Why Parent Engagement?

A 2014 study sought to identify coaches’ greatest sources of on-the-job joy and unhappiness.  Not surprisingly, coaches cited “issues with parents” as their number one source of unhappiness.  However, it may surprise you to learn that several coaches interviewed for this study cited “relationships with parents” as one of their greatest sources of joy. How did the researchers explain this paradox?  Perhaps, they postulate, teaching coaches to “view parents in a different light could alter the tone and nature of some aspects of the coach-parent relationship (19).”

---

Baltzell, A. L., McCarthy, J. M., Ahktar, V. L., Hurley, D., Martin, I., & Bowman, C. (2014). High School Coaches’ Sources of Joy and Unhappiness. Journal of Multidisciplinary Research, 6(3), 5-24.

Where Has the Trust Gone?

A parent recently offered me feedback about his choice to take his son to another organization.  I don’t have the exact quote, but this is the gist: “I took the USA Hockey Level 1 Coaches’ Clinic, and according to what I learned there your operation is not in alignment with current best practices.”

I recently read that some social scientists consider individualism and lack of trust in institutions to be defining characteristics of Millennials.  As a Millennial myself (I’m an early adopter, okay?) I get it.  Not only that, I like it.  I support independent thinking and marching to your own drummer.  I’m glad we are moving away from obedience to authority and towards an appreciation of diversity.

I applaud this parent’s efforts to educate himself.  And, if you’ll forgive a mixed metaphor, he only scratched the tip of an incredibly large and complex iceberg.   Considering that my staff has a cumulative 600+ years of hockey experience among them, this parent’s complaint is naïve and, frankly, disrespectful.  I would not consider myself the equivalent of a Certified Financial Planner after taking a 3-hour Udemy course on day trading; likewise, it is unreasonable to consider oneself the equivalent of a hockey professional after taking a 3-hour CEP class.

I’m not saying that my staff is always right.  Quite the contrary, we’ve gotten great ideas from parents that we never would have thought of on our own.  What I’m saying is that a little humility goes a long way (for parents and youth hockey leaders, both).  That parent could have said, “Last week at the CEP Level 1 course, they said ABC but I notice that you do XYZ here.  I am curious about this – do you have time to chat?”  I might have learned something I didn’t know, or I might have explained that the CEP curriculum is created by USA Hockey and is the same whether you are in Minnesota, Nevada, or New Jersey. I might have said that while ABC might work in a perfect world, or it might work in some places, it doesn’t work for us and here’s why.

This anecdote speaks to the tensions that exist among parents and youth hockey leaders today. Parents are informed consumers in a way that previous generations were not, but they sometimes confuse information with expertise.  Coaches take it personally when parents question them, usually without cause.  Parents have reams of information at their fingertips, but they need to remember that Google is not a substitute for experience. Today’s parents take much more of an interest in their children’s activities than our parents did, and coaches need to remember that most parent questions are simply questions, no more and no less. There are bad coaches and rude parents, to be sure, but we would be much happier – and our players would be much better off – if we were willing to give each other the benefit of the doubt.

5 Things Player Development Is Not

Player Development is a difficult thing to define, but it is an important concept to understand. Many people use this buzzword, but few use it correctly.  As is often the case with these types of things, it is much easier to say what “Player Development” is not than to define what it is:

1. Player Development is not measured in wins and losses. There are lots of ways to win games without developing players.  Some coaches deliberately misplace their teams at a lower level of play to boost their record.  Other coaches collect talented players and then simply replace them as they fall behind.  Still others spend time teaching systems instead of on-ice skills, decision-making, anticipation, problem-solving, awareness, ice utilization, and overall “hockey sense.”  In a culture that believes Peter Drucker when he says, “If you can’t measure it, you can’t improve it,” it is easy to focus on numbers like +/-, goal differentials, and winning percentages.  There is certainly a place for statistics, but they don’t even come close to telling the whole story.
2. Player Development is not a destination. Any coach who guarantees a particular outcome for a particular player is being disingenuous. While coaches have a tremendous influence over their players (for better or for worse), development is influenced by a million factors that are completely outside the coach’s control. Development is about helping a player reach his or her personal potential, not about achieving some external benchmark like a D1 scholarship or an NHL contract.
3. Player Development is not linear. You’ve heard it before: ice hockey is a late development sport.  Given the fact that hockey players reach their peak performance in their late twenties or early thirties, it makes little sense to get wrapped up on the day-to-day minutiae of a ten-year-old child’s performance.  Children grow and mature at an uneven rate over time, and they will often take a step back before taking two steps forward.  This is not only normal, it is a healthy way for them to learn about resilience, grit, perseverance, motivation, and the value of hard work.
4. Player Development is not only about what happens on the ice. Obviously, on-ice improvement is a huge part of player development, but in order to be successful, players must develop a good attitude, good work habits, good nutrition, good sleep hygiene, good strength and conditioning, good time management, and good character.
5. Player Development is not the same for everyone. A good coach will understand that different players need different things. A confident player may need a firm hand, while a less confident player may need reassurance.  A talented player may need to focus on skill development, while a role player may need to focus on developing leadership skills.  A power forward should be coached differently from a playmaker should be coached differently from a two-way forward should be coached differently from an offensive defenseman.  Not every player is going to be a sniping superstar, but every player can focus on developing his or her unique talents in order to best contribute to the team’s success.

