The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at:

https://www.emerald.com/insight/2042-678X.htm

Coaches’ views on how to develop Coaches’ views

on shared
shared leadership leadership
Gerrit van Dalfsen
Sport Studies, Hanze University of Applied Sciences, Groningen, Netherlands
Jo Van Hoecke
Sport Policy and Management, Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Brussel, Belgium Received 23 December 2019
Hans Westerbeek Revised 4 June 2020
6 August 2020
The Institute of Sport, Exercise and Active Living, Victoria University, Accepted 28 August 2020
Melbourne, Australia, and
Veerle De Bosscher
Sport Policy and Management, Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Brussel, Belgium

Abstract
Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to investigate coaches’ views on developing leadership and shared
leadership capacity in particular in competitive youth football.
Design/methodology/approach – This qualitative examination focusses on the leadership philosophy of
ten male coaches at the sub-elite competitive level in youth football in The Netherlands and applies the theory of
shared leadership to examine coaches’ views on developing leadership capacity.
Findings – Only few coaches have a clear philosophy on the development of leadership in general and/or shared
leadership in particular. Most coaches do not have a distinct view on how to involve players in the team processes.
Shared leadership development in youth teams occurs occasionally but can be implemented more intentionally.
Research limitations/implications – Although this study lacks generalizability, coaches’ views are
required in understanding how shared leadership is to be developed in youth sport.
Practical implications – For implementing shared leadership in football purposefully, a clear view on the
development of youth is required, whereas coaches need to be taught, how to involve the individual players in
team processes such as decision-making. In addition, leadership development in sport may have the potential of
transfer of skills to other domains.
Social implications – Learning shared leadership at a young age by athletes can have a positive influence on
relationships in teams on micro-level and might have an impact on meso-level within a football club because of
its social constructionist approach.
Originality/value – This study is one of the first to apply shared leadership at the micro-level of competitive
youth football making use of football coaches’ view.
Keywords Youth football, Shared leadership capacity, Coaches’ view, Leadership development
Paper type Research paper

Whether it is from a coach, manager or teammate perspective, the demand for effective
leadership to increase performance is an ever-present phenomenon in the domain of sport
(Wright and Cot
e, 2003). Increased performance of a team or organization as the result of
leadership has often been researched (Alimo-Metcalfe et al., 2008). Actively stimulating
leadership development can have a significant impact on developing leadership skills in young
people if learning about leadership, achievement and contribution is combined (Buchanan and
Kern, 2017). Sport and physical education offer numerous opportunities and teachable moments
that may contribute to developing leadership in young people but evidence suggests that this is
not intentionally occurring on a regular basis in sport and physical activity contexts (Gould and
Voelker, 2012). Leadership development will not happen automatically through mere
Sport, Business and Management:
An International Journal
© Emerald Publishing Limited
2042-678X
Disclosure statement: No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors. DOI 10.1108/SBM-12-2019-0123
SBM participation. Physical educators and coaches therefore must be intentional on a consistent
basis in their efforts to employ youth leadership development strategies (Gould et al., 2013a, b).
Traditionally, leadership has focussed on individual leaders and by extension on hierarchic,
vertical approaches to organizing tasks (Bolden et al., 2011). Nowadays, it is difficult for any
single individual to possess all of the required skills and abilities to competently lead an
organization or a group of people (O’Toole et al., 2002). With a dominant focus on adult
leadership development, leadership and its development in youth and adolescence are mostly
ignored (Murphy, 2011). Obtaining coaches’ perceptions of athlete leadership would provide a
more complete view of athlete leadership. However, little is known about coaches’ views on
developing youth leaders, the strategies he or she employs and the challenges he or she faces in
the process (Gould et al., 2013a, b).
A shared leadership approach has been chosen by the authors for developing leadership in
youth football. Shared leadership is explained as “a dynamic, interactive influence process
among individuals in groups for which the objective is to lead one another to the achievement of
collective goals” (Pearce and Conger, 2003). Shared leadership capacity is consistent with the
human resources component of organizational capacity (Misener and Doherty, 2009). The
current study therefore focusses on the human resource dimension and analyses the leadership
capacity of the four Ps of Hopman and Van Den Berg (2015) on the micro-level. The four Ps are
explained by the qualities and skills of the “persons” present in the team, the “position”
individuals claim or grant and the chosen leadership “process”. The P of “purpose(s)” hereby
directs the other three dimensions.
In this study, a positive youth development (PYD) perspective is chosen although it should
be acknowledged that leadership can also have a dark side. Destructive leadership as defined
by Thoroughgood et al. (2018) concerns (a) a group process involving flawed, toxic or
ineffective leaders, susceptible followers and conducive environments and consisting of (b)
destructive group or organizational outcomes, as well as (c) a dynamic time frame. Both
leaders and followers hereby can have bad intentions, negative influence versus counter
productivity and active versus passive behaviours.
The aim of this study is to explore football coaches’ views on how to develop shared
leadership capacity in youth team sport in The Netherlands. However, little is known about
coaches’ views on developing youth leaders, the strategies he or she employs and the challenges
he or she faces in the process (Gould et al., 2013a, b). Using coaches’ views will help to expand
current knowledge about how youth leadership can be activated in the context of a football
club. While implications of the study on a longer term can lead to an increase in athlete
performance and satisfaction (Cotterill and Fransen, 2016), awareness and acceptance are
required of a common approach on shared leadership development (Ensley and Pearce, 2001).

Shared leadership
Concepts related to shared leadership were first introduced by Follett (1924), whereas one
should follow the lead of the person with the most knowledge regarding the situation at hand,
rather than simply following the lead of the person with the formal authority in a situation.
Shared leadership is rooted in behavioural science and according to Ensley and Pearce (2000) to
be a more useful predictor of team effectiveness than the more traditional vertical leadership in
teams. Early studies by Bass, Hare and McKeachie (as cited in Stogdill, 1974) contended that
when groups used a structured collaborative power-sharing process, members had a higher
degree of understanding, commitment and decision-making. Shared leadership concerns a
human phenomenon for complex cooperation as a response to the need for collective action
(Van Vugt and Ahuja, 2011).
Consequences of shared leadership can result in, for example, flourishing of flow and
creativity (Hooker and Csikszentmihalyi, 2003), collective shaping of the vision (Pearce and
Ensley, 2004), joint completion of tasks, mutual skill development, decentralized interaction
among personnel, emotional support, accountability, partnership, equity and ownership Coaches’ views
(Wood, 2005), increased information sharing and participation among team members (Mehra on shared
et al., 2006), a competitive advantage (Lee-Davies et al., 2007) and discretion and autonomy
over the tasks and resources (DeRue and Workman, 2011).
leadership
According to Hickman (2010) and Pearce and Conger (2003), shared leadership tends to
cluster around four common themes: “broad distribution of leadership among a set of
individuals instead of concentrated in one or a few persons”, “decentralisation of decision
making wherein individuals and groups make decisions that govern and impact the work”,
“recognition of diverse and unique knowledge existing throughout the organisation” and
“collective input requirement, deliberation, and decision making for decision quality and
implementation effectiveness of complex issues”.

The team captain

Coaches, players, spectators and media all expect a great deal from their captains, and these
high expectations might put a lot of pressure on the shoulders of the team captain (Smith et al.,
2018). Focussing excessively on the individual perspective of leaders while informal
leadership or larger situational factors are ignored is questioned by a shared leadership
approach. Northouse (2010) separates leadership theories into categories that relate to the
following aspects: traits of leaders, their skills and their styles and the situation in which they
have to lead. Personality approaches and trait theories (great man theories) are still used in
popular literature as a way to better understand leadership although empirical evidence
linking personality to success is weak (Hoye et al., 2012).
In opposition to individual leaders, shared leadership offers a concept of leadership
practice as a group phenomenon (Bryman, 1996; Spillane et al., 1999; Pearce and Sims, 2000;
Scully and Segal, 1997; Senge, 1996; Yukl, 2010). Leadership development therefore is not
simply concerned with building the capacity of an individual, but that of a collective to exhibit
leadership through a relational network of mutual influence (Day, 2000). Leading by example
through a role modelling process was identified as an important attribute of team captains in
the context of sport (Grant and Cotterill, 2016; Cotterill et al., 2019) and by servant leadership
in general. The ultimate goal of servant leadership is to cultivate followers to become servant
leaders as well (Greenleaf, 1970; Liden et al., 2014). While servant leadership is determined by
the individual, shared leadership is viewed as a collective achievement for which who leads
and who follows is socially constructed and depends on the context (Cullen-Lester and
Yammarino, 2016). In addition, leader behaviours can facilitate knowledge sharing by
providing a role model and shaping a culture that supports knowledge sharing, thereby
enhancing creative performance (Carmeli et al., 2013).

