There is a strange insistence that participation and performance are entirely distinct and never the twain shall meet. But is there really no common ground to be found here? I will argue that participation and performance are NOT in fact mutually exclusive - especially in the case of youth sport. There is in fact plenty of overlap. So why should we keep them apart? Is it possible that bringing participation and performance back under the same roof might provide benefits in both directions?
So what is the performance case for investing time and coaching resources in participation? Well for one thing, simply increasing the numbers participating can be expected to increase the yield at the high performance ‘tail’ of the curve, as depicted in the image below.
More enlightened approaches to talent development are increasingly aligned with supporting participation, summed up with the maxim ‘as many as possible for as long as possible'. One of the negative consequences of separating participation from performance has been a tendency to select too early and to be unnecessarily exclusive in who we deem to be ‘talented’ and thus worthy of high quality coaching. Each of these things has proven detrimental, both to those who are selected and burdened with the talent label too early and to those who are overlooked and miss out on the opportunity to develop as they might.
Taking a more pragmatic approach that caters for performance whilst still supporting participation recognises the limits to our ability to ID talent early. For instance, this acknowledges that performance at age-grade level is an unreliable predictor of who will ultimately be successful at senior level. In essence we do not know who might emerge until growth curves converge later in adolescence. It follows that the only sensible approach is to cast as wide a net as possible and keep as many prospective talents in play as we can. In this way we can expose more kids to better coaching. As the saying goes, a rising tide lifts all boats: by giving attention to participation and being more inclusive in who we cater to we can be expected to raise the level of performance overall. Once again this will ultimately yield more high performers!
But is a performance-oriented approach conducive to promoting participation? The main argument for keeping participation pure and entirely separate is that any hint of striving for performance or competition is a turn off for those kids who just want to take part and have fun.
It is true that a commonly cited factor that demotivates kids and leads to drop out is an intense focus on competition outcomes. Equally, chasing short-term wins at the expense of what is best for progression in the long-term is also among the most common impediments to developing talent. So we could argue that when youth coaches (and parents) prioritise competitive outcomes to an inappropriate degree this is not only an obstacle to supporting participation but also does not serve performance in the long-term. The perils arise from prioritising winning above all else. However, this is a separate issue from emphasing performance.
“We didn’t get better, we just got older”
We should also note that ‘pure’ participation environments that strive to eliminate competition and reject performance as somehow toxic certainly do not serve those who have higher aspirations but are also not amenable to supporting participation or retention. Irrespective of their aims, we need to acknowledge and account for what is satisfying and rewarding. When kids do not see a path forwards and do not feel that they have any means to improve they will inevitably become demotivated and drift away.
It is possible to cater for those who just want to enjoy taking part whilst still ensuring that those who aspire to go further have a path to do so. Coaches and parents do however need to tailor their approach and adjust their expectations to reflect what each kid is seeking from their involvement in sport. A good first step is to ask them! We also need to keep the door open to switch between groups as goals and priorities change along the way.
We can identify three essential elements that motivate individuals to participate in sport and facilitate enjoyment:
Challenge
Competency - that is, the sense of becoming better
Community, cohesion (working with others towards a common aim)
What is striking is that these same elements also apply when supporting aspiring high performers working towards lofty aims in their sporting careers.
Striving to improve is no bad thing - albeit the intensity of this desire will likely differ markedly between individuals! The more committed performers may merit more of our time but we should not disregard the rest. Becoming better is rewarding and motivating for everybody - so as coaches we should provide this opportunity to as many as possible, irrespective of their sporting ambitions. Equipping more kids so that they feel capable and secure enough to continue participating is crucial to keep them engaged and reduce dropout.
“Comparison is the thief of joy”
Hopefully I have made the case that focussing on performance is not necessarily detrimental to participation, as long as we are measuring progress against ourselves (i.e. what we were capable of last week, last month, last year, etc.) rather than comparing ourselves to others. Naturally, kids need to be given guidance and support to overcome the default tendency and make this important switch. We also need to help them realise that they are on a different growth and development trajectory to their peers. Once again, coaches and parents have a big part to play in being mindful about praising the right things to incentivise improvement. Notably, we should reward effort. Equally we should also encourage endeavour. A common barrier to developing is a tendency to play it safe and stick to what they are good at. It is therefore important that performers and participants alike are applauded when they step out of their comfort zone and attempt things that push the limits of their capabilities, especially during practice.
