Coaching:

The organized provision of assistance to an individual athlete/group of athletes to help them develop and improve the performance of their chosen sport. (Kent, 2005)

Coaching Style
Coaching style is defined as a descriptive categorization of the individuals aggregated coaching behaviour Can also be described as a leadership style

Different styles of Coaching:

The leaders modus operandi

AUTOCRATIC Demands immediate compliance

AUTHORITATIVE AFFILIATIVE DEMOCRATIC TRAINING Mobilizes people Creates harmony Forges consensus Develops toward a vision and builds through people for the emotional bonds participation future

The style in a phrase Underlying emotional intelligence competencies

Do what I tell you.

Come with me.

People come first. Empathy, building relationships, communication To heal rifts in a team or to motivate people during stressful circumstances

What do you think? Collaboration, team leadership, communication

Try this. Developing others, empathy, selfawareness To help employees improve performance or develop longterm strengths

Drive to achieve, Self-confidence, initiative, selfempathy, change control catalyst

When the style In a crisis, to jump-start a works best turnaround, or to deal with problem employees

When changes require a new vision or where a clear direction is needed

To build buy-in or consensus or to get input from valuable employees; valuable when teamwork is essential Positive

Overall impact Negative on climate

Most strongly positive Positive

Positive

Autocratic Style (do as I say): Coaching behaviour involving independent decision making and stresses the personal authority of the coach but not the athlete.

This type of coaching style can further be broken down into two sub-categories - telling and selling. The autocratic-telling coach is content simply to instruct his or her athletes, defining the rules and parameters of a given activity and seeking no input from athlete at all. The autocraticselling coach will provide an explanation of what the athlete should do, but then will encourage questions and feedback regarding the correct execution of the activity. Ultimately, though, the final decisions rest with coach. Autocratic Style - Telling

The coach decides on what is to be done The athletes are not involved in the decision making The coach defines what to do and how to do it

e.g. in a circuit training session the athletes are told the exercises to be completed Autocratic Style - Selling

The coach decides on what is to be done The coach explains what is required and the objectives The athletes are encouraged to ask questions to confirm understanding The coach defines what to do and how to do it

e.g. in a circuit training session the athletes are informed of the exercises in the circuit. The coach explains the object of circuit training and the purpose of each exercise. Athletes can ask questions to clarify any points. Advantages Coach supports hard work Coach works hard Prepared for any type of competition

Disadvantages Performers put off by the demands Emotional outburst from coach The less motivated performers are overlooked

Democratic style (considers the players opinion): Democratic: Coaching behaviour allowing high levels of participation by the athlete in decision making, goals, practice, game tactics and strategies.

Democratic Style - Sharing

The coach outlines the training requirements to the athletes The coach invites ideas/suggestions from the athletes The coach makes the decision based on the athletes' suggestions The coach defines what to do and how to do it

e.g. the coach identifies a circuit training session. Athletes identify possible exercises for the circuit. The coach selects from the suggestions a set of exercises. Democratic Style - Allowing

The coach outlines the training requirements to the athletes The coach defines the training conditions The athletes brainstorm to explore possible solutions The athletes make the decision The athletes define what to do and how to do it

e.g. the coach identifies a circuit training session. The coach defines the conditions of the circuit to ensure it is safe and meets the overall objectives of the session. Athletes identify possible exercises for the circuit and then select a set of exercises that meet the coach's conditions. Advantages Cohesive team Relaxed atmosphere

Disadvantages Coach may be seen as weak Socially inhibited athletes overlooked

Autocratic vs. Democratic Autocratic

Coach makes all decisions Directive and dominating approach to interpersonal-behaviour The exchange of knowledge, teaching and learning assumed to be one way The coach determines rules, rewards, standards and applications Lack of personal empathy

Democratic
Athletes are able to participate in decision-making There is an inter-active communication process Athletes values incorporated into goals and evaluation Coach involves athletes in teachinglearning process Flexibility, empathy and support in personal relationships

Affiliative (people come first): This style has one of the strongest impacts on a teams climate. Only the visionary and coaching styles have more of a positive impact on all the Climate variables. When using this style the coach places more emphasis on individuals and their emotions and less emphasis on accomplishing tasks and goals. The coach does this by spending a lot of time cultivating relationships with people and building strong emotional bonds with the leader and between the team members. Primary objective: creating harmony among team members and avoiding conflict When is this style most effective? When it is important to heal rifts and broken trust in a team. When the overall environment is very stressful and people need support in keeping up their motivation. When diverse and conflicting groups need to work together harmoniously. When is it least effective? When players performance is inadequate, this styles main focus on praise can allow poor performance to go uncorrected and players may perceive that mediocrity is tolerated.

When people need clear directives to face complex challenges, this style can leave them without clarity and control.

Authoritative (come with me): The authoritative coach is a visionary he motivates players by making clear to them how their performance fits into a larger vision. Players who work under such coaches understand that what they do matters and why. Authoritative coaching also maximizes commitment to the teams goals and strategy. By framing the individual tasks within a grand vision, the authoritative coach defines standards that revolve around that vision. When he gives performance feedback whether positive or negative the singular criterion is whether or not that performance furthers the vision. Primary objective: Mobilizing the team toward a long term direction and vision When is this style most effective? When the coach is perceived to be the expert or authority. When there are team members who depend on the coach for active guidance. When is it least effective? When the coach is not perceived as credible. When the coach is not clear on the best direction for the team.

Referred sites: http://www.brianmac.co.uk/styles.htm http://www.brianmac.co.uk/articles/scni1a1.htm http://humboldtdspace.calstate.edu/xmlui/bitstream/handle/2148/292/Entire%2BThesis.pdf?sequence=3 http://www.slideshare.net/Rewazie/coaching-philosophy http://www.iihf.com/fileadmin/user_upload/PDF/Sport/Coaching_manuals/2_Level_I_Role_of_ the_Coach.pdf http://www.iihf.com/fileadmin/user_upload/PDF/Sport/Coaching_manuals/2_Level_I_Role_of_ the_Coach.pdf