This post is provided by Coaches Network

Communication is a two-way street. Not only do coaches need to be able to send clear messages that are interpreted as intended, they also need to receive messages from their athletes and staff.

In a book published by Human Kinetics, Sports psychologists Damon Burton and Thomas Raedeke, describe what good communication looks like and why it’s so important to the success of a coach.

Coaches who can clearly communicate expectations, goals, standards, and feelings to their athletes will be better able to provide instruction and lead their team. First, it’s important to note that there are two types of communication: verbal and nonverbal. Both can play a major role in how you interact with your athletes.

Many don’t realize how much nonverbal actions or gestures can affect the messages you send to others. According to Burton and Raedeke, “communication experts suggest that between 65% and 93% of the meaning of a message is conveyed through tone of voice and nonverbal behaviors (Johnson 2003).” This means that your behavior should reinforce what you say. For example, if you tell your athletes to have a positive attitude regardless of the score, you shouldn’t have a sad or dejected look on the sidelines when your team is losing or making mistakes.

Just as athletes will pick up your nonverbal cues, coaches can also learn a lot from the ways athletes behave. Not every athlete is going to tell you when they’re feeling confident or when they’re unhappy or discouraged. By being an active observer, you can better understand how your athletes are feeling and how you should communicate with them.

Timing is key to communication. Coaches constantly need to make judgments on whether or not a message needs to be sent. Sometimes a situation requires a coach’s intervention, while other times athletes might benefit from having the independence to figure things out on their own. Try to find a balance between talking too much and talking too little. Coaches who talk too much tend to ramble on and bore their athletes with unnecessary instruction, while coaches who talk too little can make the mistake of assuming their athletes know what to do or what is expected of them.

Interpretation is also a major factor. Saying something is one thing, but getting others to correctly interpret what you mean is another. It’s easy for coaches to think that what they say to their athletes will be interpreted as encouragement or helpful instruction. Yet, according to Burton and Raedeke, a simple “Run hard!” from a coach can sometimes be interpreted as “He never thinks I run hard enough.” In order to effectively communicate, you will need to give equal weight to the content of the message and the emotional impact on the receiver. By getting to know your athletes, you can become more aware of what to say and how to say it.

Burton and Raedeke cite a study that involved spending hundreds of hours observing coaches and evaluating their impact on athletes (Smith 2001, Smoll & Smith 2006). The researchers observed more than 70 coaches, coded over 80,000 behaviors, and surveyed close to 1,000 athletes. Their findings provide a helpful guide to effective communication.

They found that athletes responded positively to coaches who provided:

Positive feedback after a good performance effort
Corrective instruction and encouragement after a performance mistake
Technical instruction and a moderate amount of general encouragement unrelated to performance quality

On the other hand, athletes responded unfavorably to coaches who:

Failed to notice or reinforce good performance efforts
Criticized mistakes
Provided instruction after a mistake in a critical fashion

This article was written and submitted by retired High School Coach Dave Millhollin.

Two types of loyalty; (one genuine, one obligatory):

Freely given type (genuine loyalty):

This kind of loyalty is given to a caring authority by members of the group based on trust.  The authority figure expects results for the benefit of the institution as well as the group and all of its members. Group members are valued and recognized for exceptional performance. This creates an environment where group members want to produce expected results; they feel like they are working with their leaders.  A culture of shared accountability exists and leaders are respected.

Demanded type (obligatory loyalty):

This kind of loyalty is taken from members of the group by a demanding authority using intimidation and manipulation based on creating fear.  The authority figure expects results for institutional or selfish reasons.  The purpose of the group’s members is to serve the authority and the institution. Group members are taken for granted, they feel like they are working for their leaders and they are afraid of consequences for sub-standard performance. A culture of top down authority based accountability exists and leaders are often resented.

Which kind of loyalty do you want for your program?

What kind of leader and authority figure do you want to be?

Leading with Quiet Strength

By Dr. Cory Dobbsm President, The Academy for Sport Leadership

Editor’s This was written about a basketball team, and is offered as food for thought for your program, regardless of the sport.

