The Relationship between Coaching Leadership Styles and Athletes’ Satisfaction among Karisma Athletes at Uitm Perlis
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.37134/jsspj.vol13.2.4.2024Keywords:
athletes' satisfaction, autocratic behaviour, coach leadership styles, positive feedbackAbstract
Coaching is the term for team leadership in sports, and it is essential to achieving and maintaining high levels of athletic success and athlete satisfaction. The purpose of this study was to determine the athletes' preferences for their coaches' coaching leadership style as well as the athletes' satisfaction. The purpose of this study was to investigate the relationship between coaching leadership styles and athletes’ satisfaction in the University Sport Carnival. 164 athletes involved in the university sport carnival known as KARISMA 2022 from UiTM Perlis were selected to participate in this study. The questionnaires entitled Leadership Scale for Sport (LSS) and Athlete Satisfaction Questionnaire (ASQ) have been used for this study. The Statistical Package of Social Science (SPSS) version 27 software was used to analyze the data that had been collected. Descriptive statistic was used to identify the leadership styles preferred by the KARISMA 2022 athletes from UiTM Perlis. Meanwhile, Pearson's Correlation Coefficient was used to analyse the relationship between coach leadership styles and athlete satisfaction among the KARISMA 2022 athletes of UiTM Perlis. Based on the result, the KARISMA 2022 athletes from UiTM Perlis preferred the "positive feedback" leadership style with the highest mean score (M = 4.45)). The study findings showed a positive significant and moderate relationship between training and instruction (r = 0.657, p<0.01), democratic behaviour (r = 0.533, p<0.01), social support (r = 0.548, p<0.01), and positive feedback (r = 0.575, p<0.01) coach leadership style and athlete satisfaction among KARISMA 2022 athlete of UiTM Perlis. Meanwhile, the result showed a negative significant and low relationship between autocratic behaviour (r = -.189, p>0.015) of leadership style and athlete satisfaction among KARISMA 2022 athletes from UiTM Perlis. The findings of this study provide a wealth of useful information that will be of use to coaches across Malaysia in raising awareness of the significance of coaching leadership style and athlete satisfaction. This study suggest that there are significant relationship between leadership style and athletes satisfaction especially at university sporting context.
Downloads
References
Alfermann, D., Lee, M. J., & Wuerth, S. (2005). Perceived leadership behaviour and motivational climate as antecedents of adolescent athletes skill development. The Online Journal of Sport Psychology, 7(2), 14–36. https://api.semanticscholar.org/CorpusID:35236869
Belleza, S. (2021). Coaching behavior as predictor of athlete satisfaction. International Journal of Research Studies in Education, 10(15), 65–83. https://doi.org/10.5861/ijrse.2021.a111
Chang, C.-M., Huang, H.-C., Huang, F.-M., & Hsieh, H.-H. (2019). A Multilevel Analysis of Coaches’ Paternalistic Leadership on Burnout in Taiwanese Athletes. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 126(2), 286–304. https://doi.org/10.1177/0031512518819937
Chelladurai, P., & Riemer, H. A. (1997). A classification of facets of athlete satisfaction. Journal of Sport Management, 11(2), 133–159.
Chelladurai, P., & Saleh, S. D. (1980). Dimensions of leader behavior in sports: Development of a leadership scale. Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 2(1), 34–45.
Horn, T. S. (1992). Leadership effectiveness in the sport domain. In Advances in sport psychology. (pp. 181–199). Human Kinetics Publishers.
Ipinmoroti, O. A. (2002). Type of sport and gender as predictors of coach leadership behaviour patterns in Southwestern Nigeria. Journal of the International Council for Health Physical Education, Recreation Sport and Dance, 38, 31–35.
Jacob, R. L. (2006). The relationship between perceived coaching behaviors and win-loss success in National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) Division I men and women’s basketball coaches. State University of New York.
Kim, H.-D., & Cruz, A. B. (2016). The influence of coaches’ leadership styles on athletes’ satisfaction and team cohesion: A meta-analytic approach. International Journal of Sports Science & Coaching, 11(6), 900–909. https://doi.org/10.1177/1747954116676117
Krejcie, R. V, & Morgan, D. W. (1970). Determining sample size for research activities. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 30(3), 607–610.
Lord, R. G., & Maher, K. J. (2002). Leadership and information processing: Linking perceptions and performance. Routledge.
Loughead, T. M., Hardy, J., & Eys, M. A. (2006). The nature of athlete leadership. Journal of Sport Behavior, 29(2), 142–158.
Mashuri, S. N., Mokhtar, U. K. M., Rahman, M. W. A., & Bakri, N. H. S. (2022). Relationship between Coach Leadership Styles and Athletes’ Satisfaction at UITM Seremban. International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences, 12(7), 1237–1245. https://doi.org/10.6007/IJARBSS/v12-i7/13905
McClain, N. M. (2005). Unique aspects of team cohesion with female athletes. Alliant international university, San Francisco Bay.
Northouse, P. G. (2021). Leadership: Theory and practice. Sage publications.
Ongalo, E. A., & Tari, J. (2015). Effect of employee motivation strategies on organizational performance: A Case of Electricity Generating and Distribution Firms in Kenya. European Journal of Business and Management, 7(1), 55–65.
Peng, H. (1997). Comparison of preferred coaching leadership behaviors of basketball player sat the NCAA Division III level. University of Wisconsin-La Crosse.
Pilus, A. H. M., & Saadan, R. (2009). Coaching leadership styles and athlete satisfactions among hockey team. Journal of Human Capital Development, 2(1), 77–87.
Ramzaninezhad, R., & Keshtan, M. H. (2009). The relationship between coach’s leadership styles and team cohesion in Iran football clubs professional league. Brazilian Journal of Biomotricity, 3(2), 111–120.
Rasyid, N. M., Aziz, S. A., & Tengah, R. Y. (2020). Goal orientation and preferred coaching styles of Malaysian Sport School’s athletes. European Journal of Molecular & Clinical Medicine, 7(2), 3938–3951.
Schliesman, E. S. (1987). Relationship between the congruence of preferred and actual leader behavior and subordinate satisfaction with leadership. Journal of Sport Behavior, 10(3), 157.
Sherman, C. A., Fuller, R., & Speed, H. D. (2000). Gender comparisons of preferred coaching behaviors in Australian sports. Journal of Sport Behavior, 23(4), 389.
Smith, R. E., & Smoll, F. L. (1997). Coaching the coaches: Youth sports as a scientific and applied behavioral setting. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 6(1), 16–21.
Weinberg, R. S., & Gould, D. (2023). Foundations of sport and exercise psychology. Human kinetics.
Wilson, M. (2007). Relation of present-day magmatism to global tectonic processes. In Igneous Petrogenesis (pp. 3–12). Springer Netherlands. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-010-9388-0_1
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2024 Siti Hannariah Mansor, Muhammad Rafiq Farhan Roslan, Nurul Farha Zainuddin, Norfaezah Mohd Rosli, Zulkifli Ismail
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
