A provocative title, so allow me to specify at the outset what exactly I am highlighting and the limits of the argument. Firstly and most importantly, let me make it clear that I am excluding from the discussion the necessary and vitally important domain of child-protection and the protection of vulnerable adults under law. What I am specifically referring to is the concept creep that has seen the safeguarding approach extended to sportsmen and women at senior level, who are otherwise (in the eyes of the law) deemed responsible adults capable of providing informed consent, making decisions and advocating on their own behalf. I am also excluding clear cases of misconduct that unamibiguously violate professional ethics and the boundaries of the athlete-coach relationship - for instance, sexually inappropriate behaviour or physical abuse. What I am also highlighting is the mission creep of those charged with investigating such claims and the present danger of over-reach. Why I feel these trends need to be challenged is that the safeguarding system if left unchecked threatens to penalise coaches simply for carrying out their proper duties.
Cool Stories and Zombie Ideas
Every now and then a new concept spreads like wildfire and is soon adopted at scale by organisations and professionals within a given domain. This is a scenario that seems to be especially prevalent within professional sport and the performance sciences in general. Initially early adopters are drawn in by an appealing message and a story that they find compelling. As the idea gathers steam, the growing uptake seems as much motivated by anxiety and the sense that ‘everybody else seems to be into this, so perhaps I should be too’. In due course the concept becomes firmly established and its legitimacy is widely accepted. For those caught up by this wave (or mown down by it) this all seems to occur with dizzying speed. All of this speaks to the captivating effects of ideas and the power of narratives. It also begs the question how might we avoid being taken captive and resist being swept up by the tide. Even once the wave has subsided, these events leave in their wake a detritus of zombie ideas that we as leaders, coaches and practitioners must navigate thereafter.
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.
Beyond the Bubble: The Utility of a Neutral Third Party
One of the problems with our natural preference for those who think as we do is the tendency to find ourselves in an echo chamber. Leaders can of course combat this by recruiting for cognitive diversity, but even within a diverse group our thinking inevitably tends to become socialised as a natural consequence of spending time in the company of the same group of people. Our colleagues will also to some degree share the same biases and are subject to the conventions that are inherent to the sport. Professional sport in particular is a bubble - at present quite literally, but even under usual circumstances. It follows that it is important that we escape the bubble periodically. A related countermeasure is to strategically enlist a neutral third party to break up the usual routine and expose team members to perspectives from outside the bubble at regular intervals. Engaging with an outsider can serve a performance staff in a number of different ways as we will explore.
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?