Coach Stress: Exploring Coping Strategies

The study aimed to investigate the experiences of male and female sports coaches regarding stressors and coping mechanisms, acknowledging the underrepresentation of women and non-full-time coaches in existing literature. It addressed a gap in understanding how coaches' experiences vary based on their employment status (full-time, part-time, volunteer). The research adopted an interpretive paradigm, blending constructionist and critical realist perspectives. Lazarus and Folkman's (1984) Transactional Stress Theory (TST) provided a theoretical foundation, focusing on the interplay between individuals and their environment in relation to stress. The study also incorporated elements of the Cognitive-Motivational-Relational Theory (CMRT), recognizing its wide use in sport psychology literature. While acknowledging potential tensions between theory-driven research and the study's constructionist assumptions, the researchers opted for a theoretically informed approach to leverage the benefits of established frameworks and enhance the practical implications of the findings. This methodological choice aimed to build upon previous research and contribute meaningfully to the field of sports psychology, particularly in addressing the complexities of coaches' stress and coping.

The study involved 19 voluntary participants: 6 women and 13 men, aged between 21 and 56 (mean age 37.42, SD 12.02). All participants identified as white British. These coaches represented a variety of sports including American football, athletics, badminton, cricket, disability tennis, football, hockey, netball, squash, tennis, and triathlon, and had coaching experience ranging from 2 to 28 years (mean 15.58, SD 8.33 years). Data collection involved semi-structured interviews, guided by Lazarus and Folkman's (1984) TST, focusing on stressors and coping strategies. The interviews were structured in four sections: (1) recalling past stressors; (2) in-depth exploration of each stressor; (3) coping strategies used; and (4) a brief interview review. Each interview was digitally recorded. Pilot interviews were conducted to refine the interview guide, ensuring its applicability across all three employment bases and clarity for interviewees. Data from pilot interviews were included in the final dataset. The use of semi-structured interviews allowed for flexibility while maintaining a focus on key research themes related to coaches' experiences with stress and coping.

Data analysis employed an abductive approach, combining pre-identified themes from previous literature (Lazarus, 1999; Didymus, 2017) with an openness to new emergent themes. The researchers used Lazarus and Folkman (1984), Lazarus (1999), Skinner et al. (2003), Fletcher et al. (2006), and Didymus (2017) as key references to inform the identification and categorization of themes related to stressors and coping strategies. Themes that didn't align with existing literature were treated as distinct new themes, allowing for flexibility and the generation of novel insights. Braun and Clarke's (2006) guidance was followed in developing themes from codes, with no minimum or maximum number of codes required for theme creation; a single code mentioned by one coach could form a theme. Data were analyzed by the first author, with the other authors acting as mentors and critical friends throughout the process, contributing to analysis and manuscript production. Regular team meetings ensured shared understanding and interpretation of findings. The six phases of data analysis included familiarization with data, code generation, theme organization, theme review, theme refinement, and manuscript production. The research team assessed the quality of research using criteria including significant contribution to the literature, sincerity, meaningful coherence, and credibility.

The study identified three primary categories of stressors experienced by sports coaches: coach-related, athlete-related, and organizational. Coach-related stressors encompassed aspects directly tied to the coach's role, such as time management for planning sessions (highlighted by a part-time football coach's comment on balancing work and coaching), the challenges of returning from maternity leave (a full-time netball coach's experience), and the difficulties faced by new coaches (a part-time badminton coach's perspective). Athlete-related stressors focused on issues stemming from the coach's interactions with athletes, including managing athlete disappointment and the pressures associated with Olympic or Paralympic cycles, which were described as both positive and negative experiences. Organizational stressors revolved around issues outside the coach-athlete dynamic, such as contract complexities, particularly for self-employed coaches, and conflicts between athletes and National Governing Bodies (NGBs). The findings revealed that full-time coaches reported a higher frequency of coach-related stressors, possibly because of greater time commitment to their roles. However, the research also highlighted distinct stressors faced by part-time and volunteer coaches, underscoring the need for nuanced stress management interventions tailored to different employment contexts.

