Sports Psychology Leadership in Sports Peer Review

Write feedback to this classmate discussion:

Hello class and professor, I cannot believe we have already made it to week four! This week’s discussion topic is on leadership in sports. There are several styles of leadership in sports; leader styles and behavior’s that is indicated of friendship, mutual trust, respect, and warmth towards subordinates are best described as relationship motivated, democratic, egalitarian, employee oriented, and transformational. Leadership styles and behaviors that focus on defining the relationship between leader subordinates as well as, establish well defined patterns of organization, channels of communication, and methods of procedures are best described as being task motivated, autocratic, authoritarian, production oriented, and transactional.

Generally, the most used styles of leadership are autocratic, democratic, and holistic. Autocratic leadership is best defined as, my way or the high way. Autocratic leaders make decisions with little to no input from player or players; the leader or coach articulates a vision for what needs to be performed or accomplished by the player(s) and how they are expected to perform. This style of leadership us win-focused and usually involves inflexible training structures. Autocratic leadership works better in team sports rather than individual sports. Studies indicate that female teams respond well to autocratic coaching from a male coach, but less well to the same style from a female coach (Three styles of coaching, 2021). This style of leadership is often more preferred by older athletes, because older athletes have the ability to understand why they are being asked to perform certain tasks at certain times; though youth athletes may require this approach it can be damaging in the long-term for younger athletes to have no input in their training progress and could develop a sense of autonomy in their training, which could impact their attitude toward sports moving forward.

Democratic leadership involves coaches to facilitate decision making and goal setting with allowing input from their athletes, instead of dictating them. This leadership style is athlete-centered, and which the athletes shape their own objectives under a framework outlined by the coach. Democratic leadership provides a lot of autonomy to players and teams, who are active collaborators in their own development, direction, and success. This style is best suited for individual sports, where individual athletes have to take a lot of control over their training style. Young athletes to age 14 often prefer a democratic leadership style and studies also indicate that this style helps early and young adolescents to develop a sense of their own control over training and prepares them for more autocratic coaching later in life (Three styles of coaching, 2021).

Holistic leadership style is also known as laissez-faire coaching. This style of leadership was developed from the theory, that a happy team naturally becomes a successful team. Holistic leadership style involves creating an environment where athletes feel comfortable exploring and pursuing skills development on their own time and in their own way. During this style of coaching, the coach does not act as a central authority, but instead allows the team to set their own agenda. Holistic coaching is best suited for mature athletes who have already developed the creativity and self-awareness to be self-guided; and involves a lot of relationship building as well as the commitment to each player as a whole athlete and person.

I believe that all leadership styles are adjustable and depend on several factors like age of athletes, type of sport, and what kind of team that needs to be coached. Some teams, sports, and ages need more authority, discipline, and motivation. Whereas some sports require athletes to be in control of their own development and direction. I personally do not think there is one leadership style that is more effective than the other, because each sport, team, and or athlete require coaching and leadership styles to suit all situations they will face.

Though if I had to choose which style of leader I would be, I would choose the democratic leadership style. I say this because, too much autocratic leadership use can influence athletes to not want to work with a coach along with begin to refuse and follow instructions; and Laissez-faire leadership style can potentially lead to teams not performing as they may become disorganized and also have an effect of reducing a players’ motivation and determination (Three styles of coaching, 2021).