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 players are expected to perform. Autocratic leadership, also known as authoritarian leadership, is a leadership style characterized by control.
The leader controls all decisions and collects little information from group members. Autocratic leaders often make decisions based on their ideas and judgments. They rarely take advice from their followers. Therefore, a democratic style is best for team cohesion, so it must be the most effective style.
But is that so clear? Chelladurai's multidimensional leadership model highlights the importance of a leader adapting their style to the needs of the team, and some authors suggest that an autocratic style can be effective when it comes to young and unpredictable teams (Weinberg & Gould, 200). In addition, when it comes to large teams of players, more autocratic styles may necessarily predominate, since democratic styles have been shown to be less effective for complex problems and are more time consuming (Chelladurai & Doherty, 199). While the highly structured nature of this training style allows people to develop discipline and commitment, it may not be right for everyone. An autocratic training style sets people up with the structure needed to succeed, but at the same time, the student's natural lack of information doesn't provide as many opportunities for growth.
A student who wants to provide more information may not feel that this is the right training style for them. The results of this latest study indicated that the increase in Iranian soccer players' perception of team cohesion was positively correlated with the perception that their coach showed higher levels of social support, positive feedback, democratic behavior, and lower levels of autocratic behavior. This is a popular training style that encourages a positive attitude, allowing the student to feel that they are in control of their own training. Therefore, it is appropriate to analyze what research says about what training style creates the most successful teams and if the autocratic style is really the best path, whether in soccer or in other team sports.
It's important to keep in mind that soccer management is a complex task and that the success of a soccer team is likely due to numerous factors that go beyond the coach's leadership style. The autocratic style is a sensible style in which the coach makes the decisions and the person receiving the training accepts and complies with them. Warren hires highly trained managers and, placing enormous faith in them, gives them complete autonomy in decision-making, just as a coach who guides him with a laissez-faire training style would. The importance of coach flexibility cannot be ignored, since a fundamental skill is the ability to perceive the needs of the team at all times and to adapt as necessary to maximize the team's performance (Crust & Lawrence, 200).
We've all seen or heard of it: stories of the best soccer coaches who shout and throw things to get the best out of their players. They receive advice and, in turn, train (some of) the people who depend on them so that they can achieve their objectives and for the organization. In the courses, you will learn about how coaching works, its different approaches, how it relates to the objectives of an organization and much more. If you underwent some type of training in your own workplace, the style would often be a little lighter, but still powerful enough to generate a noticeable improvement in performance.
By encouraging a higher level of student participation, this training style increases their perception of their own value and the importance of their own opinion...