The Accountability Spectrum: The One Constant in all Successful Cultures

Accountability is a buzz word that gets used in leadership circles all around the world and I'm convinced that if you can conduct a litmus test on the level of accountability for any particular group you can get a pretty good feel for how successful that group may be in the long term.

I think of accountability as a subconscious condition that is exists in all cultures and is forever evolving along a spectrum, either for better or worse, depending on the daily decision making process of the culture's leadership. Pushing your team further along the accountability spectrum takes consistent effort. It requires that leaders are capable of having open, honest, and often times difficult conversations while unwaveringly adhering to highest level of accountability themselves. It's positively and negatively affected by the actions we do and don't take, the decisions we make, and the language we use.

I've experienced individuals, teams, and cultures that could be plotted all over the accountability spectrum and I'm convinced that if a group is plotted on the left end of the spectrum then it should be the number one focus of the group's leadership moving forward. In positions of leadership, our ability to manage different personalities, establish Leadership Led accountability, and foster a culture that pushes people to be more Self-accountable will ultimately determine the success we'll have leading the group.

Here's how I think of the accountability spectrum. It's an interesting thought experiment to consider where you, the individuals you work with, and and the groups you lead might be plotted.

Leadership Protectionism - Group Protectionism - Leadership Led - Group Led - Self Led

Leadership Protectionism

This is where the most unsuccessful groups/teams will find themselves plotted on the spectrum. On this end of the spectrum the leaders of the group protects his/her constituents when they break team rules or norms and makes excuses for them when they underperform. This is akin to the over-protective mother storming into the principle's office to get her son/daughter out of detention that was clearly earned or a coach blaming the officiating crew for a loss when they made one bad call throughout a 60 minute competition. Another common form of protectionism presents itself in the form of favoritism. Leaders who give individuals preferential treatment simply because of their talent level, give an inch and get a mile taken from them. These individuals will damage your culture from the inside out, whether they intend to or not. These individuals will never reach their potential because there's no consequences for not putting forth the effort to do so. These individuals will disregard the attempted interventions from your junior staff members, marginalizing their roles, because they know any attempt at law enforcement will fall apart at the top of the chain. I believe this type of culture matures out of a leader's inherent need to be liked by his/her constituents. I think we all want to be liked. Our jobs are easier if the people we work with like us, and this certainly doesn't suggest that our goal should be disliked, but we have to be realistic about what our culture's goals are and the role we play as leaders in keeping our people on track toward those goals. This requires leaders to be disliked from time to time. As long as you don't conduct yourself in a manner that loses your people's respect, you and your team will be better for it over the aggregate.

Group Protectionism

The second level of the spectrum involves a majority or highly influential minority of the group engaging in protectionism. In these types of cultures the members of the team are always covering for each other and looking for ways to keep one of their own from being held accountable for their actions. This is a very real problem in some cultures, and it makes it really difficult for leadership, especially new leadership, to do their jobs well. It needs to be understood by group members that covering the ass of your team member isn't the same as providing them with support. These groups are basically made up of enablers, and non-contributors (that's a bad mix) that feed off of each other. Both allow each other to continue contributing nothing to the greater good and cover for each other every time they violate rules/norms, make a mistake, or underperform. I've learned that I can get a pretty good feel for what kind of lengths a group will go to protect one of their own by investigating situations I already have information for. Some probably think I'm crazy for these mini-sting operations, but they can prove incredibly useful when trying to determine who you can trust in troubled times.

Leadership Led

This is probably the most common form of accountability that exists in teams and groups. The boss or coach carries the majority of load when it comes to holding individuals accountable to group norms and expectations. This is why choosing the right leaders and managers is of utmost importance and why we can witness an almost instantaneous change to a culture after a new leader steps into a role. In order to keep moving cultures further to the right of the accountability spectrum, we have to establish leadership led accountability. No constituents of a group will begin holding each other accountable or themselves accountable unless the group managers are willing to do so first.

