Reflective Practice In Sport Business Management
The sector of sports management has dramatically grown to attract a considerable segment of human resources into professional positions. Due to the high engagement of stakeholders with different interests and behaviours and its competitive nature, management in sports became a more professional and complex task (Rani, 2016). Likewise in other fields namely Education, professional sports managers encounter challenging situations where their efficiency in interacting with others and their professional development will hinge on certain factors such as their knowledge, their experiences and their understanding of the context in order to solve problems (Manti et al, 2011). This theme was widely discussed by theorists leading to the development of the concept of “Reflective Practice” and its relevant notions such as critical reflection or reflexivity with an emphasis in their inextricable link with professionalism (IBID). The Sports Management sector has been recently undergoing a steady growth in professionalism leading to an unprecedented demand for professional employees and graduates (De Schepper et al, 2017). The notion of “Reflective Practice” was used as a tool in practice based professions such as management to urge people to reflect on their experiences and engage in a continuous professional development. Primarily, this term was defined by John Dewey as ”‘the active, persistent and careful consideration of any belief or supposed form of knowledge in the light of the grounds that support it’ (Rodgers et al, 2002, p.10). Basically it explains how the questionable approach that a practitioner adopts will help in acting more appropriately. In more detail, it illustrates the nexus between reflection and practice. A reflective practitioner need to have the tendency to reflect on his practice and the ability of knowing how to follow this reflection with development identification of future practices (Smith, n.d)
However, the theory of “Reflective Practice” introduced by Schon gained a broad prominence and was regarded as a pivotal element for professional development. Its efficiency is manifested in challenging the traditional methods adopted to build professional status of practitioners as they encompassed a separation between theory and practice (Cáceres, 2017). Schon’s work on reflective practice is deemed highly influential on different professions including sport management and its significance was shown in how it was constructed based on distrusting the concept of positivism with implicitly articulating the epistemology of practice (Newman, 1999). His theory indeed indicated the aim to avoid three dichotomies of the positivist epistemology of practice including the separation of research from practice, the separation of knowing from doing and the separation of means from ends which are manifested in “Technical Rationality” (Schön, 1987). The developed theory of ‘High ground’ and Swampy lowlands’ illustrated Schon’s view on different professions and practitioners interventions. He classified certain professions that importantly require high reliance on the use of research based theory and practice in what he calls the ‘High ground’. Whilst others reside in the “swampy lowland” and possess complex problem solving processes which are incapable of technical solution (Urlich, 2008). Sport business management professions are a relevant example of the last concept as they require interactions with different people of different interests leading to unexpected situations and uncertainty in some occasions. Consequently, the thesis of Schon is a relevant presentation of a dissatisfaction of “Technical rationality” as the prominence and the effectiveness of his theory is tied in critiquing this concept and in urging practitioners to use a type of practical knowledge framed in what he calls “Knowing-in-action” (Newman, 1999). Technical rationality is considered irrelevant by Schon in “Swampy lowlands” situations as they are covered with uncertainty and disorder and the implementation of knowledge by separately acting without thinking is a limitation for practitioners and their professional development (Schön, 1983). Usher et al (1987) supported Schon’s theory of seeing practice as a creative fusion between theory and experience that has been reflected upon and argued that practice has the ability to effectively forge its own theory.
