ArticlePDF Available

Olympic and Paralympic Coaches Living With Stress—Is It Such a Problem? Potential Implications for Future Coach Education in Sport

January 2022
International Sport Coaching Journal 10(1):1-13

DOI:10.1123/iscj.2021-0078

Authors:

Simon Loftus

Kingston University

Robin Taylor

Dublin City University

David Grecic

University of Central Lancashire

Damian Harper

University of Central Lancashire

Following increased research into how situational and organizational stress affects coaches’ performance and welfare, there is a need to understand how coaches appraise and cope with the stressors they experience. These experiences could help inform applied interventions that facilitate both positive behavioural and performance-related outcomes. This is particularly important in elite coaches who operate in international competitions. Thirteen Olympic coaches participated in semistructured interviews to identify how they appraised stress as they prepared for the Tokyo Olympic Games. The research identified nine subthemes, which were categorized into three general overarching themes: (a) stressors, (b) appraisal of stressors, and (c) coping mechanisms. Despite the prevalence of negative stressors, self-doubt, and self-presentational concerns, many coaches interviewed demonstrated a positive outlook in relation to stress. Furthermore, they had established strong communities of practice as coping mechanisms against the impact of stress on performance, welfare, and health. Therefore, this study provides novel insights into the broad range of physical, psychological, and emotional challenges faced by Olympic and Paralympic coaches in the buildup to Olympic and Paralympic Games. Coach education programmes can use this information to help coaches develop effective coping mechanisms, subsequently leading to more positive outcomes from the stressors they experience.

Content uploaded by Simon Loftus

Content may be subject to copyright.

Olympic and Paralympic Coaches Living With Stress—Is It Such a

Problem? Potential Implications for Future Coach Education in Sport

Simon Loftus,

1,2

Robin Taylor,

David Grecic,

and Damian J. Harper

School of Science, Engineering and Computing, Kingston University, Kingston upon Thames, United Kingdom;

Institute of Coaching and Performance, School of Sport

and Health Sciences, University of Central Lancashire, Preston, United Kingdom;

School of Health and Human Performance, Dublin City University, Dublin, Ireland

Following increased research into how situational and organizational stress affects coaches’performance and welfare, there is a

need to understand how coaches appraise and cope with the stressors they experience. These experiences could help inform

applied interventions that facilitate both positive behavioural and performance-related outcomes. This is particularly important in

elite coaches who operate in international competitions. Thirteen Olympic coaches participated in semistructured interviews to

identify how they appraised stress as they prepared for the Tokyo Olympic Games. The research identiﬁed nine subthemes, which

were categorized into three general overarching themes: (a) stressors, (b) appraisal of stressors, and (c) coping mechanisms.

Despite the prevalence of negative stressors, self-doubt, and self-presentational concerns, many coaches interviewed demon-

strated a positive outlook in relation to stress. Furthermore, they had established strong communities of practice as coping

mechanisms against the impact of stress on performance, welfare, and health. Therefore, this study provides novel insights into

the broad range of physical, psychological, and emotional challenges faced by Olympic and Paralympic coaches in the buildup to

Olympic and Paralympic Games. Coach education programmes can use this information to help coaches develop effective coping

mechanisms, subsequently leading to more positive outcomes from the stressors they experience.

Keywords:coping mechanisms, cognitive appraisals, coach developers, perfectionism, imposter syndrome

Sports coaches work in a complex and dynamic environment

that can lead to high levels of pressure and stress (Bowes & Jones,

2006;Fletcher & Scott, 2010;Lyle, 1999). An important aspect of

this complexity is the way stress is recognized and dealt with

(Olusoga et al., 2009). Although the impact of stress on athletes’

performance has received signiﬁcant attention (Gustafsson et al.,

2017;Schinke et al., 2018), substantially less focus has been given

to coaches, particularly those performing at the elite level (Dixon &

Turner, 2018;Potts et al., 2021). This is perhaps down to the

perception that coaches are often seen as the source of solutions as

opposed to requiring help themselves (Frey, 2007). However,

Thelwell et al. (2008) suggested that coaches must also be consid-

ered as performers in their own right and need the same level of

help, support, and research as the athletes in their charge. There-

fore, further examination of the stressors they experience would be

an important step. Consequently, there is a growing body of

research looking at coaching in stressful conditions (Bentzen

et al., 2015,2017;Frey, 2007;Olusoga & Kenttä, 2017;

Schaffran et al., 2016) alongside numerous high-proﬁle examples

of stress and its negative impact on mental health and coaching

performance (e.g., a football coach undergoing electric shock

treatment to “cure”his panic attacks and suicidal thoughts;

Calvin, 2015). Given the environment within which elite coaches

operate, it has been highlighted that coaches are often unable or

reluctant to ask for support when experiencing stress through fear

of appearing vulnerable or weak (Olusoga & Kenttä, 2017).

Stress has been deﬁned as the “quality of experience, produced

through a person’s environmental transaction, through either over

or under arousal, resulting in psychological or physiological

distress”(Aldwin, 2009, p. 23). Thelwell et al. (2008) expanded

on this, identifying that stress is caused by the ongoing interaction

of an individual with the environment they ﬁnd themselves in and

the decisions they make to cope with issues that may arise.

Furthermore, Fletcher and Scott (2010) drew a distinction between

stressors and strain. They viewed stressors as “environmental

demands (i.e., stimuli) encountered by an individual”and strain

as “an individual’s negative psychological, physical and beha-

vioural responses to stressors”(Fletcher & Scott, 2010, p. 128).

Acknowledging that stress is a complex, dynamically changing

phenomenon, “stress”in the current study is represented as an

interactive process incorporating stressors, strain, appraisals, and

coping responses that could result in both positive and negative

responses (Fletcher & Scott, 2010).

Considering the additional responsibility and stress that is

exerted upon Olympic and Paralympic coaches (Collins &

Cruickshank, 2012), it is, therefore, worth looking at stress from

a coach’s perspective, particularly as the studies discussed in this

paper present a reasonably coherent narrative around the organi-

zational (interaction with the coach and their environment;

Woodman & Hardy, 2001) and situational (lived in the moment

experiences; Albrecht, 2010) causes of stress. These include factors

such as coaching responsibilities to the athletes, conﬂicts, pressure

and expectations, managing the competition environments, athlete

concerns, isolation, consequences of sport status, competition

preparations, organizational management, sacriﬁcing personal

time, and long, irregular working hours together with extensive

travel (Olusoga & Kenttä, 2017;Schaffran et al., 2016). However,

with each coaching context being so different, it is difﬁcult to

compare individual experiences (Bentzen et al., 2015;Frey, 2007;

Olusoga et al., 2010), which highlights the need for continued

research into how world-class coaches interact with stress to

explore commonalities and differences across contexts.

Loftus (s.loftus@kingston.ac.uk) is corresponding author, https://orcid.org/

0000-0002-8962-6178

International Sport Coaching Journal, (Ahead of Print)

https://doi.org/10.1123/iscj.2021-0078

First Published Online: July 9, 2022

This interaction with stress was ﬁrst conceptualized by Blas-

covich and Mendes (2000), who stated that individuals appraise

stressful situations through either perceptions of danger or uncer-

tainty and then assess their ability to deal with the situation through

their knowledge and skill set, resulting in either challenge or threat

responses. The challenge response would be where an individual

experiences sufﬁcient resources to meet situational demands,

whereas the threat state would be considered maladaptive, occur-

ring when an individual experiences insufﬁcient resources to meet

situational demands (Dixon & Turner, 2018). Therefore, this study

will investigate how individuals experiencing similar demands can

exhibit very different responses, depending on their cognitive

appraisals, as outlined by Dixon and Turner (2018). Indeed,

Didymus (2016) noted that future research should work toward

a better understanding of the ways in which high-level coaches

cope with the competitive and potentially stressful environment in

which they work. Furthermore, Potts et al. (2021), in a meta-

synthesis of qualitative research, highlighted the lack of research on

coaches’appraisals of stress and the potential impact stress may

have on their mental well-being. With these points in mind, it is

also worth gauging how effective coaches’coping strategies are in

managing the negative outcomes of stressors. Conversely, research

of this nature may also lead to important insights into how elite

coaches foster positive outcomes from the stressors they experi-

ence, thus providing potentially useful information to inform the

development of novel applied coach stress management interven-

tions. Such interventions could lead to enhanced well-being and a

reduction in the large number of coaches who stop coaching each

year (Potts et al., 2021).

Accordingly, the aim of the current study was to investigate the

perceptions of Olympic and Paralympic coaches on (a) the stressors

they experienced in the buildup to the Tokyo Olympic and

Paralympic Games, (b) how they appraised these stressors, and

Methodology

In view of the range and scope of stressors that Olympic and

Paralympic coaches deal with, this study adopted a qualitative

methodology through an interpretive approach as stress is experi-

enced differently by different people and is inﬂuenced by a range of

shared realities (Thorne, 2016). As such, this study collated rich,

descriptive data that portray complex human experiences in line

with a constructive epistemological approach (Fedyk & Xu, 2018).

Qualitative research emphasizes the exploration of multiple con-

texts and experiences and gains insight into the different inter-

pretations of the various sporting paradigms (Braun & Clarke,

2012). Semistructured interviews (available on request to the ﬁrst

author) were selected to explore the topic area via the experiences

of those who have ﬁrst-hand coaching experience in elite sport.

Using interviews encouraged the selected participants to provide

more in-depth information that captured the subjective meaning in

contextual situations as well as providing the opportunity to delve

deeper into personal lived experiences (Brinkmann & Kvale,

2008). The semistructured nature of the interviews allowed for

the addition of more probing follow-up questions (Newcomer

et al., 2015).

Participants

Thirteen coaches (mean age: 44.7 ± 6.3 years) working toward

leading athletes and/or teams at the Tokyo Olympic and

Paralympic Games in 2021 volunteered to participate. The criteria

for selection was the coach had to be working as head coach with

athletes or teams that had either qualiﬁed or were in the midst of

qualifying for the Tokyo Olympic and Paralympic Games. Of the

13 coaches interviewed, 12 actually took part in the Tokyo Games

(one coach changed roles prior to the Games and did not attend,

although the athlete qualiﬁed and competed). Coaches were

selected to cover a broad range of demographics to reﬂect the

diversity of coaching contexts within Olympic and Paralympic

sport. These included individual or team sport (seven individuals

and six teams), gender (nine men and four women), Olympic (10

coaches) or Paralympic coach (three coaches), Great Britain (GB;

eight coaches) or international-based (ﬁve coaches) coach, and

multiple Olympic or Paralympic coach (10 coaches) versus ﬁrst-

time Olympic or Paralympic coach (three coaches). These coaches

were deliberately targeted (Lincon & Guba, 1985) to adequately

reﬂect the broad range of experiences and contexts that Olympic-

and Paralympic-level coaches are operating in. All identities have

been anonymised. Any identifying data have been removed with

coaches presented as Coaches 1–13.

Procedure

Ethical approval was obtained through the University of Central

Lancashire ethics committee, and suitable coaches were contacted

via email, informing them of the purpose of the study and inviting

them to participate. Signed informed consent was provided prior to

data collection with a reminder that the coaches could withdraw

from the study at any time. As we were discussing stress and

potentially emotive experiences, the participants were also advised

that they were under no obligation to answer any questions that

were potentially distressing. The semistructured interviews were

conducted via Microsoft Teams due to restrictions imposed by the

COVID-19 pandemic. Interviews ranged from 56 to 136 min in

duration (mean time: 82.0 ± 20.5 min).

