Tech as a tool: implementation considering the socio-ecological model

"Technology is a useful servant but a dangerous master.”

- Christian Lous Lange

Introduction: tech as a tool

Technology has experienced rapid growth in the field of sport performance over the past several years. It’s potential to enhance various aspects of athletic performance and/or improve the practitioner-athlete experience is a hit (pun intended). Athletes and coaches can now utilize wearables, force plates, motion capture cameras and other devices to gather data on various performance metrics such as force production, velocity, acceleration, heart rate, distance travelled, and more. This data can help identify strengths, areas in need of improvement, or even provide real-time feedback that aids practitioners in managing individuals’ exposure to external load.

Whether the narrative is injury prevention or functionally reaching for positive adaptation, technology is changing how practitioners and athletes engage with their training to make improvements within the physical domain of their sport. Technology's growth in sport performance is driven by its ability to provide accurate data and enhance decision making.

What problem are you trying to solve though? When does data collection bridge to communication? Who does this impact? Where does the data get housed and mapped to? Why should the individual and organization at large care to invest?

As technology continues to advance, it is expected to play an increasingly prominent role in shaping the future of a human performance specialist’s toolbox. Exciting, but demanding competency and clarity.

Tech as a tool: the road to selection

Figure 1: From the identification of a problem or desire to your action, a road map to selection of a performance technology.

The road to selection begins with identifying the root problem that needs to be solved or the desired outcome. Do you subscribe to a countermovement jump being a predictor of performance for your sport, but don’t have the equipment to look at key metrics the literature values? Would it be advantageous to collect, monitor, and use GPS data? These are examples of your current location.

Are you looking to describe, monitor, and/or plan?

Once your current location is determined it would be wise to browse all the relevant products available to you as a consumer. Just because a company’s marketing campaign is in your face, or the facility you just toured of FC Fanatic uses a certain product, does not mean it is right for you and your daily working environment. Start with what is gold standard and work backwards through what is valid, reliable, and budget-friendly.

The next filter to pass through is then your contextual constraints. A system will absorb and deflect. It’s important that decisions made support the continual growth of said system and don’t beat it up. These nuances do not favor asking for forgiveness over approval. Subject the product to the scrutiny of your system. Technically (E.g., Validity and reliability) the product must be sound, and it’s web of demands sustainable (E.g., A compatible system with competent staff). Create a customized criteria checklist to narrow the product list.

Figure 2: Questions to consider as an example of a criteria checklist created around your contextual constraints.

Up next is demoing a product or products of interest, noting final thoughts on how it molds into your system and structure. Enter the Socio-Ecological Model. Standard operating procedures and staff upskill once a product is selected follow.

A final filter: the unconventional socio-ecological model

Traditionally the Socio-Ecological Model is a theoretical framework that examines the complex interactions between individuals and their broader social and physical environments. It recognizes that human behaviour and well-being are influenced by levels of influence, ranging from personal characteristics to societal factors. Developed in the field of public health, the model provides a comprehensive understanding of the various determinants of health and enables interventions to address issues/interventions from different angles.

By considering the dynamic interplay between these various levels, the Socio-Ecological Model also highlights the importance of comprehensive and multi-level approaches to addressing performance issues, questions, and/or desires. It emphasizes the need for interventions that target individuals, interpersonal relationships, a human performance department, and broader factors such as policy and the team/organization’s culture.

This holistic perspective enables a more in-depth understanding of performance determinants. Facilitating the development of effective interventions that promote solutions, answers, and optimization while reinforcing your way of doing business.

Figure 3: Outline of the Socio-Ecological Model and it's practical implications.

Individual: This level examines personal characteristics and additionally how a product could aid in influencing attitudes, beliefs, and behaviours of individuals. Simply put, this encompasses underpinning physical characteristics of a solo that can be hypothesized for or against interventions. Individual-level factors measure and influence behaviours and outcomes, such as using an IMTP average force production value as a key performance physical indicator related to strength irrespective of time.

