• Find the Motive -- sit down and find out why your players are even playing?  
• Create a Shared Identity -- most people want to be a part of something larger than themselves
• Honey over Vinegar -- despite the stereotypes of the yelling, screaming coach, it rarely works in the long run.  Develop positive feedback loops to cultivate player success.
• Goal Setting -- set individual and team goals to measure success along the way
• Accountability -- hold coaches and players accountable.

 Here are 33 great changes that you can make to improve your program. 

ttp://www.bourgase.com/courses/downloads/Coach_Brock_Bourgase_Thirty_Three_Coaching_Changes.pdf

Coaching Skills

As a coach you will find that you need to develop many skills. These include:

• know how to communicate effectively with your athletes
• understand the learning process and training principles
• understand and implement appropriate teaching methods
• understand the various coaching styles
• understand long term athletic development (LTAD)
• understand the capabilities of growing children
• advise athletes on track safety
• understand the causes and recognise the symptoms of over-training
• understand how to reduce the risk of injury to your athletes
• prepare training programs to meet the needs of each athlete
• assist athletes to develop new skills
• use evaluation tests to monitor training progress and predicting performance
• advise athletes on their nutritional needs
• understand and know how to develop the athlete's energy systems
• advise athletes on relaxation, visualisation and mental imagery skills
• advise athletes on the use of legal supplements
• evaluate the athlete's competition performance
• evaluate athlete/training and athlete/coach performance

Which one are you?  More importantly, which one builds mental toughness?  (I could tell you but that would go against my own coaching style.)

From www.brianmac.co.uk...

Styles of Coaching

There are perhaps two coaching styles - autocratic (do as I say) and democratic (involve the athletes in decision making). The autocratic style could be broken into two types - telling and selling and the democratic style into sharing and allowing. Coaches will use a variety of styles/types depending on the coaching situation.

Autocratic Style - Telling

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

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

Autocratic Style - Selling

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

e.g. in a circuit training session the athletes are informed of the exercises in the circuit. The coach explains the object of circuit training and the purpose of each exercise. Athletes can ask questions to clarify any points.

Democratic Style - Sharing

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

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

Democratic Style - Allowing

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

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

Alternative styles

B. Woods (Applying psychology to Sport, Hodder & Stoughton, 1998) identified 4 styles of coaching:

• Command style - direct instruction, coach dictates
• Reciprocal style - athlete takes some responsibility for their own development, monitored by the coach
• Problem solving style - athlete solves problems set by the coach
• Guided discovery - athlete has freedom to explore various options

 

We hear it all the time -- what is your coaching style?  That could be the wrong question.  If we're 'customer focused', shouldn't we be more concerned with our players' learning style?

There are several styles of coaching that do not adequately serve to aid in a young athlete developing skill, yet are none-the-less common amongst North American coaches and trainers. An example of this would be the 'Command Coach'. Command coaches presume that the young athlete is a submissive receiver of instruction. The instructions given and information offered moves in one direction only: from the coach to the athlete. Coaches who display this habit believe that coaching success is based on how well the athlete can reproduce the skills as taught or demonstrated by the coach. There are also various misappropriations relating to how young athletes actually learn -

1. Mirrors - Many coaches believe that young athletes will learn by merely reflecting the actions and nature of their coach. In this example, the coach or trainer is the most important figure in the relationship in that the athlete is a reflection of him or her.
2. Empty Buckets - Many coaches make the mistake of assuming that young athletes are akin to an empty bucket in that their heads will fill up with the information the coach or trainer offers.
3. Sponges - Much like the 'Empty Bucket' notion, very often a coach or trainer will make the assumption that as they deliver information, a given young athlete will soak it up unreservedly.

Unfortunately, optimal learning does not occur in any of these ways. These aforementioned theories fail on several levels:

• Individual differences among athletes' learning styles are not addressed
• Varying levels of physical maturity and prior athletic experiences are not considered
• Does not account for the needs or interests of each individual athlete
• Fails to recognize that "cognitive processes are important in learning physical skills

We all interact with and gather information from the world and people around us through our five senses: seeing, hearing, touching (and feeling), smelling and tasting. However, each of us will tend to rely upon just one or two senses in most situations to help us connect with the world and re-present it to ourselves internally for interpretation and understanding. These preferred senses are our primary or lead representational systems and they are extremely important, for they will be the first we use, will be consistent across time and will enable us to rapidly assess and derive deeper meaning from our encounters and experiences.

