Content uploaded by Camilla J Knight
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Camilla J Knight on Jan 08, 2016
Content may be subject to copyright.
Reprinted from
International Journal of
Sports Science
& Coaching
Volume 4 · Number 4 · 2009
Exploring Parent-Related Coaching
Stressors in British Tennis:
A Developmental Investigation
by
Camilla. J. Knight and Chris. G. Harwood
Exploring Parent-Related Coaching
Stressors in British Tennis:
A Developmental Investigation
Camilla. J. Knight1and Chris. G. Harwood2
1Child and Adolescent Sport and Activity Research Laboratory,
Faculty of Physical Education and Recreation,
University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, T6E 2H9, Canada
E-mail: cjknight@ualberta.ca
2Sport and Exercise Psychology Research Group, School of Sport,
Exercise, and Health Sciences, Loughborough University, Loughborough,
Leicestershire, LE11 3TU, UK.
E-mail: c.g.harwood@lboro.ac.uk
ABSTRACT
In order to explore the stressors that tennis coaches’ associate with
parents and examine how such stressors may differ depending upon a
player’s developmental stage of participation, seventeen focus group
interviews were conducted with a total of 70 coaches; 28 coaches of
sampling stage players, 24 coaches of specializing stage players, and 18
coaches of investment stage players. Content analysis of the focus group
data revealed three general dimensions of stressors: direct coaching
stressors, player-related stressors, and external and system-based
stressors. Sampling-stage coaches reported many stressors relating to
parents’ understanding of tennis and development. Specializing-stage
coaches highlighted multiple stressors concerning parental pressure and
involvement. Investment-stage coaches replicated many of the
specializing stage stressors, but also highlighted various methods to
reduce parent-related stressors. Results are discussed in relation to
previous research. Practical implications to reduce the stressors British
tennis coaches encounter are provided.
Key words: Coaches, Parents, Stress, Tennis
INTRODUCTION
The purpose of this study was to explore the stressors that tennis coaches’ associate with
parents. It also examined how such stressors may differ depending upon a player’s
developmental stage of participation [1]. Parents and coaches both play an important role in the
lives of young athletes, but the parent-coach relationship is often associated with difficulties
[2]. Notably, parents have been cited as one reason coaches would stop coaching and as a
“problem” for coaches to deal with [3, 4]. However, despite such evidence, little attention has
International Journal of Sports Science & Coaching Volume 4 · Number 4 · 2009 545
Reviewer: Melinda Houston (University of Utah, USA)
been given to understanding the specific stressors that coaches associate with parents.
Prolonged exposure to stressors can impact coaches’ motivation, satisfaction, and
enjoyment in their personal and professional lives [5]. This may, in turn, lead to coaches
leaving the profession or burning out [6-8]. Further, if coaches perceive parents as stressors
it may cause problems within the parent-coach relationship. Such problems can impact the
development and enjoyment of the child-athlete [4] and the coach-athlete relationship [9]. As
such, identifying the stressors coaches associate with parents is important to help prevent any
negative effects for coaches, parents, or child-athletes.
Lazarus [10] explained that stress might arise whenever people are working closely
together or have close relationships. The emotional labor associated with social interactions
has been identified as a stressor in a variety of service occupations [11]. Coaching is a service
business that necessitates continual social interactions [12-13]. As such, there are multiple
opportunities for coaches to experience stressors. Stressors arising from social interactions
consistently emerge in the coaching stress literature [e.g., 7- 8, 13-14]. Coaches interact with
a range of people from fans and the media, to athletic directors, other professionals (e.g.,
trainers, managers), and athletes. For coaches working within youth sport, the parents of
athletes are one of the most significant populations they interact with [15]. Parents are key
stakeholders within youth-sport settings and are required to commit extensive amounts of
their time, money, and emotional energy to support their children in sport [16-17]. As such,
parents spend considerable time in sports environments and there are frequent opportunities
for parents and coaches to interact.
Unfortunately, parents have been identified as one of the stressors that coaches encounter
[12, 18]. For example, Scantling and Lackey [19-22] examined high-school coaches’
stressors over four decades. Parents were reported as the main stressor for these coaches in
three of the four decades [22]. The identification of parents as coaching stressors has,
generally, occurred through quantitative studies. Such studies have aimed to examine a broad
range of coaching stressors, but specific information regarding why parents are perceived as
stressors remains unknown.
Recently, there has been a focus upon developing a more in-depth understanding of
coaching stress in college and adult sport through the use of qualitative methods [7, 14]. Such
qualitative studies have not been conducted with youth-sport coaches, thus parents have not
been discussed. However, these qualitative studies have highlighted the complexity of
coaching stressors and the importance of understanding coaches’ perceptions of their
stressors as opposed to simply obtaining a list of demands related to their profession [7].
Although our understanding of parent-related stressors is limited, some insight can be
gained from examining the means through which parents may cause coaches problems.
Specific problems that parents can create for coaches have emerged from both qualitative and
quantitative studies. Such problems have included: parents interfering with tactics, technique,
and training schedules [2, 4]; demanding too much of the coach’s time [5]; constant phone
calls [2]; an inappropriate emphasis upon winning [18]; and a lack of game knowledge [23].
Coaches have also recalled conflict with parents, often arising due to communication
problems, power struggles, or varying levels of parental involvement [2, 24]. The problems
listed above have generally emerged from studies on youth sport that have not focused
specifically upon coaching stressors or parents’ behaviors. Consequently, it is unlikely that
such studies have provided a full account of the problems experienced in the parent-coach
relationship. Nevertheless, the numbers of problems within the parent-coach relationship that
have emerged throughout the literature provide some indication of the extent of this issue and
the need to fully explore and understand it.
546 Parent-Related Coaching Stress
Recently, Gould and colleagues [3, 25] conducted an extensive study of perceived
effective and ineffective parent behaviors with respect to facilitating junior tennis success.
This research occurred in three phases, consisting of focus groups with coaches, a national
survey of coaches, and 25 interviews with tennis players, their coach, and parents. Gould and
colleagues’ [3, 25] findings spoke to instances of parents interfering with coach-player
interactions, inhibiting practice, as well as the conflict of goals held by the coach and parent
for the child’s tennis development. Coaches cited feeling undermined by parents who lived
through their child’s tennis, and often felt that parents did not support coaches in helping
players to take responsibility.
The relatively consistent evidence of parent-related issues for coaches in youth sport
suggests an ever present need for parent education. However, bespoke educational resources
are more likely to have a sustained impact on parents if there is a rigorous, academic
understanding of specific parental and coaching issues. In light of this need, the Lawn Tennis
Association (LTA) of Great Britain recently supported a three-stage research program to
understand specific stressors faced by parents and coaches within their junior tennis system.
In stage one of the project, Harwood and Knight [26] investigated parental stressors via
an open-ended survey of 123 active tennis parents. The wide range of stressors coalesced into
seven core themes of parental stressors, accounting for competitive, organizational, and
developmental stressors. Coaches emerged as one particularly pertinent stressor for these
parents. Approximately 50% of the sample expressed stressors relating to coaches’behaviors
or attitude. Stage two of the research incorporated in-depth interviews of tennis parents
whose children were located within the sampling, specializing, and investment stages of
Côtè’s [1, 27] Developmental Model of Sport Participation [28]. Côtè’s [1] model identifies
stages athletes move through during their continued involvement in sport. In the sampling
stage the emphasis is upon fun and play, with children engaging in multiple sports. Parents
are hugely important in initiating involvement and providing emotional support, while the
coach’s role is minimal. As children move into the specializing stage, they begin to focus
their attention upon just one or two sports. Coaches become more prominent as training is
increasingly important. However, parents still play a large role and increasingly commit time
and money to their child’s sport. In the investment stage, children make a commitment to
achieve an elite level in one sport and engage in extensive training. Parents often begin to
play a less direct role, with the coach becoming the main focus [1, 27].