On an unusually warm morning, sometime in October, the head coach of a successful basketball program looked at me and said, “He just doesn’t get it. He can’t help us. He simply does not know how to lead this team!” As an invited guest I listened and observed. And listened. And observed some more.

This was a return visit by me to evaluate the team’s culture. A couple of months earlier I’d spent several weeks during the off-season working with the staff and players to build a leader in every locker culture.

My visit was part research—to evaluate how “sticky” is our Teamwork Intelligence program (created by The Academy for Sport Leadership), and part coaching—to come back and revisit some of the key practices of the Teamwork Intelligence program with the coaches and players.

The player that caused the coach’s rant was a returning point guard of whom much was expected. In the past, all the point guards the coach deployed were boisterous, passionate, and outwardly emotional. This point guard, however, was unusually quiet on the floor, off the floor, and in the
classroom.

Conversations with him are always lop‐sided, others doing the talking. The head coach was frustrated that after two years in the program the player had yet to come out of his “shell.”

[perfectpullquote align=”left”]Introversion and extroversion are complex concepts about the determinants of behavior.[/perfectpullquote]

A person’s choice of interpersonal interaction sometimes offers clues to a deeper driving force—such as introversion or extroversion. One’s inclination to extroversion or introversion can quickly be determined by what I call the “crowded party effect.”

The introvert at a crowded party is likely to find a comfortable seat from which to observe the activity of others. Introverts are inclined to “be quiet” and are drained by such social encounters, while the “party animal” extrovert is energized by such activity and seeks out people to charge their batteries.

Several years ago, Susan Cain, a Harvard Business School professor, delivered one of the most well‐received Ted Talks of all time. Today the YouTube video counts more than 18 million views of her talk on introversion. Cain wrote, the 2012 book “Quiet: The Power of Introverts in a World That Can’t
Stop Talking,” which has sold two million copies worldwide. With the Ted Talk and book, Susan Cain has single‐handedly triggered a deeper awareness of and appreciation for the many facets of introversion. She’s introduced a myth-shattering perspective that has transformed the way we view introversion and introverts.

Far more than we are consciously aware of, we live in a society dominated by extroverts. Cain’s research points out that the American culture glorifies extroversion. Sports stars and movie stars are highly paid and followed, and social media thrives on people exposing their innermost thoughts and feelings. Extroverts are highly visible in most settings and situations. Bold personalities are rewarded.

Cain writes, “We’re told that to be great is to be bold, to be happy is to be sociable. We see ourselves as a nation of extroverts—which means that we’ve lost sight of who we really are.” In fact, she notes, one‐third to one‐half of Americans are introverts. So if you’re not one yourself, she often advises audiences, “You’re probably raising or managing or married to one.”

The quiet and reserved point guard that so frustrated the coach, it turns out, was an introvert. A stone cold introvert. After practice the head coach set the stage. Before examining the practice session we sipped iced‐tea—a kind of cooling off period.

[perfectpullquote align=”right”]Introversion in Action On the surface, introversion looks a lot like shyness; both effect social interaction, but for differing reasons. The shy find socializing difficult. On the other hand, an introvert simply prefers to spend time alone. Introverts are
collectors of thoughts, and solitude is where the collection is curated and rearranged to help them make sense of their thoughts.[/perfectpullquote]

Our conversation was soon set in motion. The head coach opened our post‐practice conversation with a “See. I told you so,” reinforcing a tight grip on his perspective. My observation of the practice session that day was, however, quite different.

During the practice I counted 18 personal touches (such as grasping a teammate’s elbow in order to pull the teammate in to hear him speak)—micro acts of leadership—by the point guard. The coach looked at me in a curious way when I stated this fact. So I explained. Each touch by the point guard was a leadership act. A player threw an errant pass that was taken by the opposing squad down the floor for a quick score. Knowing and sensing his teammate’s anger the quiet leader simply walked over and literally lifted his teammate’s head—softly but authoritatively. The teammate immediately shifted back into a positive mode. Such behavior happened at the most appropriate times. During a stop in action the quiet leader walked over to a teammate and softly spoke words of instruction—never calling attention to himself. Rather, in a calm and nonchalant manner the quiet
point guard curiously found all kinds of quiet moments in which to take action and provide leadership.

