The Power of Expectations: Sports Coaches’ Guide to Getting the Best Out of Their Players
Key Objectives
- Recognise the importance of the coach’s performance leadership and management style
- Identify the four steps in the expectation–performance process
- Contrast the behavioural characteristics of a Pygmalion coach and a Golem coach
- Reflect on the coaching actions that can shape the coach’s high expectations for every player
Introduction
Although the above post-match interview was reenacted by comedian John Crist, it illustrates how a sports coach’s expectations – be it through his words or any other actions – can considerably influence his/her team’s performances on and off the field. When coaches consistently hold low expectations of their players, their players will also instinctively be influenced to hold low expectations of themselves. This leads to the inevitable: Consistently below-par performances.
Now, compare Jurgen Klopp’s interview with John Crist’s.
Jurgen Klopp’s interview is a fair and consistent reflection of his attitude and behavioural approach towards his players over the years. Unsurprisingly, his player, Oxlade, went on to perform well and contribute to a couple of assists and goals in the subsequent matches.
The case study above demonstrates the culmination of the expectation-performance process, in which an individual can achieve high performance when high expectations are placed on him/her. This is highly effective due to the influential power dynamic and interdependent relationship that is present between the coach and player [1].
Overview of Performance Leadership and Management
Before we dive further into the expectation-performance process, let’s briefly examine the bigger picture.
What is Performance Leadership?
It is an ongoing process in which an individual, who is the leader, influences a group of individuals to work towards a common goal [2]. In our context, the individual is the sports coach, and the group of individuals is the coach’s players. It is crucial to note that the coach must influence all his players – be it regular starters or reserve players – to achieve the common goal together. An example of a common goal would be to achieve a top-four finish in the competition.
There are three parts to leadership:
- It is a multi-level relationship, with interactions occurring at the individual (e.g. a coach and an individual player) and group (e.g. a coach and the whole team) levels [3].
- The leader-follower interactions are ongoing and process-based.
- The leaders and followers share a similar vision and work collaboratively to achieve a common goal [4].
What is Performance Management?
Performance management seeks to develop and govern the handling of resources and operations to elevate performance standards strategically and cohesively [5].
The Coach’s Performance Leadership and Management Style: Why It Matters
A good coach is both a leader and a manager – he/she must spearhead progress, work with other stakeholders in an often-changing environment, and be able to identify and resolve issues. Hence, the coach’s attitude, behaviour and expectations of success largely influence his performance leadership and management style [6].
How Do the Coach’s Leadership and Management Style Affect Players’ Sporting Performance?
The coach’s attitude reflects his/her beliefs and influences his/her behaviour. This behaviour translates into actions (e.g. communication style, non-verbal cues, coaching actions), which affects players’ attitude. This, in turn, shapes the players’ behaviour [7]. Eventually, players’ behaviour (e.g. body language, the effort put into training, desire to strive for excellence) reflects on how receptive they are towards their coach’s approach. A cycle is thus formed (Figure 1), in which the desired players’ behaviour can either be strengthened or weakened based on the coach’s initial attitude.
The product? Players’ sporting performance individually and collectively in the long-run.
The 4-step Expectation-Performance Process
The expectations that coaches have of their players’ competency can largely determine the level of performance and overall achievement that these players can eventually reach (Figure 2) [8].
Through this process, the coach’s initial expectations for players are reinforced, which forms a psychosocial feedback loop (Figure 1) for the coach and players to continue adhering to the same process.
The Pygmalion Effect: The Power of the Coach’s Expectations
The Pygmalion Effect is a phenomenon in which leaders’ high-performance expectations for their followers lead to overall increased performance of the followers and organisation [9]. This is an important stage before the realisation of the self-fulfilling prophecy [10].
The name “Pygmalion” derives from a mythical Greek story about a sculptor named Pygmalion. He built a statue of a lady so beautiful that he eventually fell in love with it. Subsequently, the statue came to life.
DID YOU KNOW?
