Coaches` Perceptions of Athlete Leadership

Transcription

Coaches‟ Perceptions of Athlete Leadership
Joseph Bucci
A thesis proposal
submitted in partial fulfillment
of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts
in the Department of Kinesiology and Physical Education
in the Faculty of Education
McGill University
December 16, 2010
© Joseph Bucci, 2010
ii
Abstract
Leadership has been cited as a vital component contributing to the achievement, personal
satisfaction, and enhanced well being of athletes (Chelladurai & Riemer, 1998; Dupuis,
Bloom, & Loughead, 2006). Coaches believe that athlete leadership is a central component to
team success, however, the majority of research examining athlete leaders has been generated
from the athlete‟s perspective. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to identify ice hockey
coaches‟ perceptions of the factors influencing the development of athlete leadership. Semistructured open-ended interviews were conducted with six high performance ice hockey
coaches of 16 to 20 year old athletes. Côté, Salmela, and Russell‟s (1995) guidelines were
used to inductively analyze and interpret the data. Results revealed three higher-order
categories, which were called personal experiences and characteristics, daily coach tasks,
and athlete leadership. The results provided evidence that coaches had a clear understanding
of the qualities they looked for in their leaders, used similar approaches to develop the
leadership skills in their athletes, and understood the impact athlete leaders had on their team.
Practically, these findings provide coaches, sport administrators, and athletes with new
information on how to identify their leaders, cultivate positive relationships with them, and
help them develop their leadership skills.
iii
Résumé
Le leadership a été évoqué comme un élément essentiel contribuant au succès, à la
satisfaction personnelle et au bien-être des athlètes (Chelladurai & Riemer, 1998; Dupuis,
Bloom, & Loughead, 2006). Les entraîneurs croient que le leadership de l‟athlète est un
élément fondamental au succès de l‟équipe, par contre, la majorité des recherches sur les
athlètes leaders ont été réalisées du point de vue des athlètes. Donc, le but de cette étude était
d‟identifier les facteurs qui influençaient le développement du leadership des athlètes selon la
perception des entraîneurs de hockey sur glace. Des entrevues ont été menées avec six
entraîneurs de hockey sur glace dirigeant des athlètes âgés entre 16 et 20 ans. Les étapes de
Côté, Salmela, et Russell (1995) ont été utilisées pour l‟analyse inductive et l‟interprétation
des données. Les résultats ont été classés en trois catégories, les caractéristiques et
expériences personnelles, les tâches quotidiennes des entraîneurs et le leadership de
l’athlète. Les résultats nous prouvent que les entraîneurs ont une idée bien précise des
qualités recherchées auprès de leurs leaders. Ils utilisent des approches similaires pour
développer les aptitudes de leadership auprès de leurs athlètes et attribuent beaucoup
d‟importance à l‟impact qu‟ont leurs athlètes leaders au sein de l‟équipe. D‟un point de vue
plus pratique, ces résultats peuvent fournir aux futurs entraîneurs, entraîneurs actuels,
administrateurs sportifs ou athlètes de nouvelles informations sur la façon d‟identifier leurs
leaders, d‟entretenir une relation positive avec eux et de les aider à développer leur
leadership.
iv
Acknowledgements
I would like to thank the following people who helped me complete my thesis:
My advisor, Dr. Gordon Bloom, who gave me the opportunity to pursue my passion
for coaching and meet great people along the way. Thank you for challenging me as
soon as the puck dropped. Your relentless feedback and determination to make me a
better individual has allowed me to persevere through the challenges thrown my way
during the regular season. Most of all, you have prepared me for my biggest
challenge, the playoffs!
My colloquium committee members Dr. Enrique Garcia and Dr. Billy Harvey for
their guidance and feedback throughout my graduate studies.
Dr. Todd Loughead who provided great insights throughout the completion of my
thesis. Your expertise and enthusiasm for this project during the last two years has
been much appreciated.
The six coaches who welcomed me into their offices and who gladly shared their
knowledge and expertise.
My family, Mom, Dad, Cora, Mike, Marija, and Gabriella, thank you for being there
and believing in me.
Holly, Jeff, Marc, and Will. Cheers to early mornings, late nights, good times, and
lots of laughs.
Julie, your selflessness, patience, and good will have made these past two years much
easier. You are my MVP.
Au Team Carré, La Bûche, Le Ringer, et la Soirée du Hockey. Merci pour tout!
v
Table of Contents
Page
Abstract
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
ii
Résumé
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
iii
Acknowledgements
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
iv
Table of Contents
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
v
List of Tables .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
ix
Chapter 1
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
1
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
1
Purpose of the Study .
.
.
.
.
.
6
Significance of the Study
.
.
.
.
.
6
Delimitations .
.
.
.
.
.
.
7
Limitations
.
.
.
.
.
.
7
Operational Definitions
.
.
.
.
.
8
.
.
Introduction
Chapter 2
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
9
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
9
Coaching Science
.
.
.
.
.
.
9
Coaching Model
.
.
.
.
.
.
11
Primary Components .
.
.
.
.
12
Organization .
.
.
.
.
12
Training
.
.
.
.
.
15
Competition .
.
.
.
.
17
Peripheral Components
.
.
.
.
18
Literature Review
vi
Coach Characteristics .
.
.
.
19
Athlete Characteristics
.
.
.
20
Contextual Factors
.
.
.
.
21
Coach-Athlete Relationship .
.
.
.
.
22
Leadership in Sport
.
.
.
.
24
The Multidimensional Model of Leadership .
.
25
Leadership Scale for Sport
.
26
.
.
.
.
.
Congruence Between Perceived and Preferred
Leadership
.
.
.
.
.
26
Antecedent Variables on Perceived and Preferred
Leadership
.
.
.
.
.
28
.
.
.
.
.
29
Transformational Leadership .
.
.
.
32
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
35
Methods
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
35
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
35
Interviewing .
.
.
.
.
.
.
37
Interview Type
.
.
.
.
.
37
Interview Guide
.
.
.
.
.
38
Peer Leadership
Chapter 3
Participants
Chapter 4
Results
Data Analysis .
.
.
.
.
.
.
40
Trustworthiness
.
.
.
.
.
.
41
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
44
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
44
vii
Nature of the Data
.
.
.
Personal Experiences and Characteristics
.
44
.
.
.
47
.
.
.
.
47
Coaching Experiences
.
.
.
.
49
Coach Characteristics
.
.
.
.
50
.
.
.
.
52
.
.
.
.
52
Coach-Athlete Leader Relationships .
.
.
55
.
.
Coach Tasks and Duties
Athlete Leadership
.
.
.
.
.
.
58
.
.
.
.
.
58
Developing Athlete Leadership
.
.
.
61
Athlete Leader Responsibilities
.
.
.
62
Selecting a Leader
Summary
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
64
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
69
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
69
.
.
.
69
Daily Coach Tasks
.
.
.
.
.
.
73
Athlete Leadership
.
.
.
.
.
.
79
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
88
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
88
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
90
Practical Implications .
.
.
.
.
.
92
.
94
Discussion
Chapter 6
.
Athletic Experiences
Daily Coach Tasks
Chapter 5
.
.
Summary of Study
Conclusions
Limitations and Recommendations for Future Research
viii
References
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
96
Appendices
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
108
Appendix A – The Coaching Model .
.
.
.
.
108
Appendix B – The Multidimensional Model of Leadership .
.
109
Appendix C – Consent Form .
.
.
.
.
.
110
.
.
.
.
111
Appendix E – Demographic Questionnaire .
.
.
.
112
Appendix F – Interview Guide
.
.
.
114
.
116
Appendix D – Ethical Acceptability
.
.
Appendix G – Alphabetical Listing of the Frequency of Topics
Discussed by Each Participant
.
.
ix
List of Tables
Table 1: History of Coaching Background and Accomplishments .
.
36
.
.
116
.
.
45
.
.
47
Table 2: Alphabetical Listing of Frequency of Topics Discussed
by Each Participant .
.
.
.
.
Table 3: Properties and Tags with Frequencies as Expressed by
Each Participant
.
.
.
.
.
Table 4: Categories and Properties with Frequencies as Expressed
by Each Participant
.
.
.
.
Introduction 1
CHAPTER 1
Introduction
The concept of leadership has guided individuals from many diverse fields such as
military, education, industry, and sport. Powerful and successful leaders date back to Julius
Caesar, who extended the military dominance of the Roman Empire, to Jack Welch, former
CEO of General Electric, and regarded as one of the best managers of the 20th century. In the
sport context, individuals such as Derek Jeter, Michael Jordan, and Wayne Gretzky were
highly regarded for their leadership and athletic skills. In addition to being outstanding
individuals, each of these athletes had one thing in common: a coach who inspired and
helped them achieve unprecedented levels of success. Coaches have been described as
educators, analysts, communicators, and leaders, and their role entails a variety of leadership
qualities that influences the overall success of athletes in youth, intercollegiate, and
professional sport (Semaine Québécoise des Entraîneurs, 2005).
The role of a coach goes beyond producing a remarkable win-loss record. Creating a
vision, establishing a seasonal plan, planning training, working with assistants, and helping
athletes with personal concerns have all been identified as organizational tasks that led to
athlete development and performance (Côté & Salmela, 1996; Desjardins, 1996). The role of
a coach also involves teaching athletes sport skills (e.g., technical, tactical), social skills (e.g.,
cooperation, responsibility), and leadership skills (e.g., perseverance, hard work) (Arnold,
2001; Bloom, 2002; Côté, Salmela, Trudel et al., 1995; Wooden, 1988). For example, Smith
and Smoll (2002) trained coaches to ensure that young athletes had fun, enjoyed being part of
the team, learned skills, and increased their self-esteem. Similarly, many successful
university coaches stressed the importance of investing time in building self-confidence,
Introduction 2
enhancing the character of their athletes in their pursuit of higher achievements in and out of
sport (Bloom & Salmela, 2000; Gilbert & Trudel, 2000; Côté, Salmela, Trudel et al., 1995;
Vallée & Bloom, 2005). Given that the role of both youth sport and university coaches
involves the personal growth and development of their athletes, adopting an athlete-centered
approach would appear to be valuable to attaining success.
Related to developing an athlete-centered approach is the coach-athlete relationship.
For instance, Philippe and Seiler (2006) found that a close rapport between national level
athletes and coaches was important for the personal and athletic development of the athlete.
The closer the relationship, the easier it was for athletes to communicate openly about a
variety of topics with their coach. Gould, Guinan, Greenleaf, Medbery, and Peterson (1999)
also examined factors influencing Olympic athletes and found teams that met or exceeded
performance expectations had healthy relationships with their coaches built on trust, effective
communication, and a detailed plan to perform well during competition. Finally, Jowett and
Cockerill (2003) found that a mutual respect between players and coaches led to positive
coach-athlete interactions and enhanced athlete performance. Taken together, athletes viewed
the development of a mutually respectful relationship with their coach as a valuable source of
support and encouragement in and out of sport.
In addition to examining the coach-athlete relationship, the competitive nature of elite
coaches means that quality leadership plays an important role in athlete and coach success.
There is an overall consensus that successful coaches adjust their behaviours to a variety of
demands from the environment to maximize athlete satisfaction and performance
(Chelladurai, 1993; Chelladurai & Riemer, 1998; Sherman, Fuller, & Speed, 2000). For
example, athlete satisfaction was at its highest when coaches‟ behaviours focused on
Introduction 3
technical and tactical instruction and positive performance feedback (Chelladurai & Riemer,
1998, Sherman et al., 2000). Furthermore, differences in age, maturity level, and the type of
sport influenced athlete preferences of leadership behaviours. Specifically, socially
supportive and autocratic leadership styles better matched the needs of more experienced
athletes (Chelladurai & Carron, 1985, Horn, 2002). In contrast, researchers noted high
variability between democratic and autocratic preferences within individual and team sports
(Chelladurai & Riemer, 1998; Terry & Howe, 1984). The identification of these leadership
behaviours have contributed to the understanding of expected coach leader behaviours.
Research results demonstrated the importance of strong organizational skills when
preparing their athletes for training and competition (Côté & Salmela, 1996; Gallimore &
Tharp, 2004). For example, Tharp and Gallimore studied the teaching methods of UCLA‟s
men‟s basketball coach John Wooden and found that his success was a result of meticulous
practice planning and precise pedagogical interventions. Specifically, Wooden‟s coaching
methods were closely linked to his pyramid of success, which defines his vision of success.
Researchers have identified vision as an essential component for coaching success (Bloom,
2002; Côté & Salmela, 1996; Desjardins, 1996; Vallée & Bloom, 2005). Coaches who
created and articulated a clear vision of where they wanted their team to go and how they
would get there were more likely to obtain positive results (Bloom, 2002; Vallée & Bloom,
2005). For example, Vallée and Bloom investigated how five female coaches built successful
programs and found that all coaches began their season by formulating a long term vision for
their players. Interestingly, each coach turned losing teams into successful ones in a short
period of time. These findings suggest that regardless of the current state of a team,
establishing a clear pathway for players to follow leads to success.
Introduction 4
Although research on leadership has often focused on the coach, researchers have
also focused on athlete leaders by identifying some of their key characteristics as well as the
roles they play on a team (e.g., Dupuis, Bloom, & Loughead, 2006; Holmes, McNeil,
Adorna, & Procaccino, 2008; Loughead, Hardy, & Eys, 2006; Todd & Kent, 2004). There is
an overall consensus that athlete leaders possessed a strong work ethic, respected their
teammates, and looked to reach high performance levels. For example, Todd and Kent
examined the ideal peer leader behaviours of athletes aged between 14 and 19 in
interscholastic sports and found that 75% of student athletes identified work ethic as the
single most important characteristics to possess. Likewise, athlete leaders demonstrated high
expectations to perform for both themselves and their teammates. The recognition of these
characteristics has been beneficial to understanding personal qualities required to be an
athlete leader. Furthermore, in a study on male ice hockey team captains, not only did Dupuis
and colleagues identify the qualities of team captains, they also found that team captains
controlled their emotions, respected their teammates and coaches, had positive attitudes, a
strong work ethic, and communicated effectively. These qualities helped team leaders
develop positive relationships with their coaches and teammates, and facilitated their
leadership duties. Overall, these findings identified the potential impact team leaders can
have on other team members.
Despite the popularity of leadership in sport, the majority of leadership studies were
based on the athlete‟s perceptions of leadership. Given the impact of peer leaders (Dupuis et
al., 2006), it would be just as important to examine the coach‟s perceptions of his/her athlete
leaders and which factors influence their interactions. This suggests that obtaining coaches‟
perceptions of athlete leadership would provide a more complete view of leadership.
Introduction 5
In order to identify the factors that influence a coach‟s perceptions of his/her athlete
leaders, the Coaching Model (CM), a widely used and implemented model in coaching
psychology was used as a main framework for this study. The CM is practical for researchers
in sport as it provides a framework which describes coaching behaviours. It helps explain
how coaches structure their knowledge in the development of athlete leaders by focusing on a
series of primary and peripheral components influencing athlete growth. The CM implies that
coaches create a mental model which helps them evaluate their plan of action and
consequently maximize their team‟s potential. The mental representation of team potential is
influenced by three peripheral components: the athlete’s characteristics, the coach’s
personal characteristics, and the contextual factors, which in turn determine which of the
primary components of organization, training, and competition must be improved to develop
the athlete and the team. Taken as a whole, the CM is an integration of primary and
peripheral components that allow coaches to establish guidelines to create optimal conditions
for athlete performance and development and in turn, help identify coaches‟ knowledge and
strategies when dealing with team leaders.
A framework that has also served in examining leader behaviours is the
Multidimensional Model of Leadership (MML) (Chelladurai, 1978). These include the
leader’s characteristics, member characteristics, and the situation coaches must deal with
(Chelladurai, 1993). The MML emphasizes the importance of the leader‟s required, actual,
and preferred behaviours on member satisfaction and team performance, called
consequences. In its application, the MML showed that a coach‟s success relied on his/her
ability to display specific leader behaviors in response to an amalgamation of demands from
the environment, players, and the coaches. These leader behaviours will ultimately influence
Introduction 6
the team‟s outcomes, including how they coach athlete leaders as team members as well as
leaders, and ultimately how they maximize athlete satisfaction and team performance. The
MML identifies the leadership behaviours of coaches by focusing on their interactions with
athlete leaders, who can eventually impact other team members‟ satisfaction and
performance. In sum, whereas the CM provides a framework for establishing the knowledge
about the development of athlete leaders, the MML addresses how coaches work with and
influence athlete leaders, and ultimately reach team performance and satisfaction.
Purpose of the Study
The purpose of this study was to identify ice hockey coaches‟ perceptions of the
factors influencing athlete leadership. In particular, this study examined various components
of athlete leadership, such as the role of an athlete leader, athlete leader behaviours, and
coach-athlete relationship. This study answered the following question:
1. What are the factors and characteristics that influence coaches‟ perceptions of athlete
leaders?
Significance of the Study
Research on leadership in sport has clearly demonstrated the importance of athlete
leaders on a team. However, the majority of studies investigating athlete leader
characteristics and behaviours were obtained from a player‟s perspective. Therefore,
gathering the knowledge and experiences of expert coaches could provide aspiring coaches,
sport administrators, and athletes with valuable practical information. Specifically, this study
would provide coaches with a deeper understanding of how to identify, communicate, and
deal with their team leaders. Consequently, coaches would be better prepared to evaluate
what type of leader would best serve him as well as his teammates. These results potentially
Introduction 7
enhance the understanding of coaching success with respect to the value and impact of
athlete leaders.
Delimitations
For the purpose of this study, the following delimitations have been identified:
1. Participants had a minimum of five years head coaching experience at the Midget
AAA or Quebec Junior Major Hockey League levels.
2. Participants had a minimum Level 3 in the old NCCP program and/or a competition
stream (e.g., high performance) certification in the new NCCP coaching certification
program from the Coaching Association of Canada (CAC).
3. Participants were a member of a coaching staff in an international competition in the
past ten years.
4. Participants currently held head coaching positions.
5. Participants were male.
6. The interviews focused solely on coaches‟ perceptions.
Limitations
These delimitations may lead to the following limitations:
1. Results are only indicative of Midget AAA and Quebec Junior Major Hockey League
coaching experiences.
2. Since this study investigated male coaches‟ perceptions, the results may only be
relevant to that specific sex.
3. The results may only have implications within the sport of ice hockey.
Introduction 8
Operational Definitions
Quebec Midget AAA League: A league that focuses on the development of the best
15, 16, and 17 year old hockey players in the province. The league currently has 16 teams
and over 300 players representing their respective regions.
Quebec Junior Major Hockey League (QJMHL): A league composed of 24 teams that
offers over 500 players of 16 to 20 years of age the opportunity to demonstrate their talent.
Since its birth in 1969, several great players and coaches have flourished through its ranks
before paving their way to the National Hockey League.
Formal Leaders are players who have been prescribed a leadership role by members
of the organization (e.g., coach) and include both team captains, and assistant captains
(Loughead, Hardy, & Eys, 2006).
Elite Coach: In this study, coaches must have a High Performance or equivalent
coaching certification from the NCCP. They must have a minimum of 5 years head coaching
experience at the Midget AAA or QJMHL levels.
Literature Review 9
CHAPTER 2
Literature Review
This literature review will consist of four main sections. To begin, an overview of
Gilbert and Trudel‟s (2004) analysis of coaching science will be presented, particularly areas
most relevant to this study. The Coaching Model will be described in the second section,
with emphasis on the overall goal of the model. The third section will explore research
examining the coach athlete relationship, while the fourth section will investigate research
examining coach leadership, with particular emphasis on Chelladurai‟s Multidimensional
Model of Leadership.
Coaching Science
Coaching science has seen a positive shift in the amount of empirical research
published in the past 20 years (Gilbert & Trudel, 2004). Despite this increase, coaching
science has been criticized for its lack of impact on the coaching practice (Abraham &
Collins, 1998) and for its lack of organization (Potrac, Brewer, Jones, Armour, & Hoff,
2000). In an attempt to organize and gather coaching science literature, Gilbert and Trudel
completed an in depth review of 611 studies published in English journals between 1970 and
2001. They conducted a thorough search of computerized databases and online encyclopedias
from which four categories emerged. These categories were called behaviour, cognition,
characteristics, and career development. Of these four categories, the two that are most
related to the current study, behaviour and cognition will be addressed.
Gilbert and Trudel (2004) found that the majority of published articles focused on the
behaviours of a coach. The behaviour category included themes such as coach-athlete
relationships, coach athlete-interactions, and leadership. Pertinent to leadership in sport, most
Literature Review 10
of the research has focused on the characteristics and the behaviours of the coach
(Chelladurai, 1990). In particular, Smoll and Smith (1989) proposed the Mediational Model
of leadership which assessed the relationship between the coaches‟ behaviours and the
player‟s responses. Chelladurai (1978) proposed the Multidimensional Model of Leadership
which suggested that member satisfaction and group performance were influenced by the
congruence among leader behaviours and their antecedents (Chelladurai, 1993). A second
area of coaching research that accounted for a significant number of publications has been
called cognition. This area included the coach‟s attitudes, philosophy, and knowledge. Taken
together, the coaching behaviour and cognition categories have impacted both the coaching
practice and aspects of coaching leadership.
In addition to establishing the four above mentioned coaching science categories,
Gilbert and Trudel‟s (2004) report revealed the methodological trends used in coaching
science research. The report revealed that 80% of research has been quantitative. However,
qualitative research has seen a consistent increase in the use of interviews, increasing by
approximately 28% from 1970 to 2001 (Gilbert & Trudel, 2004). According to Strean (1998),
qualitative research offers sport researchers with opportunities to describe how people make
sense of their experiences in their context. The use of interviews and observational data can
help researchers understand the complex process by which events and behaviours occur
(Strean, 1998).
Much as Gilbert and Trudel‟s (2004) analysis of coaching science assisted coaching
research by providing a breakdown of the evolving coaching literature, so too has the
Coaching Model (CM) developed by Côté, Salmela, Trudel, Baria, and Russell (1995). The
CM has served as a theoretical framework for much of the research on expert Canadian
coaching (Bloom, 2007). Lyle (2002) indicated that the CM has been one of the few
coaching models derived from rigorous research that has great potential for explaining
coaching practice. Its mental model has been tested in different sport contexts such as
individual and team settings (i.e., gymnastics, ice hockey). Moreover, coaches can enhance
athlete development through the coordination and application of the components of the CM.
For this reason, research using the CM and its practical value to coaching will be discussed in
the following section.
Coaching Model (CM)
Côté, Salmela, Trudel, et al. (1995) created a model to identify and further understand
the variables of the coaching domain (Appendix A). They studied the knowledge of 17
Canadian high-performance gymnastic coaches who had over 10 years of experience and had
developed at least one international and two national level gymnasts. A qualitative
(interview-based) approach was used allowing each coach to openly discuss what he/she felt
were the important components of his/her work. This approach allowed researchers to gain a
firsthand appreciation of the complexities of coaching, as well as identify commonalities in
the knowledge of expert Canadian gymnastic coaches. These commonalities were gathered
into six specific categories, which formed the basis of the CM.
The foundation of the CM suggests that coaches begin their coaching duties by
forming a mental model of their team‟s and athletes‟ potential. This mental representation
can then help coaches evaluate their plan of action and consequently maximize their team‟s
potential. Three peripheral components influence this mental model: 1) the coach’s personal
characteristics; 2) the athlete’s personal characteristics; 3) contextual factors (Côté,
Salmela, Trudel, et al., 1995). From the mental model, the coach then evaluates which
elements of the primary components need to be emphasized. The core components of the CM
are organization, training, and competition. Overall, the inclusion of both the primary and
peripheral components of the CM contribute to the coach achieving the overall goal of
developing both the athlete and the team.
