Telling the Story

One aspect of the Art of Coaching is the Art of Storytelling. I'm not talking sit the kids down and tell'em a fairy tale and it doesn't have to be a speech with fire and brimstone that sends the troops into battle. I mean using stories that illustrate a point, or give an example. They convey a message and enhance credibility.

As a young coach its often a challenge to have the stories you need. It also may not be in your nature to do this easily. So where do your coaching stories come from?

Colleagues and Mentors
As you are building your own experiences, borrow stories. These should come from mentors and colleagues. They can come from books or at conferences. Don't take credit, but use the story as a credible example. "You know Johnny, your not the first athlete to go through this. One of the best strength coaches in the country was just talking about how All-Star Joe, went through the same thing and succeeded in the end...."

Your (team, school. facility, etc...)
Borrow from those you work with. You institution and other coaches there have stories. They are closer to home for your athletes and can carry more weight. Learn your institutions stories a well.

Your Own
Over years of coaching you will gain stories. They can be become more dramatic and profound if you stay around sport for a while. Be careful though, the most powerful stories aren't always about the famous athlete or the winning team. They may be something that happened earlier today. Sometimes it's enough for an athlete to know someone else has gone through this or travelled this path before.

The story is a tool. A tool to convey meaning to your athletes by showing them a bigger picture, giving an example, and transferring the emotional power of it to them. Used well, and not abused by trivialization, a story is a key part of the Art of Coaching.

Any Given Sunday


Remember the Titans


Braveheart


300

Coaching Education Rant

There are a lot of people being mis-guided at best and some probably ripped off. Institutionally ripped-off. By the very people they were looking towards, to educate them for their future.

It's that time of year when a lot of graduates are looking for jobs. I'm looking for some coaches. The former and latter don't match up however. Unfortunately, many (if not most) college graduates are not ready to coach.

They play or like sports. They may enjoy coaching, sports medicine, and/or fitness. They pick an exercise science or kinesiology program. Spend lots of money for years or school, exercise science classes, and expensive textbooks. They finish with a degree. They send out resumes and look for a job as strength or performance coach. They put in the hard work and spent the money. That's what everyone said they were supposed to do.

Now look at it from my point of view. Most apply and don't even know what we do in sports performance coaching. They think its like personal training. They have never coached any athletes. None of their classes were in pedagogy (the art or science of being a teacher and generally refers to strategies of instruction, or a style of instruction). They have never coached anyone in max velocity mechanics or a power clean. They probably haven't even dealt with kids in a large group at a camp, but they can tell me about the krebs cycle.

This does me no good. They have no skills of value yet. They probably don't even know enough about what we do to determine if they like it or not. I have to teach them how to do anything useful at this point.

Now don't get me wrong, I strongly believe in education. You need the science, but coaching is a HANDS-ON field. If your intention is to coach in some way, and you get zero experience coaching during your education, you are not being prepared.

I think the blame lies with both the student and the institution.

The students needs to be wise consumers and select the best programs for where they want to go. As someone who's undergraduate degree is in Sound Engineering & Acoustic Design, I understand students often start school without knowing what they really want. Still, I choose a school that provided me with hands-on learning and multiple internships.

Institutions are often so caught up in theory and the business of traditional schooling that students finish with no appreciable skills. If a student is on a track that leads to coaching, fitness training, or something where they will actively interact and instruct people in movement, than you better expose your students to it. Not just in a week overview, but more in-depth. I like the programs where the upper level student have to do an internship.

Make your students do some training as well. One of the values of the physical education majors was that they had to go out and learn different sports and experience that process. They also had to teach activity classes and learn pedagogy.

Part of the problem is also the "SHOW ME THE MONEY" attitude of many graduates. They think they've earned something. You have, the readiness to start learning how to coach. If you show promise, I'll even offer you an extensive internship where you can learn coaching skills in strength, speed, video analysis, coaching pedagogy, exposure to experienced coaches and experts in multiple disciplines, become part of a broad coaching network, and more. I wont even charge you for all this, but don't expect to be highly paid yet.