The Golem Effect: The Pygmalion Effect’s Evil Twin
If the Pygmalion Effect elevates the players’ performance, the Golem Effect does the opposite. The Golem Effect describes the process in which leaders expect low performance from their followers, resulting in the fulfilment of the expected low performance [11].
The name “Golem” derives from a mythical Hasidic story about a creature built from clay and mud. Golem was designed to serve its master. However, its creator believed that given the opportunity, Golem would wreak havoc. He eventually did.
DID YOU KNOW?
Enhance Performance Leadership and Management Style as a Pygmalion Coach
The coach’s values, belief, and attitude (Figure 3) set the platform for him/her to embrace behavioural traits of a Pygmalion or a Golem coach [12].
Using Table 1 below, let’s examine and contrast the thought process of a Pygmalion and a Golem coach [13].
| Characteristics | Pygmalion coach | Golem coach |
| 1. Belief on Expectations | “My expectations of players remain high; I provide varied and differentiated opportunities for them to meet my high expectations. As they progress, the challenges I set for them will increase.” | “My expectations of players are fixed; I have low expectations for the lower ability players. I will focus on the higher ability players, while the rest will be the supporting cast.” |
| 2. Attitude towards competence development | “Competence can be developed through quality practice and feedback.” | “Competence is inherently fixed; players are either born with it or not.” |
| 3. Belief towards own self-actualisation | “I will continuously refine my training session plan, delivery and review to be a good coach.” “I will take up opportunities to learn from other coaches and systems to improve my coaching effectiveness.” | “I need to select and train only the standout players to be a successful coach.” “If most of my players are not of the required standard, no coaching approach can help to improve my team’s performance and chances of doing well in the competition.” |
| 4. Coach-Player Relationship | “I need to understand my players better – what makes them tick, what are their strengths and areas for improvement.” | “The players need to follow my orders at all costs and put their wants aside. I will only focus my efforts with higher ability players.” |
| 5. Leadership Style | “I embrace two-way communication and allow for players to express their views constructively. I encourage my players to take up additional responsibilities such as leading certain activities and putting in extra training hours.” | “I prefer one-way communication in which I make all the decisions. My players must follow strictly to my decisions and instructions all the time for the team to achieve success.” |
| 6. Team Climate | “I will facilitate a mastery climate where individual effort is recognised, players set self-referenced goals, and training is focused on the process than the outcome.” “I will encourage players to be creative and make mistakes, as it is part of their learning and development.” | “I will only allow a performance climate where sessions are meant to outshine one another. Only those who emerged victorious are worthy of even playing.” “I will enforce strict punishments when players make mistakes – big or small.” |
| 7. Belief on players’ cultural background | “Each player will get an equal opportunity in training sessions to showcase their abilities and commitment to fight for the starting position.” | “I will prefer to select players who are from a rich background and have supportive parents. They will have more resources to enhance their playing abilities outside of training sessions.” |
| 8. Belief on players’ physical ability | “Players have different maturation and physiological growth rate and I need to be able to support their ongoing growth at all the different phases.” | “I will only select physically exceptional players – this will be a big advantage for the team. The small-sized players will be reserves.” |
A Pygmalion coach will be able to elicit from his/her players a higher level of commitment, motivation, innovation, productivity and synergy that are aligned with the team’s goals [14]. This, in return, bolsters the coach’s performance leadership and management process.
Out of the eight behavioural characteristics of the Pygmalion coach, how many of these characteristics do you see in yourself?
REFLECTION TIME
The Galatea Effect: Players’ Reaction Towards the Coach’s Expectations
The Galatea Effect is a phenomenon in which players are likely to meet a high target set by themselves if they form a high self-expectation of themselves from the onset [15]. When the coach consistently showcases the characteristics of a Pygmalion coach (Table 1), the players will be positively influenced to set high expectations for themselves too.
In the 2014 World Cup quarter-final match, the Netherlands reserve goalkeeper Tim Krul was thrust into action for the penalty shootout at the end of extra-time. He defied the odds by saving two penalties, leading his country into the semi-final.
