Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
The ritual scapegoat theory advocates that team results do not justify within-season coaching turnovers. Head coaches are nevertheless constantly portrayed as scapegoats in the face of adversity during competitive seasons. To improve the comprehension of sport coaching succession (e.g. within-season coaching changes), this study adopts the social construction of leadership as a broader theoretical perspective which values the relational nature of sport leaders who interact for collective outcomes. Two research questions are addressed: (1) Why are head coaches continuously framed as scapegoats?; (2) How can sport leaders collectively manage within-season adversities? Through a phenomenological research design, qualitative data were generated from 59 semi-structured interviews with football practitioners from Brazil, an empirical setting where within-season coaching changes are repeatedly high. A reflexive thematic analysis captured five higher-order themes: excessive media pressure, dominant politics in club administration, lack of strategic planning, illogical expectations, and disengagement among players. Accordingly, the shared experiences of high-performance practitioners are discussed with respect to the collective interactions and social relations that construct leadership, hence stepping away from the conventional leader-centric approach that focuses on the head coach as a singular leader.
Galdino et al. (Thu,) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: