check out the email that i sent to you all today (2/28)---it has a powerpoint attached to it and a link to an article that should be reviewed befor we attempt to interactively post on monday night---holler at me if you have questions---otherwise---i will expect to visit with you all on line on monday at 430 pst
I don't feel that this coach's intentions were to run up the score board. As an athlete, I am coached to play all four quarters of the game. I am coached to finish. These athletes were just playing the game and the coach was just coaching his team. You can't blame the coach or the athletes for being competitive.
Hello all and welcome to our first on-line/interactive session of coaching competitive ethics---being part of history is truly humbling!---trying to lay down some ground rules tonight---you will earn TWO quiz scores this evening---the basis for evaluation will be the quantity and quality of your posts---responding to the prompts as i manage the discussion---dealing with leadership---you were asked to review the powerpoint slides on leadership styles---based on the information contained on the slides---describe authoritarian leadership---and---give an example of a coach that uses this style of leadership and explain how they employ it
Authoritarian Leadership is a very guided process. All of the descions of when and how things will be accomplished are determined by the leader himself. He is the one that tells you when you can move onto the next set of goals. This type of leader is one who sets the mission of the program. It is hard to select one coach but I guess one that comes to mind is Bobby Knight. He has always been a hard nosed kind of guys who establishes his teams work ethic and goals. He sets the level of standards that his players will perform at and once they have completed that task than he introduces new concepts.
hooray some one is alive and with me!---true words ashley---the mission of the group is dictated by the authoritarian leader---his/her way or the highway---other examples?
Authoritarian coach would have to be Bobby Knight. When Knight says to jump all the play should say is how high? What an Authoritarian coach does is he lays down the law and what is to be expected from the players. The way that Knight employs this in when he was coaching Texas Tech we saw in the ESPN's Knight School where you could see the he knew what kind of players he wanted on his team. He laid down the rules and regulations and if you disobeyed them then you were cut. Also in Indiana when he wanted his players to work as a team he would make sure they knew he wanted to run the plays right. In so much that he would do things such as throw chairs on to the court not to distracted the players but really to get there attention. Knight is the best one that i can see as a Authoritarian leader/ coach. Just by the way that he leads his team into competition.
A leader that uses the authoritarian style of leadership would be a stereotypical no nonsense coach. The first coach that comes to my mind when thinking of this style is Bob Knight. An authoritarian coach determines all policies for the group, their goals and how they will go about obtaining those goals. Bob Knight made sure that every player he had knew what he wanted and if that player didn't act in a manner that satisfied his expectations, he let them know. When Coach Knight threw a chair on the court because his team wasn't performing well he got the point across that he would not tolerate any nonsense and that his team better adhere to his philosophy and his goals, and therefore demonstrated his authoritarian style of leadership.
An authoritarian leader is someone that has complete control of their team. They don't let their players get away with anything that they shouldn't be doing on and off of the field. They have a no nonsense attitude toward the game and can also be seen as an ass in the eyes of his players, but they all respect him. Bill Parcells is a coach that comes to mind. He is so well respected, yet in a sense I think there is some fear that he instills into his players from his persona. He runs a very tight shift and wants as much control over his team as possible. One example is when he pulled arguably his best offensive weapon out of the game in Terrell Owens because of the way that he was acting on the sidelines. Owens was mad and back talking, so Parcells sat him. Another would be Mike Singletary. He hasn't been a coach long, but he already showed he has an authoritarian attitude when he sent Vernon Davis to the locker room during a game for a personal foul. He also pulled his pants down during half time to try and show that his team was getting caught with their pants down and they need to step it up. These kinds of coaches are sometimes scrutinized in the media, but they know how to get their point across to their team about what they want accomplished.
Authoritarian leadership is much more strict leadership style than the other ones. Authoritarian is basically a "my way or the highway" mentality. The leader has the whole goal mapped out, down to the smallest detail, and it's everyones respondsibility to follow that plan, or face the consequences. The first coach I think of is Bobby Knight. He had a specific idea of what he wanted and if his players didn't preform up to what he wanted, he let them know it and made sure they didn't do it again. There is not really much room for negotiations with Authoritarian leaders. I'm sure if a player asked Bobby Knight to change a play, or do something different, things would not end well. These types of leaders like everyone to know they are in control, and they don't like to have any of it taken away. Bobby Knight uses this strategy because first of all, it's what his personality lends itself too, but also because he feels like he gets the best results this way. All practices are laid out a certain way, and game plans are done the same. That style works for some players but not all, so his success is also attributed a bit to having players that flurished under that type of direction
remember---authoritarian leadership is characterized by the desire to find what the participant can do for the organization---what the organization can do for the participant takes a back seat here
must move along here---ashley and anyone else who might be with us---what is transactional leadership? How does it differ from authoritarian leadership---and---an example from your sporting experience as a player or a coach of the use of this style??
Coach Knight might be one of the best examples of authoritarian leadership. He has a pretty narrow vision of what he wants his team to look/act like. He demands the respect and attention of his players as he keeps them in check or fearful of what happens if they lose focus.
The problem with authoritarian leaders, like Coach Knight, is that they seem to have a "do as I say and not as I do" outlook. If Knight's players conducted themselves on the court the way he does, they probably wouldn't be a part of the program for very long. This system works if the team buys into it. If they question the coach's philosophy, knowledge of the game, or system, authoritatian leaders struggle to motivate, or even keep their players.
good thoughts from justin and ryan re: the link between personality and authoritarian leadership---certainly fits with coach knight and to a certain extent with coach singletary---however---both are complex men
I very much agree with the last post above. The Authoritarian leadiership concept is one where coach or ownerdetermines allpolicies for group members. He sets the rubricof goals, missions. He is very much very much looked to as a dictator, he or she dictatesstep by step process for goal attainment. Bob Knight also comes to mind when i think of a " My way or the Highway" type of coach. I think he some what prides his coaching phillosphy on intemidation. This in my eyes can be a good thing but requires a strong minded understudy athlete.
A transactional leader helps reward players for there hard work. He is not focused on fixing what is not broken. Instead he sets a reward out there for players to strive for and in return he see large strides in play. A peime example of this is when a player is striving for the starting position on a basketball team. The leader may lay some stepping stones that say if you do this, this and this I will guarantee you a starting spot. Both the player and coach will reap the rewards.
Authoritarian Leadership is in which the leader dictate policies and procedures, decides what and when goals has to be achieved.Direct and controls step by step what needs to be done by achiving those goals.Nick Bolletieri is using Authoritarian Leadership.He has riched many goals and he and he has a huge authority from all over the world.People are coming to his academy from different countries because he knows how to reach the goals.He is determine all the policies for all the group members.Dictates step by step processes for goal achievement.