A Pygmalion coach who has high expectations even for his reserve players can enhance the players’ self-efficacy and performance in actual matches [16]. When reserve players are given ample and crucial opportunities to be substituted in, the players can thrive, given that they have embraced the Galatea Effect.
Coaching Actions of a Pygmalion Coach
Below are five key actions that sports coaches can apply and reflect upon to adopt the behaviour of a Pygmalion coach [17].
- Assessing players for weekly team selection
- Use formative assessment during training sessions and matches [18].
- Avoid using only summative assessment and early season match performance rating. Early season summative assessment will be a disadvantage for players who are late bloomers or take more time to adapt to a new environment.
- Modes of formative assessment
- Use valid evaluation sheet (Appendix A) that assess players holistically, taking into consideration their technical, tactical, social and psychological attributes.
- Avoid using checklists that focus only on players’ technical and tactical competencies. Players should be assessed holistically, including observing how they behave while waiting in line during drills and having breaks. These are psychosocial cues that can predict the players’ performance-expectancy level [19].
- Delivery of session activities
- Use differentiated instructions to engage players of different ability levels. For lower ability players, drills can be scaffolded and broken into two parts to facilitate the achievement of competence progressively. The STEP Principle can be applied.
- Avoid using one-size-fits-all drills and hoping all players can execute the drills equally well.
- Feedback during training sessions
- Use both general and specific feedback. Give praise and criticism consistent with the level of performance exhibited by the players.
- Avoid using too much general feedback and criticism without specific details on how to improve the performance.
- Coach-player communication
- Use positive reinforcements to encourage the performance of the desired behaviour [20]. Praise the effort of attempting the desired behaviour instead of praising its outcome – this fosters a mastery climate rather than a performance climate [21].
- Avoid using derogatory message to psych the players up. Often, it creates a backlash against the coach – the players’ respect for the coach will diminish [22].
Something to Ponder on
For the expectation-performance process to be effective, the coach must hold a substantial amount of power and influence on his/her players – this is where the coach’s performance leadership and management style come to the fore [23]. If the players do not even believe in the coach’s competence, the expectation-performance process will be undermined.
Caution must be taken when placing high expectations on players. Players differ in their abilities, perceived competence and motivation. Players who are generally high in these attributes will thrive under high expectations. However, players who are low in these attributes might succumb under the pressure of high expectations, especially when the coaching actions are not optimised. Thus, there is a need to holistically know and understand each player well by considering individual differences [24].
When the Pygmalion Effect and Galatea Effect are jointly present, they work in favour of the self-fulfilling prophecy. This theory is a psychosocial phenomenon anchored on having a strong belief to fulfil an intended behaviour [25]. Thus, the self-fulfilling prophecy will be further reinforced when both the coach and player hold high expectations and belief that the player can achieve the desired behaviour, leading to high sporting performance.
The expectation-performance process was first extensively applied in the educational field and it has now spread to other fields. Essentially, if there is a leader-follower relationship, the expectation-performance process can be applied [26]. Hence, it is very applicable to fields such as the military, business, healthcare, arts, social services and many others [27].
Summary
“High achievement always takes place in the framework of high expectations.”
Charles Kettering, inventor of the electric starter and pioneer of the automobile industry.
This quote succinctly sums up how high expectations that coaches have about their players’ competence can serve as a self-fulfilling prophecy, which then determines the level of performance and achievement that the players can reach. Through adopting the behavioural characteristics of a Pygmalion coach and applying the coaching actions set out in this article, coaches can further fortify their expectation-performance process.
At the pinnacle, sporting success does not come easy and by itself. By imposing high expectations on players, it sets the platform for coaches to provide the means for every player – be it an early starter or late bloomer – to perform at his/her highest level [28].
References
- Cushion, C. J., Armour, K. M., & Jones, R. L. (2006). Locating the coaching process in practice: Models ‘for’ and ‘of’ coaching. Physical Education and Sport Pedagogy, 11(01), 83-99.
- Northhouse, P.G. (2010). Leadership: Theory and Practice. Thousand Oaks: SAGE Publications.