4 Reasons to Adopt a Parent Engagement Mindset

When you ask members of the youth hockey community to suggest solutions to the problem of hockey parents gone wild, you will usually hear about the need for parent education. Mandatory trainings, codes of conduct, webinars, online classes…there is no shortage of options for anyone who wants to (or is required to) learn how to be a better sports parent.  Yet, things don’t seem to be improving.

There are at least four flaws with the education model that doom it to ongoing failure:

1. The term “education” is ambiguous and poorly defined. Are we teaching parents about the game?  Our expectations for appropriate conduct?  Strategies for dealing with their emotions?  All of the above?  A meaningful exploration of even one of these topics is an ambitious goal, never mind all three.
2. The issue is not with what parents know, but what they do. I’ve never done the research, but I think if you were to approach 100 hockey parents on the street and ask them if screaming at a referee or engaging an opposing parent in a fist fight in the parking lot is a good idea, 99.5 of them will say no.  If you then ask those same parents if they have ever done either – or both – of these things, and I’d be willing to bet that 99.5 of them will say yes (myself included).  Most parents know what they should do; the problem is that it is very difficult to do it consistently.  No amount of education is going to change human nature.
3. The education model is condescending. This approach implies that we as youth hockey leaders are experts who are above reproach, and ignorant hockey parents are a problem to be managed.  But let’s be honest…
4. We don’t practice what we preach. In my experience, the worst-behaved adult in the rink, more often than not, is a coach. As a group, we hardly have the moral high ground when it comes to appropriate conduct.

What if we replace this one-way model of teacher -> student with a recognition that parents have a great deal to offer us if we are willing to listen?  Instead of immediately labeling an upset parent as “crazy,” what if we tried to understand their position and calmly explain ours? What if, instead of trying to educate parents we try to engage them in ongoing, meaningful dialogue?

Parent engagement seems labor-intensive, and it is.  It requires a great deal of time, patience, and an ongoing commitment.  Asking parents to sign a code of conduct or watch a video is much easier – at least in the short-run.  In the long-run, the ineffectiveness of this approach costs us hours upon hours of time in addition to costing us players and even coaches who eventually get fed up with the toxic youth sports culture that surrounds us.  As they say, if you do what you’ve always done then you’ll get what you’ve always gotten.  I think we can all agree that it is high time that we try something new and see what happens.

8 Reasons Mathematical Ranking Systems are Ruining Youth Hockey

Mathematical ranking systems like MyHockey Rankings have become very popular in youth hockey.  The air of objectivity is seductive; after all, numbers don’t lie.  Right?

While these sites can be good tools for building smart, competitive schedules, and they may help coaches and recruiters use their time and resources wisely, their limited usefulness is far outweighed by the harm they have done to our sport.

