Embracing the coaching paradox

sports coach UK Research Summary 16

Š Jason O'Brien/Action Images Limited

Embracing the Paradox

What is coaching? Is it teaching, or is it motivating? Or is it, as Steven Barnson from the University of Nevada suggests, both teaching and motivating and many other behaviours simultaneously?

In a new research article, Barnson argues that coaching needs to adopt a theory of paradox to truly understand what a coach does and therefore to improve coaching practice. This summary provides an overview of the concept of paradox and how a coach can embrace the paradox.

sports coach UK Research Summary 16 – Embracing the Paradox

What is a paradox?

Nobody eats in that restaurant; it’s too crowded.

Paradoxical components are contradictory yet interrelated and are often seen as opposing forces or tensions. Anyone who coaches can immediately call to mind all sorts of tensions in their coaching: autocratic versus democratic leadership styles; allowing kids to have fun and also winning games; individual and team goals; and even formal and informal learning. For Barnson, how a coach responds to these tensions may be fundamental to an athlete or team’s fate.

© Action Images Limited/Reuters

This is a simple example of a paradox. Two elements that seem reasonable on their own become inconsistent when put together – how can a restaurant be crowded if nobody eats there?

sports coach UK Research Summary 16 – Embracing the Paradox

The paradoxes faced by a coach To help describe the paradox of coaching, Barnson has developed a model that describes four essential features of coaches and the coaching process: the inner-coaching self; the outer-coaching self; purpose; and outcomes.

Looking at each of these elements in turn is a useful way to perceive the paradoxes in coaching.

The inner-coaching self is concerned with intrapersonal issues such as values, roles and self-belief. Tensions arise when coaches feel responsible for filling multiple roles simultaneously; for example, creating a fun learning environment while at the same time establishing a winning atmosphere. These are internal tensions that a coach must struggle with in creating their own coaching philosophy.

The outer-coaching self concerns the variety of different

people a coach has to deal with, such as other coaches, parents and club officials. Coaches are often forced to wear many different masks in many different situations.

Purpose covers the strategies a coach should employ.

How can a session be routine to learn the basics but also allow innovation? Will success best be achieved through collaboration or competition?

Outcomes are the end result of the coaching process,

and even this is full of paradoxes. For a team, it may be about winning, but within the team, other, more individual goals may also exist. Similarly, other research

has suggested that agreements between coaches and athletes about outcomes may only operate on a superficial level.

These features of coaching are linked together by behaviours or actions such as teaching, motivating, organising and politicking:

• • • •

Teaching refers to the actions that help players become more skilled or proficient.

Motivating is maintaining or influencing the emotional state of athletes.

Organising is planning the environment, scheduling and time management.

Politicking is influencing and persuading, and working with parents and other coaches to gain approval for what the coach is doing.

No single one of these actions alone allows the coach to manoeuvre through the complex coaching process.

Instead, research has found great coaches are more able to synthesise a number of conflicting actions at the same time. Lesser coaches, on the other hand, struggle to juggle these different demands and will inevitably emphasise one single action. This is where Barnson advocates embracing the paradox and all its complexities, rather than seeking one solution over the other.

Traditionally, contingency theory is seen as the way to address this coaching paradox. When faced with competing demands, the coach must select to do either one thing or the other – either teaching or motivating. While this approach might help short-term performance, a paradox perspective argues that long-term success can only be achieved by addressing competing tensions. The paradox approach suggests coaches can work with competing demands and tensions simultaneously and over time. But how would a coach do this?

© Action Images Limited/Reuters

Moving away from either/or

sports coach UK Research Summary 16 – Embracing the Paradox

© Action Images Limited/Reuters

Embracing the paradox

Looking beyond sport, it is possible to find theories on dealing with paradoxes. One of these is assimilation, which involves keeping tensions separate and appreciating their differences. This is embracing the paradox, accepting them as persistent and unsolvable puzzles.

These ideas were considered by the coaching researcher John Lyle back in the 1990s when he talked about coaching as a set of interpersonal and technical elements that are in a constant state of flux. For example, goal setting can include a series of potentially contradictory ambitions among athletes, coaches and organisations.

Around this, he saw a set of external constraints, some of which are more controllable than others. Lyle called on coaches to embrace the entirety of the coaching process and not to be afraid to acknowledge uncontrollable constraints.

For Lyle, coaching is a cyclical and complex adaptive system that learns as it goes along. By constantly regulating itself, the system acknowledges the persistent and ultimately unsolvable nature of the problem.

This adaptive nature in the face of uncertainty was found to be a key attribute of expert sailing coaches studied in the 1990s. Their planning was described as flexible and based on continuous step-by-step planning – an idea that could itself be called a paradox. However, flexibility does not just mean reacting to circumstances.

In fact, a distinction can be drawn between ‘principled’ and ‘rule-guided’ actions. While the latter would regard coaching as a set of descriptions that must be followed, the principled coach believes in the rightness of their general actions, allowing the detail to fit the general as appropriate.

Similarly, the ex-British Lions and Scotland coach Ian McGeechan believes structure and discipline go hand in hand with innovation, rather than competing against it. It is only when players are comfortable in understanding their role that they will have the confidence to experiment. As he says: I think people like structure, people like discipline, and actually, the most fluid games are when you play at your most disciplined, not the other way. You get freedom of expression out of structure while you will de-structure a game without discipline.

These expert coaches have ideas similar to the orchestration theory put forward by Robyn Jones and Mike Wallace almost 10 years ago. They would see paradox as an opportunity, and argue coaches should ‘learn to cope with the relative uncontrollability, incomprehensibility, contradictory values and novelty as normal parts of the everyday coaching life.’

Importantly, they state this type of thinking can only be learnt through experience and reflection, rather than through technical training.

sports coach UK Research Summary 16 – Embracing the Paradox

Coaching is both joy and sorrow; understanding and bewilderment; action and reflection; past, present and future.

At this stage, the research on paradox in coaching is still in its infancy, but for a coach looking to move towards excellence, it offers something new to consider – in particular, to actively search for the paradoxes in your coaching and learn how to deal with them. Do you adopt an either/or approach, or do you try to embrace the uncertainty and learn through experience?

If you are interested in finding out more about this area, this summary is based on the article below:

Barnson, S. (2014) ‘Toward a theory of coaching paradox’, Quest, 66 (4): 371–384.

Other interesting articles and books are suggested below:

Jones, R., Armour, K. and Potrac, P. (2004) Sports Coaching Cultures: From Practice to Theory. Oxford: Routledge. ISBN: 978-0-415328-52-4.

Jones, R. and Wallace, M. (2005) ‘Another bad day at the training ground: Coping with ambiguity in the coaching context’, Sport, Education and Society, 10 (1): 113–134.

Cross, N. and Lyle, J. (1999) The Coaching Process: Principles and Practice for Sport. Oxford: Elsevier.

ISBN: 978-0-750641-31-9.

© sports coach UK, 2015 Designed and produced by Coachwise Ltd 90974a

In what could be an eloquent summary of his argument, Barnson suggests that looking at coaching as a paradox opens up a new way of thinking. With this approach:

References

© Jason O'Brien/Action Images Limited

Learning from the research