Abstract

There is a considerable body of research by that has investigated the coach–athlete relationship in sport. However, given the multi-disciplinary nature of modern elite coaching, there is a scarcity of research focusing on the relationship between coaches and other members of the coaching and support team. This study examined the perceptions of six elite professional football analyst’s relationships with their respective coaches. Semi structured interviews utilizing the COMPASS Framework were conducted focusing on Conflict, Openness, Motivation, Preventative Strategies, Assurance, Support, and Social Networks. The results verified that the COMPASS Model of relationship maintenance was applicable to this dyad. Content analysis indicated that there was 215 raw data units comprising of 16 higher order themes across the model which was further broken down into 29 lower order themes. All aspects of the model were found to contribute toward a positively maintained relationship. Having an open relationship underpinned by honesty and being able to provide an opinion was seen as the highest rated attribute that was closely followed by supporting the coach by understanding their requirements for successful coaching practice. Not meeting the coach’s expectations was found to cause conflict and was further highlighted by an inductive analysis that revealed the existence of a relationship that is fundamentally dictated by the coach. Implications of this investigation are that professionals which support elite performers need to set out clear expectations of working practice and hierarchies in order to minimize the chance of internal conflict that can impact on the service levels received by the performer.

Highlights

  • O’Donoghue (2010) showcased that performance analysis has become a validated support structure for coaches and athletes and there is a body of research which investigates the role of the analyst (Bampouras et al, 2012; Wright et al, 2013) and the perceptions of performance analysis within the coaching process (Francis and Jones, 2014; Wright et al, 2016), there is a scarcity of information surrounding the way coaches create, interact and maintain working relationships with

  • Research has been conducted around the maintenance of relationships, including the conceptualization of the COMPASS Model and Coach–Athlete Relationship Maintenance Questionnaire (CARM-Q) validation process (Rhind and Jowett, 2010, 2012) which has provided valuable insights of coaches within typical dyads in sport

  • The results were; Support (18.1%), Preventative Strategies (16.3%), Motivation and Social Networks (14.5%), Conflict Management (11.2%), and Assurance (6%). of the total raw data, Openness provided statements by five out of six participants it had the highest total number of raw data units of any of the themes commanding 19.5% of the total number of units

Read more

Summary

Introduction

O’Donoghue (2010) showcased that performance analysis has become a validated support structure for coaches and athletes and there is a body of research which investigates the role of the analyst (Bampouras et al, 2012; Wright et al, 2013) and the perceptions of performance analysis within the coaching process (Francis and Jones, 2014; Wright et al, 2016), there is a scarcity of information surrounding the way coaches create, interact and maintain working relationships withCoach–Analyst Relationship Maintenance Strategies performance analysts (Wright et al, 2013). All interviews adopted a semi structured format utilizing open ended questions and prompts where required to elicit deeper insight (Patton, 2002) This pattern was followed regardless of the sample size being small (n = 2) (Jowett, 2003) or large (n = 30) (Jowett and Carpenter, 2015). This enabled free expression of the athletes, without worry of their coaches’ involvement or retort (McKenna and Mutrie, 2003). Rhind and Jowett (2010) recruited unconnected coaches and athletes as previous studies had shown this amplified the range and scope of the data to make it more generalizable in the wider sporting context

Objectives
Methods
Results
Conclusion
Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.