Ecological Approach × Adlerian Psychology: The Coach's Attitude Is the Biggest Environmental Constraint
日本語で読む →
In practising the ecological approach, the coach’s role is extremely limited. Their main task comes down to designing constraints.
When you read the literature on the ecological approach, the examples given of sociocultural constraints, one type of environmental constraint, include family support, the cultural background of a sport, and social expectations. I could not find the phrase “the coach’s attitude” anywhere among them.
Yet in the small society that is the court, the biggest factor shaping “social expectations” (what kind of play is wanted, and what is allowed) is without doubt the coach. So I came to think that the attitude and atmosphere a coach gives off may in fact act as the closest and most powerful sociocultural constraint around the players.
In this post, I look at how a coach’s behaviour acts as an environmental constraint on players, and, from the perspective of Adlerian psychology, how we should conduct ourselves.
Negativity spreads, creativity is stolen
Players are not aware of, or perceiving, only the ball and the opponents on the court. They are also constantly scanning the “atmosphere” the coach gives off.
Take the moment right after a missed serve, or a spike that gets stuffed by the block. Plenty of players will glance at the coach’s face without even realizing it.
What if, at that very moment, the coach has their arms folded, lets out a sigh, and makes their frustration obvious?
Players pick up a powerful message, “mistakes are not allowed,” and may choose safe plays to avoid being scolded. As a result, body and mind tense up, and movement becomes rigid: the freezing of degrees of freedom.
And in that instant, their creativity is taken away.
Is the “poker face” the best answer?
Then what about deliberately keeping a poker face (no expression at all) to hide negative emotions?
I myself used to be one of those coaches.
But for players, a blank face is nothing other than an environment missing information. It makes them probe unnecessarily (“Was that play right?” “Is the coach actually annoyed?”), and that gets in the way of bold play. A blank face, too, cannot be called a positive environmental constraint that gives players a push.
Courage and encouragement: learning from Adler
For players to try new plays without fearing the risk, an environment with psychological safety is essential.
What is being asked here is how the coach is, their attitude.
Adlerian psychology, sometimes called “the psychology of courage,” stresses the importance of encouragement, rather than simply praising results.
Courage is defined as “the energy to face difficult situations.”
In the ecological approach, the process of players exploring unfamiliar movements on their own inevitably involves failure. And it is in this unstable zone, outside the comfort zone, that the seeds of growth are hidden.
Someone who gives players the energy to face difficulty, and gives them a strong push forward. That, I believe, is the true attitude of a coach.
Players see through surface attitudes: affording from the heart
A coach on the bench who always stays positive and accepting strongly affords (offers) players the action of “taking on challenges without fear of failure.”
But there is one important caveat: an attitude that is only on the surface means nothing. Players’ perceptual systems are extremely good. Even if a coach who is irritated inside puts on a tolerant act on the surface, players accurately see through the signals: subtle tones of voice, tension in the body.
That is why it cannot be an attitude used as a technique. The coach has to become, from the bottom of their heart, someone who supports the players’ exploration. Believe in the players’ potential from the heart, and accept the failures that arise along the way. Coaching means believing without doubt. Isn’t it about never doubting, not even a little, that the players will grow? Only when that inner truth is there does a coach’s behaviour work as a genuine constraint of encouragement.
The coach’s own exploration and failure are the greatest encouragement
That said, however hard we try, reality does not always match the ideal. Sometimes emotions we cannot hold back will show in our attitude.
I think coaches, too, are people engaged in constant trial and error (exploration). Just as players make errors during the process of exploration, coaches will certainly experience mistakes and failures in the process of coaching. That is perfectly natural, and if we become conservative out of fear of it, we cannot hope for real growth.
If we offer players an environment where failure is accepted, shouldn’t we coaches also accept and allow our own imperfection? Let’s throw away the curse that says coaches must never make mistakes and must be perfect.
Instead, a coach who bravely tries new approaches, fails again and again, and still keeps working every day to improve. Showing that process openly may be the greatest encouragement we can give players.
The sight of a coach who willingly steps into the unknown and keeps learning from failure: I am convinced that this is the best affordance of all, encouraging players to explore and pushing them strongly forward.
If we ask players for trial and error, we coaches must keep showing exploration through our own example. An “open, accepting attitude” in which we take on challenges together and accept each other’s failures together.
From your next practice, try designing this best of all sociocultural constraints: the coach’s attitude. All so that the whole team can grow as much as it possibly can.