Interview with Patrick Chanceaulme a coach who leads

In its function, the invested trainer will quickly realize that being on the point of the key is more due to human management than to technical-tactical management. To be able to enforce tactical beliefs, motivation and technical desires, above all you must transmit them. Everything therefore converges towards an improvement in his communication. Everything would be simple if it was summarized for this word. Lighting with my interview with Patrick Chanceaulme Old Pro and expert in communication in sport and professional.

Interview with Patrick Chanceaulme a coach who leads

This year I acquired the book: “Are the coaches trained?” It is one of the books that from the first pages make you feel that you will learn a lot. This was the case very much! He highlighted the things I had been able to see during my training years. Having the desire to always let you know more, I asked the author of the book for an interview. And it was kind enough to accept directly. It is therefore with pleasure that I share this interview to classify in the very enriching commercial department.

Is the coach an easy function that consists in knowing his tactical devices and knowing how to calibrate his physical preparation plans?

The coach function is mainly in the management of men (and women, in the case of female teams). Before being a technician, before being a specialist in technical devices and/or a guardian of physical preparation, the coach must be a male manager.

As in each sector of activity and for any entity, Sporting or not, collective performances are based on 3 pillars:

1/ Vision: strategy, goals …

2/ The organization: who does what, how, with what it means …

3/ The report: exchanges, methods of communication …

The first two dimensions are generally very much in terms of sports organizations or others. 3^th The dimension, on the other hand, is rarely worked. For some, it would be common sense. For others, it remains an immaterial notion. Well, it is up to each responsible manager to define common sense and make tangible what is not. Otherwise, if the relationship methods are not behaving, very quickly the vision will no longer be shared and the organization will be shattered.

Each manager, every coach, must therefore mainly put the words

and work on the 3 components of the pillar ” Relation », On 3 p

In other words, each coach must regularly ask the following questions:

PLaisir /

What I did and what I should make sure that my players and my staff take PLixir, training and competition?

PRogrès /

What did I do and what should I do to advance each of my players and every staff member?

PArt /

What did I do and what should I do to be efficient in my communication methods, individually and in a group?

The function of the coach is therefore neither easy nor difficult.

It will be easy for those who have developed their leaders and communicators, because they will have worked on the three dimensions mentioned above. From there, he will see the individual motivation and the collective enthusiasm around him grow.

It will be difficult for those who have not worked on these aspects and do not know these foundations of management and communication. In this case, those around him will suffer a lot … and he too!

Communication is at the center of all teamwork. In business everyone knows, why don’t you care about being interested in the sports environment? Don’t we strive we want to communicate better with its players?

From my point of view, there are several reasons for this.

• First of all, the amateur environment visibly sought to draw inspiration from the practices in the professional environment, which unfortunately has lost the sight of, for a long time already, the main function of the educator (see notion of progress) which is the responsibility of each coach.
• In addition, the pressure (results, those that surround them, etc.) naturally brings the coaches, even at the amateur level, to bring behind what they know best, because they were players themselves, that is to say the sacrosanct technicalistic linked to the profession.
• Then there is in sport the phenomenon of repetition and emergencies that “crushes” the coaches under the weight of their emotions. A competition replaces another. From the end of the first, the coach who is most often in his emotions is already projects in the next. Forget some essential intermediate phases: the time of analysis and reflection, to listen to its players and his staff, that of sharing, the concerted definition of progress plans (mini) for the week, etc.

Forget about involving those around him, his players, his staff … associating them with reflection and decision. However, the involvement is stronger than the motivation: in fact, while the motivated takes care, the involved, is worried!

For example, I recently participated in a debriefing of the game. It was a training on Monday, the first after the Saturday game. Basically, the chat was limited to this: ” We have lost Saturday, we have to step with these 3 points next Saturday; Come on, let’s go, tinking ball and jogging ”.

In fact, different primordial phases are missing:

• The analysis of the previous game, not a unilateral analysis, but a analysis shared by all the actors;
• the definition of (mini) plans of personalized and concerted progress with each of the players;
• The programming of the intermediate points for next week, with each of the players.
• Finally, there is resistance to the change and fear of the unknown, the fear of having to swallow the communication techniques that, this is what most coaches think, will require great efforts of appropriation or will damage their spontaneity, even go against their personality or their values ​​…

All this is not founded, but the coaches are generally fixed on their well -established beliefs.

Do you think that the development of managerial ability is the point that must make the difference between the different coaches?

What is certain is that coaches are very close to each other today, from the point of view of technical-tactical-physical preparation. These aspects are generally very processed. Are the margins of progress at this level therefore very limited?

On the other hand, the fundamental aspects of the relationship, those that make individual motivation over time, those that generate punctual stimulation during events not to be missed or those that make the full and full involvement, these foundations are not very processed.

However, the differentiation opportunities today are at this level.

What would be your definition of a good communicating coach?

There is already a good part of the answer in your question. In fact, a good coach must first be a good communicator. To do this, he must love his players (and his staff), he wants to see them pleasure, they want to progress, want to share things with them.

So, in front of those who tell me that a good coach is the one who has good results, I register in false. It’s wrong! It is more right to say that a good coach is the one who gets the best of each of his players and his group. Perhaps he will appear at the bottom of the table, but perhaps he will draw the best of his group and each one, with the means and the workforce he has.

Is communication no more listened to words?

The communication begins with listening, that is to say the consideration of the other, his opinions, his ideas, his observations, his emotions … In this regard, to be heard (and therefore considered) constitutes an essential motivation, in every individual, obviously every player.

It is therefore advisable that every master coach to listen to the techniques (the 3 types of reformulation and the 2 types of questions that are widely developed in my book ” Are the coaches trained? »).

Also note that nature has equipped us with 2 ears … and 1 single loop (it’s a sign!).