Group Led

"That's not how we do things here," can be one of the most powerful phrases muttered in a team or group. I've watched groups grow along this spectrum and when you finally get to a point that the majority of the individuals who inhabit the group are so bought-in and so passionate about the culture being established that they hold each other accountable to rules, norms, and expectations there is a huge load lifted off of leadership's shoulders. This requires that leaders foster a level of emotional maturity in their groups that allows constituents to understand that being held accountable by your peers is something to be grateful for and not something to get emotional about. In a college athletics setting it's difficult to get normally non-confrontational, 19-20 somethings, comfortable holding each other accountable to a higher standard, but once you get a couple on board, an epidemic is inevitable. These trail blazers will give other people permission to do the same and before you know it, you'll have a group bonded by respectful communication that makes up the majority of the people you lead. According to Malcolm Gladwell's book The Tipping Point, fostering this kind of culture requires that you make use of three kinds of people: connectors, salesmen, and mavens. These three archetypes are highly influential to groups of all sizes and can help you establish norms, rules, and expectations quickly and effectively. This, again, speaks volumes to the ability of manager's to properly hire/recruit managers of their sub-groups.

Self-Led

Growing up, my dad would always say, "If you want something done right, sometimes you've gotta do it yourself." This always stuck with me. I didn't know at the time that he was instilling in me a sense of self-accountability. Working with a group of individuals who are self-accountable is the gold standard for groups and teams. Holding oneself accountable takes a lot of practice, but once it's established as a habit, it can be incredibly liberating. I believe there are the two primary reasons young people resist achieving high levels of self-accountability.

1. The first is that no mentor has ever instilled it in them. A lot of young people have been told their entire life how wholesome and perfect they are. When these people become a part of large, productive groups, with high expectations for every individual, they're expected to identify, come to grips with, and get to work on all of their limitations. If they've never been told those things could potentially exist, or worse, always had them covered up by someone else, they may be crippled before ever getting started.
2. The second reason young people resist being unwaveringly self-accountable is that they don't yet realize that it can set them free. Once you open your mind to the idea that everything that goes right is a result of treating people with respect, making good decisions, and using proper language and everything that goes wrong is the product of treating people poorly, poor decision making processes, and using detrimental language you can literally TAKE CONTROL OF YOUR LIFE. As a self-admitted control freak, once I realized that taking responsibility for my own flaws and limitations was the first step to being in control of whatever life could throw at me, I was free. It's difficult to develop the habit of introspection, but as soon as you lay blame on someone else, you relinquish control. Blaming yourself allows you do to do something about it. If it's not your problem, you can't be the solution. Taking Extreme Ownership and developing high levels of self-accountability keeps you in the driver's seat. Your problem? Your fix. I believe that if we can get the majority of our group members thinking along these lines, our group will be unstoppable.

Closing

I use the analogy of a jar full of marbles to help explain the way I see groups moving along the accountability spectrum. I can't say for sure who taught me this, but it's proven useful for me when considering how our character and leadership is perceived by those we lead. When it comes to accountability and character, for every one thing you do well (actions, decisions, language) you get to add one marble to the jar. Treat someone well? One marble. Make a decision that fosters trust from the majority of the group? One marble. Use language that changes the perspective of the group for the better? ONE marble. 

Engaging in behaviors that are detrimental to moving your group or team further along the accountability spectrum, however, costs you a handful of marbles. We know this, intuitively. One poor action or decision can undo a decade's worth of work in establishing a culture of high integrity and character. Make a bad decision? Take a handful of marbles out. Break rules and don't take responsibility? Handful. Waver (even just a little bit) from your group's expectations of accountability to avoid a short term setback? HANDFUL. 

I learned from reading Ray Dalio's book 12 Principles for Life that the word integrity, in Latin, is integritas, meaning one, or undivided. We should all strive to determine who we are and simply be that. If we stray from integritas we confuse those we lead or share space with and it can happen in a hurry. Treat people well, but be genuinely yourself and people will adjust. Hold everyone accountable to the same standard and people will follow. Keeping adding marbles to the jar, one at a time, without ever taking out a handful, and before you know it people will be putting marbles in the jar for you. 

Good luck. And as always, thank you for reading!

