Image to action: Exploring coaches’ perceptions of their reputational influence on athlete creativity

Abstract

Within the realm of sports, coaches and athletes take centre stage as the main actors. The interactions between the coaches and athletes as main actors assume paramount significance due to their impact on the nature and quality of the athletes’ sporting development and experience. The close interactions between coach and athlete are the focal point of this research. This study seeks to explore coaches’ perceptions of their reputational influence on athlete creativity. We conducted this study with coaches (n = 15) across various sporting disciplines and professional levels to gain a better understanding of their perceived reputational influence on athlete creativity. We employed semi-structured interviews to collect data with the freedom to explore and examine significant responses given by the participants. The findings suggest that coaches understand and acknowledge that their reputation is an essential element in influencing athlete creativity, and that coaches and athletes are locked into a two-person (dyadic) relationship, and its quality is the measure of coaching efficacy. Our study expands the understanding of coaching reputation by highlighting its effects on athlete creativity. It additionally sheds light on how the coach-athlete relationship is influenced by the coach's reputation and how athletes respond in terms of their behaviour and attitude.

Introduction

The dynamic nature of sport is centred around competition, innovative strategies, speed, unpredictability, athlete advancement and other aspects such as coach-athlete relationships. Within the realm of sport, coaches and athletes take centre stage as the main actors. The interactions between the coaches and athletes as main actors assume paramount significance due to their impact on the nature and quality of the athletes’ sporting development and experience. ¹ The intense interactions between the coach and athlete are the focal point of this research. This study seeks to explore coaches’ perceptions of their reputational influence on athlete creativity.

Defined as a complex combination of demonstrated behaviour, prominent attributes, and accomplishments earned over a period, ² the personal reputation of a coach triggers the behavioural responses of athletes. ³ With millions of coaches training athletes from a professional down to a youth level, organised sport is widespread across the globe. Irrespective of the level of competition, one coaching objective is the creative development of athletes, which can give them a significant advantage over their competitors. ⁴ Creativity in athletes can be described as novel or unforeseen actions taken by athletes striving to be efficient. ⁵ Creativity happens when athletes create something new and useful within their social setting. ⁶ These creative actions should be original and functional and provide solutions to a situation or challenge. ⁷ The judgment of creativity is inherently relative to a competitive sporting discipline, ⁵ whilst consensus over its importance cuts across all sporting disciplines. ⁴ Coaches’ actions should encourage or create spaces that will lead to or enhance the creative actions of athletes. ⁶ An athlete's creative development can be broken down into four parts: deliberate practice and play, social priming, creative development programming and the role of coaches. ⁴

Leadership in organised sport aims to ensure and facilitate shared goals. This is achieved by influencing the process that ensures performance. ⁸ Given that creativity can give athletes a significant advantage over their competitors, it is essential to influence the development of creativity. ⁴ Reputation is socially constructed and subject to the observer within a situational context, and this can be constructed differently depending on the varying levels of proximity to the subject. ⁹ Personal reputation is a factor that can influence the process that ensures performance, as coaching reputation triggers corresponding behavioural responses in athletes. ¹⁰ Thus, leadership behaviours are directly related to performance. ¹¹ Coaching reputation triggers the behavioural responses of the athlete, meaning the coach's leadership behaviour shapes the environment for performance. ¹² Heimann further explains that specific leadership behaviours, such as leader efficacy, strengthen team learning, leading to improved performance. ¹³ While leadership and reputation may seem distinct, they are functionally connected. Leadership is based on the enacted actions and leadership styles that contribute to the formation of reputation, and reputation is the subjective interpretations of these leadership behaviours.^14–16

Coaching leadership is an essential factor that impacts athlete performance and output. ¹⁷ It appears that coaching humility effortlessly impacts athlete creativity when knowledge sharing and an openness to experience are present. ¹⁸ This implies that a coach's behaviours impact the athlete's development and thus the coach bears the leadership responsibility. ¹⁹ The lure of leadership influence is based on the leader's demonstrated behaviour, prominent attributes, and accomplishments, both earned and observed, as well as characteristics attributed by subordinates. ²⁰ Coaching leadership is, therefore, based on a set of expected capabilities associated with coaching efficacy, which in turn successively builds a coach's personal reputation. ²¹

The focal role of coaches is such that they operate within environments saturated with high expectations, which shape their reputation. Reputation is an ongoing social construct, not merely an end product of leadership behaviours; however, the judgment of leadership behaviours affects the formation of reputation. ²² Petrick et al. further explain that personal reputation reflects human capital, social effectiveness, and past behaviours of a focal person, all of which are assessed by stakeholders. ²³ The stakeholder assessment of personal reputation is neither absolute nor objective and is subject to bias.^24,25 It is evident that, in individual sports, athletes have more interactions with their coaches than in team sports, ²⁶ however, a coach's reputation affects athletes equally regardless of whether they play an individual or team sport. ¹⁰ Since personal reputation is built on demonstrated behaviour, prominent attributes, and accomplishments earned over a period ² and has the potential to aid the cultivation of creativity, athletes are more inclined to engage in risk-taking, experimentation or unconventional approaches within teams where the coach is known or open to pushing limits. ²¹ Leadership plays a vital role in shaping the climate that either stifles or encourages creativity. Leaders who cultivate a reputation that encourages risk-taking, support and innovation are likely to trigger creative subordinates. Reputation is not homogeneous, nor are its effects uniform. ²⁷ The social phenomenon of personal reputation may impact groups or individuals, and a positive reputation can provide desirable or positive outcomes such as higher performance appraisals and increased power. ¹ With this power of influence, coaches can impact the creative development of their athletes. Petrick et al. ²³ highlighted the core component of reputation as an intangible commodity that offers a competitive advantage. The functional utility of reputation is twofold. Zinko et al. ²⁸ established that a positive reputation results in positive and desirable outcomes (higher performance evaluations, increased power) whilst a negative personal reputation results in less desirable outcomes (termination, low-performance evaluations).

