There are significant differences between ego and task orientations in relations to sports motivational psychology and its various applications. Egoism is an ethical theory of human behavioural motivation which regards the needs of the self as the centre of human motivation (Cashmore 2002:96). Self-interest, (as distinct from selfishness), is deemed to be the primary mechanism to dictate human action and shape response to one’s environment. Derived from this system of thought, sports psychologists conceive the principle of ego-orientation as it applies to motivation for success in competitive sport. Cashmore (2002: 96) defines the ego-oriented athlete as “one who defines success as exceeding the performance of others.” In contrast to this basis for motivation, sports psychologists may also advocate task orientation, which refers to an emphasis upon performing a task to the best of one’s ability, from which the popularity of the idea of one’s personal best is derived. Researchers assert that the preference for ego or task orientation is determined by one’s position on three continuums. These include the individual’s disposition, the situational differences created by the presence of a significant other and the developmental differences established in childhood (Jowett and Lavalle 2007:132).
Both psychological systems of motivation employ a framework of relativity, with ego-orientation framing the comparisons between self and others, while task-orientation frames the comparison between self potential and self- realisation. These apparently opposing systems of human motivation each have their own merits, in that if the competing field of opponents in a given sport have an inferior skill set to oneself, then the task-orientation mode of operation will result in superior personal performance than the ego-orientation. If one is rating one’s application of skills against oneself, there will be higher motivation to optimise performance, than if one rates one’s performance against an inferior environment, in effect devoid of actual competition. Mediocre exertion or attention to one’s skill set may ensue, defining success in this context as simply doing better in the respective sport’s competition, than any of the opponents.
Alternatively, the ego-orientated basis for sports’ motivation has its strengths, in that when the competitive environment is stronger than one is accustomed to, one can measure optimal performance against other athletes, (some of whom may have skill sets unknown to oneself) and not only have oneself as the gauge of excellence. In other words, athletes do perform better when in the company of strong athletes, a sporting reality not well accounted for by the task-oriented psychology of sports motivation. Nonetheless, Kavussanu (2006:575) found that ego-orientation has some correlation with anti-social behaviour, which was also found to be counter-productive to the construction of task orientation. Conversely, task orientation was found to mitigate against anti-social behaviour.
Cashmore (2002:162) further notes that task orientation involves an emphasis upon skill improvement, so it has value for sports coaches, motivational psychologists and other trainers associated with improving the skill level and the actual performance of athletes. In relation to English Football, the task orientation model of success is the basis for establishing personal goals for individual players who collectively comprise the team, so that the overall performance calibre of the team may be enhanced. The idea of skill mastery derived from this model, places the focus of athletes, (in this case football players), upon honest assessments of their current skill strengths and deficiencies, with a view to devising a plan of drills, exercises and simulated plays, to perfect their fulfillment of their role within the team and position on the field.
Motivation may broadly be explained as a combination of direction and intensity of behaviour (Weinberg and Gould 2007:52) and both the task and the ego orientation approaches embrace this notion. Furthermore, in simple terms task oriented motivation is a type of intrinsic motivation, while ego orientation is external in the sense that the particular environment dictates the level of performance output exercised by the athlete. The interactional motivation paradigm seems to encompass much of how human motivation functions in practice, that is a combination of external and internal conditions which intersect to motivate or de-motivate individual and team performances (see Weinberg and Gould 2007:54). Furthermore, Bossio (2009:5) found a moderately positive correlation between motivational climate and task orientation, among Peruvian football players, indicating that task orientation training is facilitated by complementary motivational factors.
The task orientated motivational climate may be fostered within the sport of football from the local to the international professional level. When Fiedler (1967) developed a contingency model of sports leadership, he argued that “task-oriented leaders (those whose primary focus is on achieving goals, and performance related variables) are likely to be most effective in either very favorable or very unfavorable situations” (Crust and Lawrence 2006). This assessment is highly instructive for football coaches and team trainers. It indicates the imperative value of goal determination for individual players, in relation to their present personal skill set and their strategic function within the team. It is suggested by Crust and Lawrence (2006) that this is a more useful motivational impetus than the positive personal relations model which advocates morale development between and among team stakeholders, in a situation where a football team is fighting to stave off relegation through a string of losses. The importance of goal or task orientation has been tracked across the duration of a team’s football season, with Sage and Kavussanu (2008:730), finding “moderate covariance stability of goal orientations, motivational climate, and moral behaviour over a regular youth football season.”