Furthermore, It is important to acknowledge more the notion of “knowing-in-action” before analysing Schon’s reflective model. According to Edawrds (1999) the knowing-in-action in sport management results when a manager reflects on a specific context for the purpose of formulating an appropriate practice. It is useful for managers to reshape their practical knowledge which implicitly encompasses theories about sport management (Edwards, 1999) . This concept shows appreciation of practitioners’ intuition and deemed utilitarian for sports professional practitioners to consider what they know in action as they will rely on their intuitive ability to act in certain situations and use the gained experience to challenge their knowledge and renew it for future practices (IBID). This hypothesis was bolstered by how practitioners are prone to the blind application of rules or knowledge which ultimately limit their ability to know how to perform a task (Cáceres, 2017). Thus, Schon’s theory highlights the significance of intuitive and tacit knowledge considering the implicit relevant values of practitioners with an acknowledgment of the importance of their' experience in their professional development (Kinsella, 2007). On his view on the field of management and its conflicts he claimed that the artistry of managers is crucial to solve problems and it will be developed based on their experiences and how they will share it with others (De Déa Roglio, 2006)
In addition to the presence of “knowing in action” as a key component, the analysis of Schon’s reflective practice model demonstrated that it is designed based on distinguishing between “Reflection-in-action” and “Reflection-on-action” (Pandey, 2012). The first concept illustrates the reflection during an event where sports management practitioners for example have to think about what they are doing and how they are doing it while consciously considering the context of the event and their situation (Russel, 1993). On the other hand, “Reflection on action” represents a retrospective thinking with the purpose of interpreting the situation to uncover the knowledge used in problem-solving for a particular situation. The practitioner might reframe the situation and interpret it differently to identify what other knowledge can be useful for the future (Schön, 1983). Reflection-in-action in sports management represents a critical reflection that provides unique opportunities for managers to understand their managerial environment (Edwards, 1999). Schon used it to debunk the limitation of technical rationality as the last does not permit the gain of true knowledge and he integrated the principles of interpretivism in “reflection-in-action” to refute the application of positivism (Papell et al, 1992). Importantly the American theorist argued that what makes a reflective practitioner is not the implementation of knowledge and just reflecting or thinking, it is the “reflection-in-action” that summarizes a practitioner who practices reflectively in an attributive way (Schon, 1987). Schon’s model generally demonstrated some advantages especially for the sport business managers sector such as the ability to enhance practitioners skills and dynamism through reflection in action leading ultimately to a better decision-making (Kinsella, 2007). Additionally, it increases efficiency in reacting while working with others as it values the tacit knowledge of practitioners. Schon's theory received simultaneously some objections from other researchers. One key proclaimed weakness was its representation of a self-protective orientation (Tan, 2020). The practitioner in this situation may become self-conscious, biased or defensive while reflecting and when reframing the encountered problems. Other theorists critiqued this view such as Gilroy (1993) who addressed certain difficulties in Schon's work emphasizing firstly on the existence of paradoxical learning for certain knowledge and situations. An example was given in the difficulty in communicating between Coach (Quist) and Student(Petra) (Newman, 1999).
Another view on reflective practice was developed by Gibbs who designed a model of reflection where the practitioner has to engage in a continual learning through focused self-reflection on his actions. Due to its cyclic nature depending on six stages this model might be more effective for repeated situations and experiences than single experiences as it helps in designing more precisely future improvements. This model is advantageous in encouraging practitioners to think systematically about the experience. It requires description of the event and then helps through analysis and evaluation to plan eventually for future situations (Wain, 2017). Gibbs (1988) proclaimed that the effectiveness in responding to situations is gained through the feelings and thoughts emerging from systematic reflection. Besides its simplicity to be understood especially for those who are new to reflection, Gibbs theory focused on feelings and understanding emotions compared to other models (University of Cumbria, 2020). For many professions including sports management this model might be useful as the interactions with different people need high levels of self-awareness and emotional intelligence. Additionally, Bulm et al (2013) claimed that gibbs model is effective due its emphasis on a balanced reflection between the positive and negative experiences. This might consequently help sport management practitioners to maximize their learning from reflection. In contrast, Forrester (2020) stated that Gibbs’ model might lead to superficial reflection as it does not urge reflectors to search for the values and the assumptions underpinned behind their behaviours limiting ultimately their professional development.
Moreover, based on Borton's model of reflection, Driscoll developed his own theory of reflective practice using the three questions of What? So What? Now What?. To remove the ambiguity of the model, Driscoll improved them into an experiential learning process (Driscoll, 2007). The guidelines introduced are illustrated in a 3 stages process where the first one is a description to the framework of the occurred event using the “What?” question (IBID). Sports managers here need to objectively recall what happened without critical evaluation. The second is based on the “So what?” question where it contains the analysis and the evaluation of the event considering the feelings and the actions of the practitioner. The third stage which is built on the question of “Now What?” illustrates the planning phase where the actions that need to be done in future are determined as the practitioner begins to transfer the knowledge into future contexts (Driscoll, 2007). Driscoll’s model basically incorporates most of the stages of Gibbs such as the descriptive part or the consideration of emotions, and are presented overall in a simpler way than Gibbs .In addition, Driscoll’s model is advantageous for sport managers in terms of distinction between its stages and questions making it more straightforward and clear. On the other hand, it was criticised for its inclusion of little meaningfulness and weak analysis as the questions might not encourage the practitioner to fully engage in reflection (Forrester, 2020).