The relationship among the coach's reputation, creativity, and the coach-athlete relationship significantly influences athletes’ performance and development. The literature demonstrates that a coach's reputation influences the perception of trust, efficiency and credibility that athletes form, and this in turn affects the willingness of athletes to engage in creative problem solving and knowledge sharing. ²⁹ Example: Reputable coaches are more likely to foster a conducive environment where athletes feel safe to take and explore more creative solutions, a prerequisite for novelty and adaptive learning.^29,30 The coach's reputational effects do not occur in isolation. The coach-athlete relationship is the means through which reputation can translate into influence. A positive coach-athlete relationship is foundational, and this facilitates communication, trust and athlete autonomy, factors that aid creativity and learning. ³¹ Essentially, a coach's reputation initiates positive perceptions, but the quality of the coach-athlete relationship models how athlete creativity emerges.

Due to the intuitive appeal of creativity within sports, we examined the perceived reputational influence on athlete creativity through the lens of coaches by conducting a qualitative study using expert interviews (n = 15) to seek an understanding of how a coach's reputation may influence the creative development of athletes.

Theoretical basis and literature review

Coaches have the profound responsibility of leadership within sports teams, and this obligation is essential in shaping the development of athletes. ¹⁹ The focal leadership role of a coach comes with a set of expectations, and in executing these expectations, athletes form perceptions about the coach ³² which constitute the basis on which the coach's reputation is formed. ³³ A coach's reputation is built on the observable demonstration of behaviours, accomplishments and qualities over time. ¹ Athlete creativity can be defined as the autonomy to explore unconventional ways of playing sports. This freedom to explore novelty is aided by a sporting environment created by leadership that encourages risk-taking while entrusting players to probe beyond the limits of their skill sets. ³⁴

Within the sports coaching literature, two interrelated yet broad constructs are fundamental to the development of athletes: the coach's reputation and the athlete's creative behaviour. Reputation is a reflection of demonstrated behaviour that is viewed as a marker of status or efficacy and has a direct effect on the creative development of athletes. This connection is mediated by the interpersonal relationship between the coach and the athlete, primarily through knowledge sharing and openness to experience. ²⁹

The influence of reputation on creativity depends on the quality of coach-athlete relationships, which provide social and psychological safety, enabling reputational effects to shape the athlete. The coach-athlete relationship is the means to influence creativity and is widely regarded as the “heart of effective coaching”. ³¹ Structurally, the coach-athlete relationship is based on the 3 + 1C models, comprising Closeness, Commitment, Complementarity, and Co-orientation. This collectively represents the cognitive, behavioural and emotional dimensions within the coach-athlete interactions. ³⁵

The facilitative role of the quality of the coach-athlete relationship linked to the athlete's performance is supported empirically. Example: The coach-athlete relationship positively affects the motor behaviours of athletes, with the satisfaction of physiological needs mediating the effects. ³¹ In essence, a coach's reputation may enhance perception, but reputation alone is not adequate. An interplay of reputation, relational quality and a conducive coaching environment drives athlete creativity.

In the case of sports, a coach's reputation can be translated into an athlete's influence^29,36 and our theoretical enquiry is to examine the coaches’ perceptions of their reputational influence on athlete creativity. The following objectives guide this study:

How do leadership behaviours influence reputation in ways that can influence the development of creativity?

How do coaches understand the link between the coach–athlete relationship and its impact on athlete creativity?

To what extent do coaches perceive the enhancement of athlete creativity as essential to their role?

Reputation

Reputation is a major source of information for the formation of initial expectations. Reputation is the demonstrated behaviour, prominent attributes, observable qualities and accomplishments earned over a period. ¹ Through these observable actions, athletes form their perceptions which feed into the coach's reputation. ³⁷ The formation of reputation is a highly subjective and socially constructed concept and a coach can possess multiple reputations simultaneously in specific contexts. ¹ The function of reputation is such that a strong and positive reputation provides outcomes such as influence and power. However, the development of a coach's reputation does not happen overnight but results from a consistent demonstration of a particular behaviour or attributes over time.^1,30

Social interactions within sports teams are inevitable, providing the basis for forming expectations amongst coaches, officials, team members, opponents etc. ³⁸ The relationship between the coach and athlete, as determined by a set of expectations and consequences, is an important sporting rapport^39,40 as the interdependence alliance between the coach and athlete relationship is such that, behaviours, feelings, and thoughts are mutually interlinked ⁴¹ . Although the expectations formed by the athlete impact the forged relationship with the coach,^30,42the coach-athlete relationship plays an essential role in the performance of both parties (Figure 1). ²⁶

Figure 1.

The four-step expectancy cycle (Becker & Solomon, 2005). ⁴³

The four-step expectancy cycle suggests that athletes’ expectations of a coach can alter athletic performance. The expectancy cycle is based on the concept that reputational information about coaches affects coach-athlete interactions which can alter performance. According to the four-step expectancy cycle (see Figure 1) the process is as follows: Step 1. Athletes form their initial expectations of the coach based on informational cues like coaching records, accomplishments, performance, news reports, rumours etc. Before meaningful interactions between coach and athletes happen, the reputation of the coach functions as an initial cognitive frame within which athletes base their expectations. Step 2. Athletes initially act as though the formed expectations of the coach were true since the initial expectations have neither been confirmed nor denied. When athletes perceive a coach as credible and trustworthy, they may be more receptive to instruction and more willing to attempt challenging or creative actions. Step 3. Athletes interpret the coach's demonstrated behaviour and act as per the interpretation. Coach–athlete interactions act as the mechanism through which coach reputation is reinforced or challenged Step 4. In the final stage, the athlete confirms the coach's behaviour as evidence of the initial expectations formed or sets new expectations if the initial expectations were wrong or misleading. The model highlights that reputation is not static and evolves over time based on the demonstrated behaviours of the coach. Although Becker and Solomon ⁴³ provide an initial insight into how expectations influence athlete behaviours, this model is overly linear as it indicates a progression between athlete expectations and behaviours but does not account for the inherent subjectivity of reputation. We argue that the formation of reputation is a highly subjective and socially constructed concept, and a coach can possess multiple reputations simultaneously in specific contexts and subject to time.^1,44