This type of leader can be easily distinguished from the Authoritarian type because it takes place in a more relaxed environment and instead of moving along when everyone else is ready to move along. The tranactional leader allows his players to have individual goals of attainment while still functioning at the team level.
I understand an Authoritarian Leader to be one who is persistent in what they want/need. The word stubborn also comes to mind. Whether it's the details of practice, the way a drill is performed or the way a play is carried out during the game, he will see to it until the end personally.
A coach I had in junior high comes to mind. I didn't enjoy other aspects of his coaching so I decided I would not compete for him that year. Once a week while I was in math class, he would excuse me from class in hopes of "convincing" me to re-join the cross-country team. This continued every week of the season until the championship race! Perhaps "not taking no for an answer" is another Authoritarian characteristic.
right target on the essence of transactional leadership ashley---deal making at its finest---how does this effect motivation on the team? for the short term? for the long term??
When I think of an authoritarian leader, I picture a figure much like the one depicted by Tom Hanks in Saving Private Ryan. He did not focus on relating to the squad so much as he distanced himself from it. He put himself in a position of complete authority and nothing us. Choosing to lead this way really allowed him to lead efficiently, which is what you need in a war time situation. As far as coaching this way, I feel it has it's place, but should not be taken to the extreme of militant application. There needs to be more relationship involved between player and coach, coach and player, and sport and player.
I agree with Ashley about the Authoritarian Leadership. The coach is in charge and the athletes are the followers. With this type of leadership there is no room for the athletes to help set the goals for themselves individually or for the team. This type of coaching may have very positive or very negative results depending on the athletes in which are being coached. The positive side may come from those who need that direct leadership pushing them the whole way. The negative side could be seen with athletes who feel that they have no say in how they are being taught or the goals that they are trying to reach. This may push the athletes away from the ultimate goals.
As far as a coach with this kind of style, the only one that comes directly to mind is Bobby Knight. However, John Heisman also comes to mind. He was considered to be to overbearing and demanded too much perfection from his athletes...which is why he left Auborn University.
to me a authoritarian leader is someone who sets all the rules or guidelines. he tells you what to do, teaches you how to do it and then tells you when it needs to be done. an authoritarian leader to me comes off as a "my way or the highway" type of coach.
the definition of authoritarian leadership is "Leadership style in which the leader (DICTATES) policies and procedures, decides what goals are to be achieved, and directs and controls all activities without any meaningful participation by the subordinates." to me this basically means i dont give a bleep about what a player thinks or other coaches in that matter, if your not doing it my way you cant play...
i believe all coaches have characteristics of authoritarian leadership for example, setting goals and establishing work ethic but i would have to agree with airish that Bobby Knight best resembles this type of leadership.
the authoritrian is the coach who is not going to let anything be done if it is not done his way. he is not going to put up with anyone who is not going to do what he wants done both on and off the field. he finds people who will do it his way. he is the one who sets the goals for the team and determines his own policies in order to obtain the goals he has set. its his way or the highway. the best coach i can think of is bobby knight as referred to previously by the others. he knew exactly what he wanted from his players and if wasnt getting it, it was well know by everyone.
I think that as a coach you have to pay attention to alot of things and the score is one of them when the score was al least 30 to 0 the coach should have pulled back a little. I dont think that an apology will change the fact that his choice to continue to play hard and end the score 100 to 0 was not right and bad coaching at that. But on the other hand the athletes should have pulled back as well
This not only challenges the individual player who viaing for that starting spot. But it also creates a sense of competition as the individual who currently has the spot has to fight to keep it. In the long run the team will continue to make large improvements as they push each other to achieve the next level
transactional leadership is when you give the players positive reinforcement after a well played game also the coach or person in charge is more laid back and can have a disscussion with a player without raising his or her voice. Case in point, Jerry Sloan in the last class i know that i pointed out many characteristics that he has that is good to have as a coach one being that could talk to you as a person just not a player. That is the way that my expierence was when i played basketball it was a great expierence because they stayed with me and helped me also they were really open to helping me develop my skills. The coaching staff that i had was nice because everytime i would have a great day of practice they would reward us with something. Whether it be less running or more shooting drills which i liked to do because that meant i could focus more on my ball handling skills and even when they would cut practice short i wanted to prove to them that i was in it for the long haul. I like the way they would treat me on many levels they also gave me a great base to discover what my coaching philosophy is and that is something that i will keep with me from now until i am no longer coaching.
A transactional style of coaching is when the coach lets his players have more freedom. Not a stickler for perfection like the authoritarian coach. Although they want the same outcome, the transactional leader does it with a more calm demeanor. He doesn't just expect players to do well. He gives them encouragement and rewards them for doing the job that they are supposed to do. An example for me from a player's perspective was when I played high school football. My defensive line coach knew that we were capable of doing the job we were supposed to and wouldn't blow up in our faces when we weren't perfect. He gave us incentives during practice if we had the best practice out of all of the other linebackers and secondary. If we had a better practice then the rest of the defense we wouldn't have to run as much. We still had to run, but when we did well we were rewarded. And since I hated to conditioning with the skills players I made sure that we had the best practice out of the defense. He was a coach that was very approachable and we always had a good time during practice. Our head coach would get on our asses if we made mistakes, but he was there to tell us "shake it off, just go out and do your job and you will be fine." I knew I was going to get beat at some point during a game, it was inevitable, and he wouldn't rip my head off for it.
A Transactional Leader is one who is more concerned with the baby steps in learning a new skill or achieving a goal. By rewarding athletes for their achievements, he shows that his standards are met without taking on the dictator style we see in an Authoritarian.
Transactional leadership is when the leader has a more laid back approach compared to authoritarian leadership. Transactional leadership allows for the leader to be more of a motivator who encourages productivity with rewards. An example of transactional leadership was when my father coached my basketball teams during middle school. My father always pointed to the positive things that players did and would build with constructive criticism. He would always point out what a person was doing right before trying to correct a mistake they were making. Then once the player had corrected the mistake he would point out how the player had corrected his mistake in front of the whole team. This positive reinforcement made the other players and myself, feel as though we were accomplishing and made us feel as if we were constantly improving. This improvement made the game of basketball fun for all of us.
transactional leadership has strong ethical impications if you promise thae athletes something in return for agreed action---and---fulfill the promise---trust can be established---also---strong extrinsic motivator
A transactional leader allows for mistakes to be made and uses these mistakes to help achieve goals. The difference between transactional and authoritarian is that the transactional leader is more of a motivator than a dictator.
