So, what am I? I leader? A rebel? A millenial who feels entitled to do whatever he wants to (we may be onto something here…)? If only we could do the LPI in this situation, I wonder how I would be rated. The National Team coaches and tournament organizers would probably score my leadership poorly (except my favourite, “Challenge the Process”), and my peers may not score me very high either (especially my opponents). But I would like to think my partner would give me a high score. If we averaged all the scores, I would probably score terribly, but would that really matter to me? Perhaps I can say that this time, I was truly “person-centered”. Everything else just becomes noise…
“I am who I need to be, in that moment. 100% of the time.”
I consider my identity to be a human being, 100% of the time. That will be the only label I will attach myself to, because I think defining ourselves with labels can ultimately restrict us by forcing us to live in the standards of those labels. How can we optimize ourselves if we are constantly labeling ourselves with different things? I can see that there was discussion with coaches that take very good care of their athletes and ensuring they are properly rested, but the coaches are often not taking care of themselves. Why is that? Perhaps it’s in the ‘label’ of what coaches are supposed to do. But who defines that?
I also brought up the concept of the difference with being a teacher, and simply someone teaching. It is similar, yet very different. Perhaps we can borrow the idea of an athlete’s self-serving bias, where successes are attributed to the athlete’s own actions, whereas less successful events can be attributed to external events. Perhaps we somewhat do this naturally, but the identities we live may not be the ones that mean the most to us, but rather what takes the majority of our time. I feel that dedicated coaches are often stuck in that situation because of the long hours full-time coaching demands.
Maybe that is why I continue to compete, because I have lived the athlete identity for so long. I would even go far enough to call it “athlete life”, which is also my most-used hashtag on social media. The only reason I bring this up is because there are times I have had more of a coaching role, and I started using #coachlife. Afterwards, in an attempt to be funny, I sometimes write: “#lifelife. But as the aphorism goes: “Many a true word is spoken in jest“. Perhaps this is a bit of the realization that no matter what kind of “life” I choose (e.g. athlete, coach, family, work, etc.), it’s just “life” in the end. Maybe I am not a badminton player, but a person playing badminton. Maybe I will not be a badminton coach, but a person who coaches badminton. These are just things that I do, but not necessarily who I am. Perhaps this type of detachment can be a strength, but it can be a weakness as well if we are too far removed. Why do I really care for something if it’s not who I am? But that’s a very personal question that each one of us has to answer on our own.
So to tie together the situation at the Pan Am Championships this year, perhaps I was only being myself. There was an opportunity to act on something and I chose to do something. Another adage is to “choose your battles“, and I chose to battle. If I had to pick an identity, it would be that of an athlete, but more specifically, a partner. I have not been the best partner to other players in the past, and perhaps a part of me was hoping to change that. That’s just part of the learning process. A similar situation happened at Nationals earlier this year, but due to the known coaching policies by Badminton Canada, there was nothing I could do. This time, I had a chance to do something and I did.
#life
Toby, I am still trying to wrap my head around the situation regarding coaching in badminton. I wonder the degree to which a coach can have an impact in competition but likely could assist with some tactical information. In other sports coaches can have huge interventions during the competition by changing players or tactics. However, in individual sport the onus is on the athlete. I suspect the reason Rachel did well was not from any coaching, but rather she felt supported, and with this support came a tablespoon of confidence that pushed her to the top. I think this is more about the relationship and less about the tactics.
As far as the situation that you created by “coaching” it is an interesting ethical dilemma. There are so many philosophical elements to ethics which make ethical decision making a challenge. In your situation I would look at both the deontological (right vs wrong) and teleological (good vs bad) approach. Based on the rules, your actions could be considered wrong (I read you athlete blog) and further there was a precedence that others had previously been removed in the tournament which created an “unwritten” rule. Hence, even if tournament organizers did not have the exact rule, the expectation is likely clear about coaching. Now if you look at the teleological side your decision is likely a good one, or rather the goods outweigh the bads. As you indicate in your athlete blog there a plenty of good reasons. The question is whether this good outweighs the bad for the opponent. Expanding this out, there is likely a greater goodness if both athletes are given support and it would seem that this can occur in all instances except when the opponents are from the same country. It seems to me to be crazy that this rule is only in effect in this situation, as the athlete is able to get this support in all other instances. So wouldn’t it make the game better if the athlete could be coached. Is this a greater goodness for both athletes. Anyway, you can see how different philosophies can impact ethical decision making.
I am looking forward to our final debrief with Andrew.
Toby,
Your ability to challenge the process is undeniable and I am not at all surprised about the stance you took – David elaborated on the ethical decision making above, so I am not going to act smart. The true lesson to be learned here and what I am interested in is the follow up on this event and the discussion that you hopefully generated. Taking the emotions aside – was there a genuine discussion of why the current status quo is the best practice? Did your action create the intended reaction, hence putting you in the position of a leader (rather than a disturber)?
I really wish I had this trait of yours of maintaining own integrity through challenging anything/anyone without thinking of the repercussions you might face. It is something that sets you apart from the crowd, but make sure it is not the ONLY thing!
All the best!
Thanks for the comment Mira!
If anything, one of the true lessons I learned from this situation is actually something different. To summarize, I will use the often-used, semi-cliche statement: “Choose your battles wisely.”
Despite challenging the process and almost creating a situation in itself, we are still waiting for a response from one of the parties (I’m unsure who), and at this rate, it seems like it’s time to move on to other more important things. The following quote really sums it up the most (taken from my Practicum Reflection):
“Nothing in life is as important as you think it is, while you are thinking about it.” – Daniel Kahneman
At that moment, it seemed like such a big deal, but it’s remarkable how time has really put things into perspective. I would say that is one of the most power lessons I have learned through the program this year!