Coaches’ influence on developing leaders

Coaches (Gould et al., 2012; Voelker et al., 2011; Wright and C^ot
e, 2003) and parents (Murphy
and Johnson, 2011) play a critical role in influencing the leadership development of young
athletes. Influence by coaches can result in: “being kind and supportive”; “developing
physical skills and understanding of the game”; “being stimulating figures who provide
opportunities to advance in the sport”; “assigning leadership roles”; and “including the
athletes in important decision-making and discussions”. Coaches therefore are in an optimal
position to teach and instil leadership skills and the psychosocial development of athletes in
general (Horn, 2002, 2007).
However, various coaching behaviours can affect athletes positively or negatively as the
coach plays a pivotal role in athletes’ sport execution. Some behaviour, for example, may help
to reduce anxiety, increase self-confidence and the desire to continue participation and
enhance skill development (Hays et al., 2007; Smith and Smoll, 1990; Becker, 2009).
SBM Other coach behaviours may induce anger, distractions, team divisions and demotivation
(Gearity and Murray, 2011). Coaches’ influence on youth is important as they have to ensure a
safe (physical or psychological) environment allowing young people to realize and practise
their leadership skills (Van Linden and Fertman, 1998). This environment should be
conducive to leadership development in such a way that all young people are encouraged to
explore their individual potential as leaders. Leadership development in sport may have the
potential of transfer of skills to other domains, such as school, employment, social networks
and family life (Pierce et al., 2017). In addition, Holt et al. (2017) suggest a pathway of explicit
learning of PYD outcomes if there is a life skills programme focus (e.g. critical thinking, taken
on challenges and transfer activities).
Coaching leadership development, as stated by Chelladurai Riemer (1998) and Boyce et al.
(2010), concerns a behavioural process that is used to increase athlete performance and
satisfaction. Concerning coaching behaviour it should be acknowledged that there are
(terrible) negative cases of abuse of power position of coaches as well. A key ingredient for
coaches in developing leaders is having a clear view or philosophy for the individual and/or
team (Avolio et al., 2009; Vroom and Jago, 2007; Avolio, 2007; Yukl, 2010).
What is the coach’s “philosophy” reflects the foundation that ultimately guides and directs
the coaching practice (Vroom and Jago, 2007) and clarifies many aspects of the coach’s
delivery and presents their core values and coaching methods (Avolio, 2007). According to
Cushion (2007), coaches should develop a system for conducting their coaching based on
personal and organizational truths, principles, attitudes and values. In addition, Parkin (2003)
states that although the philosophy can and should change over time, it should provide clear
guidelines for consistency, trust, cooperation, understanding and expectation, as it relates to
discipline, teamwork and communication between all parties.
Within coaching models, a humanistic model of athletic coaching exists, which includes an
educational context devoted to the total development of the individual. According to Lyle (2002,
p. 174) this encompasses: “A person centred ideology that emphasises the empowerment of the
individual towards achieving personal goals within a facilitative interpersonal relationship”.
C^ot
e and Gilbert (2009) contend that in the professional sport context, the main task of a coach is
to manage the available talent to win championships and to make sure that fans are entertained.
A holistic approach to coaching considers players’ on- and off-field needs as integral to
professional sport coaching (Kellet, 1999). With a focus on athlete’s welfare, the players are
developed not only as athletes but also as people (Sheedy, 2005). Players for this reason need to
learn and develop skills, knowledge and expertise not just in football, but also in life (Bennett
and Crawley, 2002). Bennie and O’Conner (2010) confirm that the development of the total
person should be a high priority for each coach. They concluded that the humanistic ideals of
developing the player and person are compatible with principles of performance sport and
reflect a shift away from merely developing the players’ competitive skills.
Another important factor for coaches’ influence on leadership development concerns the
creation of a safe environment, positive to youth’s physical, psychological, social and
intellectual development (C^ot
e et al., 2003). The presence of trust, for instance, is a condition
that needs to be present in developing shared leadership. According to Simons and Peterson
(2000), trust is an aspect of the relationship between persons in and outside the team, which is
explained as the willingness to be vulnerable to another party. Negative outcomes of youth
physically involved in sport include sport-related injuries and eating disorders (Anshel, 2004).
Psychological safety is centrally tied to learning behaviour and refers to a climate in which
players are comfortable being (and expressing) themselves. Concerning the social aspects, the
increasing competitiveness in youth sport settings, coupled with the physical nature of
sports, youth sport involvement has led to be linked to numerous negative social outcomes.
Related to intellectual development, youth’s involvement in physical activity has been
positively related with academic performance in numerous studies (Dwyer et al., 2001).
 To facilitate a safe learning practice, the method of PYD can be used. PYD grew from the Coaches’ views
dissatisfaction with a predominant view that underestimated the true capacities of young on shared
people by focussing on their deficits rather than their development potential (Damon, 2004).
Central to its philosophy, the theory of PYD suggests that “if young people have mutually
leadership
beneficial relations with the people and institutions of their social world, they will be on the
way to a hopeful future marked by positive contributions to self, family, community, and civil
society” (Lerner et al., 2005).

Viewing shared leadership through the lens of the four Ps

Shared leadership capacity is derived from organizational capacity of Misener and Doherty
(2009) and is consistent with the human resource component. It is used in the context of youth
football to provide insight into the shared leadership capacity and its internal and external
resources to achieve team goals. The other four organizational capacity components, originally
developed by Hall et al. (2003), are not taken into account and encompass finances, inter-
organizational relationships, infrastructure and processes and planning and development.
Human resource capacity consists of the ability to deploy human capital within the team. On
the micro-level of youth football, this consists of the available players and coaches with their
strengths and weaknesses.
In the current study, two concepts (context perspective and four Ps capacity model) in
relation to shared leadership capacity are used. At first, the context of a football club is taken
into consideration making use of a humanistic perspective on coaching at which players are
developed not only as athletes but also as people. Players therefore need to learn and develop
skills, knowledge and expertise not just in football, but also in life. (Bennett and Crawley,
2002; Sheedy, 2005; Bennie and O’Conner, 2010). The context in this study is looked at from a
micro-perspective following Bronfenbrenner (1999) and encompasses activities, roles and
interpersonal relationships that the individual experiences in his immediate surroundings. In
sport this is related to relationships between individual players and the team through sports
practice and competition.
Secondly, shared leadership is viewed through the lens of the four Ps leadership
framework of Hopman and Van Den Berg (2015). The ability to choose the right person as
leader is crucial in youth team sport especially when the leadership position is shared. One
should hereby follow the lead of the person with most insight and knowledge regarding the
situation at hand, rather than simply following the lead of the person with the formal
authority (Follet, 1924). Viewing shared leadership through the “P” of “Person” therefore
consists of the persons involved (“the who”), consisting of the coach, the individual players
and the team with their individual qualities exemplified by traits and skills. According to
Todd and Kent (2004), key qualities of athlete leaders the coaches are focussing on are:
“players positive attitudes”, “having a strong work ethic” and “effective communication”. In
addition, “high skill”, “strong work ethic”, “enriched cognitive sport knowledge” and “good
rapport with people” were reported by Wright and C^ot
e (2003).
Shared leadership viewed by lens of the “P” of “Position” is explained by the formal
functional position with jurisdiction that is claimed or granted in the organization (“the
where”). According to DeRue and Ashford (2010), the dynamical character of leadership
exists of “claiming and granting” of leader and follower identities. Claiming hereby refers to
actions undertaken by human beings to get the identity of leader or follower assigned.
Granting hereby refers to the actions undertaken to provide a leader or follower identity to
someone. Within sport teams the existence of both formal and informal athlete leaders is
acknowledged (Loughead et al., 2006; Holmes et al., 2010).
Viewing shared leadership through the lens of the “P” of “Process” consists of the
processes related to roles, rules, procedures and according to Houghton et al. (2003) to the
processes that take place during the simultaneous sharing of all responsibilities (“the how”).
SBM In addition, it encompasses taking initiative, giving support, dividing and balancing power,
group dynamics between leaders and followers but also competition between leaders
(Dijkstra and Feld, 2012; Dijkstra, 2013).
Depending on the context and the available qualities and characteristics of the persons
involved, different purposes can be achieved making use of shared leadership (e.g. capturing
energy and enthusiasm, competitive advantage Lee-Davies et al., 2007), increased information
sharing and participation among team members (Mehra et al., 2006). Shared leadership viewed
by lens of the “P” of “Purpose” therefore encompasses the direction to create value and impact
(“the what” and “why”). The input of a “Purpose” is important, as it directs the other three
dimensions: “Person”, “Process” and “Position”. The concept of leadership development and its
purposes take many names according to O’Donoghue et al. (2006), youth leadership, youth voice,
youth participation, youth civic engagement, youth decision-making and youth empowerment.