The study uncovered several previously undocumented coaching stressors. For instance, the experience of returning to coaching after maternity leave emerged as a significant stressor for a high-level netball coach. While not explicitly detailed in prior research, this aligns with broader work-family conflict literature. This finding, combined with the acknowledged underrepresentation of women in coaching research, reinforces the need for investigations focusing on women's experiences, particularly during life transitions. The underrepresentation of women coaches in published literature and the limited exploration of their experiences highlight the importance of investigating the unique stressors faced by women in different employment settings within the coaching profession. This necessitates studies that specifically address the challenges faced by female coaches and capture their experiences across various career stages and personal circumstances. The unequal representation in the sample and previous literature strongly suggests a need for more research on women's experiences to balance the available data on coaches' stress and inform more effective stress management strategies.

The study's findings extended previous research by explicitly examining the experiences of volunteer, part-time, and full-time coaches. While high-level and full-time coaches' stress has been documented, less attention has been paid to part-time and volunteer coaches. The results showed that full-time coaches reported a higher number of coach-related stressors compared to their part-time and volunteer counterparts. This could be attributed to the amount of time spent in the coaching environment, but the unequal sample size (more full-time coaches participated) needs to be considered when interpreting this finding. The analysis also pointed to the unique, demanding nature of sports coaching, as previously acknowledged in the literature. Linking to broader psychological research on employment types, the study considered the potential for varied experiences of positive affect and job satisfaction between part-time, volunteer, and full-time coaches. The data highlights the necessity for future research to delve further into the specific differences in stress experiences and job satisfaction across these employment categories in the coaching field.

The study identified seven key coping strategies employed by coaches to manage stress, categorized into 'coping families' based on Skinner et al.'s (2003) and Didymus' (2017) work: problem-solving, information seeking, escape, negotiation, self-reliance, dyadic coping, and support seeking. Coaches often used multiple strategies simultaneously. Examples included a part-time football coach using mental imagery to plan sessions and feel more at ease, a full-time athletics coach learning to say 'no' to extra tasks, and a voluntary coach seeking support from the NGB. The information seeking theme involved actively researching ways to manage stressors. The escape theme involved taking time away from stressful situations. Negotiation involved finding alternative solutions, exemplified by a voluntary tennis coach discussing challenges with the NGB. Self-reliance involved strategies such as emotional regulation or using imagery. Dyadic coping highlighted the collaborative efforts of two individuals facing a shared stressor, including the reciprocal relationship between coaches and mentors. Support seeking showed coaches relying on a range of individuals, including friends, family, and other coaches, for assistance in managing stress. This detailed analysis provides valuable insight into the multifaceted coping mechanisms used by coaches across different employment statuses.

The findings underscored the critical role of social support in coaches' coping mechanisms, aligning with previous research (Frey, 2007; Knights & Ruddock-Hudson, 2016; Norris, Didymus, & Kaiseler, 2017). Coaches accessed support from various sources, including friends, family, fellow coaches, and administrative staff. While full-time and part-time coaches reported proportionally more sources of support compared to volunteer coaches, highlighting potential vulnerabilities within the volunteer coaching population. The study highlighted the importance of mentorship in coping, adding a previously under-explored aspect to the literature. Mentors provided not only practical support but also facilitated reflective practice and skill development. This finding demonstrates the value of building and sustaining strong mentoring relationships within the coaching profession. These observations emphasize the importance of creating robust social support networks and effective mentorship programs to support coaches’ well-being and reduce the impact of occupational stressors.

The study's findings corroborated some existing research on coaches' coping strategies while also introducing potentially contemporary approaches. For example, the prominence of self-reliance, with reflection as a frequently discussed strategy, aligns with recent research by Didymus (2017). The role of mentors in supporting coaches' coping efforts, although not extensively discussed previously, was a significant finding. The research also expanded on the types of support sought, confirming findings that friends, family, and other coaches serve as important sources of support (Frey, 2007; Knights & Ruddock-Hudson, 2016). However, the disproportionately fewer social support networks reported by volunteer coaches raises concerns and underscores a need for further investigation into this specific subgroup's experience. The identified coping strategies and the emphasis on the importance of mentorship and reflection contribute to a more nuanced and complete understanding of how coaches manage stress and enhance their overall well-being within the profession.