Caleb Heilman, MS, CSCS, USA-W Owner, Heilman's Performance Director of Human Performance, Minot State University 701-340-3547 | calebjheilman02@gmail.com www.heilmansperformance.com 1928 2nd Avenue SW Minot, ND 58701

Strength Coaches are Supplements, not Saviors: Why I think our inflated self-importance sets us up for blame.

Watching The Last Dance in my free time, the documentary covering the story of the historic 1990s Chicago Bulls, has provided me with a unique perspective on a number of things. I was pretty young when the Bulls first started having success so I only have vague memories of their playoff runs in '96, '97, and '98. My family was always at our lake cabin on the weekends during the Eastern Conference Finals and NBA Finals. and I distinctly remember our neighbors crowding into our living room, fiddling with the antenna on our TV to get the game to show clearly, and salivating over the greatness of Michael Jordan, Scottie Pippen, and company.

The story line for Episode three of The Last Dance highlights the struggle that the Bulls had overcoming the more physical play of the "Bad Boy" Detroit Pistons. The Pistons were big, strong, physical and they played the game a lot like that guy at your local YMCA noon ball who form tackles and karate chops everyone that tries to attack the basket on them. It drives me bonkers that this style of play, for some reason, earns the "toughness" label, but that's another post for another time. Regardless of whether or not you think the way these guys played the game has a place in a professional league, this style of play motivated MJ and his teammates to hit the weight room during the following off-season.

For a brief time, Tim Grover, author of Relentless, enters the film to discuss his work with MJ and his teammates in the weight room.  This segment and the subsequent social media reaction made me realize that strength and conditioning coaches are victims of confirmation bias as much as anyone else and I think it has the potential to hurt us in the long run. After episode 3 aired, strength and conditioning circles on social media platforms blew up. S&C coaches around the world hopped on Twitter like they finally had the ammunition they needed to convince people their work was the holy grail of team sports development. Judging by some tweets, you would have guessed that the six Larry O'Brien trophies may actually be housed safely in a glass case in Al Vermeil's living room. The message from these circles was, "MJ would have never realized greatness had he not found the weight room!" 

I would never want to intentionally minimize the important role strength and conditioning plays in the athletic development of team sport athletes, but I felt different than most of the coaches I was reading tweets from. My train of thought was more along the lines of: "It's great to see that the 90s Bulls realized the importance of engaging in consistent resistance training, but how crazy is it that MJ and Scottie were two of the most dynamic team sport athletes on the planet without ever laying hands on a free weight?"

It's nice to be recognized for our efforts, but I believe our rush to take credit in scenarios like this can create problems for us down the road if the teams and individuals we work with aren't realizing results that are expected. When we paint ourselves as the deliverer of all physical qualities we put ourselves in a position to take responsibility when "all those physical qualities" aren't developing in the manner or as rapidly as a sport coach may think they should. The fact of the matter is this: During high volume training phases (off-seasons) the most time we ever spend with a team is roughly 4-6 hours per week. That leaves 162-164 hours per week out of our control where our work can be sabotaged by poor dietary strategies, excessive alcohol intake, irresponsible sleep habits, and other ineffective training stimuli. As much as it is our responsibility to develop physical qualities in the athletes we work with, it's just as much the responsibility of the individual and the sport coach not to sabotage them.

Can our work positively affect injury rates? Yes, but if an athlete refuses to adhere to quality sleep patterns or their sport coach prescribes stimuli that promotes overtraining syndrome our efforts will be largely diminished. Can we help an athlete add fat free mass (FFM)? Of course, but if the athletes aren't taking in enough calories or their sport coach is prescribing stimuli that promotes a caloric deficit rather than a caloric surplus, they'll never gain a pound. Lose unwanted mass? Sure, but again, if their diet sucks we haven't got a chance. Improve their speed and force development? We sure can, but if you read my most recent post, you know now that in order to do so optimally, we need our athletes in a non-fatigued state. If we're in the off-season and our focus is strength and speed, but a sport coach or athlete wants to improve their "conditioning" we're chasing two rabbits and we're going to catch neither of them.

