Coping with emotional labour in tennis coaching

A tennis coach works in a social environment, employed in a service based economy with the outcome of client-customer interactions significantly impacting on the consumer experience. Research conducted outside of sport has shown that positive affective displays during interactions, which in a tennis situation may include providing support through displays of warmth, empathy, positivity and compassion as the client attempts to master a new technique, have shown positive associations with customer satisfaction. Hochschild (1983) coined the term ‘emotional labour’ to describe the process of, and demands resulting from adjusting one’s demeanour, language and tone during social encounters in a planned and strategic manner in order to facilitate a positive outcome. Hochschild proposed that individuals in jobs which require a high degree of face-to-face interaction with the public are particularly at risk of experiencing potentially deleterious effects that result from dealing with emotional labour demands on a daily basis. It would appear that tennis coaches work in environments that make them susceptible to experiencing emotional labour and as such the intention of this article is to first introduce the concept and then to provide suggestions for how a coach may cope with these demands.

Talent Identification and Development in Tennis

Accurately identifying individuals at a young age who are most likely to excel in a given sport remains a pursuit for coaches, parents and national governing bodies worldwide. In a sport such as tennis, the financial investment needed to support a player’s development is substantial, although this is offset by the vast sums of money that are on offer for those few elite players who reach the very top of the game. As such, tennis can be considered to represent a high risk, high reward venture, where the value of being able to better identify those who are likely to ‘make it’ takes on extra emphasis. The debate surrounding the timeless ‘nature versus nurture’ conundrum rumbles on and shows no sign of abating. The relative contribution that deliberate practice (Starkes & Ericsson, 2003) as opposed to genetics (Tucker & Collins, 2011) play in the development of champions remains a contentious issue. Popular texts such as ‘Bounce’ (Syed, 2010) and communications intended specifically for tennis coaches (Roetert, Kovacs & Crespo, 2009) have served to engage a wider community in the debate. It is the intention of this short article to summarize the key points emerging from this body of work and to offer some guidance to coaches moving forward.