Interview Guide

The semistructured interview guide was developed by following

the recommendations from qualitative research (Kallio et al., 2016;

Schubring et al., 2019) to gauge perceptions on the stressors

coaches experienced during the buildup to an Olympic and Para-

lympic Games. These templates included questions, probing ques-

tions, and stimuli to generate a depth of response. There was

consultation with the research team to ensure that the interview

questions were suitable for the nature of the research. This template

was then used in a pilot study, conducted with ﬁve international

coaches, to ensure the interviews provided rich data sets. This

process helped to ensure reliability (Kallio et al., 2016) and

provided positive feedback from the participants and consensus

within the research team that the interview structure and ﬂow were

coherent. A key alteration was to drop the use of mind maps as an

aid in developing stronger reﬂective keys (Collins & MacNamara,

2012) as the interviews were conducted online, and the process

clearly interrupted the ﬂow of the interviews.

Data Analysis

Interviews were recorded and transcribed verbatim before con-

ducting a deliberate “reﬂexive”analysis of the data (Braun &

Clarke, 2019) using qualitative analysis software QSR NVivo,

version 12) to help extrapolate the various overarching themes,

2LOFTUS ET AL.

(Ahead of Print)

subthemes, and data themes. A “reﬂexive”approach (Braun &

Clarke, 2018) of using both inductive (observation of new insights

arising from the data, like self-doubt, as described by the coaches)

and deductive (personal experiences based upon 15 years of

professional coaching by the lead researcher alongside a thorough

awareness of the literature base) analysis approaches was used to

allow for depth and quality of analysis and address the propensity

to get tied to either ontological or epistemological approaches

(Tracy, 2010). The researcher went through the process of famil-

iarization with the data by reading and rereading and adopted a

thematic analysis approach. Then followed the assignment of codes

based upon statements that contextualized each coach’s experi-

ences with stress before identifying a range of pertinent lower order

themes, which were then grouped into higher order themes. These

higher order themes were then built up to three overarching

reﬂective themes (Braun & Clarke, 2018): (a) stressors,

(b) appraisals, and (c) coping strategies. To improve the trustwor-

thiness of the data analysis, three peer debrieﬁng sessions took

place with two other researchers. This process helped clarify the

context and meaning behind some of the codes created as well

focus the scope of the data collected by reducing the number of

subthemes from 16 to 9 (Smith & McGannon, 2018).

Results

The results gleaned from the data analysis reﬂect the thoughts of all 13

participants with a total of 892 raw data units being identiﬁed. These

raw data units were then categorized from 46 lower order themes

and then built up into nine subthemes and then into three general

overarching themes that emerged from the data: stressors, appraisals

of stress, and coping mechanisms (Tables 1–3, respectively). The

number (n) of responses for each data theme is highlighted within each

table. It is important to note that the frequency of responses does not

imply relative importance but portrays the commonality of feeling

amongst coaches. Contributions by female coaches will be highlighted

by F and male coaches by M.

Stressors

Table 1illustrates the main stressors experienced by the Olympic

and Paralympic coaches in the buildup to the Tokyo Olympic

Games and includes coach–athlete relationship, role responsibili-

ties, and lack of support in fulﬁlling their role.

Coach–Athlete Relationship

Data highlighted the levels of investment and the potential sources

of stress experienced by the coaches in relation to the coach–athlete

relationship. The data themes identiﬁed were the selection process,

team/athlete management, prioritization of the athlete, behaviour

management, and communication. The following examples outline

how coaches prioritized athletes so that they could perform at the

highest level: “This is not a job, this is a lifestyle and we are

choosing it because we love the sport so it is pretty much 24/7

because the athletes can need you at any time and I am there for

them”(Coach 10F).

Recognizing the burden that these coaches are taking on, there

are examples that highlight some of the negative implications for

this desire to support the athletes. For example, Coach 13M

revealed, “We can be absolutely at capacity and they do not see

you almost like a human. It is just you should be able to do this.”

The fact that coaches perceive themselves to be working at capacity

and being fully invested in the process can lead to issues wherein it

is felt that the investment is not reciprocated. This was highlighted

by Coach 6M, who admitted, “Where I feel as though I lose energy

is if I feel that I am putting more into this team relationship than

they are. So this is often accompanied with bouts of frustration.”

Athlete management was frequently raised as a source of

stress, as highlighted by Coach 9F:

She [the athlete] has the ability to treat those around her very

badly and for me that has a massive increase in stress level.

Yeah she can deﬁnitely make me feel utterly worthless like I

have never felt before in my life.

Coach 10F highlighted their concerns around managing a team

member during competition:

We had an athlete with us who wasn’t on the programme as such

and has a bit of a vendetta against me so I had a bit of anxiety about

how that relationship was going to be while we were out there.

Coach 3M pointed out the fact that managing the group is more

difﬁcult when you have athletes who are striving for Olympic

qualiﬁcation or selection:“One big thing during the qualiﬁcation

period is that the other athletes can feel neglected. You still have to

make sure that they feel valued and that takes up a lot of time and

energy as well.”Furthermore, Coach 3M’s point raised the issue of

athlete management and selection and the potential for stress that

exists within this domain, which was supported by Coach 2M: “I

deselected a player who had played everything for the last 4 years

and had been to an Olympic Games and also it was a player that I

coached at my club as well and it was very stressful.”

In addition, the coaches highlighted the role of communica-

tion. Coach 10F highlighted that discussing their stress triggers

with athletes was a good way of developing trust and support in the

relationship: “I am much better now at recognizing some of those

things where I try to not show that to my athletes as they can pick up

on things now.”Coach 2M offered, “We want to spend a lot of time

on individual meetings improving communication channels,”and

Table 1 Stressors Experienced by Olympic and

Paralympic Coaches in the Buildup to the Tokyo

Olympic and Paralympic Games

Overarching

theme Subthemes Data themes

Stressors Coach–athlete

relationship

Selection process (7)

Team/athlete management (32)

Prioritising the athlete (13)

Behaviour management (15)

Communication (9)

Role responsibility Self-presentation (20)

Performance expectations (5)

Programme management (31)

Multiple roles (17)

Processes (80)

COVID-19 (41)

Lack of support Conﬂict (6)

Travel and competition (8)

National governing body (29)

Resourcing (10)

STRESS AND COACH DEVELOPMENT 3

(Ahead of Print)

Coach 4F recognized that communication, trust, and respect was a

two-way street, “You have to have a give and take relationship with

the players. You have to respect their voice as much as you want

them to respect your voice.”Other coaches discussed how their

behaviours could impact the performance of their athletes. Coach

1M revealed, “You can have a big impact on the athletes with the

way that you conduct yourself,”with Coach 5M reﬂecting, “Of

course I did not do things to make the players smaller it was just

because my angriness, my passion was so high, but it was really

only bringing a negative effect.”This point was echoed by Coach

10F, who was acutely aware of how their behaviours inﬂuenced

their athletes:

If I am spending all my time reading their body language and

picking up on their emotion then they are doing the same back

to me and if I am stressed and they are going to be wondering

why I am stressed should they be stressed?

Role Responsibility

For this section, self-presentation, performance expectations, pro-

gramme management, multiple roles, processes, and COVID-19

were identiﬁed as data themes around role responsibilities. Despite

the obvious importance of the coach–athlete relationship and the

inherent stress that has been demonstrated by the aforementioned

examples, the interviewed coaches were clear about their expecta-

tions of performance:“I have got the responsibility of trying to

achieve the Olympic place and a result at the Olympic Games”

(Coach 9F). Whilst preparing their team or athlete for the Olympic

Games, a number of the coaches interviewed were also holding

other positions of responsibility. These ranged from taking on a

mentoring role (Coach 9F) to managing business interests (Coach

7M) or from coaching a club (Coach 5M) to working as a coach

educator (Coach 4F). Linked to the multiple roles that coaches need

to fulﬁl is the programme management, which was a source of

stress to some: “It can be overwhelming; it starts at home, through

the planning, bookings, picking the ﬂights, picking the hotels,

making sure the entries are in”(Coach 10F). Coach 12M had to

manage their programme on a tight budget whilst still targeting

a medal:

It’s not a secret but Olympic [sport] for the home federations is

not a top priority, not in the women’s side, it is not a top

priority they are looking at essentially how cheap can we do

this and still win a medal.

Furthermore, Coach 3M felt that whilst having to balance the

multiple responsibilities of the role, a coach also must present

themselves in a certain way to show they are in control: “You are

just second guessing everything all the time and worrying about

other results that you can’t really affect. So all the things that you

tell the players not to worry about you are worrying about.”

Coach 12M questioned why coaches have to present them-

selves in a certain manner: “I guess it’s the hierarchical point at the

moment where people don’t want to show their vulnerability, I

would imagine if a coach showed it, would that undermine them in

the eyes of their athletes?”

In aiding the qualiﬁcation process, there is some calculated

planning to “manipulate the qualifying system to your advantage”

(Coach 3M), but it is not without its stresses:

You have got a lot of pressure in trying to pick the right

tournaments and when you start going to tournaments that you

thought before were quite reasonable and then they turn out to

be extremely hard tournaments, that puts a lot of pressure on

your own judgement calls and also whether the players are still

believing in you. (Coach 3M)

The COVID-19 pandemic of 2020 meant that long-term plans

and preparations were thrown into doubt: “We were getting ready

to start our competition season, I think a week, two weeks before

the sort of the lockdown kicked in for our guys”(Coach 1M).

Coach 13M highlighted the impact on their planning:

We live in a sport where everything is planned meticulously,

and we pride ourselves on that. Suddenly all of the goal posts

and all of the planning is up in the air, you know, that creates a

lot of anxiety and I am not immune to that.

Participants were also quick to point out the various processes

within the role that were sources of stress. One of the factors of

coaching is the sheer volume of time that is involved in preparing

an athlete for the Olympic stage. Coach 9F said, “On average I

will spend 200 days a year out of the country coaching or training

with my athlete.”Coach 10F had to deal with this gruelling

schedule:

In the 11 days of competition for a Paralympic Games we are

competing on ten of them and for an athlete that might only be

a half-day at the competition and training venue, but for the

staff that is a 16-hour day for ten days plus two weeks in

advance training and moving and with being a Para coach it is

about lifting and shifting.

With training camps and the Games being stressful in terms of time

demands, qualiﬁcation for the Olympic Games is fraught with

tension and pressure, as Coach 7M described: “I think most of

the people that are involved in the Olympics will tell you that the

Olympic qualifying process is the most stressful part of the

process.”Coach 3M highlighted the importance of 4 years of

work: “For me I think the qualifying process is more stressful

because that is why you are working for four years.”

Coach 2M considered the implications of not qualifying:

If we do not qualify for the Olympics it is kind of over in

terms of the team, the players preparing for the Olympics

won’t keep playing for the National Team, I would probably

not continue as Head Coach of the National Team. So, the

consequences of not winning the double header was present

in my mind.

Lack of Support

Several coaches highlighted the perceived lack of support as a

source of stress, and the main data themes identiﬁed were conﬂict,

issues around travel and competition, the role of the national

governing body (NGB), and resourcing. NGBs appear to be a

source of stress for these coaches as political and ﬁnancial con-

straints seem to be at odds with what is important to the coaches and

their priorities:

For me it’s a constant source of stress. I think I would probably

position myself as middle management so there are people

above me who are really responsible decision makers with

different agendas as I see it and to try and inﬂuence them

enough to get my agenda onto their desk so that we get

decisions that I think would help our sport is really difﬁcult.

I would probably say that is the biggest source of stress for me.

(Coach 6M)

4LOFTUS ET AL.