Youth football as context for leadership development

Football is generally conceded as the most popular sport in the world. Participation rates are
the largest during childhood, but decline with increasing age through adolescence as sports
become more demanding and specialized and as interest of children and adolescents changes
(Malina, 2005). According to the Dutch Olympic Committee and Dutch Sport Federation
(NOC*NSF, 2018), football is considered the most popular practices sport by U18 boys
(456.000) and the third most popular sport among U18 girls. The domain of youth team sports
seems to have the potential as a context for the development of leadership as it has numerous
opportunities for interaction and therefore a significant number of interactive leadership
skills options (Lee et al., 2005).
For leadership development to take place, three different types of contexts and related
leadership styles should be taken into account. At first contexts with challenges to maintain
stability like discipline are best served with one leader, optimizing processes and output, in a
formal position. Contexts with change challenges like in football, a sending-off during a game
of football, are best served with leadership distributed across several inspiring change
leaders focussing on individual talents and diversity. Finally, contexts with complexity
challenges like a continuous change of unpredictable factors are best served by shared
leadership with leaders possibly changing their role from leader to follower, as a single leader
is unlikely to solve each individual challenge to attain a common purpose (Peters and Strijp,
2011). By emphasizing interdependence and shared interests, values and goals, a truly
transformational leader can change followers from self-interested individuals to committed
collectivists (Van Vugt et al., 2008).
Team sports are structured to provide a social and competitive outlet for individuals and
to promote character-building activities and cohesion among talented individuals in complex
situations (Seefelt et al., 1996). It is therefore important to emphasize that athlete leaders do
not lead in a social vacuum, but instead are embedded in a web of interpersonal relationships
with their teammates and coach which is highly dependent on the surrounding context
(Cotterill and Fransen, 2016).
Youth sports can be used to aid in character development because actual experiences have a
profound impact on a child’s psychology (Chelladurai, 1980). In team sports, athletes develop a
multitude of effective leadership tactics such as intelligence, competitiveness, perseverance and
interpersonal skills, to allow for adapting strategies in crisis situations (Manos, 2006). Athletes’
knowledge of their respective sport gives them influential power over teammates to improve
interpersonal skills and change management strategies (Calhoun, 2007; Gottschalk et al., 2010;
Larue et al., 2006). Most people involved in club sport such as players, staff, club board
members, parents need broad leadership skills (Lambert, 2003) for leadership development to
be successful. Parents can have positive or negative influence on the leadership development as
they, to a certain extent, decide which children are allowed to enter sports, the types of sport Coaches’ views
they play and the experiences that they have in practising sport. Participating in sport therefore on shared
could either enhance or hurt leader development (Murphy and Johnson, 2011).
The primary focus in the field is on developing individual leader skills with no certainty
leadership
that better leadership will result (Hollander, 2009). However, according to Jones et al. (2004)
and Jones and Wallace (2005), the coaching context in football clubs is more than an
individually dominated setting and a place for learners to simply “acquire” sport skills.
Leadership development therefore will likely require intervention at a more macro-group,
team or organizational level, as leadership involves a dynamic social interaction within a
given situational context and that effective followers are needed along with effective leaders
(Hollander, 2009). As a result, leadership development in youth football clubs is not an either/
or proposition; rather, state-of-the-art practices determining how to link leader development
with more aggregate leadership development with the aim to enhance the overall leadership
capacity in a collective (Day, 2000; Day et al., 2004). Because little is known about coaches’
views on developing youth leaders, this study examines how shared leadership capacity in
youth sport on team level can be activated in the context of a football club.

Methodology
A qualitative analysis was used to examine coaches’ view on shared leadership capacity and
its development in elite youth football in the Netherlands. Both inductive and deductive
approaches were used in the study. During the semi-structured interviews, open-ended
questions were asked, with an exploratory purpose to create a first understanding of the
coach’s perspective on leadership in general and leadership development in particular. A
more deductive approach was used during the analysis of the interviews, linking the results
of the participants’ responses to the shared leadership capacity model making use of the four
Ps model of Hopman and Van Den Berg (2015).
Four criteria of assessing trustworthiness were used. At first, the results were peer
reviewed by experts researching similar topics in sport to check for credibility, and secondly
a preliminary report was sent to each participant to check if the outcome reflects their opinion.
To attain transferability, all interviews took place at the football club of the respondent and
coaches were selected from previous research based on their expertise and focus on youth
development. Next, the researcher collected sufficiently detailed descriptions of data in
context and reported them with sufficient detail and precision to allow judgements about the
transferability. The process of analysis (dependability) was explained in detail. To minimize
bias, conformability was ensured by involving a colleague researching similar topics in sport
to ensure that the findings were not affected by personal interest or biases.
A direct content analysis was employed on the participants’ responses. This means that the
analysis is guided by a more structured process than in a conventional approach (Hickey and
Kipping, 1996). Using existing theory and prior research, researchers begin by identifying key
concepts or variables as initial coding categories (Potter and Levine-Donnerstein, 1999). To
develop the initial coding scheme (Figure 1), two perspectives were taken into account: “the
leadership framework” (Hopman and Van Den Berg, 2015) and “the context” of Bronfenbrenner
(1999). The following key concepts in relation to the micro-context were used: “person”,
“position”, “process” and “purpose”. Data that could not be coded were identified and analysed
later to determine if it represented a new category or a sub-category of an existing code.

Participants
Participants for this study were ten elite-level male coaches (average age, M 5 29.2) of ten
different clubs who were active as a coach of an elite youth football team at the A category
SBM level in District North in The Netherlands in the U17 age grouping. Coaches’ demographics
are shown in Table 1. All coaches volunteered for this study. Prior to the interview, informed
consent was obtained from the participants.

Procedure and data collection

A convenience sample was used to explore coaches’ views on how to develop shared
leadership capacity in elite youth football teams. The coaches were contacted via telephone.
During the first contact, they were informed on the background of the study and the aim of
the interview and invited to participate. When the coaches agreed, the interviews were
scheduled at a quiet location of the participant’s choice. Prior to the interview, background
information, such as age, the number of years involved in football and coaching, level of
education (general and football specific), common focus on leadership and developmental
focus, was requested via email (See Table 1).
Each coach participated in a semi-structured, face-to-face interview, similar to other
studies that focussed on expert coach knowledge (e.g. C^ot
e et al., 1995; Vall
ee Bloom, 2005).
Building a constructive relationship with the interviewee is an essential component of a
successful interview according to Lincoln and Guba (1985). The researcher therefore
established a positive rapport with each participant by initiating a general discussion related
to the profession of coaching in football. Sharing this information allowed the interviewee to
establish some commonality or connection with the interviewer (Rubin and Rubin, 1995).
For this study, a semi-structured interview guide was developed which was pilot-tested
among a group of five experts resembling the intended study group. A general question was
asked to introduce the topic of shared leadership development (i.e. “What is your personal
view on leadership of youth in general?”). Follow-up questions were designed to explore the
shared leadership capacity coaches possibly used by focussing on the process, qualities of the

Coach’s view on how to develop shared leadership capacity

in elite youth football

Micro level
Person Position Process Purpose

Figure 1.
Representation of Analysis of coach’s view on how to develop shared
coded data leadership capacity on micro-level

Characteristic Data

Age 23–53 years (M 5 29.2, SD 5 9.1)

Average experience in coaching 6–22 years (M 5 12.1, SD 5 5.1)
football
Football career development All started at a U10 or younger before coaching older youth or
seniors
Coaching degree Six Dutch coaching level 3, four Dutch coaching level 2
Table 1. Ambition for higher certification Seven no ambition, three ambition
Representation of Level of education One MSc, seven higher vocational education, two vocational
demographic data education
leader as person, team and individual purposes and the position of the players as leaders (e.g. Coaches’ views
“What does the process of choosing a new leader/team captain look like?”, “What is your view on shared
on players taking initiative ?”, “Do you intentionally give players responsibilities on- and off
pitch?”, “What is your perspective on making use of players’ input?”, “Do you involve youth
leadership
to the decision making processes?”).
All questions were followed by asking the coach to describe a situation when strategies to
develop leadership worked out well. In line with previous recommendations from Rapley
(2004), this interview guide was used primarily as a reference, as during the interview, the
interviewees talk was followed. Each interview lasted between 60 and 90 min and took place
at the football club where the participant was active as a coach.