Gilbert and Trudel (2000) examined the validity of the coaching model in a case
study with a university ice hockey coach. For this study, data was collected at three separate
occasions: early season, mid-season, and late season. A series of semi-structured interviews
were conducted before and after each practice or game, which allowed for a direct
comparison between the components and categories between the initial CM study and their
investigation. Despite significant contextual differences between both studies mainly the
nature of the sport (gymnastics versus ice hockey), the six components of the CM were
congruent, thus demonstrating its relevance to the team sport context.
Primary Components
This section will focus on the central or primary components of the CM. These
components are called organization, training, and competition. Coaches apply these
components with the intent of creating optimal conditions for athlete performance and
development (Côté, Salmela, Trudel, et al., 1995).
Organization. Côté, Salmela, Trudel, et al. (1995) defined organization as “applying
one‟s knowledge towards establishing optimal conditions for training and competition by
structuring and coordinating the tasks involved in reaching the goal” (p.9). Research has
shown that organization is an indispensable component for coaching success and furthermore
has a direct impact on the growth and development of the athlete (Bloom, 2002; Côté &
Salmela, 1996; Côté, Salmela, Trudel, et al., 1995; Vallée & Bloom, 2005).
Côté and Salmela (1996) examined the knowledge of expert gymnastic coaches and
identified five critical organizational tasks: working with parents, working with assistants,
helping gymnasts with personal concerns, planning training, and monitoring weights and
esthetics. In a team sport setting, Desjardins (1996) identified seven organizational tasks:
vision, planning, team selection, goal setting, team rules, building team cohesion,
administrative concerns, and working with support staff. Both of these studies indicated that
organizational tasks were present before, during, and after the season. Moreover, a coach‟s
ability to organize the season and ways of dealing with organizational issues such as
personnel changes, player and coach conflict, and differences between his/her value system
and the expectations of the organization reveal a lot about his/her leadership skills (Lyle,
2002).
At the heart of organization is the coach‟s ability to create and sell a vision which
involves creating a mental representation of athlete/team potential allowing coaches to begin
the season with a vision of what the team can achieve (Côté, Salmela, Trudel, et al., 1995;
Desjardins, 1996; Vallée & Bloom, 2005). Desjardins stated that once the vision was
established, coaches transformed this vision into a mission statement, a tangible written
statement which could then give the team direction for the upcoming year. The team‟s
mission statement influenced a range of activities from seasonal planning, daily practices,
team selection, and goal setting. Several studies have shown the advantages of coaches
persuading their team to buy into their vision (Bloom, 2002; Desjardins, 1996; Salmela,
1996; Vallée & Bloom, 2005). For example, Vallée and Bloom investigated how five female
Canadian university team sport coaches built successful programs, beginning with the
formulation of a long term vision. Ultimately, each of the coaches‟ strategies were aimed at
developing great athletes as well as great people. They fostered individual growth on and off
the court through life skills development and empowerment of their athletes. These results
indicated that building successful programs was partly attributed to their ability to create a
plan and systematically add players that met the requirements of their long term vision. Once
the players were in place, many coaches focused on the holistic development of each athlete,
as well as the wins and losses of the team itself.
Aside from the empirical research, a number of coaching biographies have also
alluded to the importance of creating and selling a vision (e.g., Torre & Verducci, 2009;
Jackson & Delehanty, 1995). Joe Torre is well known for his success as the New York
Yankees head coach in the late 1990‟s. Specifically, the team‟s success originated from his
management by trust philosophy (Torre & Verducci, 2009). Torre recalls that one word
summarized his coaching philosophy: trust. Torres‟ vision proved to be well understood by
his players, especially one in particular, the team captain Derek Jeter. Torre recalled:
Jeter was such a big part of what we established. I filled him in on what we needed to
have done. He would literally commit to it. I wouldn‟t say buy in. He would commit to
something. He trusted me to the point where he knew what was important. (p.33)
As Maxwell (2007) stated, people first commit to the leader, then they commit to the vision.
In his first team meeting, Torre told his players:
I want to establish something here that‟s special. I don‟t want to sacrifice principles and
players to do it one time. I want to establish a foundation to be the kind of ballclub that is
going to be able to repeat. (p.8)
Torre‟s message was clear to his players; they invested in their coach and his vision, a
decision which paid off as the Yankees won four championships in the next five years.
Coach Phil Jackson, who led the NBA‟s Chicago Bulls to success in the late 1990‟s,
is another example of a successful coach who created and sold his vision to his team (Jackson
& Delehanty, 1995). Jackson‟s vision focused on three themes: the importance of team play,
passing, and selflessness. These components formed the basis of the triangle offense, a
system innovated by Tex Winter, Jackson‟s assistant coach. The triangle offense is a system
that empowers all players by involving them in the offense (Jackson & Delehanty, 1995).
Jackson‟s biggest challenge was convincing franchise player Michael Jordan that a collective
approach was in the best interest of both Jordan and the team. Similar to Jeter‟s commitment
to Torre‟s vision, Jordan bought into Jackson‟s vision of the triangle offense, and he helped
lead the Chicago Bulls to six championships. Jackson recalled:
I flashed back to 1989 when I took over as head coach and had talked to Michael about
how I wanted him to share the spotlight with his teammates so the team could grow and
flourish. In those days he was a gifted young athlete with enormous confidence in his
own abilities that had to be cajoled into making sacrifices for the team. Now he was an
older, wiser player who understood that it wasn‟t brilliant individual performances that
made great teams, but the energy that‟s unleashed when players put their ego aside and
work toward a common goal. (p.21)
As illustrated above with both empirical and anecdotal evidence, coaching success in
a team sport setting begins with the coaches visionary qualities. A coach‟s vision will help
establish the organizational standards that must be met to realize this vision, giving both the
coaches‟ and players‟ direction for short-term and long-term objectives.
Training. Training encompasses the knowledge coaches use to help their athletes
acquire and perform various skills during practice (Côté & Salmela, 1996). Researchers have
identified different types of training knowledge including technical, tactical, physical, and
mental that were used to prepare their athletes for competition (Bloom, 2002; Bloom,
Crumpton, & Anderson, 1999; Côté, Salmela, Trudel, et al., 1995; Durand-Bush, 1996;
Durand-Bush & Salmela, 2002; Tharp & Gallimore, 2004). With regard to team sport
coaches, practices are a medium in which coaches can convey their knowledge to their
athletes, as well as reinforcing their vision (Bloom, 1996). Consequently, training sessions
are of crucial importance to a coach‟s success.
A study on the teaching methods of legendary UCLA men‟s basketball coach, John
Wooden, revealed that the majority of his teaching methods during training sessions were
based on technical cues and teaching fundamental basketball skills (Tharp & Gallimore,
2004). Tharp and Gallimore attributed Wooden‟s success to the meticulous planning of
training sessions and pedagogical interventions, two key elements of his vision. In fact, it has
become apparent that successful coaches do not solely base their training sessions on
technical instructions. Bloom et al. (1999) conducted a systematic observation study of Jerry
Tarkanian, former Fresno State head basketball coach. Examination of coach Tarkanian‟s
practices revealed that almost 30% of his instructions emphasized tactical training.
Tarkanian‟s success was dependant on his ability to create specific game situations during
practice in preparation for the upcoming opponent. As big a role technical and tactical
elements play in the athlete, team, and coaching success; some researchers have discussed
the use of the physical elements of training (Durand-Bush, 1996; Durand-Bush & Salmela,
2002). Expert coaches have noted that each athlete‟s unique physical make up determined
which type of training program was best suited to meet his/her needs (Durand-Bush, 1996).
Most athletes followed specific training programs designed and monitored by strength and
conditioning coaches (Durand-Bush & Salmela, 2002). As coaches are aware of the
importance of training preparation, they are responsible for creating an optimal training
environment conducive to the transferability of training for competition.
In addition to the other forms of training, the literature has shown that some elite
coaches are skeptical about the importance of mental training (Durand-Bush, 1996), while
others value this aspect (Côté, Salmela, Trudel, et al., 1995; Durand-Bush & Salmela, 2002).
For instance, expert gymnastic coaches recognized the importance of a sport psychologist to
help athletes work on mental training aspects such as motivation, visualization, and
controlling their emotions (Côté, Salmela, Trudel, et al., 1995). More recently, Durand-Bush
and Salmela (2002) stated that mental training often occurred in conjunction with other
training activities, and helped athletes prepare for training and competition. These initiatives
taken by elite coaches to integrate all types training in athlete development, implies that each
method can be a significant contributor to athletic success.
Competition. This coaching aspect involves the tasks that coaches perform prior to,
during, and after competition (Côté, Salmela, & Russell, 1995). In particular, game day
preparation behaviours ranged from developing pre-match routines, foreseeing potential
distractions during the game, and managing coaches‟ emotions after the game (Bloom, 1996;
Bloom, Durand-Bush, & Salmela, 1997).
Research has demonstrated that the success of coaches and athletes derived from
routines and tasks that occurred throughout the competition (Bloom, 2002; Bloom, DurandBush, & Salmela, 1997; Côté et al., 1995; Thelwell, Weston, Greenlees, & Hutchings, 2008).
Bloom and colleagues found that expert coaches employed routines to prepare themselves
and their athletes for competition such as arriving at the competition site well before the start
of the competition, imagining potential scenarios that could occur during the game including
key matchups and poor officiating, and planning pre-game player meetings. Prior to the
competition, coaches used self-talk by rehearsing their game plan several times before
meeting with their players to ensure that its delivery was concise by using words that stressed
key points (Bloom et al., 1997; Thelwell et al., 2008). Furthermore, in their exploration of the
psychological skills used by coaches during training and competition, Thelwell and
colleagues indicated that the majority of coaches employed imagery prior to training and
competition. Specifically, imagery was used to foresee any potential difficulties that could
occur during training and competition. Coaches‟ imagined the best response, and how they
could prepare for it. These findings are consistent with those of Côté et al. (1995), who
indicated that expert coaches were able to foresee potential distractions before they occurred.
During competition, some coaches maximized their coaching involvement by providing
feedback to players, creating and understanding game tactics, and interacting with athletes,
referees, and other participants (Bloom, 2002). Post competition, coaches‟ first dealt with
controlling their emotions, and then shared a few words with the team given the outcome of
the game (Bloom, 2002). Taken together, the mental preparedness of the coach extends to
competition creating a more favourable performance environment for his/her athletes or
team.
Peripheral Components
The following section will focus on the peripheral components of the CM: the
coach‟s personal characteristics, the athlete‟s personal characteristics, and contextual factors.
Each component impacts the mental model and modifies the strategies used by the coach for
the application of the primary components (Côté, Salmela, Trudel, et al., 1995). This
assessment can impact athlete development as it affects the coach‟s future decisions. For
instance, coaches will use different training techniques with athletes who are mentally tough
and who have strong technical skills as opposed to athletes who lack physical strength and
are strong tactically. This section will focus on the peripheral components that contribute to
achieving athlete potential (Côté, Salmela, Trudel, et al., 1995).
Coach’s personal characteristics. Côté, Salmela, Trudel, et al. (1995) described the
coach‟s personal characteristics as variables associated with the coach‟s philosophy,
perceptions, beliefs, or personal life that could influence the primary components of the
model. Specifically, variables such as the coach‟s experience level and desire to learn were
among some of the characteristics that influenced coaches‟ behaviours.
With regard to team sport coaches, Bloom and Salmela (2000) found that expert
Canadian team sport coaches attributed great importance to such personal skills as
communicating and empathizing with players. In addition to these qualities, Bloom and
Salmela said that coaches also expressed a relentless desire for personal growth and to be
effective teachers. Coaches felt that hard work, investing time in their profession, renewing
their knowledge by attending clinics, and sharing information with peers, favoured their
chances of obtaining success in coaching. Recently, Carter and Bloom (2009) investigated
the knowledge acquisition of university coaches who surpassed their athletic achievements as
coaches. Among their findings, they discovered that coaches reported having to work harder
to learn or overcome the gap in knowledge caused by not playing at an elite level, as well as
having to rely on the experience of assistant coaches. Coaches also mentioned that working
as assistant coaches helped them acquire knowledge in the early stages of their careers,
which suggests that gaining experience as an assistant coach guided the path to fulfilling
future head coaching positions. At the high school level, coaches reported learning their trade
through observing and interacting with other staff members from their school, as well as by
gaining instruction from mentor coaches (Wilson, Bloom, & Harvey, 2010). These results
imply that coaches who work with high-school students to those who train elite athletes
possess certain characteristics that shape their careers and affect the types of relationships
they build with their athletes.
Athlete Characteristics. Côté, Salmela, Trudel et al. (1995) defined an athlete‟s
personal characteristics as any variable related to an athlete‟s stage of learning, personal
abilities, and other personal characteristics that could affect the primary components of the
coach‟s mental representation. A number of researchers have assessed coaches‟ views of
athletes attributes for sport success (Giacobbi, Roper, Whitney, & Butryn, 2002; Gould,
Diffenbach, & Moffett, 2002). For instance, Giacobbi and colleagues interviewed 10 NCAA
Division 1 coaches on their experiences in developing successful athletes. The results
showed that college coaches perceived that a combination of athletes‟ individual
characteristics, such as coachability, motivation, competitiveness, and maturity contributed to
the overall athletic success of the athlete. Coachability was defined as a characteristic found
in players who were attentive to instruction, trusting of coaches, students of the game, and
who desired feedback and information from other sources (Giacobbi et al., 2002).
The notion of coachability was highlighted in another study as a determinant of
athletic success (Gould et al., 2002). Gould et al. found that sport intelligence,
competitiveness, hard work, coachability, and confidence were some of the factors
influencing Olympic athlete‟s performance. Based on these findings, coaches should
therefore identify the psychological characteristics and skills of each athlete as they affect
his/her ability to coach a team. That is, the makeup of each individual (i.e., mental toughness,
coachability, maturity level) allows coaches to employ appropriate coaching behaviours that
best suits his/her development and success.
Contextual Factors. Contextual factors are defined as “unstable factors, aside from
the athletes and coach, such as working conditions, that need to be considered when
intervening in the organization, training, and competition components” (Côté, Salmela,
Trudel, et al., 1995, p. 12). Coaches must be adaptive and versatile as they prepare to face
uncontrollable circumstances that may interfere with the progress of their team (i.e., injuries,
trades, athlete funding).
Research has indicated that different contextual factors arose for coaches involved in
youth, high school, and university sport (Davies, Bloom, & Salmela, 2005; Draper, 1996;
Newin, Bloom, & Loughead, 2008; Wilson et al., 2010). For example, Newin and colleagues
interviewed eight minor ice hockey coaches and found that factors such as parental
involvement, athletic injuries, and tragic incidents outside of sport had negative effects on the
players and coaches alike. For example, the involvement of parents created tension in the
stands and placed unnecessary pressure on both the players and coach. In another study
conducted with high school coaches, the physical environment was an issue as limited
physical space for training impeded their ability to coach (Wilson et al., 2010). At the
university level, Draper indicated that Canadian universities lacked financial resources
compared to American universities, thus creating an uneven playing field when offering
scholarships, a factor which also had detrimental effects on recruiting new players. Similarly,
Davies et al. found that financial constraints and excessive administrative duties led
university coaches to spend less time focusing on coaching and consequently causing job
dissatisfaction. Furthermore, job dissatisfaction also derived from a poor relationship with
their athletic director. The examples listed above, indicate that coaches must adapt to a
variety of uncontrollable factors that affect their coaching. Moreover, regardless of the
contextual factors, coaches were expected to develop competitive teams.
In sum, the CM has provided researchers with an opportunity for a greater
comprehension of coaching using the components of the model as a framework (Côté,
Salmela, Trudel, et al., 1995). However, while the model can help understand which
variables influence coaches‟ decision, and in turn his/her behaviours, it is also important to
examine the quality of the coach-athlete relationship and its impact on performance, and so,
it will be reviewed in the next section.
Coach-Athlete Relationship
Gilbert and Trudel‟s (2004) analysis of coaching science indicated that coach-athlete
relationships have been a growing area of interest for researchers for several years, and
accounted for 15% of published articles from 1970 to 2000. Recent findings have indicated
that athletes developed several interpersonal relationships with their coach and teammates
throughout their careers (Poczwardowski, Barott, & Henschen, 2002; Poczwardowski,
Barott, & Peregoy, 2002). In addition, the coach-athlete relationship has shown to be an
important component that led to successful performance and satisfaction in sport (Jowett &
Cockerill, 2003; Jowett & Meek, 2000). This section will focus on three factors that
influenced the quality of coach-athlete relationship: closeness, co-orientation, and
complementarity (Jowett & Meek, 2000).
Closeness has been referred to as the emotional interdependence described by athletes
and coaches in terms of interpersonal liking, trust, and respect (Jowett & Meek, 2000; Jowett
& Cockerill, 2003). Philippe and Seiler (2006) studied the relationship between male national
level swimmers and their coaches and found that closeness played an important role in their
relationship. These athletes considered feelings of respect, esteem, admiration, appreciation,
and regard as indispensable requirements in the formation of player-coach relationships.
Furthermore, these athletes felt that establishing an effective and profitable relationship with
their coach was an essential component that helped their own development as an athlete and
a person. Similarly, Greenleaf, Gould, and Dieffenbach (2001) found that the majority of
Olympic athletes considered coach availability, coach contact, trust, and friendship, as well
as receiving consistent feedback, as positive factors on their personal performance.
Furthermore, Bloom, Durand-Bush, Schinke, and Salmela (1998) noted the importance of the
coach developing emotional connections with their athletes, a move which helped them
achieve both personal and sport related goals.
Co-orientation has been operationalized through means of communication and
includes dialogue, negotiations, and decision-making (Jowett, 2003). Gould, Guinan,
Greenleaf, Medbery, and Peterson (1999) stated that effective communication between
coaches and their athletes was a significant factor that contributed to team success.
Conversely, teams that have failed to meet performance expectations reported having a lack
of communication and a lack of trust between athletes and coaches (Greenleaf et al., 2001).
Open channels of communication facilitated the development of co-orientation (Philippe &
Seiler, 2006). Jowett and Cockerill (2003) stated that co-orientation occurred when the coach
and athlete established corresponding goals, beliefs, values, and expectations. Athletes felt
that a positive correlation existed between success in sport and determining common
objectives and goals (Philippe & Seiler, 2006). Although the final decision regarding goals
and objectives rested in the hands of the athlete, the swimmers felt it was important to reach
an agreement with their coach on the seasonal goals they set to out to accomplish. It appears
that the majority of athletes deemed having open channels of communication as a means to
work effectively and productively with their coach (Philippe & Seiler, 2006; Gould et al.,
1999; Greenleaf et al., 2001).
Complementarity, the third factor affecting the quality of the coach-athlete
relationship, can be defined as a type of interaction that promotes teamwork, mutual aid, and
collaboration aimed at improving performance (Jowett & Cockerill, 2003). Athletes have
referred to the importance of respect of reciprocal roles as a factor enabling progress in both
their athletic relationship with their coach as well as their athletic performance (Philippe &
Seiler, 2006; Jowett & Cockerill, 2003). As one athlete stated:
Respecting the role of the swimmer also means respecting what we are asked to do. If
the coach asks us to do an exercise it is always with a particular goal in mind, usually
with a view to improving our performance (Philippe & Seiler, 2006, p. 167).
In sum, the literature has indicated that open channels of communication, mutual
respect, common goals, and trust positively influenced the coach-athlete relationship and,
consequently, the overall development and performance of the athlete. Thus, coaches need to
develop strong ties with their athletes, as the quality of their relationship plays a major role in
determining individual and team success. Since leadership has also been described as a
relationship between leaders and followers (Maxwell, 2007), it is important to examine the
role of coach and peer leadership in team sport settings.
Leadership in Sport
In sport, the importance of effective leadership has been cited by athletes and coaches
as a vital component contributing to the achievement, personal satisfaction, and enhanced
well being of athletes (Dupuis, Bloom, & Loughead, 2006; Chelladurai & Riemer, 1998;
Gould, Hodge, Peterson, & Petlichkoff, 1987; Horn, 2008). A theoretically based approach to
studying leadership can be found in the Multidimensional Model of Leadership (Chelladurai,
1978, 1990).
The Multidimensional Model of Leadership (MML)
Chelladurai‟s (1978, 1990) MML was created to provide a framework to identify
effective leadership behaviours for specific sport situations. This model is very practical for
sport leadership research as it encompasses situational, trait, and behavioural leadership
approaches. In its application, the MML showed that a coach‟s success relied on his/her
ability to display specific leader behaviors in response to an amalgamation of demands from
the environment, players, and the coaches. The MML proposed that factors other than
leadership influenced successful coaching.
The MML (Appendix B) suggests that effective leadership is a dynamic process
based on a series of interactions between leader, group members, and situational constraints.
Moreover, leadership effectiveness is measured by performance outcomes and the behaviours
a leader exhibits, the leader behaviours preferred by athletes, and the appropriate or required
behaviour for a particular situation (Chelladurai, 1978, 1990). Each of these behaviours is, in
turn, influenced by three antecedent factors: an athlete‟s characteristics, a coach‟s personal
characteristics, and situational characteristics. Specifically, the demands and constraints
created by situational characteristics such as the goal of the team, social norms, the formal
organizational structure of the team, and cultural values would require a leader to behave in
certain ways. According to the MML; age, gender, and skill should all influence a leader‟s
behavioural decisions. The preferences athletes have for specific leader behaviours are a
function of the individual difference factors such as ability, traits, and needs. These
individuals‟ preferences are likely to be influenced by the situational demands and contextual
constraints. A leader‟s actual behaviours are influenced by personal characteristics including
age, gender, and years of experience. Finally, a coach‟s actual behaviours are dependent on
both the behaviours he must exhibit and those preferred by his athletes. Chelladurai
hypothesized that performance and member satisfaction can be obtained if there is
congruency between all three aspects of leader behaviour. While different leadership models
have been proposed for leadership studies, the MML is one of the most notable models in
sport leadership (Dupuis et al., 2006; Vallée & Bloom, 2005).
Leadership Scale for Sport (LSS)
In order to test the constructs of the model, Chelladurai and Saleh (1980) created The
Leadership Scale for Sport (LSS). The LSS was comprised of 40 items measuring five
dimensions of leadership which included training and instruction, democratic behaviour,
autocratic behaviour, social support, and positive feedback/rewarding behaviour (Chelladurai
& Riemer, 1998). Moreover, the LSS was used to evaluate the leadership behaviours
affecting the coach-athlete relationship. Research using the MML has been approached in
two different ways. The first line of inquiry has been to study the congruence between
perceived and preferred leadership style in relation to one of the consequences of leadership,
satisfaction, cohesion, and performance. A second line of inquiry has focused on the
individual and situational antecedent variables that influenced leader behaviours
(Chelladurai, 1990).
Congruency between perceived and preferred leadership. Researchers have studied
the congruency between perceived and preferred leadership behaviours in relation to the
following three consequences: satisfaction, performance, and cohesion (Chelladurai, 1984;
Chelladurai, 1993; Gardner, Shields, Bredemeir, & Bostrom, 1996; Nazarudin, Fauzee,
Jamalis, Geok, & Din, 2009; Sherman, Fuller, & Speed, 2000; Westre & Weiss, 1991).
