Short-term effects of mid-season coaching changes on team performance in soccer
Balduck, Anne-Line Buelens, Marc Philippaerts, R.
Balduck, Anne-Line
Buelens, Marc
Philippaerts, R.
Citations
Altmetric:
Publication Type
Journal article
Editor
Supervisor
Publication Year
2010
Journal
Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport
Book
Publication Volume
81
Publication Issue
3
Publication Begin page
379
Publication End page
383
Publication NUmber of pages
Collections
Abstract
The present study addressed the issue of short-term performance effects of midseason coach turnover in soccer. Although there are several reasons for changing coaches, midseason change is often associated with poor team performance (Rowe, Cannella, Rankin, & Gorman, 2005) and considered to be a way to reap short-term dividends in performance improvement (Audas, Dobson, & Goddard, 2002; Salomo & Teichmann, 2000). Koning (2003) and McTeer and White (1995) argued that the focus on midseason coach turnover is relevant in soccer, as the team composition usually changes significantly between seasons. Three succession theories are relevant in explaining the effect of midseason coach turnover on performance over the short or long term (Gamson & Scotch, 1964). According to the common sense theory, the coach is held accountable when the team underperforms, and, thus, a coaching turnover is likely to occur. According to this theory, coach turnover is expected to have a positive ef- fect on subsequent performance, because the new coach can avoid the mistakes of the predecessor. The vicious circle theory holds that performance continues to decline following coaching turnover, which disrupts internal rela- tionships in an organization. This destabilization leads to a further decline in performance. The third explanation is the ritual scapegoating theory, which assumes that a turn- over has no impact on performance. Changing a coach is a convenient means of placating frustrated stakehold- ers, because performance depends largely on the team's quality. Empirical studies found evidence to support the ritual scapegoating theory (Cannella & Rowe, 1995; Eitzen & Yetman, 1972). Others argued that the common sense theory was more appropriate (Bennet, Phillips, Drane, & Sagas, 2003; Fabianic, 1984; McTeer & White, 1995; Pfeffer & Davis-Blake, 1986). Few studies empirically supported the vicious circle theory (Brown, 1982). Based on mixed research results, the question re- mains whether a midseason coach turnover has an effect on subsequent performance. Therefore, the goal of this study was to examine this effect on subsequent short-term team performance. The purposes of this study were to (a) examine whether midseason coach turnover improved results in the short term, and (b) examine how team performance compared with teams that did not have a coach turnover. The three succession theories were used as the frameworks for interpreting the results.