Influence

"Influence" is a word that has been getting thrown around a lot in these leadership classes and training sessions.  Mostly it has been presented something like, "the role of a leader is to influence", and "how can you influence people to do what you want", and so on.

I was not a fan of this idea when I first heard it.  I felt like word "influence" had a negative connotation when used to describe one individual influencing another.  Basically an implication of someone taking "agency" (the ability to make ones' own decisions) away from someone else.  Essentially manipulating someone for personal gain.  I also felt (and still somewhat feel) that the word influence has a transactional flavor to it - i.e. a leader thinking "what can I gain from this person and how should I gain it".

Influence: The capacity to have an effect on the character, development, or behavior of someone or something, or the effect itself.

The definition of "influence" does not seem to carry the negative connotations that I felt at first. In fact, upon reading the definition it is immediately obvious how much influence coaches have and should have.  After all, what could be more important to coaching than what is listed in this definition?

In class, we talked a lot about different aspects of influence.  Some of it felt too political for my tastes, but there were plenty of things I think would relate well to coaching.  Here are a few:

As a coach, it is extremely important to be credible.  

Some aspects of credibility include: 

Trustworthiness and Authenticity - Are you genuine?  Can players count on you?

Competence - Do you know what you're talking about? 

Warmth - Do you care about the players as individuals?

One idea was that influence emanates from both who you are and how you deliver your message.  So one good example of this might be: if you are a coach but you behave immaturely, it will be impossible for players to take you seriously.

We talked about cognitive load, about the interaction between listening and actually absorbing information.  Basically, the idea was that in long lectures, about 90% of what is said is forgotten.  So obviously the lesson here is coaches need to be concise and specific.

We also talked about a lot of political tactics for the workplace.  While I found those to be sort of interesting in a general sense, and I like being aware of them so I can recognize others who utilize them, I do not feel they are relevant for the coaching environment.