To address you question more directly Dr. Brunner, I would say that the authoritarian leader has more positive long term effects on a team rather than short term. This is why I feel it is important to have authoritarian aspects in one's coaching style, but also balancing that out with more servant-like leadership qualities, which will keep athletes going for the time being. It kind of goes along with the idea of "punchin 'em, then huggin 'em."
Can't remember who said that, but i feel it often applies (in a theoretical sense of course) to coaching.
good job on transactional examples from all---especially the personal examples---candace you are in trouble for picking on john heisman---he is from south carolina---on to transformational leadership---what is transformational leadership? how is it different from transactional leadership?? Again---examples??
I think it is important for coaches to only reward when it is earned. Some coaches may plan to give the players a day off without telling them, then tell them if they work hard enough they will earn the day off, sort of like a bribe. No matter the result, the players get the day off because the coach planned it this way.
I think it is important to make your requirements for the rewards measurable, this way if the goal is not reached the coach is able to say "no" which may be the most powerful word in a leader's vocabulary.
david (tighe?)---does the type of team you are coaching---inexperienced, veteran, new team, and so forth enter into your decisions at all regarding whether to act in a transactional or authoritarian manner?
Transactional leaders attempt to get the best out of their players by giving rewards if standard or goals are met. Reward in exchange for motivation, productivity and task accomplishment. This concept is a lot more laid back in contrast to the authoritarian concept. I think Jerry jone is a fin exaple of the Trasactional leadership. He let his players be themselves and does not have many rules. Some critic his leadership habits. Its seems as if this coaching style is successful however on such as Jerry Jones', some players take his kindness for granted.
Team members can not do much to improve their job fulfillment under transactional leadership. The leader might share with team members some control of their income/reward by using incentives which will help to reach higher productivity. Transactional leadership is a way of organization rather a true leadership style.focused on short-term tasks. The leader can “punish” team member if the work is not working for standards.
transactional leadership is on the opposite end of the spectrum. this type of leadership gices incentive and is a motivational tool for athletes. a transactional leader will provide reward for good productivity and accomplishing the task at hand.
the difference in my eyes from an authoritarian style is that a autoritative leader would expect you to get the job done in a specific manner where as a transactional leader congradulates one for getting the job done in that particular manner.
One example would have to be Avery Johnson. The way that he taught was when he played for San Antonio he played like he was the biggest man out there. When he coached the Mavericks he was able to bring that intenstiy and winning spirit without emphasising the winning part even though Mark Cuban is one crazy owner! Similar to Al Davis hahah!
Transformational leadership allows for both the leaders and the followers of the group to help one another reach their fullest potential. The individual basis that is taken into consideration with this leadership style would be very beneficial for those that are just learning how to play a sport or for those who have had very little experience with that sport. This style allows for the creativity of the athletes to shine through.
the transactional leadership wants the same outcome as the authoritarian but does it in a way that motivates through reward and not as much strict punishment. he encourages through constructive critism, by building on the good that the team has produced. This style remind of my freshmen football coach. he wanted to do great and did that in positive way for the whole team
shiloh---you are on target---howvere---remember there is a reward beyond congratulations in transactional behavior that distinguishes it from the other styles---it truly is deal making---remember---we get a big play and we'll take away one of the gassers at the end of practice?
Transformational leadership is more about developing players in ways that help them off the court and doesn't focus as much on winning or losing. It's different from transactional in that it's not just about rewards if standards are met. John Wooden is a good example of a transformational leader as he often spoke of having his players meet their upmost potential.
As a coaching coming into a new coaching position or a coach developing a team with new player on it will have to portray more authoritarian leadership qualities, while a team with more experience will most likely need to see more transactional qualities to continue playing at a high level or in order to push forward. This discretion of application is of course solely up to a coach to decide upon rather than on a specific time line.
Transformational leaders seem to be more about the development of a player rather than punishment or reward for doing or not doing your job. It almost seems like winning isn't the top priority but more about building players. Basically they are trying to transform their team into a group that can envision themselves being great. Pete Carroll is an example. He uses his charisma and he reputation to go into the slums of Los Angeles and talk to and recruit gang members. You have to be a pretty approachable person to walk up in a bad area and just talk and try and change people's lives. He is always talking to his players and telling them where they can improve and tell them when they do a good job. He wants to put the mindset into his team that they are the best team out on the field, not that they are going to win every time the go on the field.
jesus nice example with avery johnson---his charisma and personality transferred to the team---his vision became part of what they wer---candace---dead on with the creativity comment---transformational leadership is about change---transforming the athlete/team into something that they didn't believe they could be at the outset
I think I like Tranformational leadership probably the most out of the different styles. I like it because it goes along with the old saying "you can give a hungry person a fish, and he will be full for a day. Teach him how to fish and he will be full for life." I think this goes along with Transformational leadership because you can offer rewards or get results for fear, but if you can help the person motivate themselves, I feel like the results are much better and longer lasting. I think the best example I have would be my freshmen basketball coach. He would challenge us to not only work hard for him, but to work hard for ourselves. I then continued to set goals for myself and work as hard as possible to achieve them. I didn't need someone to yell at me or give me too many rewards. I got angry enough at myself when I failed, and I was very happy with myself when I succeeded.
Transformatinal leadership is a the happy medium between the two previous leadership styles. I think it is important to set a good strong example when you first enter a new job but you must still give players the sense of accomplishment by setting goals and letting them enjoy the sport.
ryan---most def with pete carroll---he is the poster child for the new millenium for transformational leadership---he is not only articulating his vision but living it out in what they do daily---tighe---lay down the law with the new team---gene hackman in hoosiers?
This is a person who is leading the team with vision in the future. They spend a lot of time in communicating. Transformational leaders look after initiatives that add value. For example when the coach is putting someone as a captain he is putting motivation inside this person so this captain has goals for the team. So captain would want to lead.
justin---well done!---transformational leadership takes us to intrinsic motivation---the player is motivated from within---not by fear or mere reward---now were going somewhere!
I agree with Ryan on the development of a player's character being developed under Transformational Leadership. "Transform" implies a big change. This is a good way of developing the "family" feel to a team, and yes I see this in Pete Carroll as well.
Dungy is a great example of servant leadership. He is not very animated, and stays relatively quiet. Because of this his players shut up and listen when he does finally talk. Kind of an FDR "speak softly but carry a big stick" type of coaching strategy.