Overall, Atkins et al (1999) distinguished through their analysis on different reflection models and techniques that there are three main stages which are repeated. The process starts with the identification of the problems encountered within their specific context of the situations. Then the critical and constructive analysis is undertaken with consideration to the feelings and ending finally with the stage of developing future behaviours through emotional and cognitive change. There are some effective methods that might be used by sports managers to help in developing reflective practices with putting pressure on the ‘taken for granted’. Storytelling and dialogue are effective methods as they are cognitively complex and deemed efficient for conveying the perceptions about the experience (Amulya, 2004). With the combination of constructive questions Sports managers practitioners might adopt a reflexive approach about the different contexts and evaluate them in order to improve our knowledge for future situations (IBID).
References:
Amulya, J. (2004) “What is reflective practice”, International Research and Exchanges Board [online], Available: <https://www.researchgate.net/publication/229021036_What_is_reflective_practice> [Accessed 11 August 2021].
Atkins, S. and Murphy, K. (1993) “Reflection: a review of the literature”, Journal of Advanced Nursing, 18(8), 1188–1192.
Bulman, C. and Schutz, S. (Eds.), (2013). Reflective Practice in Nursing, [e-book] Chichester: John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Available: <https://zu.edu.jo/UploadFile/Library/E_Books/Files/LibraryFile_151614_52.pdf> [Accessed 11 August 2021].
Cáceres, C. (2017) Re-Educating The Reflective Practitioner: A Critique of Donald Schön's Reflective Practice and Design Education For Engineering. [online] Available: <https://www.researchgate.net/publication/316649569_Re-Educating_The_Reflective_Practitioner_A_Critique_of_Donald_Schon's_Reflective_Practice> [Accessed 8 August 2021].
De Déa Roglio, K. (2006) “LEARNING BY SHARING EXPERIENCES: THE DEVELOPMENT OF REFLECTIVE PRACTICE IN EXECUTIVE MBA PROGRAMS”, Revista Eletrônica de Administração [online], 12(5), pp.229-243. Available: <https://www.redalyc.org/pdf/4011/401137454001.pdf> [Accessed 13 July 2021].
De Schepper, J. and Sotiriadou, P. (2017) “A framework for critical reflection in sport management education and graduate employability”, Annals of Leisure Research [online], 21(2), pp.227-245. Available: <https://www.researchgate.net/publication/317326199_A_framework_for_critical_reflection_in_sport_management_education_and_graduate_employability> [Accessed 13 July 2021].
Driscoll, J. (2007) Practising clinical supervision : a reflective approach for healthcare professionals, [e-book] Edinburgh: Baillière Tindall/Elsevier. Available: <https://www.worldcat.org/title/practising-clinical-supervision-a-reflective-approach-for-healthcare-professionals/oclc/442468939> [Accessed 12 August 2021].
Edwards, A. (1999) “Reflective Practice in Sport Management”, Sport Management Review [online], 2(1), pp.67-81. Available: <https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1441352399700902>.
Forrester, M. (2020) Reflection and Reflective Writing, [online] University of Edinburgh. Available: <https://www.clinicaleducator.org/en-gb/resource/735> [Accessed 10 August 2021].
Gibbs, G. (1988) Learning by Doing: A guide to teaching and learning methods, [e-book] Oxford:Further Education Unit. Available: <https://thoughtsmostlyaboutlearning.files.wordpress.com/2015/12/learning-by-doing-graham-gibbs.pdf> Accessed 12 August 2021].
Gilroy, P. (1993) “Reflections on Schon: an epistemological critique and a practical alternative, Journal of Education for Teaching [online], 19(4), pp.125-142. Available: <https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/0260747930190413> [Accessed 17 July 2021].
