Practitioner-Driven Recommendations for the Professional Evaluation of the Strength and Conditioning Coach

Abstract

The purpose of this article is to provide a practical framework for athletic administrators and senior coaches to use in evaluating a strength and conditioning coach (SCC) under their supervision. A formal objective evaluation process may improve training outcomes, prevent common troublesome issues in the field, increase accountability, and optimize organizational dynamics. Recommendations include planned, systematic, and documented observation of work performed, review of performance testing data, and developmental feedback meetings between the SCC and the supervisor. Some modification may be necessary for each sector of the field. However, the general themes may still be followed by supervisors.

Troubleshooting a Nonresponder: Guidance for the Strength and Conditioning Coach

“…Certainly, a data-centric discussion with the sport coach would be required in this situation in order to evaluate the player's physical status without bias. A variety of information sources have been recommended for SC coaches to consider in designing and influencing the training process [25,52,53]. Recent opinions have highlighted that physiologically-derived concepts are often the primary emphasis of SC decisionmaking processes (and educational programs), highlighting the necessity of broader, more holistic decision-making processes due to the interdisciplinary nature of coaching [53].…”

“…Because of challenges to an athlete's time management skills, an additional time commitment can present further stressors to an athlete at the college level [45]; this highlights the importance of working with a qualified SC coach during high school years. Decisions of sport coaches and administrators play a large role in provision of resources to prepare athletes for the next level; therefore, if insufficient resources exist in a youth or high school setting, appropriate hiring measures may be made by the organization's leaders in order to provide adequate services for athletes [25]. Issues such as poor physical development may indeed increase the odds of a U.S. college sport coach's decision to "redshirt" a player (sit out a year without using one of 4 available years of athletic eligibility).…”

“…Due to the number of issues referenced above, it is no surprise that objective validation of work quality could be a topic of great consternation for the SC coach. Assessing the effectiveness of coaches is, however, an important aspect of professional evaluation as suggested by Gleason and colleagues [25]. From a management perspective, regularly implementing an evaluation process provides evidence that the organizational investment on infrastructure (in support staff) is paying off, and athlete time is being spent appropriately.…”

“…It is important to note that investigation of certain issues may require collaboration with an appropriately skilled support specialist (sport scientist, sport nutritionist, sport psychologist, academic counselor, sport physician, etc. ), sport coach, or sport administrator, and may indeed bring about potentially difficult conversations with certain stakeholders or identify organizational processes that need improvement [25]. Without proper investigation of nonresponse to training or concerning maladaptive responses, substantial possibility exists for inappropriate blame to be shifted on the performance staff ( [26], pp.…”

COVID-19 Surveillance and Competition in Sport: Utilizing Sport Science to Protect Athletes and Staff during and after the Pandemic

“…Other aspects of athlete monitoring include talent identification, a better understanding of the team as a group (e.g., strength levels of incoming freshmen, and trends in development) and the ability to provide professional evidence. To the last point, recent articles have discussed how athlete monitoring can serve as tool for coach and strength coach evaluation [ 40 , 41 , 42 ].…”