Show jumping is an interesting sport. A lot of the top coaches and athletes are male, yet most of the athletes in the junior and amateur ranks are women. I think it creates an interesting dynamic when a male coach has to teach female athletes. I had the good fortune of meeting Karlene Headley-Cooper in my Theory of Coaching class at the University of Toronto. Her research areas include sport psychology, athlete-centered coaching and elite athlete coaching. Her thesis was entitled “Coaches’ Perspectives on Athlete-Centred Coaching” which focused primarily on the styles coaches of female teams used.
What makes Karlene a great person to talk to, besides her academic background, is the fact that she’s also an international level athlete. She’s been a member of Great Britain’s Women’s Softball Team since 2005. I think its wonderful that an international calibre athlete can combine their athletic and academic experience to create an understanding of coaching that can combine both the coach and athlete perspectives.
Karlene Headley-Cooper combines her academic and athletic experience to advocate for athlete centred coaching.
I thought that Karlene might be able to share some interesting insight with the male-coach-female-athlete dynamic. She was good enough to answer some questions for me. I was thrilled to get such thorough responses
I think the core message Karlene is trying to deliver is good coaching will be effective coaching; athlete centred coaching will deliver results regardless of the coaches’ gender and the athletes they work with. For a run-down of exactly what athlete centred coaching is, check this out.
KPC: What would you say the biggest difference in coaching style is between female coaches and male coaches?
KHC: In my opinion, one of the biggest differences between female and male coaches is simply the access and opportunity to coach. When considering all of the combinations of male/female coaches and male/female athletes, it is quite rare for females to coach elite male athletes. Having said that, I recently attended the University of Toronto versus Queen’s University men’s volleyball game and I was extremely surprised to see that the Queen’s University men’s volleyball team had a female coach. As a fellow varsity coach (I am assistant coach of the UofT women’s squash team) and sport psychology researcher, this observation was definitely a highlight of the game. I immediately began to think that it might be very interesting to talk with this female coach (as well as her male athletes) in order to gain unique perspectives on coaching and playing elite sport. However, it is much more common practice for male coaches to coach male athlete, for male coaches to coach female athletes, and for female coaches to primarily coach female athletes.
Another difference between female and male coaches more specifically related to coaching behaviours refers to the methods of communication and organization. As one of the coaches in my study explained, sport is a vehicle for performance and personal development and a source of empowerment, especially for female athletes. Furthermore, Kidman (2005) suggests that in order to empower (female and male) athletes both female and male coaches need to recognize the importance of making all athletes feel important, valued and that their needs are being taken care. However, what may differ is how female and male coaches communicate, motivate and organize trainings and competitions. Several coaches in my study spoke about the importance of knowing how to effectively communicate with their athletes. Communication literature tells us (I am currently teaching a Communication and Conflict Resolution course in the Faculty of Kinesiology and Physical Education at UofT) that there are gender differences in how females and males communicate and interpret communication. As a result, it is important for coaches to recognize their own communication habits as well as how their athletes receive and respond to them.
For example, one of the female coaches from my study quoted American soccer star Mia Hamm during her interview when she explained,
‘Coach us as men, but treat us like women’, so in other words you’re coaching the athlete no matter what gender you are, you’re always coaching the athlete but you also have to understand that women are different than men, and so I try to accept that and really focus on that because you can’t treat every female the same. Unfortunately, the male gender you can stand there and yell and swear and do whatever and they’ll all bounce, they’re resilient, they’ll respond immediately and when you do that with a women’s team maybe half of them get it and the other half shut down completely.
While this coach was referring to differences between female and male athletes, I think that a parallel can be drawn when discussing differences between female and male coaches. Whether it was related to the coach-athlete relationship, team cohesion, scheduling trainings and competitions, motivating players to reach their maximum potential, recognizing the importance of life outside of sport, making sport fun and enjoyable, defining success, administrative logistics, or receiving funding and support, all of these coaching principles and practices were of identified as important by the coaches in my study. However, each coach spoke about these slightly differently based on their own coaching philosophy, sport organization, and previous coaching experiences. And while it is difficult to comment on specific gender differences with the responses of female coaches and male coaches, this would be an interesting avenue to explore further as we may find that differences may be more substantial and gender-specific for female and male coaches.
