AFM RSS Feed Follow Us on Twitter       
AMERICAN FOOTBALL MONTHLY THE #1 RESOURCE FOR FOOTBALL COACHES
ABOUT |  CONTACT |  ADVERTISE |  HELP  



   User Name    Password 
      Password Help





Article Categories


AFM Magazine

AFM Magazine


Managing Team Dynamics - .COM

by: Larry Wilson
by: Troy Malone
© More from this issue

Click for Printer Friendly Version          

At the end of the day, if the coach isn’t going to manage the team’s internal and external dynamics, then who is?  In today’s non-confrontational society where conflict and upheaval are seen as overly-aggressively and negative actions, a large helping of moral courage is required to effectively manage inner and outer team influences; unfortunately, many coaches refuse to address team dynamics, often to the detriment of all involved.  
Being able to manage team dynamics is a critical leadership competency for all coaches.  Failing to successfully create and maintain a constructive interpersonal exchange atmosphere can ruin, offset, or negate the positive aspects or achievements of any program; regardless of its past successes or promising futures.  Any coach that has been around more than a day knows that they must manage both intra-team and extra-team influences in order to ensure players and parents remain committed to team goals.  Historically, it is from players and parents that coaches face their greatest challenges to maintaining a workable team dynamic.

Parents
Hostile parents can serve as a catalyst to fermenting team conflict.  It’s critical that you address team dynamics with parents up front and ensure they understand that you will be actively engaged in creating good team cohesion.  There are many types of parents and every parent is unique; however, our experience has shown that parents usually can be classified using eight typologies.,  
#1-The Supporter:  The coaches’ best friend.  This is the ultimate type of parent a coach can hope for.  Normally, they are committed to the team and its goals.  This parent has “bought in” to the program and supports the coaches and the program’s end state.  The coach-parent relationship is characterized by solid rapport with coaches and other parents.  As a coach, you may want to leverage supportive parents against a hostile one in order to modify a negative parent’s behavior. 

 
#2-The Emotionally Hijacked Parent: Usually heavily committed to the team and its goals.  Unfortunately, they are unable to control their emotions and engage coaches and/or players in an argumentative fashion during or in the immediate aftermath of the game.  This misplaced emotion is usually driven by a perceived wrong done to their kid or team.  Keep in mind that any time you discuss a player with their parents, the parent is coming from the emotion (not rational) perspective.  You may have to resort to a line such as “Sir/Ma’am, if we aren’t going to discuss this like adults, then we aren’t going to discuss it”. 


#3-The Expert: Very similar to the frustrated coach.  Begins their discussions with the coach by qualifying their expertise level (usually, sounds like “when I was a player in college,etc.); They will most likely give you their entire biography in order to buttress their credibility.  Usually this parent has a different evaluation of his son or daughter than does the coach.  This parent can be recognized as the guy that sits on the sidelines and yells superficial directives to players such as “Choke up on the bat”, “Shoot the ball”, “Bend your knees”, “Get your game face on”, etc.  The Expert can usually seize upon the superficial, but lacks the depth of knowledge required to understand what is actually happening and why. 


#4-The Ambivalent Parent: We have all seen them; the parent that drops their kid off at practice and drives away.  This parent usually isn’t interested in their kid’s performance until the kid does something to draw attention to the parent (wins a scholarship, gets suspended, etc).  This parent usually fails to come to games or other events affecting their kids.  Normally, this parent is characterized by absenteeism and only becomes a problem when their kid does not play enough in the few games they choose to attend. 


#5-The Information Domineer: This parent is always “right” and as such, must achieve information dominance in every conversation.  Communications are normally characterized by the reply “Yeah but” when it comes to conversations with them (the ‘Yeah but”, may be implied).  In reality this is an attempt to seize control of the conversation by refuting any point the coach makes.  Coaches should avoid a protracted schematic engagement with parents of this type; in reality, these discussions usually serve no immediate or long-term purpose.  A good technique is to re-articulate the team’s long-term goals and leave the conversation at.    


#6-The Frustrated Coach: Similar to the Expert, but this one is normally angry they are not the team's coach. Their support for your program will usually vacillate from mild to non-existent.  Communications are characterized by hostility and emotion with coaches and other parents.  Believes they “know more” and are more competent than the coach. This is probably the same parent that tries to coach their kid on the way home from the front seat of the car.  Engage this parent early; any type of delay in establishing an effective communications channel will only exacerbate the problem. 

