Professionals register now to create your own content and profile, and gain other potential financial, networking and marketing benefits.
Consumers (athletes, enthusiasts) use our quick registration to enhance your experience of the site
Do Coaches need to know the Game?
Originally Posted on the Pilote Sport Blog (Friday 27th June, 2008)
A controversial post for Monday Morning to stimulate some debate.
I've got a problem with coaches. Not all coaches mind you, just the ones that set themselves up as motivators, but have no technical knowledge about the subject at hand. This is especially true of the trendy new job of 'life coach.'
Now a newly published study by Amanda Goodall, Lawrence Kahn, and Andrew Oswald (Opens in PDF) finds that having expert knowledge of the thing you are coaching definitely matters. The Abstract of the report says "We show that a strong predictor of a leader's success... is that person s own level of attainment, in the underlying activity... Our data come from 15,000 professional basketball games and reveal that former star players make the best coaches. This expert knowledge effect is large."
How Large? The report finds substantial evidence that the difference between having a coach who never played NBA basketball and one who played many years of NBA all star basketball is, on average, approximately 6 extra places up the NBA league table. In a league where there are 29 teams, this is significant.
The report also tries to draw some conclusions as to why this is the case. One possibility is that the same quality that drove the individual to the top of the game still exists, an 'x-factor' that determines success. Other explanations include an ability to impart expert knowledge that can only be acquired by playing the game. A third hypothesis offered is that players who are recognised as 'greats' command more respect from those who are at the top of their game in the present, whereas lesser players, or those who have never played the game would find it harder to convince current players of their credentials.
There may be exceptions, but at last there are some hard facts that show that a coach with expert knowledge will provide better results than a coach who is 'motivating' only.
A controversial post for Monday Morning to stimulate some debate.
I've got a problem with coaches. Not all coaches mind you, just the ones that set themselves up as motivators, but have no technical knowledge about the subject at hand. This is especially true of the trendy new job of 'life coach.'
Now a newly published study by Amanda Goodall, Lawrence Kahn, and Andrew Oswald (Opens in PDF) finds that having expert knowledge of the thing you are coaching definitely matters. The Abstract of the report says "We show that a strong predictor of a leader's success... is that person s own level of attainment, in the underlying activity... Our data come from 15,000 professional basketball games and reveal that former star players make the best coaches. This expert knowledge effect is large."
How Large? The report finds substantial evidence that the difference between having a coach who never played NBA basketball and one who played many years of NBA all star basketball is, on average, approximately 6 extra places up the NBA league table. In a league where there are 29 teams, this is significant.
The report also tries to draw some conclusions as to why this is the case. One possibility is that the same quality that drove the individual to the top of the game still exists, an 'x-factor' that determines success. Other explanations include an ability to impart expert knowledge that can only be acquired by playing the game. A third hypothesis offered is that players who are recognised as 'greats' command more respect from those who are at the top of their game in the present, whereas lesser players, or those who have never played the game would find it harder to convince current players of their credentials.
There may be exceptions, but at last there are some hard facts that show that a coach with expert knowledge will provide better results than a coach who is 'motivating' only.
Post A Comment
You need to be signed into istadia.com to post comments
If you are not a member yet, registering is quick and easy! Click here for Quick Registration and keep up to date with what is happening, engage in some networking and access to iStadia’s expert community.
However if you are a sport & exercise professional or business and would like to promote yourself by building a detailed, search-engine friendly profile and posting content to attract potential clients, customers or employers, we recommend Full Registration.
Comments
Coaches that know how to play the game competitively must have a head's start over one that hasn't and I'm pleased that there is some evidence to support this.