1. Mathematical rankings are not valid for youth hockey.  KRACH stands for “Ken’s Ratings for American College Hockey.”  As the name implies, the system was designed to rank college hockey teams, and there is unanimous agreement that the system is fundamentally flawed even for that use.  Applied to youth sports, rankings become all but meaningless, especially when ranking teams who rarely if ever play common opponents.
2. Mathematical rankings are not official.  Scores are entered into MyHockey Rankings by “volunteers” who who may enter some scores and not others, or they may enter scores inaccurately.  While many errors or omissions are caught by other users, many slip through the cracks uncorrected.  In addition, some clubs have two teams at each level – a national-bound team and a second, “independent” team that includes players who are ineligible for inclusion on their national-bound roster – and conflates both teams’ records into one for the purposes of their MyHockey Ranking.
3. Mathematical rankings can be bought.  Consider two teams with equal talent, skill, and coaching.  Team A’s parents are working-class individuals, and Team B’s parents are anesthesiologists and hedge fund managers.  Team A plays a local schedule supplemented by two tournaments within driving distance, while Team B travels all over North America to play other highly ranked teams.  This isn’t a theoretical scenario:  most (if not all) of the top teams at Bantam and below travel across the continent to secure those high rankings.  Maybe those teams really are better than the rest, or maybe their parents simply have the resources and motivation to make it seem that way.
4. Mathematical rankings promote bad sportsmanship.  When goal differentials are part of the ranking system, teams run up scores.  Worse, teams forfeit league games because they are more concerned about their MyHockey Rankings than they are about honoring their commitments to their opponents and leagues.
5. Mathematical rankings impede player development.  It used to be that weaker players might not play much in tight games, but they would get plenty of ice when the team was assured a win (or loss).  Now, every goal counts, benches stay short, and weaker players never leave the bench.
6. Mathematical rankings promote player burnout.  When every game – indeed, every goal – is critically important, players are under immense pressure every single shift.  Few young players thrive in such a high-stakes environment.
7. Mathematical rankings are a tool for collecting players.  It doesn’t matter if players on ultra-competitive teams burn out or fail to develop, because there will always be other players anxious to take their spots.  Coaches don’t do the hard work of developing players; they simply replace the “dead wood” each year.  The same team names may appear at the top of the list from year to year, but the teams themselves rarely stay the same.
8. Mathematical rankings are a way to monetize children.  For-profit leagues use KRACH rankings to seed teams because it allows them to admit as many teams as possible without concern for geography or quality.  Parents and associations pay MyHockey Rankings for full access to the site and the ability to upload scores.  I do not begrudge anyone a living, but marginally valid national rankings for nine-year-olds hardly seems a good use of limited hockey dollars.

Parents Are Not the (Only) Problem

The Matheny Manifesto by former MLB catcher Mike Matheny, starts:

“I always said that the only team that I would coach would be a team of orphans, and now here we are. The reason for me saying this is that I have found the biggest problem with youth sports has been the parents….I think the concept that I am asking all of you to grab is that this experience is ALL about the boys [sic].”

If you’ve spent any time around youth sports, you’ve certainly heard this before.  No one is denying that some parents can be difficult, but to put all the blame on them is a cop-out, pure and simple.  It’s time for us as leaders to take a look in the mirror and ask ourselves if we are putting the players first.

When I started in youth hockey 20+ years ago, most clubs were volunteer-run, non-profit organizations operating out of public facilities.  Players in general, and elite players in particular, did not have many options.  Since then, the number of new rinks (and for-profit programs) has exploded and the number of children playing hockey has skyrocketed.

Of course, all good things come at a price. For-profit rinks cannot afford for players to put down their bags in the spring and pick them back up in the fall like they used to, so they created a year-round hockey model and convinced parents that time off the ice is detrimental to their children’s development.   Even parents who recognize the physical and mental health risks inherent in a 24/7/365 hockey model are too afraid to give their children the rest their growing bodies need lest they fall behind their peers (#DontBeOverlooked).

Organizations hire coaches looking to parlay high-end playing experience into a career, and they market them as having the connections and experience necessary to get players to the next level.  It is unclear what, exactly, “the next level” is, but who doesn’t want their child to go there?

Clubs fill their websites and social media feeds with self-congratulatory posts, taking credit for scholarships and pro contracts when the truth is that most talented players will get discovered regardless of where they play.  Even some showcase tournaments tout the accomplishments of their “alumni,” as if the 67 minutes those players spent on the ice at a summer Peewee tournament was a difference-maker.

Many coaches opt to collect players instead of developing them, and they fuel their winning records with extremely high turnover and burnout rates.  Athletes are recruited from several states away, displacing local talent. Nine-year-old children play rigorous, far-flung, 91-game schedules for the express and sole purpose of securing a spot on a statistically-generated national ranking list.  Less skilled players sit the bench so the team can win a game by 12 goals instead of 8.

Families are fractured, academics are relegated, and futures are mortgaged.  When parents have questions, they are ignored or treated with hostility.   Parents have little recourse if their concerns are not addressed, because the rules are written by the organizations, for the organizations.  When a parent finally reaches their breaking point, exhausted and frustrated and fed up, we tell ourselves that they are the problem.