Chelladurai (1993) summarized the findings of research conducted on the response of
athletes to leadership and concluded that training and instruction (e.g., technical, tactical
skills) and positive feedback were the most common qualifications of a leader affecting
athlete satisfaction. Athlete satisfaction was high when leaders used training and instruction
to enhance and coordinate the efforts of team members. Recent studies across different sports
(i.e., Tae Kwon Do, Football, Basketball) have revealed that training and instruction as well
as positive feedback strongly correlated to athlete satisfaction (Sherman, Fuller, & Speed,
2000; Nazarudin et al., 2009; Yuan-Sheng & Henrich, 2007). Specifically, Yuan-Sheng and
Henrich indicated that collegiate athletes‟ perceptions of coaches who taught and reinforced
technical instructions and gave encouraging feedback were positive. These results support the
consensus that coaches must exhibit behaviours to which players are receptive, particularly,
training and instruction, and positive feedback.
Sport researchers have also recognized that behaviours of coaches impacted team
cohesion (Westre & Weiss, 1991; Gardner et al., 1996) and coach athlete compatibility
(Horne & Carron, 1985; Kenow & Williams, 1999). In both the high school and college team
sport settings, coaches who were perceived as socially supportive, generous with positive
feedback, exhibited democratic behaviour, and provided training and instruction had teams
with better cohesion (Gardner et al., 1996; Westre & Weiss, 1991). Furthermore, coachathlete compatibility has also grasped the attention of researchers. Horne and Carron
conducted a study on the coach-athlete dyad at the university level. Results revealed that
compatibility was at its peak when athletes perceived their coaches to provide equal or more
positive feedback than they preferred. Similarly, Kenow and Williams found that collegiate
basketball players who felt compatible with their coach felt they had their coaches‟ support
and, in turn, evaluated his/her communication ability more favourably. These findings concur
with Chelladurai (1984) who stated that optimal performance was achieved if the coaches
and athletes aims, goals, and personality were congruent.
Antecedent variables on perceived and preferred leadership. In addition to the
consequences of perceived and preferred leadership, researchers have focused on the
antecedent variables that influence leadership behaviours. The first group of antecedent
variables included personal factors such as gender, age, experience and maturity, and ability.
Age and experience have been evaluated in relation to preferred leadership style of athletes
(Chelladurai, 1993). Based on their study on leadership preference and athletic maturity,
Chelladurai and Carron (1983) found that athletes‟ preference for social support increased
from the high school midget level to the university level. Erle (1981) explained that
experienced athletes involved in competitive sports preferred social support, autocratic
behaviour, and positive feedback. Similarly, Horn (2002) indicated that more experienced
and athletically mature athletes showed a preference for an autocratic and more supportive
style of leadership. These studies demonstrated that as athletes matured, a more autocratic
and supportive leadership style appeared to better fit their personal needs. Accordingly,
coaches must carefully evaluate the maturity level of each athlete to ensure that his/her
behaviours match the preferences of the team leaders.
Other than individual differences, researchers have identified situational variables that
influenced leader behaviours (Chelladurai, 1978; Terry & Howe, 1984; Terry, 1984;
Lindauer, 2000; Beam, Serwatka, & Wilson, 2004). For example, Chelladurai found that
athletes participating in team sports preferred more autocratic leader behaviours and training
and instruction than athletes performing individual tasks. Correspondingly, athletes who
participated in highly interactive team sports such as basketball, football, or volleyball
preferred more autocratic styles of leadership than participants from coacting sports such as
swimming and bowling (Terry & Howe, 1984; Terry, 1984). Beam et al.‟s results were
consistent with previous findings as NCAA division one and two individual sport athletes
reported higher preferences for democratic leader behaviors. However, Lindauer studied the
preferred coaching behaviours of college athletes in individual and team sports and found the
opposite to be true; male athletes involved in team sports preferred more democratic
behaviours than those in individual sports. These results mirror those of Riemer and
Chelladurai (1998) who indicated that open sport student-athletes had higher preferences for
democratic behaviours. Moreover, Riemer and Chelladurai suggested that the nature of open
sport, in which the movement of opposing players‟ dictated tasks during play, required
coaches to exhibit a democratic leader behaviour approach. Therefore, the nature of the task
influences athlete‟s preferred leadership behaviours.
Peer Leadership
Research on leadership in sport has often focused on the coach. However, given that
coaches believe the athletes‟ behaviour is a fundamental component to team success (Gould
et al., 1987) and that leaders emerge at an early age (Wright & Côté, 2003), it is also
necessary to focus on the individual characteristics of peer leaders.
Several researchers have investigated the characteristics of peer leaders (e.g., Holmes,
McNeil, Adorna, & Procaccino, 2008; Loughead & Hardy, 2005; Todd & Kent, 2004;
Wright & Côté, 2003; Yukelson, Weinberg, Richardson, & Jackson, 1983). For example,
Wright and Côté used a qualitative approach to examine the development of university
varsity sport leader-athletes. The authors interviewed six male Canadian varsity athletes from
the sports of ice hockey, volleyball, and basketball and found that leadership development
focused on four components: high skill, strong work ethic, enriched cognitive sport
knowledge, and good rapport with people. Similarly, Yukelson and colleagues‟ found that
the varsity soccer and basketball players who were identified as leaders were perceived by
their peers as being highly skilled athletes. Therefore, athletes who possess a high skill level
are often associated with peer leadership. Despite this, coaches must not overlook other peer
leadership qualities, such as work ethic, the focus of the following section.
Researchers have highlighted the importance of a peer leader‟s work ethic (Dupuis et
al., 2006; Holmes et al., 2008; Todd & Kent, 2004). Todd and Kent surveyed 375 male and
female student athletes between the ages 14 and 19 who participated in interscholastic sports
with one or more teams. The results indicated that 75% of student athletes considered work
ethic to be the most important characteristic for a peer leader. Specifically, teammates who
worked hard in practice and games were characterized as ideal peer leaders. Similarly,
Holmes et al. indicated that college athletes reported that peer leaders were harder workers
than their peers and led by example. As a result, peer leaders with a strong work ethic often
occupy the role of team captain, a formal position prescribed by their organization (Dupuis et
al., 2006).
Although peer leaders are not limited to team captains and often hold other roles on
the team (Loughead, Hardy, & Eys, 2006), team captains assume a great amount of
responsibility as compared to their other teammates (Lee, Coburn, & Partridge, 1983).
According to Mosher (1979), the role of the team captain included acting as a liaison
between the coaching staff and players during practices and games. This liaison provided
additional information to the coach about a player‟s physical status (i.e., if a player was sick
or injured) and allowed the captain to explain strategies to teammates during practices. Team
captains were also expected to act as leaders during internal and external team activities (e.g.,
lead warm up session, represent teammates during meetings). In addition to the roles of a
team captain, Mosher listed several responsibilities involved with this formal position. These
responsibilities included setting the right example for other players, ensuring constant flow
between the coaching staff and players, helping coaches set and apply team rules, and
performing duties prior to, during, and after games.
Dupuis and colleagues (2006) interviewed six former Canadian university male ice
hockey team captains who were identified by current or former Canadian Interuniversity
Sport (CIS) coaches as being the best team captains they have coached. Findings revealed
that successful team captains possessed several common qualities and skills: effective
communication skills, controlling their emotions, displaying respect for their teammates and
coaches, and a positive attitude. Moreover, they felt that effective leadership required
communicating effectively by being honest and respectful and by mentoring young players.
In conclusion, the team captain represents both the players and the coaching staff and can
influence the behaviours of his/her teammates within and outside of sport (i.e., positive
attitude, working with younger players, setting the right example). As much as the leaderfollower effects are important at the peer level, of equal importance are the leadership
qualities that coaches can instill in their athletes to achieve better performance.
Transformational Leadership
Outside of sport psychology, research in leadership has focused on the effects of
transformational leadership in organizations (e.g., Avolio & Bass, 1991; Avolio, Bass, &
Jung, 1999; Bass, 1985, 1998; Bass & Riggio, 2006). Specifically, transformational
leadership has primarily been studied in profit and non-profit organizational settings,
educational contexts, and military settings (Bass, 1998). Transformational leaders rely on the
4‟Is which include: Idealized Influence, Inspirational Motivation, Intellectual Stimulation,
and Individualized Consideration to inspire and motivate their followers to higher
performance outcomes (Bass & Riggio, 2006). It is important to examine the principles of
transformational leadership and its applicability to the sport setting.
Chelladurai (2007) stated that athletes become dedicated, committed, and
hardworking in the pursuit of excellence. In the same way, transformational leaders have the
ability to motivate others to do more than they originally intended, set more challenging
expectations, and typically achieve higher performance levels (Bass, 1998). Bass and
colleagues have indicated that transformational leaders behaved in certain ways to
accomplish greater results by employing the 4‟I‟s. Firstly, transformational leaders were
admired, respected, and trusted by their followers, which led to followers wanting to emulate
their behaviours. Secondly, they were known to inspire followers by providing challenging
and meaningful tasks, as well as including followers in envisioning future goals. Thirdly,
transformational leaders encouraged followers to be innovative and creative by challenging
them to approach situations in new ways. Finally, transformational leaders paid close
attention to each individual by focusing on his/her needs and developing their strengths.
Given that the principles of transformational leadership are applicable to all aspects of life
(Bass & Riggio, 2006), researchers in sport have begun to look at the effects of
transformational leadership (e.g., Charbonneau, Barling, & Kelloway, 2001; Rowold, 2006;
Vallée & Bloom, 2005; Zacharatos, Barling, & Kelloway, 2000).
Vallée and Bloom (2005) found that expert university team sport coaches could be
labeled as transformational leaders. For instance, these coaches empowered each athlete,
stressed the role positive relationships played in attaining success, and challenged their
players to reach higher levels of achievements. These coaches had the ability to obtain
extraordinary outcomes from their athletes by investing in their personal growth and having
their players buy into their vision. A recent study indicated that adolescents can also develop
this leadership style. Zacharatos et al. (2000) focused on the leadership behaviours
demonstrated by adolescents in team sports (i.e., basketball, rugby, volleyball) and found
they modeled their father‟s leadership behaviours. Specifically, adolescents who perceived
their father‟s use of transformational leader behaviours, in turn, demonstrated similar
behaviours when interacting with peers. These findings are consistent with previous research
as adolescents exhibiting transformational leadership skills were capable of evoking effort
from their peers in a sport setting, and were capable of providing effective leadership
(Barling, Weber, & Kelloway, 1996; Barling & Weber, 2000). The importance of adolescent
leader behaviours goes beyond the effects of transformational leadership. These behaviours
that exist during adolescence provide incentives for coaches to develop athlete leaders at a
young age, which may in turn impact the leadership they can offer to the team in later stages
of their career.
In sum, few researchers have investigated the impact of transformational leaders in
sport, yet, the initial results support Bass and Riggio‟s (2006) claim that the principles of
transformational leadership are applicable to various aspects of life, including sport.
Specifically, the qualities of transformational leaders were used by coaches and modeled by
players. Therefore, coaches must consider the persuasive effects of this leadership style as it
can influence the desire of each team member to achieve more, and ultimately improve the
collective efficacy of the team.
To conclude, this chapter has provided an overview of the literature pertaining to
coaching behaviours in team sports, leadership behaviours of players and coaches, as well as
the relationship between players and coaches. To date, most of the literature on athlete
leadership has considered athlete perceptions. The current study will investigate the coaches‟
perception of athlete leadership within the coaching process to provide a more complete
understanding of the team sport context. The methods used to obtain this data will be
presented next.
Methods 35
CHAPTER 3
Methods
This chapter includes the qualitative methodology employed in the current study. The
participants, procedure, interview technique, data analysis, and trustworthiness components
will be explained. Specifically, the data analysis procedures followed the guidelines
established by Côté, Salmela, and Russell (1995).
Participants
Six elite male ice hockey coaches of high performance 16 to 20 year old athletes
participated in the current study. Their inclusion was based on four criteria. First, they had a
minimum of five years head coaching experience at either the Quebec Midget AAA or
Quebec Major Junior Hockey League levels. Second, they had completed at least a Level 3 in
the old National Coaching Certification Program and/or a competition stream certification
(e.g., high performance) from the new (NCCP)1. Third, they were a member of a coaching
staff (e.g., head coach, assistant coach) in an international competition (e.g., World under 17
Championship, World under 18 Tournament, World Junior Hockey Championship) in the
past 10 years. Finally, each coach was identified as one of the best in their field by a group of
knowledgeable hockey experts. This group included one member of Hockey Quebec, one
member of Hockey Canada, and the current research team. Table 1 provides a detailed
summary of the six participants‟ coaching background and accomplishments prior to the
commencement of this study.
1
The new NCCP model is made up of three streams and a total of eight contexts, each with its own coaching
requirements. Coaches in the Competition stream usually have previous coaching experience or are former
athletes in the sport. They tend to work with athletes over the long term to improve performance, often in
preparation for provincial, national, and international competitions. The Competition stream has three coaching
contexts: Introduction, Development, and High performance.
http://www.coach.ca/eng/certification/nccp_for_coaches/nccp_model.cfm
Methods 36
Table 1
History of coaching background and accomplishments
C1
C2
C3
C4
C5
C6
Age Range
30-39
30-39
50-59
40-49
30-39
30-39
Coaching
Experience
13 years
16 years
33 years
25 Years
15 Years
18 Years
MJ
AAA
MJ
AAA
MJ
CIS
AAA
MJ
AAA
AHL
MJ
AAA
Coach of the
Year
QMJHL
Coach of the
Year
QMJHL
Coach of the
Year
QMJHL
Personality of
the Year
QMJHL
Head Coach
World Under
17 Challenge
Assistant
Coach Team
Canada
World Under
18
Championship
Name
Elite Head
Coaching
Experience
Personal
Coaching
Awards as
Head Coach
International
Coaching
Experiences
2 Time
Coach of
the Year
Midget
AAA
Head Coach
World
Under 17
Challenge
Assistant
Coach Team
Canada World
Under 18
Championship
Leagues
Midget AAA (AAA)
Major Junior Hockey League (MJ)
Canadian Interuniversity Sport (CIS)
American Hockey League (AHL)
Assistant
Coach Team
Canada World
Junior
Championship
2 Time Coach
of the Year
Midget AAA
Head Coach
World Under
17 Challenge
Assistant
Coach Team
Canada
World Junior
Championship
Assistant
Coach Team
Canada
World Junior
Championship
Methods 37
The interviewer contacted each participant by telephone or e-mail and informed him of the
nature of the study and invited him to participate. Then, each participant was asked to
complete a consent form (Appendix C) in compliance with the McGill University ethics
policy (Appendix D), and demographic questionnaire (Appendix E). All coaches were
interviewed individually for a period of time ranging from one to two hours. These
interviews took place at a mutually agreed upon date, time, and location across various cities
in Quebec, Ontario, or eastern Canada.
Interviewing
Interviewing is about obtaining the interviewees interpretations and their
understanding of the world in which they live and work (Rubin & Rubin, 1995).
Furthermore, interviews go beyond the everyday conversation, and become a questioning and
listening approach with the purpose of obtaining meaningful knowledge (Kvale &
Brinkmann, 2008). This section will explain the type of interview used, ways of building a
rapport with participants, the structure of the interview guide, and the type of questions
asked.
Interview Type
Semi-structured open-ended interviews were conducted with each of the participants,
similar to other studies that focused on expert coaches knowledge using semi-structured
interviews (e.g., Davies, Bloom, & Salmela, 2005; Vallée & Bloom, 2005; Wilson, Bloom, &
Harvey, 2010). This type of interview has allowed researchers to initiate a topic of
discussion, while giving the interviewee the opportunity to answer openly with few
restrictions (Rubin & Rubin, 1995). Similarly, Dexter (1970) identified the importance of
giving the interviewee the opportunity to introduce what he/she regarded as relevant to the
Methods 38
topic as opposed to relying on the interviewer notions of relevancy. The use of semistructured, open-ended interviews created an environment that allowed the researcher to
build a conversation within a precise subject area, formulate questions spontaneously, and
establish a conversational style on a pre-determined subject (Patton, 2002). Finally, this type
of interview resembled an ordinary conversation with the interviewee doing most of the
talking (Lincoln & Guba, 1985; Rubin & Rubin, 1995).
Prior to the interview, the researcher established a positive rapport with the
participant by initiating a general discussion related to the coaching profession or sport of ice
hockey. The interviewee also shared some of his background information such as the number
of years involved in sports, coaching, and education. Sharing this information allowed the
interviewee to better understand how each of these experiences led to the study of this topic,
as well as showed some commonality or connection with the interviewer (Rubin & Rubin,
1995). According to Lincoln and Guba (1985), building a constructive relationship with the
interviewee is an essential component to a successful interview. This initial contact with the
participant helped establish a comfortable environment conducive to a conversation in which
they felt free to discuss openly (Davies, 2007).
Interview Guide
An interview guide (Appendix F) was created for the present study by the current
researcher and a faculty member with extensive knowledge and experience interviewing elite
coaches. The participants were asked to answer all athlete-centered questions with respect to
formal leaders (cf. Loughead, Hardy, & Eys, 2006). The interview guide consisted of four
sections. Section one contained an opening question intended to introduce the main topic of
study and to initiate the discussion (e.g., Can you briefly describe your coaching experience
Methods 39
and progression for me?). This introductory question covered information regarding the
participants coaching background and experience. The questions in section two were based
on Côté, Salmela, Trudel, Baria, & Russell (1995) Coaching Model (CM) (e.g., How does
your vision of the team‟s potential influence the type of characteristics you look for in an
athlete leader from year to year?) and Chelladurai`s (1978) Multidimensional Model of
Leadership (MML) (e.g., How does your leadership style influence the type of leader you
look for with the teams you coach?). The third section consisted of a summary question
which linked the topic of study and summarized previous answers (e.g., From your
experience, what are the key factors that differentiate great athlete leaders from average
athlete leaders?). Lastly, the fourth section included two concluding sentences which gave
the interviewee the opportunity to add any comments they felt were relevant to the study. To
assure consistency, the same interview guide was used with each participant. During the
interview, three types of questions were asked: main, probe, and follow up (Rubin & Rubin,
1995). The main questions were used to lead the discussion to the central topics of the study.
Main questions gave the participant the opportunity to expand on their knowledge relating to
a specific area in the study (Rubin & Rubin, 1995). Probe questions also helped increase the
depth and richness of the responses and allowed for further expansion of relevant areas
studied. In addition to probe questions, conversational repairs helped clarify any
misunderstood questions or responses (Rubin & Rubin, 1995). Finally, follow-up questions
were used to clarify areas of the participant‟s experience and knowledge which may have
been overlooked (Rubin & Rubin, 1995). A post interview debriefing session occured to
clarify the participant‟s responses.
Methods 40
Data Analysis
The goal of the data analysis was to create a system of emerging categories that
represented coaches` perceptions of athlete leadership by constantly comparing the data
(Charmaz, 2008). These categories were formed using a “bottom-up” rather than a “topdown” approach (Bloom, Durand-Bush, & Salmela, 1997). In particular, categories were
generated from the data obtained from the interviews as opposed to pre-determined prior to
analysis. This inductive approach followed the guidelines outlined by Côté, Salmela, and
Russell (1995). This inductive method included four steps: creating meaning units, tags,
properties, and categories (Côté et al., 1995).
Prior to the data analysis, each transcript was transcribed verbatim with only minor
edits (Côté et al., 1995). For example, changing names to code numbers occured to ensure
participant confidentiality. Each interview was analyzed line-by-line and divided into
different pieces of information, known as meaning units. Tesch (1990) describes a meaning
unit as a segment of text comprised of words, sentences or entire paragraphs that
communicate the same idea and relate to the same topic. In order to create a computerized
index system through which all meaning units may be retrieved, NVIVO 7, a computer
program designed specifically for qualitative data was used. Each meaning unit received a
tag relevant to its content. Once tags were assigned to each meaning unit, they were
examined for similarities and grouped together into larger groupings, called properties (Côté
et al., 1995). Then, each property received a tag based on the common features shared by
these meaning units (Côté et al., 1995). Finally, each property was examined and grouped
into similar collective sets named categories, in a comparable manner to the creation of
properties. On the other hand, when grouping categories together, a higher and more abstract
Methods 41
level of analysis was required (Côté et al., 1995). The data was examined until saturation of
understanding was reached and no new tag/property/category emerged at each level of
classification from the inductive analysis (Côté et al., 1995).
Trustworthiness
Qualitative researchers look to minimize any possible misunderstanding or misplaced
data by enhancing trustworthiness (Lincoln & Guba, 1985). Establishing trustworthiness is
an essential component as it encompasses the concepts of internal validity, external validity,
reliability, and objectivity (Lincoln & Guba, 1985). This section will include different
techniques used to enhance trustworthiness, such as training in qualitative methods,
prolonged engagement, peer review, and member checks.
Prior to the interviews, the researcher gained interviewing knowledge by reading
qualitative research material proposed by different authors (i.e., Lincoln & Guba, 1985;
Patton, 2002; Rubin & Rubin, 1995; Sparkes, 1998). In addition, to allow the researcher to
develop interview skills, two pilot interviews were conducted under the supervision of an
experienced interviewer, who provided feedback on the interview technique and interview
guide. Both coaches who took part in these interviews accumulated over 15 years of
coaching experience in elite minor hockey, as well as extensive careers as hockey players.
These pilot interviews allowed the researcher to enhance his interview skills and validate the
effectiveness of the interview guide (Maxwell, 1996). Furthermore, at the end of each
interview, participants were encouraged to provide feedback on the questions and format of
the interview.
Prolonged engagement requires the researcher to become familiar with the culture
and vocabulary of the participants, as well as form trust with them (Lincoln & Guba, 1985).
Methods 42
In the current study, the interviewer competed at different levels of team sport competition
(e.g., CIS), coached at varying minor league levels (e.g., Midget Espoir), and was aware of
the culture and vocabulary of team sport coaches, particularly in hockey. In addition, the
researcher worked with experienced coaches from various ranks such the Quebec Major
Junior Hockey League, Midget AAA Quebec Hockey League, and coaches who contributed
to the Under-17 provincial program. Therefore, the researcher had acquired a wealth of
coaching knowledge and experiences. Taken together, these experiences were useful in
fulfilling the guidelines of prolonged engagement (Lincoln & Guba, 1985).
Peer review involves an impartial party examining the data analysis to ensure its
credibility (Côté et al., 1995). The peer reviewer was a graduate student in sport psychology
who played hockey at an elite level for several years in the QMJHL, NCAA Division 1, and
CIS. He was randomly presented with 213 of the 853 meaning units (25%) and was asked to
place each meaning (MU) unit with one of the 41 tags that were previously generated by the
research team. The peer reviewer successfully placed 170 meaning units under the
appropriate tag, achieving a reliability rate of 80%. In total, 23 of the 43 discrepancies
retained their initial tag. A brief discussion between both parties led the peer reviewer to
agree that the researcher‟s tags were appropriate and that the diversity of misplaced MU‟s
were attributed to a lack of context. Of the remaining 20 MU‟s, 12 were changed from
“leader characteristics (general)” to “leader identification – player characteristics”. The
reason for this change was that coaches expressed the specific characteristics they looked for
in their leaders as opposed to a general description of an athlete leader. The remaining eight
misplaced MU‟s were changed from “coach leadership style” to “coach philosophy”. Both
the researcher and the peer reviewer felt that the content was more related to coaches` set of
Methods 43
ideas about coaching rather than specific coaching behaviours. The same procedure took
place when the properties were created. The peer reviewer classified the 41 tags into eight
properties. A 93% reliability rate was attained. Three misplaced tags were more ambiguous,
however each discrepancy was discussed between the peer reviewer and the researcher until
agreement was reached. In the end, no changes were made. In the final stage, the peer
reviewer grouped the eight properties into three categories with a reliability rate of 100%.