Interpersonal: The interpersonal level considers the influence of social relationships, team dynamics, and social networks on performance. It examines how interpersonal interactions, support systems, and social norms shape behaviour and outcomes. For example, having supportive human performance specialist use objective data to make informed decisions can positively impact athlete development, while negative pressures or improper use surrounding results from practitioners can deter results by diminishing buy-in (trust + commitment).

Department: Moving outward, the model zooms out, where factors such as department capabilities, athlete resources, and systemized norms are viewed. Department level factors can shape behaviours and outcomes through the availability of competent staff, adequate resources, and a supportive environment for the athlete from a biopsychosocial-spiritual lens. A human performance department (I.e., S&C, PT, MD, etc…) utilizing a GPS system to guide programming decisions and return-to-play protocols- allowing scopes of practice to interact and better serve the end result.

Policy: The policy level focuses on the influence of the department’s ability to push importance and relevance up the chain. Organizational/department policy then can illustrate a need for resource development, financial support, and emphasize the priority of positive behaviour change and outcomes down the chain. For instance, policy restricting the use of player tracking technology can help combat misuse of performance technology, but will place a ceiling on capability, and thus behaviour and outcomes. This level shapes the broader social, economic, and political contexts in which a department functions within its organization (business-to-business) and its client (business-to-consumer).

Culture: Lastly, this level looks at the holistic environment of the organization/team where which these individuals live. It includes factors such as psychological safety, access to support, availability of resources conducive to high performance, standards, values, and more. Cultural-level factors can either support or limit behaviour and outcome change. For example, an athlete attending a university with a fully staffed human performance department and allocated budget compared to a school with two volunteers in a disconnected hierarchy of staff can yield different results. Results on a countermovement jump maybe, but even much larger scale issues such as recruitment that all contribute to performance.

Conclusion

Technology has unanimously solidified itself as a prominent tool in the toolbox of a human performance specialist. With this, the tool has a host of demands including practitioner competency and a clear implementation/intervention strategy. Based on a series of contextual factors, the selection of the specific tool underpins it’s effectiveness.

By using the Socio-Ecological Model as a final filter it provides a comprehensive understanding of tech’s multiple influences on behavior and health. It highlights the interconnectedness and interdependence of these levels, emphasizing the need for interventions that target multiple levels simultaneously to achieve sustainable and comprehensive performance enhancement.

In practicum, behaviour change is the first domino to fall before positive adaptation occurs. Individuals function within a group from a biopsychosocial-spiritual lens. Imposed on this lens is personal bias, but their experience and relationship with their environment can be understood using the Socio-Ecological Model.

When vetting the implementation of tech as a means to an intervention we must consider the individual, and how the change will ripple out to the greater culture and back to other

Alexander J. Morgan, MSc., CSCS, RSCC, CEP

References

1. Torres-Ronda, L., & Shelling, X. (2017). Critical process for the implementation of technology in sport organizations. Strength and Conditioning Journal, 39(6), 54-59. https://journals.lww.com/nscascj/Abstract/2017/12000/Critical_Process_for_the_Implementation_of.5.aspx

2. Windt, J., MacDonald, K., Taylor, D., Zumbo, B., Sporer, B., & Martin, D. (2020). “To tech or not to tech” a critical decision-making framework for implementing technology in sport. Journal of Athletic Training, 55(9), 902-910. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32991702/

3. Torres-Ronda, L., Beanland, E., Whitehead, S., Sweeting, A., & Clubb, J. (2022). Tracking systems in team sports: a narrative review of applications of the data and sport specific analysis. Sports Med Open, 15. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8789973/

Disclaimer

Area 13 Training Systems, more specifically The Learning Ground, provides content for informational and educational purposes only which may contain copyrighted material. Although credit is always attempted to be given, such content available may not be specifically authorized by the copyright owner. A13 and TLG believes this constitutes fair use due to there being no known copyright or infringement intended. A13 and TLG encourages the exchange of said content to provide those interested with accessible research and educational information, so long as credit is appropriately given. Furthermore, A13 and TLG assumes no responsibility for any statements made or materials used by guest authors/presenters, which may not always represent our opinion. We also do not endorse any products or services that may be mentioned.