Harwood and Knight’s [28] results reinforced the competitive, organizational, and
developmental stressors faced by parents, but also distinguished the nature and prominence
of stressors at different time points. For example, sampling-stage parents encountered a
range of competitive stressors and few developmental stressors. Organizational and
developmental stressors were highly prominent for specializing- and investment-stage
parents. The differentiation between stages was valuable for coaches and the governing body
in terms of providing appropriate education and practical support for parents at different time
points and transitions.
The current investigation forms stage three of this program, offering coaches an
opportunity to discuss their stressors in order to ultimately facilitate improved parent-coach
interactions. In advancing upon the existing research of broader coaching stressors in a
variety of sports, this study focuses specifically upon understanding coaching stressors
directly pertaining to, and initiated by, parents in the tennis system. As children progress in
sport, the requirements and relative importance of parents and coaches change, altering the
dynamics in the parent-coach relationship. Indeed, the transitions in roles fulfilled by parents
and coaches can result in complex transitions within the athlete-coach-parent triad [29]. As
International Journal of Sports Science & Coaching Volume 4 · Number 4 · 2009 547
such, depending upon an athlete’s stage of participation, coaches may perceive different
parent-related stressors. To this end, we continued to use Côté’s [1] model as a framework
for studying the similar and differing perceptions of coaches whose work with players and
parents centrally located in either the sampling, specializing, or investment developmental
stage of participation [1, 27].
METHOD
PARTICIPANTS
The sample comprised 70 British tennis coaches (58 male and 12 female), ranging in age
from 20 to 48 years (M = 31.6, SD = 7.23). Coaches had an average of 10.3 years experience
(SD = 5, range = 2 to 29 years). Ninety percent of the sample held a level four or five
coaching qualification (the highest two qualifications available in the United Kingdom).
Participants were placed into one of three groups: sampling, specializing, and investment.
Coaches’group allocation was based upon the developmental stage of sport participation [1]
of the majority of their players.
Players were classified into the three developmental stages using criteria developed from
the characteristics of the sampling, specializing, and investment stages. The criteria for stage
classification were: a) the focus upon deliberate play or deliberate practice in training; b)
players involvement in other sports; and c) the focus upon general motor skill versus tennis-
specific skill and tactical development in coaching sessions [27]. Twenty-eight coaches were
classified as working predominantly with sampling stage players, 24 with specializing stage
players, and 18 with players in the investment stage.
PROCEDURE
Apurposive sampling strategy was initially used to identify appropriate participants. The
Lawn Tennis Association (LTA) was contacted and dates when several coaches would be
available to participate were identified. Individual coaches and clubs were also contacted via
e-mail to identify their interest in taking part in the study. Snowball sampling was then
employed to use information from coaches on other potential participants.
Focus-group interviews were selected as an appropriate method of data collection for this
study. Focus group interviews allow in-depth information to be gained from a range of
perspectives [30]. Focus groups also allow for dynamic interaction within the group, offering
coaches an opportunity to share their experiences in a way that provides direct evidence of
similarities and differences between experiences [31].
The focus groups contained between two and eight participants (M= 4). Small focus
groups do limit group interactions and information sharing. However, previous research has
successfully used focus groups with only two participants to gain extensive detail on a novel
topic (e.g., [32]). The majority of the participants were self-employed with varying working
hours. Thus, logistical constraints prevented larger focus groups from being conducted.
At the start of each focus group, participants were provided with a verbal and written
explanation of the study. Issues regarding confidentiality were discussed and written
informed consent was gained. A definition of stress and stressors was provided to ensure
participants understood the use of these terms [10, 33]. The focus groups ranged from 35 to
84 minutes (M = 56 minutes, SD = 12 minutes).
Asemi-structured questioning route, based upon the coaching stress, parent-coach
relationship, and sport parenting literature was employed to moderate the focus groups. The
questioning route comprised opening, introductory, transition, key, and ending questions
[30]. Opening questions were designed to gain demographic information and encourage
548 Parent-Related Coaching Stress
participation. The introductory and transition questions aimed to stimulate initial discussion
regarding tennis parents and allowed time for participants to become familiar with the topic.
Key questions focused upon coaches’ perceptions of parents as stressors in relation to
training situations (e.g., during individual or group training sessions), the competition
context (e.g., in relation to or at tournaments), and external factors (e.g., aspects external to
the coaches “on-court role”, such as schooling). Finally, the ending questions asked the
coaches to summarize the stressors they experience in relation to parents. The second author
reviewed the questioning route and a pilot interview (74 minutes) with three specializing
coaches was conducted. Necessary modifications were then made, including the removal of
two questions and the addition of questions regarding injuries and other hobbies. A copy of
the questioning route can be obtained from the first author.
In total, 17 focus groups were conducted: four sampling, five specializing, five investment,
and two mixed groups. Fifteen groups were composed of one category of coaches to enable
identification of stage-specific stressors. However, the inclusion of two mixed groups
highlighted differences in experiences between different classifications of coaches.
DATA ANALYSIS
Each focus group was audio-recorded and video-taped to allow analysis of verbal and body
language. The focus groups were transcribed verbatim and analyzed immediately after each
focus group and prior to the next. Transcripts were analyzed through content analysis
following the stages outlined by Côté et al. [34] and Miles and Huberman [35]. A
combination of focus group interviews and content analysis has been successfully employed
in previous sport psychology studies [e.g., 3, 23, 32].
The interviews were read and reread to ensure immersion in the data and coded for
confidentiality. The transcripts were then analyzed in two stages. Firstly, meaningful
segments of information were identified and secondly, this information was categorized into
an organizing system that emerged from the data [34]. These raw data themes were then
assigned meaning units and grouped by content into first-, second-, and higher-order themes
[35]. Each individual focus group interview was analyzed. Interviews were then grouped by
stage and analyzed. Finally, analysis of the whole data set occurred. Constant comparison of
the data occurred to ensure that data included in each theme was similar to each other but
distinct from other categories. Data matrices containing the raw data, lower-, and higher-
order themes were produced for each category of coaches to allow comparison of themes
across the three stages of participation [35].
METHODOLOGICAL RIGOR
It was necessary to incorporate various strategies during and after data collection and
analysis to enhance the methodological rigor of the study. First, concurrent data collection
and analysis provided the opportunity to identify any threats to the validity of the findings
before the next focus group. For example, questions that dictated responses or projected a
judgment on responses could be removed.
Second, the first author undertook the data collection and the initial analysis. Therefore,
in order to reduce potential researcher bias, an inter-rater check was conducted with the
second author and a graduate student. The researchers were provided with the interview
transcripts, the analyzed data set, and the data analysis notes. The transparency of the data
analysis and interpretations of themes were confirmed by these researchers.
Third, member checking was also implemented as an important step for establishing
credibility [35]. All participants received an electronic version of their interview transcript
International Journal of Sports Science & Coaching Volume 4 · Number 4 · 2009 549
and the draft themes. The transcripts were coded so that participants were only aware of
which statements they had provided. Participants were asked to comment on the accuracy of
the transcription and the interpretation of the data. All participants agreed with the data
analysis. Eight coaches provided further evidence to support statements they had already
made or supported findings from other groups. Six additional coaches also reviewed the data
themes to provide external confirmation of the findings [36]. These coaches indicated that
the findings supported their own experiences.
RESULTS
The analytical process revealed 327 raw data themes, 74 first-order, 26 second-order, and 8
higher-order themes of parent-related stressors. These themes were classified into three
general dimensions: direct coaching stressors, player-related stressors, and external and
system-based stressors (see Table 1). This section will outline each general dimension across
the stages of participation, using quotations to illustrate the lower-order themes.
General Dimension One: Direct Coaching Stressors
Direct coaching stressors encompassed stressors that arise directly from coaches’interactions
with parents. The four higher-order themes in this dimension accounted for behavior of
parents, parents’ perceptions of the coach, parents’ understanding of tennis, and parental
demands on the coach (see Table 1).
Behavior of Parents. Coaches perceived multiple parental behaviors as stressors.
Variations in parental involvement were a constant stressor cited by coaches, for example,
“Some parents almost expect you to take over their role… and then you can also be coaching
another player and the parent wants total control.” Parents viewed as being overly involved
in their child’s tennis was a stressor because, as one coach explained, “They’re just there all
the time, always wanting answers and information.” On the other hand, less involvement can
also become a stressor because coaches are required to do more for the player.