Data analysis
The shared leadership capacity was analysed by using the four “P”s framework from Hopman
and Van Den Berg (2015) in combination with the “micro environment” of Bronfenbrenner
(1999). The first “P” (Person) was analysed using the following key characteristics of “P” at the
micro-level, as identified by Todd and Kent (2004): “players positive attitudes”, “having a
strong work ethic” and “effective communication”; Wright and C^ot
e’s (2003): “high skill”,
“strong work ethic”, “enriched cognitive sport knowledge”, and “good rapport with people”; and
Yukelson et al. (1983): “being highly skilled athletes as perceived by their peers”. The second “P”
(Position) was analysed using the following key characteristics of “P” at the micro-level, as
identified by DeRue and Ashford (2010): “claiming and granting” of leader and follower
identities. The third “P” (Process) was analysed using the following key characteristics of “P” at
the micro-level, as identified by Houghton et al. (2003): “exchange of formal responsibilities”.
The fourth “P” (Purpose) was analysed using the following key characteristics of “P” at the
micro-level, as identified by O’Donoghue et al. (2006): “youth leadership”, “youth voice” and
“youth decision making”.
All interviews were subsequently transcribed and analysed for the key themes, important
participant comments, discrepancies in responses and reactions to the questions in the
interview guide. A direct content analysis was employed on the participants’ responses. The
MAXQDA software program was used to sort and categorize the data. Categories, patterns
and themes were labelled and standardized across all transcripts. Transcripts were compared
and categories and patterns were identified that had meaningful similarities.

Results
Information was collected about how to develop shared leadership capacity at the micro-level
in elite youth football. Results that emerged from the analysis are explained at the end of the
results section, and a summary of micro-, meso- and macro-level is provided in Table 2. The
coaches are referred to with numeric identifiers in order to maintain complete anonymity. For
the convenience of the reader, we started with explaining key points of the theoretical
framework, four “Ps”, and how data was framed.

Micro-level: person
Leadership can be considered as the property of a person (Grint, 2005), focussing on the
personal attributes of the leader. Leaders in sport must have the ability to blend into many
cultures (e.g. different teams and players from different backgrounds) and leadership traits
need to mesh with difficult personalities and diverse talents among team members (Calhoun,
2007; Katz, 2005; Sheffert, 2009). All coaches looked at attributes of the person as leader to
determine who should have the leader role of team captain or vice team captain. As Coach 2
stated: “A first year player was my team captain as I know that everyone is listening to him,
SBM Frequency

Is able to communicate 7
Is able to think on behalf of the team 5
Is a good football player 4
Is able to make a change 4
Dares to speak up 4
Dares to steer 3
Takes initiative 3
Is an example for the team 3
Has tactical insight 2
Has the absolute will to win 2
Disciplined 2
Determined 2
Coaches 2
Has status 2
Has personality 2
Is open and honest 2
Is social 2
Does not have to be a good football player 1
Plays always 1
Is a natural authority 1
Plays always 1
Is a natural authority 1
Fanatic 1
Shows the core values of the team 1
Shows commitment to the team 1
Is serious 1
Is able to stimulate 1
Inspires 1
Has ability to cope with challenges 1
Has an overview 1
Is clear 1
Takes responsibility 1
Is able to show appreciation and respect 1
Easily approachable by the team 1
Create trust 1
Consults 1
Table 2. Asks the team questions 1
Reasons for coaches to Cares for the team 1
choose team captains Shows responsibility 1

he determines the ambiance in the team and is caring”. He is also the one that leads the others
by example, for example, by showing that additional effort is required by the team. Individual
qualities exemplified by traits and skills of team captains having an influence on the coach
decision on choosing the team captain are categorized in Table 2.
Most of the coaches used asking questions and repetition as a method of learning. An
example of a situation in which a team successfully involved individual players’ ideas was
illustrated by Coach 1, who told about a situation in the dressing room.
“I make use of a flip chart to explain and discuss how we want to play the game. This is a
repetition of what we do from the beginning of the season. I asked the question how shall we
put pressure and how do we want to play in offense and defence? One after one the
players stood up next to the flip chart and explained their ideas. All comments were given
positive feedback. At the end three options for attacking and three options to defending were
summarised by the coach and collectively decided with the players and coach which scenario Coaches’ views
would be preferred”. on shared
A coach stated that it is very important that the players express their opinion and ideas so
they are involved and have a learning opportunity. Although it often is the same small group
leadership
of players standing up, it still provides a positive feeling.
In regard to the importance of having and gaining enriched cognitive sport knowledge
(Todd and Kent, 2004) and strong work ethic (Wright and C^ot
e, 2003), Coach 3 stated:
The best situation would be if they already would come up with solutions so the impact of learning is
higher. So they do it not because the trainer says so but they understand why they do things. Using
the system of asking questions about what goes well and what should be changed works well.

Micro-level: position
Informal athlete leadership, exhibited by other players besides the team captain, should be
acknowledged as stated by Fransen et al. (2014). In addition, they found that it is common (i.e.
70.5% of the time) that informal athlete leaders, rather than the formal leader, take the
principal lead, both on and off the field. Concerning the position of leaders, Coach 2 stated:
“Leadership is all about positioning others, players have to make sure that all players takes
the right position”. Concerning taking the principal lead, Coach 4 made a similar statement.
If you do not have this role in the team, then it is not possible to develop yourself in this role. If you
position yourself as secondary to the team, then although development is possible, you sometimes
have to stand up for yourself, and take the initiative if a certain quality is asked for. The difficulty
with leader-, and followership is that you have to judge and assess the situation. If you are wrong and
make the same mistake three times than you will be told. This is a huge risk, taking the leadership
role, so you have to be aware of this.

Micro-level: process
There is growing evidence that the PYD is more likely to occur if sport is more structured and
young people are surrounded by trained caring adult mentors (Petitpas et al., 2004). Most of
the coaches choose one team captain and one vice-team captain for the whole season. The
process of choosing the captain differs between the respondents. In some teams it is the team
that makes the decision who will become the new team captain and vice-team captain. This
was initiated by the coaches as they thought it would result in a higher acceptance and
support of the team. At the beginning of the season, Coach 1 makes use of a survey to receive
insight in processes and players’ objectives.
I make use of a survey at the beginning of the season with questions such as: What is your favourite
position, who should be the team captain and the vice-team captain?, how many times will somebody
score because of your contribution?, what is your personal aim?, in what part of the game would you
like to become better?, in what way can the coach or the team help you?.
In most of the teams it is the coach who decides about the team captain’s position. Some
coaches choose more than one leader during one match. Coach 2 explains that he values
players’ football intelligence.
I normally choose for 4 ambassadors in the teams who understand how I want to play the game.
They then explain it to the rest of the team. I choose these 4 leaders because of their football
intelligence (putting players in position, directing players, tactical insight) but also because they are
vocally strong and are able to take the lead if we need a change. By preference on central positions.
The composition of the group, experience and who they are as a person are the determining
factors for leaders to be chosen as mentioned by Coach 4.
SBM This year we had a team captain who was already part of the group last year and who was taking
care of the norms and values and agreements in the team. During the year this can change. This year
I have 3, 4 boys who are able to take the lead. They distinguish themselves as they excel in the
absolute willingness to win, discipline, leading by example, determination, commitment, consistent
but not the most vocal ones or most present. Not a certain position but the characteristics and
behaviour counts.
Other reasons for choosing several leaders in the team are mentioned by Coach 7, as he thinks
that a player of this age never is able to stand above his team mates and because 1 or 2 team
captains is a too small number to cooperate with the whole team. The coach explains why he
chooses four team captains.
I always choose four team captains with a mixture of 1st and 2nd years so all influences and opinions
are heard. I never want the role of team captain being too important as all players are important and
everyone needs to do their best. Because he is the team captain I will ask him some additional
questions related to the task lists we have or related to the team trip.
Another way of making use of more than one team captain is illustrated by coach 8 who
makes use of two team captains who in turn are wearing the armband and two additional
players who form together the council of players. This is following the protocol of the Dutch
football association.
These 4 players have most of the influence and these players are consulted by me often. We make use
of the protocol of the Dutch football association. I find it important that the team captain is my direct
connection with the team in a match, is able to coach others, in total of 4 leaders, of which two team
captains and two line leaders. Not the best football player but the ones with football intelligence,
understanding for instance when the timing is right to put pressure.
Within the process of involving the players in the decisions that need to be made before a
training or a match, some coaches do not involve the players. This is illustrated by coach 2,
who stated that he is always the one that decides as he as coach has a clear plan. He involves
his so-called four “ambassadors” in the team, because they understand his way of playing
and because they are the ones to transfer this to the other players.
Most of the coaches make use of the input of the players and try to involve the whole team
as much as they can. This is illustrated by Coach 1, who stated the following:
I try in my meetings to involve as much players as I can. Often I ask players to say something about
the opponent and ask them what kind of feeling they have about e.g. what strengths we have in our
team, which players should be empowered, which roles individual players have, if we should adapt to
the tactics of the other team, or that we should use our own strategy.
Another example of how to involve players in the processes is exemplified by Coach 4, who
involves all his players in what he calls “both processes and content”. His understanding of
processes concerns activities related to how materials are treated, how the training is dealt
with, what time the players need to arrive, how other players are treated in the dressing room.
In general, according to him, this concerns the whole process from arriving at the venue until
you leave. Content-wise he explained that this starts when playing at a competitive level, with
explaining how the opponent and own teams are analysed and which consequences this has
for the game plan.