KPC: Could you say that male or female coaches are more effective under certain circumstances or for a certain sport?
KHC: Based on my findings (as well as my own coaching and playing experiences), coaches may be more effective for sports in which they themselves have played. The majority of coaches from my study had played the sport in which they were coaching. However, this does not specifically relate to the gender of the coach or the gender of the athletes. For example, a former male basketball player could coach very well be an effective coach of a female basketball team.
In my opinion, I think that sports which naturally have an aesthetic component may benefit from having male coaches of male athletes and female coaches of female athletes. The rationale for this is based on the physical, emotional, psychological, and social demands that athletes such as gymnasts and synchronized swimmers may experience within their sport. I think that male coaches of male athletes and female coaches of female athletes may have a greater understanding of those pressures and stressors related to that specific sport.
KPC: Does your research suggest that one style of coaching is more effective than another when it comes to coaching female athletes, regardless of the coach’s gender?
KHC: As an advocate of athlete-centred coaching, I think that there are elements of this coaching style that are beneficial for all coaches and all athletes. My work has primarily been based on studying coaches’ perspectives of their coaching philosophies and behaviour in relation to athlete-centred coaching. Previous leadership and sport coaching research has focused on styles of coaching such as authoritarian/autocratic, democratic, and laissez-faire; however I believe that an athlete-centred approach to coaching encompasses many principles and practices of all of the aforementioned styles. Coaches in my study revealed several vital characteristics of coaching athletes (male or female), such as the importance of enhancing team cohesion, extending responsibility beyond sport, fostering the holistic development of the athlete, developing a coach-athlete partnership, facilitating athletes’ independence, encouraging two-way communication, providing opportunities for leadership development, promoting value-based coaching, recognizing the athlete is part of a greater whole, enlisting a support team, making sport fun, and defining success. While these are valuable findings that identify important aspects of athlete-centred coaching, I am not able to state that this (or any) coaching style is more effective than another. With respect to coaching female athletes, both male and female coaches spoke about the different aspects of coaching female athletes related to communication and organization (as outlined in the first question); however these are perspectives and opinions of the coaches who participated in the study and do not indicate whether (or not) this style of coaching is best or most effective. Measuring coach effectiveness and gender differences of coaching practices may be a fascinating and interesting direction for future research.
KPC: Does the nature of the sport play a major role in what style of coaching is best?
KHC: Although my research did not examine this issue, in my opinion, I think that the nature of sport does play a role in what is expected of coaches and their coaching behaviours. For some sports in which coaches have less direct impact (e.g., rowing when athletes are in the middle of the lake compared to basketball where coaches can call timeouts and specific plays), yes, I agree that the nature of sport can influence how coaches think and act. In this regard, athletes need to be a little more independent of their coach due to the fact that the design of the sport does not allow them to depend on their coach for specific tactical and technical help during training/competitions, etc. However, from my own experiences in sport, I think that the nature of the athletes (e.g., personality, experience, age, role/position) should play a larger role in what style of coaching might be most effective. Not all athletes can be coached the same and not all female or male athletes can be coached the same. Coaches should consider these factors when reflecting on their coaching philosophy and considering what coaching behaviours would be most appropriate for their athletes. In my opinion, coaches who are able recognize this and adapt their coaching practices to suit the holistic needs (e.g., physically, psychologically, emotionally) of their athletes have the potential to have the best coaching style
KPC: What advice could you give to coaches who work primarily with female athletes?
KHC: I would encourage all coaches to continually work to improve their own skills, stay actively involved in learning the game as well as work with their athletes to enhance team cohesion, extend responsibility beyond sport, focus on the holistic development of the athlete, develop a positive coach-athlete partnership, facilitate athletes’ independence, encourage two-way communication, provide opportunities for leadership development, promote value-based coaching, recognize that the athlete is part of a greater whole, enlist a support team, make sport fun, and create their own definition of success. In addition, when working primarily with female athletes, I would suggest that coaches create and support an environment in which athletes know when it is okay to socialize and when it is time to work hard. I would also encourage male head coaches to find a female assistant coach who can help support female athletes in a more social or personal way. As cliché as it sounds, coaches should always remember that athletes are people and therefore treat them the way that they would want to be treated outside of the sporting environment.
Happy Trails!
Stumble It!
