Lecture 2 - Mediational model of Leadership

Question 1

What are some key attributes of a leader

- and whats the most important stuff?

Answer 1

Good communicator
Good Decision Maker
Experience
Determination
Vision
Motivational
Understand needs of others
Ambition
Highly skilled

• Most important stuff: instill imagination in somebody

Question 2

What 3 things can we look at to tell if a leader is effective or not?

Answer 2

We can tell if a leader is effective or not by looking at 3 things:

1. Player satisfaction
2. Drop out/ Turn over rates
3. Performance (MAIN ONE WE LOOK AT)

Question 3

What are the generally agreed 4 parts of leadership

- Northouse (2007)

Answer 3

Lots of varying definitions of leadership General consensus that leadership is made up of:

Leadership involves:

1. A process
2. To influence
3. A group of people
4. Taking action to a common goal (Goal-orientated)
   - Northouse (2007)

Question 4

What was Fransen et al (2016) definition of leadership?

Answer 4

He argued leadership is an ACTION not a POSITION

- is it more about “what you do”> “who you are”

Question 5

Who Came up with the mediational model of coach leadership and why?

Answer 5

• Smoll, Smith, Curtis & Hunt (1979)
• Because they wanted to look at how coaching influences performances
  •a) what good/ bad behaviours do coaches do?
  •b) How does this impact athletes

Smith & Smoll (1996, p. 125): “An important determinant of the effect of participation lies in the relationship between coaches and athletes”

Question 6

What age group did Smoll, Smith, Curtis & Hunt (1979) look at and why?

Answer 6

They looked at youth sport
- and how quality of coaching influence youth sport

• They did this because this age is important - is is when you are likely to commit to the sport in the long run, or drop out
  •If you have a bad leader: may cause bad experiences = drop out
  •if you have a good leader: can build on positive experiences = commit and build on them

Question 7

What Smith & Smoll (1996, p.125) say about the coach and athlete relationship?

Answer 7

Smith & Smoll (1996, p. 125): “An important determinant of the effect of participation lies in the relationship between coaches and athletes”

Question 8

Outline the actual model

Answer 8

1. Coaching behaviours ->
2. Athletes perception and recall->
3. Athletes evaluative reactions
4. Coaches perceptions of player
5. Coaching behaviours

Question 9

Explain the model

Answer 9

So:

1. A coaches behaviour is mediated by how the athlete perceives and recalls it
   - whatever meaning athletes give to that behaviour determines what impact it will have
2. This meaning/ perception will then determine an athletes reactions or behaviours. And how the athlete views the coach or the sport
3. BUT: an athletes behaviours here then change a coaches behaviour via perceptions
   - this is mediated by the coaches perceptions and recall of the athletes behaviour

Question 10

outline what can influence coach behaviours

Answer 10

According to the mediational model, coaching behaviours can be influenced by 3 things: - basically there are 3 antecedents

1. Coach individual difference variables
2. Situational factors
3. Coach perceptions of players attitudes (the mediator between athletes behaviour and coaches behaviour - the last and then looping back to the first step)

Can then influence the next stage of the model - player perception and recall

Question 11

What can coach behaviours then influence

Answer 11

Can then influence the next stage of the model: player perception and recall

Question 12

Outline Coach individual difference variables as one of the 3 antecedents to coach behaviours (the first step)
* Fill in from reading**

Answer 12

1. Coaching goals/ motives
2. Behavioural intentions
   - is primary goal to win, or personal growth
   - if its winning - might become more punitive, authoritarian, regimented
3. Instrumentalities
4. Perceived coaching norms
5. Self-monitoring
6. Gender

Question 13

Outline situational variables as one of the 3 antecedents to coach behaviours (the first step)
* Fill in from reading**

Answer 13

1. Nature of sport
2. Level of competition
3. Practice vs game
4. Previous success/ failure
5. Present game/ practice outcomes
6. Intrateam interactions
7. Current team status - W/L/D
   •Might be more punitive when losing

Question 14

Outline Coaches perceptions of players attitudes/ behaviours as a precedent of coaches behaviours (the first step)
* FIll in from reading*

Answer 14

Coaches will behave differently to athletes they believe have negative attitudes instead of positive attitudes

• this is how the loop goes round again
• this is the mediator between the last and first steps (bottom square) - but also can be seen as a precedent to coaching behaviours

Question 15

What are the 3 precedents of player perceptions and recall (of a coaches behaviour)

Answer 15

1. Coach behaviours (step one of the model)
2. Players individual difference variables
3. Situational Factors

Question 16

Outline Players individual difference variables as a precedent to “players perceptions and recall” (step 2)

Answer 16

1. Age and Sex
2. Perceived coaching norms
3. Valence of coaching behaviour
4. Sport-specific achievement
5. Competitive trait anxiety - attend to more threatening cues - more likely to pick up on punishing/ threatening behaviours of the coach, because they are more predisposed to see them. Or just perceive more neutral behaviour as more negative
6. General Self-esteem
7. Athletic self-esteem

Question 17

Outline Situational factors as a precedent to “players perceptions and recall” (step 2)

Answer 17

1. nature of sport
2. level of competition
3. Practice vs game
4. Previous success/ failure
5. Present game/ practie outcomes
6. Intrateam interactions
7. Pressure of the situation - high pressure situations make athletes more aware of pressure relevant cues like “Critical or controlling behaviours”. More anxious = pick up negative experiences of coaches behavioure more

Question 18

What 3 things can influence players evaluative reactions (the final step) and then what 2 things does it go on to influence?