This peer review process helped diminish researcher bias and ensured that an accurate
representation of the coaches‟ knowledge and experience was formed (Sparkes, 1998).
Member checks are an essential technique for establishing credibility (Lincoln &
Guba, 1985). In this study, member checks occurred on three different occasions. The first
occured at the end of each interview where all the participants were given the opportunity to
add or modify any response or idea communicated during the interview. The second check
consisted of sending the participants a full verbatim transcript of the interview. The
participants were given the opportunity to add, clarify, or eliminate any comments made
during the interview. Of the six transcripts sent out to the coaches, two did not change
anything, one had minor edits, and three did not reply. It is not surprising that three coaches
did not reply as they were either involved in a playoff schedule or held other functions other
than coaching (e.g., general manager). The final check consisted of sending the participants a
three page summary of the results where they were asked to state any concerns, questions, or
comments with regard to the findings. All six participants approved the summary and
provided positive comments with respect to the study.
Results 44
CHAPTER 4
Results
This chapter presents the results of the inductive qualitative analysis of this study.
This section begins with a brief review of the nature of the data including a description of the
findings that emerged from the analysis. Next, the three higher-order categories, personal
experiences and characteristics, daily coaching tasks, and athlete leadership, will be
presented. A variety of quotes from each interview will be provided to describe coaches‟
thoughts and opinions about different coaching topics. Each quote will be followed by a label
(C1 to C6) to credit the coach that provided the excerpt.
Nature of Data
The six interviews of the study resulted in a total of 853 meaning units. From the 853
meaning units, 41 tags emerged. Table 2 (Appendix G) presents an alphabetized frequency of
coaching and leadership topics discussed by each participant. The number of meaning units
discussed by each participant varied from 100 (C3) to 188 (C2). A higher number of meaning
units does not necessarily imply that more or even better information was forwarded by the
participant. Some coaches may have expressed their thoughts more clearly than others. The
difference in the number of meaning units discussed by each coach is not surprising given
that open-ended interviews allow coaches to express their opinions with few restrictions. For
example, C6 discussed leader development in greater detail than any other participant.
Similarly, C5 and C4 respectively spoke more about coach-athlete meetings and leader
identification – player characteristics than the other coaches. In addition, not all themes were
discussed by each coach. As a result, the frequency of each tag from the total sample varied
from 1 to 22. This variation in tag distribution may be due to how important different topics
Results 45
were for coaches or may be explained by a direct response to an opening question of the
interview guide on coaching philosophy (i.e., Describe your coaching philosophy). In
contrast, tags that were labeled learning from leaders and coach supporting athletes were
discussed infrequently (n = 2) by the coaches. These two themes were each discussed by two
of the six coaches. The 41 tags were organized into eight properties based on their
similarities of content and are shown in table 3. Finally, the eight properties were organized
into higher-order categories. A total of three categories were created and were labeled
personal experiences and characteristics, daily coach tasks, and athlete leadership. The eight
properties reorganized within the three higher-order categories are shown in table 4.
Table 3
Properties and tags with frequencies as expressed by each participant
Properties and Tags
Athletic Playing Career
Athletic Career - C/A Relationship
Athletic Career - Leadership Experience
Athletic Career - Role Models
Career Progression - Head Coach
Career Progression - Assistant Coach
Team Characteristics (General)
Coach Leadership Style
Coach Thoughts and Beliefs
Coach Philosophy
Modifying Coach Behaviours
Coach Working with Staff
Coach Managing Players
General Coaching Responsibilities
n
19
5
7
5
2
43
11
10
22
156
27
82
41
6
51
13
11
27
C1
4
1
2
1
0
2
1
1
0
16
1
9
4
2
3
1
1
1
C2
10
3
4
1
2
17
3
1
13
19
5
6
7
1
20
7
5
8
C3
0
0
0
0
0
2
1
0
1
24
1
16
7
0
6
1
2
3
C4
4
1
1
2
0
7
2
3
2
34
8
15
9
2
12
3
0
9
C5
1
0
0
1
0
7
1
1
5
25
5
14
5
1
1
0
0
1
C6
0
0
0
0
0
8
3
4
1
38
7
22
9
0
9
1
3
5
Results 46
Table 3 (continued)
Properties and Tags
Selecting a Leader
Choosing a Captain
Leader Identification - Getting to Know
Players
Leader Identification - Player Characteristics
Leader Identification - Coach/Player Values
Leader Identification - Testing Players
Leader Characteristics (General)
Leader Development
Leader Buy-In
Collective Leadership
Coach-Athlete Leader Relationships
Coach-Athlete Meetings
Coach-Athlete Trust/Respect
Poor Coach-Athlete Relationship
Listening to Leaders
Learning from Leaders
Coach Supporting Athletes
Leader - Cohesion
Leader - Managing Emotions
Leader - Conveying Team Values
Leader - Coach Messages
Leader - Dressing Room
Leader - Code of Conduct
Athlete Role Modeling
Leader Impact – Surprises
Leader Impact- Team Success
Leader Impact- Team Values
Leader Impact - Influence Teammates
Leader Impact - Team Oriented
Total
n
227
49
C1
44
22
C2
45
9
C3
25
4
C4
32
1
C5
44
11
C6
37
2
28
6
7
2
6
2
5
72
21
21
36
110
81
8
21
141
49
34
27
21
3
7
106
8
8
4
10
6
8
11
7
9
6
22
7
853
6
8
0
2
5
5
0
0
27
9
9
4
5
0
0
26
1
3
2
3
0
0
4
1
1
4
3
4
127
16
0
5
8
16
9
4
3
38
9
8
12
1
3
5
23
1
2
0
2
0
5
2
1
0
0
8
2
188
14
2
2
1
24
16
1
7
16
6
4
3
1
0
2
3
0
0
0
1
0
1
0
0
0
0
1
0
100
9
0
7
9
18
13
2
3
20
5
5
2
8
0
0
17
5
1
0
4
2
0
0
0
3
0
1
1
144
13
5
5
8
20
16
0
4
29
15
4
6
4
0
0
19
1
2
0
0
2
0
0
3
4
0
7
0
146
14
6
2
8
27
22
1
4
11
5
4
0
2
0
0
18
0
0
2
0
2
2
5
2
1
2
2
0
148
Results 47
Table 4
Categories and properties with frequencies as expressed by each participant
Categories and Properties
Daily Coach Tasks
Athlete Leadership
Selecting a Leader
Total
n
218
19
43
156
192
51
141
443
227
110
106
853
C1
22
4
2
16
30
3
27
75
44
5
26
127
C2
46
10
17
19
58
20
38
84
45
16
23
188
C3
26
0
2
24
22
6
16
52
25
24
3
100
C4
45
4
7
34
32
12
20
67
32
18
17
144
C5
33
1
7
25
30
1
29
83
44
20
19
146
C6
46
0
8
38
20
9
11
82
37
27
18
148
The higher-order category of personal experiences and characteristics included 218
meaning units and represented 26% of the total data analyzed. This category included the
participant‟s journey beginning with their athletic career and culminating in their current
coaching position. It also included the interpersonal characteristics that shaped their career.
This property included information about coaches‟ involvement in sport while they
were still competing as athletes. Coaches talked about their athletic career, their relationship
with their coaches, and leadership positions they held during their playing days. This
property was the smallest of all three and related to the opening questions of the interview
guide (i.e., briefly describe your athletic career including previous leadership positions).
The majority of coaches began playing hockey at an early age. Of the six participants,
three discussed their athletic careers. Each of these participants reached different levels of
Results 48
competition. Specifically, one coach reached the QMJHL, while the others competed as high
as the Junior A level. The following quotes described their progression from minor hockey to
the junior ranks:
J‟ai joué au hockey mineur comme tous les jeunes au Québec, j‟ai joué à 15 ans dans
le Midget AAA en 91-92 et à 16 ans en 92-93. Ma deuxième année Midget AAA,
j‟étais assistant-capitaine ici à [name of city] et puis j‟ai joué dans le Junior Majeur à
[name of team] et puis j‟ai aussi joué dans le Junior AAA, à l‟époque le Junior A à
[name of city] où d‟ailleurs j‟ai terminé ma carrière à 20 ans comme capitaine de
l‟équipe. J‟ai commencé à diriger à 21 ans. (C1)
J‟ai joué au hockey mineur toute ma vie. Ensuite, à l‟âge de 16 ans, j‟ai joué Midget
AAA; cette année là, nous avons gagné la coupe ce qui faisait en sorte qu‟on pouvait
représenter la ligue à la coupe Air Canada. Ensuite, j‟ai été sélectionné dans la
LHJMQ. J‟ai joué quatre ans en tant que joueur au sein de trois différentes
formations. Ma dernière année, on a gagné, ici à [name of city], la Coupe du
Président et on a représenté la ligue à la coupe Mémorial. (C2)
These coaches also discussed the leadership positions held throughout their athletic
careers. Although four coaches held leadership roles as players, only one coach (C4)
described why he felt he was given a leadership role. He attributed his leadership position to
his veteran status and hard work displayed on the ice:
Je te dirais qu‟à chaque fois que j‟ai évolué à ma deuxième année, j‟ai toujours été
capitaine ou adjoint au capitaine, que ce soit dans l‟atome, pee-wee, bantam et
midget. (C4)
Je te dirais au niveau de mon leadership, je n‟étais pas celui qui parlait le plus mais
c‟était plus lead by example on the ice. J‟étais un joueur très intense qui se présentait
à tous les matchs. Je te dirais que dans ce temps là, la notion de leadership n‟était pas
aussi définie que maintenant. C‟était plus attribué au rôle que tu avais dans l‟équipe,
ce que tu apportais à ton équipe au niveau de la glace plus qu‟au niveau du vestiaire.
(C4)
Another area that emerged was the relationship they shared with their coaches. Of the
three participants who discussed this topic, each one recalled having good relations with their
coaches. They credited this positive relationship since both shared similar values and
displayed, as players, a high level of maturity, as shown in the following quotes:
Results 49
Dans un premier temps, j‟ai été élevé par des parents qui avaient des valeurs assez
justes. Je pense qu‟ils m‟ont mis sur la bonne voie en partant. Je n‟ai jamais eu de
problèmes à respecter l‟autorité, le fait de respecter des consignes ou le fait de faire
des choses pour le bien d‟une équipe de hockey tant que ça respectait mes valeurs. Je
n‟ai jamais eu d‟entraîneur qui demandait d‟aller au-delà de mes valeurs. Dans le
fond un entraîneur demande de travailler fort, respecter les règlements et de faire de
ton mieux. Je n‟ai jamais eu aucun problème. (C2)
Au niveau du Junior AAA, c‟était beaucoup une question de maturité, j‟avais maturé
excessivement vite donc c‟était une bonne relation d‟homme à homme avec mon
entraîneur si tu veux. (C1)
This property contained 43 meaning units and described coaches‟ career path leading
to their current position, as well as general information (e.g., coaching record) about the
teams they have coached.
All of the coaches in this study had a unique career path leading to their current
position. Each coach began their coaching career at a different level and/or category
including the bantam, and midget levels, as well as the CIS, and the QMJHL. These quotes
explained the career progression that led to their current coaching position:
J‟ai coaché Bantam BB comme entraîneur chef pendant un an. Bantam AA comme
entraîneur adjoint pendant un an. Ensuite, un an entraîneur chef Bantam AA, deux ans
comme entraîneur adjoint au Majeur, deux ans et demi dans le Midget AAA comme
entraîneur chef et je suis maintenant avec [name of team] depuis huit ans. (C5)
Quand je suis revenu de [name of city], mon ami m‟avait demandé si ça m‟intéressait
d‟être assistant coach à [name of university]. Les trois années subséquentes, j‟étais à
[name of city]. J‟ai passé deux ans, pendant ce temps là, comme entraîneur chef au
Midget AAA. J‟ai été trois ans à [name of city] dans le Junior Majeur comme
assistant. J‟ai été trois ans comme entraîneur chef à [name of team] pour me retrouver
cette année dans la AHL comme entraîneur chef des [name of team]. (C6)
J‟ai été entraîneur adjoint au [name of team] au majeur avec [name of coach] et puis,
suite à ces expériences là, quand j‟ai commencé j‟avais été adjoint et à un moment
donné j‟ai eu l‟opportunité d‟être entraîneur chef. J‟ai commencé au niveau Midget
BB, Bantam AA et Midget AA et j‟ai aussi été recruteur pour le [name of team]. J‟ai
pas mal touché à tous les secteurs qu‟un groupe de hockey peut avoir, ça m‟a permis
Results 50
de toucher à tout, ça m‟a permis de voir ce que je préférais le plus. D‟un autre coté,
toutes les expériences sont positives dans un bagage. J‟ai été les douze dernières
années au midget AAA, un an comme adjoint, après dg adjoint pendant 3 ans, et
ensuite 8 ans comme directeur gérant et coach avec les [name of team] avant de me
retrouver ici à [name of city]. (C4)
Whereas the previous property highlighted the different career paths taken by
coaches, the following property focused on coaches‟ individual makeup that drove their
careers. For instance, coaches discussed their philosophies, beliefs, and willingness to change
aspects of their coaching. This property was the largest within this category and contained
156 meaning units.
Coaches discussed how they provided leadership to their teams, as well as how they
altered their leadership approach depending on the situation:
Mon style de leadership. Je suis vraiment plus un lead from the front. J‟essaye
toujours de regarder trois types de leadership. Premièrement, être un leader “from the
front, from the side, and then from the back”. Je pense que tu as besoin de ces trois
types de leadership là et je les utilise différemment. (C6)
Pour moi au niveau de mon leadership, je vais être directif dans le plan d‟action, mais
dans le processus, je vais laisser les joueurs travailler avec les adjoints pour que tout
le monde soit impliqué et ça s‟avère un milieu intéressant quand tout le monde se sent
impliqué, tout le monde veut donner son idée, moi je trouve ça intéressant. (C4)
Coaches also discussed how they implemented their own type of leadership by
putting their unique mark on the team. They felt that their leadership behaviours were
contagious and influenced the team environment, including players and staff members:
Je pense que je suis un leader qui est, ou en fait, la façon donc je travaille c‟est
vraiment „„collectivité’’. Oui, il y un peu de gestion, mais à notre niveau à nous, la
gestion...les guidelines doivent vraiment venir d‟ici (coach). On a des capitaines et
assistants, mais les vrais capitaines et assistants sont ici (coach room). (C2)
Results 51
Mon leadership est beaucoup par l‟exemple, beaucoup par la tâche à accomplir. Je
suis une personnalité extrêmement travaillante de nature, je pense que juste par ma
manière d‟être ça se reflète sur mon entourage, sur mes adjoints, sur les joueurs dans
l‟équipe. Je te dirais que c‟est la prémisse première de mon leadership. (C1)
A partir du Midget AAA, de un, il faut que tu identifies ton leadership et moi au
niveau du leadership que moi j‟avais… La première chose que tu veux mettre en
place c‟est ton leadership, il faut que tu leur dises quels sont tes objectifs, quels sont
tes règles de fonctionnement et quelles sont les actions qu‟on va prendre pour obtenir
les résultats. (C4)
In addition to establishing their personal leadership style, coaches developed their
own philosophies that guided their careers. One aspect of their philosophy was the make-up
of their players. Specifically, coaches discussed the importance of player attitudes, including
their work ethic, discipline, and competitiveness:
Les trois choses que les joueurs ne peuvent pas être à 90% c‟est l‟éthique de travail,
l‟attitude d‟en vouloir plus et la discipline. Pour moi la discipline ce n‟est pas une
question de pogner des punitions sur la glace, c‟est un terme qui est beaucoup plus
global que ça; c‟est stick to the game plan, il faut vraiment protéger le plan, suivre le
plan, il faut être certain que si on parle d‟un hors-glace ou sur la glace, c‟est un plan
global ce n‟est pas juste prendre une punition. What‟s the plan? Are you sticking to
it? If not, il n‟y a aucun passe droit. Sinon j‟ai beaucoup de réprimande à faire et c‟est
là que je donne les punitions sur ces trois choses là. (C6)
J‟aime les joueurs qui jouent avec passion, j‟appelle ça de la drive. J‟aime les joueurs
qui jouent avec de la drive, qui compétitionnent, qui jouent avec un edge. En anglais,
on dit: “players who play with an edge all the time when they are on the ice”. Ce sont
des joueurs que j‟aime, ça fait partie de ma philosophie, c‟est de la manière dont je
coach. (C5)
Coaches also highlighted the importance of having quality individuals on their team.
They felt that team success resulted from having good individuals on the team, as well as the
chemistry these players created amongst each other:
Tu as des feelings, selon la qualité des individus tu sais que ça va bien aller ou tu sais
que ca n‟ira pas bien. C‟est des feelings ça, tu le sens, une chimie que tu ne voies pas,
ça se sent. Il y a une année, avant que la saison commence, je les avais regardé et j‟ai
dit: cette année, on va à la coupe. On est allé à la coupe, c‟est un feeling. C‟est ce qui
est important, c‟est quand les individus entre eux, quand les individus ont du plaisir à
être ensemble tout le temps, c‟est déjà un bon signe. Comme groupe, ils ont du plaisir
Results 52
à être ensemble, ils savent se taquiner. C‟est un feeling qu‟ils ne sont pas plus gros
que la game. Je dis toujours si tu es plus gros que la game, c‟est là que tu perds toute
ta chimie de groupe. (C3)
Oui, ma philosophie a changé depuis notre meilleure saison régulière. On était une
formation très puissante, mais on n‟a pas gagné au bout de la ligne parce qu‟on
n‟avait pas nécessairement...on avait beaucoup de talent, mais la qualité des individus
n‟était pas assez bonne. Quand ça été difficile, quand il a fallu qu‟on se regroupe,
lorsque l‟adversité est devenue plus grande, on a échoué et, en grande partie, je suis
responsable de ça, je suis le capitaine du bateau. (C2)
Daily Coach Tasks
The higher-order category of daily coach tasks included 192 meaning units and
accounted for 23% of the total analyzed data. This category described daily coaching
responsibilities, including interactions with players both on and off the ice that directly or
indirectly affected athlete leadership.
This property contained the general coaching activities performed within the team
structure including dealing with players and members of the organization. Coaches discussed
how they worked with their assistants, how they managed players, and additional
responsibilities.
As much as each coach worked differently with their assistant coaches, several
common themes emerged. For example, five of the six participants spoke about the
importance of ensuring that all coaches delivered a consistent message to players. They felt
that their assistants provided another source for effective communication:
Si au besoin on devait parler à un joueur plus régulièrement, à ce moment [name of
coach] va y aller ou un autre adjoint va y aller, pour que le message vienne d‟un autre
angle, d‟un autre individu, d‟une autre bouche, d‟une autre personne. Il faut s‟assurer
qu‟on dise les mêmes choses, mais le message va être véhiculé de façon différente.
(C2)
Results 53
Je me servais beaucoup de mon personnel pour aller jaser aux joueurs et d‟être à
l‟écoute des joueurs pour avoir le meilleur, le plus d‟information pour avoir le
meilleur pouls possible. Il y a un entraîneur chef, mais je pense que l‟entraîneur chef
va être aussi bon que les gens qui l‟entourent et des responsabilités qui vont leur
donner. (C4)
One coach described how he and his assistants worked together to ensure that there
was at least one coach who interacted with each player on a regular basis. Evidence for the
emphasis placed on touching base with each player is shown in the following quote:
J‟ai [assitant coach name] et j‟ai [assitant coach name] comme assistants et c‟était
comme ça par le passé, je fais un touch chart à toutes les semaines et si on est sur la
route, on le fait à toutes les deux semaines, un touch chart sert à voir à quel individu
on a parlé. Bon, as-tu parlé à tel joueur? As-tu eu une interaction avec tel joueur?, Astu une idée pourquoi il a fait telle et telle affaire? Là on regarde, ah, I didn‟t talk to
him; I talked to him [assistant]. Ah ok, les trois on lui a parlé. Oh, lui personne ne lui
a parlé, urgence. On va encercler et on va mettre de l‟emphase sur cet individu pour
montrer qu‟il est important. (C6)
In addition to effective communication and interacting with players, coaches
discussed the importance of surrounding themselves with a good supporting staff and
working together to achieve more. Several coaches believed that coach unity was an essential
factor for team success:
Je travaille beaucoup en collaboration avec mes deux autres coachs, ça peut être moi
ou un de mes adjoints. C‟est quelque chose bien entendu qu‟on s‟est parlé et qu‟on est
d‟accord sur un plan d'intervention. Je ne suis pas un gars… on fait un plan et on part
avec ça, mais je pense que c'est beaucoup une relation humaine qu‟on fait dans ces
moments là. (C1)
C‟est un travail, même à l‟intérieur, et je pense que ça a un effet positif sur les joueurs
parce qu‟ils le voient eux-autres, comment on se tient, on est solide et ce n‟est pas
juste le head coach, mais le groupe d‟entraîneurs, donc c‟est un leadership en
collectivité. On coach des êtres humains pour devenir meilleur et s‟entourer avec des
gens avec qui tu as confiance parce que si je rentre ici et je n‟ai pas confiance en mon
staff ou avec les gens avec qui ont travaillent, tu t‟en vas vers la défaite. (C2)
Coaches spoke about investing the time and energy that was necessary in order to
convey ideas and concepts to their players. Specifically, the coaches noted that it is, at times,
Results 54
difficult to have all the players believing in you. Consequently, the coaches discussed the
importance of focusing time and energy on the players who believed in you. Another coach
suggested that it is difficult to reach all of his players using one method and stressed the
importance of using different tools and strategies to get these players on his side:
Lui regardez bien ce qui va arriver cette année…eux-autres je m‟en suis occupé
d‟eux, les autres je m‟en fou, faites ce que vous voulez je m‟en fou. Je me suis
concentré sur les recrues. Je n‟ai pas perdu mon énergie sur eux [vets]. Souvent dans
le leadership, il faut que tu saches mettre ton énergie à la bonne place. Ne dépense pas
ton énergie sur une personne, focus sur les 22 joueurs. (C3)
Ce qu‟on fait, c‟est qu‟on répand nos injections de caring c‟est des injections
constantes, beaucoup plus sur l‟individu que sur la collectivité. C‟est sur qu‟on fait
des choses sur la collectivité, on a un système, on fait du vidéo, mais on passe
beaucoup plus de temps à voir les individus que de voir le groupe en entier. De toute
façon, c‟est prouvé que quand tu t‟adresses à un groupe, il y a peu près 1/3 qui a
saisis, qui va s‟engager, 1/3 qui s‟en fou, qui ne comprenne pas et 1/3 qui est comme
entre les deux. Donc quand je m‟adresse à un groupe, je pense toujours que je ne vais
pas atteindre tout le groupe, je vais atteindre 1/3 et je vais aller chercher l‟autre 2/3
d‟une autre façon avec d‟autres outils. (C6)
Lastly, all coaches mentioned that one of their biggest challenges was to help players
reach their full potential. Coaches felt that it was their responsibility to provide the necessary
tools or resources to enhance player performance. While some coaches used statistics to help
improve player performance, others used book excerpts and video footage:
La façon dont moi je procède, le lendemain d‟un match on „post‟ la feuille corrective,
la feuille individuelle où tu regarde ce que tu as amené à l‟équipe. Mais, si toi tu ne
fais pas ta job, tu ne m‟aides pas. Qu‟est-ce qui se passe, quand il y a un problème, je
sais pourquoi, si on joue mal, je joue mal. Maintenant, je dois apporter la solution le
plus rapidement possible. (C3)
On va lui dire, ce qu‟il a à faire lui pour aider l‟équipe, mais lui doit progresser
comme individu et qu‟il sente personnellement qu‟il a de l‟attention par du vidéo
individuel, des clips, on va avoir des articles….tiens j‟ai pensé à toi. J‟ai lu un article
et j‟ai pensé que ca peut t‟aider pour telle et telle raison. On a des livres, des tonnes
de livres et je suis chanceux parce que [name of coach] et mon autre adjoint lisent
beaucoup de livres comme moi. Des fois, on a des livres qu‟on sait qui peuvent aider
certain individu, alors voici tel livre, j‟aimerais que tu lises telles et telles pages, je
Results 55
pense que ça pourrait te faire progresser dans telle chose, si tu ne comprends pas,
viens me voir, on va pouvoir en parler. (C6)
This property described coach-athlete leader interactions designed to address team
matters, including team chemistry and player attitudes, as well as establishing an individual
rapport/connection between the player and coach. This property contained 141 meaning units
and was the third largest. This property was mainly comprised of the topics discussed during
coach-athlete leader meetings and the factors that contributed to positive and negative
relationships.
