Why Coaches Stop Learning — and What We Can Do About It

Not long ago, I had a conversation that has stayed with me. I was at a session with Professor Cliff Mallett, a researcher who has spent decades studying coaching expertise and sport psychology, and I asked him about coach evaluations. Why, I wondered, do so many coaches resist being assessed or evaluated, even when the intention is to support their development?

His answer was characteristically direct: “Well, coaches are supposed to be the experts. So evaluation is a threat.”

That single sentence captures something important and something that needs to change.

The Expert Myth in Coaching

In sport, coaches are often positioned as the ultimate authority. They have the experience, the knowledge, the eye for talent and technique. This is earned, in many cases, good coaches bring deep expertise to their roles. But there is a risk when expertise becomes identity. When ‘I am an expert’ becomes the lens through which a coach sees themselves, any external feedback or evaluation can feel like an attack on that identity rather than an invitation to grow.

Research across professional domains shows that when people anchor their self-worth to being the expert, they become less open to feedback, more defensive, and paradoxically less effective over time (Rynne & Mallett, 2024). In sport, where coaches hold significant power over athletes’ experiences and outcomes, the consequences of this closed stance can be significant.

Mallett and colleagues have argued for years that coach development requires multiple pathways — formal education, mentoring, peer learning, and critically, reflective practice (Gilbert, Côté, & Mallett, 2006). The most effective coaches are not those who know the most. They are those who keep asking questions, stay curious, and are willing to look honestly at what they do not yet do well.

Coaches Are Human — And They Have Their Own Mental Skills to Develop

We spend a great deal of time in sport psychology thinking about the mental skills athletes need: focus, resilience, self-regulation, confidence. We talk about developing these skills intentionally and consistently. But we rarely apply the same thinking to coaches.

Coaches face enormous psychological demands. They manage relationships, conflict, pressure, criticism, and the weight of responsibility for athletes who are often young and vulnerable. They experience stress, self-doubt, burnout, and identity challenges, particularly when results are poor or when they are between roles. And yet professional development frameworks for most coaches are focused almost entirely on technical and tactical knowledge. The psychological dimensions of coaching are largely left to chance.

This is a significant gap. If we want coaches to build psychologically safe environments, to support athletes’ wellbeing as well as their performance, and to model healthy responses to challenge and failure then coaches themselves need to develop those psychological capacities. We cannot ask people to give what they have never been helped to develop.

Psychological Flexibility: A Mental Skill Coaches Need

One of the most compelling areas of emerging research in coaching psychology is the concept of psychological flexibility and particularly the work of Richard Fryer and colleagues, who have examined this as a core mental skill required of coaches in high-performance environments.

Psychological flexibility, drawn from Acceptance and Commitment Therapy (ACT), refers to the capacity to remain open and present even when things are difficult, to notice uncomfortable thoughts and emotions without being controlled by them, and to keep acting in line with one’s values even under pressure (White et al., 2021). For coaches, this matters enormously. Coaches who are psychologically flexible are better able to respond to athlete distress with curiosity rather than defensiveness, adapt their coaching approach when something is not working, tolerate the uncertainty that comes with high-performance sport, and model the kind of emotional regulation they want to see in their athletes.

Research using ACT-based interventions in sport has demonstrated significant improvements in performance and wellbeing outcomes in athletes and there is growing evidence that similar approaches applied to coaches can shift the coaching climate in meaningful ways (Lundgren et al., 2021). Psychological flexibility is not a personality trait you either have or do not have. It is a skill that can be developed through deliberate practice.

What Good Coach Evaluation Could Look Like

If evaluation is currently experienced as a threat, the question is: how do we change that? A few principles from the literature and practice are worth considering.

First, evaluation needs to be developmental, not punitive. The goal of assessing coaching practice should be to identify strengths and growth areas, not to catch people out. When coaches understand that evaluation is for them, not against them, the dynamic shifts.

Second, self-reflection needs to be embedded in coaching culture. Research on coaching expertise consistently shows that coaches who regularly engage in honest self-reflection are more effective and more adaptive over time (Knowles et al., 2014). Building structured reflection into coaching roles creates the habit of learning from experience rather than just accumulating it.

Third, peer learning matters more than formal instruction. Coaches acquire knowledge primarily through informal pathways: conversations with other coaches, watching other coaches work, mentoring relationships (Côté, 2006). Evaluation frameworks that incorporate peer observation and collaborative reflection honour how coaches actually learn.

A Coaching Culture That Keeps Learning

Sport is better when coaches keep growing. Athletes benefit when coaches are reflective, adaptable, and psychologically skilled. The environments that produce great athletes are almost always also great learning environments for the coaches within them.

This does not require coaches to abandon their expertise. It requires them to hold it a little more lightly, to be secure enough in their knowledge and experience that they can invite challenge without feeling threatened by it. Evaluation, done well, is not a threat to expert coaches. It is what keeps them expert.

References

• Côté, J. (2006). The development of coaching knowledge. International Journal of Sports Science and Coaching, 1(3), 217–223. https://doi.org/10.1260/174795406776338524

• Gilbert, W., Côté, J., & Mallett, C. J. (2006). Developmental paths and activities of successful sport coaches. International Journal of Sports Science and Coaching, 1(1), 69–76. https://doi.org/10.1260/174795406776338526

• Knowles, Z., Gilbourne, D., Cropley, B., & Dugdill, L. (Eds.) (2014). Reflective Practice in the Sport and Exercise Sciences: Contemporary Issues. Routledge.

• Lundgren, T., et al. (2021). Acceptance and commitment training for ice hockey players: A randomized controlled trial. Frontiers in Psychology, 12, 685260. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.685260

• Rynne, S. B., & Mallett, C. J. (Eds.) (2024). The Routledge Handbook of Coach Development in Sport. Routledge.

• White, R. G., et al. (2021). Acceptance and Commitment Approaches for Athletes’ Wellbeing and Performance: The Flexible Mind. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-64942-5