THE NEEDS ANALYSIS – A DYING ART?

When performing this process, the key information in relation to your needs analysis can then be extracted and stored. For those papers that have interesting methods and in which interesting results are shown, I like to revisit the whole paper to get a sense of the inspiring references from the introduction and discussions. Some purists may look at this and scream you should read the whole paper properly cover to cover. However, I argue that with the above approach you can determine very quickly whether the paper is worth the time commitment versus moving onto the next article in your pile. 

Once a general understanding of the sport science principles (i.e. physiology, biomechanics and psychology) have been made, the needs analysis can be continued by detailing TRAINING METHODOLOGIES that can be identified within the sport. This can come from research sources and discussions with other coaches. Again the same principles apply of identifying the characteristic and detailing the main modes and methods to train it. For example, in soccer a popular methodology is to utilize small-sided games, which reduce the playing numbers, pitch dimensions and durations of work/rest in an attempt to simulate the demands of the 11v11 competition. Though mostly coached by the primary sport coaches, an understanding of the physical and psychological demands of these drills is important for the S&C to understand as they may utilize such knowledge to complement other drills or mimic these demands elsewhere in their exercise prescriptions. Additionally, typical training methods applied by other S&C coaches can be explored that may influence how the coach programs. This in turn can inform the specific annual plan related to the training periodization used for your sport. 

The other general category would be that of INJURY CLASSIFICATION within the sport. It is important to understand what injuries occur, the potential mechanisms and the expected injury risk and rate for the sport. Again these can be compiled from the research (INJURY EPIDEMIOLOGY studies) which classify the typical injury occurrences from the sport from injury survey data. The S&C coach can also use online web resources which also contain details of injuries from their sport (e.g. fantasy football website that provides data on why a player is out). This collated data can create a picture of what injuries you are expected to see as a result of participation in the sport. This can then begin to inform the target areas for the INJURY REDUCTION STRATEGY process. Once again the research framework can be applied here too, to detail the main methods that others use in an attempt to reduce injury occurrence (or in other cases reduce recurrence). 

Moving onto the more specific category of sport science, this is where I begin to consider TESTING AND MONITORING. Having identified the key important components of physiology, biomechanics, psychology, the training methods and common injuries, it is important for the S&C to pay attention to how to test and monitor these within their environment. Again the process of developing a testing battery can take the form of looking at what is done in the research, by other practitioners and what the team/individual has done in their sport. For some sports (e.g. sprinting) the event is the test (so to speak) and therefore consistent attention would be paid around the distance and time to complete it during training and competition (creating a consistent monitoring model). For other sports surrogate measures of performance would be used (e.g. basketball) whereby the sport isn’t purely determined by physiological outputs, but as practitioners we look to measure the important constructs we have identified earlier in the needs analysis. 

The important part to developing the testing components of the needs analysis is to use the research as a guide to finding valid and reliable measures, which are most importantly sensitive to change. This can get overwhelming for some coaches, especially when they realize there is a little more error in their hand timed flying 40 yrd sprints than first thought. Nevertheless, this component of the sport science research process will provide a sense of understanding of what error we would expect with each of our tests, and what changes have been considered meaningful and real by others within their environment. We can also go one step further by evaluating these tests in our own environment too.  However, a golden rule is that the test you have identified has to be practical. For example you may wish to monitor countermovement jumps in the sport of basketball. You have done your research and found that force plate jumping is used to provide a valid and reliable means to assess this quality. However, you don’t own a force plate, so therefore replicating this process would be more difficult. This is another important part of the needs analysis (in this case an environmental constraint that you must consider). This would require some more research to identify alternative options that may fit the budget (e.g. a video phone application). This is an obvious example but one that can help refine the needs analysis approach. 

Another specific category is that of the ATHLETE CENTERED ANALYSIS. Technically the above development of the testing and monitoring falls under this category. As the testing and monitoring is provided to analyze the athlete. However, within the needs analysis model this is more so the question(s) that as a coach you should be exploring in relation to the individual athlete and the team. Within the individual athlete centered analysis, traditionally an S&C would evaluate the TRAINING HISTORY of the individual (i.e. the training age and their exposure to strength and conditioning practices in the past). Two potentially overlooked areas for the individual athlete are their goals and training preferences. Starting with the latter, the ATHLETES’ TRAINING PREFERENCES are important to consider. From my own experience I have oftentimes tried to force feed principles of training, without understanding what the athlete actually likes to do first. Starting with their likes can give you an understanding of their level of comfortability with training approaches. This doesn’t mean abandoning your training principles, but it does give a gauge of what things you may need to educate the athlete on in the future (i.e. using your testing measures to show why a particular training method may reap benefits for them). The INDIVIDUAL ATHLETES’ GOALS are important to explore before telling them your goals for them. This again guides you in the direction of how to have success with this athlete, whilst also forming a means of comparing your own S&C goals for this individual against their expectations. When these align – perfect. When there are differences – you now have a means of discussion in the future to target with this athlete. 

Another part of the athlete centered analysis considers both the INDIVIDUAL AND THE TEAM. Here we highlight the INJURY HISTORY, following some of the principles discussed within the general categorization of injuries within the sport. It is also important to apply this analysis to your environment. For example, exploration of the teams typical injury rates can be compared to the broader sport injury rates highlighted in the research or through league wide analysis. This comparison provides a means to assess if the team is below average or above average for what is expected. This analysis again provides a means of specific target development for injury reduction strategies when applicable. The injury history process should also focus on the individual athlete. For example an athlete with a history of ACL tears may require a different monitoring strategy or training approach to maintain their qualities and prevent further implications (as these individuals would have increased risk compared to others who have not sustained an ACL tear in the past). Within the individual injury history I like to take the past season and past 3-5 years as frames of reference (with the exemption of potential catastrophic injuries that happened earlier in their careers). This is based on the assumption that a minor injury sustained greater than 3 years ago likely bears less weighting the further away from the rehabilitation process (again with the exemption of catastrophic injuries). 

The other component to consider is the COACHES REQUIREMENTS. It is useful to know the goals and plan the coach has for the team and/or the individual athlete. For team sports this could mean identifying if this player is a starter, bench player or reserve. This knowledge is valuable for an S&C coach as they will likely be tasked with applying different training strategies for each individual that falls under each of these categories. Again recall earlier that we want to note the individual athlete goals, now we can combine this comparison to what the goals are from the sport coach too. This creates a trifecta to eventually compliment the S&C targets and goals. This I would consider the final step (highlighted in red on the above schematic) as bringing the components together to create the S&C TARGETS. Utilizing all the information within the needs analysis to set both team and/or individual targets for each athlete. This is the last specific step as this creates the feedback loop for future reflection and analysis (subsequent iterations of the needs analysis). These strength and conditioning targets become one of the ways to define success within your domain, resulting from the art of producing the needs analysis. I believe this to be the most important reason and validation to perform a needs analysis, as this can be used as evidence within your S&C process, showing how decisions are driven with identified objectives. This provides a means to evaluate efficacy of the S&C delivery throughout the season and calendar year, in which a reappraisal of the needs analysis would be conducted for further continuation.