All of the coaches felt that meeting with their leaders was an essential component for
team progress. Specifically, they all mentioned frequently meeting with their team leaders to
assure that the team climate was good:
On les rencontre [groupe de leader] de façon hebdomadaire pour justement s‟assurer
qu‟ils marchent en harmonie et ensemble. Ce qui ne vas pas, ce qui va bien, qui est in,
qui est out et qu‟est-ce qu‟on doit changer chez certains individus, parfait on travaille
ensemble et c‟est quoi le plan d‟action. Si on travaille comme ça à toutes les
semaines, ou si le calendrier ne le permet pas à toutes les 2 semaines pour s‟assurer
que le groupe de leader marche ensemble. (C5)
On discute beaucoup avec eux pour savoir ce qui se passe dans la chambre parce que
vraiment, on peut penser, on peut évaluer. Les joueurs savent beaucoup plus ce qui se
passe dans la chambre que nous on pourra jamais savoir. (C2)
In addition, while team climate was an important point of discussion, the majority of
coach-athlete meetings focused on individual or team performance, and team objectives:
Honnêtement ce sont les objectifs d‟équipe, comment trouver des solutions ensemble,
trouver des moyens ensemble, comment les atteindre parce que, ce qu‟on aime faire
ici, on peut parler des objectifs jusqu'à demain matin, mais si nos joueurs achètent pas
nos objectifs à nous, il n‟y pas d‟objectif parce que ça doit venir d‟eux autres ou eux
autres doivent l‟accepter. Lorsqu‟on leur parle, on leur parle d‟objectifs et ce n‟est
pas juste des points au classement. Ça peut être un paquet de petites statistiques
durant un match. Ça peut être une façon de pratiquer, ça peut être une façon de
s‟entraîner, de vivre, mais fixer ses objectifs là avec eux. (C2)
Results 56
Coaches also mentioned the factors that led to successful and unsuccessful coachleader relationships. Three of the five coaches who discussed this topic felt that a poor
relationship with their athlete leaders occurred when the athlete leader put his personal
objectives ahead of the team‟s goals:
Les objectifs personnels qui devenaient plus importants que les objectifs d‟équipe. Je
ne peux pas dire que j‟ai coaché une mauvaise personne, vraiment une mauvaise
personne. Des joueurs avec qui on avait des buts différents, des objectifs différents,
des objectifs personnels différents. Lui pense peut-être que c‟est un marqueur de 50
buts mais, dans le fond s‟en ai pas un à notre avis, des fois c‟est ça qui a fait en sorte
que ça a créé des flammèches ou au niveau de l‟interaction ça été difficile. (C2)
Interestingly, while the majority of coaches felt that a difference in expected goals by
both parties led to a bad relationship, one coach stated that his inability to accept certain
behaviours from his leaders is what caused a poor coach-athlete leader relationship:
Il y a des choses que moi je n‟acceptais pas, que leurs bottines n‟aillaient pas avec
leurs babines. Je ne suis pas capable de comprendre, d‟accepter, de voir, d‟entendre
un pretender. Un gars qui va dire à un autre d‟être comme-ci et d‟être comme-ça,
mais lui ne le fait pas ou qui fait semblant de l‟être. Pour moi, ça m‟énerve dans la
vie, comme personne et comme coach. Je ne peux pas comprendre qu‟un joueur
demande aux autres d‟être physique, intense et de travailler quand toi tu manques
deux pratiques par semaine parce que tu fais semblant d‟être blessé. Ce n‟est pas
seulement moi who notices it, les autres te voient aussi. Les relations ont toujours
bien été sauf que c‟était plus froid et avec ces bonhommes là. (C5)
In contrast, common themes emerged in the positive relationships coaches shared
with their leaders. Specifically five of the six coaches attributed their successful relationship
to a mutual respect and openness between them and their athlete leaders:
Ah oui…ma philosophie. Je les traite comme j‟aimerais être traité. Traite moi comme
tu aimerais être traité. Tout simplement ça. Je te traite en pro. Je te l‟ai dit la meilleur
relation est une relation d‟homme, de pro tout simplement. On se cache rien, je te dis
ce que je pense, tu me dis ce que tu penses. Je suis là pour te donner des outils. (C3)
La meilleure relation par rapport à ça c‟est vraiment où le joueur n'aura pas peur de
s'ouvrir de même jusqu'à... pas devant tout le groupe, mais en rencontre un à un
d‟aller même jusqu'à challenger certaines de tes décisions et puis qu'il n'ait pas peur
Results 57
de dire qu‟il n‟est pas d'accord avec certaines choses et à ce moment là, il en résulte
une bonne discussion ou tu veux faire valoir tes points. (C1)
Furthermore, all coaches believed that caring about and trusting their leaders helped
foster their relationship. For instance, one coach referred to his relationship with his leader as
one of a big brother:
L‟affaire qui est commun avec tous les leaders avec qui j‟ai eu une bonne relation
c‟est que, “I really do feel for them and they feel it back”. Je pense que c‟est l‟affaire
que les gars ressentent le plus. Ce que je sens, ces gens là me rappelle plus tard, ils ne
sont plus dans mon équipe, ils sont dans un autre contexte, et je leur reparle et il me
redemande, soit de l‟aide. Il y a cette connexion de big brother, je te dirais, plus que
de coach. (C6)
Coaches also discussed that listening to their leaders was one way of establishing
trust and respect in their relationship. In particular, all coaches felt that it was necessary to
show their leaders that their door was always open for questions, concerns, or to simply talk:
Je vais toujours chercher à écouter mes leaders, ma porte est toujours ouverte. Ils le
savent, ils venaient à l‟aréna et venaient s‟asseoir dans mon bureau juste pour discuter
de tout et rien. (C4)
La porte est toujours ouverte. S‟il le fait, je vais déduire qu‟il a besoin de me parler. Il
ne s‟est peut-être pas comment me le dire mais il veut me parler, il y a de quoi. Je n‟ai
jamais reproché à personne d‟être venu me voir. Je fais très attention à ça, il n‟a pas
de mauvaises questions. (C5)
Finally, coaches were attentive to the suggestions and opinions offered by their
leaders. They felt it was crucial to let their leaders know that their opinions would be well
received and applied when necessary.
Je pense qu‟il faut être l‟écoute, il faut qu‟ils sentent que ce qu‟ils vont t‟apporter
comme arguments a du poids dans le processus de développent d‟une équipe. Tu ne
peux pas juste prendre de ce qui vont te dire puis ne rien faire, parce qu‟à un moment
donné, tu n‟auras plus de feedback de eux. (C1)
C‟est important aussi de le faire sentir comme son opinion a de l‟importance parce
que si tu veux que tes joueurs t‟amènent des idées, il faut que tu leur prouves que leur
opinion a une importance et que tu vas en tenir compte. Sinon, tout simplement je te
dirais à quoi ça sert de leur demander leurs idées. (C4)
Results 58
Athlete Leadership
The higher-order category of athlete leadership included 443 meaning units and
represented 51% of the total data. This category involved the culminating process of how
coaches identified and worked with the athlete leaders on their team. Specifically, this
category comprised the properties of selecting a leader, developing athlete leadership, and
athlete leader responsibilities.
Selecting a Leader
This property discussed the criteria, methods, and information coaches gathered prior
to selecting their team leaders. This property contained 227 meaning units and was the
largest. Coaches talked about the different aspects of leadership identification including
getting to know players, player characteristics, and evaluating potential leaders.
All coaches discussed the importance of team captains sharing similar values not only
with them, but with the coaching staff as well. Each of the participants felt that team captains
were an extension of the coaching staff and that fitting within the team‟s identity was a
requirement to wearing the “C” on their jerseys:
J‟ai vraiment, j‟essaye vraiment de voir le joueur sur qui les valeurs sont similaires au
personnel d‟entraîneurs, pas juste les miennes parce qu‟on est un coaching staff à
[name of city], nous sommes trois coachs. On essaye d‟identifier les joueurs en
fonction des valeurs qui sont les plus proches des nôtres, les valeurs humaines, les
valeurs de respect, les valeurs d‟honnêteté, l‟importance de l‟éthique de travail pour
ces jeunes là, parce que c‟est un petit peu le reflet si tu veux les leaders du coaching
staff. (C1)
Les valeurs qu‟on a inculquées dans notre équipe, le fait que je sois ici depuis huit
ans… des gars comme [name of player] et [name of player], on a grandi ensemble
autant moi avec eux que eux avec moi. Eux savent exactement ce que ça prend pour
jouer pour les [name of team]. Un joueur qui arriverait, qui a beaucoup de leadership,
mais qui n‟entre pas dans notre trademark serait très contesté dans notre équipe. (C5)
Results 59
Coaches also looked at an athlete‟s age prior to ascribing a leadership position to a
player. Five of the six coaches preferred to select older leaders for reasons including maturity
and playing experience in the league:
Je n‟ai jamais eu de capitaine de 15 ans. Puis j'ai eu, contrairement au junior, j‟ai eu
trois capitaines qui sont identifiés comme des lates, la raison est simple, c‟est une
question de maturité. (C1)
Généralement 19 ans, je trouve que c‟est un bel âge pour devenir capitaine junior
majeur. On veut pas se limiter à l‟âge, ça se peut qu‟un 17 ans devienne un capitaine
un moment donné, mais entre 16 et 20 ans il y a tellement une grosse différence, entre
le 17 et 20 ans au niveau de sa vision et son expérience de vie qui fait en sorte que
c‟est difficile de dire qu‟un 17 ans va devenir le leader d‟une équipe. (C2)
In contrast, one coach firmly believed that age was not among the criteria in
identifying a leader. In this case, the player‟s attitude was a carbon copy of the coach‟s vision
of what a leader should be as described in the following statement:
Ce petit gars [name of player] avait ça, il avait une discipline incroyable, son éthique
de travail était impeccable, son attitude était toujours d‟en vouloir plus.
Automatiquement, je n‟avais pas le choix, je ne pouvais pas nommer un vieux parce
que je savais que j‟étais pour payer pour les trois prochaines années parce que tout le
monde aurait suivi ce gars là comme modèle, ça c‟est de la marde. Le petit gars de 17
ans, tout de suite, it set the tone. We won after that, we won the championship.
D‟établir que ce petit gars là était en mesure de faire, ça c‟était une chose. (C6)
In addition, all coaches talked about specific characteristics they looked for in their
athlete leaders both on and off the ice. The following quote justifies the opinions expressed
by all coaches in terms of on ice qualities they identified in their leaders:
C‟est un gars qui lead by example always, qui est toujours un travaillant, qui suit les
consignes de l‟entraineur, qui est discipliné, et qui take the pain tout le temps. (C4)
While the on ice characteristics were a fundamental component in identifying team
leaders, coaches also felt that leadership qualities outside the rink were equally important.
For instance, being generous, honest, taking care of teammates, and setting the example off
the ice for teammates was discussed by all coaches:
Results 60
Tu le regardes aller. Comment il se comporte. Je regarde tout, tout, tout. Je ne regarde
pas seulement sa game. Sa façon de penser, un leader n‟est pas centré sur lui. Pour
moi, un leader veut que tout le monde soit heureux. Il prend soin des autres. Il prend
soins de eux à l‟école, dans l‟autobus, au repas, est-ce qu‟il s‟assoit avec la même
gang. J‟aime les regarder aller. (C3)
Prêcher par l‟exemple sur la glace c‟est beau, c‟est bien beau, mais ça prend plus que
ça pour être un leader. Tu peux être un joueur qui est remarquable sur la glace, qui
donne l‟exemple, mais tu dois le faire à l‟extérieur aussi, tu dois prendre soin de tes
coéquipiers. (C5)
Ensuite, est-ce que ce sont des joueurs qui sont individualistes de nature ou s‟ils sont
généreux de nature où ils vont partager avec leurs coéquipiers. Ça je pense que c‟est
une chose importante à regarder, parce qu‟au fils des ans, je me suis rendu compte
que les joueurs qui ont du souci pour leurs coéquipiers, qui sont généreux avec eux
dans tout les sens du mot, c'est souvent eux les meilleurs leaders parce qu‟ils n‟ont
pas d‟ennemi au sein de l‟équipe et sont capables de dire les vraies choses, ils vont
être capable d‟être dur avec un coéquipier sans se faire détester. (C1)
Coaches were able to identify these qualities by gathering information on each player
by observing their behaviours during team activities and, at times, through a series of written
tests on personality and leadership:
Des fois on organisait des soupers, il y en a qui étaient en charge de monter les tables,
les ustensiles, il y en a qui préparaient les condiments, on faisait un spaghetti, cuire
les nouilles, gérer le stock, gérer la monnaie. Ils communiquent ensemble et puis ils
doivent trouver des solutions à l‟intérieur des guidelines. C‟est intéressant parce que
tu vois ceux qui s‟impliquent, ceux qui mènent, et tu vois même ceux qui ne croient
pas à l‟activité. A partir de là tu pouvais travailler avec les caractères différents de ton
équipe. Pourquoi il y croit ou pas, ou moins que les autres. (C4)
Chaque sphère se divise en deux. C'est-à-dire au niveau social, ça se divise en deux.
Par exemple, tu vas sortir avec les boys, avec qui vas-tu sortir. L‟autre, tu te prépares
pour une game, avec qui voudrais-tu roomer avec? Il y aussi des mises en situation,
des scénarios qui cachent un petit peu le verdict des gars pour ne pas justement que
les gars choisissent. Il faut les endormir un petit peu pour voir ce qu‟ils pensent. C‟est
la même chose au niveau de l‟action. Par exemple tu es dans une game, ça prend du
momentum, qui tu voies dans une situation comme ça ou une autre situation, tu
montes un plan de match, l‟entraîneur délègue des joueurs pour le monter, qui voies
en train de créer le plan de match. On les met dans des situations différentes. A partir
de là, c‟est comme ça qu‟on identifie nos leaders. (C5)
Results 61
Je pense que c‟est un outil (test sociométrique) qui parle de la vie sociale d‟une
équipe. Je pense qu‟un sociogramme ça ne dit pas tout, mais ce sont des questions, et
ça prend quelqu‟un qui doit les analyser. Nous c‟est [name of specialist] qui analyse
la situation relationnelle de l‟équipe. A partir de là on définit nos leaders au niveau
social, au niveau de l‟action, au niveau de mise en action du leadership, en arrière du
banc ou monter des pratiques, à qui tu fais confiance au niveau social et action. (C5).
This property described how coaches worked with and developed the leadership skills
with all athletes on their team. Coaches talked about how they gave their athletes
opportunities to become better leaders, as well as how they worked to develop leadership
throughout the entire team.
Coaches cited that in order to develop leaders, they needed to empower players
through responsibilities and give them opportunities to make their own decisions:
Si moi je veux juste garder le contrôle, je ne développe rien. Il faut qu‟ils apprennent
à voler de leurs propres ailes, il faut qu‟ils développent de l‟initiative, je suis là pour
les guider et leur donner des outils, voici comment on fait, voici comment on va faire
ta ta ta. À la fin je n‟ai plus besoin de parler, c‟est eux qui parlent, c‟est eux qui
coachent. C‟est la même chose pour les leaders, ils doivent devenir des leaders. Là, je
leur dit, je leur donne leurs responsabilités, tu développes du leadership, si tu leur
donnes des responsabilités, qu‟ils assument leurs responsabilités. Tu n‟es jamais à
l‟heure pour le déjeuner, pour la pratique… tu ne peux pas fitter dans mon groupe.
(C3)
Je suis convaincu qu‟on peut les aider, parce que si tu veux former des leaders, il faut
que tu leurs donnes la chance de devenir des leaders, et comment tu fais ça, il faut les
mettre en situation où ils doivent prendre des décisions. Après avoir analysé tout ça, il
faut revenir avec eux pour voir ce qui a bien fonctionné ou pas fonctionné et le
pourquoi. (C4)
Coaches shared thoughts about collective leadership. Specifically, five of the six
coaches believed that leadership did not solely rely on team captains and assistants, but rather
on a leadership group:
Dans certaines équipes, tu écoutes ceux qui ont des lettres. Nous ici, ça ne marche pas
comme ça. Ici, on a un groupe de leaders. Avant les fêtes ils étaient cinq, et
Results 62
maintenant nous sommes rendus à sept avec les transactions et présentement ça va
très, très bien. (C5)
Oui, bien oui je peux influencer nos leaders. Pour moi, tout le monde est un leader. Je
ne crois pas en un leader. Pour moi, les 20 ans doivent devenir des leaders. Pour moi,
tout le monde doit devenir un leader, tout le monde peut être influencé par tout le
monde, par la façon dont tu agis, par la façon dont tu pratiques. (C3)
Furthermore, one coach selected a leadership group that had complementary
leadership skills with the intention of having individuals that were able to take the lead in
different situations:
Il y a une grosse différence entre les deux styles de leader [name of two players] mais
ils ont besoin de l‟un et l‟autre. Si tu laisses [name of player – 18 ans] leader, tu vas
avoir un leadership de respect des normes et tout ça. Par contre quand ça va être le
temps de sortir du moule et le temps d‟être un petit peu plus fou, ou quand le club va
mal, de réveiller l‟équipe et de shaker quelque chose, là ça prend un [name of player]
qui vient avec pour complémenter ça. (C6)
This property encompassed coaches‟ expectations of athlete leaders on and off the
ice, as well as the outcomes that arose from effective leadership. This included the
responsibilities attached with a leadership role and how leader behaviours and character
impacted the team.
Four of the coaches felt their leaders played a big role in communicating the coaching
staff‟s message to the team:
C‟était souvent par le capitaine que les messages étaient livrés, et lui développe et
exerce ses responsabilités de faire sûr que les activités et que les couvre-feux soient
respectés ou bien préparer des rencontres. L‟an dernier, il y avait des choses que je
voulais qui soient faites, ces demandes passaient par mon capitaine, et lui allait voir
ses assistants pour s‟assurer que le message soit bien compris par les autres
coéquipiers. (C4)
Souvent on demande aux leaders lorsqu‟on est sur la route de s‟assurer que tout le
monde soit à l‟heure, de s‟assurer à ce que les joueurs soient dans la chambre et on
peut demander aux capitaines et aux assistants de faire le tour, ou lorsqu‟on a des
messages à faire passer. (C2)
Results 63
Additionally, three coaches talked about how their leaders served as role models. One
coach provided an example that pertained to being a role model to other teammates, while the
other two described how their players needed to be role models for community members:
Ce que je dis toujours c‟est que tu as besoin de modèle. C‟est beau de parler comme
coach et mettre des valeurs, but they need to see it. Ils ont besoin de le voir. Le petit
gars de 17 ans c‟était [name of player] à [name of city] et c‟était exactement ce qui
fallait faire parce qu‟il fallait absolument, à [name of city], redresser l‟attitude des
gars, le sérieux. (C6)
Non. C‟est surtout hors glace. C‟est une façon d‟être, de vivre, pour nous le [name of
team] ou jouer pour une autre équipe de LHJMQ est un privilège mais, il y a des
responsabilités qui viennent avec ces privilèges là. Nous on veut être perçu comme
des gens modèles au sein de la communauté. On a fait en sorte que ces jeunes là…de
dire à quelqu‟un on veut que tu sois un modèle c‟est beau, mais les jeunes veulent
savoir c‟est quoi être un modèle, qu‟est ce qu‟on doit faire pour être justement ce
modèle là et on leur a mis ça sur papiers. (C1)
While acting as a liaison between coaches and teammates and being a role model
were important leader responsibilities, all coaches spoke about the importance of a leader‟s
influence on his teammates. Of the six coaches, four discussed the positive influence leaders
had on teammates and two shared their thoughts on how leaders had a negative impact on
other team members. The following quotes are representative of both the positive and
negative influence leaders had on teammates:
I think [name of player] has the best of both worlds. He is very considerate, a great
server and at the same time he‟ll pull with his energy, he‟ll take charge. We‟re losing
he‟s like, guys, I want that puck, I‟m gonna make the difference, everybody has to
follow, they don‟t have much of a choice. He also has that push from behind, where
he can really be in your face. So he‟s got all three, Pull (lead from the front), Care
(from the side-support) and lead from the back, where he can push you hard, so he‟s
got the complete package, I would think. (C6)
On avait 9 ou 10 joueurs de repêchés dans la NHL, on avait [name of player] qui
revenait de [NHL team name]. On avait toute une équipe, sauf que nos leaders,
certains de nos leader avaient tellement une influence négative sur les autres joueurs
que ça été… ils ont amené tout le monde dans la défaite. (C2)
Results 64
Interestingly, one coach stated that although a player sets the right example, is a good
teammate, and acts like a leader, it doesn‟t mean that others will necessarily follow as shown
in the following quote:
C‟est beau être un bel exemple et être à l‟écoute de ses coéquipiers, mais ça n‟a aucun
impact si tu n‟as pas le prestige ou le leadership nécessaire. Je pense que ce n‟est pas
tout le monde qui peut être un leader, c‟est à dire même si tu agis comme un leader,
ça ne veut pas dire que les autres vont vouloir te suivre. (C5)
Several coaches shared common opinions on the impact that leaders had on team
success. Of the four coaches who talked about this topic, each one felt that every winning
season they had was the result of strong leadership. C6 attributed team success to leaders
spreading the culture:
Les années où on a gagné des championnats, ce sont les années où on avait les
meilleurs leaders, point à ligne. (C1)
Mes leaders ont eu un impact énorme quand nous avons eu du succès. Je n‟ai jamais
gagné avec du poor leadership. Jamais! Never! L‟impact que les leaders ont c‟est
que ces les garants de la culture. C‟est aussi simple que ça, ils ont de l‟influence pour
quoi, pour faire „„runner‟‟ la culture, mettre la culture en place, pour qu‟elle soit
forte. (C6)
Finally, C1 described the influence a leader can have on the team by sharing his
desire to win, and dedication to accomplish something big with his teammates:
Notre leader était enthousiasme. Il était vraiment dédié à la cause, c‟était sa dernière
année junior et il a vraiment su rallier tout le monde autour de lui pour dire : moi là,
j'ai eu quatre belles années junior où j‟ai eu beaucoup de points ou j‟ai jamais rien
gagné, cette année ça ne me dérange pas d‟avoir moins de points que les autres
années au niveau individuel, mais je veux gagner. Puis les joueurs ont vraiment
embarqués là-dedans et ont poussé dans la même direction, et pour tout le monde
pour [name of player] cette année – [memorial cup participation]. (C1)
Summary
The participants in this study were purposely selected to meet a number of criteria.
