Olympic coaches personality traits and strivings
Description
This study examined the personality traits and personal strivings of Olympic coaches working in Ireland using the first two layers of McAdams’ personality framework. Expanding the work of Mallett and Coulter (2016) and building on the limited knowledge regarding Olympic coaches’ personalities, 12 Olympic coaches completed the BFI-2 personality inventory and a personal striving assessment process (e.g., listing and rating everyday strivings). Nomothetic coding and analysis of the results provided a composite profile of elite Olympic coaches working in Ireland. The findings revealed a trait profile that, when compared to the norm of coaches, is highly conscientious, agreeable, extraverted, and emotionally stable. They exhibited, almost exclusively, approach-oriented strivings, which were equally intrapersonal and interpersonal in nature. Motivational themes that arose from these strivings were achievement, personal growth, and health and intimacy. These results provide insight into the personality of a specific population of Olympic coaches and their daily motivations. They reflect and build on the existing yet limited empirical data in this area and may be of help in assessing current and future coaching behaviour. As such, these results could have implications for coaching recruitment and the development of coach support programmes. Finally, the use of multiple data sets, as outlined in McAdams’ personality framework, should be encouraged, as it would provide a more detailed understanding of the coaching population.
Files
Steps to reproduce
We present the results from the first two layers of McAdams' personality framework, traits and strivings, to provide a detailed account of the personalities of the participant Olympic coaches . Due to the multi-layered nature of McAdams’ framework, a mixed-methods approach was chosen, in line with the techniques outlined by McAdams and Pals (2006). Participants - Twelve Olympic coaches, either Irish (by birth) or working in Ireland (for at least five years), who had coached at least one athlete at the Olympic Games were purposefully recruited for this study. Measures - The Big Five Inventory to assess personality traits was used. Coaches’ strivings were assessed in accordance with the procedures outlined by Emmons (1989, 2003). Data analysis - The mean Big Five personality traits were calculated by extracting the raw scores from each question (i.e., 60 answers) for each participant. These scores were used to calculate the mean scores for each question. The mean scores were then plotted in accordance with the scoring methods outlined by Soto and John (2017). Coaches’ strivings (second layer of McAdams’ framework) were measured in accordance with the procedures outlined by Emmons (1989, 2003) to elicit coaches’ motivational strivings using the Personal Striving Assessment method. This process involved asking each of the coaches to list at least 10 (up to a maximum of 15) personal sports-related strivings. Coaches then rated each of their listed strivings across five dimensions (commitment, importance, likelihood of success, how challenging, satisfaction) on a scale of 0 to 5. Emmons’ coding matrix procedure was used to code the strivings for content and motivational themes (see Emmons, 1999 for reference). Data analysis - The mean Big Five personality traits for the participant coaches were calculated by extracting the raw scores from each question (i.e., 60 answers) for each participant. These scores were used to calculate the mean scores for each question. The mean scores were then plotted in accordance with the scoring methods outlined by Soto and John (2017). Each of the coaches listed striving was coded for the motivational themes of approach/avoidance and intrapersonal (agency)/interpersonal (communion), based on the definitions and examples offered by Emmons (1999). Following this process and in line with the categories outlined by Emmons (1999), all strivings were coded for additional motivational themes (e.g., achievement, affiliation, power). Finally, a striving matrix was established from the ratings (1 to 5) for commitment, importance, success, difficulty, and satisfaction given to each striving by the coaches.