(Ahead of Print)

Coach 9F agreed, identifying, “One frustration with the team is that

all of my discussions with the Olympic Manager seem to be about

money and not about medals.”

Coach 3M provided the following unpleasant experience

based upon political interference with the qualifying process:

We qualiﬁed two players but our own International Olympic

Committee (IOC) had different qualifying criteria, they had

stricter qualifying criteria, so both the players never got to

Beijing even though they had qualiﬁed through the World

Federation criteria.

These examples highlight the potential for conﬂict, which is

compounded when you work with Team GB and the Home Nations

(England, Ireland, Scotland, and Wales) do not have a vested

interest in the success of the programme:

The journey has been a fraught one for the programme because

if I am being candid and honest about this one it’s very difﬁcult

now for any of the Home Nations. None of the Home Nations

gets any funding from UK Sport because they are not GB

Programs. (Coach 11M)

Pertinently, some coaches did not feel that they received the same

level of resource as the athletes: “All the provision (mental health)

is around athlete and there is a whole athlete support team and we

are almost, not catered for within that”(Coach 10F). Coach 10F

then raised the question of how and when do coaches know how to

call upon this support: “The difference is when the coach is

suffering, a) Are they going to go and ask for help? b) Where

to go to ask for help? and c) Do they actually realize that there is a

need for help?”

The reality of being in a competitive situation and facing

stressful situations without the proper support mechanisms was

highlighted by two coaches: Coach 12M revealed, “You plan for

everything down to the minute but you need to be ready for those

plans just to get blown up and something to go wrong and you deal

with it.”In addition, Coach 10F acknowledged,

I did not cope well in Holland, that’s why I came home. I think

one of the reasons that I didn’t cope very well is that I thought

that I felt that I didn’t have access to my normal coping

mechanism.

Appraisal of Stress

Table 2illustrates how Olympic and Paralympic coaches appraised

stressors as either positive or negative in the buildup to the Tokyo

Olympic and Paralympic Games.

Positive Stress

When discussing responses to stress, it was interesting to note that

the coaches had highlighted numerous examples of their positive

experience with stress, which included the identiﬁcation of focus,

decision making, enjoyment, motivation, and acceptance as perti-

nent data themes. First, there were a number of examples of

coaches citing stress as a catalyst for improved focus, as highlighted

by Coach 4F: “I believe that stress can make you make mistakes but

in my case it just gives me much more focus.”Coach 7M added

more context around the focus required to compete at the top level:

My experiences at the international level and trying to ﬁnd

these real small margins because everybody is so good. So

what are the details of this? I am really hyper focused on this

and I spend all summer trying to beat Poland, Russia, France

and Brazil, all these great teams.

On top of the focus, others talked about the improved quality

of their decision making under stressful conditions. For example,

Coach 6M said, “These decisions, this quickness of taking deci-

sions is not something that I decide before. I just believe it is the

monomaniacal focus on the moment.”Coach 2M added to this by

suggesting, “The greater the stress the more concentrated I am on

the decisions I am taking. It helps me focus on the things that I do

control.”Apart from the focus and improved decision making, it

was apparent that a number of coaches took a great deal of

enjoyment from stressful situations: “I love the test and the

difﬁculty and the struggle, you know!”(Coach 11M). Coach

12M went on to highlight the beneﬁts of harnessing the motiva-

tional power of stress: “You then start to realize that stress used in

the right way can be a big advantage.”Coaches 7M and 12M

offered the following analogies for using stress as a motivational

tool: “You are only getting stronger when you break stuff down

you know?”and “To grow there has to be struggle.”Signiﬁcantly,

there were numerous examples wherein the coaches accepted the

presence of stress within their job and have embraced it. Coach 6M

summarized this: “The stress is there so I do not feel like this is part

of the problem. I want the stress, you know? So I do not ﬁght

against it!”

This notion of making the best of things was pervasive across

the coaches interviewed, and COVID-19 provided good insight

into how these coaches took the positives out of potentially

stressful situations: “This COVID thing is not affecting me, beside

the workload, the stress of COVID no way man I am dominating

this”(Coach 7M). Another coach pointed out the fact that what

should have been an extremely busy time for them was now much

more relaxed and enjoyable:

With this Corona thing I have actually been more relaxed that I

have been in 15 years at this point of the year. So for me I

would not say it is a holiday but it is a time to work without

pressure. (Coach 6M)

As well as the points raised around preparation, a few coaches were

eager to point out the positive impact COVID-19 has had on their

Table 2 How Olympic and Paralympic Coaches

Appraised the Stressors They Experienced in the

Buildup to the Tokyo Olympic and Paralympic Games

Overarching

theme Subthemes Data themes

Appraisal of stress Positive stress Focus (5)

Decision making (6)

Enjoyment (9)

Motivation (4)

Acceptance (15)

Negative stress Physiological (9)

Anxiety (4)

Lack of control (11)

Job security (16)

Conﬂict (6)

Work–home interference (41)

Self-doubt (23)

STRESS AND COACH DEVELOPMENT 5

(Ahead of Print)

planning: “I have got a higher workload because of it yes, we need

to work on the strategy but I am deﬁnitely going to have plan ABC

so I have got that possibility or opportunity of moving, whatever

direction”(Coach 13M).

Negative Stress

Despite the incidents of positive stress, the impact of negative stress

presented itself in a number of ways and more frequently. Key data

themes highlighted were physiological, anxiety, lack of control, job

security, conﬂict, work–home interference, and self-doubt. First,

coaches discussed some of the physiological impacts of stress with

Coach 1M providing this honest assessment of their experience: “It

made me really poorly. I had a mini stroke and ended up seeing a

councillor because I was having lots of panic attacks due to stress.”

Less serious examples included: Coach 7M identifying a lack of

sleep, “I just would not sleep, I would have disrupted sleep and I

would wake up in the middle of the night and be wide awake,”and

Coach 6M revealing, “What I feel in my body when I’m nervous

before a game, the physical aspects of where I can feel it in my

throat and in my stomach, it’s been the same always.”Coach 2M

said, “I do get migraines a bit which I think could be stress related.”

Along with the talk of nerves, some coaches were affected by

anxiety: “I was falling apart because you were so anxious about it

all”(Coach 11M).

Furthermore, another component of negative stress was a lack

of control in certain situations. Coach 8F suggested, “When I have

got too much on the plate and I am always just chasing my tail and

never really feel that I get things done.”This point was supported

by Coach 13M: “I get stressed out if I cannot move forward. I’m

kind of action orientated so if I do not feel that we are moving

towards a goal that then starts to stress me.”

Job security was another source of negative stress identiﬁed.

Coach 10F provided this insight around a lack of clarity on

performance expectations: “I think that is one of the challenges

what is a coach judged on? How am I rated? How am I assessed? If

I have got good athletes and then they don’t perform does that

reﬂect on me?”Coach 2M provided a comparative analogy:

My daughter said to me when I was younger, we came last in a

tournament, she said are you going to be sacked? Because with

a football manager that is what the TV or my father in law, who

is a Barca fan, say when the coach is no good he has to be

sacked.

Coach 8F had this to offer: “There is a lot of uncertainty from that

point of view, I need to have a plan ABC just in case, let’s say from

1st of April I do not have a job.”Coach 10F commented on the

power that the athlete has in determining the coach’s future:

It is hard because the athletes have a huge amount of say in the

hiring and ﬁring of coaches. Rightly or wrongly being ﬁred by

an athlete can have massive repercussions. It’s not just the end

of that relationship it can have huge knock on effects of where

you can go and work in the future.

With the sort of dynamic being described, it was not surprising to

see examples of conﬂict being mentioned by the coaches inter-

viewed, as highlighted by Coach 7M: “I used to clash a lot with a

member of staff.”However, sometimes this led to a change of

vision and leadership with negative consequences: “Obviously, I

had a big setback as well, we won the World Champs with this

young guy and the next thing you have got a new head coach and

you know, they take away this athlete from you”(Coach 9F).

Away from coaching, the impact of work–home interference

was a frequent source of negative stress: “It is not perfect, we still

go through times where it has been hard at training then we come

home and it is not happy families”(Coach 6M). This was exacer-

bated when the coach tried to compartmentalize their work and

their home life:

One criticism from my wife is I do not really talk about my

work that much to her because that is me very much just kind

of boxing it off and putting it away. When I come home it is

like I do not talk about it because then if I start talking about it I

will probably start getting a bit stressed by it and anxious and

annoyed and I do not want to. (Coach 12M)

One of the realities that faced a lot of the coaches interviewed

was the amount of time that they were expected to be away from

home: “I say to my husband do not expect to see me much this

year”(Coach 10F). Coach 9F was away from home 200 days a year

and Coach 11M over 120 days.

The ﬁnal aspect pertaining to the responses to stress was the

incidences of self-doubt. Coach 8F gave this example:

Bad stress is when it builds up and it mounts and it ends up

triggering a negative emotional response and unhappiness.

When it is bad it exhibits in lack of conﬁdence and self-doubt

and that kind of thing, that’s bad stress when those things start

to happen.

Other coaches weighed in with the following examples of self-

doubt: “It sounds ridiculous, but I compare myself, am I coaching

as good as the other coaches are coaching? Are my athletes getting

the right level of support?”(Coach 12M). Whilst Coach 11M said,

“I have had far too much self-doubt and not backed myself!”Coach

4F echoed these thoughts with, “I worry about not being good

enough to be able to take them to where they need to be.”

Coping Mechanisms

Table 3identiﬁes the coping mechanisms utilized by the Olympic

and Paralympic coaches to help mitigate the impact of stress,

including self-determination, education around stress, community

of practice, and recovery strategies.

Self-Determination

The main themes around self-determination were the learning

process, resilience, philosophy development, education, reﬂective

practice, and rituals or superstitions. Having ownership of the

learning process and the desire to continually develop through

formal and informal educational pathways, even if it meant being

out of their comfort zone, was seen as being important:

I found myself in a Continuous Professional Development

(CPD) group really, where you were forced to coach your

peers, and at that point I perceived my peers as being way

above me and I felt so uncomfortable. But I just got really

comfortable with being uncomfortable and just kind of,

almost, like diving in and going right! But the learning I

got from that was absolutely massive and as uncomfortable as

it felt that was really important. (Coach 13M)

Dealing with setbacks was apparent from speaking to some

coaches. This is linked to the earlier points around resilience

and acceptance that stress is part of the job. Coach 6M provided

6LOFTUS ET AL.

(Ahead of Print)

an example of how they used setbacks to motivate and develop

themselves:

I do not know if there has been a coach that hasn’t experienced

failure, so I would say probably reﬂect on your failures

because I think they fuel the ﬁre and are the best times that

you can really ﬁnd your blind spots.

Coach 13M built upon Coach 6M’s comment by highlighting how

reﬂection and a clear philosophy can aid development:

Which again links into your coaching philosophy around

individualised development, not just technically but as a

holistic person. But then also understanding me better within

all of that as well, has deﬁnitely helped strength and weak-

nesses and all the rest of it.

In terms of coping strategies, there were a few coaches who

described some superstitions or rituals that they have before

competition to reduce the feeling of stress:

Each one of us have our rituals, for example, before big, big

matches, I am very silent, I like to do some physical activity, I

like to wake up early, I like to try and rest between lunch and

the match as much as I can. I like to stay alone, even when I

enter the gym. I hate the chatting before a big match because it

brings nothing always. It is just increasing the fear. So I try and

be pretty ﬁxed in my rituals before every match, that is the

most important. (Coach 5M)

A major factor in the coping strategies of these coaches was

their reﬂective practice:“The big loss gives the biggest lesson you

know? So the mistakes that I did before, maybe because I have

overreacted with a player because of over stress”(Coach 7M).