Now there is an interesting argument over what a coach does that is motivating only? Does this mean that they are non-technical and have some background in psychology or not? Presumably this is important? But say, does 2 weeks of NLP equate to several years of undergraduat/postgraduate study supported by professional accreditation? And what about life experience - surely this is worth something? OK, lets assume that the client has had the wherewithall to ensure that 'coach' is appropriately qualified. If so then how important is it if he/she works along side someone that has the technical knowledge? Surely then you have the potential of some synergy, the 1 + 1 making 3 or more. To some extent it will be up to the client to decide if expert knowledge regarding a said sport is important. So if you had a choice between a mental skills coach with expert knowledge of your sport and another mental skills coach with what appeared to be similar experience with no knowledge of your sport, which one would you choose. Hmm...
And yes, as you quite rightly point out there are always exceptions, Jose Mourinho now football 'coach' of Inter Milan to name but one. A real motivator with technical knowledge can be priceless eg. Ferguson and Wenger at Man Utd and Arsenal respectively.
My own view is that knowledge of the game in question is important even if you are working with a coach with experience/previous success etc because he/she needs to work with and understand what the coach is doing. However amongst sport psychologists I am probably in the minority. I restrict my own work to the sports I have competed in namely golf and skiing.
What's more interesting, taking this point further; what about all those life coaches who get involved in leadership coaching/mentoring/seminars/workshops etc who have never led anything in their lives. Sorting out some priority over goals is one thing but understanding performance issues that may revolve around millions of pounds is quite another. But does this really matter? To all those coaches who have never been in a leadership position (the majority) will say no it doesn't. However for some clients, a shoulder to cry on is all they may need and a good listener may fulful this. A leader using a 'life coach' is going to be much more credible than using a counsellor. The former will look OK on expenses, the latter may give rise to questions over his/her position!
This is a very brief and somehat simplistic view over this issue and there are clearly points to be made on both sides of the coin but it may come down to how you define a 'coach' - technical or a 'life coach' - non-technical and where experience, knowledge (academic or otherwise) and just as importantly success comes in. Buyer beware?
Keith
Keith Irving
iStadia
So not being a player doesn't stop you from becoming an expert. My mother (dragon) was an international coach in gymnastics but wouldn't be ashamed to tell you that she couldn't do a back somersault. So, as Keith says, being a top player can be a head start, but that can be overcome.
I'm not sure that there is much of a role for people, in sport, who purely coach a process (i.e. life coaching), and don't have the content to back it up - either technical, tactical, physical, mental or all of these things. The exception might be a counsellor - but they are not coaches but ancillary to the coaching staff. Of course that also brings in the distinction between a coach of a sport (e.g. a basketball coach) and a specialist coach (e.g. strength and conditioning) who can work across sports. The specialist, could, of course, become an expert in one sport over time....
--
Rob Robson
Co-founder, iStadia.com
Life coaching and executive coaching is something very different, as is counselling and psychotherapy. The latter could be likened to GP's in the sense that it's certainly not necessary to have experienced every ailment or mental disorder in order to be effective in helping others overcome these. I've never had a phobia or panic attacks for example, but have helped others to overcome these. For life and executive coaching however, I think this is closer to the sports coaching model in that life experience and business/boardroom experience is certainly going to be of benefit, not least for credibility's sake.
In sports psychology, I believe having a knowledge of the sports you're involved in is an advantage, but is it essential? After all, aren't sports psychologists experts in psychology, while their clients are experts in their own sports? That said, the ability to understand the sportsperson you're dealing with, and being able to communicate effectively as a result, cannot be underestimated, and the best way of doing this is surely to have some experience of that sport, even if it's only at a social level.
Gary Baker
The Centre for Sports Hypnosis
--
Rob Robson
Co-founder, iStadia.com
I was discussing something similar with a university sports psychologist a little while ago, where he was concerned about "tickbox psychology" (my words not his), and that there was perhaps too many people with just a toolkit of interventions that they applied for a specific problem, and were unable (or just didn't know how) to look beyond that, or take a wider view of the patient/client and his or her situation. I don't know how true this is for sports psychology, but it sounds similar to what you are saying.
(Gone a bit off topic, sorry!)
Gary Baker
The Centre for Sports Hypnosis
--
Rob Robson
Co-founder, iStadia.com