Parents’ Perceptions of the Coach. Coaches in every focus group expressed stressors
relating to the poor perceptions they felt parents had of them. Many coaches discussed
parents’ perceptions of their knowledge, as one coach stated, “They don’t see you as the
expert, they see themselves as the expert and they try and tell you how you should be doing
things.” Another coach explained, “Half the parents they love their coach and the other half
don’t trust the coach, always asking questions, not quite sure why you’re doing certain
things.” Parents’ perceptions that their children are not in the correct squads emerged as a
prominent stressor relating to trust.
Parents’ Understanding of Tennis. Squad issues also emerged as a stressor relating to
parents’ understanding. As one coach said, “That’s very hard yet again for a parent to
understand, they always think their son/daughter to get better needs somebody better to keep
pushing them.” Parents’ lack of understanding regarding the requirements of tennis was a
further stressor for these coaches. As one coach explained, “It’s these protective [parents]…
‘I want everything, all the superficial things like rankings and all that, but I’m not willing to
sacrifice x, y, and z, that causes me stress’.”
Parental Demands on the Coach. A number of coaches also described a lack of
understanding by parents regarding the demands that coaches’ experience. For example:
All my friends and my girlfriend hate my job ‘cause it just takes your time up all the
time... I think parents just need to appreciate that a bit more. I think some do and some
don’t. Some just pick up the phone at any time and I think that’s stressful!
550 Parent-Related Coaching Stress
International Journal of Sports Science & Coaching Volume 4 · Number 4 · 2009 551
Example First Order Themes* Second-Order Themes Higher-Order
Themes
General
Dimension
Blaming coaches for loss
Emotional response to matches
Parents’ response to matches
Parents who are overly involved
Parents who are lacking involvement
Parents’ involvement in
matches/training
Parents comparing results
Gossiping about other parents
Competition between parents
How parents approach coaches
(e.g., defensive, aggressive, questioning)
Interactions between parents
and coaches
Behavior of parents
Parents’ trust in coach’s ability
Parents’ respect of the coach’s role
Parents’ trust and respect of
their child’s coach
Parents’ perceptions
of the coach
Understanding the training structure
Understanding different coaching philosophies
Understanding of player
development
Knowing the requirements of parents
Understanding the demands coaches experience
Understanding the requirements
of tennis
Having unrealistic expectations for their child
Lack of understanding of how sessions are run
Understanding child’s ability
Not understanding what behavior is acceptable
Understanding how tournaments are organized
Understanding of
tournaments/competition
Parents’
understanding of
tennis
Phone calls to coaches in personal time
Demanding coaches spend more hours on court
Imposing on coach’s time
Parents asking questions at inappropriate times
Parents asking inappropriate questions
Communication required from
coaches
Perceptions of favoritism if coaches attend some
players matches but not others
Coach’s attendance at matches
Parents expecting their child to have all the
attention of the coach
Parents’ perception of coach’s
commitment
Parental demands on
the coach
Direct
Coaching
Stressors
Parents’ inappropriate response to matches
Parents being overly results orientated
Coaches witnessing parents
pressuring their children
Empathizing with
players
Parents being overly involved in child’s tennis
Parents not providing sufficient support
Parents’ level of involvement in
their child’s tennis
Understanding of long-term player development
Understanding how sessions are structured
Parents’ understanding of the
development process
Obtaining differing opinions about the child
Using inappropriate information for advice
Parents’ access and use of
inappropriate information
Lack of organization for tournaments
Being late and disorganized for training
Organization/disorganization of
parents
Parents making excuses for match outcomes
Parents making excuses for player progression
Parents’ making excuses for
their child
Parents having unrealistic expectation for child
Parents having too low expectations for child
Parents’ expectations for their
child’s tennis
Parents’ impact upon
player development
Player-related
Stressors
Parents’ perceptions of coaching as a job
Parents’ perceptions of British tennis
Parents’ perceptions of sport
British attitudes towards success
Lack of drive for success
Britain having a blame culture
Influence of British culture on
parents
Parents’ concerns for their child’s safety
Economic climate
Current social climate
Socio-cultural aspects
Perceptions that the LTA is failing
Perceptions that the LTA is disorganized
Parents’ perceptions of the
LTA
Issues regarding the ratings/ranking system
Continual changes in the British system
The British tennis structure
Inconsistencies in the provision of programs
Different methods of employment of coaches
The organization of programs
in clubs and counties
Coaches are dependent on parents for
employment
How tennis programs are
provided
Organizational
aspects
External and
System-based
Stressors
Table 1. Overview of Parent-Related Coaching Stressors
Parents’ demands on coaches emerged as one of the main stressors these coaches
encountered. Particularly pertinent was parents imposing upon coaches’ personal lives. One
coach articulated this stressor: “It’s when you get that phone call, when it’s in your own
personal time and it’s like ‘Sorry to bother you on a Saturday but’… but don’t call me on a
Saturday!” Further demands coaches discussed related to parents’desires for more coaching
and the expectation that coaches should attend tournaments.
Direct Coaching Stressors: Stage-Specific Comparisons. There was much similarity
between coaches’ stressors across the higher-order themes. However, coaches working with
players at different stages of development recalled certain lower-order themes more
frequently (see Table 2).
Two stressors appeared particularly pertinent for coaches working with sampling-stage
players: parents’ understanding of tennis and perceptions of the coach’s role. Sampling
coaches frequently stated stressors relating to parents’understanding of mini-tennis sessions.
The next quote illustrated a common feeling for these coaches:
With mini tennis, they don’t understand why you do all the ABCs [agility, balance and
coordination]… and warm ups and that sort of thing, and the fact that you’ve only got
the racquet in your hand for probably half of the session. It is quite hard to get across,
but generally when you move on to performance, they know how a lesson is
structured.
Further examples were also provided, such as “I sometimes feel that I have to justify…if they
don’t pick up a racquet until half way through a lesson.” Parents’ lack of understanding is
perceived as a stressor, because coaches constantly have to answer questions and explain
why they are doing certain things.
Parents’ perceptions of tennis coaches, particularly a lack of respect for the role of tennis
coaches emerged as a substantial stressor for sampling coaches. Coaches described this
stressor in terms of being treated as the “hired help” or a “babysitting service”. Coaches
working with players in the later stages of participation did not discuss such stressors. This
is probably because they are seen to have a more technical and specific role in player
development.
Coaches working with players in the specializing and investment stages discussed
stressors relating to parents’ behavior and perceptions of the coach that were not expressed
by coaches of sampling stage players. Specifically, competition between parents, parents
gossiping about other parents, and parents gossiping about the coach were all widely
discussed by these coaches. As one coach explained, “I find it hard when parents talk about
other parents in a negative way and I’m stood there in the conversation.” Such stressors were
perceived to arise as parents developed cliques. Coaches working with specializing players
also discussed stressors resulting from parents comparing players. For example, coaches
expressed stressors due to parents discussing players’ funding, questioning why certain
players were improving, and parents wanting their child to have more of the coach’s
attention. As one coach explained, “Parents will always hear about what somebody else is
getting at another club and want to try and sort of play you off against them.”
Investment-stage coaches also indicated stressors in relation to parents’ behavior at
tournaments in response to match outcomes. These stressors were only discussed by
investment-stage coaches as they were the only ones frequently travelling to tournaments.