Coach 6M talked more about the processes involved:

I would not say a drain on energy, but it is really energy

consuming. What I found myself doing is going home and

really trying to replay and analyse what happened. What I did?

How they responded? What I could have done differently?

What could I do? Where are we? How can we move us back on

track etc.?

The unpredictability and uncontrollable nature of sport meant

that the coaches had to be resilient and able to deal with setbacks.

The following examples demonstrate the various ways in which the

coaches were able to rationalize setbacks and focus on the process

rather than the outcome:

To be honest it does not matter where we ﬁnished, I was

always determined to come back stronger next year so that is

my mantra going forward. It does not matter how good the

results are, next year is going to be better. (Coach 8F)

Ideﬁnitely think that knowing you have prepared the best you

can gives you more conﬁdence that the outcome will be as

good as it can be and if you don’t get the outcome the ﬁrst thing

you do is you look back and was the preparation right. I guess

getting the preparation and working hard on the preparation

will reduce the anxieties. (Coach 11M)

Education Around Stress

The discussions with the coaches in this study highlighted a lack of

information around stress, ideas for development, suitability of

educational programmes, and experience as key data themes. The

lack of information around the impact of stress on performance was

highlighted by Coach 4F:

It is a really important element of coaching. When I think

about the content of coaching courses there is very little that

talks about managing stress. We are not talking about coach

burnout here; we are not talking about when you get past the

point of managing it. But are you actually aware of what you

are going to do for you to make sure that you are at your best?

This was echoed by Coach 7M, who when asked about the need for

more information and support to deal with stress, offered the

following:

I was talking with another coach and we were talking about

some of these topics and he said, “you know at some point here

somebody is going to have to wise up and realize that these

resources need to be available to the coach and the stresses that

we are under.”

Coach 5M acknowledged how coach education seems to focus on

the technical and tactical elements: “In every coaches clinic we talk

too much about technique, we talk too much about tactics that are

the easiest things. But being motivated in the tough moments this is

what we should be taught more.”The perceived lack of suitability

for purpose was raised by other coaches, including Coach 6M:

I think this is really required all the way through coaching. If you

are coaching a junior league team and you’re passionate about it,

that is going to take up a lot of energy and I think it is going to

potentially be a stressful thing for you and the people around you.

So a discussion around stress, burnout, coping is essential.

Table 3 Coping Mechanisms Used to Mitigate the

Impact of Stress

Overarching

theme Subthemes Data themes

Coping

mechanisms

Self-determination Learning process (45)

Resilience (17)

Philosophy development (24)

Formal and informal

education (66)

Reﬂective practice (45)

Rituals or superstitions (5)

Education around

stress

Lack of info about stress (13)

Ideas for development (25)

Suitability for purpose (8)

Experience (8)

Community of

practice

Professional practitioners (4)

Friends and family (23)

Mentoring (15)

Support network (59)

Recovery

strategies

Recovery exercise (22)

Social (5)

Family time (12)

Professional/medical (6)

Tools for good mental health (18)

STRESS AND COACH DEVELOPMENT 7

(Ahead of Print)

In the United Kingdom, coaches were able to access a range of

development programmes, including “Para Coach to Rio”and “the

Energy Project”(Coach 10F), the UK Sport “Elite programme”

(Coaches 11M and 13M), the “Aspire”programme (Coach 8F),

and “the athlete to coach course”(Coach 10F). However, the

picture for coaches internationally relied more on experience,

“A lot of my best coaching advice has been unofﬁcial rather

than ofﬁcial”(Coach 3M), with Coach 7M offering, “It is probably

not really something I have tapped into to be honest.”Coach 6M

offered a potential reason for this: “I have not been involved in

coach CPD for a long time. But I think an overhaul of it to really

address this sort of the theory, practice disjoint.”Coach 13M

elucidated the impact that the CPD opportunities had on their

relationship with stress:

Being able to see the world from other people’s perceptions

::: the more that you can do that to put things into perspective,

to get that shared understanding that other people have the

same challenges, see you have the same stresses. It is normal.

Community of Practice

The coaches in this study appeared to place importance on the

community of practice that surrounded them, with 11 of the 13

coaches citing the involvement from professional practitioners like

psychologists and coach developers in their support network.

Coach 10F summarized this dynamic: “We have got a really

good relationship and I trust him and I can open up to him so

the relationship is already there I think.”The role of family and

friends was also viewed as very important: “I can see how valuable

my friends and family are that you are keeping those people

central”(Coach 1M).

The role of mentors, both informal and formal, was also core to

the coaches’development, and a mentor was a conﬁdant in times of

stress. Coach 13M highlighted that “The use of mentors through

your life as a coach to help you sense make, conceptualize and then

to put that into your context is key.”This was exempliﬁed by Coach

10F: “The mentor, through the UK Sport programme, he is pretty

much great, he opened my eyes and I started to be more aware of

things which at the time of going through it I wasn’t aware.”

The nuances of the support network were varied and very

context speciﬁc, as Coach 13M demonstrated: “Because I have got

two hats, I have got my leadership hat and I have got my coach hat

so I am working with two different people. So I am working with a

different person on my coaching and different person with my

leadership.”Coach 6M spoke about the importance of having

someone objectively monitoring your behaviours and stress levels:

You need to ﬁnd a way to monitor stress. Maybe have

someone around you that will tell you if they think you are

stressed or short of energy or run down. You need to learn

what your reactions to stress are and be mindful of them.

As a ﬁnal point, Coach 1M provided a good example of how

the support of friends and family was crucial to personal and role

fulﬁlment: “I guess I can see how valuable my friends and family

are in helping me pursue my own goals, whilst at the same time

giving me the break away from the pressure of my work and

keeping me grounded.”

Recovery

Recognizing the stress of their role, many of the coaches in this

study offered insight into their recovery strategies, as highlighted

by the data themes of exercise, social activities, family time,

medical professionals, or adopting tools to aid mental health.

Primarily amongst these was the use of exercise, which ranged

from “I like walking in the Scottish hills”(Coach 8F) to “Igo

cycling a lot. That is my main de-stressor actually”(Coach 10F).

Similarly, Coach 13M gave some insight as to how they used

exercise to process their thoughts:

I have always used exercise. So it was a mixture of gym and

cardio type stuff. Where I just go for a run and for the ﬁrst 30–

40 minutes I would be making sense, verbalizing, self-talking,

conceptualizing, working through the issue and by 30-40

minutes I would almost resolved it in my head and was

like ah right I am in a good place.

In terms of recovery, the coaches provided a broad range of

activities, including yoga, home renovations, music, and reading.

However, some coaches made time for social time to aid their

recovery, ranging from going to the pub (Coaches 1M, 3M, and

9F), going to the cinema (Coaches 1M and 2M), and going to watch

football matches (Coaches 3M and 4F). Many of the coaches

highlighted the importance of family time as the main source of

grounding or taking their mind off the job: “I always, when I am

here, spend a lot of time with them because I understand that there

are periods of time when I am away from home”(Coach 12M).

Coach 6M offered the following: “I have got a son, he makes it

quite easy to turn off because a two year old does not understand I

have just got to send this email without him wanting to do stuff.”

In addressing the more serious implications of stress, a couple

of coaches turned to medical professionals and psychologists to aid

their recovery: “I had to have some time off and lots of help from

my GP and that sort of thing. That sort of then helped me get on top

of that because I had clearly been doing too much”(Coach 1M).

Coach 10F provided another example of the use of medical

support: “I suffered from post-natal depression and when that

kind of depression and anxiety resurfaced so then I had to go

back to the GP, medication and Cognitive Behavioural Therapy

[CBT] to manage any irrational thoughts.”

Along with the likes of CBT, the coaches interviewed have

developed a number of tools that they used to mitigate the impact of

stress in their role. Coach 1 highlighted the importance of a good

work–life balance: “Work life balance is out and out number one!”

This outlook was supported by Coach 12M, who offered this

strategy: “I have started turning my phone off after 6 so that I

am not constantly checking WhatsApp or emails.”Coach 13M

offered, “When I am home I make sure that we plan activities with

the kids to make up for the times I am not around.”Another tool

discussed by several coaches was developing a clear philosophy

and sense of perspective, as highlighted by Coach 6M:

Being really clear on what your purpose is and what you want

to achieve out of it because that then kind of gives you that’s

what I am heading towards so that is where my energy goes

and you are not getting pulled in different directions.

Discussion

The aim of this study was to explore how Olympic and Paralympic

coaches appraised stress as they prepared their teams or athletes for

the 2020 Olympic and Paralympic Games in Tokyo. Importantly,

our ﬁndings highlight that coaches are required to deal with a broad

range of psychological, physical, and emotional challenges

8LOFTUS ET AL.

(Ahead of Print)

(Mallett, 2011). Often, these challenges seem to exist in potentially

contradictory paradigms, for example, the athletes being the pri-

mary source of stress but at the same time stating that the athletes’

needs are more important than the needs of the coach (Coaches 1M,

8F, and 9F). However, our ﬁndings provide novel insights into four

key areas by (a) identifying how coaches appraise stress;

(b) examining how the appraisals of stress are fuelled by factors

like self-doubt, perfectionism, and imposter syndrome (IS);

and (d) the role that coach education plays in preparing coaches to

deal with the stress of the role.

A number of the coaches interviewed in the current study

framed stress as a positive inﬂuence in terms of focusing attention

and speeding up the decision-making process (Coaches 3M, 5M,

7M, and 13M). Consequently, the acknowledgement that stress is

part of the job and embracing the somatic and psychological effects

(Coach 5M) reframes the idea that stress is largely viewed as

negative in coaching (Norris et al., 2017). This could be construed

as a “coping”mechanism, highlighting those incidences of stress

having a positive impact on performance (Didymus, 2016). This

positive view of stress may go a long way to explaining why the

elite coaches in the current study exhibited high levels of motiva-

tion and self-determination and low levels of burnout (Bentzen

et al., 2017). Despite most of the coaches interviewed in the current

study raising a number of negative stressors associated with their

job (e.g., time away from home, job security, anxiety, and self-

doubt), they remained highly motivated and were looking forward

to the opportunity to be part of the Olympics and Paralympics.

With this in mind, a potential mechanism explaining the high

levels of motivation of elite Olympic and Paralympic coaches in the

current study was the coach–athlete relationship. Many coaches

prioritized the athlete over their own needs (e.g., making them-

selves available 24/7, Coaches 1M, 8F, 10F, and 13M). Despite

this, 76 different raw data units pertaining to largely negative

examples of the coach–athlete relationship were identiﬁed, these

being perceived lack of control, poor communication, self-presen-

tation, vulnerability, loyalty, and entrapment, which aligns with

previous work by Olusoga and Kenttä (2017).

Lara-Bercial and Mallett (2016) highlighted that elite coaches

seem to be predisposed to living on the “knife-edge”of belief in

their own ability whilst simultaneously doubting whether they are

good enough to ever win again. Indeed, several of the coaches

interviewed for this study seemed to present symptoms of self-

doubt (Coaches 1M, 3M, 6M, 9F, and 10F); insecurity (Coaches

1M, 8F, 9F, and 10F); and IS (Coaches 3M, 4F, 9F, and 12M).