Answer 18

Players evaluate reactions (The last step)

Is influenced by:

1. Players perception and recall (Step 2 of model)
2. Players individual differences (From above) - including trait anxiety
3. Situational variables (From above)

And it influences:

1. Player perception and recall - back to step 2 - the more you think about it, the more angry you get, the more angry you get, the more you think about it
2. Coach perceptions of players attitudes (the bottom block) - the one which mediates the link between this and coaches behaviours

Question 19

Outline trait anxiety as an example of a players individual differences, something that influences players evaluate reactions (third step)

Answer 19

Trait anxiety is an example of a players individual differences, and this is an example of what can influence players evaluate reactions (third step)

So for one, it can effect ‘perception & Recall’ (the second step) - as you perceive the coach to be making more threatening behaviours

But can also influence evaluative reactions to coach behaviours (the third step)
- those with HIGH TRAIT ANXIETY will not only ‘perceive’ (step 2) the coach as MORE Punitive behaviours (Frequency), but these will be seen as more threatening (intensity) than those with LOW TRAIT ANXIETY

Perceiving it as more frequent (step 2) and at a higher magnitude influences their reactions (Step 3)

Question 20

What are the 3 benefits of this model?

Answer 20

√ 1. Offers a model of coach behaviours for youth sport
√ 2. Uses an observational Measure
√ 3. Emphasise players evaluative reactions - when a new coach joins a team, need to take into account that the team likel have their own norms, need to consider how they evaluate things

Question 21

What are the 4 things measured in this model and how?

Answer 21

1. Athlete perceptions and recall of leader behaviours
2. Affective reactions to sport experience
   - Structured interviews assess these first 2
3. Coaches perceptions of their own behaviour
   - Questionnaire (pen & Paper)
4. Actual leader behaviour
   - CBAS - direct observation

Question 22

Outline the CBAS

• what is it, how do you do it
• branches

Answer 22

Coaching Behaviour Assessment System - an observational method
- Look at the coaches in different contexts to get a global view of their behaviour

12 behaviours, split into 2 branches:

a) Reactive - Involves responding to something, desirable or non-desirable. HAS A BEHAVIOUR PRECEEDING IT
b) Spontaneous - initiated without any preceeding behaviours - NO BEHAVIOUR PRECEEDING IT

Question 23

Outline the reactive branch

Answer 23

A. Reactive Branch – HAS BEHAVIOUR PRECEEDING IT•Desirable performance

1. Ignored/ Non-reinforcement – Failure to respond to a good performance
2. Reinforcement – Positive, rewarding reaction (non/verbal) to a good play/ effort

•Mistake Error

3. Mistake-Contingent Encouragement – Encourage after mistake
4. Mistake-Contingent Instruction – instruction or demonstration on how to correct the mistake
5. Punitive Technical Instruction - hostile instruction, punishing you for them having to explain
6. Punishment – negative reaction (verbal or non-verbal) following mistake
7. Ignoring Mistake – don’t respond to a mistake

•Misbehaviours
8. Keeping Control – reactions intended to restore or maintain order

Question 24

Outline the spontaneous branch

Answer 24

B: Spontaneous - HAS NO BEHAVIOUR PRECEEDING IT

• Game Related

9. General Technical Instruction – Spontaneous instruction in techniques/ strategies of the sport (not following a mistake)
10. General Encouragement – Spontaneous encouragement, not following a mistake
11. Organisation – administrative behavior that sets the stage for play by assigning duties or responsibilities (everyone doing the right job?)

• Game Irrelevant
12. General Communication- just talking to the athletes, showing you care more about them as an athlete

Question 25

Outline Smith, Zane, Smoll & Coppel (1983) - Research support for the CBAS use in practical settings

Answer 25

Method:

• Used the CBAS system to compare actual baseball coaching behaviour across coaches
• Also looked at: child athletes evaluation of the coach and the sport
• They removed the ignoring mistakes category and the non-reinforcement category - as these can be difficult to assess - can never be sure the coach saw it and then chose not to react to it - did they see it

Findings:

1. Behaviours
   - 40% of behaivours were encouraging
   - 3% of behaviours were punitive
   - 44% of behaviours were instruction
2. Found a correlation between mistake-contingent instruction, and liking the sport and coach
3. Self-esteem corelatted negatively with general technical instruction (this is because it is spontaneous and not told why)

Conclusions/ implications:

• Shows the impact of a coaches behaviour towards enjoyment and participation
• Athletes preferred being corrected for a mistake when they knew why, but preferred correction at all, over nothing

Question 26

What 3 things has research using CBAS found?