I think we've all experienced having the finger pointed at us when a scenario with a team or individual doesn't play out the way all parties involved would have liked. Whether we like it or not, highly touted Division 1 schools and professional athletes will always be what the results of our programs get compared to and the default setting of the human condition will always be to find someone else to blame when results aren't in parallel with expectations. Most of us do the best we can, but we're human, so we miss some things, and often due to circumstance, intentionally sacrifice others in an effort to "fry the big fish." A performance professional who is truly attempting to optimize their performance culture knows, intuitively, that they'll never actually achieve it. We are merely a small part of a high performance program. We are not THE high performance program. We are not solely responsible for all the aforementioned variables and the reality is that in some settings, we have almost zero control over them. 

My final point is this: if we want coaches, athletes, and parents to take extreme ownership and be more introspective about how they can better manage the 164 hours they're responsible for, it starts with us. We can't continue to paint ourselves as Superheroes when the opportunity presents itself. We are not the captain, we are merely a vessel in a large fleet. I'm as guilty of it as anybody, but the sooner we come to grips with our own inflated sense of self-importance, the sooner we will be able to get the holistic adherence we need to build a high-performance culture. I don't know Al Vermeil, but I'd love to meet him. The second hand information I do have about the professional he is, leads me to believe that even he would admit his program may have given the Bulls of the 90s the extra 5-10% they needed to overcome the Pistons in the finals, but none of it would have mattered if the other 90-95% wasn't already there. 

As always, thank you for reading!

Caleb Heilman, MS, CSCS, USA-W Owner, Heilman's Performance Director of Human Performance, Minot State University 701-340-3547 | calebjheilman02@gmail.com www.heilmansperformance.com 1928 2nd Avenue SW Minot, ND 58701

Fatigue is the Enemy

The list of things that central nervous system (CNS) fatigue keeps us from performing optimally is long and something every coach should understand in order to give athletes a fair shot at realizing their potential.

There's something about the experience of being extremely fatigued that makes some coaches, athletes, and parents assume that it should be priority #1 of any quality training regimen or practice. I've had athletes tell me and my employees after sessions "That workout was really hard!" as if to suggest it's the only thing that matters. I was recently included in a social media thread in which one individual boasted their program as being "Probably the hardest!"

The first thing we need to understand about doing "really hard workouts" is that fatigue is a limiting factor in the development of almost every conceivable performance trait we wish to develop in our athletes. This means that unless the goal of the session is fatigue, you are creating a sub-optimal training session by allowing fatigue to set in. Most "experts" that put athletes through these "really hard workouts" and then slap them with a badge of honor for surviving it are usually just compensating for their inability to develop the other cognitive and physical qualities necessary for sport performance improvement.

I theorize that our obsession with providing extreme fatigue in our training exists for a number of reasons. The first is that it's really easy to do. It takes an expert to deliver desirable adaptations that actually improve an individual's performance, but just about anybody can guide a session that will make that same individual feel like vomiting and defecating at the same time. The second reason we have a love affair with fatigue is likely due to the hormonal response associated with it. Rigorous exercise signals a cascade of hormonal responses that can make us feel good. These hormones are highly reliant on the intensity and duration of the exercise regimen and longer, more intense sessions typically yield a more robust hormonal response. It's important that we don't let our emotions misguide us in this scenario. If the goal is to achieve a hormonal response to improve mental health, a hormonal response that will leave the trainee with a better chemical balance is win, but if we're in pursuit of more efficient neuromuscular coordination and fine motor skill acquisition or improvements in force output, doing a really challenging conditioning session won't deliver optimal results.

As coaches we have to be able to ask, "What does this individual need from me and what is the primary goal of this session?" If the answer to those questions are either of the aforementioned traits (more efficient neuromuscular coordination and fine motor skill acquisition or improvements in force output), then avoiding high levels of fatigue while trying to deliver them is in our best interest.