Symptoms of IS can manifest as anxiety, self-deprecation, or an

irrational fear of failure in light of previous success and perfec-

tionism (Bernard et al., 2002). This will see coaches adopt a lone

ﬁghter strategy (Olusoga & Kenttä, 2017), which can lead to

impatience, inability to delegate, inability to recognize perfor-

mance constraints, and identifying success or failure with winning

or losing competitive situations (Altfeld et al., 2018). Similarly,

perfectionism is moderated by various factors, such as anxiety, goal

orientation, fear of failure, self-esteem, performance success, self-

presentational concerns, and coping strategies (Flett & Hewitt,

2005;Schaffran et al., 2016). In a profession like coaching, where

there are high consequences for winning and losing or a risk of

losing one’s job, it is not surprising that coaches exhibit some of

these traits. Interestingly, this study suggests that these coaches

have developed a number of strategies (e.g., awareness of how

they communicate verbally and nonverbally to athletes) (Coaches

5M and 10F) or depth of planning to maintain control of their

situation (Coaches 12M and 13M), linked to self-presentation that

hides these insecurities. This is aligned to Flett and Hewitt’s(2005)

work on perfectionism and involves striving to create a public

image of ﬂawlessness, either by highlighting one’s success

(i.e., perfectionistic self-promotion) or by minimizing one’s mis-

takes (i.e., nondisplay or nondisclosure of imperfections). These

characteristics are often underpinned by setting exceedingly high,

perhaps unrealistic, standards for performance, accompanied by

tendencies for overly critical self-evaluations (Stoeber, 2015).

Although causation does not mean correlation, in unearthing

this phenomenon in a number of coaches, it would, therefore,

be worth future investigation as to how stress and perfectionism

interact in terms of coaching performance.

The counterpoint to the negative appraisals of stress came from

coaches who demonstrated high levels of self-determination and

behaviours aligned with Bentzen et al. (2017), who posited that

coaches with higher levels of motivation and self-determination

were less likely to suffer from stress. Self-determination within the

workplace links to the job demand–control model developed by

Theorell et al. (1990), which describes working conditions wherein

excessively high demands, in combination with low control and

weak support, create stress responses and tension that, over time,

might lead to psychological or physical health problems.

A key aim of this exploratory study was to gain insights into

how well elite coaches have been able to develop strategies utilized

to mitigate the stress of their role. It is apparent from the data that

many of the coaches interviewed struggled to disengage from the

coaching process. Some coaches also highlighted the fact that even

during family time, they continued to think about coaching.

Furthermore, sleep patterns being disturbed was a frequent occur-

rence, and in at least two examples, coaches developed more severe

conditions directly linked to the stress of their job. Schaffran et al.

(2016) went on to suggest that intervention programmes, which are

utilized from workplace research, do not exist with regard to

coaches, yet there are a number of examples that could transfer

into the coaching realm, for example, CBT, psychotherapy, coun-

selling, adaptive skill training, communication skills training,

social support, relaxation exercises, or recreational music making

(Awa et al., 2010;Potts et al., 2021).

Although these potential mental recovery strategies appear to

have positive effects, the coaches in this study supplemented these

approaches in a number of ways. The use of physical activity, a

sense of perspective and positive outlook, and support networks

were all prevalent in this study with physical activity being the

number one stress release mechanism cited by the coaches inter-

viewed. With consideration of the job demand–control model

(Theorell et al., 1990), it would also be worth considering a longer

time frame of rest (e.g., rest days, off-season periods) or “switching

off.”An effective approach to this could incorporate a change of

focus onto other domains (e.g., family, social life) outside of their

own sporting context (Loch et al., 2020). As this study was

conducted in the midst of the pandemic, coaches were forced

into having a break from their preparations for the Olympics and

Paralympics and, as a result, addressed some of the potential work–

life balance issues that would exist in an Olympic and Paralympic

year. The notion of changing domains is interesting as work–home

interference is a process in which conﬂict could arise as a result of

roles that affect time based in one domain (e.g., work) and that are

incompatible with fulﬁlling roles in the other domain (e.g., family:

Bakker et al., 2004). Clearly, this deﬁnition transfers into the realm

of coaching where coaches are often expected to put in long hours

or be on the road for extended periods of time. Furthermore, Lara-

STRESS AND COACH DEVELOPMENT 9

(Ahead of Print)

Bercial and Mallett (2016) highlighted how much coaches paid

attention to, or at least attempted to, maintain a relative work–life

balance and ensured that their physical and mental health, along-

side their personal relationships, were maintained. This study

highlighted the importance of a positive work–life balance, par-

ticularly in the midst of the pandemic where the boundaries

between domains were further blurred due to lockdowns. So far,

this section has focussed upon individual ownership and responsi-

bility of mitigating the impact of stress on performance and

welfare. However, there has to be some examination of the role

that NGBs play in creating an environment wherein coaches often

report that perceived lack of control over things like resources,

equipment, funding, how programmes are run, time away from

home, and their future career prospects causes them considerable

stress (Kilo & Hassmén, 2016). When you then consider the

“politicization of sport,”streamlining of funding policy, and the

“playing to win”mentality that exists within sports policy (Grix &

Carmichael, 2012), all of which exist outside the realm of control of

the coach, NGBs need to do much more to support coaches by

investing in coaches’well-being (Fletcher & Scott, 2010). Histori-

cally, it has been assumed that coaches have all the answers, and

they are, therefore, left without the same resources that athletes are

afforded (Rynne et al., 2017). This point becomes more important

when you consider that coaches’appraisals of organizational

stressors are going to have implications on their well-being, coping

strategies, and performance (Woodman & Hardy, 2001).

By drawing on some of the insights gained from the current study,

it is worth discussing the implications for coach education moving

forward. The professional standard frameworks (International Council

for Coach Education [ICCE] and Chartered Institute for the Manage-

ment of Sport and Physical Activity [CIMSPA]) have subsequently

raised important questions around the effectiveness of how coaches are

engaged and developed at all levels. Indeed, the demise of the UK

Coaching Certiﬁcate began when The Coaching Plan for England :::

? (2018) highlighted a number of recommendations with regard to the

UK Coaching Certiﬁcate, which is deemed to no longer reﬂect the core

needs of coaching. One of the signiﬁcant gaps in coach education not

addressed by The Coaching Plan for England ::: ? (2018) is that of

mental health and the impact of stress on the performance of coaches.

This point is echoed by a number of coaches in this study, who stated

they had received no support or information around stress and mental

health through formal educational or CPD channels.

Although the coaches in this study developed their own coping

strategies based upon their context, experiences, and community of

practice wherein there is a shared interest, passion, commitment,

and competency base (Stewart, 2012), many coaches may not have

the skills to recognize stress and how it affects their behaviour.

There is now a move to develop coaches with behaviours, values,

and attitudes, the so-called “soft”coaching skills like empathy

(Coaches 3M and 9F), inclusion (Coach 8F), mental health, and

well-being (Coach 7M), within their own context, as a priority

(Sport England, 2018). With these points in mind, coupled with the

lack of clarity in explaining how effective learning happens for

practitioners from a variety of contexts (North, 2010;Stodter &

Cushion, 2016), a large proportion of coaches gain their knowledge

and practice skill sets not through coach education but from

personal interpretations of previous experiences (Cushion et al.,

2003). A move to a context-speciﬁc, value-based approach in

coach education may help address the lack of clarity on how coach

education and CPD should be structured and supported (Grifﬁths

et al., 2018). At the same time, this approach could help address the

levels of stress that coaches experience in the elite arena (Didymus,

2016) by affording them the necessary training and resources to

deal with stress at an elite level.

A potentially critical point raised by the coaches in this study

was the impact of mentors and coach developers in developing the

community of practice and being a sounding board for dealing with

the various stressors encountered on a day-to-day basis. The

relationship with a mentor, coupled with the reliance on their

coach developer as a support mechanism as well as part of the

coach community of practice, has had a big inﬂuence on coaching

behaviour and performance (North et al., 2020). Many performance

programmes globally have utilized coach developers. They play an

important supporting role for the coaches by facilitating the

appropriate mix between informal, nonformal, and formal learning

as well as providing one-to-one support, mentoring, and a “buffer”

against the isolation that many coaches feel (North, 2010). Many

coaches from North’s(2010) study experienced isolation and had

negative experiences of formal coach educational settings. This

could be in terms of the consistency and quality of delivery and a

perceived lack of support from coach educators (Stoszkowski &

Collins, 2012), meaning that NGBs are not utilizing mentoring

schemes, which could be a potentially positive tool in supporting

their elite coaches. Dohme et al. (2019) highlighted the importance

of the coach developer in engaging the coach with long-term

learning by being available, approachable, and supportive and

creating a sense of belonging. Aligned to this, this study provided

some insight into the dynamic of mentoring and the use of

communities of practice in mitigating the impact of stress. The

formal mentors or coach developers accessed by the coaches in this

study offered advice or guidance about the impact of stress on

coaching welfare and performance. There were also informal

structures presented, like “buddy systems”and “critical friends”

who were empowered/trusted to be candid about how stress was

manifesting itself and impacting on coaching behaviours. Based

upon the discussions with the coaches in this study and the existing

literature around the role of the coach developer, it seems to be a

trend that coach developers, or, indeed, communities of practice,

are having to ﬁll the gap between the lack of suitable, context-

speciﬁc coach education and the support network that exists for

elite-level coaches (Dohme et al., 2019;North et al., 2020;Stodter

& Cushion, 2016). These support mechanisms become all the more

important when you are considering the recognition of stress within

the elite sphere and the ability to develop the skills to mitigate the

impact of stress in a context-speciﬁc, rather than generic, manner.

Looking at the speciﬁc context of supporting and developing

female elite coaches, Norman (2012) called for more equity to

elevate female coaches and leaders. This point becomes especially

important when you consider research by Kenttä et al. (2020)

wherein they stated that women have to adopt male stereotypes to

survive in the performance ﬁeld. In addition, Kraft et al. (2020)

have proposed women-only training programmes to tackle barriers

for women coaches. These include the lack of organizational

support and access to training and development opportunities

and the lack of female role models for networking and mentoring

support. However, despite only providing a small sample size, the

female coaches interviewed in this study all reported good access to

support via coach developers and UK Sport-funded CPD and

development opportunities. It is also encouraging to see coaches

(e.g., Coach 9F in the current study) recognize the lack of female

coaches and offer to provide mentorship and act as a positive role

model to female athletes and potential coaches in their charge. This

is aligned to Norman’s(2012) assertion that a ﬁrst step in the

empowerment of women is to enable them to become national

10 LOFTUS ET AL.

(Ahead of Print)

coaches, making it clear that coaching is a valued, worthwhile, and

accessible profession for women, thus increasing the visibility of

existing high-performance female coaches as role models. This sort

of approach might go a long way to mitigating the increased

isolation that some female coaches (e.g., Coach 10F in the current

study) feel in spite of having access to support mechanisms. This

may be due to their predisposition to prioritize relationships,

increased sense of guilt around balancing career and home life,

emotional exhaustion, and anxiety (Potts et al., 2021). Certainly,

one of the female coaches who took part in this study demonstrated

high levels of guilt around leaving her family at home for extended

periods of time. Others discussed heightened anxiety around the

potential negative interactions with their athletes. The task is, then,

for coach education (both formal and informal) to prepare coaches

for this eventuality rather than trying to deal with the fallout

retrospectively.

