Coaching the coach : intervention effects on need-supportive coaching behavior and athlete motivation and engagement

The present intervention study examined whether youth sport coaches can be trained in adopting a need-supportive (i.e., autonomy support and structure) coaching style to the benefit of youth athletes' autonomous motivation and engagement. Participants were 43 coaches (33 men, 10 women) and 326 youth athletes (221 boys, 105 girls), active in 12 team or individual sports. Sport coaches were randomly assigned to either a control or intervention condition. The training involved a workshop trajectory spanning four sessions on how to incorporate a (more) need-supportive coaching style. As for coaches' self-reported coaching style, results of multilevel modelling revealed positive effects on autonomy support and control at posttest, and additional effect on structure and control from pre-test to follow-up (i.e., 4 months later) compared to coaches in the control condition. As for athletes' reports, multilevel modelling showed that athletes of coaches in the intervention, relative to those involved in the control group, perceived their coach to be more autonomy-supportive, more structuring, and less chaotic from pre-to posttest, with these effects being more pronounced for athletes of team sports. Further, athletes of coaches in the intervention group reported being more autonomously motivated and more engaged compared to those of coaches in the control group. Overall, the present findings indicate that sport coaches can become more skilled in adopting a need-supportive coaching style, to the benefit of athletes' autonomous motivation and engagement

Proactivity in sport teams: Mastery climate mediates the relation between need support from the coach and proactive behaviors in sport teams

Team sport settings are challenging, dynamic environments in which coaches might profit from proactive players who correct each other, provide suggestions and feedback. Despite the proven benefits of proactivity for organizational team functioning (e.g., Morrison, 2014), research about proactivity in sport-settings remains sparse. This study aimed to test a hypothetical model in which a mastery motivational climate mediates the relation between need support from the coach and proactivity in sport teams. Based on Self Determination Theory (Deci & Ryan, 2000) and previous empirical work (e.g., Cox & Williams, 2008), it was expected that a need supportive coaching style would be positively linked to a mastery climate. Such a climate defines success in terms of self-referenced progression and stresses the importance of cooperation (Ames, 1992). It was therefore hypothesized that a mastery climate would positively predict proactive behaviors in sport teams. 180 senior volleyball players (Mage = 21.92) completed a questionnaire assessing need support from their coaches, the motivational climate and three types of proactive behaviors (voice, taking charge and upward communication). Results. The results of confirmatory path modelling indicated a good fit of the hypothesized model and standardized regression coefficients were significant. Further examination of direct and indirect effects suggested that mastery climate mediated the relation between need support and proactivity. The results of the present study indicated that coaches can stimulate players’ proactive behavior by adhering a need-supportive coaching style. Furthermore, this study revealed the creation of a mastery climate as an underlying mechanism through which need-supportive coaches can stimulate proactivity in sport teams.status: publishe

Can losing teams cope with destructive voice behaviour? The role of game results and athletes’ perceived motivational climate

This study examined the relation between losing a game and players’ destructive voice about the coach. As team performances would suffer when such behaviours are not managed properly, we tested the motivational climate as a potential mechanism by which coaches can manage these destructive behaviours. Twelve volleyball and basketball teams (N = 136) were weekly assessed during eight weeks using questionnaires. Players rated the extent to which their teammates expressed destructive voice about their coach. Each player’s indegree centrality (i.e. the average score received from all teammates) functioned as measurement of his/her destructive voice about the coach. As hypothesized, losing a game increased players’ expression of destructive voice about the coach. At both the within- and between-person level, perceived mastery (performance) climate negatively (positively) predicted players’ destructive voice about the coach. When players perceived a more salient performance climate than usual after a loss, their increase in destructive voice about the coach was magnified. These results highlight the dynamics of players’ destructive voice about the coach and how a single loss can start the utterance of such voice. A coach would be able to counter this process by increasing the focus on a mastery rather than a performance climate.status: publishe

Coaching is teamwork! Het stimuleren van proactief gedrag in sportteams.

De sportwereld is een zeer dynamische en veeleisende setting die continu in verandering is. In zulke omgeving is het zeer moeilijk voor coaches om continu alle atleten aan te sturen. Steeds meer wordt van atleten verwacht dat ze initiatief nemen en elkaar aansturen waar nodig. Voor deze reden onderzochten wij hoe coaches zulke proactieve gedragingen kunnen stimuleren in hun team. Aan de hand van een vragenlijststudie bleek dat hiervoor een belangrijke rol is weggelegd voor een noodondersteunende coachingstijl. Coaches die deze stijl hanteren, creëren namelijk een taakgericht klimaat. Dit klimaat focust op intra-individuele progressie en samenwerking, wat uiteindelijk resulteert in een zelfregulerend team.status: publishe

The emergence of shared leadership in newly-formed teams with an initial structure of vertical leadership: A longitudinal analysis

The importance of high-quality leadership for team effectiveness is widely recognized, with recent viewpoints arguing shared leadership to be a more powerful predictor than vertical leadership. To identify changes in leadership structures over time, we longitudinally tracked the leadership structure of 27 newly-formed teams (N = 195), all having an initial structure of vertical leadership. Our findings demonstrated that the average team leadership strengthened over the course of the 24-week project and leadership tended to become more distributed among team members. Regarding the antecedents of these changes, we found evidence that the more team members are perceived as warm or competent, the higher their perceived influence. Finally, examining the consequences of these changes, the leadership structure was found to be related with team performance in that teams with higher average leadership perceptions performed better. These findings underpin the importance of shared leadership, thereby suggesting leaders to empower their team members.status: publishe

How do Profiles of Need-supportive and Controlling Coaching Relate to Team Athletes’ Motivational Outcomes? A Person-centered Approach