The players work hard for him because they don't want to let him or the team down. Servant leaders keep the focus on the team, making limited room for "I" guys. It becomes more about conforming to the team and the goals of the team, rather than working for personal performances.
according to homer rice's qoute, transformational leadership is both tranactional and autoratarian leadership combined into two.
to me a transformational leader is a person with vision and passion, and with this one can achieve great things. i see a transformational coach being a real enthusiastic and energetic person.
the best example of this would have to be coach akey. i have never experienced a coach with so much energy and enthusiasm. you could truely compare him to a bouncy ball because he is constantly jumping around all of his players
One issue that I see can arise through solely basing coaching style on transformational techniques is the problem of favorites. Especially in team oriented sports such as football and basketball, picking favorites and developing a few players is excellent for those players, but is unfair for the others who do not get that individualized attention from the coach. If a coach is exceptionally amazing with this idea, he might be able to affect the entire team, but on bigger teams such as collegiate programs (with 150 players to juggle) adopting this as a sole coaching technique could be a pretty steep challenge.
ok---let's look at servant leadership briefly---we'll follow up on all of this next week when i am in class with you all---what is servant leadership? how is it different from all of the other styles that we have discussed this evening? Examples??
Transformational Leadership is a concept i wish to utiluze when a begin coaching. In transformational leaderiship a coach must offer individualized care. He must get to know more about the player than what meets the eyes. coaches that display transformational leadership thrive on bringing the best out of each and every player. These coachces get to know there players on a personal basis. This is that "father, mentor like Bond". In this sort of coach to player relationship an overenphasis is placed onintellectual stimulationin attempt to promote affiliation and unity.
A servent leader is one who leade because he loves what he does. He is committed to the team as a whole and accepts responsibility for the outcome. He really has an overall love for both the game and his players. I think Mr. Wooden could fall under this category.It is all about the sport.
I agree with Keo as well about Akey. He is the very enthusiastic and very motivating. Being able to listen to him coach and the end of practice speaks, it pumped me up...and I don't even play.
tighe---i think i follow your arguement---if you are selling vision and attempting to spawn creativity in the players---they need some individual attention to be reinforced in their behaivior?
Servant Leadership it is when the coach is picking one individual from the whole team and if he need to work on serve then the whole team is gonna work on serve no matter what.
Servant leader leadership. The idea seems simple to me. Of course putting it into practice might be difficult but the idea is simple. Put your players, and others around you above your self. This will intern cause a mutual respect between player and coach.
Be the first to show respect and trust and be the second to be respected and trusted. Cause and effect.
good job cwhite---the relationship building aspect is critical in transformational leadership---tighe hit home with that point as well---airish---servant leaders are caring---wooden is a great example---however how do servant leaders differ from transformational ones??
With servant leadership, the coaches focus more on meeting the needs of those they are coaching rather than on their own needs. They help to facilitate personal growth in everybody that they are working with. Servant leaders can be seen as being selfless.
I think that they are almost the same. The one difference is that a transformational leader is focused in on the vision where the servent leader is more like how can I help or sees the overall picture of getting to that point.
Servant Leadership describes coaches that kind of let their players have the most freedom. They give players more independence than the other types of leadership. My example would be Phil Jackson. He lets his team play their game and then if something starts going wrong or its not going as well or consistently as he would like then he will bring in his team and be a coach. He tells his players where they can improve and what they need to do and lets them go and do it. He gives his team the freedom to run their game the way they want to an extent.
Servant leadership is the idea that someone can lead from the bottem up. The leader will put the players above him and do what he can to lead them in the direction he aims for. Also they like to make sure each individual is performing at their highest level before the team as a whole can succeed. These leaders are often looked at as being selfless and very careing
shiloh---candace---and---ashley---all on target---servant leaders are concerned with the development of the individuals first and the organization second---the goals and objectives of the organization take a back seat to the development of the individual first
I agree that players need individual attention. The more the better. It really does inspire creativity among the individual being targeted. Targeting the right individual(s) to spread the inspiration is also an idea that needs to be considered. To have be viewed by your players as an Authoritarian, but to up hold transformational and servant based ideals behind the scenes, is some thing I think is important.
Really it isnt different. well in my eyes they all have similarites but i dont think that they differ in many aspects. I spoke on Sloan he puts players feelings and lets them know that they should have there lives clean because the if they dont have a clear head in the game they are more liable to make mistakes on the court.
Servant leadership is the leadership style that puts the players needs first. It's different because lets players develop their skills in an independant manner. It also emphasizes a course of moral thinking and placing things in the right order of importance. An example would be Bill Walsh because he always said that a man shouldn't be afraid to say that he loves someone, which he told his players constantly.
well done all---enjoyed the time on line---will be back in class with you all next monday---feel free to add to this blog if you would like to with'late comments'---blog class ok??
A servant leader is one who Loves and has great compassion for each and everyone of his players. Coaches such as Vince Lombardiand Tony Dungee are instrumental in the way that they imploy this concept. This concept works really well, especially when conducted by someone who really knows how to emphasize respect, responsibilty,humility, love patience and commitment.
Sorry I missed your discussion. but I read everything and these were great blogs. Im gone go on record and say that Bob knight is the perfect example. It was his way or the highway he was the high authority on his team and every who worked or played for him knew that.
I agree with Nunez, authoritarian coaching is Bobby Knight. Knight wants nothing but the best out of his players and nothing less. Knight is what you will call a coach. drill sargent the way he coaches and how people view his style.
I agree with Faumui because I am coached to play four quarters. And if we continue to run up the score, thats good in a way because it shows that even though we were up by a lot we stayed consistent.
check out the email that i sent to you all today (2/28)---it has a powerpoint attached to it and a link to an article that should be reviewed befor we attempt to interactively post on monday night---holler at me if you have questions---otherwise---i will expect to visit with you all on line on monday at 430 pst
ReplyDeleteI don't feel that this coach's intentions were to run up the score board. As an athlete, I am coached to play all four quarters of the game. I am coached to finish. These athletes were just playing the game and the coach was just coaching his team. You can't blame the coach or the athletes for being competitive.
ReplyDeleteHello all and welcome to our first on-line/interactive session of coaching competitive ethics---being part of history is truly humbling!---trying to lay down some ground rules tonight---you will earn TWO quiz scores this evening---the basis for evaluation will be the quantity and quality of your posts---responding to the prompts as i manage the discussion---dealing with leadership---you were asked to review the powerpoint slides on leadership styles---based on the information contained on the slides---describe authoritarian leadership---and---give an example of a coach that uses this style of leadership and explain how they employ it
ReplyDeleteAuthoritarian Leadership is a very guided process. All of the descions of when and how things will be accomplished are determined by the leader himself. He is the one that tells you when you can move onto the next set of goals. This type of leader is one who sets the mission of the program.
ReplyDeleteIt is hard to select one coach but I guess one that comes to mind is Bobby Knight. He has always been a hard nosed kind of guys who establishes his teams work ethic and goals. He sets the level of standards that his players will perform at and once they have completed that task than he introduces new concepts.
hooray some one is alive and with me!---true words ashley---the mission of the group is dictated by the authoritarian leader---his/her way or the highway---other examples?