 
#7-The D1 Parent: Also known as the “disillusionary”.  They mistakenly believe their kid has the ability to attain a “D1 scholarship” and has unrealistic expectations toward achieving this goal. These expectations can originate from an external coach’s overly ambitious or incorrect assessment (this external coach is normally recruiting players for a pay-for-play situation).  Usually this parent takes their kid to private external coaches or shops them on web sites.  The conflict arises when the feedback given to the player and parent conflicts with that of the external coach.  Parents of this type normally question the competency level of the regular coach vice their private coach.  This is the parent that truly believes his kid is going to play D1 ball and that they are being denied the chance. Coaches should remember there is a fine line between motivating your players and crating unrealistic (and subsequently unfulfilled) expectations. 
The “D1 scholarship” expectation is usually an indicator of a less-than-spectacular performance executing parental duties. Some parents feel the need to demonstrate how “good“ their son or daughter is to validate them as a parent.  In reality, the parent is saying “Look what a good parent I am, I raised a D1 athlete”.  Communications with this parent is usually characterized by lack of interface with coaches, but normally has on-going communications with other disgruntled parents. 


#8-The Mutineer: This parent wants the coaches fired and works behind the scenes to achieve that end.  They unceasingly communicate with those who can fulfill this desire.  Does not and won’t communicate with coaches, but will have an on-going rapport with those they believe can fire or remove the coach (administrators, sponsors, boosters, alumni, etc). 
            Remember, parents are not usually characterized by a single typology.  For example, a parent can start out as a supporter, move through the expert category, and end up as a mutineer.   When it comes to managing parents, an ounce of prevention is truly worth a pound cure.  A couple of techniques can be helpful in this regard.  First, engage the parents early. A great technique is to do a full blown season inbrief prior to the start of the season.  This inbrief should include both player and parental expectations.  Hold the line; if the parents don’t come to the inbrief, their son/daughter doesn’t play.
Second, address parental problems early.  This will keep a supportive parent from becoming a non-supporter.  If you sense you are going to have a disgruntled parent, engage them early and come to some sort of a mutual resolution.  There is nothing worse than having a good season ruined by a couple disgruntles parents who don’t share the vision. 
Finally, in the middle of the season (and at the end of the season as well) do an interim periodic assessment with both the player and parents in written form.  This developmental counseling session should include sustains, improves, performance grades, and future roles and expectations for the player. Do this assessment in writing and let the player and parent both have a copy. Bottom line: If it’s not in writing, it doesn’t count.  Ensure your performance grades are backed up with hard statistical data; statistical data legitimizes the case made to the parent. 

Players
When dealing with players, there are some fundamental indicators to look for when it comes to team dynamics. In 2005, the University of Central Florida completed a study on the “big five in teamwork” (Salas, Sims, & Burke, 2005).  The five traits identified by the researchers as having the most impact on teamwork are:


1.  Team Leadership.  Team leadership can come from two sources: either coaches provide it or it comes from the team’s peer leadership.  Team leadership is the single most important factor to establishing good teamwork.  A lack of team leadership can be attributed the team leader’s failure to guide and structure team actions.   The following is a list of indicators of good team leadership:

  • Accountability in all actions
  •  Inclusive; feelings of equality
  • No finger pointing
  •  Acceptance and Free Admission of failures
  •  Continuous work to improve the team
  • Players honor commitments made to one anther
  •  Shared vision of excellence
  •  Open Candid, Non-Attributional Communications
  •  High Player Satisfaction combined with quality performance
  •  Low team turn-over
  •  Positive Social Contact outside structured team interactions

2.   Mutual Performance Monitoring (MPM). MPM is a team member’s awareness of team actions to catch mistakes, slips, or lapses.  In essence, this is an in-flight correction during the execution of tasks to ensure team success.  For example, the shortstop telling the 2nd baseman where to go to correctly receive the outfielder’s throw is an example of MPM.  The basketball player telling her teammate to stop the ball during a 3-on-2 fast break is MPM.  MPM is normally non-existent in teams that lack good leadership. 


3.  Backup Behavior. Closely related to MPM, backup behavior is the adjusting of work load amongst the team.  This shifting of workloads is intended to utilize everyone and is critical to maximizing the team’s performance.  A good example of this is to limit the number of football players playing both ways.  As the Central Florida study points out, “the importance of backup behavior does not simply lie in the improved performance outcome, but rather in how backup behavior affects team processes to allow greater team adaptability in changing situations” (Salas, Sims, & Burke, 2005, p 579).  . 