For example, these coaches highlighted stressors that arise from sitting with parents during
matches, “It’s the comments that they come out with, they can just make you just want the
552 Parent-Related Coaching Stress
International Journal of Sports Science & Coaching Volume 4 · Number 4 · 2009 553
Table 2. Stage-Specific Direct Coaching Stressors
All coaches Coaches of sampling stage players Coaches of specializing stage players Coaches of investment stage players
Higher themes 2nd order themes 1st order themes 2nd order themes 1st order themes 2nd order themes 1st order themes
Parents’ response
to matches
Blaming coaches for loss
Emotional response to matches
Parents response to
matches
Blaming coaches for loss
Emotional response to matches
Parents response to
matches
Blaming coaches for loss
Emotional response to matches
Behavior at tournaments
Parents’
involvement in
matches/training
Parents who are overly involved
Parents lacking involvement
Parents
involvement in
matches/training
Parents who are overly involved
Parents lacking involvement
Differing involvement levels
Parents involvement
in matches/training
Parents who are overly involved
Parents lacking involvement
Differing levels of involvement
Competition
between parents
Parents comparing players
Gossiping about other parents
Competition
between parents
Parents comparing players
Gossiping about other parents
Behavior of
parents
Interactions
between parents
and coaches
How parents approach coaches
(e.g., defensive, aggressive,
questioning)
Interactions
between parents
and coaches
Parents approach to coaches
(e.g., defensive, aggressive,
questioning)
Interactions
between parents and
coaches
Parents approach to coaches
(e.g., defensive, aggressive, questioning)
Perceptions of
the coach
Parents’ trust and
respect of their
child’s coach
Trust in coach’s ability
Respect of coach’s role
Respect for coach’s knowledge
Approaching other coaches
Parents trust and
respect of their
child’s coach
Trust in coach’s ability
Respect for coach’s knowledge
Parents gossiping about their coach
Approaching other coaches
Parents’ trust and
respect of their
child’s coach
Trust in coach’s ability
Parents gossiping about coach
Approaching other coaches
Understanding of
player
development
How training is structured
Differing coaching philosophies
Understanding long-term focus
How players progress
Understanding of
player development
What is required for improvement
Understanding long-term focus
Understanding of
player development
What is required for improvement
Understanding long-term focus
Understanding how improvement is
measured
Understanding the
requirements of
tennis
What is required from parents
What demands coaches face
What demands players experience
Understanding the
requirements of
tennis
What is required from parents
What demands coaches face
What demands players experience
Understanding the
requirements of
tennis
What is required from parents
What demands coaches face
Understanding
child’s ability
Unrealistic expectations for child Understanding
child’s ability
Unrealistic expectations for child
How child fits into training sessions
Understanding
child’s ability
Unrealistic expectations for child
How ability and success are related
Parents’
understanding
of tennis
Understanding of
tournaments
How parents should behave
How tournaments are organized
Imposing on
coach’s time
Phone calls during personal time
Demanding coaches work more
hours
Imposing on
coach’s time
Phone calls during personal time
Demanding more time with coach
Expect to receive all coaches’ time
Imposing on
coach’s time
Phone calls during personal time
Dictate coaches’ holiday times
Expect coaches to organize matches
Communication
required from
coaches
Questions at inappropriate times
Asking inappropriate questions
Communication
required from
coaches
Questions at inappropriate times
Asking inappropriate questions
Communication
required from
coaches
Questions at inappropriate times
Asking inappropriate questions
Questions in inappropriate places
Coach’s
attendance at
matches
Not understanding financial
implications of watching matches
Perceived favoritism at matches
Coach’s attendance
at matches
Not understanding financial
implications of watching matches
Excessive demands of at matches
Coach’s attendance
at matches
Not understanding financial implications
of watching matches
Perceived favoritism at matches
Parental
demands on
coach
Parents’ perception
of coach’s
commitment
Expecting coach’s attention
Questioning coach’s commitment
to player
Parents’ perception
of coach’s
commitment
Expectation for coach’s attention Parents’ perception
of coach’s
commitment
Expectation for coaches’ attention
Questioning coach’s commitment to
player
ground to swallow you up, it’s like why did they just say that… and they’re just saying the
wrong thing at the wrong time.”
Anumber of investment-stage coaches did indicate that some direct stressors were
reduced or more manageable than they had been. For example, these coaches perceived that
the amount of respect they were afforded often increases as they work with higher-level
players. As one coach summarized, “I suppose on court you’re the boss and what happens
goes.” Many of these coaches have also developed strategies to reduce the impact of direct
parent-related stressors. For example, while recognizing that parents can be demanding,
some investment-stage coaches acknowledged that they have learned to accept this:
I mean, sometimes you have to speak to parents when you’ve had a long day and it
may be unsociable hours, but that’s part and parcel of the job we do, you choose to
either go and teach adult tennis… you don’t get any calls and it’s just your hours done
or you do the type of coaching that we do, I think it’s part and parcel of it.
General Dimension Two: Player-Related Stressors
This dimension encapsulated stressors experienced by coaches due to the effect they perceive
parents have upon their child. Player-related stressors arise indirectly from parents because
they depend upon the child’s response. As one coach described, “There is a real stress
triangle from the player, the parent, and the coach that has to be managed.” In total, 85 raw
data themes were classified into 21 first order, seven second-order, and two higher-order
themes: empathizing with players and parents’ impact upon player development (see Table
1). Empathizing with Players. Empathizing with players incorporated the stressors that
coaches experience, because they witness parents placing pressure upon their child. As one
coach explained:
I think that when you see the parent that’s sort of, you know, arms always crossed,
pacing around, will sort of hit every ball, that has to have an effect on the actual child,
so that’s the only kind of stressor for me really.
Many of the coaches expressed empathy for players because they themselves had had similar
experiences and they worry for children in this situation. One coach explained, “It stresses
me out when I see them [parents] white knuckled on the balcony and little Johnny’s looking
up at them and you worry about the car journey home.”
An awareness of the long-term implications of parental pressure also appeared to enhance
this stressor for coaches. As one coach stated:
The parents are going to be what they are, but. . . really and truly it’s the kid that
you’re worried about . . . if they feel that intensity and that pressure, then there’s a
good chance they won’t enjoy it, and if they don’t enjoy it, they won’t [play].
Witnessing parental pressure was not always perceived as a stressor by coaches. Some
coaches felt it was dependent upon the child and how he or she responded. The following
quotation highlights this sentiment, “I think it really depends on the kid . . . because there are
some kids out there that actually . . . want somebody behind them just permanently on their
case.”
554 Parent-Related Coaching Stress
Parents’ Impact Upon Player Development. The second higher-order theme within this
dimension relates to parents limiting their child’s tennis development. Coaches identified an
array of parental behaviors and attitudes that they perceived could impact upon player
development. As one coach highlighted, “That causes stress because you’re trying to help
the kid and you’re not getting where you want to get because the parents are stopping them
from progressing.” The quality and success of a coach is often based upon the improvement
and results of their players. As one coach stated, “Players are a reflection of us [our work as
coaches] therefore we need it to be seen that they are improving.” Consequently, when
parents prevent players from improving coaches can appear less effective, which is perceived
as a stressor.
Parents were perceived to influence player development by preventing children from
developing independence (parents are overly involved), not providing appropriate
opportunities for their child (disorganized parents), and distracting the player during training
sessions. Consequently, coaches expressed stressors relating to the ongoing education of
parents regarding their role in their child’s development. As one coach stated, “It’s probably
the biggest [stress] … trying to educate the parents on actually what they have to do for their
children competitively, what is required of them.”
Indirect Coaching Stressors: Stage-Specific Comparisons.
Player-related stressors were highlighted across all the focus groups. However, coaches
working with players at the higher two stages of participation provided wider discussion of
these stressors (see Table 3). Coaches working with players in the sampling stage recalled
that the emphasis for these players is upon fun, as one coach summarized, “The parents aren’t
amazingly worried about how much better their kids getting, as long as they’re having fun.”
Consequently, limited discussion was provided regarding parental pressure and any
subsequent stressors for these coaches. However, some coaches’felt that a small number of
parents were over-involved at this stage. These parents were associated with stressors for
sampling-stage coaches. However, because competition situations are the most common time
for parental pressure, such stressors were limited at this stage.
Sampling-stage coaches did indicate a range of stressors relating to parents’ involvement
and long-term player development in relation to parents’impact upon player development. For
example, parents who are overly involved in their child’s tennis try to teach their child
themselves, resulting in them contradicting the coach. When parents contradict the coach, it
can limit players’ development because the players get confused or learn bad habits.
Additionally, parents of sampling-stage players have a lack of understanding of the
development process. Specifically, this lack of understanding is regarding the movement
between mini-tennis stages and the specialized equipment that is used with young children.
