Coaching scholars have for a long time searched for some viable and helpful coaching models, where they proposed some models of the coaching process. These models have been shown to be prescriptive, having some idealistic representation of a number of the coaching process as well as have a basis of research. These models have offered great help to the coaching process where in a number of cases have allowed the coaching practitioners base their behaviors as well as their objectives on some already laid down principles rather than having their principles be influenced basing on their feelings, emotions, as well as intuition and the experiences (Lyle, 2002). These coaching models processes can be used effectively especially in the process of informing on of the coach education programs both which are considered effective, as well as others which are not considered effective. These models are beneficial since they allow the caching scholars and educators to have a glimpse of the reasons as to why the contextually relevant, as well as the real world decisions are made (Saury, and Durand, 2000).
Despite of having the use of a number of different theoretical positions, the coaching process has been seen to lack some sound conceptual basis as well as have a substantial set of varied principles. Coaching models have not been able to have an influence as they are supposed to be especially in respect to coaching practice. It has been shown that models especially in respect to the coaching leadership might not be in a position to hold the coaching leadership despite having a formulation of coach effectiveness model as well as having them being tested in the sport settings (Lyle, 2002). However a number of the theoretical models as well as the frameworks have not been formulated as one of the models intended for use by the coaching practitioners. These models are basically intended on enabling the researchers to be able to have a clear identification of some relevant factors which have the potential of affecting the behavior of the coach as well as being able to test the impact of the coach’s behavior especially on the athlete performance as well as development. A number of these theoretical models have been formulated (Cushion, Armour and Jones 2006).
Two theoretical models have been clearly outlined. These two theoretical models are; Leadership model and relation model
The multi-dimensional model on matters of leadership states that there are usually three faces of leadership behavior in respect to coaching. These leadership behavior includes; the required behavior by the coach, the preferred behavior of the coach by the employee as well as the actual behavior of the coach. Each of the states is influenced especially by three variables, which have a clear representation of the situation at hand, the coach as well as the athlete. This model clearly indicates that the performance of the athlete as well as his satisfaction is directly related to te relationship existing between the three state regarding the coaching behaviors.. Smoll and smith (1999), have gone further to propose a cognitive meditational model which concerns especially the coach leadership. One of the great assumptions of the model is that regardless of having some influence on a number of situational factors, the cognitive processes as well as a number of individual differences will come in between the coach’s behavior as well as the outcome of the athlete (Saury and Durand, 2000).
A number of authors have come up in favor of leadership model. Rieke and Hammermeister (2008) put into test the application of this model to the sport and especially in the field of coaching, where they came up with some positive results regarding its applicability. Research has also indicated that servant leadership to one of the models indicating some positive correlation especially in regard to coaching process. Servant leadership is based on the principles of trust, humility as well as a service to others. The research was able to provide some understanding especially on matters concerning the effectiveness of the coach leaders.
Another theoretical model in the coaching process is the relation model. Relationship model is based on an understanding of the coaching process as a social process that is constructed as well as has maintenance of a reciprocal together with having interpersonal relationships. This relationship frame work has been able to supplement a number of researches through conducting some investigations regarding the interpersonal constructs as well as a number of processes that are able to facilitate some meaningful together with satisfying and successful relationships. Jowett has been able to have a clear conceptualization of the coach and athlete relationship in respects of their interpersonal constructs. According to Jones and Wallace (2005) contextual, cognitive as well as some personal orientation have a clear motivation of a coach and athlete relationship. They have a clear proposing of the fact that a number of these factors have a direct influence especially to the behavior of the coaches which consequently have an effect of the perception of the athlete in respect to competence, autonomy together with intrinsic motivation (Cushion, Armour, and Jones, 2006).
Coaching effectiveness model
This is one of the theoretical models that propose that there are three determining factors especially regarding the coach behaviors. These factors include; the socio-cultural context, the climate of the organization as well as the personal characteristic of the coach. The effects of these factors especially on the behavior of the coach are in a way mediated by the expectancies of the coaches, values, beliefs as well as the goals set up by the coach. The behavior of the coach is known to have a direct influence especially on the perception of the athlete towards the coaches who consequently have an impact on ones’ self-perception as well as beliefs. All these factors have a direct influence especially on the performance of the athlete and his overall behavior. Those effective coaches have been able to have an engagement in matters of behaviors that are a direct application of an integrated professional as well as an interpersonal together with some intrapersonal knowledge. When a number of these factors are applied they are able to bring about some positive changes especially in respect to athlete outcomes of the matters of competency, connection as well as their character (Saury and Durand, 2000).
Employing various models in the coaching process has been seen to yield a number of fruits especially in ensuring good relationship between the coach and the athlete. The coaching process need to have some leadership initiatives being incorporated to it. The model of coach leadership is able to incorporate variables such as coaching context which includes the age of the player, gender as well as the goals. Also in the coaching outcome is widely considered as one of the factors, to be considered. This leadership model is able to impact positively on the outcome of the athlete as well as the behavior of the coach. The relationship model is able to have some coach-athlete relationship, this is so due to the fact that coaching is an inherently a social process which is facilitated by the relationship between the coach and the athlete (Saury and Durand, 2000). A number of personal as well as contextual variables have been shown to have some influential constructs that influence the coach’s behavior as well as the outcome of the athlete. The coaching process is both considered as a social process which is constituted as well as maintained by a number of reciprocal interpersonal relationships supported by the coach and athlete relationship. Therefore modeling the coaching process is a very important step in ensuring the effectiveness of the coaching process.