4.  Agility.  Agility is not to be confused with the kinesthetic intelligence of employing one’s body correctly.  It is used here as the mental realm vice the physical.  It is the cognitive ability to recognize deviations from expected actions and to react as necessary.  An example is the ability to adapt personal actions to fit the needs of the team.  For example, a team adjusting to the rigors of being required to play a previously scheduled home game at a neutral location due to inclement weather is an example of agility.  Deviating from a set play in order to adjust to the conditions of the opposing team’s defense is an example of agility.   


5.  Team Orientation.  This goes back to the age old adage that “there is no I in Team”. This self- sacrificing perspective should lead to increased cooperation among players and enhance others performance through actions of one’s own.  Simply stated, no one individual is bigger than the collective.  Sure, there will be role differences amongst team members, but no player can achieve success without the others.  Ideally, coaches should articulate a player’s role to eliminate role ambiguity and facilitate this “team first” approach.  In individual sports such as swimming or track, this team orientation may not be required as much as in co-acting sports such as football, basketball, or volleyball. 

Poor Team Dynamics
Coaches must actively look for Indicators of poor internal team dynamics.  Remember that it’s not just what’s verbalized that is important. On any team, there are two processes taking place at once: overt and unspoken actions. The coach must be able to effectively “see” the processes and react accordingly.  Keep in mind that there will always exist a gap between the spoken and unspoken.  In order to have good team concept, this gap must be narrowed. 
The unconscious and unspoken plays a major role in individual and group behavior.  In order for a coach to ascertain what is taking place in the meta-communications realm, a good helping of Howard Gardner’s Interpersonal Intelligence is required. Gardner’s landmark book on Multiple Intelligences Theory hypothesizes that “Interpersonal intelligence is critical to understanding the intentions, motivations and desires of other people”.  This ability to sense other’s moods, temperaments, and motivations is significant in achieving cooperation amongst players. Some of the negative dynamics team leaders and administrators should be on the lookout for are:

  • Player harassment by other players
  • Sarcasm
  • Intergroup conflict and group ineffectiveness. 
  • Unengaged/absentee leaders; be they coaches or upper-class players
  • A coach just there for the paycheck
  • Failure to successfully integrate new players
  •  No sense of pride in the organization or work produced
  • Any player talking about themselves in the third person
  •  Poor communications: back-stabbing, personality conflicts, gossiping , squabbling, ascendency attempts, passive aggressiveness
  •  Mutual Distrust between leaders/subordinates
  •  Increased regulation; Prescriptive Guidance
  •  Increased centralization and Micro-Management
  • Repeated complaints from many directions
  • The “gut” feeling that something isn’t right

A good technique to socialize players to the team concept is by assigning jobs to specific classes.  For example, a good way to keep that egotistical Freshman in line is to give the Freshman class the responsibility of carrying the team gear, loading the bags, etc.  Make sure your team captains supervise this task accomplishment.  This will immediately establish a cohesive, position based, structure.  Ensure that the team captains are held accountable. 
A second technique to establishing good teamwork is to ensure that players “talk the issue” when registering a compliant.  Never entertain or agree with a personal attack by one player on another.
In conclusion, managing team dynamics and positive culture can be a Herculean undertaking.  However, understanding some of the basic techniques of influencing parents, players, and administrators can make the task less daunting.  At the end of the day, quality coaches understand an effective developmental environment characterized by good teamwork is critical to the maturation of young men and women; which reinforces the fundamental question “If the coach isn’t going to manage the team’s internal and external dynamics, then who is?”    


References

Gardner, H. (1983). Frames of mind, Pages 237-255. 
Salas, Sims, & Burke (2005). Is there a big five in teamwork? Small Group Research (36), 555-599.

Widmeyer, N. & Williams J. (1991). The cohesion-performance outcome relationship in a coacting sport. Journal of sport and exercise psychology, 13 (4). 364-371





NEW BOOK!

AFM Videos Streaming Memberships Now Available Digital Download - 304 Pages of Football Forms for the Winning Coach



















HOME
MAGAZINE
SUBSCRIBE ONLINE COLUMNISTS COACHING VIDEOS


Copyright 2024, AmericanFootballMonthly.com
All Rights Reserved