We are all human so we are inherently at the mercy of our own emotional states. When a session gets rolling and blood gets flowing it's really difficult not to cut the leash and let our athletes push themselves into a state of oblivion. It's important we don't allow ourselves to fall victim to these emotions and there are ways to do it, but we must remain highly disciplined and trust what the science tells us is true. I've conducted basketball skills sessions for players for roughly 5 years now and worked consistently in a weight room for almost a decade. I've worked really hard to understand what is and isn't best practice (according to scientific literature) in the development of the fine motor skills necessary to excel in basketball and force output for team sport athletes. Because of my experimentation and experiences in these realms, I'll share with you some of the things that have helped me keep my exercise prescriptions aligned with what the sports performance literature suggests is optimal.

1. Identify the goal of the session or drill and KEEP THE GOAL THE GOAL.

I learned this from Dan John. If you're a young coach I would highly recommend reading all of his books. Often times, in our S&C and skill sessions we get so wrapped up in delivering multiple qualities with one stimulus that we diminish our ability to deliver the quality we originally set out to deliver. In a basketball session, for example, it's not uncommon for ball handling drills to be performed so dynamically, for such a long duration that we allow extreme fatigue to set in and compromise our athletes' ability to improve the skill we're really trying to improve: ball-handling. This happens all too often in shooting drills too. We say things like "game-speed" and fail to realize that athletes can go "game-speed" during the repetition and then we can allow for proper rest in between reps to insure fatigue isn't compromising our ability to acquire the fine motor skill. As a coach, it's our job to challenge our athletes, but it's also our job to be the experts and identify when practice is becoming sub-optimal. Learn to identify when fatigue is limiting your athlete's ability to develop the skills you want to develop and stop the drill to take a break, coach them up, or move onto something else. If the goal is metabolic conditioning, great, keep them moving. But if you're trying to develop a fine motor skill, keep them fresh and fast.

2. Organize sessions optimally

Hopefully by now you understand that fatigue compromises our athlete's ability to achieve high levels of cognition, produce high levels of force, and acquire fine motor skills. To give ourselves the best possible chance of not allowing fatigue to interfere with our ability to deliver these things we can organize our sessions in a systematic manner. Stimuli that require these qualities should be delivered at the beginning of the sessions, in micro-doses, and managed properly to keep fatigue from negatively affecting them. In S&C sessions if we want to develop speed, which requires high levels of force development, we run our sprints before we do anything else and we NEVER allow our athletes to get tired while performing them. In a skill development session, the tasks that demand the highest levels of fine motor skill should be performed first, while the CNS is fresh. This strategy should apply to team practices as well. Drills and teachings that require high levels of cognitive demand such as learning a new play or defensive scheme should be taught early in practice before fatigue limits an athlete's ability to learn.

3. Practice prescribing the minimum effective dose (MED)

The MED is a term that we use to describe an exercise or performance training prescription that achieves the goal we set out to achieve while subjecting the biological organism to the least amount of stress possible. This is where holding ourselves accountable to the concept of micro-dosing can be incredibly effective. I'd rather see an athlete run sprints 5 days per week at 3-5 repetitions per day than 2 days per week at 10-12 repetitions per day. In the former example we get 15-25 reps in a week, never in a fatigued state, and the skill of applying high levels of force are reinforced on a daily basis. Comparatively, the latter example has an athlete engaged in roughly the same amount of volume, but they don't get daily reinforcement, and a number of reps will likely be ineffective because of the ill-effects of CNS fatigue. Emotionally, this may be difficult for some coaches to lead because the athletes will never put their hands on their knees and gasp for air, but scientifically, it works.

Closing

As coaches it is our job to facilitate adaptations in those we work with. In order to facilitate an adaptation we must apply stress. No stress? No adaptation. What we have to learn to grasp, however, is that stress doesn't always have to equal exhaustion. I understand the fear that coaches have of their athletes not being well conditioned enough to compete, but allowing fatigue to creep into sessions where fatigue is not the goal is not only limiting your ability to deliver desirable adaptations in the current session, it's likely creating some kind of "hangover" so your ability to optimize the next session is also compromised. Being under conditioned really only comes back to bite us during a specific time of year so it's important that we're patient with the stimulus. I've always said, it doesn't matter if you're in great shape if the other team is so much bigger, faster, stronger, and more skilled that we're down by 20 at halftime.