The study's findings suggest several key areas for future research. Researchers should continue exploring the experiences of sports coaches across different employment types (full-time, part-time, volunteer) to gain a more comprehensive understanding of their stressors and coping strategies. The study highlights the need for research methods capable of capturing the subtle and individual variations in coaches' stress experiences. Daily diaries or similar methods are suggested as potentially valuable tools for this purpose. Additionally, further exploration of the stressor and coping experiences of women coaches is essential, given their underrepresentation in the existing literature (Norman, 2010; Kubayi et al., 2017). This focus on gender differences will contribute to a more holistic and accurate understanding of the coaching workforce. These research recommendations emphasize the need for inclusive research designs and methodological approaches that adequately capture the lived experiences and diverse challenges faced by coaches in various settings.

The study strongly advocates for the integration of stress management into coach education programs. National Governing Bodies (NGBs) should collaborate with practitioners to incorporate specific modules addressing stress and coping strategies. This collaborative approach will ensure that the content reflects the realities faced by coaches across different levels and employment statuses. The study's findings highlight the importance of addressing the identified stressors and equipping coaches with effective coping mechanisms. This includes fostering social support networks, promoting reflective practices, and emphasizing the role of mentorship. By incorporating stress management training into coach education, NGBs can actively contribute to the overall well-being of coaches, which has implications for improved job satisfaction, reduced burnout, and enhanced coaching performance. Open communication channels between researchers, NGBs, and practitioners are crucial for the development and implementation of effective stress management programs tailored to the needs of the coaching workforce.

The study emphasizes several critical areas needing further attention. The research points to the need to explore the effectiveness of various coping strategies used by coaches and their impact on well-being outcomes. Furthermore, a deeper understanding of how coaches appraise stressors (positive vs. negative appraisals) is essential as this is a pivotal element in understanding stress transactions (Didymus & Fletcher, 2012). This study identified that some stressors could be viewed as both positive and negative, which highlights a crucial link between appraisal and coping. A more comprehensive examination of coaches' appraisals will facilitate the development of targeted interventions. The under-representation of women in coaching research again emphasizes the need for future research to address the gender gap and provide insights into the gendered experiences of stress and coping in coaching. Ultimately, this will contribute to the creation of a more positive and equitable work environment for all coaches.

A limitation of the study is the unequal representation of coaches across different employment types (full-time, part-time, volunteer). The larger number of full-time coaches in the sample might influence the findings, particularly regarding the frequency of reported stressors. The higher number of recalled stressors among full-time coaches may reflect the larger sample size rather than a higher number of stressors experienced per coach. This imbalance requires careful consideration when interpreting the comparative data on stress experiences among the different employment groups. Future studies should aim for a more balanced representation of coaches across these employment categories to enhance the generalizability and validity of findings related to the frequency and types of stressors encountered.

The study did not assess coaches' appraisals of stressors, a crucial element in stress transactions (Didymus & Fletcher, 2012). Appraisals, whether conscious or unconscious, influence how individuals perceive and respond to stressors. The absence of appraisal data limits a complete understanding of the relationship between stressors and coping strategies. The study also did not evaluate the effectiveness of the coping strategies employed. Understanding the efficacy of different coping mechanisms in managing stress and their impact on well-being outcomes is crucial (Kaiseler et al., 2017). Future research should incorporate measures of appraisal and coping effectiveness to provide a more holistic and insightful analysis of stress processes in sports coaching.

While the semi-structured interview approach allowed for flexibility and in-depth exploration, the lack of complete standardization across interviews might have introduced variability into the data. Differences in the way questions were asked or answered could have influenced the reported stressors and coping strategies. This potential for inconsistency should be acknowledged when interpreting the findings. Future studies could benefit from using more standardized interview protocols or incorporating other data collection methods to enhance data reliability and validity, reducing the potential for bias related to interviewer or interviewee differences.