- Fletcher, D., & Arnold, R. (2015). Performance leadership and management in elite sport: Current status and future directions. In S. Andersen, B. Houlihan, & L. Ronglan (Eds.), Managing elite sport systems: Research and practice (pp. 162–181). Abingdon: Routledge.
- Yammarino, F. (2013). Leadership: Past, present, and future. Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies, 20(2), 149-155.
- Wiltshire, H. (2013). Sports performance analysis for high performance managers. In T. McGarry, P. O’Donoghue and J. Sampaio (Eds.), Routledge Handbook of Sports Performance Analysis (pp. 176-186). London: Routledge.
- Crust, L., & Lawrence, I. (2006). A review of leadership in sport: Implications for football management. Athletic Insight: The Online Journal of Sport Psychology, 8(4), 28-48.
- Cumming, S. P., Smith, R. E., & Smoll, F. L. (2006). Athlete-perceived coaching behaviors: Relating two measurement traditions. Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 28(2), 205-213.
- Solomon, G. B. (2010). The assessment of athletic ability at the junior college level. International Journal of Sports Science & Coaching, 5(1), 37-46.
- Rosenthal, R. (1993). Interpersonal expectations: Some antecedents and some consequences. In P. D. Blanck (Ed.), Interpersonal expectations: Theory, research, and applications. Studies in emotion and social interaction (pp. 3–24). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
- McNatt, D. B. (2000). Ancient Pygmalion joins contemporary management: A meta-analysis of the result. Journal of Applied Psychology, 85, 314–322
- Eden, D. (1990). Industrialization as a self-fulflling prophecy: The role of expectations in development. International Journal of Psychology, 25, 871-886.
- Reynolds, D. (2007). Restraining Golem and harnessing Pygmalion in the classroom: A laboratory study of managerial expectations and task design. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 6(4), 475-483.
- Horn, T. S., Lox, C. L., & Labrador, F. (2015). The self-fulfilling prophecy theory: When coaches’ expectations become reality. In J.M. Williams (Ed.), Applied sports psychology: Personal growth to peak (7th ed., pp. 78–100). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
- Callow, N., Smith, M. J., Hardy, L., Arthur, C. A., & Hardy, J. (2009). Measurement of transformational leadership and its relationship with team cohesion and performance level. Journal of Applied Sport Psychology, 21(4), 395-412.
- Kamphorst, J. J., & Swank, O. H. (2013). When Galatea cares about her Reputation: How having Faith in your Workers reduces their Motivation to shine. European Economic Review, 60, 91-104.
- Hancock, D. J., Adler, A. L., & Côté, J. (2013). A proposed theoretical model to explain relative age effects in sport. European Journal of Sport Science, 13(6), 630-637.
- Horn, T. S. (2002). Coaching effectiveness in the sport domain. In T. S. Horn (Ed.), Advances in sport psychology (pp. 309-354). Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.
- Gréhaigne, J. F., & Godbout, P. (1998). Formative assessment in team sports in a tactical approach context. Journal of Physical Education, Recreation & Dance, 69(1), 46-51.
- Solomon, G. B., & Rhea, D. J. (2008). Sources of expectancy information among college coaches: A qualitative test of expectancy theory. International Journal of Sports Science and Coaching, 3, 251-268.
- Skinner, B. F. (1948). ‘Superstition’ in the pigeon. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 38, 168–172.
- Horn, T. S. (2019). Examining the impact of coaches’ feedback patterns on the psychosocial well-being of youth sport athletes. Kinesiology Review, 8(3), 244-251.
- Horn, T. S. (1987). The influence of teacher-coach behavior on the psychological development of children. In D. Gould & M. R. Weiss (Eds.), Advances in pediatric sport sciences. Vol. 2: Behavioral issues (pp. 121-142). Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.
- Buning, M. (2018). Examining differential coaching behaviors in positive coaches: A mixed-methods perspective guided by the expectation performance process. Journal of Amateur Sport, 4(2), 29-60.
- Horn, T. S. (1984). Expectancy affects in the interscholastic athletic setting: Methodological considerations. Journal of Sport Psychology, 6, 60-76.