Each coach had accumulated over five years of head coaching experience at either the
Results 65
Quebec Midget AAA or Quebec Major Junior Hockey League levels. Furthermore, each
coach was a member of a coaching staff (e.g., head coach, assistant coach) in an international
competition (e.g., World under 17 Championship, World under 18 Tournament, World Junior
Hockey Championship) in the past 10 years. Finally, each coach completed at least a Level 3
in the old National Coaching Certification Program and/or a competition stream certification
(e.g., high performance) from the new (NCCP). Six elite male hockey coaches were
interviewed and an inductive analysis of the data revealed three higher-order categories,
which were called personal experiences and characteristics, daily coach tasks, and athlete
leadership.
Personal Experiences and Characteristics described the participant‟s journey
beginning with their athletic career and culminating in their current coaching position. It also
included the interpersonal characteristics that shaped their career. The majority of
participants discussed their hockey playing career. Each participant reached different levels,
of which two played professionally in the United States and Europe without making it to the
NHL. Regardless of their highest level of competition as an athlete, each coach was ascribed
a leadership position during his career. They attributed their leadership position to a high
maturity level and work ethic. This leadership role helped them develop positive
relationships with their coaches. Interestingly, all six coaches got involved in coaching
immediately after their playing days finished and took distinct paths leading to their current
coaching position. Specifically, five of the six participants began coaching at the youth level
(pee-wee, bantam, or midget), while one coach started his career as an assistant coach in the
QMJHL. Aside from their playing and coaching experiences, each participant believed that
providing strong leadership within their team stemmed from their own behaviours. They felt
Results 66
that creating team guidelines and good work habits started with the coaching staff and could
then be emulated by their players. In addition, each coach specified the importance of having
quality individuals with winning attitudes and irreproachable work ethics. Overall, it can be
concluded that while each coach‟s career path was unique, they shared similar thoughts on
the importance of their own leadership on the team, as well some essential player
characteristics that were the foundation of their coaching philosophy.
Coach Daily Tasks contained the general coaching activities performed within the
team structure, including dealing with players and members of the organization. Five of the
six coaches discussed the importance of working with their assistants. Effective
communication within the coaching staff enabled each coach to deliver a consistent message
to players. Furthermore, all the coaches mentioned spending a significant amount of one on
one time interacting with their players. They felt that one of their biggest challenges was to
help athletes reach their potential. For instance, several coaches talked about how they used
different instructional tools such as book passages and video footage to help all of their
players improve overall performance. Coaches also focused on meeting with team leaders in
order to establish a connection as well as to gain a pulse of the team‟s ambiance. These
coach-leader meetings varied in topics ranging from team climate, to individual performance,
to team performance. Interestingly, coaches discussed both the positive and negative
relationships they shared with their leaders. Coaches believed that several factors led to
successful relationships with their leaders, including caring about and trusting their leaders,
and developing a mutual respect and openness between them. More specifically, trust was
demonstrated by coaches through active listening and by considering and applying leader
suggestions when necessary. Although the majority of their relationships with team leaders
Results 67
were positive, coaches also encountered some negative relations with their leaders. These
were attributed to players and coaches not sharing the same vision of both a player‟s
individual goals and team direction. In general, coaches shared similar thoughts on how they
worked with their assistants, as well as the different factors that led to positive or negative
coach-leader relationships throughout their career.
Athlete Leadership involved the culminating process of how coaches identified and
worked with the athlete leaders on their team. Many common themes emerged between the
coaches. For instance, each coach felt that team captains were an extension of the coaching
staff and thus, needed to share similar values with the staff in order to wear the “C” on his
jersey. Additionally, several coaches looked at leader age prior to ascribing a leadership role.
Coaches believed that in most cases, older leaders had a greater overall experience and
maturity. However, one coach stated that leadership was not age related. He believed that
athlete leadership was determined by the players who had the abilities to influence
teammates by spreading the coach‟s vision. Another commonality was that coaches used
similar methods to gather information about their players in their leader identification
process. Specifically, coaches organized team activities as a mean to observe player
behaviours in different settings. Coaches also had players write a series of tests that provided
them with a perspective on their player‟s leadership qualities and personalities. Aside from
identifying their leaders, all coaches focused on developing leadership throughout the entire
team. In particular, coaches developed leadership skills by giving their players
responsibilities and providing them with opportunities to make their own decisions.
Interestingly, coaches stressed the importance of obtaining leadership from all players as
opposed to only team captains and assistants. Finally, coaches attributed successful seasons
Results 68
to strong athlete leadership and felt that leaders influenced others by “running” the culture as
well as gathering teammates around a common goal.
In sum, the results obtained from this analysis highlighted the thoughts and
experiences of elite ice hockey coaches with respect to athlete leadership. Specifically, both
the personal experiences and characteristics and daily coach tasks categories influenced
coaches‟ perspective on athlete leadership. Therefore, the athlete leadership category was the
outcome that derived from the aforementioned two categories as it contained information
specific to how coaches used their previous experiences and knowledge to identify and work
with their leaders. While each coach had unique thoughts about their athlete leaders, many
similarities arose. Firstly, coaches felt that leadership was becoming more of a group
responsibility as opposed to a one man show. Secondly, coaches felt that leaders needed to
share common values with the coaching staff. Thirdly, all coaches discussed how they played
an important role in developing their leaders by giving them responsibilities and providing
them with leadership opportunities. Given the emphasis coaches placed on their leadership
behaviours as well as the time and effort invested in developing leaders, this supports the
idea that athlete leadership is becoming more of a collective responsibility and that
leadership can be demonstrated by any member on a team. Even though leadership starts
with the coach, athlete leaders are just as important as they display the leadership behaviours
that represent the practical side of the coach‟s vision as shown in the following quote:
Le coach est un modèle pour certaine chose, pour la vision mais, ça prend des
joueurs qui sont modèles parce qu‟ils représentent le côté pratique de la vision. (C6)
Discussion 69
CHAPTER 5
Discussion
The purpose of this study was to identify ice hockey coaches‟ perceptions of the
factors influencing athlete leadership. In particular, this study identified the various
components of athlete leadership, such as the role of an athlete leader, athlete leader
behaviours, and coach-athlete relationship. Three higher-order categories emerged from this
study: personal experiences and characteristics, daily coach tasks, and athlete leadership.
The following chapter will discuss these categories as they relate to previous research on
coaching and athlete leadership. The final section of this chapter will summarize the current
research and provide conclusions and implications for this study, and recommendations for
future research.
The higher-order category labelled personal experiences and characteristics included
the participant‟s journey beginning with their athletic career and culminating in their current
coaching position. It also included the interpersonal characteristics that shaped their career.
Despite the differences in competitive levels reached as athletes, career paths, and coaching
philosophies and style, there were several common themes that emerged from the data. These
themes will be discussed in relation to previous empirical research.
All of the coaches competed at a fairly a high level of hockey (e.g., Midget AAA,
QMJHL), and held leadership roles on various teams. It can be speculated that their diverse
athletic experiences influenced who they were and what behaviours they would later exhibit
as coaches. The current findings are consistent with previous literature on coach development
(Carter & Bloom, 2009; Gilbert, Côté, & Mallet, 2006; Salmela, 1994; Schinke, Bloom, &
Discussion 70
Salmela, 1995) which has found that expert coaches‟ athletic experiences were a crucial but
not essential component of their development and success. For instance, Salmela suggested
that expert coaches used their athletic experiences to gain and consolidate their coaching
knowledge, philosophies, and beliefs. Likewise, Gilbert and colleagues stipulated that
becoming a high-level University coach required a significant amount of pre-coaching
athletic experience while competing in their sport. In addition, recent empirical research
found that it was possible to become an expert coach without having competed at an elite
level (Carter & Bloom, 2009). In the current study, although participants did not directly
state how impactful their athletic career was in their coaching progression, it can be inferred
that several coaches were exposed to extensive training in their sport that could have
benefited their knowledge and understanding of the game, and eventually help them progress
throughout their coaching career. Based on these results, it is difficult to ascertain that the
level of athletic experience is a pre-cursor to coach success. However, as Schinke and
colleagues highlighted, a high level of commitment in an elite sport can potentially contribute
to an individual‟s coaching career.
In addition to having different athletic experiences, results indicated that all coaches
followed different career paths, including working as assistant coaches earlier in their careers
before becoming head coaches. These results relate to the literature on knowledge acquisition
(Carter & Bloom, 2009; Lemyre, Trudel, & Durand-Bush, 2007; Werthner & Trudel, 2006)
which has highlighted the importance of learning from others. For example, Carter and
Bloom reported that working as an assistant coach helped coaches gather a significant
amount of coaching knowledge during the early stages of their career. Lemyre and colleagues
found that experiences working as assistant coaches helped them to socialize and integrate
Discussion 71
within their culture, and ultimately gain specific knowledge. In the current study, each coach
worked at least one year as an assistant prior to taking a head coaching position in the
QMJHL. Interestingly, a common career progression pattern was evident in the later stages
of their careers as five of the six coaches either held assistant coach positions in the QMJHL
or were head coaches in the Midget AAA, prior to being named as head coach in the
QMJHL. Thus, it is reasonable to conclude that the role of working as an assistant coach is
common before obtaining a head coaching position at the elite hockey level. Nonetheless, it
would be interesting to further study how much of an impact being an assistant coach plays
in their pursuit of a head coaching job, and what type of knowledge is acquired while
apprenticing as an assistant coach.
Besides their playing experiences and learning from other coaches, their own personal
characteristics played a crucial role in influencing their coaching career. Despite having
different approaches to leadership, coaches adjusted their approach throughout the season.
For instance, one coach noted being very autocratic when establishing his plan of action for
the season, but being less autocratic as the season progressed. These findings are in
accordance with previous literature which has indicated that expert coaches adjusted their
behaviours to accommodate the needs of their players (Bloom, 2002; Côté, Salmela, Trudel,
Baria, & Russell, 1995; Giacobbi, Roper, Whitney, & Butryn, 2002). Not only do coaches
adjust their behaviours in light of players needs but coaches will also adjust their behaviours
based on the situation. This would explain why coaches used more of an autocratic style
during the pre-season and less autocratic style as the season progressed. Bloom suggested
that expert coaches tailored their coaching style based on their evaluation of an athlete‟s
potential to grow and develop. Furthermore, although coaches in the current study adjusted
Discussion 72
their coaching approach, other characteristics appeared to be constant such as establishing
team guidelines and objectives, as well as leading by example. These characteristics guided
their coaching behaviours and allowed them to influence the team environment by giving
their players a sense of direction by exemplifying good work habits, and telling their players
which behaviours were required to achieve team objectives. This style of decision-making is
similar to the antecedents presented in Chelladurai‟s (1978) Multidimensional Model of
Leadership. In particular, this model stresses that coaching behaviour is influenced by the
demands of the situation (situational characteristics), the coach‟s own personal characteristics
(leader characteristics), and the attributes of the athletes (member characteristics). Overall,
the current findings contribute to the existing literature which has emphasized a coach‟s
ability to adapt to each individual on his team, while showing a strong commitment to his
personal characteristics or beliefs.
Finally, results of the current study revealed that within each coach‟s philosophy, a
number of criteria were established with respect to the types of player characteristics that the
coach preferred to have on his team. It was essential that players meet the criteria of the
coach‟s philosophy in order to develop and ultimately, for the team to move in the right
direction. For instance, characteristics such as a strong work ethic, competitiveness, and
consistently wanting to improve were crucial components of their philosophies. These
findings are consistent with previous research which suggested that a variety of interpersonal
characteristics were necessary to develop successful athletes (Côté, Salmela, Trudel, et al.,
1995; Giacobbi et al., 2002; Gould, Dieffenbach, & Moffett, 2002). For example, Giacobbi
and colleagues found that motivation, competiveness, coachability, and maturity led to the
overall success of their athletes. However, coaches in the current study also mentioned
Discussion 73
characteristics that weren‟t illustrated in the aforementioned literature such as playing with
an edge and demonstrating passion for the game. Therefore, it is reasonable to conclude that
the current participants appeared to have established both common and essential player
characteristics that derived from their coaching philosophy and were specific to coaching
elite 16 to 20 year old hockey players.
Daily Coach Tasks
This higher-order category described daily coaching responsibilities, including
interactions with players both on and off the ice that directly or indirectly affected athlete
leadership. This category contained information that paralleled elements of organization and
training of the CM, as well as literature on the coach-athlete relationship. These areas will be
addressed in this section, as well as previous coaching literature.
According to the CM, organization has been identified as an essential dimension in
high-level coaching and athlete development and encompasses a wide variety of topics,
including creating a team vision, planning training sessions, and working with a support staff
(Bloom, 2002; Côté & Salmela, 1996; Côté, Salmela, Trudel, et al., 1995; Desjardins, 1996).
That is, coaches apply their knowledge to provide their athletes with optimal sporting
environments. One way to achieve an optimal sporting environment involves the role of
assistant coaches. In the current study, coaches stressed the importance of working closely
with and collaborating with their assistant coaches. Coaches recognized that trusting their
assistant coaches and working together were essential factors for achieving success. These
results are similar to other studies which revealed that coaches shared several responsibilities
with their assistants (e.g., Côté & Salmela, 1996; Desjardins, 1996). More specifically, Côté
and Salmela found that head coaches and assistant coaches worked together in planning their
Discussion 74
athlete‟s training sessions. Furthermore, Desjardins reported that assistant coaches helped
reinforce the team vision and were involved in the player selection process. Along the same
line, findings from the current study also revealed that assistant coaches communicated the
head coach‟s message to the players. This is consistent with previous research indicating that
each member of the support staff must communicate with their athletes in the same manner
(Bloom, Stevens, & Wickwire, 2003). Taken together, these findings highlight the
importance of a strong coaching staff and suggest that assistant coaches help the head coach
provide the ideal environment for his players.
In addition to working with their assistant coaches, coaches revealed that one of their
daily responsibilities involved different aspects of training. Training has been defined as the
knowledge coaches use to help their athletes acquire and perform various skills during
practice (Côté & Salmela, 1996). To date, a number of studies on athlete development have
suggested that expert coaches used various types of training techniques, including technical,
tactical, physical, and mental to prepare their athletes for competition (Bloom, 2002; Côté,
Salmela, Trudel, et al., 1995; Durand-Bush & Salmela, 2002). All of these training
components were discussed throughout the current interviews, however they did not get into
too much depth with one particular training method. Despite this, the use of technology to
help the players‟ developmental process emerged as a reoccurring theme. For instance,
several quotes suggested that an important part of training involved video analysis of player
performance. This was used to help improve and develop the technical, tactical, physical, and
mental aspects of each athlete. The use of statistics and reading materials were also used by
coaches to help players with their overall development. Specifically, coaches provided their
players with an individual statistical breakdown of their performance which highlighted their
Discussion 75
contribution to the team as well as the areas of their game that needed improvement. This is
consistent with previous literature which has suggested that coaches postponed player
feedback immediately after competition and used this delay to access resources such as video
equipment, statistical information, and the opinions of their assistant coaches to shape their
analysis of the game (Bloom, 1996). Therefore, the current participants appeared to use a
combination of resources under which expert coaches have achieved success to highlight the
different elements of training to enhance player development.
In addition to their daily responsibilities, coach-athlete leader meetings were a
frequently cited theme of the coaches in this study. These meetings served to discuss the
team‟s climate, as well as how individual and team objectives could be achieved. While
researchers have yet to study the content of coach-athlete leader meetings, some studies have
provided information regarding topics discussed between players and coaches (Dupuis,
Bloom, & Loughead, 2006; Giacobbi et al., 2002). For example, Dupuis and colleagues
found that university hockey team captains provided the coach with information concerning
team climate and individual athlete concerns. These results are similar to those found in the
present study as coaches indicated that one of their main concerns during these meetings was
to discuss the dressing room climate. Interestingly, one important finding of this study that
differed from other studies on coach-athlete leader meetings is that several coaches discussed
meeting with a group of leaders as opposed to a single leader. The current results suggested
that the thoughts and perceptions of more than one leader must be gathered for coaches to
grasp the state of the team`s climate. In fact, Loughead, Hardy, and Eys (2006) found that
athlete leadership within a team was widespread with numerous athletes serving different
leadership functions (e.g., task, social, external). This finding in concert with the results of
Discussion 76
the present study suggests that it is important for coaches to solicit the input from all their
team leaders in order to have an understanding of the team‟s atmosphere. Another topic
discussed during these coach-athlete leader meetings was how individual and team objectives
could be achieved. Although, the coaches did not discuss the type of goals they specifically
established with their athlete leaders, they indicated that these meetings helped to establish
practice and game objectives. This finding was similar to Giacobbi and colleagues which
indicated that coaches had meetings with their athletes to discuss their goals. Taken together,
these findings extend the literature on the nature of the content discussed during team
leadership meetings.
Aside from the topics discussed between coaches and their athlete leaders, previous
research has demonstrated that the coach-athlete relationship is important in successful
performance and satisfaction in sport (Jowett, 2003; Jowett & Cockerill, 2003; Jowett &
Meek, 2000). Specifically, three factors influenced the quality of the coach-athlete
relationship: co-orientation, closeness, and complementarity. The following sections will
address how the current findings are related to these three factors.
Much of the research on coach-athlete relationship has highlighted the notion of coorientation (e.g., Jowett, 2003; Jowett & Cockerill, 2003; Jowett & Meek, 2000). Coorientation has been operationalized through means of communication and includes dialogue,
negotiations, and decision making (Jowett, 2003). Results from the current study indicated
that coaches always welcomed their leaders to share their thoughts, concerns, and ideas with
them. These results are in accordance with previous literature that indicated that open
channels of communication facilitated the development of co-orientation (Jowett &
Cockerill, 2003; Jowett & Meek, 2000). Interestingly, not all aspects of co-orientation were
Discussion 77
met in the current study. One of the main tenets of co-orientation is that both the players and
coaches must establish common goals, beliefs, values, and expectations (Jowett & Cockerill,
2003). Furthermore, establishing common goals was only discussed when coaches were
asked to describe the reasons that led to poor relationships with their leaders. Specifically,
three of the five coaches who discussed this topic indicated that differences in goal
expectations were the main cause for such a negative relationship. One possible explanation
for these results may be that coach‟s dealt with athletes ranging from 16 to 21 years of age,
and perhaps not all of their leaders were mature enough to understand or correctly assess
their role or contributions to the team, which ultimately led to these conflicts. Although these
coaches did not elaborate on the effects these poor relationships had on the individual‟s or
team performance, it can be speculated that such a relationship can negatively impact an
individual‟s performance and perhaps team performance. Future research may want to
consider closely investigating the effects of poor coach-athlete leader relationships on
individual or team performances.
In addition to co-orientation, literature has indicated that closeness also plays an
indispensable role in the coach-athlete relationship (Jowett, 2003; Jowett & Cockerill, 2003;
Jowett & Meek, 2000). Closeness has been described as an emotional interdependence by
players and coaches in terms of liking, trust, and respect (Jowett & Meek, 2000). One unique
contribution of this study was that it focused on the relationship and interactions coaches had
with their leaders as opposed to interactions with all team members. Interestingly, although
the sample of this study differed from those with respect to the nature of the coach-athlete
relationship (Gould et al., 2002; Greenleaf, Gould, & Dieffenbach, 2001; Philippe & Seiler,
2006), similarities did emerge with regards to the construct of closeness. Results from the
Discussion 78
current study revealed that elite ice hockey coaches developed an emotional attachment to
their leaders by caring, trusting, respecting, and listening to them. This is consistent with
previous literature on the relationship between elite athletes and their coaches. Unlike the
current study which dealt with the knowledge of elite coaches, Philippe and Seiler gathered
the thoughts of elite level athletes, and obtained similar results, as respect, esteem, and
appreciation were indispensable factors in the formation of the coach-athlete relationship.
One explanation for these results is that in elite sports, coaches and players spend several
years together potentially facilitating the development of their relationships. Notably, all of
the coaches in this study spent consecutive years with the same organization. This suggests
that closeness in the coach-athlete relationship may be determined by the number of years
coaches spend with their players as opposed to the nature of the relationship (e.g., coachathlete, coach-athlete leader).
A third element of the coach-athlete relationship is called complementarity.
Complementarity involves both coaches and athletes understanding their roles, working
equally as hard to achieve success, and for coaches to provide different types of emotional
and instructional support to their athletes (known as helping transactions) (Jowett, 2003;
Jowett & Cockerill, 2003). Although the link with complementarity does not appear to be as
strong as with closeness and co-orientation, some comparisons are warranted in the coachathlete leader relationship. In the current study, coaches had an open door policy with all of
their players in an attempt to cooperate and provide the necessary support to their athletes.
These results relate to previous research which has indicated that both coaches and players
needed to be responsive to each other‟s actions to enhance performance (Jowett, 2003; Jowett
& Cockerill, 2003; Jowett & Meek, 2000). For instance, Jowett and Meek found that
Discussion 79
Olympic level athletes valued a coach‟s effort to provide effective instruction and to make
them feel good and positive. Similarly, all the coaches in the current study discussed the
significance of ensuring that their leaders knew that their opinions were accounted for and
valued. Therefore, the current participants appeared to have focused on elements of
complementarity under which positive coach-athlete relationship have developed.
Athlete Leadership
A third category emerging from the current study was labelled athlete leadership.
Whereas the previous categories focused primarily on the coach-athlete relationship, the
information in this category pertained to how coaches identified and worked with the athlete
leaders on their team, as well as the overall impact these athletes had on the team‟s success.
This category contained information that pertained to elements of Chelladurai‟s (1978)
Multidimensional Model of Leadership, as well as athlete leadership, and transformational
leadership.
All of the coaches in this study highlighted the characteristics they looked for in their
athlete leaders, both on and off the ice. Although they did not all look for the same
characteristics, some commonalities emerged. All of the coaches spoke about an athlete‟s age
in the identification process of a formal athlete leader (e.g., team captain). According to
Chelladurai‟s (1978) Multidimensional Model of Leadership (MML), age influences the
required behaviours of a leader, in this case, identifying and selecting the appropriate leader
for his team. Support was found for the proposition that age can affect a coach‟s decision
when choosing an athlete leader. Specifically, five of the six coaches devoted significant
importance to an athlete‟s age prior to ascribing him to a leadership position. These coaches
preferred to assign leadership positions to older athletes who had accumulated more playing
Discussion 80
experience in the league and who were more mature. This would suggest that the team‟s
leadership effectiveness lied in the hands of older athlete leaders who gathered a variety of
experiences throughout their playing career in Major Junior hockey. Interestingly, although
these coaches preferred to select older athletes to represent the team, they did not refute the
possibility of a selecting a younger leader (i.e., 17 or 18 years old). Similarly, previous
research has indicated that seniors typically occupied a leader status within sport teams
(Loughead et al., 2006; Yukelson, Weinberg, Richardson, & Jackson, 1983). As Loughead
and colleagues found, second, third, and fourth year varsity athletes were identified by their
teammates as serving in a leadership role. From a QMJHL coach‟s perspective, a team on
average is composed of 17 and 18 year old players, typically being in their first or second
year in the league. It is possible for a second year player to hold the status of a veteran, and
be considered a team leader as a 17 year old. In contrast, it is also possible for a 19 year old
player to be in his first year in QMJHL and not be in the coach‟s leadership group. Therefore,
a distinction must be made between age and seniority as they both appear to influence the
leader selection process.
