Problem, Process, Presentation: Selecting Tools & Technology
The pendulum has swung in sports performance over the last decade or so. Metrics and technology have tilted the teeter totter in exchange for foundational knowledge of first principles such as physiology, psychology, biomechanics, sport competency and program design. Many times, the former without the latter may be a mindless pursuit. Being able to communicate metrics and technology may be more important than the shiny gadget itself (Yes, valid, and reliable measures are important). Placebo or not, this in an important component in the coach’s toolbox. Feelings > Figures > Technology. Twentieth century entrepreneur and economist Roger Babson spoke of the Wall Street market crash in 1929. Prior to the crash another famous economist, statistician and inventor Irving Fisher stated that the stock market had reached "a permanently high plateau". Fisher lost a fortune in the crash (an estimated $10 million, in 1930 dollars!), and he never, thereafter, got out of debt. Babson stated, “He thinks the world is ruled by figures instead of feelings.” Take home point, the world of sports performance is ruled by feelings (trust) not machines. You can acquire all the fancy technology that money can buy, but you better be able to explain to the coach, athlete, and front office staff why it’s important, and how it will drive results, whether input, output, or outcome. The perception may be more important than the measure.
Technology Acquisition
The first two questions I ask prior to procuring a said technology is: Is it valid? Is it reliable?
Validity: the degree to which it measures what it claims it measure
There are several different kinds of validity, but for most coaches with an extensive foundational knowledge of first principles, face validity will do.
Face Validity: does it “look valid” (to all, including untrained observers)?
“Awed or baffled by arcane vocabulary and statistics, clinical investigators may have neglected the appraisal of face validity-a statistically unmeasurable attribute that refers to the measurements clinical sensibility or common sense in doing its intended job.” - Alvan Feinstien
Reliability: the degree to which the measure is free from measurement error
If I’m looking at pre-existing literature, I look for previous studies examining technology/metrics that include both relative reliability and absolute reliability.
“Relative reliability concerns the degree to which individuals maintain their position in a sample with repeated measurements. We assessed this type of reliability using the intraclass correlation coefficient.” (1)
“Absolute reliability is the degree to which repeated measurements vary for individuals, and we expressed this type of reliability with the standard error of measurement expressed in absolute terms (SEM) or as coefficient of variation (CV).” (1)
The 3 P’s
After identifying validly and reliability, my thought process shifts to answering the 3 P’s: Problem, Process, and Presentation. The goal, pending each professionals’ environmental constraints, is to be able to answer these questions in a constructive fashion (Special thanks to my friend Fergus Connolly for his input).
1. Impellizzeri F, Rampinini E, Castagna C, Bishop D, Bravo DF, Tibaudi A, and Wisloff U. Validity of a repeated-sprint test for football. Int J Sports Med 29: 899-905, 2008.
