The Application of Coach Leadership Models to Coaching Practice: Current State and Future Directions

Abstract

The purpose of this concept/review article is to critically discuss the application of sports coaching leadership models to coaching practice. The focus of the discussion will be on the coherence and impact of the numerous models in the current literature, and the accumulated impact that they have on practitioners. This discussion will be framed in current conceptions of sports coaching and expected athlete outcomes. This article can serve an important role in the continuing dialogue about the essence of sports leadership; particularly in relation to how it is defined, how it is measured, and how the leadership literature can be applied in the field.

The Coaching Needs of High Performance Female Athletes within the Coach-Athlete Dyad

“…In this way, any data produced using the LSS "must be examined with caution" (Becker, 2009, p. 94) when applying to a sports coaching context. Vella, Oades, and Crowe (2010) agree, arguing that quantitative measures of leadership have had little impact on coaching because practitioners do not value such models as much. This may be because measures have not been generated for immediate use for coaches (Vella et al, 2010).…”

“…Vella, Oades, and Crowe (2010) agree, arguing that quantitative measures of leadership have had little impact on coaching because practitioners do not value such models as much. This may be because measures have not been generated for immediate use for coaches (Vella et al, 2010). Similarly the Coach Evaluation Questionnaire (CEQ) (Rushall & Wiznuk, 1985) was not devised using the perceptions of athletes or coaches even though the constructs included in the measure are more relevant to the coaching context.…”

“…Attempting to reduce and 'fit' what athletes need from their coach into a model ignores the idea that coaching is about improvisation and interpersonal awareness with many possible outcomes rather than just prescribed and structured actions (Côté & Gilbert, 2009;Jones & Wallace, 2005;Vella et al, 2010). Poczwardowski et al (2006) argue that using such models within the field of coaching behaviours and the coach-athlete relationship have taken a narrow approach to the subject area through the privileging of particular units of analysis over others and the over-use of psychological theories.…”

“…Consequently, models fail to capture the pedagogical processes involved within the coach-athlete dyad nor adequately describe the significant contextual factors surrounding these relationships (Poczwardowski et al, 2002). Vella et al (2010) believe that as a result of a positivistic approach to 'modelling' the coaching process, coaches (and in turn, athletes) have suffered because of the reduction of what is a complex endeavour into "simple and casual components" (p. 426). This may also explain the lack of influence of such models on coaching practice (Vella et al, 2010).…”

A Pilot Test of Transformational Leadership Training for Sports Coaches: Impact on the Developmental Experiences of Adolescent Athletes

“…Unique components such as inspirational motivation and intellectual stimulation are important because youth sports are expounded as appropriate avenues for youth development due to simultaneously high levels of attention, motivation and challenge [22]. Further, components such as individual consideration and fostering acceptance of group goals speak to the inherent nature of coaching practice as constituted by the relationship between coach and athlete [23], which itself is set amongst the context of the multiple interpersonal relationships. The importance of these components are highlighted by research that has shown that the personal experience of effective coaching is predominantly about the relationships and environment that the coach creates rather than a limited range of prescribed behaviours [24].…”