Training sport psychologists in the 21st Century

I was reflecting at a recent sport psychology workshop whether we are adequately preparing the practitioner sport psychologists of the future for the world they are going to work in?

Increasingly, most practitioner sport psychologists need to be a marketing and branding expert, IT specialist, well versed in data handling, understand consumer law, and possibly a small business expert (if self-employed). This is all in addition to being an expert practitioner with well-developed communication and counselling skills, a strong theoretical and empirical grounding, have developed a clear model of practice, and have developed a toolkit of assessment, profiling and intervention strategies for a potentially very diverse client base. It is definitely harder than when I originally qualified!

In particular, the personal branding and marketing aspects of the profession are increasingly time consuming and complex. Many trainees (for good reason) feel compelled to have a strong online presence. This presence can include multiple social media accounts (e.g., Twitter, Instagram), having a website (which might require the services of a web designer), and a Facebook site, amongst other online platforms. There are also various practitioner/ expert lists you ca be part of (all of which require up-to-date profiles). When I first started as a consultant the main dilemma was what picture to put on the back of your business cards!

Much of this online presence is often managed through mobile devices, and often predominantly through smartphones. Add to this the likelihood that our trainee practitioners might well be communicating with clients via video conferencing (e.g., Skype, Zoom, Facetime) and through instant messaging (e.g., WhatsApp, Facebook messenger, SMS), there is a real issue of work potentially creeping into all aspects of your life. In the good (?!?!) old days over working was mainly spending too much time at the office or with clients, now however the job (and the clients) are carried with you wherever you go. There is often very little separation between work and non-work settings and time. While these advances in technology offer real flexibility, they also come at a cost, which is frequently a lack of downtime from work. This outcome in turn presents the serious potential for increasing susceptibility to a range of mental health conditions. The increasing risk of technology addiction is becoming a real social health challenge that is only going to increase over time. The nature of the consultant’s role now means that we are very much at risk of not being able to switch off (literally and metaphorically).

In considering possible CPD needs for the profession (not just for trainees) these sorts of topics needs to be considered. Developing training opportunities around topics such as: developing your brand and a personal marketing plan; working with social media; ethical and legal implications of online/virtual delivery; small business skills for sport psychologists; and enhancing your service provision through mobile technology and applications are crucial. Finally, it would be good if we could have compulsory CPD for practitioners on how to ensure your own mental health and how to stay mentally healthy!

Rebranding sport and exercise psychology for the 21st century

Reflecting on my professional career to date I have always been very interested in how we as a profession are perceived by the ‘real world’ and potential clients. There are broader questions that emerge about what constitutes a profession, but they are beyond the scope of this month’s blog.

So back to the main topic, I have become increasingly interested in the breadth of our specialism / interest. The UK government register for practitioners (HCPC) refers to registered Sport and Exercise Psychologists. The British Psychological Society’s relevant Division is titled ‘Division of Sport and Exercise Psychology’, and run qualifications in ‘sport and exercise psychology’. Finally, most Universities employ lecturers in sport and exercise psychology, and it is this link with and historical emergence from academia in the UK that might be part of the problem.

In my experience no-one in the real world is looking for a sport and exercise psychologist, they are predominantly looking for a sport psychologist, or possibly an exercise psychologist – but not someone who can cover both, indeed there are question marks over whether you can truly be a sport and exercise psychologist, in my experience practitioners are one or the other. At this point it is important to highlight a distinction, which might be in part how we have ended up where we are. In University academic and researcher terms it is very possible to focus on, and be an expert in the field of sport and exercise psychology. Theories of motivation for example can easily be applied across both domains. This is not the same though as being an applied practitioner whose expertise lies in the context specific application of psychological theory and evidence-based approaches to practice. Historically many of the key decision-makers who shaped the development of the profession were from a University background, a place where the linking of these two domains makes sense, but often in the ‘real world’ it simply does not. Even the terminology used as part of our profession can be questioned. For example, eminent expert Professor Nanette Mutrie when presenting at the BPS Division of Sport and Exercise Psychology conference in 2016 suggested we should be talking about the psychology of physical activity – not exercise.

I am increasingly of the view that the profession is in need of a re-brand, though again reflecting on my career to date I think there was never an original ‘branding’ exercise undertaken. It reflects poorly on a profession when its clients do not know who the qualified professionals are and the job (and services) they offer. Maybe part of the crisis is born out of the combining of two very different parts of the psychology spectrum: sport and exercise. Yes, there are numerous similarities, but then there are similarities between other domains of psychology. In terms of the profession-focused service delivery aspect of our discipline maybe it is time to rethink what we call ourselves, how we are perceived by the public, and how we coherently and consistently communicate what we do. Maybe sport and exercise psychology in the 21^st Century is in need of a rebrand!

Performance psychologists do not necessarily equal performance psychology.

