The purpose of this cross sectional study was to explore the effect of coach leadership style on athletes performance. A sample size of 70 was used from selected sub cities athletics clubs of Addis Abeba from athletes and coaches using convenience sampling technique. The study used quantitative and qualitative approaches, questionnaire was designed. A five-point Likert scale. RLSS and LSS questionnaire was used to determine the impact of leadership style on athlete’s performance. SPSS software version 24 was used in analyzing the questionnaires. Demographic analysis, descriptive analysis and regression analysis were presented. Descriptive statistics show that the most significant value associated with athletes performance is democratic leadership style followed by social consideration leadership style and positive feedback leadership style. Democratic leadership style has the highest mean value corresponding to 3.0515 and standard deviation value of 0.37319, social consideration leadership style scores the second highest mean value corresponding to 3.0327 and standard deviation value of 0.47806, and positive feedback mean value 3.0212 and standard deviation 0.39714, and social support mean value 3.0159 and standard deviation 0.47511and training and instruction mean value 3.0055 and standard deviation 0.48702 and autocratic leadership style has the lowest mean value corresponding to 2.9364 and standard deviation value of 0.54267 indicating that autocratic leadership style is poorly correlated with athletes performance. Regression coefficient analysis shows that there is a significant and positive impact of training and instruction leadership styles on athlete’s performance. Social support style beta coefficient value is0.23 with a significant value of 0.958 which is higher than 0.01, hence social support style is found to have statistically insignificant impact on athlete’s performance. Recommendation shows that use of more demographic factors to determine their influence on athlete’s performances.

Introduction

Participating in a sport is something many individuals will choose to do at some point in their life. While participating in this sport, one relationship that will have a direct effect on an athlete’s success will be the relationship between the athletes and their coach. Coaching sports has become an increasingly difficult task. Being able to manage athletes and using the right leadership style is crucial to any team’s success. It is important to understand the impact a coach can have on their team. Kim and Cruz [1] noted that coaches play a vital role in sports teams because they can create an ideal condition for players to achieve their fullest potential. However, every athlete is different, so understanding how to relate to them is just as important as winning or losing any game.

The quality of the coach- athlete relationship is important to the athlete development and overall performance in sports. (Prophet, Singer, Martin & coulter) [2] More specifically, how a coach decides to lead their athletes can affect multiple areas that determine how successful an athlete can be. Obtaining sport success depends on many factors: one of them is coach leadership style (Aruda & Marquez) [3]. Further, coaches have great influence on their team and the coach’s leadership styles and behaviors have a great effect on the performance of their athletes (Nezhad& Keshtan) [4]. Overall, it is important for coaches to be aware of not only which leadership styles they use on a daily basis, but which leadership styles their athletes prefer.

Material and Methods

Samples and Sampling Technique

The participant of the study consisted of Arada, Gulelle & Kolefe sub cities athletics club. The study included seventy seven respondents. The researcher made use of purposive & conveniences sampling technique as the most appropriate techniques for the study with in the set time frame of this study. The respondents of this study were voluntarily participated.

The target population of the study includes three clubs (have 150 total athletes). The composition of the athletic fields is running/sprint, jumping/long jump, and throwing/javelin are chosen for the purpose of the study.

Even though the selected three fields of events are specialized in various fields they are classified as athletics. The accessibility of data and the number of target groups have been taken as the main criteria to select those events, by considering that they are on the same field of sport as compared to different sport games. Moreover, each of the events is homogeneous in nature except they are specialized in three types of athletics field. Accordingly, the sample has been selected purposely which enable to include more concerned body and the choice of participant club depend on the researcher perception of their ability to increase improvement of data which likely to enhance the quality of the study result and due to their knowledge, skill and experience on matters of leadership styles and athletes performance.

The respondents was nominated from each type of athletic fields was all club athletes, all club coaches, purposively and seventeen coaches (17), and sixty athletes (60) from each field of athletics. Therefore, the total expected respondents were 77(51.33%) as a sample. Moreover, the researcher made use of convenience sampling technique as the most appropriate technique for the study. The respondents of this study were supposed to participate voluntarily.

Table 1 shows that leadership dimension has a positive effect on athlete’s performance. However athletes respondent age, social support, autocratic behavior, democratic behavior, positive feedback, training and instruction, have positive effect on athletes performance with (r =.000, .000, .000, .000, .000, .000, .000 p <.0001).