The consideration of how best to leverage a task oriented motivational paradigm for a football team’s success must take into account research findings which suggest less experienced athletes seek specific performance feedback following performance, while more experienced athletes prefer social support and such support is arguably more critical for optimising future performance than evaluative post-match feedback (Jowett and Lavalle 2007:65). A further distinction has been noted in research regarding the efficacy of motivational strategies in relation to professional as opposed to local sporting athletes. Elite athletes preferred more democratic support while local club players preferred more direct evaluative feedback (Jowett and Lavalle 2007:65).
This being said, constructing personal player profiles, by auditing their skill sets and tracking their performance across several seasons and matches, provides useful data to establish individual goals which are consonant with team goals. Such goals pertain to enhancing psychological and physical qualities such as mental toughness and resilience, general fitness, speed, agility, acceleration, balance, reading the play, adaptability and team work. Additionally, personal goals pertain to ways to better execute the strategic function of one team placement.
To return to the original premise of this essay, while a clear disjunction between ego and task orientation can be made, as Jowett and Lavalle 2007;141) observe, it is possible for athletes (including football players), to rate high on both ego and task orientation scales. In this sense, it is important for coaches developing task orientated strategies to recognise that the nurturing of team members achieving their potential is often more palpable in players’ mindsets, if they see victory on the field, and not only on their profile metrics. In other words, personal winning remains closely linked with winning matches. One research study found a team higher on the national youth soccer league had superior maximal pedalling speed increased by 34.1% (Gissis et al 2004:544). In other words, there was a correlation between a specific physical skill set and the relative number of team wins within the season. Interestingly, as a counter to the value of ego orientation, Bloomfield et al (2005:191) found that “score-line has no effect on intensity of play however it can be identified that intensity increases for a short period after the score-line changes.”
Bibliography
Bloomfield, J.R., Polman, R.C.J. O’Donoghue. P.G. (2005) Effects of score-line on intensity of play in midfield and forward players in FA Premier League, (Part VI. Sport Performance), Journal of Sports Sciences 23.2 (Feb 2005): p191(2)
Bossio, M.R. (2009) Motivational Climate and Goal Orientation in Soccer Players of Furst Division, Cuadernos de Psicología del Deporte Dirección General de Deportes-CARM 2009. Vol.9, núm 1 pp. 5-20
Cashmore, E., (2002). Sport Psychology: The Key Concepts, Routlege, London
Crust, L. and Lawrence, I. (2006), A Review of Leadership in Sport:
Implications for Football Management Online Journal of Sports Psychology, available at http://www.athleticinsight.com/Vol8Iss4/FootballManager.htm
Fiedler, F. (1967) A theory of leadership effectiveness, New York: McGraw-Hill.
Gissis, I. et al. Nikolaidis, D., Papadopoulos, C. and Papanikolaou, Z. (2004) Maximal isometric force and cycling speed in young male soccer players.(Part III: physiology and kinanthropometry). Journal of Sports Sciences 22.6 (June 2004): p544(2).
Kavussanu, M. (2006) Motivational predictors of prosocial and antisocial behaviour in football Journal of Sports Sciences, June 2006; 24(6): 575 – 588
Jowett, S. and Lavalle, D. (2007) Social Psychology in Sport, Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics
Sage, L. and Kavussanu, M. (2008) Goal orientations, motivational climate, and prosocial and antisocial behaviour in youth football: Exploring their temporal stability and reciprocal relationships, Journal of Sports Sciences, May 2008; 26(7): 717 – 732
Hide details
Weinberg, R.S. and Gould, D. (2007) Foundations of Sport and Exercise Psychology (4TH ed.), Champaign, Ill. Human Kinetics