• in general
• the 3 behavioural dimensions

Answer 26

3 Main behavioural dimensions have emerged following analysis:

1. Supportiveness - reinforcement, mistake-contingent encouragement
2. Instructiveness - technical instruction, mistake-contingent instruction
3. Punitiveness - Punishment, punitive instruction vs organisational behaviours

Question 27

What are broad findings about CBAS

Answer 27

1. More supportiveness = liking coach and team mates more, enjoying sport more
2. More punitive actions = liked coach less, less persistance with sport
3. Liking for coaches = positively associated with self-esteem
   - constant correction without reason = reduced SE
4. Win-loss record unrelated to attitudes towards coaches
5. Low correlation between coaches predictions of behaviours and their actual behaviours

Question 28

What did Smith & Smoll (2007) say about findings with regards to the CBAS

Answer 28

“Coaches were blissfully unaware of how they behaved”
- page number?

• Low correlation between coaches predictions of their behaviours and their actual behaviours

Question 29

What is the Coaching Behaviour Questionnaire

• what does it measure
• what are the two classes

Answer 29

The method for assessing atheltes perceptions and evaluative reactions towards positive .negative coaching behaviours

Classes coaching behaviour into 2 types:

1. Negative activation
   - coaching behaviour that make athletes feel tensed, uptight and distracted
2. Supportiveness
   - coaching behaviours that make athletes feel in control, confident and composed

Question 30

Outline Williams et al (2003) as research into the CBQ

Answer 30

Method:
took the 2 components of the CBQ (negative activation & supportiveness) - comparing them to athletes levels of trait anxiety, cognitive and state anxiety & self-confidence
- (State Anxiety = how anxious you are in that situation)

Findings:

• More anxiety and less self-confidence = saw coach as negative
• Having compatible (beliefs/ goals/ personality) with coach = positive evaluation of their behaviours.

Question 31

Outline Coach effectiveness Training as the practical applications of this model
- What is it, what is its aims

Answer 31

Aims to use this model to change coaches and make them more effective
- its an intervention programme to change coach behaviours to enhance YOUTH ATHLETES sport experience

5 things Smith & Smoll Suggest:

1. Focus on enjoyment - over winning/ losing
2. Emphasise positive approach - positive reinforcement, encouragement, sound technical instruction
3. Establish positive norms - that players have to abide to - e.g. come to a game despite being injured
4. Compliance with team roles and responsibilities - involve athletes in decisions, preferences of rules > punishments
5. Be aware of your own behaviour as a coach - self-monitor

Question 32

Outline Smith, Smoll & Curtis (1979) - support for the CET

Answer 32

Methods;

• Tested CET to see if it worked
• Looked at baseball little league coaches - experimental group given 2 hour CET workshop
• Measured coaches using CBAS and compared them to controls

Findings:

• Trained coaches were different in 4 ways:
  1. Viewed as more supportive, less controlling/ punitive
  2. Players had Higher SE
  3. Higher intra-team attraction- players liked the group more and wanted to stay in it
  4. Those with Lower SE reacted more positively

Question 33

Outline Barnett, Smoll & Smith (1992) - support for the CET

Answer 33

Athletes with trained coaches had:

1. Less competitive anxiety
2. Higer SE
3. Reduced attrition/ drop out rates (5% compared to control of 26%)

Question 34

What has been the implications of the Mediational model

- what has it influenced?

Answer 34

1. Has led to a new Mastery Approach to Coaching intervention (MAC)
   - Mastery Env = development and getting better
   Vs
   - Ego centred = just about winning

MAC provides specific behavioural guidelines for master-involving motivational climate
- it is inspired by achievement Goal theory

Question 35

Outline what is meant by behavioural signatures
- perhaps another development from Mediational Model
Smith & smoll Findings - but what year?*** - reading

Answer 35

Compares how a coach behaves across multiple
situations
- this can then be compared to other coaches

Looks like a graph - plots how they behave
- Intraindividual situation-behavioural patterns

Smith & Smoll found:

• Coaches behaved differently if they were liked or not liked, and if they were winning or losing
• supportiveness, instructions or punishments all varied depending on the situation
• When losing, a liked coach might be supportive, but a disliked coach might be punitive

Question 36

what are limitations of the mediational model of coach leadership

Answer 36

X - doesnt break down behaviours into verbal or non-verbal
X - Doesnt account for magnitude/ type of reinforcement - e.g. saying well done/ good job could be in any context. But saying: well done good pass is specific
X - Quality and duration of instruction - doesnt distinguish qualities: Saying: “move to the left side there is space to score” and “try and score” would get the same rating but they are obviously different categories
X - Ignores inspiring/ creating vision in followers
X - doesnt assess athletes evaluative reactions to these behaviours