Kinsella, E. (2007) “Technical rationality in Schön's reflective practice: dichotomous or non-dualistic epistemological position”, Nursing Philosophy [online], 8(2), pp.102-113. Available: <https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/17374071/> [Accessed 15 August 2021].
Manti, P. Henderson, J. and Watkinson, D (2011) “Reflective practice in conservation education” [online] Lisbon. Available: <https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/8808485.pdf> [Accessed 3 March 2021].
Newman, S. (1999) ”Constructing and critiquing reflective practice1”, Educational Action Research [online], 7(1), pp.145-163. Available: <https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/09650799900200081> [Accessed 17 July 2021].
Pandey, S. (2012) “Reflective practice: A gateway to professional development”, Journal of NELTA, 17(1-2), pp.40–49. Available: <https://www.nepjol.info/index.php/NELTA/article/view/8091/6576#:~:text=Reflective%20practice%20can%20be%20a,their%20 effectiveness%20in%20the%20classroom.> [Accessed 21 July 2021].
Papell, C. and Skolnik, L. (1992) “The Reflective Practitioner”, Journal of Social Work Education [online], 28(1), pp.18-26. Available: <https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/10437797.1992.10778754> [Accessed 21 July 2021].
Rani, M. (2016) “Sports Management and Opportunities for Professional Development”, IOSR Journal of Sports and Physical Education, [online] 03(04), pp.30-36. Available: <http://www.iosrjournals.org/iosr-jspe/papers/vol3-issue4/G03043036.pdf>.
Rodgers, C. (2002) “Defining Reflection: Another Look at John Dewey and Reflective Thinking”, Teachers College Record [online], 104(4), pp.842-866. Available: <https://www.researchgate.net/publication/240645823_Defining_Reflection_Another_Look_at_John_Dewey_and_Reflective_Thinking> [Accessed 17 July 2021].
Russell, T. (1993) “Reflection-in-Action and the Development of Professional Expertise”, Teacher Education Quarterly [online], 20(1), pp.51-66. Available: <https://www.jstor.org/stable/23475150> [Accessed 4 August 2020].
Schön, D. (1983) Donald A. Schön-The Reflective Practitioner_ How Professionals Think In Action, [e-book] Basic Books. Available: <https://www.academia.edu/36335079/Donald_A._Sch%C3%B6n-The_Reflective_Practitioner_How_Professionals_Think_In_Action-Basic_Books_1984_.pdf> [Accessed 7 August 2021].
Schön, D. (1987) Educating the Reflective Practitioner Toward a New Design for Teaching and Learning in the Professions, [e-book] San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers. Available: <http://www.daneshnamehicsa.ir/userfiles/file/Manabeh/Educating%20the%20reflective%20practitioner.pdf> [Accessed 18 July 2021].
Smith, T. (n.d.). CONNECTING THEORY AND REFLECTIVE PRACTICE THROUGH THE USE OF PERSONAL THEORIES, [e-book] Charles Sturt University. Available: <https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED501125.pdf> [Accessed 11 August 2021].
Tan, C. (2020) “Revisiting Donald Schön’s notion of reflective practice: a Daoist interpretation”, Reflective Practice [online], 21(5), pp.686-698. Available: <https://www.researchgate.net/publication/343513339_Revisiting_Donald_Schon's_notion_of_reflective_practice_a_Daoist_interpretation> [Accessed 5 August 2021].
Urlich, W, (2008) Reflections on Reflective Practice, [online]. Available: <https://wulrich.com/downloads/bimonthly_september2008.pdf> [Accessed 4 August 2021].
University of Cumbria, (2020). Gibbs’ reflective cycle. [online] University Of Cumbria. Available: <https://my.cumbria.ac.uk/media/MyCumbria/Documents/ReflectiveCycleGibbs.pdf> [Accessed 9 August 2021].
Usher, R. and Bryant, I. (1987) “Re-examining the theory-practice relationship in continuing professional education”, Studies in Higher Education [online], 12(2), pp.201-212. Available: <https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/03075078712331378181?journalCode=cshe20> [Accessed 10 August 2021].
Wain, A. (2017) “Learning through reflection”, British Journal of Midwifery [online], 25(10), pp.662-666. Available: <https://www.researchgate.net/publication/320342913_Learning_through_reflection> [Accessed 9 August 2021].