As the march to high performance systems continues we have yet to resolve how to unite all parties to the cause. The estrangement between sports science (and medicine) and those operating in the field has proven to be a recalcitrant problem. Just as there is an ongoing divide between academic research and applied practice, achieving alignment between support staff in different disciplines and the coaching staff (not to mention the athlete as the ‘end user’) often proves to be elusive. Proponents of sports science and medicine often rail at how coaches and athletes seem reticent to adopt new findings and assimilate evidence-based practice, despite the merits presented in the research literature. Support providers commonly bemoan a lack of ‘buy in’ from the coaching staff, whereas researchers similarly cite a lack of compliance from athletes and coaches as thwarting their attempts to take interventions from the lab into the field. Here we will attempt to unravel these issues and explore some solutions to bring the respective parties together in our quest to unite the holy trinity of coach, support staff and researcher scientist.
QUESTIONS OF ALIGNMENT…
A striking finding from a recent study exploring perceptions and barriers between coaches and support staff was that one of the few things both parties agree on is that there is a lack of a common goal. Given how prevalent this problem seems to be it is odd we have not invested more effort in seeking to explain why it is such a struggle to align our objectives.
What is important to us and what matters to the coach (and performer) may be quite different things. It should perhaps come as less of a surprise when coaches or athletes do not show any interest unless and until we can demonstrate how what we propose will serve their performance objective. The question that performers first want an answer to is ‘will this make me better?.
When we fail to begin from this starting point it is natural that we will struggle to secure engagement. Coaches and athletes are solely accountable for performance in the arena. When they observe that the other party perhaps serves different masters and has different incentives this naturally prompts reservations. And when it comes to academic research in particular there may be something to the suspicions that investigations and reporting of findings are motivated by serving other agendas.
CONFRONTING OTHER AGENDAS…
“We (should) only care about discovering the truth; we shouldn’t care ahead of time which truth it is... ”
The motivations behind pursuing research questions are sadly not always as pure as one might expect. The researchers often do have an agenda or at least a stake in producing a certain outcome that fits with their pet model or theory. In the digital era it is becoming more commonplace to seek prominence by staking a claim to a niche area and research publications are a primary vehicle for pursuing this end. The reality is that attaining ‘expert’ billing in a particular area confers status and this naturally motivates behaviour. There is a tendency for these influences to creep into how studies are carried out and in turn this colours how the results are presented and what inferences are made from the research findings.
In the realm of athlete support there is a similar tendency to overstate the importance and oversell the particular service being offered. To some extent this is simply borne out of a desire to be involved. Equally there can also be an element of seeking to justify our own existence. National institute of sport systems can be particularly prone to these issues. Once the machine becomes big enough there is a tendency to create silos in the form of departments for each respective discipline, each with their own leader and in turn their own agenda. When each respective discipline becomes its own fiefdom this naturally influences practitioners to seek to represent their team and stake their claim to a share of the credit in the event that athletes have success.
CHECKING OUR ASSUMPTIONS…
Something that is entwined in how we have tended to approach issues of coach and athlete engagement is a tacit presumption that we know better. By extension, we assume that the reticence on the part of the coach and resistance to assimilate our ideas of best practice is borne of ignorance. Naturally this leads us to the conclusion that coaches and athletes simply need to be better educated. Once enlightened they will naturally come around to our way of thinking and adopt our recommended way of doing things.
We are also prone to an over-abundance of certainty. This is most evident in how we present what we deem to be best practice based on the current consensus and latest research. It is rare that we allow that we might be wrong or that we might be misled by the research findings or the authors’ conclusions on the practical applications. In particular we tend to overstate the extent to which interventions and findings can be directly imported and applied to the athlete population in question. Rediscovering humility may be an important first step in our quest to foster collaboration.
RECONSIDERING ‘EVIDENCE-BASED PRACTICE’…
We have a notion that science drives innovations in practice. In fact this is not fully reflected in reality (whether we are talking about sport or other fields). Cutting edge practice at elite level is rarely led by research, at least not entirely. Indeed rather than leading, there is often a lag between pioneering practice that is happening in the field and what is being studied in research. The inventions and innovations that lead to scientific discovery most often come from the field. One of the most important roles of research is to test and validate (or not) practices that coaches and practitioners are already engaging in.
This prompts the question whether evidence-based practice is actually something we should be aspiring towards. Aiming to be evidence-informed seems a far more worthy goal. Aside from the lag we have described, there is almost inevitably some leap to be made in translating research findings to a real-life setting. It is striking how this mirrors the data-driven versus data-informed debate! There is however an extra dimension to add in this case as inferences are being made from findings relating to study participants that differ markedly from the athlete populations we are seeking to apply them to. It remains an open question whether or not we can in fact make these inferences and generalise findings when the populations in question differ in such fundamental ways.
