Communication strategies of Division I football coaches during winter strength and conditioning drills.

College athletic participation has long been a year-round commitment for those willing to accept the responsibility associated with it. These athletes participate in rigorous off-season strength, conditioning, and agility drills, as well as practices and scrimmages. While there has been much research and documentation associated with the leadership and communicator styles that coaches exhibit during regular season practices and games, not much has been mentioned about the off-season programs.

[ILLUSTRATION OMITTED]

I have therefore sought to explore this segment of athletic participation and to document the leadership and communicator styles that emerged from the observed Division I football coaches during winter strength and conditioning drills.

The purpose of winter strength and conditioning drills is for physical and psychological growth.

Physical growth goals include increased quickness and agility, operating with appropriate knee bend, and improving the overall conditioning of each player.

Psychological growth goals include dealing with adversity, building team unity, and development of new leaders.

TRADITIONAL LEADERSHIP/COMMUNICATION STYLES

Autocratic and dictatorial leaders are categorized as task-oriented, while democratic and laissez-faire leaders are categorized as people-oriented. The task-oriented leaders, like the autocratic leaders, employ a one-way line of communication, and a "my-way or the highway" mentality.

The dictatorial leader allows for a two-way line of communication, but the coach has the ultimate say. These coaches are viewed more as 'benevolent' dictators.

Conversely, people-oriented leaders, like the democratic leader, share decision-making responsibilities, while laissez-faire leaders offer little or no direction and provide mixed communication.

RESEARCH RESULTS: LEADERSHIP/COMMUNICATION STYLES

While leadership was attributed for creating a hostile and aggressive atmosphere, each coach managed to maintain his own coaching identities within this environment. In particular, six coaching communication profiles emerged from the collection of data, which included site visits, video and audio recordings of winter drills, and interviews with players and coaches.

These profiles were categorized as: military commander (1), quantity controller (2), business executive (3), quality controller (4), good cop (5), and situational strategist (6). The first five profiles are presented as most aggressive to least aggressive, while the sixth profile represents a more hybrid approach. See Table 1 for a summary.

Military Commander (1)

The military commander has a high preference for aggressive and hostile communication tactics. The coach who utilizes this strategy takes an 'on notice' approach to his duties, whereas the players feel that this coach is constantly looking for and finding things that they are doing wrong rather than right.

The military commander is very fond of the use of profanity and tough criticism. He prefers to chastise and punish players and ignores and criticizes player's needs. While not all of these conditions need exist to meet this classification, one thing is clear about the military commander: he is the most hostile and aggressive communicator.

Quantity Controller (2)

While he has a similarly high preference for aggressive and hostile communication tactics, this coach is focused on getting more repetitions, more speed, more of everything at each drill.

Similar to the military commander, he also utilizes an "on notice" approach to his duties. However, he is more concerned with constantly increasing the level of effort and the output from players.

The quantity controller is known to use profanity, approach instruction clearly and in an up front manner, but is impatient with the players, utilizes destructive criticism, prefers to chastise and punish players, and ignores or even criticizes player's needs.

Business Executive (3)

Our B.E. used a more neutral approach to communication strategies during mat drills. This coach was neither overly aggressive nor hostile towards the players, but he was also not overly concerned with their feelings and needs either.

Simply put, this coach was there to do the business of coaching during mat drills and was going to get his groups in and out of his station efficiently, but not without attention to doing things right. There was a lack of confirmation for jobs well done and a lack of individual feedback for jobs poorly done by this coach. But his business mentality for getting things done warranted the coach to provide general reminders to the groups about their technique and how to do things better.

Quality Controller (4)

Represents a quite opposite approach from the business executive. Whereas, the latter is more concerned with the frequency and effort involved in doing things, the quality controller focuses more on the process of doing things well. While this coach can also be somewhat aggressive, he is recognized more often as being assertive. This coach approaches mat drills with an organized agenda that details what he expects the players to achieve as a group and for individual performances.

His proactive approach may tip his demeanor to one of an optimist, but his main concern is on doing things well and doing them right. This can be seen by his patient reminders to individuals and the group regarding their technique.

The quality controller focuses on providing constructive criticism and frequently engages in praise and rewards for good performances. Players appreciate his patience in teaching the skill, but are often embarrassed or annoyed at being called out or held up to do things right.