Micro-level: purpose
Sports leadership give athletes an opportunity to guide team objectives and manage change
to accomplish set objectives (Larue et al., 2006; Sugar and Holloman, 2009). Most of the
coaches stated that their club did not have a plan on youth development or youth leadership
development in particular. A few coaches stated that their club is working with an academy
developmental plan. Nearly all coaches noted it is important to have a common vision on
youth and its development but few clubs expressed such vision. Reasons for not actively Coaches’ views
developing youth leadership are outlined by coach 9. on shared
The amount of coaches leaving the club each year is high, so continuity is a problem. Also because leadership
we are a club with volunteers, most coaches are just part-time involved. The coaches are also not
investing in their own development as they do not participate in further training, read trade journals,
consult colleagues, or attend meetings, as time is failing.
In relation to the development of leadership by youth in teams, Coach 4 explained that
according to him, a coach (un)consciously is always involved with team leadership. He stated
the following:
Also at the youngest age you can recognise initiatives by youngsters telling others what to do. There
always will be someone starting up the game, while others are following. As a coach you always pay
attention to leadership, as the leaders in the team are determining the setting or mindset of other
players. As a head coach of the club this also counts for the other coaches. Although the other
coaches sometimes have different strong opinions, they still have to follow what we as a club have
agreed upon regarding youth development and therefore also leadership development.
Coach 8 stated: “By making use of ’positive coaching, the whole youth department is involved
with leadership development”. People involved are volunteers and employees from the working
group of FC Groningen (a Dutch Premier League team). Outcome will be a protocol for trainers
and coaches as part of a national pilot from the Dutch Football Association.
Summary of the micro-level. At the micro-level, the contribution to the learning and
development of individuals and the team concerned the following coaching strategies: “Asking
questions by youth, repetition of what is learned, making youth responsible and providing
structure”. Focussing on the personal attributes of the leader (Person), the team captains are
chosen for various reasons and existing qualities. Most noted qualities were related to:
“effective communication”, “players positive attitudes” and “having a strong work ethic”.
When a certain individual quality is asked for, a player possessing this quality can take the
position of leader (Position). This could also include a risk if the same player fails several times
while taking the lead. In the decision-making process concerning football activities (Process), it
is mainly the coach who makes most of the decisions with a few exceptions. Youth leadership as
an objective (Purpose) is not actively developed in football in most of the teams, although some
teams make unintentionally use of shared leadership principles by choosing more than one
leader during one match and involving youth in the decisions that need to be made.

Emerged themes
Two topics came out of the interviews with the coaches on how to develop leadership capacity
in youth football that could not be positioned on micro-level. Both topics were named emergent
themes and were each mentioned by six coaches. The first topic concerns youth involvement in
activities organized at club and community level. This encompasses activities such as
organizing parties, team trips, BBQ’s, (youth) tournaments, community engagement, coaching
younger teams and being a referee. To keep the club running, some clubs or coaches in
particular expect youth to be involved as it shows commitment and works as an example for
younger teams. The second topic concerns a club vision on youth development. One club, for
instance, had a youth academic plan and as a result of this plan was involved in a national pilot
about positive youth coaching.

Discussion
The purpose of this study was to examine football coaches’ view on how to develop shared
leadership capacity in youth team sport. A clear view or philosophy on the development of the
SBM individual and/or team has often been mentioned as a key ingredient of coaching success
(Avolio et al., 2009; Vroom and Jago, 2007; Avolio, 2007; Yukl, 2010). In the current study, not
all football coaches did have a clear vision or philosophy on the development of leadership in
general or shared leadership in particular. This is in accordance with the claim of Gould and
Voelker (2012) that although sport and physical education offer numerous opportunities and
teachable moments that may contribute to developing leadership in young people, this is not
intentionally occurring in sport and physical activity contexts. Neither do the coaches have a
distinct view on how to involve the individual players in the team processes. Almost all of the
interviewed coaches confirmed the necessity of having such a vision. According to Coterill
and Fransen (2016), the number of different leaders in the team is positively correlated with
team confidence, team identification and a higher place on the team ranking. Some football
coaches confirmed that the number of different leaders in the team had a positive relation
with team confidence and identification, although this was not proven statistically and was
not measured in relation to team ranking at the end of the season.
To develop youth leadership capacity in team sport, it can be questioned if next to the micro-
level of team sport also the meso- and macro-level should be taken into consideration. The two
topics that came out of the interviews that were different from micro-level suggest that shared
leadership activities can possibly also be observed at club community and federation level. This
confirms Checkoway (2003) and Christens and Dolan (2011) considerations, that youth can play
an important leadership role in their communities and often want to be involved in local
decision-making. Next, the development of a club vision on youth development transcends the
meso-level as it might involve a more broader discussion about the socio-cultural values and
beliefs of the industry of football and its consequences for sport clubs. To include micro-, meso-
and macro-level perspectives in the development of leadership, is in accordance with Hollander
(2009), who stated that in order to initiate leadership development an intervention is required on
team-, organization- and macro-group level. Table 3 provides a summary of elements for
developing shared leadership on micro-, meso- and macro-level which can be used for further
development of shared leadership capacity in teams.
The four key elements: “person”, “position”, “process” and “purpose” are important for
developing shared leadership capacity in youth sport. Although discussed individually, all
four key elements need to be considered together from a holistic perspective, as changes in
one key element directly have an influence on the other key elements. It can also be discussed

Micro Meso Macro

Person Ability to communicate, to think Youth coaching or refereeing The coach is an example for
on behalf of the team, being a for personal development youth, as players will look at
good football player, to make a should be stimulated him or her and copy the
change and dare to speak up behaviour
Position Players should be empowered To keep the club running, it is Working with youth goes
and leaders should be chosen by more or less expected that much further than just
the team and/or the coach youth show commitment in coaching them to play
things to do at the club football
Process Make use of the input (opinions, Coaches should attend club The club should choose for
ideas and solutions) of the activities and stay around after educational programmes
players and try to involve the training or matches such as positive youth
team in decision making coaching
Purpose For developing youth, an The club and/or community A common view on youth
academy developmental plan is should involve the players by, development or youth
Table 3. required e.g. organizing parties, team leadership development is
Leadership framework trips, BBQ’s, tournaments, etc. required
that precondition should be taken into consideration as a fifth P, as shared leadership requires Coaches’ views
a certain level of trust, willingness to cooperate, ability to listen and to communicate. It can be on shared
argued that these behaviours and such skills are also developed during the development and
sharing of leadership (Van Dalfsen et al., 2019).
leadership
The person as leader stands for the qualities and skills of the “persons” present in the team
and consists of the coach, the individual players and the team. Although most studies
focussed on the team captain being the leader (Dupuis et al., 2006; Grandzol et al., 2010;
Voelker et al., 2011), also other informal athlete leaders nowadays are acknowledged within
sports teams (Holmes et al., 2010; Loughead et al., 2006). Divergent from these researches is
the consideration of also the coach being part of the leadership capacity of a football team. In
the current study, the person as leader can be fulfilled by the team captain, the players and/or
coach. It is also important to include the perspectives of players, as researched by Fransen
et al. (2020) concluded that coaches often do not have sufficient insight in their team’s
leadership to identify the players who can best meet the leadership needs of the team.
Therefore, depending on qualities available and the challenges derived from the context, both
different players and coach can claim the leadership role. In the current study, one leader but
also sometimes several leaders were active at the same moment.
Taking the position of leader, both players and coach can take the lead and develop
themselves, although this entails taking a risk as the leadership activity could fail. Research
by Libby et al. (2005) and Stoneman (2010) stated that youth often are more creative and
willing to take risks in tackling problems than adults.
Considering leadership process, the coach often decides about the team captain’s position
with some exceptions, whereas the players are involved and the team makes the decisions. As
shared leadership consists of dynamic, interactive influence processes among individuals in
groups with the objective to lead one another for the achievement of collective goals (Pearce
and Conger, 2003), this could indicate that principles of shared leadership in relation to
processes were not always present.
Most of the youth teams did not purposefully develop youth shared leadership. However,
some teams made unintentionally use of shared leadership principles by choosing more than
one leader during one match and involved youth in the decisions that need to be made. For
leadership development to take place, physical educators and coaches in their efforts must be
intentional on a consistent basis to employ youth leadership development strategies, which
confirms literature Gould et al. (2013a, b).