That’s not to say that the intensity of today’s youth hockey culture is all bad.  Instruction has gotten exponentially better, the overall level of play is light-years away from where it used to be, and this certainly benefits elite players.  Unfortunately, the pendulum has swung too far and rink-life balance is all but absent from our sport – and the players are the ones who pay the biggest price.

Some of my colleagues will read this and say that it’s all true, but that’s business.  They are just giving the customers what they want.  To them I say, you can do better.  You can be a leader, not a follower.  You can set the tone instead of letting others set it for you.  You can have the awkward, honest conversations and say the things people don’t want to hear.  You can measure your success by looking at your kids, not your KRACH ratings. Our players deserve the best you have to give, nothing less.

6 Ways to Build Diversity & Inclusion in Youth Hockey

Diversity & inclusion are big buzz words these days, and the NHL has taken up the mantle of change with their Hockey is for Everyone ™ initiative.  According to NHL.com, “Hockey is for Everyone ™ uses the game of hockey – and the League’s global influence – to drive positive social change and foster more inclusive communities.”  USA Hockey is also taking steps in the right direction with the creation of a new position, Director of Diversity and Inclusion.  The person who is hired to fill this role will be “responsible for developing and implementing strategies and programs to increase multicultural, ethnic, and inclusivity efforts for USA Hockey’s membership.”

Hockey is notoriously played and watched by a homogeneous fan base of economically well-off white people, and it is critical for us to start welcoming a more diverse population into our rinks for a number of reasons.  Most importantly, it is the right thing to do.  Research shows that diversity promotes critical thinking, collaboration, creativity, and feelings of safety while it prepares our children for future employment and citizenship.  From a business perspective, youth hockey organizations must expand our potential customer base in order for us to continue to thrive and grow, and diversifying our sport is one very obvious way we can accomplish this.

While the work of building a more diverse player base is slow and difficult, the rubber really hits the road once we have these children and families in the rink and we become responsible for making them feel welcome.  We need to create a culture of inclusiveness, and that culture will have to be built at the grassroots level.

I recently received a message from a woman who has a son with dwarfism.  Her family finds the use of the word “Midget” offensive, and she asked that we adopt the official USA Hockey terminology and use ages (8 & under, 10 & under, etc.) instead of the traditional nomenclature (Mite, Squirt, and so on).  I apologized and told her that while I knew USA Hockey had made that change I was never aware of the reason, and I suggested that she contact them and let them know that there seems to be a need for some additional education around this issue.  She replied that she had contacted them and was told that she should reach out and educate organizations on her own.

This story is disappointing, but unfortunately not surprising.  There is a serious lack of leadership when it comes to dealing with difficult issues, and responsibility is quickly shifted down the chain of command. While the addition of a Director of Diversity and Inclusion is a step in the right direction, it will take time for that person to get up to speed and they will be fighting a tide of inertia and bureaucracy that will make it difficult to get things done.

Once we understand the need for diversity and inclusion in our sport, and we accept that it is up to each of us to make these changes in our own organizations, what is the next step?

1. Be willing to look at your own biases and blind spots. We all have them, and we need to be open to constructive feedback and self-examination.
2. Create a Diversity & Inclusion policy for your organization and post it publicly. US Lacrosse has a great Diversity and Inclusion Best Practices statement you can use as a starting point.
3. Adopt a Zero Tolerance policy towards hate speech of any kind. Make sure the consequences are clear, consistent, and enforceable.
4. If you hear something, say something. Don’t let bullying and hate speech go unaddressed.
5. Expect officials to enforce USA Hockey Rule 601. “A game misconduct penalty shall be assessed to any player or team official who…uses language that is offensive, hateful or discriminatory in nature anywhere in the rink before, during, or after the game.”
6. Be willing to go the extra mile.  Things as simple as where to buy equipment and how to put it on a player can be overwhelming for someone who is new to the sport.  Make sure you are available to provide help to families who may not have any other hockey-savvy people in their lives.

College Bribery Is Just More of the Same

While on some level the news about college admissions fraud and bribery is shocking, on another level it totally isn’t.  In fact, on a very basic level this scandal is the logical extension of what we see in youth sports every single day.

Parents of means have always used their resources to best position their children for success.  In youth hockey, wealthy parents hire private coaches to work with their children every day in rinks they construct on their property.  They have their children play on superstar teams that travel across the continent – or even around the world – all year long.  They fly back and forth every weekend so their child can play on a team located several states away, or they recruit players from across the country and house them in their mega-mansions.  They purchase rinks, clubs, or junior teams so their children will have a place to play, and then they “incentivize” talented players to join them.