One coach explained, “They’re standing there with a 4 year-old, with a proper tennis ball
bouncing over their head. You see so many parents just smacking it at them and you know it’s
going 20 ft past them.” Using the incorrect equipment with young children results in bad habits
and techniques developing, which subsequently limits children’s long-term development.
Specializing-stage coaches expressed a wider range of stressors relating to parental
pressure than sampling-stage coaches. Specializing coaches particularly provided greater
discussion regarding parents’ inappropriate response to matches and parents’emphasis upon
results. The specializing coaches also introduced two further first-order themes: parents’
excessive expectations and parents viewing their child as an investment. When considering
parents’ expectations for their child coaches provided statements such as, “When players
lose… the parent is shocked. They question what the coach is doing and what the player is
International Journal of Sports Science & Coaching Volume 4 · Number 4 · 2009 555
556 Parent-Related Coaching Stress
Table 3. Stage-Specific Indirect Coaching Stressors
All coaches Coaches of sampling stage players Coaches of specializing stage players Coaches of investment stage players
Higher themes 2nd order themes 1st order themes 2nd order themes 1st order themes 2nd order themes 1st order themes
Coaches’
empathizing
with players
Coaches
witnessing parents
pressuring their
children
Inappropriate response to
matches
Parents overly involved in
matches
Parents emphasis on results
Parents projecting their desires
on child
Coaches witnessing
parents pressuring
their children
Inappropriate response to
matches
Parents overly involved in
matches
Parents emphasis on results
Parents projecting their desires
on child
Viewing child as an investment
Parent’s excessive expectations
Coaches
witnessing parents
pressuring their
children
Inappropriate response to matches
Parents overly involved in
matches
Parents emphasis on results
Parents projecting their desires on
child
Viewing child as an investment
Parent’s excessive expectations
Parents’ level of
involvement in
their child’s tennis
Over involvement in tennis
Limited levels of involvement
Parents’ level of
involvement in
their child’s tennis
Over involvement in tennis
Limited levels of involvement
Parents’ level of
involvement in
their child’s tennis
Over-involvement in tennis
Lack of consistency of parental
involvement
Parents’
understanding of
the development
process
Understanding of LTPD
Understanding session structure
Understanding the importance of
competition
Understanding of different stages
Understanding requirement for
specialized equipment
Parents’
understanding of
the development
process
Understanding of LTPD
Understanding session structure
Understanding the importance
of competition
Parents’
understanding of
the development
process
Understanding of LTPD
Understanding session structure
Parents’ access and
use of inappropriate
information
Obtaining differing opinions
about the child
Parents’ access
and use of
inappropriate
information
Obtaining differing opinions
about the child
Using inappropriate information
for advice
Parent’s changing coaches
Organization/
disorganization of
parents
Not organizing tournaments
Being late and disorganized for
training
Organization/
disorganization of
parents
Not organizing tournaments
Being late and disorganized for
training
Not helping child to get school
work done
Parents making
excuses for their
child
Excuses for the match outcomes
Excuses for player progression
Parents’ impact
upon player
development
Parents’
expectations for
their child’s tennis
Having unrealistic expectations
for child
Having too low expectations for
child
doing. It can cause a loss of confidence in the coach and in the player, because the parent’s
expectation isn’t realistic.”
Specializing-stage coaches also indicated many more stressors relating to parents’ impact
upon player development. Again, these coaches expanded upon the stressors highlighted by
sampling-stage coaches regarding parental involvement and their understanding. For
example, specializing coaches provided examples of these stressors in relation to
tournaments (whereas sampling coaches had only discussed training situations). An
additional four first-order themes were also discussed by specializing-stage coaches: parents’
access and use of information, parents’ organization, parents making excuses for their child,
and parents’ expectations for their child’s tennis. Examples such as the following began to
emerge, “We were expecting a certain player at a tournament and he just didn’t turn up,”
and, “They come back with all this interesting stuff, yeah some kids cheat, but if a players
gone out and lost 6-1, 6-2, that guy must be a fantastic cheat to have beaten his son so well!”
Coaches explained that such statements become a stressor, because players miss matches and
start making excuses for themselves rather than improving weaknesses.
Investment-stage coaches identified similar stressors as specializing-stage coaches in
relation to both higher-order themes. Some additional stressors were also discussed.
Regarding parents’ responses to matches, coaches indicated stressors relating to parents
bullying players. One coach summarized, “If the parent is bullying the child, that’s me done
[coach will stop working with the child] I’m afraid.” Coaches indicated that such behavior
appears to be related to parents viewing their child as an investment. As one coach explained,
“With the performance players, they are investing money in winning, they’re not interested
in just partaking… that’s the pressure that can be projected onto the coach and player if they
start losing.”
Two additional stressors were also presented relating to parents’ impact upon player
development. Firstly, these coaches were the only coaches to discuss stressors relating to
players actually dropping out of tennis due to over-involved parents. One group of coaches
discussed this stressor widely, concluding, “You know when the kid has had enough of it
[involvement from parents], then they are going to give up, you know, and we will lose them
from tennis all together… that’s stressful, we don’t want that.” Secondly, these coaches
discussed the stressors they encounter when parents decide to change coaches because they
perceive other coaches to have better or more up-to-date information. As one coach
explained, “The coach is always blamed for everything and if the player wins matches
fantastic, coach is doing a great job. But if he loses then it’s the coach is crap, right who’s
next on the list?” Consequently, players might have to leave their program, work with a new
coach, and change their technique. Such changes can cause players’improvement to plateau.
However, a number of investment-stage coaches indicated that due to their experience and
the experience of the parents and players, coaches’ appraisal of parents as stressors is
reduced. As one coach summarized, “You just hope that the children will be able to know
what’s right and know what the information they need’s right and prepare themselves as best
they can.” Investment coaches also indicated a reduction in many player-related stressors,
because they have methods to prevent them. As one coach explained, “It’s one of my rules
that parents aren’t allowed to set one foot on the court, it’s not that I don’t want them being
involved, it’s very simply that the kids have a tough enough time as it is.”
General Dimension Three: External and System Based Stressors
The third dimension highlighted factors inherent in the coaching environment that were
perceived to moderate stressors arising from parents. Such factors were perceived to impact
International Journal of Sports Science & Coaching Volume 4 · Number 4 · 2009 557
upon parents’attitudes, perceptions, and behavior and as such enhance the direct and player-
related stressors. Two higher-order themes were established, socio-cultural aspects and
organizational aspects, comprising 57 raw-data themes (see Table 1). All British tennis
coaches work within the same environment, thus no distinction was made between stages.
Socio-Cultural Aspects. Socio-cultural aspects are elements of British society that
influence coaches’ experiences of parents. For example, when considering parental under-
involvement, one coach explained, “I think it’s a lot to do with the way our country’s run…
I don’t think there’s that hunger and determination at all and everything’s handed to them
[parents] on a plate.” Similarly, it was felt that parent-related coaching stressors may arise
due to British attitudes to success, “We’re very much a nation of mediocrity… we don’t
recognize talent, we don’t recognize winners… so no one will push to achieve this success.”
On the other hand, it was perceived that parental involvement might have increased due to
safety concerns in society, as one coach stated:
I think that’s, you know, the way it’s changed because within four years, more and
more parents have got involved. I mean, we are talking about quite young children
here, so again, with possibly with society as it is, you know parents of nine- and ten-
year-olds don’t want them going away with strangers.
Many focus groups discussed the impact of the economy on parents’ behavior, as one coach
explained:
I think that because now money is tight… they [parents] are investing money and they
are looking at it as a business. They are investing money and they want a return. If the
positive results are not coming and you are investing in a company that’s not giving
you any return, then the coach is going to be put under a lot of pressure.
The perceptions of tennis coaching as a profession was frequently identified as an issue for
coaches when they are interacting with parents, as the following quotation highlights:
I think one thing where our industry’s got to go is being much more professional in
everything that we do and hopefully some of those difficulties [with parents], which
perhaps exist to lesser degrees in other countries where coaching is regarded as more
of a serious profession, are alleviated.