Table 2 shows ANOVA shows level of significance since the value of p <.05 so it is accepted that leadership style has strongly impact on athlete’s performance.

The result in table 3 shows that, leadership dimension has a positive effect on athlete’s performance. However training and instruction, democratic behavior, autocratic behavior, social support, positive feedback have positive effect on athletes performance with (r =.000, .000, .000, .000, .000, p <.0001)

Table 4 shows that ANOVA shows level of significance since the value of p <.05 so it is accepted that leadership style has strongly impact on athletes performance.

Discussion

These findings are discussed according to the following headings: coach’s leadership style, athlete performances and correlation between coach leadership style and athlete performances in selected sub cities athletics club of Addis Abeba.

This study found that the selected sub cities athletics club of Addis Ababa preferred training and instruction coaching behavior. The selected sub cities athletics club of Addis Ababa preferred their coach to:

• make complex things easier to understand and learn

• pay special attention to correcting athletes’ mistakes

• explain to each athlete the techniques and tactics of the sport

• use a variety of drills for a practice

• stress the mastery of greater skills

• use objective (rather than subjective) measurements for evaluation

• conduct proper progressions in teaching fundamentals

• supervise athletes drills closely

• clarify training priorities and work on them

• possess good knowledge of the sport

• provide feedback after a substitution

• provide instructions that are brief, clear and concise

Amorose and Horn [5] indicate that athletes with higher intrinsic motivation perceived their coaches to exhibit a leadership styles that emphasized training and instruction coaching behavior. The study showed that female student-athletes for four NCAA Division I and six NCAA expressed their preferences using RLSS and had significantly greater preferences training and instruction and situational consideration. Sherman, et al. [6] found that the Australian footballs players, netball players and basketball players preferred more positive feedback, followed by training and instruction, democratic coaching behavior and preferred social support and autocratic coaching behavior which is not the same as in this study. However, Asiah [7] found that there is a correlation between motivational factors among university athletes and social support leadership style of coaches. The study showed that there are no differences in the motivational factors and numbers of years of participation on sport involvement.

This study has indicated that team integration was the most important factor influencing athlete performances in selected sub cities athletics club of Addis Ababa. This shows that the athlete in the athletics club were satisfied with their team members;

• my teammates sense of fair play

• my teammates sportsmanlike behavior

• how the team works (worked) to be the best

• the degree to which teammates share (shared) the same goals

This study has showed that the athletes preferred training and instruction leadership styles in selected sub cities athletics club of Addis Ababa. Based on the results obtained there was a positive correlation between coaching leadership styles and athlete performances in selected sub cities athletics club of Addis Abeba. However, Asiah and Rosli [8] indicated that the athletes in sport teams were satisfied with their teammate’s sense of fair play, sportsmanlike behavior, and teamwork and shared the same goals.

1. Kim HD, Cruz AB. The influence of coach’s leadership styles on Athletes’ satisfaction and team cohesion: A meta- analytic approach. International Journal of Sport Science and Coaching. 2016. https://bit.ly/3bHRJtl
2. Prophet T, Singer J, Martin I, Counlter TJ. Getting to know your Athletes: Strengthening the coach-athlete dyad using an integrative personality framework. 2017. https://bit.ly/3dXxlGd
3. Aruda CM, Marquez S. Relation between coaches’ leadership styles & performance in synchronous swimming. Fitness & Performance Journal (Online Edition). 2007.
4. Nezhad RR, Keshtan MH. The coach’s leadership styles team cohesion and team success in Iran football clubs professional league. International Journal of Fitness. 2010. https://bit.ly/2WFq2x9
5. Amorose AJ, Horn TS. Intrinsic Motivation: Relationship with collegiate athletes’ gender, scholarship status, and perceptions of their coaches’ behavior. Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology. 2000. https://bit.ly/2z0a1Jj
6. Cheyne A Shennan, Robert Fuller, Harriet D Speed. Gender comparisons of preferred coaching behavior in Australian sports. Journal of Sport Behavior. 2000. https://bit.ly/3fZbQXm
7. Asiah MP. PertalianfaktormotivasidangayakepimpinanjurulatihterhadappenglibatanSukan di kalanganatlit. Unpublished master thesis. Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia. 2003.
8. Asiah MP, Rosli S. Motif penglibatandankepuasandalam kalanganAtletUTeMterhadappenyertaanSukanMasum.Proceeding Convention 2008 International Games: Friendship through Sportanjuran UTM: TelukDanga, Johor Bahru. 2008.