I reinvented my program from the inside out, starting with me, and the winning showed up.
Many athletes think about and plan for their four years in College. It’s scripted in our minds and we can see the good times, the wins, the classes, the friends the bus rides…
We know that it might not turn out exactly as we envision it, but it’s likely to be great. We’ll start, be healthy, maybe even make all-star teams and win championships.
Get strong, get sleep, be ready. It’s gonna be great.
Ok, have a plan B, too.
Enjoy.
In these unusual times the world is talking a lot about connection. How do we replace in-person connection with virtual or other forms of connection?
Is there a limit, or an ideal amount of communication or connection on a team?
Is it bad that I’m tired of Zoom?
This got me thinking about the types of connection on teams in “regular” circumstances. Should every team member have a tight connection with every other team member? Is this a reasonable goal on any sized team? Here are two models of connection; both have TEAM in the middle.
#1 has solid connections between each and every team member. These connections pass thru the team each time.
#2 shows each team member having a solid connection to the team. Is this enough?
What if that was the question we asked?
How can I help other guy?
What does this kid need from me as a coach? What am I going to do to move this situation forward?
We all have a narrative about what’s ok and what’s not, who is “good” and who’s not, but how often do we think about what’s actually best for the other guy? Now.
Of course what’s best for the team might be different. Then the questions change.
We don’t spend time on strategies when learning how to talk.
Mostly, as babies, we listen to the adults around us, we watch as they are communicating and we do the same.
There really is typically not in a how-to guide to communication for developing humans. But there should be for organizations.
Organizations and teams that spend time with specifics–who strategize about how they best communicate–can make themselves into more effective communicators.
Every organization needs their own how-to guide. AND, they need to revise and rewrite it regularly.
Does this org value top-down manuals that tell people what to do? Do you want completely open, everyone-can-say-anything systems? Some hybrid? Decide what you want it to look like, and not look like, and get to work building it.*
*the “it” can really be anything.
Your job, my job, our job in the world is to add value to others.
Think about what you have to offer and offer it.
See what happens.
Number 1 is mostly driven by the leader. The head coach, the person at the top. YOU must have an idea of the central principles by which you’ll drive the program and from there you can, and should, include all of the important people.
Start there. Simple. Not easy.
When people don’t know what’s going on, they make something up.
Most are uncomfortable with the feeling, “I don’t know,” so they insert a story into the situation. It’s really a part of the human condition.
Do any of these sound familiar?
“She must just be a &#^&$ ,”, or “He’s just reacting to that thing that happened.”, or “I’m pretty sure that those guys are not the kind of guys we want to hang out with.”
Things go south QUICKLY on teams when things are not easy and communication is not valued. Or perhaps good “communication” is not defined well to be understood among the individuals, and so people have to make up stories to fill the gaps in understanding.
What if coaches made it their top priority to define great communication, display the standards through positive and negative examples and talked about it
every
single
day?
Would that help?
What if you did the work to know what was truly important to you?
What if you saw all of your actions thru a lens of the values you believe deeply in? What if you really knew what those were?
What if you worked hard to really value the impact of your actions based upon higher values that winning and losing? It might work.
Keep doing, and work harder on being.
It’s tough out there! 50+ positions have turned over in college softball this year. FIFTY! A good amount of coaches–of both genders but more women it seems–are leaving the profession altogether. #coachingishard
Tongue in cheek I have said that women are leaving more often than men because they are “smarter”, and when it gets tough the recognize that there are other great opportunities. I don’t really believe that, however. I think that lots of “smart” people are finding coaching at the college level to be too big a challenge because “we” don’t adequately prepare people for the job.
Yes, it’s a job. One that needs training and deserves our best attention. Like teaching in too many places, however, we think about how people do the job and not enough about what the role of a coach should be. There’s too much at stake to just roll out the balls and hope people get it.
Obviously, sports at the college level is zero sum. Those who win couldn’t do so without another party playing the role of loser. Someone has to win. So, unless are are globally happy with a 50% loser rate, the scoreboard cannot be the only measure of success.
Let’s train people to define success (by this I mean administrators being honest with themselves and others) and devise a plan to achieve most of the goals. Let’s allow mistakes on the scoreboard and believe in our bones that, indeed, things like good team culture, kids enjoying the process and becoming “better” people will indeed lead to positive results on the scoreboard, but not every time and not simply because we hope that coaches and players alike “get it”.
We are better than this.
Coaching Made Easier 