This perception of coaching was indicated as a barrier to coaches gaining parents’ trust and
respect.
Organizational aspects. Similar feelings were expressed regarding perceptions of the
LTA, as one coach articulated, “I really don’t think, because of our British track record of
producing players, parents really trust that we can do the job.”
Coaches consistently identified factors inherent in the structure of British tennis that
moderate the stress they experience from parents. A number of statements similar to the
following were provided, “It’s not the parent that’s causing me any stress, it’s more the
system.” Numerous aspects of the British tennis structure were perceived to augment the
stressors experienced by coaches. For example, the rating structure can result in parents
placing excessive pressure upon their children, as one coach highlighted, “I think there is a
lot of pressure from the LTA that makes parents put pressure on their kids.” The continually
changing tennis structure was also perceived to increase stressors, as one coach described,
558 Parent-Related Coaching Stress
“In this country our competition structure’s changed, our ratings systems changed, our
ranking system’s changed… and I think that causes stress between the coach and the parent.”
One coach summarized this issue, explaining, “It’s probably the one you get the most of, or
the most regularly and it’s not a direct stress on me, but they vent their stress through me…
people have grievances with the LTA, the systems.”
Finally, it was highlighted that many of the stressors coaches encounter are enhanced
because their livelihood depends upon parents. As such, coaches are aware that they must
provide the service that parents expect. The following quotation sums up such sentiments,
“We’re a service industry aren’t we and … they’re the paying customer. If they don’t like what
you’ve got, they’ll go elsewhere.” As such, coaches expressed stressors associated with
maintaining their business, as one coach articulated, “If you’re not delivering what people
want and they’re [players] not improving, then your business will go down the chute.”
DISCUSSION
The focus of this study was to provide a detailed insight into the stressors that coaches
encounter due to their interactions with parents. This study also aimed to identify whether
stressors differed depending upon the player’s developmental stage of participation [1]. All
but three coaches identified stressors in relation to parents, supporting previous research
examing parent-coach relations and coaching stress [e.g., 6, 18].
Three dimensions of parent-related stressors were derived from the data. These
dimensions accounted for stressors arising directly from coaches’ contact with parents,
indirectly through parents’ interactions with their child, and organizational and cultural
factors coaches perceived to moderate parent-related coaching stressors. The wide range of
stressors and means through which these stressors are experienced provide some indication
of the complexity of the parent-coach relationship [9]. This study also offers further support
for the importance of qualitative studies to fully understand the stressors experienced by
coaches [7].
This research was based upon studying one specific relationship stressor that coaches may
encounter. On the broadest level, these stressors are representative of the sport relationship
and interpersonal demands dimension of organizational stressors [37]. Researchers interested
in athletes’ sources of stress have recently made the conceptual distinction between those
stressors linked specifically to competition and competitive performance (i.e., competition
stress) and the stressors associated primarily with the organization within which the
individual is operating (i.e., organizational stress; [38-40]). By adapting Cooper et al.’s [41]
work in an organizational setting, Fletcher et al. [37] forwarded five dimensions of
organizational stressors in sport: factors intrinsic to the sport; roles in the sport organization;
sport relationships and interpersonal demands; organizational structure and climate of the
sport; and athletic career and performance development issues. Through their interview
process, Thelwell et al. [14] identified a similar distinction within coaching stressors. The
detailed examination of parent-related coaching stressors indicates that all the dimensions of
organizational stressors are interrelated and appear to be represented within the stressors
coaches associated with parents. As such, the sections below examine each dimension of
parent-related coaching stress in relation to research on organizational stress in sport and
previous literature on parent-coach relationships.
DIRECT COACHING STRESSORS
The direct coaching stressors that emerged from this study support previous research that
identified problems coaches have with parents. For example, inconsistencies in parental
International Journal of Sports Science & Coaching Volume 4 · Number 4 · 2009 559
involvement, parental over-involvement, and parental under-involvement were highlighted as
stressors for these coaches [2, 15, 42]. Excessive demands on coaches, particularly during their
personal time, was a main stressor that coaches associated with parents [5]. Parents’
understanding of issues relating to tennis was also related to a variety of stressors for coaches [23].
The sheer number of stressors that coaches identified suggests that previous broad
examinations of parents will not have sufficiently examined this area. For example, conflict
between parents and coaches has regularly been identified as a coaching stressor [2, 15, 18,
24]. However, in this study, conflict itself was not indicated as a source of stress. Rather,
stressors arose due to factors that underpin confrontation, such as squad selection. Similarly,
communication problems are often cited between parents and coaches [2, 42], and such
problems were apparent in this study. Nevertheless, the stressors associated with parents
arise due to the implications of these problems, such as the impact on coach’s time. Parent
and coach education needs to consider the underlying issues within the parent-coach
relationship rather than the behaviors that result from them.
Anumber of the direct stressors that coaches associate with parents appear to relate to
confusion, inconsistencies, and conflict in the roles of coaches and parents. Such role
ambiguity and conflict account for one dimension of organizational stressors [37] and have
also been identified as a stressor across many occupations [11]. For example, it has
previously been identified that tennis parents perceive a large number of demands from the
LTA, but the parents do not always understand what is required or why [26]. As parents
attempt to establish their role, it can result in stressors for coaches. Also, there are no set rules
or guidelines regarding what a coach’s role is; different coaches provide varying amounts of
support to players. As such, parents may be unsure what demands they can place upon
coaches. This variation in support and involvement from different coaches may be one of the
reasons that parents perceive stressors in relation to coaches [26]. It appears that parents and
coaches do not clearly understand each other’s roles.
The direct coaching stressors also clearly represent sport relationship and interpersonal
demands for coaches. The stressors inherent in maintaining good relationships with parents
were apparent throughout the data. Coaches provided examples including answering
questions, finding time to talk to parents, educating parents, and coping with parents’
behaviors as stressors associated with maintaining relationships. Similar stressors have been
identified for athletes in relation to coaches and governing bodies [38] and for coaches
working with other coaches and with athletes [14]. Additionally, the specific demands
parents place upon coaches, such as demands for time and attention, are representative of
interpersonal demands from many service-type industries [41].
PLAYER-RELATED STRESSORS
For a large proportion of coaches, their main stressors arose due to the effect parents can have
upon players. The negative impact that parental pressure can have on child-athletes has been
widely explored (e.g., [43-44]). However, to the authors’ knowledge, previous research has
not identified the subsequent stress that is experienced by coaches. Considering the strong
relationship that coaches develop with athletes [9] and the role coaches can play in buffering
the parent-child relationship [25], it is understandable that coaches may experience stressors
if their players are experiencing pressure. Gould et al. [3] identified a variety of ways that
negative interactions arise between tennis parents and players; for example, parents
exhibiting an outcome orientation. Similar parental behaviors were described as player-
related stressors in this study, indicating that coaches appraise witnessing such negative
interactions as a stressor.
560 Parent-Related Coaching Stress
Coaches indicated that the stressors they experience regarding parents are enhanced if
parents cannot detach themselves from their child’s results. As such, parents increase the
pressure upon their child and the coach. This may occur through parents projecting
fulfillment wishes from their youth onto their children [43]. Conversely, parents may fall into
a reverse-dependency trap, whereby they over-identify with their child and become
dependent upon them [42]. Alternatively, Coakley [45] explained that when children excel in
sport it is often directly attributed to their parents, which may lead to excessive pushing from
parents.
The stressors represented within this dimension appear closely related to the
organizational-stress dimension regarding athletic career and performance development. Just
as athletic success can be attributed to parents, coaches’ reputations are also built upon
athletes’ success and improvement. Occupational stress research has highlighted the effect
that working in a performance-related environment that is open to public evaluation has on
coaches [7, 13]. If parents limit athletes’ development, they are clearly enhancing stressors
that coaches are already experiencing.
Beyond the requirement for players to achieve for coaches’ reputations, coaches also
identify with their athletes and want them to develop and enjoy the sport. Coaches fulfill
many roles in the lives of young athletes, including taking a responsibility for their overall
social and psychological well-being [46]. Coaches spend a relatively large amount of time
with their athletes and watch them develop not only as athletes but as young people. As such,
it is little wonder that coaches will experience stressors if they feel players are under
pressure.