ReplyDeleteAuthoritarian coach would have to be Bobby Knight. When Knight says to jump all the play should say is how high? What an Authoritarian coach does is he lays down the law and what is to be expected from the players. The way that Knight employs this in when he was coaching Texas Tech we saw in the ESPN's Knight School where you could see the he knew what kind of players he wanted on his team. He laid down the rules and regulations and if you disobeyed them then you were cut. Also in Indiana when he wanted his players to work as a team he would make sure they knew he wanted to run the plays right. In so much that he would do things such as throw chairs on to the court not to distracted the players but really to get there attention. Knight is the best one that i can see as a Authoritarian leader/ coach. Just by the way that he leads his team into competition.
ReplyDeleteA leader that uses the authoritarian style of leadership would be a stereotypical no nonsense coach. The first coach that comes to my mind when thinking of this style is Bob Knight. An authoritarian coach determines all policies for the group, their goals and how they will go about obtaining those goals. Bob Knight made sure that every player he had knew what he wanted and if that player didn't act in a manner that satisfied his expectations, he let them know. When Coach Knight threw a chair on the court because his team wasn't performing well he got the point across that he would not tolerate any nonsense and that his team better adhere to his philosophy and his goals, and therefore demonstrated his authoritarian style of leadership.
ReplyDeleteAn authoritarian leader is someone that has complete control of their team. They don't let their players get away with anything that they shouldn't be doing on and off of the field. They have a no nonsense attitude toward the game and can also be seen as an ass in the eyes of his players, but they all respect him. Bill Parcells is a coach that comes to mind. He is so well respected, yet in a sense I think there is some fear that he instills into his players from his persona. He runs a very tight shift and wants as much control over his team as possible. One example is when he pulled arguably his best offensive weapon out of the game in Terrell Owens because of the way that he was acting on the sidelines. Owens was mad and back talking, so Parcells sat him. Another would be Mike Singletary. He hasn't been a coach long, but he already showed he has an authoritarian attitude when he sent Vernon Davis to the locker room during a game for a personal foul. He also pulled his pants down during half time to try and show that his team was getting caught with their pants down and they need to step it up. These kinds of coaches are sometimes scrutinized in the media, but they know how to get their point across to their team about what they want accomplished.
ReplyDeleteAuthoritarian leadership is much more strict leadership style than the other ones. Authoritarian is basically a "my way or the highway" mentality. The leader has the whole goal mapped out, down to the smallest detail, and it's everyones respondsibility to follow that plan, or face the consequences. The first coach I think of is Bobby Knight. He had a specific idea of what he wanted and if his players didn't preform up to what he wanted, he let them know it and made sure they didn't do it again. There is not really much room for negotiations with Authoritarian leaders. I'm sure if a player asked Bobby Knight to change a play, or do something different, things would not end well. These types of leaders like everyone to know they are in control, and they don't like to have any of it taken away. Bobby Knight uses this strategy because first of all, it's what his personality lends itself too, but also because he feels like he gets the best results this way. All practices are laid out a certain way, and game plans are done the same. That style works for some players but not all, so his success is also attributed a bit to having players that flurished under that type of direction
ReplyDeleteremember---authoritarian leadership is characterized by the desire to find what the participant can do for the organization---what the organization can do for the participant takes a back seat here
ReplyDeletemust move along here---ashley and anyone else who might be with us---what is transactional leadership? How does it differ from authoritarian leadership---and---an example from your sporting experience as a player or a coach of the use of this style??
ReplyDeleteCoach Knight might be one of the best examples of authoritarian leadership. He has a pretty narrow vision of what he wants his team to look/act like. He demands the respect and attention of his players as he keeps them in check or fearful of what happens if they lose focus.
ReplyDeleteThe problem with authoritarian leaders, like Coach Knight, is that they seem to have a "do as I say and not as I do" outlook. If Knight's players conducted themselves on the court the way he does, they probably wouldn't be a part of the program for very long. This system works if the team buys into it. If they question the coach's philosophy, knowledge of the game, or system, authoritatian leaders struggle to motivate, or even keep their players.
good thoughts from justin and ryan re: the link between personality and authoritarian leadership---certainly fits with coach knight and to a certain extent with coach singletary---however---both are complex men
ReplyDeleteI very much agree with the last post above. The Authoritarian leadiership concept is one where coach or ownerdetermines allpolicies for group members. He sets the rubricof goals, missions. He is very much very much looked to as a dictator, he or she dictatesstep by step process for goal attainment. Bob Knight also comes to mind when i think of a " My way or the Highway" type of coach. I think he some what prides his coaching phillosphy on intemidation. This in my eyes can be a good thing but requires a strong minded understudy athlete.
ReplyDeleteA transactional leader helps reward players for there hard work. He is not focused on fixing what is not broken. Instead he sets a reward out there for players to strive for and in return he see large strides in play.
ReplyDeleteA peime example of this is when a player is striving for the starting position on a basketball team. The leader may lay some stepping stones that say if you do this, this and this I will guarantee you a starting spot. Both the player and coach will reap the rewards.
Authoritarian Leadership is in which the leader dictate policies and procedures, decides what and when goals has to be achieved.Direct and controls step by step what needs to be done by achiving those goals.Nick Bolletieri is using Authoritarian Leadership.He has riched many goals and he and he has a huge authority from all over the world.People are coming to his academy from different countries because he knows how to reach the goals.He is determine all the policies for all the group members.Dictates step by step processes for goal achievement.
ReplyDeletewell said golden (steele?)---remember---the most powerful leadership tool at your disposal is your own personal example (Wooden, 2005)
ReplyDeleteThis type of leader can be easily distinguished from the Authoritarian type because it takes place in a more relaxed environment and instead of moving along when everyone else is ready to move along. The tranactional leader allows his players to have individual goals of attainment while still functioning at the team level.
ReplyDeleteI understand an Authoritarian Leader to be one who is persistent in what they want/need. The word stubborn also comes to mind. Whether it's the details of practice, the way a drill is performed or the way a play is carried out during the game, he will see to it until the end personally.
ReplyDeleteA coach I had in junior high comes to mind. I didn't enjoy other aspects of his coaching so I decided I would not compete for him that year. Once a week while I was in math class, he would excuse me from class in hopes of "convincing" me to re-join the cross-country team. This continued every week of the season until the championship race! Perhaps "not taking no for an answer" is another Authoritarian characteristic.
right target on the essence of transactional leadership ashley---deal making at its finest---how does this effect motivation on the team? for the short term? for the long term??
ReplyDeletem pilger---great example of the 'inflexibility associated with the authoritarian leader! We all have some of these experiences in our past!