You may be:

• a visual athlete and will, for example, "see things for what they are"
• an auditory athlete and will "get a real buzz from playing well"
• a kinaesthetic athlete (touching, feeling people) and will "get to grips with the issue"
• an olfactory athlete (understand the world through their sense of smell) and will "nose around a problem"
• a gustatory (taste) athlete and will "get their teeth into the training programme"

The point to remember is, everyone uses their individually preferred senses first and more frequently than the others, because these are the senses they use to learn about and process information from the world. Indeed, you yourself rely more on one or two primary representational systems, no less than do your athletes, which is why we will connect more immediately if I talk to you in a language that speaks to your lead senses. Thus I could ask you "how do you feel about the future?" or I could ask "how do you see things working out?" I will connect with you at a deeper, subconscious, level via the first phrasing because I know you process experiential information kinaesthetically (feelingly), or via the second phrasing because I know you prefer to interpret information using a visual representational system.

You can check your own preferences. Think actively about the phrases that you naturally tend to use. When unprompted * do you:

• See your way clearly? Keep an eye on things? Look out for yourself? Take a long-term view? If so, you are likely to experience a visual preference.
• Tune-in to new ideas? Maintain harmonious relationships? Sound people out? Keep an ear on things? ** Keep an ear to the ground? If so, you are likely to experience an auditory preference.
• Get to grips with a problem? Keep a balance in your life? Get a feel for things? Hold on tight to reality? Jump in with both feet? If so, you are likely to experience a kinaesthetic preference.
• Pick up the scent of an issue? Turn your nose away from something unpleasant? ** If so, you are likely to experience an olfactory preference.
• Get the flavour of a new experience? Keep things sweet? Avoid souring your relationships? Taste the rewards of success? If so, you are likely to experience a gustatory preference.

• * By "unprompted" I mean you are not using clichés or buzz words simply because they are currently fashionable; you are not using the language of whomever you are talking with, simply because it is the language they are using; and you are not using "standard" phrases, metaphors or other figures of speech because they are a convenient shorthand. In other words, "unprompted" means without conscious thought or ulterior motive.

• ** Listen out particularly for such slight twists of common sayings as these. Usually, people would say "Keep an eye on things" and "Turn your face away from something unpleasant."

This idea of representational systems is not an abstract, it is concrete. The words we freely, though mostly subconsciously, choose to use are often accurately indicative of our internal map of reality and which of the sense systems will more readily motivate us to achieve a goal, even though a listener might pass off our words and speech patterns as merely idiomatic. But the more a coach is trained to identify a pattern the more he or she will be able to mirror their athlete's prime representational, or learning, system and work at a level below conscious awareness. Thus to coach a visual sprinter I would use sentences with a high "seeing" content, such as "let's shed some light on this problem," whereas to coach a kinaesthetic sprinter I would use sentences with a high "feeling" content, such as "notice your footfall and how the correct balance makes you feel as you go round the first bend."

I recently worked with such a sportsman, a golfer. My first step was to listen to what he said and to identify from his words and speech pattern his preferred representational system. I wanted to understand why after several months of him using classic visualisation techniques with another coach, his game had not improved. It became clear to me, though it was a revelation to him, that he was strongly kinaesthetic. This led me to design a coaching programme centred on him capturing consciously how his body felt when he prepared for his tee shot, swung well and putted well. He also agreed to carry a small notepad in his pocket on which to write down his feelings. The words were random, barely grammatical, but they nonetheless provided a powerful source of reinforcing information. His jottings included words like "rhythmic", "light", "flowing", "balanced", "calm", and "smooth". After good shots he wrote words like "confident", "powerful" and "relaxed". These and similar kinaesthetic words became his athlete's golf dictionary and he committed them to memory. We called this technique "trapping the good", which had the effects of "releasing the bad" and, hence, developing his conscious competence. He now understands why, for him, visualisation was an inappropriate learning and habit changing technique. He is a "feeling" athlete rather than a "seeing" athlete.

Up to now I have referred to the clues to an athlete's preferred representational system being word-borne. This is not the only source of clues. Another, perhaps more overt source, is the athlete's eye movements. This too needs an explanation.

How an athlete processes information will be signalled by changes in their physiology. These changes will likely be systematic and indicative of state. They can involve posture, gesture, breathing, voice tone and tempo, skin colour, and eye movements. Eye movements, where an athlete looks, are also a good way of identifying an athlete's representational system.