Reputation is rarely formed in a tidy cycle; it often emerges through iterative, multi-directional interactions shaped by context and experiences, ⁴⁴ but the model assumes a predictable, sequential process and treats athletes as homogeneous while overlooking individual differences and subjective interpretation. Reputation is not a static label but rather evolves through accumulated experiences ¹ ; however, the model fails to account for its evolving nature. Lastly, coaches interpret and experience the judgments subject to them. Becker and Solomon's ⁴³ model offers a useful foundation for reputation but does not capture the complexity and subjectivity of reputation.

Coach-Athlete relationship

The coach-athlete relationship is the most influential and important interaction experienced by coaches and athletes in sport, ²⁶ and athletes spend an increasing amount of time with their coaches as they advance through the sporting ranks and become more competitive. ⁴⁵ Given the impact of the coach-athlete relationship on the nature and quality of an athlete's sporting development and experience, this relationship is a significant area of inquiry ⁴¹ in terms of understanding how coaches perceive their reputational influence on athletes.

Interestingly, coach-athlete relationships are more effective when they are patterned and consistent rather than highly variable. Effectiveness increases when the coach fosters a positive environment and deliberately engages with athletes. ⁴⁶ Deliberately engaging in athlete interactions ⁴⁵ suggests that the interactive experience must be based on the developmental trajectory during the sporting season and a unique relationship with each individual athlete. The coach-athlete relationship should be based on meeting the needs of the individual athlete and not just the characteristics of the sport in question. ⁴⁷

The value of the coach-athlete relationship is priceless, as its quality serves as a barometer by which the participation and performance of sports can become a unique positive experience.^35,48 Since humans are social beings, positive relationships make us healthier, happier, and ultimately aid us in living longer. ⁴⁹ Coach and athlete are locked in a Dyadic relationship (two-person relationship), and understanding this dynamic is essential since it can influence their experiences, coaching efficacy and the level of success. ³⁵

For an effective coach-athlete relationship, both parties must have confidence in each other's abilities while estimating the other party's confidence in them, as explored from the tripartite efficacy perspective, which identifies the antecedents and consequences of the working relationship between the coach-athlete interactions. ⁵⁰ The tripartite efficacy explains how the coach-athlete relationship is influenced by the athlete's beliefs about efficacy, such that the athlete's perception of the coach's ability to perform their role influences their interactions. ⁵¹

The coach-athlete relationship is instrumental in the development of both parties, such that conflicts must be treated as a learning curve. ⁵² Great coaches understand that athletes give their all and learn from coaches they love. Thus, prioritising the building and maintaining of positive relationships with athletes should be paramount. ³⁵ The building blocks of this coach-athlete relationship involve mutually dissolving personal boundaries in order to build and develop a deep, strong relationship with each athlete. ⁵³ A positive coach-athlete relationship allows both parties to flourish together. ⁴⁸

It is evident that both the coach's demonstrated behaviour and relationship with athletes are positively related to the developmental experiences of athletes, ⁵⁴ however, the power dynamics within the coach-athlete relationship are unevenly distributed in favour of coaches due to their expert knowledge of their sport and their decision-making authority. ⁵⁵

Athlete creativity

The concept of creativity in sport is becoming increasingly popular, particularly for researchers and coaches, since it could give a team a significant advantage over its competitors. As a result, researchers and coaches create strategies to improve the unpredictability of collective and individual actions within teams. ⁴ Amabile defined creativity as the successful development and implementation of novel solutions to tackle challenges. ⁵⁶ In the sporting world, creativity is defined as when an athlete's actions exceed a normal level by generating and applying novel solutions to specific game situations, mostly in high pressure environments. ⁷ While creative actions often appears unpredictable, not all unpredictable actions or behaviours are creative. Creativity applies an unexpected solution to a problem, while unpredictable actions are inappropriate for the context or situation. ⁷

The investment model refers to creativity as unique decisions that are inherent within sports ⁵⁷ and are expressed in a non-verbal manner. ⁵⁸ Creativity is limited by real time and spontaneity, ⁴ and has two aspects: the generation and application of originality.^7,59 Previous research assessed creativity with a variety of tests, such as the Torrance Tests of Creative Thinking (TTCT) or the Creativity Behaviour Assessment in Team Sports (CBATS), video and monitoring, and performance-based situation tests. ⁴ Understanding the creative development of athletes is a vital aspect for researchers and coaches. An athlete's creative development can be broken down into four parts: deliberate practice and play, social priming, creative development programming and the role of coaches. ⁴

Deliberate practice and play involve improving an athlete's skills, expertise and talent.^60,61 Deliberate practice employs a set of specific goal-oriented drills to improve an athlete's performance. ⁶² Deliberate play, on the other hand, focuses on athlete development rather than performance during the early stages of an athlete's career by engaging in intrinsically motivating developmental activities. ⁶³ Therefore, a combination of deliberate practice and play is vital for an athlete's creative development. ⁶¹

The concept of social priming uses creative role models within sport as a creative thinking benchmark where athletes study the characteristics and attributes of a creative player (example: Diego Maradona or Roger Federer) and visualise their decision-making within game scenarios with a view to activating and influencing an athlete's mental representation of creativity. ⁶⁴ Creative development programming provides the framework for creativity, with several proposed models such as the Creative Development Framework (CDF) or the Tactical Creativity Approach (TCA). Its goal is to develop the creative behaviour of athletes, positively supported by research. ⁴