Theoretical and practical implications

The results of this qualitative study are not and should not be generalized. However, this does
not mean that the results cannot be applied theoretically or practically. Theoretically, this
study provides some first insights in shared leadership development in youth football
making use of the micro-level of Bronfenbrenner (1999) in combination with the four “P”s
leadership framework of Hopman and Van Den Berg (2015). These insights concern at first
the need for a clear view or philosophy on the development of youth in general and/or youth
leadership and in particular for shared leadership to be developed. Second, coaches need to be
taught how to involve the individual players in the team processes of shared leadership such
as decision-making. Third, to develop leadership capacity in team sports, next to the micro-
level of teams, it is recommended also to consider the meso- and macro-level. Because shared
leadership activities probably also can be developed on club and community level, it requires
a broader discussion about the socio-cultural values and beliefs of the industry of football.
Fourth, the four Ps need to be considered together from a more holistic perspective, because
changes in one key element directly have an influence on the other key elements. Fifth,
considering leadership capacity, next to acknowledgement of informal and formal leaders in
SBM teams, the coach as leader is important as he or she can also claim or grant leadership roles
and is crucial for shared leadership development to take place. Six, by encouraging youth
players to think about “what they do”, or “how they do it” but also “why they do things”,
leadership development can take place that is purposeful and provides meaning to further
personal development. Shared leadership therefore can contribute to personal development
with a lifelong impact.

Further research and limitations

This exploratory study used a small number of coaches as interviewees to generate a first
insight in the shared leadership development in youth sport. For that reason, the findings
cannot be generalized to larger (other sport) populations yet. Further research is recommended
to make use of the leadership framework (Table 3) to initiate studies that next to the micro-level
also take the meso- and macro-level into consideration. Future research is recommended to do
research in the design of educational programmes on club level and the importance of self-
regulation of players.

Conclusion
This research delivered a first insight into the ways in which shared leadership is developed
(or not) in competitive youth football. It was found that coaches do not have a clear view on
the development of leadership in general and shared leadership in particular. Although youth
football offers numerous opportunities and teachable moments that could contribute to
developing leadership in young people, it may well be that leadership development is not
intentionally occurring and that it does not take place on a consistent base.

