Coaches have their own way of doing things. No two coaches run their team and teach the same way. If you’ve been coaching for a while, you probably know how to manage a team. You’ve settled into a style that works for you. For newer coaches, figuring out what kind of coach you want to be can be difficult. You need to reflect on who you are as a person, but gauging what works best for team is equally as important. That last part is just as important for more seasoned coaches too. While you may have plenty of experience and a proven method, refusing to integrate new strategies into your coaching can be detrimental to the progress of the team.

When considering coaching styles, there are three major methods: autocratic, democratic, and holistic. Each of these has its own benefits, as well as challenges that a coach will have to deal with. Again, the two contributing factors that go into deciding on a coaching style are the personality of the coach and what approach best fits the team.

Autocratic

This approach is usually the least preferred by players. An autocratic coach is best described as an authoritarian. Someone who values strict discipline, likes making most, if not all, decisions, and is always in control. These kinds of coaches expect the utmost respect from their players at all times. They are the ones with the information and whatever they say goes.

Autocratic coaching can work with teams of lesser skilled and inexperienced athletes. Having a stern demeanor can effectively help players improve. It requires them to stick to what the coach says. Hopefully the coach is knowledgeable and understands what the team needs. An experienced autocratic coach can yield some incredible results in terms of player improvement.

However, there are some drawbacks to the autocratic style. Out of the three methods, this one is seen as the most harmful for team morale. Coaches may find themselves being too strict and getting a bit carried away with having complete control over all aspects of managing the team. Still if done right, an autocratic coach can succeed in not only being a productive coach, but one that is beloved by the team as well.

Democratic

A democratic coach is all about listening. This kind of coach encourages the athletes to speak up and express their opinions. Instead of an authoritarian role where players have little to no role in decision making, a democratically led team has more freedom to get involved in discussions. The coach still provides leadership and guidance, but allows players to have some ownership in how the team operates. A democratic style lets players be much more active within the team. This coaching style is fitting for teams with older or more skilled athletes. These players are more mature and have a better understanding of the game, thus they can contribute more insightful suggestions.

It’s easier to develop a rapport with players in this style of coaching. Every player feels like they have an active role to play. Morale is typically higher than that of a team run autocratically. Players tend to feel more comfortable around the coach.

The democratic technique doesn’t come without some pitfalls though. Coaches may find it tough to carve out the necessary time to have all players voice their opinions and concerns. The risk of perceived favoritism may also come into play. If a coach is continually siding with the same player(s), others on the team may see that behavior as bias. The more likely explanation is that the coach is simply agreeing with the best suggestion, but if it happens to be the same few voices, players could begin to feel underappreciated. It’s important to talk things through with players before, during, and after a decision is made. Just to make sure that everyone is on the same page.

Holistic

One commonality between autocratic and democratic is the coaches who fall strictly in one of those two categories is usually focused on improving their athletes’ skills. A holistic coach is concerned with developing players’ skills, but looks to extend guidance beyond the game. The holistic style heavily focuses on teaching life lessons. An emphasis on not just the player, but the person is a key component. Holistic coaches are just as concerned with an athlete’s emotional state as they are with the athlete’s physical and mental state.

This method is more akin to the democratic style. Players tend to have some control in the direction of the team. Because of that, the same drawbacks can occur. Overall though, the holistic approach is beneficial because it gives players a safe place to grow not only as athletes, but as people.

Combined

When deciding what kind of coach you want to be, don’t limit yourself to a single style. Most people don’t fit under just one category. Adopting bits and pieces from multiple methods is a more realistic and healthy approach. No coach should be so entrenched in one style. Incorporate aspects of each whenever it is appropriate.