Data collection procedure

Data were collected through a holistic multiple case-study approach (Yin, 2009) on all

consenting participants (n = 4) in community coach settings using the procedure identified in

figure 5.2.

Figure 5.2 Case method stages of data collection matrix

Stage one - Background information collection

With the permission from organisations, background information data collection

related to coach role were carried out. This was to gain better understanding of the roles and

activities coaches’ undertook and acted as a baseline mechanism to undepin other aspects of Stage

one

• Background information collection via organisation websites and documentation regarding job description, roles etc.

Stage two

• Qualitative interviews with case studies to assertain thier perception of thier role

Stage three

• Qualitative interviews with case study line managers (where applicable) to establish organisational perspective of role.

Stage four

•Reflective logs exploring a "week in the life" of the case studies

Stage five

122

the study. These included: (a) job descriptions and person specifications (b) work

programmes and key performance indicators (c) access to website information related to thier

role (d) other information deemed to be appropriate and relevant to the case-study (Yin,

2009).

Stages two and three - Interviews with participants and organisations

Each participant was interviewed to explore their role perception. Interview dates and

times were established, with interviews conducted in-person at a convenient location for the

participants. Interviews were recorded using an Olympus WS-32M digital voice recorder,

and subsequently transcribed verbatim. Similar protocol was observed for interviews with

individuals identified as line managers, with the questions relating to their perceptions of the

role of study participants as community youth sport coaches.

Stage four - Reflective logs

This phase, gave participants an opportunity to present a synopsis of the activities

carried out on a day to day basis. Each coach was asked to detail a week in their role. Within

the scope of the study, participants were able to choose any periods they deemed appropriate.

Stage five - Observational data collection and associated field notes

The systematic observation instrument used was the Coach Behaviour Assessment

System (CBAS) (Smith et al., 1977). This instrument enabled the researcher to record in-situ

coach behaviours into one of twelve primary categories (see table 5.2). These are sub-divided

into two classifications; reactive behaviours and spontaneous actions. Reactive behaviours

are identified as behaviours that are direct responses to athlete behaviours (Smoll & Smith,

2010). Spontaneous behavioural categories are self-initiated by the coach and deal with items

123

Smoll, 2006). Smith, Smoll, and Cumming (2007) have identified that these classifications

allow for distinctions between prompted behaviour (responses to clear stimuli) and emitted

behaviours (behaviours that have less straight forward antecedents).

Table 5.2. Coach Behaviour Assessment System (CBAS) classifications and definitions

Behaviour Definition

Reinforcement A positive rewarding reaction to a good play or good effort

No-reinforcement A failure to reinforce a positive behaviour, the coach essentially fails to respond Mistake Contingent Encouragement given to a player following a mistake

Encouragement

Mistake Contingent Instructing or demonstrating to a player how to correct a mistake Technical Instruction

Punishment A negative reaction, verbal or non-verbal, following a mistake

Punitive Technical Technical instruction following a mistake which is given in a punitive or hostile manner

Ignoring Mistakes A lack of response, positive or negative, to a mistake on the part of the player or the team

Keeping Control Reactions intended to restore or maintain order among team members

General Technical Spontaneous instruction in the techniques and strategies of the sport (not following a mistake)

Encouragement Spontaneous encouragement which does not follow a mistake

Organisation Administrative behaviour which sets the stage for play by assigning duties, responsibilities, positions etc.

Communication Interactions with players unrelated to the game

Notes:

1. CBAS behaviours cited from Lewis, Groom, and Roberts (2014, p.3).

2. An additional component referred to as “transitional activities” is also included. This is defined as periods of time that fall outside CBAS categories.

Data were collected on three seperate occasions for each participant. Sessions

attended by the researcher, were mutually agreed with participants to show the breadth of

their respective roles. Data were collected in a live format, with the researcher identifying

124

panel on a Samsung Galaxy tablet (see Appendix I). This approach was taken to allow for

easier access to coached groups (under the age of 18) and reduce any child protection issues

related to video data capture.

Observational analysis examining coach behaviour is not a new phenomenon, as such;

protocols and research are abundant in academic coaching literature (see Cushion et al., 2012;

Roberts, Fairclough, Ryrie, & Sharpe, 2012). With the objective of systematic observation an

exploration of the nature of coaching (Roberts et al., 2012) and to establish what actually

happens in a coaching environment (Smith & Cushion, 2006). Turnnidge, Côté, Hollenstien,

and Deakin (2014) have acknowledged that systematic observation has contributed to a better

understanding of the coaching process, but have also identified the need to supplement its use

with other methods. In this case, the use of field notes (see Figure 5.1).