Building on recent self-determination theory research differentiating controlling coaching into a demanding and domineering approach, this study examined the role of both approaches in athletes' motivational outcomes when accompanied by autonomy support or structure. Within team-sport athletes (N = 317; mean age = 17.67), four sets of k-means cluster analyses systematically pointed toward a four-cluster solution (e.g., high-high, high-low, low-high, and low-low), regardless of the pair of coaching dimensions used. One of the identified coaching profiles involved coaches who are perceived to combine need-supportive and controlling behaviors (i.e., high-high). Whereas combining need-supportive and domineering behaviors (i.e., high-high) yields lower autonomous motivation and engagement compared with a high need-support profile (i.e., high-low), this is less the case for the combination of need-supportive and demanding behaviors (i.e., high-high). This person-centered approach provides deeper insights into how coaches combine different styles and how some forms of controlling coaching yield a greater cost than others.status: publishe

Characterizing Positive and Negative ‘Voicers’ in Elite Sport Teams: The Role of the Five Factor Model and Narcissism in Players’ Frequency and Passing on of Voice

Objective: This study examined the role of the Five Factor Model and grandiose narcissism in players’ positive (i.e., constructive voice, supportive voice) and negative voice (i.e., defensive voice, destructive voice) in elite sport teams. Method: Players from six field hockey and seven korfball teams from the two highest national levels were assessed for four weeks. Using social network analyses, players’ personality was related to their self-reported voice frequency, their voice frequency as perceived by all teammates (other-ratings), and the extent to which they pass on voice. Results: Extraversion was positively related to players’ frequency of positive and negative voice. Other traits such as conscientiousness and emotional stability were only related to, respectively, positive or negative types of voice. Not all personalities (e.g., extraversion) were consistent in how they assess their own voice versus how others perceive this. Interestingly, traits such as extraversion, emotional stability and the agentic facet of narcissism were found to predict the passing on of voice. Conclusion: This study explored the importance of personality for (a) players’ frequency of a differentiated set of positive and negative voice and (b) the extent to which they function as ‘gates’ that more covertly pass on voice. Further, the results provide perspective on how specific personalities view their voice behavior versus how their teammates perceive their voice behavior. In this way, this study is a first step in identifying players who have the potential to endanger or strengthen a team in a clear or subtle, yet influential way.status: accepte

An examination of the relationship between athlete leadership and cohesion using social network analysis

Two studies investigated the structure of different athlete leadership networks and its relationship to cohesion using Social Network Analysis. In Study 1, we examined the relationship between a general leadership network and measures of task and social cohesion using the Group Environment Questionnaire. In Study 2, we investigated the leadership networks for four different athlete leadership roles (task, motivational, social, and external) and their association with task and social cohesion. In Study 1, the results demonstrated that the general leadership quality network was positively related to task and social cohesion. The results from Study 2 indicated positive correlations between the four leadership networks and task and social cohesion networks. The motivational leadership network emerged as the strongest predictor of the task cohesion network; while the social leadership network was the strongest predictor of the social cohesion network. The results complement a growing body of research indicating that athlete leadership has a positive association with cohesion.peerreview_statement: The publishing and review policy for this title is described in its Aims & Scope. aims_and_scope_url: http://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?show=aimsScope&journalCode=rjsp20status: publishe

How do profiles of need-supportive and controlling coaching relate to team athletes’ motivational outcomes? A person-centered approach

Building on recent self-determination theory research differentiating controlling coaching into a demanding and domineering approach, this study examined the role of both approaches in athletes' motivational outcomes when accompanied by autonomy support or structure. Within team-sport athletes (N = 317; mean age = 17.67), four sets of k-means cluster analyses systematically pointed toward a four-cluster solution (e.g., high-high, high-low, low-high, and low-low), regardless of the pair of coaching dimensions used. One of the identified coaching profiles involved coaches who are perceived to combine need-supportive and controlling behaviors (i.e., high-high). Whereas combining need-supportive and domineering behaviors (i.e., high-high) yields lower autonomous motivation and engagement compared with a high need-support profile (i.e., high-low), this is less the case for the combination of need-supportive and demanding behaviors (i.e., high-high). This person-centered approach provides deeper insights into how coaches combine different styles and how some forms of controlling coaching yield a greater cost than others

Controlling coaching in team sports: the role of demanding and domineering behavior in athletes’ motivational outcomes.

Recent research within the context of Self-Determination Theory distinguished being demanding and domineering as separate approaches of a psychological controlling coaching style. This study aimed to examine the role of these controlling approaches in athletes’ motivational outcomes when accompanied by need-supportive coach behavior (i.e., autonomy support and structure). K-means cluster analyses were performed to identify coaching profiles combining controlling and need-supportive approaches. Within a sample of team sport athletes (N = 317), results pointed towards four-cluster solutions (i.e., high-high, high-low, low-high, low-low) when analyzing either the autonomy and demanding scores or the structure and demanding scores. Also four clusters were found when focusing on the autonomy and domineering variables (i.e., moderate high-high, high-low, low-high, & moderate low-low), and when inspecting the structure and domineering scores (i.e., high-high, high-low, low-high, & moderate low-moderate low). Concerning associations of these profiles with athletes’ autonomous motivation, controlled motivation and engagement, adopting a domineering approach showed to be unfavorable in terms of all motivational outcomes, whereas profiles characterized by high levels of demanding did not show negative associations with beneficial motivational outcomes. Yet, a highly demanding approach even provoked the highest scores regarding autonomous motivation and engagement when extended by either high levels of autonomy-supportive or structuring behavior. Altogether, while coaches are being strongly recommended to avoid domineering coaching behavior, these results may indicate that being demanding does not necessarily have to harm athletes’ adaptive outcomes (i.e., autonomous motivation and engagement), but only when coaches also display high levels of autonomy support or structure.status: publishe