The role of coaches is to help the athletes to realized and reach their potential. In order to reach their potential, athletes must sustain a high level of motivation and satisfaction over many years of training and competition.

1. 30/12/2014
1
THE RELATIONSHIP OF
COACHING LEADERSHIP
AND ATHLETE
SATISFACTION
GUSTL PIDO
(賈斯托)
Andy Li-An Ho, Ph.D.
Advisor
Graduate Institute of Sport Coaching Science

2. Presentation Outline
3/12/2014
2
Introduction
Literature Review
Methodology
Result
Conclusion and Discussion

3. A role of coach’s is to help the
athlete’s to realized and reach their
potential. In order to reach their
potential, athletes must sustain a high
level of motivation and satisfaction
over many years of training and
competition. ATHLETE SATISFACTION
COACHING LEADERSHIP

4. Ho1. The individual performance satisfaction is significantly related to coaching
leadership style of training and instruction, democratic behavior, social
support, situational consideration, positive feedback and autocratic behavior.
Ho2. The training and instruction satisfaction is significantly related to leadership style of training
and instruction, democratic behavior, social support, situational consideration, positive
feedback and autocratic behavior.
Ho3. The personal treatment satisfaction is significantly related to coaching leadership style of
training and instruction, democratic behavior, social support, situational consideration,
positive feedback and autocratic behavior.
Ho4. Team performance satisfaction is significantly related to coaching leadership style of
training and instruction, democratic behavior, social support, situational consideration,
positive feedback and autocratic behavior.
Ho5. The team integration satisfaction is significantly related to coaching leadership style of
training and instruction, democratic behavior, social support, situational consideration,
positive feedback and autocratic behavior.
Ho6. The strategy satisfaction is significantly related to coaching leadership style of training and
instruction, democratic behavior, social support, situational consideration and positive
feedback and autocratic behavior.
Ho7. The total athlete satisfaction is significantly related to coaching leadership style of training
and instruction, democratic behavior, social support, situational consideration and positive
feedback and autocratic behavior.
30/12/2014
4
The following hypotheses were developed for
further investigation for the purpose of this study

5. 30/12/2014
5
LiTERATURE
REVIEW

6. 30/12/2014
6

7. 30/12/2014
7
methodology

8. A. Research Design
- Descriptive Correlational Design
30/12/2014
8
Chapter III
METHODOLOGY
B. Research Locale
- The study was conducted among
athletes in the Philippines

9. C. Samples and Sampling
Techniques
Samples – One Hundred athletes from
Colleges , Universities and National
Athletes
Sampling Technique– Random Sampling
Technique
30/12/2014
9
Chapter III
METHODOLOGY

10. ChapterIII
METHODOLOGY
• A revised version of Leadership
Scale for Sport (RSLL)
• by Zhang, Jensen and Mann (1997)
Coaching
Leadership
Behavior
• Athlete Satisfaction Questionnaire
(ASQ) by
• Chelladurai and Riemer (1998)
Athlete
Satisfaction

11. • In order to better understand the
characteristics of each variable.
Ilustrate the means, and standard
deviation of each research variable.
Descriptive
Statistic
Analysis
• Determine the relationship of coaching
leadership behavior on athlete’s
satisfaction.
Multiple
Regression
Analyses
30/12/2014
11
F. Statistical Analysis
Chapter III

12. 30/12/2014
12

13. Profile Description Percentage (%)
Gender Male 52
Female 48
Age 15-19 33
20-24 38
25-29 16
30-35 7
36 above 6
Status Freshmen 12
Sophomore 25
Juniors 19
Seniors 44
Type of Sports Individual 68
Team Sports 32
Athlete Classification Student Athlete 56
National Athlete 44
Playing Experience 3- Below 8
3-5 15
6-10 38
11-15 23
16- Above 16
13/11/2013
13
Demographic Profile

14. COACHING LEADERSHIP
Mean Std. Deviation
Training and Instruction 4.428 .4852
Situational Consideration 4.387 .4364
Positive Feedback 4.369 .3968
Social Support 4.208 .4840
Democratic Behavior 4.167 .5214
Autocratic Behavior 3.771 .7573
30/12/2014
14
Coach Leadership Preferred

15. Mean Std. Deviation
Team Integration 5.933 .858
Personal Dedication 5.910 .847
Ability Utilization 5.842 .865
Individual Performance 5.840 .923
Strategy 5.830 .857
Individual Performance 5.840 .923
Ethics 5.823 .8495
Team Social Contribution 5.760 .956
Personal Treatment 5.778 .986
Training and Instruction 5.770 .885
Team Social Contribution 5.760 .956
Team Performance 5.738 1.004
Medical Personnel 5.495 1.081
Academic Support 5.4733 1.062
External Agent 5.2925 1.047
Budget 5.160 1.252
30/12/2014
15
Athlete Satisfaction