I'm hoping this writing can help you identify when fatigue is affecting your training sessions in a negative way and provided you with solutions to make your training sessions/practices more optimal.

As always, thank you for reading!

Caleb Heilman, MS, CSCS, USA-W Owner, Heilman's Performance Director of Human Performance, Minot State University 701-340-3547 | calebjheilman02@gmail.com www.heilmansperformance.com 1928 2nd Avenue SW Minot, ND 58701

The Science of "Buy-In"

When I first started digging into the tenets of evolutionary biology I would have never guessed that it could make me a better coach. Learning about it in my free time, coupled with my more regimented study of sport psychology has led me to better understand the basic human behaviors that are hard wired into almost all of us and exist for good reason. The study of evolutionary biology attempts to identify the biological mechanisms that exist in EVERYONE because our ancestors developed them over many years in order to push our species forward. The "soft" wiring of our brain is more malleable and can be changed depending on how we interact with our environment and the people in it.

An example I use often to explain this hard wiring we all have in us is the act of being inherently uneasy in the dark. Most people are, at least a little bit, more uneasy in the dark than in the light. Why? Our biological wiring increases anxiety when light isn't present, because when things got dark for our ancestors they were at a much higher risk of becoming someone else's dinner. After the sun set, being on high alert was a necessary survival mechanism. Evolution of a species moves at very slow rate. Industrialization, however, progresses exponentially, so it's important to be able to identify where these hard wirings can help explain basic human behaviors we may not necessarily need, but still have, due to the fact that they were of necessity to our ancestors.

I'll give one more example. Robb Wolff, author of Wired to Eat, does a better job of linking the tenets of evolutionary biology to the way we eat better than anyone I've ever read. He suggests that we are all hard wired to eat things that are of the highest caloric density whenever they are available and then rest as much as possible immediately after we've filled our bellies. Sound familiar? It's the way most Americans eat today and a huge reason why we have an obesity epidemic on our hands. Again, industrialization has outpaced our evolution. The hard wiring in our brains hasn't evolved to understand that there is a grocery store less than a mile down the road where we can get our hands on just about anything we want at any time. It still governs you as if you hunted down and killed that meal and have no way of anticipating when you'll get your next meal. The survival mechanism wired into you as a result is to conserve as much energy as possible until you'll feed again.

There's good news, though. We can reason with this hard wiring using the more malleable parts of our brain and discipline ourselves to not fall victim to these innate responses. This is why, as most of us get older, we learn to convince ourselves not to fear darkness and discipline ourselves not to eat junk food whenever it's in front of us.

I opened this blog discussing the tenets of evolutionary biology because I think it can help us, as coaches or employers, utilize tactics that will allow us reach most everyone. If we can understand the way human behavior is hard wired into us all, we can better understand what it is people need from us, and engage in practices that allows both parties to win. 

In coaching circles we have a knack for giving names to things that are already heavily researched in the scientific literature under different terminology. One of these terms that is used in almost all coaching circles is "buy-in." Coaches around the world are constantly searching for what it takes to get every individual they recruit or inherit to "buy-in" to the principles and practices of their program.  My opinion is that "buy-in" is just a term coaches use to refer to the principles of adherence and motivation. If you search the term "buy-in" in your campus' online library you may not find much, but if you search "adherence and motivation" you'll find that there is a plethora of scientific literature covering how we can better understand "buy-in" by better understanding hard-wired, basic human needs.

One of the most widely accepted theories of adherence and motivation is the self-determination theory (SDT) originally constructed and proposed by Deci and Ryan (1985). The SDT suggests that individuals are motivated to pursue high levels of mastery in any endeavor by two means. These means are intrinsic motivation and extrinsic motivations. Our goal should be to get the individuals we work with (athletes or employees) as intrinsically motivated as possible, because research shows that it is the longest lasting and most enduring form of motivation. The simplest way I can define someone who is intrinsically motivated is someone who does something simply because they are madly in love or with it or genuinely curious about how it works. These people are drawn to tasks because of their interest and drive to master the task itself and not the things that becoming competent at the task can provide them. 