ReplyDeleteWhen I think of an authoritarian leader, I picture a figure much like the one depicted by Tom Hanks in Saving Private Ryan. He did not focus on relating to the squad so much as he distanced himself from it. He put himself in a position of complete authority and nothing us. Choosing to lead this way really allowed him to lead efficiently, which is what you need in a war time situation. As far as coaching this way, I feel it has it's place, but should not be taken to the extreme of militant application. There needs to be more relationship involved between player and coach, coach and player, and sport and player.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Ashley about the Authoritarian Leadership. The coach is in charge and the athletes are the followers. With this type of leadership there is no room for the athletes to help set the goals for themselves individually or for the team. This type of coaching may have very positive or very negative results depending on the athletes in which are being coached. The positive side may come from those who need that direct leadership pushing them the whole way. The negative side could be seen with athletes who feel that they have no say in how they are being taught or the goals that they are trying to reach. This may push the athletes away from the ultimate goals.
ReplyDeleteAs far as a coach with this kind of style, the only one that comes directly to mind is Bobby Knight. However, John Heisman also comes to mind. He was considered to be to overbearing and demanded too much perfection from his athletes...which is why he left Auborn University.
to me a authoritarian leader is someone who sets all the rules or guidelines. he tells you what to do, teaches you how to do it and then tells you when it needs to be done. an authoritarian leader to me comes off as a "my way or the highway" type of coach.
ReplyDeletethe definition of authoritarian leadership is "Leadership style in which the leader (DICTATES) policies and procedures, decides what goals are to be achieved, and directs and controls all activities without any meaningful participation by the subordinates." to me this basically means i dont give a bleep about what a player thinks or other coaches in that matter, if your not doing it my way you cant play...
i believe all coaches have characteristics of authoritarian leadership for example, setting goals and establishing work ethic but i would have to agree with airish that Bobby Knight best resembles this type of leadership.
the authoritrian is the coach who is not going to let anything be done if it is not done his way. he is not going to put up with anyone who is not going to do what he wants done both on and off the field. he finds people who will do it his way. he is the one who sets the goals for the team and determines his own policies in order to obtain the goals he has set. its his way or the highway.
ReplyDeletethe best coach i can think of is bobby knight as referred to previously by the others. he knew exactly what he wanted from his players and if wasnt getting it, it was well know by everyone.
ok tighe---i'll bite---when will this style of leadership 'have it's place?
ReplyDeleteI think that as a coach you have to pay attention to alot of things and the score is one of them when the score was al least 30 to 0 the coach should have pulled back a little. I dont think that an apology will change the fact that his choice to continue to play hard and end the score 100 to 0 was not right and bad coaching at that. But on the other hand the athletes should have pulled back as well
ReplyDeleteThis not only challenges the individual player who viaing for that starting spot. But it also creates a sense of competition as the individual who currently has the spot has to fight to keep it. In the long run the team will continue to make large improvements as they push each other to achieve the next level
ReplyDeletetransactional leadership is when you give the players positive reinforcement after a well played game also the coach or person in charge is more laid back and can have a disscussion with a player without raising his or her voice. Case in point, Jerry Sloan in the last class i know that i pointed out many characteristics that he has that is good to have as a coach one being that could talk to you as a person just not a player. That is the way that my expierence was when i played basketball it was a great expierence because they stayed with me and helped me also they were really open to helping me develop my skills. The coaching staff that i had was nice because everytime i would have a great day of practice they would reward us with something. Whether it be less running or more shooting drills which i liked to do because that meant i could focus more on my ball handling skills and even when they would cut practice short i wanted to prove to them that i was in it for the long haul. I like the way they would treat me on many levels they also gave me a great base to discover what my coaching philosophy is and that is something that i will keep with me from now until i am no longer coaching.
ReplyDeleteany more thoughts on transactional leadership?
ReplyDeleteA transactional style of coaching is when the coach lets his players have more freedom. Not a stickler for perfection like the authoritarian coach. Although they want the same outcome, the transactional leader does it with a more calm demeanor. He doesn't just expect players to do well. He gives them encouragement and rewards them for doing the job that they are supposed to do. An example for me from a player's perspective was when I played high school football. My defensive line coach knew that we were capable of doing the job we were supposed to and wouldn't blow up in our faces when we weren't perfect. He gave us incentives during practice if we had the best practice out of all of the other linebackers and secondary. If we had a better practice then the rest of the defense we wouldn't have to run as much. We still had to run, but when we did well we were rewarded. And since I hated to conditioning with the skills players I made sure that we had the best practice out of the defense. He was a coach that was very approachable and we always had a good time during practice. Our head coach would get on our asses if we made mistakes, but he was there to tell us "shake it off, just go out and do your job and you will be fine." I knew I was going to get beat at some point during a game, it was inevitable, and he wouldn't rip my head off for it.
ReplyDeleteA Transactional Leader is one who is more concerned with the baby steps in learning a new skill or achieving a goal. By rewarding athletes for their achievements, he shows that his standards are met without taking on the dictator style we see in an Authoritarian.
ReplyDeleteTransactional leadership is when the leader has a more laid back approach compared to authoritarian leadership. Transactional leadership allows for the leader to be more of a motivator who encourages productivity with rewards. An example of transactional leadership was when my father coached my basketball teams during middle school. My father always pointed to the positive things that players did and would build with constructive criticism. He would always point out what a person was doing right before trying to correct a mistake they were making. Then once the player had corrected the mistake he would point out how the player had corrected his mistake in front of the whole team. This positive reinforcement made the other players and myself, feel as though we were accomplishing and made us feel as if we were constantly improving. This improvement made the game of basketball fun for all of us.
ReplyDeletetransactional leadership has strong ethical impications if you promise thae athletes something in return for agreed action---and---fulfill the promise---trust can be established---also---strong extrinsic motivator
ReplyDeleteA transactional leader allows for mistakes to be made and uses these mistakes to help achieve goals. The difference between transactional and authoritarian is that the transactional leader is more of a motivator than a dictator.
ReplyDeleteI like the style of a the Transactional Leadership and seem to use this in my coaching.
ReplyDeleteTo address you question more directly Dr. Brunner, I would say that the authoritarian leader has more positive long term effects on a team rather than short term. This is why I feel it is important to have authoritarian aspects in one's coaching style, but also balancing that out with more servant-like leadership qualities, which will keep athletes going for the time being. It kind of goes along with the idea of "punchin 'em, then huggin 'em."
ReplyDeleteCan't remember who said that, but i feel it often applies (in a theoretical sense of course) to coaching.
good job on transactional examples from all---especially the personal examples---candace you are in trouble for picking on john heisman---he is from south carolina---on to transformational leadership---what is transformational leadership? how is it different from transactional leadership?? Again---examples??
