What's Your Coaching Footprint?

One’s carbon footprint is defined as the amount of carbon dioxide released into the atmosphere as a result of the activities of a particular individual, organization, or community. The implication is that the way in which you choose to live comes with a trade-off. That trade-off may or may not be important to you, depending on what other concerns you have in your life, and whether or not the environment is something you think and care about.

The term “therapeutic footprint” was first used in 2006 by Anderson and colleagues. They described a model to plot the relationship between level of evidence and risk, and to analyse how that relationship varied in medical, complementary and alternative therapies.

Back in 2019, I saw the term used on Twitter by Sigurd Mikkelsen in a slightly different manner. It got me thinking about how this might apply beyond strictly healthcare, and how we might want to think about the “therapeutic footprint” concept in coaching / personal training (one-to-one, group, online etc.).

What Have I Left Behind?

When I (Gary) coach someone, I try to be conservative. I try my best to recognise that I am guiding someone on how they live their life. Whether it’s a change in the amount of time they allocate to exercise per week, the foods they buy, their pre-bed routine etc., it’s a change in the way that they live. I take that seriously. However, it’s clearly not just “what they do”, but also “why” they do the things they do, and also their attitudes, beliefs, knowledge, and so on. Even if I tell someone to do all of the right things, do I want them to be doing them for the wrong reasons? Do they now have more negative attitudes towards something? Are those attitudes justified? What have I left behind?

That’s the important part – what I leave behind. I consider this to be my Coaching Footprint. I care about it more than the % strength gained, weight lost, or kilometres ran. I believe that personal training, even in an online capacity, can be a very valuable part of our “frontline” healthcare system. But, that will only be the case if we treat ourselves as professionals. One of the central principles of healthcare is “first, do no harm”. I believe that we should carry that into the fitness profession(s).

First, Do No Harm

“Harm” in the fitness industry is acknowledged. This harm is generally exclusive to acute injury or illness. You will often see coaches and trainers virtue signal about how their clients are so healthy, injury free, never sick, not hungry etc.. However, I would argue that a lot of the harm left behind, or, one’s coaching footprint, actually goes unnoticed. It is the fear of certain movements; of food; of weight gain; of living “impure”. It is the belief that for one to be healthy, one must reduce all life decisions to “positive” or “negative” for health. It is the attitude that health can be viewed through a purely biomedical lens, at the expense of one’s career, relationships, and sense of fulfillment. It is a flawed understanding of the principles of nutrition. It is the misapplication of “feelings” in exercise prescription. It is the debt incurred by one’s monthly supplement bill. It is the fear of not being “perfect”.

I wish I understood this sooner. Why? Well, I once had a much larger coaching footprint. I was not precise with my speech, nor was I considerate of the repercussions of the narrative delivered. If I thought something might have a chance of helping someone, I was all for it. I thought I was doing a better job by trying to have someone improve everything, rather than improving the things that had the greatest effect size. I would give advice, without considering potential misinterpretations or extrapolations either now, or in the future.

What Now?

I try to be conservative. When making decisions as to what advice I am going to give to someone, or how I might deliver it, I consider some of the following:

Cost – Is there any cost to the advice that I am about to give? If so, is it likely that this is within someone’s budget? If so, is this the most cost-effective way for this person to move closer toward the goals that they have set for themselves.

Example: If someone is going to invest in a supplement for “general health”, it would be fair for that person to assume that, based on what I have said, this supplement is a requirement for long term health. If this costs €40/mo, that is a cost of €480/yr. That is a lot, and hence, I should probably have a pretty strong justification.

Time – How much time is going to be invested by the person if I give them this advice? If so, is it likely that the person has this much time available? If so, is this the most time-efficient way for this person to move closer toward the goals they have set for themselves.

Example: If someone starts a “stretching routine” [in addition to resistance training] that is to be performed for 30 minutes daily, that is an investment of 3.5 hrs/wk, 14 hrs/mo, or 182 hrs/yr. That is a lot of time, and hence, I would want to know that this is really in line with that person’s goal (e.g. get better at stretching vs reduce injury risk, great for the former, not for the latter).

Attitudes/Beliefs – How might my advice modify someone’s attitudes/beliefs? Is my advice aligned with a specific narrative, and if so, is that a helpful one? How might this affect the way that someone views their health and fitness behaviours, and the other areas of their life?

Example: If I tell someone that they need to do specific exercises for their posture, one would assume that this aligns with the general narrative relating to posture and pain. This has the potential to reinforce preconceived notions about slouching and back pain, rounded shoulders being harmful etc.. Therefore, I must consider 1) the utility of the advice, and 2) the narrative that runs with it.

Justification – This is a simpler one, but is the information I am providing correct/true? And, how do I know? Is there a very high level of evidence (e.g. systematic reviews / meta analyses on x intervention in populations similar to my client), or is this simply my opinion? If the justification is weak, then all of the previous questions become even more important. If advice is based on weak, unsubstantiated claims, is also part of an unhelpful narrative, and carries a significant cost and time investment, then that’s probably not great advice.

Example: If I tell someone they need to follow a specific meal plan with specific foods, requiring someone to eat every 3 hours to lose body fat, that’s 1) not justified based on the evidence, 2) potentially harmful to one’s attitudes/beliefs toward nutrition, and 3) a large investment of time (meal prep, specific shopping) and potentially money.

Summary

They are the basic pillars of my thought process. There are more questions you could ask yourself, but my intent is not to create a standardised list of questions. Rather, I hope that, if you are a coach, you can begin to work on reducing your coaching footprint.

If you are not a coach, then this article can still be equally as valuable. Whose “footprints” have affected you? There are undoubtedly attitudes and beliefs that you hold as a result of social media, the mainstream media, popular books etc. that have shaped a false understanding of lots of things.

Grab your critical thinking brush and scrub those footprints off.