Gert Vande Broek

The myth of the team captain as principal leader: extending the athlete leadership classification within sport teams

Abstract Although coaches and players recognise the importance of leaders within the team, research on athlete leadership is sparse. The present study expands knowledge of athlete leadership by extending the current leadership classification and exploring the importance of the team captain as formal leader of the team. An online survey was completed by 4,451 participants (31% females and 69% males) within nine different team sports in Flanders (Belgium). Players (N = 3,193) and coaches (N = 1,258) participated on all different levels in their sports. Results revealed that the proposed additional role of motivational leader was perceived as clearly distinct from the already established roles (task, social and external leader). Furthermore, almost half of the participants (44%) did not perceive their captain as the principal leader on any of the four roles. These findings underline the fact that the leadership qualities attributed to the captain as the team’s formal leader are overrated. It can be concluded that leadership is spread throughout the team; informal leaders rather than the captain take the lead, both on and off the field.

“Yes, we can!”: Perceptions of collective efficacy sources in volleyball

Abstract Collective efficacy can be defined as a groups shared confidence that they will successfully achieve their goal. We examined which behaviours and events are perceived as sources of collective efficacy beliefs in a volleyball context. In Study 1, volleyball coaches from the highest volleyball leagues (n = 33) in Belgium indicated the most important sources of collective efficacy. This list was then adapted based on the literature and on feedback given by an expert focus group, resulting in a 40-item questionnaire. In Study 2, coaches and players from all levels of volleyball in Belgium (n = 2365) rated each of these sources on their predictive value for collective efficacy. A principal component analysis revealed that the 40 sources could be divided into eight internally consistent factors. Positive supportive communication (e.g. enthusiasm after making a point) was identified as the factor most predictive for positive collective efficacy beliefs. The factor referring to the negative emotional reactions of players (e.g. discouraging body language) was the most predictive for negative collective efficacy beliefs. These findings offer a starting point for the design of continuous measurements of collective efficacy through observation.

Is team confidence the key to success? The reciprocal relation between collective efficacy, team outcome confidence, and perceptions of team performance during soccer games

Abstract The present manuscript extends previous research on the reciprocal relation between team confidence and perceived team performance in two ways. First, we distinguished between two types of team confidence; process-oriented collective efficacy and outcome-oriented team outcome confidence. Second, we assessed both types not only before and after the game, but for the first time also during half-time, thereby providing deeper insight into their dynamic relation with perceived team performance. Two field studies were conducted, each with 10 male soccer teams (N = 134 in Study 1; N = 125 in Study 2). Our findings provide partial support for the reciprocal relation between players’ team confidence (both collective efficacy and team outcome confidence) and players’ perceptions of the team’s performance. Although both types of players’ team confidence before the game were not significantly related to perceived team performance in the first half, players’ team confidence during half-time was positively related to perceived team performance in the second half. Additionally, our findings consistently demonstrated a relation between perceived team performance and players’ subsequent team confidence. Considering that team confidence is a dynamical process, which can be affected by coaches and players, our findings open new avenues to optimise team performance.

Perceived Sources of Team Confidence in Soccer and Basketball.

PURPOSE Although it is generally accepted that team confidence is beneficial for optimal team functioning and performance, little is known about the predictors of team confidence. The present study was aimed to shed light on the precursors of both high and low team confidence in two different sports. A distinction is made between sources of process-oriented team confidence (i.e., collective efficacy) and sources of outcome-oriented team confidence (i.e., team outcome confidence), which have often been confounded in previous research. METHODS In a first step, two qualitative studies were conducted to identify all possible sources of team confidence in basketball and in soccer. In a second step, three quantitative studies were conducted to further investigate the sources of team outcome confidence in soccer (N = 1028) and in basketball (N = 867), and the sources of collective efficacy in basketball (N = 825). RESULTS Players perceived high-quality performance as the most important factor for their team outcome confidence. With regard to collective efficacy, team enthusiasm was perceived as most predictive determinant. Positive coaching emerged as second most decisive factor for both types of team confidence. In contrast, negative communication and expression by the players or the coach was perceived as the most decisive predictor of low levels of team confidence. At item level, all studies pointed to the importance of team confidence expression by the athlete leaders (i.e., leader figures within the team) and the coach. CONCLUSION The present manuscript sheds light on the precursors of high and low levels of team confidence. Athlete leaders and the coach emerged as key triggers of both upward and downward spirals of team confidence, thereby contaminating all team members.

A game-to-game investigation of the relation between need-supportive and need-thwarting coaching and moral behavior in soccer

Objective Although perceived need‐supportive and need‐thwarting coaching have received considerable attention, the question whether coach behavior fluctuates from game to game, with resulting associations with players’ moral behavior has not been examined. Design and method A Belgian sample of soccer players (N = 197; M = 26.57) was followed during five competition games, with players completing measures both prior to and following each game assessing, pre‐game and on‐game perceived coaching as well as athletes’ moral behavior. Results Results of multilevel analyses indicated that there exists substantial variation in perceived need‐thwarting and need‐supportive coaching behavior from game to game. The game‐to‐game variation in perceived pre‐game need‐thwarting coaching behavior related positively to variation in the adoption of an objectifying stance, which, in turn, related to variation in antisocial behavior oriented towards the opponent, the referee, and even their own teammates. Variation in perceived on‐game need‐supportive and need‐thwarting coaching behavior yielded an additional relation to team‐related moral outcomes. Finally, supplementary analysis indicated that these effects also held for an objective marker of moral functioning (i.e., number of yellow cards) and that players’ level of competition‐contingent pay related to their antisocial behavior via an objectifying stance. Conclusion The discussion highlights the fluctuating and dynamic nature of motivating coaching behavior, and its association with players’ moral functioning. HighlightsVariation from game to game in (de)motivating coaching behavior is found.This variation goes along with variation in players’ moral behavior during the game.Coaching behavior before the game influences players’ behavior towards opponent and referee.Coaching behavior during the game influences players’ behavior towards own teammates.

