AMBIENTUM BIOETHICA BIOLOGIA CHEMIA DIGITALIA DRAMATICA EDUCATIO ARTIS GYMNAST. ENGINEERING EPHEMERIDES EUROPAEA GEOGRAPHIA GEOLOGIA HISTORIA HISTORIA ARTIUM INFORMATICA IURISPRUDENTIA MATHEMATICA MUSICA NEGOTIA OECONOMICA PHILOLOGIA PHILOSOPHIA PHYSICA POLITICA PSYCHOLOGIA-PAEDAGOGIA SOCIOLOGIA THEOLOGIA CATHOLICA THEOLOGIA CATHOLICA LATIN THEOLOGIA GR.-CATH. VARAD THEOLOGIA ORTHODOXA THEOLOGIA REF. TRANSYLVAN
The STUDIA UNIVERSITATIS BABEŞ-BOLYAI issue article summary
The summary of the selected article appears at the bottom of the page. In order to get back to the contents of the issue this article belongs to you have to access the link from the title. In order to see all the articles of the archive which have as author/co-author one of the authors mentioned below, you have to access the link from the author's name.
Authors: MARIA-DANIELA MACRA-OŞORHEAN, HUNOR FLAVIUS CRIȘAN, PAUL OVIDIU RADU.
DOI: 10.24193/subbeag.68(1).04
Received 2022 February 27; Revised 2023 April 21; Accepted 2023 April 24; Available online 2023 May 30; Available print 2023 June 30.
pp. 31-40
VIEW PDF
FULL PDF
Abstract: Leadership style is an essential component of the effectiveness of the coach’s work. There are three styles of coaches generally accepted in sports: dictatorial, democratic and negligent. Each of these styles has its own advantages and disadvantages, which is why it is important to understand each of them. Purpose of the study: The purpose of this research was to determine, by means of an applied questionnaire, to what extent coaches use leadership styles and their impact within a sports organization. Methods and means: To carry out this study, the questionnaire-based survey method was used - The Coaches’ Interpersonal Style Questionnaire (Pulido et al., 2018). It included 10 questions with reference to the leadership style of the coaches. The questionnaire measured 3 forms of leadership style – democratic, authoritarian and negligent. The collected data were measured using a 5-item Likert scale represented by the numbers 1 – never, and 5 – frequently/always. Results: The comparative graphic clearly shows an absolute dominance of the democratic style in each center, in the dictatorial style there is a predominantly significant difference between clubs, and the negligent style is used less often or never. Conclusions: In general, the coaches have understood the modern trends and that is why the democratic leadership style prevails, managing to involve even very young athletes in decision-making, which also implies responsibility for both parties.
Keywords:: leadership styles, sports organizations, performance in sport