It should be pointed out that one coach felt that age was not a factor when selecting
athlete leaders. This coach put more emphasis on selecting a leader who displayed and
carried out the elements of his vision, regardless of age. In fact, according to Côté and
colleagues (1995) Coaching Model (CM), vision lies at the heart of this model and involves
creating a mental representation of what the athletes/team can achieve. As such, coaches
must identify athlete leaders who they think can help the team achieve its goals by sharing in
the vision. Moreover, previous literature has shown the advantages of coaches persuading
their players to buy into their vision (i.e., building a successful program, winning consecutive
Discussion 81
championships) (e.g., Jackson & Delehanty, 1995; Torre & Verducci, 2009; Vallée & Bloom,
2005). Given that all coaches in the current study required or expected their athlete leaders to
have similar values with the coaching staff as well as embody the team‟s identity, the notion
of an athlete leader meshing with the coach‟s vision is further reinforced and may be as
important as age.
Additionally, coaches in the current study discussed the impact athlete leaders had on
the team. Although coaches shared both the positive and negative impact leaders had on their
team, one common element that emerged was that each coach felt winning was the result of
strong athlete leadership. Participants discussed that athlete leaders had the strongest impact,
and consequently the biggest influence on teammates when they fostered the team‟s culture
established by the organization and coaches. These results strengthen the importance of
coaches having a long term vision and establishing a culture that athletes can commit to
(Desjardins, 1996; Vallée & Bloom, 2005). In fact, these results imply that an athlete leader‟s
commitment to the coach‟s vision must be displayed through his actions as they set the
standard for other teammates to follow. As such, there appears to be an exponential effect in
the leadership process. That is, a coach must get his athlete leaders to commit to his vision
before these leaders can in turn influence other teammates to follow their actions. In contrast,
one coach in the current study stated being an impactful leader required more than being a
good teammate, setting the right example, or acting as a leader. Specifically, this coach noted
that displaying these leader attributes does not necessarily mean that others will follow,
suggesting that influence is an important factor in establishing effective athlete leadership on
a sport team. In fact, Northouse (2001) argues that a central element of leadership is
Discussion 82
influence and without it, leadership does not exist. Therefore, it appears that influence is a
required factor that all leaders must possess to provide effective leadership to the team.
Aside from influence, coaches discussed the specific on-ice qualities that athlete
leaders needed to demonstrate. All of the coaches in this study indicated that a strong work
ethic, leading by example, and following the coach‟s instructions were essential requirements
for their athlete leaders This relates to the required leader components described in the MML.
Perhaps one the most important required characteristic was an athlete leader‟s work ethic.
Previous studies considered work ethic to be an essential athlete leader characteristic at both
the youth and varsity levels (Dupuis et al., 2006; Todd & Kent, 2004; Holmes, McNeil,
Adorna, & Procaccino, 2008). For example, Todd and Kent found that 75% of student
athletes competing in interscholastic sports considered work ethic to be the most important
characteristics for an athlete leader to possess. Similarly, at the varsity level, Dupuis and
colleagues revealed that the best way university ice hockey captains felt they could provide
leadership to the team was by working hard on the ice. Interestingly, work ethic has also been
alluded to by a number of expert coaches at the collegiate and professional level. For
example, legendary UCLA basketball coach John Wooden was perhaps one of the first
coaches to highlight the importance of work ethic. He demonstrated its importance by
placing what he called „industriousness”, ones desire to work hard, as a key element for
attaining success, making it the cornerstone for attaining success. Thus, different sources,
both empirical and anecdotal have stressed that work ethic was an essential characteristic for
athlete leaders to possess, and was at the core of being a successful leader.
Coaches in the current study also emphasized that leadership qualities outside the rink
were equally important. Generosity, honesty, taking care of teammates, and setting the right
Discussion 83
example were all mentioned by coaches at different times throughout the interviews.
Specifically, coaches looked for players who had a sincere concern for their teammates well
being. The notions of taking care of teammates and setting the right example have been
illustrated in previous literature as a prominent responsibility of athlete leaders (Dupuis et al.,
2006; Mosher, 1979; Wright & Côté, 2003). Three coaches in the current study discussed
how they required their athletes to act as role models to other teammates and community
members. Specifically, one of these coaches felt that communicating his values to his players
wasn‟t enough, players needed to see these values in a specific athlete leader on the team.
Similarly, coaches felt that it was their responsibility to inform their athlete leaders of the
responsibilities that came with being a QMJHL player, and that children in the community
looked up to them, and needed to view them as positive role models. Taken together, these
results signified that acting as a role model went beyond the confinements of the rink, and
that coaches helped their athletes refines their skills.
One interesting finding that emerged from this study relating to the overall
development of the athlete was the importance coaches attributed to developing leadership
skills in their athletes. Results from the current study suggested that coaches displayed
specific transformational leader behaviours that contributed to their athlete leader‟s
development. Research in both the business and sport setting has shown that empowering
individuals can lead to individual and team success. That is, by displaying transformational
leader behaviours, coaches or business leaders have the potential to increase the performance
of their athletes or followers. As Bass (1998) noted, there are four types of transformational
leadership behaviours: Idealized Influence, Inspirational Motivation, Intellectual Stimulation,
and Individualized Consideration. In the current study, coaches appeared to use the
Discussion 84
transformational leadership behaviour of Intellectual Stimulation, which involves the coach
creating an environment that promotes proactive, creative, and innovative thinking. It was
found that coaches encouraged their players to take more initiatives, to accept and assume
responsibilities, and encourage the use of independent decision-making. Similarly, Vallée
and Bloom, found that empowering athletes and promoting leadership responsibilities on and
off the court were important components for coaches in building successful and winning
university team sport programs.
Given that the coach occupies a central leadership position within the team and is in a
position to influence each team member‟s behaviour, it can be suggested that coaches
develop the leadership skills in each player by highlighting the fact that each team member
can contribute to the team or organization‟s success by having strong leadership skills.
Furthermore, since each coach mentioned empowering their athletes in the decision making
process, it can be suggested that coaches used a supportive leadership style to interact with
their athlete leaders. A supportive leadership style has been identified as the preferred style
by more experienced and mature athletes involved in competitive sports (Chelladurai &
Carron, 1983; Erle, 1981; Horn, 2002). This supportive style may have contributed to athlete
leaders‟ liking their coach, and in turn, the team‟s satisfaction and performance. Thus,
coaches should favour a supportive leadership to increase the satisfaction of his athlete
leaders.
Research has shown that transformational leaders have the ability to motivate others
to do what they originally intended, set more challenging expectations, and typically achieve
higher performance levels (Bass & Riggio, 2006). Given that all of the coaches in the current
study indicated that winning stemmed from strong leadership, it can be thought that athlete
Discussion 85
leaders used some transformational leader behaviours in the realization of success, and that
coaches can help these 16 to 20 year old athletes become this type of leader. Although most
of the literature on transformational leaders applies to older individuals (i.e., CEO‟s, sport
coaches, world leaders), there exists some evidence that adolescence can also develop this
leadership style (Barling, Weber, & Kelloway, 1996; Zacharatos, Barling, & Kelloway,
2000). For example, Zacharatos et al. found that adolescents who perceived their father‟s use
of transformational leadership, in turn, demonstrated similar behaviours when interacting
with peers. In addition, these findings were consistent with previous research on adolescents
exhibiting transformational leadership skills were capable of evoking effort from their peers
in a sport setting, and were capable of providing effective leadership (Barling et al., 1996).
Given that coaches in the current study attributed much importance to empowering their
athletes and giving them direction, it can be speculated that these athletes learned from their
coaches and provided the same type of leadership to their players. In addition to working
hard and setting the right example, coaches stated that one of the biggest ways an athlete
leader could impact his team was by sharing his desire to win with his teammates. This is
perhaps one way for athlete leaders to relate with their teammates that results in better
individual and team performance (Yammarino, Dubinski, Comer, & Jolson, 1997). In
addition to coaches, it can be argued that athlete leaders can influence their teammates by
influencing them to buy into their vision and adopt their goals, characteristics indicative of a
transformational leader. Therefore these results contribute to the existing literature on an
adolescent‟s ability to demonstrate transformational leadership behaviours, and lend support
to its main principle as leaders have the ability to motivate others to achieve more (Bass,
Discussion 86
1998). Nonetheless, it would be interesting to investigate how peer leaders exhibit
transformational leader behaviours and in turn, the impact they have on the team.
Finally, one unique finding in the current study relates to the number of players
coaches felt could provide leadership to the team. While some literature has indicated that
coaches typically relied on one or two individuals on the team to motivate and direct their
teammates (Glenn & Horn, 1993), it was also suggested that leadership was available to
everyone within a group (Carron & Haussenblaus, 1998). Moreover, a series of studies on
athlete leaders have indicated that both formal and informal leaders on a team carry out
different tasks (Eys, Loughead, & Hardy, 2007; Dupuis et al., 2006; Loughead & Hardy,
2005; Loughead et al., 2006), suggesting that leadership relies on a group of individuals as
opposed to one leader. For instance, Loughead and Hardy found that two thirds of the
athletes in their study indicated that both team captains and teammates provided peer
leadership to their teams while the other third of athletes felt that captains served solely as
leaders. Results from this study are in partial agreement with the literature on team
leadership. Specifically, none of the coaches in the current study felt that leadership came
solely from their formal leaders (i.e., captains, assistant captains). They all indicated relying
on a group of peers to provide leadership to the team. Although coaches viewed leadership as
a collective responsibility, they did not all specify the exact number of leaders representing
this group, suggesting that an ideal number of athlete leaders on a team may vary from year
to year. In fact, one coach stated that each team member could influence one another by the
way they interacted with others and by the way they practiced. Thus, according to the present
results and previous literature, it appears that athlete leadership within a team is widespread,
allowing both coaches and teammates to rely on several individuals to guide and influence
Discussion 87
each other. Moreover, these results suggest that coaches must develop the leadership abilities
of each member on his team as any one member can influence the other.
Summary 88
CHAPTER 6
Summary of Study
In the past decade, researchers have attributed much attention investigating leadership
in sport. Recently, attention has shifted from coach leadership to athlete leadership. Most of
the research on athlete leadership has focused on characteristics and behaviours that were
obtained from a player‟s perspective. This limits the central role that a coach plays in the
team‟s success and in the development of their athlete leaders. The purpose of the current
study was to identify ice hockey coaches‟ perceptions of the factors influencing athlete
leadership.
Participants in the current study were six male ice hockey coaches of high
performance 16 to 20 year old athletes. These coaches were identified as the best in their
field by a group of knowledgeable hockey experts. These participants were invited to
participate in this study based on specific criteria. First, coaches needed to have a minimum
of five years coaching experience at the Quebec Midget AAA or Quebec Major Junior
Hockey League levels. Second, each participant must have completed at least a Level 3 in the
old National Coaching Certification Program (NCCP) and/or a competition stream
certification (e.g., high performance) from the new NCCP. Third, they needed to be a
member of a coaching staff (e.g., head coach, assistant coach) in an international competition
(e.g., World under 17 Championship, World under 18 Tournament, World Junior Hockey
Championship) in the past 10 years. All of the coaches were interviewed individually at a
mutually agreed upon date, time, and location across various cities in Quebec, Ontario, or
eastern Canada for a period ranging from 1 to 2 hours.
Summary 89
Semi structured, open-ended interviews were conducted following a pre-determined
format. The pre-interview routine involved building a rapport with the participants, the
completion of a consent form (Appendix D), and the completion of a demographic
questionnaire (Appendix E). Data were analyzed inductively using the guidelines put forth by
Côté, Salmela, and Russell (1995). Three higher-order categories emerged from the analysis
which indicated the coaches‟ personal experiences, the type of relationship shared with
athlete leaders, and the factors that influenced their perceptions of athlete leadership. These
three categories were called personal experiences and characteristics, daily coach tasks, and
athlete leadership. Personal experiences and characteristics pertained to the participants‟
journey beginning with their athletic career and culminating in their current coaching
position. This category also included the interpersonal characteristics that shaped their career.
Daily coach tasks described daily responsibilities, including interactions with players both on
and off the ice that directly or indirectly affected athlete leadership. Athlete leadership
involved the culminating process of how coaches identified and worked with the athlete
leaders on their team.
While each coach shared different coaching experiences, several commonalities
emerged. Coaches had a very clear understanding of the qualities they looked for in their
athlete leaders both on and off the ice. Moreover, coaches appeared to have shared positive
relationships with their athlete leaders throughout their careers. Finally, coaches used similar
approaches when developing athlete leaders. Interestingly, many of the findings that emerged
from the current study were consistent with those highlighted in previous literature pertaining
to athlete leadership. More specifically coaches viewed the importance of athlete leadership
in a similar manner to other athletes. This implies that athlete leadership is essential to both
Summary 90
athletes and coaches, and that coaching and team success can be affected by athlete
leadership. Therefore, coaches should invest in their athlete leaders by fostering a positive
relationship, developing his leadership skills, and guiding his actions.
Conclusions
Several coaches began playing hockey at an early age and reached different levels of
competition throughout their athletic careers, including the QMJHL and the Junior A
level.
Coaches held different leadership positions throughout their athletic career and
attributed these positions to seniority and hard work on the ice.
All of the participants had a unique coaching career path leading to their current
position. They began coaching at different levels, from the bantam and midget levels,
to the CIS, to the QMJHL.
All six coaches felt that their leadership behaviours were important and influenced the
team environment, including players and staff members.
Each coach developed a philosophy that guided his coaching career. Part of this
philosophy was the characteristics they looked for in their athletes, including work
ethic, discipline, and competitiveness.
All six coaches felt that success derived from having quality individuals on the team,
as well as the chemistry these players created amongst each other.
Coaches worked closely with their assistant coaches, ensuring that each delivered the
same message to the team.
Summary 91
All coaches felt that their biggest challenge was to help players reach their full
potential. In particular, coaches used different resources to enhance their players
performance, including statistics, video footage, and book excerpts.
All six coaches stressed the importance of meeting with their leaders to discuss the
team‟s climate.
Topics discussed during coach-athlete meetings involved individual or team
performance, and team objectives.
Three coaches felt that poor coach-athlete leader relationships occurred when athlete
leaders put their personal objectives ahead of the team‟s goal.
Several coaches attributed positive relationships they shared with their athletes to
mutual respect and openness between both parties.
All six coaches believed that caring about and trusting their leaders helped foster their
relationship.
All coaches listened to their leaders. They made a point to show their leaders that
their door was always open to talk.
Several coaches were attentive to the suggestions and opinions offered by their
leaders. They felt it was crucial to let their leaders know that their opinions would be
well received and applied when necessary.
Coaches felt that athlete leaders were an extension of the coaching staff and needed to
share similar values with all coaches.
The majority of coaches looked at a leader‟s age prior to ascribing a leadership
position. Maturity and playing experience in the league were factors that influenced
their leader selection.
Summary 92
One coach felt that age was not a factor when selecting a leader, rather a player
meshing with the coach‟s vision was most important.
Work ethic, discipline, leading by example, and following instructions were the most
important on-ice leader characteristics.
Coaches felt that off-ice qualities such as generosity, honesty, setting the right
example, and taking care of teammates were important for their athlete leaders.
All six coaches honed the leadership qualities of their leaders by empowering them to
make their own decisions.
The majority of coaches believed that leadership was a group function rather than
being the responsibility of the team captain and assistants.
Half of the coaches discussed the importance of role modeling. In particular, one
coach specified that athlete leaders served as role models to other teammates, while
two coaches required their athletes to be good models to younger members of the
community.
Over half of the coaches agreed that winning was the result of strong athlete
leadership.
Practical Implications
The current study is of interest to a variety of members in the sport community
including current and aspiring coaches, athletes, and sport administrators. The results of the
current study may provide current coaches with new information on how to identify their
leaders, cultivate positive relationships with them, and help them develop their leadership
skills. For example, recognizing that athletes are at the core of team success and that
leadership belongs to all team members suggests that coaches should allocate time and effort
Summary 93
to the development of leadership. Moreover, current and aspiring coaches may gain
knowledge on how coaches influenced the team identity by implementing their own type of
leadership within the organization, how their philosophies guided their thoughts on the
required assets and behaviours of their leaders, how they fostered positive relationships, and
how they enhanced the leadership skills of the formal and informal leaders on the team. With
this new information, current and aspiring coaches may re-evaluate their own leadership
behaviours, those of their athletes, as well as question the effectiveness of their actions in
establishing the leadership direction of the team. By modifying or adding some coaching
behaviours, they may develop better leaders, become better coaches, and ultimately enhance
the level of member satisfaction and performance of the team. The current study may also
help athletes learn about the behaviours exhibited by athlete leaders, the type of relationships
they shared with their coaches, and that leadership is available to all team members. Given
that the results of this study suggested that coaches empowered their athletes within their
leadership role, this information may allow athletes to be better prepared to deal with the
leadership expectations set by their coach and grasp the leadership opportunities that may
arise as they progress in sport. Furthermore, from a sport administrators perspective, the type
of interactions held between coaches and their leaders such as the topics discussed, their
readiness to listen, as well as the attention attributed to the methods used to reinforce the
leadership skills of their athletes can help refine and organize specific coach-athlete leader
sessions within coach education programs allowing the overall quality of the coach-athlete
leader interactions to increase.
Finally, these results may be used to help researchers understand the knowledge and
successful strategies used by coaches to obtain success with respect to athlete leadership. As
Summary 94
stated earlier, little empirical research has gathered the thoughts of expert coaches with
regards to athlete leadership. This knowledge can lead coaches to strengthen the leadership of
the team by carefully identifying, developing, and utilizing their athlete leader‟s influence
and aptitudes more effectively.
Limitations and Recommendations for Future Research
The objective of the current study was to address the limited research on the factors
influencing peer leadership from a coach‟s perspective. These results may not be generalized
as the sample size for this study was small (N = 6) and was purposefully chosen. These
findings may only be indicative of Midget AAA and QMJHL coaching experiences.
Moreover, these findings were gathered from North American coaches‟ perspective, and may
not be applicable to other ice hockey settings. Since the study investigated male coaches‟
perceptions, the results may only be relevant to that specific sex. Finally, as the study
pertained to coaches with a minimum of 5 years experience at the Midget AAA of QMJHL
level and with international coaching experience, one must be cautious not to over generalize
these results with less experienced coaches. As such, there a several future directions
researchers can consider. For instance, it may be interesting for researchers to replicate this
study with professional coaches. Given the different constraints of professional sports (i.e.,
veteran players, franchise players, salaries, team performance), it would be worthwhile to
draw comparisons between professional coaches and the current sample of coaches. In
addition, researchers could also investigate male coaches who coach women‟s hockey, and
therefore explore gender differences with respect to peer leadership. The current study can
also be replicated with other team sports including basketball, soccer, or volleyball to
investigate the potential differences as the nature of each these sports is different (i.e.,
Summary 95
number of players on the team, duration of season). This would add to the current study as
these findings were specific to the sport of ice hockey. Additionally, by gathering the
thoughts of female coaches, research on peer leadership in ice hockey would cover both the
men‟s and women‟s game.
While the results of the current study provided information regarding the thoughts
and perceptions of coaches on athlete leadership, many questions about athlete leadership can
still be explored. For instance, assistant coaches are sometimes the forgotten heroes, and thus
may provide a different perspective on athlete leadership. In particular, how involved are
assistant coaches from the selection process, to their interactions with athlete leaders, and
finally in their development. This study is a small step in the growing field of athlete
leadership, and thus, future studies investigating the influence of athlete leaders may use
these findings to advance research in this domain.
References 96
References
Abraham, A., & Collins, D. (1998). Examining and extending research in coach
development. Quest, 50, 59–79.
Arnold, P. (2001). Sport, moral development, and the role of the teacher: Implications for
research and moral education. Quest, 53, 135–150.
Avolio, B. J., & Bass, B. M. (1991). The full range of leadership development: Basic and
advanced manuals. Birmingham, NY: Bass, Avolio, & Associates.
Avolio, B. J., Bass, B. M., & Jung, D. (1999). Reexamining the components of
transformational and transactional leadership using the Multifactor Leadership
Questionnaire. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 7, 441–462.
Barling, J., Weber, T., & Kelloway, E. K. (1996). Effects of transformational leadership
training and attitudinal and fiscal outcomes: A field experiment. Journal of Applied
Psychology, 81, 827–832.
Bass, B. M. (1985). Leadership and performance beyond expectations. New York: Free
Press.
Bass, B. M. (1998). Transformational leadership: Individual, military and educational
impact. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Bass, B. M., & Riggio, R. E. (2006). Transformational leadership (2nd ed.). Mahwah, NJ:
Lawrence Erlbaum.
Beam, J. W., Serwatka, T. S., & Wilson, W. J. (2004). Preferred leadership of NCAA
Division I and II intercollegiate student-athletes. Journal of Sport Behavior, 27, 3–17.
References 97
Bloom, G. A. (1996). Life at the top: Philosophies of success. In J.H. Salmela (Ed.), Great
job coach! Getting the edge from proven winners (pp. 36-65). Ottawa, Canada:
Potentium.
Bloom, G. A. (2002). Coaching demands and responsibilities of expert coaches. In J. M.
Silva & D. E. Stevens (Eds.), Psychological foundations of sport (pp. 438–465).
Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
Bloom, G. A. (2007). Coaching psychology. In P. R. E Crocker (Ed.), Sport psychology: A
Canadian perspective (pp. 240–265). Toronto: Pearson.
Bloom, G. A., Crumpton, R., & Anderson, J. E. (1999). A systematic observation study of
the teaching behaviors of an expert basketball coach. The Sport Psychologist, 13,
157–170.
Bloom, G. A., Durand-Bush, N., & Salmela, J. H. (1997). Pre- and post competition routines
of expert coaches of team sports. The Sport Psychologist, 11, 127–141.
Bloom, G. A., Durand-Bush, N., Schinke, R. J., & Salmela, J. H. (1998). The importance of
mentoring in the development of coaches and athletes. International Journal of Sport
Bloom, G. A., & Salmela, J. H. (2000). Personal characteristics of expert team sport coaches.
Journal of Sport Pedagogy, 6, 56–76.
Bloom, G.A., Stevens, D.E., & Wickwire, T.L. (2003). Expert coaches‟ perceptions of team
building. Journal of Applied Sport Psychology, 15, 129–143.
Carron, A. V., & Hausenblas, H. A. (1998). Group dynamics in sport (2nd ed.). Morgantown,
WV: Fitness Information Technology.
References 98
Carter, A. D., & Bloom, G.A. (2009). Coaching knowledge and success: Going beyond
athletic experiences. Journal of Sport Behavior, 32, 419–437.
Charbonneau, D., Barling, J., & Kelloway, E. K. (2001). Transformational leadership and
sports performance: The mediating role of intrinsic motivation. Journal of Applied
Social Psychology, 31, 521–534.
Charmaz, K. (2008). Grounded theory. In J. A. Smith (Eds.), Qualitative psychology: a
practical guide to research methods (2nd ed., pp. 80-110). Los Angeles, CA: Sage.