ReplyDeleteI am sorry :) P.S. We are going to miss you around here!!!!
ReplyDeleteI think it is important for coaches to only reward when it is earned. Some coaches may plan to give the players a day off without telling them, then tell them if they work hard enough they will earn the day off, sort of like a bribe. No matter the result, the players get the day off because the coach planned it this way.
ReplyDeleteI think it is important to make your requirements for the rewards measurable, this way if the goal is not reached the coach is able to say "no" which may be the most powerful word in a leader's vocabulary.
david (tighe?)---does the type of team you are coaching---inexperienced, veteran, new team, and so forth enter into your decisions at all regarding whether to act in a transactional or authoritarian manner?
ReplyDeleteTransactional leaders attempt to get the best out of their players by giving rewards if standard or goals are met. Reward in exchange for motivation, productivity and task accomplishment. This concept is a lot more laid back in contrast to the authoritarian concept. I think Jerry jone is a fin exaple of the Trasactional leadership. He let his players be themselves and does not have many rules. Some critic his leadership habits. Its seems as if this coaching style is successful however on such as Jerry Jones', some players take his kindness for granted.
ReplyDeleteTeam members can not do much to improve their job fulfillment under transactional leadership. The leader might share with team members some control of their income/reward by using incentives which will help to reach higher productivity.
ReplyDeleteTransactional leadership is a way of organization rather a true leadership style.focused on short-term tasks. The leader can “punish” team member if the work is not working for standards.
transactional leadership is on the opposite end of the spectrum. this type of leadership gices incentive and is a motivational tool for athletes. a transactional leader will provide reward for good productivity and accomplishing the task at hand.
ReplyDeletethe difference in my eyes from an authoritarian style is that a autoritative leader would expect you to get the job done in a specific manner where as a transactional leader congradulates one for getting the job done in that particular manner.
candace---back on the palouse friday---in class with you all next monday---looking forward to it!---transformational leadership?? help!!!
ReplyDeleteOne example would have to be Avery Johnson. The way that he taught was when he played for
ReplyDeleteSan Antonio he played like he was the biggest man out there. When he coached the Mavericks he was able to bring that intenstiy and winning spirit without emphasising the winning part even though Mark Cuban is one crazy owner! Similar to Al Davis hahah!
Transformational leadership allows for both the leaders and the followers of the group to help one another reach their fullest potential. The individual basis that is taken into consideration with this leadership style would be very beneficial for those that are just learning how to play a sport or for those who have had very little experience with that sport. This style allows for the creativity of the athletes to shine through.
ReplyDeletethe transactional leadership wants the same outcome as the authoritarian but does it in a way that motivates through reward and not as much strict punishment. he encourages through constructive critism, by building on the good that the team has produced. This style remind of my freshmen football coach. he wanted to do great and did that in positive way for the whole team
ReplyDeleteshiloh---you are on target---howvere---remember there is a reward beyond congratulations in transactional behavior that distinguishes it from the other styles---it truly is deal making---remember---we get a big play and we'll take away one of the gassers at the end of practice?
ReplyDeleteTransformational leadership is more about developing players in ways that help them off the court and doesn't focus as much on winning or losing. It's different from transactional in that it's not just about rewards if standards are met. John Wooden is a good example of a transformational leader as he often spoke of having his players meet their upmost potential.
ReplyDeleteIn fact I believe it does Dr. Brunner.
ReplyDeleteAs a coaching coming into a new coaching position or a coach developing a team with new player on it will have to portray more authoritarian leadership qualities, while a team with more experience will most likely need to see more transactional qualities to continue playing at a high level or in order to push forward. This discretion of application is of course solely up to a coach to decide upon rather than on a specific time line.
Transformational leaders seem to be more about the development of a player rather than punishment or reward for doing or not doing your job. It almost seems like winning isn't the top priority but more about building players. Basically they are trying to transform their team into a group that can envision themselves being great. Pete Carroll is an example. He uses his charisma and he reputation to go into the slums of Los Angeles and talk to and recruit gang members. You have to be a pretty approachable person to walk up in a bad area and just talk and try and change people's lives. He is always talking to his players and telling them where they can improve and tell them when they do a good job. He wants to put the mindset into his team that they are the best team out on the field, not that they are going to win every time the go on the field.
ReplyDeletejesus nice example with avery johnson---his charisma and personality transferred to the team---his vision became part of what they wer---candace---dead on with the creativity comment---transformational leadership is about change---transforming the athlete/team into something that they didn't believe they could be at the outset
ReplyDeleteI think I like Tranformational leadership probably the most out of the different styles. I like it because it goes along with the old saying "you can give a hungry person a fish, and he will be full for a day. Teach him how to fish and he will be full for life." I think this goes along with Transformational leadership because you can offer rewards or get results for fear, but if you can help the person motivate themselves, I feel like the results are much better and longer lasting. I think the best example I have would be my freshmen basketball coach. He would challenge us to not only work hard for him, but to work hard for ourselves. I then continued to set goals for myself and work as hard as possible to achieve them. I didn't need someone to yell at me or give me too many rewards. I got angry enough at myself when I failed, and I was very happy with myself when I succeeded.
ReplyDeleteTransformatinal leadership is a the happy medium between the two previous leadership styles. I think it is important to set a good strong example when you first enter a new job but you must still give players the sense of accomplishment by setting goals and letting them enjoy the sport.
ReplyDeleteryan---most def with pete carroll---he is the poster child for the new millenium for transformational leadership---he is not only articulating his vision but living it out in what they do daily---tighe---lay down the law with the new team---gene hackman in hoosiers?
ReplyDeleteThis is a person who is leading the team with vision in the future. They spend a lot of time in communicating. Transformational leaders look after initiatives that add value. For example when the coach is putting someone as a captain he is putting motivation inside this person so this captain has goals for the team. So captain would want to lead.
ReplyDeletejustin---well done!---transformational leadership takes us to intrinsic motivation---the player is motivated from within---not by fear or mere reward---now were going somewhere!
ReplyDeleteI agree with Ryan on the development of a player's character being developed under Transformational Leadership. "Transform" implies a big change. This is a good way of developing the "family" feel to a team, and yes I see this in Pete Carroll as well.
ReplyDeleteairish---agree on the lead by example comment---transformational leadership truly is powerful when the visionary leader walks the talk
ReplyDeleteOn to Servant Leadership?
ReplyDeleteDungy is a great example of servant leadership. He is not very animated, and stays relatively quiet. Because of this his players shut up and listen when he does finally talk. Kind of an FDR "speak softly but carry a big stick" type of coaching strategy.