I was always impatient and hated being told I had to "pay my dues." You do need to develop some coaching skills however so you become valuable to an employer, team or institution.

A degree does not a coach make.

Planes, Trains and Automobiles

Planes, Trains and Automobiles. I rolled on the floor laughing first time I saw this movie with John Candy and Steve Martin. Thats not what we are talking about though. Listening to Walter Norton give a great talk this weekend at a clinic in SoCal, he reminded of an analogy I like.

I'm going from Los Angeles to Chicago to coach a lifter in the Pan American Championships this week. I could get there by any of these three means. Each has some advantages and dis-advantages, but in the end, each could get me there.

The plane will get me there fastest without a doubt. Now I will probably pay more (although not recently with gas and cheap flights). I won't see much, will be relatively uncomfortable and confined to my 2' x 2 1/2' space. Cant chnage my mind once we start and doesn't work well if you are afraid of flying. Still its the fastest and most direct route.

The train is faster than car but significantly slower than the train. I can see a lot more scenery and have more freedom to move around. Since someone else is driving, I can read, relax, work or whatever I want to do. I can't however, change the route we our taking or have flexibility in the schedule once the journey is started.

Going by car will take longer and I will be driving. This means I can change the pace or the route whenever I want during the journey. I can see the scenery and detour if I please. Of course I have to do the driving, can be affected by weather more, and if there's a breakdown it's up to me to deal with it.

End of the day each of these very differnt methods will get me the final results I desire, getting to Chicago. Training methods are often the same. We have coaches in sports performance that argue ad-nauseum that there is only one method and they are the keeper of the secret (available for $19.99 on there new DVD).

There is nothing wrong with believing in your methodology. You had better. You also had better realize that there is more than one way to get to Chicago. It seems like too many belive that for their methods to work, all the others can't. Not true. There's more than one way to Chicago, they are just different and which is better depends on the circumstances.

Coaching: Art or Science?

What is performance coaching? Art or Science.

It's both, and that's the problem.

Some coaches are scientists. They test and measure and make calculations. They understand the the mechanics and mechanisms of human movement. They can design the optimal program based on their knowledge.

Other coaches are artists. They inspire and challenge and connect. They understand how to communicate with the athlete and tap into the athletes motivations and personality.

There are several problems caused by this seeming dichotomy of art and science:

1. Outsiders are confused. Which are we? Is it art or science? Because they are presented opposing views, or come from a bias for one or the others themselves, we often seem like charlatans. When they encounter a coach who is all science or all art and they don't match or the results are poor, the perception is negative.

2. As a profession, we are confused. Look at the conferences and seminars and you'll see it quickly. Some are all about the science, others have no science and all art. All science and you have academia with theories, but no ability to apply it in the real world. All art and you have some successes and many failures but never know why.

This is also where many coaches are turned off from the other view and the battle lines are drawn. The artist sitting listening to the scientist will hear a blowhard talking about theory and see nothing they can use. The scientist witnessing artists doesn't understand why the artist can't give them the exact formula or proof for what they do and they see a con-artist.

3. We don't recognize which aspect is needed. You may have the best science in the world, and the perfect program, but if you can't communicate it and get the athlete to buy in, it won't work. The real world isn't a lab and you can't control all the variables. You have to have the artistic skills to adapt to the athlete appropriately and make decisions based on the day to day. You have to be creative and at times follow your gut instinct.

On the flip side if you are the artist, you may get some great results because of your talent and instincts, but eventually you will run into trouble when you are working with the right canvas, When the athlete is different or has different needs and you don't have the scientific knowledge to help guide your direction. You need the science to build you art upon.


When you witness a truly great performance coach you find genius. Most have a bias toward one side or the other, but the great ones learn to develop both. The greatest coaching staffs have a blend of both. Leonard da Vinci may be the perfect example or artist/scientist. The epitome of a "renaissance man." When you can master both sides of the performance coin, then you are a master.

Can you be that good?