EXTERNAL AND SYSTEM-BASED STRESSORS
When studying relationships, it is necessary to not only consider individual’s behavior but
also the context [4]. To fully understand the dynamics that influence relationships within the
coaching process, it is essential to consider contextual factors inherent within a coach’s
occupational and social world [47]. Contextual factors, such as level of competition and
years of experience, were identified as key factors affecting college coaches’ stress
experiences [7]. Such sentiments were replicated in this study, with numerous social and
organizational issues perceived to moderate parent-related stressors.
The external and system-based stressors replicate a variety of organizational stressors that
are experienced by athletes, parents, and coaches [14, 28, 37]. A number of system-based
stressors represented factors intrinsic to the sport. For example, replicating the findings of
Gould et al. [3], these coaches recognized that the financial demands that tennis places upon
parents might subsequently increase the demands parents place upon both players and
coaches. Similarly, the tennis structure demands parents to become quite involved in their
child’s tennis [48]. Coaches acknowledged that driven or pushy parents were necessary to an
extent for parents to reach their potential [15]. However, these coaches felt that as
involvement from parents is a requirement of tennis, parents felt they had more rights to be
involved. Striking the balance between over- and under-involvement, both in relation to
players and coaches, then becomes a stressor [3, 24].
Additionally, external and system-based stressors correspond closely to the organizational
structure and climate stressors indentified by Fletcher et al. [37]. Coaches perceived that the
competition structure and the emphasis the LTA place upon winning and ratings points
enhance the pressure parents might place upon players and coaches.
International Journal of Sports Science & Coaching Volume 4 · Number 4 · 2009 561
STAGE-SPECIFIC COMPARISONS
There was much agreement among all the coaches regarding parent-related stressors.
However, there were certain stressors that were only discussed by coaches working with
players at certain stages of participation. When considering stressors by stage, there was
greater discussion and more identification of stressors by specializing-stage coaches than
sampling-stage coaches. The emphasis upon fun rather than competition and the limited
amount of training during the sampling stage [27] may explain the reduced number of parent-
related stressors at this stage.
The increase in stressors for specializing-stage coaches may be due to the increasing role
of coaches in athletes’ lives at this stage [1]. Previous research has indicated that the
specializing stage can be associated with problems between parents and coaches due to the
large role both parties play in athletes’ lives [17]. There is an increase in the number of
interactions between coaches and parents, enhancing the opportunities for direct coaching
stressors to arise.
Additionally, the specializing stage is associated with an increase in structured practice
and competition [27], corresponding to the increase in stressors relating to parental pressure
and behavior at tournaments. The specializing stage has also been associated with an increase
in the financial, time, and emotional commitment required from parents [1, 17, 43]. It is
associated with greater levels of parental stressors [26, 28]. Coaches’ stress can be
transferred to athletes [7] and it is possible that a similar issue is arising with parents
translating their pressures onto coaches.
The role of parents usually decreases in the investment stage, which has been recognized
as a potential cause of conflict between parents and coaches [9, 24]. Investment coaches did
recall stressors regarding parents imposing on their role at this stage. However, a reduction
in the number of stressors was also indicated. This may result because parents are less
involved, and thus interactions are decreased. Coaches also perceived that parents had more
trust in them and stressors were reduced due to the experience of parents, players and
coaches themselves. It appears that coaches’ appraisal of parents and situations are different
at this stage, reducing their stressors. For example, these coaches can afford not to work with
players whose parents are difficult.
APPLIED IMPLICATIONS
From an applied perspective, this research highlights a number of means through which
parent-related stressors could be decreased. The underpinning factor identified throughout
the focus groups was a lack of parent education. Coaches indicated that education to enhance
parents’ understanding and their behavior is necessary. The British tennis structure also
affects the parent-coach relationship. Changes within the organization and structure of tennis
are required to address many of the issues identified in this study.
Teaching coaches to cope with the stressors associated with parents would also be
particularly beneficial for coaches. Although the main purpose of this study was not to
identify coping mechanisms adopted by coaches, it was found that the majority of coping
mechanisms were problem-focused, aiming to change parents’ behaviors or level of
understanding. Specifically, coaches encouraged parents to chart matches to reduce parents’
emotional response to matches; coaches implemented rules to restrict parents entering the
tennis courts during training to reduce interference and questions; coaches dedicated specific
times to answering phone calls from parents and dealing with queries; and some coaches also
required parents to write any questions and leave them in a box so coaches could respond to
them when they had time rather than when they were trying to coach. To enhance
562 Parent-Related Coaching Stress
communication and increase parents’understanding, a number of coaches had begun to carry
out termly parents’ evenings to discuss children’s progress and termly reports were also
produced to inform parents about their child’s improvement and goals.
LIMITATIONS AND FUTURE DIRECTIONS
This study aimed to identify British tennis coaches’ perceptions of parents as part of an
ongoing research project. The use of focus groups allowed a large amount of in-depth
information to emerge. However, focus-group research aims to indicate trends rather than
produce results that can be generalized. Therefore, caution must be used when applying these
results to other coaches. This is particularly pertinent given the contextual factors this study
identified. Quantitative research with more coaches may help to confirm these findings.
Differences between the stages of coaches can be inferred through the recall of themes in
focus groups. However, extraneous factors such as age and experience and the group nature
of focus groups prevent firm conclusions regarding differences being drawn. Additionally,
the allocation of coaches to different stages was based upon the predominant stage of
participation of their players. Coaches may have recalled stressors relating to parents of
players at different stages. Historical recall with investment coaches to explicitly explore
stressors across the developmental stages would help substantiate these findings.
To extend this study, future research examining the strategies coaches use to cope with
parental stressors would be beneficial. This may allow for the eventual development of an
intervention to improve parent-coach relationships. A study examining the interaction of
stressors experienced and influenced by all members of the athletic triangle would also be
beneficial to maximize positive interactions in youth sport. Finally, it may be beneficial to
examine whether parents are aware of how their behavior impacts coaches and athletes.
CONCLUSION
British tennis coaches perceive multiple stressors in relation to parents, with certain stressors
appearing more prominent at different developmental stages of participation. The findings
highlight the complexity of parent-related stressors perceived by coaches and the importance
of both contextual and individual factors. It is hoped that this study will help to reduce the
stress experienced by coaches and enhance parent-coach relationships by increasing parents’
awareness of their impact upon coaches.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
We would like to acknowledge the Lawn Tennis Association (LTA) for funding this project
and the support of staff in the Coach Relations department, with particular thanks to Alistair
Higham.
This study was conducted by the first author as part of her Masters thesis, which was
completed at Loughborough University, UK, during which time the second author was her
supervisor. During the preparation of this manuscript, the first author was supported by a FS
Chia PhD Scholarship from the University of Alberta.
REFERENCES
1. Côté, J., The Influence of the Family in the Development of Talent in Sport, The Sport Psychologist, 1999,
13, 395- 417.
2. Duncan, J., Focus Group Interview with Elite Young Athletes, Coaches and Parents, in: Kremer, J., Trew, K.
and Ogle, S. eds., Young People’s Involvement in Sport, Routledge, New York, 1997, 152-177.
International Journal of Sports Science & Coaching Volume 4 · Number 4 · 2009 563
3. Gould, D., Lauer, L., Rolo, C., Jannes, C. and Pennisi, N., Understanding the Role Parents Play in Tennis
Success: A National Survey of Junior Tennis Coaches, British Journal of Sports Medicine, 2008, 40, 632-
636.
4. Strean, W., Youth Sport Contexts: Coaches Perceptions and Implication for Intervention, Journal of Applied
Sport Psychology, 1995, 7, 23-37.
5. Taylor, J., Coaches are People Too: An Applied Model of Stress Management for Sports Coaches, Journal of
Applied Sport Psychology, 1992, 4, 27-50.
6. Duda, J. L., Balaguer, I. and Crespo, M., Burnout Among Tennis Coaches: What is it, What Causes it and
What can We Do About it? ITF Coaching and Sport Science Review, 2003, 30, 12-13.