As the head of the team, coaches exert influence on their athletes. ⁶⁵ In their study, Owens and Hekman ⁶⁶ confirm that athletes emulate coach (leader) behaviours which, in turn, creates a benchmark that influences team performance. Thus, imitable coach (leader) behaviour is a vital mechanism for influencing athlete and team performance. This confirms Hambrick and Quigley ⁶⁷ who suggest that the influence of leadership is a relative factor in shaping athlete and team performance. A coach's reputation is informed by their demonstrated behaviour, qualities and accomplishments or observable coaching effectiveness. ¹ As established by Asare and Schnitzer ²⁹ a coach's reputation may influence the development of an athlete's creativity. This study seeks to understand whether coaches are aware of their perceived reputational influence on athletes.

Although creativity is important within sports, it is a complex and multidimensional construct that eludes simple definition.^6,68 It is essential to acknowledge that creativity is conceptualised differently across various coaching contexts, and boxing the concept into a single definition would risk distorting how coaches understand and enact creativity in practice. ⁶⁸ Therefore, we do not try to fix creativity to one framework but rather explore how coaches themselves perceive creativity and how they believe their reputation shapes its emergence within the coach-athlete relationship.

Methodology

Study design

We examine coaches’ perceptions of their reputational influence on athlete creativity. While we understand that reputation is a social construct based on the collective shared meanings, collective judgments and interactions, we contend that coaches live within and interpret these constructs. Reputation is not merely an external evaluation by others; it is continually experienced and negotiated by those it describes. For this reason, our study focuses on how coaches understand and interpret their formed reputation.

Reputation is not inaccessible to persons who are subject to it. Coaches engage athletes, club officials, and parents regularly, and these interactions offer the coach insight into how they are perceived. Coaches’ subjective interpretations of these dynamics offer a legitimate and meaningful source of data for exploring reputational influence. Our goal is to understand how coaches perceive and make sense of their position within these socially constructed processes.

The interpretative focus is central to our studýs epistemology. The subjective experiences of coaches are central to understanding how social phenomena are enacted and sustained in practice. In this case, the coach's accurate or inaccurate interpretation and beliefs about their reputation shape their day-to-day behavioural actions. By centring coaches’ perceptions of their own reputational influence, our study offers an insight into the subjective dimension of reputation.

We conducted this study with coaches across various sporting disciplines and professional levels. The goal was to investigate their experiences, perceptions, expectations and reflections about their reputational influence on the creative development of athletes. Perceived reputational influence on athlete creativity is the focus of this study.

Data was collected by interviewing the sports coaches about their perceived reputational influence on athlete creativity. Narrative interviews gave the researchers the means to understand this specific social development by sampling and interpreting an array of the coaches’ experiences. ⁶⁹ Our interview was based on 2 scopes: contextual and reflective questioning to understand the experiences of our participants. For example, participants were asked: 1. How do the behavioural responses of athletes change with your presence? Example: Do the athletes behave in a certain way around you? 2. How do you think your reputation as a coach influences athletes’ willingness to take risks and try new things? We employed semi-structured interviews to collect data but also had the freedom to explore and probe significant responses given by the participants. ⁷⁰ Based on the requirements of this study, we believe this was the most appropriate method to address this topic.

We obtained consent from all the participants in the study and explained our data handling procedures. The interviews were conducted in accordance with the Ethics Guidelines provided by the Board of Ethical Questions of the University of Innsbruck. This ensures the participants’ confidentiality; additionally, the data collected cannot be directly associated with any participant. The data was made accessible to the researchers for analysis purposes only and saved in a secure folder. The researchers carefully considered whether the study could cause potential harm to anyone involved but did not identify any possible ill effects.

Interview guide

We employed purposeful random sampling to identify coaches to participate in our study. We divided our target sample into team and individual sports coaches while focusing on heterogeneity since the experiences of coaches or social groups are constructed differently and the difference is vital to understanding the totality of a situation. ⁷¹ This study is based on 15 qualitative interviews (the interview guidelines are available upon request), examining the coaches’ perceptions of their reputational influence.

Our sample was represented by coaches in team sports (football, ice hockey, basketball, American football, handball, water polo, volleyball) and individual sports (surfing, Jiu-Jitsu, hip-hop dance, alpine skiing, climbing and swimming). Our diverse group encompassed 15 participants, predominantly male (12 men, 3 women), ranging from 20 to 48 years of age. The level of professional experience varied significantly among the participants. The cohort included five professional coaches, with experience ranging from 6 to 22 years. Notably, the most experienced coach (Participant 9, with 22 years) was a 48-year-old Spanish surfing coach, followed closely by a water polo coach with 19 years of experience. There were four coaches operating at a semi-professional level, with experience spanning from 5 to 10 years. The amateur level was represented by four coaches, including the youngest participant (a 20-year-old basketball coach with only 1 year of experience). Refer to Table 1. The interviews were conducted between 1 December 2023 and 31 January 2024 in a semi-structured interview format consisting of 17 interview questions. Data collected included demographic information, views, experiences, and thoughts about their reputational influence on athlete creativity.

Table 1.

Interviewed participants.