References
Alimo-Metcalfe, B., Alban-Metcalfe, J., Bradley, M., Mariathasan, J. and Samele, C. (2008), “The impact of
engaging leadership on performance, attitudes to work and well-being at work: a longitudinal
study”, Journal of Health, Organisation and Management, Vol. 22 No. 6, pp. 586-598.
Anshel, M.H. (2004), “Sources of disordered eating patterns between ballet dancers and Nondancers”,
Journal of Sport Behavior, Vol. 27 No. 2, pp. 115-133.
Avolio, B.J. (2007), “Promoting more integrative strategies for leadership theory-building”, American
Psychologist, Vol. 62 No. 1, pp. 25-33.
Avolio, B.J., Walumbwa, F.O. and Weber, T.J. (2009), “Leadership: current theories, research, and
future directions”, Annual Review of Psychology, Vol. 60, pp. 421-449.
Becker, A.J. (2009), “It’s not what they do, it’s how they do it: athlete experiences of great coaching”,
International Journal Sport Science Coaching, Vol. 4 No. 1, pp. 93-119.
Bennett, W. and Crawley, S. (2002), Don’t Die With the Music in You, Australian Broadcasting
Corporation, Sydney.
Bennie, A. and O’Connor, D. (2010), “Coaching philosophies: perceptions from professional cricket,
rugby League and rugby union players and coaches in Australia”, International Journal of
Sports Science and Coaching, Vol. 5 No. 2, pp. 309-320.
Bolden, R., Hawkins, B., Gosling, J. and Taylor, S. (2011), Exploring Leadership. Individual,
Organizational Societal Perspectives, University Press, Oxford.
Boyce, L.A., Jackson, J.R. and Neal, J.L. (2010), “Building successful leadership coaching relationship:
examining impact of matching criteria in a leadership coaching program”, Journal of Management
Development, Vol. 29 No. 10, pp. 914-931.
Bronfenbrenner, U. (1999), “Environments in developmental perspective: theoretical and operational Coaches’ views
models”, in Friedman, S.L. and Wachs, T.D. (Eds), Measuring Environment across the Life Span:
Emerging Methods and Concepts, American Psychological Association, Washington, DC, pp. 3-28. on shared
Bryman, A. (1996), “Leadership in organisations”, in Clegg, S.R., Hardy, C. and Nord, W.R. (Eds),
leadership
Handbook of Organisation Studies, Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA, pp. 276-292.
Buchanan, A. and Kern, M.L. (2017), “The benefit mindset: the psychology of contribution and
everyday leadership”, International Journal of Wellbeing, Vol. 7 No. 1, pp. 1-11.
Calhoun, J. (2007), A Passion to Lead: Seven Leadership Secrets for Success in Business, Sports, and
Life, St. Martin’s Griffin, New York.
Carmeli, A., Gelbard, R. and Reiter-Palmon, R. (2013), “Leadership, creative problem-solving capacity,
and creative performance: the importance of knowledge sharing”, Human Resource
Management, Vol. 52 No. 1, pp. 95-122, doi: 10.1002/hrm.21514.
Checkoway, B. (2003), “Young people as competent citizens”, Community Development Journal, Vol. 38
No. 4, pp. 298-309.
Chelladurai, P. (1980), Leadership: Handbook on Research on Sport Psychology, McMillan, New York, NY.
Chelladurai, P. and Riemer, H.A. (1998), “Measurement of leadership in sport”, in Duda, J.L. (Ed.),
Advances in Sport and Exercise Psychology Measurement, Fitness Information Technology,
Morgantown, WV, pp. 227-256.
Christens, B.D. and Dolan, T. (2011), “Interweaving youth development, community development, and
social change through youth organizing”, Youth and Society, Vol. 43 No. 2, pp. 528-548.
C^ot
e, J. and Gilbert, W.D. (2009), “An integrative definition of coaching effectiveness and Expertise”,
International Journal of Sports Science and Coaching, Vol. 17 No. 1, pp. 1-17.
C^ot
e, J., Salmela, J., Trudel, P., Baria, A. and Russell, S. (1995), “The coaching model: a grounded
assessment of expert gymnastic coaches’ knowledge”, The Journal of Sport and Exercise
Psychology, Vol. 17 No. 1, pp. 1-17.
C^ot
e, J., Baker, J. and Abernethy, B. (2003), “From play to practice: a developmental framework for the
acquisition of expertise in team sport”, in Starkes, J. and Ericsson, K.A. (Eds), Recent Advances
in Research on Sport Expertise, Human Kinetics, Champaign, IL, pp. 89-114.
Cotteril, S.T. and Fransen, K. (2016), “Athlete leadership in sport teams: current understanding and
future directions”, International Review of Sport and Exercise Psychology, Vol. 9 No. 1, pp. 116-133.
Cotterill, S.T., Cheetham, R. and Fransen, K. (2019), “Professional rugby coaches’ perceptions on the role
of the team captain”, The Sport Psychologist, Vol. 33 No. 4, pp. 1-29, doi: 10.1123/tsp.2018-0094.
Cullen-Lester, K. and Yammarino, F. (2016), “Collective and network approaches to leadership: special issue
introduction”, The Leadership Quarterly, Vol. 27, pp. 173-180, doi: 10.1016/j.leaqua.2016.02.001.
Cushion, C.J. (2007), “Modelling the complexity of the coaching process”, International Journal of
Sports Science and Coaching, Vol. 2 No. 4, pp. 395-401.
Damon, W. (2004), “What is positive youth development?”, The annals of the American, Academy of
Political and Social Science, Vol. 591 No. 1, pp. 13-24.
Day, D.V. (2000), “Leadership development: a review in context”, The Leadership Quarterly, Vol. 11
No. 4, pp. 581-613.
Day, D.V., Gronn, P. and Salas, E. (2004), “Leadership capacity in teams”, The Leadership Quarterly,
Vol. 15 No. 6, pp. 857-880.
DeRue, D.S. and Ashford, S.J. (2010), “Who will lead and who will follow? A social process of
leadership identity construction in organizations”, Academy of Management Review, Vol. 35
No. 4, pp. 627-647.
DeRue, D.S. and Workman, K.M. (2011), “Toward a positive and dynamic theory of leadership
development”, in Cameron, K. and Spreitzer, G. (Ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Positive
Organizational Scholarship, Oxford University Press, New York.
SBM Dijkstra, J. (2013), Innoveren door slimmer leiderschap. Hoe persoonlijk leiderschap de innovatiekracht
van individuen, groepen en organisaties kan versterken, Lectoraat persoonlijk leiderschap en
innovatiekracht, Leeuwarden.
Dijkstra, J. and Feld, P.P. (2012), Gedeeld leiderschap: veerkracht door nieuwe vormen van
samenwerken, organiseren, leren en leiderschap, Van Gorcum, Assen.
Dupuis, M., Bloom, G.A. and Loughead, T.M. (2006), “Team captains’ perceptions of athlete
Leadership”, Journal of Sport Behavior, Vol. 29 No. 1, pp. 60-78.
Dwyer, T., Sallis, J.F., Blizzard, L., Lazarus, R. and Dean, K. (2001), “Relation of academic performance
to physical activity and fitness in children”, Pediatric Exercise Science, Vol. 13 No. 3,
pp. 225-238.
Ensley, M.D. and Pearce, C.L. (2000), “Assessing the influence of leadership behaviors on new venture
TMT processes and new venture performances”, in Paper Presented at the 20th Annual
Entrepreneurship Research Conference, Babson Park, MA.
Ensley, M.D. and Pearce, C.L. (2001), “Shared cognition as a process and an outcome in top
management teams: implications for new venture performances”, Journal of Organizational
Behavior, Vol. 22 No. 2, pp. 145-60.
Follett, M.P. (1924), Creative Experience, Longmans, Green, New York.
Fransen, K., Coffee, P., Vanbeselaere, N., Slater, M.J., De Cuyper, B. and Boen, F. (2014), “Identification
and collective efficacy”, The Sport Psychologist, Vol. 28 No. 4, pp. 347-360.
Fransen, K., Mertens, N., Cotterill, S.T., Vande Broek, G. and Boen, F. (2020), “From autocracy to
empowerment: teams with shared leadership perceive their coaches to be better leaders”,
Journal of Applied Sport Psychology, Vol. 32 No. 1, pp. 1-23, doi: 10.1080/10413200.2019.1617370.
Gearity, B.T. and Murray, M.A. (2011), “Athletes’ experiences of the psychological effects of poor
coaching”, Psychology of Sport and Exercise, Vol. 12 No. 3, pp. 213-221.
Gottschalk, P., Gudmundsen, Y. and Yngve, S. (2010), “An empirical study of intelligence strategy
implementation”, International Journal of Police Science and Management, Vol. 12 No. 1,
pp. 55-68.
Gould, D. and Voelker, D.K. (2012), “Enhancing youth leadership through sport and physical
education”, Journal of Physical Education, Recreation and Dance, Vol. 83 No. 8, pp. 38-41.
Gould, D., Voelker, D.K. and Blanton, J. (2012), “Future directions in youth leadership Research”, in
Schinke, R. and Hanrahan, S. (Eds), Sport for Development, Peace and Social Justice, Fitness
Information Technology, Morgantown, WV.
Gould, D., Carson, S. and Blanton, J. (2013a), “Coaching life skills”, in Potrac, P., Gilbert, W. and
Denison, J. (Eds), Routledge Handbook of Sports Coaching, Routledge, New York, NY,
pp. 259-270.
Gould, D., Voelker, D.K. and Griffes, K. (2013b), “Best coaching practices for developing team
captains”, The Sport Psychologist, Vol. 27 No. 1, pp. 13-26.
Grandzol, C., Perlis, S. and Draina, L. (2010), “Leadership development of team captains in collegiate
varsity athletics”, Journal of College Student Development, Vol. 51 No. 4, pp. 403-418.
Grant, J. and Cotterill, S.T. (2016), “An exploration of the role of the captain in field hockey: the
coaches’ perspective”, Proceedings of the Association for Applied Sport Psychology, Phoenix.
Greenleaf, R.K. (1970), The Servant as a Leader, Greenleaf Center, Indianapolis.
Grint, K. (2005), “Problem, problems, problems: the social construction of “leadership””, Human
Relations, Vol. 58 No. 11, pp. 1467-1494.
Hall, M.H., Andrukow, A., Barr, C., Brock, K., de Wit, M., Embuldeniya, D., Jolin, L., Lasby, D.,
L
evesque, B., Malinsky, E., Stowe, S. and Vaillancourt, Y. (2003), The Capacity to Serve: A
Qualitative Study of the Challenges Facing Canada’s Non-profit and Voluntary Organizations,
Canadian Centre for Philanthropy, Toronto, ON.
Hays, K., Maynard, I., Thomas, O. and Bawden, M. (2007), “Sources and types of confidence identified Coaches’ views
by world class sport performers”, Journal of Applied Sport Psychology, Vol. 19 No. 4, pp. 434-456.
on shared
Hickey, G. and Kipping, C. (1996), “Issues in research. A multi-stage approach to the coding of data
from open-ended questions”, Nurse Researcher, Vol. 4 No. 1, pp. 81-91.
leadership
Hickman, G.R. (2010), Leading Organizations: Perspectives for a New Era, 2nd ed., Sage, Thousand
Oaks, CA.
Hollander, E.P. (2009), Inclusive Leadership: The Essential Leader-Follower Relationship, Routledge,
New York.
Holmes, R.H., McNeil, M. and Dorna, P. (2010), “Student athletes’ perceptions of formal and informal
team leaders”, Journal of Sport Behavior, Vol. 33 No. 4, pp. 442-465.
Holt, N.L., Neely, K.C., Slater, L.G., Camir
e, M., C^ot
e, j., Fraser-Thomas, J., MacDonald, D., Strachan, L.
and Tamminen, K.A. (2017), “A grounded theory of positive youth development through sport
based on results from a qualitative meta-study”, International Review of Sport and Exercise
Psychology, Vol. 10 No. 1, pp. 1-49, doi: 10.1080/1750984X.2016.1180704.
Hooker, C. and Csikszentmihalyi, M. (2003), “Flow, creativity, and shared leadership”, in PearceConger,
C.L.J.A. (Ed.), Shared Leadership: Reframing the How’s and Why’s of Leadership, Sage
Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA, pp. 217-234.
Hopman, N. and Van Den Berg, C. (2015), Nieuw publiek leiderschap: top-ambtelijk leiderschap in tijden
van verandering, Leadership Centre, Universiteit Leiden – Campus Den Haag, Den Haag.