Empirical study is not restricted to the research setting. We should perhaps not be so quick to dismiss practice-based evidence. Academic bias creates a tendency to dismiss what we don't yet understand. In other words, there is an idea that in order for research findings to be legitimate we must be clear on the mechanism. This is the reverse of how discovery actually proceeds in reality. We should rather seek to find out what works, then figure out why and how!
FOSTERING ENGAGEMENT: START AT THE BEGINNING…
Frequently we come to coaches with our 'solution' - typically without having bothered to ask them what their most pressing question might be or what problems they need to solve. Funnily enough we are stretching credulity when we expect the other party to accept that we are not only all knowing but also have a window into their deepest desires.
A better starting point is to enlist those on the ground in deciding what questions need to be answered and what problems need to be solved before we start proposing solutions. Beyond that, we also need to acknowledge the complexity and uncertainty involved in problem-solving under real-life conditions.
There is a need to exercise some humility and allow that we do not have the answers. We should entertain and perhaps acknowledge the possibility that what we propose may not necessarily be the solution. Solving problems in the wild is most often an iterative process of trial and error. What this requires is a partnership with the coaches and athletes - we need them to stay with us as we try things and iterate towards the eventual solution.
From a research perspective we must similarly seek to engage those on the ground to inform the research questions that we pursue. Beyond that we further need to invest in fully exploring the problem. Our attempts to investigate these questions must be genuinely motivated by discovery rather than validating a pet model or something that fits with our stated view of how things work. In this way we leave open the possibility for chance discovery rather than simply beginning with a desired end in mind.
CONSIDERING THE ‘USER EXPERIENCE’…
Matt Ridley and others make the important distinction between invention and innovation. What differentiates these two things is that innovation encompasses the process of bringing the idea to a stage where it is adopted by the desired audience. Having successfully navigated the invention stage and initial proof of concept there are still a number of steps to negotiate in order to successfully bring the new concept ‘to market’.
Beyond advocating for a particular intervention, we still need to figure out how best to deliver the service offering to the end user. In order to do so, we must first identify and address the barriers to uptake. It is these critical steps that are too often missed, as numerous illustrative examples in the realm of injury prevention attest to. At present the typical response to an observed lack of initial uptake is to throw our hands up and point the finger at coaches and athletes for failing to comply.
Our task clearly does not end once we come up with a solution that works in a controlled setting. If we want to get traction then considering the desires and experience of the end user is paramount. Whilst we might be able to anticipate some of these issues this is not something we can entirely second guess.
From a delivery perspective we need to engage the end user in order to illuminate what questions need to be answered and what problems need to be solved in order for them to adopt the solution proposed. Once again coming up with the final version that addresses these miscellaneous issues will be an iterative process and the coach and athlete must be partners in the endeavour if we are to arrive at the desired outcome.
CLOSING THOUGHTS: REALISING OPPORTUNITY COST…
Something that is fundamental yet we typically fail to take into account is opportunity cost. When presenting an idea or proposing an intervention we must consider the time and attention it will take away from other aspects. The opportunity cost involved becomes all the more pertinent when what we are proposing does not necessarily directly benefit performance in the short-term. Adopting this mindset might perhaps make us more selective and considered about what we choose to propose and when.
Engagement is a matter building relationships. From the outset we must take the time to understand the performance model and objectives of the coaching staff. Before we start to talk about what we might bring to the party we need to show that we first understand the mission and have a clear appreciation of what they are seeking from us. There is similarly a need to invest time with individual athletes to understand what they seeking to achieve and discover how we might best support them. In both cases it is important for them to see that we are genuinely invested in contributing to realising their goals (as opposed to our own). Securing some early wins will also go a long way to demonstrating what value we can bring. Investing the time to discover the needs and demonstrate our commitment and value are crucial in developing the requisite trust and goodwill to earn a seat at the table.
Those interested in learning about the services we offer to organisations and teams can find more via the consulting section on the site. You are also welcome to reach out via the Contact page.
Found this a worthwhile read? Subscribe to get Informed Blog posts direct to your email inbox and free to share with anybody in your network who might find value. When you subscribe you will receive a link to access a course entitled Fundamentals of Physical Preparation for free.
Also check out the Books section for a host of resources that take a deeper dive on various topics relating to human performance, coaching, athletic preparation and sports injury. The recent release Prepared: Unlocking Human Performance with Lessons from Elite Sport is now available worldwide.