7. Frey, M., College Coaches’ Experiences with Stress: Problem Solvers have Problems Too, The Sport
Psychologist, 2007, 21, 38-57.
8. Kelly, B. C., A Model of Stress and Burnout in Collegiate Coaches: Effects of Gender and Time of Season,
Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 1994, 65, 48-58.
9. Jowett, S. and Timson-Katchis, M., Social Networks in Sport: Parental Influence on the Coach-Athlete
Relationship, The Sport Psychologist, 2005, 19, 267-287.
10. Lazarus, R.S., Stress and Emotion: A New Synthesis, Springer, New York, 1999.
11.Johnson, S., Cooper, C., Cartwright, S., Donald, I., Taylor, P. and Millet, C., The Experience of Work-Related
Stress Across Occupations, Journal of Managerial Psychology, 2005, 20, 178-187.
12. Dale, J. and Weinberg, R., Burnout in Sport: AReview and Critique, Applied Sport Psychology, 1990, 2, 67-
83.
13. Vealey, R. S., Udry, E. M., Zimmerman, V. and Soliday, J., Intrapersonal and Situational Predictors of
Coaching Burnout, Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 1992, 14,40-58.
14. Thelwell, R. C., Weston, N.J.V., Greenlees, I.A. and Hutchings, N.V., Stressors in Elite Sport: A Coach
Perspective, Journal of Sports Sciences, 2008, 26, 905-919.
15. Hellstedt, J. C., The Coach/Parent/Athlete Relationship, The Sport Psychologist, 1987, 1, 151-160.
16. Fredricks, J. A. and Eccles, J. S., Parental Influence on Youth Involvement in Sports, in: Weiss, M. R., ed.,
Developmental Sport and Exercise Psychology: A Lifespan Perspective, Fitness Information Technology,
Morgantown, 2004, 145-164.
17. Wolfenden, L. E., and Holt, N. L., Talent Development in Elite Junior Tennis: Perceptions of Players,
Parents, and Coaches, Journal of Applied Sport Psychology, 2005, 17, 108-126.
18. Raedeke, T., Warren, A. and Granzyk, T., Coaching Commitment and Turnover: A Comparison of Current
and Former Coaches, Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 2002, 73, 73-86.
19. Lackey, D., Why Do High School Coaches Quit? Journal of Physical Education, Recreation, and Dance,
1977, 48, 22-23.
20. Lackey, D., The High School Coach, A Pressure Position, Journal of Physical Education, Recreation, and
Dance, 1986, 57, 28-33.
21. Lackey, D., The High School Coaching – Still a ‘Pressure Cooker’ Profession, Journal of Physical
Education, Recreation, and Dance, 1994, 68-33.
22. Scantling, E. and Lackey, D., Coaches Under Pressure: Four Decades of Studies, Journal of Physical
Education, Recreation and Dance, 2005, 76, 25-28.
23. Wiersma, L. and Sherman, C., Volunteer Youth Sport Coaches’ Perspectives of Coaching
Education/Certification and Parental Codes of Conduct, Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 2005,
76, 324-338.
24. Hellstedt, J. C., Early Adolescent Perceptions of Parental Pressure in the Sport Environment, Journal of Sport
Behavior, 1990, 13, 135-144.
25. Gould, D., Lauer, L., Rolo, C., Jannes, C. and Pennisi, N., The Role of Parents in Tennis Success: Focus
Group Interviews with Junior Coaches, The Sport Psychologist, 2006, 22, 18-37.
564 Parent-Related Coaching Stress
26. Harwood, C. and Knight, C., Understanding Parental Stressors: An Investigation of British Tennis-Parents,
Journal of Sports Sciences, 2009a, 27, 339-351.
27. Côté, J. and Hay, J., Children’s Involvement in Sport: A Developmental Perspective, in: Silva, J.M. and
Stevens, D. E eds., Psychological Foundations of Sport, Allyn and Bacon, Boston, 2002, 484-502.
28. Harwood, C. and Knight, C., Stress in Youth Sport: A Developmental Investigation of Tennis Parents,
Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 2009b, 10, 447-456.
29. Salmela, J. H., Young, B. W. and Kallio, J., Within Career Transitions of the Athlete-Coach-Parent Triad, in:
Lavallee, D. and Wylleman, P., eds., Career Transitions in Sport: International Perspective, Fitness
Information Technology, Morgantown, WV, 2000, 181-194.
30. Kreuger, R. A. and Casey, M. A., Focus Groups: A Practical Guide for Applied Research, 3rd edn., Sage,
Thousand Oaks, CA, 2000.
31. Morgan, D. L., Focus Groups as Qualitative Research, 2nd edn., Sage, Thousand Oaks, 1997.
32. Gould, D., Guinan, D., Greenleaf, C., Medbury, R. and Peterson, K., Factors Affecting Olympic
Performance: Perceptions of Athletes and Coaches from More and Less Successful Teams, The Sport
Psychologist, 1999, 13, 371-394.
33. Scanlan, T. K., Stein, G. L. and Ravizza, K., An In-Depth Study of Former Elite Figure Skaters: III. Sources
of Stress, Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 1991, 13, 103-120.
34. Côté, J., Salmela, J. H., Baria, A. and Russell, S., Organizing and Interpreting Unstructured Qualitative Data,
The Sport Psychologist, 1993, 7, 127-127.
35. Miles, M. B. and Huberman, A. M., Qualitative Data Analysis, Sage, London, 1994.
36. Holt, N. L. and Hogg, J. M., Perceptions of Stress and Coping during Preparations for the 1999 Women’s
Soccer World Cup Finals, The Sport Psychologist, 2002, 16, 251-271.
37. Fletcher, D., Hanton, S. and Mellieau, S. D., An Organizational Stress Review: Conceptual and Theoretical
Issues in Competitive Sport, in: Hanton, S. and Mellalieu, S. D., eds., Literature Reviews in Sport
Psychology, Nova Science, Hauppauge, NY, 2006, 321-373.
38. Fletcher, D. and Hanton, S., Sources of Organizational Stress in Elite Sports Performers, The Sport
Psychologist, 2003, 17, 175-195.
39. Hanton, S., Fletcher, D. and Coughlan, G., Stress in Elite Sport Performers: A Comparative Study of
Competitive and Organizational Stressors, Journal of Sports Sciences, 2005, 23, 1129-1141.
40. Woodman, T. and Hardy, L., A Case Study of Organizational Stress in Elite Sport, Journal of Applied Sport
Psychology, 2001, 13, 207-238.
41. Cooper, C. L., Dewe, P. J. and O’Driscoll, M. P., Organizational Stress: A Review and Critique of Theory,
Research, and Application, Sage, Thousand Oaks, 2001.
42. Smoll, F. L. and Cumming, S. P. (2006). Enhancing Coach-Parent Relationships in Youth Sports: Increasing
Harmony and Minimizing Hassle, in: Williams, J. M., ed., Applied Sport Psychology: Personal Growth to
Peak Performance, 5th edn., Mayfield, Monterey, CA, 2006, 92-204.
43. Libman, S., Adult Participation in Youth Sports: A Developmental Perspective, Child and Adolescent
Psychiatric Clinics of North America, 1998, 7, 725-744.
44. Scanlan, T. K., Competitive Stress in Children, in: Weiss, M.R., and Gould, D., eds., Sport for Children and
Youths, Human Kinetics, Champaign, IL, 1986, 113-118.
45. Coakley, J., The Good Father: Parental Expectations and Youth Sport, Leisure Studies, 2006, 25, 153-163.
46. Bloom, B., Developing Talent in Young People, Ballantine Books, New York, 1985.
47. Cushion, C. J., Armour, K. M. and Jones, R. L., Coaching Education and Continuing Professional
Development: Experience and Learning to Coach, Quest, 2003, 55, 215-230.
48. Harwood, C. and Swain, A., The Development and Activation of Achievement Goals Within Tennis: II. A
Player, Parent and Coach Intervention, The Sport Psychologist, 2002, 16, 111-137.
International Journal of Sports Science & Coaching Volume 4 · Number 4 · 2009 565
