Achievement motivation in ultra running, ironman and endurance sport

I've not written a blog in a while, and for the masses that are wondering what happened in Transalpine 2012 after my last post - I'm going to be lazy and refer you to Lotte's race report (part 1 and part 2) :-)

The seed for this post was actually planted during my participation Transalpine this year, and relates to that of achievement motivation in endurance sport. Its a topic that I have been chewing over for a while now, and even after extensive thought, I'm still not sure I've got to the bottom of it. Anyway, here goes:

What first appealed to me about endurance events (ultras, marathons, ironmans etc) is that to just to finish was an achievement. The battle to be had was with the race itself. Not that there isn't a competitive aspect to every "race", but there was fundamentally something welcoming and encouraging about the fact that my performance wasn't going to compared so much with my competitors (a competitive climate) but with myself (a mastery climate).

The fact I, (and many others) have been drawn to this aspect of endurance sport isn't surprising. There is research to suggest that mastery climate fosters task involvement, where persistence, and personal improvement are rewarded. In competitive climates however, only the best prosper and it can be an extremely debilitating environment for those who are less able.

According to Nicholls' (1984) Achievement Goal Theory, there are two basic stable personality orientations: task or ego-oriented. The former prefers to participate in a given activity more for the opportunity for self-improvement, whilst the latter head out and like measure success relative to those directly around him/her. Although this is a somewhat simplified description of the theory, I think its enough to go by. Cury et al. (1997) showed how task-oriented people are far more likely to select challenging tasks so that they have the opportunity to assess their development that they have achieved through persistence. It follows, that those who tend to participate in endurance events, are likely to be task-oriented the scraps of research that have been conducted on the topic would seem to point in this direction also; Krouse et al. (2011) found that female ultra runners had a tendency to be task-oriented.

MICRO

Now not to get too far into this, but musings have led me to consider the bigger picture. I believe within each race (lets call this the micro-level) a mastery climate is more or less predominates. On any given day, while the ego-oriented amongst us are free to look at just how far up the 2nd from last page or results they came, most will contextualize their performance relative to their personal goals, reminisce and head home. Only a small percentage really seem to care that much about how they did relative to others, and thats perfectly ok.

MACRO

When you zoom out a little, I think the mastery climate is somewhat diminished. People naturally begin to compare between races (lets call this the macro-level). You get all the talk of the toughest, the hardest, the longest etc. (a blog post in its own!)  In doing so, I don't think its unfair to say that maybe what an individual has achieved say in a less difficult race, might often be overshadowed by more 'impressive' achievements, even amongst those in the know! Personally however, I like to think I value some of my less notable achievements far more than some of the more "impressive" ones.  A good example of this came up at a recent race I attended. During the race briefing, the organiser spent a few moments welcoming the group, then went on to specifically mention a few of the more outstanding achievements of the competitors toeing the start line. I'm all for celebrating success and was it inspiring? Sure. Also, was it important to recognise the influential names who's opinions might help define the success of the event in future years? Definitely. But I can't help but think what those taking part in their first ultra may have thought when the goliath challenge ahead of them was effectively devalued amidst the trans-national and trans-contienental accolades of their very immediate others. It reminded me of animal farm a little actually.....

"All ultra runners are equal, but some are more equal than others"  

Ok, maybe that was a bit far, but hopefully you get the jist? Now there was no negative intent at all in the organiser's words, quite the opposite, but I think it shows how when you look at more than just one race, the aspects of a competitive climate begins to surface. Needless to say, this comparison of races is a bit of a pet-peeve of mine, and something that I think is kind of missing the point! (but thats just my opinion - each to their own).

META

The final level it made me consider was the contrast between those who participate in endurance sport and those that don't participate at all (let's call it the meta level). Here, I think the balance between the mastery/competitive climate is heavily in favour of the latter. Even though all your mates  might ride 100 miles every weekend, get up at 5.30am to go running all the time, or train 15 hours a week, you are in the minority.  I suppose it feels like a collective narcissism of sorts, where it the 'why' and 'how' of what you do are lost, and people 'looking in' only see the number....... 26.2, 112, 50, 100.....

I've tried to conceptualise the three layers below. Red denotes a competitive climate, and blue a mastery climate. The Micro-levels are the races, where the mastery climate predominates. In the context of this environment, for the most part, the task-oriented can thrive and prosper. As you begin to look at the broader picture and the wider endurance scene, denoted by the pill shaped area - the competitive climate starts to make itself known. Here the substance and value of personal goals can be lost amongst someone who has gone harder, faster and longer.  Finally, at the meta-level, where those that do and those that don't are compared, the entire world of endurance sport is nearly enveloped, where what you do, seems to start to say something about who you are.

As far as I can tell, I'm task-oriented, which might explain why the comparative nature of the ego-oriented types, and their influence on the endurance environment bothers me a little. This post didn't turn out how I expected it to, and its pretty loose on the ground in terms of theory. It's certainly not watertight and I've not even really touched upon achievement motivation in competition - a pretty relevant topic. I've more tried to explain my perspective (very crudely) of how the dynamics of competitive and mastery climates interact in different contexts within in endurance sport.

If you want to test whether you are task or ego oriented you can do so here. Doesn't mean much on its own, but might explain why its important to you that came 655th NOT 656th in your Age-group.....in the 12th wave.....on the Saturday, not the Sunday......