Limitations and Future Research

In part, as a consequence of the limitations (i.e., context, time

speciﬁcity leading to a delayed game), there are two methodologi-

cal limitations worth considering within this study. First, the

coaches interviewed provided one-off, stand-alone accounts that

could only provide a snapshot into their world. This could lead to a

lack of contextual considerations, such as socioeconomic statuses

of the sports and the expectations on them to deliver medals to

maintain funding (Bostock & Breese, 2021), which could inﬂuence

the outcome of our ﬁndings. Consequently, future research could

consider adopting a critical realist lens that would allow for the

consideration of social structures, biases (both conscious and

unconscious), and institutional norms (Byers et al., 2021). The

use of critical realism could lead to a better understanding of the

role that NGBs play in creating a culture wherein coaches are

expected to operate and thrive in an environment that is unsustain-

able in terms of demands on time, energy, and resources. Another

limitation is related to the female participants as the ﬁndings are

based upon a small cohort and do not address whether or not stress

and lack of education and support have a part to play in this dearth

of female coaches at an elite level (Norman et al., 2018). Finally, in

terms of future research, the issues raised around IS were not

explicit in the aims and objectives of this study, and as such, the

link between perfectionism and stress within coaches needs further

consideration.

Conclusions

In conclusion, the current study provides novel and original in-

sights into how stress manifests in Olympic and Paralympic

coaches and discusses the various coping mechanisms commonly

used to mitigate the impact of stress on their performance. Speciﬁ-

cally, we have identiﬁed that although elite coaches face a broad

range of psychological, physical, and emotional challenges, their

appraisals are incredibly individualized and context speciﬁc. As

such, the way elite coaches frame stress can be a positive mecha-

nism for improving focus and decision making and could have an

impact on the way we associate stress as a negative and something

that needs to be reduced at all times. NGBs and coach educators

need to be cognisant of the context-speciﬁc stress that elite coaches

are under and provide them with the same resources and support

that are available to the athletes operating in this space.

The second novel ﬁnding was around the issue of IS, perfec-

tionism, and self-doubt, all of which help fuel negative appraisals

of stress. As such, it is vital that coaches develop, and are supported

to develop, higher levels of self-determinism to counteract the

high demands of the role. Ultimately, this could also help address

a signiﬁcant source of strain, which was the potential for the

breakdown of the coach–athlete relationship. There has been

very limited research done in relation to IS and stress appraisals,

and this would, therefore, merit further investigation.

Third, the coaches in this study demonstrated that a strong

exercise regimen in conjunction with high levels of self-determina-

tion, motivation, and an ability to manage a good work–life balance

were all identiﬁed as important in terms of building strong coping

mechanisms for the demands of coaching at an Olympic and

Paralympic level. It would, therefore, be recommended that a coher-

ent educational strategy is developed that not only reﬂects the needs

and context of coaches at all levels but also engages funding agencies

and NGBs to understand stress better and appraise the impact of

positive and negative stress on performance and long-term welfare.

Building upon effective coping strategies comes the importance

of effective communities of practice wherein mentors and coach

developers help to support elite coaches. Within the realm of Olympic

and Paralympic coaching, both coach developers and mentors appear

to have a signiﬁcant importance in ﬁllingthegapfromcoach

education. This point could be magniﬁed when it comes to female

coaches. Although the female coaches in this study appeared to be

well supported in terms of access to mentors, CPD, and coach

developers, generally speaking, the existing research suggests that

there is a gap between formal coach education dealing with complex

issues around mental health, dealing with stress, and the increased

sense of responsibility and isolation that female coaches may experi-

ence (e.g., Coach 10F; Norman et al., 2018;Norris et al., 2020). As

such, there is a need to explore how coach education can be evolved to

address these gaps in the knowledge base around stress by tackling it

proactively rather than retrospectively and including some of the tools

identiﬁed in this paper.

Author Biographies

Simon Loftus is a lecturer in sports coaching at Kingston University in the

School of Life Science, Pharmacy and Chemistry. He is a DPhil candidate

at the University of Central Lancashire with a focus on the development

and welfare of sports coaches.

Robin Taylor is an Assistant Professor in Elite Performance in the School

of Health & Human Performance at Dublin City University. His research has

focused on the role of family in supporting athletes develop within a talent

development environment.

David Grecic is the Professor of Sport and Physical Education in the

School of Sport and Health Sciences at the University of Central Lanca-

shire. His research spans all areas of talent development and learning with

a particular focus on the coach education system and its impact on

maximising performance in sports.

Damian J. Harper is a lecturer in coaching and performance based

within the Institute of Coaching and Performance (ICaP) at the University

of Central Lancashire. He is an accredited sport and exercise scientist and

strength and conditioning coach with research interests in athlete devel-

opment, coaching and human movement sciences.

References

Albrecht, K. (2010). Stress and the manager. Simon and Schuster.

Aldwin, C.M. (2009). Stress, coping, and development: An integrative

perspective. Guilford Press.

STRESS AND COACH DEVELOPMENT 11

(Ahead of Print)

Altfeld, S., Schaffran, P., Kleinert, J., & Kellmann, M. (2018). Minimising

the risk of coach burnout: From research to practice. International

Sport Coaching Journal, 5(1), 71–78. https://doi.org/10.1123/iscj.

2017-0033

Awa, W.L., Plaumann, M., & Walter, U. (2010). Burnout prevention: A

review of intervention programs. Patient Education and Counseling,

78(2), 184–190. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pec.2009.04.008

Bakker, A.B., Demerouti, E., & Verbeke, W. (2004). Using the job

demands‐resources model to predict burnout and performance.

Human Resource Management, 43(1), 83–104. https://doi.org/10.

1002/hrm.20004

Bentzen, M., Lemyre, N., & Kenttä, G. (2017). A comparison of high-

performance football coaches experiencing high- versus low-burnout

symptoms across a season of play: Quality of motivation and recovery

matters. International Sport Coaching Journal, 4(2), 133–146.

https://doi.org/10.1123/iscj.2016-0045

Bentzen, M., Lemyre, P.N., & Kenttä, G. (2015). The process of

burnout among professional sport coaches through the lens of

self-determination theory: A qualitative approach. Sports Coach-

ing Review, 3(2), 101–116. https://doi.org/10.1080/21640629.

2015.1035050

Bernard, N.S., Dollinger, S.J., & Ramaniah, N.V. (2002). Applying the big

ﬁve personality factors to the impostor phenomenon. Journal of

Personality Assessment, 78(2), 321–333. https://doi.org/10.1207/

S15327752JPA7802_07

Blascovich, J., & Mendes, W.B. (2000). Challenge and threat appraisals:

The role of affective cues. In J.P. Forgas (Ed.), Feeling and thinking:

The role of affect in social cognition (pp. 59–82). Cambridge

University Press.

Bostock, J., & Breese, R. (2021). Theorising organisational resilience for

sport management research and practice. Managing Sport and Lei-

sure, 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1080/23750472.2021.1930113

Bowes, I., & Jones, R.L. (2006). Working at the edge of chaos:

Understanding coaching as a complex, interpersonal system. The

Sport Psychologist, 20(2), 235–245. https://doi.org/10.1123/tsp.20.

2.235

Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2012). Thematic analysis. In H. Cooper,

P.M. Camic, D.L. Long, A.T. Panter, D. Rindskopf, & K.J.

Sher (Eds.), APA handbook of research methods in psychology,

Vol. 2: Research designs: Quantitative, qualitative, neuropsycholog-

ical, and biological (pp. 57–71). American Psychological

Association.

Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2018). Reﬂecting on reﬂexive thematic analysis.

Qualitative Research in Sport, Exercise and Health, 11(4), 589–597.

https://doi.org/10.1080/2159676X.2019.1628806

Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2019). Thematic analysis. In P. Liamputtong (Eds.),

Handbook of research methods in health social sciences,(pp.843

–860).

Springer.

Brinkmann, S., & Kvale, S. (2008). Ethics in qualitative psychological

research. In C. Willig & W. Stainton-Rogers (Eds.), The Sage

handbook of qualitative research in psychology (vol. 24, pp. 263–

279). SAGE Publishing.

Byers, T., Gormley, K.-L., Winand, M., Anagnostopoulos, C., Richard, R.,

& Digennaro, S. (2021). COVID-19 impacts on sport governance and

management: A global, critical realist perspective. Managing Sport

and Leisure, 27(1–2), 99–107. https://doi.org/10.1080/23750472.

2020.1867002

Calvin, M. (2015). Living on the volcano. Century.

Collins, D., & Cruickshank, A. (2012). ‘Multi-directional management’:

Exploring the challenges of performance in the world class pro-

gramme environment. Reﬂective Practice, 13(3), 455–469. https://

doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1080/14623943.2012.670630

Collins, D., & MacNamara, Á. (2012). The rocky road to the top. Sports

Medicine, 42(11), 907–914. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1007/

BF03262302

Cushion, C., Armour, K.M., & Jones, R.L. (2003). Coach education and

continuing professional development: Experience and learning to

coach. Quest, 55(3), 215–230. https://doi.org/10.1080/00336297.

2003.10491800

Didymus, F.F. (2016). Olympic and international level sports coaches’

experiences of stressors, appraisals, and coping. Qualitative Research

in Sport, Exercise and Health, 9(2), 214–232. https://doi.org/10.

1080/2159676x.2016.1261364

Dixon, M., & Turner, M.J. (2018). Stress appraisals of UK soccer academy

coaches: An interpretative phenomenological analysis. Qualitative

Research in Sport, Exercise and Health, 10(5), 620–634. https://doi.

org/10.1080/2159676X.2018.1464055

Dohme, L.C., Rankin-Wright, A.J., & Lara-Bercial, S. (2019). Beyond

knowledge transfer: The role of coach developers as motivators for

lifelong learning. International Sport Coaching Journal, 6(3), 317–

328. https://doi.org/10.1123/iscj.2019-0034

Fedyk, M., & Xu, F. (2018). The epistemology of rational constructivism.

Review of Philosophy and Psychology, 9(2), 343–362. https://doi.org/

10.1007/s13164-017-0372-1

Fletcher, D., & Scott, M. (2010). Psychological stress in sports coaches: A

review of concepts, research, and practice. Journal of Sports Science,

28(2), 127–137. https://doi.org/10.1080/02640410903406208

Flett, G.L., & Hewitt, P.L. (2005). The perils of perfectionism in sports and

exercise. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 14(1), 14–18.

https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0963-7214.2005.00326.x

Frey, M. (2007). College coaches’experiences with stress—“Problem

solvers”have problems, too. The Sport Psychologist, 21(1), 38–57.

https://doi.org/10.1123/tsp.21.1.38

Grifﬁths, M.A., Armour, K.M., & Cushion, C.J. (2018). ‘Trying to get our

message across’: Successes and challenges in an evidence-based

professional development programme for sport coaches. Sport, Edu-

cation and Society, 23(3), 283–295. https://doi.org/10.1080/

13573322.2016.1182014

Grix, J., & Carmichael, F. (2012). Why do governments invest in elite

sport? A polemic. International Journal of Sport Policy and Politics,

4(1), 73–90. https://doi.org/10.1080/19406940.2011.627358

Gustafsson, H., Sagar, S.S., & Stenling, A. (2017). Fear of failure,

psychological stress, and burnout among adolescent athletes compet-

ing in high level sport. Scandinavian Journal of Medicine & Science

in Sports, 27(12), 2091–2102. https://doi.org/10.1111/sms.12797

Kallio, H., Pietilä, A.M., Johnson, M., & Kangasniemi, M. (2016).