Good Cop (5)

The good cop is generally regarded as the coach who will say everything positive and nothing negative. He does not utilize aggressive or hostile tactics, but takes a cheerful approach to his station while players are performing the drills. This coach often overlooks poor performances rather than having to confront lack of effort or the technical skill level of each player.

Situational Strategist (6)

The situational strategist represents a hybrid coaching style--there is no one best way to coach each player or group. This is not to say that this coach treats everyone differently but, rather, that he has learned that people are motivated differently and therefore he must use different motivational tactics to elicit the best performances from each player and group.

The situation often provides enough information for formulation of the coaching strategy for each moment or day. This coach will take into consideration the tone set for the day and how things are progressing as various groups enter the station.

This type of approach allows the coach to provide constructive or destructive criticism, praise and reward, or chastising and punishment, depending upon the situational strategy chosen. This coach was able to be aggressive or assertive if the need to be one or the other was more beneficial. Recognizing and acting on individual and groups needs on an as needed basis gave this coach's social support staying power, leaving the players with the impression that this coach cares and will step in and show it when he knows they need it, without patronizing them.

CONCLUSIONS:

Interscholastic athletic programs and their coaches often model their philosophies, leadership styles and behaviors according to their collegiate counterparts. In bringing to light the communication strategies that college football coaches are employing during their winter strength and conditioning drills, several conclusions may be drawn toward the application of this new knowledge.

First, one's leadership style must correspond with one's communicator style.

Second, the head coach's leadership / communicator style must incorporate complimentary assistant coaches styles (not necessarily the same).

Third, while no one leadership / communicator style stood out to be the best, the situational strategist may provide coaches the flexibility that may be necessary from week to week or season to season in order to maximize their effectiveness.

Last, coaches must be cautious when attempting to alter their leadership / communicator style, as players may see their attempts to evolve as less credible and potentially phony.

Two conclusions can be drawn pertaining specifically to off-season workouts.

First, the head coach sets the tone for off-season sessions and assistant coaches must be in support of the environment cultivated.

Second, highly aggressive and hostile communication may increase performance to a point, but often is done so at the cost of respect for the coach, decreased opportunities for learning and player resentment.

With strong leadership, consistent communication, and constructive learning environments, winter strength and conditioning drills can provide opportunities for physical and psychological growth, and enhance a coach's knowledge for the upcoming season.

Table 1. Coaches Communication Strategies

                     MANAGEMENT                  TECHNICAL
                                          (TRAINING & INSTRUCTION)

MILITARY            * On Notice                  * On Notice
COMMANDER

QUANTITY            * On Notice               * Clearly defined
CONTROLLER                                       * Impatient

BUSINESS        * Business mentality              * Implied
EXECUTIVE                                 * Skill reminder to group

QUALITY        * General organization         * Clearly defined
CONTROLLER   * Expectations/Aspirations      * Patient repetition
                                          * Skill reminder to group

GOOD COP       * General organization     * Skill reminder to group

SITUATIONAL    * General organization         * Clearly defined
STRATEGIST   * Expectations/Aspirations      * Patient repetition
                                                 * Impatient
                                         * Skills introduced to group
                                          * Skill reminder to group

                  REINFORCEMENT/             SOCIAL SUPPORT
                     FEEDBACK

MILITARY     * Destructive criticism         * Ignore needs
COMMANDER      * Chastise & punish         * Criticize needs
                  * Aggressive

QUANTITY     * Destructive criticism         * Ignore needs
CONTROLLER     * Chastise & Punish         * Criticize needs
                  * Aggressive

BUSINESS         * Non-feedback:             * Ignore needs
EXECUTIVE         * Unconfirmed         * General group support
                   * Overlook

QUALITY      * Constructive criticism      * Recognize needs
CONTROLLER      * Praise & Reward            * Act on needs
                   * Assertive          * General group support
                  * Aggressive

GOOD COP        * Praise & Reward          * Recognize needs
                 * Non-feedback:            * Act on needs
                  * Unconfirmed         * Individualized support
                   * Overlook           * General group support

SITUATIONAL  * Constructive criticism  * Recognize & act on needs
STRATEGIST      * Praise & Reward       * Individualized support
                  * Assertive                * Ignore needs
             * Destructive criticism        * Criticize needs
               * Chastise & Punish        * Impersonal support
                  * Aggressive          * General group support

By Stephanie Cerow Diaz, Dept. of Parks, Recreation & Tourism Management North Carolina State University