Here, we'll outline the pros and cons of five different types of training styles, Democratic training. This method gives the team freedom and responsibility, and the coach intervenes only when necessary to keep the process going. Each of these three training styles has proven to be effective in its own right, but it's important to understand the characteristics of each one and how they are suitable for different teams, players and contexts. Understanding each training style and being able to adapt its use to specific contexts is known as situational leadership.
It's one of the keys to good training. [2] Autocratic coaching can best be summarized with the phrase: “My way or my way”. Autocratic coaches make decisions with little or no participation of the player or players. The autocratic coach articulates a vision of what players should achieve and what is expected of players to perform.
Autocratic training focuses on victory and generally features inflexible training structures. This training style is suitable for individual sports, such as tennis or athletics events, where individual athletes have to take great control over their training. Players up to 14 years old tend to prefer a democratic training style. Studies indicate that democratic coaching helps young and young adolescents to develop a sense of control over their own training and that it prepares them for more autocratic training in the future.
3 Also known as “laissez-faire training”, holistic coaching is based on the theory that a happy team naturally becomes a successful team. When employing holistic training methods, coaches offer very little in terms of structured training or positive feedback. Instead, the holistic coach works to create an environment in which players feel comfortable exploring and developing their skills in their spare time and in their own way. In a holistic training approach, the coach does not act as a central authority, but rather allows team members to set their own agenda.
5 The holistic training style is more suitable for mature players who have already developed the creativity and self-awareness needed to guide themselves. Holistic training involves a large number of relationships and the coach's commitment to each player as a whole, athlete and person. While this requires a little more work, it can be cost-effective for experienced teams with the maturity needed to handle this “hands-on” training style.6.For most coaches, simply choosing a training style isn't an option. Few leaders fall exclusively into one training style, and personal experience and philosophy also shape approaches to training.
Whether you use autocratic coaching, democratic coaching, or holistic coaching, coaching skills are the same skills that inform leadership in professional, academic, or military environments; they can be organized around a few key principles. A team must end a season being better players and people than they were at the beginning of the season. The coach must learn to recognize the difference between effort and results, and between physical and mental errors. A good coach models fairness and good sportsmanship consistently, and maintains clear lines of communication, even if that communication is one-sided.
7.Compared to other training styles, democratic training places more control in the hands of the clients, while the coach provides the momentum and support needed to achieve the tangible objectives. Often regarded as the most empowering style of training, democratic coaching is the best option for clients who are prepared to take responsibility and require less labor. It is ideal for financial advice, professional training and personal growth training. Unlike the democratic style, the autocratic training style places authority in the hands of the coach.
You steadfastly direct your client to the desired results and success. Autocratic coaching puts control in the hands of the coach. And it's important that you use this style when you have the experience and knowledge needed to dictate the conditions. Very close to the autocratic training style is bureaucratic training.
It follows a more old school approach and is more driven by processes and systems. For example, in a law firm or hospital, where deviating from a process could cost a lot of money or even lives. Most of the time, bureaucratic coaching is adopted for organizational training in disciplined and regulated environments that require a non-negotiable approach to compliance and processes, such as government and public sector bodies. The holistic coaching style basically focuses on the overall growth of the person, giving equal importance to all aspects of the client's life.
The coach's job is to ask the right questions and provide support and encouragement. Holistic coaching is the best option in situations where the client seeks to create lasting results in their life in general: mind, body, spirit and community. Development coaching involves understanding your client's “what”, “why” and “how”. The coach uses 360-degree feedback and questions to understand the client's past experiences and assess where they are in their development journey.
This style takes into account the client's age, mental age and thought processes. Let's say you have a client, Rachel, who is in her early 20s. He is at an important stage in his life. You need to apply to universities and select your careers that will decide your professional life for years to come.
She is a brilliant student; however, she is unable to specify what she wants to do. Get different opinions from friends and family, your teachers, peers, and online communities. And that mix of conflicting opinions confuses her. She's moving from one option to another, and the deadlines for college applications are getting closer.
Now she has reached out to you, as a coach, to help her in this phase. Now list a different style (or a combination of 2 styles) that you think might work better and why. Training styles are methods for preparing teams for success. Coaching involves motivating employees, increasing their self-esteem, teaching new collaboration techniques, and providing ongoing encouragement and support.
Examples of training styles include vision, autocratic, and holistic. The coaching style can be a powerful tool in the fight against a dysfunctional corporate culture. Understanding these styles helps managers achieve incredible results by emphasizing personal and group development. This is a common training style in the workplace.
Conscious coaching takes a spiritual approach to improving the way professional clients interact with others while helping their overall well-being. By teaching clients about self-awareness and empathy, they improve their relationships with team members and clients and better manage stress at work and at home. Mindful training is beneficial for those experiencing anxiety and depression. Many of us will recognize this training style in education, especially in sports training.
Autocratic coaching is a development training approach that is perfect for clients seeking direct instruction. Unlike the democratic training style, which encourages clients to come to conclusions independently, an autocratic coach has full control during sessions. This training style is perfect for teaching the techniques needed to achieve short-term goals and inculcate discipline. As we develop our coaching approach, it's important to remember if we're using a holistic or solution-focused training style.
How we manage client relationships ultimately determines whether we are successful coaches. Tools that aid programming, communication, and evaluations are essential to training styles. Since the firm has experienced the benefits of coaching, the goal is to improve its culture by developing conversation skills and increasing access to coaching. Unlike the democratic training style, an autocratic coach adopts a more rigid or dictatorial leadership position, and training sessions often don't include employee participation.
For example, of two clients who work with a fitness trainer, one has a greater need for power and another has a greater need for connection. Also called life coaching or change of perspective coaching, transformational coaching helps the client to make the necessary changes to drive positive change. For example, if you want to introduce the conscious training style into your sessions, but you yourself feel uncomfortable leading guided meditations, or with the exploratory and agendaless nature of the approach, it's not going to work. Those interested in pursuing a coaching career should understand the strengths and weaknesses of each style.
The strong link between mindfulness practices and reduced anxiety suggests that a coach specializing in mindfulness may be particularly beneficial for clients who experience symptoms of anxiety. A laissez-faire coach, who is considered to be more impartial than other methods, basically gives decision-making power to athletes, with the expectation that they will be held responsible for training and practice. They should leave judgment at the door when they come to the coaching session and interact with the client with candor, curiosity and attention. While coaches can often be categorized into the common approaches to democratic, autocratic, holistic and laissez-faire training, there are other training styles that emphasize different skills or priorities in player development and what they hope to achieve.
To develop the skills needed to improve the coach's professional career, the coach uses techniques of setting goals, planning actions, questioning, listening and behavioral change. Knowing that they can turn to someone who is not only a reliable leader in the field, but who is also a resource for dealing with daily difficulties can empower athletes in a way that other training styles cannot. It's pretty clear that, to improve your training style, you need a deeper understanding of the psyche of your clients. While highly effective, the results of the democratic training style may not be immediately apparent.
Also known as “laissez-faire” coaching, holistic coaching is based on the theory that a happy team naturally becomes a successful team. .