Horn, T.S. (2002), Advances in Sport Psychology, 2nd ed., Human Kinetics, Champaign, IL.
Horn, T.S. (2007), “Three decades of research on coaching effectiveness: what do we know and where
should we go?”, in Paper Presented at the Association for Applied Sport Psychology Annual
Conference, Louisville, KY.
Houghton, J.D., Neck, C.P. and Manz, C.C. (2003), “Self-leadership and super leadership: the heart and
art of creating shared leadership in teams”, in Pearce, C.L. and Conger, J.A. (Eds), Shared
Leadership: Reframing the How’s and Why’s of Leadership, Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks,
CA, pp. 123-140.
Hoye, R., Smith, A.C.T., Nicholson, M., Stewart, B. and Westerbeek, H. (2012), Sport Management,
Principles and Applications, Routledge, New York, NY.
Jones, R.L. and Wallace, M. (2005), “Another bad day at the training ground: coping with ambiguity in
the coaching context”, Sport, Education and Society, Vol. 10 No. 1, pp. 119-134.
Jones, R.L., Armour, K.M. and Potrac, P. (2004), The Cultures of Coaching, Longman, London.
Katz, S. (2005), Cultural Aging: Life Course, Lifestyle, and Senior Worlds, Broadview Press,
Peterborough, ON.
Kellett, P. (1999), “Organisational leadership lessons from professional coaches”, Sport Management
Review, Vol. 2 No. 2, pp. 150-171.
Lambert, L. (2003), Leadership Capacity for Lasting School Improvement, Association of Supervision
and Curriculum Development, Alexandria, VA.
Larue, B., Child, P. and Larson, K. (2006), Leading Organizations from the inside Out, John Wiley and
Sons, New York.
Lee, S.Y., Recchia, S.L. and Shin, M.S. (2005), “Not the same kind of leaders: four young children’s
unique ways of influencing others”, Journal of Research in Childhood Education, Vol. 20 No. 2,
pp. 132-148.
Lee-Davies, L., Kakabadse, N. and Kakabadse, A. (2007), “Shared leadership: leading through
polylogue”, Business Strategy Series, Vol. 8 No. 4, pp. 246-253.
LernerAlmerigi, R.M.J.B., Theokas, C. and Lerner, J.V. (2005), “Positive youth development”, The
Journal of Early Adolescence, Vol. 25 No. 1, pp. 10-16.
SBM Libby, M., Rosen, M. and Sedonaen, M. (2005), “Building youth-adult partnerships for community
change: lessons from the youth leadership institute”, Journal of Community Psychology, Vol. 33
No. 1, pp. 111-120.
Liden, R.C., Wayne, S.J., Liao, C. and Meuser, J.D. (2014), “Servant leadership and serving culture:
influence on individual and unit performance”, Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 57 No. 5,
pp. 1434-1452.
Lincoln, Y.S. and Guba, E.G. (1985), Naturalistic Inquiry, Sage Publications, Newbury Park, CA.
Loughead, T.M., Hardy, J. and Eys, M.A. (2006), “The nature of athlete leadership”, Journal of Sport
Behavior, Vol. 29 No. 2, pp. 142-158.
Lyle, J. (2002), Sports Coaching Concepts: A Framework for Coaches’ Behaviour, Routledge, London.
Malina, M.M. (2005), “Youth football players: number of participants, growth and maturity status”, in
Science and Football V: The Proceedings of the Fifth World Congress on Sports Science and
Football, New York, NY, Routledge, pp. 434-445.
Manos, K. (2006), 101 Ways to Motivate Athletes, Coaches Choices, Monterery, CA.
Mehra, A., Smith, B., Dixon, A. and Robertson, B. (2006), “Distributed leadership in teams: the network
of leadership perceptions and team performance”, The Leadership Quarterly, Vol. 17 No. 3,
pp. 232-245.
Misener, K. and Doherty, A. (2009), “A case study of organizational capacity in nonprofit community
sport”, Journal of Sport Management, Vol. 23 No. 4, pp. 457-482.
Murphy, S.E. (2011), “Providing a foundation for leadership development”, in Murphy, S.E. and
Johnson, S.K. (Eds), Early Development and Leadership - Building the Next Generations of
Leaders, Routledge, New York, NY, pp. 3-37.
Murphy, S.E. and Johnson, S.K. (2011), “The benefits of a long-lens approach to leader development:
understanding the seeds of leadership”, The Leadership Quarterly, Vol. 22 No. 3, pp. 459-470.
NOC*NSF (2018), “Ledenrapportage NOC*NSF [online]”, available at: https://nocnsf.nl/media/1080/
ledentalrapportage-nocnsf-2018-sportonderzoek.pdf (accessed 15 May 2020).
Northouse, P.G. (2010), Leadership: Theory and Practice, 5th ed., Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA.
O’Donoghue, J., Kirshner, B. and McLaughlin, M.W. (2006), “Youth participation: from myths to
effective practice”, Prevention Researcher, Vol. 13 No. 1, pp. 3-6.
O’Toole, J., Galbraith, J. and Lawler, E.E. (2002), “When two (or more) heads are better than one: the
promise and pitfalls of shared leadership”, California Management Review, Vol. 44 No. 4, pp. 65-83.
2010 Parking, D. (2003), “Coaching philosophy”, in Bennie, A. and O’Conner, D. (Eds), Coaching
Philosophies: Perceptions from Professional Cricket, Rugby and Rugby Union Players and
Coaches in Australia, International Journal of Sport Science, Vol. 5 No. 2, pp. 309-320.
Pearce, C.L. and Conger, J.A. (2003), Shared Leadership: Reframing The Hows and Whys of Leadership,
Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA.
Pearce, C.L. and Ensley, M.D. (2004), “A reciprocal and longitudinal investigation of the innovation
process: the central role of shared vision in product and process innovation teams (PPITs)”,
Journal of Organizational Behavior, Vol. 25 No. 2, pp. 259-278.
Pearce, C.L. and Sims, H.P. Jr (2000), “Shared leadership: toward a multi-level theory of Leadership”,
Advances in the Interdisciplinary Studies of Work Teams, Vol. 7, pp. 115-139.
Peters, F. and Strijp, I. (2011), Leiderschap in evenwicht. Nieuwe tijden vragen nieuweleiders, Sdu
uitgevers Academic Service, Den Haag.
Petitpas, A.J., Van Raalte, J.L., Cornelius, A. and Presbrey, J. (2004), “A life skills development program
for high school student-athletes”, Journal of Primary Prevention, Vol. 24 No. 3, pp. 325-334.
Pierce, S., Gould, D. and Camir
e, M. (2017), “Definition and model of life skills transfer”, International
Review of Sport and Exercise Psychology, Vol. 10 No. 1, pp. 186-211, doi: 10.1080/1750984X.2016.
1199727.
Potter, W.J. and Levine-Donnerstein, D. (1999), “Rethinking validity and reliability in content Coaches’ views
Analysis”, Journal of Applied Communication Research, Vol. 27 No. 3, pp. 258-284.
on shared
Rapley, T. (2004), “Interviews”, in Seale, C., Giampietro, G., Gubrium, J.F. and Silverman, D. (Eds),
Qualitative Research Practice, Sage, London, pp. 15-33.
leadership
Rubin, H.J. and Rubin, I.S. (1995), Qualitative Interviewing: The Art of Hearing Data, Sage
Publications, London.
Scully, M. and Segal, A. (1997), “Passion with an Umbrella: grassroots activists in the workplace”,
Working paper, MIT Sloan School of Management, Cambridge, MA.
Seefelt, V.D., Ewing, M.E. and Brown, T. (1996), “Youth sports in America: an overview”, PCPFS
Research Digest, Vol. 2 No. 11, pp. 51-63.
Senge, P. (1996), “Leading learning communities: the bold, the powerful, and the invisible”, in
Hesselbeinet, F., et al. (Eds), The Leader of the Future, Jossey Bass, San Francisco, CA.
Sheedy, K. (2005), “Contemporary issues in coaching”, (Notes of Lecture, February 9).
Sheffert, M. (2009), “Chameleon leadership: adopting different leadership styles during a Crisis
[Online]”, available at: http://www.tcbmag.com/ideasopinions/corneroffice/113971p1.aspx
(accessed 10 August 2018).
Simons, T.L. and Peterson, R.S. (2000), “Task conflict and relationship conflict in top management
teams: the pivotal role of intragroup trust”, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 85 No. 1,
pp. 102-111, doi: 10.1037/0021-9010.85.1.102.
Smith, R.E. and Smoll, F.L. (1990), “Self esteem and children’s reaction to youth sport coaching
behaviours: a field study of self enhancement processes”, Developmental Psychology, Vol. 26,
pp. 987-993.
Smith, M.J., Arnold, R. and Thelwell, R.C. (2018), “There’s no place to hide: exploring the stressors
encountered by elite cricket captains”, Journal of Applied Sport Psychology, Vol. 30 No. 2,
pp. 150-170, doi: 10.1080/10413200.2017.1349845.
Spillane, J.P., Halverson, R. and Diamond, J.B. (1999), “Towards a theory of school leadership practice:
implications of a distributed perspective”, Working paper, Institute For Policy Research,
Northwestern University, Evanston, Illinois.
Stogdill, R.M. (1974), Handbook of Leadership: A Survey of Theory and Research, University of
Cambridge Press, New York.
Stoneman, D. (2010), “The role of youth programming in the development of civic engagement”,
Applied Developmental Science, Vol. 6 No. 4, pp. 221-226.
Sugar, W. and Holloman, H. (2009), “Technology leaders wanted: acknowledging the leadership role of
a technology coordinator”, TechTrends, Vol. 53 No. 6, pp. 66-75.
Thoroughgood, C.N., Sawyer, K.B., Padilla, A. and Lunsford, L. (2018), “Destructive leadership: a
critique of leader-centric perspectives and toward a more holistic definition”, Journal of
Business Ethics, Vol. 151 No. 3, pp. 627-649, doi: 10.1007/s10551-016-3257-9.
Todd, S.Y. and Kent, A. (2004), “Perceptions of the role differentiation behaviors of ideal peer leaders:
a study of adolescent athletes”, International Sports Journal, Vol. 8 No. 2, pp. 105-118.
Vall
ee, C.N. and Bloom, G.A. (2005), “Building a successful university program: key and common
elements of expert coaches”, Journal of Applied Sport Psychology, Vol. 17 No. 3, pp. 179-196.
Van Dalfsen, G., De Bosscher, V., Westerbeek, H. and Van Hoecke, J. (2019), “The development of
shared leadership as a fundamental concept in youth team sport”, International Journal of Sport
Management, Vol. 20 No. 4, pp. 388-415.
Van Linden, J. and Fertman, C.I. (1998), Youth Leadership: A Guide to Understanding Leadership
Development in Adolescent, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, CA.
Van Vugt, M. and Ahuja, A. (2011), De natuurlijke leider, Bruna Uitgevers, Utrecht.
SBM Van Vugt, M., Hogan, R. and Kaiser, R.B. (2008), “Leadership, followership, and evolution: some
Lessons from the past”, American Psychologist, Vol. 63 No. 3, pp. 182-196.
Voelker, D.K., Gould, D. and Crawford, M.C. (2011), “Understanding the experience of high school
sport captains”, The Sport Psychologist, Vol. 25 No. 1, pp. 47-66.
Vroom, V.H. and Jago, A.G. (2007), “The role of the situation in leadership”, American Psychologist,
Vol. 62 No. 1, pp. 17-24.
Wood, M.S. (2005), “Determinants of shared leadership in management teams”, International Journal
of Leadership Studies, Vol. 1 No. 1, pp. 64-85.
Wright, A. and C^ot
e, J. (2003), “A retrospective analysis of leadership development through sport”,
The Sport Psychologist, Vol. 17 No. 3, pp. 268-291.
Yukelson, D., Weinberg, R., Richardson, P. and Jackson, A. (1983), “Interpersonal attraction and
leadership within collegiate sport teams”, Journal of Sport Behavior, Vol. 6 No. 1, pp. 28-36.
Yukl, G. (2010), Leadership in Organizations, 7th ed., Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ.

Corresponding author
Gerrit van Dalfsen can be contacted at: [email protected]

For instructions on how to order reprints of this article, please visit our website:
www.emeraldgrouppublishing.com/licensing/reprints.htm
Or contact us for further details: [email protected]