Obviously, none of this is illegal.  After all, if you can afford to give your children all these advantages, why wouldn’t you?  The problem comes when all of that still isn’t enough. Once parents have invested hundreds of thousands of dollars into their children’s ambitions, put their reputations and egos on the line, and given them every conceivable advantage, failure is unacceptable.

Bribing your child’s way into college is shameful and despicable, there is no doubt about it.  However, just like any other parent, these people’s allegiances are to their own kids.  They are simply doing what they have always done: using their wealth and influence to give their children an edge.  They don’t owe anyone anything.

But what about Yale, Stanford, Georgetown, the University of Southern California, UCLA, the University of San Diego, University of Texas, and Wake Forest?  What about the athletic directors and volleyball, tennis, soccer, water polo, and soccer coaches?  What about the teachers, proctors, and test administrators?  They have obligations to their businesses, schools, students, and athletes, not to mention their obligations to the integrity of the process and to every single hard-working child who deserves a level(ish) playing field.  Their greed drove them to take resources away from people who earned them and give them to people who did not.

Fundamentally, there is little difference between a building a library and bribing a soccer coach in exchange for admission.  Yes, in the first case other students are benefitting from the exchange, but that is of very little comfort to the child whose spot was sold and who will never get the chance to use the fancy new building.

Perhaps while we nurse our righteous indignation over the college bribery scandal we should ask ourselves a few questions.  Are these schools really different from youth sports organizations who take parent donations in exchange for a spot on a AAA team?  Are these coaches any worse than those who give a child a spot on a Midget AAA team provided that the parent recruits and houses superstars from around the country to play alongside him?  Is there an analogy to be drawn between the fraudulent testing scheme and holding tryouts when most of the spots on the team have already been sold?  It is a difference of degrees, to be sure, but is there a level at which they are fundamentally the same?

7 Ideas for Introducing a Family-Centric Culture to Youth Hockey

On Monday, February 11 about 40  Atlantic Amateur Hockey Association leaders and influencers met with Pat LaFontaine of the NHL and Chris Price of Life Sports to discuss the NHL’s Declaration of Principles and how Life Sports can help the AAHA membership to reimagine youth hockey.

Chris shared his vision of a family-centric youth hockey culture where parents are engaged (as opposed to educated), character values are promoted, and all players are given the opportunity to develop life skills.  Instead of seeing parents as youth sports’ biggest problem, we can start to view them as our biggest asset and invite them to be an active and valuable part of our sport.

That’s not to say that some individual parents aren’t challenging to deal with; this is simply to say that we don’t have to throw out the baby with the bathwater.  Right now, youth hockey organizations are operating under the mentality that “the customer is always wrong,” but  all this does is create unnecessary conflict and drive families away.  It doesn’t have to be this way.

Creating such a culture shift is an enormous task; however, the real and opportunity costs of not doing so is intolerable and unsustainable.  The financial and time resources spent on staff turnover, player loss, and “managing” parent behavior are increasing every year, and there is no end in sight unless we take action.

The journey of a thousand miles starts with a single step – so what steps can we take right now that will start us on the journey towards a healthier youth hockey culture?

1. Thank your parents.  Send a quick and sincere note to your parents thanking them for sharing their children with you.  For better or for worse, your parents chose to trust you with their child’s well-being and development and that is something to appreciate.
2. Put a suggestion box in your rink.  Many parents are afraid to offer feedback because they are afraid of repercussions towards their child or because they don’t want to be seen as “that parent.” Give them the opportunity to anonymously offer their ideas.
3. Create a mission and vision statement for your organization.  Take some time to understand your motivation and goals, and then create a concise statement that communicates these things to your parents.
4. Distribute a newsletter.  Think about the most frequently asked questions you receive, and answer them proactively by putting together a brief informational document for your parents.
5. Use social media.  Start a Facebook or Instagram page or take to Twitter to share stories, ideas, and information with your families.
6. Plan individual player meetings.  With the season wrapping up, now is a perfect time to give each player some personalized feedback.  Your comments can be written, but ideally they will be delivered in a face-to-face meeting with players and parents where you share your thoughts about the player’s strengths, areas they need to work on, and your favorite thing about the player as a person.
7. End every staff meeting and board meeting by asking yourself, “What did we do for our players and families today?”  In the day-to-day business of running an organization, it is easy to lose sight of the kids.  Create a habit of deliberately calling them to mind when you are engaged in planning and decision-making.