The players work hard for him because they don't want to let him or the team down. Servant leaders keep the focus on the team, making limited room for "I" guys. It becomes more about conforming to the team and the goals of the team, rather than working for personal performances.
according to homer rice's qoute, transformational leadership is both tranactional and autoratarian leadership combined into two.
ReplyDeleteto me a transformational leader is a person with vision and passion, and with this one can achieve great things. i see a transformational coach being a real enthusiastic and energetic person.
the best example of this would have to be coach akey. i have never experienced a coach with so much energy and enthusiasm. you could truely compare him to a bouncy ball because he is constantly jumping around all of his players
One issue that I see can arise through solely basing coaching style on transformational techniques is the problem of favorites. Especially in team oriented sports such as football and basketball, picking favorites and developing a few players is excellent for those players, but is unfair for the others who do not get that individualized attention from the coach. If a coach is exceptionally amazing with this idea, he might be able to affect the entire team, but on bigger teams such as collegiate programs (with 150 players to juggle) adopting this as a sole coaching technique could be a pretty steep challenge.
ReplyDeleteKeo that is an awesome example of him!
ReplyDeleteok---let's look at servant leadership briefly---we'll follow up on all of this next week when i am in class with you all---what is servant leadership? how is it different from all of the other styles that we have discussed this evening? Examples??
ReplyDeleteshiloh---i always thought of ake as a great dane puppy on the loose for a run in the neighborhood---powerful energy!
ReplyDeleteTransformational Leadership is a concept i wish to utiluze when a begin coaching. In transformational leaderiship a coach must offer individualized care. He must get to know more about the player than what meets the eyes. coaches that display transformational leadership thrive on bringing the best out of each and every player. These coachces get to know there players on a personal basis. This is that "father, mentor like Bond". In this sort of coach to player relationship an overenphasis is placed onintellectual stimulationin attempt to promote affiliation and unity.
ReplyDeleteI would say coach Akey attemts to imploy this message, however mixed in with a few other.
ReplyDelete(Transformational)
A servent leader is one who leade because he loves what he does. He is committed to the team as a whole and accepts responsibility for the outcome. He really has an overall love for both the game and his players. I think Mr. Wooden could fall under this category.It is all about the sport.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Keo as well about Akey. He is the very enthusiastic and very motivating. Being able to listen to him coach and the end of practice speaks, it pumped me up...and I don't even play.
ReplyDeletetighe---i think i follow your arguement---if you are selling vision and attempting to spawn creativity in the players---they need some individual attention to be reinforced in their behaivior?
ReplyDeleteServant Leadership it is when the coach is picking one individual from the whole team and if he need to work on serve then the whole team is gonna work on serve no matter what.
ReplyDeleteServant leader leadership. The idea seems simple to me. Of course putting it into practice might be difficult but the idea is simple. Put your players, and others around you above your self. This will intern cause a mutual respect between player and coach.
ReplyDeleteBe the first to show respect and trust and be the second to be respected and trusted. Cause and effect.
good job cwhite---the relationship building aspect is critical in transformational leadership---tighe hit home with that point as well---airish---servant leaders are caring---wooden is a great example---however how do servant leaders differ from transformational ones??
ReplyDeleteservant leadership encourages leaders to serve others while staying focused on achieving results in line with the values and integrity of everyone.
ReplyDeleteWith servant leadership, the coaches focus more on meeting the needs of those they are coaching rather than on their own needs. They help to facilitate personal growth in everybody that they are working with. Servant leaders can be seen as being selfless.
ReplyDeleteI think that they are almost the same. The one difference is that a transformational leader is focused in on the vision where the servent leader is more like how can I help or sees the overall picture of getting to that point.
ReplyDeleteServant Leadership describes coaches that kind of let their players have the most freedom. They give players more independence than the other types of leadership. My example would be Phil Jackson. He lets his team play their game and then if something starts going wrong or its not going as well or consistently as he would like then he will bring in his team and be a coach. He tells his players where they can improve and what they need to do and lets them go and do it. He gives his team the freedom to run their game the way they want to an extent.
ReplyDeleteServant leadership is the idea that someone can lead from the bottem up. The leader will put the players above him and do what he can to lead them in the direction he aims for. Also they like to make sure each individual is performing at their highest level before the team as a whole can succeed. These leaders are often looked at as being selfless and very careing
ReplyDeleteshiloh---candace---and---ashley---all on target---servant leaders are concerned with the development of the individuals first and the organization second---the goals and objectives of the organization take a back seat to the development of the individual first
ReplyDeleteI agree that players need individual attention. The more the better. It really does inspire creativity among the individual being targeted. Targeting the right individual(s) to spread the inspiration is also an idea that needs to be considered. To have be viewed by your players as an Authoritarian, but to up hold transformational and servant based ideals behind the scenes, is some thing I think is important.
ReplyDeleteReally it isnt different. well in my eyes they all have similarites but i dont think that they differ in many aspects. I spoke on Sloan he puts players feelings and lets them know that they should have there lives clean because the if they dont have a clear head in the game they are more liable to make mistakes on the court.
ReplyDeleteServant leadership is the leadership style that puts the players needs first. It's different because lets players develop their skills in an independant manner. It also emphasizes a course of moral thinking and placing things in the right order of importance. An example would be Bill Walsh because he always said that a man shouldn't be afraid to say that he loves someone, which he told his players constantly.
ReplyDeletewell done all---enjoyed the time on line---will be back in class with you all next monday---feel free to add to this blog if you would like to with'late comments'---blog class ok??
ReplyDeleteI agree with Church, but some times Loving your players entails being a hard ass as well as verbal affirmation.
ReplyDeleteThanks Dr. Brunner. See ya in class next week.
ReplyDeletesee ya brunner
ReplyDeleteThank you Dr. Brunner. See you next week.
ReplyDeleteA servant leader is one who Loves and has great compassion for each and everyone of his players. Coaches such as Vince Lombardiand Tony Dungee are instrumental in the way that they imploy this concept. This concept works really well, especially when conducted by someone who really knows how to emphasize respect, responsibilty,humility, love patience and commitment.
ReplyDeleteSee you next week, Thanks for a good discussion.
ReplyDeleteSorry I missed your discussion. but I read everything and these were great blogs. Im gone go on record and say that Bob knight is the perfect example. It was his way or the highway he was the high authority on his team and every who worked or played for him knew that.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Nunez, authoritarian coaching is Bobby Knight. Knight wants nothing but the best out of his players and nothing less. Knight is what you will call a coach. drill sargent the way he coaches and how people view his style.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Faumui because I am coached to play four quarters. And if we continue to run up the score, thats good in a way because it shows that even though we were up by a lot we stayed consistent.
ReplyDelete