Systematic methodological review: Developing a framework for a

qualitative semi‐structured interview guide. Journal of Advanced

Nursing, 72(12), 2954–2965. https://doi.org/10.1111/jan.13031

Kenttä, G., Bentzen, M., Dieffenbach, K., & Olusoga, P. (2020). Chal-

lenges experienced by women high-performance coaches: Sustain-

ability in the profession. International Sport Coaching Journal, 7(2),

200–208. https://doi.org/10.1123/iscj.2019-0029

Kilo, R.A., & Hassmén, P. (2016). Burnout and turnover intentions in

Australian coaches as related to organisational support and perceived

control. International Journal of Sports Science & Coaching, 11(2),

151–161. https://doi.org/10.1177/1747954116636710

Kraft, E., Culver, D.M., & Din, C. (2020). Exploring a women-only training

program for coach developers. Women in Sport and Physical Activity

Journal, 28(2), 173–179. https://doi.org/10.1123/wspaj.2019-0047

Lara-Bercial, S., & Mallett, C.J. (2016). The practices and developmental

pathways of professional and Olympic serial winning coaches.

International Sport Coaching Journal, 3(3), 221–239. https://doi.

org/https://doi.org/10.1123/iscj.2016-0083

12 LOFTUS ET AL.

(Ahead of Print)

Lincon, Y.S., & Guba, E.G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Sage.

Loch, F., Berge, A.H.Z., Kölling, S., & Kellmann, M. (2020). 21 stress

states, mental fatigue, and the concept of mental recovery in sports. In

M. Kellmann & J. Beckmann (Eds.), Feelings in sport: Theory,

research, and practical implications for performance and well-being.

Routledge.

Lyle, J. (1999). Coaching philosophy and coaching behaviour. In N. Cross

& J. Lyle (Eds.), The coaching process: Principles and practice for

sport (pp. 25–46). Butterworth-Heinman.

Mallett, C. (2011). Quality coaching, learning and coach development.

Japanese Journal of Sport Education Studies, 22(2), 51–62. https://

doi.org/10.7219/jjses.30.2_51

Newcomer, K.E., Hatry, H.P., & Wholey, J.S. (2015). Conducting semi-

structured interviews. In J. Wholey, H. Hatry, & K. Newcomer (Eds.),

Handbook of practical program evaluation (pp. 492–505). Jossey-

Bass.

Norman, L. (2012). Developing female coaches: Strategies from women

themselves. Asia-Paciﬁc Journal of Health, Sport and Physical Educa-

tion, 3(3), 227–238. https://doi.org/10.1080/18377122.2012.721725

Norman, L., Rankin-Wright, A.J., & Allison, W. (2018). “It’s a concrete

ceiling; It’s not even glass”: Understanding tenets of organizational

culture that supports the progression of women as coaches and coach

developers. Journal of Sport and Social Issues, 42(5), 393–414.

https://doi.org/10.1177/0193723518790086

Norris, A.L., Didymus, F.F., & Kaiseler, M. (2020). Understanding social

networks and social support resources with sports coaches. Psychol-

ogy of Sport and Exercise, 48, Article 101665. https://doi.org/10.

1016/j.psychsport.2020.101665

Norris, L.A., Didymus, F.F., & Kaiseler, M. (2017). Stressors, coping, and

well-being among sports coaches: A systematic review. Psychology

of Sport and Exercise, 33, 93–112. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.

psychsport.2017.08.005

North, J. (2010). Using ‘coach developers’to facilitate coach learning and

development: Qualitative evidence from the UK. International Jour-

nal of Sports Science & Coaching, 5(2), 239–256. https://doi.org/10.

1260/1747-9541.5.2.239

North, J., Piggott, D., Rankin-Wright, A., & Ashford, M. (2020). An

empirical examination of U.K. coaches’issues and problems, and

their support and advice networks. International Sport Coaching

Journal, 7(3), 283–294. https://doi.org/10.1123/iscj.2019-0049

Olusoga, P., Butt, J., Hays, K., & Maynard, I. (2009). Stress in elite sports

coaching: Identifying stressors. Journal of Applied Sport Psychology,

21(4), 442–459. https://doi.org/10.1080/10413200903222921

Olusoga, P., Butt, J., Maynard, I., & Hays, K. (2010). Stress and coping: A

study of world class coaches. Journal of Applied Sport Psychology,

22(3), 274–293. https://doi.org/10.1080/10413201003760968

Olusoga, P., & Kenttä, G. (2017). Desperate to quit: A narrative analysis of

burnout and recovery in high-performance sports coaching. The Sport

Psychologist, 31(3), 237–248. https://doi.org/10.1123/tsp.2016-0010

Potts, A., Didymus, F., & Kaiseler, M. (2021). Psychological stress and

psychological well-being among sports coaches: A meta-synthesis of

the qualitative research evidence. International Review of Sport and

Exercise Psychology, 1–30. https://doi.org/10.1080/1750984X.2021.

1907853

Rynne, S.B., Mallett, C.J., & Rabjohns, M.W. (2017). High performance

coaching: Demands and development. In R. Thelwell, C. Harwood, &

I. Greenlees (Eds.), The psychology of coaching: A contemporary

review (pp. 114–127). Routledge.

Schaffran, P., Altfeld, S., & Kellmann, M. (2016). Burnout bei trainern:

Ein review zu einﬂussfaktoren, diagnostik und interventionen.

Deutsche Zeitschrift für Sportmedizin, 2016(5), 12–125. https://

doi.org/10.5960/dzsm.2016.232

Schinke, R.J., Stambulova, N.B., Si, G., & Moore, Z. (2018). International

society of sport psychology position stand: Athletes’mental health,

performance, and development. International Journal of Sport and

Exercise Psychology, 16(6), 622–639. https://doi.org/10.1080/16121

97X.2017.1295557

Schubring, A., Mayer, J., & Thiel, A. (2019). Drawing careers: The value

of a biographical mapping method in qualitative health research.

International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 18, Article

1609406918809303. https://doi.org/10.1177/1609406918809303

Smith, B., & McGannon, K.R. (2018). Developing rigor in qualitative

research: Problems and opportunities within sport and exercise

psychology. International Review of Sport and Exercise Psychol-

ogy, 11(1), 101–121. https://doi.org/10.1080/1750984X.2017.

1317357

Sport England. (2018). The coaching plan for England :::?[Ebook].

https://sportengland-production-ﬁles.s3.eu-west-2.amazonaws.com/

s3fs-public/coaching-in-an-active-nation-two-years-on.pdf

Stewart, M. (2012). Understanding learning: Theories and critique. In L.

Hunt & D. Chalmers (Eds.), University teaching in focus: A learning-

centred approach (pp. 3–20). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/

9780203079690-1

Stodter, A., & Cushion, C.J. (2016). Effective coach learning and pro-

cesses of coaches’knowledge development: What works? In P.A

Davis (Ed.), The psychology of effective coaching and management

(pp. 35–53). Nova Science Publishers.

Stoeber, J. (2015). How other-oriented perfectionism differs from self-

oriented and socially prescribed perfectionism: Further ﬁndings.

Journal of Psychopathology and Behavioral Assessment, 37(4),

611–623. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10862-015-9485-y

Stoszkowski, J., & Collins, D. (2012). Communities of practice, social

learning and networks: Exploiting the social side of coach develop-

ment. Sport, Education and Society, 19(6), 773–788. https://doi.org/

10.1080/13573322.2012.692671

Thelwell, C.R., Weston, V.J.N., Greenlees, A.I., & Hutchings, N.V.

(2008). Stressors in elite sport: A coach perspective. Journal of

Sports Sciences, 26(9), 905–918. https://doi.org/10.1080/02640410

801885933

Theorell, T., Karasek, R., & Eneroth, P. (1990). Job strain variations in

relation to plasma testosterone ﬂuctuations in working men—A

longitudinal study. Journal of Internal Medicine, 227(1), 31–36.

https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2796.1990.tb00115.x

Thorne, S. (2016). Interpretive description: Qualitative research for

applied practice (pp. 50–53). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/

9781315545196

Tracy, S.J. (2010). Qualitative quality: Eight “big-tent”criteria for excel-

lent qualitative research. Qualitative Inquiry, 16(10), 837–851.

https://doi.org/10.1177/1077800410383121

Woodman, T., & Hardy, L. (2001). A case study of organizational stress in

elite sport. Journal of Applied Sport Psychology, 13(2), 207–238.

https://doi.org/10.1080/104132001753149892

STRESS AND COACH DEVELOPMENT 13

(Ahead of Print)

Exploring developmental factors influencing performance excellence in twice-exceptional Saudi athletes: a case study of Paralympic champions

Article

Full-text available

Apr 2025

Introduction Achieving exceptional performance in sports, particularly among twice-exceptional athletes, is a multifaceted process that remains underexplored. Understanding the developmental pathways that lead to performance excellence is essential for supporting this unique population. Methods This study employed a qualitative case study approach involving three male Paralympic champions (mean age: 33 years). Data were collected using achievement portfolios and in-depth interviews to explore the athletes’ lived experiences and identify influential developmental factors. Results Two distinct developmental stages emerged from the analysis. The first stage, characterized by spontaneous and unstructured motivation, was shaped by psychological and social influences that sparked a general interest in sports. The second stage involved intentional goal setting and structured practice within specialized sports environments. Key factors such as individual growth characteristics and physiological development influenced each stage differently over time. Discussion The findings highlight the complex interplay of personal, psychological, social, and contextual factors in the development of performance excellence in twice-exceptional Paralympic athletes. This research contributes to a deeper understanding of how targeted support and recognition of developmental needs can foster sustained athletic excellence.

“Switching the mind off completely” – Understanding the psychology of rest in coaches

Article

Jul 2023
PSYCHOL SPORT EXERC

Objectives: To better understand the psychology of rest in coaches. Rest appears to be important for coping, recovery, and well-being in coaches, yet there is limited research on and in turn understanding of this concept in this population. Design: A qualitative description study design was employed. Method: 22 NCAA Division I coaches were interviewed about what rest means to them, key barriers to rest in coaching, and strategies employed to obtain rest in the face of these barriers. A codebook thematic analysis was undertaken to examine the analytical generalizability (Smith, 2018) to the coaching context of an extant model of the psychology of rest in athletes (Eccles & Kazmier, 2019). Results: The Eccles-Kazmier model appears to offer some analytical generalizability to the coaching context. Consistent with the model, the process of resting in coaches involves both sleep and resting while awake. Resting while awake involves (a) a break from thinking about work, (b) a break from effortful thinking generally, and (c) engaging in life outside coaching. However, departures from the model were also observed; specifically, unlike for athletes, the wakeful resting process for coaches does not appear to involve assuming control or experiencing variety. Conclusion: The findings advance the current understanding of the constituents of rest in coaches and can inform coach education about how to obtain the rest needed to perform effectively and stay healthy.

Coaching for winning or holistic athlete development, or both? Validation of the two-dimensional Identity of Sport Coaches Scale (2-DISCS)

Article

May 2023

Mariya Yukhymenko

Coaches face the pressures of producing desired sport outcomes for athletes and teams and developing their athletes as holistic individuals. As a result, coaches may invest different amounts of time, passion, and effort in fostering different outcomes for athletes, including winning and holistic development, and thus view themselves as primarily oriented toward winning or holistic athlete development, or both. The purpose of this study was to develop and validate the Two-Dimensional Identity of Sport Coaches Scale (2-DISCS) designed to measure winning-centered and holistic development-centered coaching identities. The scale was developed using the 4Cs framework. Following literature review, an item pool was developed and submitted for content validation. Then, items were tested with collegiate coaches. In Study 1 (N = 946), initial factor structure was examined through confirmatory factor analysis. In Study 2 (N = 380), psychometric properties of the items were further assessed through confirmatory factor analysis. Results confirmed the two-factor structure. Measurement invariance was established across gender, NCAA Division, and position. Overall, results provided evidence of factorial validity, construct validity, and reliability of the scale. The 10-item 2-DISCS is suggested as a reasonable measure of winning-centered and holistic development-centered identity of sport coaches that can be used in future studies and in practice. However, future studies should further examine the validity of the 2-DISCS. Lay summary: Coaches may view themselves primarily oriented towards winning or holistic athlete development, or both. Utilizing the 4Cs framework, here we describe the development and validation of the Two-Dimensional Identity of Sport Coaches Scale (2-DISCS), a 10-item scale designed for coaches to measure winningcentered and holistic development-centered coaching identities.

