature of athletics, the intensity of sport, and the vital role that the athlete perceives the coach to have in the pursuit of her ambition, the relationship with the coach can become of extreme significance to the athlete as an individual as well as a performer. As we have seen, gender can add a further complicating layer to the dynamics as, obviously, sexuality can also do.

Note: The coach/athlete partnership is a potent power relationship, taking place in informal and unsupervised situations. The addition of a sexual dimension to this can be, at best, a complication too far and a hindrance to performance, and, at worst, abusive to the athlete and destructive of performance. A sexual relationship with anyone under the age of 16 is, of course, a criminal offence. (See Taboos) Further reading: Spoilsports. Understanding and preventing sexual exploitation in sport. Celia Brackenridge. Routledge 2001.

The characteristics of this relationship places huge responsibilities on the shoulders of the coach and, in order to conduct his/her part of the relationship appropriately and maximise its effectiveness, a degree of self-knowledge is required.

Furthermore, coaches, particularly those in the voluntary sector, are entitled to expect to get enjoyment and gratification from the time, money, energy and expertise they inject into their work in the sport. But such pleasure can be elusive without awareness of personal needs and motivations upon which to base choices about who, what, where, when and how to coach. Coaching can be an isolated, stressful activity. Athletes expect their coaches to have all the answers, to understand and accommodate their individual physical and personality traits, to deal with their moods, ambitions, worries, and disappointments. Self awareness and the ability to manage personal boundaries, to be open and able to discuss problems and worries with trusted colleagues are essential components of the coach’s self-preservation toolkit.

Fig 15, The Whole Person, has been used to illustrate the importance of an holistic approach to the management of people in the workplace. How much more important, then, is the recognition of holistic needs and functioning of mainly voluntary coaches, whose stock-in-trade is close relationships with young people who have varying degrees of vulnerability based on their desire to succeed. The diagram identifies and then links the individual and the “professional” or role needs of the worker, or, in this case, the coach. It emphasises the significance of self-awareness.

Fig 16 Johari Window provides a diagrammatic representation of the process of achieving self knowledge. Another way of labelling the bottom right square is “potential”. For the athlete, openness is the process of demonstrating aspects of performance for the coach’s assessment and feedback. The coach seeking increased self awareness upon which to build congruent inter-personal skills also needs expert, well intentioned and sensitive feedback within the coach education and mentoring process.

Abraham Maslow’s Hierarchy of Human Needs (Fig 7) is a classic psychological model providing insight into human motivation.

Maslow took an optimistic view of human nature as a reaction against what he saw as the pessimistic, deterministic views of Freud, who studied the neurotic behaviour of the mentally ill, and behaviourist B.F. Skinner who worked on conditioned responses in animals. Maslow judged that humans inherently tend towards growth and love, and are basically trustworthy, self-protecting and self-governing. Violent and destructive behaviours occur when human needs are thwarted.

These needs are hierarchical, so, when people are deprived of lower needs, such as safety, they may defend themselves by violent or non-ethical means. According to Maslow there are general needs (see diagram) which must be met before people can behave unselfishly. He called these “deficiency needs” – as long as we are motivated to satisfy these needs we are moving towards growth, the self –actualising level on the diagram. This is a healthy process. Blocking gratification of these needs makes us dysfunctional – either emotionally or physically sick or destructive in our behaviour.

With this in mind, it is a simple step to see self-awareness, the ability to recognise and accept one’s own personal needs and motivations, as a positive and essential tool in the process of coaching, not to mention Life. Awareness of personal needs means that we are more likely to deal with our motives appropriately. Denial of these needs and motives means they are likely to arise subconsciously and be dealt with inappropriately or destructively, getting in the way of conscious objectives and damaging the individual and his/her relationships.

An example might be to examine the losses that athlete centred coaching might imply for the coach. This may be very difficult for coaches to acknowledge. However, it is beneficial to recognise the resulting feeling and useful to share those feelings with a colleague/mentor if possible. Non recognition of those losses may produce a certain amount of disruptive but unrecognised resentment as, indeed, does all change, however welcome. Recognition enables emotion to be accepted and dealt with appropriately and ofset by logical acceptance of the advantages of such a change (see figure 18).

Examples could be:- Less immediate satisfaction; more frustration; increasing demands on time and energy; neglect of own personal life; financial demands; being drawn into family, educational or financial problems beyond own expertise/energy levels etc. Much of this is endemic in coaching anyway. Will being more athlete centred make it worse?