- Weaver, J., Moses, J. F., & Snyder, M. (2016). Self-fulfilling prophecies in ability settings. The Journal of Social Psychology, 156(2), 179-189.
- McNatt, D. B., & Judge, T. A. (2004). Boundary conditions of the Galatea effect: A field experiment and constructive replication. Academy of Management Journal, 47(4), 550-565.
- Whiteley, P., Sy, T., & Johnson, S. K. (2012). Leaders’ conceptions of followers: Implications for naturally occurring Pygmalion effects. The Leadership Quarterly, 23(5), 822-834.
- Becker, A. J. (2009). It’s not what they do, it’s how they do it: Athlete experiences of great coaching. International Journal of Sports Science & Coaching, 4(1), 93-119.
Hi sufri, the article was very insightful and showed me the importance of being a Pygmalion coach in contrast to a golem coach. There are many qualities of a Pygmalion coach which I will adopt as a basketball coach myself.
However, I do have one question. I was an athlete in my school days and my coaches mostly adopted the golem coaching style. The coaches were usually very harsh and tough which actually taught us to be resilient and preserve towards our goal. At the same time, it helped us to be focused on our goal rather than be complacent once we did better in our games.
So can I say that a coach can have a good mix of both a Pygmalion coach and golem coach? As some players would still need the tough approach.
At the same time, I feel that coaches must be firm with certain decisions as accommodating to all the player will result in the players overpowering the coaches in certain situations.
Thank you
Hi, Kumar! Thanks for sharing your experience as a player and how it has helped to shape you as a coach. Your sharing makes for a good discussion. Can I check with you – if you were to recall and reflect, what could be the underlying reason for your coach to behave in a harsh manner? Was it because he held high expectations for his players or otherwise?
Holding high expectations for players can also manifest to a coaching style that demands the best out of the players. However, as many of the commenters have pointed out, it is equally important to understand the individual differences of players – some players thrive under the pressure cooker, while some players would prefer the more soft approach. Still, both ways would only be effective only if the coach holds high expectations for his players – essentially the coach wants to get the best out of every player while considering individual differences. What do you think?
Once again, thanks for your valuable sharing and query – I appreciate it 🙂
Very informative article, Sufri! Definitely agree on the wonderful results yield by a pygmalion coach. Of course the key is also in the process of developing players with different strength. Setting short term goal during the training phase help to shape their success as well. Ultimately, players will train harder when coaches believe and see the strength in them.
Hi, Jackie! That’s very true – the process of developing players should be the emphasis rather than the outcome. I like your suggestion on setting short term goals during the training phase – these short-term goals can help players and even coaches to be more focused and act as the stepping stone to achieve the long-term goals.
Thank you for your feedback and in-depth sharing – I really appreciate it 🙂
Great article!! Thoroughly enjoyed the in-depth analysis of pygmalion coaches and also the contrast between a golem coach! One question that I must ask is, are high expectations always beneficial? Can they do more harm than good at times?
Hi, Tom! I understand where you are coming from and I agree that coaches do need to first evaluate the situation and assess their players’ readiness level. At times, having high expectations for players might not seem beneficial especially when players are already under a lot of stress.
However, if coaches are able to channel the high expectations into providing the high support level needed for the players to overcome the stress and thrive, then holding onto high expectations can be beneficial. Thus, having high expectations always may not be necessarily harmful – coaches need to know how to channel these high expectations into behaviour and actions that can progressively aid their players to achieve the desired performance.
Thanks for taking the time to read the article and for your valuable query – I appreciate it 🙂
Great information about how coaches can make/break their players’ potential when performing in a sport. Much attention has been on youth development in high performance situations and many have fell through the cracks due to their inability to meet the high expectations of the coach, as well as the coach’s belief in them performing during games. I was wondering how coaches and players can work together to raise their performance level and yet not hampering their development as a player? I think this is an important skill a coach must have to develop players and bring out the best in them when asked to perform during games.
