Part 2: Comparing to Best Practices from Australia and the Netherlands

This article is the second in a three part series evaluating the way that various nations develop athletes in order to explore what future best practice models might look like.

In order to have success against the best, we should first look at those that are our size (or smaller) and evaluate their models. This is particularly true when those comparable nations are outperforming us on the worlds biggest stages.

Australia and the Netherlands are prime examples of countries with comparable populations that consistently outperform in terms of Olympic success, particularly when compared to Canada. The success of these nations can be attributed to their highly effective and well-structured athlete development models. Below is a detailed review of athlete development in both Australia and the Netherlands, supported by peer-reviewed research, to explain why their systems are so successful.

Athlete Development in Australia

The Australian Institute of Sport (AIS)

History and Structure: The AIS, established in 1981 following Australia’s disappointing performance at the 1976 Montreal Olympics, serves as the cornerstone of the country’s athlete development. The AIS provides centralized, elite-level training facilities and integrates sports science, sports medicine, and performance psychology that spans NSOs, while also addressing/aligning from grassroots to high performance sport.

Approach: The AIS adopts a holistic athlete development approach, emphasizing not only physical training but also mental health, nutrition, education, and career planning. The focus is on long-term athlete development, with pathways from grassroots to elite levels.

Key Elements:

Sports Science Integration: The AIS was among the first to heavily integrate sports science and sports medicine into its training programs, giving Australian athletes a competitive edge. They continue to push the envelope by adopting new communication strategies for things like physical literacy as seen here.

Centralized Coaching: Top coaches are brought together at the AIS, allowing for a high level of expertise and knowledge sharing and a large amount of alignment in the development of both coaches and athletes. This includes simple things such as language (what things are called, how they are described, when they are said, etc) or more complex areas such as technical cueing.

Talent Identification: Australia has robust talent identification programs, such as the National Talent Identification and Development (NTID) program, which seeks out potential athletes from a young age across various sports. The ability to work together with the AIS to facilitate high performance camps across multiple sports is also an extremely effective development tool that sets them apart.

Community and School-Based Sports Programs

Description: Australia has a strong culture of sport within schools and communities, ensuring broad participation at the grassroots level. Programs like Sporting Schools and Active After-school Communities engage children early, promoting lifelong involvement in sports.

These programs not only increase the talent pool but also ensure that talented athletes are identified early and provided with the resources needed to reach elite levels. Take a look at the research and innovation topics they have that help create improved development of athletes in their country. Their play-based and market segmentation work is particularly interesting.

Olympic Success

Australia’s approach has yielded significant Olympic success, particularly in swimming, cycling, and rowing. For example, Australian swimmers, trained through AIS programs, have consistently been among the top performers at the Olympics. Despite a population of just 26 million, Australia regularly finishes in the top 10 in the Olympic medal tally.

Research Support

Holistic Development: Research shows that the holistic development approach, which integrates physical, mental, and educational support, leads to better athlete performance and career longevity (Arnold, Fletcher, & Daniels, 2017).

Talent Identification and Development: Studies highlight that Australia’s talent identification programs, which scout athletes across the country, are highly effective due to their scientific basis and comprehensive support (Gulbin, Croser, Morley, & Weissensteiner, 2013).

Athlete Development in the Netherlands

Dutch Elite Sports Model (NOC*NSF)

History and Structure: The Netherlands Olympic Committee Netherlands Sports Federation (NOC*NSF) oversees the development of elite sports in the country. The Dutch model is characterized by its decentralized system, where national sports federations play a crucial role in developing athletes. This model is similar to the Canadian model.

Approach: The Dutch focus on "structured flexibility," meaning that while there are structured pathways and support systems, there is also flexibility to cater to individual athletes' needs. This approach allows for tailored development plans that optimize each athlete’s potential.

Key Elements

Talent Development Centers (TDCs): These centers are crucial in the Dutch system, providing high-quality training facilities, coaching, and sports science support at a regional level. TDCs focus on nurturing young talent and bridging the gap between grassroots and elite levels.

Multisport Approach: The Netherlands encourages young athletes to participate in multiple sports, delaying specialization until later stages. This approach is believed to enhance overall athletic development and reduce burnout.

Data-Driven Decision Making: The Dutch system heavily relies on data analytics and research to optimize training programs and make informed decisions about athlete development. Programs like this one that the Royal Netherlands Football Association have adopted for top-to-bottom development are easy to find across their sport eco-system.

Focus on Innovation and Technology

Description: The Netherlands places a strong emphasis on innovation and technology in sports, investing in advanced sports science, biomechanics, and data analysis. Initiatives on the forefront like the Sports Innovation League make it easy for them to continue to challenge the gold standard practices due to their collaboration with technological advances. This approach has been particularly successful in sports like cycling, speed skating, and rowing.

Olympic Success

The Netherlands, with a population of just 17 million, consistently punches above its weight in the Olympics, particularly in cycling, speed skating, and field hockey. At the 2020 Tokyo Olympics, the Netherlands won 36 medals, including 10 golds, ranking 7th overall, an extraordinary achievement for a country of its size.

Research Support

Multisport Participation: Research supports the Dutch model’s emphasis on multisport participation, showing that it contributes to better overall athletic development and reduces the risk of overuse injuries (Brouwers, De Bosscher, & Sotiriadou, 2012).

Innovation and Data-Driven Development: Studies indicate that the use of technology and data analytics in athlete development, as practiced in the Netherlands, leads to optimized performance outcomes and gives athletes a competitive edge (Pion, Hohmann, Liu, & Lenoir, 2015).

Conclusion

Australia and the Netherlands exemplify how smaller countries can achieve outsized success in the Olympics through well-structured and innovative athlete development models. Their success can be attributed to factors such as holistic athlete development, robust talent identification, heavy integration of sports science, and a strong focus on innovation and technology. These practices are supported by peer-reviewed research, which shows that such approaches lead to better athlete performance and long-term success.

In the third and final segment of this series, I will explore some reasons for the differences between Canada and these other nations, as well as potential tools for future direction.

Sources

1. Arnold, R., Fletcher, D., & Daniels, K. (2017). Development and validation of the Organizational Stressor Indicator for Sport Performers (OSI-SP). Journal of Sports Sciences, 35(9), 898-907.

2. Brouwers, J., De Bosscher, V., & Sotiriadou, P. (2012). An examination of the importance of performances in youth and junior competition as an indicator of later success in tennis. Sport Management Review, 15(4), 461-475.

3. Gulbin, J., Croser, M. J., Morley, E. J., & Weissensteiner, J. R. (2013). Talent identification and development in sport: An Australian perspective. Journal of Sports Sciences, 31(2), 111-116.

4. Pion, J., Hohmann, A., Liu, T., & Lenoir, M. (2015). Retrospective analysis of elite performance athletes in cycling, rowing, and speed skating. Journal of Sports Sciences, 33(5), 508-517.

5. Reardon, C. L., & Factor, R. M. (2010). Sport psychiatry: A systematic review of diagnosis and medical treatment of mental illness in athletes. Sports Medicine, 40(11), 961-980.

6. Balyi, I., Way, R., & Higgs, C. (2013). Long-Term Athlete Development. Human Kinetics.