Chelladurai, P. (1978). A contingency model of leadership in athletics. Unpublished doctoral
dissertation, Department of Management Sciences, University of Waterloo, Canada.
Chelladurai, P. (1984). Discrepancy between preferences and perceptions of leadership
behavior and satisfaction of athletes in varying sports. Journal of Sport Psychology,
6, 27–41.
Chelladurai, P. (1990). Leadership in sports: A review. International Journal of Sport
Chelladurai, P. (1993). Leadership. In R. N. Singer, M. Murphey, & L. K. Tennant (Eds.),
Handbook of research on sport psychology (pp. 647–671). New York: Macmillan.
Chelladurai, P. (2007). Leadership in sports. In Tenenbaum, G., & Eklund, R. C. (Eds.),
Handbook of sport psychology (3rd ed., pp. 113-135). Hoboken, New Jersey: John
Wiley & Sons.
Chelladurai, P., & Carron, A. V. (1983). Athletic maturity and preferred leadership. Journal
of Sport Psychology, 5, 371–380.
References 99
Chelladurai, P., & Riemer, H. A. (1998). Measurement of leadership in sport. In J. L. Duda
(Ed.), Advances in sport and exercise psychology measurement (pp. 227–253).
Morgantown, WV: Fitness Information Technology.
Chelladurai, P., & Saleh, S. D. (1980). Dimensions of leader behavior in sports:
Development of a leadership scale. Journal of Sport Psychology, 2, 34–45.
Côté, J., & Salmela, J. H. (1996). The organizational tasks of high-performance gymnastic
coaches. The Sport Psychologist, 10, 247–260.
Côté, J., Salmela, J. H., & Russell, S. J. (1995). The knowledge of high-performance
gymnastic coaches: Competition and training considerations. The Sport Psychologist,
9, 76–95.
Côté, J., Salmela, J. H., Trudel, P., Baria, A., & Russell, S. J. (1995). The coaching model: A
grounded assessment of expert gymnastics coaches‟ knowledge. Journal of Sport and
Exercise Psychology, 17, 1–17.
Davies, M. J., Bloom, G. A., & Salmela, J. H. (2005). Job satisfaction of accomplished male
university basketball coaches: The Canadian context. International Journal of Sport
Davies, M. B. (2007). Doing a successful research project. Hampshire: Palgrave Macmillan.
Desjardins, G. (1996). The mission. In J. H. Salmela (Ed.), Great job coach! Getting the edge
from proven winners (pp. 67–99). Ottawa, Canada: Potentium.
Dexter, L.A. (1970). Elite and specialized interviewing. Evanston, IL: Northwestern
University Press.
Draper, S. P. (1996). Coaching contexts. In J. H. Salmela (Ed.), Great job coach! Getting the
edge from proven winners (pp. 181–205). Ottawa, Canada: Potentium.
References 100
Dupuis, M., Bloom, G. A., & Loughead, T. M. (2006). Team captains‟ perceptions of athlete
leadership. Journal of Sport Behavior, 29, 60–78.
Durand-Bush, N. (1996). Training: blood, sweat, tears. In J. H. Salmela (Ed.), Great job
coach! Getting the edge from proven winners (pp. 103–137). Ottawa, ON: Potentium.
Durand-Bush, N., & Salmela, J. H. (2002). The development and maintenance of expert
athletic performance: Perceptions of World and Olympic champions. Journal of
Applied Sport Psychology, 14, 154–171.
Erle, F. J. (1981). Leadership in competitive and recreational sport. Unpublished master‟s
thesis, University of Western Ontario, London, Canada.
Eys, M. A., Loughead, T. M., & Hardy, J. 2007. Athlete leadership dispersion and
satisfaction in interactive sport teams. Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 8, 281–296.
Gallimore, R., & Tharp, R. (2004). What a coach can teach a teacher, 1975–2004:
Reflections and reanalysis of John Wooden‟s teaching practices. The Sport
Psychologist, 18, 119–137.
Gardner, D. E., Shields, D. L., Bredemeir, B. J., & Bostrom, A. (1996). The relationship
between perceived coaching behaviors and team cohesion among baseball and
softball players. The Sport Psychologist, 10, 367–381.
Giacobbi, P. R., Roper, E., Whitney, J., & Butryn, T. (2002). College coaches views about
the development of successful athletes: A descriptive exploratory investigation.
Journal of Sport Behavior, 25, 164–180.
Gilbert, W. D., Côté, J., & Mallett, C. (2006). Developmental paths and activities of
successful sport coaches. International Journal of Sports Sciences and Coaching, 1,
69-76.
References 101
Gilbert, W. D., & Trudel, P. (2000). Validation of the Coaching Model (CM) in a team sport
context. International Sports Journal, 4, 120–128.
Gilbert, W. D., & Trudel, P. (2004). Analysis of coaching science research published from
1970-2001. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 75, 388–999.
Glenn, S. D., & Horn, T. S. (1993) Psychological and personal predictors of leadership
behavior in female soccer athletes. Journal of Applied Sport Psychology, 5, 17–34.
Gould, D., Dieffenbach, K., & Moffett, A. (2002). Psychological characteristics and their
development in Olympic champions. Journal of Applied Sport Psychology, 14, 172–
204.
Gould, D., Guinan, D., Greenleaf, C., Medbery, R., & Peterson, K. (1999). Factors affecting
Olympic performance: Perceptions of athletes and coaches from more and less
successful teams. The Sport Psychologist, 13, 371–394.
Gould, D., Hodge, K, Peterson, K., & Petlichkoff, L. (1987). Psychological foundations of
coaching: Similarities and differences among intercollegiate wrestling coaches. The
Sport Psychologist, 1, 293–308.
Greenleaf, C. A., Gould, D., & Dieffenbach, K. (2001). Factors influencing Olympic
performance: Interviews with Atlanta and Nagano U.S. Olympians. Journal of
Holmes, R. M., Mcneil, M., Adorna, P., & Procaccino, J. K. (2008) Collegiate student
athletes' preferences and perceptions regarding peer relationships. Journal of Sport
Behavior, 31, 338–351.
Horn, T. S. (2002). Coaching effectiveness in the sport domain. In T. S. Horn (2nd Ed),
Advances in sport psychology. (pp. 309–354). Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.
References 102
Horn, T. S. (2008). Coaching effectiveness in the sport domain. In Horn, T. S. (Ed.),
Advances in sport psychology (3rd ed., pp. 239–268). Champaign, IL: Human
Kinetics.
Horne, T., & Carron, A. V. (1985). Compatibility in coach-athlete relationships. Journal of
Sport Psychology, 7, 137–149.
Jackson, P., & Delehanty, H. (1995). Sacred Hoops: Spiritual lessons of a hardwood
warrior. New York: Hyperion.
Jowett, S. (2003). When the “honeymoon” is over: A case study of a coach-athlete dyad in
crisis. The Sport Psychologist, 17, 444–460.
Jowett, S., & Cockerill, I. M. (2003). Olympic medallists‟ perspective of the athlete–coach
relationship. Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 4, 313–331.
Jowett, S., & Meek, G. A. (2000). The coach–athlete relationship in married couples: An
exploratory content analysis. The Sport Psychologist, 14, 157–175.
Kenow, L., & Williams, J. (1998). Coach-athlete compatibility and athlete's perception of
coaching behaviors. Journal of Sport Behaviour, 22, 251–259.
Kvale, S., & Brinkmann, S. (2008). Interviews: Learning the craft of research interviewing.
Los Angeles, CA: Sage.
Lee, M. J., Coburn, T., & Partridge, R. (1983). The influence of team structure in
determining leadership function in association football. Journal of Sport Behavior, 6,
59–66.
Lemyre, F., Trudel, P., & Durand-Bush, N. (2007). How youth-sport coaches learn to coach.
The Sport Psychologist, 21, 191-209.
Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. London: Sage.
References 103
Lindauer, J. (2000). A comparison of preferred coaching leadership behaviors of college
athletes in individual and team sports. Unpublished master‟s thesis, University of
Wisconsin, La Crosse.
Loughhead, T. M., & Hardy, J. (2005). An examination of coach and peer leader
behaviors in sport. Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 6, 303–312.
Loughead, T. M., Hardy, J., & Eys, M. A. (2006). The nature of athlete leadership. Journal of
Sport Behavior, 29, 142–158.
Lyle, J. (2002). Sports coaching concepts: A framework for coaches’ behaviour. New York:
Routledge.
Maxwell, J. C. (1996). Qualitative research design: An interactive approach. Beverly Hills,
CA: Sage.
Maxwell, J. C. (2007). The 21 irrefutable laws of leadership. Nashville, TN: Thomas Nelson.
Mosher, M. (1979). The team captain. Volleyball Technical Journal, 4, 7–8.
Nazarudin, M. N., Fauzee, M. S., Jamalis, M., Geok, S. K., & Din, A. (2009). Coaching
leadership styles and athlete satisfactions among Malaysian university basketball
team. Research Journal of International Studies, 9, 4–11.
Newin, J., Bloom, G.A., & Loughead, T.M. (2008). Youth ice hockey coaches‟ perceptions
of a team-building intervention program. The Sport Psychologist, 22, 54–72.
Northouse, P. G. (2001). Leadership: Theory and practice (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA:
Sage.
Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative research and evaluation methods (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks,
CA: Sage.
References 104
Philippe, R. A., & Seiler, R. (2006). Closeness, co-orientation and complementarity in coachathlete relationships: What male swimmers say about their male coaches. Psychology
of Sport & Exercise, 7, 159–171.
Poczwardowski, A., Barott, J. E., & Henschen, K. P. (2002). The athlete and coach: Their
relationship and its meaning. Results of an interpretive study. International Journal of
Sport Psychology, 33, 116–140.
Poczwardowski, A., Barott, J. E., & Peregoy, J. J. (2002). The athlete and coach; Their
relationship and its meaning. International Journal of Sport Psychology, 33, 98–115.
Potrac, P., Brewer, C., Jones, R., Armour, K., & Hoff, J. (2000). Toward an holistic
understanding of the coaching process. Quest, 52, 186–199.
Riemer, H., & Chelladurai, P. (1998). Leadership and satisfaction in sport. Journal of Sport
and Exercise Psychology, 3, 276–293.
Rowold, J. (2006). Transformational and transactional leadership in martial arts. Journal of
Rubin, H. J., & Rubin, S. I. (1995). Qualitative interviewing: The art of hearing data.
London: Sage.
Salmela, J.H. (1994). Tracing the roots of expert coaches: Searching for inspiration. Coaches
Report, 11, 9-11.
Salmela, J. H. (1996). Great job coach! Getting the edge from proven winners. Ottawa,
Canada: Potentium.
Schinke, R. J., Bloom, G. A., & Salmela, J. H. (1995). The career stages of elite Canadian
basketball coaches. Avante, 1, 48-62.
References 105
Semaine Québécoise des Entraîneurs (2005). Compétences des entraîneurs. Retrieved on
September 1st, 2009 from
http://www.semainedesentraineurs.com/sqe/index_f.aspx?DetailID=861
Sherman, C. A., & Fuller, R. (2000). Gender comparisons of preferred coaching behaviors in
Australian sports. Journal of Sport Behavior, 23, 389–406.
Smith, R. E, & Smoll, F. L. (2002). Youth sport as a behavioral setting for psychosocial
interventions. In J. L. Van Raalte & B. W. Brewers (Eds.), Exploring sport and
exercise psychology (pp. 341–371). Washington, DC: American Psychological
Association.
Smoll, F. L., & Smith, R. E. (1989). Leader behaviors in sport: A theoretical model and
research paradigm. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 19, 1522–1551.
Sparkes, A. C. (1998). Validity in qualitative inquiry and the problem of criteria:
Implications for sport psychology. The Sport Psychologist, 12, 363–386.
Strean, W. B. (1998). Possibilities for qualitative research in sport psychology. The Sport
Psychologist, 12, 333–345.
Terry, P. C. (1984). The coaching preferences of elite athletes competing at the Univesiade ‟
83. The Canadian Journal of Applied Sport Science, 9, 201–208.
Terry, P. C., & Howe, B. L. (1984). Coaching preferences of athletes. Canadian Journal of
Applied Sport Sciences, 9, 188–193.
Tesch, R. (1990). Qualitative research analysis types and software tools. New York: Falmer.
Thelwell, R. C., Weston, N. J. V., Greenlees, I. A., & Hutchings, N. V. (2008). A qualitative
exploration of psychological skills use in coaches. The Sport Psychologist, 22, 38–53.
References 106
Todd, S. Y., & Kent, A. (2004). Perceptions of the role differentiation behaviors of ideal peer
leaders: a study of adolescent athletes. International Sports Journal, 8, 105–118.
Torre, J., & Verducci, T. (2009). The yankee years. New York: Doubleday.
Vallée, C. N., & Bloom, G. A. (2005). Building a successful university sport program: Key
and common elements of expert coaches. Journal of Applied Sport Psychology, 17,
179–196.
Werthner, P. & Trudel, P. (2006). A new theoretical perspective for understanding how
coaches learn to coach. The Sport Psychologist, 20, 198-212.
Westre, K., & Weiss, M. (1991). The relationship between perceived coaching behaviors and
group cohesion in high school football teams. The Sport Psychologist, 5, 41–54.
Wilson, L. M., Bloom, G. A., & Harvey, W. J. (2010). Sources of knowledge acquisition:
Perspectives of the high school teacher/coach. Physical Education and Sport
Pedagogy, 15, 383–399.
Wooden, J. (1988). They call me coach. Chicago, IL: Contemporary Books.
Wright, A., & Côté, J. (2003). A retrospective analysis of leadership development through
sport. The Sport Psychologist, 17, 268–291.
Yammarino, F. J., Dubinsky, A. J., Comer L. B., & Jolson, M. A. (1997). Women and
transformational and contingent reward leadership: A multiple-levels-of-analysis
perspective. Academy of Management Journal, 40, 205–222.
Yuan-Sheng, W., & Henrich, T. (2007). Relationships between the Perception of Coaching
Leadership Behaviors and Satisfaction among Taiwanese Collegiate Tae Kwon Do
Competitors. Journal of the International Council for Health, Physical Education,
Recreation, Sport & Dance, 43, 16–20.
References 107
Yukelson, D., Weinberg, R., Richardson, P., & Jackson, A. (1983). Interpersonal attraction
and leadership within collegiate sport teams. Journal of Sport Behavior, 6, 28–36.
Zacharatos, A., Barling, J., & Kelloway, E. K. (2000). Development and effects of
transformational leadership in adolescents. Leadership Quarterly, 11, 211–226.
Appendices 108
Appendix A
The Coaching Model (CM)
Goal: Developing Athletes
Coach‟s Personal
Characteristics
Athletes‟ Personal
Characteristics
Coach’s Mental Model
of Athletes’ Potential
Competition
Training
Organization
Contextual Factors
Adapted from:
Côté, J., Salmela, J. H., Trudel, P., Baria, A., & Russell, S. J. (1995). The coaching model:
A grounded assessment of expert gymnastic coaches‟ knowledge. Journal of Sport &
Exercise Psychology, 17, 1-17.
Appendices 109
Appendix B
Multidimensional Model of Leadership
SITUATIONAL
CHARACTERISTICS
(1)
LEADER
CHARACTERISTICS
(2)
REQUIRED
BEHAVIOR
(4)
PERFORMANCE
ACTUAL
BEHAVIOR
(5)
SATISFACTION
(7)
MEMBER
CHARACTERISTICS
(3)
PREFERRED
BEHAVIOR
(6)
Adapted from:
Chelladurai, P. (1978). A contingency model of leadership in athletics. Unpublished
doctoral dissertation, Department of Management Sciences, University of Waterloo,
Ontario, Canada.
Appendices 110
Appendix C
INFORMED CONSENT FORM
McGill University requires that participants be informed of the details of any research study in
which they participate. However, this does not imply that the participant is put at risk through
their participation; the intention is simply to ensure the respect and confidentiality of individuals
concerned. This study is in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of
Arts for Joseph Bucci, a graduate student in sport psychology, in the Department of Kinesiology
and Physical Education at McGill University.
The purpose of this study is to explore the factors influencing coaches‟ perceptions of athlete
leadership. If you participate in this study you will be requested, without payment, to partake in a
90 minute interview which will be audio taped. If more information is necessary, then a followup telephone conversation may occur. Once the interview is complete, you will obtain a typed
transcript, which may be edited at your discretion. Prior to publishing, you will also receive
copies of the results and the conclusion of the study. The information you provide here will
remain confidential, and all the data will be destroyed 2 years after the study ends. The
information disclosed during the interview will remain confidential and will be used for
publication purposes in scholarly journals or for presentations at conferences. The researchers
will not disclose names or identify of the participants at any time.
Your participation in this study is voluntary and not mandatory. You are free to withdraw
from participation at any time, for any reason, without penalty or prejudice.
I (please print your name),
, have read the above statements
and have had the directions verbally explained to me. I freely consent and voluntarily agree to
participate in this research project based on the terms outlined in this consent form. I recognize
that I may refuse to continue participation at any time, without penalty, and that all the
information gathered will remain confidential.
Signature
Please feel free to contact us at any time:
Joseph Bucci
Master‟s Candidate, Sport Psychology
Dept. of Kinesiology & Phys. Education
McGill University, Montreal, Quebec
[email protected]
Date
Gordon Bloom, Ph.D.
Graduate Program in Sport Psychology
Dept. of Kinesiology & Phys. Education
McGill University, Montreal, Quebec
(514) 398-4184 ext. 0516
[email protected]
Appendices 111
Appendix D
Ethical Acceptability
Appendices 112
Appendix E
Demographic Questionnaire
1. Name: _____________________
2. Age:
_____________________
3. E-mail: _________________________________________________________________
4. Address: ________________________________________________________________
5. Phone Number (home, work, and cell).
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
6a. Current coaching position:
______________________________________________________________________________
6b. Number of years in your current position:
______________________________________________________________________________
6c. Best seasonal record as a head coach at Midget AAA or higher:
______________________________________________________________________________
7. Past success as a head coach (list personal coaching awards, team championships, recognition)
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
Appendices 113
8. Please list individual awards/accomplishments that formal leaders (i.e., captains, assistant
captains) you have coached have received (e.g., academic, athletic, humanitarian, community)
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
Appendices 114
Appendix F
Interview Guide
Pre-Interview Routine
Introduction
Consent Form
Demographic Questionnaire
Opening Questions:
1. Briefly discuss your athletic career including previous leadership positions?
□ Relationships with coaches
2. Can you briefly describe your coaching experience and progression for me?
3. Describe your coaching philosophy?
4. How would you describe your leadership style?
Key Questions
Interviewer: Now I would like you to answer the following questions with respect to formal
athlete leaders (i.e., team captains, assistant captains).
5. How does your leadership style influence the type of leader you look for with the
teams you coach?
6. How do you identify your team leaders?
□ What do you look for in a team leader?
7. How does your vision of the team‟s potential influence the type of characteristics
you look for in an athlete leader from year to year?
□ Age
□ Past leadership role
□ Leading by example
□ Bringing the team together
□ Leader potential
□ Skill level
□ Experience/Tenure
8. What are some of the responsibilities and behaviours that you require/expect your
team leaders to fulfill?
9. What are the main topics of discussion that you share with the team leaders?
Appendices 115
□ Team performance
□ Player attitude
□ Ice-related or off- ice related
10. Looking back to the year where your team had the best record or success in the
playoffs, how much of an impact did your team leaders play?
□ During the regular season
□ In the playoffs
11. Describe the best relationship you have had with team leaders and what made your
interactions effective.
□ Daily meetings
□ Pre-game and post game meetings
□ Monthly wrap-ups
12. Briefly describe the worse team leaders you have coached and what went wrong.
□ Communication
□ Trust
□ Commitment
13. From your experience, what are the key factors that differentiate great athlete leaders
from average athlete leaders?
14. Do you think a coach has any impact on their leadership development?
□ If a coach answer is “yes”, how does a coach foster that development?
□ If “no”, why doesn‟t the coach foster that development?
Concluding Questions:
15. Would you like to add anything else related to our interview?
16. Do you have any final question or comments?
Appendices 116
Appendix G
Alphabetical Listing of the Frequency of Topics Discussed by Each Participant
Tags
n
C1 C2 C3 C4 C5 C6
Athletic Career - Player
5
1
3
0
1
0
0
Athletic Career - C/A Relationship
7
2
4
0
1
0
0
Athletic Career - Leadership Experience
6
1
1
0
2
1
0
Athletic Career - Role Models
2
0
2
0
0
0
0
Career Progression - Head Coach
11
1
3
1
2
1
3
Career Progression - Assistant Coach
10
1
1
0
3
1
4
Coach-Athlete Meetings
49
9
9
6
5
15
5
Coach-Athlete Trust/Respect
34
9
8
4
5
4
4
Coach-Athlete Listening to Leaders
21
5
1
1
8
4
2
Coach-Athlete Poor Relationship
27
4
12
3
2
6
0
Coach Learning from Leaders
3
0
3
0
0
0
0
Coach Leadership Style
27
1
5
1
8
5
7
Coach Managing Players
11
1
5
2
0
0
3
Coach Philosophy
41
4
7
7
9
5
9
Coach Working with Staff
13
1
7
1
3
0
1
Collective Leadership
17
0
1
7
3
2
4
Coach Thoughts and Beliefs
82
9
6
16 15 14 22
Coach Supporting Athletes
7
0
5
2
0
0
0
General Coaching Responsibilities
27
1
8
3
9
1
5
Leader Development
81
5
9
16 13 16 22
Leader Characteristics (General)
36
2
8
1
9
8
8
Leader Buy-In
8
0
4
1
2
0
1
Leader Identification - Choosing a Captain
49 22
9
4
1
11
2
Leader Identification - Getting to Know Players
28
6
7
2
6
2
5
Leader identification -Player Characteristics
72
6
16 14
9
13 14
Leader identification - Coach/Player Values
21
8
0
2
0
5
6
Leader Identification - Testing Players
21
0
5
2
7
5
2
Leader Impact - Surprises
7
1
1
0
0
3
2
Leader Impact- Team Success
9
1
0
0
3
4
1
Leader Impact- Team Values
6
4
0
0
0
0
2
Leader Impact - Influence Teammates
22
3
8
1
1
7
2
Leader Impact - Team Oriented
7
4
2
0
1
0
0
Leader Responsibilities - Cohesion
8
1
1
0
5
1
0
Leader Responsibilities - Managing Emotions
8
3
2
0
1
2
0
Leader Responsibilities - Conveying Team Values 4
2
0
0
0
0
2
Leader Responsibilities - Coach Messages
10
3
2
1
4
0
0
Leader Responsibilities - Dressing Room
6
0
0
0
2
2
2
Leader Responsibilities - Code of Conduct
8
0
5
1
0
0
2
Modifying Coach Behaviours
6
2
1
0
2
1
0
Non Letter Leaders
4
0
2
0
0
2
0
Role Modelling
11
4
2
0
0
0
5
Team Characteristics (General)
22
0
13
1
2
5
1
Total
853 127 188 100 144 146 148

Coaches` Perceptions of Athlete Leadership

Transcription

Documents pareils

2015 girls` state golf tournaments

the french coaches association

Coaching and Culture - Towards the Global Coach

20 Apr 2016 ETTU Coaching Seminar - Budapest/HUN

Curriculum vitae

Spielautomaten Manipulieren Mit Handy

IDÉE DE PROGRÈS

Answers - Worksheet part 1