Hi, Jonathan! I definitely agree with you. You raised an important issue concerning players’ holistic development. At times, when coaches are too indulgent in demanding consistently high performances from their players, the coaches tend to neglect players’ emotional and social well-being. For players to develop holistically, players’ social-emotional development is equally as important as their technical and tactical sporting development. The sample evaluation sheet provided can be a good start for coaches to purposefully look to develop their players holistically.
Thank you for taking the time to read the article and providing your valuable thoughts – I appreciate it 🙂
Excellent article! Having learnt about Pygmalion effect in my undergrad days, I’ve always thought that such a phenomenon could be applicable in many other situations other than in education, where it was rooted in.
As a budding youth sports coach myself, I’ve always taken great care when speaking to my young charges. This was only possible I believe, was because of my philosophy that these youth players have such a huge oppurtunity to grow and mature – it would be foolish to just focus on thier mistakes now and cause them to feel demoralised and get their morale affected. I also believe that to help them reach their potential, encouragement and positive reinforcement is crucial.
My question is about external factors that can disrupt the Galatea effect from occuring. Namely, inter-player relationships which will definitely impact players’ expectations of themselves.
What kind of impact will such negative peer remarks have? What can coaches do during such situations to achieve a best possible outcome? Sometimes no matter how good a coach’s leadership is, peer remarks can have a more lasting impact as peers exist closer on their hierarchy of needs as compared to adult coaches. Don’t you agree?
Thanks for sharing!
Hi, Zailany! Through your sharing of your coaching style and experience, it is clearly visible that you possess the key characteristics of a Pygmalion coach – expectations, competence and relationship building! Keep it up!
Inter-player relationships, as you rightly pointed out, have been a ubiquitous cause of concern. Personally, I feel that it’s important for coaches to have a good understanding of players’ individual differences and inculcate values education be it explicitly or through teachable moments. For instance, coaches can simulate activities that bring out values such as showing respect and teamwork in the players. I did “set up” a situation in which I made two players who could not see eye to eye be in the same team, and both playing side by side. Knowing that they were intrinsically competitive, I set up a situation where they had to hold onto a 1-0 lead. Hence, these players decided to put their feud aside and show good communication with one another to keep possession. At the end of the session, I called both of them and got them to share their thoughts and feelings. The rest was history.
We also cannot underestimate the power of role modelling. The way we interact with our players, fellow coaches and other people will in turn influence how our players interact with one another.
Thank you for your feedback and in-depth sharing – I really appreciate it 🙂
Hi Sufri!
Interesting read!
Your article reminded me of the discourse recently that came to my attention, of youths playing sports at a competitive level. Do you feel that the restructuring/redesigning of rules and regulations in a sport, at younger competitive platforms, to supposedly increase chances of success of these young players in a competition setting create the ‘pygmalion coaching effect’ at a systemic level?
That aside, I agree that a Pygmalion coach would definitely be beneficial for a player, especially beyond their duration on the field or court. I feel it is also important to note that it is essential that a coach/mentor/leader be aware of how they are going about setting their expectations, etc, as they might have the intentions to be the best of Pygmalion coaches but might be misunderstood (which in turn could possibly result in outcomes that the coach was trying to avoid) simply due to the inability to communicate their intentions across clearly. Building relationships to attain the fruits of a Pygmalion coach can be very tricky if we do not back up the approach with other tools to better communicate and relate to our players.
Hi, Ismail! You have a valid point there – it is also important to look at the bigger picture – at the systemic and/or organisational level too. This is where the performance leadership and management of the key stakeholders at the upper management level of the sporting organisation becomes crucial. I strongly believe that the directors and head of the organisations have to be proactive in reaching out to coaches with a view of quality two-way communication, where exchanges of ideas and feedback are encouraged. This way, the concerns of the ground can be heard, leading to better alignment with the organisation vision and goals.
Thanks for your valuable feedback and sharing of your insights – It really sets me thinking. I really appreciate it 🙂
Thank you for the article Sufri. I agree that a coach’s performance management and leadership styles do influence his/her players to a large extend. However, putting myself in the shoes of a coach, I find that being too optimistic about my players (having high expectations) does not always help them become better as sometimes, it is necessary to also be realistic (helping players face hard truths). I believe that differentiated methods have to be adopted to bring the best out of each individual player at different junctures, especially when each player is so different in terms of the values and attitudes they bring to the game.