Extrinsic motivations aren't worthless. They just aren't as enduring and can't be relied on to create genuine forms of adherence and motivation. Examples of extrinsic motivation are public perceptions, awards and accolades, verbal approval from prominent figures, financial compensations, etc. This is why we intuitively understand that people who pursue money, fame, and attention typically burn out while those who are obsessed with the process and do their work because they love it typically have longer, more successful, and enduring careers. 

Ok, so if intrinsic motivation is the holy grail of buy-in, how do we use what we know about how all people are hard wired to get them more intrinsically motivated? Deci and Ryan (1985) suggest that we can do this by catering to three hard-wired basic human needs: autonomy, perceived competence, and relatedness. I believe in these three concepts so much that I've made them a staple of all my presentations to any recruits that come onto our campus and I make a conscious effort to manage my employees and coach my athletes by them. I'll explain in the next three paragraphs what each of these concepts are and how we can use them to improve adherence and motivation with the people we work with. 

Autonomy

Autonomy is a hard wired human need for self-governance and independence. People NEED to be given freedoms to pursue their goals in their own way. As coaches and employers, we often feel like we're the experts in our field, so things have to be done the way we've learned to do them. This often leads to micromanagement and black and white rules or restrictions that end up de-motivating the people we've been tasked with leading. The best thing about becoming radically open-minded about the many different ways tasks can be completed and goals can be achieved is that you open yourself up to new learning opportunities on a daily basis. As an employer I've learned that the best way to lead my people is to explain to them what the task at hand is or the goal to be achieved and then step back and give them the freedom to do their thing the best way they know how. If the end result isn't in parallel with our expectations, we re-visit the method they're employing and make minor adjustments for it to better fit our vision. This has allowed me to learn new ways of doing things and made them feel like they have the freedom to explore their own development and come up with more effective means of helping the people they work directly with. As a strength and conditioning coach, I provide autonomy to my athletes by providing them with programming that I believe best incorporates the most efficacious exercise science literature I'm aware of, but allow them to make small tweaks to the programming to better fit what they believe allows them to make progress as an individual. The old school strength and conditioning coach may step into my weight room and see chaos and disorder, but I see autonomy and a conglomerate of individuals in pursuit of mastery. Adults want to be treated like adults, not children. I strive for adherence and motivation with my people, not obedience. If you're the type of person that needs someone to drive obedience into you, you don't fit my culture anyway, so I'd rather not engage.

Perceived Competence

Perceived competence is simply how competent one perceives themselves to be in any endeavor (duh). Scientific literature shows that the most powerful means of developing this trait is something referred to as "mastery experience." This simply means that the people we work with have to have experiences in the domains that they care most about that lead them to believe they are becoming more competent. This is why it's so important for us to not only become competent professionals ourselves, but also work to understand what it is that is important to the people we work with. Employees want to have access to the tools and education they need to do their job well. If we're able to deliver that to them they will perceive themselves and more competent and subsequently become more motivated to their job well. As employers, therefore, our focus shouldn't be to make sure our employees are doing things OUR way, but to make sure our people have everything they need to do the best job possible in the best way they know how and have access to education to continue improving. As a strength coach, this means I have to find ways to help my athletes improve at their sport of choice, not just at lifting weights. I have to find a way to utilize the weight room in a manner that provides athletes with more mastery experiences when they go to compete. Having mastery experiences in the weight room will likely be helpful, but if you're working with a basketball player, it's probably best that your methods are focused on providing them with mastery experiences on the basketball court rather than on the platform. This will ultimately motivate them to keep coming back to work with you. 