Development and validation of the Characteristics of Resilience in Sports Teams Inventory.

This multistudy paper reports the development and initial validation of an inventory for the Characteristics of Resilience in Sports Teams (CREST). In 4 related studies, 1,225 athletes from Belgium and the United Kingdom were sampled. The first study provided content validity for an initial item set. The second study explored the factor structure of the CREST, yielding initial evidence but no conclusive results. In contrast, the third and fourth study provided evidence for a 2-factor measure, reflecting (a) the team’s ability to display resilient characteristics and (b) the vulnerabilities being displayed under pressure. Overall, the CREST was shown to be reliable at the between-players and the between-teams level, as well as over time. Moreover, its concurrent validity was verified by linking the characteristics of team resilience with various relevant team processes. Its discriminant validity was established by comparing the CREST measures with individual athletes’ resilient traits. In conclusion, the CREST was argued to be a usable state-like measure of team-level resilient characteristics and vulnerabilities. To gain further understanding of team resilience as a process, this measurement could be used in future process-oriented research examining adverse events and sports team’s pre- and postadversity functioning.

Leading from the top or leading from within? A comparison between coaches’ and athletes’ leadership as predictors of team identification, team confidence, and team cohesion

The present study used a sample of team sport athletes (N = 343) to investigate to what extent the leadership quality of the coach and the athlete leaders was related to athletes’ team confidence and team cohesion. The findings demonstrated that the leadership quality of both coaches and athlete leaders predicted a unique part of the variance of team confidence and team cohesion. In addition, members’ identification with the team was demonstrated to be an important mechanism underlying this relation, thereby supporting the Social Identity Approach to Leadership. We conclude that both coaches and athlete leaders can inspire players to identify with their team. In turn, this feeling of ‘us’, rather than being a group of I’s, predicts a stronger confidence in obtaining team goals and fosters the task and social cohesion within the team. When coaches share the lead with their athletes, an optimal team environment can be created.

The competence-supportive and competence-thwarting role of athlete leaders: An experimental test in a soccer context.

The aim of this experiment was to study the growth-promoting and adverse impact of athlete leaders’ competence–supportive and–thwarting behavior on the motivation and performance of team members. Male soccer players (N = 144; MAge = 14.2) were allocated to ad-hoc teams of five soccer players. These teams participated in two sessions, being randomly exposed to an athlete leader who acted either competence-supportive, competence-thwarting, or neutral during the second session. When the athlete leader was competence-supportive (versus competence-thwarting), his teammates’ intrinsic motivation and performance increased (versus decreased) compared with the control condition. The leader’s impact on intrinsic motivation was fully accounted for by team members’ competence satisfaction. These findings recommend coaches to invest in the competence-supportive power of their athlete leaders to establish an optimally motivating and performance-enhancing team environment.

An experiment on the impact of coaches’ and athlete leaders’ competence support on athletes’ motivation and performance

Grounded in the Cognitive Evaluation Theory, the present experiment aimed to compare the relative impact of competence support provided by coaches versus athlete leaders on players’ competence satisfaction, intrinsic motivation, and performance.

Do coaching style and game circumstances predict athletes' perceived justice of their coach? A longitudinal study in elite handball and volleyball teams

Objective The present longitudinal study is the first to examine game to game fluctuations of perceived justice of elite volleyball and handball coaches. More specifically, we studied whether coaching style (i.e., need support versus control), coach behaviors (decision justifications), player’s status (i.e., starter or substitute), and game result (win/loss) predicted athletes’ perceived justice and its fluctuations. Methods A longitudinal questionnaire study was performed during 6 consecutive weeks among Belgian female volleyball (N = 57) and male handball players (N = 39). We administered a general questionnaire (i.e., need support/control) the first week, and game-specific questionnaires (i.e., justice, decision justifications, game circumstances) after six consecutive games. Because game-to-game measures (i.e., within-athlete) were nested into individuals (between-athletes) we conducted Hierarchical Linear Modeling to examine the hypotheses. Results Multilevel analyses showed that 49% of the variance of perceived justice was situated at the within-athlete level. Furthermore, coaches’ need support and the provision of decision justifications were positive predictors of athletes’ perceived justice of the coach. More specific, the impact of justifications was less strong in a high need supportive environment and stronger in a high controlling environment. Finally, both the status of the player and the game result were negative predictors of athletes’ perceived justice. Conclusions We can conclude that athletes’ perceived justice of their coach shifts considerably from game-to-game. Furthermore, the coaching style and coaching behaviors can help to overcome the negative effects of specific game circumstances such as being a substitute or losing a game on athletes’ perceived justice of the coach.