Exploring a Women-Only Training Program for Coach Developers

Article

Full-text available

Jul 2020

The following practice paper introduces an innovative women-only training program for coach developers in a Canadian provincial sport organization. The dearth of women in coaching and sport leadership positions informs the program as a whole and the participant perspectives on what is working, in practice, for them specifically in a way that could support future sport leaders interested in increasing gender equity in their sport organizations and leadership skills in their female leaders. The aims of the coach developer program are two-fold: to promote women in leadership and to create a social learning space for women to connect and support each other in their leadership development. The purpose of this practice paper is to discuss the supports that have enabled the facilitation of this program and to explore the value of a women-only training program. Two women (out of a total of 10) participating in the program and two leads facilitating the program were interviewed for their perspectives. The lessons learned touch on the types of value that were created (immediate, potential, and applied) and the specific supports (micro, meso, and macro) that enabled the facilitation of the program. Finally, the authors discuss additional considerations (e.g., consistent buy-in from the organization is needed) with practical insights in the hopes of inspiring other sport organizations to implement similar initiatives for promoting women in leadership and coaching in sport.

Challenges Experienced by Women High-Performance Coaches: Sustainability in the Profession

Article

Full-text available

May 2020

High-performance (HP) coaching is a demanding profession. The proportion of woman HP coaches is reported to be in the range of 8.4–20%. Mental health concerns in elite sports have recently gained attention, but mainly focusing on athletes. Beyond coach burnout, limited attention has been given to coaches’ mental health. A recent coach burnout review included only one paper that focused exclusively on women. It has been argued that women HP coaches face greater challenges in a male-dominated coaching culture. The purpose of this study was to explore challenges experienced by women HP coaches and their perceived associations with sustainability and mental health. Thirty-seven female HP coaches participated by answering a semistructured, open-ended questionnaire. All responses were analyzed using inductive thematic analysis, which resulted in two general dimensions: challenges of working as women HP coaches and sustainability and well-being as women HP coaches. Overall, results indicate that challenges reported might be common not only for all HP coaches, but also highlight gender-specific elements. Consequently, coach retention and sustainability would benefit from more attention on well-being and mental health among HP coaches.

An Empirical Examination of U.K. Coaches’ Issues and Problems, and Their Support and Advice Networks

Article

Full-text available

Mar 2020

Although there have been increasing calls to recognise the 'voice of the coach' in both policy and research, there has been very little work that has asked the coaches directly: 'what are your main issues and problems?', and 'where do you go for support'? Instead assessments and decisions have been made on these issues by the media, policy-makers, support agencies, governing bodies and researchers with results often reflecting the perspectives and interests of the latter. This paper presents new research with a reasonably representative sample of over 1,000 UK coaches that considers the issues and problems, and support networks, from the perspective of the coaches themselves. The results suggest that coaches experience a wide range of problems but that they can be broken down into 17 main categories with places to play sport (e.g. facilities), problems with player-coach interaction, and problems with coaching knowledge and skills, being most frequently mentioned. In terms of support networks, the coaches tended to look 'closest to home': to themselves, their family/friends, participants and parents, and local coaching networks. Governing bodies and coaching associations tend to be less well used. Some implications for policy and practice are discussed.

Theorising organisational resilience for sport management research and practice

Article

May 2021

Purpose/Rationale Helping individuals and teams achieve their goals by being resilient is an established research field in sport. How sport organisations can be resilient in adversity is comparatively neglected, so the purpose is to provide firm foundations for conceptualising organisational resilience in sport management. Research question “How can organisational resilience best be theorised for sport management research and practice?” Design/Methodology/Approach From a critique of the resilience literature, a new Framework for Organisational Resilience Management (FfORM) is developed, based on the theory of organisational resource conversion and the separation of normative and descriptive levels. The FfORM is applied to sport management contexts, including the resilience of National Governing Bodies of Sport (NGBs) to reductions in UK Sport funding. Results and Findings Organisational resilience is conceptualised as a means to an end, to achieve externally generated goals, emphasising its dynamic, temporal nature. The FfORM illuminates the challenges for NGBs in developing organisational resilience because of trade-offs in the actions they take. Practical implications As well as being an evaluation tool, the FfORM will be of utility to sport organisations addressing the unprecedented challenges arising from COVID-19. Research contribution Development of theory on organisational resilience, for use in both sport and other contexts.

Psychological stress and psychological well-being among sports coaches: a meta-synthesis of the qualitative research evidence

Article

Apr 2021

Approximately 200,000 coaches cease coaching each year in the United Kingdom alone. The reasons for this dropout are not fully understood, but they could be linked to the stressful nature of coaching and the potential for this to impede health and psychological well-being (PWB). The aim of this meta-synthesis is to systematically search for and draw together the qualitative research evidence on coaches’ experiences of stressors, primary appraisals, emotions, coping, and PWB. Using a rigorous and systematic search protocol, 11 studies were identified, assessed for research quality, and synthesized thematically to generate new insight. The findings highlight the plethora of stressors that coaches can experience, the impact of coaches’ appraisals on PWB, and the coping families that coaches can use to foster adaptation. In doing so, the meta-synthesis deepens our understanding of coaches’ stress transactions and their experiences of PWB. There is a significant lack of qualitative research evidence on coaches’ appraisals and PWB. Qualitative and or longitudinal research is warranted to develop knowledge in these areas. Such research should be used to develop interventions that are applicable to different coaching populations (e.g. working parents and part-time coaches) to help minimize stressors, facilitate positive appraisals and emotions, and foster PWB.

COVID-19 impacts on sport governance and management: a global, critical realist perspective COVID-19 impacts on sport governance and management: a global, critical realist perspective

Article

Jan 2021

This commentary considers the impacts of COVID-19 on sport governance and management, given the global threat to sport services and organizations evident as a result of the disease since early 2020. To frame this analysis of the impacts and lessons to be learned, we use a Critical Realist (CR) perspective, which takes a multi-level view of reality and seeks to establish how and why something occurs in reality [Byers, T. (2013). Using critical realism: A new perspective on control of volunteers in sport clubs. European Sport Management Quarterly, 13(1), 5–31. https://doi.org/10.1080/ 16184742.2012.744765]. While the existing commentaries and emerging research on COVID19 have focused on a superficial level of reality (i.e. what stakeholder responses have been), a CR view encourages a more holistic account of what and why something happens. Specifically, this commentary contributes to the discussion of COVID-19 impacts focusing on sport governance, using a philosophy that encourages examination of what is happening in sport organizations, how different stakeholder’s perspectives and assessment of the legitimacy of COVID-19 may reveal underlying social structures and biases that help explain sport administrator’s responses and value systems. We hope this novel perspective on sport governance encourages readers to think of new ways of organizing and governing that is more inclusive of diversity (e.g. race, gender, disability) in sport

Interpretive description: Qualitative research for applied practice, Second edition

Book

Mar 2016

Sally Thorne

The first edition of Interpretive Description established itself as the key resource for novice and intermediate level researchers in applied settings for conducting a qualitative research project with practical outcomes. In the second edition, leading qualitative researcher Sally Thorne retains the clear, straightforward guidance for researchers and students in health, social service, mental health, and related fields. This new edition includes additional material on knowledge synthesis and integration, evidence-based practice, and data analysis. In addition, this book takes the reader through the qualitative research process, from research design through fieldwork, analysis, interpretation, and application of the results; provides numerous examples from a variety of applied fields to show research in action; uses an accessible style and affordable price to be the ideal book for teaching qualitative research in clinical and applied disciplines.

Stress States, Mental Fatigue, and the Concept of Mental Recovery in Sports

Chapter

Sep 2020

In elite sports, physical, mental, and social challenges are constantly increasing and the combination of sport-specific stressors with rigid competition schedules can result in a state of mental fatigue as well as in negative consequences of stress-states (e.g. under-recovery, overtraining syndrome, burnout syndrome). Mental fatigue is described as a psychobiological state caused by prolonged periods of demanding cognitive activity that negatively affects physical and cognitive performance. The role of physical recovery has been well acknowledged in both science and practice, but research should also focus on the effects of mental fatigue and, consequently, the need for mental recovery. Therefore, we introduce the concept of mental recovery and outline potential mental recovery strategies (e.g. psychological-oriented strategies, additional strategies) for rest periods in elite sports as a countermeasure to mental fatigue. Moreover, we focus on sleep as a comprehensive recovery activity, which can also assist in the enhancement of mental recovery. Based on the current knowledge, we summarise applied recommendations of mental recovery, which might open an additional opportunity to optimise systematically the recovery process.

Understanding social networks and social support resources with sports coaches

Article

Feb 2020
PSYCHOL SPORT EXERC

Objectives Research on social support with sports coaches is limited, yet the benefits of social support within other occupations have been widely reported. This study explored sports coaches’ social network structures, the social support resources available to coaches, and the situations in which coaches use social support. Design Cross-sectional. Method Data were collected with male (n = 6) and female (n = 7) British coaches (Mage = 34.20, SD = 13.37; Mexperience = 13.20, SD = 10.41) using semi-structured interviews and interviewee-aided sociograms. Interview data and sociograms were analyzed using abductive thematic analysis and social network analysis to create ego-network diagrams. The ego-network diagrams were created to provide information on the locality and influence of coaches’ social network members. Results The ego-network diagrams highlight that the structure of coaches’ social networks encompasses support from peers, friends, family, and miscellaneous (e.g., media). The diagrams also demonstrate that support from friends tended to be perceived as most influential. The coaches called on their network for appraisal (e.g., affirmation), emotional (e.g., venting), informational (e.g., training), and or instrumental support (e.g., cooking dinner) for a variety of situations, such as training (e.g., drill ideas) and issues with athletes (e.g., venting about a misbehaving player). Conclusion Given the pertinence of coaches’ social networks and resources for performance and psychological well-being, coach education programs should include a focus on the importance of building relationships. Longitudinal research methods are warranted to, for example, explore the dynamic functions of coaches’ social support. This will develop a more comprehensive base from which interventions can be developed.

Beyond Knowledge Transfer: The Role of Coach Developers as Motivators for Lifelong Learning

Article

Sep 2019

Research investigating coach education and development has grown significantly over the past three decades. Most of these efforts have focused on establishing how coaches learn; yet the actual impact of specific coach education and development interventions has received considerably less attention. Moreover, the role of coach developers in facilitating this impact remains largely unknown. To address this knowledge gap, this study used a realist evaluation approach to engage in a detailed exploration of a large-scale, multi-annual coach education and development intervention with high school coaches in the Philippines. Using interviews and focus groups at two different time points with multiple stakeholders, this study established a series of context, mechanism and outcome configurations that provide a nuanced perspective on how coach education and development works. More specifically, this paper offers a novel interpretation of the role of coach developers as ‘motivators for lifelong learning’ established through three key mechanisms: 1) being available, approachable, and supportive; 2) creating a sense of belonging; and 3) raising coaches’ aspirations by increasing their sense of purpose and duty. Practical guidelines for the education of coach developers, as well as future coach education and development programmes are provided.