Hi, Crosby! It is indeed a challenging yet rewarding balancing act to uphold consistently high expectations of our players and at the same time being realistic of the players’ development. It’s encouraging to know that there are many passionate youth coaches out there like yourself who consistently apply the Pygmalion type of coaching actions (such as differentiated instruction) to bring the best out of every player.
Thanks for your valuable feedback and sharing of your experience – I really appreciate it 🙂
Great read!
When it comes to coaching children/youth football (U12s), i realise now that in terms of relationship building, it seems necessary to lean towards the Golem type of coaching, before slowly progressing towards the Pygmalion type. I feel the need to establish an understanding with them that I decide what is best for them, when it comes to playing as a team. This helps with maintaining discipline from a young age. Importantly though, is to be mindful not to restrict their creativity as this might affect their development as a player. Perhaps a good balance of Pygmallion and Golem works when it comes to coaching children’s football. What’s your take on this? 🙂
Hi, Umar! Thanks for sharing your experiences – you have provided a valuable and thought-provoking perspective.
I agree with you that we do have to progressively stretch our players for them to realise their fullest potential, especially for young players. Like you mentioned, taking a slightly more disciplinarian approach on players at a young age can be helpful to instil certain desirable values, which can then facilitate their personal and professional development.
In line with this, as coaches, we can still adopt a high expectation from the onset. This high expectation has to be pegged realistically on the individual player’s strengths and areas for improvement. The coach’s high expectation will then invariably influence his/her behaviour (i.e. coaching actions) to get the best out of every player. Identifying and understanding individual differences will be key to ensure that we apply differentiated instruction to cater to our individual player’s needs.
Thank you for your feedback and in-depth sharing – I really appreciate it 🙂 It really git me to think deeply!
Very meaningful and rich article with the detailed analysis and characterization between a golem coach and pygmalion coach. I find the assessment tool useful after adapting and trying it out with my players too. Thank you, Sufri.
Hi, KH! Thanks for the encouraging feedback – I appreciate it 🙂
Glad to know that the assessment tool has helped you! May I ask how did you apply the assessment tool and what were the changes that you observed from your players?
I have adapted the evaluation sheet during training for my basketball players. I modified the skills which I wanted to assess my players accordingly and found that students were more motivated to improve for their subsequent sessions. They were also more aware of how they could improve from the modified assessment tool.
That’s great to hear! I like how you pointed out that your players have become more aware of their strengths as well as areas for improvement. Self-realisation might actually be the most important tool/skillset for a player to have in order for them to be able to effectively work on the areas to improve on while still playing to their strengths.
Once again, thanks for your wonderful sharing, KH 🙂
A really detailed analysis into the concepts which govern the different coaching mentalities, very good stuff!
Would be nice to look into the other cases of the “Golem” effect on players, and the subsequent chanced successful outcomes which occasionally happen! Have there been any cases of coaches exhibiting the “golem” traits and still have athletes thrive under them? And if so, what would be a possible explanation for the psyche which underpins the mentality of such athletes? Likewise, could the same happen as well for coaches whom are already exhibiting the most ‘pygmalion-est’ traits but still fail to inspire their athletes to success? Great article once again!
Hi, Shazwan! That’s a good query! Unfortunately, there are not many studies out there that focus or even contrast the “Pygmalion” and “Golem” effect on players – for one, due to ethical concerns. However, we can observe many real-world examples that illustrate how the “Golem” effect has adversely affected players.
In football (soccer), Mourinho’s time at Manchester United has been shrouded by how he constantly berated his players publicly, which then led to his players feeling disgruntled. The culmination of it all: his players ‘stopped playing for him’.