16. NO 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
1 Training and Instruction Person
Sig.
1 .235**
.009
.749**
.000
699**
.000
.633**
.000
.854**
.000
.326**
.000
.174*
.041
.349**
.000
.320**
.001
.438**
.000
.387**
.000
2 Autocratic Behavior Person
Sig.
1 .316**
.001
.377**
.000
.545**
.000
.243**
.007
.303**
.001
.303**
.001
.356**
000
.326**
.000
.285**
.002
.259**
.005
3 Positive Feedback Person
Sig.
1 .672**
.000
.764**
.000
.780**
.000
.370**
.000
.311**
.001
.369**
.000
.375**
000
.419**
.000
.491**
000
4 Social
Support
Person
Sig.
1 .680**
.000
.739**
.000
.256**
.000
.259**
.005
.357**
.000
.357**
.000
.418**
.000
.371**
.000
5 Democratic Behavior Person
Sig.
1 .670**
.000
.468**
.000
.405**
.000
.473**
.000
.403**
.000
.446**
.000
.471**
.000
6 Situational Consideration Person
Sig.
1 .363** .284**
.000
.419**
.000
.393
.000
.529**
.000
.473**
.000
7 Individual Performance Person
Sig.
1 .633**
.000
.702**
.000
.789**
.000
.620**
.000
.738**
.000
8 Team Performance Person
Sig.
1 .742**
.000
.724**
.000
.708**
.000
9 Strategy Person
Sig.
1 .792**
.000
.881**
.000
.780**
.000
10 Training and Instruction Person
Sig.
1 .745**
.000
.817**
.000
11 Personal Treatment Person
Sig.
1 .723**
.000
12 Team Integration Person
Sig
1
30/12/2014
16
Intercorelation

17. DEPENDENT VARIABLE
INDIVIDUAL PERFORMANCE
INDEPENDENT VARIABLE
DEMOCRATIC BEHAVIOR
Beta .47
R2 .22
Adjusted R2 .21
F value 27.51
P Value .000
17
Regresion result of individual performance as
dependent variable

18. DEPENDENT VARIABLE
TEAM PERFORMANCE
INDEPENDENT VARIABLE
DEMOCRATIC BEHAVIOR
Beta .41
R2 .16
Adjusted R2 .17
F value 19.23
P Value .000
18
Regresion result of team performance as
dependent variable

19. DEPENDENT VARIABLE
PERSONAL TREATMENT
INDEPENDENT VARIABLE
SITUATIONAL CONSIDERATION
Beta .53
R2 .28
Adjusted R2 .27
F value 38.08
P Value .000
19
Regresion result of personal treatment as
dependent variable

20. DEPENDENT VARIABLE
TEAM INTEGRATION
INDEPENDENT VARIABLE
POSITIVE FEEDBACK
Beta .49
R2 .24
Adjusted R2 .23
F value 31.17
P Value .000
20
Regresion result of team integration as
dependent variable

21. DEPENDENT VARIABLE
STRATEGY
INDEPENDENT VARIABLE
DEMOCRATIC BEHAVIOR
Beta .47
R2 .22
Adjusted R2 .26
F value 28.31
P Value .000
21
Regresion result of individual of strategy as
dependent variable

22. DEPENDENT VARIABLE
TRAINING AND INSTRUCTION
INDEPENDENT VARIABLE
DEMOCRATIC BEHAVIOR
Beta .40
R2 .16
Adjusted R2 .15
F value 18.96
P Value .000
22
Regresion result of individual of training
and instruction as dependent

23. 23
Regresion result of total athlete satisfaction
as dependent variable
DEPENDENT VARIABLE
TOTAL ATHLETE SATISFACTION
INDEPENDENT VARIABLE
DEMOCRATIC BEHAVIOR
Beta .49
R2 .24
Adjusted R2 .24
F value 31.59
P Value .000

24. 24

25.  The present study showed that there is a
significant relationship on athlete satisfaction
especially with the democratic behavior, positive
feedback and situational consideration coaching
leadership style
 The findings of this study suggest that the
coaches should to use the democratic behavior,
positive feedback and situational consideration
and allow athletes’ to participate in the
formulation of team goals, practice methods, and
game strategies in order to increase the levels of
satisfaction and decrease quitting among
athletes
25

26.  The present study focused only coaching
leadership
 Use of demographic factors
 Inclusion of more respondents
30/12/2014
26
LIMITATION and FUTURE
RESEARCH

27. 30/12/2014
27