The seemingly reticent team leader was completely in tune with his teammates. The head coach, however, not looking at these micro‐actions as leadership moments, simply could not see what was right in front of him. The team manager loaded up the video of the practice, allowing me to show
display evidence of the “non‐leader” leading.

Most people are comfortable thinking of leaders as being outgoing, visible, and charismatic. Such a perspective is overly narrow.

Scientists now know that, extroverts have no special advantage in leadership. Yes, they tend to be more visible, and assertive, but those are situational advantages.

[perfectpullquote align=”left”]Quiet Strength: The effective introverted leader turns what might be considered weakness into a strength. Introverts tend to be more empathetic, humble, and focus on relationships.[/perfectpullquote]

Introverts tend to process more information and do so accurately as they are often able to mitigate the influence of emotion. Further, introverts seldom need the emotional stimuli that an extrovert requires. They do best in quiet environments where they can interact one-on‐one, or in small groups. Knowing who the team’s introverts and extroverts are can go a long way in building deep and durable interpersonal relationships.

The specter of the introverted team leader touches on a fundamental distinction between action and reflection. When we think of team leaders, we usually envision someone like Tom Brady, LeBron James, Carli Lloyd or Julie Foudy. The image of a team leader is one of action; rare is it when
reflection is considered a co‐equal quality. But action without reflection is a suboptimal way of building a cohesive team.

These two aspects of human dynamics, action and reflection, establish the essential elements of leadership. Everything a leader does involves some degree of action on the ground and reflection distilled in making sense of events, incidents, and relationships. As one expert said, “Action
without reflection is thoughtless; reflection without action is passive.”

Accordingly, it is no longer impossible to have introverts participate in team leadership. A reorientation to use action (read extrovert) and reflection (read introvert) in creative ways is to ensure a healthy climate conducive to building a high‐performance team culture. To put it
simply, if we recognize ways to include the introvert along with the extrovert in team leadership, we can create a leader in every locker.

The Academy for Sport Leadership’s Coaching for Leadership Approach: Our approach to team building is rooted in the belief that leadership is a powerful force for shaping a team’s culture, influencing the growth and development of student-athletes. We find that and those coaches that practice deep leadership, and a deep commitment to Coaching for Leadership, stand above and apart from others in the profession.

COACHING FOR LEADERSHIP RESOURCE

Coaching for Leadership: How to Develop a Leader in Every Locker. ($24.99)

The Academy for Sport Leadership    www.sportleadership.com

About the Author

Dr. Cory Dobbs is a national expert on sport leadership and team building and is the founder of The Academy for Sport Leadership.  A teacher, speaker, consultant, and writer, Dr. Dobbs has worked with professional, collegiate, and high school athletes and coaches teaching leadership as a part of the sports experience.  He facilitates workshops, seminars, and consults with a wide-range of professional organizations and teams.  Dr. Dobbs previously taught in the graduate colleges of business and education at Northern Arizona University, Sport Management and Leadership at Ohio University, and the Jerry Colangelo College of Sports Business at Grand Canyon University.

Contact Information for Dr. Cory Dobbs:
[email protected]rship.com
(623) 330.3831 (call or text)
www.sportleadership.com

by Cory L. Dobbs

John chose Yoko over Paul, George, and Ringo.  Shaq couldn’t stand Kobe.  Steve Jobs was fired by John Scully, his hand-picked CEO.  Socrates rejected Plato’s theory of forms.  Both the West Coast rapper Tupac and the East Coast legend The Notorious B.I.G. were killed as a part of a hip-hop rivalry.  And Carl Jung drifted far from Freud, his close friend and mentor.  Relationships between people of high status often prove challenging.  It not need be this way.

Have you ever been on a team where the players can’t get along?  How about having coached such a team?  Maybe it’s simply a matter of personalities.  Or the circumstances, such as a losing streak, over- power the desire to get along with one another.  Conflicts easily erupt when team relations become dysfunctional.  Yet, many coaches I’ve witnessed seem to think everyone will get along because they are forever preaching teamwork.  This is not so.