I hope you enjoyed reading, and welcome all comments.

IRRfc Team Analysis Workshop 1 - MBTI - 15th December 2009 - Team Arktix

On Tuesday 15^th December 2009, the team met with Ruth Storm of IRRfc for our first team workshop.  The primary aim of which was discuss the topic and importance of good team dynamics under stress and then move on to understand a little bit more about ourselves, in terms of personality type and our various preferences within that context.

A couple of weeks prior to the meeting we had been asked by Ruth to complete the MBTI Questionnaire and were eagerly awaiting the results.  Would this test at last uncover the truth, that Oli IS in fact part-robot? Only time would tell.

We began the session with a brief discussion about our previous experiences with MBTI, and it became apparent that despite all having completed it on more than one occasion within the workplace – none of us had ever really followed through with the learning outcomes and attempted (consciously) to apply its principles.  All in all the workshop lasted over three hours – and by the end we began to see we were only beginning to scratch the surface of our various personalities and idiosyncrasies.

The Myers Briggs Indicator test reports preferences on four dichotomies each consisting of two opposite poles. These preferences indicate the differences in observed in people that result from the following 4 questions listed below.  It is important however to note that these are only preferences and one person can not only use, but also be very adept (or equally rubbish) at exhibiting both preferences (but not at the same time).  Any given individual will rarely be able to discretely exhibit opposite poles with equal confidence.  When using a preferred method we often feel at our most competent, natural and energetic, and vice versa.

For us as a team, the value of this testing lies in being able to understand exactly how each of us prefers to vent, understand, express, cope with, approach and decide upon what may seem like menial decisions during the race.  When the temperature is through the floor and we are sleep deprived, exhausted zombies, stumbling through the endless arctic tundra or confined into a small tent for extended periods of time, I’m sure no decision will be menial, and no task a matter of fact. We will all appreciate and work much better as a team if we are well versed in how best frame and package our ideas to others so that they are most palatable, and also allowing each other the space or time (if needs be) to digest that information.

Where they prefer to focus their attention and get energy?

Extraversion (E) – People who prefer Extraversion like to focus on the outer world of people and activity.  They direct their energy and attention outwards and receive energy from interacting with people, the environment and from taking action. Often seen as ‘outgoing’ or a ‘people person’ Jay and Andy

Introverison (I) - People who prefer Introversion like to focus on their own inner world of ideas and experiences. They direct their energy and attention inwards and receive it form reflecting on their thoughts. Often seen as ‘reflective’ or ‘reserved’   Oli

How do you prefer to take in information?

Sensing (S) – People who prefer Sensing like to take in information that is real and tangible –what is actually happening. Observant to details and attuned to practical realities.  Remember events of snapshots of what actually happened and solve problems by working through the facts until they understand the problem. Jay

Intuition (N) – People who prefer Intuition like to take in information by seeing the big picture, focussing on the relationship and connections between facts. They grasp at patterns and are attuned to seeing new possibilities.  They remember events by what they have ‘read between the lines’ and solve problems by leaping between different ideas and possibilities. Andy and Oli

How do you make decisions?

Thinking (T) – People who prefer to use Thinking in decision making like to look at the logical consequences of a choice or action, they want to remove themselves mentally from the situation and objectively examine the pros and cons.  They notice inconsistencies, solve problems with logic and their goal is to find a standard principle that will apply in all similar situations. Andy

Feeling (F) – People who prefer to use Feeling in decision making like to consider what is important to them and to others involved. They like to mentally place themselves in a situation to identify with everyone and make decisions based on values about showing respect for people. They are seen as empathetic and as being guided by personal values. Oli and Jay

How do you deal with the outer world?

Judging (J) – People who prefer to use their Judging process in the outer world like to live in a planned orderly way seeking to regulate and manage their lives.  They take satisfaction from sticking to a schedule or plan and are energised by getting things done!  They like to make lists of things to do and are systematic/methodical. Andy and Jay

Perceiving (P) -  People who prefer to use their Perceiving process in the outer world like to live in a flexible spontaneous way, seeking to experience and understand life, rather than to control it. They find detailed plans confining and stay open to information and last minute options.  Seen as spontaneous, flexible and casual and work in bursts. Oli

So that leaves us with individual and team personality types of:

Andy – ENTJ – Frank decisive, assume leadership readily. Quickly see illogical and inefficient procedures and policies, develop and implement comprehensive systems to solve organisational problems. Enjoy long term planning and goal setting. Forceful in presenting their ideas.

Jay & Overall team– ESFJ – Warm-hearted, conscientious and cooperative.  Want harmony in their environment, work with determination to establish it.  Like to work with others and to complete tasks accurately and on time. Loyal, notice what others need in their day-to-day lives and try to provide it.  Want to be appreciated for who they are and what they contribute

Oli – INFP – Idealistic, loyal to their values and to people who are important to them.   Want an external life that is congruent with their values.  Curious, quick to see possibilities, can be catalysts for implementing ideas.  Seek to understand people and to help them fulfil their potential.   Adaptable, flexible and accepting unless a value is threatened.

In the next session (Tuesday 8^th Feb) we will discuss conflict resolution and are aiming to establish and prioritise the team objectives.  In the next blog I’ll write a little more on where we think these conflicts might arise, and try explain them within the context of our personality types as detailed above.  All very exciting, and no, we can still neither confirm nor deny whether Oli is a robot.