Participant	Sex	Age	Nationality	Sport	Years of experience as a coach	Professional level
1	M	25	Austrian	Handball	10	Semi-Professional
2	M	24	Austrian	Football	3	Amateur
3	F	22	German	Volleyball	5	Amateur
4	M	39	Austrian / Hungarian	Water Polo	19	Professional
5	M	28	Austrian	Basketball	5	Semi-Professional
6	M	20	Austrian	Basketball	1	Amateur
7	M	30	Austrian	American Football	11	Professional
8	M	39	Austrian/Canadian	Ice Hockey	6	Professional
9	M	48	Spanish	Surfing	22	Professional
10	M	30	Mexican	Jiu-Jitsu	13	Professional
11	F	25	Czech	Hip-Hop Dance	3	Youth
12	M	30	Austrian	Alpine Skiing	8	Semi-Professional
13	M	25	Austrian	Climbing	9	Amateur and Youth
14	M	30	Austrian	Swimming	9	Professional
15	M	35	USA/Zimbabwean	Football	18	College Football

The participants were informed about the research topic, the interview recording and all ethical considerations before the interviews to ensure anonymity and data protection. Our guided semi-structured interviews were conducted in person, while others were conducted remotely on Zoom and lasted around 40–60 min. Seven (n = 7) interviews were conducted via Zoom, and eight (n = 8) were in-person interviews. All interviews were recorded and transcribed. Non-English interviews were translated from their respective languages into English. The semi-structured interviews were designed to explore the key themes related to reputation, coach-athlete relationships and creativity, informed by the analytical framework guiding the study design. The interviews were semi-structured, in that the participants were asked all 17 questions to ensure consistency whilst the researchers were allowed the flexibility to pose follow-up questions or probe the responses given by the participants. The semi-structured interview allowed the researchers to pursue topics that participants introduced and that aligned with the research goals. Not all questions were posed to all participants in the same order, as some questions were adapted subject to the participants’ responses. After conducting 15 interviews, we noticed that the information gained from the participants did not add any new knowledge, such that the data collection was halted. ⁷² Based on the recommendations of Francis et al., fifteen interviews (n = 15) were deemed appropriate and sufficient to achieve theoretical saturation. ⁷² Francis et al. ⁷² suggest a method for determining the appropriate sample size via data saturation in qualitative research. A minimum of an initial number of 10 interviews and additional interviews are conducted until no new insights or themes emerge. This saturation level is not just a numerical target but rather a depth and thematic sufficiency.

Analysis

The data for the study was analysed using a deductive data approach, with pre-established categories originating from the literature review. We coded and identified thematic similarities with phrases and keywords and further split them into themes and sub-themes after the coding process. ATLAS.ti 9 software was employed to support the systematic organisation and management of the qualitative dataset which ensured that our analysis remained grounded in the core objectives of the study. This software was employed to enhance the rigour and transparency of our analysis through an auditable record of coding decisions, theme development and the capacity to handle multiple transcripts efficiently. Finally, we interpreted the identified recurring themes with the aid of triangulation among the researchers to enhance our interpretations and the meaning of the data. Our goal was to have reliable interpretations of and an integrated discussion about the data. Our study prioritises transferability by providing rich and contextualised accounts. Thus, our findings can be meaningfully applied to other contexts and settings. In this study, transferability is supported through detailed contextualisation of coaches’ experiences and the transparent presentation of themes. Our aim is not to claim a universal fact, but rather to enable reasoned judgments about applicability.

Results

The data collected reflected the coaches’ perceptions of reputation as an influence on athlete creativity. The themes were informed by the analytical framework guiding the study design, as well as by the emergent patterns identified within the collected data. Data was divided into the 3 main themes that emerged: (1) coach reputation, (2) coach-athlete relationship and (3) athlete creativity. Only the most relevant results are presented with anchor examples.

Coach reputation

Exploring the topic of coach reputation among the participants provides valuable insights into how coaches perceive the significance and impact of their reputation within the sporting community. A coach's reputation can influence various aspects of their coaching career, including their ability to secure positions, the trust and influence of athletes, and overall coaching effectiveness. Although each coach defined their reputation distinctively, all definitions fell within the larger bracket of what reputation means, highlighting reputation as an opinion established over a period, where this opinion influences the expectations of people even before meeting in person. The relationship between a coach's reputation and an athlete's creativity is such that a positive reputation offers legitimacy, which affords coaches a greater opportunity to influence creativity.

The study found that the observed competence and expertise of coaches significantly influenced athlete perceptions of coach reputation. Coaches reported that, as per their observations, athletes placed value in coaches who demonstrated a deep understanding of their sport, effective teaching methods, and the ability to develop personalised training plans tailored to their individual needs. Within this sporting context, trust is framed as the confidence placed in coaches’ efficacy in performing their functions. Trust emerged as a fundamental attribute that aids athletes in assessing a coach's reputation for supporting innovation or risk-taking. Coaches who are viewed as trustworthy provide athletes with psychological safety, enabling creative behaviours.

A coach's reputation for technical knowledge and coaching skill was considered to enhance athlete confidence and trust in their coaching abilities, driving improved performance and development outcomes. “When you mention the name José Mourinho, everybody thinks of somebody who likes to win, somebody who's demanding. When you mention a name like Guardiola, people think of someone philosophical. That is the credibility they’ve built; it's more than wins, it's who they are” (Coach 1). Essentially, coaches’ reputations for innovation and adaptability were seen to stimulate athlete creativity and problem-solving skills by introducing novel training methods, techniques, and strategies, as this significantly impacts an athlete's willingness to express creativity or take risks.

Coaches perceive that athletes view them as role models not only for their creative or sporting development but also through the behaviours they exhibit. Example: Coaches suggest that the application of creativity within coaching methods, game strategies, and problem-solving approaches can inspire the development of athletes. “A good reputation is essential, kids look up to the coaches more than anything else. I often hear from parents, my kid will listen to you more than they listen to me at home” (Coach 15).

A common convergence is the recognition that a coach's reputation influences the trust and perception of athletes. Coaches emphasise the importance of building a positive reputation to foster trust and collaboration among athletes. Coaches highlighted the importance of supportiveness and empathy in fostering positive coach-athlete relationships. Coaches who show genuine care for their athletes’ overall well-being while offering a supportive coaching environment, characterised by encouragement, positive reinforcement, and constructive feedback, contribute to athlete motivation, resilience, and overall satisfaction with the coaching experience.