The Facts of Life

Your team is only as strong as its weakest relationship.  Yes, I know that’s a strong statement, so let me say it again.  Every team is only as strong as its weakest relationships; and great teams—players and coaches—never assume everyone will get along.  Oh, almost every coach says they spend enough time on relationship building.  Yet when I’ve asked coaches to journal their activities, slowly but surely team building and internal (player) leadership take a back seat to the tasks “necessary” to practice and master the game plan.

Two Sides to Every Story

In an effort to be transparent, let us agree that we like to think of ourselves as being reasonable, mostly right, and when in some level of conflict we often make negative attributions about the other person’s intentions.  Indeed, in the privacy of our own minds, we hold, with white knuckles, our position with a high degree of confidence and certainty.  We must be right, we reason.  The problem is, the other person we are engaged in conflict with is holding tightly to their “reasonableness” too.

Thus a dance of defensive routines emerges.  Each participant—combatant to be sure—thinks that their conclusion is factual, that their view is complete (rather than partial), and the other person is the problem.

The result: conflict.  The condition of the team changes at that moment.  The one-sided nature of each player’s perspective can, and often does, set in motion a roller-coaster of irrationality which invariably will snare more players into its trap.

Nip this in the Bud

You know that to solve a conflict requires slowing things down.  It’s crucial to find out how we got from “there” to “here.”  But the game plan doesn’t allow for this, “We must continue to move forward” you’re likely to think, say—and do.  While you might get back on track, this is why and how things get swept under the carpet.  You know relational issues will catch up with you, but you think if you run fast enough you might out-run the fall-out.  The questionable news is, you just might get away with nipping the problem in the bud.  But it will get you.  It’s just a matter of time.

The Vulnerability of Relational Blindness

Several years ago I worked with a successful high school basketball team.  After a deep run in the playoffs the team wanted to understand how to get over the hurdle and get to the proverbial “next level.”

During a leadership training exercise a senior-to-be, a starter and major contributor, broke down and apologized to his teammates.  He acknowledged the team’s loss should be attributed to him.  As the team’s point guard, with the clock running and down by one point in the state semi-final game, he had the ball in his hand and an opportunity to pass to either of two open teammates.  One teammate was not a scorer (1.5 ppg), while the other was the team’s leading scorer (19.0 ppg) and best shooter.  Down by two, he crosses half court and sees the two teammates open in each corner.  He had a choice.   And he knew the team’s best option.  So do you.  He passed it to the non-scorer, coincidently his best friend, who put up a shot with time expiring.  Air ball.

The caring young man, in his desire to be transparent, admitted that personal bias led to the sub-optimal choice of shooters.  He said it was rooted in a fight he had with the leading scorer around mid-season.   And after the fight was broken up by teammates, he willingly “recruited” the underclass team members to “side” with him.  They did.  And in effect they split the locker room into upperclass vs. underclass; seniors against the juniors.  No coach witnessed the fight, never heard that it happened, and the coaching staff was completely unaware that the locker room split.  The players, in a twisted show of team work, hid the division—the fault line—that ultimately cost the team a shot at the State Championship.

Any time you talk about relationships it’s easy to gloss over the fact that people create and sustain them.  People matter.  Relationships matter.  Student-athletes make a wide range of choices that affect relations, mostly unconscious as in the incident mentioned above.  Importantly, it’s utter folly to think that you, or any coach, will know all that goes on with team member interpersonal interactions.  This, of course, is a reason for team leaders—you need your players to engage in detecting and correcting problems encountered as they build the team.

Over the course of a season incidents like this pile up and drag down practices, film study, and in-game behavior.  Don’t get me wrong, I’m not suggesting coaches are blind to such deviant behavior.  What I do know though is that when the choice for spending time is either better spent on direct team building or the game plan; it is the relationship side of things that usually falls by the way side.  Relationship building is sorely neglected during the course of a season.

Hit the “Pause” Button: Rebuilding Trust

The good news is that when conflicts and dysfunction rear their ugly heads, you can, and should, turn them into team building teachable events.

When two players (or more) clash, you need not throw your hands up and declare the issue unsolvable.  Actually, this is the moment to explore the “honesty” in perspectives.  Most coaches ignore this moment.  It stresses them out.  But if you’re willing to, you can use the “argument” to strengthen the relationship.

