No description available.

The organisation of elite sport systems has been the focus of a great variety of different investigations over the past ten years. In particular, many studies have compared the structure and organisation of different national elite sport systems on the macro and meso levels. A result of the existing investigations is a clear convergence of the service portfolio different elite sport systems offer their athletes and coaches. Despite this current trend to a homogeneous elite sport system design, medal tables of major sport events suggest that some nations are still more successful than others in specific sports. This suggests that more successful sport systems might have found better ways to implement the otherwise similar and conventional support portfolio. However, there is a lack of studies that focus on what practices successful elite sport systems apply in the actual delivery of the support services to their athletes and coaches; in how far these practices are related to the ,success of the sport systems; if these practices look similar across different successful sport systems; and if these practices provide useful lessons for other systems to learn from. The management tool benchmarking appears to be a useful framework to guide such comparisons at the operational level. Thus, this thesis evaluated the applicability of this management concept for furthering understanding of elite sport system management. In order to conduct this evaluation it was decided to analyse the operational processes and structures two successful elite sport systems apply for the delivery of five elements of the elite sport support portfolio. In specific, the investigation focused on the comparison of the design of the squad system, the hierarchy of coaches within the squad system, the organisation of the coach education, as well as the provision of sport science and lifestyle support, which were the Benchmarking Objects of this study. The Swedish athletics and the Norwegian cross-country skiing national team, and the general elite sport support institutions they cooperate with, were chosen as the Benchmarking Subjects, i.e. the comparison partners, for this investigation. This research was based on a series of semi-structured interviews which were conducted with about 50 key pOSition holders such as coaches, athletes, lifestyle support managers, or performance diagnosticians during two study visits to Norway and Sweden. This study concluded that benchmarking can lead to insights into the operational management of successful elite sport systems. It must however also be stressed that benchmarking is not a universal remedy for the problems managers of elite sport systems face today. As this research showed, the two Benchmarking Subjects applied unexpected solutions for the delivery of some of the chosen Benchmarking Objects - and some of these practices appeared to be heavily linked to the organisational and cultural context of the investigated sport systems. Thus, it must be carefully evaluated for each process or structure, which is identified during a bench marking exercise, if it constitutes a transferable best practice which is applicable outside the organisational context of the respective Benchmarking Subject.

The purpose of this study was twofold: (a) assess cycling coaches' trauma-related competencies, as measured by trauma knowledge (i.e., trauma-specific education, familiarity with post-traumatic stress [PTS]), stigma of persons with PTS (i.e., fear/dangerousness, help/interact, forcing treatment, negative emotions), and interpersonal skills (i.e., self-reported emotional intelligence, perceived quality of coach-athlete relationships); and (b) examine the influence that trauma knowledge and stigma of persons with PTS has on coaching efficacy specific to coaching trauma-impacted athletes (i.e., trauma-informed coaching efficacy), after controlling for general coaching experience. Descriptive statistics indicated the majority of coaches had no trauma-specific education, a high degree of familiarity with PTS, and a low level of stigma via four attribution variables. Moreover, participants highly appraised their own emotional intelligence, the quality of their coach-athlete relationships, and their trauma-informed coaching efficacy. A hierarchical regression analyses indicated that familiarity with PTS helped to explain additional variance in trauma-informed coaching efficacy over and above demographic and general coach experience variables. The study establishes trauma-informed coaching as a distinct area of research and highlights the need for improved continuing education opportunities for coaches related to psychological trauma and PTS.

The application of sport science is crucial to athlete performance development. However, the frequent disconnection among sport scientists, coaches, and athletes often leads to miscommunication and increased potential for performance barriers. The creation of sport performance enhancement groups (SPEGs) can help with the professional integration and communication among all personnel involved in the training process. However, SPEG formation faces a number of barriers in the current coaching landscape. The application of a benefits-based programming (BBP) model may aid in the formation of an SPEG and the dissemination of education for coaches, athletes, and administrators. A field experience involving the BBP model and SPEG creation in a National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) Division II school is presented with multiple model iterations

Coaches in Canada are trained through the National Coaching Certification Program (NCCP) administered by The Coaching Association of Canada. The NCCP is the national standard and recently shifted its educational emphasis from the transfer of knowledge to the development of coaching competency. As a result, coaches are required to demonstrate competency in a specified sport and level prior to being awarded a coaching certification. The purpose of this study was to establish validity and reliability of an NCCP coaching competency assessment. Gymnastics Canada agreed to have their Community Sport coaching competency instrument tested for content validity, face validity, inter-rater reliability and intra-rater reliability. Their original assessment instrument was revised during content validity testing based on recommendations from five coaching context experts. Removing six items, adding one item, and revising four items for clarity modified the original 48-item instrument. An assessment of overall competency was added to the instrument to rate the coach as Beginner, Competent, Proficient, or Expert. Three certified coaches confirmed the face validity of the modified instrument. Reliability tests were conducted on the ratings provided by ten experts who observed a coach’s lesson on video. The result was a moderate level of inter-rater reliability, displayed by an Agreement Coefficient (AC1) of 0.43 and a Percent of Agreement (PA) of 72%. Nine of the ten raters assessed the coach’s performance as Competent, Proficient or Expert, while one of the ten rated the coach as Beginner. After a repeat observation of the same coaching performance, the intra-rater reliability of five raters resulted in agreement levels of Moderate (AC1 = 0.45; PA = 67%), Substantial (AC1 = 0.75, 0.77; PA = 81%, 89%), and Almost Perfect (AC1 = 0.87, 0.82; PA = 93%, 90%). The modified instrument has content and face validity. However, its usefulness is impacted by variability in rater preferences. The inter-rater reliability results attest to concerns about the consistency in assessment of a coaching certificate for Community Sport Artistic Gymnastics coaches. Suggestions to improve the reliability of the instrument include training raters to classify the coach’s competency on a standardized scale of sport-specific expertise.

Coaching efficacy is largely influenced by mastery experiences such as formal education, coaching experience, and sport participation. Further examining specific experiences, such as exposure to sport psychology, may prove helpful in advancing our understanding of coaching efficacy. Thus, the purpose of this study was to explore male high school coaches' coaching experience to determine whether sport psychology education and interactions with sport psychology consultants relate to coaches' coaching efficacy. Participants, 585 males (Mage = 43.89 + 10.02), completed an online survey measuring coaching efficacy and coaching and sport psychology experience. A hierarchical regression analysis revealed that after controlling for years of coaching experience and school size, sport psychology education and interactions with sport psychology consultants were associated with higher overall coaching efficacy scores (p < .001). Additionally, analysis of covariance revealed that those with extensive sport psychology education had statistically higher coaching efficacy scores than those reporting no sport psychology education (p < .05). Knowledge of these phenomena may be relevant for sport psychology consultants, coach educators, and researchers.