Coaches perceived that effectively communicating coaching competence and expertise plays a significant role in shaping how their reputation is perceived. Importantly, open and transparent communication shapes the perceptions of a coach's reputation, either as collaborative or authoritarian, with substantial implications for an athlete's willingness to engage creatively. A coach's reputation for technical knowledge and coaching skills enhances athlete confidence and trust in their coaching abilities, driving improved performance and development outcomes. “In difficult game situations, the team expects me to communicate and utilise the strengths of each player to put them in the right pieces like a puzzle. So communication is very important” (Coach 6).

The divergences in the coaches’ experiences were found in the long-term impact of and external influences on reputation. Some coaches believed that once established, a positive reputation can sustain itself, while others suggested that reputation may fluctuate over time based on coaching performance and interactions with athletes, while external factors, such as rumours or gossip, can influence a coach's reputation. Some coaches acknowledged the potential impact of external perceptions, whilst others emphasised the significance of personal interactions and direct experiences with stakeholders. To sum it up, based on the results from the participants, we conclude that coaches who prioritise building positive reputations characterised by competence, supportiveness, and effective communication are better positioned to foster athlete motivation, confidence, and overall development.

Coach-Athlete relationship

The coach-athlete relationship emerged as a central theme reported by our participants as the most influential and important interaction within the team dynamic. Coaches emphasised that, the quality of the coach-athlete relationship impacts the nature, experience and sporting development of athletes as coaches maintain that athletes are at their best creatively when they experience a sense of security and safety. Establishing a positive relationship with athletes is crucial to giving them the motivation and support they need to take risks, explore and innovate freely. In essence, the coach-athlete relationship is the means to the execution of reputational influence. This relationship is essential to coaching efficacy and must meet the holistic needs of the athlete, not just sporting needs. Thus, for a coach's reputation to have influence, there should be a positive coach-athlete relationship serving as a means through which the coach can influence the development of athletes. It is crucial to recognise that the coach-athlete relationship is vital, but it does not compensate for a lack of coaching skill or efficacy. Thus, the positive coach-athlete relationship does not replace coaching competence but rather enhances it. “At training, when I say no restrictions, my swimmers try all sorts of moves, but when I am strict, they all follow the book with no risks” (Coach 9). Building a supportive and positive relationship with athletes becomes the basis for enhancing their creative development.

There was consensus on the significance of creating a supportive and inclusive environment. The goal is to establish a culture where athletes feel valued, respected, and empowered to express themselves freely while providing a foundation for sustained creative growth. “During interactions with my team, I notice when communication is good, they try to put in more effort in their actions and are open to trying more stuff “ (Coach 11). A prominent convergence is the acknowledgement of trust and communication as being foundational to successful coach-athlete relationships. Coaches uniformly stressed the importance of open, honest communication and building trust to nurture positive connections while advocating for an individualised approach to fostering relationships with athletes. The emphasis is on understanding each athlete's unique needs, motivations, and communication styles to tailor interactions accordingly.

On the behavioural response of athletes, the results suggest that coaches believe that their presence has multiple effects on athlete behaviour. Several coaches reported that simply being present can enhance the athletes’ concentration and drive, possibly because the athletes are aware they are being observed and thus push themselves to perform at their best. Conversely, some coaches noted an increase in relaxation and creativity among athletes, attributing this to a sense of security that allows them to try new methods. Overall, the presence of a coach was seen as a complex element influencing various aspects of the athletes’ conduct, including their focus, relaxation, creativity, organisation, and adherence to structure.

A divergence in the coaches’ experiences within the coach-athlete relationship was found in the coaching approach. Some coaches clearly prefer a more authoritative coaching style, where they dictate decisions and strategies, whilst others opt for a collaborative approach, involving athletes in decision-making processes. The primary focus of coach-athlete relationships emerged in the discussions. Coaches managing athletes in higher or professional leagues prioritise achieving performance outcomes while coaches working with youths or semi-professionals focus on the athletes’ personal growth and well-being, even if it means sacrificing short-term results. Overall, coach-athlete relationships underscore the importance of open communication, trust, and collaboration in fostering a positive environment where athletes feel empowered to express their creativity and contribute to their sporting journey.

Athlete creativity

In dealing with the theme of creativity, all coaches regardless of the sport, emphasised the importance of creativity and the characteristics that can contribute to an athlete's creative development. Coaches defined creativity within the context of their respective sport and collectively summarised it as the innovation and application of the right solutions to challenges. The results highlight the coaches’ collective perception that creativity is a paramount skill required for sporting success. Coaches delineated multiple facets of creativity, encompassing the aptitude for innovative problem-solving, receptiveness to new concepts, and the capacity for self-actualisation.

A common convergence is the belief that athlete creativity is primarily driven by coaches. Coaches design training sessions, exercises, and drills that challenge athletes mentally and physically while promoting skill acquisition and problem-solving. The session design is the primary means by which coaches drive athlete creativity as a session designed to allow athletes to experience, experiment and take risks is likely to lead to more creative athletes than those exposed to a training session based on rote learning.

Coaches unanimously recognised the role of creativity in sporting performance and emphasised the importance of keeping training sessions dynamic, stimulating, and enjoyable so as to maintain and trigger athlete creativity, motivation and commitment. The perspectives regarding the extent to which risk-taking athletes can engage their creativity were varied as risk aversion differed among coaches. Some coaches advocate taking calculated risks to challenge athletes while others are more cautious and play it safe, leaving less room for creativity.