As for a coach displaying the most ‘pygmalion-est’ traits but yet is not able to inspire his/her athlete, Unai Emery, the ex-Arsenal’s head coach, comes into my mind. Everyone in the club – from backroom staff to the players – could agree on one thing: Emery is full of optimism and has a very positive attitude who really wanted to see his players perform well. However, it did not work out at all. Same reason as the above: his players ‘stopped playing for him’.
Emery probably applied and was good in all the coaching actions mentioned in the article. Yet, he failed. And this could largely be attributed to the lack of power he has over his players. You could read more about this here: https://totaluplift.org/coaches-use-of-power-in-youth-sports-setting/
What are your thoughts?
Thanks for taking the time to read the article, and I really appreciate your questions and feedback 🙂 It does provide room for further discussion!
Hi, very nice infographic that summarises everything! I have 2 questions after reading your article:
Is setting high expectations for low ability feasible? Will they feel worse if they don’t meet the coach’s expectations?
Do the “high expectation” for high ability players and “high expectations” for low ability players differ?
Hi there! Quality questions raised!
1) Yes, setting high expectations for lower ability players are still feasible. High expectations stem from the coach’s belief and values. If the coach believes that every of his/her player can succeed at the highest level, he will then set high expectations which then translates into his behaviour and actions.
Hence, the coach’s behaviour and actions can be adapted to meet the needs of the lower ability players. For instance, differentiated instructions can be applied – drills and activities can be scaffolded so that these players are able to achieve success progressively, and subsequently able to perform at the level expected of their coach.
Essentially, the coach’s high expectations can be viewed as a fuel for the coach’s him/herself to proactively apply varying suitable methods to get the best out of all his players.
2) The high expectations do not differ – what differs is the coach’s assessment of his/her players’ readiness for more challenging tasks, which every player eventually will have to perform in order to fulfil the high expectations that the coach has put in place in the first place.
Thank you for taking the time to read the article, and I appreciate your questions and feedback 🙂 Hope it helps!
Great article Sufri! Well done 👏. Just tk add a bit… The Power of Expectation –
Is it possible that this “expectation” is grounded from the stakeholders/owners/fans/etc? If it is so, then is there a possible hypothesis on why some big sports teams fail to meet the expectations of the stakeholders/owners/fans/etc?
Hi, Ridhuan! You have brought up a good point. Yes, the power of expectation should not just be coming from the coach but should also come from other stakeholders you rightly pointed out.
These expectations can culminate and lead to the players’ achievement of the self-fulfilling prophecy. However, it is also important to note that these expectations must be reciprocated by the form of support given by the respective stakeholders. Else, players can easily crumble under the weight of these expectations.
Thus, personally, I feel that some big sports teams fail to meet the lofty expectations of their stakeholders because the necessary support was not adequate. What do you think, Ridhuan?
Thank you for taking the time to read the article, and I appreciate your feedback 🙂
Great article! It has inspired me to be a pygmalion coach and to set greater expectations of my players to bring the best out of them. Will definitely try the tips shared here. Thanks
Hi, JR! Yes, setting high expectations for our players is actually very crucial – it influences our attitude and behaviour towards planning, delivering and also reviewing our coaching sessions to bring the best out of our players.
Thank you for taking the time to read the article, and I appreciate your feedback 🙂
I may give the evaluation sheet a try. Easy to use and added dimension to assess my boys. Good stuff mate
Thanks, buddy! I agree with you – the evaluation sheet provides a more holistic assessment of players, taking more than just their technical and tactical competence into consideration. In some ways, this goes to show that we have naturally formed a high expectation for our players since we have the strong belief that our delivery and their efforts go hand in hand to provide them with the best platform to develop into the complete player and also person.
Informative article. Players are really inspired by their coaches. They can think highly of themselves and perform well when coaches give full support. Thank you for sharing
Hi, Ray! Yes, I fully agree with you. When coaches provide inspiration through their vision, give full support in all aspects (emotional, esteem, informational and tangible), and also challenge their players, players can thrive and perform at their best!
In a nutshell, coaches need to consider the vision, challenge and support they provide for their players to succeed!
Thank you for taking the time to read the article, and I appreciate your feedback 🙂