Interpreting eye movements is not always as straightforward as it might seem. For one thing, eye movements can be fleeting and the information embedded in them quickly lost, literally in the blink of an eye. Watching an athlete's eye movements and testing for their prime representational system(s) takes immense concentration. Trained observers know that testing for the lead sense(s) requires them to use what is known as "clean language", that is questions or vocal prompts free of 'contaminating' content that might actually steer the athlete's gaze (or their spoken reply) away from what would otherwise be their innate eye position (or vocabulary). There are many anomalies to eye movements and their standard interpretation. For instance left-handedness could result in the meanings of the face diagrams shown above being reversed. An athlete's eye movements that seem to show either little consistency or appear to never go to one or more (expected) positions could mean they are blocking out perhaps painful memories associated with one or more sensory systems. When an athlete's eyes move repeatedly side to side or up and down it could be because they are scanning to compare recalled and constructed images. But the point is if you actively notice an athlete's eye movements and actively listen to what they are saying, you will understand what they are subconsciously telling you about how to connect with them at a deep level. It is here that you will be able to facilitate lasting performance changes.

Five Axioms of Coaching

Representational systems are only one half of the story as the other concerns the coaching role. I would like to share with you my own perceptions of the role of the coach which I class as the Five Axioms of Coaching.

1. Coaching in not telling, it is leading and facilitating

This means refocusing the relationship from I (the coach), you (the athlete), we (together) to You, We, I (in this order), and in which the athlete thus owns the issue (need or problem), solution and outcome, and is responsible for the coaching relationship and progress made.

2. Coaching is more onerous than teaching

Coaching demands of you high concentration, exceptional listening and observation skills, the ability to correctly interpret body language, a willingness to ask challenging (not confrontational) questions, rapport by which you can offer supportive advice that will be heard, an insistence that the athlete learns for him or herself, your resistance to doing for the athlete what he or she could/can do for themselves, repetition (using different learning methods and appealing to different representational systems), patience, and time.

3. The coach must be a consummate self-coach

You must be willing and able to self-debrief following a coaching session, self-analyse and self-learn. You must accept feedback as a development opportunity. Remember, it is much easier to adapt your own behaviour than it is to change someone else's.

4. All coaching sessions must be structured

Here I am not referring to content structure (e.g. warm up, exercises, warm down) but to process structure. I use Sir John Whitmore's proven GROW model. In this:

• " G stands for Goal(s) - What the athlete wants to achieve overall and particularly this session.
• This objective can be expressed as a C-SMARTER goal i.e.
  • C - Challenging (testing and stretching)
  • S - Specific (closely defined)
  • M - Measurable (changes that are recordable)
  • A - Achievable (within capability)
  • R - Realistic (relevant)
  • T - Time framed (achievement time/date)
  • E - Evaluated (against personal or external standards)
  • R - Reviewed (debriefed)

• R stands for Reality - Acknowledging the athlete's current skill/performance and, against the objective, the consequent coaching gap
• O stands for Options - Considering the different learning/development methodology choices
• W stands for Will - Determining the athlete's real conviction/readiness

5. Coaching is attitude

Successful coaching is dependent as much upon you as it is upon the athlete's attitude to themselves, other people, their environment, circumstances, learning and setbacks. The right attitude is characterised by the athlete's maturity and self-empowerment. This takes us full circle to Axiom 1, in which the athlete must own the issue, solution and outcome.

In observing and adhering to these axioms I find that carefully balancing push and pull questions, listening for and observing representational system accessing cues (words and eye movements), responding sensitively to body language and using Cognitive Behaviour Therapy or Transactional Analysis, amongst a number of psychological assessment models, to understand and react appropriately to an athlete's emotional state, enables me to work at the depth of coaching that athletes themselves take me down to.

Adversity Quotient

 http://www.winstonbrill.com/bril001/html/article_index/articles/501-550/article517_body.html

http://www.targetlearn.com/files/course_docs/ADQW000.pdf

 Intelligence

http://psychologytoday.tests.psychtests.com/take_test.php?idRegTest=1304

Mental Speed

http://psychologytoday.tests.psychtests.com/take_test.php?idRegTest=1608

How Players Learn

http://psychologytoday.tests.psychtests.com/take_test.php?idRegTest=1312

Player Personality Test

http://psychologytoday.tests.psychtests.com/take_test.php?idRegTest=1297