Exploring how coaching reputation helps influence athlete creativity, coaches believe the environment they project (safety and security) allows athletes to feel at their most creative as does a coach with a trustworthy and supportive reputation. “Because of my coaching reputation, I believe that the players are more likely to try out new things again and are more creative” (Coach 2). The results suggest that coaches perceive their reputation as facilitating a safe space where creativity is encouraged or legitimised. This is not a straightforward process, but rather one that transects coaching efficacy and the coach-athlete relationship to create an enabling environment for creativity.

An athlete's creativity reaches its peak when coaches offer athletes the freedom to experiment and take risks. Indeed, a tolerant, open and easy-going coach reputation contributes significantly to an environment that fosters and encourages athletes to explore and try the unknown. Additionally, coaching efficacy plays a significant role in developing athletes as their maximum creative potential is unlocked when they have confidence in the coach and their competence. A coach's effectiveness can therefore instil confidence in the athletes to try harder to develop their creative abilities.

Overall, creativity is the multifaceted nature of athlete development and the various approaches coaches take to nurture their players’ growth on and off the field where the emphasis is placed on building confidence in coaching efficacy, on creating a reinforcing environment and mentoring an holistic approach to fostering the development of creative skills Table 2.

Table 2.

Anchor examples.

Category	Subcategory	Participants	Anchor example
Reputation	Coaching methodology	Coach 1	“When you mention the name José Mourinho, everybody thinks of somebody who likes to win, somebody who's demanding. When you mention a name like Guardiola, people think of someone philosophical. That is the credibility they’ve built; it's more than wins, it's who they are.”
	Role modelling	Coach 15	“A good reputation is essential, kids look up to the coaches more than anything else. I often hear from parents, my kid will listen to you more than they listen to me at home”
Creativity	Experimentation	Coach 2	“Because of my reputation as a coach, I believe that the players are more likely to try out new things again and are more creative”
	Motivation	Coach 9	“At training, when I say no restrictions, my swimmers try all sorts of moves, but when I am strict, they all follow the book with no risks”
Coach-athlete relationships	Communication	Coach 6	“In difficult game situations, the team expects me to communicate and utilise the strengths of each player to put them in the right pieces like a puzzle. So, communication is very important”
	Cooperation	Coach 11	“During interactions with my team, I notice when communication is good, they try to put in more effort in their actions and are open to trying more stuff “

Discussion

In striving to understand coaches’ perceptions of their reputational influence on athlete creativity, the experiences shared by our participants showed general consensus that their reputation as coaches impacts the creative development of their athletes. Although the participants agreed that their reputation had an impact, they assigned different levels of importance to the notion.

Influence of coach reputation on athletes

All participants perceived coaching reputation as having an immediate influence on athletes due to the role of coaching in athlete development. Coaching reputation is twofold, exerting both a direct and an indirect influence. The direct influence is the impact on the athletes being coached, while indirect influence might be an athlete's decision to join a team based on the coach's reputation. The development of a coaching reputation is a layered process shaped by multiple factors such as demonstrated behaviours, coaching methodology, achievements, human capital and social effectiveness. ¹

As the architects of a team structure, the focal role of coaches provides the opportunity to impact athletes. The coaching methodology, team structure, training drills, style of play etc, are designed by the coach and are guided by their principles, training or philosophy, and form part of the building blocks of personal reputation. This responsibility offers coaches the opportunity to impact athletes through their commitment and interactions as athletes seek guidance and training to move up the sporting ranks.^73,74 The coaching approach was found to be essential to triggering creativity among athletes. In an open approach with creativity-promoting drills, where athletes are encouraged to experiment, take risks and develop and implement ideas, athletes will be more prone to creativity since it is encouraged by the coach. By contrast, a strict approach where athletes are instructed rigidly without any room for individuality will lead to a plunge in creativity. These findings were consistent with studies on athlete creativity.^61,63,65 Importantly, some coaches said they adopt different approaches based on the athletes’ level. Example: Coaches might be strict with beginners until they have understood the fundamentals of the sport.

Athletes emulate the coach's behaviours, which creates a benchmark that influences creativity or performance. This means that the leadership's position of influence is a relative factor in shaping athlete development.^65,75,76 A broader viewpoint offered by Wang et al. ⁷⁷ draws on a single characteristic of a leader to provide insight on its influence on follower creativity. Thus, by examining psychological capital as a mediating factor, Wang et al. ⁷⁷ established leader humility as a factor influencing follower creativity. Evidently, a coach's reputation exerts influence on an athlete's creative development as they perform their duties.

A crucial part of coach influence is coaching efficacy. Athletes’ perceptions can be seen as a predictive factor for coaching efficacy based on a coaches’ leadership style and performance. Interestingly, the coaches’ self-ratings predicted the athletes’ perceptions of the coaches’ leadership style and team performance.

Coaches must be equipped with the necessary skills, training and experience to influence athletes. ⁷⁸ Higher coaching efficacy leads to a higher chance of positive team performance, given that a broader perspective on coaching effectiveness is assessed by the combined effects of coach-athlete relationships and coaches’ leadership behaviours on team performance. The study proved that, in addition to the quality of coach-athlete relationships, coaches’ leadership behaviours offer a higher predicted chance of athlete development and team performance beyond what was predicted for coaches’ leadership behaviours only.^79,80

While the essence of coach-athlete relationships is well established, our study extends this understanding by exploring how coaching relationships operate within this relationship to create enabling spaces for athlete creativity. Athletes are more likely to take risks when they perceive their coach as supportive or as encouraging autonomy. The coach-athlete relationship is an essential part of athlete development and is a measure of coaching efficacy. Athletes depend on the coach's skill, experience and expertise to guide their sporting development.^26,52 This relationship allows the coach and athlete to attain their individual and collective aims as neither can succeed alone; they need each other to achieve. Our participants focused on coach-athlete-centred coaching as the means to influence creativity since it is both empowering and inclusive. The coach-athlete-centred approach engages the athletes’ understanding of the training methodology and its effectiveness. This means that sporting success is based on the ability of both parties to develop a unit where the relationship encourages, enhances, motivates and supports the interests, experience and development of both the coach and the athletes. ⁵²