Relatedness

Relatedness refers to the basic human need for connection. As human beings we need to feel like we are a part of something bigger than ourselves and are working in concert with others to achieve a common goal. When we feel connected to a larger group, and feel like we have the support of that group and its leaders, we become more motivated to do well. My opinion is that this is the most important component of achieving buy in with our employees and athletes, but also the most difficult. It requires that you care. Not that you put forth demonstrations to show them you care, but that you GENUINELY CARE. It can't be faked and it can't be systematically implemented. Team building activities and organizing events to create a family like atmosphere can help, but none of it will last if you don't genuinely care about the well-being and emotional state of those you are in a position to lead. This takes time and effort, which is what makes it so challenging. These aren't a luxury we all have a lot of, but making a point to ask those you lead how they are doing and if there is anything you can do to help goes a long way to making them feel connected. Understanding that everyone you work with perceives things differently, acts differently, has different things that make them tick, and needs for individuality is incredibly important. It's hard, but incredibly important.

Closing

I'm hoping that if you read this far you learned something about what the scientific literature says about getting buy-in from the people you lead. Giving them some more freedom and allowing them to have a say in the way things are done is difficult for some, but it's incredibly important if achieving long-lasting adherence and motivation is the goal. The more liberties we give those we lead in concert with our professional guidance, the better they'll become at what they do and the more they'll perceive themselves as competent at what they do. Reminding them and making them feel like they are an important part of something that matters should be a done DAILY. Being supported and connected creates incredibly loyal and highly motivated people and these kinds of people are the ones who ultimately achieve great things. How you incorporate these three things is entirely up to you. I don't micromanage :), but I can tell you that they are important.

As always, thank you for reading. 

Caleb Heilman, MS, CSCS, USA-W Owner, Heilman's Performance Director of Human Performance, Minot State University 701-340-3547 | calebjheilman02@gmail.com www.heilmansperformance.com 1928 2nd Avenue SW Minot, ND 58701

Don't Call It a Comeback

Writing is hard, but I know it's an important skill for me to continue developing if I'm going to grow into the professional I want to be. For the last couple of years I've gotten up before the crack of dawn to fulfill my reading and writing requirements for the master's program I was enrolled in. The writing style I engaged in over the last two years was good for me, but it wasn't really my style. I love sharing new ideas, engaging in professional discourse, and having great discussions with like-minded individuals, but mediums like Twitter, where I can be open and honest about what's actually going on in between my ears suits me much better. I'm infamous amongst my friends, family, and colleagues for being long-winded, though, so Twitter has always left something to be desired. It's just too difficult to share complex thoughts with enough context to really get an actionable message out. All that said, I've realized that actively blogging and vlogging is the only reasonable solution.

Now that my educational responsibilities have been fulfilled I'd like to commit to writing more often to help share information, new ideas, and to spark discussions with the coaches and athletes I work with in my own community. I'm going to try my best to keep it short to keep you all actively engaged because I know what it's like to open an article, observe how long it is, and then close the article immediately knowing that you just don't have time to truly absorb the content it contains.

So here's the plan: honest and informative writing on a weekly basis with a conscious effort to blend what I know to be true of the scientific literature and practical applications pertaining to:

• the development of speed, strength, power, and athleticism 
• the acquisition of gross and fine motor skills
• the tenants of sport psychology and how we can use them to better prepare athletes at all levels
• the importance and habitual application of proper nutrition and recovery strategies 
• the business of fitness, strength and conditioning, and sports performance

My plan is not to just share information, but strategies and guidance that all readers, whether they be parents, business owners, coaches, or athletes, can put into practice. Adjusting my writing style from one that fits the scientific literacy of my professors to one that the layman can absorb and put to good use will take some time, but I'm hoping you follow along and find some value as I work to develop this important skill. I see writing as an opportunity for me to help those in my community, grow as a professional, and potentially provide more for my family as quality content in online forums becomes more sought after.

So I guess this is the official re-birth of my blog inspired by all the things I couldn't fit in a Tweet. I can already picture all of my employees rolling their eyes. But worry not, I won't get any of us in trouble, at least not WRITE away. LOL. I'm evolving already. Follow along and I hope you learn something!

As always,

Thank you for reading!

Caleb Heilman, M.S., CSCS, USA-W Owner, Heilman's Performance Director of Human Performance, Minot State University 701-340-3547 | calebjheilman02@gmail.com www.heilmansperformance.com 1928 2nd Avenue SW Minot, ND 58701