An outsider’s view of elite and professional sport tends to assume that these environment are constantly engaged in ‘pushing the envelope’ in the relentless pursuit of better. The situation in reality tends to be quite different. Conventions and the pressure to conform to what others are doing have a powerful pull. Paradoxically the resistance to exploration and barriers to innovation are often more pronounced the highest level. Especially within professional sport those involved are acutely aware that their position is highly prized and job security at a premium. These conditions are naturally not conducive to taking risks or moving beyond the tried and tested. All of this helps to explain the abundant examples demonstrating that opportunities remain to gain significant competitive advantages and even some easy wins
Diversity and Inclusion in Elite Sport
Elite sport is not immune to shifts in cultural norms and conventions in wider society. The number of diversity and inclusion roles have increased 60% in the UK over the past five years, and this has started to be mirrored in sporting organisations. The governance and national sport systems for Olympic sports are government funded, so it perhaps unsurprising that these organisations might be prompted to adopt policy that is becoming the norm in other sectors. That said, professional sports have also begun to follow this trend, notably in the US. In this post we consider what diversity and inclusion means in the context of sport at elite level.
Triangulating a Position
As the value of cognitive diversity becomes more recognised, what is striking is how slow we have been to realise the need to revise our habitual ways of consuming information and interacting with those who hold contrary views. Whilst pioneers who think different are celebrated in modern western culture, in reality we are far less amenable to entertaining disagreement and diverging ideas. In the professional and academic realm we are quick to follow an authority and align with a school of thought. The hordes are likewise quick to leap into the breach to defend the doctrine against perceived challenge or dissenting views. If anything debates in all circles are increasingly polarised, as the assembled masses flock to either one side or the other. We might appreciate cognitive diversity on a conceptual level, but on a practical level we are clearly not there yet. So what steps can we take to enjoy the benefits of cognitive diversity and open our minds to the possibilities as we form our opinions?
Special Post: 'The Illogic of Being Data Driven'
In the digital era there is a great onus on being ‘data driven’ across all domains. The drive to be objective and to quantify input and output is eminently understandable. The well-worn phrase that gets thrown around is ‘how can you manage something if you don’t measure it?’. We do however need to be very careful about what metrics we use as a proxy for the thing we are attempting to evaluate. There is inevitably a separation between the measure we can objectively quantify and the complex entity that it represents. We need to be very confident about the specificity and sensitivity of the particular measure in relation to what we are seeking to evaluate, to avoid false positives (detecting something that isn’t there) and false negatives (failing to detect something that is there). On a more fundamental level, complex phenomena defy simple measurement.
Tempering Athletes: Future Proofing Versus Acquired Fragility
Tempering is a process used to impart strength and toughness, and essentially serves to bring out the intrinsic properties of the material under stress. Athletes forged in the crucible of severely testing conditions may be similarly rendered highly resilient to future challenges and stressors. Those who successfully come through such trial by fire paradoxically often prove stronger from the experience. The notion that stressors can not only make systems more resilient, but in fact stronger and better as a consequence, speaks to the concept of antifragility, a phenomenon observed in nature and highlighted by Nassim Taleb who famously coined the term. In this post, we will bring this antifragility lens, and a general reticence to accept that sports injuries ‘just happen’, to reframe how we think about preparing athletes to ‘future proof’ them to risks and scenarios that we cannot fully anticipate. In place of safeguarding measures and interventions that seek to protect, we will make the argument for tempering athletes to harness and develop their intrinsic reserves and coping abilities. Adopting this perspective and general strategy for managing injury risk, we will outline some tactics to help guide practitioners in their approach.
Fostering Diversity of Thinking
Divergence of opinion has traditionally been viewed in less than positive terms: when x and y don’t see eye to eye on a particular subject, this is generally seen as problematic. By extension, we hear of the virtues of assembling a group of ‘like-minded’ individuals. Organisations typically promote compromise and conformity as virtues to foster harmony and unity within the group. Contrary to this, the wisdom of crowds illustrates the benefits of aggregating judgements from a broad and disparate group of individuals. To further strengthen the case for diversity of thought and experience, ‘cognitive diversity’ is in fact found to be the major factor that differentiates successful teams and organisations. In this Informed Blog, we explore the paradoxical ways diversity and divergence are conceptualised, and see what lessons we can take on a group and an individual level in the context of sport.