Our findings highlight the meaningful role of the coach-athlete relationship in influencing athlete creativity. Athletes attain their creative peak when they are secure, safe and in a supportive environment that encourages risk-taking and meets their needs beyond the scope of sport. ⁴⁷ In essence, the coach-athlete relationship is not a one-size-fits-all; coaches must meet each athlete's individual needs. As coaching efficiency is based on the coach-athlete relationship, coaches should aim to develop an effective relationship with their athletes, which is characterised by open communication, effective feedback, trustworthiness and dependability.^35,41

The correlation between the coaching environment and athlete creativity is such that an environment that fosters initiative, autonomy and risk-taking motivates athletes to develop, explore and execute their creative ideals. The social nature of coaching is related to the pros and cons of human interactions and sets a social expectation. These expectations influence judgments and the coach's personal reputation. Example: The coach's reputation impacts team dynamics, the coaching environment and the coach-athlete relationship. ⁸¹ The mere existence of the coach-athlete relationship is not what matters, but rather the quality of trust and communication that offers the athlete psychological safety. A coach's reputation shapes this dynamic as it serves as a signal to athletes about the encouraged or discouraged behaviours. The quality of the coach-athlete relationship reflects the coach's reputation, as this enhances a coach's credibility and influence, encouraging athletes to try new approaches without the fear of punishment.^35,53,82

In summary, our findings suggest that coaches are aware of their reputational influence on athletes in shaping their lives, influencing not only their creativity and performance on the field but also their personal development and overall well-being. A coach's reputation is built on their expertise, demonstrated behaviours, and the achievements of their coaching methods. This reputation can significantly shape the attitudes and behaviours of athletes, both on and off the field. ³ In essence, a coach's reputation plays a pivotal role in influencing athletes. A well-respected coach, known for their expertise, integrity, and successful methods, can significantly impact athletes’ creativity and performance. Building and maintaining a strong reputation is thus essential for coaches aiming to positively influence their athletes’ development and lead them to success.

Implications

This study suggests that the quality of the coach-athlete relationship and the coach's reputation for efficacy and trustworthiness are central in fostering an athlete's creativity. The results of the study have both theoretical and managerial implications for coaching practice and education. Theoretically, this study expands the understanding of coaching reputation by highlighting its effects on athlete creativity. It additionally sheds light on how the coach-athlete relationship is influenced by the coach's reputation and how athletes respond in terms of their behaviour and attitude. Lastly, we expand the understanding of social learning theory within coaching as athletes view coaches as role models and emulate their demonstrated behaviours, so a good reputation serves as a positive effect for athletes to adopt desirable behaviours or values. The team is a reflection of a coach's behaviour, and our theory is that athletes learn by observing or imitating and that the coach should be aware of this influence. Coaches need to demonstrate the behaviours, skills, and attitudes they want their athletes to adopt. This includes technical skills, work ethic, teamwork, sportsmanship etc.

On the managerial side, building and maintaining a strong reputation is essential for coaches aiming to have a positive influence on their athletes and lead them to success. Reputation should be built on expertise, a robust coach-athlete relationship and open communication. It is important that coaches engage in continuous learning by keeping abreast of modern coaching methodologies and sports science via training, courses, and workshops. Peer learning also offers opportunities for coaches to experience other coaching methods, whilst working with athletes at various levels gives insightful practical experience. Coaches can also build their reputation through goal setting, where they sit down with the athletes and set specific, measurable, achievable, relevant, and time-bound (SMART) goals while building a track record of progressive improvement in athlete development and performance.

Most importantly, coaches must realise that their reputation is subjectively constructed based on their observed and demonstrated behaviours via their interactions and the execution of their coaching function, which in turn empowers athletes to act creatively or to take more risks. Additionally, beyond technical competencies, coaching education programmes should include training on reputation management and building safer coaching environments for athletes, as this could effectively help coaches to support the needs of athletes.

Coach-athlete relationships are essentially at the heart of coaching. Coaches should aim to build a conducive and positive environment where athletes feel supported and able to engage in learning and experimentation. The relationship should be built on trust because athletes will deem the coach dependable when there is trust. Also, coaches should share their knowledge and expertise as this builds admiration and respect among athletes. As Julian Nagelsmann (ex-Bayern Munich and current manager of the Germany men's football team) famously said: “Coaching is 30% tactics and 70% social competence”. ⁸³ Lastly, open and effective communication with athletes is essential. Communication should avoid any ambiguity and convey instructions, expectations and feedback. It should be a two-way stream where each athlete's feedback, concerns and recommendations are valued.

Conclusion

This work has examined coaches’ perceptions of their reputational influence on athlete creativity. Key takeaways have emerged. Coaches understand and acknowledge that their reputation is an essential element in influencing athlete creativity, and we argue that coaches and athletes are locked into a two-person (dyadic) relationship and that its quality is a measure of coaching efficacy.

Limitations and future research

Although this study presents relevant findings on understanding coaches’ perceptions of their reputational influence on athlete creativity, future research should take into account the views and experiences of coach educators since they educate and instruct coaches to influence athletes. The athletes’ parents, especially in the case of youths, decide where their children play. Understanding the reputational factors that parents consider before deciding where their children engage in sport would add a different dimension to research into coach reputation. This study is not without limitations. The sampling of coaches was conducted in a non-probability manner due to the difficulty in gaining access to them. As such, we employed purposeful random sampling to identify coaches to participate in this study. Lastly, our study interviewed coaches from 13 different sports which constitutes an under-representation since there are over 50 sporting disciplines.