The psychology of performance, as a branch of psychology pretty much is what the title suggests a domain within psychology that focuses on the way the mind works (or needs to work) to be able to perform at a high level when it counts time after time. The ability to perform, when it matters is a key characteristic of many performance environments within human endeavour including: sport, business, surgery, the emergency services, the military, and aviation. Those performers who are successful in these domains, and successful on a regular basis have developed specific strategies to cope with, and excel under the pressure that is associated with performance at the highest level. Many of the psychological strategies utilised to perform when it counts are similar across many performance-focused domains. While the context is different each performance environment is ‘pressured’ and the key psychological skills and abilities that separate the successful from the unsuccessful are relatively similar across the board.

Performance psychologists then, you would reasonably expect are individuals who have significant knowledge regarding these fundamental underpinning psychological factors, and crucially their application across a broad range of performance domains. While this knowledge and expertise is demonstrated by a small number of practitioners (who generally do not refer to themselves as performance psychologists) this specific knowledge and expertise is not the norm. Indeed, in the UK there is no regulation of the title ‘Performance Psychologist’ (a situation that is replicated in many other countries). The lack of regulation of the term psychologist in the UK means that potentially anyone can use this title even though they have not completed any structured or rigorous education and development programme. Employing a performance psychologist, unless professionally qualified (such as BASES accredited, BPS Chartered, or HCPC registered) could put clients at risk. This issue could be even more problematic as practitioners who focus on ‘performance’ can be intuitively appealing to clients because often it is performance gains they are interested in achieving.

As a result, there is a continuing need to educate the end users regarding what the options are, what appropriately qualified is, and crucially why appropriately qualified (beyond the scope of today’s blog post) is what you should be looking for. What can the qualified practitioner do that the unqualified individual can’t? This question, is of fundamental importance. In the UK we have focused too much on telling the industry who they should employ, but not the reasons why. This should be the next step I the evolution of our profession.

What’s in a name? The HCPC’s role in sport and exercise psychology

There is still considerable confusion in the UK regarding the regulation of the use of protected titles and the role of the Health and Care Professions Council (HCPC). Recently I was fortunate enough to attend a meeting with HCPC organised by the BPS Division of Sport and Exercise Psychology that provided the opportunity to ask specific questions and to clarify a range of issues. As such, I feel I have much greater clarity regarding the role of HCPC and the regulation of the protected title of Sport and Exercise Psychologist.

I have heard a lot of complaints over the years about ‘why aren’t HCPC policing the profession’? The simple answer is that it is not their job. They are a regulatory body whose main role is to protect the public by enforcing a level of qualification and expertise for anyone who uses a protected title. Their function is about regulating the use of the title rather than a profession per se. The other aspect of their function is the breadth of their role. HCPC currently regulate use of the 9 protected titles across seven modalities of psychology, which is one of 16 professions that they regulate. As a result, it is simply unrealistic to expect HCPC to ‘police’ these professions. What they will do though is investigate (and prosecute if necessary) breaches of the regulations that are reported to them. These complaints can be made by anyone (members of the public or professionals). So, as a profession it is our responsibility to report individuals who we feel are practicing illegally, or deliberately misleading the public. If we don’t take responsibility for our profession no one else will. Also, HCPC are happy to ‘educate’ the media if cases of miscommunication or misuse of the title are reported to them.

The next question is then what constitutes a breach of the regulations? Well, broadly speaking it is one of two things. First, using a protected title (in this case sport and exercise psychologist) and not being on the HCPC register. Anyone who uses the full-protected title (sport and exercise psychologist) or a partial title (sport psychologist or exercise psychologist) is breaching the regulations if they are not on the register and as a result can be prosecuted. The second area is broadly seen as deliberately misleading the public. As far as HCPC are concerned if you say you provide sport psychology services and are not on the register you are implying appropriate qualification which can be misleading to the public, and as a result you can be prosecuted. The implications of this are pretty clear. If you are not on the register and either call yourself a sport psychologist, or say you provide sport psychology services you can be prosecuted – pretty clear so far!

problem and solution concept with yellow road sign

Now though it becomes a little ‘greyer’. The regulations relates to sport and exercise psychology specifically, and not psychology more broadly. This means that you can provide psychological services in the domain of sport (as long as you do not make reference to sport psychology) and that is fine as far as HCPC are concerned. This grey area has led to a proliferation of ‘performance psychologists’ in the field (which is going to be a whole separate blog). So, if you are BASES accredited and you include (sport psychology) at the end of your title that is beaching the regulations, using (psychology) – so a Sport and Exercise Scientist specialising in psychology – is acceptable. As is a BPS chartered psychologist who is not HCPC registered working in sport (but not claiming to be a sport psychologist).
The final point I will make relates to the level of accountability. As far as HCPC are concerned accountability exists at the individual level. So an organisation can advertise for a sport psychologist (and not require HCPC registered status), and appoint an individual who is not legally allowed to use the title. Once the employee uses the protected title in their job they (not the organisation) is breaching the regulations.

If anyone has a specific question about their own circumstances or the process of reporting cases to HCPC please feel free to get in touch.