6 minute read
AUTONOMY SUPPORTIVE COACHING
AUTONOMY-SUPPORTIVE COACHING TO INCREASE ATHLETE MOTIVATION AUTONOMY SUPPORTIVE COACHING
MOTIVATION
Advertisement
BY CORY REBMANN, MS, CSCS
KYLE LEHMAN HS, HEAD POWERLIFTING COACH & STRENGTH AND CONDITIONING COORDINATOR
Self-determination theory (SDT) has been applied extensively in sports research to study the social, emotional, and motivational influences associated with athletes’ well-being. Further research has analyzed how autonomysupportive coaching influences self-determined motivation in athletes. In this article, we will look at how autonomy-supportive coaching increases athletes’ intrinsic and self-determined extrinsic motivation leading to numerous athletic and team benefits.
Self-Determination Theory (SDT) is an empirically based, organismic theory of human behavior and personality development that is primarily focused on the psychological level, and SDT differentiates types of motivation along a continuum from amotivation to intrinsic motivation. Specifically, SDT is concerned with goal pursuit and attainment and how people can satisfy their basic psychological needs as they pursue or attain their valued outcomes. However, SDT argues that these tendencies are not automatic and require supportive conditions to occur. That is, SDT looks at three psychological needs, which they consider essential for understanding the “what” and “why” of goal pursuit. The three psychological needs required for well-being, according to SDT, include competence, relatedness, and autonomy.
Competence concerns the feeling of mastery, which is a sense that one can succeed and grow. The need for competence is best satisfied within an environment that is well-structured with optimal challenges, positive feedback, and opportunities for growth. Relatedness concerns a sense of belonging and connecting, which is conveyed through respect and caring. Finally, autonomy concerns self-ownership and a sense of initiative in one’s actions. It is supported by experiences of interest and value, which are damaged by being controlled through rewards or punishment. However, in any case, the satisfaction of the three basic needs must be met for the healthy development and well-being of all individuals regardless of their culture.
SDT research originally began focusing on intrinsic motivation, which is the expression of the active integrative tendencies in human nature. Intrinsic motivation pertains to activities done for their own sake or their inherent satisfaction, interest, and enjoyment. Thus, intrinsically motivated behaviors are freely engaged out of interest and pleasure without consequence, control, or rewards, and are maintained through the need for autonomy and competence.
Research has shown that rewards undermine people’s intrinsic motivation leading to a decline in behavior or performance below baseline. This research supports the view that an understanding of human motivation requires consideration of motivational processes. Studies support the view that autonomy is essential to intrinsic motivation by showing that events like pressure, threats, rewards, deadlines, or evaluations lead to an undermining of intrinsic motivation.
Furthermore, motivational strategies like rewards and threats undermine autonomy and lead to decreased intrinsic motivation, less creativity, and more inadequate problem-solving skills. Conversely, providing choice and acknowledgment of feelings can enhance the sense of self-initiation, providing fulfillment of autonomy, which results in increased intrinsic motivation and performance outcomes. Additionally, it has been shown that in real-world settings that provided autonomy support, relative to control, was associated with more positive outcomes that included greater intrinsic motivation, increased satisfaction, and enhanced well-being.
AUTONOMY-SUPPORTIVE COACHING
Being autonomy supportive as a coach means taking athletes’ perspectives into account, acknowledging other’s feelings, and providing others with valuable information and opportunities for choice while minimizing the use of pressures, demands, or consequences. In fact, within SDT, primary attention has been given to autonomysupportive and controlling coaching styles. Furthermore, autonomy-supportive coaches place value on self-initiation, encourages choice, and encourages independent problem solving and decision making. Thus, autonomysupport suggests that an athlete is viewed as an individual who deserves self-determination. Conversely, coaches who use controlling behaviors such as pressure to think, feel, or act a certain way undermines an athlete’s need for autonomy. Controlling behaviors use powerassertive techniques that force compliance and not autonomy. Moreover, coaching behaviors that provide structure and involvement in an athlete’s well-being represent essential determinants of athlete’s perceptions of competence and relatedness, which increases intrinsic and selfdetermined extrinsic motivation.
Moreover, autonomy-supportive coaches differ from their controlling counterparts in the type of change-oriented feedback they give. Change oriented feedback indicates that performance is inadequate and that behaviors need to be modified to eventually achieves athletes’ goals. Conversely, promotion-oriented feedback aims at confirming and reinforcing desirable behaviors. While promotion-oriented feedback is more pleasant than change-oriented feedback, research has shown change-oriented feedback is more likely to motivate the athletes because it helps them achieve desired performance outcomes, and it guides the athletes to improved future performances.
Coaches provide autonomysupport in seven ways. These include:
1. Provide as much choice as possible within specific rules and limits. 2. Provide a rationale for tasks, limits, and rules. 3. Inquire about & acknowledge other’s feelings. 4. Allow opportunities to take initiatives and do independent work. 5. Provide non-controlling competence feedback. 6. Avoid overt control, guilt-inducing criticism,
These seven behaviors taken collectively represent an autonomy-supportive coaching style, which has been shown to increase intrinsic and autonomy-driven extrinsic motivation. Additionally, it has been shown that autonomysupportive behaviors relative to controlling behaviors enhance intrinsic motivation and selfdetermined motivation.
AVOIDING CONTROLLING BEHAVIORS
Unfortunately, many behaviors that coaches do have the opportunity to be controlling. These controlling behaviors can hinder an athlete’s autonomy by pressuring them to think or act a certain way. That is, controlling behaviors can cause situations in which failure to behave in a certain way causes a threat to the coach-athlete relationship or the athlete’s self-esteem, which can reduce intrinsic or self-determined extrinsic motivation.
Furthermore, controlling behaviors weakens an athlete’s autonomy, which can reduce their motivation. Also, guilt-inducing or threatening statements can threaten the bond of the coachathlete relationship, which can reduce an athlete’s autonomy, and thus, their intrinsic or self-determined extrinsic motivation. For example, threatening an athlete’s playing time or punishment drills can hinder the coachathlete relationship and decrease motivation. Moreover, athletes who perceive their coaches to be more controlling, less supportive, and more operationalized report lower intrinsic motivation. Also, a controlling environment is created when coaches intimidate athletes through verbal abuse and punishment.
Furthermore, issuing criticism and taskcontinent rewards has also been shown to reduce intrinsic motivation. However, punishments or threats are not the only forms of controlling behaviors that can reduce intrinsic motivation in athletes. Coaches who offer rewards for an athlete’s actions also have been shown to reduce intrinsic and self-determined extrinsic motivation. Specifically, coaches who offer rewards for tasks decrease intrinsic motivation and send a message that the task is not exciting, which can shift an athlete toward extrinsically motivated task completion.
CONCLUSION
Research clearly shows that athletes are more motivated by autonomy-supportive coaches. Research also clearly shows that controlling coaching behaviors hinder athletes’’ motivation and increases deviant and unwanted behaviors. It should be noted that autonomysupportive coaching does not mean that athletes do not have to adhere to expectations and team rules/procedures. Instead, it means, providing as much choice as possible within specific rules and limits; providing a rationale for tasks, limits, and rules; inquiring about and acknowledge other’s feelings, allowing opportunities to take initiatives and do independent work; providing non-controlling competence feedback; avoiding overt control, guilt-inducing criticism, controlling statements and tangible rewards; and preventing ego-involvement from taking place.
Whenever possible, try to use autonomysupportive behaviors with your athletes instead of controlling coaching behaviors and watch your team, culture, and results improve for the better.
