Adding Value With Words

Everyone has their own communication style. Each of those styles may work for a period of time but if it is monotone in nature, it will be short lived.

In G.A.A. circles, I mainly had either great motivators or utter psychos. Some would send you out the dressing room with a wrap of a hurley, others would send you out feeling ten feet tall. The latter worked best for me when I was younger. I thrived most under the coaches who had most belief in me and who I believed in most. There were a few but notable mentions would go to my brother and Dad who I trained under at different times as a hurler. The players on their teams were always motivated.

Tactically I didn't need much direction because of the nature of my roles. On the football front, I played mostly at corner back and there your job is simple. Get to the ball first and keep it moving on. Hurling wise was slightly different. My most meaningful contributions were in goal. I would cheekily claim to be p1ssing off the crowd with a 'puckout strategy' long before Cusack started to claim the attention on that front! Due to the specificity of that role, you would handle the discussion separate to the teamtalk though.

On the hockey front, I encountered the most tactically astute coaches I had in sport. George Treacy was standout. Formerly an international coach, he thought me a lot of the principles which I still carry today. It wasn't easy but he gave me tactical discipline. Eddie Kirwan was also excellent both in motivation and tactics. He brought with him the siege mentality from Nemo and coupled it with a tactical approach which allowed a limited team survive and even thrive in what was a competitive league.

George's talks were always simple and focused on tactics. Eddie too but with a bit of spice thrown in. Players knew what was expected of them individually and collectively.

The team talk gives someone a stage to orate from and some grab the opportunity with both hands, with no concern for the audience. They'll ramble from one thing to another, bang a few tables and share very little tactical ingenuity. Ask a player to pick out the key point five minutes later and few will be able to.

When I started out here in 2008 I’d have been more of a chest beater. The boggers like Keary and Big Jim would love that but the city slickers like Sheanon thought it was all bullsh1t and bluster! That kind of approach definitely has a place but if you are playing up to five games a day in a tournament then you are going to run out of material pretty fast.

In the last couple of years I moved away from that towards more game specific stuff but fell into the trap of trying to cover every facet of the game at times!

In Toyota, where I work, we have a methodology simply called ‘Problem Solving’, or to give it’s official name, ‘Toyota Business Practice’. Six Sigma is similar.

Put briefly and simply, this examines where you are against your ultimate goal i.e. winning a Championship. It clarifies what the current GAP is. You then breakdown the problem, identify the point in the process from preparation (training) through to implementation (playing the matches).

Here is where we come unstuck. It’s likely that by breaking down the problem in this way, you will isolate a number of problems i.e. attendance at training, turnovers, fouls etc. When the coach goes to address these in a session plan, a team talk at training or at a game, he might go at all of them at once.

However, in Toyota problem solving, one of the most important aspects of identifying the problem is to be able to quantify it. In this regard, stats would be helpful. You may find that you are conceding 15 frees a game but the majority in the opposition half. On the other hand, you are turning over the ball 15 times a game in your own half.

It is important to prioritise the problems to solve. In this case, turnovers looks to be having the biggest negative impact on your team’s performance. Rather than trying to solve everything at once, the coach should zone in on this aspect.
Now, looking specifically at turnovers, analyse what is the root cause of these turnovers i.e. poor hand passing or kick passing, getting stripped of the ball in tackles etc. Again you should be able to quantify this through stats. Once you have identified the root cause, you can start to think about countermeasures.

Next, you develop your training plan and go to work at solving this prioritised problem. The drills should be specific and focused as should all the words you use to players in the sessions.

Then your next tournament will come and you will get an opportunity to see if your countermeasures have solved the problem or not. In terms of your team talk on the day, it can be very simple. You’ve been delivering a consistent message through your coaching in recent sessions so it should be engrained in player’s minds. Now all you need to do is to turn the switch on for lads and get them to focus.

Now you are connecting all the dots, the message is clear and understandable for the players. Isn’t that what you want to achieve?

This problem solving methodology is what made Toyota so successful but also what led to so much criticism in recent years. The process is slow and you must be patient. The idea is you will get to the very root of the problem and that is not always easy to find. It will never lead to revolution, instead it focuses on small incremental change. A step by step approach to closing that GAP.

This whole link to problem solving only flashed into my mind this morning but I think it has some value when considering how to structure your messages to players at sessions and at matches.

Is there still place for the bluster? For sure. Players need to be motivated. Some of that should come from within but the coach definitely has a role in that. It’s just a question of timing.