In the dictionary, the antonym of honesty is lying.  Thus a participant in any conflict is going to protect himself.  In most cases differences of opinion arise out of one’s desire to feel respected, appreciated, and needed.  And the opposite of arguing is agreement.  The curious thing is that the conflict participants are, for the most part, seeking agreement—however one-sided it is to begin with.

You can capitalize on this moment of truth by harnessing honesty and agreement.

You task, and goal, is turn the adversarial relationship into one in alignment with the team’s mission.  Now is the time to hit the pause button—literally.

Give the participants their own quiet space in which to reflect and respond to the following questions.

• What is the outcome I want here?
• Do I want a relationship with this person?
• What is the outcome our teammates want?
• What goals do we share?
• How do I want this to end?

These reflective questions help the student-athlete learn to see themselves as architects of their own experience.  They determine the need and desire to shift to acting on the end they want and the future they’re trying to achieve.

During the course of a season the absence of interpersonal conflict is unlikely.  Conflict is natural.  What you do with conflict will have much to do with the growth, or stunting the growth, of your team building efforts.

COACHING FOR LEADERSHIP RESOURCE

Coaching for Leadership: How to Develop a Leader in Every Locker. ($24.99)

The Academy for Sport Leadership    www.sportleadership.com

About the Author

Dr. Cory Dobbs is a national expert on sport leadership and team building and is the founder of The Academy for Sport Leadership.  A teacher, speaker, consultant, and writer, Dr. Dobbs has worked with professional, collegiate, and high school athletes and coaches teaching leadership as a part of the sports experience.  He facilitates workshops, seminars, and consults with a wide-range of professional organizations and teams.  Dr. Dobbs previously taught in the graduate colleges of business and education at Northern Arizona University, Sport Management and Leadership at Ohio University, and the Jerry Colangelo College of Sports Business at Grand Canyon University.

This article was written and submitted by J.P. Nerbun of Thrive On Challenge Sports

Forget about setting uncontrollable mid-level goals this season. Make these six commitments and build a transformational culture in your program that values people.

Commitment 1: Be authentic and vulnerable with your team.

Start the process to become a transformational coach AND open up with your team about the journey you are setting out on.  Buy “Transformational Leadership” by Joshua Medcalf and Jamie Gilbert or “Inside Out Coaching” by Joe Ehrmann. Don’t just read one of these books, but fully engage with the activities they outline to help you become a transformational coach. And then be authentic and vulnerable by sharing with your team (coaches and players) that you are setting out on a process to become not just a better coach, but a better person. Explain how transformational coaches use their platform to help mentor and serve the people in their care. By sharing your journey with them throughout the season they will gain a greater respect for you and be more more apt to forgive you when you do fall short and make mistakes as a leader. Model the transformation and openness you want to see in others!

Commitment 2: Read and journal together as a team.

Purchase a book and a journal for every member of your team, then commit 20-30 minutes at the end of every practice and game to read and write as a team. Jon Gordon says, “A team that reads together grows together.” Spend 5-10 minutes reading aloud and then have THEM discuss what they learned from the reading. If you need recommendations for books suitable for this exercise please contact me. After the team reads, everyone gets out their journals and does a success log or a what went well diary. Everyone writes down 5 things that they did well in their practice, 1 area of improvement, and 1 thing they learned. “10 Minute Toughness” by Jason Selk outlines the many benefits of this activity. We need to train our minds to see the good not just the bad, and THEN focus on learning and growth.

Commitment 3: Stop using conditioning as punishment.

Stop using running or other physical conditioning as punishment. Instead start to use it to develop mental toughness and create positive associations with conditioning. Mistakes should be embraced as part of the learning process, not reprimanded or punished. Conditioning our players hard and then getting them to execute when tired helps build mental toughness. One activity you can employ to change the negative connotations with conditioning is what I call a GUT CHECK. Put everyone on the line and have them run a sprint. Whoever comes in last stands on the sideline to cheer everyone else on. Continue until only one man is left standing. The team cheers and praises the people who run the most and give their best. You will even start to see other players continue to keep doing the sprint because they start to value  conditioning!